Judging Freedom - AMB. Chas Freeman: Trump and USAID.

Episode Date: February 4, 2025

AMB. Chas Freeman: Trump and USAID.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, February 4th, 2025. Ambassador Charles Freeman is here with us on just what is USAID and what do they do with our money. But first this. Tesla is increasingly beholden to China. I have no reason to think that Elon won't jump like a circus monkey when Xi Jinping calls in the hour of need, unquote. He went on to refer to Musk as a Chinese puppet, and then when posted on X that the U.S. needs leaders who aren't in China's pocket. This is Vivek Rabhaswamy, who had been originally, as you know, one of the co-chairs at this so-called Doge. Elon Musk, you didn't create U.S. aid. The United States Congress did for the American people.

And just like Elon Musk did not create U.S. aid, he doesn't have the power to destroy it. And who's going to stop him? We are. We're going to stop him? We are. We're going to stop him. This is what the beginning of dictatorship looks like. When you gut the Constitution and you install yourself as the sole power, that is how dictators are made. These are some of the insane priorities that that organization has been spending money on.

$1.5 million to advance DEI in Serbia's workplaces, $70,000 for a production of a DEI musical in Ireland, $47,000 for a transgender opera in Colombia, $32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru. I don't know about you, but as an American taxpayer, I don't want my dollars going towards this crap. And I know the American people don't either. And that's exactly what Elon Musk has been tasked by President Trump to do. To get the fraud, waste, and abuse out of our federal government.

Thank you, guys. What Trump and Elon and all of their cronies are trying to do is take away the constitutional power of Congress. And I want to apologize. I want to say I'm sorry that you have to put up with this offensive bullshit. by a billionaire who nobody voted for to illegally and unconstitutionally steal from taxpayers so he can give himself a tax break. Well, I'm glad that at least a few people are standing up to what is a clear constitutional coup d'etat. The problem is that Congress has authorized the expenditure of funds and the president can't not spend the money because he doesn't like the authorizations. That's right. And what we have is perfectly fine for the new administration to come in and change the policy. But to criminalize the previous policy, which is, this is much of what you heard in that clip was about DEI, which was very much a program of the United States,

both domestically and internationally, perfectly legitimate to change that. But to treat this that way, to shut down the agency while you simultaneously send a group of quasi-brown shirts into the Treasury to seize control of the payment function for the United States government, ignoring all conflicts of interest,

to empower someone who has no position in the US government and is not subject to its laws against conflicts of interest, to put him in charge of reorganizing the US government, shutting down agencies, forcing their way into secure facilities with people who don't have security clearances. And other behavior, this is mob rule by plutocrats, led by plutocrats. And it is the beginning, as Ilhan Omar said, not just of dictatorship, it is quasi-fascist. What does USAID do? And what standards does it use to distribute some of these funds that to our ears sound ridiculous, like a transgender opera in Serbia? I mean, that sounds like a one-liner from Seinfeld.

I agree with you about that. But USAID basically is engaged or tries to be engaged. Its professionals are engaged in long-term economic development. And this is good for the United States because it builds foreign prosperity, which leads to a demand for American products. USAID has also, however, been bent to other purposes, which are very questionable. For example, the recent elections in Georgia, apparently several hundred million dollars was spent through USAID, AID, and the National Endowment in Democracy, to skew those elections away from any kind of pro-Russian direction. So we interfere in elections. The money that was spent by NED to carry out the 2014 coup in Ukraine was also appropriated through USAID. USAID, in other words, has had an active democratization agenda. And recently, as DEI became quite a thing, it apparently has taken on that role too. But this is not the fault of the people in USAID. This is the fault of the politicians who, in the last administration and previous

administrations decided that they would appropriate money for those purposes. The U.S. appropriated money for democracy promotion, for DEI promotion, and we've had ambassadors in countries that are very conservative, like Hungary, for example, hanging out the rainbow flag in support of diversity, transgender diversity. And some of us have always thought this was a bit questionable. There's a cure for it. You don't come in with a sledgehammer to kill a mosquito. You come in with a scalpel and you cut out the stuff that doesn't make sense. That is not what is happening.

And it is not happening in accordance with any constitutional process or any manner of brain. Donald Trump, listen, I'm against foreign aid, but I understand the argument for it. But Donald Trump himself signed legislation authorizing all of this during his first term. Now he's trying to block the will of the Congress as exercised during Joe Biden's sermon. And this money that is to be spent by these people and their salaries was legitimately lawfully authorized by Congress. He's really in no position to stop them from working and stop them from doing their job until this budget is over. And he can try and get the Congress to enact a budget that doesn't include this. But right now it's in the law. Well, that is a very important point. But before you condemn foreign assistance, I assume you think that the Marshall Plan was a good investment. That was foreign assistance to

Europe, bringing it back on its feet to make it the great market that it is now for American goods. Foreign aid also promoted successfully the rule of law in both South Korea and Taiwan brilliantly. So I think there's a difference between stupid policies that are funded, I have to say, very much in the usual manner of Congress, earmarks for NGOs, for local associations. Well, if they're earmarked, at least Congress is making the decision. But when Congress says to the executive branch, here's $500 million, a half a billion dollars, spend it however you see fit. That is Congress, in my view, refusing to do its job because the decision as to how the money should be spent must be congressional, not executive. I couldn't agree more. But I'm making the point that the earmarks probably account for a good many of those ludicrous TV and I programs. Yeah. All right. So in other words, one congressman

gets this. It's a silly example. They have a transgender Serbian opera in return for voting for something more profound for another congressman. I got it. They've got a transgender Serbian in their district whom they're trying to do something with. Most of the AID money is spent domestically. Yeah, I don't know how this is going to end unless a federal judge restrains Musk and even restrains Trump from firing these people who are lawfully employed and lawfully spending money that the Congress has lawfully authorized. Well, if the Justice Department were still on the job as opposed to acting as the president's personal lawyer, we might actually have a prosecution of people who are clearly violating laws and regulations, barging into the Treasury by dismissing people in violation of the Civil Service Act and so forth. And clearly, this is a signal that the entire separation of powers has broken down.

Before we blame Trump entirely for that, let's recognize that this is something that's been in progress for quite a while under the Democrats. Yes. Listen, my column this week is about the Curtis Wright case. Do you remember that? That's the case that basically let FDR do whatever he wants, including imposing tariffs, which of course he did. the arrival of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House with his foreign minister, but without the U.S. Secretary of State. I don't know why Rubio's not there. But nevertheless, what does Netanyahu hope to get from Trump? Well, I think we have to note that a lot of the foreign press describes this as a convicted felon greeting a fugitive from justice

as a war criminal. And this does not add to the reputation of the United States. What Mr. Netanyahu wants is to take the measure of Mr. Trump. I think he was surprised by Trump's envoy, Mr. Witkoff's tough love for him, which brought about this pause in the genocide in Gaza. Mr. Witkoff is trying hard, I believe, to extend that and actually to have Netanyahu implement the second and third phases of the agreement, which Mr. Netanyahu clearly has no intention of doing. So I think one of the reasons he's here is to see whether he can persuade, cajole, seduce Mr. Trump, our president, into aiding and abetting the violation of this agreement and a return to the genocide in Gaza.

Now, President Trump announced a billion dollars. That seems to me like an awful lot. I don't know if Biden ever gave a tranche of that size. You're the former Deputy Secretary of Defense. You would know what that is. A billion dollars in military equipment to Netanyahu. Maybe he's got some other things he's going to tell him that Netanyahu doesn't want to hear. But a billion dollars seems like a lot to me. That's right. And it is for what

purpose? To continue the genocide. Exactly. So there's no question where Mr. Trump and his administration stand. Just as President Biden spent most of his time focused on how to support Israel rather than how to halt the genocide, Mr. Trump is going to spend even more time on that, pretty clearly. I'm sorry, I had to adjust a blind behind me. I'm not in the studio at the moment. Okay, well, you know, there was a rumor that Trump was going to tell Netanyahu, not in the studio at the moment, suitable for this. But, you know, there was a rumor that Trump was going to tell Netanyahu that we're about to open up an embassy in Tehran.

That would probably give Netanyahu a stroke. But, you know, that was just a rumor. I don't know where any of this is going to go, Ambassador. Nor do I. There have been repeated rumors, as you say, that behind the scenes, President Trump has been reaching out to Pazeshkin, the president in Iran. I don't know if there's any evidence of that. I don't think you can see anything like that happening soon. But Mr. Trump does have a desire to carry off

bold initiatives that surprise and shock people. And I wouldn't put it past him to actually pursue the deal with Iran that he claimed when he canceled the nuclear deal he was aiming to achieve. He didn't achieve it in his first term. Maybe he will try in his second. How stable is Netanyahu's government? How stable is he in office? How stable is his health? I don't know about his health, but his government is on life support, essentially.

He has a two-vote majority in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. He's surrounded by extremists. The most extreme of the extremists, Ben-Gvir, actually quit the cabinet over the pause in the genocide. Smotrich, the other most well-known, but not by any means the only extremist in the cabinet, stayed in only with assurances that the genocide would be resumed and that Mr. Netanyahu had the assurance of incoming President Trump that that would be okay. So this is a government that does not have a firm hold on majority in the parliament. It is opposed by a great number of people in Israel, including the military and the intelligence services, which disagree with Mr. Netanyahu and the extremists about Gaza, about other things.

It is carrying out pogroms in the West Bank, which are a delight to the settlers there, but which offend others. It has tried to bring about the independence of the judiciary, which has greatly disturbed secular Israelis and people who are committed to Israeli democracy for Jews, not of course for everyone. And it has annoyed and irritated the ultra-Orthodox by proposing at one point to conscript them. And it has ruined the economy. There are something north of 64,000 small business bankruptcies that have taken place. The call-up of reserves has innervated the army. Much of the army is disgruntled. Of course, the army is also discredited by October 7th, as well as by its conduct of genocide.

So this is not a healthy place. Mr. Netanyahu is in power only because he has been able to remain a wartime prime minister. He wants the war to continue. He would like it to expend. And this keeps him there. But, you know, that's why Mr. Witkoff's alleged deal of three-phase ceasefire in Gaza is a threat to Mr. Netanyahu personally. He's been in court facing up to corruption charges. This is not a man whose position is secure.

I'm going to play for you a clip from one of President Trump's golfing partners who likes to whisper into his ear about bombing Iran. You know who this is. Cut number 11. So what this resolution does, it lays out the case against Iran's nuclear ambition. Bibi and the Israelis are going to have to make a decision relatively soon what to do about the Iran nuclear program. This is not an authorization to use force. But I am here to tell you and the audience in the world that I think America should support an effort by Israel if they decide to decimate the Iranian nuclear program because I think it's a threat to mankind.

Israel is strong. Iran is weak. Hezbollah and Hamas have been decimated. They're not finished off, but they've been weakened. And there's an opportunity to hit the Iran nuclear program in a fashion I haven't seen in decades. Crazy. Israel is strong. Iran is weak. Hezbollah and Hamas have been decimated. Well, you know, I mean, Israel does have a free pass through Syrian airspace now. So it could technically mount an effect, an air raid on Iran. It probably couldn't destroy the nuclear facilities. But I know it also, this question of Iran having a bomb. I was ordered in 1994, when I was ambassador to Saudi Arabia, to go brief Crown Prince Abdullah, later the king, that Iran was two years away in 1994 from a nuclear bomb. It has not built a bomb.

I note that the director of CIA outgoing, Ambassador Bill Burns, left saying that there was no evidence that Iran had made a decision to build a bomb. That is also the judgment of Mossad. So there is this political assertion that Iran has a nuclear weapons program and it's intending to build bombs and do all kinds of bad things. But there is no evidence of this from the intelligence community. So this is exactly the sort of thing that we just saw in the hearing on Tulsi Gabbard's nomination to be Director of National Intelligence. Whatever you think about that, she was browbeaten for failing to conform to narratives, for which there is no intelligence support.

None. She was also browbeaten for failure to characterize Edward Snowden as a traitor, even though the government has not indicted him for treason. Her nomination passed the Senate Intelligence Committee, but we don't know what the vote was because they voted in secret. Inconceivable to me that these people can claim to be a democracy, even a republic, whatever they want to call themselves,, I have to say when Snowden first made his revelations, I was horrified. I'd spent my entire career, 30 years, protecting secrets. I never leaked my knowledge at any rate. And here was this man breaking the code. But when I read what he had actually revealed, which was a gross set of extra constitutional, unconstitutional intrusions into our freedoms, I thought he'd done us a service. And I analogize him to Henry David Thoreau, who objected to the Mexican war and was called a traitor.

But he was right. Yeah. There she is being browbeaten by one of the more super silliest jerks on that committee. Cut number nine. of this committee believes, as the vast majority of members of our intelligence agencies believe, that Edward Snowden was a traitor to the United States of America. Senator, I've confirmed as director of national intelligence, I will work with you to make sure that there is not another Snowden-like leak. This is not a moment for social media. It's not a moment to propagate theories, conspiracy theories, or attacks on journalism in the United States.

This is when you need to answer the questions of the people whose votes you're asking for to be confirmed as the chief intelligence officer of this nation. As my colleague said, this is not about you. It's about the people that serve the intelligence agencies of the United States. Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America? That is not a hard question to answer when the stakes are this high. Senator, as someone who has served in uniform. Your answer, yes or no, is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America? As someone who has worn our uniform in combat, I understand how critical our national security is.

Apparently you don't. Apparently you don't. Let me... Now, you and I believe, and most of the people watching us know, that Snowden is a patriot and an American hero. The proper answer probably would have been two Justice Departments, Senator Bennett, the Trump Justice Department and the Biden Justice Department did not think so and did not charge him with treason. Therefore, under the law, he's not a traitor. Senator Bennett declaring that this is not a moment to propagate. It's pretty ironic. I don't know that he wanted to hear any answer. This was a demand to be politically correct. We don't need someone in the National Intelligence Directorate who is politically correct. We need someone who is intelligent, asks questions, and thinks for

his or herself. And that should have been the issue, along with respect for the Constitution, rather than following the secrecy fetish that we've imposed on our country. Last subject matter, Ambassador. Do we know if the Biden pipeline of cash and military equipment to Kiev is still flowing? I don't know. I know that President Trump, true to form, has proposed that he would resume aid to Ukraine if they would give us all their rare earths. This is not a good reason to be engaged in a war in Ukraine.

And it basically reduces the United States to a sort of mercenary level that is totally dishonorable. Chris, I think we have the clip of the president saying this just about two hours ago. In Ukraine, they have very valuable rare earth. clip of the president saying this just about two hours ago. Ukraine, a very valuable rare earth. We want what we put up to go in terms of a guarantee. We want a guarantee. We're handing them money hand over fist. We're giving them equipment. European is not keeping up with us. They should equalize. Look, we have an ocean in between. They don't.

It's more important for them than it is for us. Well, I don't know how this is going to end or where it's going to go, but Ukraine, I don't think you know this better than I, since you're with your experience in the Defense Department. How much longer can they last, no matter what gear we send them? Well, the head of their intelligence service, apparently off the record, but quoted later, said that within three months

they might disappear as a state. I don't think that's necessarily going to happen, but their time is limited. They need to make peace with Russia. They have to come to grips with the consequences of our use of them, our abuse of them, to go after Russia. They have suffered a catastrophe. They are run out of military manpower. They are depopulated. They're deindustrialized. They're shorn of their democracy. And they have no qualifications

to get into the European Union, which we talk about as a possible part of a deal, adamantly opposed, by the way, by the French, who will not accept Ukraine in the EU because it would destroy French agriculture, not desired by the others because of its corruption. Ukraine has terrible problems. We have made them far worse, and we should be collaborating with people who want to make peace and call this whole thing off. On that, I firmly agree with President Trump. Ambassador Freeman, a pleasure, my dear friend. I know our schedule was a little crazy and you were generous enough to hop in at this open time. Much appreciated.

The audience was huge. I hope you'll come and visit us again next week. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Thank you, Ambassador. Coming up at four o'clock Eastern, always worth waiting for, Professor John Mears-Shermer, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.