Judging Freedom - Ray McGovern : Netanyahu’s Endless Bloodshed

Episode Date: January 12, 2026

Ray McGovern : Netanyahu’s Endless BloodshedSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

New Year energy is all about resetting routines, feeling healthier, and starting fresh. Why not give your dog the same reset? From daily walks to better habits at home, our dogs are always right there with us. Ollie helps you start the new year with intention, beginning with your dog's bowl. With fresh, protein-packed meals crafted from real human-grade ingredients, your dog can start the year feeling their best, too. Choose from five recipes and get a personalized plan for your dog's needs. Meals arrive perfectly portioned with a scoop and storage container, so serving is fast and mess-free.

And with Ollie's in-app on-demand health screenings, tap real experts whenever you need peace of mind. Visit ollie.com slash crossover and use code crossover for 60% off your first box. Undeclared wars are commonplace. Fragically, our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression with no complaints from the American people. Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. What if sometimes to love your country you had to alter or abolish the government? government? What if Jefferson was right? What if that government is best, which governs least?

What if it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong? What if it is better to perish fighting for freedom than to live as a slave? What if freedom's greatest hour of danger is now? Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, January 12, 2006, my dear friend, Ray McGovern joined us now. Ray, thank you very much for your time. Is there any serious question about the involvement of CIA, MI6, and Mossad, and the instigation of chaos on the streets in Iran? No. Now, there is a lot of popular dissent, and there was the devaluation of the Rial, and there's

lots of reasons that the Iranians are upset. Many reasons are traced right back to the sanctions that the U.S. has imposed on Iran. But yeah, I mean, it's very, very clear. This has been done before. You know, you go back to 53. This is exactly what happened. And we have the Shah's son now, for God's sake, trying to pretend he has some support, which he does not. The Shah, of course, was the person the CIA sort of crafted as the monarch of Ukraine after they ousted Muhammad Mossadegh, who had been popularly elected, and that's the coup to which you're referring in 1953. Alastair Crook has said, and our buddy Larry Johnson will be on shortly after you, I believe we'll also say, that this coup has been a failure that the tide has turned and that the demonstrations we are seeing and will soon see

are pro-government demonstrations. That's my information as well. The question is that doesn't make Netanyahu and Trump, by extension, even more apoplectic, even more willing to go ahead with what they had planned originally, even though these plans seem even worse than they were when they were conceived. So all bets are off here, but I think Larry and Alistair are quite right in saying that the demonstration such as they are now are in favor of the government mostly. I don't know if you had a chance to hear Alistair, but he was describing in some detail the level of violence fomented by CIA, M-I-C-E-C-A-M-C-A-S.

six, Mossad paid militias who beat the daylights out of people. And then the Iranian security forces come in and they try and stop the beatings. And then the people doing the beatings start shooting at the security forces. The security forces shoot back. People die. Innocent people die. And that's, of course, what the press picks up on. Yeah, judges forth recalling, you know, the year I graduated from elementary school,

1953. This all happened before. Why? Well, because there was a popularly elected Prime Minister Musa, that came in and said, hey, we Iranians, we should be able to profit a little bit more from the oil under our earth here. And what happened? M.I. Zex took the fledgling CIA and said, look, this is what you do in an upstart land like Iran. thinks that the oil under its soil belongs to them. They fomented a coup. British showed how that would be done. That was the first major one.

And look at the result of that, a repressive regime, second only to the Nazis under the Shah. Next year, Guatemala. What did Guatemala have to do with general food with that one? So, you know, it always has to do with these resources, and the British are still leading us pretty much, saying, look, this is what you do, and we can do it for you, and you can help us, and you can find it.

So CIA MI6 and now Mossad are in it up to the hilt, and what they think they can achieve after the petering out of what happened in June and even what happened earlier on when they tried to do this stuff, what they think they can achieve, well, I don't think they can achieve. Well, I don't think they can achieve it, and I just hope that Trump and Netanyahu don't go off half-cocked because they cannot achieve it. Are Trump and Netanyahu preparing to go off half-coct? Is Netanyahu willing to risk the existence of the state of Israel, knowing the armaments that Iran has and its likely lack of restraint this time around? Well, you know what I've been saying, Judge?

but we have to always say that you're asking me to predict the unpredictable, right? Right. Curial. So. Make so valuable to the show, Ray. Yeah, but it's so, you know, it's so feckless. I mean, it doesn't Trump have any good advisors? Well, I suspect he does.

And I suspect that for the nuns, Tulsi Gabbard, while in the shadows, will come again and say, Hey, Mr. President, I forgot to tell you again, but I told you back last March that Iran is not working on a nuclear weapon, and we still, and we still have no evidence that it is, you know. Don't believe, Bibi, believe us. We've been saying this since 2007, for God's sake. And again, all I can say is that's the only national intelligence estimate that I can prove prevented a wider war against Iran during Bush and Chinese last year before they went off into the Western sunset. It worked. We did the estimate. We said that all the stuff that was said before about Iran being almost, almost having a nuclear weapon was phony, and we had proof of that. It was

unanimous. It was supported by everyone. And it was said in high confidence and to her credit. She repeated that in March and Trump said, well, maybe he'll come around now and say, well, maybe we need to be a little bit less sensible than we have been here to four. You know, I've been a big fan of hers. It was easier to be a fan of hers when she was in the House of Representatives and could speak more freely. And I recognize what our colleague Tucker Carlson said about her unhappy financial, personal financial situation, but I don't know how she can stay in that job, that this monumental monstrosity of an invasion and kidnapping in Venezuela was planned and rehearsed for six months, and she was kept entirely out of the loop. They all either lied to her or kept from her

what she should have known. I just don't know. But it's, Judge, I briefed her when she was a representative as well. She's bright as hell. Right. And I think she's honest, basically. Now, it's not for me to say whether she's better inside or outside. I used to say she ought to quit, but I don't know now. I recognize that argument that she might get something done on the inside, even though they humiliated her. She was showing selfies of herself on the beach in Hawaii while the attack was coming in 48 hours. I want to get to Trump's mind about which you have opined a lot.

Here he is on January 8th. It's only a 30-second clip from a two-hour interview with The New York Times, but it's the one that everyone is talking about. You've probably seen it, but let's watch it together. Chris, cut number two. Do you see any checks on your power on the world stage? Is there anything that could stop you if you wanted to? Yeah, there's one thing.

My own morality, my own mind. It's the only thing that can stop. And that's very good. I don't need international law. I'm not looking to hurt people. Is he of sound mind? Because he says my mind, my morality, I don't need law. That sounds like a madman.

He's not well, Judge. I've been saying that for months now, as you know. The question is how important people react to that. And I see Putin in the first instance, she and the second trying to get along with him so that he doesn't do something really, really stupid. Now, with respect to morality, I have to tell you, my God, Trump couldn't get into an Ivy League college, right? He just couldn't, no matter how much money his uncle paid them, all right? So he went to Fordham, my alma mater. At Fordham in those days, he was a couple years behind me,

believe it or not. Moral theology, otherwise known as ethics, was a required course in sophomore year. So he took that course. Now, his lawyers have forbade under pain of very expensive lawsuits. Michael Cohen was a guy that did this. He told Fordham and the University of Pennsylvania, where Trump was finally led in by a friend of his from Queens, who was head of admissions, right? Okay. They finally intimidated them. Don't, under pain of lawsuits, do not release those transcripts. I would dearly love to know what the Jesuits gave Donald J. Trump, what marked they gave him in moral theology. He flunked, okay?

Now, moral theology is something really important. You can't have your own morality, for God's sake. What bothers me most, Judge, as probably you know, is that Fordham will not speak out. You know, they won't say, well, they don't have to release the marks. They're not supposed to do that. But they can say, well, people just realize that what Trump said is his morality is not the morality. They're not the morality or what we expose is our morality. Why don't they do that?

They're afraid. And the silence, this cone of silence that prevents, in universities even, not less churches, from saying, look, this is not in any way. moral, Christian, Islamic, Abrahamic theology. It's not moral to have your own moral theology to disregard international law, disregard your domestic law, and disregard the tenets of morality like genocide and forced starvation. They won't speak out. And that's what bothers me most. The solution there or the inevitable conclusion judge, it's up to us, right? It's up to us, the faithful to speak out.

This happened before. You have written extensively and passionately about the need for everybody to speak out, but I want to play another clip for you. This is Anthony Scaramucci, who once was one of Trump's closest advisors.

This is not very flattering, but it's fascinating. Chris, cut number seven. Miller and Trump are fascists. Okay, let's just stipulate that. And they're being unchecked by the U.S. Congress, who is very fearful of him, and they are intimidated by him.

And those are the facts. How he was democratically elected? And he's, well, so was Hitler. Hitler rose to power on the 30th of January, 1933. He's democratically elected Chancellor of Germany. So what we know, and by the way, think about what Trump is doing with January 6th. Okay, he's five years later. He's revocating.

And that's what classically would fascists do. But listen, if he loses the midterm, He said something last night that he knows he's going to get impeached because he's got an Amelian Clause issue. He's broken the... Not profiting from the presidency. He's broken the Constitution. He's done a whole series of things that's going to cause a huge amount of problems for him. So your viewers know he's a fascist and I know he's a fascist.

And the question is, are you going to check him or not? And if you're going to let three more years go with this fascist-like behavior, we're going to It's going to be a problem. Our friend, Ron Unz, publishes the Unz report says the Trump doctrine is, they have it, we want it, we take it. That's some doctrine, isn't it? Scaramucci looked a little bit like Hick Seth's father, didn't he? I mean, he had the same kind of thing. I mean, my God, you know.

Well, anyhow, yeah, you know, the morality, you know, let me just dwell on this a little bit more. The year I entered Fordham College, Albert Camus, won the Nobel Prize. And why did he win it? Well, because he spoke out during World War II, and nobody else did, especially the church. And the Dominicans in this little monastery in La Tour, France, asked him to come, hey, tell us how you thought the church acted during World War II. Camus said was, look, I, an atheist, I waited for a voice from Rome, and no voice came, and so I inquired it. And I was told, oh, yes, there was a voice.

It comes in the form of an encyclical. And so I, Elbeah said, can you tell me what an encyclical is? And they told me, I said, well, look, what really needs to happen is the voice has to be clear. It has to come out so that any simple person can understand it and it's got to condemn what's going on. Now, that's what he told these Dominicans. That's what I say is necessary. And, you know, this is kind of, you know, I just want to quote this because he says, look, what the world expects of people of the Abrahamic tradition is that they speak out loud and clear

that they should voice their condemnation at such a word. that never in such a way that never a doubt, never the slightest doubt could arise in the heart of the simplest person that they should get away from abstraction and confront the bloodstained face history has taken on today. We're at the same point. And as far as I can tell, what we look to for moral leadership has been drowned in platitudes and abstractions and say, oh, war is really bad, tortures really, but you should. What moral principle could possibly have justified the invasion of Venezuela and kidnapping of President Maduro and his wife?

By the way, they broke three of her ribs in the process of kidnapping. I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but who knows? But what moral principle was there? What value judgment was made? Well, Judge, when you say, I have my own morality. the rest is all superfluous. There aren't any principles. Mike makes right. I have this really pretty Secretary of War, mind you, and he's got this thick Tracy Chin, and he's really tough, and we can do this. We could do this in our own backyard. We can do this at home if you get out of line, and we have enough

troops to do it, and they will obey me sheepishly. They are submissive, and I have the generals in there that will do me. my bidding so I can do it. That's my morality. Are the Israelis still killing people in Gaza? Of course, yeah. It never really stopped the killing. It just diminished in scale. Now they're at it again with their tanks, for God's sake. And, you know, that is, that's the supreme indignity, the supreme crime. Genocide, forced starvation. We gave an award. to Tony Aguilar just last Wednesday, and it was he who spoke out that these new aid, these food aid distribution sites reduced from 100 to 4 were orchestrated as shooting galleries. And when people came to get food, they were shot, many of them, okay?

He came back and testified to that. I said, how did you get that footage out of Israel? They were on your tail. They said, well, you know, right, when you're in the Special Forces, you know how to do these things. Yeah, it took some doing, but I got it out. And I've showed it to Congresspeople. And what happened in Congress?

They arrested me. They arrested me with Josie Gilboe, an army captain, who also objected and quit after 17 years of service because of Gaza. What's happening in Syria? Is the Syrian government slaughtering the Kurds with the, help of the Turks and what's to gain for Israel by that happening. Judge, now I'm over-asked. I don't know. It's such a mess.

Alistair, maybe Larry, this might be able to enlighten you. I just don't know. Well. What are the dangers of a government that has no value where the president is self-rength? absorbed as much as this one. Well, you know, Judge, it really depends on whether Putin and she are cautious, are perspicacious enough to humor him so he doesn't do any really stupid things, like strategically. Now, there is an offer out from Putin to adhere to the quantitative limits of the New Star Treaty, which expires on February 5, that's less than four weeks from now, okay?

There's been no official answer from the United States. That, my friends, is the litmus test. If Trump can't simply say, okay, one more year will keep those quantitative strategic offensive missiles limits in place. If he can't even do that, well, there is no ducking the question in the Kremlin as to whether he's sincere in wanting this or whether he can't do it because he's not his own man. One other thing in the same vein. A week ago, a port, a control gizmo from a drone that was shot at Vallai, the presidential house there, was retrieved and given to the defense attaché's office in Moscow. It's been in Washington a week now.

Okay? Now, I am 90% sure that that show. shows that the target was specifically what they call the State House near Wauldai in Northgorod province, okay? What has the Russia, what has the US said? We don't know. Chances are they have said nothing, but there's also a chance that the CIA has been asked to examine this thing and the CIA will inevitably come up as our Trump is lying to you

in your face, Mr. Trump. Look, that doesn't show that at all. If the U.S. response is either silence or, no, you're lying, Putin. You know, all bets are off. That would be the death knell for these fledgling attempts at rapporteur with Russia. The saving grace is that on the very day of these attacks with the drones, 91 of them, that same day, Lavrov, the foreign minister, said, look, this is not going to derail our attempts to have a decent.

relationship and to continue talking to the United States. Nothing the Russians have said at an authoritative level have denied that or even cast any doubt on that. So again, I'm a glass half full. I think the Russians are holding out the prospect of continuing trying to create a decent relationship. But if they answer or they don't answer on this new start limitations renewal, and if they don't answer on this control mechanism that was given to them, Putin and his folks will have to draw their own conclusions, and I think they'll say, well, you know, whether you can believe Trump or not that he likes it, and we've said we believe him, well, he can't do it because he's not his own man.

We have to draw the necessary implications for that. Are you ready for a little touch of humor? The head of the foreign ministry, well, spokesman Maria Zachara, whom you've met, judge, she replied to British Foreign Secretary Healy's remark about, yeah, if he'd get Putin, he'd arrested him and put him on trial for war crimes. What did Maria Zakhanatha say just two hours ago? Ah, well, what she said was this. What the Defense Secretary of Britain said about detaining our president for war crimes

these remarks are, quote, the wet dreams of British perverts, period, end quote. Now, that's not very diplomatic. She's a tough looking. The Russians are up to here with MI6 and they're up to here with Dennis Healy, right? Whether it's up to here with Trump. We'll have to see.

It's just going to play out just in the next couple of weeks. Ray, thank you very much. I was going to run a clip of Netanyahu, but we'll save it for next time, and we'll end with that. note. Thank you, my dear friend. We'll look forward to seeing you on Friday with Larry Johnson. All the best. Thank you, Judge. And the aforementioned Larry Johnson will be here at 1130 this morning and at 3 this afternoon on all of these topics, Venezuela, Gaza, Ukraine, Iran, Scott Ritter.

Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.