Judging Freedom - Lt. Col. Karen Kwaitkowski: Biden and Killing.

Episode Date: January 23, 2024

Lt. Col. Karen Kwaitkowski: Biden and Killing.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, January 23rd, 2024. Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski is here on Joe Biden and killing. But first this. Judge Napolitano here. Do you know that we the people have reached 34 trillion plus in debt? It's unsustainable and it's growing. Our government is addicted to printing money and it's not going to stop. And if you believe that, as I do,

then you need to understand why gold prices will continue to rise along with our staggering debt. In this report called $3,200 gold, it explains how rising debt will cause the value of gold to rise and it could reach $3,200 an ounce. Listen to some of the stats that I pulled from this report. They make a very strong case for the likely surge in the value of gold. In 2002, gold was $256 an ounce and the national debt was $6.5 trillion. Last year, the debt broke through $33 trillion and gold exceeded $2,000 an ounce. That is a 400% rise in the debt and a 700% staggering rise in the value of gold. And now the debt has hit $34 trillion and the value of gold continues to rise along with it.

It's great information from my friends at Lear Capital, and I encourage every one of you to call today and get your copy of this report. There's no obligation of purchase. It's a free report. It's free education. Call 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com. And when you talk to my friends at Lear, tell them the judge sent you. Karen, how are you, my dear friend? What is the status of things in Ukraine? Is Ukraine on its last leg? Well, it certainly is. Militarily, it's been on its last leg for some time. And it looks like, you know, politically, the leadership is struggling. And I don't mean just Zelensky, but they're talking about replacing his top general with an intel guy, an intelligence expert, not with combat skills, but somebody who is trusted. And it's kind of the

bunker mentality that you see. So I think it's going really bad for not just militarily, but for the whole country and for the political cohesion of Ukraine. They don't seem willing to talk. They don't seem willing to reasonably deal with Russia or anybody else to make peace. So it's hard to say how long they can hang on. But it's not good. I wouldn't want to not want to be in Ukraine. And if I was Ukrainian, I would be crying. We have seen reports of Ukrainian young men having, this is a little crude when I'm about to tell you,

although you're a career military veteran, so you've heard this kind of thing, of young men having their friends intentionally break their legs so that they would not qualify for being kidnapped and then drafted, willing to endure a crude damaging to their body rather than being thrown into the front lines without any preparation whatsoever, only to be slaughtered. Yeah, I mean, it's an indication that the end is near, doesn't it? Yeah, well, I mean, yeah, I mean, they can't find soldiers. The soldiers they have, they can't train to the levels that they need. They cannot supply these soldiers with anything that will keep them

alive. So the people in Ukraine that are fighting kind of have a clear picture of what's going on. Now, could Ukraine continue like this? Well, there's things they can do, and we're seeing it, of course, with these missile and drone strikes into Russia, you know, into Crimea. So they can still cause problems for Russia by doing that, but they can't, the things that you need to do with a qualified, manned, energetic, well-fed, and well-trained army, those are the things they cannot do because they don't have that and they can't create that at this point in time. Chris will run some what we call B-rolls, some photographs of this while we're talking about it. We did a special show on Sunday because Patrick Lancaster, the American, very courageous independent journalist, who's in the parts of Ukraine that Russia says are Russia,

and the parts of Ukraine that Ukraine has been bombing, called us up before the sun came up and said, there's just been a missile attack on a market, an open-air market, and I'm right here. And I've counted, we've blurred him, because we have to blur the dead bodies in order not to offend anybody and conform to YouTube's requirements, basically said, I'm here, and I'm counting the dead, and there are 25 dead, they're just newly dead, put me on to explain this. So my question to you, Karen, is of what conceivable military purpose is there to sending two missiles into an open air market on a Sunday morning,

knowing it's only going to kill civilians, and it does? Yeah. Well, the purpose is, of course, to incite an overreaction by Russia. It will feed into Zelensky's narrative, will feed into NATO's narrative. They want an overreaction. They want a counterattack that will be something that can hold up and say, see, stop looking at Gaza. Our people are dying. We need to get your Congress off the dime to give us the rest of the 50 billion or whatever it is. So I think they're trying to incite a response. And that is also kind of a desperate measure. It also kind of illustrates that they could care less about a rules-based order than they keep talking about.

Here is Secretary Blinken. This is a few weeks ago. I'm playing it because we're going to contrast him to Foreign Minister Lavrov in a minute. But here's Secretary Blinken saying and elaborating, Putin has failed. Putin has already failed in what he set out to do. He set out to erase Ukraine from the map, to eliminate its independence, to subsume it into Russia. That has failed, and it cannot and will not succeed. Second, Ukraine has not only stood up to the aggression.

Over the past year, it took back more than 50 percent of the territory that had been taken from it in February of 2022. The last year, the last part of the last year has been challenging. But even then, something that got little notice, what Ukraine managed to do in the Black year, the last part of the last year, has been challenging. But even then, something that got little notice, what Ukraine managed to do in the Black Sea, opening it up, pushing the Russian Navy back, and starting to get grain out to the world. It's been the breadbasket of the world.

It's gone back to that as a result of actions it's taken. All right, I misspoke. This is not a couple of weeks ago. This is last week in Davos. Who does he think he is fooling when he says to an international audience, the questioner is Tom Friedman from The New York Times. Yeah, I couldn't really realize it. Yeah, talk to Novak. He was nodding the whole way. Right. Who does he think he's kidding when he says Putin has failed. I can't imagine even the people in Davos, which are, while they certainly have a narrow perspective on things, they are well informed

in many ways. They're heavily European. So, you know, they have a sense of the reality. He seemed to be making a lot of eye contact with Tom, who was nodding very vigorously. So I think it was two people trying to talk over the truth, because there was no truth in what he's saying. And it starts with the assumption that Putin intended to destroy Ukraine or to take it all back completely or to take it over or to surge his troops to Poland and beyond. Never, ever has that been a Putin objective or a Russian objective, but it's also known by the NATO folks, the people that run NATO and many of the people that I'm sure were at Davos understand very well that that was never part of this uh this uh operation you know there was a red line the head of nato said it he said yeah well we you know we we pushed this nato thing

and we kind of blew it i mean he's admitted this publicly to european audiences so um clearly the americans are isolated in their fantasy at least blinkeninken is, and Tom Friedman as well. You know, this is a part of a long interview where we can't play the whole interview, but Tom is going like this. I'm shaking my head up and down for those of you that are getting the show on audio only, incessantly to the point where a number of our guests and viewers have commented on it. Compare what Secretary Blinken said to Foreign Minister Lavrov. This is cut number two. The United States is using Ukraine as a battering ram, as an instrument of war,

and notwithstanding what the press will tell you, Russia has always been willing to talk. Listen to this. Anybody who is sincerely interested in justice, including justice being established in the relations between Russia and Ukraine, which would involve, of course, stopping the Western policy of using Ukraine as an instrument of war against Russia, we would be ready to listen. President Putin repeatedly said that it is not true when somebody is saying that Russia is against negotiations. Actually, Antony Blinken said this in Davos a few days ago. It is not true.

Russia was always emphasizing that any serious proposal which would include the discussion of the situation on the ground, of the origin of this situation and of reaching a solution which would guarantee legitimate national interest of Russia and Ukrainian people, we would be ready to discuss it. That's a statesman, Karen. Yes, it really is.

We don't see that very often in the United States. No, we see secretaries of state speaking as if they're addressing a domestic political audience, much like their bosses, the president's chair. I just thought he was very, very savvy. And I wonder, at this end game in Ukraine, why President Zelensky is not being pressured by the White House? Let me rephrase that. Why the White House is not pressuring President Zelensky? Or why the White House doesn't pick up the phone and say to Foreign Minister Lavrov, yeah, let's meet in Geneva. We've got to resolve this thing. Why is that not happening? There were rumors and news reports of the rumors last week that Zelensky

had asked the folks that run the Swiss government to put together high-level talks, Americans, Russians, Ukrainians, and I guess the Brits would have to be there as well to do whatever the Americans tell them to do and say whatever the Americans want to hear. But anyway, to put together a negotiating, a high level negotiating team in Geneva. I don't know if those reports were accurate. I don't know if that's happening. Why isn't it happening? Tony Blinken and Victoria Nuland and Jake Sullivan see how their Ukrainian escapade has failed and failed catastrophically? Yeah, I think they recognize that it's failed to achieve anything positive for the American people.

And I think they by by changing course now in an election year, I think it's very risky for them because, you know, as we change course, and what way could we change course? Well, negotiations, which will entail loss of some of the eastern Ukrainian territory, of course, and it will be recognized as a Ukrainian loss in that way. You can wrap words around it to make it look like an agreement, but it will be a loss for Ukraine. Ukraine is damaged, it's wrecked, it's lost its people, and it's lost territory. So if they move in that direction of recognizing that, all that comes, all that communicates back to the American voter is Joe Biden is another loser. First he did Afghanistan, now he did this, can't win anything. And that's not something that they want to hear. Now, if the Democrats could get rid of Joe Biden and put a different Democrat up there,

this would be totally doable. So this can be blamed on Joe Biden, both as the current president and as a president who is aspiring to run another race and be president again. So it is all on Joe Biden in this regard. You have written about this, Karen. The current president, the one who wants another 68 billion to kill more Russian boys, the one who with his friend, the prime minister of Great Britain, are attempting to destroy the military capacity of the Houthis, the one who acknowledges those attempts are failing, wants to kill, wants to expand war. Does, I'm switching gears now, Prime Minister Netanyahu have Joe Biden painted in a corner. Is Joe Biden willing to, do you think, expand a war in the Middle East

to include Iran and the United States? Well, Joe Biden does not see himself, and he never has even when he was all there. He's not all there now. But all his life, he has been very combative in his personality, very much. You know, he considers that he has battle smarts and street smarts, which he doesn't. But he has political smarts. But he imagines that he is a man of action. And he believes, ignorantly, because he has grown up. He's never had a real job.

His entire career has been in D.C. So he believes what the propagandists in DC tell him. Oh, we have the greatest military in the world. Nothing can stop the American military. It's high tech as it could be. We're leading the planet. It's not just the money we spend, but our technology, our training. And he believes that, okay? And so he thinks, yeah, I can take these risks and I'm not going to back down. We're going to show these people what the American military is all about. And we're going to have our way.

That is Joe Biden to a T. Unfortunately, he is misinformed. He's ill-informed and he's not all there. So he will stumble into something. I think he's totally willing to expand the war in the Middle East. And if he could get away with bombing Iran, he would probably do it. I don't see that he would resist those urges because that's what motivates him is these kind of urges. Now, Netanyahu, Netanyahu is not a stupid man. He's a political beast.

He has Joe Biden's number from 20 years ago from yesterday. He understands exactly what he's dealing with. And, you know, you can see Blinken wringing his hands and insisting this is true and that's true only to friendly audiences because Blinken can't defend anything Biden's doing. But Blinken is also in the pocket of Netanyahu, but Blinken at least has some self-awareness. He sees how, you know, we're being manipulated. Netanyahu could care less if we start a war in the Middle East. He would probably welcome it. So, you know, there's nothing stopping Joe from doing that. All right. I said I wasn't going to run another. I said I wasn't going to run another Blinken and Tom Friedman, but I want to do it because you mentioned it. Chris, I think

this is number seven, the old number seven. Here is Tony Blinken being interviewed by Tom Friedman, the same interview at Davos last week. Blinken on Gaza. One of the things you hear so often from people, given the high civilian casualties in Gaza is does the United States, do Jewish lives matter more than Palestinian and Muslim lives, Palestinian Christian lives, given the incredible asymmetry in casualties? And I've been asked that. I want to give you a chance to respond to that. No.

Period. For me, I think for so many of us, what we're seeing every single day in Gaza is gut-wrenching. And the suffering we're seeing among innocent men, women, and children breaks my heart. The question is, what is to be done? We've made judgments about how we thought we could be most effective in trying to shape this in ways to get more humanitarian assistance to people,

to get better protections and minimize civilian casualties. And at every step along the way, not only have we impressed upon Israelis' responsibilities to do that, we've seen some progress in areas where, absent our engagement, I don't believe it would have happened. Absent our engagement, the Israelis would have to stop their war crimes in a heartbeat. All it would take is a phone call. How do you compare that weak, misleading hand-wringing to the solid, stable analysis we just heard from Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov. You cannot compare them.

No, no. And yet they hold the same position comparatively for the two countries. Lavrov is, of course, exceptionally well-informed and has, you know, an interesting thing. Lavrov, he's a Russian, so we don't know about Russians. Russians lie, they say. But Lavrov particularly has always come across as very honest. When he says things, he connects them to reality, to historical reality, to real world events. He's very reasonable. He's not,

you know, he's just an honest person who has thought about these things. And clearly when we see Blinken, that question that Friedman asked is a very good question, right? It's a hard question, really. Do Jewish lives matter more than Christian and Muslim lives? Well, Blinken, who certainly has heard that question before, didn't even address it. Had nothing to come back with. It's a question he should have been prepared for. And then he talks about, oh, but we've saved some lives because of our particular intervention. What intervention?

Are you talking about the billions of tons or thousands, hundreds of thousands of tons of weapons that we have accelerated the flow to Israel so that they can continue to kill the 27,000 Palestinians that have died so far. You know, about the bulldozers, the American-made bulldozers that they are flattening northern Gaza with, you know, did he do anything about that? What's his role there? Well, the guy has no perspective. He's not prepared. In fact, you know, I know Blinken is not a stupid person. I'm not saying he is. But the lack of preparation and the inability of him to even do himself any favors as a person on the spot.

Let's have an answer. Let's have an honest answer. Maybe you can't be as smart as Lavrov, but let's have an honest answer. And he can't do it. And it also tells you he's also afraid to some extent of the administration. They have they are in a box. They are in a corner. And I think when you see the performance of a guy like Blinken, especially on these issues that he should be prepared to talk about and he can't do it. It is very concerning. But see, I'm an American. I'm concerned. What does the rest of the world think when they see this? Because the rest of the world

is not our friend, particularly, and they see this kind of weakness at that level. I really wonder, you know, what that does for us as Americans. It doesn't do us any good at all. And I'm not advocating for a different president. It doesn't do us any good at all. And I'm not advocating for a different president. This is systemic in Washington. Here's another clip from Foreign Minister Lavrov on honesty and on what does the United States do to get other countries to vote with it in the UN? Is it being honest with them, or is it using a characteristic? Why is this Western, when over 140 countries in the General Assembly voted to condemn this invasion?

It is not important for us who was voting what way because all these votes I know how the Americans and the Brits and some Europeans are getting those votes I have many friends in New York and when these resolutions were voted I asked why did they vote this way and they told me me, you know, being a bit ashamed, you understand that I have worked here for 10 years. My kids are in Stanford. And before the vote, they came to me and said, don't forget about that your kids are studying there and don't forget that your bank account is in such and such bank.

So your contention is that most of these countries were pressured by the United States? Not most. All of them. Not most. All of them. I mean, we shouldn't laugh, but we ran that clip to compare and contrast his remarkable honesty with the remarkable either foolishness, irrationality, or dishonesty, however you want to characterize it, of his opposite number, the Secretary of State. Oh, yeah, for sure. And I remember years ago when we, you know,

UN votes were in the military, we paid attention to those kinds of things. And it was very well known how we got all these, many of them little countries, if you go beyond the Five Eyes countries, you know, the Brits and whatnot. But many of these small countries that really don't have a, you know, an opinion on some of these small countries that really don't have an opinion on some of these critical matters that would embarrass the United States if they put it against them, pressured them. And many of the pressures came in terms of aid, military exercises we were going to have in their country, or not just military aid, but other types of USAID, foreign loans, making the case with the IMF.

There's a zillion ways that we interfere with the global economy and we use that. This is actually a big part of what both the Pentagon and the State Department do as a matter of their job is to gain allies. Now, how do you gain allies? Not true allies, but you can get the votes stacked in your direction. And this is long before, you know, 2022. This is back in the, you know, 1990s and 2000s. It's the same. We have a longstanding habit of doing that. And to be fair, when, you know, Russia was the Soviet Union and they had their satellites, those guys voted as a bloc. There's no doubt about that. So, you know, I think Lavrov definitely knows what he's talking about.

Colonel Kwiatkowski, always pleasure my dear friend you're so spot on and such a so refreshing to spend time with you thank you Karen I hope we can see you again next week absolutely very smart lady

very happy to have her with us as one of our regular guests. Coming up at four o'clock Eastern, Max Blumenthal's colleague and partner, Aaron Matei, right here, judging freedom, Judge Napolitano. I'm out.