Judging Freedom - Who_s Weaker SInce Russia_s Rebellion_ w_Jack Devine fmr CIA

Episode Date: June 28, 2023

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Thank you. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Wednesday, June 28th, 2023. It's about 335 in the afternoon here on the east coast of the United States. Jack Devine, the courageous Jack Devine, returns to our cameras today. We have much to discuss, Jack. Thank you very much for joining us. Thank you very much for giving us your time.

You're beginning to develop some fans and people that regularly look forward to you amongst the Judging Freedom viewers. What is your take on what we all observed over the weekend, which I will describe as Yevgeny Progozhin and his Wagner group pretty much dominating the town of Rostov-on-Don, which has a Russian military installation in it, and then beginning a march toward, I don't think it was literally a march, they must have been in vehicles, a movement toward Moscow, which most of the world thought was some sort of a coup in the making, and then changing his mind and turning around and then going to Belarus. What's your handle on this, Jack? Judge, look, this is the million-dollar question.

How can you get into a bottom-line assessment in a few words? I'm going to try. Okay. First of all, I'm so glad to learn that so many of the audience is much more appreciative of my positions and tracking them, particularly last week. So we won't dwell on it, but it's great to have some of them with me. So on the view, and again, a lot of your audience had heard me talk about this before,

and that was back in March of 22, the title of the op-ed was Putin ensured his own demise, right? And I stand by that. The albatross around his neck is Ukraine. He's not going to be able to dig himself out of the hole given the situation in the Ukraine. What happened was, and I've been saying all along that I think he's on a path to his own exit. This was a bit unanticipated that it would happen, that the military cracks would show this early should be extremely upsetting to him. It shows tremendous weakness and not control. And his whole pathway in life was he was the man in charge. He was the boss. And now he doesn't look that way at all. And I personally believe

that within the infrastructure there, the military, the intelligence services, the elites and the political and economic area look at him quite differently. And there are more people to be willing to challenge. Here's my bottom line. I felt the fuse has been burning since the day he went across the border at a slow rate. I believe that rate picked up quite a bit. But I'm not saying he's going to be out in the long term, but when the situation is clear in Ukraine, not that he's failing, that he failed. The moment it's now he's clear he failed, that's when his real troubles begin. And it'll be just a matter of months from then before he's replaced. That's my bottom line. I appreciate the candor

very much, Jack. Let me ask you some specific questions about the events of the weekend. Was the CIA involved in this event? That same op-ed said whatever you do, the CIA

should not get involved in any internal of him because it will, A, you probably can't do it, B, it will fail and boomerang. And I believe not because they listen to me, but I think most smart practitioners of the business recognize that and that would have been extraordinarily dangerous and foolhardy and totally inconsistent with my view about covert action. So the answer is absolutely not. All right. The answer is in Jack Devine's view, if Jack Devine were still the deputy director, absolutely not. But in fact, and in history, do you know if

the CIA caused or facilitated this last weekend? Absolutely not. There's nothing to substantiate that. Okay. I mean, there's nothing, there's no leak. Wait, you know, a leak from the White House, right? Something that Gibson or from the committees that said the agent, if you see that, then let's talk some more. Right now, I don't see any indications. And stupid happens. Is it fair to say that the CIA, because of its extraordinary surveillance capabilities, was aware of this coming event before it happened? Oh, yes. I think that's almost a certainty, and I think the record shows that. Let me just make one point. The CIA could do it.

The CIA could do it. Okay. Do you know what happened? I don't believe even if they, that they're in a position to do it. Okay. Do you know what happened on Wednesday of last week when some

intel leadership, I don't know if it was Averill Haynes, the director of national intelligence. I don't know if it was Bill Burns, the director of CIA, but some high ranking people met with the gang of eight. You know what that is, the Congress within the Congress, to give them some sort of a heads up on some intel. Was it this? Do you know? Well, I believe that's what the record's saying now publicly, that they went down and briefed the... It's bipartisan and it's the top leadership in both the House and the Senate. Correct. They've been around for many, many years, and that's to make sure everyone's briefed.

CIA's obligated to go do this. It's not like a choice. Correct. Correct. It's a bit of a fraud, Jack, because the members of Congress can't tell anybody. What the hell kind of a representative government is this? Eight of them know a secret. There's going to be a revolution in Russia.

We can't tell anybody. This is where your fans and I disappear. You're 99.9% with you. And that is, in a democracy, you have to have secrets. Under what conditions do you have a secret? It can't be an open book. Forget CIA. Disband it.

Maybe a lot of the audience wants to do that. You can't run a government. No government. George Washington can run without having some of this information protected. I hear you. I hear you. I want to play Yevgeny Progozhin, his first statement. Actually, this is his only public statement, as far as we know, from Belarus. This is, I believe, on Monday after he was safely in Belarus. It's audio only. It's in Russian. There are subtitles. I will read the subtitles for your benefit and for the benefit of our friends that are listening as opposed to watching this podcast. Here we go. We started our march because of injustice.

On the way, we did not kill a single soldier on the ground. In a day, we were only 200 kilometers away from Moscow. We entered and completely took control of the city of Rostov. The civilians were glad to see us. We showed a master class on how 24 February 2022 should have looked. We did not have the goal of overthrowing the existing regime and the legally elected government, which was said many times. We turned around in order not to shed the blood of Russian soldiers. Is this credible, Jack? Only parts, tiny parts, tiny, tiny, tiny little parts.

Tell me what you believe. Tell me what you believe and what you would challenge in what he just said. Well, I think what happened, let me try, it's probably the easiest way to answer it. I mean, everyone's putting credit on like he's the great planner and he's had all these relationships. I think he was annoyed. I think he read his own speeches. I think he was inflated that he wasn't the man that made the difference in Ukraine and that he had so much power and influence with Putin that they were going to acquiesce to him, right? And that he would have his way.

And he started down the highway with 4,000. You know, the 25,000 didn't go. And, you know, he was as amazed as everybody, including Putin, that he was rolling down the highway without any resistance. It's not that he didn't kill anybody. They weren't in a firefight. Where he left out is they shot down, then you kill a soldier on the ground.

This is where he's playing with words. No, they shot down six helicopters and an aircraft and at least 30 to 40 people died. Let me tell you, the Russian Air Force is never going to forgive him. They're never going to think there's amnesty. So there was bloodshed. It will remain a mystery why he turned around. What I said the other day on Bloomberg News, they got to me before you did.

I said, you know, one of the first people that called him was Erdogan, called Putin. Now, Erdogan is the president of Turkey, and they tried to coup against him, and they backed off, right? Now what he probably said, this is not what he said, I don't know what he said, but this is what I'm betting he said, Putin, cut any deal you can, just get them to stop and turn around and they will lose momentum and then he can pick them apart. And I think that's what happened. Lukashenko and the discussions with him are amazing. This whole thing is a study. Now, what I read, which was very interesting because of my experience in Chile many, many years ago, is they tried a coup to get Allende out. A small group, just like

Procursion, wanted to seize the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. They went out and seized them, but they killed them in the process, and the whole thing fell apart. So it's the same sort of model where one group inside the military thinks they can get it going. So I think it was clear to him. Whatever they said to him on the phone, the Air Force is coming at you. We're going to bomb you up and down the road, whatever it was clear to him, whatever they said to him on the phone, the Air Force is coming at you. We're going to bomb you up and down the road, whatever it was. Or he forgot that they were taking him seriously. And they found all his family members and said, listen, pal, if you care about your family and your top guy, you better turn around.

And this is all over. By the way, we'll let you live in Belarus. Good. Here's President Putin addressing the Russian nation. There's a nice English translation on Monday evening. I'd like your thoughts on this, Jack. The mutineers betrayed their country, their people, and they betrayed those who they dragged into this affair,

who they pushed to shoot at their comrades. It is this fratricide that the new Nazis in Kiev and their Western masters wanted to see, and the various traitors as well. They wanted to see Russian soldiers kill each other, they wanted to see Russian servicemen and civilians die, and ultimately to see Russia defeated. And the Russian society split apart so since the very beginning I gave orders to prevent bloodshed and

we needed time for that including to give an opportunity to those who realize they've made a mistake to rethink their decision to realize that they're putting society at risk and that this is leading to destructive consequences as a result of this reckless affair. I thank the soldiers and commanders of the Wagner Group who made the only correct decision and refused to engage in the fratricide

and who stopped at the last line. Sounds very state-of-the state you like me, Jack. He was scared to death. He left Moscow. Who leaves Moscow? It's your country. How do you go and hide? Jack, you're the only person saying he left Moscow.

What is the basis for that? Proof that he was there. Everything I read says that he wasn't there. Is there anybody that, not only did he leave, as far as I know, the senior command left. So, but what is he saying? He's bringing back the old song. Oh, I saved the day. How did he save the day?

He disappeared for 24 hours almost. Is this not a happy ending for him? No, he's in deep trouble, serious trouble. But it doesn't mean it ends tomorrow, but he's in serious trouble. But he's taken the right line if you were on his side. Blame it on the Americans and the Nazis from 1940. Blame it on them. But the difference this time, this guy was not, Bogosian wasn't from his opposition. This was a guy that he developed. It was his man. He funded him. He created him. He deals to his people. So this message, hence the amazing things that Bogosian said, fake news that this was not, this war wasn't necessary,

that he'll never be forgiven. Now, if you look at what Lukashenko is saying, is he backed by Putin from wanting to kill Prokosian, right? And I don't think that's the last act either. So what you're hearing now is somehow he, in the goodness of his heart, he solved this. He is trying to crawl his way back. And this is, he, the world

saw this. He wasn't viewed the same after he went into Ukraine. This is worsening his reputation inside and out. It's burning and it's burning at a faster rate than it used to. Is Prokofiev long for the world?

Well, let me give you a story. You know, Trotsky decided he was going to go to Mexico. All right. We all know what happened to Trotsky. If that was Joe Stalin, that wasn't Vladimir Putin. Well, Vladimir Putin better be Stalin. In other words, he has to be as tough as nails. If Prokofiev believes that being in Belarus or if Putin thinks it's a good idea to have on his border the guy that whatever you want to call it, the march of justice or a mutiny,

and you're going to put them on the border, one of them is wrong. And I'm betting on Putin having this right, that this guy is not going to be a trouble. He cannot be a troublemaker. I will squeeze him in a way that he will not be able to deal with me. Jack, does President Biden know what he's talking about when he talks about President Putin and Russia fighting Ukraine? Well, I don't know what you mean, honestly, Judge. I mean, I think the policy has been the correct policy. And you know this, that I talk on both sides and I try to be nonpartisan. I think he did a terrible job in Afghanistan, but I think the Ukraine effort has been very solid.

I would have put more in. I would have been more aggressive, but that's me. But I think they did an excellent job in uniting the forces of NATO and in responding to this. I think they did an excellent job in predicting the, but I think they misjudged the Russians. They thought the Russians were going to prevail and Zelensky would get a ticket out.

And I think they've adjusted to that. And I said- Jack, what is the Biden administration's goal in this war? Well, I think it starts out with Putin as part of an axis with China, if you will, trying to be a bully in Europe, looking at opportunities to increase his strength and make Mother Russia great. He goes into Ukraine, democratic, unprovoked. Prokoshen says it was unprovoked, and he was the lead guy. So, you know, those who want to believe something else, good luck that NATO is behind it.

Prokosian is saying that. Remember, the question is, what is Biden's goal? Well, Biden's goal is to get Russia to leave Ukraine. I wrote in the Wall Street Journal of last month, there's want to get rid of Putin so that you break the alliance between China and Russia and make this world better because of a balance. That's not Biden. Biden's goal is to stop Putin. And I think the Ukrainians are like David and Goliath. They have a stance, so they've held Mother Russia to the task, and they're weaker today than yesterday. Does Biden run the risk that the war morphs into a wider conflict involving countries that have no interest in Russia or Ukraine?

Look at Russia. Look what's going on there. There was nothing to stop this guy heading to the Kremlin. I guy heading to the Kremlin. Where's the army? What army? Where's the second army? Remember the guys that were telling you? I'm talking about Biden. Does he run the risk of expanding? How do you run a risk? What's the risk? Well, you know from history, wars have a tendency to expand, that wars produce unexpected events. Does he run the risk that this war will expand beyond the battlefields where it's now being fought? Think of Germany in 1944. The war was going on.

Was it going to expand in 1944? No. What I'm saying is the tide has turned. I do not believe there is a second big offensive. I don't see where they, do you think he's going to be able to draft? He couldn't draft soldiers the first time. Who's he going to draft? I'm telling you, there is no expansion. Okay. I get your answer. I get your answer. I want you to watch and give me your thoughts on President Biden outside the White House an hour ago being asked his opinion on Putin's standing and stature and status after the Progozhin events. To what extent has Vladimir Putin been weakened by recent events? It's hard to tell, but he's

clearly losing the war in Iraq. He's losing the war at home. And he has become a bit of a briar around the world. Losing the war in Iraq, obviously, that was a mistake. Okay, losing the war at home. Do you buy that, Jack?

Oh, I... Listen, this has been a seismic change. In other words, what you had is Putin is much weaker at home, not a little bit, much weaker. And he's much weaker on the battlefield. His lead group has just crumbled. I mean, how is he going to expand? I find it-boggling. There's a group in the United States that somehow wants to hang on that Putin somehow is this powerful guy and he's going to overrun Europe, and it's all total nonsense. He doesn't have the wherewithal.

If Putin is so weak at home and so destabilized politically and militarily, why the hell are we bothering to fight him? Say again, Jack? The worst thing around his neck is Ukraine. You want to take it away? Life might get better for him. I'm saying stay the course. You've got him on the ropes. Do not back off.

Keep putting everything you can. Keep the pressure. This is a bad guy. He's got to go. He's unstable for the world. Jack, we appreciate your thoughts, and you aroused a lot of responses from some wonderful people. Did I lose my 2%?

You still have your small percentage of fans, but thank you for your time, Jack. Always a pleasure. Always a pleasure, no matter what you say. More as we get it. Scott Ritter tomorrow at 1.30 in the afternoon. We'll play some clips of what Jack said. You can imagine how Scott will respond to those.

Ask him where the 300,000 man army is. I will. Play that tape. I will. Judge the Politano with Jack Devine for judging freedom. Thanks for watching!