Judging Freedom - LtCOL Tony Shaffer : Ukraine War Update.

Episode Date: June 20, 2025

LtCOL Tony Shaffer : Ukraine War Update.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, June 19th, 2025. Colonel Tony Schaeffer returns to our cameras and microphones. Good morning. Colonel, it's a pleasure. Welcome back. Thank you for taking the time to chat with us. While the eyes of the world, the media, and the public, and diplomats, and military people like you have been understandably focused on Israel and Iran, I would like you to help us catch up with what's happening in Ukraine.

Did President Putin ever retaliate for the drone attacks on the four Russian airfields and the two or three civilian targets that hit Russia a couple of weeks ago? Well, they've had record number of missile and drone strikes against a number of targets they've not hit before. But I don't think, Judge, you could point to one event and say this was the one they did to retaliate. I think it's been a continuation and expansion of their current offensive effort against the Ukraine. And so it's more about they were already winning. Instead of going and refocusing their assets on other things to create a big event, they just continue to do the study work of wearing down and demilitarizing the Ukrainians, which

I think is much more effective than seeking a specific event and doing a revenge attack. Is there pressure on President Putin, whether from his right wing or the circle around him or the military or the intelligence community, to get this over with? So there is, but the folks who just want it done have been, I think, I don't know if shouted down is the right word. Judge, the Russian pace has been effective. It's been slow. It's been methodical. And I think the argument is, well, why would I change the pace that is Putin from doing it the way I've been doing it if we're going to achieve victory in the end? And I think that's the issue at this point. Putin, like Trump, has people within his own country who are critical of the way he does business, some of them being close to him. And I think at this point,

both men are faced with dilemmas regarding how do we continue to meet military objectives without creating a larger global conflict. So that's why I think both and people, this may get you, I don't want to get you in trouble, but by comparing Putin to Trump, but in this area, both leaders have real specific dilemmas of how to continue to do things which are militarily important without increasing the risk of an expansion of the conflict. So that's what they're both doing in their different different areas obviously but but for Ukraine it's all about trying to basically do everything to kind of get to the Dnieper and get those areas within the current conflict area

settled before I think they're going to go for a ceasefire because I don't think the Ukrainians could continue to hold out much longer. You and our other military guys who've spent careers in the military have been telling us for a long time and it's going to be over soon, it's going to be over soon, they can't last much longer. How much longer can they last by the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian government. You have an issue with the illegitimate presidency of Vladimir Zelenskyy. I think, well, we've always believed

that people would act rationally on the Ukrainian side, which I guess was our error, because they don't act rationally. They continue to do things to allow their people to die without any hope of winning. So I think that's the issue that many of us have faced. With that said, two things are no longer present, which is our funding.

US funding is running out. It's not gonna be renewed. And the military weapons in the pipeline, that's running out. It's not going to be renewed and The military weapons in the pipeline that's running out to p-hick stuff Our friend Peter said we're not sending a bunch of material that they asked for especially drones and count basically counter counter missile and counter drone drones which we need So with that said if that stuff stops showing up, you just can't fight. And the Europeans have kept offering stuff and they've offered to fund stuff, but they can't. All the nations in Europe owe each other billions of dollars, so I don't

know how they're going to come up with money that they don't have to pay to a country that will not win and obtain weapons which are not available. I don't know how it's possible. So I really do believe we're seeing July, August as the latest the Ukrainians continue to hold out. How about President Zelensky in office? I mean, is he still pretty much a puppet of the hard right and Ben Darius animated nationalists? Is he

just going to go away? I mean, what's going to become of that government? Can he survive the demise of his own military? I mean, literally as a human being, can he live the demise of his own military? Well, he believes so. And I think that's what he's trying to do right now is continue to make very brave statements without any hope of backing it up with what he's going to be able to obtain. So I think it's all aspirational for Zelensky. And judge beyond that, he's, I think, already invested in his own future.

He could walk away today, be a very rich man and live out his days in comfort, at least until someone tries to assassinate him. But I think that's what he's trying to prevent. He's trying to basically show that he's on the right-wing side until the very end. And then at the very end, I think he's going to book out and leave to fly off and resign. I think that if the military collapses, he's done, which I think it's going to happen. And I think he'll wind up here in the United States

in some form as some sort of a refugee. Has the United States dialed back the volume of equipment? I know at some point the legislation that was last passed under the Biden administration, all of which is subject to the discretion of now President Trump will come to an end. And I think we're comfortable in saying that the president is not gonna go to Congress

to ask for more. But in the interim, has the United States government, whether it's to defer this to Israel or because they know that Ukraine is losing, has the Defense Department dialed back what has been the flow of military equipment to Ukraine? And intelligence both, yes, absolutely. I think at this point, the guidance, as I understand it, is to provide the Ukrainians defensive support, not offensive support. Anything that would give them the ability

to strike Russia regarding intelligence or specific military technology has been limited. I know they were able to help, the United States was able to help broker, believe it or not, the Israelis to give up an older Patriot missile battery from the first Gulf War about, you know, it was one of the early model Patriots. So things like that, which are technically defensive in nature, I think you're going to continue to see. Otherwise, a lot of the support for offensive capabilities is going to end. I think the F-16 support is going to end. Things like that are just going away.

What has become of the 20 CIA bases that were built during the first, maybe you don't want to answer that, that were built, only tell me what you can of course, that were built during the first Trump administration. Are there still 20 of them across Ukraine? Are they still operative? The CIA is a bit of a different animal as we know. And I think that even with its current leadership, there's resistance to certain guidance. And they will drag their feet and justify their bad behavior by saying they're doing things to help defend the Ukrainians. I think

that drone attack did not sit well with President Trump. I think they, the administration figure, CIA was still up to helping them at the time that happened. So I think CIA has been running its own game, but again, I think CIA with Radcliffe is being reined in slowly. So I don't know if those bases still exist. I'd say about half of them still do probably. And I think it's just a matter of time,

especially if Ukraine collapses before they're all shut down and it should be shut down. There's no reason for them to be there. What's your take on the drone attacks? It's obvious CIA, MI6, and perhaps God were involved. But who in the CIA knew? Did Ratcliffe know and not tell Trump? Did he not tell him intentionally

so that Trump would have plausible deniability? Did Tosy Gabbard, before Trump said famously or infamously, I don't care what she says, did she know about it and not tell him how far up the food chain did the knowledge of the CIA's investment of manpower and American dollars in that drone attack go? So this is one of those things that Mike Flynn and I were trying to warn the president about first term,

is that these people, especially CIA, are going to do and say things in such a way that they will kind of tell you something is going on, but not tell you. And when you're at that level, you get all these code names read to you, you get these read on slips, and judge, they can bury things in the detail pretty easy and it's it's one of those things that unless you're paying attention you have someone kind of doing a deep dive to everything they say something could get past you I'll bet well no at some point I'll bet they briefed they briefed him on a concept

that had been approved by the Biden administration, not actually talking about it was implemented. It was already being formulated for execution and the contemplation of the execution was probably also ignored by the staff. They just didn't wanna say it. So they're gonna come back and say, well, we told you about it on this briefing on this date back six months ago. That's the game they play.

Did Radcliffe know? Again, I think he knew but not like how far along it was. So that's how they do these things. Okay, I don't wanna veer into because I want to be able to take advantage of your knowledge of Intel and military on Ukraine. However, when the president said the other day about Tulsi Gabbard, famously in Air Force One, I don't care what she says. Yeah, yeah. I don't care what she says. Under the law, which you and I both understand, she and she alone is the principal person to inform him of American intel.

Is he getting intel from some other source? Let me answer this question in two parts. First, my friend, John Lehman. Johnny Lehman, the former secretary of the Navy? Yeah. We both know him. Okay, go ahead. You know John, you can ask him this question then too.

So John, during a meeting on Able Danger, which we talk about again at some point since Kurt, our friend Kurt Walden has been stirring that up, rightly so. John Lehman told me that when he was Secretary of the Navy, they always had other intelligence sources to include some of their own, Navy and the New York Times and other outlets. And John said to me, we never trusted what the intelligence community was telling us. We always believed there were other sources which were equally or better informed. Just saying, just saying. Not here to be shot at for what he says, but he said the other cabinet members,

other Reagan cabinet members had a similar point of view. So I don't think that's changed. Should she resign? Because he probably said, I don't care what she says. Well, no, let me hit the second part of this. So during the time, my second part is Jim Woolsey, you know, Jim. So when Jim was director, I was running an operation completely off the books. Well, it was kind of, I mean, you know, it's black operations. It was run legally, just saying for the audience,

we did it legally. We had determined through this operation when I was chief of Army's clandestine program, human intelligence program, that the North Koreans in 92, Judge, had already obtained, created five working nuclear weapons. If you go back and look at history, the Clinton administration didn't admit till the late 90s

that we had knowledge. The policy was to not admit or acknowledge what we knew about the North Korean nuclear program. So Jim had to lie. We had the army had to lie because it was an Army operation. We were forced to not say what we knew. So when I see Tulsi, and I said this on the network, let you know that I judge, I have no problem

with Tulsi saying her own opinion or having a point of view which takes a certain stance because we can't always acknowledge everything we know. And that's my position on that on what she said. So yeah, but this is not her own opinion. What she was saying was the uniform opinion of the intelligence community. All right. I get that uniform opinion can be wrong.

So okay, got it. Got it. Got it. So, okay. Got it, got it, got it. Back to Ukraine. We are hearing that China is entering into agreements to make major investments in the Donbas. Are you hearing that? Do you know about it?

What does that tell you about the future of the Eastern part of Ukraine? Will the world soon recognize it as part of Russia? So I do believe that Russia is going to walk away with what it has and maybe a little bit more because they're still on the offensive. China has its own internal problems right now. China can do a lot to invest and do things, but I'm not sure Xi is going to last the rest of the year either, the way he's going, because of the People's Liberation Army not being happy with him, the internal consumer price index being very shaky by the Chinese people.

We'll see. I think if Russia wins, China's going to come in with them. But I don't know if China's going to be that strong a partner in the end because of their own internal issues, which are not anywhere near to being resolved, as far as I can tell. Is there still a front? Is there still a line or a DMZ between the Russian troops and the Ukrainian troops? Or is there no front anymore?

Can the Russians just go wherever they want? The Ukrainians have been successful in laying down essentially defensive lines, built up areas, cities especially, which are slowing down the Russians. With that said, once they break through one barrier, they kind of go for a good amount of terrain, 10, 20 kilometers to hit the next barrier. Ukrainians have been very good about being defensive and building these things up.

So the answer is, yeah, there's barriers, but once they break through, they can run a little bit and then they get to the next barrier. But the Ukrainians have been successful in keeping those barriers up and slowing them down. Let me get back to the flow of military equipment. Has it been slowed down because Trump and his advisors including our friend who's now the

Secretary of Defense, believe this is a losing venture or because they want more gear to go to Israel? Or both? I think it's a losing venture. They were declinating this stuff before the Israeli fight with Iran started. And I think if they could get away with a judge, they just would leave Ukraine altogether. You've got Lindsey Graham and the other folks who want us to fight every nation on the planet.

You have Lindsey Graham and Richard Blumenthal talk about an odd couple, but they are fiercely along with Ted Cruz before Tucker Carlson took him to task. And Tom Cotton and those guys are badgering Trump to send more military equipment to Ukraine. I was kind of surprised about Ted Cruz coming across so strong on this.

Ted used to be kind of, I think, more of a Walter Jones, Ron Paul guy in some ways, but I guess he's changed. I think it's unwise to continue to invest in Ukraine. I think the larger issue, Judge, needs to be what President Putin and President Trump are focusing on on relationships. As we speak, there's a number of meetings still going on between Russia and the United States to reestablish effective diplomacy. I think that diplomacy will then result in certain military agreements, which I think are necessary. And again, I fought the Cold War.

We fought it to beat Russia. I think it's time we understand the Cold War is over and there's larger issues we need to work together on relating to global security, especially nuclear weapons that go beyond what's going on in Ukraine. Will the war in Ukraine still be going on by Christmas time? I hope not. I hope you and I are having a conversation about-

What does your military background and analytical ability tell you? Again, if we're the primary funder and provider of weapons and things in the pipeline continue to trickle through, some things are decremented because of other things that we're doing with the Israelis. They have to stop. The Russians aren't stopping.

The Ukrainians will not be functionally able to continue to do what they're doing without our dollars, without our aid. I have to believe by this time in August, you know, the 19th, 20th of August, it's going to be done for the Ukrainians. Tony Schaeffer, thank you very much, my dear man. Much appreciated. Thank you, sir. Good to be here.

We'll look forward to chatting with you. Thanks for accommodating my schedule. I look forward to chatting with you again soon. Sure, thank you. All the best. Thank you. And coming up later today at 11 o'clock this morning, back to Israel and Iran, Colonel Douglas McGregor. At one o'clock this afternoon, Professor Glenn Deason.

At two o'clock this afternoon, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. MUSIC