The Duran Podcast - Russiagate distraction w/ Ray McGovern (Live)

Episode Date: July 29, 2025

Russiagate distraction w/ Ray McGovern (Live)

All right, we are live with Alexander Mercuris in London, and we are joined once again on the Duran with the Incredible Ray McGovern. Mr. McGovern, how are you doing today? Pleasure to have you on the Duran again. Well, I don't like being called Incredible. I prefer credible, Alex. I'm glad to be back with you. I must apologize for, I fell on my face, okay? That was the big lesson I learned from my two weeks. in Europe, not only mind the gap, but you're in the Moscow subways. It's, Osteroszano, the door are,

are closing themselves. Well, I wasn't careful. And so if I have this bad appearance, thanks for having me on. Anyway, please understand it was a lot worse just two weeks ago. Right. Well, thank you for coming in spite of all of that. Ray and we're very, very thrilled to have you. Now, as I said, we're good, we're going on.

Alexander, before you get started, let's just say a hello to everyone that is watching us on Odyssey, on Rockfin, on Rumble, and on YouTube as well. And a big shout out to our community on locals, the durand.com. A big thank you and a shout out to our moderators. And to everyone that is watching, I have a link in the description box down below to Ray McGovern. site and I will also have that as a pinned comment when the live stream is over. So definitely check out that link to follow Ray McGovern. Alexander. The floor is yours.

Indeed. Well, can I say I'd like to go straight in because I said we're going to have a lot of ground to cover and we're going to be talking about Russiagate and there is no better person to discuss Russia gate with than Ray. Ray McGovern, as analysts of the CIA going all the way back to the next. 1960s, a person who, one of the first analysts to realize that there was a Sino-Soviet split and it was real, a person whose brief presidents, somebody who's analyzed and understands Russia and the Soviet Union before that, better than I know anyone else do. And also a co-founder of

VIPS, veterans intelligence professionals for sanity, one of the most important institutions as far as I'm concerned, in the United States, indeed in the world of intelligence, if you want to get a sense of what is happening in the world, then go to them. If you worry about some of the information that's being put out there, go to them too. They've advised, they've sought to advise presidents going all the way back to George W. Bush when they were telling him that the data he was getting about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction. didn't add up and they were right. All presidents current and future should listen very carefully to what Vips are saying.

And Vips are going to come up a lot in this programme because it is, to some extent at least, to a great extent at least, the work that Vips has done over the topic that we're going to be discussing today that I want to discuss, we need to talk about with Ray to do. Now, the topic is Russiagate, and I think there's a number of things to understand about Russiagate. Russia gate is a very complicated story in some respects, but at the core of it, there was one central allegation which made the rest of the scandal. Everything ultimately revolves around that key core allegation. And that is, that the Russians, the GRU, Russian military intelligence,

hacked the computers of the DNC and extracted certain emails which were unfavorable to Hillary Clinton and potentially damaging to her campaign and then laundered them through WikiLeaks and published them, made them public. And that is the central allegation. That is the allegation which led to the claims

that the Russians interfered in the election. That was the allegation that was used to embroider the story, that there was some kind of collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians. Now, Vips looked into this question at the time thoroughly in a way that nobody else could do. And basically they said that that whole narrative is wrong, or at least it's unproved.

And I think this is where I'm going to turn over directly to Ray, and I think you perhaps can take us a bit through what happened, and how that allegation really could not work and who it was, the role that William Binney and others played in proving that it could not be true. So over to you, Ray. Thank you, Alexander, and thank you, Alex. You know, this is a trip down memory lane.

I mean, we were not alone. You guys were with us. I mean, anyone who had any good sense smelled a rat here. Let me be really as brief as I can. On the 12th of June, 2016, the election year, Julian Assange announced, we have emails related to Hillary Clinton pending publication. Oh my God.

What could these be? Well, Hillary's camp was a flutter because if these were emails from the DNC or even from Hillary Clinton, my God, they would prove that she stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders, pure and simple. I mean, it's very clear from outside evidence, but this would be proof.

Oh, what we can do, okay? Then there was a curious thing. all of a sudden this shadowy firm named CrowdStrike, and this fellow, Dmitri Alperovich, started saying, oh, yeah, we have some little tentative signs that the Russians were involved, the little Russian fingerprints on these. So we looked into that. Now, not to be missed is that these things were stolen, not hacked,

from the DNC during the last week of, of May 2016. We know that Bill Binney can tell you the exact dates, okay? So they, if they had any, if they had any acumen in investigating things, they knew that, oops, wait a second, there was some sort of copy from one of those DNC computers at the end of May. The reason I mention that is because when they found that out, and then after Julian Assizes announced, he had him, my God. Then not incidentally, in my view, on the 10th of July, a DNC worker named Seth Rich was murdered on the streets of Washington in an alleged robbery gone bad. They didn't think to take his wallet or his watch. The FBI immediately seized Seth Ritch's computer,

didn't tell anybody about it. The FBI has chapter and versus what happened. There is a court case now where the FBI has been disseminating and lying for six years, okay? But there's one judge that's pursuing this. And he is actually going to get from the FBI, we think, the data. Anyhow, so Seth Rich was killed on July 10th, and not long after Julian Assange says, you know, we hate to see sources killed, you know, and the interviewer said, oh, was that a issue of salt? Well, I don't reveal my sources, but my God, we offer $20,000 reward for information leading to, wow, was that a hint? Okay. Then we fast forward to when WikiLeaks, having poured over this stuff laboriously, as they tend to do, publish it on the 22nd of July.

Okay? That was three days before the Democratic National Convention. Oh, my God. What are Bernie people going to say? What is he? Oh, I know what we'll do, says one of Hillary's geniuses. We'll blame it on the Russians. And Hillary looks around and says, but it wasn't the Russians.

No evidence about the Russians. That's okay. We hate both WikiLeaks and a Russian. It's a tofer, okay? We'll blame on the Russians. We'll distract attention from the content of the emails. We'll spread this thing. Everyone will say, why did the Russians do this instead of,

why did the DNC do this? Okay. And it worked like a charm. Okay? It worked like a charm. So that's the background of all. Now, during this period of time, veteran intelligence professionals for sanity,

was really smelling a rat. Okay. Now, we were blessed because of our record with all kinds of newcomers. And among them were two former technical directors of the National Security Agency, NSA. Okay. And one very senior analyst, Bill Benny, Ed Loomis, and Kirk Weeby. Okay. So he said, look, you guys built the systems in NSA.

You probably could figure out whether there was any hack. Could you put your minds to that? They did. And on December 12th, 2016 now, before Trump ever became president, we put out a piece saying, look, it could not have been a hack by Russia or by anybody else. And this is why. And we explained it in enough detail so that the normal American non-specials could understand the difference between a hack and a copy.

short explanation is when you copy something from a computer and put it on a, let's say a thumb drive, okay, there's no internet, there's no ether, there's no sign that goes on the internet. So that's what happened. And we proved it then, okay? Now, we tried to shop that around. Nobody paid attention to it, even the most progressive people, you know. I mean, what we had, and I'll stop here, what we had was Bill Binney,

who constructed these networks. We had Ed Snowden, two years before, that gave us the charts, what we used to call the view graphs, where are these little points where, where they monitor, you know, the trace routes, they call them. And then, of course, we had the principles of physics.

And later that year, well, later the following year in July of 2017, we were able to prove that the, download speed of one of these supposed Russian hacks was several times the speed that the internet could accommodate, but it was exactly the speed that a thumb drive could. So we smelled a rat in the beginning. We had all the expertise and no one would listen. I was banned from Amy Goodman. I was banned from common dreams, from counterpunch, from you know what, okay? And all we had was all this stuff going on about Russian hacking to make sure that Trump won and Hillary lost.

So that's the background. Now, with respect to the intelligence community assessment, which is a lie. Before we get to that, because there's some questions I want to ask. Because, of course, you mentioned Crowdstrike. They are supposed to be the people who carried out the investigation. They gave the impression that they provided this information about a Russian hack. They are supposed to have done a report, but no doubt you want to discuss that. And their chair, a man called Sean Henry, had something to say about all of this, eventually,

which most people don't know. Now, can you go through all of that? Because I know you're very familiar with this. because CrowdStrike for a time became one of the most famous organizations in the world of computers, at least that I knew about. And we all found out about, you know, was it Cozy Bear or all these strange names of these GRU agencies that they were talking about. So can you just tell us a little bit about CrowdStrike and what they actually did and what their own chairman, Mr. Henry, actually said? Sure. Well, CrowdStrike has an impeccable record for fraud. When they were picked, it was a month after they had been, they had to apologize for writing a report that the Russians had hacked into Ukrainian artillery and made it miss its targets, by God's sake.

And then even the Ukrainian said, oh, no, actually it was a manufacturing error, you know. And so Crowds sake. So at this position, precise time, CrowdStrike was appointed to do the forensics on what happened at the DNC. Now, before I forget, CrowdStrike never gave a report to the FBI or to the DNC. Well, isn't that strange, okay? And yet they were cited often as being the forensic people that for some reason, Jim Comey, the head of the FBI, deferred to because the DNC preferred crowd strike to Comey sending in his own little, his own president. I mean, here's John McCann say, this is an act of war.

Forget that it was an act of war by the Russians, okay? And Comey, the head of the FBI, he says, well, the DNC won't let me send my own people. And they've hired crowds. So long story short, CrowdStrike is the war. Everyone says, oh, Crowdstrike says the Russia is hacked. Now finally, in the final days of the Democratic-led House 2017, before the change in power over to the Republicans, Devin Nunes, to his great credit, who had been sidelined by the House Speaker, okay, he forced, Sean Henry, the head of CrowdStrike, to testify under oath. Okay? So here he is. December 5, 2017.

Corn Henry, his pedigree? Oh, I worked for Bob Mueller. Oh, he worked for Jim Comey for almost 20 years. They're a high-tech guy. And they set him up with this Crowdstrike outfit when he retired. Okay, okay? So here's Sean Henry. And who asked the first question? Well, is it the third question? actually, Adam Schiff. Now, Adam Schiff was the big guy behind Russia gate. So Adam Schiff says, naively, it turns out, Mr. Henry, can you tell us, tell us how it was that the Russians hacked into those DNC emails? And Sean Henry says, well, and then his lawyer. It says, you're right, girls, nearerals. And Sean, oh, well, actually, Mr. Schiff, we don't have no. We have no technical evidence that the Russians hacked or that anybody hacked into the DNC.

We have information that some of that data was prepared for exfiltration, but nothing was exfiltrated. Now, my NSA colleagues suggest that, yeah, you prepare things together and then you prepare things together and then you copy it onto our drive, right? You're doing exultrate. So that was the big thing. Now, what happened? Adam Schiff was when he came in January, he became head of the committee, right? So what do you do with that report? Even though it was unclassified, he put it at the bottom drawer of a safe for two and a half years. Okay. Then finally says to then President Trump first term, President Trump, you know, you're the president.

You can get that thing released if you want. Okay, well, tell them to release it. So they call Adam Schiff. If you don't release that testimony, we're going to do it tomorrow. So Adam Schiff releases it on the 7th of May 2020, two and a half years after the testimony. Do Americans know about this? Do British people know about this? Well, what happened?

Well, it fell in the crack. apparently, and the mainstream media missed it. So, do the math. December 5th, 2017. What's today? Today's July something, 2025, right? Still, the Americans don't know that this was a big hoax with respect to the Russian hack, and the implications were so serious. People could be asking me, McGovern, why don't you, you're a one-pony act, for God's sake, Why do you keep the ordinance? And finally I said, I guess the simple answer is because the Russians have nuclear weapons. Oh, I guess, you know, well, suffice it to say that Americans have been so brainwashed. And I feel this everywhere, including in my extended family, that they can't believe, they can't bring themselves to believe anything that Trump's or Trump supporters say. And, you know, this is kind of a burden for me because I hold no brief at all for Trump.

But the truth is a truth for God's saying. And that's what we do on VIPS. We tell the truth to the extent we can possibly tell it. Well, can I just quickly sum that up? Because the entire evidence that there was a hack, as far as I can see, comes from crowdstrike. Because what you've told us is that the FBI didn't do the investigation. there is no actual final report from CrowdStrike that there was confirming that there was a hack

and their own chair in testimony to Congress said that they have no evidence actually that there was in fact any extraction of material from the computers. So this evidence of the hack which your technical people, William Binney, the other people at the NSA, the people who created all these systems who have all this knowledge say could not have happened. All of the evidence, actually, when you actually look at it properly, disappears. It fades away because there was no report, there was no confirmation from the FBI,

and the chair of the organization in question says, we don't have that information. Am I summing this up, correct? That's exactly right. And you're doing some of this from memory yourself because you guys were right on the target as well. No one would listen to us. Okay. Now, let me just give you a little view as to how intelligence offices work as if you need it. We go with the evidence that we have.

Now, when I was running intelligence community assessments, including National Intelligence Estimates, I had the privilege to pick out this expert from the Army, this expert from the Department of Energy. I knew who they were, and I asked them, come help me figure this out, okay? So when you knew who an expert was who was not going to lie or was not going to figure out how to get around it, then you plucked them out. Now, I didn't have to pluck out Bill Benny or Ed Loomis or Kirkwood. They came to us and said, look, this is really bad, right? Let us help you.

And we say, thank you, Jesus. Come and help us, all right? So professional journalists, and maybe this is part of the trade, they can't go on just something they don't quite understand. So take Matt Taibi, for example. I talked to him at length. I said, Matt, for God's sake, call Bill Binney. He'll explain it to you in technical terms.

And then if you have further questions, I can explain you in English, okay? He never would. He never did. Why? Trump derangement syndrome, for God's sake, okay? It was just too, well, okay, the charitable explanation is, oh, you always need another source. Well, in intelligence workers, you have a good source who knows what he's talking about, is honest. You don't need another source, so that's the way we operated in intelligence. It is different. Now, Matt is great. I don't want to criticize Matt Thib, but he's the arch typical example. example of a really good guy who wanted to get into this, but was either afraid of understanding when Bill Binney was saying, or it just didn't want to go that far because it was really,

really off the charts. And we would call, guess what, conspiracy theorists and people like James Reison from the Times and others call Bill Binney on air, on video. Well, he's gone conspiracy theorists, you know, well, my God. You know, oh, okay. I'm Irish. I get a little bit angry about these things. Well, so you should. Now, can I just say quickly that in the world of the law also, people go to experts. If you don't go to experts, you're going to go wrong, by definition. It's obvious.

Now, let's move forward because we have this situation where there's all this talk about the hack, but we've actually, as we've discovered, this evidence that there was a hack basically doesn't exist and we have the expert testimony that it is impossible, the expert evidence that it is impossible, the evidence that people like Will Bill Binney and others provided. We then have this extraordinary report that appears in October and I remember it very well because I remember when it came out, it was before the election, very damaging that such a thing should appear before the election. As I remember, it was the CIA and some other agencies that put it together. I think it was three.

It wasn't a proper assessment as such, but it was a kind of statement. I remember analyzing it at the time. I found the language that it used extremely manipulative, and that did make me wonder who had drawn it up, actually. Tell us about that and who inspired it in your opinion. Well, you're talking primarily about the ICA, right? The intelligence community assessment. Yes, yes.

Well, the one that appeared in October 2016. Okay, well, the one in this, the ICA appeared in January 2017. But you mentioned October and that is really worthwhile mentioning and passing because that's really when we have the card. evidence that Obama himself was the prime mover behind this whole thing. Remember, he threw out 35 Russian diplomats. He confiscated Russian property in the United States all because of this hack and this Russia-gate thing. So here's the evidence. As I said before, the Democratic National Committee, Hillary, decided to blame it on the Russians. Okay. So Jennifer Palmyri, her spokesperson,

told the whole world, actually told us at one of these think tanks, look, you know, I drove my golf cart around to all the outlets and the cable people, and nobody would buy this. And Russians hacked? Come on. To defeat Hillary? But then, so this is late July. Then when we go back to Brooklyn, then intelligence people and reporters close to intelligence.

But we still needed to. formal statement, and that didn't come until October 7th. And then we said, thank you, Jesus, finally we have something to go with. What's the background on that? That was something that Obama insisted on. Crowdstrike had not given any evidence at all, spurious or real. And even the CIA and the FBI wouldn't report this at the time.

So what do you do? We got the two most pliable. James Klepper. who is famous, you remember for saying that the Russians, the Russians are inclined, are genetically, almost genetically built to deceive. So that's, he's the head of national intelligence, okay? And then they get this guy, Jay Johnson. Now, Jay Johnson was a nice lawyer. He's a black guy.

He's really, you know, he did what he was told. If Brennan told Obama, look, these two guys were seen associating with somebody else who was associating with a suspected terrorist in Iraq. So we're going to drone, kill him. Is that okay? Obama would have turned to Jay Johnson. Is that legal? Oh, okay. It was so bad that Jay Johnson admitted in public. You know, I married a Catholic, and I'm really glad that I didn't convert because then I would have to go to confession. Okay, so this is Jay Johnson that he picks together with Clapper, okay? And the two of them put out this statement on October 7th, exactly a month before the election.

The Russians hacked, the Russians hack. The House Intelligence Committee asked Johnson in sworn testimony, why did you do this? And he said, well, it was Obama. Obama ordered us. We knew that Obama won't, this is a direct quote, we knew that Obama wanted it, he insisted on it, and so it was really a government assessment,

not just Jay Johnson or Jim Clapper or not, it was a name of defensive. Anyhow, that's what proves that Obama was in it from the very beginning, and that we can at least pin it to the first week of October a month before November. Then comes what you were talking about, about what you alluded to Alexander,

the so-called intelligence community assessment. The only word that's correct in that title is assessment. Assessment, you know, in the old trade, we used to talk about the swag factor, okay? That was a scientific wild-ass guess, okay? Well, this was not even the swag factor. It was an assessment done for political purposes. It wasn't really intelligent,

and it was not the intelligence community. Now, Hillary Clinton immediately said, all 17 intelligence agencies agreed on this thing. And for four months you got away with that. The Klepper under testimony said, well, actually, it was only three. You know, FBI, CIA, and NSA. And actually, but it was handpicked.

the analysts. That's just so how dumb Kim Kleppers, but when you handpicked the analysts, you handpicked the results, of course, okay? And who is it, Clapper, and Comey and Brennan would pick the analyst? Now, it turns out that those five analysts, we know they were five now, they were all working for Brennan. Now, they have been, may have been detailed from NSA or from these other people that don't really deal directly with substantive intelligence. But there were five that were all working for Brennan. We know the names of two of them. One is, what's his name, Michael Van Lendingham.

Why do we know that? Because he bragged a month ago in Rolling Stone magazine. I was the primary drafter of that. And I'm so glad because those Russians are capable of anything. I looked them up. He went to the finest schools, Alex and Alex. there, okay, prep schools, Ivy schools, and he learned to hate the Russians. I mean, that's what you learn in these places.

Okay. And so it's very clear. He's pounding his breast, yeah, I was the, why was the guy? And man, I'm just so happy that I did that. Now, I wonder now that his colleagues are going to Tulsi Gabbard and saying, look, you know, they hired these creeps from NSA or from, you know, They got these, it's an old tried and true tactic, okay? You get it, when you can't get the answer you want from honest analysts, you create a little, well, off to the side, you give them secure areas, you know, okay?

I saw that when Bill Casey came in and wanted us to say that the Russians were behind the assassination attempt on the Pope. And we said, BS, you wouldn't have an evidence. So he created this little thing on the side in a new, organization, and guess what they came up with? Yeah. It was the Russians and a Bulgarian. So it's a try to test the technique. That's what Brennan did.

Brennan and Komi were the spearheads of all this. The NSA guy was, you know, so, well, we don't have complete confidence. Well, if there was a hack, they would have complete confidence, for God's sake, because they would have intercepted. Okay, I'll stop on that. But the intelligence community assessment was, as I said at the time, a dishonor to the trade of intelligence analysis. It was awful. It was not supported.

Even Scott Shane, I think his name is, in the New York Times, even though David Sanger and all the others were going full bore with this, even Scott Shane the same day said, you know, this is a really disappointment because missing has any real evidence of what the Russians is. I'll just have done. So I'm sorry to carry on this way. But it's so indelial, it's so, you know, they've, they found a new, a new strain of Alzheimer's. Did you know that? Yeah, it's called Irish Alzheimer's. You forget everything, but the grudges. I got a big grudge here. So I'm not forgetting my grudges. Whatever else might I may be forgetting. Absolutely. Can I just say that I can clearly remember you saying at the time and VIPS saying at the time that this assessment really doesn't make any sense and that it really isn't up to the standard, not remotely up to the standard that you would expect of something like that. Now, there's a few things I wanted to ask about this because it is around this that I think the Telsi Gavard disclosures have been very interesting. because first of all, she's confirmed, the documents confirm exactly what you said,

that it was made by five hand-picked people picked by Brennan. We now know that. There's no, I don't think, any doubt about that anymore. It turns out the two of them, two out of the five, weren't happy. And made that fact clear. They said that this doesn't make any kind of sense. and that the evidence that we're being asked to assess just doesn't support the conclusions you want us to reach.

And it turns out that one of the pieces of evidence that they were asked to work with was the Steele dossier, which I find extraordinary. And then there were a whole series of, I believe it was about 13 comments, fragments, very difficult to work out what they are exactly. One in particular about Putin supposedly counting on Donald Trump winning the election.

Counting on, yeah. Yeah, except that apparently of the five people could have been picked to, as right the assessment, they each had different opinions as to what that meant. So tell us a bit about this. Tell us what you make. I mean, I actually found, found,

the fact that two of these people basically rebelled actually a hopeful thing. It suggests that even even this hardcore people, there were some of them who just wouldn't go there and say what they were asked to say. But I mean, you've been involved in this far more than I think anybody else. I mean, is what you've seen of the evidence? Is it even evidence? I mean, is the steel dossier evidence of anything. Are these fragments that we know about? Were they usable evidence? I mean, you know, the Steele DUSDAA was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the FBI.

I'd say, you know, I mean, the Steel Dussie, picture this, Obama meeting with his top national security officials on the 5th of January 2017 before Trump has even inaugurated. It's okay, go ahead, you guys. Go ahead, Clapper. Go ahead, Brennan, and Comey, go brief the president-elect and tell him we have this intelligence community assessment that says that Putin's largely responsible for your victory, Mr. President-elect. And Comey, why don't you brief him on the steel dossier about the scurrilous stuff, okay?

Let the others go away. So that's what happens. They brief, Mr. President, the next day, Sixth, Mr. President, just out. We just published it, just so you know, a very, very good intelligence assessment that says that Hillary really was defeated by help for the marshal. Oh, and then Comey says,

now, gentlemen, could you please leave because I have something very, very sensitive to tell the president elect. Yeah, so they did. Mr. President, I don't know how to say this. I mean, it's not confirmed, but there's a scarless report going around. It's in the press today, just so you know, about you cavorting with prostitutes in Moscow, and they urinating on the bed that Obama. It's just, we watch it.

Just so you know, Mr. President, just as President-elect, just so you know. Now, Alex and Alexander, if that were I or either of you, we would have said, thank you so much, Director Comey. Get out of here, clean out your desk. Get the hell out of Washington if you know what's good for you. We know this trick. For God's sake, it happens almost every time, okay? But instead, Donald Trump says, oh, thank you so much.

And then because of his magnificent persuasive powers, he tries to get Comey, call me the head with Brennan of the deep state. Okay, he tries to take it, call me on his side. Oh my God. So the whole thing played out in a very foolish way. Suffice it to say that when Chuck Schumer, the head of the Senate, while Trump was still president-elect, namely the 2nd of January 2017, when he called,

what's her name the one that MSNBC Rachel Maddow okay he says Rachel I got something really important oh come on Chuck

so that night she said what is it Chuck says well you know I thought that Trump was a really smart fellow but he's done something

really foolish oh what would that be Chuck well he's he's taken on the deep state he's taken on the intelligence community and they have six ways to Sunday to get back at you.

So he's not as smart as I thought. He was a very, very, very, very foolish man to take on the intelligence community. Oh, Chuck, instead of asking, Chuck, are you telling me that incoming presidents need to be very afraid of the intelligence? No, she didn't ask that at all, but that was the message. Just a couple of weeks before Trump took, but Trump didn't get the message, okay? And you know the rest of the story. He was debilitated. He was emasculated from doing anything sensible with respect to creating a more decent relationship with Russia for the next four years. And that matters deeply when his successor, Biden almost brought us to nuclear war at the end of his tenure four years later.

I mean, can I just say, maybe this is incredibly naive, but I'd assume that the function of the intelligence community, the United States was to serve the president and to advise him not to in effect threaten him. Well, yeah, let me just add that the good news here, there's good news and there's two bad newsers. Good news is, what joy to know that there are still people of integrity and honesty who would fight back against Brennan, whom they knew what he wanted to do, fight back. Okay, that's the good news. still around, okay? And they've been vindicated and they're coming out of the woodwork.

Yes. Bad news. Bad news number one. I kept asking, why did none of them whistleblow? Why did none of them say what was going on? This is, this matter is, okay? This is Russia, okay? And then bad news number two, the answer, to whom would they go? In my day, you could go down to the New York Times Bureau in Washington, give them some documents, they would verify them and print them the next day on the front page. New York Times, go to the New York Times now? That's suicide. So to whom would they go?

They came to us. We were publishing it, but nobody would see it because we're not allowed into the mainstream media anymore. And so the two bad news is for each one, good news here on this one. And it's kind of, well, if I were, if I were not an opportunity. mystic guy, I will be depressed by all this. I think this is going to come out all right, even though Tulsi Gabbard has thrown down the gauntlet before the deep state, and now, you know, to choose words here, she's going to run the gauntlet between the media, between the

deep state, and of course the Dems, the Democrats that have so much to lose with this. So, you know, the odds are against her. Let's be honest about it. So I admire her for thrown down. this gauntlet, we'll have to see how it comes out because it depends on a lot of other things, the Epstein stuff included. I'm going to ask one very last question, and it is actually about some of the things that happened then and some of the stories that were put out, because there's one that intrigues me, and I've noticed that nobody's commenting about it anymore or saying anything about it, which is that I remember that, and I think it was in June 2017, an article appeared in the

Washington Post, which said that the CIA had had an agent inside the Kremlin and that this person had provided the CIA with the actual evidence, the information that Putin had given this instruction to interfere on Trump's side in the election. And then about a couple of years later, a man called Smolenko left Russia in somewhat mysterious circumstances. Exfiltrated. Exfiltrated. Passed through Montenegro and ended up in the United States. And though this was never really confirmed, it was sort of suggested that this man

who worked for Ushikov, who is, as you know, Putin's foreign policy aid, that he was this person who had provided that information. Now, I've looked through these documents that we've just been provided by Tulsi Gavard, and I've been looking to find this information that this man, if it was Smolnikov, the agent in the Kremlin, is supposed to have provided which one would assume, I would have assumed would go into the, you know, creating the ICA, the assessment. I can't find anything that remotely comes close to describing this information there.

I mean, I just don't know. So, I mean, is this whole thing about, you know, the agent in the Kremlin? Is it a fairy tale? Was it one of these fragments, which, as I said, look very inconclusive, in which case, that's misrepresented? Or is it, would it have been the case that for some reason this person's information was not provided to the five analysts? In which case, why? So, I mean, I ask these questions. I mean, what are your thoughts about this?

My first thought, Alexander, is you have an excellent memory and you have excellent files. This is key. This was, I remember thinking about it at the time. Oh, they have this mole close to the Kremlin. talking to Putin. Now, if my memory serves, this guy ended up in a nice plantation in Virginia, living quite openly. And he was the guy that John Brennan was saying, oh, had this special thing. And we tell him the Congress and all this stuff. Well, it was a combination of a fairy tale and a fragment of information because apparently he said that he was the only one in this little fragment that

was a dubious interpretation that, yeah, Putin favored Trump and he aspired to help Trump. And the other, the honest analyst said that's a lot, that's a crock, okay? But you need a fragment, okay? So it was made up. And the people like David Sanger in the New York Times, my God, you know, they bought the, well, they didn't buy it. They reiterated it whether they believed it or not. So there's a really interesting thing. And the fact that I have to say, as much as I admire what Tulsi did, there are traces of a modified limited hangout.

if you go back to Ehrlichman on the Nixon, okay? There's that, and there's some other verbiage about, well, maybe the Russia did do some hacking into the DNC. I don't know where she gets that. We're pursuing that. But so, that made me things so delicate. I mean, Brennan has been proved to be a prevaricator and a, you know, odd that he said Trump was,

was guilty of treason because it looks like the other way around. But, you know, this may be too delicate. Maybe this guy wants to live in peace on the farm has been given a promise. But that's what it was, it seems to me. And it was revealed later that, you know, well, my memory is not quite as good as yours. But it seems to me that even the Washington Post had a reveal later that, well, you know, actually he wasn't all he was cracked up to be. It was an incredible performance. Brennan thought he'd get away with. Maybe that's the thing I need to add here. How did these guys? How did Comey? How did Brennan think they get away with this

stuff, violating the law, regulations, its constitution? And the answer is very simple. It's in Comey's book. He wrote a book or had somebody help him write a book, a year after all this went down. And he said, quote, I was operating in an atmosphere or in a milieu in which Hillary Clinton was sure to be the next president of the United States period, end quote. Well, I mean, if you're operating in that kind of environment was the way to use, well, you're going to become attorney general. You're not going to end up in jail. God's sake. So it's really that simple with these crooks, okay? And I just hope that they'll be exposed for what they are. But as I say, Tulsi has a hard slog before her navigating this terrible opposition from the Dems, from the mainstream media, you know,

and from the deep state writ large. Ray McGovern, thank you very much for quite I think such excellent, thorough, and if I may say so, witty, but also very revealing answers to our questions. And in some places, I mean, I should say I show your anger about what happened as well. I mean, the damage that has been done has been enormous. But thank you again for coming on our program and answering these questions. Now, if you could just wait a moment because I'm sure that we've got some questions for our viewers and Alex will probably want to communicate this to you. Ray, a lot of people are asking your thoughts on Epstein and Trump and Epstein and the Epstein client list and Pam Bondi. What are your thoughts in general about what's going on if you have any ideas?

Yeah. Well, I don't, you know, I preface this by saying that I don't follow domestic stuff as closely as I do foreign. But as for foreign, the notion. that the notion that Trump has given 110 support to Netanyahu, that that might be largely the result of blackmail for violating for sexually abusing underage girls is doubly heinous in my view. It's bad enough that the, oh, that the starvation, that the Holocaust, that the, what's going on in Gaza, okay?

But the notion that this double heinousness, the notion that it could be prompted or explain by blackmail, by Mossad, by Epstein, by Netanyahu, I mean, that just curdles my whatever. And that's the, I think, I've talked to this, I mean, I'm not an expert, but I talk to Phil Jorali, for example, who knows this chapter and verse. He said, yeah, Ray, I think that more than half of the motivation here may be, maybe, maybe, the notion that this Epstein stuff is being used against Trump by Netanyahu. And that explains the unexplainable how we can, how we can support, fund, aid. genocide and Gaza. Another question for Urey from a lot of people is what are your thoughts on the ultimatum from Trump to Russia? Why did he make it, why did we take it from 50 days to 10 days? Hey, look, Trump is the paragon of unpredictability, okay?

or being able to be analyzed. He says one thing one day and some, well, on this one, it's real pure theater. You know, Stormer probably said, you know, I got a stormer. You got a 30 days, 50 days, make it. So Trump gets up and says, okay, 10 days. 10 days for what? 10 days for the Russians to decide to clean up the mess in Ukraine, right? What's going to happen? Oh, we're going to put sanctions on. Now, the Russian economy, as Alexander, has so dutifully reported, it's flourished under the sanctions. They don't give a rat's petooty about more sanctions. Secondary sanctions? Well, you just try secondary sanctions, see what happens to the world economy. Another thing that I learned from Alexander. My God, this is crazy. India, China, are going to give me a break. So it's all.

It's all rhetoric and it's crazy and it doesn't mean anything except that the Trump is deranged and all the people that kind of are also deranged because he's deranged makes a real noxious mix. From Vincent, in general, Ray, how does one go about determining if someone is controlled opposition? Well, you look at their behavior and you see if it makes sense if they were not controlled. it's real pretty easy, you know. We have various labels in the intelligence craft, agents of influence and so forth. Well, you know, Epstein was clearly working with Mossad. It's very, very clear. Max Blumenthal, again, a good friend of mine, has chapter and verse on that. That's the beauty of us, honest analysts, banding together, sharing with each other, not in competition with each other,

but just trying to get to the truth, all manner of special. Not only the technical experts from MNSA, but experts on Israel like Max Blumenthal, and experts up the gazoo who are really eager to help us. And again, there's no trace of competition. None of us get into the major media. But, you know, we come into the truth. And I think we're getting a larger share of people who really are, dissatisfied with the pap that the major media puts out.

From Don Zugar, Ray, you are a Catholic. Can you use your tremendous clout at the Vatican to coerce, cajole, or browbeat the Pope to go to Gaza? Well, you know, I don't agree with the Pope a lot, but I have tried that. Three years ago, I was interviewed by the most right-wing Sister Angelica. radio TV people, and I made a direct appeal to the Pope. Now, send an emissary. Tell Trump, look, this is crazy what he's doing in Ukraine at the time. And it ran, but I didn't get any result.

Now, the only, well, I was going to be smart here. Well, maybe I'll just say there is a Catholic principle of, what is it, I'll skip that. I'll say is serious, okay? After World War II, Camus, Albert Camus, was asked to come to a Dominican monastery. And they wanted to ask them, why did you think of the behavior of the church during the war? And they did. And they knew Camus would give them a straight answer. It says, you want a straight answer? I'll tell you. quote, I waited, I waited longingly for a pronouncement from Rome. Me, an atheist, and an agnostic, a pronouncement from Rome?

Yes, I did. And none came. And then later, I was told that there was an cyclical. And so I said, what, pray tell, is it in cyclical? And they told me, oh, it was very authoritative. And Camus says, well, if I didn't know, about this encyclical, what the hell good is it? The church needs to speak out so that the simplest man or woman can understand what the situation is. And I have to say, I'm just so disappointed.

I'm a Catholic. The institutional church has failed again, and it's not only Catholics. Everybody's afraid. Everybody's afraid. And so did it take? I mean, how many mosques would this? in Gaza before they hit a Catholic church. And what the Pope do? Oh, you're not supposed to do. You're not supposed to hit churches. Mosques? He didn't say this. Let me be fair. He didn't say, monks are okay. But he said, oh, Catholic Church, don't kill anybody at Catholic Church. Well, you know, it's giving hypocrisy a bad name. The bottom line for me is we can't wait for those who pretend to be on moral leaders. It's up to. us as my favorite theologian says Annie Dillard. Look, it's up to us. There's no one but us. There

never has been anyone but us. Elza asks, is there any chance Russia will get the property back that was taken because of Russia gate? You know, you're going to be surprised by this answer. I think, yes, there's a good chance. Now, why do I say that? Because in all this stuff, Ukraine, Iran, even attacking bomber bases, part of the triad in Russia, Putin has been very, very restrained, unbelievably restrained. Why? Because he puts priority on working with this president, the only president he has for the next three years, okay, to work out a decent relationship with the United States. Don't ask me why, but that's the evidence, okay?

In other words, I follow the evidence. After all these betrayals and going out on a limb saying, and this is what Trump has said, I think that, I'm not Trump, but Putin, I think that Trump is serious about wanting to come to an agreement on Ukraine. I trust them. My God, trust. They had been no trust with all these betrayals, and yet Putin is strong enough and honest enough to say, look, this is the only guy we have to work with.

Now, Trump, that's the fly in the ointment. He's this way and he's that way. But I think he too, and if you listen to Whitkoff and people like that, you could see that they too are putting a priority on developing the kind of relationship with Russia that he couldn't do during his first term. and that means finding some sort of a deal, which will acknowledge that the Russians have won in Ukraine, but will supply enough lipstick to put on this pig or defeat for NATO and Ukraine and the U.S. So that Trump can say, well, look, I solved this, not the best of deals, but I made a deal, and no more people are being killed, and it was in my war to begin with. Rubia Appel says Ray McGovern is a living legend. Thank you to the Duran for having him as a guest. The Russians do get the blame for just about everything, don't they?

Well, yeah, that's clear, and thanks for the comment. OMG Puppie says, What does Ray think of Yuri Besmanoff and his viral videos about active measures, psychological ops? You know, I'm not familiar with that. I know what active measures are. The Russians used to call them mockria, wet measures. And, you know, all intelligent services practice them.

And then they're accused of practicing them even if they don't. And I'm referring to Scripal, for example, and other things. Scripal happened in the country where you are now, Alexander. there are all kinds of things that have a historical basis but are not true anymore. Putin doesn't need to do this stuff. He's very strong. You know, let me just make this point.

If you take two steps back, you say that, look, the empire is on its way out. Trump and his astute geniuses don't realize that yet, but everybody else does. Okay? Now, in Europe, ironically, Russia has built up its forces so that if you want to be afraid of something, the Russians have a capability of invading Europe, would they do it? Why the hell would they do it? When Biden says, oh, you think they'll stop in Ukraine, I never take Poland. He said this, Biden, Poland, they're going to take the Baltic State.

Give me a break. The Russians already stopped. When? Six weeks after the war started in Ukraine, okay? April, they stopped. They said, look, you agree not to join NATO? We'll work it out. We'll have restrictions on armaments and we'll do it.

We'll deal with Crimea later. They stopped. The army stopped. Not the full-scale army. It was never a full-scale army. The 90,000 troops opposite Kiev withdrew because the promise had been made. Now, what happened? Boris Johnson came in there.

And the USPS said, no, no, don't stop. We're going to keep going. We'll support you for as long as it takes. And, you know, I'm so sad for the Ukrainian people because now is as long as it took and it took maybe a million young Ukrainian men out of life because of these. So my point is simply, the Russians already stopped for God's sake. Why would I want to go in Poland? There's not a scintilla of evidence that before the coup in Kiev, that the Russians even thought about Crimea or thought about

anything else like that. And you have to really search for such evidence. And the kinds of evidence that James Clapper, who says, again, that the Russians are almost genetically inclined to invade and deceive, you know, unless you're of that school. And he must have studied under General Curtis Lemay, the real Russian experts there in the Air Force. Now, give me a break. It's, the evidence isn't there. So don't worry about it. Now, the Europeans, if, if they want to say, oh, we're going to build up arms. That's feckless. They don't have the money.

They don't have the weapons. And not even the U.S. can provide the weapons. So they are saying, well, the Russians won't do it for a couple of years. That gives us time. It's all about the military, industrial complex. They're profiteering on all this stuff. And look at the head of Germany. Look at his background.

The Germans are, you know, I mean, Volkswagen, not making any cars anymore. Audi, Land-off, what kind of? I mean, what the hell's happening to the, to the German economy? And the German is all saying, okay, we're not going to grow up. We're going to do it. Oh, whatever, Uncle Sam says. Back in the 30s, there was a young lawyers studying and be a journalist in Berlin, early 30s. And he talked about how the German people reacted to Hitler's threat after the Reichs. after the Reichstag burned down, and he spoke of Shaft's mesiga egimite. Okay. It's almost as hard to pronounce in English.

Cheapish submissiveness. Shaf is sheep. Cheapish submissiveness, say that three times in a row. That's what you had then, it might die. That's what you have now on most part, but it's not quite that bad now because the German German populace is infirmant. I don't think they really want to get involved in the war with Russia. And they probably know.

And, you know, Alexander, you will relate to this. I signed up for the CIA to fight against the Glevny Vrak, the main enemy. Okay. We were always the main enemy and vice versa. But guess what? We lost our top place as the main enemy. Recent Russian polls. incredible Russian Poles.

We are replaced at the Vklaveni Vrag, the main enemy, by the Germans. My God, this has a history. So, we have to kind of promote our truth and try to educate as many British, as many Americans,

as many outslinda as we can, and ask people to get off their rear ends and say, oh, isn't that interesting? And get out and tell their colleagues, to say, look, you're being had. And it's not to be ruled out that this could end up in something close to a nuclear holocaust. And I never thought I'd hear myself saying this in this day and age.

But if not in Ukraine, look at the Middle East. Now, here is Netanyahu, you know, genocide, forced starvation, lying through his teeth. Do you think if he were put in a corner that he would have a woman, that he would have from using his nuclear weapons, I don't think that would happen. And so the real danger is tamping down the Israeli-Iranian thing. And I just hope that the Iranians have shown what they can do to Israel to the point where even Trump doesn't want Israel to commit suicide and doesn't want to get in yet another war at this point. Zareil says you pronounced it very well, Ray.

Very well pronounced. I'm not even going to try to pronounce it. Well, it took me a long time to memorize that one. Let's see. We have a couple more. Thanks, Ray McGovern, for over the years. From Jeff Bigford says thanks. from O.G. Wall, quote of the day, I'm not incredible, just credible, Mr. R. McGovern, 2025.

All right. Thank you for that. And two more. From Neil, Ray, your thoughts on the Candice Owens lawsuit. I don't know if you're following the whole Macaron, Candice Owens thing. Well, is this about my clone's wife being a male? Yeah, yeah. This loss. It's a loss. It's a lot of food from Macron. Yeah, I think I'll try away from that one. Yeah. Bono says, loving your work as always.

How awesome is Ray McGovern. And one final one from Jungle Jin, Ray. Who was, there's a big topic. I'm sorry, who was? Who from Jungle Jin, Ray? Who was responsible for 9-11? Hmm. This is a very important question.

to be taken very seriously. I don't know. There are very persuasive people who say that building 7, for example, there's no explanation to why it fell down in the very measured way that it did. We know that Bush

and the Saudis, we know there are a whole lot of unanswered questions. The head of the Senate intelligence committee of Graham at the time, talked about the Saudi influence. They were dancing Israelis. So my take on this is simply, don't call anyone a conspiracy theorists who is not satisfied with the accepted answer to 9-11. It's BS to accept it as a has to be wrong.

Now, I applaud the architects and engineers. my fellow colleagues from New York City who are doing their damnedest to get justice, you know, it just is awful to think of what that's set and trained. And if it was, if it was Cheney who would be a prime suspect, well, let me just give you one little vignette here, true story. They asked me to speak at one of the anniversaries of the founding of the Constitution. Okay. And I was in I was like I was reciting the 13th Amendment or something like that. And Leon Panetta, who is Secretary Transportation at the time, was was reciting the 16th. So I said, okay, well, I'll wait for him at this fancy Georgetown corridor. And when he comes down, I'll ask him. And so when he came down, I said, Secretary Panetta, Ray McGovern. Now, you have to know etiquette in Washington.

You can't ever, if you think you should know somebody, and I was addressed to the guild, you know, if you think it might, no, you can't say, Ray Montgomery? No, no, you got to say, all right, how are you? What she does, you know? So I said, Mr. Pineda, can you just tell me that naval guy that came in and said, you know, just four minutes left or three minutes left? Same instructions, Cheney, Mr. Vice President? Who was that guy? Oh, well, you know, that plane that went down in Pennsylvania. No, no, not that one.

I'm talking about you right there in that safe place with the vice president and his wife, for God's sake. And don't you remember that naval guy that came in and said, you know, just 10 minutes before that plane plowed into the Pentagon? 10 minutes, still same instructions, Mr. Vice President? Do they give you any different instructions? No. Okay, for that one. That one land. Well, that plane in Pennsylvania was really, I said, look, I'm not talking about Pennsylvania.

I'm talking about what you observed. Thank you very much, Mr. Governor. I think. So, my God. Now, he kept his mouth shut, right? And what do you get for keeping your mouth shut? They named an airport in California, ask them. So, you know, if that's your mentality, oh, I want an airport named after me.

And I don't give a rat's pituitary about telling the truth. Or it's simply too dangerous to tell the truth. Well, Cheney is still alive. And I'll finish with this. I have a very devout Catholic friend. And she came to me, this is about 15 years ago. And she said, Ray, I don't think God is answering my prayers anymore. And I said, why do you say that?

Well, every time Dick Cheney goes into the hospital for these incredibly expensive, intricate heart operations, I pray so hard. And then he always gets better. No, no, no, no, no. That's a joke, folks. You're supposed to laugh, Alex. He always gets better. It took me a while to get it. Maybe on that note.

On that note, the credible. the credible, Ray McGovern. Thank you so much for joining us. I have to say this. You guys do incredible work. And whenever I have time, and it's almost every day, I tune in and I learn a hell of a lot of things that I don't really know about. And you fill in a lot of my blanks.

And so thanks for filling in the blanks, folks. We're in this together. I think there's a lot of hope due to that fact. Thanks. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ray. Thank you for coming on to our program. The link to follow Ray is in the description box down below.

Everybody follow, follow Ray Montgomery. Thank you, Ray. Thank you so much. Have a nice day. You too. You too. Take care. All right, Alexander.

You with us? Absolutely. I mean, it feels, I have to say, somewhat anticlimactic afterwards to follow off after someone like Ray McGovern. But, you know, here I am. Here we are, and I'm sure there's still some questions. Yeah, we've got some questions. Let's go through them. Let's start off with Mark.

Mark Hewitt says, if the bricks do take off and the European economy is destroyed by the Trump deal, who will the Americans trade with? That's a very good question. I think ultimately they will have to trade with the bricks. Now, I should say that some months ago when Steve Wickhoff was traveling to Moscow and was meeting Putin, somebody who perhaps was well informed told me that Putin was actually already making that point to wick off that the United States started to need, needed to start thinking about the opportunities the bricks offered rather than seeing it as challenges

and that they shouldn't really waste their time with the European economy. They was already in severe difficulties and should start to think about the bricks. Maybe that will turn out to be prescient. Haroku, thank you for that super chat. Neil, thank you for that super sticker. And from Nikos, three four-part question. This is an off-topic question,

but I would like to hear your opinion on this. Before I found your channel, I used to talk geopolitics with a friend. It was at that time of the Tempe Act. accident, and we were trying to find ways to save Greece from this oligarchy. His view is that we need someone that cares about the people to take all the power, a dictator that would put all the correct politicians in jail. I didn't agree with him at the time, but I do now. This needs to be done in the West. It's the only way to arrest these people. In my view, when democracy is hijacked

by oligarchy, votes and opinions do not matter. We need someone to take actions. Have you thought about this. I've thought about it often and very, very many times. And by the way, what you are referring to, your view there has a mirror in no less a person than Aristotle. Aristotle said that there was a continuum that you go oligarchy, oligarchy leads to tyranny, dictatorship, in other words, which in turn leads to democracy. And then democracy eventually collapse. back into oligarchy and the cycle continues that way. I have lived under dictatorships. I've lived for a time at the Greek dictatorship in the 1960s,

relatively short dictatorship, but not something I would ever want to revisit again. And of course, the thing to always understand about dictatorships is that because they're arbitrary and unaccountable, because you cannot, by definition, hold a dictator to account. I think ultimately they always reduce extremely bad outcomes. That was my experience then, and it is my belief today.

Living in the UK, Alexander, and being Greek Orthodox, what's your view on a monarchy? I don't think very much about it, to be completely honest, I believe in the British monarchy. I mean, if we're talking about the monarchies of long ago, you know, I think the monarchy like they had in Byzantium or pre-revolutionary Russia was as different as you can get from the Britain of today as you could possibly imagine. I, as far as I'm concerned today, I'm somebody who still holds firmly to democracy. That may be an increasingly out-of-date thing.

But anyway, that's my fundamental set of beliefs. I also believe as a Orthodox Christian that it is the same. system that is most compatible with my religious beliefs and the world we have now. And as for the British monarchy, as I said, as a monarchy, I don't take it especially seriously. I think the British state very seriously, but the individuals who made up the monarchy, I don't. All right. Matthew says, what is Trump's new deadline about? Is he going to get maneuvered into a major war? I've discussed this a lot in my program, which will be coming out. later today. I think there's a number of things to say here. First of all, exactly as Ray said,

I mean, Trump says one thing one day, so something completely different. The next day, you can never be quite sure. But there's a few things I will quickly say, which I said in my program. The first is I've been involved in many negotiations in my time. In the legal world, it's not unusual for people to set deadlines and to demand that the other side capitulate or come to terms within those deadlines. Whenever the party that does that then shortens the deadline, and I have come across several instances where that happened, without exception, it was a sign of weakness.

It was a sign of nervousness and a weakness. A sentiment that the other side wasn't paying attention to the threat you were making and weren't impressed by it and that you felt somehow frustrated and that was why you wanted to re-emphasize it. So I think there may be an element of that here also. The other thing is that the United States is currently involved in a massive

and very complicated negotiation in Stockholm with China trying to sort out a trade agreement which if that trade agreement isn't agreed, could result, according to Trump's own timetables, in massive tariffs being reimposed on China on the 12th of August. I suspect that Trump is very nervous

about these negotiations as well. And I wonder whether his comments weren't intended again to rattle the Chinese because the secondary tariffs would be imposed against them. There's a whole lot of other bills passing through Congress, by the way, being proposed to Congress, all of which are also intended, I think, to shape the Chinese, threatening them with all kinds of things. And Marco Rubio has been talking a lot about China recently, blaming China for the fact that the Russians are winning Ukraine. So that's, the last

is a theory, if you like. The first, that, as I said, it's a sign of weakness when somebody has a deadline and then shortens it. That is something that's based on experience. Of course, with Donald Trump, it's difficult to know. And I expect that I accept that my experience here

might not be a particularly good guy. That's what I said in my video update for today as well as Alexander. That this may be about China. More about China than anything else. Yeah. Also, Trump is, he's the type of person

that he'll say what the last person that spoke to him told him. That's pretty much how he runs his hard policy. So Kirstehmert tells him all these things and he talks about reducing the deadline. Anyway, Nikos says, Alexander, I saw you on Daniel Davis

and with Professor Meersheimer recently, saying that Russia is not capable of fighting Europe. Why? If Germany can do it, so does Russia. They just don't want to. I say this, because we need to be consistent in our opinions, because if people like Pierce Morgan who promote propaganda can debunk our views like he did to Glenn Greenwald, we need to be all in.

Well, first of all, Germany, today cannot defeat the whole of Europe. It tried to defeat the whole of Europe twice in the First World War and the Second World War, and it lost on both occasions. And I think we need to understand. Now, with the Russians, perhaps I should explain what I think here, perhaps more precisely, I think the Russians are absolutely able to defend themselves. If they're attacked, in fact, as Lavrov just said, in effect, they have been attacked by the entire collective West. They've been fighting them in Ukraine. They can defend themselves and are defending themselves success.

If you're talking about conquering the whole of Europe, I think that is beyond their strength and power to do. As Ray McGovern just said, why would they want to do that anyway? And maybe, yes, the Russian armies could drive through Europe, they could reach the Atlantic. But then their problems would begin, because then they'd have to control all this enormous territory. They would expend massive resources trying to do so. It would not, I think, be successful. It wouldn't last very long. It would probably be the end of Russia.

That girl, Casey, welcome to the Duran community. Sangeva says Duran, good evening from Australia. Nikos says, speaking of Pierce, did you see his interview with Megan Kelly? Wow, I mean, wow. This woman told him that Trump can't negotiate with Putin. and then she said that Palestinians starve themselves. Wow. People like them and their followers drive policies.

And when that Russia-EU war comes and it will come, we need to be firm in our views, not a cult like MAGA who excused Trump on everything, but Epstein. Well, I mean, what you've just said about the views that were expressed on Piers Morgan's program, are I think absolutely conventional and absolutely horrifying. But I don't watch Pierce Morgan.

I have more useful things to do with my time. I mean, I just don't take this man seriously. He isn't taken very seriously here in Britain. I think he has a much bigger international audience than he has a British one. That's my own sense. Black tie, thank you for that super sticker. Latimerot, thank you for that super sticker.

And Nikos says, this 20 is a gift from me to you. Yesterday was my 26th birthday. Oh, well, congratulations. Happy birthday to you, yes. Happy birthday, Nicos. And I've almost reached two and a half a year since I found your channel.

Thank you, my fellow Greeks, for enhancing my critical thinking and also for tolerating me. Well, thank you for your very, very kind words, Nicos, and you're always welcome with your comments. I just to make that clear. So Ladis says they are trying to isolate Russia.

They want to break up Russia-China-Iran alliance. That's why they are targeting Iran. Yeah, great, absolutely. I mean, by the way, if you go to the think tank world, the one that Brian Balletik spent so much time following, by the way, so one should, and which I also spend a certain amount of time following. They make no secret of this.

Yeah, true. Monkey King, 1981, says, I have a feeling Obama will flee to Europe, LSD generous style, not that he will be. or admit he is fleeing, just all of a sudden Obama and Big Mike will be living in London indefinitely. Everyone goes to London. But I would not be imagine.

Everyone flees to London. Everyone does. Absolutely, yes. All right. What a thought. But I would be surprised. Yeah. Grod-Smurf says, want to reach out to French historian Emmanuel Todd.

He talks about Russia and the West from a demographic, religious and industrial point. of view. Even Pepe Escobar reviewed his book, The Decline of the West. I think, I think, I think, trying to reach out. Yeah, Emmanuel Todd is brilliant. I would love to reach out to him. We've been trying and no, no, I mean, I think, I think he's, I think he's rather, I would say, I think he must be getting on in years. I mean, I can remember reading pieces he was writing in the 1970s. So there might, there may be an element about that. What I would also also say is, His latest book has not yet been translated into English that I'm aware of, which does surprise me.

So we'd love to have him on, as Alex said, it's not proving easy or possible to do. But perhaps the other thing is please get this translation of his book out as quickly as possible. The alchemist welcome to the Duran community. So Laris says Tulsi just cowered to Trump over her Iran report. she can't be trusted. No, I've spoken to people who are quite close to Tulsi, and they were furious about this. And their faith in her has been massively shaken.

And I understand why. I would say, though, that what she's doing at the moment is nonetheless important and incredibly valuable. And, I mean, it does fill out the details in the way that Ray McGovern was speaking about in our program. Matthew says, what is this nonsense about NATO taking Kaliningrad? Is this all just hot air and bluster as Russia wins?

It's hot air, it's bluster, it's an attempt to keep the Russians nervous and keep them unstable. But it's also an attempt to try to persuade us that we are still strong, that we can still defeat the Russians if we must. I mean, that's a lot of what it's all about. Neil Mehta says, thoughts in the RIC grouping. will it be revived? This is RICS. RIC, Russia, India, China.

Our RIC, before Brazil. Before Brazil. My own personal view is that at the moment, there is the bricks. And then within the bricks, there is the core group, which is Russia, China.

I'm not saying that the other members are not important, but it's the Russia-China partnership that is the main driver. behind Bricks. India is important and because it is so powerful and it is so big. And currently, by the way, it's working to try to re-engage China and improve its relations again. But I think that rather than look at Rick, Ricks, which I think is the past now, Bricks, But as I said, keep aware where the real energy and driving the relationship actually is coming from.

From Old Slow says almost a year with you guys, you're my go-to for world news. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. From Panos, loving your work as always. How awesome is Ray McGovern? Thank you for that. Panos, an awesome super chat.

From Iranian kiddo, China and Russia are no ally of Iran. bin. It's a fallacy being reported by many in the West. They do not support Iran militarily, just lip service. Ask people in Iran if they consider them allies. There is a lot of suspicion between Iran and Russia and Iran and China. I think more between Iran and Russia, because they had very difficult histories with each other. It's widely overlooked that Russia and Iran have fought five wars and that the Russians' partitioned. Iran with the British in effect just before the First World War and that they jointly occupied Iran with the British during the Second World War. So there is this history. I don't believe that the

Russians and the Chinese are not prepared to help Iran. In fact, it was the Iranians who rejected their offers of assistance. The Russians have said that extensively. The Chinese, by the way, have recently been saying it as well. I think there has been a shift. I think that over the last couple of, about a week, the Iranian foreign minister, sorry, Larijanik, who is the chief foreign policy advisor of Hamanae, went to Moscow.

He had a long meeting with Putin. The Iranian defense minister came with him to Moscow. They met with he met with the Russian defense minister. He also attended the meeting with Putin. So I think something is going on. And we're getting reports that Iran is now sourcing weapons from China as well. So I think that we will see something happen over the next few days and weeks and months. And by the way, yesterday Putin had a telephone conversation with Netanyahu, which I'm still analyzing.

We've got a Russian readout about it, but there's Israeli commentaries about it too. But I think it was basically a warning from the Russians to keep away from Iran. John Ski says, who's behind the mass third world invasion, destabilization of Britain, Europe, Canada, Japan, and the U.S.? There has been a cabal doing all of this. Is the W.EF a global branch of the deep state? Well, I think that what you need to understand is that there is a kind of of different people and agencies and they all interconnect with each other. So the WEF is part of it and there's the other globalists, some of them are members of the

WEF, some are not, then there's the deep state in the United States, then there's the neocons, very strong in Britain, but who are also somewhat distinct from this, then there's the neoliberals who are also distinct from all of these things. Then all of them have their ideas about immigration, migrant flows. and things of that kind as well because they derive political advantages from it. All of these people together form a community. I wouldn't call it exactly a cabal. Within this community, there are cabals,

most of many of which have slightly different agendas and different priorities from each other. but their objectives tend to overlap and dovetail with each other. And that's what we basically see. Iranian kiddo says China and Russia will never sell jets or air defense systems to Iran at the behest of Israel and Gulf states. That is understood in Iran, contrary to some pundits, accusing Iran of rejecting their non-existent offers.

Well, I don't think I don't think non-existent offers. I mean, Russia has sold air defense systems to Iran. It sold them as 300 missiles and systems which were deployed to Iran. They also supplied Iran with other air defense systems, tall missiles and that kind of thing. And Putin recently said he gave an interview in which he said that Russia offered Iran an integrated air defense system and the Iranians refused. So I mean, unless Putin is lying about this and I don't see why he would. by the way. I think that we have their confirmation that that offer was made. And by the way,

the Chinese are saying, because there's been a flurry of interest about Iran buying JCPen fighter jets from China. There's been reports, there's been commentaries in China pointing out that China actually offered to sell these fighter jets to Iran 10 years ago. So again, unless, the Chinese are lying about this, you know, it does look as if it was Iran, which for understandable reasons, the historical reasons that I've talked about,

has been reluctant to accept these offers. From John Skee, the top U.S. General in Europe said NATO could take Kaliningrad easily. Are these people insane? Yes. I think to say something like that is insane. Yeah. from

from Iranian kiddo Iranians arms are Iranian made how good or bad they may be they were able to repel

two nuclear powers for now Iran going to be all right on its own after all Iran's been

around as a country longer than both of them and that is a widespread sentiment in Iran

it is one that I understand as you must have realized I have a lot of knowledge of Iranian history. As Greeks, by the way, tend to. I mean, for us, Iran is not a faraway country.

I understand why Iranians think that. I just wonder whether, given the scale of the threat and given the fact that there are friends and allies out there, that is a wise policy to follow now. Just saying. Life of Brian says, worse than blackmail, Trump has no concept of policy. He thinks only an interpersonal. terms, deals, grudges, friends. Starving kids don't register. I think that is perhaps overstating things to some extent, but I can understand why you think it. I mean, certainly his policies are not very coherent or very stable. He moves and changes position

all the time. And of course, we did a program recently on the Duran, which you will find, in which we said that with Ukraine, he risks ending up in the worst of all worlds. A.E. Bempler says, thoughts on Pizza Bala, said he didn't begin Pope, but he highly distinguished himself, in my opinion. I'm not sure I know who this is. I'm sorry. I'm not sure either. Anyway, thanks for that super chat. O.G. Wall says, quote of the day, I'm not incredible, just credible. Ray McGovern in 2025. Yes, we said that. Thank you for that. Game of chair says, given the current wars and the Gaza genocide, is there any point to the UN anymore? Yeah, I think there is, and I'll tell you what it is.

Obviously, the General Assembly has some value in the sense that world opinion can be mobilized there and you can get resolutions and things of that kind. And ultimately, if it wants to exercise its powers, the General Assembly has considerable ones. But the Security Council is the place where the world power. meet, China, Russia, the United States, Britain, France. So that is where the bulk of diplomatic exchanges take place. It's not between embassies, it's between the representatives of these great powers who sit in the Security Council. So that is where diplomacy happens. Now, I should say Alex knows

a lot more about this in some respects than I do, because his father represented Cyprus. at the United Nations. And I've looked this up. He attended meetings of the Security Council. He looked it up. All right, Iranian Kiddo says, Reisi made Iran an accessory to the war in Ukraine and got nothing in return for the drones. Iran is in dire need of new jets for its aging air force. Reisi was a pawn and an expendable one at that. They have North Korea now. Can I come back to what I was saying? I think this is unfair. First of all, we don't know what the Russians gave Iran in return for those drones.

I mean, probably they paid for them. I mean, that would be the simplest thing. Secondly, there's been reports that these huge factories that the Russians are building, developing these drones, are also supplying some of these drones to Iran itself and are helping to modernize them. But I come back to what I say. I mean, the Russians have supplied air defense missiles to Iran. They appear to have supplied a certain amount of military technology to Iran.

And Putin says that they offered Iran help to create an integrated air defense system. Now, unless Putin is lying about this, and I don't see why he would, that offer was made. and Putin said again that it was the Iranians who rejected it. Death Dealer 1341 says, did anyone see what Medvedev said about Trump's ultimatum? Yes, I did. I thought it was very, I thought it was extremely clever, actually. Because what he was basically saying to Trump is this,

you're going exactly along the path that Joe Biden followed. You are imposing sanctions upon us, which are going to fail, but which will backfire on you and which are going to create problems in the United States. Bedvedev is a clever man and I think you saw it in this comment and by the way, it infuriated Lindsay Graham which is another sign in my opinion that it hit home.

Yeah, and Trump said yesterday that he's not interested in speaking with Putin is what he said. I know, I know. Once again, a Biden type of policy. Absolutely. Yeah, exactly. So Medvedo was correct, yeah. Iranian Kiddo says, if Islamic Republic is not going nuclear,

then it must normalize with Israel and give major concessions. If officials think there's a way out of this or they can work this out with the IAEA or U.S., they are sadly mistaken. Well, I agree about the second point. I mean, I'm not here to, I don't know what Iranian policy is going to be. my own personal view is that Iran doesn't want to capitulate to Israel. I think there would be major problems with the regime in Iran. If it did anything like that, I think it would be unpopular in Iran.

So I think that Iran has two options. Option one is to go nuclear, which is absolutely not the option. I would want Iran to follow myself because I don't want to see a world where there are more nuclear weapons, and I think that would be incredibly dangerous and very destabilizing, but it would be a policy, and I can understand

why some people in Iran might advocate. The second option, which is the one I think Iran should follow, is to deepen its relations with its friends and actually seek their help. And I think that is exactly what the Iranians are now doing. They sent their defense minister to China, and he had discussions with the Chinese,

and they've sent their top foreign policy official, plus their defense minister to Russia, and he's had deep talks with the Russians. Iranian Kero says, Arachi and the defense minister can go to China and Russia all they want. They've been told not to sell arms to Iran, and they will do just that. They won't go to war with the world's Jew over Iran.

Well, I've already answered this question. I mean, I've said that, you know, the Russians and the Chinese have said that they were prepared to provide Iran with assistance. It was Iran that rejected it. It's as simple as that. Unless they're lying. And the Iranian government has not said that they're lying. Iran has not said that what Putin, for example, said about Russia's offer of an integrated air defense system. They've not said that that was untrue.

Elza says, Mr. McGovern, I enjoy your fiery discussion with Larry Johnson. You both sometimes have on Judge Scho. Thank you for your great work. Iranian kiddo says Chinese ambassador to Israel denied reports of China arming Israel's, quote, unquote, greatest adversary in an interview with the Israeli paper Al-Hayam. He then said, quote, a lie repeated a thousand times is still a lie, end of quote. No, I accept. I mean, I was skeptical, if you remember, about some of those reports about Iran importing J.C.10s. And I've also said about these stories about Iran importing air defense missiles from China. At the moment, I've seen no corroboration for this. I have heard that the

Chinese have offered to sell weapons to Iran. And the Russians definitely have made it clear multiple times that they've offered to sell weapons to Iran. Putin himself has said this. From Nicos, why do the British always escape criticism? Because so much of the world media is based in Britain. That's the first thing to say. Also, they don't escape criticism. I mean, a lot of people criticize Britain,

more than have done so in the past. From David, March, when are we going? going to stop covering all this modern war nonsense and get back to important episodes covering Zahar, Rasputin, and Lenin. That would be a great thing. One day, maybe. Yes, hopefully soon. Iranian kiddo says Chinese are nobody's ally.

Leaked FSB reports indicated Russia still views China as an enemy. Meanwhile, China is Russia's biggest trading partner, but Russia is China's seventh partner. Well, again, what is your point? I mean, I don't believe, I've never seen any such FSB reports. I don't believe that there are such FSB reports to say straightforwardly. The New York Times ran something like that or the Washington Post ran something like that. Well, I know, exactly. Two months ago, yeah.

Double down says nobody is driven into war by ignorance, and no one who thinks he will gain anything from it is deterred by fear. And Makratis describes war economies. Iran Kido says Iran is essentially. the one supporting Chinese economy with cheap fuel and Russian drone industry, but Iran hasn't benefited from it and it acknowledged in Iran. They don't even invest in Iran. Well, what is your suggestion? I mean, that Iran should isolate itself completely from China and Russia and doodle by itself.

I mean, you know, it's an option. China does not depend on Iran for its economy. I mean, I think that's the first thing to say. So, I mean, again, to repeat. once more. The Russians have sold weapons to Iran. They have supplied weapons to Iran. They supplied air defense missiles. They've made bigger offers, and this has been communicated by none other than Putin himself. The Iranian authorities have not contradicted him. As for the Chinese, the Chinese media is saying that they've also made offers to Iran. Chivin did not accept. Iran doesn't have to accept

any offers, that is its sovereign right. I personally think that would be a mistake for Iran to do at this time, isolating itself at a time when it is being challenged by two major nuclear powers, as you said. Now, I've said this several times now over the course of this live stream. I can't go on repeating myself. Assad did the same thing. Yeah. In theory, it did the same thing. He did the same thing. He isolated himself and we see what happened. We saw what happened. Yeah. Iranian Kido says Russian and Chinese investments in Iran are minuscule compared to their investments in the Persian Gulf states. And frankly, Bricks has had no effect on Iran's economy. The inflation went up under Raisi and continues to rise.

Well, I mean, again, I've been repeating myself endlessly. If you don't want, well, in that case, I mean, I think Iran can just isolate itself and then make a decision. I mean, it's up to Iran at the end of the day. what it intends to do. It has only been a member of Bricks for a relatively short time. Sophisticated caveman says, will the new EU tariffs cause more or less European imports to the US? Will there be more or less American exports to Europe? Well, I can't see how they can be more European exports to the United States, given the nature of the agreement that was done. In fact, it's going to be an absolute,

it's going to be a massive blow to European exporters to the United States. States. And of course, American exports to the U.S., to Europe, rather, they face no tariff barriers at all. The alchemist says trust is gone. Will they ever trust the West again? No. Iranian kiddo says last fall, the IRGC finally came out and pretend they no longer wanted to buy S-400s and jets from Russia to say face, just looking at Persian social media, everybody knew it was sold to Algeria. Now they are selling SU57s to India. Well, first of all, I mean, you're saying all sorts of things.

I mean, there's no sales of SU57s to India. Maybe you should trust more what the IRGC are saying than others. I mean, and about the internal economic situation in Iran. Well, there may be all kinds of factors about that, which are unrelated to Briggs. As far as I could see, by the way, economic relations between Iran and Russia and China are improving, and over time they will have an effect on the economy. Elsa says, Alex, you said that the future of the EU would be tourism and having a military complex,

but Ursula made the European military complex disappear. Yes. Alex did say that, and he's right. And you're right, too else. And the military complex is just going to be buying the weapons. from the US. Exactly. That's it.

Iranian kiddo says, we need to know the terms of this integrated air defense system they claim Iran had rejected. If it didn't allow Iran to operate them, then Iranians are not going to accept that. Iran wants to be in charge of its own skies. Well, again, you ask valid questions. I don't know. But I mean, surely these are answers that the Iranian authorities can give. And I don't know, at the moment, I haven't seen them or heard them.

Usually these things are negotiated and terms of use are negotiated. And again, ultimately, I think Iran would be wise in seeking help from his friends. Elza 06 says Melania didn't see reports from Gaza, did she? No. Melania Trump. No, I think that's a very good point, actually. I mean, supposedly she's complaining to Trump about. He does, yeah, my thinking on this is he did the same thing with Syria and Ivan or Ivanka.

Remember back in the back of the day with Syria, she showed pictures to Trump or complained to Trump, and then Trump sent missiles into Syria. I think Trump uses this often. I'm afraid I agree. Yeah. Matthew says, still think we're past the most dangerous point of the Ukraine war. Top reporting, as always, chaps. Yes.

Actually, I think the most dangerous period was under Biden. I don't think Trump is going to take us to a war with Russia. Knitswitch says the Russian will give Europe the waste bin treatment. Only open the lid if you have to dispose of something else. Stay away. Yes. Iranian kiddo says last time Russians were in charge of air defense system, it was used more as a garnish sitting idly as Syrians and Iranians there came under repeater.

fire. Well, again, I mean, I don't agree with any of that. And all I would say is that if you're talking about when the Russians were in Syria, I mean, we were not having attacks on the Syrian Defense Ministry in Damascus. So, I mean, you know, I can't accept your view that these things didn't make any difference. They clearly made a huge difference. Rafael says, I am with Alexander 100%. I was watching a Russian TV show.

Russians are saying they know Europe is broke. They do not want to be the one responsible to feed and take care of them for 100 years. The U.S. is going to be feeding and taking care of Europe for 100. Which was exactly the point that Alex made when we discussed these sanctions. This thing that Trump has agreed with Ursula is a trap for the United States. not a trap that Osir cunningly laid. It's a trap that will develop of itself. Iranian kiddo says millions of Russians live in Israel

and Russian Israeli billionaires have much influence. Putin is a friend of Israel, Medellahu, is his old pal. If anyone thinks Russia supports Iran against them, then I have a bridge to sell you. I have to tell you. I've already answered all the question. exhaustively. I mean, I cannot go on repeating these points

endlessly. Russia doesn't sell weapons and has never offered to sell weapons to Israel. It has sold weapons and is offering to sell weapons to Iran. That is a completely different scenario. Take the weapons

and take the help. That would be my advice if it counts for anything. Yeah. Sparky says, it'll be enough for Russia to deal with the NATO sponsored banderite guerrillas in western Ukraine, so they're not even thinking about taking Europe, which has nothing they need or want. Exactly. Sophisticated caveman says, Alexander, off topic, but in your opinion, what could be done to help the Rust Belt and industrial cities in the U.S. like Detroit and Cleveland?

I think you could actually develop a pretty effective and successful industrial policy. you could do all kinds of things that way. And I'm absolutely prepared to accept that an element of protection could play a significant role in that too. But, I mean, you do need to develop that industrial policy. The United States has all the means to do so. It's still got the engineers, the scientists.

It would need massive retraining of workforces. It would need a proper plan looking at what can be developed there, what is needed, but it can be done. The United States used to be superb at this kind of thing. Elza says three years plus with you, gentlemen and community. Thank you very much, Elsa. Iranian kiddo says TRT had an interesting article a while back by Mark Katz, saying Israeli-Iran

hostility serves Putin's interests by preventing Peseshkiyan from tilting towards the west. So you're going to listen to what the, so the, you're going to listen to what the Israeli defense minister says, just say. Iranian Kido says, as John Helmer pointed out in an interview with Dimitri Lascaris YouTube channel on June 25th, President Putin only asked Netanyahu not to target the Russians in Iran in the phone call, not Iran itself. Which, well, I mean, was, oh, I have to have scary, I didn't watch this program. But, I mean, I'm a little surprised by that comment because I didn't know.

that Putin and his official share that kind of information about what they say in a telephone call with Netanyahu. I mean, is that in any read? Sparky says it's encouraging that the Bricks submit, that the Bricks summit in Brazil turned out much better than expected. Modi seemed to like it, so maybe India will lean more into bricks, build a better world with Bricks. Absolutely, I agree. And I think India at the moment is doing major, making major efforts to develop closer relations with China and we'll see where that goes. Neil Mehta says, will Russia stay stable after Putin? Russia is stronger than what it was in the 90s, but still, how is Putin planning his succession? This is a huge question. I can't look

into a crystal ball. My guess is yes, it will remain stable. And I would have thought that Putin, who spent most of his career. as president trying to develop stability in Russia, will do everything he possibly can to make sure that it remains stable after he's gone. But, you know, I can't look that far into the future and say, for the moment he is there, and most Russians are very happy he is. Iranian kiddo says President Putin always gone out of his way to avoid public criticism of Israel, despite their recent involvement in attacks on the air bases

or causing Russian Air Force to crash back in Syria in 2018? Well, Putin has criticized Israel. Often he spoke about Israel's attacks, recent attack on Iran during the 12th day war, as aggression. He called it unprovoked aggression. It's there in the Russian redounds. Sparky says,

anytime someone says Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can't help but think before Israel we had no enemies in the Middle East, U.S. missionary, John Sheehan. You quote this often on our live streams and you're right to do so. Iranian kiddo says President Putin claimed that Russia has no defense pact with Iran. That's categorically false, as indicated under Article 4 of the treaty. John Helmer also made this point on Dimitri Lascarus' on June 25th. I've analyzed it extensively. I did so at the time when the treaty was published.

It is not a full defense pact. It does provide for security arrangements. And again, for the record, Putin said that the Russians did suggest to Iran that it might be renegotiated as a proper defense pact during the negotiations. And it was the Iranians who refused. Again, the Iranians have not contradicted that. Sparky says President Trump surrounds himself with people who constantly lie to him in order to reinforce false premises set by his.

primary source controlled opposition Fox News. Yes. Iranian Kido says, according to Article 4 of the treaty, quote, the contracting parties shall consult and cooperate in countering common military and security threats of a bilateral and regional nature, end of quote. Well, that's not a security treaty. That's not an alliance. Nitzvich says, when you have two options, the threat of violence or making friends, make friends.

Yeah. Industrial farting complex says MAGA influencers are participating in the cover-up and war jingoism. How do successful modern populist movements combat this corruption amongst their leaders? Through openness, publicity, transparency, and insistence on accountability. Jam says Putin lost his brother to famine. His view on Gaza? Well, good question. Of course, he never knew his brother, because he's brother. died before he was born, just to say. And his brother actually died during the siege itself.

Putin was born after the war. So he never knew his brother. He has referenced his brother several times, and he's discussed the very harrowing circumstances in which he died. He has actually spoken up about Gaza's on several occasions. He spoke to Netanyahu yesterday. I want to study the read out, Catherine.

Salilla, thank you for that super sticker. Niko says, I forgot to mention that I'm trying to convince the kid from Mariupil to perhaps talk to you, but he is shy for now. His channel is called Videos for Marupol. It's a great insight of Mario. Okay. Thank you for that. Nicos Iranian kiddo says, just like globalists that believe they are always right,

some always feel compelled to always defend the Russian position, even when they refuse to attack HTS approaching. Damascus, on M5 highway or not defending the Armenians. They did defend. They did attack HTS as it approached Damascus. As for the Armenians, the Armenians again refused to ask them for help. So what exactly were the Russians supposed to do? Now, you know, we do want, I have criticized the Russians many times about many things.

To give an example, I think the Russians massively mishandled. their relations with Ukraine in the lead up to the Midan events. I think they made huge mistakes there. I think they were incredibly naive and foolish in many of their expectations about Europe and the relations that they could build up with Europe. So absolutely, I did criticize the Russians. They still call them partners. They still call them partners.

You can criticize their military strategies in Ukraine. you can do all kinds of things. But, you know, there is criticism and then there is, you know, attempts to basically say that the Russians are responsible for all sorts of things that they are not. And in this case, if Armenia doesn't want Russian military help because Paschignan doesn't like Russia,

and if Iran doesn't want Russian military help, because Iran is an independent country that's fought for its independence, has good historic reasons to be suspicious of Russia. Well, you know, don't expect the Russians then to help. I mean, it's as simple as that. Iranian kiddo says, I like how all of a sudden Russia realized there are Azerbaijani criminal elements in Russia, LOL. It's complete propaganda.

The whole debacle is about Azerbaijan selling gas to Ukraine. It's a smokescreen. Well, maybe you're right about this. I mean, all I will say is that there's been lots of explanations and reasons. for it. But my own understanding of it, and again, I've had this from several sources, is that what ultimately caused the situation to go viral, to go bad, was that the Russians discovered that the Azerbaijans in the Urals were trading in military secrets. And that was something that the Russians were not going to accept.

Rafael says, my prediction, Germany will be divided in two again, and this time it will stay like this forever. Alaska will be Russia again. I'm not going to make this prediction. I hope that's not true about Germany, by the way. Double down says defense wins championships. Offense gets the glory. Sparky says using Akam's Razor, isn't it obvious, Brian Berletic,

not Soros is puppet master of the world. How else can this apparent clairvoyance be explained? No mortal, no mortal, would read 700-page think tank documents. Well, I have to say, I mean, churning one's way through that material. I cannot begin to tell you, I can't begin to say how horrible that material is and what an agony it is to read through it, by the way. So, I mean, what Brian Balletic does is extraordinary.

Iranian kiddo says Russia supports Zengizod Corridor. It would connect Azerbaijan to Navajan. enclave which has a border with Turkey, it would lead to annexation of southern Armenia and its border with Iran and eventual partition of Armenia. No, well, again, I'm not going to get into the details of this. I mean, the Iranian, the Azarias, the Armenians, agreed as part of a peace treaty that's supposed to be between them, that this corridor should be available for transit. There is negotiations to do that.

Again, if Armenia had good relations with Russia, opening up this corridor would I think benefit Armenia. It has very, very bad relations with Russia. And so the result is that the negotiation is excessively tipped in Azerbaijan's favor. The problem is, again, with Paschignan, not with the Kremlin. Iranian Kido says Russia has no cards against Azerbaijan. They need Azerbaijan to export their oil and gas, and Azeris know that. Plus, Russia supports this pan-Turkic-Turnean NATO-Zegger corridor.

Iran was the only one rejecting this idea. No, again, I don't think that that is true. And Azerbaijan has no cards to play against Russia. We did a program with Lashir Tidrardze, and he explained, who is from the region, by the way, and he explained this all very. well. Iranian Kido says one can't blame a country of three million for losing the war. Armenia has no natural resources to fund their military. They don't have Israel and Turkey to back them either.

Well, indeed, I don't blame them for losing a war. And that takes us back to Iran. What Armenia needed to do was to make sure that its alliance with Russia was strong rather than work constantly to undermine it and refuse Russia's assistance, which is what Armenia did. And in my opinion, that's exactly the same mistake that Iran is making and which, as Alex correctly said, Syrian then. Iranian kiddo says one should understand Armenia, a small Christian country surrounded by Turks has to make lots of maneuvers to survive. It's not all about Paschignan being a rusiphobe, and I'm defending him. He jails his critics. Well, I will, states this. Most

Armenians are, I don't think I know a single Armenian, and I know quite a few Armenians, doubt that it is Paschignan, who has managed to lose Armenia or his positions. I mean, I don't think there's any doubt about this.

I remember covering this. Didn't, didn't Paschignan say that Nagorno-Karabakh is Azerbaijan? I mean, didn't he say that? Yeah, absolutely. He did. And Putin was like scratching his head going, before the war. Yeah.

Before the war. Anyway, Toaster LMP says, just wanted to say, thank you for you both for mentioning your Orthodox faith. I became a Catholic human in the Greek Orthodox Church last week. Thanks to you both. Thank you.

Thank you. Double down says defense. I read that defense wins championships. Off that's against the glory. Iranian kiddo says, Russian peace forces stood. as civilians were ravaged by angry Islamist mobs and La Cynchon corridor remained blocked. That's why, according to Moscow, Times, only 30% of Armenians view Russia positively down from 90% in 2019.

It's not a reliable media outlet. It's not published in Moscow, by the way. Not even in Moscow. It's published in Amsterdam, just a second. Yeah. Rafael Lingot says, my prediction is Germany will be divided again. Okay, yes, I read that. Thank you, Raphael, for that. Iranian kiddo says, by the way, Mark Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University of Virginia. I wasn't referring to.

Oh, you're, you're, okay, okay, but it's still, Mark, yeah, but it's still, it's still, it's still amounts to the same thing. I mean, that's an opinion, which I don't actually share. Neil Mehta says, has diplomacy failed the Palestinian people? It's frustrating to see such destruction of Gaza. Yes. In words. Elsa says Matvienko went to a woman's conference in the Hague. She invited Russia's critics to come to Dombas and see the memorials for children.

I'm surprised that she was able to visit the Hague. Sparky says, like social media, custom steers content and advertising to special users, content supporting globalist narratives, are steering to the first lady and others. So they legitimize them to President Trump. Iranian kiddo says, by the way, Iranians quote, unquote, being suspicious of Russia is not all about what happened 200 years ago.

It's about what they are doing now. Some Iranian officials are now saying they don't support Iran. Some Russian officials. Some Iranian officials are now saying they, in reference to Russia, does not support Iran. Can I just say I have lived through the whole history of Russian-Iranian relations.

They have been very bad at various times since the time of the Islamic Revolution. And of course they were very, very bad during the time of the Shah. I mean, this is a long-term thing. And I understand the reasons for it. All I am saying is at this particular time, maintaining that suspicion, of Russia is a luxury. But it's up to Iran. If Iran wants to take on Israel and the United States by itself and refuse offers of help from those who are making them, then that's up to Iran. You know, it's an Iranian decision to make at the end of the day. All right. I think that is

that is everything, Alexander. Final thoughts as I just do a final. Well, I think we've had an absolutely outstanding program with Ray McGovern. He absolutely said it is a trip down memory lane. But to see all of this, to hear all of this, somebody who's actually worked with intelligence and has done intelligence work and knows all of the mechanics of it, I mean, that is enormously, enormously satisfying and insightful. Alexander, one final question from the 0.09.

What is Alexander's opinion of Shanghai Cooperation Organization as an influential global institution? Right. I think it is not influential as a global institution, but I would say that it is part of that web of relationships that the Chinese and the Russians are spinning around each other, which of course bricks is by far the most important, which are gradually congealing together and creating what is in effect. I won't say exactly a block, but if you like, an alternative system for that of the West. And we'll end it with Sparky's Super Chat. What does a president win when unbeknownst to him, his CIA restarts an old border war between Cambodia and Thailand when he's credited with stopping it, the Nobel Griffith Prize? All about the Nobel Peace Prize. All about the North Carolina.

I understand the foreign policy right now. it's all about that prize. All right. We will end it there. Neil Metta says, when can we expect Jeffrey Sacks on this show? Wow. Neil,

you are amazing, Neil, you are amazing because we will have sex on Thursday, right? Just that's right. That's right. Wow. Neil Meta. Cool way to end the live stream.

All right. Take care, everybody. Thank you for everyone that watched us, to everyone that watched us on Odyssey, on Rock Finn. locals rumble youtube thank you to our moderators zarael and peter and uh who else alexander was in and uh da da da da da da and brett and and i think um i'm missing a bunch of moderators yeah anyway all right uh thank you to our moderators as well i'm sorry if i've missed you on here

but a big shout out to everyone that is helping in the chat. All right. Take care. Take care, everyone.