Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter: Ukraine, Gaza, and Free Speech.

Episode Date: September 16, 2024

Scott Ritter: Ukraine, Gaza, and Free Speech.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Resolve to earn your degree in the new year in the Bay with WGU. WGU is an online accredited university that specializes in personalized learning. With courses available 24-7 and monthly start dates, you can earn your degree on your schedule. You may even be able to graduate sooner than you think by demonstrating mastery of the material you know. Make 2025 the year you focus on your future. Learn more at wgu.edu. Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, September 16th, 2024. Scott Ritter is here with us on Gaza, Ukraine, and whatever happened to the freedom of speech.

But first this. A divisive presidential election is upon us, and winner is gold let me tell you what i mean since 2016 our national debt a divisive presidential election is a divisive presidential election is upon us and the winner is gold let me tell you what i mean since 2016 our national debt has grown a staggering 70 and gold has increased by 60 do you own gold i do i bought my gold in february 2023 and it has risen 33 you've heard me talk about Lear Capital, the company I trust. Let me tell you why. Recently, Kevin DeMeritt, who is the founder and CEO of Lear, assisted the FBI in discovering a nationwide gold theft ring. And because of Kevin's good work, the FBI caught these people before they

could steal anymore. That's why I have been saying the people at Lear are good people. They believe in America. They believe in their product and they're honest to the core. So take action right now, my friends. Call 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com. Protect your savings and retirement before it's too late. 800-511-4620, learjudgenap.com. Remember, hope is not a strategy, but gold is. Scott, welcome, my dear friend. Welcome to the show. Alistair Crook informed us this morning that from his reading of Haaretz and other newspapers, it's a general understanding in Israel that Netanyahu intends a total takeover of Gaza and the redevelopment of the land there, the moving out of all Palestinians or their eradication.

How could he have such a goal if he can't defeat Hamas? I mean, people are allowed to have fantasies. I have a goal of climbing Mount Everest one day and owning a beachside condo on the north shore of Hawaii. Unless I get in tremendous physical shape or win a lottery, I'm not going to accomplish either goal. These are purely domestic political ploys that Netanyahu is putting out there to feed his increasingly embattled right-wing coalition. It's raw meat for his base, and that's it. He literally will not be able to accomplish any of these. But what it does is it sends a signal to those nations around the world,

the United States and many nations in Europe, who are getting prepared for the United Nations General Assembly, where Israel will come under tremendous pressure, tremendous attack by the international community for its policies in Gaza and for its inability to come up with a plan for a ceasefire to bring an end to this conflict, which is not only destabilizing the region, but destabilizing the world., this is pure domestic political audience. I mean, he has even appointed a retired IDF colonel, if you haven't heard this, it's going to blow you away, as the governor of Gaza. It's another country. I know they are occupying it. I know the occupation is illegal, but to appoint a governor of Gaza and to make this

public, I suppose it's just consistent with the fantasies that you've described. 100%. You know, here's the other aspect of that. He may have appointed this fantasy governor, but to implement any of this, he will have to fire his minister of defense and the military chief of staff. That's how unrealistic this is. So far, both have basically told him no, when he said, I want you to implement aggressive occupation strategies for Gaza and to move into Lebanon to take on Hezbollah. Both have said no. With all due respect, but no. It's interesting you should say that because Alistair also reported this morning that Netanyahu has leaked that Galant is on his way out and he's looking for the cabinet's

permission, which I guess he needs in wartime, to make a change. I don't know who the other person is going to be. I mean, Gallant is not exactly Mother Teresa, but he does have the courage to say, as you say, to Netanyahu, no, there are certain things we won't do. The military is exhausted. They can't fight another war. We can't even beat Hamas. It's an idea. How could you possibly occupy and run the government of the country? You know, Galant doesn't speak for Galant. Galant speaks for the Israeli Defense Force, for the military. The idea that this man who is simply relaying the consensus opinion of an exhausted military to an embattled political leader, that you can replace him and somebody come in and become a yes man, that won't happen. He'll lose whoever that is. If somebody

comes in simply because their job is to say yes, they'll lose the military. There will be a military revolt in one way, one form or another. I'm not saying a coup. I'm saying the military will disobey. And that's a breakdown in civil military relations that no ostensibly democratic society wants to see. Netanyahu has lost the military. They don't trust him. They don't trust his judgment. They don't trust him to have strategic vision. And he's becoming frustrated because he wants to hear yes, because he has to hear yes to keep his coalition viable, because his coalition is becoming increasingly frustrated with the fact that Netanyahu is not delivering on the promises. You can appoint governors of Gaza, but until they're actually in Gazaillo, who's the head of CENTCOM and his two visits last week,

let's go from Gaza to the West Bank, where one of the fanatical members of Netanyahu's cabinet, Smotrich, is referring to himself as the governor of the West Bank. He has a lot of authority there. His colleague, Ben Gavir, has tremendous authority there. As I understand it, correct me if my understanding is wrong or exaggerated, that Ben-Gavir has established a 10,000-person civilian militia, and he also controls the police there because of his head of some national security thing, sort of like the FBI. How fragile is life for Palestinians in the West Bank with this going on? I wouldn't want to be a Palestinian living in the West Bank. We're looking at people who have a vision of a greater Israel that cannot exist as long as there is a Palestinian presence in the West Bank. They've spent the past

decades stealing Palestinian land, robbing the Palestinians of their homes, murdering Palestinians, driving them out to try and break any notion of a Palestinian state. And they want to complete that job. And so, you know, this 10,000 person militia, basically what happened is he handed guns out to settlers without any criminal background check. No, you know, if answer, but just here's your weapon, automatic weapon, M16, here's your ammunition. And now we have this heavily armed militia that's composed literally of criminals, people whose sole function in life was to fly to Israel to steal Palestinian land. They're murderers, they're rapists, they're people of the lowest possible socio-norm, and now they're heavily armed. And then they're backed by police who turn a blind eye as they

commit these crimes. The police are complicit in the criminal activity of these settlers. So for the Palestinians, it's very difficult. There is no normalcy. Every day you wake up, you don't know if this is the day they're going to take your home, kill your relatives, kill you, drive you out of your home. Eventually, that will be what happens to all these Palestinians unless something is done to reverse course. The Houthis sent a missile into Israel over the weekend. Initially, the Israelis said we shot it down, but it turned out they didn't. Do you know of the strength of this missile? Was it hypersonic?

And did it reach its target? And what was the target? Resolve to earn your degree in the new year in the bay with wgu with courses available online 24 7 and monthly start dates wgu offers maximum flexibility so you can focus on your future learn more at wgu.edu well according to the hooties it's a hypersonic missile. And based upon, you know, as much of a technical analysis that can be done long distance, from everything I've seen, it has the characteristics of a hypersonic missile, the speed, etc. It's not a ballistic missile, meaning that it flies a ballistic trajectory. It came in in a more flat trajectory, underpowered flight, with some maneuvering capability at the end. What we do know is that the Houthi announced that they were acquiring this on their own. I believe that even though this missile may say made in Yemen on it, there's a lot of Iranian components and a lot

of Iranian design features in this. It's very difficult to go from crude liquid-fueled ballistic missiles to a modern solid fuel with advanced chemical characteristics in the fuel, advanced design hypersonic missile. But they have it. They fired it and it hit a target in what they call Jaffa, but that's part of Tel Aviv. It looked like a transportation target. The Yemenis called it a military target, but it hit it. But the most important thing is that it flew through concentric circles of. Navy ships that are on patrol, basically parked off of Israel, designed to shoot down missiles as they come. This is part of the missile defense shield that the United States has been building for Israel. They didn't get it. The French didn't

get it. The Israelis didn't get it. They fired everything they had at it. Arrow 3, David's sling, the Iron Dome. Missile hit its target. Basically, with one missile, the Yemenis proved the point that I've been making, that everybody else who talks about hypersonics is, if Hezbollah and Iran are to fire hypersonic missiles at Israel, they will hit their targets because Israel and the United States have nothing that can shoot them down. The Yemeni just proved that firing one missile. Wow. General Carrillo, who's the head of CENTCOM, personally visited Israel twice in one week. What does that tell you, Scott?

It underscores what we were talking about earlier, the domestic political problems that Benjamin Netanyahu has and the desperation that he's facing trying to hold on to power. He can't be seen as being on the defensive. He has to take the attack to Hamas, to Hezbollah. But his military is telling him, no, you can't. What Kirill's job is to come in is to sort of reinforce the signals being sent by the Israeli military to Netanyahu by saying that the United States is here to help defend you. We will bring all our resources in, even though they don't work, apparently, all our resources in to defend you, but we will not facilitate any offensive military action initiated by you. If you want to attack Hezbollah, you're on your own. We're not going to be part of that. If you

want to attack Iran, you're on your own. And you know where we stand on Hamas. And I think Karela, you know, went there to reinforce this point. Maybe the first time he said it, Netanyahu didn't, you know, thought he could outmaneuver the United States politically, get America to override Carrillo's statement. Maybe he didn't believe that Carrillo had the backing of the White House. Carrillo won a second time to make it clear. When I speak, I speak for the authority of the United States of America. And I'm here to tell you right now, we will not participate, nor will we condone any offensive military action by Israel, unprovoked, against Hezbollah or Iran. Now, that is very, very consistent also with what Alistair Crook told us,

which is that Tony Blinken has been sidelined, and the DOD is basically advising the White House, we're going to get to Iran in a minute, there are certain things you just don't want to do and certain things we don't want to do, like let's jump to Iran. Give long-range missiles to the, I said Iran, I meant Ukraine. Let's jump to Ukraine. Give long-range missiles to the Ukrainians with permission to use them and with technicians to operate them. Have you heard what President Putin said? This is the argument that Alistair says the DOD is making via channels to the White House. Makes sense to you? Oh, I thought you were going to show Alistair.

I was waiting for Alistair. No, no, no. I'm going to show a lot to you, but I'm just summarizing Alistair. Sorry about that. Look, he's 100% correct, but it's even more than that. It wasn't just Putin that spoke. Here's the dangerous part. We have people, Tony Blinken amongst them, but also British and NATO members who think that the Russians are bluffing, that these are red lines, that Russia's not serious. And Putin said, if you use these weapons, and we know how to do it, you don't want to know how they know? Because they captured intact attack comes missiles they can they've taken apart the warhead they can see the i think it's a kyk 13 or something it's a it's it's a port for encryption the gps signal used on the attack is a military grade gps signal it has to be encrypted in order to prevent it from being spoofed to do that you have to have special keying material which is american only so in order to encrypt this and you have to have special keying material, which is American only. So in order to encrypt this, and you have to change the encryption frequently based upon a schedule published by the National Security Agency, there has to be American hands on that.

So in order to take an attack missile, load in the GPS signal so it can be fired, an American hand has to touch it. Putin said that in his presence. We know this. They've also captured the storm shadow guidance. They know what goes there. They know that terrain following radar signal is taken from intelligence. They've taken the intelligence. They saw the inputs. They know that this comes from the United States target planning cell in Ramstein, in NATO. And they know that in order for this to strike a target in Russia, America has to not just approve the target, but plan the target, bring together components

loaded into the system. And he said, we know this. So if you do this, you will be attacking us. You will now be a direct party to the war. But we say he's bluffing. Well, guess what? The Russian ambassador to the United Nations, in a session of the Security Council, that means they are seated there, said, if you do this, it will be a declaration of war. He said it at the Security Council, to the Security Council, letting them know with no uncertain terms, this will be war. Anatoly Antonov on Friday furthered that. He said, not only are we going to hit NATO targets, and we will hit NATO targets, we will hit America too. Your hands will be burned by this. But even then, Starmer flew to Washington, D.C., Blinken flew to Kiev. They were going to do

it, Judge. They were going to do it. Then the back channel call came in. We believe that's done through the intelligence services. And the Russians made it absolutely certain what would happen to include, I believe, the targets and the weapon systems that would hit them. Did you see how mad Biden was when he had to sit down with Stormer? How furious he was? And they said, you know, did you have to back down to Putin? I have no use for Putin. Well, Putin humiliated him because he was ready to sign off on that. Blinken overrode. Remember Lloyd Austin last week in Ramstein told Zelensky, no, you can't do this because the Pentagon understands what's going to happen. They understand the role they play. The Pentagon knows that you can't attack Russia without American fingers touching it.

And they say, we don't want to be a party to this conflict because we trust the Russians when they say there will be consequences. But Blinken and Biden overrode it because it's political now. If you remember during the debate, the question asked by ABC News to both candidates, do you want Ukraine to win this war? Well, that's the exact same line of speech that Tony Blinken used. We want Ukraine to win this war, and they can only win it if they can equalize the playing field by striking deep. Vanguard. It's a hypersonic warhead on strategic systems. It hits the ground with the equivalent of 26 kilotons of high explosive, more powerful than the bomb used at Hiroshima or Nagasaki, but it's conventional. They'll take out Kiev, but then they're going to take out sites in England, in Brussels, in Germany, and in the United States. And they made it clear, this is going to happen instantly. The decisions have already been made. We will automatically do it. You can't stop it. So I'm trying to emphasize this point, Judge, because on Saturday morning,

every American got up and went off and did their business. We almost all died on Saturday. Had Biden said not, we're going to do it, we'd all be dead right now. Because once the Russians did that, we'd have to respond with nuclear weapons. We'd have no choice. And then 72 hours later, because that's all it takes, Judge, 72 hours, minutes, I'm sorry, minutes, 72 minutes later, an hour and 12 minutes, we'd all be dead. That's all it takes for the world to be gone. And that almost happened on Saturday. I'm not bluffing. I'm not joking. This is as real as it gets. This is why Biden was so furious, because he was humiliated. Because Putin basically told him, I've made the decision that we're all going to die because of you, you idiot, you moron, you nincompoop. Don't attack Russia. This is the red line of red lines. Don't do it. And yet they're still

talking about how they can do it. But we are as close as we've ever been since the Cuban Missile Crisis of having global nuclear war. We almost all died on Saturday. We almost all died on Saturday. And that's not a bluff. That's not an exaggeration. We were 72 minutes away from the world ending only because somebody made a phone call. Does Joe Biden, does Tony Blinken, does Jake Sullivan know that? They now do. That's why they changed their minds. That's why they went, oh, we're not going to sign. Starmer came with the target that you saw his little red bag. What was in there were the targets. We want to hit these targets. He was going to get Biden to sign off on it. And then they were going to strike that day. And the Russians said, no,

we'll kill everybody. We're done. We're finished. We're not playing this game anymore. You invaded Russia and Kursk. You have them attacking us with long range drones. We can, we can handle that. But when they come at us with your weapons, with your hands on them, hitting targets you selected, then you're part of this war and we're going to hold you to account. Here's President Putin's very measured public warning. Cut number five. It is not about allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is about making a decision about whether NATO countries are directly involved in the military conflict or not.

If the decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States, and European countries in the war in Ukraine. This is their direct participation, and this, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict. This will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are fighting Russia. And if this is so, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict,

we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us. from their intel to our intel. But there it is. Now, here is Zelensky, former President Zelensky, still claiming to be President Zelensky, on with Fareed Zakaria on CNN, making an appeal for the long-range weapons because the Russian people must suffer. And only if the Russian people suffer

will Putin change. Cut number one. He is afraid of only one thing. No leaders, no countries, nothing. He is afraid of his society, Russian people. And if Russian people are in danger, if they don't have comfortable life, if they live without energy like our people, they will understand the price of the war and they will be not happy with it

and they will begin to influence on him, on Putin. That's why I said, make Ukraine strong and you will see that he will sit and negotiate. Thanks be to God, the American Defense Department sees right through that, Scott. I mean, Zelensky is a fool, a delusional fool. What part of Russian history has he not studied? The Germans occupied a tremendous amount of

Russian territory in a conflict that killed 27 million Soviets, many of them Russians, most of them Russians, caused the evacuation of entire cities and regions. Russia relocated its industry east of the Ural Mountains. Is he high? Does he not know that unlike him, Putin did go up for election? Over 78% of the population participated in that. We had our best turnout in 2020 is, I think we had 66%. Everybody's going, man, that's so many. 78% of eligible Russian voters turned out, 88% of whom voted for Vladimir Putin. The man has a mandate to rule. And this is during a time of war when things were going not so rosy.

It was tough. The Russian people said, we're behind you. Zelensky is insane. What he doesn't understand, and again, we've talked about Putin's measured statement. We talked about the direct statement made by the Russian ambassador to the United Nations in Anatoly Antonov's statement. We talked about the backchannel. But the ambassador to the United Nations and Anatoly Antonov's statement. We talked about the back channel, but the one we didn't talk about was Dmitry Medvedev, who basically said, if this happens, Kiev will no longer exist and it will be hit, not with nuclear weapons, but he said the non-nuclear weapons we

have that will bring about nuclear type results. That's the avant-garde. Zelensky doesn't understand that he's going to die. He will die, his entire government will die, and the city of Kiev will die. It hasn't gotten through his head. This isn't about equals. This isn't about leveling the playing field. This is about Zelensky, who initiated a war of aggression against the Russian-speaking people of the Donbass, an anti-terrorist operation that allowed the Ukrainian army to go in and butcher women and children in innocence. This is about a man who lied about the Minsk Accords. This is about a man who turned his back on a peace treaty. This is about a man who has empowered the Banderas and Azov Nazis. He will no longer exist.

This isn't about equals. Vladimir Putin is a legitimate leader of a viable nuclear armed power. Zelensky is the leader of a broken nation governed by oligarchs and corruption. And it's high time the West replaced this man, because he is. And again, I just want to say this to your American audience. You almost died on Saturday. You almost died. I almost died. I'm mad. I'm mad as hell. I didn't want to die, but it was out of my hands. speaking, hold your fate in his hands because he's putting pressure on a president, Biden, who's in a very difficult political situation where he's going to gamble our lives because he's afraid of the consequences of his bad policy in Ukraine. Because he's going to be embarrassed, we're going to die. When are we going to wake up and demand that the policies change, that this idiot in Ukraine no longer get to hold the fate of the American people, the fate of the world in his hands. Let's take control of our own destiny.

But in order to do that, we got to get rid of him and we got to change this policy. Here is somebody who almost makes Zelensky seem rational by comparison. I won't even have to tell you who he is. You'll know in a flash. Cut number seven. As for the role the Ukrainians could themselves play in stability and security in the Euro-Atlantic area, it's obvious. Thanks to the heroism of the Ukrainian forces, they've been fighting for more than two years,

almost three years. They are the most accomplished armed forces in the whole continent. It's easy to see how they could play a very, very role in in peace and stability on the european continent one of the arguments i think we should make to our american

friends is if they want to if they want to take back some u.s troops from the european theater and and save a few billion a lot of billion uh mike uh then I'm sure the Ukrainians, having defeated the Russians, and there's nobody more effective at defeating the Russians than the Ukrainians, I'm sure the Ukrainians would be only too happy to backfill in Europe. Anyway, those are some of the things, some of the ways in which I think Ukraine can be a force for stability. Before you explode, Scott, before he said that, he said that Ukraine will soon be a member of the EU and a member of NATO. I mean, like I said, I want to climb Mount Everest and I want to have a condo in Hawaii, but

just saying it doesn't make it happen. Ukraine will never be a member of the EU and Ukraine will never be a member of NATO., and Ukraine will never be a member of NATO. Did you hear the last thing he said? He said that Europe should encourage Americans to leave Europe, and they'll be backfilled by Ukraine. So Ukrainians, in addition to defeating Russia, a nuclear power, by the way, Ukraine will now take over the role of American military might in Europe. They will backfill. They will have 100,000 Ukrainians in Poland. If you ask the Poles, how about they feel about that? Last time I checked, the Poles were demanding Ukrainians apologize for the Volhyn massacre, 1943. Boris Johnson is so

far removed from reality, it's not even funny. It's disgusting, though, because the stupidity of what he says is listened to because of the so-called quality of his resume, former prime minister of Great Britain. So he gets invited to places like this. He speaks and people listen to him. At the end of the day, though, there's nothing there's no seriousness behind his words. All that's going to happen is he's going to encourage people to continue pursuing these same failed policies and hundreds of thousands more of ukrainians are going to die 100 billions of dollars are going to be lost tens of millions of people will be displaced and again i just want to make this point to everybody watching we may die today we may die tomorrow all it takes because the decision's been made in Russia. I hope that's been made clear. The decision's been made that if we enable this to happen, it will be automatic.

And then we're dead. And we're going to let that flopped haired, whatever you want to call him, hold our fate in his hands, empowering the maniac Zelensky. Man, we are America. Take control of our own destiny. Take control of our own policies and shut these idiots down. Everything that you have just said, everything that I say, everything that our colleagues on this show say, we say without fear that there will be consequences to us because we have exercised our natural human right to speak freely, a right that restrained, that the First Amendment theoretically restrains the government from interfering. First Amendment doesn't create or grant the right. The right comes from within us.

The First Amendment was written to restrain the government. The government is not recognizing that restraint these days the way it has historically, is it? No, I mean, they knocked on my door. You know, I said, why are you here? Well well we have concerns about things that you've been saying and posting uh i said really you have concerns about my exercise my free speech oh no we respect your free seats and why are you here because you don't respect my free speech because you're afraid of what i'm saying you're concerned about what i'm saying i mean somebody said the fact that they showed up means that my words are having more impact. And they're like, OK, that's nice. But they still came to my house. I mean, they went through everything. They took my electronics.

I mean, they were nice. They were polite and all that. But the government doesn't have any right to do this based upon a whim, especially they'll never write to do it if they're seeking to violate my constitutional rights. But they did it anyways. But they're not going to find anything. There's nothing in there that shows I'm a Russian agent. But what they're trying to do is intimidate me and intimidate others. And while it hasn't worked for me because I'm just too stupid and stubborn, it has worked for others. People are scared. Nobody wants the FBI coming to your door. But the Department of Justice, the Department of State has lost touch with reality. I don't know.

Maybe it's time for Tony Blinken to go back to constitutional refresher course 101. Merrick Garland needs to be sitting next to him. So does Christopher Wray. So does Jamie Rubin, the head of the global, the GE, global encounter cell or something. It's the anti-disinformation group run by Jamie Rubin, the man who lied to us about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit him in the head. These guys are literally launching a frontal assault on our constitutional right of free speech. You know, and they're doing it such a crude way that the rest of the world sees right through it. I mean, it's something to have the Indian foreign minister lecture the United States about its duties and responsibility to the constitutional principles of free speech and free

press. When an Indian foreign minister has to lecture his American counterparts over American constitutionality, it shows you how broken we are as a nation. Look at Dmitry Symes, an American citizen, a Russian citizen, working in Russia, living in Russia, his wife the same, prosecuted in America for the speech he articulates in Russia. How can that possibly be a crime in America? It's just speech. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, which today means no government shall do anything to interfere with speech. And yet this Department of Political Justice is doing just that. It's almost as if the Moscow show trials of the 60s, the DOJ wants them to resume here. We have become what we condemned. I would encourage everybody, John F. Kennedy, you know, he's looking a lot better today. In

retrospect, the man had a lot of wisdom. His American University speech about trying to prevent a world war with Russia resonates today more strongly than it did even when he said it. But he gave another speech before, I think it was the American Reporters Association or something in April of 1961, where he was holding them to account. He said, you guys have to be responsible for what you publish. I can't tell you not to publish something, but when it's national security, you got to think twice before you put it out there. But he said, I will never interfere with your free speech. And then he went on this just tour de force of explaining the importance of free speech and a free press and how imperative it was for the press to hold him accountable,

to hold his administration accountable, to criticize bad policy, because from criticism, mistakes are identified and corrections are made, and then you get good policy. I'd love for the Biden administration to listen to this, because the reason why Tony Blinken is crying that we aren't making the case around the world that the Russians are winning and winning the minds of people, well, maybe because the Russians don't have to work too hard to defend their policy. Maybe it's because that when you defend American policy, you lie, that rather than coming up with better ideas, you seek to suppress. When in a debate, your tactic is suppression, you've lost the debate. And that's the tactic that the United States is using today. John F. Kennedy's speech, April of 1961, everybody should read it

because it's a very powerful defense of the basic fundamental principles of free speech and free press in America. I know you wrote about it very articulately, and I'm glad you did because everybody knows, or those of us who follow these things know, the speech at American University in 63, June of 63, five months before he was murdered, but not that many people know of this April 1961 speech. And you are right, history is treating him a lot better than his contemporaries did. But that is not the government that we have today. Today we have a government that really

doesn't care about the freedom of speech and is willing to prosecute people in order to chill their rights or chill the rights of others. Chilling occurs when you have second thoughts before you speak publicly for fear of what the government might do to you. The Supreme Court has condemned chilling as a profound and direct violation of the First Amendment. I have had literally, I mean, if I open up my phone right now, I can guarantee there'll be at least one or two more queries. People calling me, emailing me, saying, what does the Department of Treasuries and the State Department's most recent round of sanctions mean? I mean, I used to be interviewed by Sputnik or RT. Can I be interviewed today?

And I said, you need to get a lawyer, unfortunately, because I believe that from a constitutional standpoint, of course, you can speak. And the government can't ever, ever prosecute you for your speech. But what they shouldn't be able to, but what the government's done now is turn your speech, if you're interviewed by one of these sanctioned entities, into a commodity, a good or a service that is now sanctionable and you can be held criminally liable. Man, again, this is a perversion of the constitution. It can't be allowed to exist. And I believe that if you fought it in court, you could win. But how many people have the time and the money and the wherewithal necessary to make that battle? So what's happening is people are scared.

And they're saying, oh, well, then I'm not going to be interviewed. I'm not going to engage with the Russians. And all you've done there is make yourself stupid. I'm not picking on the person. I'm talking about society. The moment we stop listening to the Russians is the moment, and I'm not saying that we have to listen and agree, but it's the moment we become stupid about Russia. From ignorance comes fear. Fear is exploited by the government. And next thing you know, we'll be sitting silently while they approve long range strikes against Russia,

and then we all die. We have to defend free speech everywhere, even if you don't agree with it. You may not. First of all, all the people say, well, RT is Russian propaganda. I can guarantee you that the people say that haven't read it. Because if you did compare and contrast the content of RT with the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, you'd know which one is propaganda and which one does its best to be fact-based, sharp analysis. So Russia, RT does put the Russian government's point of view out there and defends the Russian government. Absolutely. It's a state-owned thing, but they are as honest as the day is long in presenting the facts of a situation. Here, we know that the CIA leaks information

that it knows to be inaccurate to the mainstream media in order to get ahead of the Russians on the narrative, not the truth, the narrative. We know that a US court in prosecuting the Hoover III said that disinformation isn't about being truthful. It's about deviating from official government narrative, that you are guilty of disinformation if you're not agreeing with the government. This is sick, Judge. This is sick. This is wrong. When Attorney General Garland announced the indictments, seated next to him was

Chris Wray, the director of the FBI, who condemned the speech of the people being indicted as propaganda. The First Amendment protects propaganda. The First Amendment says the government may never evaluate the content of your speech. We're not talking about a guy with a bullhorn in a residential neighborhood at three in the morning. We're talking about open political speech on accepted venues like this one, whether it's this or whether it's the New York Times or whatever venue it might be. It is none of the government's business what we say. But now they're accusing, I mean, I'm just reading between because, you know, there's been no indictment. And I actually am starting to, of course, I shouldn't say this, that there will be no indictment because they literally have no case. But one of the things that they've accused the Uhura III and others of is interference in the American presidential election.

Well, Judge, I am guilty as hell of interfering in the American presidential election, and so should every American who votes, because your vote is interfering with at least 50% of the candidates running. You're saying, I don't choose you. I choose this person. It is active interference. My job is to put my thumb on the scale of public opinion to try and convince the American people not to support policies that lead to nuclear war. Guilty, guilty, guilty, because it's what every patriotic American should be doing. And yet now, because I deviate from the official narrative, I'm speaking disinformation, even though factually I'm 100% correct, it's disinformation. And now through the perverted minds of Merrick Garland, Christopher Wray, I'm guilty of interfering in a presidential election.

Man, we have lost the, you know, we don't know who we are anymore as a people. We've lost it. Well, we need to defend the First Amendment because human liberty will die if it just sits there. It must be exercised and the government must be challenged at every turn. There are very few people who do it as effectively as you do. You and I will be together doing it along with our friends, Max Parenthold. Excuse me. He'd love that.

He'd love that he had her last name. Max Blumenthal, Anya Parenthold, and Gerald Salanti at our anti-war rally for peace on September 28th in Kingston, New York. I wonder how many federal agents will be in the audience. I'll be telling them each one, hi, I'll be offering them one of my coins. I have a special challenge coin for this event. I'll be giving it to the FBI agents. All you have to do is come up and identify yourself as such. Scott, I love you. Thank you, my man. All the best to you. We'll see you again next time. Thank you so much for joining us. Thanks. Wow. A great segment. Tomorrow, Tuesday, Professor Jeffrey Sachs at eight in the morning,

Matt Ho at two in the afternoon, Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski at three in the afternoon. If you like what we do, like and subscribe. We just broke 440,000 subscriptions over the weekend. Our goal is a half a million by Christmas. That's a little over three months to achieve that goal. If you like, that sends a message to the algorithm to enhance our availability to a lot of other people. And if you subscribe, it sends a message to the advertiser. So like and subscribe, help us spread the message. Go to judgenap.com, where if you like and subscribe and join, you'll find hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of these pieces, things that I wrote going back to nine and 10 years ago. A lot from Scott Ritter, a lot from Jeffrey Sachs,

a lot from Karen Kwiatkowski and others who believe as we do that human rights are natural, they come from our humanity, they exist in our heart, but they must do more than just lie there. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thanks for watching!