Judging Freedom - Putin calls out West for a Real War against Russia - Tony Shaffer

Episode Date: May 9, 2023

See omny.fm/listener for privacy information.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Tuesday, May 9th, 2023. It's about 11 o'clock in the morning here on the East Coast of the United States. Lieutenant Colonel Tony Schaefer joins us for his weekly time with us. Tony, always a pleasure. Always great to be here. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks for coming back. The last time we talked, we were discussing the then recent, now you don't even hear about it, event where two drones were destroyed within inches of the roof of a building in the Kremlin. Right. Has this event succeeded in, well, I shouldn't say succeeded because that would

depend on who did it. Has this event resulted in galvanizing Russian support for President Putin and animosity toward the West? Well, it's clear that it's being portrayed by the Russian government as an aggressive move by Ukraine. As a matter of fact, one of the considerations now on the table, which is being discussed, is should Russia declare Ukraine a terrorist country, a country that promotes terror? So no matter how you cut it, it's benefited the Russians. It's just, it is going to benefit the Russians by the fact that Russians are going to use this to gain traction to say, look, Ukraine's a terrorist state. And yeah, I think the approval rating for Putin based on how he is conducting the war and how the people in Russia feel about it,

he's doing just fine. And I don't think he needed the drone strike or the attempted assassination to strengthen that. I think it's overall just kind of going his direction. Judge, one of the things that people tend to forget, and I just watched, I looked at some of the media today regarding the celebration, the VE Day, Victory Europe Day celebration that happened in Red Square. I'll never forget, there's this thing in the UK Daily Mail saying, oh, only one tank was displayed. It's like they were just showing a T-34, which was the tank that was used during World War II. They probably don't have many of those, but they were trying to say, oh, this shows that the Russians are depleting resources.

It's like, no, it's symbolic. It's what they used during World War II. So I think the media here misportrays the Russian people's view of Putin and the war. It's really dangerous. Should we expect more language like we heard from Dmitry Medvedev? Well, it's time to get Vladimir Zelensky, or should we expect more restraint and silence and revenge is a dish that tastes best when it's eaten cold like we seem to be getting from President Putin? Well, again, I watch what the media says about the current situation and they're saying, oh, the Russians fought to a standstill, being left with the necessary kind of digging in and allowing a war of attrition to take place like I don't think

the Russians were forced into it judge I think the Russians wanted the war of attrition because they're going to win it it's like slugging it out uh or you're the defense and your enemy the ukrainians keep coming at you and expending their resources uselessly. That's what they're planning. So I don't believe for a minute that the Russians have to change what they're doing all that much to be successful. Yeah. Here's what President Zelensky believes. Now, this was taped for May 8th, yesterday, their sort of victory in Europe day. VE Day. Right. Right. It's very stylized. It's highly produced. May 8 yesterday, their sort of victory in Europe day. They did.

Right. Right. It's very stylized. It's highly produced. Maybe you've seen it. It's in Ukrainian with English translation. You let me know. Let us know what you think of it.

Sure. We fight now so that no one ever again enslaves other nations and destroys other countries. And all those old evils that modern Russia is bringing back will be defeated just as Nazism was defeated. We will not lose what we have gained. We will return everything captured by the enemy. We will rebuild what was destroyed. And together we will protect it all.

We do not yet know the date of our victory, but we know that it will be a holiday for all of Ukraine, for all of Europe, for all of the entire free world. An actor, a serious leader appealing to Ukraine, looking for an off-ramp for a spring offensive that's not coming or something else? So let's start with the spring offensive first. It's going to be pitiful if it happens to any degree at all. I mean, they're in danger right now, Judge, of squandering the resources they just recently been given by NATO and other allied nations, to include the weapons we've given them. I just, I don't see it being successful.

And again, I'm not taking sides here. Secondly, Zelensky's claim that we're going to retake everything. I don't necessarily know what universe he's in, but it's not this universe because that's, again, not going to happen at least for the next five years, if at all. And I want to remind people, again, I don't want to sound, I'm not taking sides here, but Ukraine is cut from the same cloth as the Soviet Union. They all used to be the Soviet Union. They all used to be the Soviet Union. So when I talk about, when Zelensky talks about, you know, the Russians defeating the Russians, it's like, this is something essentially that needs to be resolved by the Russians and Ukrainians without outside influence. I just don't believe it's in our interest or NATO's interest to get

in the middle of a dispute between what, two nations, which fundamentally used to be one. It's a civil war in many ways. And I just don't think it's in our interest to jump in there. So what he's saying, I think, is he's trying to garner, he's trying to put the best face on what I think is a terrible situation. And the answer is, yes, it's time to look for peace and sue for peace. Do your sources tell you that the American government, whether it's the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, or the Oval Office, understand that the spring offensive either is not going to happen or will be a paltry and symbolic only or will be a miserable, crushing, catastrophic defeat for Ukraine. So you have to understand, Judge, and I think that you hear this from other folks, our government is torn on this. There's no monolithic or unified voice on this. You have the neocons, Victoria Nuland, Tony Blinken, who want the war. They want to continue this. I don't think that they would do anything.

I think if their mother signed up to be on the Ukrainian side and they knew they would lose, they'd still send their mother into battle. I don't think they care. I think they want the conflict. I think they feel that to use a communist term, the ends justify the means. And so that's what they're trying to do here. They think that weakening Russia, no matter what it takes, even it means sacrificing the Ukrainians, is worth it. So I don't think that they're pushing for it. I think others within the White House, within the Pentagon, are starting to recognize that the current configuration and weapons available plus troop strength does not equate to a potential victory by Ukraine over Russia. So I think there are saner voices now being heard, but I don't think necessarily they're going to be the ones in the room that

Biden picks to go with, unfortunately. Over the weekend, there was a bizarre, murky report that a Russian hypersonic missile had struck an underground bunker in Ukraine that was 100 meters underground. Right. And there were British, Polish and American generals in there who did not emerge alive. What do you make of this kind of a report? I'm assuming it's untrue, but I don't know who would have put it out there and what's to be gained by it. Could it be true? And we don't know it. Well, we'll find out, I think, soon if it is or not. The Russians have introduced some very effective new weapons. Some of those are hybrid hypersonic weapons where they basically go subsonic until they get to a certain point. Then they go up high and come down super darn fast and penetrate things. So I do know that the Russians are being very effective in using new technologies or I should say adapting technology to the current war.

And Ukraine's having a hard time dealing with those technologies. Even our weapon systems don't necessarily deal with them. So I think that may be part of this, is trying to create a perception that there are challenges relating to protecting those inside of the country. Would the Russians hit a bunker like that where they know foreign advisors are? I don't think so. I don't think the Russians are looking to go down that path at this point they don't need to I think they're winning and if they're winning there's no need to be more aggressive and go after these targets plus

I I do believe a lot of the reported attacks on its civilian infrastructure judge based on what I'm looking at and and and uh reports I I hear I think a lot of destruction of civilian targets are actually Ukrainian anti-missile missiles coming down and hitting populated centers. So I think something else is going on that's not being properly- I want to ask you about a few other reports. One is that the Ukrainians claim to have shot down a hypersonic- Right. I saw that report. claimed to have shot down a hypersonic missile. I saw that report. This thing goes 10 times the speed of sound.

How could the Ukrainians shoot it down? So, yeah, I think it's supposedly with a Patriot. And I'm skeptical because, again, the folks I've talked to, I've talked to several folks who helped design the Patriot and recognize how it works. There's very little prospect of a Patriot missile taking down something that's traveling at hypersonic speed. It's just statistically, it's very difficult to imagine.

You have to have something that travels essentially the same speed as a hypersonic missile with great precision. And I don't think that's available at this point. So I'm skeptical. I think we'll have to see what the reports say in the end. i don't feel comfortable commenting based on what's out there to make an assessment but i don't i don't believe it's true based on everything i know about the technology the other uh report is of uh russian and polish uh fighter jets playing i can't say in a dog fight because they weren't shooting at each other but but coming very, very close to each other, taunting each other in the skies over western Ukraine.

Now, if that is true, what were the Polish jets doing there? That's NATO over Ukraine. Right. I don't doubt it at all. I mean, remember, Judge, during the Cold War, we would do things very aggressively to each other. I mean, we're talking about, you know, submarines going at the submarines. We're talking about aircraft tapping each other. So I don't doubt it at all. And I think the Polish were there because the Polish,

more than any other nation, are mostly interested in going to war with Russia. They, the Poles, I think would love an opportunity to mix up with the Russians. And I don't think it's a good idea. I don't think anybody would benefit from that. But the Poles clearly have an aggressive attitude regarding Russia. And yeah, I think they let their pilots go up there and mix it up a little bit. Again, the biggest danger to peace is miscalculation or an aggressive move that results in an expanded war. And something like this could result in an expanded war because of miscalculation. I want to show you a clip now of Jenny Progozian, the head of the Wagner Group.

He's very angry and very animated. Now, you're familiar with Blackwater and what they did for the American government. I know you're familiar with it, but can you imagine Eric Prince, who ran Blackwater, speaking publicly about Donald Rumsfeld or General Petraeus the way the head of the Wagner group is speaking publicly about the Russian defense minister and the Russian commander in chief of all the troops. There's a lot of expletives in here. When he turns over his shoulder to point, he's pointing at a pile of what he says are dead bodies, Wagner fighters.

It's blurred, so you can't see them. The rest is crystal clear. Yeah. Wow. Now he sends us's backed off that I understand. I also understand that the Russian high command has given him a former or still Russian general to sort of coordinate things between himself and the military with respect to logistics and supplies. But an outburst like that, what is it intended to produce? Well, there's differences, bright contrasts and differences between Blackwater and the Russians. First off, the Prokofiev and the whole Wagner organization was designed to essentially exercise itself as a tool of foreign policy, doing things that the Russian government and the Russian constitution says they can't do. It's outside the law. So that's a little bit different than Eric Prince. And I know Eric, and I don't want to badmouth Eric here. I think Eric did things that he thought was completely legal and ethical that were on the periphery. Remember, and Wagner's the main air, water never going to be thing in declaring victory. So there's another bright difference. And again, I think this is because Putin wants something that's outside the law, the Russian law that'll do his bidding. So you get what you pay for. And so I have no sympathy for Bogosian. I have no

sympathy for Wagner. It's a volunteer organization. He's just pointed out. It's like, okay, you volunteered and you're dead. I'm sorry. I have no sympathy. And if this is going to be a military operation, then it needs to be a military operation and you run it as such. So this is where as much as, again, I don't like taking sides. I'm not on either side. This is kind of stupid. This is not the way to run a war. If you're going to run a war, put professional soldiers up front. You should run it in such a way that you have discipline, accountability and, for goodness sake, unity of command. That's part of the problem here is a guy's been in unity of command is not the strong suit of the Russians right now. Okay. So when Blackwater worked for the U.S. government, were American generals and colonels like you in uniform commanding Blackwater even though they were civilians? No. No, we were not. As a matter of fact, if you read, we've talked about Darkhart before.

I actually, in Afghanistan, we would come up and bump into these guys because they were under CIA's command and control. They would actually work in parallel to our Green Beret Special Forces guys. As a matter of fact, I had to handle two Blackwater KIAs. CIA wasn't around to handle them, so I ended up having to handle the casualties because CIA abandoned them. Trust me. CIA is killed in action killed in action yeah two k two two of the blackwater guys were killed in action i think it was coast i have to go back and look but there's nobody there literally these the

bodies show up in the middle of the night at bogram ci is not there to deal with it so i have to do the entire grades registration thing and everything else because CIA abandoned them. So I'm just saying, as much as I'm unsympathetic to this issue, I mean, I understand how these guys volunteered to go do things. But, Judge, again, Blackwater was never our main effort to go defeat the enemy. They were on the periphery doing special operations type things. So Prokosian and this issue, I'm completely unsympathetic, and I don't think it's the best way to run a war. Does Prokosin operate on his own, or do Russian generals tell him where to move his people? No, I think he reports to Putin, and the generals are probably afraid to deal with him. I think the whole logistics thing is the generals getting back at him for being resentful of his methodology and direct work for Putin.

He has a direct line to Putin. So whatever happens, it's on Putin's He has a direct line to Putin. So whatever happens, it's on Putin's shoulders as far as I'm concerned. So. Switching gears to another area of which you are a student, which is the intersection of politics and intelligence. Over the weekend, RFK Jr., famously now challenging Joe Biden for the Democratic nomination for president, gave an interview in which he said publicly what people have been whispering for a couple of generations, that the CIA killed his father and his uncle. that type of talk ever been common amongst the younger generation of intelligence agents who were obviously not in the intelligence community in 1963? From high school on, Judge, I was instructed to think critically. And even in high school, Professor Dombrowski read to us a great deal of details, and I've studied it since then

and there's peculiarities that the Warren Commission refused to actually examine. The moment you have a commission that's supposed to be on a fact-finding, truth-finding expedition and comes back with a narrative that to me compromises that whole

chapter and tells me that there's something they're hiding. So having been a guy who had to be a whistleblower regarding 9-11 issues, I do, in my own experience, Judge, I do tend to believe that there's something there. Is everything that he's saying correct? I don't know. But to me, the fact that it was never adequately explained or resolved regarding the circumstance and the lone gunman and all the other shots that can't be explained, there may be something while there. Remember, during that time, just like they went after Trump, I think JFK was going to do some things against the intelligence community and against the Pentagon that the permanent bureaucracy didn't like.

So would they be willing to go that far to participate or direct an assassination? It's very possible. I still think Oswald was a dupe. I think if you go back and watch Oswald and when he's in front of the media, he looks bewildered about why he's there. Was he part of it? I think he was part of it. I just don't think he thought he was the guy that pulled the trigger. So I think there's things that need to be looked at still. I'm very skeptical. I don't believe the official narrative, if that's what you're asking me. And why are the JFK files still secret, still sealed, even though Congress ordered them opened? I know.

You have to ask yourself. I mean, you're a judge. You've had to deal with issues relating to records which need to be opened or not opened or sealed. I don't get it. And, again, this is part of our system at this point, Judge, where there are deep, dark secrets, some of which I still know, others know, that the government refuses to give up. And it's just shameful that we live in a system that is so Stalinist in so many ways still. Tony Schaefer, always a pleasure, no matter what we're talking about. Thank you very

much for joining us. Thank you, sir. If you like what you saw, tell your friends to like us. And if you haven't subscribed, like us yourself and subscribe. More as we get it, a verdict in the Trump rape case might be coming today. You'll hear it here. Judge Napolitano, we're judging freedom.