Judging Freedom - Larry Johnson : Trump’s Capacity to Lead — A Serious Question

Episode Date: January 19, 2026

Larry Johnson : Trump’s Capacity to Lead — A Serious QuestionSee 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. Tragically, 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? 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 Monday, January 19th, 2006. Larry Johnson joins us now. Hi. Before we, thank you, Larry, for accommodating my schedule. As always, before we get to your understanding of Trump's mental capacity and mental state and leadership capacity, isn't President Putin justified to feel aggrieved at NATO expansion? Oh, yeah.

Look, I think at this point, that there ought to be even a question of whether Russia should continue even trying to have a relationship with the United States. I think what Trump has done over the course of the last two weeks, now starting into the third week, reject a complete rejection of international law, asserting the right to invade and conquer, whoever he wants, that he can take Greenland just because he wants to, ignoring any kind of international law, any kind of convention. So I think at this point, you know, Putin would be well justified to say, these Americans are crazy.

We have to recognize that they're a toxic threat and then be prepared to act accordingly. Here is President Putin saying it not quite as sharply and clearly as you just did, making his views known in no uncertain terms about the absence of respect for sovereignty and the non-interference in internal affairs of other countries. This was January 15th, so it was last Thursday. Chris cut number one. 80 years ago, our fathers and grandfathers, great-grandfathers, having won the Second World War, were able to unite, find a balance of interests, and agree on the fundamental rules and principles of international relations, and enshrine them in the UN Charter in all their totality, completeness, and interconnection.

The imperatives of this foundational document, such as equality, respect for sovereignty, non-interference and internal affairs, and the resolution of disputes through dialogue, are now in demand more than ever. This principle is enshrined in fundamental international legal documents. Disregard for this basic, vital principle has never led and will never lead to anything good. This was clearly demonstrated by the crisis around Ukraine, which became a direct consequence of many years of ignoring Russia's legitimate interests and a deliberate course toward creating threats to our security, toward the advance of the NATO bloc to Russia's borders, contrary to the public

promises given to us. I want to emphasize this, contrary to the public promises given to us. I recall that Russia has repeatedly put forward initiatives to build a new, reliable and fair architecture of European and global security. There you have it. Yeah, so, you know, I misspoke on Friday because I based it upon what Alexander Bikouris had said about Putin explicitly saying, we're going back to the 1991, you're pushing it with NATO back to 1991. But in essence, that's what he's saying. He's noting that this entire, the root cause of what's going on in Ukraine is grounded in the expansion of NATO to the east. But more importantly, the rejection of international law ignoring it.

the continued interference of the West in the internal affairs of Russia and other countries. Now, I imagine popcorn sales have gone up in Russia over the weekend, as, you know, Putin's got to be sitting there with a big tub of buttered popcorn, just watching the United States in Europe flail at each other, where, you know, the United States is poised to take Greenland by force. And threatening to, you know, the entire rationale for the war and the European support for Ukraine and the war in that country is that Russia has violated international law by trying to, by taking by force the Ukrainian territory. Yet here is the United States threatening to take by force Greenland and take it from another country, Denmark, who's a NATO member. I mean, you can't make this stuff off.

No. Our friend and colleague, Ray McGovern, claims that as a result of Trump's demands, he hasn't done anything yet other than make demands and insults. In some respects, he even insulted himself. We'll get for that in a minute. As a result of Trump's demands, he's helping to destabilize NATO. and Putin will sit back and applaud at that. Yeah, that's as I say, Putin's got the popcorn out, just saying, this is great.

And now you have to ask the question, is this a deliberate strategy by Donald Trump to eliminate NATO? I could see how people could make that argument. I think NATO ought to be eliminated anyway, so I'm in favor of that. But, you know, underlying this is Trump's open declaration. that there is no such thing as international law that will govern or restrain U.S. actions. Now, there's not just Trump saying that. We've heard it repeated by Stephen Miller, is a deputy chief of staff. Marco Rubio has signed on to that, Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Treasury.

Scott Bessett has signed on to it. So what you're looking at here is not the aberrant, you know, erratic actions of one guy. You're looking here at an entire cultural shift in the United States, at one point having been an advocate for international law and saying, hey, we have to abide by these agreements. It constrains what governments can do is now tearing that off, said, hell, we can do whatever the hell we want.

Here's a little bit more of Putin in the same, in the same speech. also on January 15th. Chris, cut number two. I want to emphasize this, contrary to the public promises given to us. I recall that Russia has repeatedly put forward initiatives to build a new, reliable and fair architecture of European and global security. We proposed options and rational solutions that could suit everyone. In America, Europe, Asia, throughout the world,

We believe that it would be worth returning to their substantive discussion in order to fix the conditions under which a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine can be achieved, and the sooner the better. It is precisely toward a long-term and sustainable peace, reliably ensuring the security of everyone that our country is striving. Not everywhere, including in Kiev and the capital supporting it, are they ready for this. but we hope that awareness of such a necessity will come sooner or later.

Until this happens, Russia will continue to consistently pursue the goals it is set for itself. He says not everywhere, including in Kiev and the capitals supporting it, are they ready for this? Ready for what, Larry? That I'm not sure. I mean, ready for the United States to, become an outlaw country. Let's think through logically this claim that we've got to, you know, Trump and his team are claiming it we've got to take Greenland to protect it from Russia and China.

Well, if Greenland through Denmark is a part of NATO or, you know, so because of Denmark, the NATO would have interest in protecting Greenland. If there really was a threat from Russia and China, and there is not, absolutely not. I mean, you know, right now, Russia's got full free access to the Arctic because it borders the Arctic through, you know, 10 of the 11 timesomes that it's it, that it encompasses. But in theory, you know, there would be just the United States say, yeah, we pledge ours, we'll support you, we'll help protect and defend you. But that's not what Trump wants. Trump wants unfettered, complete control of Greenland so that we can go in and take what we want, do what we want. want and install, without any regard for the rights of the people who live there, without any

respect for any kind of property rights, we're going to take it, and it's going to be ours to use as we please. So it is that assertion that I think, you know, part of what Putin's talking about, because he said, hey, we have an international order where these conflicts can be resolved through dialogue instead of war. And I know the people that's not what Russia did. Now, Russia was pushed into a corner by the West, and it didn't start with Donald Trump. I mean, that started under George Bill Clinton, then George W. Bush, then Barack Obama, then Joe Biden, with Donald Trump in between.

The entire U.S. approach has been to try to do to Russia. what we're proposing to do to Greenland. Wow. Well, who knows how this is going to end up? You know, we talked about, I'm switching gears, Larry. We talked about this briefly with Ray on Friday, but how do you think CIA and Mossad so grievously bungled their effort to bring about a 1953-style coup in Iran in the past two weeks?

Well, actually, I don't think they bungled it. I thought they did it. They really pulled off something pretty extraordinary. And it wasn't just CIA and Assad. The British MI6 was up to their eyeballs in this as well. One of the major propaganda channels that was helping communicate inside Iran and paint a picture to the Iranian people that your government is collapsing. All is lost was out of Iranian interference.

international, on a television station, satellite station, broadcast out of London. So this information played a very important role early on in spreading disinformation, claiming that there were riots were spreading across Iran without control, that the anger against the Ayatollah was real and it was growing. And pushing Reza Palavi, the son of the Shah, as the logical replacement. Now, recall, this all started with, there was a, they created,

the intelligence agencies created an economic panic with the collapse of the currency. They did it. It was a deliberate operation. And people said, oh, they can't do that. Hell, George Soros did it to the UK several years ago. So don't tell me that an organized intelligence organization working with, like the Department of Treasury,

can't collapse the currency of another country. They knew that that would bring out protests. But then once those protests started, they had already pre-positioned these Starlink terminals and pre-positioned firearms with ammunition and people ready and willing to use them. And so once the organic protest started out of, you know, upset over the economic situation,

then these outsiders or these, these agents of influence that were controlled either by CIA, Mossad, MI6. They came in and started acting, and what they were doing was they were both killing the protesters and killing the security service personnel. And they're trying to make it look like the security service personnel were doing all the killing of the protesters, which was not true. But again, this is the nature of it. They had counted on this content.

continuing to grow and escalate until last Tuesday when this military operation was supposed to kick off. And one of the reasons it did not is starting on the previous Thursday night. So a week ago, Friday, the Internet was shut down across Iran, this outside propaganda that was being fed in and used to coordinate messages and information throughout Iran, that was shut off, and they identified where all these starlink, you know, where many of the Starlink terminals were operating, in addition, seized an additional 40,000.

So this was, I don't think Bungal's the right word, because this was well planned, it was extensive, it was comprehensive. It failed, though, and it failed because of the Iranians with the help of the Chinese and the Russians, figured out how the information was being spread via the internet, and they cut it down. So at some point, the thugs in the street, whether genuinely aggrieved or whether hired thugs, couldn't get instructions from wherever, Tel Aviv, Langley, or London.

Yeah, so they instead of seeing themselves as part of a coordinated operation that was integrated across Iran. And again, this covered a variety of different groups. You had the Kurdish fighters. You had the Mujahideen al-Kalk. You had the People's Mujahideen of Iran. You had out in Balochistan. I'm sure you had some Azeri communities.

You had Armenian communities. So, yeah, look, there was genuine anger at the government of President Pasechian over his mismanagement of the economy entirely justifiable. But that didn't translate into a rejection of the Islamic Republic and the role and status of the Ayatollah Khamani. And you saw this, you know, the propaganda that the West was laying on about how all the women in Iran are having to, you know, they have to wear the,

the hoods and the full-length dresses and they can't, you know, that's a lie. I mean, they do that in Saudi Arabia, and we're not attacking Saudi Arabia, but the women in Iran have actually much more freedom to both dress and move around in the streets than do any of the women in Saudi Arabia, just for starters. But that propaganda was being spread. And once they intercepted and shut down that outlet, that, was the turning point. And that started, as I said, a week ago Friday. And before they shut down Starlink, they obviously monitored it. So they knew who was communicating to home.

Well, at least they were starting to collect that information. There's just, you can't just hit one button and suddenly get that picture. But it requires some digging, some analysis of different signals. But what's telling is this is it's not like the protest started on Sunday. And then somebody at CIA or Mossad or MI6 said, hey, we need to get some Starlink terminals in there right away to help. Hell no, that was done in advance. This thing was teed up well before that. Now, you can fault the Iranian intelligence service for failing to detect that. I think that's a very, you know, one of the things that hasn't really been focused on so far. Right, right.

But once they realized what was up, and I'm sure they did it with the assessment, assistance of Russian and Chinese intelligence, they very quickly brought that to a halt. And the propaganda that was being spread among the West, again, it wasn't just to discourage the Iranians inside. It was also to create within the mindset of people in the United States and in Europe, yeah, we got to go in and do something. We got to act militarily to help the Iranian people. So that it was completely gaslighting, but it was designed to create at least political support for what was going to be an illegal military operation. When you said hood or hoods a few minutes ago for female coverings, you were talking about

the hajib, you were talking about the traditional garb that we see of women in Saudi Arabia and what the American media misled everybody to believe was still being forced upon women in Iran. Right, the hijab. And, you know, you've talked to both Max Blumenthal and Adamperimphil, his wife. They were in Iran roughly a year ago, and she wasn't having to wear anything like that. Right. You know, I think she may have kept a scarf on her head, but that was about the extent of it.

but they saw other women, Iranian women, walking out without their heads covered. But again, it's another of these lies. We keep portraying Iran as this most extreme conversion of Islam and conflated always with ISIS and with al-Qaeda, which are Sunni organisms. They're based in Sunni Islam. And Sunni Islam is a little bit like, you know, I'll liken it to the Catholic Church within Islam.

It is the authority. And anybody that strays from that within that Sunni version of Islam is seen as an apostate. And so from the Sunni version, they see Iranian, they see all Shia Muslims as apostates. As apostates. And so that is why, actually, over the last 10 years, Iran was in Syria fighting ISIS and al-Qaeda. Now we claim that those are our enemies because they attacked us on 9-11 but here is Iran

trying to destroy them and the United States ends up aiding and a better I thought the enemy of my enemy is my friend Yeah, it should be Not in our case You have recently questioned the mental competence of Donald Trump to be president Yeah, no I think

I think he's reached that stage where you know, anybody that's had a senior parent finds that the day comes when, you know, they should no longer have the car keys. They shouldn't be able to drive out of the house because they're going to cause some accident and get some people killed. I think that's where we are with Donald Trump.

I think the 25th Amendment needs to be invoked. I think he needs to be pulled from office. Again, just in the last couple of days, he basically tells Norway, yeah, I'm going to be more aggressive because you didn't give me the Nobel Peace Prize. It's like, apart from the immature narcissism that reflects, that's just, it's like, you may think that.

You don't say it out loud. He says it out loud. And he has lost, what he has lost is the filter, the ability to recognize, I may think some things, but I shouldn't say those things. And I saw that in the case with both my mother and father when they got into their mid-80s, that, you know, particularly as my mother, what she was 40 years ago, completely changed, became sharp, more brittle.

And that's what I think we're seeing with Donald Trump. Here's the note that he sent to the Danish ambassador. Dear Jonas, calling it by his first name, considering your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped eight wars, I won't even comment on that. Plus, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of peace, although it will always be predominant,

but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America. Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia and China, and why do they have a right of ownership anyway? There are no written documents. It's only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, and we had boats landing there also. I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now NATO should do something for the United States. The world is not secure unless we have complete and total control of Greenland.

Thank you, President D.J.T. Where to start, Larry? When did Russia and China threaten to take over Greenland? Yeah, well, they haven't, but let's assume that they did. That's supposedly why we have NATO, because Denmark, as a member of NATO, would, you know, I guess implement Article 5 or enact, put it in, put it into operation, and the rest of the countries have to sign on. Yeah, we're going to come help protect Denmark and Greenland against those nasty Russians and Chinese. but it's all a lie. And then, again, this is where I come back to his mental status.

The number of logical inconsistencies in that statement. You know, somebody, you know, I've worked for people that, you know, senior diplomats and such. And if you wrote some nonsense, they'd correct it. Say, no, no, no, we're not saying that. And they would always have a broader vision in place about, what they're trying to do. For Trump, it's increasingly about his own ego and without any regard for what does it mean for the world? What does it mean for the actual U.S. security? So I, you know, I look, I say that's, I'm sad to admit it. I voted for the guy. I regret it now. And I really

think there's time to implement the 25th Amendment, but that's not going to happen. Trump still have enough in mental acuity to surround himself with sycophants who are going to bow and scrape and do what he wants. Those sycophants consist of the vice president and just about everybody in the cabinet. Yeah, Marco Rubio in particular, Scott Bessent, Pete Hagseth. And so the United States is setting itself up on a collision course. Now, there was a, in my latest piece at Sunar 21, there's a piece of it, it looks now like it is artificial intelligence put out, and I think it's put out by the Chinese. But what is being pointed out by this artificial analyst is that what's taking place in the silver market right now where the price of silver is just exploding is not because there's so increased demand.

for it per se, but there's a real supply problem and that this and that Trump's tariffs on the European countries that vowed to defend Greenland, England, France, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, I think that's the list. They're going to have a 10% tariff and those tariffs are actually likely to provoke a financial crisis. Again, Trump's not thinking that through. No. I thought these are allies. I thought these are deep allies. I thought in the case of two of them, Great Britain and France, we have our nuclear weapons

on their property. Yeah, yeah. I mean, Europe is now involved with an abusive relationship. You know, they're like the spouse that gets beat up every other week by her

drunk husband. And instead of them walking out, instead of them calling the police, instead of them getting a restraining order, they just keep saying, honey, what do you want for dinner tonight? You know, they may protest, but they're still willing to sit there and take a beating from the United States. I don't know if that'll stop. Europe does have the ability or the capability to say, okay, to the United States, take your nuclear weapons and shove it, shut your bases down, get the hell out. we're going to go actually have a relationship with Russia.

We get cheap oil and cheap gas and recognize that their future lies in the East, not in the West with America. But they're not going to do that. They're too internally divided and in many cases financially beholden to the West. So, you know, this is with Trump's actions, I think he's going to end up promoting conflicts that are going to spread and run the real risk of taking us into a global war. Great conversation, Larry. Thank you for letting me go across the board with you, much appreciated. That's great.

Chris, yeah, Chris nailed that one. Yes. That we're laughing at it. For those, Chris put it up again, for those enjoying the show on audio, only. It's a clip of Kim Jong-il. Kim Jong-un, the leader of North Korea, saying, I no longer craziest leader, L-O-L. There you go. Larry, thank you very much. We'll see you at the end of the week with Ray McGovern for the Intelligence and Community Roundtable. All the best. You got it, Judge. Thank you.

Thank you. Coming up at 3 o'clock today on all of this, are we about to start the Cold War again? What do you hear what Ritter has to say? Scott Ritter. Judge Napa Tanna for judging freedom.