Judging Freedom - Ukraine War as Putin meets with NOKO Kim Jong Un w/ Scott Ritter

Episode Date: September 11, 2023

Sponsored by: Lear Capital - https://LearJudgeNap.comIt's time to take control of your financial future and consider investing in gold.Consider adding gold to your portfolio with the company I trust – Lear Capital. Over 25 years of experience, thousands of 5-star reviews, and a 24-hour risk-free purchase guarantee. Give Lear a call today at 800- 511-4620 – the information is Free and there is no obligation to purchase. Get your Gold and Silver wealth protection guides, get your questions answered, and there is zero pressure to buy. Or inquire online @ https://LearJudgeNap.comSee 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, September 11th, 2023. Scott Ritter joins us now. I'd like to start with 9-11, Scott. Today's the 22nd anniversary of that assault on America, on American democracy, and on innocent human beings. Do you think that elements of the United States government, maybe as high as Vice President Cheney himself knew this was coming before it came? I don't have any information that could corroborate that. I mean, clearly the CIA had provided warnings of this potential. Clearly there was a lack of communication between the FBI and the CIA who were both respectively running or monitoring personnel who are directly involved in the attack. Had they coordinated more effectively, there's a likelihood that this attack could have been prevented. There

was incompetence all around. I'm a big subscriber to the incompetence theory as opposed to the conspiracy theory, just having worked in government for as long as I did. I'm familiar with the concept of incompetence. I'm not very familiar with the concept of competent conspiracy. So I'm more comfortable and perhaps it's part of me just not wanting to believe that my government could be involved in something of this nature. But I believe that there was a lot of incompetence. This attack could have been prevented. But to this day, I do not subscribe to the notion that men and women who took an oath to help home defend the Constitution of the United States of America

against all enemies, foreign and domestic, men and women who would have given their lives in defense of their nation, would somehow have been complicit in an attack that took so many thousands of innocent American lives. Do you think foreign governments were involved, whether it was Saudi Arabia or Israel? I think there's no doubt that the Saudi Arabian government was complicit in this. There's no evidence that I've seen. Again, I need to point out that on 9-11, I was not in the U.S. government. I hadn't been in the U.S. government for many years, and I was in no position to have access to classified information. So I was just a private citizen. But I monitored the issue and there's been no hard evidence that links

Israel to this attack. I do believe that there is significant evidence that links the Saudi Arabian government to this attack and it's evidence that continues to be suppressed to this day. Do you think that the CIA and the NSA suppressed evidence that didn't pass on either to the White House or to FBI law enforcement, what they knew, what they had, what they suspected? I think that's been established without any doubt that the CIA had information. The CIA was monitoring people who ended up on the list of 19 personnel accused of hijacking aircraft. The CIA was monitoring these people. And had they passed this information on to FBI, to law enforcement, these people could have been detained. But we also know that the FBI was monitoring people as well and that they weren't coordinating with the CIA. The failure of the FBI and the CIA to communicate on this issue because, frankly speaking, turf wars, it had nothing to do with national security when it has to do with whether or not evidence was acquired lawfully to be used in a prosecution.

But we're not talking about a prosecution at that point. We're talking about defending the nation from an onslaught. We're talking about the CIA knowing some of the pieces of the puzzle, Zacharias Massawi learning how to fly a plane but not how to land it, and the FBI knowing about money coming in from Saudi Arabia, and them just not talking to each other, not communicating with each other, almost like little boys who want to go to the president, like a school teacher, and say, oh, look what I found, and I beat so-and-so to the punch. That is beyond incompetence. That is malfeasance or misfeasance in office. No? I agree with you, Judge. I mean, I'm not a law enforcement officer. I don't play one on TV,

and I didn't spend the night at a Holiday Inn Express, but I agree with you that the level of culpability approach is criminal. That you were given a task, you're given a job to protect Americans. You were given certain powers and authorities to complete this task and you failed to do so, not because of incompetence, which is forgivable. I mean, just because you're incompetent doesn't make you criminally complicit. But this was because you had a turf war that you were trying to one-up a bureaucratic competitor, unforgivable. And again, I think I trust your judgment when you say that this approach is criminally complicit. Giraldi and McGovern point to the incident of about eight or nine Mossad agents, Israeli intelligence, on a rooftop in Jersey City, New Jersey, the day before 9-11, looking for sight lines to the World Trade Center.

And then it points out that they were there and rejoicing or appear to be celebrating or dancing when the planes hit. And then they were arrested by the FBI and kept in solitary confinement for a month and then released on the order of President Bush. This, of course, causes some of our colleagues, I've just named two of them, to believe that the Mossad knew this was coming and benefited from it because it gave the Bush-Cheney regime evidence with which to involve the military in wars in the Middle East in ways that it had not been involved there to before. Make sense to you? I'm not dismissing it. What I have to say is I've heard the same information. I think Mr. Giraldi has done a deeper dig into the issue than me, and so I'll rely on his judgment there. I can't say

that I'm competent to pass judgment on what he said one way or the other. Switching gears, are you satisfied that the observations, that the spring or summer offensive, Ukrainian offensive, has failed and the world has recognized it? I am. I mean, you know, it's still ongoing and you never want to count your chickens before they hatch or get too far ahead of the game, especially in something like war where, you know, the enemy can rise up and punch you in the face. There's still a lot of lethality left in the Ukrainians. But at this juncture, I think it's clear to everybody that the Russian defenses are holding. They're going to continue to hold and that Ukraine lacks the resources to viably challenge the Russians and that they're running out of resources, not just for

the particular counteroffensive operations in the vicinity of the village of robertino but up and down the line there's a resource exhaustion that could lead to the collapse of the ukrainian defensive position in the coming weeks and months here's uh general milley who uh no surprise uh has an entirely different view and argues that there has been, I'll let you define this word if you can, after you watch him, partial success. The Ukrainians have achieved very steady progress and they've maintained a depth of combat power that is significant. And there's still a reasonable amount of time, probably about 30 to 45 days worth of fighting weather left. So the Ukrainians aren't done. This battle is not done.

And they haven't achieved they haven't finished the fighting part of what they're trying to accomplish. So we'll see. It's too early to say how this is going to end. They at least have achieved partial success in what they set out to do. And then we'll get the cold, as you mentioned. It'll start, the rains will come in. It'll become very muddy and it'll be very difficult to maneuver at that point. And then you'll get the deep winter. And then at that point, we'll see where things go. But right now, it is way too early to say that this offensive is failed or not failed. There's still heavy fighting going on. The Ukrainians are still

plugging away with steady progress through the various defensive belts that the Russians have put in place. Political hogwash or based on hard evidence of which he is aware? I think it's politically motivated, wishful thinking. You know, he's very careful with his words. You can't sit there and point to him and go, liar. Steady progress. If scratching forward and taking 10 meters here, 10 meters there, 100 meters here at the loss of hundreds, if not thousands of lives, if the General Mealy wants to call that progress, be my guest. He knows what the objectives are. He was part of the planning process. He knows that the Ukrainians should have been in Tokmok, the next major town up,

and advancing towards Melitopol at this point, or have already captured Melitopol. So the fact that the Ukrainians are still beating their heads against the first defensive line of the russians uh he knows that this is uh it's taken far too long and that the ukrainians simply lack the resources to finish the job he knows this but he's spinning his words very carefully um he's he's leaving open a window of hope but there there's no serious politician, no serious military professional who believes that the Ukrainians have a chance of succeeding in this counteroffensive. Almost everybody universally recognizes failure when they see it. He goes into retirement on January 1st. I had misspoken earlier thinking it was September 30th. Is it likely he already

has a job in the defense industry or at a think tank funded by the defense industry? And so he's got to keep articulating the government line, the defense industry line, the DOD line, the get more money and buy more ammunition line. I'll tell you what, if he has a job lined up in the defense industry, then he should be arrested and thrown in jail. He is a serving chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. His duty and loyalties and his entire energy should be 100% focused on completing his mission. He should not be engaged in any conversation with defense industry regarding post-retirement employment. The same thing with think tanks. He knows this. He knows what the law is. So I doubt that he's doing that. Now, having said that, we all know how the game's played.

We know that there's wink, wink, nod, nod taking place. And we know that on January 2nd, his phone will be ringing off the hook as these board memberships come in as offers for fellowships here, positions there come in as, you know, offers for, you know, fellowships here, positions there come in, but he should not be involved at all. But the revolving door is such that it's just assumed this is going to happen. So there's no reason for him to be involved in direct conversations of that nature. We're going to take a break for a statement from the sponsor, sponsor coming out of my mouth when we come back. General Petraeus and his latest nonsense

and what Scott Ritter thinks about that. But first this. Hi, everyone. Judge Napolitano here. And the verdict is in. Everywhere I go, people are complaining how expensive things are and how their stomachs turn

every time they get their IRA statement. Listen, many experts are predicting a recession. When, how, where, how bad, who knows? But why wait and see? Do what I did and learn how adding gold to your portfolio can help. Now, you all know that I am a paid spokesperson for Lear Capital. But I believe in Lear Capital. I trust them and I value their products. Lear Capital is the company that I trust for buying my gold. Lear Capital has over 25 years experience and thousands of five-star reviews and a 24-hour risk-free purchase guarantee. Call my friends at Lear today and start protecting your retirement with gold.

Here's the number. You see it on the screen. 800-511-4620. 800-511-4620. Or use the internet as I do, learjudgenap.com and get your free gold investment guide and learn how to take control of your financial future. Now, listen to this. My friends at Lear are offering to Judging Freedom customers only a $15,000 bonus in gold. Call today and see if you qualify for it. 800-511-4620 or Judge Knapp,

excuse me, learjudgenap.com. Let me play you General Petraeus, again, using a line that you and I have heard him use before and of which you've been partially and justly critical in my view, referencing the Russian defense's cracking. Do you think that the geography and the geometry of the war still favors Ukraine and will get better? Depends on a number of different factors. Most significantly is whether or not Russian forces at some point crack and perhaps even crumble or even collapse. Again, that's not the base case necessarily. And that's certainly what those of us who are following this very, very closely are looking for. That's, I think, the key. The

Ukrainians know that. The Ukrainians are fighting for their very survival. This is their war of independence. Russian soldiers are not all that happy to be there in many cases. They certainly can't look over their shoulder and see who they're fighting for. There are slight cracks, but nothing like a real crumbling, much less a collapse. But that's I think what we need to watch for. That's what I'm sure the Ukrainians are trying to figure out how to precipitate party line again well i mean the the interesting thing is his um at least he's being honest uh he's thrown away um anything resembling professionalism or military rationality uh and he's basically going on a wing

and a prayer, which is what, you know, any assault strategy that's premised on the Russians cracking and crumbling as a precondition for success. You know, you can't have the Russians crack and crumble if you haven't provided sufficient resources to suppress Russian firepower as you close with a fortified position in an effort to breach it. The first letter in the suppression acronym is S, in the breach acronym is S, and it's for a reason. Without suppression, you can't breach. The Ukrainians don't have an air force. They can't suppress the Russian air force. They can't suppress Russian air defense. They have artillery that's insufficient to the task of suppressing Russian artillery. They have not shown themselves able to suppress Russian helicopters,

Russian anti-tank guided missiles. And this is why they're still stuck outside the first defensive belt. They're getting beat to death by the Russians, who, by the way, have the high ground. General Petraeus, if you knew anything about the military and maybe forgot everything you learned at West Point, but the high ground beats the low ground all the time. And this is the reality. Petraeus is sitting there hoping that the Russians will crack, the Russians will run. There's no evidence for that whatsoever. Take the Alyosha tank. It was that single Russian tank that went out and engaged eight Ukrainian vehicles, two tanks, six armored fighting vehicles,

destroying them all. The crew was composed of one contract soldier, that's the equivalent of our professional soldier, one volunteer, and two mobilized soldiers. Those are the guys that Petraeus is saying they don't want to be there. Those four guys all got the Hero of Russia Award because they fought like demons. They know what they're fighting for. Petraeus should go visit Russia, go to Volgograd, look at the Motherland Call statue that looms over the Volga River, and Mother Russia with the sword in hand pulling back, waving the Russian men forward.

The Russians know what they're fighting for The Russians know what they're fighting for. They know what they're fighting for. Maybe General Petraeus is getting his views from President Zelensky, who recently said that the Ukrainian front line has advanced eastward. Here he is. Fellow Ukrainians, at the end of this week, it is important to say a few things. First of all, the front line. Over the past seven days, we have advanced. There is movement in the Tavria directions. There is movement in the Bakhmut direction. Kupyansk and Lyman directions,

Avdivka and Mariinka, we are holding our ground there. I am grateful to all the warriors who make this possible. Every week, our warriors continuously keep the initiative in the hands of Ukraine. It is Ukrainian heroism that determines how this war will end. Again, for domestic political consumption and not to be relied on as an accurate statement of fact. Well, I mean, again, he's not lying. At the end of this week, the front line has moved forward

100 meters, but you lost 5,000 guys to do it. And it's 100 meters the Russians didn't care about. They're not going to die for that 100 meters. They're going to make you die for that 100 meters. So they pulled back, let you come in. They killed you. Who's winning this one, Zelensky? At this rate of advance, it'll take you 20 years to get to Melitopol, but you're never going to do it because you're going to run out of manpower first. That's the reality. You know, war isn't about drawing little arrows on a map. War is about suppressing an enemy's ability to sustain combat efficiency on the field of battle.

There's logistics involved. There's, you know, firepower, maneuver, et cetera. Under no circumstances is Ukraine prevailing in any aspect of this. They've proven able to amass tens of thousands of men backed up by thousands of pieces of equipment in a given area and achieve very little for that effort besides losing thousands of men, losing hundreds of pieces of equipment. Is the United States government trying to flip the famously neutral Switzerland into becoming an ally in this war, either publicly or by supplying ammunition and military equipment to Ukraine? Well, the answer is straight up yes.

The U.S. ambassador to Switzerland, Scott Miller, has made a concerted effort at pressuring the Swiss government to, one, put more stringent economic sanctions against Russian assets that are held by Swiss banks, by Swiss interests, and two, to violate Switzerland's constitutionally mandated neutrality by allowing nations who have bought Swiss ammunition. They have an anti-aircraft gun that's very popular, 20 millimeter, 40 millimeter. And ammunition is being held by several NATO members. They've sent guns to the Swiss that use this ammunition, but the Swiss say that you can't resell that or re-export it. If we gave it to you, that's a contract between us and you. You can't send it to a nation that's at war. That's a violation of our neutrality. And

there's a lot of pressure being put on Switzerland for that because they're the only source of this ammunition. There's pressure for Switzerland to become more active in the European Union, an act which in and of itself could put Switzerland in danger of losing its neutrality. And for people who scoff at neutrality, understand this, the Swiss neutrality, it's not perfect. I know there's going to be people calling up history and say, what about Nazi Germany? What about the gold? What about that? What about it? It happened. We know that. But what about the Swiss providing Geneva as a neutral ground where the United States and Russia could sit down and talk about arms control agreements and perhaps save the world from killing itself. Because of our interference, the Russians no

longer view Geneva as neutral ground. So even if we wanted to engage in arms control discussions with the Russians, there is no more neutral ground there. Thank you very much, Scott Miller. Thank you, Tony Blinken. Thank you, Joe Biden. Swiss neutrality is actually beneficial to American national security. I would think that it's so integral to the Swiss people and to the Swiss government and the Swiss constitution, as I understand it. Like you, I've spent a lot of time in Switzerland, that this would have to be some sort of, this is the purest democracy on the planet as we know it. I think there would have to be some sort of a referendum on this, no? Well, there's going to be because, I mean,

the way that, you know, the Swiss government has been acting without, I mean, they act without consulting the Swiss public. And so the way the Swiss public can get back is by holding a referendum. And on the issue of neutrality, there is a group right now who is seeking to get the 100,000 signatures necessary to bring this issue of enshrining Swiss neutrality into the constitution, making sure no laws can deviate, no government can act in violation of this. It's going to work. 91% of the Swiss population in a recent poll support Switzerland being neutral. So they have direct democracy.

It's an amazing thing. You mentioned it. The people get the vote. They show up hand counted. And sometimes when I say hand counted, you have to raise your hand and they count the hands. It's a wonderful thing. I wish America we had more of it.

The other thing is they can debate these things. When you come together for a vote, any Swiss citizen capable of voting can take the stand and have his or her voice be heard on this issue. So I think it is going to come to a vote, and we'll see. I'm confident that the Swiss will continue their neutral path. But the problem is not the Swiss. The problem is the Americans. The problem is the Americans. The problem is the Europeans. We are looking for short-term political bragging rights to say,

we got the Swiss on our side. There's no safe haven for the Russians. But there's very little to be gained from this. So we have so much to lose. Like I said, Swiss neutrality is important. Right now in the Korean peninsula, there's a Swiss military detachment that goes back and forth to monitor the ceasefire. They do it because the North Koreans trust them as honest brokers, as neutral parties. If we violate Swiss neutrality and we lose that, that's a big deal. Scott Ritter, always a pleasure, my dear friend. We'll chat with you again soon. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. freedom. We're up to 197,000 subscriptions. Our goal is 250,000 by Christmas time. You know what we do. You just heard Scott at 430 General or Colonel McGregor. And at five o'clock, Bernie

Carrick, the police commissioner of the city of New York 9-11, on 9-11 with his reminiscences of what they thought was happening and what they did to keep people safe. Were they concerned about keeping liberty safe? Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. I'm going to go to bed.