Judging Freedom - NATO's Next Move in Ukraine War w/Jack Devine fmr CIA

Episode Date: July 28, 2023

Sponsored by: Lear Capital - https://LearJudgeNap.comIt's time to take control of your financial future and consider investing in gold.Consider adding gold to your portfolio with the company I trust – Lear Capital. Over 25 years of experience, thousands of 5-star reviews, and a 24-hour risk-free purchase guarantee. Give Lear a call today at 800- 511-4620 – the information is Free and there is no obligation to purchase. Get your Gold and Silver wealth protection guides, get your questions answered, and there is zero pressure to buy. Or inquire online @ https://LearJudgeNap.comSee 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 Friday, July 28, 2023. Jack Devine will be with us in just a moment. Jack thinks that everything is great in NATO and they're ready for implementation. Implementation of what? Right after this. Hey, Judge Napolitano here. You know that I believe that that government is best which governs least and that government is worst which interferes and regulates the most. There's no better example of this than government printing cash. It devalues everything you own, including your savings. I also believe that one of the best protections against this government

excess is gold, physical, unprintable gold, which has a long history of protecting individual investors against government interference. You all know that I'm a paid spokesperson for Lear Capital. I know the folks at Lear Capital. I work with the folks at Lear Capital. I trust the folks at Lear Capital. I invest with them, and I encourage you to do the same. Learn more about how to invest in gold by calling Lear.

Lear has 25 years of experience and thousands of five-star reviews and a 24-hour risk-free purchase guarantee. Call them at 800-511-4620 or reach them at learjudgenap.com. Give them a call today. They'll answer your questions. They'll send you a booklet. They'll tell you what you need to know. There's no pressure. There's no obligation. 800-511-4620, learjudgenap.com. Jack, welcome back to the show, my dear friend. Always a pleasure to be with you. You recently wrote that NATO is now solidified. You were speaking, of course, of the events in Vilnius, and it's time for implementation. Jack, implementation of what? Well, I think, you know, to put this in context, if we look at how the Russians feel about what

happened, not Putin, but let's say the folks around him and how they're looking at whether this was a success or not, the big shortcoming in his great strategy is that NATO was limping along. Remember how everybody was complaining about it in the West and in the U.S. government and it was speckless and this and that and the other? He single-handedly has solidified it. I've never seen, and I'd ask you, have you ever seen NATO so well organized? I mean, it's so united. First of all, they've added Sweden and Finland,

and now they're talking about bringing in a friendly relationship to some of our other allies. I know that there's people grumbling in very quiet turns about this is one of the big disadvantages. So I think what are they doing? I think they're going to be, you know, they're going to be providing more assistance. And when it gets around to the rebuild, they'll probably be the biggest donor in my mind.

So I think it's big. Well, they don't have an army, Jack, do they? They don't have a central military command. So aside from supplying less military equipment than President Zelensky has asked for and less than General Zelensky needs, what has NATO done? No, but we're in the same boat. I mean, he's asked us for many, many more weapons. He's not wrong. It's just what is the capacity to do it? But I mean, the Europeans have been very supportive, both with money, substantial amounts of money, and with support. I mean, the tanks, the Leopard tanks did go in.

I mean, I'm not sure that was a big deal other than symbolically for the Germans to do it was unprecedented. Nobody would have predicted that a year before the war started. So what I think I'm saying is NATO is born again. It's born again, and it's going to be, you know, we are part of that. And when you look at Russia, it's his alliance. Who is he tied with? Are the Chinese really shoulder to shoulder with the way NATO is with us?

There's a lot of things that are quite different between them. NATO is not exactly that solidified. We know that Greece and Turkey hate each other, right? And they're both NATO members. Well, there's a history there, if you want to say that. But there's a long history between the Germans and the French and so on. But right now, the Turks allow the Swedes to get in, right? What do you want to see NATO do? Do you want

a NATO army on the ground made up of troops from 32 different countries under a central command? Is that what Jack Devine and the CIA want? You're talking to a peacenik here. I mean, I don't want to see... Wait a minute. Did you just call

yourself a peacenik? That was a joke. That was a joke, Your Honor. Did you just call yourself a peacenik? That was a joke. That was a joke, Your Honor. Does the court not have a sense of humor? Just because you hit me in the eye with your shoe the other night and forgot about it, I mean, it doesn't mean you have to. I have to be, I can't make a joke. So my point is I do not want U.S. troops in there.

I don't see NATO troops. I've never envisioned that. What I hope they do, because remember what Putin's strategy is, and we've talked about it from the beginning, is to outlast the West, to wear us down, have us divide and fight amongst ourselves. That's not working so well, and that's the point of that article, which is NATO and we are working better than we have in decades, decades. But no troops. I mean, they're going to give a lot of money. I think that's true. They're also

giving the strategic weapons that the Brits have given and other things are going on that I can't talk about, but they're in there supporting as much as they can within the- What kind of other things are going on? I don't want to say that. There's more we could do. There's all more we could do. All right. What kind of other things are going on, Jack Devine? Well, if I was going to tell you,

I would have said it right now. But look, there's a lot of training that's taking place. And I think intelligence sharing that is self-evident. Do you think that there are... That is a very hard part of fighting. Okay. Do you think that there are... That is an important part of fighting. Okay. Do you think there are, to be serious, do you think there are peace negotiations going on that the public doesn't know about? If they are, they're meaningless.

I mean, I hate to be a pessimist. The ingredients on the ground are not propitious for peace. I wish it were true. I think it's over the horizon, not far over the horizon than I've been thinking for a long time, which is probably 24, not 23. Do you think that Russia, I know you think that Russia will not move farther west, but do you go so far as to say that Russia has lost this war? Not over yet, by any means. But let's look at what we have here today.

They gained ground in the early invasion. They've lost 50% of that. They haven't gained anything on the ground. There's no real gain. But they did. They still control those four regions that they wanted, and Crimea. That's really all they're looking for. Well, they went a lot further now to get pushed back. Let's get the story straight on that one. I mean, they are holding on. Now, what's interesting, the Western commentary is saying, well, we're not making progress. But if you look at Russian, you start talking to the Russian sources or look at reporters that are covering that,

they're not at all happy about what's going on. Now, I've been consistent on this show for months that the big offensive, the Ukrainians, the counteroffensive was not going to push them out of there. Okay. And I've always said, holding the Russians, that they're not making progress should be a national embarrassment to Russians, that they can't move forward is a disgrace. Look at their general. They removed General Popov, who was in the 58th, because he said, look, we're getting hurt out here, and we don't have the equipment. You're talking about Zelensky complaining. Look at what Rogoz his and putin's own own generals about them being under supported he's also raising the contributors i want to bring you i want to bring you back to uh vilnius because

president zielinski was very unhappy at vilnius and referred to the consensus of NATO that Ukraine is not ready to join. He called it absurd, and he had a temper tantrum on social media. Where does that go? I would say I'm sure that's his sentiment. However, I have never felt that NATO was going to bring him in during the war, and I think there are provisions that says NATO can't do that, that you cannot bring a member when they're in an active war. That doesn't mean there can't be an adjustment in the rules, right? NATO could do it if they chose to change the rules.

Well, if they change the rules now and admit Ukraine, wouldn't that trigger Article 5 and then we have troops on the ground? Well, let me just stop for a second. I think it's a really important thing that NATO not bring countries in when they're fighting. In other words, I would have voted on that because it immediately does what you're suggesting. It drags you into a war. Right. Or you say, well, we're going to make an exception in Article 5 and we're not going to do it. So I think, you know, I understand why Zelensky

wants to do it. And I think, you know, he is an actor. I'm not diminishing it. But it probably was the right play for him to take. It doesn't mean we have to sign up because he has a strong view on this. I think they took the right decision. They said, basically, we're going to let you in at the right time after this war comes to succession. Now, the Russians don't want to hear that.

Let me tell you, if you think Zelensky was unhappy, the people that are more unhappy with what took place in NATO with the Russians. All right. Before we get to the unhappiness of the Russians, I want you to tell me if you agree with President Biden. Here he is two weeks ago in Helsinki. It's the day after the conclusion of the NATO conference in Vilnius, Lithuania. The issue of whether or not this is going to keep Putin from continuing to fight, the answer is Putin's already lost the war. Putin has a real problem. How does he move from here? What does he do? And so the idea that there's going to be what vehicle is used. He could end the war tomorrow. He could just say, I'm out. But what agreement is ultimately reached

depends upon Putin and what he decides to do. But there is no possibility of him winning the war in Ukraine. He's already lost that war. Imagine if even if, anyway, he's already lost that war. Do you agree with that, Jack? There's no possibility of Russia winning and that Russia has, quote, he said it three times, already lost the war. No, but there's two different questions. One is, have they lost the war already? Or am I saying they're not going to win the war? Okay, let's start with, have they lost the war already? You don't saying they're not going to win the war? Okay, let's start with have they lost

the war already? You don't agree with that, do you? Absolutely not. But I would have chosen what I did. You can't see it over my shoulder. I had an op-ed the week after the Russians went in, and I said, Putin has sowed the seeds. Wait a minute. The op-ed is over your shoulder? You have that piece from the Wall Street Journal on the wall of your office there? Absolutely. I am going to bring it to you when this is over and make you sign it. Okay? And I'm going to bring my shoe and hit you in the right eye.

All right, Jack, I see you have a little black eye there. You didn't tell everybody how it happened when we had that lunch the other day. I wasn't looking. You hit me with your shoe. But look, I don't hold it against you. It's all business. But seriously, from the very beginning, his going in was a failure, which is different than losing the war. I think it's so deceitful and he is going to go. That's different. What we have is a war that's being contested. I think it's so deceitful and he is going to go. That's different. What we have is a war that's being contested, right? I think the Russians should be embarrassed where they are. And I am hopeful that Ukrainians, I still don't see them pushing the Russians out of the areas

they have. I've been saying it over and over again. This is a question of who says uncle first. Okay. All right. I hear you. I hear you. It is long and tough. Here's President Putin with an English translation on the latest state of the battle. We confirmed that over the past days, hostilities have significantly intensified the main clashes taking place around Zaporizhia. But the enemy was not successful in any of the areas of combat. All counter-attack attempts have been stopped. The enemy has been pushed back and suffered big losses.

They don't call it fake news for nothing. The Russians have three rungs, rings of defense, and the Ukrainians haven't even approached the first of those three rings. That's not true. They're actually making progress in the south. They've taken villages. But this is not – people don't want to hear about villages, right? Right, right. They want a real breakthrough.

There was a great overestimation of this. So there's a lot of landmines. And in warfare, I don't need to tell you, maybe most of your audience, you want to be on the defensive side in the struggle, right? Now, that doesn't mean you're going to win, but it's an easier place to be. OK, so I think what we're going to see between now and when the the offensive is over is some modest gains. What I think is going to happen, this is Jack's prediction, but there's already been a few incidents. No startling breakthroughs. OK, it's not going to push them out of where they are. But for example, attacking the land bridge between Russia and Crimea is a big deal. They're hitting depots, big deal. So I don't see a big change in land, but I think there's going to be a series of

embarrassing setbacks for the Russians. Okay. Let me switch gears a little bit because I have a clip from CIA director Burns at the Aspen Institute, a place where you would be welcome, but I would not. I'm not sure about that at all. I know you're not welcome. I think I might not be. I've been contaminated.

Well, you've been contaminated because you come on this program. But before we get to Director Burns's statement, what is your view now with the perspective of three weeks of the Pergosian incident? Well, I still, there's parts of this that are amazing, but I think it showed great weakness. The more I see it, Putin must be hanging by a thread. That's an exaggeration, but he's much weaker than I thought. Prokofiev's walking around, and I think a week ago, maybe even less, he was still criticizing the military, and he was in St. Petersburg, and then he was still criticizing the military and he was in St. Petersburg. And then he was in Belarus and criticizing them. And he's walking around now meeting African leaders, talking about, you know, the good fight down there. I mean, how he survives, it tells you how weak they are. They're afraid to tackle him.

And that in a dictatorship is really scary. It is baffling. Someone, I hope some Russian writer, writes the story because it is very hard to diagnose other than it's nothing but weakness for Putin. I mean, it's a real sign of weakness. I don't know how you can cut it any other way. Here's CIA Director Bill Burns, who, of course, is the former U.S. ambassador to Moscow and knows Russia and knows Putin well and knows him personally. Here he is last week at the Aspen Institute in a very interesting exchange. I'd like your thoughts on this, Jack. Weaknesses have been exposed by Prokofiev's

mutiny, but I think even more deeply than that, they've been exposed by Putin's misjudgment since he launched this invasion as well. And I think there's a relationship between the battleground in Ukraine and what's going on inside Russia in the sense that if and when the Ukrainians make further advances on the battlefield, I think what that's going to do is cause more and more Russians in the elite and outside the elite to pay attention to Prokosian's critique of the war. Putin is someone who

generally thinks that revenge is a dish best served cold. So he's going to try to settle the situation to the extent he can. But again, in my experience, Putin is the ultimate apostle of payback. So I would be surprised if Prigozhin escapes further retribution for this. So in that sense, the president's right. If I were Prigoosian, I wouldn't fire my food taster. So your audience is going to be convinced I'm part of the deep state. They know you're part of the deep state, Jack. That was your job for 40 years. But what he said, I've been saying and talking in different ways over many months about this the last part about Prokosian I think it's a foot race between who goes first

Prokosian or Putin I think it's that I'm not betting money but the rest of it is what I've written in op-eds it's what I've said on this show and everywhere else when you say go do you mean leave power or leave life on Earth?

At least one, maybe two. I mean, Putin could be rid of Prokofiev in a heartbeat with a phone call, right? No, he has decided that he can't do that. This is weakness. He's afraid to do it. Why not do it? I mean, why let a guy march when you make a fool out of you? Well, you just heard Director Burns say, in other words, Prokosian's life is threatened. He better not fire his food taster. Well, if I were Putin, I wouldn't fire my food

taster. In other words, I think both of them, I think Prokofiev isn't, I agree with his assessment. Putin hates him, hates him viscerally, right? So how he has the audacity to do what he does and feel that he can do this and get away with it is stunning to me. I cannot fathom this other than to say Putin is weak. One last subject matter, which is dictators really, when they're weak, they're in a dangerous place, really. You alluded to this earlier, Jack. I'm going to go back to NATO. Should the G7 countries join NATO? Are you suggesting Japan should join NATO? What I have in the other op-ed, which you can't see in the other wall, which I also want you to sign. You have op-eds all over your walls.

No, only the ones that I think are going to stand the test of time. It'll be a family monument, if you will. All right. Should Japan join NATO? It's absurd in my view, but in Jack Devine's view. struggle between NATO, the US, our allies, Russia, China, and its allies. And the outcome of this is the outcome of the Ukrainian situation is going to change that balance. We should therefore, and I'm a big advocate and have been for many years, of enriching our relationships with our allies. Get stronger. They're a force multiplier. Invest in allies, right? That

doesn't mean they have to be part of NATO, okay? They don't have to be part of NATO. But I'm saying that's the right path. Get tighter. Let NATO get tighter with Japan and all the other countries that find the behavior of Russia outrageous. So if North Korea fires some sort of a weapon, some crazy nonsense at Japan, Lithuania and France are going to have to go to battle for Japan. Is that what you're telling me? I have no idea.

I mean, is that going to happen? I mean, I have no, let me put it, I think Kim Jong-un is crazy. Not crazy. He's a clever fox. But the Abdelaziz Marbles, he's not going to do that. So hypothetically, I mean, why go there? I don't think, you know, who goes in, no matter what piece of paper you have in your hand, you know, it doesn't mean it's going to happen. So if North Korea fires a missile at Japan, they're not going to be worried about little states. They're going to worry about what the United States is going to be doing the next

day. Okay. So it's not about little states that are part of a bigger alliance. I don't think he's going to do it. That's been a problem for almost 50 years. Okay. Jack Devine, always a pleasure. Always a pleasure, my dear friend. I hope we can see you next week. Appreciate all the time you give us. Well, it's fun, and I think your audience is special.

Thank you. My audience is very special. Very special. I think I'm special too, but probably not in the same way. Thank you, Jack. I hope your eye heals well. Oh, it will. I've had this before, all kinds of things. Okay.

Okay. So, yeah, yesterday I sat down with New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who is the second of the major presidential candidates whom I've been privileged to interview. If you go to judgenap.com or Judging Freedom, you'll see my interview with RFK Jr. The interview with Governor Christie we will post at noon Eastern time on Monday. But here's a little snippet. Governor, would you cut the defense budget? Bearing in mind, we have 903 foreign military, American military installations, and the Defense Department gets $860 billion with a B a year.

Do we really need them spending all that money? Do we really need troops on 900 various locations throughout the world that no one person could even point out? Well, I'll tell you this, Judge. Every bit of the budget will get... All right. You'll see the full interview. We're going to throw a few more teases up before the weekend is out. You'll see the full interview posted on our website at noon Eastern time on Monday. And of course, we're back on the saddle. We'll have the full panoply of our guests for you next week, just as we did this week. What to expect next week? An indictment of former President Trump for the January 6th events and events

leading up to it. More as we get it. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thanks for watching!