Judging Freedom - LtCOL. Karen Kwiatkowski: What If Trump Goes Neocon?

Episode Date: November 12, 2024

LtCOL. Karen Kwiatkowski: What If Trump Goes Neocon?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, November 12th, 2024. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski will be with us in a moment on Not So Fanciful. What if Trump goes neocon? But first this. We're taught to work hard for 35 to 40 years. Save your money, then live off your savings. Unfortunately, there are too many threats undermining the value of our hard-earned dollars.

The Fed's massive money printing machine is shrinking your dollar's value. Just the cost of groceries is absurd. Let me be brutally honest. I think the dollar is on its way to being extinct. Not just here, but globally. The BRICS nations, led by Russia and China, threaten to remove the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

Central banks have been shifting away from the dollar and into gold. And if we go to central bank digital currency, that will not only destroy the dollar, but we will lose our freedom. We will lose our privacy. They can track anything we do. You need to take care of yourself and your family. So here's what you need to do. Immerse yourself in knowledge and information. The writing is on the wall. Now is the time to consider shifting some of your dollars into gold and silver as your bedrock financial asset. Call my friends at Lear Capital, the leader in precious metals investing for over 27 years. They helped me diversify into gold and silver. They can help you too. Call Lear today at 800-511-4620,

800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com. When I wrote the title of, Karen, welcome here. Colonel Kwiatkowski, welcome here. When I wrote the title of our conversation, What here. Colonel Kwiatkowski, welcome here. When I wrote the title of our conversation, What If Trump Goes Neocon, it was before I even knew about Mike Waltz or Marco Rubio. The Rubio thing is not confirmed. It's a rumor. It's not denied, but we'll see where it goes. But before we get there, how do you think the Kremlin reacted

to Trump's victory last week? Well, I think they have an assessment of him that is pretty realistic. You know, they see his ego. They know from the past four years how he operates, how he tends to operate. So, you know, they're going to continue to be cautious and see what he's doing. The fact that he thinks he can end the war in 24 hours, you know, the Russians laughed at that. I mean, they thought that was somewhat arrogant. So, you know, I think they're cautiously watching, much like many of his voters are. Right, right. Your friends, and I say this sarcastically, at the CIA planted a story in the Washington Post, which had it on the front page that Trump called Putin and told Putin, don't accelerate the war.

Putin's people denied it. Dmitry Peskov, Trump's people said nothing about it. It appears that the conversation never took place, but it's interesting that the CIA mouthpiece, otherwise known as Jeff Bezos's Washington Post, wanted the American public to believe that. Yeah, yeah. It's, I mean, you know, we just got done with an election season, which, of course, is always filled with, you know, a lot of things you can't believe and strategies that you're trying to figure out, you know, how they'll do this and that, how they'll frame everything, October surprises.

And then afterwards, it seems like a lot of the gamemanship gamesmanship is really continuing uh and i'm not quite sure you know who's who's what now in terms of israel they own both parties so that's straightforward in terms of ukraine you know it's hard to say it's's hard to say. I do know. I mean, anybody that watches U.S. government knows that. Let's say we stopped aiding Ukraine, which we will do. What do we do with that money, that fake money or whatever, the borrowed money? What do we do with that money? Well, the D.C. establishment says, well, there's some money that we can then, nobody wants to stop spending. It's really about what money are we spending now and how can we spend it more for what I'm interested in or what the other guy's interested in. So it's a play for that money. And it may be that they think we'll stop Ukraine and go whole hog into the Middle East. Well, the Biden administration is giving every indication that it will spend every nickel that Congress has authorized between now and January 20th. Chris, you can run these two clips back to back. First is Matt Miller at the State Department last week, and second is Jake Sullivan, the current national security advisor,

two days ago. Cut one and then cut two. Trump has been critical of Biden's assistance for Ukraine. Is it true? Rushing billions of dollars to Ukraine before the transition? Yeah, we've been quite open about that, that the money that was appropriated in the supplemental, that we intend to do everything in our power to get all that deployed to Ukraine before the end of the year. I'm sorry, before the end of the term. President Biden made clear when President Zelensky was here in Washington a couple of months ago that we would spend all of the resources that were provided to us by the Congress on time and in full, meaning that by January 20th, we will have sent the full amount of resources and aid to Ukraine, the Congress has authorized.

And of course, President Biden will have the opportunity over the next 70 days to make the case to the Congress and to the incoming administration that the United States should not walk away from Ukraine, that walking away from Ukraine means more instability in Europe. And ultimately, as the Japanese prime minister said, if we walk away from Ukraine in Europe, the question about America's commitment to our allies in Asia will grow. You know who agrees with him before you comment, Karen? His likely successor, Mike Waltz, congressman from Florida, who said as recently as three days before Trump nominated him, it's not a nomination, named him, this doesn't require Senate confirmation,

to be national security advisor, we should be giving long-range Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine so that they can bomb Moscow. That's what we're confronting Colonel Kwiatkowski, or will be, in the earliest days, until he fires Waltz, in the earliest days of the Trump administration. Yeah. You know, as I'm watching the Matt Miller and, or, you know, the spokespeople, you know, the security advisor guy, Jake Sullivan, you know, it's Jake's job. It really is Jake's job along with Blinken and Biden to formulate a foreign policy that makes sense. And they don't have any foreign policy. They are talking about convincing Congress to throw money at a problem. Now, there's no connection between throwing money in Ukraine and changing the scenario on the ground

for Ukraine or for Russia. You know, they don't even know what's going on over there. If they do, they're ignoring it. So the whole thing is like, how do we spend money? And this, to me, is what I see in Washington. I don't, everything they do is about spending money. Now, are they enriching themselves and their cronies? Of course. You know, are they enhancing their power bases? Sure. But that's not foreign policy. That's not what we pay the executive branch to do. That's not what the Constitution charters the executive branch to do. We need a strategy. Do they have one? We haven't had one for years. So, you know, if you bring guys in that are part of this system, and if Waltz is an example of the same thinking, we're not going to get a foreign policy. We're not going to get a real strategy to so-called make America great again.

I mean, it'll be more of the same and maybe even more bellicose because of Waltz's stated animosity toward China. I mean, and if Rubio ever become Mark, Senator Rubio, sorry, ever becomes the Senator Rubio, sorry, ever becomes the Secretary of State, he too has this publicly stated visceral animosity toward China.

I mean, we could no more defeat China than we could, you know, go dancing on the moon. I mean, it's just not in the cards. They have a bigger, stronger Navy, and the Navy would be the thing in terms of aircraft carriers and naval vessels. I don't even want to consider what it would be like. McGregor says it wouldn't even be close. No, and it's not just military with China. China has many allies, and they have ways of fighting non-decentralized war. There's all kinds of non-direct combat ways that China can harm us if we were to engage in a confrontation with them. Where's the strategy? Peace is good. And I think people maybe hopefully thought Trump might, you know, make more peace rather than less peace.

And we did have four years to look at how he operated and kind of a side effect was a little bit less, you know, a little bit more peace, if you can call that. But just saying you want peace is not going to give it. It's not a strategy. It's not a, you know, I thought what we were doing when we were putting America first, I thought we were going to evaluate and communicate what it is we stand for, not the relationships and the graft and the corruption and who's friend, who, you know, how we make money in this country, but what does America stand for? And what is America's priorities, which the American people said has to be Americans. The American people said that, we make money in this country, but what does America stand for? And what is America's priorities? Which the American people said has to be Americans. The American people said that. I mean, they have spoken and they've been saying that for a long time. They want to put Americans first.

But foreign policy doesn't do that. So when is that going to change? I mean, if some of these names floating around that are going to have major influence on our foreign policy, if these names floating around that are going to have major influence on our foreign policy, if these names are the ones or people like them, nothing changes. What do you think the reaction of the NATO and European elites, you can only imagine, has been to the election of Donald Trump? They probably don't even believe it. They probably think it's a dream, a bad dream, a nightmare. Yeah, well, you know, they all support it. Well, I mean, you can't say they supported Biden. They supported the imperial neocon American project, particularly in Europe, but globally. That's what most of the European elite likes. That's how they're geared to profit. That is how they maintain their own influence. So yeah, it's a big kick in the

shorts, which is great, I mean, for what it's worth. But our expectation is the people who support Trump or supported Trump, or if nothing else, voted against the status quo when they voted against Harris. Okay, those folks expect something, and they don't expect the status quo to continue. So if Trump doesn't, if he delivers more neocon stuff, it's not going to be just the Democrats that don't like him. He's going to have big problems. I mean, maybe he doesn't care, you know, but. Right before we came on air, Karen, the Trump transition announced that the United States ambassador to Israel will be my former Fox colleague and longtime friend. He's a heck of a nice guy, but you'll know his politics as soon as I tell you who it is. Mike Huckabee. is a Christian nationalist fundamentalist who actually literally believes that God the Father gave certain land to the Jews in perpetuity.

Well, you know, the Gray Zone guy that you interview him frequently. Max Blumenthal. Yeah, I was listening to him just before this and he had a guest on and they were suggesting possibly that putting people like, well, I didn't know about the Huckabee, but putting people like the one they're very obvious about what they believe. And the majority of the world and a great many Americans hear what they're saying and find it to be ludicrous. They find it not to put America first. It's contrary to that. It puts Israel first. It doesn't even put Israel first. It puts Zionism first.

So these folks will be kind of put out there to be critiqued, perhaps. They will be very obvious. They will, people will be listening. The Donald Trump that I know doesn't think that way. That is a very interesting and optimistic observation. I got to tell you, I'm so down in the dumps. The conversation I had with Colonel McGregor, which is one of the more informative ones I've ever had with Colonel McGregor, which is one of the more informative ones I've ever had with him. As soon as we were off air, we looked at each other and went, it was exhausting.

It's so dark. It's so unhappy. I want to say one thing about Huckabee. If Huckabee is in Israel, perhaps he'll talk to how Christians are treated in Israel. Perhaps he will consult with Christians there and he will hear from them. And, you know, he's not particularly stupid. He certainly has his ideology. But this could actually, I mean, you know, he's a firebrand.

People will look at what he says. He will blurt out things. If he talks to the right people, if he sees something, he could be jarred by what's going on in Israel. And so there is that. But I'm an optimist, you know, unrealistic, I'm sure. Here's the finance minister of Israel, so the equivalent of our secretary of the treasury, who named himself the governor of the West Bank. Now, the West Bank, under law, is Palestinian, recognized by the UN, and at one point even recognized by Israel. But this man, Smotrich, named himself the governor of the West Bank

and relying on the presidency of Donald Trump. Here's what he announced yesterday. Cut number nine. I have instructed the settlement division in the Ministry of Defense and the civil administration to begin professional and comprehensive work to prepare the necessary infrastructure for applying sovereignty. In his first term, President Trump led dramatic steps, including affirming the legality and legitimacy of settlements in Judea and Samaria. Alongside this, there were the Abraham Accords, peace for peace. Those accords, a set of agreements facilitated by Trump's first administration, saw Israel normalize relations with four Arab nations. We were on the verge of applying sovereignty over the settlements in Judea and Samaria, and now the time has come to do so.

I mean, this fellow has a sort of Damocles over Prime Minister Netanyahu. If Netanyahu nullifies what Minister Smotrich just said, and Smotrich and his buddy, Minister Ben-Gavir, who's the rough equivalent of the head of their FBI, decide to leave the government coalition. Then Benjamin Netanyahu is no longer the prime minister. So this person has extraordinary power, and he is a super, as you know, Karen, religious zealot. How dangerous is this? It's very dangerous. And it also illustrates the fact that a little country run by a population that is split, I don't think they all support Smotrich, but many do.

But a little country, 9 million people or 8 million people with those kinds of ambitions would be utterly unthinkable and utterly impossible without American backing. So this is, we've broken Washington's rule of entangling alliances and we've entangled ourselves. We need to disentangle ourselves. But he is, it's almost, if you imagine the U.S. was not supporting Israel, was not funding Israel and subsidizing its every aspect, because frankly, we are, particularly nowadays. If you can imagine that we were not doing that and Smotrich said these things, he would be seen as not just a fanatic, but a fantasist. You know, it is utterly impossible for them to do this on their own. They need the United States to do it. So something is out of whack.

Something's out of balance with this, because Americans don't want to spend money on this thing. You know, maybe Huckabee does, and he can spend his own money, but most Americans are utterly uninterested in assisting Smotrich in his Greater Israel Project, or Netanyahu for that matter. These people are not likable to most Americans, if they even are acquainted with them or recognize who they are or pay attention to what they say. So this is, to me, it's illustrative of a really big problem. And that problem is us, okay? As much as it is what's going to happen to the Palestinians, it is us.

We have enabled and created a monster. It needs to change. How can it change? You know, in a real world, in a libertarian world where countries took care of their own responsibilities and paid their own price for the stupid things that they do, this wouldn't be happening. Israel would be constrained. Most of Israelis would be satisfied with the land they carved out back in 48. But only for our support now, they can imagine something that we really haven't seen in 150 years.

This is pure colonialism, pure, aggressive mass murder, intentional mass murder being advertised. And we're supporting it. This country, this our government subsidizes this. So I it's a huge problem. And it's not just for us, it's a huge problem for us, Stuart, should be. You and I and many of the other folks on this show have often commented that through AIPAC and other sources, the Israeli government has an iron grip on the American government and that in some respects Netanyahu is Biden's boss. Do you think he will be Trump's boss? Will he be in a position to demand, expect, acquire, and receive everything he wants from Trump as he did with Biden? You know, this is my only slim hope when it comes to Trump and his Israel policy. He is a man who can be a bully, I think.

He is certainly an aggressive negotiator. He's easily flattered, but he's also been through some fake flattery. So I think he might be, you know, better able to handle it. I think if Netanyahu gets in his face, and I don't think Netanyahu would do that. I think Netanyahu is way smarter than that. But I think if Netanyahu ticks him off with his arrogance, you know, he's bumping up against somebody that will bring it back in spades to him. Not necessarily because of America First, not because it's the right thing to do,

but really just because of Trump's personality. So that's the only hope. I mean, if you're trying to, you know, we're counting on some guy, his personality, not allowing him to be pushed around excessively as America's foreign policy, then this country is shafted. Here's what Bibi thinks of Donald.

This is yesterday, cut number eight. In the last few days, I have talked three times with President-elect Donald Trump. These were good and very important conversations designed to strengthen the covenant made between Israel and the allied countries. We see eye to eye on the Iranian threat in all its forms and the danger it poses. I don't know what he means by the allied countries, but saying we see eye to eye on the Iranian threat. And if Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu see eye to eye on Iran, here comes World War Three right around the corner. Yeah, yeah. But I also don't believe what Netanyahu see eye to eye on Iran? Here comes World War III right around the corner. Yeah, yeah.

But I also don't believe what Netanyahu says. Good point. Good point. He is the great deceiver. Yeah. Well, I mean, we heard what Zelensky said after. He said, I met with Donald Trump and Donald Trump, we're going to get along great. You know, that was not true.

I mean, he might have met with him, but the impact of that meeting was not that Zelensky and Donald Trump see eye to eye on anything, despite Zelensky's positive spin. So it could be that Netanyahu is putting a positive spin. And also, you know, the Israelis are master media manipulators. You know, they haven't done such a great job with their genocide. But in most things that they get away with, it's because they've't done such a great job with their genocide, but in most things that they get away with, it's because they've managed and controlled a narrative, and part of it is, of course, they own the Congress, but they also influence a great much of Western media, certainly American media, when it comes to reporting on Israel. I mean, and they own the

law, too, apparently, because if you protested the genocide at a college university last year. Oh, that's right. You're expelled and you have to shut up and you hurt somebody's feelings because you spoke the truth. So they don't care about the truth. They care about how it impacts Israel and they spend a lot of money. They're very good at it. When I hear Netanyahu say, I spoke three times to the president-elect, that's a little overkill. So he's probably trying to shape the, he's shaping the narrative as best he can. But I'm not hopeful. I am not hopeful. I don't know Trump. I only know Trump like we, everybody knows Trump is past president. And just from observing him, I don't know. He is very easily flattered. But you make a good point, Karen. I mean, foreign policy should be made not by the picadillos of personality, but by the ideological

and realistic understandings of the sovereignties of nations. Are we going to finally see Israel dialed back because Donald Trump can't stand Bibi Netanyahu's personality? Well, I mean, you know, I'll take it if that's the only thing we have, but I don't, I don't, yeah. I mean, can the United States be saved from AIPAC, Karen? Not really. Well, okay, okay. No, that's not true. And they're putting Massey in USDA, so I've heard. I don't know if that's true, but, you know, Thomas Massey's dual citizenship rule of all government employees and all congressmen, you know, to renounce any

second citizenships that they have if they want to serve our government. That's a really good step. And of course, nobody wants to take that up. But there are ways to limit AIPAC. And one of them is the dual citizenship role. And the other one, of course, is to have it listed under the FARA, you know, as a foreign lobby. There's nothing wrong with that. They are a foreign lobby. And the fact that they've been exempted from this is nuts. And I think even and I and I think even Trump sees this. I mean, Trump is you know, he can assess things very rapidly as a as a business person. And when he sees that. Farah doesn't apply to APEC and that's the only one it doesn't apply to.

Well, that's nuts. And it should change. So there are some ways to cut it back. But the big thing that we need to do is shrink the size of our government, shrink the size of our military budget. You know, Massey himself. And I hate to come back to him. He's my favorite, of course. You know, he's my favorite, too. And I love him. But he'd be a lot better on the floor of the House of Representatives. Why would you take him out of the House? But, you know, he's his you know, he's not lobbied. He's not lobbied by AIPAC because it doesn't pay off, but he's also not lobbied by other lobbies, whether they're foreign or domestic, because Massey's agenda is to have a constitutionally limited government and not to waste egregiously waste taxpayer dollars. So he's not going to get sold on, oh, this boondoggle, this white elephant here, I can pass some money through, let's money launder for this district or that state

and trade off for other things. He's not susceptible to that. How do you get more Thomas Massys in Congress? Well, you know, I don't know. I don't know how to do that. But if we could, and these congressmen were not vulnerable, they didn't need AIPAC money, didn't want it, refused to take it, then AIPAC would be rendered ineffective, whether or not it was FARA registered. But of course, it should be. do. And maybe there's people that will run for Congress that think like Thomas Massey, that believed Trump's words, if not his actions, and become motivated to represent, you know, and save money. But Congress says seems to be impossible. They can't save money. They can't reduce their

spending. So we have a big problem. I mean, I would like an easy, I don't want to crash. I would like to have, let's, I got a flat tire. Let's slowly go to the side of the road and fix things, you know, but if they want to keep spending trillions and trillions of dollars, then we will have a crash and we will not have government and we will have something new and exciting and different. But that's not my preference. I'd like to, you'd like to think that our government could steer us into a more sane direction. All right, here's one for you before we go. Fire Jerome Powell and nominate Ron Paul to be the chair of the Fed.

Wow, then we'd finally open up the Fed's books and we'd know exactly what they own and who owns them. That's right. That's right. And, you know, he really, the idea that a bureaucrat like Powell would say, oh, you can't fire me. Oh my goodness, I would fire him so quick. Whether it was legal, not legal, throw it in the courts.

He's saying that to the wrong person. Karen, thank you very much. Very enjoyable as always. I appreciate your time and look forward to seeing you next week. All the best, my friend. Thanks a lot, Judge. Of course. Coming up tomorrow, Wednesday, Ambassador Charles Freeman at 8 in the morning. At 11 in the morning, Max Blumenthal.

At 2.30 in the afternoon, Phil Giraldi. We are up to 478,000 subscribers. Our goal is a half a million by Christmas, just six or seven weeks to go. Please help us get there. Like and subscribe. It spreads the word, a word you hear only in very few other places. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.