Judging Freedom - Ray McGovern: Did Russia Give Up Syria?

Episode Date: December 9, 2024

Ray McGovern: Did Russia Give Up Syria?See 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 Monday, December 9th, 2024. Ray McGovern will be here with us in just a moment on what role did American security play in, excuse me, American intel play in toppling the Assad regime in Syria. But first this. We're taught to work hard for 35 to 40 years, save your money, then live off your savings. Unfortunately, there are too many threats undermining the value of our hard-earned dollars. The Fed's massive money printing machine is shrinking your dollar's value. Just the cost of groceries is absurd. Let me be brutally honest.

I think the dollar is on its way to being extinct. Not just here, but globally. The BRICS nations, led by Russia and China, threaten to remove the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Central banks have been shifting away from the dollar and into gold. And if we go to central bank digital currency, that will not only destroy the dollar, but we will lose our freedom. We will lose our privacy. They can track anything we do.

You need to take care of yourself and your family. So here's what you need to do. Immerse yourself in knowledge and information. The writing is on the wall. Now is the time to consider shifting some of your dollars into gold and silver as your bedrock financial asset. Call my friends at Lear Capital, the leader in precious metals investing for over 27 years. They help me diversify into gold and silver.

They can help you too. Call Lear today at 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com. Ray McGovern, welcome here, my dear friend. Thank you. Thank you. What role, if any, did American intel play in toppling the Assad regime? Well, there are a lot of former alumni that are pounding their breasts and saying, we did it finally. Judge, you probably know that our first covert operation at regime change was in 1947, the year that the CIA was created. And our objective was to topple the regime in Syria. Okay.

But it was back then. Okay. Now, our next covert action, big one, was 1953 when the British took us by the shoulder and said, now you guys, you're a young organization. This is what you do when a dictator, freely elected, Mossadegh in Iran, thinks that the oil under his soil belongs to him. It doesn't belong to him, it belongs to us. And so they overturned the government, the duly elected government of Mossadegh there in 1953. So the U.S. has been involved in this forever.

Of course they knew what was going on here. They trained lots of troops that put $5 billion into this effort. Whether they knew chapter and verse or whether they knew that Jelani would go so fast into Damascus, that's an open question. But I think they probably knew that too because the whole Syrian army, as well as the government outside Assad, was corrupt to the core, and didn't heed the warnings that they were given long since by the Russians and by the Iranians to clean up their act so this wouldn't happen. Doesn't American intel have second thoughts about supplying cash to

and training to a group that cuts people's heads off? I mean, Jelani, this guy who's now the head of what passes for the government in Syria post-Assad, is still considered a terrorist by the State Department, and there's still a bounty on his head, even though the CIA is paying him. Well, Judge, this betrays the reality that were you to work for the CIA, you would be in the analysis directorate. But you said it makes very good sense. But in answer to your question, it's the operations people that run the CIA, and they have no bones about funding this kind of thing.

Actually, there's so much in bed with the Israelis, people that run the CIA and they have no bones about funding this kind of thing. Actually, there's so much in bed with with the Israelis and so much help. This all happened that it reminds me, you know, back. What is it? Eight years ago, the New York New York Times bureau chief in Jerusalem, her name was Jodi Ruderin. She talked to top-level senior Israeli officials, and among them Alon Pinchas, who's come to the fore now. He had been consul general in New York. He said, Alon, what's your preferred outcome in Syria?

And he said, Jodi, this is a little embarrassing to say, but our preferred outcome is no outcome. As long as the Sunni and Shia are battling it out, as long as they're massacring and hemorrhaging their blood, Israel has nothing to fear from Syria. Now, eight years later, that's finally come to pass. Israel has nothing to fear from Syria. Iran has taken it on a chin, so has Hezbollah. This has changed a whole bunch of things, and the question is, what will Iran do now that has little other option than to resort to the natural outcome here, and that would be developing a

nuclear weapon, which they can do rather quickly. Donald Trump issued a one-liner over the weekend saying the reason Syria fell is because its patron and benefactor abandoned it, and he identified the patron and benefactor as Vladimir Putin. Is there any argument to be made there? Well, no, that's not quite, that isn't correct. The Russians tried to persuade Assad to get his act together. They too are surprised. Everyone, I think, is surprised at the quickness with which this happened. But, you know, the Russians are a little smarter than many other superpowers. And the Bronx would say, you got to know when to hold them and when to fold them.

And it was very clear to the Russians weeks ago, this might be the time to fold them because Assad won't listen to anybody. He's cozying up to the Gulf monarchies. He thinks there's percentage in that. We better be prepared for this guy to go down. And as soon as he does, well, we'll try to keep our equities in Syria. That's not likely to eventuate. So we're prepared to leave. We've got to fold them on this particular one. How can the intelligence community, the West Wing, the White House itself, the State Department be crowing about this when you consider the blood on the hands of the person now in charge of what passes for a government in Syria?

Well, Judge, that's a softball question. It's really easy. I mean, you just have the right people go to the Washington Post, the New York Times, and Jelani has changed. He's going to welcome all kinds of disparate groups. He's a new man, okay? And so when he comes in, he's not going to chop off any hands, any heads. He's going to let his surrogates do that. So he's been given a new image. Now, there's, I suppose, a chance that he will start to act more like a statesman than a head chopper. I think there's maybe a 20% chance of that happening.

So we have to wait and see if that happens. But right now, the PR is really good. This is terrific. You're getting rid of a brutal dictator. But the whole name of the game, Judge, is Israel. You can't look at US policy or UK policy towards Syria without realizing that Israel is driving it. Its interests are paramount in our policymakers' thinking. Sir John Sawyers, the recently retired head of MI6, recently characterized all of this as a surprise to everyone. Cut number four, Chris. Well, I think it was a surprise to everyone, Trevor.

It probably came as a surprise to Tahrir al-Sham, the group you're calling HTS, which have been the main rebel group involved in this march on Damascus. I don't think they expected to go so far so fast. I think we're all surprised at how the regime forces have just completely collapsed, even those most loyal to the regime and closest to the regime. So yes, it is a surprise. It's not a failure of intelligence. It's a surprise to everyone. Was the American government caught by surprise, or was this orchestrated by Amos Hochstein? Did he know what he was doing when he negotiated the so-called ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel.

Well, begging the forgiveness of my Irish grandmother, I totally agree this time with the head of British intelligence. Your Irish grandmother would probably not forgive you for that, but go ahead. But yeah, once he's right, he's not spending it. One interesting thing about that interview is prior to that, he says, you know, for 30 years, the Westerns been involved there and all that stuff. And the French certainly have. Well, actually, it I said before, the Brits and the Americans deposed the freely elected government. The only Persian government that was freely elected in three ages, okay, deposed them.

That goes back, do the math, 1953 and 2024. So the British and the U.S. and the French here in Syria have been deeply involved. The notion that they didn't know how corrupt, how sequestered, how out of the picture Assad was, well, if they didn't, that's a black mark on them because they damn well ought to have known that. Explain to me the involvement of Turkey and whether Turkey is now adverse to Russia with respect to the toppling of Assad. The Turks double-crossed the Russians and the Iranians. They have this Astana group.

They met just a couple of weeks ago and they were double-crossed by Turkey. Now, this is not the first time Turkey double-crossed folks. But, you know, the equities here remind me of trying to do a ceasefire in Syria back in, well, 2016 or so, when John Kerry was given the order to work out something with Sergei Lavrov, okay, that worked for 11 months and they put a ceasefire in. What happened? U.S. Air Force violated the ceasefire by bombing fixed Syrian army positions nine days later, end of ceasefire. Now, the reason I mention that is because I was at an Atlantic Council meeting back then, and I heard John Kerry two days after he arrived back in Washington, and I printed this out because it really bears repeating.

Very brief, this is what Kerry said. He was asked by Steve Clemens, a good interviewer, he said, look, how do you explain? How do you explain this thing? And you said you could align things. And here's what Kerry said, quote, Syria is as complicated as anything I've seen in public life, in the sense that there are probably six wars going on at the same time. Kurd against Kurd, Kurd against Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sunni, Shia, everybody against ISIL, people against Assad, Nusra. Well, Nusra now is H-T-S, right? Nusra.

This is a mixed-up sectarian and civil war with strategic and proselytes, and so it's very, very difficult. Get this, Judge. It's very, very difficult. Get this, Judge. It's very, very difficult to align all those forces. Well, who gave Cherry the notion that he could align all these forces? Nobody can align all these forces, not even Erewhon in Turkey. It's going to be Bedlam there. And who profits from Bedlam in Syria, as I mentioned before?

Netanyahu does. And this is a big win for him and a big reverse, not only for Iran, but for those who are trying to do more sensible things, like Russia. And Russia, as I say, has now folded them. They've given Assad refuge and political asylum, I suppose, in Russia. But that's about all they're going to do about this. They're folding their cards. They're going to concentrate on Ukraine.

What is American intel doing in Syria now because it's a state of chaos and internecine warfare? There was effectively no government, no matter what Jolani claims to be the head of. Well, I'm sure they have somebody, not a US case officer, most likely, but somebody close to Jolani. And they're showing him the Washington Post and New York Times and say, hey, look, you're a peacemaker here now. You've not, don't chop any

heads off just yet um you're a a diversity guy now okay and so please can you live this just for a couple of months no weeks at least and i don't know if that's going to work because he's in charge of the head choppers i mean they do heads, and Jelani himself has chopped heads. Now, could he change? Could he do a little rapprochement with Israel? Well, Jelani, I'm told, means that he comes from the Golan Heights, okay? So he has some history with Israel. Who knows?

It's possible, but not very likely at all. We're in for bedlam there. And as I'd say the third time, chaos is exactly what Israel wants. No arms are going to get through by land or by sea or by air to Hezbollah. That's going to be a disaster for them. What is the status of Turkey with respect to BRICS? I would imagine they're going to give up on that because Putin will say no. Well, they won't give up. Erdogan never gives up. But there are powerful forces, not only Russia but China, that really look askance on this double crossing. And I think it's going to make it very difficult for Turkey to become a full member of BRICS.

Very difficult. Very difficult indeed. What will this do for Iran's nuclear program? Do they have more of an incentive to develop it into nuclear weapons now? You know, Judge, that's a really tough, that's the best question to ask. The answer is yes, they have more incentive. But there is this fatwa, you know, this religious edict.

That means something. It's also the case that as soon as they start developing a nuclear weapon to put on one of these missiles, we'll know about it. So will the IAEA. Everyone's going to know about it. And so will Israel be justified in saying, okay, now we have to zap them, and you're going to help us, President Trump? Well, justified or not, they're likely to say that. So the prospect of a wider regional war is even greater now, now that Iran feels with great justification that it has no

cords in Syria and the resistance, the arc of resistance has kind of fallen in in the middle. Why did Hamas praise the departure of Assad? Wouldn't they want him there to continue the supply route to Hezbollah? Well, that's a good question. I don't really know. But, you know, when you have a winner and you see what's happened, it's easy enough to applaud what happened rather than be a negative person and incur the wrath of those people now in power. And sadly, Jelani and his group, HTS, are now in power, a direct derivative of Al-Qaeda, al-Nusra. I mean, the same people, for God's sake.

The same people who fought against us in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere. So it's a sorry patch of events here, but we've got to deal with it. The Russians have already decided to fold their cards. We're not going to fold ours because we're joined at the hip with Israel. Does this event or series of events in Syria over the weekend encourage the neocon mentality in the American deep state to want to do more of this? Well, I'm sure, you know, they feel vindicated. You know, five billion dollars is a lot of money, but look what we got, you know, what we got is chaos. That's what we wanted. That's what the Israelis wanted. that use their prerogative to approve or disapprove covert action operations that make no sense, oh, that would be different. But you don't have that.

You don't have Bill Burns sticking up for anything. You don't have Averill Haynes aware of what's going on. And that leads me to some ray of hope here. If Tulsi Gabbard gets confirmed, I think she's got her head screwed on right. And although she's been far more pro-Israel knee-jerk than I would have liked, I think she'd be a leavening influence on these kinds of things. It might be able to tell Trump, hey, this is the real shape of the world. You ought to listen to me and you ought to listen to the analysts at CIA and not just

the operations officers. Can't she put the operations officers out of business? That's an easy one, Judge. The chances of that are 1%. But, I mean, it could be somebody quit on Tulsi Gabbard just over the weekend. As a matter of fact, he and I had a debate on Amy Goodman almost exactly 10 years ago, 2014, right after the coup in Kiev. And I remember that distinctly because when I mentioned the coup in Kiev, he said, what coup? And I said, well, haven't you heard the intercept between Nuland and Jeffrey Pyatt, U.S. ambassador in Kiev? And he says, well, is that all you got? Is that all you got? So I challenged him to debate in you and I've asked Amy Goodman's people to set us up so that he and I can go at it on the relative merits of having Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence.

I haven't heard back from either yet. the intel the way the head of CIA has repeatedly filtered it so as to please the recipient, the president, rather than fidelity to the truth. That is so noxious, Judge, and that's so familiar that it would be a major departure for her to tell the truth, to say, look, you ought to fold them on Iran, on Ukraine, as the Russians folded right on Syria. You know, if it were someone else, I would say she doesn't have the guts or he doesn't have the guts. There's a chance she does. I briefed her personally. She asks the right questions, seem interested in the right things. She's really good on Ukraine. She's lousy on

Israel. But you know, when you come into power and you have a chance to influence good decisions, your patriotism tends to come into view here. And you might just say, well, Mr. President, you don't want to hear this, but this is the way it is. This is how I see it. You can listen to these other guys if you want, but here's why I think the way I think. appointed her would be helped and well served by a head of intelligence who tells the truth and doesn't shape things so that he or she ingratiates

herself with the president. Ray McGovern, a pleasure my dear friend. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your thoughts. We'll see you God only knows what will happen in the next four days. We'll see you at the end of the week with Larry Johnson. Thanks, Judge. Of course. All the best, my friend. The aforesaid Larry Johnson right here at 11 o'clock. Pepe

Escobar at noon. Professor Jeffrey Sachs at 2 p.m. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Altyazı M.K.