Speaker 1: And we are back with another edition of the Federalist
Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle's senior elections correspondent at the
Federalist and your experienced Shirpa on today's quest for Knowledge.
As always, you can email the show at radio at
the Federalist dot com, follow us on x at fbr LST,
make sure to subscribe wherever you download your podcast, and
of course to the premium version of our website as well.
Our guest today is Justin Folter, former senior advisor to
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, a guy who knows a
thing or two about what is happening in terms of
where this department is and where it plans to go. Well,
thank you Justin for joining us on this edition of
the Federalist Radio Hour. Thanks so much for having me
you bet, let's begin. What is it like working at
the new Department of War. Lots of changes going on
there over the last year. And I know you worked
there for for six months and until you moved on,
But what was that experience like?
Speaker 2: Work working alongside Secretary Hike Seth was an incredible experience.
And yeah, over over the past year, we've seen tremendous changes.
I think, you know, not only from you know, a
cultural shift and getting back to you know, focusing on
what matters, which is war fighting and being prepared you know,
for war to ultimately you know, pursue the peace through
strength agenda. But overall, I mean, on top of the
cultural changes, I think we've just seen, you know, Secretary
Hike Seth really move out quickly on trying to pursue
you know, increased efficiency, you know, looking at how can
we equip our war fighters with the equipment they need quickly,
you know, not five or ten years late and over budget.
And ultimately you know, it was an honor of a
lifetime to support him, and of course you know, support
President Trump's agenda. Yeah, you're right.
Speaker 1: I mean what we have seen in the first year
of what was known as the Department of Defense is
a real shift and focus that is making sure that
America is ready for and that's the best way many
will argue to keep the peace. So that's the question
I have for you, based on what you have seen
and based on your contacts at the Department of War,
are we prepared? Are we as prepared as we need
to be?
Speaker 2: Well? I think we've seen over the past year major
systematic changes to realign our military and the War Department
to focus on what actually matters, which is, you know,
no more DEI, no more no more distractions, no more
climate change, but instead focusing on the real issues that matter,
which is making sure that the US military and the
War Department is completely prepared for whatever contingency happens across
the globe. And I think Secretary of head Seth, you
know it deserves enormous credit for the work that he's
done in changing the culture to shift, you know, from
you know, perhaps an ambiguous mission set uh you know
previously to now a very very clear, you know, mission
focus and aligned organization that's focused on war. Hopefully we
don't have to use it, but ultimately that's the only
way that piece through strength, you know, can really be
upheld is if our adversaries believe that we are truly
prepared and equipped. And I think Secretary head Seth has
done a phenomenal job of getting back to the basics,
but back to the things that matter to prepare our
war fighters in case in situation breaks out.
Speaker 1: The Secretary has certainly excelled at ruffling the feathers of
the establishment, deep within the military complex and deep within
the military industrial complex. How is that going after a
year on the front lines of that important battle.
Speaker 2: Well, I think a lot of significant changes have been
made in terms of you know, challenging the status quo.
And you know, there's a lot of always a lot
of complaints around you know, delivery times and you know,
capabilities that are promised that may not be you know,
fully lived up to what was shared. And I think
Secretary Heseth and the team has done to the heart
of the problem, which is holding you know, large organizations
accountable but ultimately demanding excellence across you know, not just
our war fighters, but across any contractor and defense industrial
base that you know is serving the Department of War.
I mean, he's for the past couple of weeks gone
out on his Arsenal Freedom Tour, which I think is
really focused on highlighting these issues you know firsthand, which
is going around and of course there's there's great photo
ops and there's great you know meetings happening and displays
of you know, defense industrial based power, but also behind
closed doors, you know, he is absolutely pursuing accountability to
make sure that this defense industrial base is completely restarted,
so that in the event you know that it's needed,
all of the capabilities can be in the hands of
war fighters very quickly.
Speaker 1: You were a senior advisor there, let me ask you this,
did you advise the Secretary on fat generals and whipping
them back into shape? What area? What areas did you
offer advice regarding our defense?
Speaker 2: That was something he took on firsthand. And you know,
the fitness standards and you know, making sure that you know,
everybody's held to the same same standard of excellence. You know,
it's something he took on firsthand. One of the areas
that I had the you know, the opportunity of serving
was really looking at this defense industrial based challenge as
well as you know, how can the Pentagon very quickly
adopt new technologies, so for example, things like the drone
dominance initiative where you know, there was a huge shift
in war fighting that we've seen in Ukraine where you
know now you have very you know, cheap, attriadable systems
that are changing on almost a weekly or monthly basis,
and so really looking at how can you know the
Department of War actually feel these capabilities very quickly and
instead of taking you know, one to two years to
procure a system, how can we do this you know,
in a matter of weeks, And so, you know, really
looking at at those sorts of issues of you know,
the defense industrial base, supply chain, procurement challenges, and looking
at how can we shift the Department of War to
acquire these capabilities quicker, but also how can we look at,
you know, perhaps some of the new innovative, up and
coming technology and instead of just you know, awarding contracts,
you know, to the large defense primes, how can we
bring in the latest and greatest technology to the War
Department to really give our warfighters and our troops the
absolute best technology and capabilities they need to win if
they're called upon.
Speaker 1: Well, we know that Donald Trump is a builder. He's
been a builder all of his life, and so it's
no surprise that he wants to build up this military.
You look at what's happening, particularly in the Navy and
what we're seeing, as you just mentioned in the air
force and air warfare and air to ground of warfare
as well. How deficient was this military to the best
of your knowledge coming in from four years of the
Biden administration.
Speaker 2: Well, I witnessed it firsthand when we when we came
in into office and you know, we're really assessing. One
of the first things we did was assess, you know,
where things stood, so we could take an honest, you know,
gap analysis of you know, where things were strong or
maybe areas that were neglected. And unfortunately, we found you know,
many areas including you know, the defense industrial base as
well as like critical and emerging technologies that were unfortunately
in many cases completely ignored under the previous administration. And
so one of the first things we did was, you know,
a Secretary head seth asked us to do, is to
do an honest assessment of where those gaps are so
we could just face it head on. And we knew
that there was going to be, you know, some big
challenges considering the previous administration just underinvested in some of
these areas, and we just wanted to understand where things
were so that we could get after it and really
try to make the department, you know, significantly better. We
had a lot of catching up to do after four
years of neglect, but ultimately, I think what we've seen
in the past year is a complete one eighty in
terms of you know, not only just a huge cultural shift,
but actually you know, turning that talk and cultural shift
into real action.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I would assume that this is a department
that is committed to not giving up billions of dollars
in military equipment to the Taliban. So that's that's a
good first step beyond the Biden administration. You also worked
at the DOGE in the Department of Government Efficiency, and
you did some work at the Pentagon. How much waste
were we seeing? And waste is always a problem throughout
big government, and we have massive amounts of it. One
of the biggest areas of waste we've seen over the years,
of course, has been at the Pentagon. What what did
you find there with your work with DOGE.
Speaker 2: Well, I think, you know, the Pentagon was a target
rich environment for waste, fraud and abuse unfortunately, and so
you know, we saw a huge amount of waste that
you know, we were able to get after. But I think,
you know, waste could be defined in two primary categories.
You know. The first one is you know, companies that
are just completely overcharging the government. You know, in some cases,
you know, ten to twenty x what they're they're selling,
you know, to the private sector. But then the other
I think more nefarious waste that we witnessed was the
delays on delivery. I mean, there are companies that you know,
were five, seven, ten years behind on delivering capabilities. And
when you see this, it's not just you know, the
dollars that are being wasted, but it's also the opportunity
cost of not getting you know, the technology and the
capabilities that we need for our warfighters to have so
that they're best equipped, you know, to go out and
win the fight. And so you know, for us, we
really divided it into those two categories of looking at
like where is you know, kind of the raw waste,
frad and abuse happening, but then also trying to you know,
flag areas where programs were significantly delayed and behind schedule
and flagging those for Secretary Hegseeth so that you know,
he and the team could ultimately engage there and look
at holding these companies accountable. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I grew up in Wisconsin, and I can tell
you that when I was a kid, seemingly three centuries
ago now, when I was a kid back in the
seventies and eighties, there was a politician there by the
name of William Procksmeyer and William Proxmyer had what was
called the Golden Fleece Award, and he was maybe the
last Democrat who concerned himself with waste, fraud and abuse,
but he really was had a sharp eye on this stuff,
and he would talk about constantly, you know, the golden
hammer in the military, or the you know, the thousand
dollars toilet seat, just as you mentioned just the the overcharging.
Why do you think that is why when we have
nationally so much respect for our military, for the service members,
yet so many companies out there don't have respect for
the American tax payer paying for these service members and
what they do.
Speaker 2: Right, And I think, you know, that's something where you know,
for years and especially you know, in the four years
before the second Trump administration, it was absolutely clear that
these companies became extremely complacent because there was no accountability.
They could essentially get away with charging the government, you know,
almost anything they wanted, and they could also completely disregard
any sort of you know, deadlines. And that's not to
say that you know, this is every single company that
was serving the Department, but this happened with billions and
billions of dollars a year being wasted and so I
think you know what Prashmaier was getting at is is
spot on, which is you know, government waste, fraud and abuse.
I mean, they're not partisan problems. These are depending on
it has been plagued by these for a long time
and in many ways they're institutional. And I think ultimately
where Secretary Hegseth deserves immense credit is for you know,
taking this on firsthand and actually you know, holding these
companies accountable, which with all the vested interests in Washington,
it's incredibly difficult to do because you know, of all
the different labs dollars in Congress and so many you know,
vested interests that you know are incentivized to keep this waste,
fraud and abuse in place. So I'm a mental respect
for Sectary Hike Seth taking that on firsthand, and I
think he deserves a tremendous amount of credit.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I hope that that success continues moving forward, because
you know, as I said, this thing has been going
on for a long time. I mean Simon Cameron, who
is Secretary of War during the Lincoln administration, you know,
was caught up in all kinds of graft and all
kinds of abuses and fraud, and you know, shoes falling
apart for union soldiers on the front lines because they
had contractors who absolutely took advantage of the situation. And
again that goes on yet today and it sounds like
the Department of War is is really looking into and
addressing some of those larger areas. Now, let's talk a
little bit about the politics of this all. And I
know that Secretary Hegseth is not one to tolerate a
lot of politics in the Pentagon. That said, nothing is
in a vacuum. And what he does and what that
department does is constantly being scrutinized by the media, generally
the accomplice media harshly and of course their friends in
the Democrat Party. There have been some bumps and bruises
along the way. I mean the signal gate, there was
no picnic, and there were clearly some problems there, particularly
letting someone from the Atlantic in on something like that,
let alone, you know, anybody, you know. But there has
been a drive and there certainly was early on before
confirmation of Pete Hexseth, and then after confirmation to just
destroy this guy. I mean that the full fire of
the Democrat machine and the uh, the corporate media machine
was on taking this guy out. He has admirably survived
and thrived. All of that is the is is he
still dealing with the kind of uh you know, uh
fire that that he has he had seen earlier and
we just were just not necessarily seeing that in the
news today.
Speaker 2: Well, I think you know, certainly the media has has
not let up in any ways, you know, towards Secretary
Hike Seth. But I will say I think they've realized that,
you know, his tenacity and focus. It's it's it's almost
wasted energy to try to go after him. I mean
they put every single, you know effort they could in
the early days of the administration to just do whatever
they could to try to discredit and frankly try to
push them out of his positions as Secretary of War.
And I think you know, ultimately, you know, he persevered
through that. And you know, there's any department is never perfect.
But I think you know, despite the immense pressure, he's
handled this situation extremely well. And I mean everything from
you know, Operation Midnight Hammer to you know, the Madurero raid.
I mean, this just goes to show that you know,
despite you know, nothing happening in a vacuum, his resolve
has resonated, you know, across the ADMIN and frankly across
the world. With the effects that the Department of War
have made.
Speaker 1: We hear a lot, especially online, about conservatives attacking other conservatives.
Sometimes it even seems like conservatives they're fighting each other
more than they fight the left. That's where the new
podcast Conservative Crossroads with Henry Olsen, Senior Fellow at the
Ethics and Public Policy Center comes in. It doesn't shy
away from these disputes. It leans into them by putting
two conservatives who disagree about an important issue together to
hash it out on the air. Every other week, Conservative
Crossroads does what no other program does explore conservatisms disagreements
without name calling. Conservative Crossroads is the podcast for conservatives
who want to understand what's happening to their movement. Join
Henry Olsen and his guest at Conservative Crossroads every other
Monday as they hash out the ideas and principles that
will decide the future of the right. Download Conservative Crossroads
from our partner Ricochet or any platform where you get
your podcast. Conservatism is at a crossroads, which is why
all conservs it's need conservative crossroads listen today, Yeah, no
doubt about it. I mean at every turn you have
seen you know, the narrative from the left and from
the accomplice media on this constantly training the fire on
heg Seth. But just about every turn we find out,
not surprisingly that you know, it is a narrative. There
isn't fact behind a lot of this stuff, and it
is just simply trying to you know, erode the Trump administration.
And that's been the campaign since the first Trump administration
and that resistance movement, if you will, goes on, how
does he handle that pressure? You've been in the room
with him, how does he handle all of that?
Speaker 2: Well? I think you know, ultimately he handles it extremely well.
He's he's focused on on the mission and the why,
you know ultimately, but you know, ultimately the mission is
what you know, allows him to transcend these distractions and
that's what they are. I mean, the media has constantly
berated Secretary head Seth. You know, even even in some
of the most positive, you know, successful missions like Operation
Midnight Hammer. You know, within hours of announcing the strikes,
you know, the corporate media machine had completely you know,
tried to discredit every single step along the way of
a successful operation. And so, you know, it's it's kind
of sad to say, but you know, he could he
could literally do anything and then get criticized. And that's
you know, ultimately, I think it speaks to his character
of of really having that resolve under pressure and being
able to you know, maintain the focus on the mission
despite you know, the public narrative from corporate media just
absolutely being against him every step of the way.
Speaker 1: I think it's a reflection of how they feel about
his boss, obviously, the commander in chief, President of the
United States, Donald Trump. I mean we've said it before.
Trump could literally cure cancer, and you would have the
corporate media and the leftist saying, well, he wasn't equitable
about whatever their excuse is, they would find some way
to vilify him for that. And I think Hegxeth, you know,
fits into that, not just because you know, he serves
President Donald Trump, but because he also has many of
the you know, the same fighting instincts to go up
against corporate media, to go up against these allegations and
charges in the narrative, and I think that's why he
has based on the people. I'm other folks. I'm talking
to Pentagon sources and others who are are close to them.
He's had a great deal of success working with the
most important people, and that's the front line people, you know,
the people, the soldiers, the troops, the sailors, the pilots.
You know, that's who he's really reached. Is that what
you have seen as well? I've seen it firsthand. I
Mean there's one one event stands out, you know, very clearly,
when when we visit a womb and you know, we
roll up to this aircraft hangar and you know, there's
hundreds of you know, our men and women in uniform
there and and I mean they're extremely excited when he
walks up on the stage.
Speaker 2: They're cheering, they're incredibly fired up. And it's just so
clear that there's been one hundred and eighty degree cultural
shift in terms of actually serving the people that matter,
not corporate interest, but you know, our men and women
in uniform. And I think Secretary hag Seth made that,
you know, his top priority and a core part of
his ethos for anything that he did. And I think
the troops, you know, certainly recognize that, and I think
you know he's seen the most success there, which in
my opinion is, you know, very clearly the most important
constituent that.
Speaker 1: Matters our guest today is Justin Fulcher, former Senior advisor
to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, joining us on this
edition the Federalist Radio Hour. Let's talk about some of
those campaigns, the use of that Department of War, I believe,
and correct me if I'm wrong. You were there when
the call came to target those those bunkers with those
bunker busting bombs in Iran. Can you give us a
sense of what that was like, because that was a
huge decision and a huge moment for this Department for
foreign policy for this country.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, and I think you know it was definitely a humbling,
humbling moment. And you know, any any use of force
or contemplation of use of force is something that you know,
both the President's Secretary heg Seth and and every single
person I interacted with at the Department of War, you know,
took extremely seriously. And you know, Iran was a situation
where you know, President Trump made the consequences very clear
that if they don't abandon their nuclear program, that there
would be consequences, and I think you know, ultimately, in
the in the days and weeks leading up to that,
you know, a lot of different options were of course,
you know, reviewed and and you know, Secretary of hag
Seth's first priority was how can we you know, execute
any sort of operation that you know would minimize the
potential you know, placing of troops in harm's way and
of course you know, not trying to get entangled in
any sort of forever war in the region. And I think,
you know, ultimately the decision that was made, you know,
for the precision you know strikes and the and the
B two bombing of the facilities you know, of course,
was flawlessly executed, and all credit goes you know, to
the minimum in uniform that you know executed that and
supported it. But ultimately, you know, I think it was
the just the resolve of secondary head Seth and the
President of being willing to make those tough calls and ultimately,
you know, back up words with action when necessary.
Speaker 1: And of course they were roundly criticized by their opponents
on the left, who of course see Donald Trump as
more of a threat to democracy then you know, the
the despotic regime in Iran. But here we are, and
that's the state of American politics to day. One of
the narratives surrounding that event, the bombings at the time,
was well, yeah, they may have gotten in there, they
may have dropped those bombs, but Iran still has the
potential to move forward on their nuclear weaponry now. And
I remember, this is the same group that told you
that Iran was not and would not thanks to the
agreement the Obama and Biden administration signed with the help
of palettes of cash, that they weren't moving toward nuclear weaponry.
It was all for peaceful use. But you were there,
Can you give us a sense of what went down
in terms of the destruction? And it's clear now that
the original narrative from the left wasn't correct. But how
much damage did this military exert.
Speaker 2: It was an incredibly successful series of strikes that caused
enormous damage. And I think what was so fascinating, you know,
to witness, you know, on the inside, was you know,
we of course you know, had had very you know,
inside information of exactly you know, the situation. The best
we could, you know, with all the different tools of
American power. But within literally minutes of the strikes being announced,
you had mainstream media interests already calling out and saying
the strikes were unsuccessful. We're basically trying to prop up
this counter narrative that it was a complete failure. And
so for us, it was just so fascinating to see,
you know, the juxtaposition between what we witness firsthand being
incredibly successful strikes and you know, complete destruction of the
ability for Iran, you know, to pursue these nuclear capabilities
in those facilities. But then, you know, minutes and hours
after the strikes were announced, the media saying there were
complete failures or you know, in many ways, you know, unsuccessful.
So that was shocking to witness firsthand, but ultimately, you know, unsurprising.
Like you mentioned before, you know, President Trump could have
cured cancer and they'd still find a way to vilify. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I wish the American voter, the American consumer of information,
quite frankly, didn't have the attention span of a gnat,
because that's really I mean, you know, every time you
see the corporate media take this path, and we've seen
it over and over again, the Russia collusion hoax, you know,
the Arctic Fox, all of this sort of stuff. You know,
it's just been one lie after another, and the the
corporate media have just continued to serve as the water
carriers of the left in a campaign to degrade the
administration of Donald Trump. And so I just you know,
that was a huge issue where the American public was like, Okay, yeah,
we are getting the wrong story, the incorrect, the false,
the lying story from corporate media. It's just one of
the myriad examples. But they don't remember that when, for instance,
we're taking a look at the ice issue in Minneapolis,
or you know, myriad other issues that come up to
I want to jump forward now several months. What where
do you think we are heading with the Iran question?
Given the massive protests from pro democracy forces inside Iran,
will will there be US military engagement there? In your estimation?
Speaker 2: Well, I think you know, the most important thing to
understand about Iran right now is that this is a
deliberate test of deterrence. You know, President Trump has been
extremely clear about the outcome he wants, which is no
nuclear weapons and an end to the regime killing its
own people. And while he's not broadcasting you know, timelines
or doing any sort of negotiating, you know, through the press.
He has delivered that message very clearly to Tehran, and
the Iranian regime knows the terms and what's at stake,
and I think, you know, they'd be wise to heed
his words, considering, you know, the successful Operation Midnight Hammer,
you know, months back. But ultimately, I think you know,
despite you know, naval posturing and developments and deployments in
the region, I think that you know, force may or
may not be necessary here because the Iranian regime knows
that when President Trump speaks, he means what he says,
and he's prepared to back it up with force if
the situation requires it.
Speaker 1: Indeed, speaking of that, were you at all surprised by
the Marxist left in US politics seemingly coming to the
aid the defense of Nicholas Maduro in Venezuela with that
amazing operation that went down. I mean, we will be
talking about this for many, many years to come, but
it was it was incredible, not only to see how
that happened, Maduro in handcuffs in the in US custody,
but then the immediate response from the Alexandria Ocasio Corteses
of the world, the real Marxist about Nicholas Maduro's due
process rights and all of these sorts of things. I
can't say I'm surprised. I mean, despite the fact that
you know, we witnessed, you know, arguably one of the
most effective and impressive, you know, joint operations in modern history,
every by every standard, it seems to me, with the
people I've talked to and you know, and reading the accounts,
this was precision at its finest.
Speaker 2: Oh absolutely, And I mean, you know, just what's been
released to the public, I think there's no other response
than to be impressed with our military's capabilities. And you know,
it's I think it's frustrating for many folks on the
left because of how effective these operations are, and so
their natural response is just to look for any sort
of way to tear it down. I mean, Maduro was
captured alive. I mean, how impressive is that. And when
you talk about due process rights, I mean, he's getting
his day in court, he is getting due process rights.
But at the end of the day, I mean the
US military, under the leadership of Secretary HeiG Seth and
President Trump, I mean, deserve enormous credit for that. Effective
operation in Venezuela.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that made the Noriega operation in eighty nine look
like a piker. I mean, it really had to wait
that cat out, you know, that massive drug lord. They
had to wait him out, you know, in Panama. And
apparently they were playing really bad pop hits that drove
him out of his his little asylum over there. But
this was in out, you know, and mission truly accomplished
on this front. We'll see what lies ahead. And that's
the question, what do you think comes next? Is a
lot of talk about Venezuela oil opening up those markets there.
You know, it's obviously the reality of the damage that
has been done there over the years, the collapse of
that country and its wealth, the rebuilding of it the
next you know, administration in there, if you will, for
for Venice Wheel. Where where does this all go from here?
Do you think? Well?
Speaker 2: I think we're we're starting to see that play out
right now, which is you know that the oil, Venezuelan
oil finally being able to be sold, you know, on
the free market. I think we'll have verberating effects. I
think it has effects even now on on Russia joining
the peace talks in Abu Dhabi of you know, now
facing even stronger economic pressure, and so ultimately, I think,
you know, the President Trump has made it clear that,
you know, prosperity in Venezuela is an option, you know,
if free and fair elections are are able to happen.
And I think that the current you know, interim government
there is wise to you know, collaborate and cooperate with
the Trump administration to help ensure that that that happens.
And ultimately, you know, revitalizing the Venezuelan economy, you know,
from from what it was under Maduro to what it
looks like in the future. Sure, I think, will you know,
not only benefit an enormous amount of folks in Venezuela,
but the entire region and the United States.
Speaker 3: How does consumer confidence fall into the lowest level in
over a decade. The watch dout own Wall Street podcast
with Chris Markowski. Every day Chris helps unpack the connection
between politics and the economy and how it affects your wallet.
The media income is eighty four thousand dollars, but people
feel like they need one hundred and thirty thousand just
to feel like they're getting ahead. Until housing and insurance
costs go down. Will it be more of the same.
Whether it's happening in DC or down on Wall Street,
it's affecting you financially.
Speaker 1: Be informed.
Speaker 3: Check out the Watch Doot on Wall Street podcast with
Chris Markowski on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: Something tells me, and you never know with human beings,
and you know their repensity to repeat history, but something
tells me that the people who originally supported, maybe voted
for Marxist in that country many years ago will not
go that way again. They have learned some very powerful
lessons that unfortunately members of the left in this country
who are fleeing California and Oregon and Illinois and New
York they haven't learned. In fact, they just end up
taking their miserable policies and support for those miserable policies
with them. You mentioned the Kremlin. What do you think
that very successful mission in capturing Nicholas Maduro did for
the situation in Ukraine, the ongoing, the never ending war
between Russia and Ukraine. Did that send a message to
Vladimir Putin that this is a country that means what
it says.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. I think it's been a very clear and strong
message to every country around the globe. And I think,
you know, as as countries like Venezuela, who you know,
are historically aligned with Russia and China, they need to
realize that, you know, they they don't necessarily have any
sort of assurance or guarantee just because you know, Russia
or China is promising them, you know, defense aid. I mean,
the United States operation of Venezuela, you know, showed that,
you know, frankly, no one is immune from US military power.
And I think it really will cause a change in
the calculus. And ultimately, I think why, you know, butin
and the Kremlin have decided that it's best to come
to the table in Abu Dhabi and actually have a
trilateral discussion. Now the outcome of that, you know, is
still to be determined, it's ongoing right now, but I
think ultimately them being at the table is a signal
that that calculus has changed.
Speaker 1: Tough question for you, but you know, you know, people
in the know, do you think this war ends this year?
Speaker 2: I think that there are a variety of factors that
are underway now, you know, both you know, economically, but
also just the attrition factor of this war that is
really weighing on you know, of course the Ukrainian people,
but but especially in Russia. And I think these trilateral
talks in Abu Dhabi, you know, show that you know,
people are getting you know, fatigued and beyond fatigue in
many ways. And ultimately, I think, you know, we we
do see a lot of conditions aligning to where this
could get resolved, you know, in the coming months. So
there's there's a lot of factors at play here. And
of course, you know, when dealing with with actors like
like Putin, the enemy does get a vote here. But
I think ultimately there's a lot of converging factors that
suggest that this is getting wrapped up, you know, hopefully,
you know, much sooner than later.
Speaker 1: So many people have so senselessly died, of course, and
that's what we've seen in so many wars in world history.
This isn't any exception to the rule. Here just a
few minutes left, But can we talk Greenland absolutely, Now,
you were at the Department of War when you know
a lot of this talk was going on. The President
brought this up in his first administration. Everybody thought it
was a big joke. I had a feeling he was
serious from the get go on this. But you know,
I think we all think of Greenland as frankly no
tourist destination. I think the population is somewhere around the
size of Dubuque, Iowa, and they're controlled by one of
the smallest countries in Europe. And so you had all
of this craziness going on, But the one thing that
cannot be disputed is the strict TGIC benefits that Greenland
would bring. What do you think about.
Speaker 2: All of this, Well, I think you're exactly right. Greenland
matters because it sits at this intersection where you know, geography, security,
and even you know defense, industrial based power all all intersect.
I mean geographically, it's sitting right between the North Atlantic
and the Arctic, which make it absolutely essential for you know,
missile warning, space tracking, air and sea routes that connect
you know, North America and Europe. But also you know
there's a second layer that's just as important here, which
Greenland sits on enormous amounts of critical mineral reserves, which
you know could all go into fighter jets, satellites, radar,
and other you know, military and consumer applications. So I
think you know, Greenland goes you know, far beyond just
you know, the territory and basing rights. But I think
it's it's really about whether the US and its allies
can you know, control these modern you know, choke points
that make modern power possible.
Speaker 1: Looking at the agreement that was signed, because everybody was
up in arms that Secretary heg Seth and the President
wouldn't take military action off the table. But if they
followed this administration, they should know they never take military
action off the table. It doesn't matter what it is.
And so you know, that may may have been an
option well down the line, but it's always an option.
But what did you think of the final agreement, if
you will, that was hashed out moving forward?
Speaker 2: Well, I think the final agreement definitely, you know, aligns
the interests of the United States and the America First Agenda,
you know, much better than it was before. And I
think you know, ultimately even you know, the investments that
the United States will make in Greenland will also benefit
you know, the people of Greenland as well. But you know, ultimately,
you know, when when folks get get fired up about
the potential use of you know, military force, I mean
by by no means is that ever, you know, the
first option, But it would be incredibly unwise to take
military action off the table for any sort of you know,
strategic interests of the United States. I mean, it's a
core element of our national power. Doesn't mean, you know,
we'll provoke war or strike first or you know, unnecessarily
you know, use military action when it's not required. But
of course it's always an option in the back pocket
if necessary.
Speaker 1: Well, I guess people got used to presidents who like
to talk about red lines in the Middle East and elsewhere,
and then of course those red lines meant absolutely nothing.
There has been an absolute change and and I guess
that's what do you see in two aspects here the
world waking up to the idea that the United States
of America is not to be taken for granted, and
it is not to be underestimated, and it certainly is
not to be disrespected as it has been for so long.
And how how do you think that will play since
we've talked about none of this is in a vacuum,
how do you think it will play out in this
upcoming midterm election season?
Speaker 2: Well, simply put, America is back, and I think you know,
despite you know, different folks and actors on the world stage,
maybe being being shocked that America is flexing its power
and mobilizing, you know, in various parts of the globe.
I think it's very clear that you know when President
Trump speaks that he means business. And you know wherever
you are, whether you're in you know, Moscow or in Beijing,
that the US is back and needs to be taken
seriously and respected again. And ultimately, I think you know,
as it relates to the midterms, I think you know,
the American people recognize the respect that you know, from
our US military to our economy and other aspects of
our country. US being back and being revitalized. I think
that will only bode well in the midterms for the
Trump administration.
Speaker 1: It is a different day in America, there is no
doubt about that. Thanks to my guest today, Justin Fulcher,
former senior advisor to Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, you've
been listening to another edition of the Federalist Radio Hour.
I'm Matt Kittle's senior elections correspondent at the Federalist. We'll
be back soon with more. Until then, stay lovers of freedom,
anxious for the pray,