Judging Freedom - Prof. Jeffrey Sachs: Can the US be Trusted?

Episode Date: June 2, 2025

Prof. Jeffrey Sachs: Can the US be Trusted?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 Monday, June 2nd, 2025. Professor Jeffrey Sachs is here on, can the United States be trusted? But first this. While the markets are giving us whiplash, have you seen the price of gold? It's soaring. In the past 12 months,

gold has risen to more than $3,000 an ounce. I'm so glad I bought my gold. It's not too late for you to buy yours. The same experts that predicted gold at $3,200 an ounce now predict gold at $4,500 or more in the next year. What's driving the price higher? Paper currencies. All around the world they are falling in value. Big money is in panic as falling currencies shrink the value of their paper wealth. That's why big banks and billionaires are buying gold in record amounts. As long as paper money

keeps falling, they'll keep buying and gold will keep rising. So do what I did. Call my friends at Lear Capital. You'll have a great conversation and they'll send you very helpful information. Learn how you can store gold in your IRA, tax and penalty free, or have it sent directly to your doorstep. There's zero pressure to buy and you have a 100% risk-free purchase guarantee. It's time to see if gold is right for you. Call 800-511-4620,

800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com and tell them your friend the judge sent you. Professor Sachs, welcome here. I want you to watch this brief BBC clip, which is the BBC version of what happened in Russia over the weekend. Chris, cut number one. Far from Ukraine's borders, an attack of astonishing audacity. Russian strategic bombers picked off one by one by a fleet of drones. Ukraine calling this Operation Spider's Web, personally overseen by President Zelensky. One of Kiev's boldest attacks so far, a reminder despite Russia's overwhelming strength in numbers, that Ukraine is a resourceful, determined enemy.

Sources say this took a year and a half to prepare. Dozens of drones smuggled into Russia, stored on wooden pallets, loaded onto trucks, driven to distant air bases and launched remotely. Swarms of drones picked up on social media from Siberia to the Arctic Circle. At a petrol station north of Irkutsk, a glimpse of the operation in progress. With smoke already rising behind, a drone emerges from the truck and heads off to join the attack. Moments later, another. And gunfire as police officers try to bring it down.

Ukraine claims to have done a staggering $7 billion worth of damage and knocked out a third of the planes Russia uses to deliver cruise missiles. We know exactly whom we are dealing with. We will defend ourselves by every means available to us, available to Ukraine, available to Ukrainians. Not for a single moment did we want this war. We offered the Russians a ceasefire."

Earlier, a different kind of wreckage. This, the Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhia, after the country suffered another major drone and missile attack. Elsewhere, 12 Ukrainian soldiers were killed at a training base, the head of Ukraine's land forces tendering his resignation. What chance then for another round of peace talks set to take place in Istanbul? Russian and Ukrainian delegations are expected to be there, but after 24 hours of mayhem, the omens for a breakthrough do not seem good. Did the United States of America attack Russia? Well, the US surely knew about this because this was an operation obviously supported

by the CIA, by MI6, by other intelligence agencies. The location of the strategic Air Force, the strategic Air Force, the bases, many things surely the United States knew. If it didn't know, then the incompetence level of our intelligence is staggering beyond belief and dangerous beyond belief. This attack brought us closer to a global nuclear war. This was an attack on one part of Russia's strategic fleet. And it's extraordinarily dangerous. It may be viewed as a video game watching planes destroyed, but we took a step closer to nuclear war today. Zelensky, this group in Ukraine, I wouldn't trust for a moment, not for a moment with our lives, but having said that, either the US government knew and assisted,

which is horrific to think about, or it didn't know, which is also horrific to think about, because then we're just bobbing in the waves as we step closer to Armageddon. This war needs to stop. What is happening now, attacking part of the nuclear triad, attacking deep in Russia, is a dramatic escalation that brings us closer to Armageddon. And people may say, well, they have the right to defend themselves, but you and I have the right to live as well as other people listening right now. I find our political leaders absolutely incapable of the most basic common sense and drawing lines right now. And if President Trump didn't know, that is a beforehand, I mean.

This is a grave failure of American intelligence or intelligence briefings. We need to understand this. MI6's role in everything going on in Ukraine is dreadful and deadly. I can't stand to watch Starmor one moment, probably the greatest warmonger on the planet actually. And Zelensky is killing his people wantonly because there's no serious discussion of how to make peace. Which is worse that Donald Trump knew about it or

he didn't know about it. I mean, in the past two weeks, he's called President Putin crazy, said he's deeply disturbed with what I think I'm fairly summarizing President Trump's words, deeply disturbed with what President Putin has done, that he was wantonly aiming missiles and killing people. And now we find that the United States government facilitated and aided by the use of its intelligence assets a similar set of events about which President Trump complained. I mean, do the intel people keep this from Trump so he has plausible undeniability and engage in something that could bring this to the brink of nuclear war without the president authorizing it? Or did Trump know it and authorize it and is utterly unworthy of belief because

he says the opposite of what he speaks? Of what he does the opposite of what he speaks? We don't know. We just don't know. And I have learned over the decades that the CIA and our intelligence system is the most dangerous part of our government by far. MI6 I would put on equal par in terms of the dangers. We don't know what they knew or don't know. No one's going to tell us. We're never going to know an honest answer about this.

But when you start attacking the part of the nuclear triad of the other nuclear superpower, the nuclear triad of the other nuclear superpower, the issues that are raised are absolutely profound. But as usual, either this won't even be discussed in the mainstream media other than a celebration of Ukraine's cleverness, or maybe not mentioned at all because we're living in such a bizarre period when we step closer to complete annihilation and we seem, again, treated like video games. I find it absolutely astounding. Has the American government made any public statement either acknowledging responsibility or condemning this?

No, obviously it will never acknowledge responsibility. And I haven't seen any statement whatsoever. I'm sure that it would not condemn this, although it should. But practically speaking, what needs to happen, practically, is that this war needs to stop before we all get blown up. And the way that it has to stop, clearly, is the President of the United States simply and consistently stating American policy, not changing it from morning till afternoon to evening. And American policy should be that this war needs to stop immediately, permanently on the basis of Ukraine's neutrality, and that the fighting needs to stop, and the intelligence agencies need to stand down and stop their provocations. Now, I assume that the president has command of our intelligence services. I know that he can tell the British,

I can't even start about the British, by the way, but he's got can tell the British, I can't even start about the British, by the way, but he's got to tell the British, stop dreaming of their ancient goddamn empire, honestly. It's enough. Stop all of the provocations to global destruction. Today, by the way, Stammer unveils the new defense mandate saying we're endangered by Russia. Well, yes, Britain has been after Russia since 1840. This is nothing new and it's reckless and it needs to stop. And incidentally, and I think it's also quite interesting,

he announced that Britain needs a new war doctrine because of all that we're learning in Ukraine. This is part of what's happening in Ukraine. They're playing with their toys, they're playing with their battlefield weapons, they're learning how to use drones. This is all one jolly experience. They're not sitting down to discuss the end of the war to take seriously the real security concerns of Ukraine and of Russia and how this war really arose and how it needs really to stop. How close are we to the use of nuclear weapons? Well according to the doomsday clock, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, that is an

expert group that reviews that very question round the year, every year since 1947, we are 89 seconds to Armageddon, meaning in this graphic terms of the doomsday clock that we are closer to annihilation than ever before in the history of the planet and ever since the start of the atomic age. And that means we are closer to nuclear Armageddon than during the entire Cold War period. And I think that that is a completely accurate assessment.

I honestly believe that the world has become benumbed by the video games, by the seeing war every day. That's just a video, whether it's Gaza being blown up or aircraft that carry nuclear weapons being blown up deep inside of Russia. That's like a video game that you would see anyone playing on a seat next to you in the train or on an airplane or on the subway, people are inured to this right now. And yet we have a,000 nuclear weapons on each side. And it's a hot war raging until today. And I think Donald Trump wants to stop this, but it takes

skill and determination to stop this. And the skill and determination is not to change the rhetoric by the hour, but actually to have a serious detailed negotiation over the real issues that cause the war and that can end the war. And it's not going to be done that cause the war and that can end the war. And it's not gonna be done on a social messaging by the hour and name calling by politicians one side or another that has nothing to do with our survival, the name calling. So the Ukrainians showed up in Istanbul this morning.

And by the way that conference according to Reuters lasted less than an hour and placed on the table their first negotiating point. This is almost absurd and laughable that they have the right to join NATO whenever they want. It's like Where have they been? Well, these negotiations the only negotiations that count and they're not really taking place are between the United States and Russia. And the United States and Russia should settle the issues seriously with a treaty, with a security agreement that NATO will never enlarge, that the United States recognizes Crimea as part of Russia

because part of this whole plan, dating back to 1853, was to grab Crimea. This has been acknowledged again, time and again, what this has been about. So we need an arrangement between the United States and Russia as the two nuclear superpowers, that the United States is done fighting this war, done supplying the armaments, done

with the idea of NATO enlargement, not as a game, as a concession, but as our survival need, because the whole idea of the United States moving its military into Ukraine was mind-boggling from the start. As I always like to remind people, it would be like Russia moving its military into Mexico or into Canada. How well would it play in the United States?

Not very well. It would lead us to war. And so if we just understand the root causes of this, we have to understand Ukraine can say whatever it wants until the United States makes clear where the U.S. stands, which is that it is not at the behest of an extremist clique ruling by military rule that the U.S. installed by a coup in 2014. Come on. Do we have some survival instinct in the United States?

What you say is perfectly rational, only a serious treaty from between the United States and Russia can resolve this. But Professor Sachs, even before today and now this weekend and now after the weekend, do you think the Kremlin trusts the United States? The Kremlin does not trust the United States.

The US may not trust the Kremlin. But the art of a treaty and negotiations is, as Ronald Reagan used to say, trust but verify. In other words, the two sides need to come to an arrangement that is monitorable, that is verifiable, that is clear. And when that is done, as President John F. Kennedy famously said in a speech, Kennedy famously said in a speech, a wonderful speech describing how the U.S. could reach a successful treaty with the Soviet Union, if that is done, then it is in the mutual interest of both parties to abide by a well-done agreement. And incidentally, in 1963, President Kennedy argued at the height of the Cold War

that it was in the mutual interest of the United States and the Soviet Union to sign a partial nuclear test ban treaty, and that it would be in their mutual interest to observe the treaty, and that it could be counted on to be observed because it was in the mutual interest of both sides. So President Kennedy gave the explanation over the opposition of his Joint Chiefs of Staff, by the way, and they signed the treaty and the treaty was observed by both sides, just as President Kennedy said it would be observed. So trust, you know, trust is earned over time, but treaties can be made that can be observed and verified

and actually implemented. And this is what needs to be done at this stage. That's the grownup work that needs to be done at this stage. That's the grown-up work that needs to be done. What do you think President Putin's response will be to this, the continued methodical, patient, regular, consistent, systematic advance of troops on the ground where this war is effectively being fought, or a couple of Arashnik missiles which can't be stopped and which are horrific in the damage they can do aimed at Kiev?

One of these days something absolutely terrible is going to get out of hand. This is the basic lesson of the nuclear age. And we are playing with fire as never before. And whenever you hear a politician say, oh, don't worry about the nukes, don't worry about nuclear weapons, he's only bluffing. Anyone that utters that statement is such a fool and so reckless with the lives of 8 billion people, they surely don't know it or they have a level of irresponsibility beyond imagining. You should worry. I should worry. The whole history of the last 80 years is of emotions and mistakes and close calls and

misjudgments and escalations that are extraordinarily dangerous. I don't know if people even know that in the Cuban Missile Crisis, not only was it a fraught crisis that almost brought us to the end of the planet. But even after President Kennedy and Chairman Nikita Khrushchev reached an agreement, a disabled Soviet submarine came within one second of launching a nuclear-tipped torpedo that under U.S. military doctrine would have resulted in a full nuclear attack by the United States at the time estimated to kill 700 million people. Now we know better that it may have ended life on the planet through the nuclear winter. But my point is that that happened after an agreement was reached because one disabled

submarine was out of contact with the surface. It thought a war was going on on the surface. The captain gave the order to launch the torpedo and it was only by the fact that there was a senior officer, senior to the captain, who could countermand the order that the world was saved. And this kind of occurrence happens repeatedly. Well, this is why the president and his national security team need to know about this. A bunch of secret CIA agents can't make a decision that jeopardizes the planet. Of course not. Of course not. And whatever is happening, if they didn't know how could an operation so complex for 18 months with the country we are fighting for, with, and so forth do this,

did it not tell the United States? I think it's unbelievable, frankly, because the technical needs of this operation almost surely required U.S. intelligence all along the way. And if they did know in the moment when we're trying to end the war, such an attack is launched, how can this be conceivable? Something isn't right in this picture. Larry Johnson has seen reports that Secretary Heg Seth and his staff watched this happen in real time. Now, if that is true, then Marco Rubio must have known about it. He's the national security advisor as well as the secretary of state, theoretically. I think he's just the de facto secretary of State.

The real Secretary of State is Steve Witkoff, another story for another time. But it would be inconceivable that the Secretary of State in defense didn't tell the president. Look, if it's true, I had not heard this, but if it's true that our Secretary of Defense watched this in real time, let's move the second hand not to 89 seconds to midnight, but to 10 seconds to midnight. Is this even conceivable? It's so shocking to hear, but it is absolutely astounding, if true. What are we doing? What are we doing? Are we just playing with doom right now? Or are we trying to end the war so that we can survive? I don't know.

If the Secretary of Defense watched this in real time, it would be good to hear is that the case? How could that be? Was this a US operation? We need, well, I don't know if we'll ever get answers. We don't get any truth from our government at all. No, but your argument is that it is inconceivable that this was done without the knowledge and consent of MI6 and CIA, and probably Mossad. I don't know about Mossad, but I do find it inconceivable. And if it was done that way, my god, then the incompetence level moves the second hand even closer to Armageddon.

But I doubt that it was done that way. I doubt that it was done without US knowledge. What does US official silence tell you, Professor Sachs? Supposedly Marco Rubio and Sergey Lavrov had a telephone conversation. Knowing Lavrov, as you and I do, you know him far better than I, he was very, very direct and forceful, not emotional, but direct and forceful with Secretary Rubio. What could Rubio say? We knew about it, but we couldn't

tell you. We didn't know about it. And Lev Ruff will say, nobody believes you, Marco. Again, either explanation is unacceptable, actually, because either one is just an imperiling account. If we did know, it's completely shocking. If we didn't know, it's completely shocking. The main point, I would say, once again, is either is so unacceptable what it points to is the need to end the war. Now we have to understand a basic point and that is that the war ends in a treaty between the United States and Russia. By the way, the same in the Middle East. The end of the war is not between negotiations between Israel and Palestine. It's between the United States and Palestine.

We right now have a foreign policy that is whipped around that puts us all in extreme peril by lobbying groups for other countries, not for our national interest. Donald Trump said that he wants a foreign policy for an American interest. Well, the American interest is not to have Russian nuclear bombers blown up as they're sitting on the tarmac, nor is the American interest for a genocide in Gaza. That's not the American interest. So what President Trump properly calls for, a foreign policy of American interests, we're

not seeing it yet. And that's actually the job of the president, a foreign policy that protects Americans. America became endangered even more in the last 24 hours because of this Ukrainian operation. America became endangered even more because of Israel's wanton slaughter of starving Palestinians. These are endangering America. And it's the job of foreign policy to protect America, not to protect regimes that are doing damage to America. And that's Zelensky's regime installed by the United States in a coup and by Netanyahu, protected by a lobby in the United States.

And America is endangered when the president of the graduating class of Massachusetts Institute of Technology is denied the right to attend her own graduation because over the weekend she gave an informal talk calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state. Well, calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state is what 185 countries out of 193 at the UN have called for, which shows that essentially

the entire world other than the US and Israel and let me add Micronesia, Polau, Nauru. Who the hell has never heard of these other countries? Well, Nauru has 12,000 people. Micronesia has about 110,000 people. They vote with the United States in the UN General Assembly. Other than that, let me just say that the world is aligned on the need for a state of Palestine. And that is overwhelmingly in America's national interest.

Even if it weren't, how can she be punished for articulating that political speech? All right, we've been through this. A professor- Of course. Yeah, Professor Sachs, thank you very much. I'm not trying to aggravate you by adding these unpleasant stories. I'm just trying to draw out your brilliant analysis. Thank you for joining

us. Thank you for your time. We look forward to seeing you next week, my dear friend. See you next week. Bye-bye. Okay. Another brilliant guy. Even when he's hot, he's brilliant. Justin Palatano for Judging Freedom. MUSIC