Judging Freedom - Scott Ritter: Ukraine’s Nightmare

Episode Date: November 11, 2024

Scott Ritter: Ukraine’s NightmareSee 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 Monday, November 11th, 2024, Veterans Day in the United States. Scott Ritter will be with us here in just a moment on Ukraine's nightmare and some troubles facing President-elect Donald Trump. But first this. We're taught to work hard for 35 to 40 years, save your money, then live off your savings. Unfortunately, there are too many threats undermining the value of our hard-earned dollars. The Fed's massive money-printing machine is shrinking your dollar's value.

Just the cost of groceries is absurd. Let me be brutally honest. I think the dollar is on its way to being extinct. Not just here, but globally. The BRICS nations, led by Russia and China, threaten to remove the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Central banks have been shifting away from the dollar and into gold. And if we go to central bank digital currency, that will not only destroy the dollar, but we will lose our freedom. We will lose our privacy.

They can track anything we do. You need to take care of yourself and your family. So here's what you need to do. Immerse yourself in knowledge and information. The writing is on the wall. Now is the time to consider shifting some of your dollars into gold and silver as your bedrock financial asset. Call my friends at Lear Capital, the leader in precious metals investing for over 27 years. They help me diversify into gold and silver. They can help you too. Call Lear today at 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620, or go to learjudgenap.com. Scott Ritter, welcome here, my friend. You were telling me before we started the show that even though today is Veterans Day, yesterday was the day that the Marine Corps celebrates. Can you explain that, please? Well, every November 10th, the United

States Marine Corps comes together wherever Marines are stationed around the world. And we celebrate the founding of our beloved Corps. We are a wonderful organization with a proud tradition that began in a bar, Tuns Tavern, outside of Philadelphia, where the first Marines were recruited. So every November 10th, we get together and recreate that event by hosting a magnificent ball. Traditionally, the youngest and oldest Marine in attendance will come together, and the oldest will cut the cake and deliver a piece, the first piece, to the youngest Marine who will eat the cake, and then Marines will proceed to get drunk. We in the Marine Corps tend to refer to Veterans Day as Hangover Recovery Day because of the festivities to take place on the tent. Can I read into this that the first Marines were drunks? The first Marines were more than

likely working class continental patriots who were probably in a bar having healthy discussions and had nothing better to do. How did the Marine Corps come under the Department of the Navy? Well, Marines traditionally are naval infantry and the first Marines tend to, you know, Marines served aboard ships. They were the boarding parties. They maintained discipline. They were the landing parties. You know, later as warfare developed, you know, Marine battalions became expeditionary forces. They were deployed with the U.S. Navy. Some of the, if you read the lyrics of the Marine Corps hymn from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli. The shores of Tripoli refer to First Lieutenant Presley O'Bannon, a Marine officer who led his Marine detachment in 1805 to capture the Libyan city of Derna, which was then held by Barbary pirates. His heroism prompted the sheik of the area to

give him a sword, a Mameluke sword. And in 1825, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, Archibald Henderson, in recognition of Presley O'Bannon's heroism, designated the Mameluke sword to be the sword for all Marine officers. And indeed, when you graduate from the basic school, you have to purchase your own Mameluke sword. I have my every marine officer has their sword it's uh it's something that's part of our heritage something we're very proud of and who dispatched those marines to protect american shipping thomas that would be thomas jefferson yes he said look i i love the marine corps and i love the uh the discipline i love the heritage and everything but um you know there's another very famous marine out there, Smedley Butler, two-time winner of the Congressional Medal of Honor. And, you know, he was decorated as a soldier in American history.

Absolutely. And he reflected back on his time in the Marine Corps and he's a very proud Marine, but he said that, you know, more often than not, Marines serve the interests of, you know, big money and that rather than being a patriot defending his country, oftentimes he felt like a hitman defending racketeers. The issue isn't the Marines, of course. The issue is those who send Marines into combat. And we have a duty and responsibility as Americans to make sure that before we send the brave

men and women who honor us by wearing the uniform of the Marine Corps or the other services, the lesser services, as we call them. I'm joking. I have nothing but love in my heart for the soldier sailors and the airmen out there and Coast Guardsmen, and I guess now the guardians of the Space Force. But, you know, they implement policy. We have to make sure that the policy we're asking to implement is sound policy. We're in the sacrifice. that Nikki Haley and Mike Pompeo would have nothing to do with his next administration. And then in the next breath, announced that the ultra-Zionist Elise Stefanik

would be his U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Not nearly as significant a role as Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense, but maybe this indicates the direction Trump is going in, and if it does, this is not good news. Well, first of all, I think we need to be honest. Trump was never going to be good about Israel, ever. And we knew that. We knew that going in. One of the problems with this election is when you have an issue like the ongoing genocide in Gaza, the potential of conflict with Iran, neither candidate was good. I mean, you know, Jill Stein, you know, made her campaign based around this. She did have an impact in Michigan. I think we

have to acknowledge that, you know, she did strip votes away from Kamala Harris and put her thumb on the scale for Donald Trump. But nationally, she got 0.04%. She didn't even get 1%. She was hoping for 5%. She was a non-factor. Israel, the conflict in Gaza didn't resonate nationally. And Trump was always going to be very bad on this issue

from the standpoint of those wanting peace, from the standpoint of those who believe that Palestine should have a home of their own. Trump is a staunch Zionist, a supporter of Benjamin Netanyahu, a supporter of Israel. So it should shock no one that uh he would put um in the united nations which is the front lines of america's diplomatic support to israel this is where the united states can use its veto to uh to hold back global um global attacks on israel uh diplomatically and elise stefanik will represent uh the interests of Israel on behalf the United States and the United Nations uh I would have been shocked had he picked anybody um who didn't have similar mindset and we we will wait and see what he does I I think

you know by putting Stefanik in the United Nations he liberates himself now to have a more careful person occupying the position of Secretary of State or Department of Defense. I think his priorities will be not so much Israel, but Russia, Ukraine, and China. And here we're going to need somebody who has a little bit more gravitas, a little bit more depth, a little bit more moderation. So Elise Stefanik is going to be a mouthpiece, you know, who will be singing Israel's tune in the United Nations. But there's literally nothing other than a veto that Elise Stefanik can wage. She doesn't make policy. That's the important thing to realize. Not only does she not make policy, they tell her how to vote, whoever the Secretary of State is. And she doesn't know yet, but whoever that person

is, it could be Marco Rubio, who probably knows less than she does, but whoever it is, we'll be telling her how to vote. We're going to veto this. We're going to go along with that. Yeah. Right. I don't think it'll be Marco Rubio as well. And there's a number of reasons why I believe that. One, I think Trump learned last time that you don't put people with political aspirations in positions of authority because they will use those positions to leapfrog over you. He was betrayed over and over again by people like this. And Marco Rubio has not been an ally of Donald Trump. In fact, he has articulated often and recently his opposition to Donald Trump. So I find it hard to believe that Donald Trump would be willing to sweep all

of that under the rug and suddenly put Rubio in a position where he has a national platform. He's a young man. He would clearly have political aspirations. He would seek to be seen as an alternative J.D. Vance. I don't see Trump going that direction. I think Trump will put somebody who doesn't have a track record of disloyalty. That's one of first and foremost, I think, is the, you know, the criterion that are being used to pick these people is loyalty to Trump. And the other thing is fresh blood of people with a new outlook. Marco Rubio has articulated too long and for too strongly in favor of the Ukraine conflict. Donald Trump doesn't want to be in conflict He recently did say, to my surprise

It was almost as if he was making a Making a pitch for himself for office Chris, do we have that Marco Rubio statement? Where he actually says Ukraine is lost And the State Department knows it Sounds like he was making a pitch Let's move on What do you think is the Kremlin's view, not articulated,

but held internally of Trump's victory? What does President Putin think? Well, I mean, this is pure speculation. I can tell you that the Russians have for some time now said that the most important thing for them in terms of America is predictability. And in many cases, this meant that as much as they disliked the policies being put forward by the Biden administration and the policies that could be put forward by a Harris administration, at least they would be predictable and that would allow Russia to define its courses of action, what they need to do to oppose policies being put forward by an American administration, etc. Unpredictability is something that the Russians disdain and not knowing what a president will do makes things very difficult. Right now, they have perhaps the single most unpredictable president has been elected, and so this creates problems.

Of course, the Russians would like to take advantage of any possibility of improving relations with the United States, but they're dealing with a man who isn't well grounded in the facts, doesn't know the details of, you know, what makes this policy work. And has shown in the past to be susceptible to pressure being placed on him by people hostile to improved relations. Remember, Trump promised to be friends with Russia in 2016 and then ended up bragging that he was the strongest, hardest president against Russia. I think the Russians right now are waiting for the opportunity to engage with the Trump team to find out what they want. But Russia, here's the thing that, and if anybody from the

Trump team is listening, I'm just going to give it to you straight. The idea that you can dictate an outcome to Russia over Ukraine is absurd and the extreme and doomed to fail. And if you want to poison the well, if you want to ensure that there will never be improved relations, try that tack. You see a whole bunch of fake news out there about plans about Trump wants to put British soldiers on 800 miles. Trump never said anything like that. It's not part of the Trump formulation. It's an absurd plan that comes out of Ukraine and Great Britain that is being packaged as a Trump idea. The idea that Trump and Putin had a phone call was absurd. The Russians have come out

and said there was no such phone call. People are trying to poison the well already by putting forward ideas that are so fundamentally against the reality, the Russian reality, that it's designed to turn Russia off. Fortunately, Russia doesn't pay attention to American news. They will want to hear it from the horse's mouth. And they're waiting for that time for that to happen. You know, the phone call is somewhat peculiar. The Washington Post reported that the phone call occurred and Trump said to Putin, don't accelerate your military into Ukraine. Now, we know that didn't happen, but the fact that it came from the Washington Post means it probably came from the CIA,

meaning there are still CIA out there who want to attempt to control the narrative. Dmitry Peskov, President Putin's spokesperson, said it never happened. And you understand the way President Putin thinks. I can't imagine he would sit there and listen to anybody, Donald Trump or anybody, telling him how to control his military, particularly in the middle of a war. It'd be the shortest conversation in history. No, this is ridiculous. Look, first of all, the CIA brought us this conflict. The CIA has been tasked since prior to and since the Cold War time to bring down the Soviet Union. And they carried on that mission after the collapse of the Soviet Union to bring down Russia. This has been the never-ending task of the CIA. Regardless of who president is, the CIA has always had a mission statement of bringing

down Russia. The CIA gave us 2014, gave us the Maidan coup. The CIA gave us 12 permanent CIA bases on the border between Ukraine and Russia to spy into Russia, to carry out covert actions, to disrupt Russia. The CIA gave us Navalny. The CIA gave us Garry Kasparov. They gave us Nemtsov. They gave us all of these so-called opposition leaders whose sole purpose is to bring down Russia and bring down Vladimir Putin. The CIA has given us sanctions. The CIA has given us this endless war, secret armies to invade Russia. The CIA is very nervous about Donald Trump coming in because for the first time, if Trump follows through on that which he says he wants to, the United States mission statement of seeking the strategic defeat of Russia could be reversed. That is, of course, the prerequisite for any improved relations is the Russians say, we won't talk

to you about anything. If you're telling us that strategically your goal is to defeat us, then there's nothing to talk about. You're our adversary and we're just going to keep doing what we do because we're winning. If you want to improve relations, you have to tell us that you're not trying to defeat us, that we can peacefully coexist and now we can talk. And the CIA is scared to death of that. This is why the statement made by President-elect Trump earlier where he talked about anybody in the national security state that has used their

position to lie, to attack Americans, to distort the truth will be removed. The CIA is in great risk of seeing its mission and even its existence as it's currently manifested brought to an end. I would love to see, and through an interesting route, told them why they should get rid of the operations department of the CIA. That's the crew that runs coups and fights secret wars and spies on Americans. We're not talking about legitimate intel gathering from foreign countries, those that wish us ill and those that wish us well. We're talking about a secret government that does whatever whatever it wants we'll see where trump uh comes down on that how do you think um the nato

and eu elites have viewed i'm sure sleepless nights have you trump's victory? This is an existential crisis for them because Donald Trump is in a position and is inclined to significantly reduce American engagement with NATO, to make demands upon NATO in terms of non-American sufficiency, meaning learn to live without the American taxpayers' dollars underwriting everything you do. And NATO can't. This is the reality. I laugh when I hear the statements about the president of Poland meeting with the British and the French to come up with some sort of European backbone and spine that's going to stay in Ukraine and back Ukraine up uh when the Americans leave they can't afford it they don't have it they don't have the British as I said the

British military today if you bring them all together and put them in a large uh soccer stadium um they they there will be 30 000 unsold seats there's just It's not even a real military anymore. The Poles don't have a military capable of fighting by themselves. The French certainly don't have one. The idea of these three nations, all of whom have significant internal domestic problems, coming together to suddenly stand up to Russia is absurd. But this is the desperation that they face. NATO is quickly going to be exposed as one of the more, not just irrelevant organizations, but dangerous organizations, dangerous to the United States, dangerous to Europe. In the European Union, there's already deep fractures in the European Union. They need the United States to underwrite them, to bolster them.

Basically, the United States has become those parents that keep irresponsible adult children in business by paying their bills, paying for their car loans, paying for their apartments, paying everything. And Trump has come in and he's the parent that says, I'm not doing that anymore. And when that happens, that party lifestyle is done. And the European Union, NATO has been a party funded by the United States for too long. It's time for it to end. And there's a lot of panic going on in Europe today. How badly is Ukraine losing as we speak, Scott? It's devastating for Ukraine. I're looking at continued significant personnel losses, equipment losses. Their air defense is crumbling. Last night there was a massive attack by Russia against Ukraine and Ukraine was unable to defend itself. This is the kind of attack that will

continue over and over again. Even when Ukraine receives equipment, we continue to send equipment their way. The equipment isn't being used by trained personnel, and it's being destroyed almost as soon as it's deployed. The Russians are just making continuous advances. They're less than 20 kilometers away from the administrative border of Dnepropetrovsk. That means once they reach that, they've recaptured all of the Donbass, of Donetsk, Lugansk. They're making gains in Zaporizhia. And if they cross the Dnieper River into Kherson, that means they're going to Odessa. And it's just a desperate time for the Ukrainians.

And we have winter coming where there's no power, no water. The inability to sustain life. Big cities are going to literally freeze to death. Ukraine's in for a very, very rough ride, which is why I think, you know, the Trump administration realistically says we can't keep this party going. We have to bring this to an end. Trump told a number of gatherings during the campaign that he would end the war in 24 hours. Well, A, I don't know how he could do that,

but B, the war might be over before he gets inaugurated. I think, you know, Trump has done, you know, the relationship between Don Trump Jr. and his father, it's one that I don't think anybody can say they know exactly what's going on there. But I think it's closer than many know. Don Trump Jr. together, RFK Jr. wrote an article about bringing an end to the Ukraine conflict. It was published in The Hill magazine. They also talked about preventing nuclear war. And I don't believe that article could have been published without the approval and knowledge of the Trump campaign and Donald Trump himself.

And Donald Trump Jr. put out a meme today that showed Zelensky and he basically alluded to the fact that, you know, this is what a man looks like who's been told that his allowance is about to be cut off. The implication being that the policy decision of the Trump administration is to cut funding to Ukraine. This is the reality of a Trump policy towards Ukraine, and it means the end of the war. Ukraine can't survive without American funding. Do you think that the United States will remove Zelensky since we know Putin's not going to deal with him and replace Zelensky, not necessarily by violence, but by telling him your time is up, replace him with somebody more rational and farsighted.

Well, I think this is what we're going to be seeing happening between now and January 20th is for the Trump administration to make it as clear as possible, either directly or indirectly through European proxies, that the lifeline is cut off and that it's going to get very ugly very soon. This is why you see a panic in Europe as they're trying to come together to figure out how to come up with alternative means of funding. This is why the Biden administration is panicked right now, trying to say we need to get as much money into Ukraine as possible before January 20th. But Zelensky may, like any person with addictive tendencies, he's addicted to American money and he may fall victim to believing that that will be enough, that, you

know, if he can just get that money, then more will come. The Trump administration, I think, is looking for people who surround Zelensky and people in Europe who recognize the reality of what it means when the American spigot is turned off and to impress upon, not Zelensky per se, but those around him, that it is in the best interest of Ukraine to make a peace that, as bad as it would seem like, it's far better than the one that they would get if Russia continues this conflict after January 20th and will dictate terms that will be far more harsh than a peace that could be achieved today. This is where I think Trump, you know, let's get away from the notion of threatening Putin and all this stuff. This is where Trump can end the war before he comes into office by making it crystal clear to Ukraine and their European allies that the spigot's off. There's no more money. And if you want to go that route, the Russian victory will be absolute and the surrender will be unconditional. Right now, while there's still the illusion of resources coming into Ukraine,

the Ukrainians might be able to dictate something that, while not pleasant, I mean, they have lost the war after all. That is a reality. But at least give them something more than what they would get if they have to surrender at the tip of a barrel of a gun. I want to switch gears before we leave for the day, Scott, and ask you about Ron Dermer. Now, Ron Dermer, for those who don't know, is Prime Minister Netanyahu's closest advisor. He was born in Miami Beach, Florida. He renounced his American citizenship in order to be in Prime Minister Netanyahu's cabinet. You can have the dual Israeli-American citizenship, but once he got to a certain level in the cabinet, he had to renounce American citizenship, and he did that. I met him many times when I was at Fox.

Last week, he secretly visited Moscow, according to Haaretz this morning. What do you think that was all about? Israel's in a very, very difficult situation. They are collapsing from within. Their economy is collapsing. They took a $67 billion hit last year. That's not about the war. That's about normal economic functioning, $67 billion hit. This year, they're in line to take a hit of over $100 million. There's no tourism. Last year, 90% drop. And right now, just nobody's going there. There's no investment taking place. They're looking at absolute economic collapse, and that's the end of any society when they have that. They're on the verge of civil war. The relief of the defense minister, Gallant, has created tension within the military.

The Netanyahu government itself is decisively split. You know, so they're on the verge of a civil war with a collapsing economy, and they aren't winning anywhere. They're getting slaughtered in Gaza, slaughtered in southern Lebanon, and Iran is just hanging over them like this, you know, evil cloud that could come down at any time. There's nothing Israel can do to stop it. They are in desperate straits. Russia is one of the most influential nations in the world. I know here in the United States, we don't like to hear that because we're trying to destroy Russia, but Russia today diplomatically has far more leverage on the international community than the United States does. And Russia has a very large and significant Jewish population, and Russia has maintained very close relations between Russian Jews and Israeli Jews over the years.

Russia also has great relations with China and Iran and the region as a whole. I think Israel is looking for a lifeline i think israel's reaching out to russia saying hey we can't keep going the american negotiation route because nobody trusts the americans more this thing is done we're dying we are literally dying this is the truth it's not me just saying this israeli generals israeli politicians have come out and said if you don't change this dynamic, Israel self-destructs this year. This year, the state of Israel ceases to exist if they don't change it. That's the kind of desperate straits. When I say this year, I mean 2025, talking about within a year.

Right, right, right. And it's all of this to be laid at the feet of one man, Benjamin Netanyahu. Benjamin Netanyahu has killed Israel. He is responsible, solely responsible for the death of Israel. And I think this visit to Moscow is a plea for help to say, please help us save ourselves because we are dying. We are desperate. We have nothing. If we keep doing what we're doing, it's over. If Iran attacks us, all we can do is nukes and we don't want to do that. We need help. And I think they're looking to Vladimir Putin to save them.

Wow. Did the Russians and the Iranians ever sign that mutual defense pact? My understanding is that they have signed a mutual defense pact and that pact is being implemented as we speak. It may not be as intimate as the one that Russia has with North Korea, but it's a very serious defense pact and it has Iranian military technology going to Russia and Russian military technology coming to Iran and the two nations working together in common cause. Scott, thank you very much. Again, a happy Veterans Day to you. A belated, I did not know this, I know you won't let me forget it next year, a belated Happy Marines 249th. Well, next year will be a huge, gargantuan celebration. Next year is a big year.

Will you have an extra seat at your table for me? Judge, we will put together a celebration, and we'll all get together on November 10th. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Thanks for your time. Thanks for your analysis. I hope we can see you again next week.

All the best, my friend. Yes, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Coming up at, what a great, great conversation, even with the silliness about a bunch of Marines being drunk when they founded the Corps. What a surprise. Coming up at five o'clock this afternoon, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. Sacks. Judge Napolitano for judging freedom. Thank you.