Judging Freedom - INTEL Roundtable w/ Johnson & McGovern - Weekly Wrap 6-June

Episode Date: June 6, 2025

INTEL Roundtable w/ Johnson & McGovern - Weekly Wrap 6-JuneSee 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 Friday, June 6th, 2025. Pardon me, it's the end of the day, the end of the week, our favorite time of the week with our favorite presentation, the Intelligence Community Roundtable with my two dear friends and collaborators, Ray McGovern and Larry Johnson. Gentlemen, thank you very much as always for the double duty. first, was the attack by Russian drones, excuse me, by Ukrainian drones on Russian military aircraft and civilians a pinprick and a PR stunt as Alastair Crook and Colonel McGregor claim or was it a seriously destabilizing event as Professor Sachs has argued?

The first. The key, a judge, is how the Russians react. Now on the fourth, that's Wednesday, Putin made a lengthy statement, curious that he didn't even mention the attacks on the air bases. Ushakov gave a lengthy statement as a result of the summit by telephone, and curiously enough, he didn't even mention the attacks on the air bases. So, you know, there was a phrase used by presidential spokesman Dmitry Tyskov about a week ago. He talked about emotional overload. I'm afraid we're seeing a lot of emotional overload because of the re-hensibility of this attack, but the key is and if you watch Russian statements They're distinguishing between the blowing up of the bridges which they say is a terrorist attack that how can you negotiate with terrorists?

And the pinpricks that they don't even mention so the tree on stuff I applaud my colleagues for looking really closely at nuclear doctrine on the on the Russian part the And I'm making a federal case out of it and for Jeffrey Sachs and many others to make such a case I really disagree with that and this first time I find myself in disagreement With such a bright guy as Jeffrey and many of the other analysts that you've had on your program Larry before you respond this is brief, but it's the Putin statement To which Ray just referred. Chris Cut, number one. It was a deliberate strike, and it only confirms our suspicions that the illegitimate regime

in Kiev that came to power through a coup is now being reborn as a terrorist organization, and its sponsors become supporters of terrorism. At the same time, they're asking for a ceasefire. They're asking for top-level meetings. But how can we organize such meetings? Something like this is happening. What is there to talk about? How can we negotiate with those who are resorting to terrorism?

And why should we reward them with cessation and hostilities, allowing them to receive additional weapons to continue their mobilization and to prepare for more terrorist attacks like those in the Brownskins course regions. What is the significance of the use of the word words terrorist terrorism and terror attack? Well, it marks a shift in the Russian approach to this war now from a special military operation to now a counterterrorism operation, which means more extensive military attacks and greater power of the government to conduct surveillance and to take steps to protect Russia. I disagree with Ray that the Russians were all upset.

The issue was the attack of the bridges. We've had previous terrorist attacks that Russia never reacted to it this way. We had the attack on the Kirch Bridge in October of 22. We had the Crocus City Hall attack, killed 145 people. I mean, you compare the Crocus City Hall attack to the attacks on the bridges in Bryansk and Kursk, those are nothing burgers. You killed seven people. You can't tell me that killing seven people now all of a sudden Russia's going. Oh my god

I think there's another reason why Putin and others didn't necessarily mention it In these public speeches Is because it was a great embarrassment for Russia but what we do know and i've heard from other friends in Moscow and in St. Petersburg, as well as what Pepe has witnessed personally since he's been there, it was the attack on the airfields that has enraged the Russian people. And if you watched and listened to Putin

the other day, he was I would describe it as controlled fury. His body language and his voice the tenor of his voice Was as angry as we've ever seen him over the course of the last three years So what this with the shift to a counterterrorism operation now means that this war is it going to be entering a new face? and it's going to be a more it's going to be a devastating phase for Ukraine because Russia is now, up to this point, they've limited themselves on some targets, including Zelensky.

Right. And I think particularly now that it's a counter-terrorism operation, that Zelensky is definitely on the list of possible targets. Is this a pinprick slash PR event or is it destabilizing? Larry, where are you on this Colonel MacGregor Alistair Crook versus Jeffrey Sachs analysis? Well it's a pinprick from the standpoint that it didn't accomplish much despite the Ukrainian claims at all we wiped out 41 aircraft.

No, it didn't. They got about seven maximum and at least three of those were decommissioned aircraft. It didn't have engines under the wings. So yeah, from a tactical standpoint, it was a penprick. But from the strategic standpoint, in terms of what it represented, this strike on a nuclear base has now crossed the line. And whether it's true or not, the Russian leadership perceives this as this was Western supported, directed and encouraged.

And what they've been trying to sort out was was it the United States? Was it Great Britain? But they know in their own, they believe, again, whether it's true or not They believe that this couldn't have been done by the Ukrainians on their own Ray does Russian Intel

know the nature and extent of the involvement of MI6 and CIA in these attacks Well, they're busy finding out during that long press conference with Putin himself. The inspector that reports directly to Putin pointed out that a lot of the materials used were foreign origin. They're looking into it and you know MI6's fingerprints are all over this. I don't know, I disagree with many of my colleagues on anything that has been said about you know US involvement or CIA involvement. I do think that Trump did not know.

I do think that the Russians want to believe that and do believe it. But I also see a disinformation campaign, for example, this morning in the New York Times. Okay. Now pay attention because there's distinction here between blowing up bridges and attacking strategic bomber installations. Okay. bomber installations. Okay, today, this morning, says the New York Times, the Russians launched a well something that was one of the largest barrages of missiles, blah, blah. It killed four people, mind you, okay, damaged buildings. And Moscow suggested that this was retaliation for the audacious assault on Russian strategic bombers. That's not the case. Russia did not suggest that.

Russia said, this is a retaliation for the terrorist attacks on the bridges on the 31st of May, the 1st of June, right before the negotiations were to start. I mean, it's very clear. I mean, seldom do you get so clearly a sequence here where they wanted to sabotage the negotiations, OK, and then or they wanted to provoke Putin into overreacting. Now, what happens if if Russian intel reports to Putin that the American CIA planned, plotted this, and knew it all along?

He will call Mr. Trump and say, God, we have the evidence on these guys. Do you need it? Because I can give it to you. And they'll proceed accordingly. Look, the stakes here are really high. But Trump and Putin have agreed they wanted a more decent relationship. Ukraine, I hate to tell you, is subordinate to all that. They're going to work this out. And the Russians not making a federal case

about this triad thing, you know, a Russian doctrine. Well, maybe they're doing it in private, but you know, you would expect in my experience, at least, them to say, always says this righteous thing up. Instead, the only people saying that are the New York Times and some of the people, some of the commentators. Now, Larry mentions Papie Escobar and the others. Well, I too am in contact with Jeff Roberts, for example, a Russian historian out of British Russia, Ian Proud, who is a former British diplomat, they agree with my case that this is very interesting, but the interesting part is that the Russians are proceeding very calm, cool, and collectively, and that it is the West that is and especially in New York Times saying aha see

it was not a print practice in New York Times this is why four people mind you were killed in Kiev this morning. Larry before you respond here's Deputy Foreign Minister Ribicoff excuse me Ribicoff two days ago pretty much contradicting Ray, but because... No, no, no, no, what you said was... Hang on, hang on, you can comment on it. It might not be the same clip that you're thinking of. No, it's the same one. Hang on, Ray. Cut number five.

We demand that both London and Washington react in a manner that will stop this cycle of escalation. So how will Russia respond? Are all options on the table or can you rule out a nuclear response? This is a question to our military people and our supreme commander. I am not in a position to speculate. All options are on the table. That's right.

Okay, Ray. You find that conclusive? That's what they always say. I find it fascinating that he would say all options are on the table. Larry has thoughts on this. They say that all the time. Yeah. Having met and chatted with Sergey Rybkov, he's much more congenial than he was right there.

I understand Ray talking to Jeff Roberts and Ian Proud, but they're not in Russia. The people that I know that are on the ground in Russia, including an American, he was an American military officer at West Point Grad in 1974, graduated with David Petraeus, of all people. But he's a Russian Orthodox Christian and been living there. He's saying the same thing that Pepe said. This has outraged. It's not the attack on the trains. Because again, I got to emphasize, you've had multiple terrorist attacks, multiple terrorist attacks

over the course of the last three years. Again, Crocus City Hall. Ray, you're not suggesting that somehow blowing up the two trains was a greater terrorist act than killing 145 people and warning over 341 in the Crocus City Hall attack. I mean come on No, no Larry what I'm suggesting is that it takes two to escalate Okay, and the Russians aren't playing that game the fact that the Russians are being being closed-mouthed On what everybody else is blowing up as an attack on that tree. I don't want an attack on the tree.

I was. Yes. Yes. Whether you like it or not, the fact of the matter is that's how the average Russian is perceiving this doesn't matter. Well, yeah, it does matter because it creates political pressure. And the fact that Russia is not going out immediately reacting, it's that revenge is the dish best served cold.

They're taking their time and planning. The strikes that took place in the last 24 hours, that's not the Russian response to the bridge attacks. That's not the Russian response that's coming. And in fact, we know it's going to be so severe that even Donald Trump, who a week ago was calling Vladimir Putin crazy, all of a sudden said, yeah, he's going to be a, he's strongly, he was very strong in emphasizing that they're going to, that he has to respond.

And within an hour of the end of his conversation with Vladimir Putin, State Department issues a warning to American citizens in Ukraine, basically get the hell out of the way, because something bad's coming. All right, the best way to bring two friends together who are disagreeing is to find a common enemy. No, let me just comment. All right, go. And then I've got to read you this email about which you'll both roar when you learn who sent it to me. Go ahead, Ray. No, I just want to say it was after that comment that Dmitry Peskov, having consulted with his boss Putin, how do I play this stuff?

And that's when Peskov says, look, this is a very complicated issue. And you know, there's such a thing as emotional overload. And that's what Peskov says, look, this is a very complicated issue. And, you know, there's such a thing as emotional overload. And that's what we're seeing here. We're going to go to Istanbul and do real work here. Don't worry about all these things that anyone says, including Trump. Well, actually, you notice late yesterday, Peskov made a distinction. They're not going to continue Istanbul. They will. Whoa. They Istanbul. They will continue. Oh, they will.

No, no, they will continue. He said they're going to continue at the delegation level, technical talks, such as prisoner PLW exchanges, returning bodies, but they're not going. They're not continuing the negotiation. That's what they're doing now. Larry is the same thing. Here you go. What a crazy world, your honor.

I loved the Ukraine drone attack on the Russian bombers. It's a big deal on several levels. Jack Devine. Yay. Had you included that, uh, judge, I've never agreed with Jack Devine and anything. Larry? Oh, well, it's typical Jack, you know, out of touch with reality. Wouldn't Trump have known?

Wouldn't Tulsi Gabbard have known? Wouldn't John Ratcliffe have known? Wouldn't somebody south of Ratcliffe have known of CIA involvement, Larry, and had a duty to reveal it? Or are these guys waging a rogue foreign policy that results in human death? Well, let me, there are only three possibilities and none of them are good.

That Ukraine planned this operation over 18 month period and the CIA didn't have a clue. What? You know, we're basically sleeping together over the last 18 months, and we don't know about that. Possible. Or one of the case officers that's on the ground there, one of the folks attached to the Special Activities Division, they knew about it but didn't say anything to the superiors up the chain of command or in fact that we did know about it. None of them are good looks and you know what I think what this has underscored at least from the Russian

standpoint is Trump's not really in control and Trump is either being kept in the dark deliberately or choosing not to know but It's not the kind of thing, you know Ray is correct that Russia is not seeking to blow up the relationship with the United States but at the same time United States. But at the same time, we're now going to see this military operation kick into a new gear that has not happened before. And note that it's not at full war. It's not

complete mobilization and then just destruction of anything that's in the path of the Russians. Because up to this point, they've been extremely careful to limit civilian casualties. That's been sort of the hallmark of this special military operation. Ray, who's in charge? Look, we have to look at this from the Russian perspective. Trump is the only president that they have that they can deal

with. Now, the interesting thing is not exactly how it worked out in the intelligence stuff. And I agree with Larry and Scott on that. The interesting thing, the operative thing is how the Russians are playing it. Now, the same day that Putin issued his long statement, Ushakov gave the readout from the Putin-Trump conversation. This is very official. And what he said was this, as for the attack on the military airfields, this topic was also touched upon, also touched abound. And Donald Trump again confirmed that the Americans were not

informed about this in advance. Now whether the Russians believe that or not doesn't matter that's the tact they're taking. In other words the overweening desire here to put to to conduct a decent relationship with the US and Trump is their glass white hope. That's what's priority here. They're playing everything in those terms and they want us to believe that they believe that they, they, uh, take us in good faith. What Trump is saying. And here's you shock off again.

Uh, Trump again, Trump again confirmed that the Americans were not involved in the, about this in advance. Now that's as authoritative as you can get. That's the Russian readout of that conversation. Ray is, is, um, Putin under pressure to, uh, bring the war to a swift conclusion. Of course he is. And he's admitted that six weeks six weeks ago he gave a big speech and he said look there are people here who want me to go faster. I mean they complain that

I'm not going fast enough in Ukraine. Now that's reality and this does this of course and reinforces that wish but Putin's in charge okay. He had an option to make a big deal about this. He hasn't. He's actually called this a terrorist act, which Larry is right. This is a different kind of game, okay? That's where they're going to retaliate. They're not going to let people like Zelensky and MI6 sabotage what has the potential of a new Dayton between Russia and the United States. Larry, what will Ukraine look like in a couple of weeks?

Well, it's not gonna look much different than what it is now, although Sumi is likely to be under Russian control by then. The Russian advance all along the line of contact has been pretty rapid and unprecedented really compared to previous years. What I think the real difference is this last round of so-called talks, it was an exchange of documents. The talks took place the two hours before when Medinsky sat down with Umarov and basically gave him the final ultimatum,

which was you take this deal or the next offer is going to be much more severe and you're going to have the question of whether you'll survive as a country is going to be on the table. And then they went in, they held the meeting and they actually noticed that Umarov didn't even attend that meeting. He took off immediately from Washington. Is Zelensky a legitimate target for the Russians, Ray? You mean for assassination or something like that? Of course he is. And they could do it, they could do it right after this program. They choose not to do this kind of thing because they don't like assassinations, frankly. The old

days they did. Mochria diella they used to call it. Wet affairs, okay. Actually with Putin himself having been subjected to such an assassination attempt, You know, you would think he'd fly off the handle, but he's not emotionally constructed that way. He's cool, calm and collected. And we ought to thank God for that, in my view. On that, you agree, Larry? Yeah. The what's changed, though, again, the terminology.

Under special military operation, Zelensky was not a target. Now under counterterrorism operation, Zelensky very well could be a target, because that has changed. When you look, this term counterterrorism operation goes back to what Russia carried out against the Chechens from 1999 to 2009, 2010 in the second Chechen war. And assassinating leadership was on the table during that time. And I think what Putin made clear in his speech

the other day was he doesn't view Zelensky as legitimate at all. And it's like, as he said, what's the point of negotiating with terrorists? Gentlemen, thank you very much. Great television when you disagree. We love it, but we love each other. Yeah, absolutely. We disagree agreeably as the late great JFK once said. Thank you very much much Larry. I know you're traveling safe travels I hope you can join us at the usual times while you're traveling Ray. God love you. Thank you gentlemen. All the best Thanks a lot. Thank you judge

And of course on Monday all of your usuals Alistair Crook Ray Larry and one or two on Monday afternoon. Thank you for watching. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do it.