Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter: Putin Up Close!

Episode Date: February 12, 2024

Scott Ritter: Putin Up Close!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 Friday, February 9th, 2024. Scott Ritter joins us again for his second visit with us this week in light of the Tucker Carlson, President Vladimir Putin interview, which was released last night. Scott has graciously agreed as the person that I know who knows the most about Russia, the most about the Russian government, the most about the relationship between the President of Russia, the Russian government, and the Russian people of anybody I know. And I'm deeply grateful that my friend has come back to give us this time and to give us his thoughts. Scott, a pleasure as always.

Welcome here. So let's start out with the concept, the idea of a controversial, politically aligned American journalist. I know him very well and used to work with him. You know him. Interviewing the president of Russia in wartime in an American election year. He's been called everything from Hanoi Jane to a useful idiot. To me, it was courageous, heroic, gifted, brilliant, and timely. But before we get into what they talked about and what President Putin said and the impressions he made on you and what you think the impressions were he made on the American people. Talk about the concept and the idea. Well, Judge, I think you'll appreciate my take on this because it's founded in constitutional law and Supreme Court precedent. Let's just assume for a fact that Tucker Carlson's an idiot, that there's nothing good going to come out of his mouth, and that Vladimir Putin is just a pure

Russian propagandist trying to manipulate everything in America. Let's just say that everything the detractors of this interview say is true. Is the American way to suppress this, to shut it down, to silence it? No. And how do we know this? Well, I think there was a Supreme Court justice named Louis Brandeis, who in 1927, in a very important decision, I think it was the United States versus Michigan, the details of the case don't matter. But what he said is that basically, in short, you know, the solution to bad ideas is better ideas. And that rather than silence people, give them a chance to air what they're saying so that you can counter it with free speech. You can counter it with better ideas, with facts, with dialogue. The best way to defeat bad ideas is to expose bad ideas to sunlight and then counter them so that people agree with you and

not them. Be convinced in the strength of your own argument. So those people who are seeking to shut Tucker down, that's the most un-American thing you can imagine. If you don't agree with Tucker, let him speak. Let Putin speak and then take them apart. Then demonstrate the strength of your ways, that you have better ideas. The people that seek the silence, Tucker, are saying we don't have a counter to it. We're afraid of what Vladimir Putin is saying because we don't know how to respond. Because maybe what he's saying is the fact-based truth. And now we will be exposed as the fantasy, the purveyors of fantasy. We will be exposed as the people with the bad ideas. Tucker Carlson did the American people a great service by going to

Russia and engaging in this interview. You know, I couldn't agree with you more. And of course, I deeply appreciate your reference to the Constitution and Supreme Court history. Some of his critics are crazy. I mean, it's one thing for Hillary Clinton to call him a useful idiot. It's another thing for Matt Van Dyke to call him Hanoi Jane. The prince of the neocons, Bill Kristol, said he should not be allowed back in the United States. Why? Because they want to silence him, because he's afraid, they're afraid he will challenge them and they cannot live up to the challenge. What is your view of how President Putin came off as a person, as a human being, as a knowledgeable, in-command leader,

in command of history and in command of the difficulties of the moment? Well, understand that, and you know Tucker Carl, you know, he's the consummate professional. Tucker did not share his questions with Vladimir Putin. There's no doubt that Vladimir Putin studied Tucker, studied, you know, what Tucker said in the lead up, anything he said about Russia, and that the president came in prepared. But he spoke without notes. And he came in and he spoke about the history of Russia. Again, without notes, and he knows the history of Russia. And it's more important than just being a professor, you know, spouting off dates and times and facts. This isn't coming from the brain, although Vladimir Putin has a very good brain.

This was coming from the heart. What Vladimir Putin has a very good brain. This was coming from the heart. What Vladimir Putin did in this interview is open up his chest, take his heart out and say, this is who I am. This is what I believe in. This is what guides me. This is what shapes the decisions I make. He spoke about the Russian soul. I've been speaking about the Russian soul for years.

When I went to Russia back in May and June, I said it was a journey of discovery of the Russian soul, because anybody who knows anything about Russia knows that in order to understand it, you have to grasp the Russian soul. And Putin talked about that. Now, I don't know if Tucker Carlson got it. To be honest, I think Tucker was a little unprepared for this. Who could be prepared for this? Who could be prepared for a Russian president opening up his chest, taking his heart out and saying, this is the soul of Russia. This is my soul. But Tucker gave the president of Russia a chance to do that. And I'm hoping, praying that an American audience will respect what the Russian president said. You don't have to agree with it, but at least you got an insight into how this man operates, how this man thinks. You got to see his eyes. You got to see his facial expressions.

You got to hear the tenor of his voice. And this is important. This isn't about reading words on a page. This is about seeing a man interact with another man over issues of great complexity. And I think the Russian president did himself and the world a great service. Do you think that part of President Putin's goal, and we can only speculate as to his goal, was from his words and his facial expressions and his body language, was to appeal to the American public. There's no doubt about it. Look, why did Tucker Carlson get picked? He's not a Russian expert.

And frankly speaking, you know, he speaks about Russia today in a very positive manner. There's a risk of bringing in a dilettante and having an interview like that. And I think halfway through the interview, you could see Putin's face going, oh God, does this guy get it? I'm supposed to be having a conversation with this guy and he's asking, you know, throw away stupid American questions. But they worked through it together. I give Tucker full credit for that. But what Putin got was an audience. Okay. Other people could have come in and given him 400,000, maybe a million, 2 million. Tucker Carlson, I think I let last numbers. I look at a hundred

million people watch that interview and many of them are Americans. And so Vladimir Putin spoke not only to America, but to the West through Tucker Carlson interview, Vladimir Putin was able to put some fundamental ideas out there. The primary of which was, I'm ready to talk. I'm here. Talk to me. You know, the door isn't shut. Open the door. And hopefully enough people will see that, start calling their congressional representatives saying, why aren't we talking to Putin? Putin gave ammunition to people who can now ask questions about, hey, what really happened? Did the CIA really try to fund a Wahhabist fundamentalist in Chechnya to break it away? Did the CIA really orchestrate the Maidan coup d'etat? You know, did we really interfere with the peace process?

Did Boris Johnson really shut down a peace treaty that would have allowed all these territories to stay as part of Ukraine and save 500,000 lives? Is this true? Is this true? Ask questions. That's what a responsible citizen is supposed to do, hold his or her elected representative accountable for what they say and do in their name. Vladimir Putin empowered anybody who watched this interview, any American citizen, to start thinking, gave them some facts to start asking questions. It doesn't mean that you agree with Vladimir Putin, but what it says is maybe it's time you hear from our side about what we're doing to try and prevent a war with Russia, because Putin did talk about that. He talked

about the potential of conflict. Here's two interesting cuts. We're going to play them back to back. T1, Chris. So this is Tucker Carlson asking President Putin if he would invade Poland under any circumstances. And then this is President Putin talking about just what you talked about right now, the agreement in Turkey, which was disrupted by Mr. Johnson. We all know who that is. Can you imagine a scenario where you sent Russian troops to Poland? Only in one case, if Poland attacks Russia. Why? Because we have no interest in Poland, Latvia or anywhere else. Why would we do that?

We simply don't have any interest. It's just threat-mongering. So, I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding what you're saying. I don't think that I am. I think you're saying you want a negotiated settlement to what's happening in Ukraine. Right. And we made it. We prepared the huge document in Istanbul that was initialed by the head of the Ukrainian delegation. He affixed his signature to some of the provisions, not to all of it.

He put his signature and then he himself said, we were ready to sign it and the war would have been over long ago, 18 months ago. However, Prime Minister Johnson came, talked us out of it and we missed that chance. The agreement we've all talked about, which Bill O'Reilly, another friend of mine and former colleague, as well as a lot of neocons have denied ever existed, it was so gratifying to hear him give those two answers, Scott. Why would I invade Poland? Only if they invade us, and I don't expect that. Why is this war going on? Because the West interfered with an agreement. He held his fingers up like this, showing him at an inch apart, showing a very thick, he described it as detailed, it probably was a lot of geographic terms in there, a very thick and profound agreement initialed by President Zelensky's own negotiators until the West said no. One of the great tragedies of the modern era was their

interference with that deal, Scott. And the price that Ukraine is going to pay is unimaginable. You know, there was a reason why Vladimir Putin gave the history lesson that he did, and you had to listen to his words very carefully. This is why I don't think Tucker was up to the task, because he wasn't aware of the history and he wasn't aware of the importance. But Vladimir Putin continuously talked about throughout the history how the right bank of the Dnieper, and remember, the way you look at the Dnieper River isn't by north and south, left and right. It's by the flow of the river. So flowing down the right bank is the West Bank. He said,

traditionally, you could call that Ukraine, but everything to the left bank is Russia. He said it was new Russia back then, and it's new Russia today. And when he spoke about how this conflict will play out, what he's telling the world is that this war will end when Russia has control of new Russia. That's Odessa, Mykolaiv, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov. Vladimir Putin all but said that last night. Nobody picked up on it. But he also saw in his eyes, he said, it didn't need to be this way. Historically, this is how it's going to end because those lands are Russia and we are going to control Russia when this is

done. We can never again allow this to be controlled by Ukraine and influenced by the West. Russia will be Russia, but it didn't need to be that way, he said. This peace treaty that he signed, a thick document, would have given Kherson, Zaporizhia to Ukraine, would have put Donbass in the mix. The only thing that wouldn't be Ukraine is Crimea, and it is explained because it is Russia and the Ukrainians threatened it. But the Russian president put a lot of information out there last night. And if people would just listen to what he says, there's two things. One, the tragedy of Ukraine is going to be great. Ukraine is going to end up losing nearly 50% of its territory because of this war. And that's because of Boris Johnson and only because of Boris Johnson. But two, Russia doesn't want a broader war. Russia wants this war to end. As he said at the end,

it will take time, but the Russians and Ukrainians will repair their relation because they are the same people. I want to play another clip where Tucker Carlson asks President Putin if he would talk to President Biden. But before we get there, just for a little comic relief, here is a former Secretary of State of the United States commenting on this interview. Tell me if you think she comes across in a dignified or secretary of state manner. What does that tell you about Tucker Carlson and right-wing media and also Vladimir Putin? Well, it shows me what I think we've all known.

He's what's called a useful idiot. I mean, if you actually read translations of what's being said on Russian media, they make fun of him. I mean, he's like a puppy dog. You know, he somehow has, after having been fired from so many outlets in the United States, he, I would not be surprised if he emerges with a contract with a Russian outlet. You know, an idiot calling somebody else a useful idiot is the epitome of irony. The only difference is that there's nothing useful about Hillary. She and I'm getting cheap here. I apologize for that.

But I don't but I don't blame you. I mean, she came across as a psychopath in that interview. Diplomacy is diplomacy. It's the art of sitting down with people that you inherently disagree with and trying to find a compromise that avoids conflict. There's nothing diplomatic about her. She's not a good representative of the United States of America. And, you know, it shows, you know, you don't have to agree with Vladimir Putin to understand the absolute necessity of sitting down and listening to Vladimir Putin. Tucker Carlson is doing the work that should be done by Anthony Blinken, that should be done by Joe Biden, that should have been done by Hillary Clinton, but wasn't. So if Tucker Carlson isn't sitting down talking to Vladimir Putin, who is? And what are the consequences of not getting Vladimir Putin's ideas, words into the mainstream so that American people can be empowered by them? Not because empowerment doesn't mean that we agree. Empowerment means that we know, we have insight, we can make informed judgments. Tucker Carlson was doing a better job than Hillary Clinton ever did.

Here's the question where Tucker Carlson asks him if he would talk to Joe Biden. He thinks for a minute before he answers. It's a very steely answer. Remember, Joe Biden has called Vladimir Putin a killer. Joe Biden has dispatched more than $100 billion in military equipment to kill young Russian boys. Joe Biden has dispatched the CIA to destabilize the government of which Vladimir Putin is the head. But here is his answer about what it would take for them to have a conversation. And so why don't you just call Biden and say, let's work this out? What's there to work out? It's very simple. I repeat, we have contacts through various agencies. I will tell you what we are saying on this matter and what we are conveying to the US leadership.

If you really want to stop fighting, you need to stop supplying weapons. It will be over within a few weeks. That's it. And then we can agree on some terms. Before you do that, stop. What's easier? Why would I call him? What should I talk to him about? Or beg him for what? And what messages do you get back?

You're going to deliver such and such weapons to Ukraine? Oh, I'm afraid, I'm afraid, please don't? What is their time? That was, in my view, fabulous and probably resonated so well with the West, that little bit of sarcasm and humor at the end. Well, I mean, there's a lot of people who labor under the false assumption that we can intimidate Russia, that we can make Russia back down only if we double down. You hear it in Congress all the time. All we have to do is give more money to Ukraine. Let the brave Ukrainian soldiers go forth and fight and sacrifice in our

name. Let them die. No Americans have to die. They're killing Russians. This is a good thing. And somehow this is going to cause Vladimir Putin and the Russian people to become intimidated and say, we're going to back. You know what gives the Russian president strength? It's not just his own belief, his own value system. It's the absolute knowledge that the Russian people back him up. They believe the same thing. I just got back from Russia, Judge. I was there in May and June. I was there in December and January. Every Russian I met, when you look them in the eye, you come back with the absolute certainty that these people are committed to victory because they believe in the cause. And when you have a population like that, and you have a leader like Putin, understand that when Putin is speaking, he's not speaking about him personally. He's speaking as the president of a united Russia. What is there to talk about? You're sending guns to Ukrainians to kill Russians. What is there to talk about? We're going to call you up and beg you to stop doing this? Not on your life. You want to

stop this war? Stop sending guns. Right. Brilliantly and poignantly put in a way that the Western audience can understand it. and the problem with the Ukrainian nationalists, particularly if there is a truce in the near future, if the Zelensky government just collapses or comes to its senses and begins to negotiate? Well, you know, Tucker Carlson got slapped down by Putin because of this question, because Tucker Carlson, you know, tried to link denazification to Adolf Hitler because Putin, in giving his historical explanation, said that modern day Ukrainian nationalism has been linked to personalities who fought side by side with Adolf Hitler. And Tucker was like, well, that was 80 years ago. They were defeated, swept under. And Putin gave a very terse response. He said that your answer is very clever, but it's also disgusting. And what he meant by that is, do you understand what you're saying, Tucker?

Stepan Bandera is a man responsible for slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Polish people, hundreds of thousands of Russian people, tens of thousands of Jews. And this ideology has not been defeated. It continues to exist in Ukraine with the same people that were seeking to slaughter the Russians in the Donbass and Crimea and are there today in power. It hasn't been defeated and Russia cannot allow it to continue to exist. Russia must eliminate this because as long as it exists, it represents a threat to the Russian people. So denazification means the termination of Banderist ideology. It is the same thing as Hitler's Nazi ideology, the same thing. So denazification means the elimination of that ideology. It can never again be allowed to fester in Ukraine next to Russia, not given what Russia

has suffered, 27 million people losing their lives, the Soviet Union, to defeat that ideology, only to have the United States come back through the CIA and breathe life back into it. De-Nazification means that there will be no Anderis left when this thing is done. Did you catch the references to the CIA's efforts to destabilize his own government? Absolutely. Look, and Putin's not, did you see what he said when he came up and it was Clinton was the president at the time. And he said, we know what you're doing in Chechnya.

He said, what are you talking about? We're not doing anything. And he said, here's the proof. And he handed him a file that proved that the CIA was sending weapons arms, and trained manpower into Chechnya to, you know, create this war. And, you know, the president's response wasn't, oh, this is lies, because you couldn't say it was a lie. It was the proof. He said, I'll go kick their ass. The CIA is nefarious. Jack Devine, I know some people like him. He's a nice guy. He's the personification of evil because

this is what he does. He interferes in the sovereign business of nations. He tries to undermine them, overthrow them, to disrupt them. And from the Russian perspective, understand, they take that very personally because the CIA's effort to undermine Russia led to the catastrophe of the 1990s, where millions of Russians lost their lives and hundreds of millions of Russians suffered because of this catastrophe. Vladimir Putin takes it personally because he's the man responsible for bringing Russia out of that mess to where it is today. And he's deeply resentful of the CIA's ongoing efforts to undermine Russia, to try and dismember Russia. Scott, a tremendous analysis, a great

summary, and I'm very grateful, as is this enormous audience watching you now, for your time and your thoughts on this. All the best. We'll see you next week, my friend. Okay, thank you. Have a great weekend. And you. Coming up this afternoon, Colonel Larry Wilkerson on the same topic in just a few minutes at 3.30. And at 4.15, our Intelligence Community Roundtable with Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern on this and on the butcher of Bachmut. We'll hear about him coming up. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. before judging freedom. Thank you.