Judging Freedom - Why the CIA Fears Putin w/Ray McGovern fmr CIA

Episode Date: September 25, 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.

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. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Today is Monday, September 25th, 2023. In a minute, Ray McGovern, and why does the CIA hate President Putin, and why are most Americans willing to go to war with Russia? But first this. Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Lear Capital. You all know that I am a paid spokesperson for Lear Capital because it's the right thing to do because the government is

regulating too much and printing too much money and reducing the value of everything you earn and everything you own. And the best hedge against this is gold and silver. That's what I've done. I know the folks at Lear. I trust the folks at Lear. I've worked with the folks at Lear. And I use their advice when it comes to my investing in gold and silver. You should do the same. Call them at 800-511-4620

or go to learjudgenap.com. You'll have a very nice conversation with a very knowledgeable person who'll send you literature to read, which you can review with your spouse and your financial advisor. And then you can call them back and decide what you want to do.

Why Lear? Lear has 25 years experience and thousands of five-star reviews and a 24-hour risk-free guarantee. And when you have this conversation with a Lear representative, you'll find out if you can qualify for a $15,000 gold bonus. So call Lear now, 800-511-4620 or learjudgenap.com. Ray McGovern, welcome back to the show, my dear friend. So you really sent me a very intriguing question in an early morning email. Why are most Americans willing to go to war with Russia? Well, the unkind adjective to use is that they're dushed to think that Putin is the devil incarnate, that at least he's the new Hitler, and that he interfered with our election

to give us Trump. They did all manner of things. And we have been brainwashed to the extent that many Americans believe that to be the case. Now, I was in a debate just yesterday with a person who is of the persuasion that Putin is the devil incarnate. And I was reminded, where does he get that? Well, he gets that from people like Fiona Hill, who studied under Harvard, under Richard Pipes, the arch anti-Russian person, and who wrote an op-ed in the New York Times, well, January, a year ago,

saying, look, what Putin really wants is to kick the U.S. out of Europe and to say, don't even pause to let the door hit you as you're on your way out. Now, that would be comical, except Fiona Hill was the top Russian expert, okay, under W. Bush and under Obama. And under Trump, she was in the Security Council as a senior director of Russia. So these kinds of people explain why it is that people in the CIA or in DIA, if they want to get ahead, well, they have to repeat the party line. And that's why you see so little dissent from people who know about Russia and know which end is up. All right. So this name rings a bell. I believe that she testified against Trump in the impeachment hearings or maybe even the impeachment prosecution, the first one, the one that had to do with

Ukraine. Did she not? She did indeed, yeah. Okay. And is she former CIA or intelligence community but not CIA? Intelligence community but not CIA. She was brought in at the very top, at the superstructure, the National Intelligence Council, under the Director of National Intelligence, that's Averill Haynes. So she was made the top national intelligence officer for Russia, okay? That means she has purview over 16 or 17 intelligence agencies and whatever any of them say about Russia.

If they don't believe that Putin wants to kick the US out of Europe and not wait until the door hits them on the backside of them, I guess if they're going to get ahead. Why does the CIA or why do her

colleagues in the intelligence community hate Putin? Let me back it up. Is it hatred or is it fear? Which is the emotion that they have towards President Putin? If you want to get along, you go along. Right. Now, after Bobby Gates and Bill Casey made sure that all Russian or Soviet analysts believed that the USSR never really caved in and that Putin is just a representative of the old Imperial Soviet Union, unless a Russian analyst said that, they didn't get ahead. And so you end up with a bunch of malleable managers. And of course, supremo here, Fiona Hill, is the supreme manager of all the malleable managers. So it's really no mystery why even Biden and others are being misguided into thinking this is a terrific threat. You know, Judge, let me just adduce one little thing that I like to focus on.

We have 155 millimeter shells for our tanks, for artillery. Hello? Now, why is it that we don't have or NATO doesn't have enough of these shells? Because the Russians were no threat whatsoever to us. There was no threat of Russians coming into Western Europe and kicking us out of Europe. Russia imploded. It was completely unable to do this kind of thing. And not until we overthrew the government in February 2014 did the Russians become a rhetorical threat. But even then, we didn't do the shells. So, you know, it speaks volumes. The fact that, you know, if you really thought Russia was a threat,

why didn't you do the rudimentary thing and like the best of the virgins, for God's sake, come to the party with enough oil in your lamps or at least shells for your 155 millimeter howitzers. So are you saying that the CIA itself has been advising presidents Biden and predecessors that Russia is not a serious threat to Western Europe? Russia is not a serious threat to the United States. And it's only lately that the neocons have sort of big-footed that advice and said, oh, look at Ukraine. He wants to seize it. He wants to steal it. He wants to destroy it. And if we don't stop him there, he'll go farther. Is that attitude, the domino theory, of recent vintage in the American intelligence community?

Well, George, back in the day, Russia was a real threat. Now, let's face it. That was the Soviet Union. They had intercontinental ballistic missiles. They were a threat, okay? But then they imploded, and then they became zero threat, 2001 when Putin took over. transformation, Yeltsin, Gorbachev, Putin, changed radically the threat aspect for the U.S. and for Western Europe. Do I have that correct? You do have that correct. Now, if you go back to 1990, 1991, when Yeltsin came in, he was a drunk.

And Bill Clinton knew how to exploit drunks. And the Wall Street gang and the Harvard boys went in and destroyed what was then the Soviet economy. They exploited it to a fare-thee-well. The living conditions in Russia were terrible. Here's an example. World Bank figures. The average age that a Russian male died went down from 63 years of years in 2000, I think, 1995. Okay, so in four or five years, you had that kind of attrition, that kind of diminution in the average age of a Russian man.

That speaks volumes. Those are World Bank figures, okay? Then Putin comes in and he reaches out to NATO and says, hey, I'm no threat. Let me join NATO. And Bill Clinton says, well, no, that would not be very good to sell arms because we need it. I didn't say this to Putin, but we need an enemy, okay? We need an enemy to demonize. We need an enemy to fear. We need to feed the military, industrial, congressional, Russia a strategic defeat, as the CIA director said. And he also said, you know, now we're winning. And the ineptitude of the Russian military has been laid bare for the whole world to see.

Delusional, delusional. Will he be held accountable? No. But what I'm concerned about is that the American people believe that. After all, he's got really nice wavy hair and he's got a diplomatic attitude. A diplomat he was. He knows better, but he's lying because

he's a cog in the system and not only is he CIA director, but he's a member of the cabinet, for God's sake. So he serves up, but he's a member of the cabinet, for God's sake. So he serves up information, then he decides on it, and then he serves up more information to justify the correctness of his decision. Give me a break. The consensus of those who watched President Zelensky last week was that his trip to the United States was not nearly what he had hoped for.

The audience at the UN was about two-thirds to three-quarters empty when he spoke. His strongest allies in Europe, the Poles announced, the President of Poland announced on the East River in New York, right outside the UN, that Poland would no longer help Ukraine, that Ukraine was like a drowning swimmer, pulling down the lifeguards that were sent to help her. President Putin, excuse me, President Zelensky begged Speaker McCarthy to let him address a joint session of Congress, and McCarthy, fearing a revolt on the right, said no. And he hopefully believes he got some whispers into his ear from President Biden. But you wouldn't know that from what he said to the Ukrainian people earlier today.

Here's a clip of President Zelensky painting his trip to America radically different from the way I've just described it. There is a historic decision by the United States to jointly produce weapons and defense systems, in particular air defense. This is something that was an absolute fantasy until recently, but it will become a reality. We will make it a reality. I held very important meetings in Washington and Congress, both parties, both houses, and we specifically requested a format of meetings and communication in Congress that would allow for the most detailed conversation. This resulted in more trust, and I heard that support for Ukraine will persist. This resulted in more trust, and I heard that support for Ukraine will persist. The Republicans are about to allow the government to shut down

because a courageous band of them, small group but enough numerically, are absolutely enough. It's enough we're not giving him any more money. We've given him $113 billion. That's one-eighth of the defense budget. And add to that some group called Republicans for Ukraine, now paying for expensive television ads saying we have to defend Ukraine. And it's the Fiona Hill argument, because if we don't stop Putin there, who knows where he'll go next? What do you make

of all this? Well, it really is a hodgepodge, isn't it, Judge? If you look at the Polish leader who, with the East River at his back, talked about a drowning nation, namely Ukraine, and how dangerous it is to try to save somebody who's drowning. I mean, they have adrenaline, they have unaccustomed strength and, you know, not to make light of it, but he made it clear that he wouldn't touch Ukraine with a 10-foot pole, so to

speak. No pun intended. So you have that, and then you have him going to Congress and meeting the reception that he got in the UN, and you have that, and then you have him going to Congress and meeting the reception that he got in the UN. And you have Rand Paul making it clear that he's going to block any more aid to Ukraine. That's what the Russians and everybody else are looking at.

There is a limit to how much aid can persuasively be given to Ukraine, given all the needs in our country? And so the denouement is going to come next week when, well, this week, when we have to see if the government's going to close down or not. Meanwhile, Putin's looking at all this and says, well, you know, there's no need for me to hurry. I'm not going to try to make a deal right now. I'll keep going. I'll keep attritting, attritting, attritting, and we'll see what they do. So we'll see a percentage. As support fritters away, not only the Poles, but the Hungarians and others, as the winter comes on and the Germans start to freeze to death, there's going to be some movement in Western Europe as well as here. The question is whether the U.S. and the mainstream media can keep this

thing going long enough so that Biden can have a realistic chance to get reelected. I don't think they can, but they think they can. They have no other choice. All right, talking about getting re-elected, and one of our viewers writes in, reminding us, you and me, that there are Polish parliamentary elections in three weeks on October 15, and the Polish president's comments could very well have been just for a domestic Polish political audience, because apparently the idea of giving away Polish funds, money from the Treasury to Ukraine, they've given about 3.3 billion so far, is not popular, and the government is worried it might be voted out of office. Is this, in your view, do you know from your sources if it is,

a political stunt or a consensus of Polish society, we'll defend our own border but we're not going to get involved in Ukraine? Well, it's going to be hard to backtrack from what has already been said. No more military aid to Ukraine. Now, if the next several weeks indicated that Ukraine actually is not losing, that maybe there's some hope, then I would expect the Polish position. That's not going to happen. And the Polish are not going to be able to back off this thing. They're going to have to say, well, look, we have this grain issue with Ukraine. We're not going to let any more Ukraine grain and

deplete the sources, the money that our farmers get. So this is a long-term problem. And I should have mentioned that the immediate effect of this thing has to do with the election, but I would suggest that the longer-term effects will remain in place, that Polish people have had enough of this. I mean, they've been very generous, actually, in accepting millions of Ukrainian refugees. It's got to stop sometime. If there's no hope for the Ukrainians, and the Polish will know it before the American populace, then they will react in the same way that their president and their prime

minister did at the UN. I just want to switch gears for a minute, though. This is in your your wheelhouse with respect to CIA. John Ratcliffe, who was the director of national intelligence under President Trump, I think the last year and a half of Trump's term in office, said in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal last week the same thing that Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University said on judging freedom last week. And this has to do with the CIA's study of the origins of COVID. Both accused the CIA of bribing CIA analysts to change their views on the origins of COVID in order to conform to what management wanted. I don't want to get into the medicine or the virology on the origins of COVID. I want to get into, does the CIA bribe its agents to change their reports, or does it just ignore reports that it disagrees with?

Toward the end of my tenure at the CIA, there were bribes, but they came in the form of promotions and elevation and rewards, extra monetary rewards, which were all copacetic. Now, all we're talking about here has to do with Avril Haines, who is now Director of National Intelligence. Again, she sits above all this. What did she used to be? John Brennan picked her, handpicked her to be his deputy at CIA, okay? When Brennan was the director of CIA. Yeah. Now she went to the National Security Council. Why was that? Well, because John Brennan was caught red handed,

hacking the computers of the Senate Intelligence Committee that was investigated John Brennan. Okay. So what happened? Well, she went to the NSC to investigate that. And guess what? And to exonerate him. Yeah. She found no problem. That was all a bad mistake. So the point is the CIA will lie and cheat and bribe its way out of any mess. It has to do with people. Now, the more important thing about April Haynes is because she was put in charge of the investigation of the origins of COVID, for God's sake. What does she know about COVID? Nothing. What does she know about politics? If John Brennan picks you to be his deputy, you know a lot about prostitution of information. Now, if she chose some malleable people that would say, well, you know, maybe we could say that.

Well, that's what happens when you have a corrupt intelligence apparatus. That's what she did. You know, Bobby Kennedy has put out chapter and verse on this. It's very clear that she had a key role. Why the National Security Council? A key role in dovetailing the conclusions of the whole government on the origins of COVID. That is about as bad as it gets. Ray, thank you very much. Very, very insightful, very helpful. And of course,

very much appreciate your joining us today. Thank you. More as we get it, my dear friends, Larry Johnson on this and on the Nazi who received a standing ovation in the presence of President Zelensky at the Canadian Parliament last weekend. If you're unfamiliar with this story, you won't believe it. That's at 11 this morning, Eastern at 3.30 this afternoon, Eastern, Phil Giraldi on more lying and spying. Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom. I'm not sure if I can do it.