Judging Freedom - Putin's Unpredictable - Sign of Weakness? w/ Jack Devine fmr CIA

Episode Date: August 10, 2023

Putin's Unpredictable - Sign of Weakness? w/ Jack Devine fmr CIASee 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 Thursday, August 10, 2023. Jack Devine graciously comes back to our cameras. Jack, it's always a pleasure. Thank you for joining us. I see you have some fancy new equipment there, and I very much appreciate it. Your team wanted me to dress up for the event. All right. Well, you're loud and clear. Crystal clear. What is the United States goal in Ukraine? Well, I think there's one that starts on a country that's friendly with us has been invaded by Russia. And while they're not part of NATO, they were a friend and ally.

The second is to curtail what is clearly Putin's intention to use force to expand his borders. So I think it's out of interest. The other point that I would make, and we've discussed it, Russia is one type of country with Ukraine and one when it doesn't have it. With Ukraine, it's a much more powerful country. And people get confused when they look at Russia today and think it's the Russia of World War II or the Russia of the Cold War. Without Ukraine, it's a much weaker economically and militarily structured country. Jack, if Mexico entered into a treaty with China and allowed China to put missiles in northern Mexico aimed at Dallas and Miami. Wouldn't we use force to remove those missiles and the Chinese officers manning them?

Well, first of all, the Mexicans wouldn't do that. It's a hypothetical, Jack. We would have intelligence long ahead of it. We'd be able to chat about it. So I don't think it's the hypothetical. I don't think it's possible. You don't want to answer the question. No.

I don't think the Chinese are going to do it, would dare to do it. I don't think the Mexicans would dare to do it. And I think it would have meant that the Mexicans in turn to become an ally of China full bore, in which case they're taking a big chance putting them there. Maybe that helps focus it. Okay. So you would be in favor of using force, but you don't want to say it. Only if they became an ally of China in its military aggression towards us. Okay. Ukraine didn't become an ally of the United States until your buddies in the CIA fomented a coup in 2014, right? Oh, I think, listen, after the wall came

down and after Ukraine fell apart, remember the relationship we had. They had nuclear weapons and they were friendly enough that they gave up their nuclear weapons. So we had a good relationship with them. Now, the concern was, and first of all, to the best of my knowledge, if someone can prove it, I'd love to see the documentation on it, that we fomented that coup. You're not going to see documentation. You guys don't see documents when you run a coup. Give me anything other than wild speculation. So give me something hard, something that gives credibility. Do you deny that Victoria Nuland and the State Department and the CIA were behind the events of 2014 that chased the popularly elected neutral or pro-Russian president to Moscow?

I have seen nothing that would support that point. Were we supportive? Look, we're supportive around the world. Did we sit in the back room and come up with a plan, and on Tuesday, we're going to do this, on Wednesday, we're going to push them out? Of course not. Remember, this stuff has to be briefed downhill, has to be coordinated. Everyone thinks that this is the president calls the director of CIA and all of a sudden things happen. Things like that get leaked. And this is where the documentation comes out. If things like this happen, trust me, somebody's got a document that they shuffle off to the media. And I don't see it. Okay. Fair enough. Do you agree with Joe Biden and even with some Republicans when they say Putin has already lost the war? Absolutely not.

There's certain empirical tests in life. When you're firing at each other, the war isn't over, right? So the war is not over. I think what the president might have thought to say is that the Russians have run into, they're in a quagmire, and someone used that word. In other words, they're not winning this war. And there's a certain inevitability about its outcome which george truly wrote to 10 days after they invaded this is the war is not over it is by no means over okay but is he on his heels yes but you have predicted and and don't let me put words in your mouth that this is likely to end where it is

now in a stalemate. He's not going to give up Crimea. He's not going to go home. He's not going to take Kiev. He's not going to march all the way to Poland. Probably going to end where it is as we speak. No? What I found interesting, I was watching a Republican senator, I better not, well, I will mention he's from Texas. And he was on TV and he said, the Russians cannot lose this war. Or no, excuse me, let me say it correctly. The Ukrainians can't win this war. That's what he said. And I would have said, the Russians can't win this war. Okay, so that's where we are. That's different than quite a stalemate. It says that neither party can win, but there can be a lot of back and forth in the meantime. I see no reason to believe that Russia will ever be able to complete its original objective of subjecting Ukraine. I do not believe, as you postulated, that the Ukrainians are going to be able to drive the Russians totally off of their territory.

Is the American objective to chase Putin from office? No, I think that'll be the fringe benefit. In other words, I think Putin has designed his own outcome. He will fall of his own weight. His own people will decide it. Not going to be some CIA, DIA group planning how he's going to leave. There's no coup plotting. I'm strongly on record on this. It's in the press. You can read it. Don't mess around. This will solve itself. All you have to do is hold him in a way that everyone recognizes that Russia cannot win in his own country and his elites will take care of the rest. but it's extremely recent. This is President Zelensky speaking to the Ukrainian people about Crimea as if it's a foregone conclusion that Crimea will return to Ukrainian jurisdiction.

I want your opinion on this, Jack. Today, I held a meeting on the content of our return policy, specifically regarding Crimea and its reintegration. It is obvious that after the liberation of Crimea from occupation, economic opportunities, personal security for people, and a sense of real freedom, which has not been there since 2014, will return there. But all of this should not be just abstract. Every detail of the de-occupation of Crimea should have a specific meaning. How exactly normal life returns. What exactly this means for Crimea and for all our people.

This should be clear to everyone. Step by step, we are making the deoccupation of Crimea more and more achievable and well thought out. Is this realistic? We are making the return of Crimea realistic? I think it's an aspiration, if that's the better phrase. the return of Crimea realistic? I think it's an aspiration, if that's the better phrase. I think that's what the Ukrainian people want. I think that's what they believe is achievable.

I just think it's a harder nut to crack. I hope they're right. I hope they prevail. I hope we aid them to the degree that's feasible. And so but I I don't think the Russian army has weakened to the degree that they're going to be able to do that. This is why when you listen to Zelensky, when he says he wants Crimea, if you flip your disc over and you record Putin, he's going to say, I will never part with the Crimea. That's why there's no deal. That's why there's no deal today, because both sides truly believe that that's a bottom line position. So we can send all the delegations we want. Is that why you think things are more or less going to end more or less where they are now, neither side being able to claim victory,

but Crimea still Russian and Kyiv still Ukrainian? It depends on how Putin leaves office and what the successor group decides is desirable. And what do they need to accomplish their objective? And that is if part of it is, I would think, to end the war, and the second part, not that it would become a democratic state or that they would be integrated in the NATO, but that they were going to do business again with the West and try to normalize the relationship, then the territorial gains are more promising. I still think, you know, I'm not recommending it. I'm not suggesting this is off the top of my head. You might end up with some partitioning, some divided leadership like

Northern Ireland, you know, something like that. I don't know. But I'm saying it'll depend on how Putin leaves the audience. Has the CIA overestimated Ukrainian strength or underestimated Russian resilience and the depth of their military availability? If I were to give an accounting, I would say the CIA had a really good fix on what the Russians were up to ahead of time and that they were going to invade. I think they universally, and it's not the CIA, every pundit, everybody overestimated. This is a normal thing, by the way, overestimating Russian capabilities. And I think there was a wholesale underestimating of the Ukrainians. We tend to be like a yo-yo up and down right i mean i think you have to be consistent this is a tough war where you have two armies pitted against each

other and they're serious fighters so overestimating uh let me just state where i've been i've been telling you the same thing all along don't expect you know a major breakthrough with the uh counter offensive and that right the expectations are too high we we drive ourselves politically in areas that are totally unnecessary we are way ahead of the game to have stopped him cold and actually pushed him back and he's not taking any territory is a major accomplishment you don't say so you didn't win but that's a major accomplishment and stop saying to say you didn't win, but that's a major accomplishment. And stop saying to them, hey, you have to take the Crimea before we really respect you. Okay, so in eastern Ukraine, Russia has built three levels of defenses.

The Ukrainians haven't even approached, much less breached, the first, the westernmost of those offenses. Let me answer the question. What I've just said is a fact. Question. What has become of the spring, now summer, Ukrainian offensive? Let's divide it into two parts that you queued it up. Let's go to the trenches. Do you see the pictures? They look like they were built in World War I, right? Do you know what the life like is in a trench like that? Jack, they work. They work, Jack.

No, no, no. Let me explain. Let me explain. It's not courage. It's not brilliance to go run over those trenches when they're all mine. I mean, any general worth of soldiers, look, here's an obstacle. It's going to cost me a lot to get three rings, these famous three ditches built from World War I.

To get those three things, I'm going to have to lose a lot of men. We're going to have to come up with a different, I think they're probing and they're changing their strategy. And we'll have to see how it plays out. But you don't do a second offensive because you promised the Americans you're going to do it. You take a look at what you're facing and you say, wait, we can do it, but it's going to cost us, you know, X style. What is the new strategy, Jackson? No, I'm saying they're seeking the strategy. Now,

one of the things that we need to discuss at some point is they're clearly now taking the battle inside Russian territory. Okay. This is a change of strategy in the battle inside Russian territory. This is a change of strategy in the last couple of months, and it's getting bigger. Now, I have mixed feelings about it. One is I understand why they're doing it. I think they have to do it, but they must do it very carefully. They cannot hit civilian targets.

In other words, this can backfire if it's not okay. But this is strange that they're attacking Russia on the motherland. Who thought that the day Putin went into Ukraine, that the Ukrainians would be attacking their ships in the harbor, flying drones in front of the Kremlin? I mean, who thought that that's where we would be? Nobody I know. Well, the drones are just a pinprick, but waging war in the Black Sea, attacking grain ships or attacking naval ships there to protect the grain ships. You're right. That's serious.

So has the failed- But look at what Putin's doing. Let me finish, Jack. Let me finish. Has the failed spring offensive become a summer battle over the black sea no i don't think we're there yet first of all i'm not putting failed on it it accomplished what i want you just keep holding them right failed means you made the attempt and then you backed off right they did not never heard of an offensive as becoming defensive and offensive moves forward there's

no defense no defense no no no no defense. I'm not giving you that. You see, I ain't got to twist anything, can't you? Find one town. Give me a nice piece of territory that the Russian has started since the Ukrainians started their push, okay? They have stopped the push on their own. They haven't been pushed back.

There's no one that got out of the trench. There's no one that ran through their own minds. I mean, the Russians aren't winning. The Ukrainians have put it into a lower burn. And I think, I keep coming back to this great poem,

The Valley of the Dead. You don't go up the valley and let 6,000 people die just because some wacky general has some idea, or Custard's last stand. This is the right move. This is the right move. That is not defeat. That's the right move. Is the FSB, it's the Russian security services, recruiting Ukrainians to kill Zelensky? Oh, the FSB. The other day, one of your friends was saying it was the CIA that was doing it. Now you want to talk about the FSB? The FSB has been trying to kill him since day one.

They tried to take him out in the first attack. I thought you were going somewhere else. The FSB, now, are you talking assassination or are you talking blowing up the building, he said? I mean, there's a nuance apparently in the intelligence world about it. They're trying to kill him. He is such a strong leader, they would like to kill him. Does the CIA believe that the FSB, the Russian intel, has a death warrant out for President Zelensky? Let me be very blunt. They'd like to see him dead. Death warrant, I don't know. In my business, we never sign death warrants, but you want them to go. They're doing what they can, destroy them. Okay. So they will be in the business of

recruiting Ukrainians. Well, they've been in the business of the Ukrainians since the beginning of mankind. I mean, and they were doing it at the beginning. They had deep penetrations before the Orange Revolution. They still have penetrated. Of course they do. This reminds me of the people that don't think CIA can be penetrated. That's what people do for a living. How big is the FSB?

How big is the KGB? How many people do you think are out there? This is their number one target. If they're not recruiting, they're in deeper trouble than I've analyzed. They're in much deeper trouble. Is the CIA recruiting? Don't tell me what you can't tell me, of course. It's the CIA. I never would do that. Right, right, right, right, right. It's the CIA recruiting. Oh, wait, there's a knock on the door. Someone's coming to get me. They're right there with you. When they come, they're probably computer hackers.

Maybe they can work on your computer for you. Don't tempt anybody. All right. Is the CIA recruiting from FSB agents in Russia? My God, I hope we're – hope we're, there were, there were, the FBI was sending out notices worldwide saying, hey, listen, just call this number and we'll talk to you. We'll give you a good deal. That's what we, that's what you do in the business, the intelligence business. You recruit, one of the key targets is always the other one's intelligence service, because in there

you will find the secrets to so many other things that are going on in the government. And the other thing is you need to defend yourself. For your own defenses, you need to know how deeply penetrated you are. So I don't fault the Russians for doing it. Let me be really clear. That's what you expect them to do. This is what they get paid to do. We should be at least equal in the game. And are the Chinese recruiting Americans like young American soldiers of Chinese ancestry? Well, I think there's extensive proof of that, okay? And pleading people in jail with it. And I'm not faulting the Chinese. I mean, big powers use intelligence. You know, people that don't, It's like armies. You say, well, you shouldn't

have an army. Well, okay, the guy next door has an army. You better have one. You better have an intelligence service. So they're doing it. But there is a difference if you wanted to tease it out a little bit. The Russians have had human sources for a long time, and they've worked this since the day of the Communist Party. The Chinese were very heavily vested in technology because they weren't out on the street recruiting. That changed 25, 30 years ago. They're out there recruiting sources. I would say this to any intelligence, what would you expect? What do you think is going on? We're going to play a clip from CBS in San Diego about this arrest of a 21-year-old American of Chinese ancestry for giving NDI, National Defense Information, to a Chinese foreign agent. Take a look. petty officer pleaded not guilty in federal court Thursday afternoon, one day after being arrested at Naval Base San Diego on espionage charges. Patrick Way worked as a machinist on board the

USS Essex. He had a security clearance and sent classified material to a Chinese intelligence officer between March 2022 and as recently as two days ago, according to San Diego's U.S. attorney, Randy Grossman. Our indictment alleges that over the course of more than a year and on multiple occasions, Wei sent national defense information to China, including documents, photos, videos, and technical manuals. You know what NDI is. That's always and everywhere unlawful to possess outside of a secure federal facility. That's the highest protected information there is. That's what the feds have accused former President Trump of mishandling at Mar-a-Lago. But I don't want to talk about Trump right now. Is what we just saw a 22 year old Chinese American,

uh, sailor falling prey to a Chinese intelligence agent, something to be expected. Absolutely. A hundred percent. I mean, what we should applaud is the ability that the team that found it and discovered it.

But I mean, I'm, I'm flabbergasted. If I would be flabbergasted, if there are dozens of them and deep in our defense, that, I mean, I'm flabbergasted. I would be flabbergasted if there are dozens of them. And deep in our defense, I mean, the activity of intelligence services today is monumental in the technical area of collecting information. In addition, there's armies of people that are out there collecting information that is beyond their reach. So that this happened, and I think we have to be vigilant. I mean, the FBI has to be spending its time rolling these sources up.

And around the world, the agency needs to be and has been, and we have a long record of it. And I associate it with many of those people that joined our side. So it's part of the world I lived in. It's a part of the world you lived in. If other people haven't shared with you, the espionage is a worldwide phenomenon. We work under rules. We work under rules. CIA, of course, does the same thing, trying to seduce some young Chinese sailor who has a Chinese security clearance to share what he has with the American agents, right?

That's your job. You're not trying to shock me, are you? No, I'm trying to shock you. Because I will be very critical of my colleagues if they're not out there recruiting people. It's not a matter of right and wrong. It's just a matter of which side of the aisle you're on. Well, no. Now we're going to get the philosophical basic principles.

Don't give me that Irish Catholic stuff, Jack. Well, don't give me your Italian philosophical alternative. But the point is, judge seriously, before we get thrown off by your audience and everybody hangs up on us, the basic principle is, what system do you have? What system are you defending, right? You say, all countries are the same. I don't say that for a minute. I believe in American exceptionalism. I believe this country has a special role in the history of mankind in forming a democratic government. You believe we should go around the world looking for monsters to slay, and Putin is one of them, right?

Well, that's a bit dramatic. We were around the world. I'm quoting President John Adams, who famously said, and I think I'm paraphrasing him, but he did say monsters, if we go about the world looking for monsters to slay, quote, there will be no end to our search. Right. And I have addressed this in both books, and we won't plug the book this minute. One of the conditions- Which is the book you want to plug, Jack? Well, both of them, Spidem Masters, Prism, and Good Hunting.

But both of them go with this core issue of under what circumstances do you use force? And one of these days we'll talk about NYSER. And the point is, one of the conditions is you have to have a legitimate target. And people could argue about that. But you have to believe that you have a chance for success. You have to have people on the ground that are going to support it you have to there's a whole set of principles you just don't go out and slay a dragon because it's over the hill is it bothering you is it causing you a problem is it eating your young so i think there's a whole and then wait a minute. Is Putin bothering Washington? Well, I hope he's bothering all the free world.

Look at him. Jack, answer the question. How is Putin bothering Washington? Well, which part of the world should you want to talk about? Washington. Washington. The capital of the United States. The headquarters of the exceptional country. When World War II came and ended, Washington could not go back to living within its borders without a role.

We had a role in the world. And you had a very major threat that people have forgotten and many people of a certain age don't even know about. There was a real threat, international communism. I'm not talking, Putin is not a communist, right? He's a real capitalist. So there was a real threat. In fact, the reason this is so important is you are watching the Cold War redux. We kidded, not kidded about it, we said that that was likely, but look at what's happening in Africa. Look what's happening in Latin America. The Russians are out there trying to do combat with us at every place they can put pressure. And they picked on Ukraine. I mean, they decided and they've been brutal.

You know, you want to talk about the Ukrainians hitting one port, they're flattening the ports in Ukraine and destroying the possibility of feeding a large portion of the Middle East and Africa. I mean, you want to talk about real monsters. Yeah, he's a monster bothering the United States and all its allies. Why is NATO up in arms? Because they see it the same way we do. Jack, it's always a pleasure, my dear friend. You've got to be stirred up today.

I thought you were going to start quoting Senator Joe McCarthy for a moment, but you didn't go that far. Oh, excuse me. He is not in our club. He's not in our club. I thought he was. He was not. You've got to go find another group.

All right. Always the best, Jack. I hope you'll come back next week. You have to have a fact-based position. McCarthy did. All right. I'm not going to challenge you on that. We'll be here all day.

More as we get it. We're always looking out for your freedom, no matter who we speak with or what we ask or what answers they give. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thanks for watching!