Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter: Russia, Ukraine, and Biden

Episode Date: February 13, 2024

Scott Ritter: Russia, Ukraine, and BidenSee 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 Tuesday, February 13th, 2024. Scott Ritter joins us now. Scott, thank you, my dear friend, for taking the time to join us. Since last we spoke after some sort of a marathon weekend of speeches and debate and negotiations, the United States Senate has sent over to the House of Representatives an appropriations bill which would send $61 billion, with a B, dollars in cash and equipment to Ukraine. What is Ukraine going to do with it? How crazy is it to send this kind of equipment to this kind of a country on life support? Well, first of all, we don't know if the House will approve.

In fact, the Speaker of the House has said that it's dead on arrival. So we'll see if he's able to follow through with that pledge. But let's just say that for some reason the House passed it and it was signed into law. Everybody who thinks that this is going to suddenly turn the table when it comes to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, you're wrong. The vast majority of this money, about 60% of it, will be used to build new weapons. Some of those weapons will replace weapons the United States has already provided to Ukraine, which means that Ukraine's not going to get anything out of this. Another will be new production, ammunition and stuff for Ukraine that requires medium to long lead time. So it's not as though this gets built, the money gets passed and

suddenly ammunition's flowing into Ukraine. This ammunition hasn't even been built yet. It has to be funded and then contracts have to be let. And then the ammunition needs to be produced and then it has to be shipped over to Ukraine. Meanwhile, Ukraine is just getting slaughtered on the battlefield today. You know, the new General Sersky tried to mass some forces to create the potential for a counterattack in the Advyavka region. The Russians detected it and hit it with a pair of Iskanders. And depending on what numbers you believe, the casualties range from 500 to 1.2 thousand. But it's devastating. And this is happening all across the front. So what's happening in Ukraine is irreversible. Some of that money, I think 8 of it, would go to the coffers of the Ukrainian government so that they could continue to fund their government to pay pensions, to pay salaries, etc.

That would be useful for the Ukrainian government. All that does is forestall political collapse. The military right now is in freefall, and there's nothing that this bill would do to turn that around. The new commander of the military has this scary sounding nickname, the Butcher of Bakhmut. I gather that that nickname was given to him by his own troops. What is the origin of that? Well, the origin of the name Butcher actually comes, it predates Bakhmut. It goes back to 2014 when Sersky was the commander of the Ukrainian forces around the village or the town of Debaltsevoi. I might be saying that wrong, but that was where a big battle was fought

in early 2015, where the Ukrainian army was surrounded. It's this battle, the defeat that Sersky oversaw, that caused the Germans and the French to intervene and insist on the Minsk Accords, Minsk II, begging Vladimir Putin, don't kill the Ukrainians, because Putin was ready to end it all. I mean, and today Putin says, my biggest regret was just not ending it. I should have killed every single Ukrainian there that would have destroyed the Ukrainian army at the time, and we wouldn't have had this problem. But no, Putin believed in peace, believed that the French and the Germans were serious about peace. And he agreed to, you know, terminate the conflict and the vast majority of the Ukrainians fled. But Sersky was named the butcher starting with that battle because he has a total disregard for the lives of his soldiers. He just throws them away. He got that reputation also in the defense of Kiev. Everybody says, well, it was a successful defense. I remind people, as Vladimir Putin said to Tucker

Carlson, the Russians voluntarily withdrew from Kiev. And while they did suffer casualties, the Ukrainian army was eviscerated. It was eviscerated in Kiev. It was eviscerated in other battles, including the first NATO-funded counteroffensive in Kharkov in the summer of 2022. Yes, the Ukrainians took land, but the troops were slaughtered in the thousands and tens of thousands. The reserves that were built up were lost, causing NATO to have to build up yet another army, which Sersky squandered in the Battle of Bakhmut, and then later on in the counteroffensive

in Zaporizhia. This is a man who is very aggressive, but his aggression has resulted in disaster for the Ukrainian army. And yes, the title butcher comes from his troops, and it's not a good title. So what can the Ukrainians hope to gain? What can President Zelensky hope to gain by having this general as his commander, other than perhaps ridding himself of a potential political adversary in General Zelensky? I mean, there were two aspects to Zelensky's appointment. First and foremost, he's a, you know, he's a competent military commander. I mean, you can, we can say we went about throwing, you know, General Grant threw lives away. And yet Grant turned the war around in 1864, you know, fighting these very bloody

battles with General Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia. But he was able to sustain these casualties. Ukraine, you know, has 880,000 men under arms. If they were able to mobilize rapidly, 500,000, give them appropriate training, equipment, etc. This kind of aggression could blunt the Russians. The Russians do not want to lose a lot of guys. They're not in the business, attacking and losing forces. You know, the battle for Berlin, a very aggressive battle. They lost hundreds of thousands. That's not what the Russians do. They're happy to engage in a war of attrition. But, you know, the Sersky style war of attrition is one where he stabilizes the line and maybe even pushes the Russians back a little bit, creating political victories for the Ukrainians. This is what Zelensky is hoping for. He's hoping for political victories.

He needs Sersky to launch one of his deadly counterattacks, losing tens of thousands of Ukrainians, but pushing the Russians back out of a village here, out of a village there, getting a propaganda victory that then he can use to sell the concept of continue to fund Ukraine, West Sea. We can win if you give us the money. That's what he's trying to get out of Sersky, the illusion of a victory. The other thing is, when he replaced illusion, he was very popular. Sersky does have a following amongst the Ukrainian command, and it stabilizes politically the Ukrainian officer corps, because if you put somebody in who didn't have the popularity of Sersky or the notoriety of Sersky, you could get a rebellion amongst the ranks. So, you know, it's twofold. One is stability from a domestic political standpoint. And the other one is hoping that Sersky can create the illusion of victory on the battlefield to an extent where the United States and the West will say, see if we just fund them, they can continue this fight. You used the word illusion three times in the answer that you just gave. You don't believe that General Sersky and his 800,000 men can possibly turn this around?

Not at all. Look, the math alone argues against it. They're losing 20, 30, 40,000 men a month. They're not getting anywhere near that number to replace them. So this 800,000 man army is shrinking every day. Again, if the casualty figures are accurate, just in that one incident alone, 1,200 Ukrainians dead and wounded. And that's just in one location. They're losing them up and down the battlefield in huge numbers right now. So we're looking at an army that could easily, you know, be shrinking by 50, 60,000 a month if these calories figures continue to rise.

And, you know, yeah, you could sit there and say, well, Scott, that's 880,000 men, 60,000 a month. That's not much, but remember that's 880,000 men, 60,000 a month. That's not much. But remember, that's 880,000 men spread out along the whole front. As you start to window them down, their ability to sustain their presence on the battlefield is nullified and gaps will emerge. And the Russians penetrate, surround, destroy, annihilate, and it's all over. So, yeah, Sersky's not going to turn this thing around. Do the Ukrainian troops know how to operate the equipment we've been sending them? The troops that, you know, originally received the training got basic training on this stuff so they could start the engine.

They could make a move forward. They could turn left, turn right. They didn't know how to operate in combat. They didn't know how to do a sprint to cover. They don't know, you know, any of the basic tactics. Now, I guess if they survive long enough on the battlefield, they'll develop an innate sense of weaponized, you know, some of these Ukrainian operators are doing quite well with the Bradleys. There's a couple of videos out there that show them handling the Bradleys in a very impressive manner. But that's more by accident than design.

The fact of the matter is they're not getting the level of training necessary. And that was back when we gave them maximum training, you know, effort. Today, you know, when these guys come in, they're literally taking guys and eight days later, they're appearing on the front lines and their training is non-existent. And so, you know, they don't on the front lines, and their training is nonexistent. And so, you know, they don't know how to operate this equipment. That's the fact. The people that do know how to operate the equipment are being killed or wounded or taken prisoner. So it's a problem.

Even if we want to give them all this equipment, how are they going to do it? There are artillery crews who are very professional, by the way. There was some talk about the French giving a dozen of the new Caesar, you know, long range, 155 millimeter artillery systems. Fine, great. But all the experienced crews that France trained for many weeks back in the summer of 2023, 2022, they're all dead. Where are you going to get the new crew? Who's going to train them? You need them

on the battlefield now. So no, the numbers game is artificial because there's a quality aspect to it that no longer exists. The numbers may look impressive, but many of these troops barely know how to put on their uniform, let alone fire the weapons they've been given. Here's a summary argument that Republicans made in the Senate when they voted along with all their, when many of them voted along with their Democratic colleagues, but the numbers were overwhelming, to send over to the House of Representatives this bill sending $61 billion. Here's the delusions that they're under. So it's the same person. You'll recognize him. Three different cuts. Sonia, eight, nine, and 10, back to back to back. If we fail to help Ukraine, Putin will invade a NATO nation. He may delay his next invasion until he rebuilds his decimated military. But we must be clear-eyed.

Ukraine is not the end. It is a step. If we fail to help Ukraine, NATO, the alliance that's prevented great power conflict for over 75 years, will falter and eventually disintegrate. If we fail to help Ukraine, Putin will invade a NATO nation. He may delay his next invasion until he rebuilds his decimated military. But we must be clear eyed. Ukraine is not the end. It is a step. We're to start with this nonsense. He also said if we fail to protect Ukraine, President Xi is going to invade Taiwan. I mean, this domino theory nonsense is repeated over and over and over again, but I gather it holds sway in the Congress of the United States.

Well, first of all, Congress doesn't deal with reality in terms of foreign policy. They deal with domestic political reality. And Mitt Romney is speaking to a domestic audience that's ignorant. I hate to say that about my fellow American citizens, but they are ignorant. If you believe for a moment that Putin is going to invade a NATO nation, then you just don't know what you're talking about. If you believe for a moment that, I mean, look, NATO's on its way out no matter what. The problems that confront NATO are far greater than Russia. There's some internal problems. There's problems of how they can afford this. Germany, we're talking about a collapsing economy, deindustrializing as we speak, and they want to continue to be the forge of the NATO arsenal. It just isn't going to happen. And then China, if you study China, you'll understand that the number one focus of China is the peaceful resolution of the problem with Taiwan. The last thing China's looking for is to invade. They will only invade if provoked,

and they've made their red lines quite clear, but void of an American military intervention in Taiwan or the Taiwanese government declaring independence, there will be no Chinese military action. Any Chinese expert knows this. Mitt Romney is not an expert on anything. Mitt Romney is a man who never served one day in the military. He doesn't know a war if he saw it. And he's just out there just speaking nonsense because unfortunately, that's what the people who elected him are paying him to say. When you and I analyzed the, you did the analysis, I just threw in a few questions, the Chuckle Carlson interview, there was one thing there that struck me as a little odd, and that was his sort of, I got to be critical here, and I think you'll agree with me, patronizing

a question to President Putin about this Wall Street Journal reporter, Evan Gershkovich is an innocent journalist and was only taken so as to be trade material for somebody that we have. What is the story with Evan Gershkovich? What are the charges against him? What is the evidence as you understand it? Well, first of all, let's start with the following. Pre-Gershkovitz, the CIA in testifying to the Senate in the 2000s said that there are conditions under which they would use journalistic cover. And the whole American journalist community went crazy. You can't do that. That makes us all look like spies. But the CIA said, we don't care. There are certain conditions where we can't use diplomatic cover. That is the standard, you know, station in let's say Moscow, which hasn't run a successful op in years because they get rolled up all the time because the Russians know exactly who the

CIA people are before they get there and they follow them and track them. So what's your option in Russia if you want to continue to do intelligence? You go to non-official cover. And one of the non-official covers that the CIA has said they will use in situations like this is journalistic cover. So anybody out there saying there's no way that Evan could be a CIA, because the CIA doesn't do that. I'm just telling you right now that the CIA admits we do do this. Now, they haven't said we've done this, but they have. I'll tell you why. What Evan Gershowitz did is go to the city of Ekaterinburg. You don't go there by accident. It's off past the Ural Mountains. You have to travel there, buy a ticket, et cetera. You're a journalist. You're going to

Ekaterinburg, which means that you had to have cleared this with an editor. There's a story that you're writing. There's something going on here, which means that the editor is in on what you're doing. They're approving something so that you have plausible deniability. The Russians said that he was caught in conspiratorial fashion, gaining access to classified information. This means it wasn't a situation where Evan went in and say something, hey, do you work at the Caliber Missile Production Factory? Wow. How is it there? I mean, how many missiles are you guys producing? I could give you something. Oh, really? You could give me? That'd be cool, man. I'm a journalist.

That'd be really cool. Or you gave me this stuff. Oh, it says secret and I'm under arrest. Hey guys, this was innocent. I didn't mean to do that. Nope. That's not what happened. What happened is he went and targeted somebody. There was covert communications with this person where they were meeting for the sole purpose of receiving this classified information, which Evan knew was classified. Now, what did he receive? He received information about missile production at a top secret Russian facility that produced caliber missiles at a time when one of the CIA's top collection priorities was, what is the missile production rate of the Russian government? Can they sustain the firing of caliber missiles against the Ukrainians, because this played into what kind

of air defense that we had to send forward to the Ukrainians. If the Russians were exhausting their missile supply, then we wouldn't be under stress in the long term. But if the Russians could sustain or even increase their missile supply, then we needed the double down on air defense. It was a strategic national security question set forth by the CIA and their top collection priorities, and Evan Gershowitz was collecting on it. Now, what the Russians have said, what Vladimir Putin said is, this is being handled in channels. And what's important here is in channels isn't a one way street. It means that the Russians are in communication with their American counterparts in the CIA, like speaking to like.

The Russians aren't using in channels to talk about Paul Whelan, an American Marine arrested on espionage charges. Why? The CIA says he's not ours. We're not we're not talking about this. We're not. He's not ours. Paul Whelan will be treated for something other than a big item. Evan is the CIA's and the CIA is all but acknowledging it by engaging in a discussion with the Russians about the conditions under which he can be released, meaning that they will trade a like thing. And Putin has said who it is. He wants the Russian or the Russian patriot, he calls him, who assassinated the Chechen who murdered Russian soldiers in Berlin. He says, I want that guy back.

And he's high value to us. And we know that Evans high value to you because he's non-official cover. And so you want him back? We'll talk in the CIA's talking. That means Evans guilty as charged. That means that Tucker probably did not do his homework. When he asked that question, President Putin did do his homework. He was prepared for the question. And man, the way the mainstream media has treated the Tucker Carlson interview, which you and I believe was spectacular, over the top and historic in its nature. The only nice thing they said about it was, oh, he may have saved Evan. He didn't save Evan. Look, Tucker, I mean, we've had this.

I don't know what the numbers are up right now, but they're huge. 300 million, somebody told me, views. And growing. It's going to grow. He got a great audience in the in in the developing south and amongst the arab population sympathetic audience uh to what he was saying about his journey what he was saying about russia he's turned the table people are talking about in america and yes there are chattering class that are attacking him for doing this but the bottom line is people are have heard that i'm reporting

for the first time and are saying. That's a rational actor, that's a guy we could do business with. Why aren't we doing business with? And it's changing the political dynamic in America and around the world. Tucker deserves all the credit and work as only Tucker Carlson could have pulled it off on this scope and scale. But, you know, this is where I get a little, you know, he could have prepared better. I mean, I always say that if you're, you know, man, he should have hired. He's got the money. Why didn't he hire three PhDs to sit him down and talk about Russian history, talk about Vladimir Putin, have a psychologist come in and talk about Putin's body language? You know, whatever, just so that you're prepared in there.

So, you know, it's capping. You can anticipate and you have effective follow on questions. Tucker didn't ask a single effective follow on question. He was in receive mode, which Putin exploited and got his message out, which is good because it was a message people needed to hear. But as an interview goes, he could have done better. And the proof is in the Evanan gershkowitz question that was a bad question it was just uh poorly thought out um unless tucker knew this and he was just setting it up anyways he was just throwing it out there because tucker to be honest doesn't care about anything i just said what tucker knows is he's got the numbers and the numbers are huge and they're having an impact

and everybody's listening to what he has to say right now. And that's where the value of Tucker comes in, not the interview, but what he says after the interview. If you go through what he said in Dubai, it was genius. It was the way he owned that audience, and not just the audience that was watching, but the internet audience. Tucker is now armed and in a position to be a credible voice about having America change its policy direction. And for that, he deserves all the credit in the world.

Nicely put. Here's a nice tape for you. We added some things to this, views of Moscow and views of New York. I know you're familiar with all of it, but this is Tucker in Dubai, cut number six. Sonia. What was radicalizing, very shocking and very disturbing for me was the city of Moscow, where I'd never been, the biggest city in Europe, 13 million people. And it is so much nicer than any city in my country. I had no idea. My father spent a lot of time there in the 80s when he worked for the U.S. government and barely had electricity. And now it is so much cleaner and safer and prettier

aesthetically, its architecture, its food, its service, than any city in the United States that you have to, and this is non-ideological, how did that happen? How did that happen? And at a certain point, I don't think the average person cares as much about abstractions as about the concrete reality of his life. And if you can't use your subway, for example, as many people are afraid to in New York City because it's too dangerous, you have to sort of wonder, isn't that the ultimate measure of leadership?

And that's true, by the way, it's radicalizing for an American to go to Moscow, I didn't know that, I've learned it this week, to Singapore, to Tokyo, to Dubai and Abu Dhabi. Because these cities, no matter how we're told they're run and on what principles they're run, are wonderful places to live. They don't have rampant inflation. We're not going to get raped.

Sir, excuse me. What is that? Excuse me. Are you anti- American model? No. I am the most pro-American. So I'm 54. I was born in 1969. I grew up in a country that had cities like Moscow and Abu Dhabi and Dubai and Singapore and Tokyo, and we no longer have them. And what

I have discovered is that's a voluntary choice. He's right. And you can corroborate everything he said about Moscow from your many trips there, not the least of which was just last month. Well, no, it's not just Moscow, St. Petersburg, but all of Russia. I mean, that's the beauty of it. I mean, Moscow is a city of 13 million. I think the number is actually 20 million because it's just grown and grown. And as it grows, the infrastructure grows with it. I mean, they put the subway system out there, connectivity, schools, hospitals, the whole works. I mean, the Russians do a lot of city planning right now. But if you travel around Russia, you know, there was always back, you know, in the boom days of Russian oil, people said only Moscow and St. Petersburg tonight, but the rest of Russia stinks. Well, that might have been true then. I can tell you it's not true now. The rest of Russia is building up as well. Not every city looks like Moscow, but every city has parts

of the cities that look like Moscow. They've got infrastructure that they're building. The investments is real. Russia is doing quite well, and it would be an eye-opener for most Americans to go there and see this. Someone used the phrase the other day, the Banderites, referring to this person Bandera. Are these the extreme Nazis in the Ukraine military and body politic? Well, absolutely. I mean, let's just take a look at General Zeluzhny, the man who, you know, the Iron General. He's infamous in my book for posing in his office with a portrait of Stepan Bandera, who is sort of the father of World War II, his organization for Ukrainian nationalists was responsible for the murders of tens of thousands of Jews, hundreds of thousands of Poles, hundreds of thousands of Russians. This is a man who is evil personified, and modern Ukrainian nationalism as manifested in

Ukraine today uses him as their hero. He is literally a hero of Ukraine. They have statues, they have streets named for him, the whole works in. Zelushny has a portrait behind him. All of the major players in the Ukrainian military, with few exceptions, are followers of Bandera. And, you know, even if you look at the Ukrainian politicians, they say, well, no, no, no, I'm not part of that. You're intimidated by that. Just ask Zelensky himself, who was told by Yaroche, head of the Slovoda party, right sector, the Nazis, the Banderas, that if he implemented the Minsk Accords, he will be hanging by the neck until dead on the main street. Could you imagine somebody going in and telling Biden, if you sign this bill,

I'm going to hang you on Constitution Avenue? No, the Secret Service would kick the door down and put the guy in jail. Yaroche threatened that. Not only he threatened Poroshenko before him, he threatened Zelensky. This is the way these guys operate. Ukraine is a Nazi state dominated by Banderist ideology. Is the Nazi ideology in the Ukraine military and body politic. This victory at all costs, victory only, no negotiation with Russia until Putin is gone. Is President Zelensky afraid for his life if he shows the slightest rational impulse toward negotiating with President Putin?

Absolutely. That's why he made it part of the constitution that you can't negotiate with President Putin. So he took it right off the table so nobody could accuse him of that. But no, Zelensky is afraid of his life. Again, the proof in the pudding is that when his life was threatened, he didn't do anything about it. He caved in and he fears these people. That's why he continues to empower them by, you know, rewarding them. But he needs them also. Remember, it's the ADAR battalion, the Azov battalion. It's the Typhoon, the Safari, these units that are behind the front lines with their machine guns shooting Ukrainian soldiers who run away. So when the Ukrainian soldiers go to the front, they can't voluntarily disengage. They'll be shot as deserters by these banderists who provide the stiffening there. And if you didn't have them, there wouldn't be a Ukrainian army on the front line because they'd all be running home.

Switching gears to Israel and Gaza, what are your sources tell you? What is your sense of reasoning tell you Netanyahu will do next? Will he invade and destroy Rafah, the city in the south, to which his people told the Palestinians to flee before they invaded the north? Yes, I think it's heading that direction. I mean, you know, on Super Bowl Sunday, he carried out this vicious attack. They say it was to rescue two hostages. But, you know, any hostage rescue operation that results in hundreds of dead, innocent civilians, three dead hostages, maybe eight because five are also wounded. That's a failure.

Delta Force would never call that a success. Team Six wouldn't call that a success. Somehow this is a success for the Israelis because they don't care about civilian life. They did it. And there's no repercussions. There's none. And so he'll continue to press it until there are repercussions. And at some point in time, you know, the world, it's going to reach a tipping point.

There's over a million Palestinians whose lives are at risk right now. They're being bombed. I mean, he straight up bombed a mosque full of innocent civilians, straight up bombed it. Nobody said a word. Nobody's doing anything about it. I mean, the Israeli army killed a family of five, leaving a six-year-old girl alive in the car. She's calling for help. And the paramedics coordinate with the Israelis,i say we're going to come in and save her and the israeli said yes you can come in this is the route you can take the paramedics got within 50 meters stopped saw where the girl was we're getting out and the

israelis killed them and killed the girl they lured the paramedics in using a six-year-old girl but nobody's doing anything about it judge no one's doing anything about it, Judge. No one's doing anything about it. This is happening every single day. They're shooting doctors in surgery. They're shooting innocent people trying to come into the hospital. They're shooting mothers crossing the street with their children, and nobody's doing anything. So Netanyahu believes that he can get away with anything, because he literally is getting away with murder. Well, when will the Arab anger rise up and reach the elites, the governmental people, Georgia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and force them to do something? Never. I mean, sadly, you know, the Palestinians- What about President el-Sisi in Egypt? Egyptians have never really cared for the Palestinian people.

They've used the Palestinian cause to, you know, to to positions themselves. Well, the Camp David Accords was an abandonment of the Palestinian issue. But Egypt received hundreds of millions of dollars because their defense money and the money they received the United States is linked to the money that the United States sends to Israel. So he really doesn't want to change that equation. So he might be bluffing right now. You know, people say he's moving surface to air missiles. It's old stuff. They say threes. It's not the modern stuff. He moved 40 tanks. Well, that's not going to change the equation. At the end of the day, is Egypt going to go to war for the people of Palestine? And I believe the answer is no. Now I'd like to be proven wrong on this. Again, Hezbollah, they're the one power that could do something here,

but is Hezbollah going to go to war for the Palestinian people? I always believed the answer was yes, but I'm beginning to doubt that because they're a political party now in Lebanon, and their larger objective is not to bring harm to the Lebanese people because they could be blamed for that and lose their political clout. And so is Hezbollah going to sacrifice themselves for the Palestinian cause? You know, right now, the only people fighting for Palestine is Hamas. That's it. How do you see this ending? I mean, what's going to stop Netanyahu from this slaughter other than his loss of his job for domestic political reasons? dramatic increase in pressure on the United States by the global South. Look, even if Palestine goes down, there's nations right now that will no longer work with the United States the same ever again because of this issue. And if the United States could be convinced that they are permanently

losing their ability to influence the global South because of Israel, then the United States might put pressure. And you see that. We're in a race against time. Biden apparently is having some very heated personal conversations with Netanyahu. What he needs to do is make those public conversations. He needs to humiliate Netanyahu. He needs to make the Israelis understand the consequences that will accrue to them by continuing to empower Netanyahu. If the political pressure could be placed on Netanyahu to resign before he can carry out his genocidal policies against Rafah, then there might be hope. But right now there's a race because it's not certain that the United States is capable of putting pressure on him. That with the control of the Israeli lobby over the American Congress and indeed the American presidency, you know, that we may not be able to put that pressure on because we need that

Israeli money too much to, it's an election year. Who's going to turn down $100 million worth of Israeli money, which AIPAC has put on the table right now? Thank you, Scott. Thank you for your analysis on both of these hotspots. Very, very, very illuminating and deeply appreciated. All the best, my friend. Thank you. Of course. Wow. I don't know how this ends either, but coming up tomorrow, Professor Sachs, Phil Giraldi, Aaron Matei, and all of our usuals throughout the week, ending, of course, late Friday afternoon with the Intelligence Community Roundtable. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.