Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter : Alaska Viewed From Moscow.

Episode Date: August 21, 2025

Scott Ritter : Alaska Viewed From Moscow.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

You know what doesn't belong in your epic summer plans? Getting burned by your old wireless bill. While you're planning beach trips, BBQs, and three-day weekends, your wireless bill should be the last thing holding you back. That's why millions have made the switch to MidMobil. With Mint, you can get the coverage and speed you're used to, but for way less money.

And for a limited time, MittMobile's offering three months of unlimited premium wireless service for $15 a month. So while your friends are sweating over data overages and surprise charges, you'll be chilling, literally, and financially. All plans come with high-speed, data and unlimited talk and text delivered on the nation's largest 5G network. This year, skip breaking the sweat and breaking the bank. Get this new customer offer and your three-month

unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com slash john. That's mintmobile.com slash john. Use your own phone with any mint mobile plan and bring your phone number along with all of your existing contacts. Up front payment of $45 required equivalent to $15 a month. Limited time new customer offer for first three months only. Speeds may slow about 35 gigabyte on unlimited plan. Taxes and fees extra. See Mint Mobile for details. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Thursday, August 21st,

2025. Scott Ritter joins us now. Scott, a pleasure, my dear friend. Thank you for the terrific work that you did in Moscow. Thank you for the show that you gave us with the interview that we did. It seems like it was months ago. It was only two weeks ago with your Russian colleagues. you just came back from two weeks in Russia. Before we get to Alaska, what are the Russian people think of the American people? Do you have a handle on that? Yeah, I mean, this trip was sort of a very intensive delve into that very question, you know, speaking to, you know, Russian influencers. It would be basically the equivalent of bringing together the top podcasters in in the United States, the top alternative media in the United States, people who, you know, we can rightly say have a finger on the pulse of what the American people think and do.

You know, you don't succeed, I guess, in this business unless, you know, you get enough people to, you know, think you're saying the right thing. The same thing with Russia. And I, you know, and I was interviewing these people, talking to these people. They have two opinions. They have an opinion about the American government, and then they have the opinion about the American people. Right. They love the American people. First of all, they like winners, and they just view the United States as the only country out there right now in the West that's winning. They disdain Europe. They'd like to have good relations with Europe. The Russians don't want to go to war with anybody, but they don't respect the Europeans. They don't respect European leadership, and they're

rapidly losing respect for the European people themselves. Because, I mean, to give you an example, When a Russian hears that there's a poll in Germany that says that if invaded, only 16% of Germans would fight for Germany, they don't respect that. They respect America because America stands up. America says this is who we are. This is what we do. America fights for itself. But, you know, they also recognize America is a deeply divided country and has a lot of issues. But they love the American people.

The U.S. government, not so much, especially because of the policies. but they are, they're more MAGA than MAGA. They are all about Donald Trump succeeding, especially when it comes to peace with Russia. They respect what he's trying to do with the American economy, even if they disagree with some of the policies. They like strength, and they view Donald Trump is a relatively strong guy. So do they have a different view of the American government under the presidency, this may be a ridiculous question, but I have to ask it under the presidency of Donald Trump than they did under the presidency of Joe Biden.

The Russians are far more nuanced than that. They embrace the concept of the deep state reality more than many Americans do. They understand what the military industrial complex is. They understand the power, the reach of the Democratic Party, what it's done to law enforcement, the whole weaponization of law enforcement. They get it. They understand it. They think that Donald Trump stands alone.

They don't think that he stands with the American government. They think that many of the people that were in his, you know, in the group that he went to Alaska with are people who are working against Donald Trump. People who don't have this, you know, share the same vision. And they're very concerned about that. The message they kept saying is just tell the president that we're with him. We stand with. He can lean on us. Don't be afraid of us.

If you need to lean on us, lean on us. We're here for you. And that was heartening because they, they distinguished between Donald Trump, the man, and the U.S. government. They say that, you know, they think he's trying to do the right thing. They don't trust the U.S. government. They don't trust the establishment. They don't trust the deep state. Wow.

What was the, you were there, I believe. I'm not familiar with your precise itinerary, but I believe you were in Russia. last Friday when the president of Russia was in the United States of America, as odd as that would have sounded, as inconceivable as it would have sounded only a few months ago. What was the reaction in Moscow to Vladimir Putin going to Alaska to meet Donald Trump? Let's put in even a broader perspective. When I first planned this trip, Donald Trump had just announced that there was a 50-day deadline for Russia to accept his terms on the ceasefire. or else he was going to bring down the, you know, rains of hell.

And then after I bought my ticket, he changed that to 10 days. So the day I arrived in Russia was the day that hell was supposed to be ushered forth that the Russians didn't concede. Steve Whitkoff preceded me in Russia by one day. And so when I landed in Russia, everything I thought was going to happen in Russia suddenly was put on hold because they agreed to a summit in Alaska. And so I was there from the very beginning as the Russian people reacted to this news. And we're trying to, you know, and so I got, as you know, you've been there. I got invited to every Russian talk show, every Russian media outlet. They, nonstop, people are just asking, what do you think about Alaska?

What's going on? And in, you know, I guess, you know, I was told by senior members of the Russian government that my presence in Russia created an information atomic bomb. that, you know, everybody was listening to what I had to say. Everybody was, you know, taken into consideration that had a deep impact on, you know, on what the Russian people were thinking. And they believed that this was a good thing. There was a lot of people worried.

There were people concerned that, you know, that, you know, Trump couldn't be trusted, that the U.S. government couldn't be trusted. And they were wondering why Putin was going there, you know, knowing that the president was saying you have to accept a ceasefire that Putin would accept. It was like, are you setting yourself up for failure? But the one thing I said while I was there over and over again is that Vladimir Putin is as steady as anything in the world. And he has already made his position very clear. And he will make this position very clear that Donald Trump. And I'm confident that Donald Trump, once he's exposed to the Russian reality and not the

garbage he's getting from everybody around him, that Donald Trump will do the right thing if his true objective is peace. Sure enough, a short car ride with Donald Trump and the beast, and suddenly Donald Trump did an 180-degree flop. He said, no more ceasefire. Remember, if Putin didn't accept the ceasefire from the start, he was going to sanction him. And suddenly Trump comes out and goes, yeah, no ceasefire. Listen, on the flight from Anchorage, from D.C. to Anchorage, on Air Force One, two hours before he met President Putin, he told Fox News, I'll be very disappointed if there's no ceasefire and there will be consequences.

I suspect it was the bonding in the beast plus that hour-long lecture that President Putin gave in the presence of the president Marco Rubio and Steve Whitkoff and Vladimir, Sergey Lavrov. I'm going to guess the neocons around the president had never even told him the Russian understanding of the genesis and causes. of the special military operation and it resonated with him and the truth about the war the president was told the russians were losing that the russians were taking horrific casualties and i think putin just set him straight we're killing 20 ukrainians for every russian dead russia's lost a lot of dead but we're and now we know the truth they they 1.7 million dead ukrainian soldiers that's from the ukrainian ministry of defense um you know and putton

set him straight on so many things. Whitkoff, when, you know, when, when the Gary, Whitkoff left and sat down and he was ashen-faced. He had to leave the debriefing. Marco Rubio couldn't speak because Putin basically took control and basically said, everybody who was advising he was lying to you. Everybody is lying to you. Here's the truth.

The whole truth is nothing but the truth. And he brought, he brought that, you know, Trump, Putin has a way of doing this. It's his thing. You remember with Tucker Carlson when Putin gave him the history lesson? It was 45 minutes long, and it was, it was textbook. It was practically with footnotes. It was so well articulated. Right, but he also brought, he said, I went to the archives, and I pulled out the original documents.

Here's copies of them. Museum quality copies that he gave to Tucker saying, when I speak, I'm just not making stuff up. This is the history. These are the documents. When he met with the president, he gave him a presidential daily briefing. the CIA's equivalent with the documents, with the facts, could not be refuted. This is why the president did the flop, because he was presented with the real information. Marco Rubio and Pete Hagseth and John Ratcliffe, the head of the CIA, all of whom were with the president of Alaska,

should have been humiliated for the lousy job of preparing him and for feeding him with data and information demonstrably. false. I agree. I agree 100%. But we see the reflection now in what Trump is doing. First of all, the 180-degree flop. Trump made a bold commitment, as you said, on the airplane. If Putin doesn't immediately yield to my demand for a ceasefire, there will be consequences. This will not be pretty. And suddenly he's saying, yeah, no ceasefire. We're going, you know, long-term conflict resolution, root causes, the whole thing. And I think you're going to see as this goes forward, look at Trump, the way he handled the Magnificent Seven that showed up in the White House, dismissive, because he now knows the Russian truth. He knows the Russian reality. I have to ask you about the Magnificent Seven.

It is clear from whatever he said to them, perhaps privately, because Chancellor Scholes said this back in Germany, and President Macron said it that evening on NBC News that the United States would participate militarily in a security guarantee. So there's a lot to unpack here. First of all, what is a security guarantee? And secondly, I can't imagine any circumstances under which the Russians would agree to EU, U.K., U.S. troops anywhere in post-war Ukraine,

whether on the ground or in the air? Lavrov just said that. I mean, you've met Lavrov. You know he's a serious man. Lavrov just said, no, this is not going to happen. No European presence at all. No security guarantees the way they're talking about. Russia is the security guarantee.

He said, if you want to do all that, Russia gets a veto over it. Because the Russians are putting the mark down. Ukraine belongs to us. Ukraine is part of him. Why would Trump have, unless he's just wanting to, you know, he sometimes listens to whoever speaks in his ear last. Sometimes, unfortunately, that's Lindsey Graham. Sometimes he's the opposite to that. Sometimes he tells the audience what he thinks they, they want to hear. Why would he even have said what Macron said and Mertz said he said? Because they, first of all, I think Macron and Mertz are guilty of wishful thinking. First of all,

Trump goes into verbal diarrhea. I apologize, but that's just the way he does. He starts talking about something. You have to listen to what he says very carefully. He says, you know, yeah, security guarantees. We think it's a good idea. Then he said about the Europeans, yeah, they want to do this, but I don't know if it's going to happen. That's the reality. Trump didn't commit to anything. I can guarantee 100 percent Trump did not commit to putting U.S. air power over Ukraine. And I can guarantee 100 percent he did not commit to putting U.S. boots on. the ground what he told the europeans is this is your responsibility you have to do it we'll be sort of there in the background monitoring this but no trump did not commit american military power to

europe this is wishful thinking on the part of the europeans who heard what they wanted to hear and eliminated the parts of trump's response such as the one that i just said they make it clear that he didn't he didn't agree to this all right uh sergey lavrov has made a number of newsworthy states in the past four days. I mean, the first newsworthy statement he made was his sartorial choice when he arrived in Alaska wearing a CCCP sweatshirt. That was enough to get the attention

of the international press in a brilliant way. We'll put that aside because you and I both love that kind of snarkiness. Here is Foreign Minister Lavrov. Chris, I'm not sure when this was, but I know it was very recently, it was either yesterday or this morning, no strategic guarantees. Cut number 18. Following the summit of Russia and the United States in Alaska,

where we have achieved significant progress in moving towards defining the future shape and parameters for conflict settlement, and following this event, And the European countries, together with Mr. Zelensky, went to Washington and there, they tried to promote their own gender, which is aimed at making sure that the security guarantees follow the logic of isolating Russia, the logic of uniting the Western world and Ukraine in order to continue the aggressive confrontational policy of holding Russia back. and in mind of the goal of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia,

we completely reject such proposals and initiatives. Besides, the Ukrainian regime and its representatives are making quite specific comments on the current situation, directly showcasing that they are not interested in a sustainable long-term and fair conflict settlement. there you have it look the the russians said to trump we're you know if you can open the door for peace on our terms we're willing to walk through it but the russians haven't even put their shoes on because they know that zolensky in europe won't play ball so lincke's already

undermined himself i mean he you know one of the key russian demands is that the that whatever post-conflict ukraine looks like um they need um they need to respect the rights of the Russian people who live in Ukraine. That means that Russians have to be able to speak their language, practice their religion, the Orthodox faith, which is being violently suppressed by the Ukrainians today, and that their history and culture has to be respected. You know, Russian literature has to be allowed in the libraries. The Ukrainians have to stop going in and toppling Russian monuments. And yet Zelensky today just straight up said they will not allow Russians to speak Russian. In game set match, it's over. That, Zelensky just committed,

political suicide. Well, how close your colleague, Colonel Schaefer, says 30 to 45 days? How close is the Russian military to achieving its military objectives on the ground? I'm not going to dispute that timeframe. I'm also not going to commit to it because one thing I've learned is that the Russians don't care about calendars. They care about results. And that the Russians, as the Ukrainian casualty figures show, the Russians are in the business of killing Ukrainians.

For all the military geniuses out there who say, well, the map hasn't moved very much. Well, it doesn't need to. Demilitarization means destroying the Ukrainian army, and that's what's happening. And when they're fully destroyed, the Russians will advance, as they are doing right now across the entire line of contact. But the Russians, you know, aren't going to be in a position where they say, oh, my God, we said we'd have this done in 45 days. and now we have to put the pedal to the medal and lose 100,000 guys. This isn't the Battle of Berlin. Russia's winning.

Right now, they're basically setting the Ukrainians up for a disastrous winter. They're taking out the Ukrainian energy infrastructure, letting the Ukrainian people know that this idiot that you have in office right now is going to ruin you. There's no gas reserves for Ukraine. Europe doesn't have enough gas for itself. This is the Russian concept. So if it's over in 45 days, that would be apti al-Adenov, who's the lieutenant general commander of the Ahmad special forces, he thinks there's going to be significant changes.

He basically said, take a snapshot of the front line today, take a snapshot in 30 days, and you won't recognize it. It will change that much. You know, but, you know, the Ukrainians have shown themselves to be very tenacious defenders. Despite the fact of their force mobilization, they still get several thousand, you know, prime debonial. volunteers are people ready to get trained in fight. They're just not getting trained anymore. They're being thrown into the front lines without adequate training. And the complexity of this modern battlefield is such that if you don't have training, you're not trained to survive. You die. Again, why they have $7 million debt. So the Russians are confident in victory. Every time,

everything they said, peace through victory, meaning that there's not going to be peace through compromise. I think Rubio's got to get that term compromise out of his mouth. The only compromise is going to made is from the United States. The Russian perspective, peace through victory. Victory will be theirs, one way or another. And this is the reality. It's over for Ukraine. Look, every aspect, the Russians just now starting to play hardball. You know, there was an American factory. It was forget flex, I think, flex industries. Ukraine's like, it produced coffee makers. Did you see that factory? It didn't produce coffee makers. Flex tronics here in the United States, before it renamed Demflex was a major producer of advanced electronics for American defense in aerospace technologies.

That's what they were doing in Ukraine. This was the place to produce the electronics for the Ukrainian drones and Ukrainian missiles. It doesn't exist anymore. It's been erased off the map by the Russians who are starting to play hardball. It's an American-owned company. They sort of had hands off on that one. And now the Russians say nothing you do that's related to defense, nothing you do that's related. Chris is going to post a post a post by President Trump in the past hour, and I'll read it. It is very hard, if not impossible, to win a war without attacking an invaders' country. It's like a great team in sports that has a fantastic defense, but it's not allowed to play offense.

There is no chance of winning. It is like that with Ukraine and Russia. Crooked and grossly, this is the second part of it, crooked and grossly incompetent Joe Biden would not let Ukraine fight back, only defend. How did that work? Regardless, this is a war that would never have happened if I were president. Zero chance. Interesting times ahead, President B.J.T.

It's hard to read to analyze what he means when he writes like this. Do you think he means that Ukraine has no chance of winning? What do you think he means it's about time for Ukraine to attack Russia? I think it means Ukraine has no chance of winning. You know, it's funny. Everybody thinks, well, Russia's attacking Ukraine, therefore, Ukraine. Russia's not attacking Ukraine. Ukraine still exists.

There's parties in Kiev. There's parties in Odessa. Western Ukraine, much of it runs around as if there is no war. There's electricity. The parliament meets in a parliamentarian building. The president meets foreign dignitaries arrive. If Russia was at war with Ukraine, which Russia would be if Ukraine was to carry out long-range strikes against Russia, Ukraine would not exist anymore. It would cease to

exist. No matter what Zelensky does, the first time he throws one of his new flutin, British-made missiles into Moscow is the last time, because then Kiev disappears. I'm not saying in a nuclear Holocaust, I'm saying a Russianic and other advanced systems that have now been deployed. The Russians have been playing, you know, very tolerant strategic games with the Ukrainians, giving them every chance in this war. On the front line, yeah, they kill a lot of Ukrainians, but they don't do the damage to Ukraine that could be done. And frankly, if you want to win the war rapidly, should be done because they honestly view Ukraine as a branch of the same tree. The Slavic Brotherhood, the Russians and Ukrainians, won people that have branched off. The Russians aren't in the business of killing

their brothers, their cousins, their uncles. They respect the history. And so they've taken, you know, very kid-glove approach towards Ukraine. Donald Trump doesn't understand this. You know, because if Ukraine can strike Russia and not pay a consequence, he's higher than a kite. Let me ask you a technical question there. What is a security guarantee? I mean, in the case of Austria, which is a terrific model here, in 1955, the Soviet Union, the old Soviet Union, entered into a treaty with Austria. And it required for Austria's permanent neutrality, among other things. The security guarantee consisted of a Soviet official, physically present, and permanently a member of the Austrian Security Council. It sounded outrageous. They all

went for it. Fantastic effect. The Soviet troops were gone. Austria flourished economically, politically, and stayed neutral. The security guarantee was not troops, It was a Soviet official in the hierarchy of the Austrian government. When the British and President Trump talk about a security guarantee, I don't think that's what they're talking about. I think they're talking about troops. The British are. I don't think Trump knows what a security guarantee is.

But they all say that they want it to be like Article 5 of the NATO Charter. The Russians will never accept that. Lavrov could not have been clearer. Right, but read it. Article 5 isn't what everybody claims it to be. Article 5 requires no action. You know, it's not, Article 5, as defined during the Cold War, was backed up by a NATO that had front-loaded the approval sequences so that you had troops on the ground in West Germany ready to surge from barracks to fight. They didn't need to call back to their home governments and get permission. It'd all been front-loaded. But then the Cold War ended, and all those permissions went away, and all those troops went away.

They went back to the garrisons, and now their economies are. you know, focused on other things. Article 5 just says that if an attack against one will be considered an attack against all, in all member states will consider what their options could be, not will be, could be, including military. But there's no guarantee of a military option. There's no guarantee of any response. You know, such measures shall be terminated, well, that's the Security Council, but the parties, such actions as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force. But the very thought of this language, I think, would be rejected by the Russians as I read what Foreign Minister Lavrov said.

It has been rejected by the Russians. But what I'm trying to say is Article 5 isn't what people think it is anyway. I agree with you on that. But now when they speak about it, every time you ask the European, for instance, the French and the British, British came up, they said, you know, 30,000 troops. But then immediately had to back down because they don't have 30,000 troops ready to deploy. They said, we'll need some other help, but there's no logistical sustainability. So whenever Europe talks about, you know, putting troops on the ground to provide a guarantee, it's always contingent upon America being there to back them

up. Okay. In America, they say, we're not playing that game. We're not doing it. And that, which means there's no security guarantees. The Russians have said that the best security guarantee, is Russia, which is very much what you bring up the Austrian precedent. And this is what it's going to be. I spent a lot of time talking to people who will probably play a very significant role in post-conflict Ukraine in terms of governance. Ukraine will not be governed by Zelenskyy or anybody else who's been tainted by the West. Ukraine will be governed by somebody handpicked by Russia. That's the reality. And that's the best security guarantee because now we're talking about ukraine that is not the donbass that is not the part that is

russian you're talking about what remains of ukraine after the war correct what what would be governed by kiev by a government in kiev that government in kiev will be 100% controlled by russia that's all right i want to i want to switch gears not to aggravate you you have just said very nice things President Trump's ability to grasp and understand the genesis and origins of the special military operation. And we have both praised him for meeting with Vladimir Putin and breaking this wall that was built by the Biden administration that existed between Russia and the United States. However, yesterday the same President Trump told Fox News that Benjamin Netanyahu is a war, hero. When asked if he would consent to the invasion and occupation of Gaza, the president looked

at Mark Levin and said it on Fox News and said, Benjamin Netanyahu is a war hero, and so am I. What will stop Netanyahu's next move? Hamas. They're slaughtering the Israelis as we speak just this morning, an 18-man Hamas team emerged from underground and assaulted an Israeli armored column, killing the commander of the column, blowing up the tanks, and then they turned their assault, went into a building, caught the Israeli sleeping, killed them, got into a big gunfight. They took casualties, but they wiped the Israelis out.

And this will happen over and over and over again. Israel can't win, can't invade, can't do anything. The Israeli people won't put up with it. 300,000 people were in the streets the other day, demonstrating it's been in my eye on. If somebody hacked the IDF file, on their records of how many people have been killed. According to the IDFs files, 8,900 Hamas fighters have been killed and 42,000 civilians.

That's according to the Israeli government's own classified files. If this hacker has produced truthful information, this is reported on the Guardian about two hours ago. Yeah, but 8,900, I can guarantee you that, for instance, one of those is the postman, because Hamas controlled the postal service. service. So anybody who was employed in the, in the Palestine, in the Gaza Postal Service is considered by Israel to be a Hamas official. Anybody who is in a school that had to register, you know, a teacher had to register with Hamas because they're the government becomes a Hamas official. So we need to drop that 8,900 number. At a minimum, cut it in half, probably cut it by two thirds. Actual combatants killed by Israel is far less than that number. That's just the reality of it. How crazy is this move by Netanyahu, not just in the face of the resistance at home, but in the face of the resistance, he will meet and the absurdity of trying to occupy and govern the Gossans? It's an act of desperation. He's being prosecuted right now.

He's probably going to lose. he's probably going to be found of guilty of committing gross negligence of his duties as prime minister during war lying to the Israeli people and in you know if his corruption case ever goes forward he'll be found guilty of corruption he and his corrupt wife so he is desperately trying to make himself relevant and the last way to make himself relevant is to say that he's going to occupy Gaza good luck The IDF right now can't recruit enough troops. They have a personnel problem because the Orthodox refused to serve. So there's a deficit in the recruits coming in. They just put out a release.

They're asking all Jewish males of, you know, war age who live abroad to come to Israel and serve in the IDF. Oh, my God. Wow. That's the appeal that they just put out. Here's a fellow named Anthony Lowenstein, who's a well-known. known Israeli author, a friend of our friend, Max Blumenthal, saying just what you said, reservists are not showing up. Netanyahu was walking into his own Vietnam. Chris, cut number 10. There's growing numbers of reserves who simply are refusing to show up within Israel. I'm not talking

about the 18-year-olds who simply refuse to serve because they're utterly opposed the occupation and the genocide. They have people I deeply admire. Saly there's too few of those. I'm talking about the hundreds and hundreds of reservists who have fought in Gaza, and I suspect have committed numerous war crimes, they're refusing to show up because they see the complete futility of what Netanyahu and his cronies are trying to do in Gaza. The idea of fully occupying Gaza indefinitely, which frankly has always been the Israeli plan, is guaranteed to be akin to Vietnam, where you have overwhelming Israeli military force, but you have an insurgency. And And Israel, like the U.S. was in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, are utterly vulnerable to that,

let alone the moral cost, the ethical cost. You cannot occupy and other people indefinitely forever, as Israel has realized in the West Bank and Gaza without collapsing your society morally. And that sadly and tragically is where Israeli society is developed over the last years, long before October 7, but certainly since. Donald Trump's going to continue to finance this because Benjamin, Netanyahu was a war hero. Same way, Donald Trump's a war hero.

Donald Trump, who never served his country in uniform, Donald Trump, who, you know, I guess, you know, getting the divine intervention to the bullet, Nicky his ears made him the equivalent of a medal of honor winner in his own mind. Donald Trump might want to take a look at what it takes to earn the Medal of Honor, what it takes to earn a Navy Cross or a Silver Star, a Bronze Star.

He hasn't done any of that. He's a politician. He's a businessman. man. I hope he succeeds in his policy's promoting peace. But Donald Trump, a war hero? No, Benjamin Netanyahu, a war hero. You know, at least Benjamin Netanyahu served in the military. He served in the Saudi al-Matkal, the elite Israeli commander force when he was there, probably saw some combat. So, you know, you could make the case that at one point in time in his life, Benjamin Netanyahu showed courage under fire. But right now, to call him a war hero, no. All he's doing is condemning Israelis to die, to be wounded, he's destroying Israeli society, and he's guilty of genocide,

the mass murder of Palestinians on a daily basis. They're killing women and children. I just saw a video of a drone strike out of a six-year-old girl carrying water to her family, and the Israelis singled it out and killed her with a drone, six-year-old carrying water, and they killed her. And they do this over and over and over again. This is why there was a letter recently signed. I forget the exact number, but pretty much every retired military intelligence and civilian intelligence and national security official in Israel signed a letter saying what we're doing in Gaza is wrong morally. We can't win. And it's stunning. But that's the equivalent of, you know, the four-star general of command today, you know, America's nuclear deterrence. We are, we stand ready. What happens

the moment every single one of these four-star generals leaves that post, we got to get rid of all nuclear weapons because what I saw is insane. You know, this whole, that's the reality of Gaza. Every Israeli who knows knows, it's insane. It's bad policy. It's destroying Israel. But when you wear the uniform on active duty, you have a choice, not show up or obey your orders.

Right now, a lot of Israelis are just saying, we ain't showing up. Scott Ritter, thank you, my dear friend. Thank you for letting me go across the board from Moscow to Alaska to Gaza. I almost forgot while you were away. how fabulous and insightful your analysis is. Don't let me forget that. Thank you, my dear friend. I'll afford to see you again soon.

I did catch a lot of Ritter's rants while you were awake because you know I watched them. Thank you, Judge. Thank you, Scott. All the best. And still a busy day coming up. At 1 o'clock, Professor Glenn Deeson on all of this, at 2 o'clock Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson on all of this,

and batting cleanup at 3 o'clock, Professor John Mearsheimer, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thank you.