Judging Freedom - CIA Manipulation of Public Opinion w/Jeffrey Sachs

Episode Date: September 13, 2023

CIA Manipulation of Public Opinion w/Jeffrey SachsSee 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 Wednesday, September 13th, 2023. Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University joins us again. Professor Sachs, it's a pleasure to have you here. Thank you very much. So good to be back. Thank you. Thank you.

Professor Sachs, who runs the executive branch of the United States government today? Do we know? It's definitely the security state. So I would say it's the intelligence community. It's the CIA, the Pentagon, the White state. So I would say it's the intelligence community, it's the CIA, the Pentagon, the White House once in a while gets in there perhaps. But this is definitely not the public at all, not the Congress at all. It's within the executive branch, a pretty hidden part of our government.

So the American public voted, I'm going to assume the election was valid, for Joe Biden to be president. You listed three or four or five entities that run the executive branch. The White House was not the first, was not the second, wasn't even the third of those entities. Is this because President Biden is advanced in years and doesn't appear to have the best mental and physical health? Or is this because the security state has a stranglehold on the White House, no matter who the principal occupant is? Well, I think it's a little bit of both. You watch President Biden these days, you know he's not running things. This is pretty clear. But it really is the case that it takes an extremely capable and strong president to put the brakes on war and to put the brakes on the shenanigans of the CIA.

And we don't have that. We haven't had that for quite a while. So this really is the security state. They, I think, more or less tell the president what to do most of the time. And again, the American people are so much kept in the dark that there's absolutely no democratic aspect to this. And whenever there's a glimmer, such as asking the American people, do you support what's happening in Ukraine and what the U.S. is doing? They say no, but it doesn't make any difference at all. Congress goes along with the executive, the executive goes along with the security state, and this is the real situation. The president of the United States who established the security state would

live to denounce it. President Harry Truman, of course, famously signed the National Security Act in 1947. In 1963, he published a famous piece in the Washington Post. In those days, there was a morning edition of the Washington Post and an evening edition. Now there's barely a morning edition, but they do have one. His piece appeared in the morning edition and it's the former president of the United States. And the Washington Post took it off the editorial page in the evening edition, presumably because of what he said, which is that the CIA was totally out of control. It wasn't the CIA he envisioned, and it should be disbanded. JFK famously said, not publicly, but to his brother and others, it should be smashed into a thousand pieces.

He said that three months before he was murdered. So it is clear that the CIA is out of control. The Patriot Act, which was enacted in the crazy days right after 9-11, which nobody in Congress had a chance to read, unleashed the federal government to spy in a manner that we never imagined. Turned out the spying was even worse than we thought. Not only has that not dissipated now that the terroristic threat has dissipated, it's actually gotten worse and more sophisticated. So question, and I apologize, Roger Ailes would let me have it because it's too long a question. Does the intelligence community have a stranglehold on the Congress and the White House by the dirt that it knows about and has on them.

I think what Truman was saying when he wrote that famous article is that in 1947, the United States Republic made a catastrophic mistake. We created a security entity, a central intelligence agency that had two completely different jobs. One was true intelligence, what's going on in the world, analyze. This is actually quite important. The other was a secret army, a secret army that at best is responsible to the president and at worst is responsible to nobody who tells the president what to do. We have a secret army and we have an intelligence agency, and they're both under the rubric of the CIA. I have no problem with the CIA as an intelligence agency. We have absolutely gone off the rails and lost our democratic hold because we have a secret army that engages in war, in regime change operations, in psychological operations, psyops, and in murder, relentless false information, of course, in murder, in all sorts of subterfuge that we basically never see

the light of day. There were hearings famously in 1977, 78, the Church Committee, when Senator Frank Church held hearings, found shocking things. That's the last time that we've actually had public scrutiny of this institution. But what we know is that we have been engaged in nonstop regime change operations. And one of them, the one in February 2014, has gotten us into an extraordinarily dangerous hot war. Because when the United States was part of a conspiracy to overthrow the government of Ukraine, that set us to a war with Russia. And we've never heard the truth about that. And we probably never will hear the truth about that, except when it comes out kicking and screaming through whistleblowers and people who eventually tell the truth. And it's quite interesting, if I may, it may sound like a weird digression, but it's not.

60 years ago, President Kennedy was killed, 60 years ago this year, quite possibly by rogue agents of the CIA or parts of the U.S. government. And a completely hokey workup was made of the forensics based on, as many people know, this crazy magic bullet theory that tried to justify the absurdity that Oswald was the only shooter, despite eyewitnesses and despite so much evidence. And just last week, the Secret Service man, I think 88 now, has said, oh, by the way, the magic bullet theory is completely wrong because I found that bullet in the back of Kennedy's seat in the limousine and I put it on the stretcher. And so we've been operating. And now why is that related to what we were talking about? Because who ran the Warren Commission? Alan Dulles, CIA. And this was a this was just another job of deception.

Interestingly, the American people never bought it. It was so absurd, so many of the things being said. But basically, they got away with it. No one ever really looked into this matter because officialdom shut it down. And that's what we have. We have a very dangerous dangerous rogue operation of government. You cannot have an octogenarian like Biden in this situation. There's no control at all. And we face a very serious problem. Why does Congress continue to

authorize sunset provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, sunset provisions of the Patriot Act, an extraordinary budget for the CIA. You know that the Constitution says no money shall be spent from the public treasury except that which is recorded in a public journal. Try and find out how the CIA spends their money. I mean, how is it that this happens regularly, consistently, and systematically, unless Congress is terrified of the intelligence community and afraid to buck them? And both parties, they are terrified, and they are, in a sense, paid off because the military side of the story has ensured that there are jobs in every district of our military industrial complex. And so no congressman or senator, even for that narrow, bizarre reason, wants to touch this. But people are afraid,

and they don't touch it. And we don't, we barely hear a voice about any of this. I just admire Rand Paul so much for speaking out and calling for the truth on many things, but he can't find any colleagues in the Senate, either party, and sometimes throughout the whole Congress, because people don't want to know, where's our debate about Ukraine? They don't even dare to have a discussion when there's so many lies being told every day about Ukraine. Where is our Congress? It just doesn't even exist on this central issue. You recently gave a speech in which you said the Anglo-Saxon parts of the world, not just the U.S., but the Anglo-Saxon parts of the world have gone mad. So tell us what you mean by that, and tell us about the five I's, E-Y-E-S. The Anglo-Saxon world is, of course, the world that the British Empire created. It includes us. baton was passed to the American Empire, the successor empire of the Anglo-Saxon world.

And we have made sure that we bring together Britain, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the English speaking world that was created by the British Empire. And that's the knit together intelligence community. And boy, I watch it. I watch it in Australia. I watch it elsewhere. These politicians just squirm. This really is the security state of the United States that spreads its umbrella over Britain, who used to be the one that ran the show. Canada, of course, Australia, New Zealand, they can barely move. And you watch Britain, of course, we know famously that any British prime minister, the first rule of the job is do not contradict the United States in any way. So that security link is nailed down. You look Eyes is, is the deep security state of the U.S. And those are the ones that are supposed to share the intelligence. And we're making more and more military work around that. We've gotten the Australians to spend a fortune that they could cannot afford, by the way, and that will does nothing for their security

to start buying submarines as part of a new AUKUS alliance, Australia, UK and US, which makes no sense whatsoever. And we do share we do share intelligence among the five eyes. But of course, we tell them what to do with it and how to use it. That's exactly right. And that's the core. And then through that, of course, NATO is the other arm of this, extending through Western Europe. And the rest of the world watches this a little bit in amazement, because even when you add up all those countries, that's about 12% of the world population. The rest of the world's looking on, saying, come on, guys, we don't exactly agree with you. We don't like what you're doing. Would you calm down? Stop overthrowing our governments. I want to play a clip for you from Admiral Kirby, the spokesperson for the National Security Council.

He was just asked at a press conference in the White House in the past hour or so, hey, Admiral, can you tell us again what we're doing in Ukraine? What is the administration's goal? Is it to defeat Russia, or is it ultimately to seek some sort of negotiated settlement? Man, I don't know how many times I've answered this question in the last year and a half. And we have been, again, very, very consistent. We want to see Ukraine succeed on the battlefield. We want to see them get all their territory back. We want to see their sovereignty respected. We want to see no Russian troops inside Ukraine. We want to see the war end. And it could end today, obviously, if Mr. Putin would do the right thing and just get the hell

out. That's clearly not going to happen right now. So we're going to continue to provide Ukraine with the capabilities that they need to be successful. Your comments, Professor Sachs. First, you watch that smirk because it's just a game and the guy is there smirking at us. Second, I can tell you, I hear from senior people in Congress that absolutely would claim to refute that based on what they get briefed, which is, no, we understand Crimea is never going back. That's not our aim, I swear to you. So what Kirby just said is not right at all. And he knows it, thereby the smirk. And third, of course, he doesn't explain at all why we are in this war. Why did we topple a government, another covert regime change operation in February 2014? Why have we pushed NATO enlargement to Ukraine against a clear Russian red line that our own diplomats said

was a reckless move and a dangerous move. And incidentally, there was the famous GAF meeting that a little bit of truth slips out when the Secretary General of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, spoke to the European Parliament last week. He said, yes, this is a war because of NATO enlargement, but Russia has nothing to say about that. So Stoltenberg said what the Putin apologists say. He's the Secretary General of NATO, but he was very clear. Yes, this is about NATO enlargement. Well, it is about NATO enlargement. We overthrew a government that wanted neutrality for Ukraine. We pushed NATO enlargement so recklessly and dangerously that our own top diplomats were trying to say repeatedly,

don't do this. This could mean disaster. And this is the disaster we're in. So Kirby is completely, once again, not telling the truth to the American people. President Trump and a young man named Jack Teixeira are both about to go on trial for the unlawful possession and exposure of NDI, National Defense Information. Just bearing that in mind, I want you to watch a clip from CBS News. The correspondent, David Roberts, is a friend of mine. The person being interviewed is General Miley.

The general takes David into the subterranean inner sanctum of the Pentagon. See what's on the walls of that inner sanctum that now has been broadcast all over the world when the CBS News report was shown on television. And General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. What do you have up first this morning? About 10 minutes, I got a call with General Zaluzhny. General Valery Zaluzhny, commander of Ukraine's armed forces. I talk to him every week as a minimum, sometimes twice a week, three times a week. That much?

It's 6.45 a.m. Three hours later, he takes us underground, deep in the bowels of the Pentagon, into a top-secret command center where all the intelligence collected from the battlefields of Ukraine is monitored by his staff. This is the crew that keeps Secretary and I informed on a day-to-day basis of what's happening out there and in the current operation. How well can you see through the fog of war from here? The fog and friction of war is always present, but our information systems are pretty good. His information systems seem to be revealing to CBS News

the location of Ukrainian troops on those maps on the walls. Is it a cavalier attitude about national defense information? Do these maps change all the time? Does this concern you or not concern you? You know, my concern is actually a little bit different, which is that it was completely knowable and predictable that the U.S. was sending Ukraine into a bloodbath this summer. So if we had looked at the maps in April and May and understood the echelon defense that Russia had dug in in the Zaporizhia region and understood Russia's air superiority and other military considerations, it would have been perfectly plain that this so-called Ukrainian counteroffensive that started in June and that

continues till today would be a bloodbath for the Ukrainians. And that's what really concerns me, which is we are not telling the truth to ourselves and to the American people. And shockingly, by the way, I saw that Senator Mitt Romney announced he's not running for reelection. Sorry to say to my case. Goodbye, Senator. You have been the one that is saying all along what a great war this is. No Americans dying. We're getting our money's worth. Same thing Richard Blumenthal said that, the senator of Connecticut.

Shame, shame. We are sending tens of thousands of Ukrainian young people off the street. These aren't even professional soldiers. These are people taken off the street and sent to their near instant death right now, completely predictably. And we are not told that. But if you because we're bankrolling this, is that we are bankrolling a bloodbath of Ukrainians. Professor, I could not agree with you more. And I don't remember if it was Senator Romney or Senator Blumenthal who said we're getting our money's worth and the acid in my stomach welled up. One more clip I want to show you, which is relevant to the brilliant statement you just made, Professor Sachs.

This is President Zelensky saying, ah, it took too long for us to start the offensive. They didn't get the weapons here to us fast enough. When we speak about the counteroffensive, it depends on many cases. Of course, we gave a lot of time for Russians. We gave a lot of time to prepare to mine. To put the mines in. To put the mines on the fields and on the big territory.

And so you see the three defending lines. And that's because you were waiting for Western weapons. For the weapons. That's why I said it depends on many issues. We wait. Look, we waited too long. It's true. No, I'm thankful to partners, to the United States. I'm thankful very much to President Biden and to Congress, but we have to understand we first we waited too long. They put mines. Then when we been ready from the point of view of our partners,

because the decision to give us, for example, Bradley or another kind of weapon, the decision, it doesn't mean the result. You don't get them immediately. Of course, you don't. Of course, you don't. Not course you don't. Not sure where to begin with that. Ukraine is a vassal state of the United States. The American taxpayer is paying to operate the government, to operate their veterans administration and paying for the graft. But I'll let you take it from there. It makes me shudder to watch that. I don't think it's an easy position for a president of Ukraine,

but God, has this guy failed miserably, terribly, leading his country to destruction. What happened in truth about this war, not only that it started in 2014 when the U.S. engaged in this covert operation, overthrew Yanukovych, ignited this war. But in 2022, when this war started on February 24th in this new phase, not the original beginning of the war, but Russia's special military operation, Within a few days, Zelensky had at that time the somehow awareness and felt he, whatever, the honesty to say we need to negotiate with Russia on the basis of neutrality. And I know what happened then. We talked about it last time, and I've spoken to the inner group of those negotiations in the end of February and through March 2022. Russia and Ukraine could have ended this war on the basis of Ukraine's neutrality.

Zelensky knew that. Now, for whatever reason, when the United States pressed, he backed off and said, no, and the U.S. probably, as always, American leaders have wrongly done for decades, said, don't worry, we've got your back, our sanctions, we're going to cut them off of the SWIFT system. The economy is going to be on its knees. We're going to back you up with HIMARS. Whatever it is, whatever promises were made, Zelensky failed at that moment to defend Ukraine because he backed off from the negotiations

and it is a bloodbath now. Ukraine is being destroyed. So when I watch this, my God. Okay, so he also knew that they didn't have the weapons, they didn't have the means to do this. And they went ahead and they've lost tens of thousands of people dead in recent weeks since this counteroffensive began. And every day you tune in, it's hundreds dead. You can even see it in these drone films day by day, this bloodbath continuing. And nobody speaks honestly. Our senators say, oh, what a good value this is. And Zelensky says, yes, all we need is more arms. And Milley says, yes, well, maybe they won't reach the objectives now, but next spring. Everything's a lie. The lie, of course, starts partly because our president of the United States doesn't say anything to the American people about anything. He may go and mumble something to his donors, but he doesn't tell us anything. And he's afraid of the truth is, this was a terrible blunder that the United States and tragedy that the U.S. pushed Ukraine into. Biden was there from the very start because he was part of this overthrow group in 2014. It was Biden. It was Newland. It was Blinken. It was Sullivan. Way back then, same team under President Obama, same crowd. They're there today. They made a horrific, horrific set of miscalculations, and they won't tell the truth because now we have an election coming up, an election that President Biden shouldn't be any part of anyway because he's

too old and absolutely should not be president again. Professor Sachs, you're spot on. I had two pages of questions for you. I didn't even get through the top of the first page, because your answers are so illuminating, engaging, courageous, and right on. Would you come back again next week, Professor Sachs? Let's do it. Absolutely. I'm trying to find Chris. My dog jumped right up into the screen. Yeah, he was there last time. We took a screenshot of Professor Sachs smiling, me smiling and Chris looking at me like that. But he's in another room now. Give Chris my best regards, please. And we'll see him next week.

Give Sonia my best as well. Thank you, Professor Sachs. All the best. Thank you so much. Thank you. Wow. Nothing else I can say except thank you for watching. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.