Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter: How Close to Nuclear War?

Episode Date: November 25, 2024

Scott Ritter: How Close to Nuclear War?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This podcast is sponsored by Talkspace. You know when you're really stressed or not feeling so great about your life or about yourself? Talking to someone who understands can really help. But who is that person? How do you find them? Where do you even start? Talkspace.

Talkspace makes it easy to get the support you need. With Talkspace, you can go online, answer a few questions about your preferences, and be matched with a therapist. And because you'll meet your therapist online, you don't have to take time off work or arrange childcare. You'll meet on your schedule, wherever you feel most at ease. If you're depressed, stressed, struggling with a relationship,

or if you want some counseling for you and your partner, or just need a little extra one-on-one support, Talkspace is here for you. Plus, Talkspace works with most major insurers, and most insured members have a $0 copay. No insurance? No problem. Now get $80 off of your first month with promo code SPACE80 when you go to Talkspace.com. Match with a licensed therapist today at Talkspace.com.

Save $80 with code SPACE80 at Talkspace.com. Thanks for watching! Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, November 25th, 2024. Scott Ritter is here with us on just how close are we to nuclear war. 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. Scott Ritter, welcome here, my dear friend. What is the significance, militarily and geopolitically of the Ereshnik missile that Russia fired at Ukraine late last week? Well, let's put it this way. If we take a look at, you know, from a conventional standpoint, the Tomahawk missile, the storm shadow missile, the scout missile, the Taurus missile, all these missiles that we, we in the West, you know, tout as deep strike missiles. These are, let's just call them pinpricks and irritant.

The Ereshnik is Mike Tyson's strongest punch. It's a knockout every time it lands. It's qualitatively far beyond anything the West has. It's the most powerful conventional weapon on the planet. It has more destructive capacity. We haven't even been able to calculate the destructive capacity of it fully. Theodore Postol of MIT is in the process of doing that. But the technologies that are being used, the physics that are involved are things that are beyond the imagination in the West.

We just haven't thought about it and how to do this in this manner. The Russians have hit us with a unique weapon that we can't shoot down, we can't interdict, and when it hits us, it kills us. And for all those out there saying, well, it's just an experimental missile, there's no need to worry about it. I'm here to tell you right now that it may be an experimental design, but the components of this missile already exist. Many of them are in serial production. Most of them have been produced

to at least pilot level production. And the Russians have the ability to immediately assemble dozens of these missiles. And if they put into serial production, they'll be able to produce, you know, close to 100 of these missiles per year. But as we speak, Russia probably has somewhere in the order of, you know, 12 to 25 Ereshniks available. That's 12 to 25 locations in Europe that will cease to exist if Russia fires this missile. Was the existence of this missile a total surprise until they fired it the other day? No. U.S. intelligence is actually very, very good. The problem, and we've had this conversation before, the we cannot acknowledge the strength of Russia, because to acknowledge the truth strength of Russia would automatically expose the policies we're seeking to implement regarding Russia in Ukraine to be doomed to fail.

So our politicians are saying we must succeed. So give me the intelligence that shows that we can succeed. Even if it's false intelligence. 100. Even can succeed. Even if it's false intelligence. 100, or even, of course, if it's false intelligence, because that's what senior intelligence management is doing right now. When I say false, they cook the books. It's not as though they're lying. For instance, Mr. President, the Russians are preparing to launch an experimental missile system that we've never seen before. And we believe this is a one-off. So it's fired and the president goes, damn, that was pretty powerful.

But it was just the one, right? There's no more. It's not like they have a whole bunch of them. So they're bluffing. See, that's falsified intelligence. But give me another example. Do you remember the headlines that came out shortly after this? That the Pentagon and the White House and NATO were paralyzed in fear because they didn't know until the last second, until the missile hit, whether it was a nuclear weapon or not. That's just a straight out lie. We knew right from the start it wasn't a nuclear weapon. What the public's not being told is that 36 hours before this missile was launched, the Russians rolled it out on the launch site at Kapustin Yar, range number four, I believe, one of the most heavily monitored spots because that's where the Russians do their missile testing. So our entire intelligence collection capabilities for this are directed at Kapustin Yar. They're already there. We put it out there and we oriented it towards Ukraine, 36 hours in advance. So the Russians were saying, we're doing

this. That gave us enough time to get any other assets available, positioned to follow. There's certain nuclear protocols that are involved. Protocols are involved when there's a nuclear weapon involved. And we know this. I'm just telling you that somebody used to do this for a living there are things that you're looking for that that either are happening or aren't happening and as the ructions prepared this missile for launch uh none of those protocols kicked in so every intelligence analyst is looking at saying this is a conventional warhead because we're not getting these units we're not getting this happening we're getting this this security isn't there. This isn't happening, et cetera. We knew it was a conventional thing even beforehand.

Now when it comes time to launch, you know, the Russians called in 30 minutes advance. We're going to fire. They did that because there's a legal requirement to do. But we already knew they were going to fire. We've been tracking it almost real time, communications, the whole thing. The missiles launched. And, again, without getting into too many details, let's just say that we have the ability right above Kapustin Yar and on the

entire line of flight to gather the most detailed intelligence about this missile imaginable, including high resolution photographs, radar imagery, the whole thing. We're tracking this thing, filming this thing. We know everything. So we know what this missile can do. We know what this missile can't do. We know everything about this missile. But that truth is inconvenient because the truth about this missile isn't what the White House wants to hear, isn't what NATO wants to hear.

And so this information is being suppressed. But the, you know, the reality is we, we know everything about this missile because the Russians made sure that we could, because it's in the Russians interest that we understand what's happening here. It's not in Russia's interest to have us confused. It's in Russia's interest at this point in time to make sure we know damn well what's happening here. They just deployed a system that we will never be able to shoot down. And it's a system that will hit its target and will destroy its target. And there's nothing we can do to stop that. And there's not a site in Europe that's safe from this missile. This missile can take out targets that previously

only could have been taken out by nuclear weapons. Before they fired it, did we know how fast it was? And did we know how destructive it was? I would say that my understanding is that this missile makes use of available technologies and some unique technologies. But generally speaking, for instance, the first stage of this missile appears to be related to an ICBM, an intercontinental ballistic missile that's already in development by the Russians and has been flight tested on several occasions in 2023 and in 2024. um and Ukrainians are giving a name to this they call it Decatur I mean Cedar and that means they know what the missile is uh and so again as I said when they when it's test fired we're fine we know the performance characteristics of this first stage we've been tracking it we know how fast it could go so we know exactly what was going to happen here as to the warhead um that

i don't know um if that warhead has ever been tested in a in a live fire like this before um you know that that i can we do know that the warhead dispensing mechanism uh which is this is unique because normally you'll have a missile and you'll have what's called Mervs a multiple independent retard reentry vehicles and so the the missile will fire and then the bus will come across come off and then it'll turn and then a release warheads as it's going what happened with this is that instead of having a bus with warheads attached it has six miniature missiles on the top that will fire on their own and in in in in hyper velocity down and then they'll release the war the the munitions which are six of these unique uh

non-explosive exotic alloy systems that will super heat because of the heat that heat in itself is a weapon because it allows it when it impacts to create a crater penetrate deep burn combust uh the whole thing um it's just a unique weapon and we knew that exists because the russians have declared it in their tech and their technology we and the report is that this missile makes use of that aspect of it. So there's a lot that we knew about this missile because we monitor Russian missile testing. I don't know about the exact characteristics of the warhead, the hazel. If you look at a hazelnut tree and you take a look at the way the fruit hangs down, and then you compare that with

how these uh sub munitions came down now you know where they get the name hazel because it's an exact replication of uh of of what visually what the uh hazel tree looks like um but we we knew a lot about this missile going in we know a lot about the russians uh i i think politically though we never thought they'd fire it this is the first first time. This is what's amazing. It's the first time a strategic system like this has ever been fired in combat. I mean, that's a psychological barrier. Nobody ever wanted to cross that barrier. This is the first time that a strategic system has been fired in combat. This is a huge event because now Russia has done it and they're ready to do it again. I don't think the West is caught up to what exactly happened because this is literally a game changer. And if we don't respect it, we're going to be hit harder and harder and harder.

Is there any question in your mind, Scott, but that this was fired in response to the authorizations by President Biden and Prime Minister Starmer for the use of ATAKOMs and storm shadows landing inside of Russia. We know that this missile was developed as a result of the decision by the United States to deploy intermediate nuclear forces or intermediate range missiles, nuclear capable to Germany. The Dark Eagle system, we've already created a brigade. We've deployed some forward systems. The missile's not ready yet. We also deployed a containerized system for training in Denmark that has the ability to fire intermediate range missiles and russia said if you do this we will respond so in uh july of this year this tells you how fast is uh putin said go forward and the the areshnik then was put into development it's designed to take out of the dark eagle system and the containerized system it's

designed to be able to preemptively strike these systems before they can launch against uh the united states so that's what the weapon was designed to do um but you know those weapons aren't deployed yet but what happened is that we we started using storm shadow and we started using um uh the attackums to attack russia uh and uh the weapon available to respond and the russians warned us if you go back remember that they're there they had military people and political people saying we will use a weapon that has never been used before that has unimaginable destructive power beyond anybody's imagination and everybody's looking at going are they talked about

thermal barrack warheads are they talking about nuclear some sort of special nuclear thing nope they're talking about the hazel. But there's no doubt that this weapon was used because of what we did, what we authorized Ukrainians to do. Le Monde, the Paris publication, reported this afternoon, Paris Time, that President Macron and Prime Minister Starmer are, I don't know if it's going to blow you away if they're this crazy, are discussing sending troops to Ukraine. At the same time, Admiral Rob Bauer, B-A-U-E-R, chair of the NATO Military Committee, said today NATO is discussing preemptive precision strikes on Russian territory. Are these people crazy? The short answer is yes.

My understanding is that Starmer and Macron are talking about deploying troops in a post-Trump pullout scenario, meaning that if Trump becomes president and orders America to cut aid to Ukraine, that Britain and France would step up and deploy troops. So I think it's a bluff to Trump saying that, you know, don't push, but they're not talking about deploying these troops now. First of all, France can't deploy the troops. They're not ready and the British don't have any troops to deploy. So it's farcical. It's purely a political move. The more dangerous one is the talk of NATO preemption.

Why is this the dangerous one? Because the Russian nuclear doctrine that was just published by Vladimir Putin, one of the conditions for using nuclear weapons is if NATO countries fire conventional precision strike weapons and hit Russian strategic targets, command and control, logistics, communications, etc., that that would trigger a nuclear response and so when you have nato saying we're going to do just that preemptively which means that we're not going to wait for the russians to trigger it we're going to hit them preemptively um that means that russia now has to evaluate every action as a potential initiator for such a preemptive strike which means the the next time Ukraine fires an attack missile or storm shadow missile, the Russians have to ask themselves, is this the beginning of this NATO preemptive strike? And therefore, if it is, we don't need to wait for all of it to come.

We're going to go ahead and launch everything in response to take them out, including nuclear weapons. This is the suicidal aspect of it. It's just, it's crazy. What do you think Russia would attack? Would they attack the new American base in Poland? Would they attack Paris? Would they attack London? Well, it depends. If it's nuclear weapons, then it's going to be, it's not going to be a decisive attack that takes out strategic targets would include capital cities, major military bases, major industrial locations. It would be absolutely devastating. It would be the end of the world. I do believe that the Russians are prepared, and if this thing escalates, the anti-ballistic missile system that the United States installed in Poland will be destroyed as one of the first targets outside of Ukraine to be struck. Russia's already indicated that that's on their target list. And this new Eretzianic missile is purpose-built to destroy that. That won't last a second.

So I do believe that they'll hit those kind of targets. I think the airfield in Romania that France would deploy out of will be struck. Romanian ports will be struck. Polish depots holding American military equipment will be struck. This is the reality. And when I say struck, I mean gone, finished, nothing left. Would Admiral Bauer, who sounds American but apparently is Danish, would Admiral Bauer have made a statement like he did today without express authorization from Washington? He can. He's the director of the military committee of NATO. So he could have it. But the interesting thing is the military committee can't really convene without a U.S. military presence there. Both the Secretary General, both Stoltenberg

and now Rutte and now Bauer, they all are guilty of, remember, half these statements that are being made are being made for the benefit of the United States. Because NATO, Bauer, Rutte are scared that the United States because these statements are meant to put political pressure on the United States to talk about, you know, what will happen if the United States withdraws from NATO. Basically, they're trying to paint the darkest, most dire picture possible, you know, to complicate a decision politically for Donald Trump to withdraw. But there's no doubt in my mind that he made the statement without clearing the United States, because this statement is being made to influence Donald Trump. Is there an American four-star named Christopher Caroli still involved, or has he been replaced by Admiral Bauer? Oh, no, no. If Admiral Bauer tried to replace Christopher Caroli, he'd get a bullet square

in the head. Christopher Caroli can't be replaced. He's a personalized American. And no Danish admiral is going to even come close. He won't approach him without permission. Who's the commander in chief in Europe of NATO forces? Christopher Cavoli. I'm sorry. Bauer is the head of NATO's military committee. They're a policy making uh group uh but yeah but understand that uh nato policy makers have no power they make policy but then that those decisions have to go to the sovereign states that comprise nato and then the parliaments have to approve budgets and all this

so bauer can say we're going to develop precision strike. And then, you know, but who? Germany? They're going to do the Taurus? They have to get the money to do Taurus. They have to develop it. They're going to develop an independent capability? Who's going to do that? Germany?

France? England? He's just saying words that have no meaning. In your view, Scott, is there a counterinsurgency in the deep state against Trump to cause the Ukraine war to explode in a catastrophic way on Trump's watch, not on Biden's watch? I actually have a different point of view. I think Donald Trump played the American people. He ran on a platform of no war. He actually got his son and RFK Jr. to write an op-ed piece that was published in The Hill that said they want to get out of Ukraine and they want to prevent a nuclear conflict. But now his choice for the national security advisor is speaking after selection, which means the words he is saying have been approved by the Trump team.

He's saying there's no gap, no space between what Biden's doing and what we're going to do. He said exactly that yesterday on national television. I have spoken with Jake Sullivan. I have met with Jake Sullivan. We're on the same team. We view this international threats to the U.S. to the extent that there are any precisely the same. And he wouldn't make that decision. And the Ukraine war in 24 hours.

Is that even thinkable? No. Now what we found out is that, you know, Sebastian Gorka now, I mean, the ultimate lunatic. Sebastian Gorka is like Lindsey Graham with a brain. Lindsey Graham has a brain. Sebastian Gorka doesn't. Gorka is now saying things like, you know, if Putin doesn't back down and yield to Trump, then they're going to open the floodgates and just flood ukraine with weapons

um so this isn't about people trying to sabotage covertly trump has picked people and empowered them to say things that clearly show that that's the intent that's his direction um telling me that trump's intent all along was to use ukraine to dominate Putin, which would make it the same intent that Joe Biden had. I don't want to believe that, but that's what the facts show. You don't pick a man as your national security advisor, then authorize him to go on TV and say there's no difference between what Jake Sullivan and Tony Blinken are doing and what we're going to do. Sebastian Gorka says we're going to double down on stupid and flood the weapons. And now you have to wonder what Marco Rubio is going to say because he believes the same thing, all this hardline

nonsense. He has surrounded himself with people that are pushing for a war with Russia. The only person that right now is in a position who isn't pushing for war is Tulsi Gabbard, and she's been silent. Here's a recent clip from Sebastian Gorka. I'll give one tip away that the president has mentioned. He will say to that murderous former KGB colonel, that thug who runs the Russian Federation, you will negotiate now, or the aid that we have given to Ukraine thus far will look like peanuts. That's how he will force those gentlemen to come to an arrangement that stops the bloodshed. This is more bellicose than anything Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, or Joe Biden have ever said in the past three and a half years? Do you remember when Biden, someone asked him, is Trump a murderer or something like

it? Trump's a, you know, or is Putin a killer? Stone cold killer. Looked him in the eyes. I told him he was a killer. And then everybody, you know, he had to, that haunted his uh you know his ability to meet with putin you know he had to work around that because i mean how do you meet with a leader that you've called that and so now here's a guy that claims to speak for donald trump calling the

russian president a bug there's no way vladimir putin's taking a phone call from donald trump with that that literally trump needs donald trump you're listening, get rid of these people and bring in a Russian expert. You need an honest-to-God Russian expert. I'll tell you what. I'll volunteer for that job. I don't want to be paid by you. I don't want to be on your administration. But you better damn well listen to me for 24 hours and understand what's really happening in Russia today, what's really going on in the

Kremlin, because everything you're doing is counterproductive. Putin will not talk to you. He will not entertain you with this mindset. Putin is not going to approach you from a position of weakness, but you know that already, Donald, because you met with Putin in Helsinki, where he strode out to the stage like the cock of the walk, and you strode out like a beat puppy, because he is not a guy to be intimidated. Why the walk and you strode out like a beat puppy because he is not a guy to be intimidated why the hell are you letting these people talk like this right now this is the exact opposite approach you need to be taking if you want to have peaceful coexistence with russia russia has won the war in ukraine there's nothing donald trump can do to reverse

that literally nothing sebastian gorkin knows nothing about american defense industry nothing about production defense production rates he doesn't know what the stockpiles are he doesn't understand that we don't have anything left to give i'd like uh admiral uh the admiral in the pacific fleet to come out and talk to sebastian gorka and pound it through his nose and moore's code about how the fact that you can't give ukraine anything more because you're drawing down on the weapons we need to fight the Chinese if there's ever a war. If you give it to the Ukrainians, we have nothing. I mean, I'm not advocating for a war with China,

but I'm saying that if your job is to defend ourselves from a potential conflict in China and you give away all the weapons, we can't defend. Gorka doesn't know what he's talking about. Is Donald Trump ignorant of everything you just said, or was he deceptive with the American people and intended this all along? Both. Both. Donald Trump is ignorant about Russia. He doesn't know anything about Russia. And I'm sorry, Donald, that's the truth. You surrounded yourself with people who know nothing about Russia. They are Putin whisperers who wrote PhD theses about how Vladimir Putin is a brutal

dictator, et cetera. Why don't you meet with somebody who knows the truth about Russia and can tell you the reality of it? Because you need to have that foundation of truth to make good policy. But his ignorance also is, he, remember, this is a man who said, I can pick up the phone and make this war end in 24 hours. But that was always premised on his ability to threaten vladimir putin and then he walked away from it he said all the magic words about i don't want a nuclear war of nuclear and everything well if you don't want a nuclear war then why are you letting sebastian gorka speak like that why are you letting your national security advisor speak like that why aren't you stepping up right now and slowing down the insane rush towards nuclear war that the by

administration is doing the american people voted on nove November 5th to put a president in office who said he will get out of Ukraine and he won't promote a nuclear war with Russia. And now we have our sitting president who's doing just that in disregard to the American people. Why isn't the person the American people selected stepping up and saying, stop, that's not what the American people want. And then tell the world that's not what we're going to do. But instead, he sends his national security advisor out who says is exactly what we're going to do. He lied to the American people. He lied to us.

Here is President Putin on Friday afternoon, very methodically and calmly explaining the Oreshnik missile system. Cut number one. The Oreshnik missile system isn't simply an efficient hypersonic weapon system. Thanks to its power, particularly in the case of its massive use, in combination with other precision long-range weapons that Russia has, the results of its use against enemy targets would be comparable in effect and its power to strategic weapons.

Although, in fact, the Oreshnik system is not a strategic weapon. In any case, it is not an intercontinental ballistic missile. No one in the world has such weapons yet, as we know, as you know. Sooner or later, other leading countries will also get them. We are aware that they are already under development. But this will not happen tomorrow, or in a year, or even two years. While we have this system now, I will add that there are no means of counteracting such a missile.

No means of intercepting it. In the world today, they don't exist. And I will emphasize once again, we will continue testing the latest system. Considering the special strength of this weapon, its power, it will be put into service in the strategic missile forces. In addition to the Oreshnik system, several similar systems are currently being developed in Russia for further testing. Based on the results of the testing, this weapon will also go into serial production. That is, we are developing a whole line of medium and shorter range systems. The new missile could be fitted with nuclear and

conventional warheads. It can reach targets across the entirety of Europe. Wow. I've been watching Vladimir Putin for years. Right. He is the most stoic professional person, especially in that environment. Judge, did you see his face? He couldn't contain the smile. Yeah. He was sitting there smiling. He was speaking because, I mean, he knows. He knows that.

I mean, he's like the guy that knew because he kept warning the west this is going to happen this is going to happen they go you're bluffing you're bluffing you're bluffing you're bluffing he's like no no no this is going to happen now he's out there like i told you it was going to happen and and you could see the smile i've never seen him that close to losing his composure uh that way because you know he's a very serious man but the the absolute joy that he felt being able to prove the to the world that russia is the most powerful nation on the planet and there's nothing the world can do about it this missile can't be beat can't be touched and it exists and the the west is just struggling to figure out what to do about it

because they don't know what to do. They're afraid because they know they can't stop it. And believe me, the West knows what happened to the USEMASH facility. They know. Here's a statement that Trump made during the campaign, which is decidedly the impression he wanted to give, but not the impression that Mike Waltz and Sebastian Gorka are giving. We have never been closer to World War III than we are today under Joe Biden.

A global conflict between nuclear armed powers would mean death and destruction on a scale unmatched in human history. It would be nuclear Armageddon. Was he just reading something or did he understand what he was talking about? No, no. Somebody wrote that statement. He didn't write that statement. Somebody wrote that statement. He's reading it. He doesn't understand the policy implications of that statement he doesn't understand uh from a policy position of what would have to be done look if he wants to do that you know when he says the world is in the most dangerous situation to the entire history that means we're in a more dangerous situation than the cuban missile crisis which previously was the most dangerous time we've ever seen you know during

the cuban missile crisis jfk could speak to nikita khrushchev and was speaking to nikita khrushchev which previously was the most dangerous time we've ever seen. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK could speak to Nikita Khrushchev and was speaking to Nikita Khrushchev. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Russian ambassador would visit the White House and have conversations. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the American ambassador would visit Khrushchev and have conversations. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, there were multiple venues for diplomatic interaction that allowed us to have communication that allowed us to avoid a decisive conflict because we were talking to the Soviets we were able to come up with the compromises that prevented a nuclear war today we aren't talking to the Russians Anthony Blinken is not picking up the phone and calling Lavrov Biden is not talking to Putin nobody's talking anybody Anatoly Antonov, the ambassador to the Russian ambassador to the United States, went home last month and hasn't been replaced because nobody talked to him for seven years.

So here we are in a time when we have to be talking to the Russians. We have no other choice but to be talking to the Russians. We're not. That just shows you that Trump doesn't know what he's talking about because if he's going to make that statement, he then has to understand the implications of that statement. And therefore, he has to understand what has to be done to prevent the concept of nuclear war from happening. We're not talking to the Russians. This is a very dangerous situation. You know, he needs to start off, Trump, by saying, I will immediately, upon being sworn in, cease the American policy that seeks the strategic defeat of Russia. We policy that seeks the strategic defeat of Russia.

We are not seeking the strategic defeat of Russia. That is not our goal. That is not our objective. Well, you'd have to fire Mike Walts and Sebastian Gorka. Well, or just, or make them quit. I mean, you know, that's the other option is just when Mike Walts comes in

and says, Mr. President, he says, ah, no, no, Mike, go out and sit in the lobby. I'm talking to Scott Ritter right now. We should be so fortunate, Scott. But, you know, the fact is, Trump, that is, and I'll say it again in case anybody on there from the Trump campaign, if you want to succeed with Russia right now, you don't violate the Logan Act. But if you come out and with Russia right now, you don't violate the Logan Act. But if you come out, you make the following statement. I'm speaking to the Russian people and I'm speaking to the Russian leadership. On day one, I will sign an executive order that says that the policy in the

United States regarding Russia is no longer premised on the notion of achieving a strategic defeat of Russia and Ukraine. The United States is not seeking the strategic defeat of Russia. The United States is seeking to find the mechanism for peaceful coexistence with Russia. And that's what will be guiding our relations for the next four years. He makes that statement. It is a game changer. The Russians will sit up and listen, and they'll be in a better position to make compromises that Trump may want them to make. But if you think they're going to do anything after Sebastian Gorka called President Putin a bug, or after Walt said that they're hand in glove with Jake Sullivan's policies, that is, Russia will never talk to you.

It's just the way it is. And if you don't talk, Mr. President, I want to bring it back full circle, if you don't talk to the Russians, we're die because it is the most dangerous situation we've ever faced and the only way we got out of the Cuban Missile Crisis was by talking to the Russians based upon mutual respect you better learn to respect the damn Russians Mr president because they don't respect you right now Will this Ereshnik be used to protect Iran if Israel and the United States attack it? I don't think so. I don't think so. First of all, I think Iran has its own strategic deterrent, and we know what it is. There's nothing we can do to stop that strategic carrier from being fired.

They have hundreds of Fatah 1 and Fatah 2 missiles, thousands of other missiles. The Israeli missile defense shield doesn't work. And Israel will cease to exist. And they don't need Russian or anything else like that. If you took a look at the, the interesting thing here is if you take a look at the Iranian missiles as they came in, it appeared that they had their own version of the Erezhinik. They had their, they didn't have the, the, the, the, the missiles that, you know, the, the post-boost vehicles that are self-propelled. But when you take a look at their missiles coming in, you see the warheads break up and then you see them break into additional clusters.

These are kinetic kill weapons. So the Iranians have high technology, better technology than anything we have. I can tell you their warheads are 10 times better than the warheads we have. Their missiles are very good. They don't need the aeration. Scott Ritter, thank you very much, my dear friend. You have presented a view of Trump, which I haven't seen anywhere, not even from your colleagues on the show, but you presented it as you do everything with logic, with facts, and with concern for the security of the United States.

I love you. I hope you're wrong. I hope Trump was not engaged in a material deception. But from the way you present this, it now appears that he has. Now, I'll just say the last thing I'll say is Donald Trump, call me. We can save this. We can salvage this. But if you keep following Gorka and Michael Waltz, it's over. It's over. Thank you, Scott. All the best, my dear friend. We'll talk to you again soon. If I don't talk to you before Thursday,

because you never know what's going to happen, we may need you. The happiest of Thanksgivings to you and your beautiful family. Thanks. I just bought a 12-pound turkey, so hopefully I can master the cooking of it on Thursday. I'm sure you will. All the best.

Thanks. Wow. More on this coming up. All the best. Thanks. Wow. More on this coming up at five o'clock Eastern with Professor Jeffrey Sachs. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Thanks for watching!