Judging Freedom - Matt Hoh : Hegseth and a Weakened Military.v

Episode Date: December 23, 2025

Matt Hoh : Hegseth and a Weakened Military.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

New Year energy is all about resetting routines, feeling healthier, and starting fresh. Why not give your dog the same reset? From daily walks to better habits at home, our dogs are always right there with us. Ollie helps you start the new year with intention, beginning with your dog's bowl. With fresh, protein-packed meals crafted from real human-grade ingredients, your dog can start the year feeling their best, too. Choose from five recipes and get a personalized plan for your dog's needs. Meals arrive perfectly portioned with a scoop and storage container, so serving is fast and mess-free.

And with Ollie's in-app on-demand health screenings, tap real experts whenever you need peace of mind. Visit ollie.com slash crossover and use code crossover for 60% off your first box. Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, December 23rd, 2025. Matt Ho joins us now. Matt, a pleasure. Thank you for accommodating my schedule. Earlier today, a woman whose work we both admire, Greta Thunberg, was arrested in London for quietly sitting on a sidewalk in front of an insurance company, an insurance company that, apparently ensures what remains of the British defense industry, holding a sign that said, I oppose genocide. And for silently sitting there and holding that sign,

she's been cast into a London jail. So people are going to be afraid to express their opinions because they're not going to all have the personal courage of this young woman. That's the idea of it, Judge. You know, thank you for having me on. And, I mean, I think this gets to the core of what you've been trying to do with this show for years now, provide a platform for people to speak truth to power. Even if that truth to power is something as simple as, and the genocide, that the murder of innocence is wrong. And you see, Greta Thunberg, just the latest in many who've been arrested in the UK under their anti-terrorism laws. which are reprehensible draconian assaults on civil liberties and free speech. But the Brits have arrested hundreds of people in the past year, particularly those connected to the organization Palestine Action. Just for holding a sign in the United Kingdom that reads,

I support Palestine action, you can be arrested. And again, hundreds have. You know, and many of them, I believe it's eight, are on hunger strike and have been on a hundred strike for the better part of two months, and they are approaching dire conditions. And I think for many people, this makes people recall the 10 Irish Republican prisoners who starved to death in the early 80s under Margaret Thatcher's rule. But this sweeping anti-terror legislation that suppresses British citizens' rights, as well as anyone in the island, on the island, to free speech, it has caught up celebrities or prominent people like Greta Thumburg. The journalist Richard Medhurst was arrested. The Irish, Northern Irish ban. Neacap had a big public trial where they were put under these.

types of pressures because they were saying things the British government didn't like in their music. And then, of course, you've had hundreds upon hundreds of just normal, everyday good people out there who feel that they should be able to say something as simple and as righteous and as correct as end of genocide. Well, what happens to them? I mean, if she brought before a judge and given bail or are they kept in jail? You're telling me these people are under a hunger strike? They're not a lot of bail. Many of them. have been in jail for more than a year and a half now, without bail, not receiving, not having gone the trial yet, you've had those arrested who, particularly who began a campaign against

British participation in the Israeli war industry and the Israeli weapon industry, particularly with Elbit systems. You've had members of the British public in jail for their participation in civil disobedience against the British involvement directly by supporting the arms industry, by supplying weapons, and support Israel's conduct of its genocide. And so you've had men and women who've been in prison for more than a year. And then hundreds and hundreds have been arrested since the early summer of this year, who have been protesting in sympathy to those who were arrested before them. And this just shows how corrupt and bankrupt the British government is, how it is ruled by elites whose allegiance are to industries, such as the weapons industries, who are either in co-opted or in fear of, I guess it's one of the same, of the Zionist lobby, and who do not have one ounce of concern or care.

for the rights of their citizens, that their rhetoric about liberty, their rhetoric about freedom, their rhetoric about Western values is all superficial. And of course, this all traces back, you know, judged to our friend Julian Assange, and the persecution and prosecution of Julian Assange for committing journalism

by the British government, in conjunction with, the American and Swedish governments for more than a decade. Switching gears slightly, but it also pertains to a speech, the case of Colonel Jacques Bo, the Swiss retired military and intelligence officer, now sanctioned. He can't travel, and they can't use credit cards or get his money out of his bank accounts by the EU, even though he's a Swiss citizen.

He's not a member of the EU, though he unfortunately lives in Brussels. Yet another example of this. And his great crime seems to have been simply speaking the truth about the Ukraine war, in particular, which is why this is so fantastical, right? almost like a dystopian science fiction novel, it seems as if what the European Union is most concerned about is that Colonel Baud was quoting directly Ukrainians who were critical

of the war effort or who were at times offering honest appraisals or giving some, you know, real facts to the case of the Ukraine war. That seems to be upon which the European Union has decided to sanction a Swiss citizen who was essentially just doing his job. He was a career officer in a Swiss military, and for many years now he's been a well-regarded and very sober analyst. And so I think this has surprised a lot of people in our community judge. But again, this ties into what we were just discussing about what happened in Britain. saw happen in the United States in the last couple years with the persecution and prosecution of young men and women who were speaking out against genocide on American campuses and their

freedom of speech just being crushed first by the Biden administration and now continuing by the Trump administration. But what this all gets back to is this idea of how deathly afraid our governments are. Governments are always afraid of their people. I think that's a fundamental truth that we all understand. But when they're precarious, when they realize that their sovereignty, when they realize that their ability to govern is jeopardized by reality, by truth, by the public's understanding of their complicity in these great crimes against humanity, they will go to any lengths to shut that down for their own preservation. So this, This suppression of civil liberties, suppression of free speech, of journalism is so craven because it's not, it doesn't come from an ideological place.

It comes from just a very petty and grotesque place of self-interest among, you know, the ruling class and those who govern our societies. I'm reminded of that. I'm going to switch topics. I'm reminded of that. one-liner from Thomas Jefferson, when the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty. So the government is afraid of its own fear, if you don't mind the double use of the word there. President Trump was asked, what is he going to do with the...

A tanker recently seized. This is the tanker with the Panama flag, according to our friend Pepe Escobar, filled with oil bought and paid for by a Chinese company and destined to go through the Panama Canal and across the Pacific to China. Here is what the president said. Cut number nine.

what are we going to do with the oil that we have going to do with what the oil that has been seized the united states seized 1.9 million barrels of oil on december 10th we're going to keep it we're keeping where is it are we going to sell it or put in the strategic maybe we'll sell it maybe we'll keep it maybe we'll use it in the strategic reserves we're keeping it we're keeping the ships also now that is piracy theft and an act of war And the victim, and the victim is China. Are they crazy? They're, you know, the absurdity, judges that, from what I understand,

we're still chasing a third tanker that the Coast Guard and Navy are in hot pursuit of this third tanker that refused to stop for them two days ago and discontinued and going into the Atlantic. And so you have this, we have this event occurring where the Coast Guard, American Coast Guard and Navy are chasing this tanker to try and seize it. And just as the President of the United States says, just to take its oil, to take the ship, to commit this act of piracy. There's no other explanation for it, no other word for it.

The crimes that are occurring in the Caribbean, the Pacific, in the Pacific, in these opening phases of this war in Venezuela, of this potential coming war in Venezuela and what could be a potential regional war because certainly anything that occurs in Venezuela could expand beyond Venezuela's borders. But, you know, the opening phases are just such criminal. The conduct is so criminal. I mean, you can imagine historians in the future, Judge, right,

writing about this. And can you imagine, you know, a couple generations from now, you know, our younger family members reading history books where this is detailed. How we are stealing, how we are committing acts of piracy, how we are no better than thugs and gangs looting trucks someplace. This is the same as some organized attempt to rob a truck full of cigarettes. Yeah, I mean, and then claiming your Robin Hood, essentially,

that you're going to redistribute them. You know, that's essentially what Trump's doing here. Oh, we'll put in our strategic reserve, we'll put to good use for our people, you know. The whole fraudulence of this, you know, now that the argument being put forth by the American government is that this oil fuels or sustains the narcotics trade, right? As if the narcotics trade isn't a self-sustaining, you know, industry of its own that has more than ample revenue to keep it going, as if any organized narcotics trade needs to sell oil in order to fund its drug-selling efforts.

I mean, the absurdity of this, how much of a farce this is, and it's, you know, the danger is that I don't think they know what they're doing. You know, during that press conference, judge, at one point, you know, maybe it was the same question, but Donald Trump is asked, how does this end? What's the end game? Do you want Maduro out? And you could see the Secretary of Defense Pete Higgs-eth

and the Secretary of State slash National Security Advisor, or Mark or Rubio are on either side of Donald Trump. And most of the time when you're watching these press conferences and he's got his subordinates, you know, they're standing there. They know what he's going to say or they have a good idea. And so they're not spacing out, but, you know, they're not engaged, you know, with their body, with their body in the conversation. And you could see at this point, though, when Trump starts to answer the question about

what's the end game here with Venezuela, you see both Hegsef and. Rubio become hyper aware, really focus in on what Donald Trump is saying. You see both of their sets of eyes just glue to the president because they don't know what the end game is. I feel like you can almost guarantee that both Rubio and Hegseth in that moment at that press conference was wondering if Donald Trump was going to make an announcement that was going to change things or solidify things or at least give them some understanding of what's now. next. So this is, you know, the idea that not only are they making this up as they go along, but they're not bound by anything, but that they're willing to steal, as you were getting to,

oil from China, you know, not just carrying acts of war and piracy out against a small, a weak nation like Venezuela, but doing it against the world's greatest power. You know, so the madness here is really quite alarming. Here's what the Wall Street Journal just reported a couple of minutes ago, actually after we went on air might and that. The U.S. moved a large number of special operations aircraft and multiple cargo planes filled with troops and equipment into the Caribbean area this week, giving the U.S. additional options for possible military action in the region, according to U.S. officials and open-source flight

tracking data. I guess maybe he wants to start this war while Congress is away. Doesn't make a damn bit of difference because even when Congress is there, Congress is away. It doesn't do anything. Right. You mean the failure of the Congress to pass another war powers resolution, which I think you and I both agree that wouldn't do anything, but at least there'd be some type of symbolism. There'd be some type of acknowledgement by the Congress that only about 20% of the American people support this war. You know, 80% of the American people are saying at the forefront of this thing, we don't support it, which historically is not how it typically works.

Typically, the American public is supportive of the wars. And then as the wars go badly, as the lies are exposed, as a great moral weight of these wars, crushes the American government's narrative about them, the public turns against the wars. That was true for Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. What do you fear may very well be the unintended consequences of this thoughtless, illegal, immoral, unwise invasion of Venezuela?

Oh, judges. They mean the possibility. From your military experience, do these young men, there's 20,000 young men in these ships loaded for bear, so to speak. Do they want to storm the beaches? You know, I have a very good friend, a very dear friend whose son is there now, and it breaks my heart that this is what he's taking part, and he's taken part in this illegality, in this criminality, and this piracy. He's a good man. He's about one of the best men you'd ever meet. And, yeah, it breaks my heart that here he is doing the same as me. my friends, my colleagues did a generation ago. There is such an insular nature, such a bubble that the military is in, Judge, whether that is

due to ignorance, whether that is due to cultural reasons, whether it's due to a mindset that says we don't make policy, we carry out policy, right? So those excuses, that apologia, just, again, that culture, living in that bubble, I think for most of them, there is either an acceptance that this is my job. And as long as I'm in uniform, I will carry out the lawful orders of my command, including the commander-in-chief, others who are eager to put to use, to put into practice what they've been training for. Many of them will believe or do believe that what they are doing is righteous. Look, I mean, the stat I throw out all the time, judges, is about the Iraq War, how in March of 2006, Zagbi does a poll. and it finds that three quarters of the American Marines and soldiers in Iraq, three years after the invasion, four and a half years after the 9-11 attacks, believe that they are in Iraq because Iraq was part of the 9-11 attacks and that they are in Iraq to prevent the United States from being attacked again as it was in 9-11.

So I have no doubt that many of the men and women who are part of this 20,000 strong armada off the coast of Venezuela believe in the righteousness, either because they're in that bubble, either because they're ignorant, either because or maybe they want to believe this, they're eager again to put in the practice what they've been training for. And so I think regardless of what the outcomes are in terms of a U.S. military intervention, a war in Venezuela. And I think the United States, from its perspective, will keep it limited. So it will be more like a Libyan intervention than an Iraq evasion. But, you know, certainly the tragedy and the ruination that will befall the Venezuelan people from this, that's the historical record of how these things go.

Or the fact that it could spread to other parts of South America and Central America, either by design or by accident and unintended consequence. wars are breeding grounds of unintended consequences we all know that you know beyond that i think for these 20,000 men and women Americans who are part of this armada the ruination of their souls the ruination of who they believe they are the moral injury that will come from taking part in such an illegal barbaric act as a regime changed war against venezuel let alone what we've already seen so far, whether it be the piracy of these tankers or the murder of, I think it's 109 people now on speedboats in the Pacific and the Caribbean, there's no honor in any of this.

There is no, there is nothing upon which to rest any form of laurels in this. This is dishonorable. This is shameful. And so for those young men and women who are taking part in this war, who, you know, we can have conversations about, what degree of responsibility they have for their actions, what agency that they have as uniform members of the American military. It's a conversation that can be had. But the reality is, is that a year, five years, 10 years, 20 years from now, that shame, that regret, that guilt for taking part in something that is so clearly illegal,

so fundamentally wrong, so against any form of values and ethics and morals, which I believe these young men and women pronounce about themselves, that effect, that moral injury is going to have its toll. And so I think that will be one of the consequences of a war or regime-fined operation or just continued acts of piracy and murder on the American soldiers, Marines, sailors, airmen, and Coast Guard personnel that are taking part in this. I'm going to go back to free speech in Great Britain.

And we're going to play. It's on the long side. It's about 120 seconds. one of the more dramatic defenses of Palestinian rights ever articulated on the floor of the House of Commons. And as you listen to this, the great orator, I don't know if he's still alive anymore. I don't think so. Anthony Wedgwood, Ben, you tell me what would happen to him if he said this today outside the House of Commons. Chris?

I finish us by saying this. War is an easy thing to talk about. There are not many people of the generation that remember it. The right honourable gentleman served with the six and last one. I never killed anyone, but I wore uniform. But I was in London in the Blitz of 1940, living in the Millbank Tower, where I was born. Some different ideas have come in since. And every night I went down to the shelter in Thames House. Every morning I saw Dockland burning. Five hundred people were killed in Westminster one night by a landmine. It was terrifying.

Aren't Arabs terrified? Aren't Iraqis terrified? Don't Arab and Iraqi women? Weep when their children die. Doesn't bombing strength of their determination? What fools we are to live in a generation for which war is a computer game for our children and just an interesting little channel 4 news item? Every Member of Parliament tonight who votes for the government motion

will be consciously and deliberately accepting the responsibility for the deaths of innocent people, if the war begins, as I fear it will. Now, that's for their decision to take. But this is a quite unique debate in my parliamentary experience where we ask to share responsibility for a decision we won't really be taking with consequences for people who have no part to play in the brutality of the regime which we are dealing with.

And I finish with this on October 24, 1945, and the former Prime Minister from Bexton Old Circuit will remember the United Nations Charter was passed and the words of that Charter etched into my mind and moved me even as I think of them. We the people of the United Nations determined to save future generations, succeeding generations, from the scourge of war which twice in our lifetime has caused untold suffering to mankind. that was the pledge of that generation to this generation and it would be the greatest betrayal of all if we voted to abandon the charter and take unilateral action

and pretend we were doing it in the name of the international community and I shall vote against the motion for the reason that I've given them brings tears to your eyes I mean that was Tony Blair's motion to join George W. Bush in one of those fruitless useless

youthful invasions in which you participated. What do you think? I mean, my point is, if he or someone else gave that speech on a public street in Great Britain today, he'd be locked up. There's a very real danger he would be, Judge. The British police just arrested the leaders of protests in Britain,

men and women who peaceably assembled to show their disagreed, agreement, their dissent to British policies in support of Israel and its genocide, the men and women who led those movements were recently arrested by the British police. So it's quite likely that he may not have been, he wouldn't have been arrested or he would not be arrested within the parliament, but certainly outside, he may be a fair game. And there's no aspect of this where it is abiding some type of legal principle or legal precedent. This is is inherently political. The idea is to conduct lawfare against the citizens of Great Britain

in order to shut them up. You know, as you said earlier, to put fear in them to make it so that they have to do calculations in their head as to whether or not it's worth it, whether or not they can speak their peace, speak their beliefs without fear of some type of repercussion or consequence or punishment that would have long-lasting effects on them. You get arrested in something like this, again, as I said, they've had people in prison now for more than a year in Britain who are there because of what they have said, what they have done, how they have acted civilly in defiance of their government's policy of supporting genocide. You know, so if you get arrested in this, the ruination that the problems it can bring to you and your

family, to your loved ones are great and serious. And the government knows this. This is why They do such things. They want to shut these people down because they are so afraid. And for us, I think the response to that is to keep speaking, to keep organizing, to keep showing up. I mean, you look at that clip we just heard of that beautiful, wonderful speech from 22 years ago. You can draw a straight line from that time through the Iraq War, the escalation of the Afghan War, the wars in Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, et cetera. to arrive at this point now and every time the abdication of our governments the willingness of them to do

the wrong thing continuously to do the murderous thing continuously for their own self-interest or for the benefit of their friends or for benefit of their allies in the weapons industry or the fossil fuel industry or in the banks we are in this point now because of that allowance by our governments and so it's against our governments that we have to stand uh chris just reminded me that our mutual friend George Galloway is effectively living in exile from the United Kingdom, living abroad after being questioned, detained, and threatened at Gatwick Airport in the summer, this past summer, the summer of 2025, he has managed to take his assets out of the country before they're seized. Oh, well, it's Christmas time. Maybe there's hope, although things look pretty bad.

Matt, it's a pleasure. As you may know, judging freedom. past the 100 million view mark this past weekend. The number is astounding to me. This is the second year in a row we did this. Thanks in no small measure to all your contributions. I hope you'll stay with us next year. And I hope that the good Lord fills your heart with joy at Christmas. And congratulations, Judge, that's well deserved.

Yes, and happy holidays and Merry Christmas to you and yours. you know, especially your dear mom. And then, of course, happy holidays to everyone who's watching and listening. Merry Christmas to all. Thank you, Matt. All the best. And coming up at 3 o'clock on all of this, Colonel Karen Koukowski. And at 4 o'clock, how better to end this day, Max Blumenthal.

Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.