Judging Freedom - Aaron Maté : Trump and Lebanese Liberation

Episode Date: July 1, 2026

Aaron Maté : Trump and Lebanese LiberationSee 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. Pragically, 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? the 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, July 1st, 2006, Aaron Mote will be with us in just a moment. Can Donald Trump liberate Lebanon from the IDF? And what about those Democratic primary victories in the past few weeks? Is APEC worried? But first this. Today's headlines aren't just bleak. They're an indictment of a government that has abandoned the Constitution. You are witnessing the direct result of the Federal Reserve's relentless war on the value of your dollar. For centuries, gold and silver have been the ultimate

shield against the state's favorite tools. Monetary expansion and runaway inflation. To protect your wealth is to protect your liberty. And you can do that with gold and silver. I own both and continue to buy because J.P. Morgan is now lying gold at over $6,300 an ounce. and Bank of America is suggesting silver could reach $300. That's great news for precious metal investors. Don't wait for Washington to fix a mess they created. Secure your freedom today. Take possession of your precious metals or diversify your IRA by adding gold and silver.

Call 800, 511, 4620 to see if you qualify for up to $20,000 in bonus medals. That's 800, 511, 4620. or go to Learjudgenapp.com. Aaron Matte, welcome here, my friend. I want to start with domestic politics. What message, as you understand it, do the recent Democratic primaries in New York and Colorado send to the American Israel lobby in general

and APAC in particular? They send the message that APAC is a toxic political branch. for two consecutive weeks, and now four races from New York to Denver. Candidates who openly reject A-PAC, who advocate for self-determination of Palestinians, who reject the Israel's first agenda that's dominated politics for so long, they've won. And in the case of Denver, which was last night, this is another stunning upset. It's a young woman named Melat Kuros. She's a 29-year-old lawyer.

she defeated a 30-year incumbent Diana DeJet, who received more than $1.6 million of the course of her career in money from pro-Israel lobby groups. And Malek Kuros run unapologetically against APEC calling for justice in Palestine against the genocide, vowing to cutoff weapons to Israel. She's even said she won't support Hakeem Jeffries as House Speaker because of his unapologetic support for Israel. So this is not just in New York where people thought, okay, well, yes, this is a leftist enclave. So it's to be expected that a race like this could happen. It's not happening in Denver, and I suspect that it won't end there. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in both primaries, incumbent, democratic members of Congress were defeated by these upstarts.

In New York, I think Goldman had been there for two terms. In Denver, this woman had, well, I never heard of, but this woman had been there for 50. term. So I have this right. That's right. And there's one more also in New York where the race that was won by Daria Liza Avila Shebelier, she also defeated the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, a very powerful position, who is another incumbent. So yes, all these incumbents have suffered because of their support for Israel during a genocide. And it's not just that, I mean, all these progressive candidates who won, they've had a very, you know, worker-friendly progressive message.

So this is not just exclusively about Israel-Palestine, but without the genocide and without this procession of democratic politicians lining up to support Israel to rush to pay for bombs that destroy Gaza, that destroy Lebanon, rather than investing in issues here at home, which has been a message of all these candidates, these results, I think, would not have been such a resounding sweep for progressives. I'm going to pay a clip from the woman from Denver last night, and we have a closed captions because the sound reproduction is not that good. It's not her fault.

This is just what we were able to get. But if you listen carefully, now I know you know this, Aaron, so I'm saying it for the benefit of the audience. You will hear that this woman, a lawyer, wrote a letter protesting Israeli genocide, and her law firm said to her, withdraw the letter, or you're fired. And of course, she did not withdraw the letter. But listen to this, and then we'll talk about it. Chris?

Because it matters for what comes next. Yeah. When I wrote a letter of defending students' rights to protest the genocide in Gaza, where those in my tomb to not rock for votes, that seems to happen a lot in Congress. But here in Denver, we stand by... Much of a threat is this to APEC? I think it's a pretty big threat that you're seeing integrity,

like the kind just explained, being rewarded at the ballot box. We haven't seen this really ever happen. So many races in such a short amount of time with candidates who are unapologetically standing up to APEC, not trying to water down their message, but unapologetically standing up and saying that they're not going to be intimidated by all the traditional bullying tactics of censorship

and a lot of money that go to defeating candidates who support Palestine self-determination. So I think if you're the congressional leadership, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, who are totally in APEC's pocket and A PAC itself, I think all of this is worrying. And it's a really inspiring story. I imagine, well, you go from losing your job at a law firm because you refuse to retract your support for free speech rights for students who are protesting the genocide. And then you run for office. And all the people, like the wealthy billionaires who were behind this wave of cancellations trying to force, trying to try and. And just basically announcing that if you speak up for Palestine, you will be unhirable and you will lose your job and we'll get you expelled from school.

Or if you're a school president and you don't sufficiently crack down on these protests, we're going to get you fired. That was hugely intimidating. And I don't think the people who orchestrated this wave of cancellations of censorship, the billionaire Zionists like Bill Ackman, I don't think they thought for a second it would create a kind of backlash where people like we just saw speak, Milat Kiroz go and run for office and win and win by showcasing the integrity that got them fired from their jobs. So it's sending a message to everybody, not just APEC, but also to the powerful people who were getting people fired like Malak Kiros for having a conscience.

So if you take a step back and look at the Republican primaries and the Democratic primaries, the king makers, a pair of octogenarians. In the Republican primaries, it's Donald Trump, and the Democratic primaries, it's Bernie Sanders. Well, Bernie played a role, but also Zora Mamdani, I think, has played a critical role as well. The success he had, certainly in New York,

he was a decisive factor. And then, you know, since coming to office, he's done a great job, I think, according to all accounts. Like, even his detractors haven't had much to attack him with. In fact, the New York Post the other day, so desperate to attack Zora Mamm Dani, they literally printed a cover story about him, you know, jumping into a public pool to mark the beginning of summer.

And they complained that he was violating the dress code because he was wearing his suit as he jumped into the pool. So the fact that the New York Post has to resort to complaining about Zoroamam Dani wearing a suit when he jumps into a pool that speaks to the hard time they're having in knocking him down and to the success he's having in elevating progressive candidates like himself. You know, his involvement with, or cheerleading of the triumph of the New York Knicks has just made him even more popular than he was.

Everybody associates that unbelievable comeback victory with him. All right. Is the MOU, the memorandum of understanding that President Trump and Possackian signed, a serious document upon which the international community can rely, and to which the signatory countries will comply? I've said from the start that this was a pause, not peace, from the Trump administration's perspective, because they have two goals that are fundamentally at odds,

and that's recently been underscored by what's been happening. They say they want to stop the war on Iran and reach a broader peace deal, but at the same time, they've refused to restrain Israel as it goes scorched earth in Lebanon. And they've even now formed formalized officially a policy that is direct odds with each other. So the MOU says, the first clause says there has to be a cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon. That was

the MOU. But then what happened last week? The U.S. brokered a deal between Israel and the government of Lebanon, which basically says that Israel can continue occupying Lebanon, can continue attacking Lebanon until Hezbollah is disarmed. So it's giving Israel a blank check to violate the first clause. of the MOU, which says there has to be an immediate termination of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon. So this is Trump because he does not have a coherent foreign policy, because he outsources the important functions to his main principles, J.D. Vance with the MOU, and Marco Rubio with the deal between Lebanon and Israel, he's formalized a literally incoherent policy, like an officially

incoherent policy. And this always was the question, hanging over Trump, is he going to actually use his leverage over Israel to restrain them in Lebanon and get them to withdraw? And he's given the answer. He's not, which thus renders the MOU to be at this point on life support.

Because it's the policy that I like to see a lot. Here's Jay DeVance, whose entire political career depends upon what happens with this MOU, basically saying what you said, it's a pause. Oh, by the way, it gives us a chance to refill the world's oil supplies. Chris, number four. So I think what the president has told us to do is use this MOU to sort of refill

the world's oil economy, to refill some stocks, and then to see where the hand is. And, you know, if the, as I've said this repeatedly, if the Iranians are willing to make the commitments that we would like them to make and are willing to back those up with verifiable milestone, then we are going to change our relationship with Iran. And if they don't do that, then nothing has really changed except for what we've already accomplished from the military campaign, which is a lot. So we kind of have two options here. We have the option of pursuing a long-term deal with the Iranians,

but that requires a significant change in their behavior. We have the option of banking our wins, and then, of course, doing things on top of that if the president feels that we have to. And I think both of those options are very much in play, and the president's going to let this play out. But what's happening right now is he's letting those options play out, in an environment where there is significantly less pressure on the world energy economy. Take him seriously, Aaron, chastising the Iran chastising the Iranians for verifiable milestones.

Donald Trump earlier this week received a briefing from the Pentagon about resuming all-out war, the threat to which is expressly prohibited by this document. What will verify the United States compliance, Mr. Vice President? It's a great question. Yeah, I mean, J.D. Vance has to, he's backtracking here. And it's a humiliation for him because this is his initiative. And it's pretty well understood that he was not gung-ho about this regime change war to begin with. But he's put his loyalty to Donald Trump above everything else.

And so this puts him now in a very uncomfortable position where he has to defend Trump undermining his own deal. Because this talk about the issues that Iran has to agree to verifiable conditions. they've done that. They did that in the JCPOA, which Trump tore up. They were doing that when they were talking a year ago, when then Trump decided to go to war alongside Israel in operation, so-called Midnight Hammer. And then again, earlier this year, the talks in Geneva, where Iran agreed to its harshest restrictions on its nuclear program to date. And Trump, rather than build on that, went to war for regime change instead. So the issue here is not Iran's acceptance of limits, which everybody knows. they have and could lead to a deal. It's that Trump won't put any limits on Israel. And Israel has every interest in blowing up a peace deal because it wants regime change in Iran. And it wants to eradicate Hezbollah in Lebanon because Hezbollah is a deterrent to its aggression. And they also want to, if they can't even fully wipe out Hezbollah, they at least want to take this time to wipe out the base of support that Hezbollah has by engaging in ethnic cleansing of Lebanon's Shia population,

where Hezbollah has its stronger space of support. Do you suspect that Trump has any intention of removing the IDF, either by words or by force, from Lebanon? No, I don't. I don't. And he could because already in recent weeks, after the MOU was signed and after Iran protested, ongoing Israeli attacks in Lebanon, the U.S. did actually get Israel to pull back.

back. If you speak to people who are based in southern Lebanon, they will tell you that there was a reduction in Israeli attacks, a considerable one. Haven't totally stopped, but they noticed that there was a lot more restraint on Israel's part, and that was the direct result of U.S. pressure. So if Trump wanted to, he could get Israel to fully withdraw from Lebanon. This idea that he can't is just not serious. As J.D. Vance openly said, Trump was the only head of state with any power who's sympathetic to Israel at this point. And he was right about that. He was, that was a rare acknowledgement that the U.S. has significant leverage over Israel. Trump just has not been willing to use it.

In the meantime, the Israelis continue to kill children in the West Bank and Gaza. Yeah, the horrific images that have defined this genocide pour out of Gaza every single day. And the West Bank as well, you will, you know, every day, essentially, you can point to a new act of terror by Israeli soldiers or by settlers. who are completely unconstrained. And I recently wrote about what the problem is from the point of view of Washington when it comes to Lebanon especially. You know, Mike Waltz, the UN ambassador,

he recently described Hezbollah as a cancer, which is an extraordinary statement because you're talking about not just a militant movement that has a base of support. It's a political movement that is a part of the largest bloc in the Lebanese parliament. So Mike Waltz is describing a huge segment of Lebanese society as a cancer.

And he's de facto endorsing the Israeli line that this so-called cancer has to be eradicated. Well, why is Hezbollah a cancer? Especially given that it has a strong base of support inside of Lebanon. And what I wrote about for the answer was a document from the State Department for more than 20 years ago

when they were talking about Syria and they were assessing serious cooperation in the so-called war and terror. back when Assad, Bashar Assad, was in his early years of power. And what the State Department pointed out was that, yes, Syria was cooperating with the U.S. against al-Qaeda, because Syria also saw al-Qaeda as an enemy. But the document had a complaint that, yes, even though al-Qaeda is our enemies, after all, like, al-Qaeda attacked the U.S. 9-11s, the basis of the so-called war and terror,

yes, even though they're cooperating with us against al-Qaeda, there's a problem. Syria won't cooperate with us against Palestinian and Lebanon. resistance groups, namely Lebanese Hezbollah. And why is that? Because Syria sees those groups at fighting for self-determination and national liberation. And that in Washington's view is a cancer. You have groups that are fighting for national liberation from Israeli occupation. They're a cancer, and they have to go. By contrast, al-Qaeda, which is who Syria was back then cooperating with the U.S. against, they're fine because they're not pushing for national liberation for Israeli occupation. The current al-Qaeda government in Damascus, which U.S. helped install,

they said barely anything about Israel occupying large segments of their territory. And they haven't fought back at all. Even after Israel helped over the Assad government, Israel then stole more of Syria's land. And Syria's offered a very tepid response. So as long as you fight for national liberation and resist Israel occupation, you're a cancer, as long as you don't fight Israel occupation and you go along with U.S. dictates. Even if you're formerly Al Qaeda, you're fine. 250 years ago, I wonder what Mike Walts would have thought of Washington and his troops. Are they a cancer resisting a British operation and fighting for liberation?

What is the story with Rubio's false, but this is ridiculous that he paraded it around us, a peace treaty between, Israel and Lebanon. What is the story with that? Well, they got a very subservient Lebanese government, a very weak in subservient Lebanese government to go along with the biggest surrender, arguably in Lebanon's history.

They essentially, it's an entire wish list of Israeli talking points. It says, as I mentioned earlier, that there's no obligation for Israel to withdraw from Lebanon. The only obligation is that Hezbollah disarm. So until Israel decides that Hezbollah has been sufficiently disarmed. It has free reign to stay inside Lebanon and carry out attacks. Lebanon also renounces all legal claims against Israel, which is unbelievable.

This foreign armies occupying your country, committing war crimes, destroying whole neighborhoods. Donald Trump even pointed this out that Israel is acting with extreme brutality inside Lebanon. And that's why he favored maybe the former Al-Qaeda government in Syria going in, because he thought that they'd act more humane in fighting Hezbollah than Israel. So it also says that Lebanon will give up all legal claims. names against Israel. It basically puts, it gives Israel a blank check to do whatever it wants in Lebanon with no obligations whatsoever, which again is, it's Rubio sabotaging J.D. Vance's memorandum of understanding. That's really what it is. And Donald Trump was going along with it.

He has, he is officially competing peace deals. In recent weeks, his administration has signed mutually exclusive peace deals. I've never seen such incoherent. And when it comes to level, Lebanon, the country's never seen such a surrender. I mean, there was a peace document that was signed in May 1983 after the Israeli invasion then. And that also let Israel stay and continue to carry out attacks. This one's even worse. Wow. Aaron, thank you very much.

Thanks for the clip about that future member of Congress. I did not know the serious ethical, serious problem with legal ethics with what her law asked her to do. And I'm glad she left and I'm happy for her. And thank you for pointing all that out. Aaron, I'll be gone for a couple of weeks. We'll look forward to seeing you in the second half of July. See you then, Judge. Have a great vacation. Thank you. All the best to you. Tomorrow, I know a lot of you have been asking about Uncle Larry. So tomorrow, 9.30 in the morning, Uncle Phil, Phil Giraldi, at two in the afternoon, Uncle Larry, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, at three in the afternoon. If Chris can find him, Max Blumenthal, Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.