Judging Freedom - Prof. Jeff Sachs : Netanyahu Undermines Trump's Gaza Deal.

Episode Date: October 1, 2025

Prof. Jeff Sachs : Netanyahu Undermines Trump's Gaza Deal.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The proceeding was brought to you by ZEPA. With over half a million sold, ZEPA is the only FDA-approved mouthpiece that has a 91% success rate in silencing snoring. For a limited time, go to ZEPA.com and use the code, happy, or text, happy, to 511, 511, and get the absolute best solution guarantee to stop your snoring with the Happy Z-Pack and save over 24% off. Plus Z-ZPA will donate $10 to breast cancer research. Visit ZYP-P-P-A-H.com, use code happy or text Happy to 511-to-5-11 and save over 24% off with

the Happy Z-Pack and start improving your sleep health. Remember, Zipa is HappyZ spelled backwards. Save over 24% off by going to Zipa.com and using the code Happy. Today, text fees may apply. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for judging freedom. Today is Wednesday, October 1st, 2025. Professor Jeffrey Sachs joins us on Benjamin Netanyahu, undermining the Trump-Gazza deal. Gee, what a surprise. But first, this. My friends, if you care about your liberty and your right to control your own future, you need to hear about this. From October 10th to 12th, Mikkel Thorpe,

host of the Expat Money Show, is bringing together top experts from around the world for the Expat Money Online Summit and it's completely free to attend. You'll learn how to legally protect your wealth, secure second residences and citizenships, reduce your tax burden,

and own property abroad, all to safeguard your freedom. This year's focus is on Latin America, where opportunity is booming. Argentina is shifting to free markets. El Salvador is undergoing a dramatic transformation, and Panama and Paraguay are offering simple residency programs. A plan B is no longer optional.

It's essential. Reserve your free ticket at expatmoneysummit.com, and if you want VIP access with special perks, including lifetime replay access, and exclusive VIP panels, use promo code judge for 20% off your upgrade. That's expatmoneysummit.com, promo code judge. Professor Sachs, welcome here, my dear friend. Thank you for the double duty this week.

What is your understanding of the Trump-Gaza agreement, and who do you think agreed to it that Trump can even call it an agreement well it's basically a trump net yahoo agreement there was a a plan that had some good elements in it that trump discussed with arab leaders a few days ago but then trump met with net yahoo and with net yahoo's political aid and an american is Israeli Ron Dahmer, who was Israel's ambassador to the United States for many years and is a deep hardliner. And out of that meeting, Trump changed the terms of the agreement in some pretty basic ways and then announced it unilaterally. So he says there was an agreement with the

Arab nations. But of course, in the end, this is a Trump agreement with Netanyahu. And it may not satisfy everyone of Netanyahu's most murderous genocidal colleagues. Though when they look at what Netanyahu has gotten from Trump, they may well go along with it. It's basically a deal that the fighting would end, Hamas would disband, disarm, and Israel would keep basically open-ended control of Gaza. So it's mostly a recipe for continued Israeli occupation of Gaza. Was there in the agreement a contemplation that after five years, a serious negotiation would begin for the establishment of a Palestinian state? Well, there's no such thing as serious negotiation of a Palestinian state. There either is a

Palestinian state or there's not a Palestinian state. Israel will never negotiate a Palestinian state. And you don't have to take my word for it. You can listen to what Bibi said at the UN. And we discussed that. The whole point of Natyao's speech at the UN was to say never a Palestinian state. and his ambassador reiterated that point in the UN Security Council afterwards. There's no negotiation for a Palestinian state. It has nothing to do with Israel. Israel has no veto over a Palestinian state. The only one with the veto is the United States.

The U.S. literally uses its veto to stop the state of Palestine, now recognized by more than 150 countries, from being a member of the United Nations. So it's not a matter of negotiating. That's the joke. That's the trick. That's the parody of the last 30 years. And by the way, the completely Zionist-controlled media,

and it is in the United States, says, oh, it's always the Palestinians that don't accept the deal. Well, just listen to Netanyahu. Just listen to him. He was very clear at the U.N. No, never. It's got nothing to do with negotiations. Palestinians are evil.

And never will there be a state of Palestine. That's been true for decades, by the way, for people who listen. But Netanyahu, we can thank him for one favor. He was vulgar and clear in his speech at the U.N. a few days ago. He told it straight. Israel's position is never. So to say that there would be negotiations after five years is just the most meaningless, empty point when this is an issue that's been going on for 100 years,

and Israel has no intention ever of allowing such a state. Now, there are other things that could be done, and the rest of the world could stop dealing with Israel until it obeys international law, and it could be true. treated as the rogue state that it is, and that would make a difference, but not an agreement, quote, unquote, that starts negotiation sometime in the future in some vague way. This is pathetic. Worse than pathetic. It's a farce. I know this is the New York Post, so take it for what it's worth, but this is their digital headline for tomorrow morning. Hamas signals it could reject Trump's Gaza peace plan

that only, quote, serves Israel's interests. Hamas has indicated it could reject President Trump's Gaza peace plan because it only serves Israel's interests and ignores the Palestinian people. One of the group's senior figures said on Wednesday, the militant group is said to have issues with some of Trump's 20 conditions for ending the war, including that it disarm and destroy its weapons,

as well as the deployment of international stabilization force into Gaza. Amos has yet to officially respond. What is the International Stabilization Force? Another phrase for the IDF? Well, it seems like it is a way to put U.S. troops on the ground is what it is. I think that that's definitely part of it because it mentions that the U.S. would be part of this. So it could be partly a U.S. occupation force. There was an idea, and it's a valid one.

of a protection force for the Palestinian people that is formed by the Islamic nations. And Indonesia has said, for example, that it would contribute to such a protection force. But the way that this agreement is written is that Israel keeps its security control over Gaza. In other words, Gaza remains under Israel's dominance, which is Netanyahu's whole point. It is a kind of, well, it's a surrender of the Palestinian cause is what it basically is. Here's Prime Minister Netanyahu speaking in Hebrew immediately upon his return from Washington to Tel Aviv. Instead of Hamas isolating us, we turned the tables and isolated Hamas. Now the whole world, including the Arab and Muslim world, is pressuring Hamas to accept the conditions we set together with President Trump

to release all our hostages, both the living and the fallen. While the IDF remains in most of the Gaza Strip, who would have believed this? After all, everyone kept saying you have to accept Hamas' terms to withdraw everyone. The IDF needs to withdraw, and Hamas can recover. and also rehabilitate the strip. No way, that's not happening. On the contrary, and President Trump added that if Hamas refuses, he will give Israel full backing to complete the military operation to eliminate it.

And that's why I think, from every perspective, this was an excellent visit. Many in the government, there's a question being asked. Did you agree to a Palestinian state? Absolutely not. It's also not written in the agreement. But one thing we did say is that we will strongly oppose a Palestinian state. President Trump also said that, he said he understands that. He also said at the UN that it would be a huge reward for terror and a danger to the state of Israel.

Idea why Smotrich and Ben-Gavir condemned this? I think that what happened was that there were discussions on Thursday and Friday with the Arab leaders, and then the terms were changed in the meeting of Trump and Netanyahu and Dermer. And the terms improved, let us say, for Israel. It became basically a license for permanent Israeli control, I would say, because all the supposed language of something else is so vague as to be absurd. So this is, of course, in a circumstance where Israel is starving, 2 million people.

There were two deaths from starvation today reported and another 51 people killed today by IDF actions. So the slaughter goes on. People are trying to end the slaughter, but basically what Trump and Netanyahu have concocted with a lot of heavy players in the background of the Zionist lobby is no state, no Palestine. None of this

matters. None of the recognition by the rest of the world matters. None of the slaughter matters. There will be a surrender and Israeli control will continue. I don't think that this is really going to stand up in the way that they think. But this is what the idea is that Israel has used a genocide to, quote, win. That's basically what Netanyahu has said. When the fighting stops, when it stops, we will see the genocide before our own eyes, except that Israel will do everything to prevent any independent eyes, any actual examination of the forensic evidence. But to the extent that witnesses are allowed and not killed by Israel, that will reveal what has happened, which is a crime of astounding proportions.

So the handshake between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump and the Oval Office, Monday and the hoopla over the agreement is just a subterfuge. It's nothing that the, that Hamas or the Palestinian people would ever expect. It's a subterfuge for more slaughter and more starvation. Well, what Netanyahu said with his characteristic lying is that this is an agreement that was agreed with the Arab leaders. They did not agree to this agreement. This is the agreement that was changed by Netanyahu and then unilaterally announced. This is not a group of honorable people, let me put it mildly. They announce whatever they want, they say whatever they want, and they kill whoever they want, by the way.

But this is not an agreement that was reached with the Arab neighbors. Now, whether they will have actually the gumption to explain what has happened, I have no idea. American force threats from Israel, the continuous use of every kind of murderous approach has definitely quieted a lot of people. But this is not an agreement that was reached with Trump and the Arab leaders and Israel. That's absurd. Why do you think there's no humanitarian empathy? whatsoever manifested by Trump or his people or Netanyahu or his people for the abject,

obvious, unassailable suffering of innocent people like babies? Because this is the raw power structure of the United States. This is a war in which our leading companies, Microsoft, Amazon Cloud Services, Meta, Talentier, Google, are all complicit. This is the American power structure. And what's interesting about these tech companies who have concocted high-tech murder is that they also own most of the media in the United States now, including one of the most zealous backers of Israel,

second richest person in the world is about to also own TikTok because TikTok had some independent videos that people could watch and that was unforgivable. So it has to fall into the hands of Larry Ellison's son so that we get those awful pictures away. So what's happened is there is no humanity in this and there's no room for humanity in the mainstream media, which is controlled by the very companies that are fighting this war as well. It's really something. The captain of one of the boats in the aid flotilla, which is slowly making its way in the Mediterranean.

Well, it's just been boarded, apparently, in just the last minutes. Yes, yes. And this particular captain who made a video of himself before they took a cell phone from him is an American. I mean, what is the state? department going to do about an American citizen kidnapped in international waters by the Israeli military? Well, maybe try to send them to El Salvador or to send them to South Sudan or to send them some other place. The American military role is to, and the American policy is to keep all eyes off of what is happening in Gaza. And that's the role of the tech companies. That's the role

of the White House. That's the role of the media. They're all the same right now. So it's not as if it's different groups. But why was the flotillas stopped? It was a humanitarian, unarmed flotillas stopped in international waters because the idea is to make sure that no one sees the truth. That's why. This Congresswoman from Georgia is not really someone that you and I would expect to agree with us on much, but she apparently is in a full accord with us on Israeli issues. Marjorie Taylor Green has just called for any social media influencers paid by Israel or its American acolytes to register with FARA, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. I don't think that's ever going to happen, but God bless it for pointing this out. Well, most of the

platforms are owned by strong backers of this whole cause. So this is, we have a media, a so-called mainstream media, whatever it is, the platforms, the cable, all the rest. It's a few owners. Almost all of them are staunch backers of Israel, so you wouldn't see anything other than what you're supposed to see in the media. And again, That's what the TikTok issue arose from. It wasn't about China. It was about that on TikTok, we were seeing what was happening in Gaza. So TikTok had to be brought under control.

You can't have just open media in an issue like this. You know, having a genocide in broad daylight, a little inconvenient. So you have to make sure that all of the channels of communication are some, somehow shut down. And a flotilla that is there on a humanitarian mission, well, you have to intercept it in international waters, which they've just done. Yesterday, Secretary of Defense, he calls himself Secretary of War. Hague Seth gave a reprehensible preening and demeaning talk to 800 generals and admirals at Quantico, Virginia, and the president did well. is perhaps the most alarming thing the president said. Chris, number 19, please.

San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles. They're very unsafe places, and we're going to straighten them out one by one. And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That's a war, too. It's a war from within controlling the physical territory of our border is essential to national security. We can't let these people in. We're under invasion from within. No different than a foreign enemy, but more difficult in many ways because they don't wear uniforms.

At least when they're wearing a uniform, you can take them out. These people don't have uniforms. I told Pete, we should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military, national guard, but military. In streets as training guard, as training ground, for American military, something that didn't even happen during the Civil War? Well, don't let us not say that we weren't told what the plan is. The plan, as we just heard, is a military occupation of our cities.

It's amazing that a speech like this is given. and that a country were in disarray because, again, the media are in such concentrated hands. And the media are so aligned with the interests of war that we don't even have a reaction from the media. Look at who owns the media. Look at the share prices. These wars in Gaza and Ukraine, and by the way, American tech companies are in both of them, and America media platforms are therefore making huge amounts of money from both of them, they're not allowing our even democratic discussion.

It's as if, incidentally, we don't have a Congress. Of course, we don't even have a government right now, but we don't have any honest discussion. The president says he's going to occupy American cities with the military, and it doesn't raise even a, blip in the so-called mainstream media. It is only being raised here. I don't mean just on judging freedom, but in the alternative media, where you are gracious enough to give us a version

and an understanding of things that mainstream media and the APAC crew don't want the Americans to hear. Colonel Wilkerson was just with us, and he referred to January 6 as Trump's failed coup. and said he doesn't think they'll fail this time. Well, they've made their plans. And as Hegset said in his speech yesterday,

all those niceties of war anyway, we're warfighters, your killers, we don't have rules that are going to limit our winning. So these back-to-back speeches were absolutely. shocking. I went back, by the way, I'd like other people to do it to read one of the two finest speeches of the modern American presidency. I know what you're going to say. I was going to say the farewell address of Eisenhower. It has everything in it. Not only the warning that our liberty will be lost to the military industrial complex,

but also how the big tech, he says, is going to come and, or is it, we are at risk that it will come and control our society. Actually, Eisenhower makes all of the points and the opposite. Now, there was a real general and a real general that won the war in Western Europe against Hitler. And what Eisenhower said was that we need peace and disarmament and decency and civility and diplomacy. Hegset, who is none of the above, spoke in the most vulgar possible terms. And the President Trump, whose military service is, well, let's just say not even a footnote, I said that the military will occupy our cities. It's quite a situation.

Please, people go back and read January 17, 1961, farewell address of President Eisenhower, a real military leader and a real Democrat that is small D Democrat. And somebody who told us presciently about the situation. that we are in as a nation now. You know what he said his favorite job was before he passed being president of Columbia University? I thought you were going to say JFK's speech at American University. That's the other great speech. A close rival.

I said the two great speeches, we had two presidents who believed in peace. and we've had a lot of mediocrities and then worse, and we're in the march to war, and now in the march to war inside the United States too. Wow. Terrifying, terrifying, Professor. I know it's the middle of the night where you were. Thank you very much for your early morning email to me,

and thank you very much for the time. time that you spend with us. It is so deeply and profoundly appreciated. Likewise. We'll look forward to seeing you. We'll see you soon. Yes, all the best. Thank you. Thank you. He is a brilliant, great, and tireless, tireless man and a good friend. We have a busy day for you tomorrow. A filled day, Colonel Tony Schaefer at 8 in the morning, Colonel Douglas McGregor at 11, Pepe Escobar from God knows where. at noon, Scott Horton at three, excuse me, at two, and at three o'clock, Professor John Mearsheimer. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. Our military organization today bears little relation to that known of any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea. Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry.

American makers of plowshares could, with time, and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent arminance industry of vast proportions. How to do this? Three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States corporations. Now, this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry,

is new in the American experience. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Thank you.