Yes, Leftists are 'Evil.' Here’s How They Got That Way — and Why You’ll Never Change Them

American Thinker 

“They are programmed…,” Soviet defector and ex-KGB man Yuri Bezmenov warned decades ago about the ideologues we call “leftists.” “You cannot change their mind…. You are stuck with them.”

It’s common for people to say today when contrasting our two major ideological groups, “Conservatives think leftists are misguided; leftists think conservatives are evil.” I, though, am different.

I know leftists are evil.

That is, practically speaking. Theologically speaking, I’m not judging their souls or inborn nature. Putting it plainly, however, and alluding to the reality that leftists have embraced evil, I will say they are so. I’m going to now explain how they got that way, too, and why Bezmenov was right: You will never, ever change their minds. 

One more caveat: Because what’s true in principle is not always true in the particular, there are exceptions to the above rule. This is evidenced by the leftists who get “red-pilled.” Now let’s proceed.

It’s common to hear warnings about the effects of modern education’s left-wing indoctrination. We’ve all heard the stories, too, about young people entering college seeming normal and then going haywire — and even, sometimes, disowning their parents over political differences. Yet believing education is the only, or even main, culprit misses much.

The proverbial saying goes, “Give me a child until he is seven, and I will show you the man.” Psychologist Nicolai Sennels, who worked with delinquent Muslim youths in Denmark, once explained that what’s inculcated into a kid during his first seven years can become almost unchangeable (i.e., you’re “stuck” with it). And the “age of reason” has traditionally been considered seven.

The point is that by this age a person’s foundation (emotional and in other dimensions) is already largely formed. This means, too, that most formation occurs before the child has any schooling. But what is happening, mainly, during this period?

Ancient Greek philosopher Plato explained it well. Children must be raised in an atmosphere of nobility and grace, he stated, so that — and this is the crux — he will develop an erotic (as in emotional) attachment to virtue. (Note: Virtue is “that set of objectively good moral habits.”)

This is important because during these tender years, the child is too cognitively immature to grasp virtue’s importance intellectually. Once this emotional attachment is established, however, upon reaching maturity the individual will be much more likely to accept the dictates of reason. (For example, “There’s no such thing as a free lunch” or “You’re not owed other people’s money.”)

This is just common sense, of course. We all know how significant the formative years are (ergo the term “formative”); thus is abuse, especially sexual, during this period so devastating. Little children are as sponges, absorbing whatever truths, tastes or toxins surround them; they are as wet clay, too, highly malleable.

And whatever the negative influences, the point is this: Do the opposite of Plato’s prescription and raise a child in a degraded atmosphere, and the result is the opposite: He develops an erotic attachment to vice. Upon then reaching the age of reason, he will generally be very unreasonable. He not only will be less likely to accept reason’s dictates, but they may be anathema to him.

Unfortunately, too, forging a child in vice is far easier than inculcating virtue because, left to themselves, things naturally move towards disorder. (Think here of a house or car left to sit for years without maintenance.) In the case of individual moral development, this leads to what theologians might call “disordered thinking.”

As you might’ve guessed, too, the weaned-on-vice children tend to become what we in our time call “leftists” (or low-virtue people, LVP). And this explains a common experience normal people often have when debating them:

You present a logical point and factual evidence—and the LVP rejects it, responding emotionally.

Bezmenov referenced this phenomenon thus: You cannot change such a person’s mind even when exposing him “to authentic information. ... The facts tell nothing to him.”

It also explains why two young people will attend the same college, exposed to identical propaganda, but respond very differently. The first will perhaps go along to get along, but roll his eyes and emerge with his degree — and with sanity (and politics) unchanged or even improved, having been spurred on to growth via exposure to error.

The second will become a raving, perhaps violent “leftist.”

Most would say the latter changed, and perhaps he did. What’s for certain is that each young person embraced ideology that corresponded to his early-years-forged emotional/moral foundation. The first student retained ideas that aligned with virtue because he was essentially virtuous.

The second easily gravitated toward ideas aligning with vice because he was essentially vice-imbued, an LVP. You could say that his college “transformation” was just a matter of what with animals is called “instinctual drift.” Only a catalyst was necessary — and the professors and their “teaching” were it.

This helps explain, mind you, the “red-pilled” leftists who experience political conversion. They are very often not LVP, just temporarily deceived people. And when finally witnessing leftism’s ugly face — such as merciless “cancel culture” or unjust political violence — they are viscerally repelled and then gravitate toward where they finally realize the greater virtue resides: the so-called “right.” (Note: “Greater” doesn’t mean “complete.” It means those in question are higher-virtue people, HVP.)

This also explains findings such as those presented in Peter Schweizer’s 2008 article “Don't listen to the liberals – Right-wingers really are nicer people, latest research shows.” But they are “nicer” because they are HVP.

Philosopher C.S. Lewis framed this LVP-HVP difference very well in his 1943 book The Abolition of Man.

“No justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous,” he warned. “Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism. I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite skeptical about ethics, but bred to believe that ‘a gentleman does not cheat,’ than against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers.”

“Conservatives” are more likely to be bred believing “a gentleman does not cheat”; leftists are more likely to have “been brought up among sharpers.”

Anyone fancying this mere partisan prejudice doesn’t have to take my word for it. Just listen to LVP Democrat operative Scott Foval. He himself admitted on hidden camera in 2016 that there “is a level of adherence to rules on the other side [Republicans] that only when you’re at the very highest level, do you get over.”

So this is why I say, and know, that in principle leftists are evil. If this sounds uncharitable to anyone, I’ll offer hope: Leftists, you don’t have to wallow in wickedness. You can begin that journey into the light and seek virtue anytime you wish. The choice is yours.

On another charitable note, you don’t have to be a “sharper” to raise a sharper-like child. Why not? Well, harkening back to Plato and raising kids, does an “atmosphere of nobility and grace” at all describe our culture today? With vulgarity and perverse sexuality infusing virtually everything now, with “Bad Bunny” truly epitomizing a bad collective sense of virtue, we now have a culture of vice. You don’t need abusive parenting or corruptive schooling to yield an LVP (though it helps). Just expose the child, unfettered, to enough TV, internet, and popular music.

And this is why, my friends, I’ve said that we can’t MAGA unless we MAMA: Make America Moral Again. A vice-ridden culture begets vice-ridden people — who then gravitate toward vice-reflecting ideology.

It’s so simple, perfect and demonic a scheme for creating citizens “of intemperate minds” who’ll invite and deserve tyranny that the suspicious could almost think it’s a conspiracy, and suspicious theists could almost think it’s a conspiracy transcending man. For we’ve heard that “politics is downstream from culture,” but the cleverest beings know that culture is downstream and upstream from human hearts.

Podcast thread for Feb 17

 

Try to treat yourself nicer.

California Chased Out Another Billionaire, Bringing the Total Money Lost To...

California Chased Out Another Billionaire, Bringing the Total Money Lost To...

Stephen Green for PJ Media

AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File

Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick says he's the latest billionaire to join the exodus out of California as the "billionaire tax" initiative gathers signatures for the November ballot. "On December 18, I moved to Texas," he told TPBN hosts John Coogan and Jordi Hays. "I don't know what's so specific about December 18, but let's just say it's prior to January."

If the initiative passes, it would levy a one-time 5% tax on the entire net worth of the state's billionaires, backdated to Jan. 1, 2026. That much you probably already knew.

What you might not know about the so-called Billionaire's Tax Act is who is pushing for it and why — or how much it's already cost the state.

The initiative's primary sponsor is SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW), which hopes to literally cash in on the tech sector's riches. The Billionaire's Tax Act, according to the union, would direct any funds raised "primarily to healthcare funding and food assistance programs through the newly created 2026 Billionaire Tax Reserve Fund."

I think we know how that would play out in the real world: as a slush fund by, for, and of the SEIU.

The union's initiative — officially known as Initiative No. 25-0024 — hasn't yet gathered enough signatures to put it on the ballot in November. The best current estimate is that around 220,000 or so have been collected, out of the 874,641 valid voter signatures required by law. 

But the SEIU has until June 25 to get there, and the union isn't just well-organized — it believes there's [dr_evil_voice] ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS [/dr_evil_voice] to be had. 

That kind of revenue booty does tend to focus one's efforts, but the opposition is well-funded (duh!) and even includes California Gov. Gavin Newsom. 

Here's the thing, though: Billionaires like Kalanick aren't waiting around to see if it passes or not.

While the SEIU-UHW website claims that "The tax would be paid only by Californians worth more than $1 billion — which is about 200 people who hold a combined wealth of $2 trillion," those are 200 highly mobile people.

So mobile that with Kalanick becoming the latest high-profile billionaire to set up residence elsewhere, an estimated $536 billion worth of billionaires have fled California. That's more than a quarter of the $2 trillion SEIU-UHW was hoping to wet its beak in, bringing the hoped-for windfall down to "just" $74 billion or so.

But this is a public service sector union, so naturally, things get worse.

Venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya estimated that by January, $1 trillion of billionaire wealth "has left California," and "taking their income tax revenue, sales tax revenue, real estate tax revenue and all their staffs (and their salaries and income taxes) with them."

"With no rich people left in California," Palihapitiya concluded, "the middle class will have to foot the bill" for Sacramento's lavish ways.

Ha-ha, so funny. California already chased out so much of the middle class with taxes and regulations that it's hardly worth squeezing the survivors. 

In any case, if Palihapitiya is correct, the billionaire's tax might raise $50 billion.

Assuming the initiative passes, which is unsafe to assume, given the opposition. And survives the inevitable court challenges. To my eyes, Initiative No. 25-0024 looks like an unconstitutional taking, although granted, you never know what the courts might decide. 

But the money has already left the state, perhaps never to return. 

They just don't need the headache.

Weirdos, Child-Haters, and Other Leftists

Townhall 

The Left never—never—fails, daily, to produce something perverted, abnormal, violent, irrational, decadent, barbaric, and utterly, completely stupid. Let me share with you three recent examples I ran across.

1. This first one is Canadian, a country that is farther gone (if that is possible) into leftism than many Americans. This is incredible…well, for the Left, no, it's not. Headline from the National Post: "Ontario resident who wants both a vagina and penis wins public funding for unique surgery; A court has ruled Ontario must pay for a penis-sparing vaginoplasty for a person who identifies as neither fully female nor fully male"

Are there any words, in the tongues of men or angels, that can describe this? Here's a freak who claims he doesn't know if he is a man or a woman, so he wants both a penis and a vagina. I guess he can't make it with either gender, so he wants to have sex with himself. I've got to admit, this is a new one to me, though I admit no surprise. Some pervert in America will surely see this and want the same thing. There is no stopping point for these people.

But what is perhaps even more inconceivable is that a judge in Canada is demanding that the taxpayers of that country pay for this man's sick, perverted obsession! A judge, someone who is supposed to have a modicum of normality and common sense, who is allegedly one of the public "leaders" of his nation, is forcing Canadian citizens to support this degenerate, decadent, ghoulish debauchery. I can understand one of these mentally aberrant kooks who ought to be in an asylum not understanding what he is doing and demanding both a penis and a vagina, but for a judge to go along with it, and demand citizens pay for it? This is just indescribable, beyond the comprehension of any normal, rational human being. My best friend is a Canadian, and he tells me Canada is gone. It's hard to argue with him.

2. Headline two illustrates the "love" the Left has for children. From Breitbart: "School-led Anti-ICE Protesters Grow Increasingly Violent, Putting Children in Danger"

We've all heard about these schools where teachers, administrators, etc., are dismissing classes so they can go on "anti-ICE" protests. The Left has no sense of duty or responsibility to the people who pay their salaries. Ideology is, by far, the most important thing to them, and no duty, even to children, is too sacred to give up for that ideology. This is the way the Left is.

That these protests are becoming "increasingly violent" is no surprise, either, because the Left is always violent, even in their "peaceful" protests. That their school protests are beginning to endanger children is also no shock; the millions of babies they murder every year, and the children they butcher, are a full indication that the Left cares absolutely nothing about children. So, if a few kids get hurt in the anti-ICE protests, then that is the price that must be paid for the cause. Millions of children killed by Lenin, Stalin, Mao et al meant nothing to them, either. Power is everything to the Left, and they will let nothing, or no one, stand between them and it.

3. I wrote an article recently for Townhall about the illogical reasoning of the Left. I found another brilliant example of that which I wish to share with you. From X: 

"There should be a rule in America that if you hate immigrants, you can no longer eat their food…enjoy your potato." – Trevor Noah 

I've never heard of Trevor Noah; maybe his mother knows who he is. I do know he isn't very intelligent. Or totally dishonest. Notice a few things about this quote.

It should be a "rule" in America…not a "law." The reason it shouldn't be a law is that the Left doesn't believe in any they don't create. The illegals are breaking our current law, so using the word "law" would imply that some exist and can be broken. Can't use that with the illegals, can we? Hence, the word "rule," not "law."

Secondly, his red herring about people hating immigrants. That is a bald-faced lie, something the Left is never above telling, of course. We don't hate immigrants, even "illegal" ones (at least, we shouldn't hate them). Every single American citizen is the descendant of an immigrant, even the Native ("first") Americans who, historians believe, came from East Asia. It's not immigration we hate, or immigrants, even illegal ones. What we "hate" is law-breaking, and that includes any law-breaking, including that by people who illegally enter the country.

Let me state clearly, and unequivocally, that I do not, for one moment, oppose legal immigration. America was built on such—again, all of us are descendants of people who migrated to North America. So, for Trevor Noah to say we "hate immigrants" is just a typical leftist lie to rationalize and justify the Democratic Party's total politicization of illegal immigration. They want the illegals here. They want to give them amnesty, then citizenship and the right to vote, so that they will (hopefully) vote for the Democratic Party and make that party the majority party in America. That is 100 percent the reason the Democrats support illegal immigration. Not because these people are "refugees" from "oppressed" nations. Let them prove it if they are. If we are going to accept all "refugees" from "oppressed" nations, we'd have to allow 1.5 billion Chinese into the country, and how many from the Middle East and Africa? The "refugee" argument is absurd.

If we let the illegals break the law, then we establish the principle that people can violate our laws whenever they fancy; that means you and me, too. America would no longer be a nation of laws but of arbitrary human beings.

But the Left will never stop, not until they are totally crushed.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Oh My, This Is Embarrassing: Eric Swalwell's Erotic Poetry

RedState 

Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell (CA-14) is running for governor of California. 

It's not going very well for him so far, as the Republicans are leading in the most recent polling and the Democrats aren't coalescing around him, instead splitting their votes among multiple people. 

He's even getting called out for missing a lot of votes in Congress by one of his Democrat opponents in the race, billionaire Tom Steyer. 

One of his main problems is that people don't take him seriously, and he's viewed as a lightweight, in my opinion.

So I'm just going to take a wild guess that this story about his erotic poetry isn't going to help him in that regard. 

I give you fair warning. Gird yourself, this is embarrassing. 

The Democrat, now running for governor, wrote the eyebrow-raising piece when he was a 19-year-old student enrolled at Campbell University, where he contributed to the literary magazine “The Lyricist” and also penned a column for the student newspaper, according to Daily Mail.

The poem, titled “Hungover From Burgundy,” describes two partners meeting atop a hotel before having “formless and magnificent” sex in a “flurry of limbs and nails,” with the narrator appearing to relish being bitten.

“While I screamed / She bent her lips to mine,” the passage reads, adding the pair kept kissing “till veins imploded and exploded … For bounded mouths cannot speak of parting.”

“And there beauty was, formless and magnificent — a flurry of limbs and nails. She chased and I ran, I chased and she ran,” Swalwell wrote in the poem.

The poem continued:

“Atop my hotel she stopped, and I lept for cloth and tan, my anxious arm she bit — my scar is beautiful.”

Swalwell continued: “While I screamed, she bent her lips to mine. Kissing till veins imploded and exploded, till blood rolled down our chins, for bounded mouths cannot speak of parting.”

“In the morning, I awoke beside beauty’s shadow — her form sloppy and her legs pale. My scar lost, my lips cracked and dry. And we groaned simultaneously."

I don't know if I can say "eww" enough over that one. Seriously, Eric? Biting and chasing? Eeks. And on top of that, it's just not a very good poem. But perhaps given the thoughts about biting, getting together with someone named "Fang" was a foregone conclusion.

Frankly, it reads like he was trying to be edgy but had no idea, so this is what he came out with. 

His team is trying to fluff it off.

His spokesman laughed off the cringeworthy poetic effort. 'If you think Eric's poetry at 18 was bad, you should see his diary entries from when he was 12,’ he said.

Diary entries? Oh, lord, dig the hole deeper. He really has no sense of the public. 

But that wasn't going to stop the mockery. 

Our managing editor thought of the irony of the school's fight slogan. 

The problem, of course, is that he still doesn't have much substance. 

Press Release: How Government Funding Broke American Science—and How to Fix It

 

National Association of Scholars

February 17, 2026; New York, NY—American science is suffering a crisis of public trust. Long-standing doubts about the quality of the scientific literature, the COVID-19 debacle, and the overt politicization of climate “science” and transgender “affirming care” as a euphemism for child mutilation have all fed into the current crisis of confidence.

In a new report, Rescuing Science: Recovering Science as Civic Virtue, Dr. J Scott Turner, Director of Science Programs for the National Association of Scholars, argues that the crisis is rooted in the National Science Foundation's founding in 1950. That’s when the federal government imposed itself as the nation’s scientific gatekeeper.

Government funding of academic research was minuscule prior to World War II. Since 1950, federal expenditures for academic science have grown to roughly $100 billion annually. This spending was intended to promote scientific discovery, but instead, it taught scientists to conform to deep-state priorities. It fertilized the growth of a self-aggrandizing class of hangers-on and rent-seekers that constitute an effective Big Science Cartel.

“The growing power of the Big Science Cartel has transformed science,” says Turner. “Where pre-war science and scientific careers were shaped around an ethic of discovery, an ethic of production now prevails.” Turner argues that “intellectual autonomy, originality, and creativity have been replaced by a culture of conformity, crowd-following, and careers built on bogus metrics of success.”

According to Turner, rescuing science will require dismantling the network of perverse incentives that sustain the Big Science Cartel: close the National Science Foundation, and phase out the extramural research programs of more than a dozen federal agencies. In its place, we must restore the Small Science Ecosystem that prevailed prior to World War II, in which basic science was supported largely by philanthropy and university institutional funds. This was better suited to fostering the culture of scientific discovery.

In Rescuing Science, Turner lays out a 10–20-year glide path to restoring the academic sciences to an ethic of discovery. This will include immediate changes in the protocols for funding research grants, as well as longer-term reforms to restore decision-making power to scientists, and to changes in graduate education that will foster creativity and independence in future generations of scientists. The end goal will be to remove the government entirely from supporting academic science.

Rescuing Science: Recovering Science as Civic Virtue will be released to the public on February 17, 2026, at 6 pm ET, via live stream and in-person audiences. Register here. 

NAS is a network of scholars and citizens united by a commitment to academic freedom, disinterested scholarship, and excellence in American higher education. Membership in NAS is open to all who share a commitment to these broad principles. NAS publishes a journal and has state and regional affiliates. Visit NAS at www.nas.org.

Secretary Marco Rubio Joint Press Conference with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban

Secretary Marco Rubio went out of his way in this joint presser to emphasize the personal relationship between Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and U.S. President Donald Trump.  Orban is facing a serious election challenge this April and all of the EU/NATO systems are actively trying to create pressure points to remove him.

Secretary Marco Rubio is in Budapest today for meetings with Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his government to include the signing of a civilian-nuclear cooperation agreement heralded by the Trump administration. Hungary is one of the few voices within the European Union who is pushing back against Brussels efforts to go to war against Russia.

Prime Minister Orban has been very critical of Ukraine, openly stating his opposition to EU membership for the embattled country. In response President Zelenskyy has weaponized Ukraine’s geographical stewardship of oil and gas pipelines to shut down Hungarian energy and drive-up prices. VIDEO:

[Transcript] – MODERATOR: (Via interpreter) Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.  May I extend my most cordial welcome to all of you, and may I extend my most special welcome to His Excellency Mr. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State of the United States of America, at the press conference and signing ceremony organized on the occasion of his visit to Hungary.  Let me also extend my warm welcome to Mr. Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary, members of the U.S. and Hungarian delegations, and all our esteemed guests.

At today’s event, the agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Hungary to facilitate cooperation on the civilian nuclear program in Hungary will be signed.  The signatories to the agreement on behalf of the United States of America, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and on behalf of Hungary, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Mr. Peter Szijjarto.

MODERATOR:  (Via interpreter) Thank you very much, gentlemen.  And now, may I invite Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban to deliver his statement.

PRIME MINISTER ORBAN:  (Via interpreter) Good morning, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, distinguished Mr. Secretary of State.  This week starts well.  It’s only Monday, and we are already over friendly and very serious discussion with the Secretary of State arriving from the United States of America.  We agreed upon this visit with the President of the United States on our visit to the U.S. last November, and I’d like to deliver my heartfelt thanks to Secretary of State to – for visiting Hungary and therefore doing a privilege to Hungary.

We reviewed and overviewed our bilateral relationships.  There is a new U.S. President, so I am also adapting to the new expressions.  A new golden age has set upon us concerning the relationship between the United States and Hungary.  We operate with understatements in the Hungarian language and Hungarian politics, but the situation is that I cannot remember – although for 30-odd years I have been present in politics – when the last time it was that the relationships between the two nations were at such a high level, so balanced and so friendly.  So, my heartfelt thanks goes to President Trump.

Perhaps the last time we were near this, when President Bush visited us prior to the change of the political regime, which visit greatly contributed to us doing away with the communists and the Warsaw Pact.  Since then, we had better and worse periods in the U.S.-Hungarian relationships, but we’ve never been to this high a level.

Since last year’s January, 17 U.S. investments have been decided upon here in Hungary.  This is a decade-long record.  And Hungarians can once again travel to the U.S. without a visa – thank you very much, Mr. Secretary of State.  Hungary was invited to the Peace Council.  The first inauguration meeting will take place in Washington, D.C., this Thursday, perhaps where I shall represent Hungary.  And we entered into agreements of key importance in the fields of energy, including oil, gas, and nuclear energy.  And these agreements, with the exception provided by the President of United States of America which allows for the use of Russian gas and oil here in Hungary, jointly contribute to the fact that Hungary can continue to remain secure on the aspect of energy supply and that we shall be able to supply households and the industry with cheap energy in an international comparison.  And we also discussed the refinery in Serbia, how that can be purchased – NIS – how NIS can be purchased by MOL, the Hungarian oil company.

As for me, I assured Secretary of State Mr. Rubio that Hungary continues to support, regardless of European conflicts (inaudible), Hungary shall continue to support the efforts of peace of the U.S. in Ukraine.  The current President of the United States did the most in international politics in order to ensure peace in the Russia-Ukrainian war.  And I must reiterate, although everybody knows, that if Donald Trump had been the president of the United States, this war would never have broken out.  And if he were not the President now, then we would not even stand a chance to put an end to the war with peace.  So, thanks goes to the United States President for his efforts in favor of peace.

Hungary remains ready that if there is a peace summit, that we provide a venue for that here in Budapest, and I assured Mr. Rubio that Mr. Trump has a live invitation to Hungary.  Thank you very much, Mr. State Secretary, for the opportunity to enter into discussions today.

MODERATOR:  (Via interpreter) Thank you very much, Mr. Prime Minister.  Now, may I invite Secretary of the United States of America Marco Rubio to make a statement?

SECRETARY RUBIO:  Well, thank you, Mr. Prime Minister, for welcoming us here today.  It’s an honor to be with you in this incredibly gorgeous city.  It’s my first time being here, and it’s phenomenal, even to be in this hall where – and the history behind it and everything that’s going on here.

The second is the relationship – you talked about the golden age, which is not an exaggeration.  The relationship between the United States and Hungary today is as close as I can possibly imagine it being.  And it’s not just close rhetorically; it’s close in action and things that are actually happening.  And I think some evidence of that is here today in the agreement that we’ve just signed that builds on a historic meeting that we had in November at the White House, that you had with the President and that I happened to be – have the honor to be present and be a part of.

The signed agreement we’ve had today is one that we hope will be many in the years to come in areas of collaboration.  You spoke about the 17 investments.  To those who think that Hungary is being isolated, that’s an example of the fact that that’s not the case – that under the prime minister’s leadership, in fact, there is a growing number of American companies, as evidenced by the 17 that have already arrived, who want to invest in your economy and want to be a part of what’s happening here and are excited about it – because you have strong leadership, because you have leadership that we know are going to protect investments and allow it to continue to be a place that’s friendly for business, and be competitive with rules that are competitive that allow businesses to grow and prosper in comparison to other places.  And there are so many other areas that we can work together on, especially on energy, but just so many areas of common interest.

But I have to say this because it’s important to understand.  We are entering this golden era of relations between our countries, and not simply because the alignment of our people, but because of the relationship that you have with the President of the United States.  I don’t think it is any mystery – and should not be a mystery to anyone here – how the President feels about you, how he interacted with you in his first term as President, and now in his second term as President that relationship’s grown even closer.  And it’s important to understand how important the relations between leaders are to the relations between countries.  There is – we are – at the end of the day, we are still human, we are still people, and that person-to-person connection that you’ve established with the President has made all the difference in the world in building this relationship and in hopefully growing this relationship even more.

It is the kind of thing that I think, for example, I can say to you with confidence that President Trump is deeply committed to your success because your success is our success, because this relationship we have here in Central Europe through you is so essential and vital for our national interests in the years to come – that if you face financial struggles, if you face things that are impediments to growth, if you face things that threaten the stability of your country, I know that President Trump will be very interested because of your relationship with him and because of this importance of this country to us, to finding ways to provide assistance if that moment ever were to arise, and obviously with regards to finances and the like.

I also think it’s the reason why, in your visit in November, you saw an extension of – and a suspension of the imposition of sanctions and allowed to move forward on energy.  It was because of that personal relationship.  It’s because we want you to continue, because we want this economy to prosper, we want this country to do well.  It’s in our national interest.  Especially as long as you’re the prime minister and the leader of this country, it’s in our national interest that Hungary be successful.  It helps America, and obviously it helps you.

So, it’s an honor to be with you here today.  We have a lot that we can continue to work on.  We also want to thank you, and I want to thank you, on behalf of the President of the United States, for the indispensable role you’ve played on the Board of Peace.  Not everyone’s on the Board of Peace, and not everyone – for different reasons they can be participants or not be participants, but you are, and you’ve been there from the very first day.  And again, a testament to the personal relationship between President Trump and Prime Minister Orban that I think speaks volumes.  The role you play geopolitically, the role you play even outside of this region in affairs involving the Middle East, is invaluable and indispensable, and we are very appreciative of it.

And that’s why after traveling to Munich for the Security Conference, I wanted to make sure we paid a visit here to continue to build on this relationship and to signal very clearly that not only are we in a golden age, but we haven’t even scratched the surface of what we can achieve together as a people – as peoples, as nations, and as leaders.  And so I thank you for the opportunity to be with all of you here today, and thank you for the very warm invitation and the very important conversations that we had where we touched on a bunch of subjects and a bunch of topics that I think will be of great interest back in Washington when I return.  Thank you.

MODERATOR:  (Via interpreter) Mr. Secretary of State, thank you very much.  We have some time for questions.  Hungarian Television gets the floor.

QUESTION:  (Via interpreter) Good morning.  I am Laszlo Meszaros.  Volodymyr Zelenskyy, president of Ukraine, is constantly attacking Prime Minister Viktor Orban for not supporting the accession of Ukraine.  What is your take on this political action, this political attack against a NATO and EU member-state?

PRIME MINISTER ORBAN:  (Via interpreter) And who is the question addressed to?

QUESTION:  (Via interpreter) Both of you.  Both of you, naturally.

PRIME MINISTER ORBAN:  (Via interpreter) I don’t wish to drag Secretary of State into Hungarian internal political issues.

(In English) So if you allow me, I start to answer first to this question.

(Via interpreter) The Ukrainians and their president obviously have entered into the Hungarian election campaign.  For a while, I was thinking whether we should take that on the wrong note or not.  I mean, with such brutal openness entering into the election campaign of another country is not very frequent.  You don’t see that often.  But then again, I realized it was understandable, because the Hungarian elections is the most important to Hungarian people but it has an impact beyond Hungary as well.  And the Ukrainians quite justly believe that what government Hungary shall have is significant to them.  And there are only two options.

One is what you knew well – that is the option of the Hungarian people who, at a vote – vote 2025, clearly stated that they would not undertake the Ukraine acceding to the European Union because that would drag us into a war and ruin our economy.  And you can also know that we shall not provide money for Brussels in order for them to send that to Ukraine.

The other option, which is a real option, and the Ukrainians would favor that – and with common sense you can realize that if a government arrived which would want or which will accept Ukraine becoming a member of the European Union, they obviously want a government which will take a part in the financial burden of Ukraine – in other words, send money to Ukraine.  And for the Ukrainians it does matter what the outcome of the elections will be, therefore they decided to participate in the campaign.  And since we stand on the ground of common sense, we must not be surprised at that.  We must adapt to it, and we must acknowledge that the Ukrainian president and Ukraine will be an active participant of this election, and we have to prevail against them too.  That is our reality.  Anything else attached to that – the future of the war, the funding of the war – are beyond the framework of this press conference.   I will not go into detail.

I would only return to a single aspect, that this is an election.  As an election, people decide.  And for Ukraine, it does matter what the outcome of the decision is, and therefore, they put their full weight and weaponry in participating in the Hungarian campaign.  We know full well that they fund – finance our opponents.  We know how that happens.  This is a well-known, written fact.

But once again, we must not be outraged, but we must acknowledge that this campaign in Hungary also has an international dimension – in other directions, too, but in the Ukrainian direction.  That is why it’s an important international event, not only for Hungarians, but as the example of the Ukrainians shows, it’s important for other greater nations.  That’s how you have to win elections.  We have won elections in many ways.  Now, we shall win this way.

SECRETARY RUBIO:  My only comment is the United States interest is to see the war end, and we want to do what we can to make it end.  We’re the only nation on Earth that apparently can get both sides to the table to talk.  I’m not here to insult anybody, but the United Nations hasn’t been able to do it.  There’s no other country in Europe that’s been able to do it.  The United States has been successful at being able to get both sides to talk.  I mean, for the first time in a number of years, you have – truly have, at a technical level, military officials from both sides sat down last week in the Middle East.  And we’ll restart those talks again in Geneva later this week.  I think that’s a very positive thing.

That said, all we are trying to do is play a role, if it’s possible, in reaching a deal.  We’re not seeking to impose a deal on anybody.  We’re not trying to force anyone to take a deal they don’t want to take.  We just want to help them, because we think it’s a war that’s incredibly damaging. We think it’s a war that’s incredibly destructive.  We think it’s a war that never should have happened and should end as soon as possible.  That’s how the President feels, and the President’s invested a tremendous amount of time and political capital in trying to serve a useful purpose.  Usually, in my time observing geopolitics, when a president tries to engage himself in peacemaking and in ending wars, that’s usually applauded.

So, this is one of the few times, for a lot of different reasons – I don’t know what they may be, but maybe I can speculate what they are – where people actually criticize a President trying to end a war.  Usually when you’re trying to end wars, the international community applauds you.  This is one of the few wars I’ve ever seen where some people in the international community condemn you for trying to help end a war.  But that’s what we’re trying to do.  That’s what we’re going to continue to do as long as our role is, and our engagement is, a positive one.

And, hopefully, the war will end – the sooner, the better.  It should have ended a long time ago.  It should have never actually happened.  This war should have never happened.  This war would have never happened if Donald Trump had been president of the United States at the time it began.  But that’s what happened, and so now here we are.  So, we’re going to continue to do everything we can to try to bring it to an end.  And if we can be successful at it, I think the world will be a better place.  And if we can’t, then unfortunately the suffering and the dying and the killing will continue, and that’s not good for anybody, but that’s where we find ourselves.  So hopefully we can stop it, but let’s see.

MODERATOR:  Next is CBS News.  Please, Olivia.

QUESTION:  Thank you very much.  Budapest is, in fact, beautiful.  Mr. Secretary, on the notion of a golden age, why isn’t the United States conditioning deeper cooperation with Budapest on Hungary reducing its extensive and ongoing, deepening cooperation with China, which is a strategic rival for the United States?

Secondly, if, despite President Trump’s endorsement and your visit here, Prime Minister Orban does not succeed and loses the April election, does the U.S. commit to working with his challenger constructively?  Prime Minister Orban, do you commit to accepting electoral defeat if it happens?