Judging Freedom - COL. Douglas Macgregor: Is Trump For Peace?

Episode Date: March 13, 2025

COL. Douglas Macgregor: Is Trump For Peace?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

you Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Thursday, March 13th, 2025. Colonel Douglas MacGregor is here with us on, is this ceasefire deal serious? Where is it going to go? But before we get there, first this. Markets are at an all time high, euphoria has set in, the economy seems unstoppable. But the last administration has buried us so deep in debt and deficits,

it's gonna take a lot of digging to get us out of this hole. Are you prepared? Lear Capital specializes in helping people like me and you grow and protect our wealth with gold. Did you know that during Trump's last presidency, gold rose 54% to a record high? If that happens again, that puts gold at $4,200 to announce in his next term. Don't wait. Do what I did. Call Lear at 805-11-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com for your free gold ownership kit and special report $4,200 gold ahead. When you call, ask how you can also get up to $15,000 in bonus gold with a qualifying purchase. Call 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com and tell them the judge sent you.

Colonel McGregor, welcome here, my dear friend. Thank you for accommodating my time. Colonel, in one week, Secretary of State Rubio announced a ceasefire to which the Ukrainians had agreed. President Trump announced the resumption of President Biden's military support by providing military gear to Ukraine and American intel, and the Ukrainians dispatched hundreds of drones to attack a residential neighborhood in Moscow. What's going on? I think the first thing is it's unfortunate that we continue to discuss our negotiations and interactions with the Russians in public. I don't see any point to it.

And I think as a result, we're going to be embarrassed somewhat by this latest ceasefire offer. If there is anything the Russians have made clear repeatedly, it's that a ceasefire in and of itself is not acceptable. They see that as simply buying time for their Ukrainian opponent to receive more weapons, equipment, cash, whatever, rebuild themselves, and carry on the fight. And frankly, there's a lot of evidence to suggest that that's probably the case.

So I don't know why we start with this ceasefire business. We say we want to save lives, but that's not the answer. The second thing, of course, is ending the aid. People say, well, it really doesn't matter. It'll take so long for the additional aid to reach Ukraine. What difference does it make? It makes a lot of difference if you're a Russian. If you are on the one hand saying, I want to normalize relations between my country, the United States, and Russia. I'm sincere and I'm serious about it, then why not stop the aid to people who are absolutely committed to killing Russians? That ought to be done right away. So I think that's a serious mistake.

And again, this is not Donald Trump's war. He said that. He didn't want it. So why sustain the aid? That doesn't make any sense. That's not a bargaining chip. That's a self-inflicted wound. It tends to undermine the sincerity and the truth of everything he's saying.

And I do believe the president when he says he wants to end the war. That's not how you end it. So at the moment, I think we're going to be disappointed. I don't see anything happening that's good. Is the United States a neutral in the communications between and negotiations between Russia and Ukraine? Because I think it's a co-belligerent with Ukraine. John O'Brien Not only are we a co-belligerent, frankly, we're responsible for the existence of this heinous regime. The hundreds of drones that struck a residential area in Moscow would not have flown anywhere were it not for us. I think that this travesty that we somehow

or another are brokering something between Kiev and Moscow ought to be ended immediately. We are mightily responsible for everything that's happened in Ukraine. I think if you're a Russian, you reasonably ask the following question. If they want good relations with us, if they want to repair the damage, why don't they simply put an end to this regime in Kiev? And we could. And we could also demand that elections be held as soon as possible to put in a new government. And we could ask the Organization of Security Cooperation in Europe to help with that and

get rid of Zelensky and his crew. The fact that we're not doing any of those things sends the opposite signal to the Russians. It means we're not serious and we're not sincere. We have any leverage with the Russians whatsoever? No, of course not. Remember, we've made this analogy before, but we probably ought to do it again, Judge. If there were a large military establishment force, 400, 500, 600, 700,000, whatever, sitting in Mexico, it was armed, trained, and equipped by the Chinese, or the Russians, or anybody.

And its sole purpose was to attack the United States, to regain control of southern Texas, or southern California, or something, based on what happened many, many years ago. What would we do? We would smash it, We would stop it. Right. And we would not negotiate with it. It's an existential threat. And we need to understand that.

We have no leverage whatsoever. No one would have leverage over us in the case that we were destroying a threat in Mexico. So are Marco Rubio and Mike Waltz and Steve Witkoff on a fool's errand. Oh, they're on Fantasy Island. Worse than a fool's errand, I guess. I don't know what they really think they can accomplish. Let me switch.

I don't think they're going to accomplish much of anything. Although, you know, to their credit, I think the Russians will still be polite to them. What is your view of President Putin's methodical patience? I mean, he could have, I think you've told us

this, if he wanted to demolished the invaders in Kyrsk. He could also demolish the government buildings in Kyiv if he wanted to. I think he's going to work diligently to achieve the aims of his campaign, denazification, demilitarization, and hopefully set the stage for a neutral Ukraine that does not have NATO forces or any foreign forces on its soil. We should welcome that. From the very beginning, a neutral Ukraine was in everyone's interest. It put this enormous barrier, five, six, seven hundred miles between us, between NATO and Russia, in a very positive way. The opportunity for any accidents or problems

that could spill over the border are almost nonexistent. So this is what he's going to do. He's going to finish that to the extent that he can. And then at the same time, I think he's going to look to us to do what we just discussed. Get Zelensky out of the picture and his little supporting cast. Stop pretending they're legitimate. Stop pretending that we have nothing to do with them. We're just sponsoring them or supporting them. That's nonsense.

Get rid of them. Hold some hasty elections to the best of their ability. Put a new government in there. Let's do that. That much will help enormously. And then it's time for all the states that border Ukraine to come on board and sign the Neutrality Treaty, which should be modeled on the Austrian state treaty. And we can certainly sign it, but we can't guarantee anything in perpetuity there, because we don't live there. But the people that do live in Europe,

they can have a profound impact on the survival of the agreement once it's made. How would you advise President Trump, if you were, please God, in a position to do so, handle the Europeans? I mean, you have Sir Keir Starmer, whose military, as you've told us, wouldn't even fill Yankee Stadium. On the other hand, you have President Emmanuel Macron, who does have nuclear weapons, the first nuclear weapons, I understand, are subject to approval by the Americans, some unique relationship we have with them, but how would you handle them? They seem to me to be profoundly ill-advised, a bit hot-headed, and I don't understand what they're trying to accomplish or even what they fear.

But they're talking military action in Ukraine. Their people, in my view, would be blown to bits, but you're the military expert. No, listen, you don't have to be an expert to understand that this is an empty threat. There's no support in their countries for military action against Russia. As I think I've said before, 86% of the people polled in Poland now oppose the use of Polish forces in Ukraine.

Now, how are you going to get there to fight it all? It doesn't make any sense. So I think President Trump should cut his losses in Ukraine. He's a businessman. This was not an investment he made, it was made by his predecessor. It was a bad investment. Cut it, be done with it.

Then turn around to the other partners and say, you're free to do whatever you think is best. That you have, your sovereignty is yours. In other words, there's nothing in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization that prohibits you from doing something stupid if that's what you want to do. But I'm telling you as president of the United States,

if you go in there with the objective of fighting the Russians, you're on your own. We don't want anything to do with it. We want good relations with Russia. You should too. I would leave it at that, because these governments will not survive, Judge. Do you think these leaders—and we'll take Stammer, Mertz in Germany, and Macron as examples, go to bed at night worrying that they're going to be attacked in the morning? Or you think this is all domestic, politically generated? Well, they're globalists.

They think that they are supporting what they consider to be a truly righteous cause, which I think is nihilism, atheism, socialism, all bound up together in ways that are catastrophic. I don't think the population support it. I think that's pretty obvious. I'd be surprised if the European Union survives this whole adventure. We know NATO won't. That's inevitable. And these things happen over time. That's inevitable. And these things happen over time. It's better if you have some foresight and you can manage the dissolution of these things. But we don't live in the world of 80, 90 years ago.

And the notion of building alliances or structuring anything that triggers an automatic war for the American people doesn't make any sense. So we definitely need to get out of these places. And I would just, if I were the president, I would simply say what I did. I don't think these governments will last. I think Stammer is on borrowed time. Macron is about as popular as the plague in France. I think the French and the British will dispose of them. Now, Matt's just got in there. And the Germans, as you know, these are very conservative people,

and they will wait to see what he does. And they will discover that he is another globalist. He's another manifestation of the old problem. And the Germans will eventually throw him out. It just takes the Germans longer. Things usually begin in France, but they don't begin in Germany. longer. Things usually begin in France, but they don't begin in Germany. Here's Secretary of State Rubio in Ireland yesterday. I'd like your thoughts on this.

Chris, cut number one. Are you truly prepared to apply pressure on Russia? Should it be recalcitrant and not agree to the terms of the ceasefire? There's been no concrete action that this administration has taken to punish Russia since it's come to office. Well, a couple of points. To be clear, as far as I am aware, the United States has not provided armaments to Russia. The United States is not providing assistance to Russia. Every single sanction that has been imposed on Russia remains in place.

Every single sanction the president inherited has remained in place. But they inherited it, previous minister. Right, but well, I mean, they're pretty sanctioned up. I mean, there's a lot of sanctions on already. So my point being is that there's been no steps taken to relieve any of these things. These things continue to be in place.

But we don't think it's constructive for me to stand here today and begin to issue threats about what we're going to do if Russia says no. Let's hope they say yes. Say yes to what? To giving the 30 days to regroup and rearm? Yeah, exactly. I think Senator Rubio or Secretary of State Rubio is in a difficult position now. We have no leverage.

Threatening the Russians with more of what we've already done is not going to have an impact. They have found a way to survive the sanctions regime. In fact, you can argue that they flourished as a result. We've actually strengthened this whole BRICS system that is evolving by imposing sanctions. We are seen as so hostile and so belligerent. The view is that with the United States, it's their way or the highway. And the world doesn't want to play in that ballpark anymore. So the bottom line is he's telling you the truth. We've already done all that we can,

and it doesn't make sense to do anything more. We hope they'll say yes. Well, that's a stupid remark because they're not going to say yes. We know what the conditions are. How many times do they have to repeat themselves? And we can help this along. We can accelerate the end of this war, or we can cause it to last longer. And it looks like we've decided to postpone any fundamental change and let it continue. We talked a few minutes ago about the Europeans in my interview with Foreign Minister Lavrov on Monday. He said a number of fascinating things, a two-hour interview. I think he did 95% of the talking, that's just the way he is. I'm deeply grateful for having been there. But here's an interesting comment he made, Colonel, about his belief,

and I assume President Putin's belief, that the Europeans actually want more war. Chris, cut number 10. Prime Minister of Denmark. She said that these days Ukraine is weak. Ukraine cannot be fairly treated now. Therefore, for Ukraine today, peace is worse than war. She said this. for Ukraine today, peace is worse than war. She said this, yes, let's pump Ukraine with weapons again and when we shake, have shaken Russian position,

then let's see whether we can talk. And the chief of German intelligence a couple of days ago said that it would be bad for Ukraine and for Europe if the war ends before 2029 and 2030 even better. Yes, they say these things. And when President Trump was interrogating President Zelensky in the Oval Office, asking him many times, you don't want to negotiate, Zelensky was trying to avoid the Nazi. Were you startled to hear those comments from the Prime Minister of Denmark? Peace is worse than war. From the head of German intelligence, it would be good if the war lasted to 2029-2030. The gffaws in the background were mine. I was startled to hear that I was seated just across the table from him at the time. Well, these people are lunatics.

Let's not even discuss lunacy at this point. Let's just say Prime Minister Salisbury of Great Britain, one of Britain's best prime ministers, frankly, once observed that the biggest mistake in politics is to cling to the carcass of dead policies. The Ukraine policy, the policy of arming Ukraine to the teeth and hurling it at Russia is dead. It was a mistake, it should never have happened. These people are clinging to it. If they insist on doing so,

their voting electorates will turn them out. There's no question about it. Now, secondly, when you listen to the prime minister of Denmark, I've listened to, I think, the lady leading Estonia, another prime minister in Finland or president, these people have lost all sense of proportionality. They don't know what war is. All of these people do not understand war. They haven't looked

carefully at what's gone on in Ukraine. This is the kind of war that can be brought to them if they insist on persisting in this hostility to Russia at a point in time where Russia is not interested in hostility to them. I mean, this is the real tragedy here. We're not dealing with a Stalinist Russia that is bent on territorial conquest and expansion. There is no common turn. That's ridiculous nonsense. If anybody has something like the common turn, it's USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy. Those things are gone. They've got to wake up and come to terms with reality.

And as long as we seem to be allied with them and underwrite them, they will behave stupidly. It's the same problem with Zelensky. That's why President Trump needs to say to them, if this is what you want, you are on your own, you will get nothing from us. And this notion that we have some holy obligation to do anything the European leadership wants us to do is ridiculous. It's nonsense. We came there after World War II, and we stayed because of the threat that was represented

by the Soviet Union. It's all gone. There's no reason for us to be there now. That's not contemporary Russia. They need to wake up and get on with things Switching to the Middle East Colonel The Israelis have have stopped all food water medicine and electricity into Gaza

President Trump has dispatched Steve Witkoff, the same Witkoff that we mentioned a few minutes ago because he's also going to Moscow, to negotiate directly with Hamas over the severe but not publicly revealed objections of Prime Minister Netanyahu and in the right wing cabal around him. Not too long ago, you warned about the likelihood of a regional war in the Middle East. Do you still have that view, Colonel? Oh, absolutely. And by the way, just to backtrack a little bit,

if we do not act in a more sober and realistic manner towards Moscow, the war in Ukraine could also unravel in Eastern Europe. I think it's very important that we act swiftly to put an end to the fantasy island trip that these people in Great Britain or Denmark or France are on. That should end as soon as possible. In the Middle East, there are many potential triggers that could lead to a regional civil war.

I've mentioned this before, there's something called Abasiyya, which is a word that seems to mean in the Muslim world, a sense of solidarity, a coalition or coherence of Islamic peoples. That's always been very weak in the past, but that's changing. If Mr. Netanyahu does what I think he will do and resumes bombing in Gaza, that will bring Egypt into conflict with Israel. When that happens, all bets are off. The entire region is going to gear up and go to war with Israel in some form or another. It may not happen in the first 24 hours, but it will spread. The same thing is true in southern

Syria. If the Israelis are only perhaps 30 kilometers from Damascus right now, insist on annexing all of that territory, inevitably they will confront the Turks. The Turkish military will confront them. That's not going to be tolerated. Damascus is one of the great cities of Islam. The idea of the Israelis marching into it is anathema to every Muslim. They've already lost Jerusalem. Cairo is the other great city and then Damascus in the modern world. They're not going to give those up. So I think it's a question of where does this begin? What triggers it? What causes it?

What about a Turkish confrontation with the Israelis at sea? I don't know. And then of course there isan and iran has pledged support to egypt has has saudi arabia And I think the iranians will stand by egypt and if egypt gets into a war with israel, they will be supported by iran The whole thing is a house of cards. It could collapse very suddenly thing is a house of cards that could collapse very suddenly and then erupt in fire, and the fire will not contain itself. It will spread and spread and spread. So the only solution at this point for the President of the United States is to rein in Mr. Netanyahu, which I think he will not do under any circumstances.

One of the—well, the one question that I put to foreign minister Lavrov, which he chose not to answer, Colonel, was if the Israelis, uh, bomb Iran, will Russia come militarily to Iran's defense? He just sort of looked at me with a little bit of a smile and went on to finish answering a previous question. He chose not to address that. Do you think Russia will come to Iran's defense if the Israelis attack Iran,

particularly with American assistance? The short answer is yes, I do. I think Russia, China, Iran, all the states in the Middle East and beyond that frankly, in the world, many, many other nation states are watching all of this. And I think they've concluded that a failure to act against Israeli aggression and against us, if we directly join Israeli aggression, will lead to their own destruction. You know, at some point, no matter how weak you may feel or be, you

decide that it is no longer in your interest to do nothing. And frankly, the Arabs, for a very long time, have taken the position it's in our interest to do nothing. That's no longer the case. I think the Arab states understand at this point it's do or die. And right now, the two leading powers in the region who are prepared to act against Israel and us, if necessary, are Egypt and Iran. So I think the Russians understand it,

the Chinese understand it. You've seen the Russian-Chinese naval drills off the coast of the Straits of Hormuz. That's not an empty gesture. That's a very real statement. And I think we can expect more of that as the time goes on. So that's why my great concern at this point is the only person, the only individual who has the authority and the power to intervene and stop this is Donald Trump.

But I don't think he will do that. I think he's caught up in a web of his Not necessarily of his making a web that constrains him in in terms of what actions he can execute Colonel you and I have a mutual friend who used to appear in this show and now has his own Colonel Daniel Davis, who recently, the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, announced she was going to appoint him as deputy director, a position for which I think in your view and mine, he is eminently qualified. What happened to Colonel Davis when Director Gabbard announced she was going to appoint him? I think a number of things happened.

Keep in mind that whether you like or dislike Dan Davis, I happen to like him. This is someone who is always scrupulously honest in all of his dealings. This is a person who absolutely rejects deceit and is a man of complete integrity. In addition to that, he has great courage, not just physical courage on the battlefield, which he demonstrated back in 1991 because I was able to see it. He also has moral courage. He's willing to stand up to those

who are doing things that he thinks are wrong. What he's done that has deeply offended the people that control Washington is that he has said he cannot support what the Israelis are doing in Gaza, that this is inhumane and it is beyond the pale for him as an American and as a Christian to support this. That's unacceptable today in Washington, D.C. Everyone in Washington, D.C., with very few exceptions, has decided for personal reasons that they are going to support whatever Mr. Netanyahu's government wants to do, regardless of how many deaths that means among the populations of Gaza, or for that matter the West Bank, or ultimately anywhere else in the region.

Unconditional support for whatever he wants to do. That's something that Dan can't publicly do, and he's honest about it. And I think that's done him in And it's unfortunate that we've reached a point now where that's the attitude It's it's not a healthy one for the united states. It's very it's very sad you and I and our colleagues on this show were harshly critical of the Influence that the israeli lobby had in the biden administration, it apparently has the same influence in the Trump administration. Well, John Mearsheimer has talked about that in great detail, and I certainly would defer to him. That's not something I've studied in detail as he has.

But let's keep in mind that money buys a lot inside the Beltway, and that's not a new development. It's always had an enormous impact. There are reasons people want to sit on certain committees. The Securities Banking Exchange Committee in the House is a good example. You go there, you are someone who is in a position to interact with the banks, and they find ways to reward you for your support of their interests. This is an old game.

It's nothing new. It's just better organized and more subversive, I suppose, to our foreign policy and our defense than ever before in the history of our country. Colonel McGregor, thank you very much. Thank you for your time, for your insight, for your personal courage, and thank you for accommodating my schedule. It's always a pleasure, my dear friend. We'll look forward to seeing you next week. Sure. Thank you, Judge. Of course. Coming up at one o'clock, I'm not sure where on the planet he is, Pepe

Escobar. At three o'clock, the aforementioned by Colonel McGregor, Professor John Mearsheimer, and at four o'clock, Colonel Larry Wilkerson, MUSIC