Judging Freedom - Aaron Maté : Did a Regime-Change Operation in Iran Fail?

Episode Date: January 21, 2026

Aaron Maté : Did a Regime-Change Operation in Iran Fail?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Undeclared wars are commonplace. Fragically, our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression with no complaints from the American people. Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. What if sometimes to love your country you had to alter or abolish the government? government? What if Jefferson was right? What if that government is best, which governs least? What if it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong? What if it is better to perish

fighting for freedom than to live as a slave? What if freedom's greatest hour of danger is now? Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for judging freedom. Today is Wednesday, January 21st, 2006, my dear friend Aaron Marte joins us. Now, a lot to talk to you about, Aaron, the true causes of the failed regime change in Iran, the government of Syria attacking the Kurds, the government of the United States of America, attacking citizens in Minneapolis. But before we get that, just to get to all of those topics, a few minutes ago, President Trump told the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, that while he ardently covets Greenland, which he says is geologically a part of North America, he won't use force to obtain it. Who would believe him?

Fair question. But look, let's assume he's true that he's not going to use force. How then will he get Greenland, which he seems very intent on acquiring? Well, this is where I think the Ukraine proxy war comes in. He needs to placate Europe if he's not going to use force as he claims to in Davos. So what could he offer them? Well, they really want Trump to offer Ukraine security guarantees, basically a NATO-like pledge for the U.S. to get involved in a war with Russia if hostilities ever resume there after a peace deal. And I suspect that if Trump really is not going to use force to get Greenland, which is just, again, I agree with you in questioning, that this might be something that he actually could offer

if there is a negotiation. And regardless, I mean, that's just speculation. All this has shown what a complete humiliation and disaster. NATO's overall, the European members of NATO, what their policy has been of just basically subordinating themselves to the U.S. NATO Secretary General calling Trump daddy. Back when Biden was president, some referred to him as grandfather Biden, you know, taking care of the European continent. They've also coordinated their security and their economies to the U.S. because one of the things that they did at the behest of the U.S. was cut themselves off from cheap Russian gas, which powered a lot of Europe,

especially Germany, which is the economic engine of Europe. And what do they get in response? They get a U.S. president basically calling them all weak and saying that he's going to take the territory of one of their members. And so they're in a very, very tough spot here. And whether Trump uses force or not, he is totally fine with humiliating the people who were previously told were our top allies and NATO was sacrosanct and we respect NATO. All NATO has gotten as a reward for their subordination to the U.S. is just more and more humiliation. I mean, do we know what the Kremlin thinks about these efforts to acquire Greenland?

I mean, we have a clip from Sergei Lavrov saying Trump covets Greenland, and you can analogize it to us retaining or reacquiring Crimea. We have Dimitri Peskov saying Trump's going to go down in history one way or another, whatever happens with Greenland. There's the idea that this is further destabilizing NATO, which is something that the Kremlin has long sought. So when your enemy is shooting his friends in the foot, why stop them? Yeah, I think that's fair.

I mean, I'm sure they enjoy the humiliation that is ensuing, especially given what was happening before. They were powering a lot of Europe with their cheap energy. Trump was among the key figures who ended that because recall that in his first term, he was trying to stop the Nord Stream pipelines. He imposed sanctions on his own allies, including Germany, over the Nord Stream pipelines. He didn't want it built.

And so he was trying to sever Europe from Russia. They achieved that. And what did they get in return? Trump now trying to sever Europe from their own territory, which is Denmark's control of Greenland. At the same time, though, why does Trump want Greenland? Well, you know, he wants, he's been open that he sees it as a good tool. in the use against Russia, that this does push the U.S. closer to Russia, and then for a so-called Iron Dome defense system and other military designs, he could have a new territory, including

a new territory that he could use to extract valuable minerals from, which is seen as an affront to Russia. So I suspect in Moscow there are some mixed feelings here. And meanwhile, what all this is distracting from, you know, this is called a major crisis for NATO and it is. But But what has also happened lately? In just little over three weeks, the last remaining treaty between the U.S. and Russia that limits both countries' nuclear weapons stockpiles is over. It expires February 6th, I believe. Correct.

And this is the last treaty that limits the nuclear arsenals of the world's top two nuclear powers. And Russia has offered repeatedly to extend for one year, which is the maximum possible under the terms of the deal. Trump initially said he was open to that. What has he said recently? Well, if it expires, we'll negotiate a brand new deal. That's not how it works.

Once it expires, we're in a new nuclear arms race. And everybody, except for Moscow, which has tried to bring this up, seems to be ignoring this. So we're in a very dangerous moment, and people are ignoring, I think, the biggest danger there is. Is it your understanding that the Russians and the Chinese actually helped defend defeat the CIA MI6 Mossad coup attempt on the streets in Iran two weeks ago? I think it's a bit of a mixed picture. So, for example, when the currency plummeted and the allegation from Iran and its supporters

is that this was manipulated deliberately by the U.S. and their allies abroad, which I don't know enough about. But what I do know is certainly that the sanctions imposed by the U.S. played a major role in collapsing the Iran's economy. But when the currency cratered, why didn't China especially step in to help out Iran when they could have, as far as I understand, given the vast foreign exchanges they have and the financial power that they have? So why didn't they step in then? That's something I'd like to hear someone explain. But then after the protests erupt and then they did turn violent, Iran was able to disrupt Starlink, this communication system built by Elon Musk that allows.

people to gain internet access and then presumably if you're coordinating with people overseas as Mike Pompeo bragged about saying that the massades involved in these protests and so did some masad tied actors then Iran was able to shut that down could they have done that without the help of Russia and China I doubt it and I suspect that's where if there was cooperation that's where it happened and by the way on that front there was a really funny article in the New York Times recently saying in very small print that the U.S. helped smuggle tens of thousands of Starlink terminals into Iran. Now, the Times portrayed this as the group of what they called a rag-tag organization of Iranian activists, you know, just scrappy activists rolling up their sleeves and smuggling in these Starlink terminals.

Then they bury at the very bottom that, oh, yeah, the State Department coordinated with them. And the main group that was involved in smuggling in these terminals is funded by the next. National Endowment for Democracy, which is the regime change arm of the U.S. But they don't mention that the National Endowment for Democracy is funding them. They mention the group, but you have to then search for yourself who this group is, who their funders are. And then you see, after some research, as people like my colleague Jeremy Lafredo did, that, oh, they're funded by the National Endowment for Democracy.

This is always part for the course. You can never acknowledge in Establish a media that groups that are portrayed as so-called grassroots and scrappy and rag tech. They're really funded by the regime change arm of the U.S. government. This is the same crew that is promoting the Shah's son, calling him the exiled crown prince, and he's been on all the major television networks in the past week. He's expecting to be crowned the new Shah of Iran. I mean, this is fanciful. This is crazy that anybody would take this seriously. You brought us a very interesting clip from the Secretary of the Treasury, admitting the subterfuge to devalue the Iranian currency. Chris, cut number 18.

What do you want to say about sanctions, something else you've been working on, of course? What are you planning there in terms of Iran and the impact there? Do sanctions actually work? And the same question with regard to 500% secondary sanctions or tariffs on countries who purchase energy products from Russia. Okay, so two things there. There are Treasury sanctions. And if you look at a speech that I gave at the Economic Club of New York last March, I said that I believe the Iranian currency was on the verge of collapse, that if I were an Iranian citizen, I would take my money out.

President Trump ordered Treasury and our OFAC division, Office of Foreign Asset Control, to put maximum pressure on Iran, and it's worked. Because in December, their economy collapsed. We saw a major bank go under. The central bank has started to print money. There is a dollar shortage. They are not able to get imports. And this is why the people took to the street. So this is economic state crap.

No shots fired. and things are moving in a very positive way here. This is what you're suggesting the Chinese with their enormous wealth could have, for lack of a better word, diluted the effect of. Yes, I mean, the dilemma with these situations is all the criticism goes on the people who are imposing these illegal sanctions, these murderous sanctions, that Scott Besson is bragging about. So there's something a little unfair about criticizing, you know,

China and Iran for not adequately responding. But I still think that these are matters worth raising because, look, it's their responsibility, especially the government of Iran, to do their best to maneuver in these situations. But that doesn't negate the fact that these sanctions are just completely illegal and immoral. What right does Scott Besson have and an army? of bureaucrats in the Treasury to design policies that deliberately impoverished the people of Iran. None. And what right? Political, moral, legal, diplomatic does Donald Trump have to depose the head

of state of another country, whether it's Nicholas Maduro or the Ayatollah? Yes. And as you can see, as is the case here with Iran and every other case, it's never the government that really is personally impacted by this. I mean, the government of Iran, the rule they're living still comfortable lives. It's the people who are suffering to the point where Scott Besson Braggs about their economy collapsed and they went out on the street. He's taking credit for the economic deprivation, the misery that caused people to protest. And no government has the right to do that to somebody else.

But yet it's taken as normal that the U.S. has the right to spend years and years and years. And a lot of people work on this, work on these sanctions policy, carefully coming up with all these complex rules and decrees that make economic functioning for other countries like Iran impossible. And that's what I think was the major spark of these recent protests. Now, there is corruption in Iran. There is mismanagement. There is repression.

And people have legitimate grievances in that. But I think the question to ask is, like, why is this seen to be supporting, struggling people when really all you're doing is increasing their deprivation? And the best way to support people of Iran, I think, is to stop economically suffocating them. But that question never comes up. It just assumed that because people there have grievances against their government, that we have the right to go in and make their lives even more difficult. And in a different timeline, if Iran wasn't being crippled by the U.S., it wasn't being constant under the threat of war from Israel and the U.S., you have to wonder how different things would be. There are studies showing that the main drivers of social reform inside Iran,

are the middle class. And the middle class has been wiped out by Trump sanctions. After Trump sanctions were imposed back in 2017, 2018, Iran's middle class shrunk drastically. And economic gains that had been happening previously were wiped out. So these sanctions, on top of being immoral illegal, also target the people who are most vulnerable and who actually could drive social change

if the country was just left alone. Do you think that the Israelis actually, actually believed that this would result in the overthrow of the regime? Do you think that Trump actually authorized the CIA to hand out thousands of rifles knowing that innocent people would be they would be used to kill innocent people? As to who directly armed those who took up weapons, and that did happen. I mean, more accounts are coming out that, you know, seeming to support those who initially said that the first few days of the protests were peaceful.

There wasn't a government crackdown, but that things got violent, and that was carried out by infiltrators. But as to who's arming them, look, to be fair, there was a Mossad account taking credit for arming the protesters, but whether that actually happened or whether that's just part of a PSYOP against Iran,

I don't know. But the Starlink component, certainly that had a U.S. government role. And the problem with these things is we don't know the real story until sometimes 50 years later. I mean, recently, only a few years ago did we get new classifications on the 1953 coup in Iran when the CIA helped overthrow Mossadei. And just a few years ago, a lot more documents on that were released showing about how the CIA did it.

So the full story, unfortunately, doesn't emerge sometimes until decades later. What we know is that these sanctions deliberately destroyed Iran's economy. We know that Mike Pompeo openly bragged about Mossad agents walking side by side the protesters. So it's fair to assume that there is some sort of covert operation going on. And I don't think that they're going to stop. I mean, now the latest news is Trump is still considering strikes. He's moved in U.S. military assets closer to Iran. So this is far from over.

Why did Netanyahu ask Trump not to strike? Well, the story there is that Israel wasn't ready, that they need more time to prepare for a new round of hostilities with Iran. The last time it looks like they underestimated Iran's capabilities to inflict damage on Israel. And after 12 days, the U.S. and Israel called it off because Israel wasn't able to sustain that level of direct fire from Iran. And this part, I believe, that Israel simply wasn't ready this time, but they are getting ready. I mean, Israel is pathologically obsessed with regime change in Iran. They've been committed to that for a very, very long time. And Trump has done everything Israel wants so far.

So there's no reason to believe he won't try again. And the movement of U.S. military deployments moving closer to Iran, that suggests that there will be another round of military attacks on Iran after what we saw in June. What's happening in Syria as we speak? Well, it's a very long story. I'll just try to truncate it. The Kurds of Syria are facing new atrocities, but this time from the new Syrian government that took power just over a year ago. For a long time, Kurdish forces have been allies of the U.S. Because during the dirty war in Syria, the U.S. first let ISIS take territory.

John Kerry admitted that in a leaked conversation with Syrian opposition activists. He said that we sat back and watched as ISIS took territory because we thought we could use that as leverage to get Assad to negotiate his way out of power. So ISIS takes territory. ISIS gains a lot of power. Sorry, Judge. I have some ambulance noise here in the background.

Yeah, we're used to it here. Yeah. ISIS takes territory. And then the U.S. has a problem. You have ISIS now spreading throughout Syria. And the problem the U.S. has is they don't want to enable the Syrian government to fight ISIS. because they don't want the Syrian government to control its own country because they're trying to overthrow it.

Wait a minute. Is it the president of Syria, the former head of ISIS in Syria? Well, so I'm talking about in the period of about 10 years ago when ISIS was taking territory and the U.S. was sitting back and watching, then they realized, oh, we have a problem on our hands. But their dilemma now is they don't want to help the Syrian government retake territory that ISIS has because they're trying to overthrow the Syrian government. So what do they do? they partner with the Kurds. And the Kurds, who have long sought autonomy,

they see in U.S. support and opportunity for their goals of autonomy. To the point where literally a U.S. general names the Kurdish force. It's a U.S. official who came up with this name, the Syrian Democratic forces, okay? And with the U.S. help, the Kurds do fight ISIS, and they do take back some territory,

including in places like Kobani. But after that happens, now you have a situation where Kurds control territory, But there still is a Syrian government that wants that territory back. So you have efforts by the Syrian government to basically negotiate with the Kurds. And who stands in the way? Washington and basically tells the Kurds, don't make a deal with the Syrian government. We'll have your back.

Because they don't want Syria to control its own territory because they're trying to overthrow Assad. So fast forward, you know, under Trump in the first term, he makes a deal with Erdogan because Erdogan doesn't want to have any Kurdish presence. So he sells out the Kurds. that gets reversed a little bit because there is some outrage among some U.S. officials because Trump has sold out the Kurds. But anyway, fast forward now to, now you have a new government in Syria after Assad's overthrown, ruled by the former al-Qaeda offshoot, Hayatahir al-Sham. And they recently signed some deal with the Kurds to have normalization.

But rather than implement that Syrian government under the new al-Qaeda offshoot decides, you know what, forget it. And they start attacking the Kurds, leading to some horrible atrocities. that have been caught on camera recently, including women Kurdish fighters subjected to sadistic attacks. And this is all, and so, and the U.S. is basically saying the Kurds, now, sorry, forget it. You know, there's nothing we can do here because Syria should be a unitary state. So once again, this has happened many times throughout history. The U.S. has sold out the Kurds. And because they didn't make a deal with the previous Syrian government and they hitched their wagon to the U.S., They're being betrayed.

And this time, because the new senior government has a support of Washington, because they're doing our bidding, they're basically, they have Trump's blessing. Trump is standing by right now and watching as the Kurds face new atrocities. It's really tragic. Well, I want to go to Minnesota, where the state of affairs is deteriorated, radically. Chris, let's play the clip by the Brooklyn Park Police Chief. Watch this, Aaron. We, as law enforcement community, have been receiving endless complaints about civil rights

violations in our streets from U.S. citizens. What we're hearing is they're being stopped in traffic stops or on the street with no cause in being forced to demand paperwork to determine if they are here legally. As this went on over the past two weeks, we started hearing from our police officers the same complaints as they fell victim to this while off duty. Every one of these individuals is a person of color who has had this happen to them.

In Brooklyn Park, one particular officer that shared her story with me was stopped as she passed ice going down the roadway. When they boxed her in, demanded her paperwork of which she's a U.S. citizen and clearly would not have any paperwork. When she became concerned about the rhetoric and the way she was being treated, she pulled out her phone and in an attempt to record the incident, the phone was knocked out of her hands, prevented her from recording it. The officer had their guns drawn during this interaction,

and after the officer became so concerned, they were forced to identify themselves as a Brooklyn Park police officer in hopes of slowing the incident and deep. escalating the incident down. The agents then immediately left after hearing this, making no other comments, no other apologies, just got in their vehicles and left. I wish I could tell you that this was an isolated incident. This isn't just important because it happened to off-duty police officers, but what it did do is we know that our officers know what the Constitution is, they know what right and wrong is, and they know when people are being targeted, and that's what they were. if it is happening to our officers,

it pains me to think how many of our community members are falling victim to this every day. It has to stop. One thing they had in common was every single one of those off-duty cops who was stopped by ICE was a person of color.

And look, just to connect this to what we're talking about earlier with Iran, I mean, Trump has repeatedly threatened the use of force against Iran over its crackdown on protesters. By the way, a crackdown that he helped generate by destroying the economy, as Scott Bessent took credit for. And meanwhile, this is happening in Minneapolis and across the country.

Judge, let me ask you, I mean, you're an expert on these things. I mean, what do you think of, I mean, does ICE have the legal authority to be carrying out all these operations, including now? I mean, the talk is about, you know, people like Renee Goodwin, were interfering with a law enforcement operation. That's what the Trump and the judge says about her. But now it sounds like by harassing cops, ICE is interfering with law enforcement. Yes, ICE is interfering with law enforcement.

ICE is violating the 10th Amendment because public safety is unambiguously a local and state responsibility under the Supreme Court. ICE stopping people. Look, a federal judge just said, you can't stop people. without articulable suspicion and you cannot arrest them without probable cause. We're not going to prevent these group arrests. You need an arrest warrant to arrest someone, or you must actually observe them committing a felony in an order to arrest them. That's the law of the land in the United States. It's been the law since 1963 when the Supreme Court

decided that the states were serving to the Fourth Amendment as well as the federal government. Look, there's a new twist on this. A Minnesota doctor, we're going to play this. clip right now for you. A Minnesota physician says Renee Good, the woman that was murdered by the ice agent Jonathan Ross, had a pulse eight minutes after he shot her, and no aid was administered to her by these thugs in the streets. Chris? This morning I learned for the first time through an MPR story that Renee Good still had a pulse, eight minutes after she was shot by an ICE agent. And yet, the offer to administer aid from a physician on the scene following his Hippocratic oath was denied. I can't say how much that stirs the blood

of everyone behind me here as we try to fulfill our obligation, our oath and our duty to care for the people in Minnesota. And I believe it stirs the blood of every patriotic Minnesota who knows how we treat each other in this state. So that is what we are here to speak to today as health care professionals. I don't know where this is going to go. Look, you talk about the Constitution. The feds have committed obstruction of justice by seizing the evidence and not sharing it with state authorities.

I saw an interview with an FBI agent who is talking to, a retired FBI agent who's talking to his friends that were still in the FBI. They are repulsed by the fact that they are not permitted to investigate this killing. These are Minnesota FBI agents and instead are ordered to investigate the politics of the surviving spouse of the murdered victim. Who the hell has ever heard of this? I mean, that part just is one of many aspects of the story that is just beyond belief, the fact that they're investigating the partner of Renee Good for her political affiliations. And they're not investigating as Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has openly said,

they're not investigating the officer who for some reason the termination nation insists have immunity. I mean, but is it not true that because this is a federal, technically a federal officer that the investigation has to be federal, that it can't be at the state level? Is that at least? That is not true at all. If you recall the Ruby Ridge, Idaho case, the FBI sharpshooter was indicted for murder by the state and he was tried for murder by the state and the courts upheld the prosecution. It has an unsavory ending that has nothing to do with the facts in the case, but the prosecution is perfectly valid.

There's no statute of limitations on murder. So Jonathan Raw, and the president cannot pardon a state crime. Jonathan Ross can be indicted and prosecuted at any time, whether it's by Keith Ellison in the next year or so, if the feds will ever surrender the evidence, or by another administration, more concerned about the rule of law at some time in the future. But I fear for our basic civil liberties when these masked agents can stop you in the streets and demand that you prove you're an American. Who the hell can prove you're an American citizen?

Who walks around with their passport in downtown Manhattan or Brooklyn or Minnesota? Minneapolis. That's where we are. Aaron, I know you're as aggravated about this as I am. I don't know how it's going to end while Trump is in the White House unless the courts will start doing the right thing. A courageous federal judge in Minneapolis did say no arrests without probable cause. We'll see if that works.

Aaron, thanks for your time, my dear friend. I know we've been across the board from Syria to Minneapolis. but I appreciate your analysis and your thoughts on all of us. Thanks for having me, Judge. Good to see you. Sure. And coming up later today, Chris, do we know if we have Phil Giraldi? We don't know yet. All right. Phil is having internet issues. So we have Professor Glenn Deeson at one and perhaps the great Phil Giraldi of three. As soon as we know about Geraldi, we will let you know. Judge LaPalteno for judging freedom.