Return to Transcripts main page

Smerconish

Trump: Zelenskyy Coming To Oval Office For A Meeting Monday; Trump And Putin End Summit With Talk Of Progress But No Deal; Trump Put The Onus On Zelenskyy To Negotiate A Ceasefire; Body Language Expert On Trump-Putin Summit. Hillary Clinton Says She'd Nominate Trump For Nobel Prize If He Brokers Peace; Mayors Of Democratic Cities Beyond D.C. Decry Trump's Takeover Threats; Detroit's Mayor Launches Independent Run For Governor. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired August 16, 2025 - 09:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:00:31]

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN ANCHOR: No questions were taken, but so many remain. I'm Michael Smerconish in the Philly burbs. There will be no immediate ceasefire, that's really all we know for sure. After the two and a half hour meeting between Presidents Trump and Putin, Trump reported that while there'd been great progress, quote, "we didn't get there." He suggested there was one big area of disagreement but didn't reveal exactly what that was.

He later told Sean Hannity that it's up to President Zelenskyy to get it done. And now Ukraine's president will come to the White House on Monday. Some were quick to call it a fail given that en route to Anchorage, Trump told Bret Baier that he wouldn't be happy if he left without a ceasefire. Leaving Anchorage, he appeared weary, was uncharacteristically quiet. The banner hanging in Anchorage read pursuing peace, and President Trump has certainly been doing that.

I think he deserves credit for the effort that he's making to end three and a half years of bloodshed in Ukraine and at other global hotspots. And as the song goes, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors. Thus far there've been no leaks, no word on what that one big area of disagreement might be. We're left parsing their words and reading their body language. Words and gestures suggested that when it ended, the two of them remain congenial.

Pre-summit Trump critics worried that Trump would sell out Ukraine. There's no indication that he did that, nor that Putin made any accommodations. But here's a glass half full wish, if Trump and Putin did sketch out a framework, a deal, they could not have said so that would have appeared heavy handed toward President Zelenskyy and Ukraine. Maybe there was a quiet concession from Putin that Trump will now present to Zelenskyy on Monday. We'll cern loon (ph) -- we'll learn soon, pardon me.

And here will be the tells, does President Trump now impose the very severe consequences that he promised before the summit? And will President Putin continue to up his battlefield war games against Ukraine? Only then will we know the real outcome from Alaska.

Joining me now is former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO and CNN's Senior Military Analyst, Admiral James Stavridis.

Admiral, you heard my short take, the floor is yours.

ADMIRAL JAMES STAVRIDIS, FORMER SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER OF NATO: I'm going to park on severe consequences. I think that is the ultimate tell. It is whether or not President Trump is going to impose a price on Vladimir Putin for what, you know, clearly was yet another round of rope a dope by Putin just coming in, trying to be charming, as charming as a thug like Putin can be, and seeking to kind of tap along the president's words, not mine. So will we impose some sanctions, some consequences, Michael? I think we should.

I think there should be military consequences, for example, triple the number of F-16 fighter aircraft. I think there should be economic consequences, secondary sanctions. And let's go after this oil smuggling fleet that Russia is running, starting pounding those vessels. And then thirdly, politically, I would like to see not bringing the Ukrainians directly into NATO, that would be quite explosive, but opening the taps for various forms of NATO cooperation including with NATO centers of excellence in cyber, air defense, land warfare, for example. So I think there's plenty of arrows in the quiver that President Trump has.

The question is, will he get out a bow and start shooting a few toward Moscow?

SMERCONISH: OK. So in a nice and gentlemanly like way, you're completely dismissive of me saying maybe there's a glimmer of hope. Because as I think about it, Admiral, how could they have stood on that stage and said, hey, we're in agreement on the most significant of issues, then everybody would be saying, how can you do that without Zelenskyy and Ukraine at the table?

STAVRIDIS: I like your thinking. As you said, it's a glass half full. And as the saying goes, from your lips to God's ears, I think the tell in that scenario is going to pop on Monday when we see what the White House meeting looks like between Zelenskyy and President Trump.

[09:05:03]

Here, I'm kind of with you. I'm hopeful that Zelenskyy will have learned from his first go round in the White House. I think President Trump really does want to resolve this crisis.

And here's the missing man in the conversation so far that neither you nor I have mentioned, it's the Europeans. Where are they going to land? To what degree can they pull Trump toward that axis of Kyiv, Paris, London, Berlin? That is going to be the thing to watch, the Europeans as well as the actual meeting Monday. And I hope your scenario comes to pass. SMERCONISH: Yes, I'm not -- I mean, I'm not wagering on it, I'm just trying to be fair. And I'm hearing all the criticism. I'm hearing all the criticism, oh, my God, they rolled out a red carpet as if he should have kneed him in the groin the minute that he stepped off the plane. I mean, he's trying to cut a deal. He, President Trump, is trying to cut a deal.

I'm willing to give him credit for that so long as he doesn't sell out Ukraine in the process. And there's no suggestion that he's done so at this stage. I want to tap into your expertise as a former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, what's the NATO role in all of this? You mention our European allies, be specific now to NATO.

STAVRIDIS: What I would do in terms of unleashing some of the consequences, I would go to the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO who used to be on my team as a hard charging colonel when I was Supreme Allied Commander a decade ago, and I'd say to him, OK, General, you're in charge of putting together a task force of the European powers. Doesn't have to necessarily be under a pure NATO flag, but pull the NATO countries together to provide more training for those F-16 pilots, more battlefield advice, more logistics flow into Ukraine, help facilitate the sale of American weapons paid for by the Europeans, how are they going to get into the hands of the Ukrainians? Big role there for NATO. Again, not pulling Ukraine into NATO, but making them a very close and trusted partner. And it's also a short step from there toward Article 5, security guarantees, which I think is what Zelenskyy ultimately is going to want.

SMERCONISH: Quick, final question, which of the two big buckets, you and I have spoken on radio that there are these two big buckets, one are boundaries and the other are future security guarantees. Which of the two, if either, do you perceive to be the greater impediment to peace?

STAVRIDIS: I think the security guarantees, because that is what Putin is deeply opposed to. Putin is going to fight with everything he's got to avoid a scenario in which Ukraine is actually free and democratic and isn't essentially a proxy or a vassal of Moscow. So in those conversations we spoke about just a moment ago, White House for Zelenskyy, the European engagement in these conversations, watch for how the security guarantees land.

The borders, that's a deal, we can cut that. But the issue that's going to be the challenge are the security guarantees.

SMERCONISH: Admiral, we always appreciate your being here. Thank you so much for your expertise.

And to everybody else at home, here's the poll question of the day at smerconish.com, are you ready for this? If President Trump brokers a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, I'm going to stress these words, that Ukraine finds acceptable, should he be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize? That's the poll question at smerconish.com. Go cast your ballot. I'll give you results as they stand at the end of this hour.

What are your thoughts on social media? Hit me up on social media. You can find me on all the usual platforms, including X.

Bob says, he's too thirsty for the prize, they'll never give it to him. He wouldn't be able to broker a deal anyway. Zelenskyy is more likely to receive it. Be a light in the dark.

Hang on, Bob, just keep that on the screen for a moment because I'm confused. He's too thirsty for the prize. I guess that means Trump is too thirsty to win the Nobel Prize. Consequently, they won't give it to him. Well, hopefully if he deserves it, they'll give it to him. But I, but I get that he's, you know, he's very eager.

He wouldn't be able to broker a deal anyway. Well, let's see. My attitude is -- now you can put it back on me. Let's let this thing breathe. They just had the meeting last night, already people are willing to write it off.

And yet President Zelenskyy is coming to the White House on Monday. There's something that President Trump wishes to tell him. I have no inside information on any of this. I'm just reading all the tea leaves like the rest of you.

[09:09:58]

Up ahead, President Zelenskyy said that he will meet with President Trump in Washington on Monday, as I just referenced after the summit ended without an agreement for a ceasefire. Former U.S. Ambassador to Poland, Mark Brzezinski, is going to join me. And from the red carpet rollout to the presidential gate to how it all ended, what can we learn from the body language? I've got an expert. Also, Mayor Mike Duggan, the second longest serving mayor in Detroit's history, he has the record for the largest back to back landslides ever.

Why is he now deciding to drop the Democratic Party and run for governor as an Independent? Don't forget to sign up for my newsletter at smerconish.com when you're casting your ballot on the poll question today. Check out what Scott Stantis just drew for us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMERCONISH: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that he'll meet with President Trump in the Oval Office on Monday. Trump said that it's up to Zelenskyy to get a peace deal done with Russia.

[09:15:06]

During an exclusive interview with Fox News, Trump said that there are many points he and Putin agree on, but then he added this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Up to President Zelenskyy to get it done. And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit. And if they'd like, I'll be at that next meeting. They're going to set up a meeting now between President Zelenskyy and President Putin and myself, I guess, you know, I didn't even -- I didn't ask you about it. Not that I want to be there, but I want to make sure it gets done.

And we have a pretty good chance of getting it done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Trump's comments to Hannity come after the president had previously indicated he did not feel that he was negotiating on behalf of Ukraine, but has promised to find an end to the war there.

Joining me now from Warsaw is Mark Brzezinski, former U.S. ambassador to Poland and Sweden. He previously served in the White House on the National Security Council. Today, he's the CEO of Brzezinski Global Strategies, LLC.

Mr. Ambassador, nice to have you back. I remember three years ago when the war began we were together in Poland. And so I'm most eager to hear what stands out from yesterday in your mind.

MARK BRZEZINSKI, CEO, BRZEZINSKI GLOBAL STRATEGIES: Michael, what jumps out to me most about what happened yesterday is the reflection, the reflection of the pomp and circumstance and the warmth of the American president's greeting of Russian President Putin to the February meeting of President Trump with Ukraine President Zelenskyy, where Zelenskyy was effectively tossed out of the White House. And for this part of the world where I'm speaking to you today in Warsaw, in Central and Eastern Europe, a landmass of almost 200 million people, that is a scary reflection because it symbolizes a subordination, a subordination of Central and Eastern Europe to the interests of Russia. And Russia has pulverized Ukraine.

SMERCONISH: So I thought that the emasculation, and that's what it was of President Zelenskyy back in February with the president and the vice president and others, I thought it was horrible, I thought it was embarrassing. Having said that, with regard to yesterday, I don't have a problem with the red carpet because Trump's trying to cut a deal. Do you, with your record of diplomacy, object to the way in which Putin was welcomed in Anchorage?

BRZEZINSKI: Well, I thought that yesterday what it was actually was a working meeting, a working meeting hopefully towards a ceasefire. And I see a ceasefire in comparison to a peace plan because that is effectively what Trump conveys when he says he wants hostilities to cease immediately.

Let me stay up front, Michael, that it is good. It is good for the American president to try to bring peace to the Russian Ukraine conflict. And we, regardless of who we all supported in the American elections last November, we all want President Trump to be successful in this. The world will be a better place if he is successful.

But with that kind of warmth, the one-on-one personal connection between a man indicted for war crimes, Vladimir Putin, who has created a conflict with almost 1 million casualties, Michael, being greeted warmly, let's see how warm the welcome of Zelenskyy is to the White House on Monday. If Zelenskyy --

SMERCONISH: I agree with you, I agree.

BRZEZINSKI: -- is also greeted with (inaudible). Yes.

SMERCONISH: I hope -- I hope he also gets the red carpet and then some.

Mr. Ambassador, President Trump, it seems to me, has more recently been more solicitous of the opinions of our allies. Are they appreciative of him trying to broker this, or would they rather he not be involved? And by the way, if the answer is the latter, then how could it otherwise end?

BRZEZINSKI: Well, I think that the European leaders are appreciative of being consulted and engaged. But Michael, President Trump is an unconventional American leader to many, including European leaders, because for them, there is no blueprint in terms of what America is trying to do here. Sometimes it seems like President Trump is being tougher on Putin and then he's solicitous of him. The same thing with Zelenskyy. And the Europeans are trying to figure out what is the roadmap here.

What is President Trump trying to get to? There are vague notions that he wants to win the Nobel Prize. And frankly, good for President Trump to want to win the Nobel Prize by bringing peace. And if he lands a ceasefire, if President Trump is able to end the hostilities between this terribly bloody war that again has created almost 1 million casualties on both sides in Eastern Europe, then, I mean, that is very deserving of an accomplishment. But the European leaders are confused and only recently have been consulted closely.

[09:20:00]

SMERCONISH: I want to ask you the same question that I asked Admiral James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, with regard to, as I see it, the two major buckets that stand in the way of peace, one being boundaries and the other being future security agreements. Which of the two do you think is more problematic to securing this resolution?

BRZEZINSKI: Michael, I think the future security agreement, and I'll tell you why, because this has been --

SMERCONISH: That's what he says.

BRZEZINSKI: -- such a bloody -- there's been such a blood -- this has been such a bloody war that even if a ceasefire is put in place and a peace plan is negotiated, the sense that there must be retribution on both sides, Ukrainians for having been killed, Russians for having been killed, will continue. This is the worst, bloodiest conflict since World War II on European soil. And payback will be on the minds of the Russians and Ukrainians for a while. And so a security guarantee in terms of how to see it through will be a tough thing to do.

SMERCONISH: Ambassador Brzezinski, nice to see you again. I look forward to joining you in Warsaw again at some point in the future. And everybody else at home, keep the social media reactions coming. You can find me on all the social media platforms, including X.

Is Peace defined as 24 hours, 72 hours, one month? Does anyone really believe this war can be resolved while we have the same regime in Russia? Says Dr. Hindy.

But Dr. Hindi, what would be then the alternative? Do nothing and stand by and accept the status quo?

By the way, I want to underscore and make crystal clear that Mark Brzezinski speaks for me when he reminds us of the, my word, emasculation that Zelenskyy, President Zelenskyy was put through in February in the Oval Office. I thought it was disgraceful. I said so at the time on Sirius XM Radio and here on CNN. OK.

Having said that, I am appreciative of President Trump trying to get this done. And I would ask all of you because I -- I'm sure that, you know, the criticism will continue to come, and that's fine, I welcome it. What else has transpired in the last three and a half years that perhaps has brought so much focus and we hope to the precipice of maybe where there could be a resolution. Nothing I can think of. Nothing I can think of.

I want to remind you, go to my website at smerconish.com and answer today's poll question, if President Trump brokers a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine that Ukraine finds acceptable, should he be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize?

Still to come, President Trump said that there's no deal until there's a deal. But what can we learn from how these two world leaders greeted each other? The handshake, that clap, that clap before Putin walked up to him, the news conference. A body language expert is going to break it all down for us. I love that stuff.

And will Trump's DC takeover happen in other cities? The mayor of Detroit joins us. Under his stewardship, the crime rate has dropped 17 percent, still high. Would he work with President Trump to fight crime? Sign up for the newsletter at smerconish.com you'll see the work of prize winning illustrators like Steve Breen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:27:42]

SMERCONISH: As the U.S. seeks a cease fire in the Russia-Ukraine war, what did President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin's body language tell us about their high stakes summit? Joining me now is behavioral analyst and body language expert Chris Ulrich.

Chris, thanks so much for being here. I've got five cuts. I cannot wait to hear what you have to say. Let's begin and we'll roll these and you can analyze.

Let's begin with the clap. The clap by President Trump as Putin is approaching him. What do you make of the clap? CHRIS ULRICH, BEHAVIORAL ANALYST AND BODY LANGUAGE EXPERT: Michael, this is a moment. Remember when Trump gets that carpet there, he's waiting. He's in the authority position. By using that clap, he's taking some of the authority out of the moment, going from host into receiver. He offers a rapport, an opportunity to lighten the moment through that clap.

It's followed by a smile as he puts his hand out in this very open palm gesture. It's an interesting hand move that he does in order to clap in that particular. So the clap just takes some of the intensity out of the moment.

SMERCONISH: And we showed the handshake as well. The handshake, the warm greeting between them. By the way, with regard to the clap, I hear a lot of criticism, like, why would he clap for Putin? I don't have your expertise, but I took that as. It's like, hey, I'm happy you're here.

Like Chris Ulrich, I'm happy you're on my show today. All right, we're going to do this.

ULRICH: Yes. Keep in mind that a clap moment like this, we'll see tonight, show hosts and other folks to do this, it's like, let's get ready. Let's get ready to do this. The handshake that follows that is a moment of opportunity for them to connect.

And that handshake, Michael, lasts for 10 seconds as they build rapport. They're smiling at each other. They're making eye contact as they're looking at each other. This is a moment of rapport building and parity. And even in those moments, keep in mind, Michael, the handshake is a negotiation, an ongoing signal for power.

Here Trump shows deference, followed by pulling the hand in and using these touch gestures to reestablish dominance as they walk down, showing he's in control, he's in command.

SMERCONISH: Look, this is -- this is not their first rodeo.

ULRICH: Correct.

SMERCONISH: Clearly, each of them thought in advance, am I going to smile? What do I want to transmit? It's the farthest thing from a candid moment, you know, that you're ever going to find.

All right, we have some behind the scenes footage. Can we go to the behind the scenes footage and have Chris Ulrich analyze what he sees in this? Hopefully you've seen it or can watch it now. Tell me what you see.

ULRICH: I'm looking at it now, Michael. It is Trump in the middle here. It's an ongoing conversation. Now, you've got to frame yourself, defame yourself we always see. There's Trump in the middle kind of holding cohort.

He's talking to the president. He's talking to the adviser. And him being in the middle, it's cordial. It's kind. They're open. They're not in each other's faces. Even the handshake moment is like a follow up moment. They also know probably the cameras are on them.

And you're right, that initial handshake is a climax moment of that engagement. Like, it's staged. And here it's a little more behind the scenes.

But even here, Trump does his effort here where he'll pat the other person's hand, it's a dominant gesture. It's like he's in control. He's in command. That is the narrative that they're looking for in this ongoing -- this -- at this summit.

SMERCONISH: Chris, for reasons I don't have time to elaborate today, I once spent seven hours in the company of Fidel Castro. By the way, I can hear half the audience -- I can hear half the audience saying, of course you did.

But the point is, he had an interpreter. He had an interpreter that I don't think he needed. I think it was a way that he had additional time for reflection and -- you know, Putin used English in making the Moscow reference yesterday. I think he does the same thing that I suspect of Castro. Quick reaction to that.

ULRICH: Yes, he's -- he is good at listening to passive English, right? But he does do that. It gives him a moment to think, to prepare the response. And we see that at the end of their conversation that turn to say, this is, you know, come to Moscow next.

In this subdued setting compared to when they come into the room, it's much more. So, by the end we see Trump, who was in command in the beginning now, by taking that pause, by using those moments, Putin is able to now turn -- and he looks more in command in those particular moments by the end.

It's a -- it's a bit of a switch. It's more subdued by that end. And your -- other guests you've had on here commented on that change in energy, but that pause allows Putin to come across much more powerfully in that particular moment.

SMERCONISH: OK. After the meeting, now they come out to the two podiums. This is the presser. They didn't take any questions. We'll run that footage. What are you seeing in this?

ULRICH: Well, this is really interesting, right? This is -- they're managing optics here. By the end, there's only like a two or three second handshake. They know that they're probably not going to take questions here. And it is this quietness.

Now, they're -- they're -- Putin is speaking. He's listening on the earphone. It's very cordial. It's typical Trump.

We saw this during the debates and other elements. He -- there is a party going on with his face. We'd have to ask him what's happening in those particular moments. But he's taking it in. He's listening.

There's -- it's -- it's a calm moment between the two. It's a much different energy in the room before we saw them. Even in that behind- the-scenes footage at the top of the footage, they're much more engaging. They're much more -- there's a lot of energy. Here we see the exact opposite of that, much more formal. This is the formal part of the opportunity.

And finally, Michael, the language that happens at the end here, when Trump uses the language -- when we talk about statements and the power of statements, he says, we didn't get there, but there's a great chance we'll get there.

That language at top, you might be like, what? But what he's doing here is buying time, continuing like the sign on the back says, let's keep pursuing peace. But it also gives them both political cover. And finally, it offers the opportunity to figure out what the there -- there is and gives them strategic ambiguity.

SMERCONISH: I have one more.

ULRICH: Yes.

SMERCONISH: All right. One more. The departure. Here's -- here's how they -- here's how they part company. Roll it for Chris. What do you see in that?

ULRICH: Well, let's look at the change, right? From the beginning where they're taking their time, they're engaged, there's a lot of taps, this is a very quick handshake. Less than two seconds. Acknowledging the two of them as they walk off the stage, and then they're getting off that stage fast to keep it quiet, to not take any questions.

Trump normally sometimes will entertain a question or two from the reporters. He does not here. He engages and keeps it very formal as they walk out of the room to keep that strategic ambiguity so that by the end -- and we see -- will follow with Zelenskyy coming on Monday.

You referenced Zelenskyy getting the kind of treatment that we saw Putin. It will be fascinating to see the dichotomy of that compared to the last visit with Zelenskyy and -- what we'll see here on Monday.

SMERCONISH: Quick final -- quick final question. When you look at the body language of the two of them leaving the stage, is there any prospect that something good has just taken place?

They look weary. They look tired. Look, they're old guys. They flew a long way. You know, I give them props for that. But is there any reason for optimism that you see in their body language?

ULRICH: Well, it's -- it's what we're not seeing. There's not a -- there's not the joy that we saw in the beginning. So, that may just speak to the seriousness that both sides are embracing this with.

You had mentioned giving Trump credit for this. This is a -- it's a powerful moment in bringing Putin back into -- onto the world stage. So, there may be that tiredness. We wouldn't know unless we had the chance to ask them. But the subdued nature of the finality of this does tell us there's probably more to the story here. What didn't they -- what did they disagree on?

SMERCONISH: Yes.

ULRICH: Time will tell.

SMERCONISH: For sure.

ULRICH: And the conversation will tell.

SMERCONISH: All right. That was awesome. Thank you, Chris. Appreciate it. And for everybody at home keep the social media reactions coming.

[09:35:00]

From the world of YouTube. What do we have?

The arrival was disgraceful. Such a kingmaker moment, says Mary.

Mary, I don't want to be repetitive, but what would you have rather like Putin steps off the plane and we throw him in the dunk tank? I mean, Trump's trying to cut a deal here. If it gets us where we need to go, which is peace and not at the expense of Ukraine -- not at the expense of Ukraine.

As a matter of fact, I want to tell you something else. Secretary Clinton -- Secretary Clinton framed this very interestingly on this whole Nobel Peace Prize business. She said, if Trump can fulfill this without selling out Ukraine, then he deserves it. I'll nominate him. Roll that tape if we have it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), FORMER U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: If he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, had to, in a way, validate Putin's vision of greater Russia, but instead could really stand up to Putin, if we could pull that off, if President Trump were the architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize.

If he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, had to, in a way, validate Putin's vision of greater Russia, but instead --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: There were a lot of caveats in that. There were a lot of caveats in that. We tried to show you the full tape. Others are only showing you a snippet that says, I'd nominate him.

Make sure you're voting on today's poll question at Smerconish.com. If President Trump brokers a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine that Ukraine finds acceptable, should he be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize? Still to come, President Trump declared a public safety emergency in D.C. this week, adding that it may be time for the federal government to step into other high crime cities. He listed by name Chicago, L.A., New York City, Baltimore, and Oakland. One place he did not mention, Detroit. The mayor of the Motor City joins us right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:41:14]

SMERCONISH: President Trump declared a public safety emergency in Washington, D.C., deploying National Guard troops to deal with crime there, and did a press conference earlier this week, he noted that it may be time for the federal government to step into other high crime cities.

One city many think of when they think of crime is Detroit. It's got a long history of troubles, going back to at least the 1967 riots. But many Detroiters lately have a sense that they're climbing out of the hole. And part of the reason is their mayor.

Today's guest, Mike Duggan, a former federal prosecutor -- former state prosecutor, pardon me, elected mayor in 2014 after winning the primary as a write-in candidate. He's since been reelected twice by large margins.

He's been called a detail-oriented leader who concentrates on nuts and bolts issues. And to answer Donald Trump's message, he helped drive the homicide rate down to its lowest rate since the 60s. One thing he won't do, however, is run for another term. Instead, he's going to run for governor of Michigan in 2026 and not as a Democrat but as an independent.

There's no denying Detroit still has plenty of problems, which makes one wonder how would he react if Donald Trump offered to work with him to fight crime? This is Mayor Duggan. Mayor, thanks so much for being here. Why do you think that President Trump isn't talking about Detroit when he's speaking of crime in other cities?

MIKE DUGGAN, MAYOR OF DETROIT: Well, thanks, Michael. Yes, when I ran for mayor in 2013, Detroit was carjack city, 750 carjackings. Fifteen times a week, somebody stuck a gun in somebody's face, mostly seniors at gas stations, and stole their cars. As of today, we're at 45 for the entire year. We're down almost 90 percent. We put more cops on the street, we backed them with cameras, and we are at the lowest violent crime rate since the 60s.

But I don't want to discount this. The federal government has been a huge partner in this. The president appointed Jerome Gorgon, the new U.S. attorney, who was a career prosecutor himself, and he dramatically ramped up the federal support for gun violence. So, we've got the U.S. attorney, the ATF, the DEA, working hand in glove with the Detroit Police Department. It really has been a partnership with the federal government that's producing these results.

SMERCONISH: Fair to say, crime is still too high in Detroit. I mean, I've seen the statistics. The "Detroit News" said that violent crime -- I think you rank only behind Memphis. But everybody acknowledges that under your stewardship, it has gotten a hell of a lot better.

DUGGAN: Yes. You know, we went from 400 homicides a year to 200 homicides a year. Now, I don't celebrate 200 of our citizens being murdered in a year, but it's dramatically down. We're on track this year to be well under 200.

But I look at a place like Boston that is in the range of 25 or 30, and you can see what years of sustained strategy. But again, Boston had good partnerships between the federal government and their local city and state governments. For years I've studied what they've done. We're implementing it, and it's headed the right direction.

SMERCONISH: Mayor, this will be politically incorrect, but that won't stop me. I'm sure some people are looking at their television screens right now, and they're saying, wait, he's the mayor of Detroit. He's a white guy. How have you been able to draw so much minority support?

DUGGAN: Well, yes. When I ran in 2013 in an 83 percent black city, at first, I was dismissed. We hadn't had a white candidate for mayor in 40 years, but the city was in bankruptcy. The street lights were out, the grass was overgrown, and the kids couldn't go to the parks.

And I campaigned by going house to house. I said, invite me to your home and I'll show up. And for 250 nights I sat in people's living rooms and backyards and basements. And when you sit and break bread with people and speak in their homes, all the divisions between us fade to the background.

[09:45:03]

And I not only won by a huge margin in 2013, but I've been elected with more than 70 percent of the vote in the last two terms. But I've also enjoyed a good partnership with city council.

When people see jobs coming back, when people see Detroit lead the state of Michigan in new population, with 7,000 people coming in last year -- I think, around southeastern Michigan, they say, this is the kind of politics that actually solves problems that make our lives better.

SMERCONISH: Are you running for governor as an independent? You're the Detroit mayor and have been elected as a Democrat. Is that political expedience because you want to avoid a messy primary? Or do you no longer feel at home in the Democratic Party? I know you come from a Republican household historically, so which of the two is it?

DUGGAN: Yes. No, you're right. My dad was a federal judge appointed by Ronald Reagan, and we loved the debates. But of course, my dad was a member of a Republican Party that was strong on Russia, balanced the budget, free trade. That's not really the Republican Party today.

I was the Democratic Party that represented farmers and union members and working-class people. And, of course, a lot of those folks don't think the Democratic Party represents them today, but it's hard to describe to your listeners who don't live in a purple state. But in Michigan, the presidential campaign last September, October, we never saw a Burger King ad or a car ad or a new movie ad. It was nonstop saturation.

Republicans hate Democrats. Democrats hate Republicans. We're already seeing Democratic Republican attack ads for next year's election, and nothing in the state of Michigan in Lansing is getting done in this toxic environment.

I finally said, it'd be a lot easier to get elected as a Democrat. But if I did, I'll just be one more partisan up there where all the Republicans are against me because I tried to beat them. The left wing of the Democratic Party isn't particular fans of mine anyway. I don't have any desire to be a governor who doesn't get something done. I thought, what if somebody --

SMERCONISH: Know, a plurality -- a plurality of the country -- according to Gallup, I think the latest number is 43 percent identify not as an R or a D, 28 and 28 percent for each, but 43 percent if I have the math right. They say, I'm an independent and that seems to get lost. Final word is yours.

DUGGAN: Yes. No, you're absolutely right. And I'd say to the business folks, who would invest in an organization that's at 28 percent declining, which is the Republican and Democratic Party? We're saying, if you don't like politics as usual, we got a different choice. Let's change it.

SMERCONISH: Mayor Duggan, thanks for being here. Checking in on your social media comments. From the world of -- where is this coming from? I don't see them in advance.

X. You've got to be kidding, right? We are becoming a police state with the National Guard in L.A. and D.C., paid actors wearing ICE, tear-gassing, terrorizing the population. And you think he gets a prize for that? He doesn't even deserve the prize from the bottom of the Cracker Jack.

Wait a minute. A prize -- I've not advocated for a prize for the president relative to what's going on in your cities. I've said that if, in fact, he brokers a peace agreement between Ukraine and Russia, one that does not sell out Ukraine, then yes, I'm with Secretary Clinton, and I'd nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize. This is todays poll question at Smerconish.com. Put it up on the screen. Make sure you're going and casting your ballot on this.

If President Trump brokers a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine that Ukraine finds acceptable, should -- I was very careful to put that in the question. I didn't just say, should he get a Nobel Peace Prize? First of all, they've got to resolve the war and Ukraine has to find an acceptable.

And frankly, I don't know how you'd vote no on that. I don't know how. I'm prepared. Let me just say this, I proved this to you last week on air when I covered my eyes and Catherine asked me to predict, you know, what's the outcome of the poll? We learned a couple of things. I don't cheat on these things. I really don't know what the results are. I anticipate that President Trump is going to come out on the losing end of this stick when we come back with the results in just a few minutes.

But I don't get it. I truly don't get it. That will be Trump derangement syndrome, because how could you say if he negotiates a fair peace that he's undeserving? I don't understand it. I really don't.

Anyway, while you're there, subscribe to the newsletter. Answer the poll question, subscribe to the free and daily -- the worthy newsletter, you'll get the editorial cartoons from the likes of Jack Ohman. All right, we'll come back with the result.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:53:52]

SMERCONISH: Hey, we have a technical issue, so I can't show you the fancy slide with the result, and consequently I know the answer. Normally, I don't know the answer, 42,701 have voted. And on the question of, if President Trump brokers a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, that Ukraine finds acceptable, should he be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, 66.77 percent say no. Meaning, 33.23 percent, you know, I'm in that category -- I think Secretary Clinton is in that category, 33 percent say yes.

So, Trump did better, frankly, than I thought he would. I would have figured, you know, 20 percent would say, yes, if he doesn't sell out Russia -- Ukraine and gets this deal done, then he deserves it. All right. Here's some social media response to the program. This, I think, we'll be able to show you.

It doesn't matter what Trump does, people will have hatred no matter what. The fact that the poll is majority no just shows how people don't have an open mind.

I think that's true. I mean, I think that's baked into the cake on -- I mean, if I'd simply said, does he deserve a Nobel Peace Prize?

[09:55:03]

You're like, no, because he's -- he's going to, you know, do Ukraine wrong. I worded it deliberately to protect against that outcome. And still, it's a two-thirds, you know, against Trump. More social media reaction. What else do we have?

You're so sickening. There's a universe between kicking him in the groin and rolling out the red carpet while kissing the war criminal's ass.

This is Tony responding to me, responding to those who said, oh, we got a red carpet and the flyover and the this and the that. I did advance for Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush. So, I pay particular attention to the staging of these events, and I thought that the criticism was unwarranted.

We forced -- here Tony -- was this guy's name Tony? We forced Putin to walk a gantlet of F-35s as a B-2, you know, flew overhead, I presume the same type of an aircraft that that dropped that bomb on the nuclear facilities in Iran. I mean, I think there was a good message that was given to Putin as to American strength. And for making him feel warm so that Trump could try and cut a deal, I have no problem with that.

More social media reaction. Go ahead. Oh, that's it? I'm out of time? Oh, and I went over? OK. Sorry about that.

If you missed any of today's program, you can always listen anywhere you get your podcasts. Thank you for watching and see you next week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)