All Episodes
Previous Next
March 16, 2025 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano
25:44
Larry Johnson : Can Trump Intimidate Putin?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
Today is Monday, March 17th, 2025, St. Patrick's Day here in the West.
Larry Johnson is here and will be with us in just a moment on can Donald Trump, can anyone intimidate Vladimir Putin?
But first this.
Markets are at an all-time high.
Euphoria has set in.
The economy seems unstoppable, but...
The last administration has buried us so deep in debt and deficits, it's going to take a lot of digging to get us out of this hole.
Are you prepared?
Lear Capital specializes in helping people like me and you grow and protect our wealth with gold.
Did you know that during Trump's last presidency, gold rose 54% to a record high?
If that happens again, that puts gold at $4,200 an ounce.
In his next term.
Don't wait.
Do what I did.
Call Lear at 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com for your free gold ownership kit and special report $4,200 gold ahead.
When you call, ask how you can also get up to $15,000 in bonus gold with a qualifying purchase.
Call 800-511-4620, 800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com and tell them the job.
Larry Johnson, welcome here, my dear friend.
Always a pleasure to be with you.
Before we get into your understanding of what cards, if any, the Americans have and what purpose was served by Marco Rubio and Mike Waltz initialing that ceasefire agreement, big picture.
Can Steve Witkoff The President's emissary in Gaza and in Ukraine.
Can Marco Rubio, the Senate-confirmed Secretary of State, be honest brokers, whereas in reality the American government is a co-belligerent against Gaza and against Russia?
Yeah, no.
In fact, I think what we've seen over the weekend with this unprovoked attack on Yemen, That Whitcoff's credibility, I think, is significantly damaged with respect to the Arab side of the equation.
Up to this point, I think there was some hope that they could see Whitcoff as somebody who would be something of an honest broker.
Again, I was wrong.
I had falsely held out the hope that because Donald Trump was not going to be standing for election again, that he had some independence and freedom from the AIPAC-Zionist coalition.
And that turns out absolutely not to be true.
They got their hooks into him so deep, you know, you'd think he was a fish caught on a giant hook.
You know, he's just, he's under the complete control.
And so to that end, Witkoff, instead of being able to actually provide Some direction, independent of that Zionist coalition, completely subservient to it.
Is Israeli efforts by Netanyahu to restart the war, which apparently he needs in order to stay in office,
will Trump support that?
Yes, without a doubt.
You know, again, Trump, you know, we've had the second time, you know, it was a week ago, for the second time, Trump said to Hamas, you release those hostages by Saturday or there'll be hell to pay.
Well, you know, they're already living in hell.
And, you know, Trump made the threat and didn't follow through on it.
And even if, you know, he made a threat, I'm not sure what he could have done.
Let me rephrase that.
There's nothing that he could have done that would have compelled Hamas to, quote, release the hostages.
So Trump is just squandering whatever limited credibility he had.
How do you view the attack over the weekend on the Houthis?
Is it a prudent military move?
Is it foolish?
Is it likely to be counterproductive?
It's U.S. terrorism.
We killed civilians.
The use of violence against civilians for political purposes.
Not my definition.
That definition was offered by Bibi Netanyahu to William F. Biden 40 years ago.
And it's one of the few things that I agree with Netanyahu on.
That's an absolute correct definition of terrorism.
We killed Yemeni women and children.
They weren't launching missiles.
They were not engaged in any military operations.
We killed them.
And for what?
The Houthis had not launched any attacks on any ships.
I think the last one was really in November of 2024.
Since the initialing of the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, the Houthis basically said, okay, yeah, we'll go along with that.
They had endorsed it.
And now what had happened was they had issued threats to the Israelis and said, hey, you follow through with this agreement and get into phase two or else we're going to restart and we'll block the Red Sea again.
That's what they said, but they hadn't taken any action.
And then the United States, without any justification under international law,
I think we're going to pay a price for it.
The Houthis are a side show.
This is all about, I believe, based upon the statements that have been made by Marco Rubio and Michael Waltz, this is laying a predicate to justify an attack on Iran.
That's coming down the pipe.
Here's the statement to which you refer.
It's a little long.
It's about 80 seconds.
But I'll be anxious to hear your comments on it, Larry.
This is Mike Waltz yesterday on this very topic.
Chris, cut number four.
Iran needs to hear him loud and clear.
It is completely unacceptable and it will be stopped.
The level of support that they've been providing the Houthis, just like they have Hezbollah, just like they have the militias in Iraq, Hamas and others.
The difference here is the Houthis have incredibly sophisticated air defenses and they also have anti-shipping cruise missiles, drones, sea skimming types of attack drones and other.
Ballistic missiles, even.
They've launched dozens of attacks on multiple warships, dozens of attacks, over 175 on global commerce, sank multiple ships.
I just think the American people need to understand what has happened here.
The previous administration had a series of feckless responses.
President Trump is coming in with overwhelming force.
We will hold not only the Houthis accountable, but we're going to hold Iran their backers accountable as well.
And if that means they're...
Targeting ships that they have put in to help their Iranian trainers, IRGC and others, that intelligence, other things that they have put in to help the Houthis attack the global economy, those targets will be on the table,
too. Wow.
Sounds like John Bolton, Larry.
Yeah, no, these guys are fools.
They think that they can solve this militarily.
They pretend that the military strikes the U.S. Navy carried out while Biden was president were just pinpricks.
They were simply symbolic gestures.
That's nonsense.
The United States found out that with all of our so-called military prowess, we're incapable of stopping the Houthis because the Houthis are using mobile launchers.
If the Houthis had fixed military bases, then, yeah, it'd be easy to destroy those, and we would definitely render their offensive capability moot.
But that's not the case.
So the United States is going to keep, you know, throwing bombs at targets in Yemen.
Some of them are decoys, some of them are not.
Many times we're not going to hit them, and then they're going to turn around and launch attacks on the U.S. One of these days, they're going to succeed in sinking a U.S. ship.
And boy, if it's a carrier, then that's really going to be a disaster.
But, you know, Walt's betrayed it right there in his comment.
This isn't about stopping the Houthis.
This is about stopping Iran for an imaginary nuclear weapons program that Netanyahu has insisted that...
20 years that the Iranians are just two weeks away from developing, and the United States has climbed on board with that silliness.
The Russians and the Iranians signed an agreement on January 17th that made it very clear that Russia is going to work with Iran on developing peaceful nuclear energy, and that Russia, based upon its track record,
Is not going to allow or facilitate any development of nuclear weapons.
But the United States seems hell-bent on getting itself into a war in the Middle East.
And this, as I've written, I think it will destroy the presidency of Donald Trump.
And he'll have nobody to blame but himself and his Zionist enablers.
Well, here is one of those other Zionist enablers who was until...
Two months ago, an arch neocon and now is the Secretary of State on the same subject matter as Mike Waltz.
Chris, not to overload you on this, Larry.
Chris, cut number six.
What we can't ignore, and the reason why the president mentioned Iran is because the Iranians have supported the Houthis.
They've provided them intelligence.
They've provided them guidance.
They've provided them weaponry.
I mean, there's no way the Houthis, okay, the Houthis would have the ability to do this kind of thing unless they had support from Iran.
And so this was a message to Iran.
Don't keep supporting them because then you will also be responsible for what they are doing in attacking Navy ships and attacking global shipping.
Yeah. I don't get it.
Have the Houthis killed a single American?
Not yet.
You know, you can go back to the attack on the USS Cole, which was, you know, anchored just off the shore of Yemen back in 2000.
And Al-Qaeda carried out that attack, and you could argue that, oh, the Yemeni authorities allowed...
The Al-Qaeda operatives to be there.
You know, that was the last I think Americans killed anywhere near or around Yemen.
But again, all of this is, right now, I'm not sure who came up with this as the idea, but they decided, hey, let's peddle that everything that the Houthis are doing is because of Iran, and therefore we're going to be able to attack Iran.
I would simply note that I think this week marked the end.
Of the seventh annual joint naval military exercise between Iran, Russia, and China.
So any attack that the United States is contemplating on Iran could actually embroil both Russia and China in this.
And so, you know, here's Donald Trump presented with an historic opportunity to be the peace president of the 21st century.
And instead, he seems now intent upon becoming a combination of Lyndon Baines Johnson and Richard Nixon, creating his own quagmire that instead of Vietnam, it'll be Iran.
Wow. Let's move towards Putin and Trump, and we'll start with Secretary of State Rubio.
How diplomatic was it for him to...
The Steve Witkoff present to President Putin a signed document signed by Vladimir Zelensky and signed by Marco Rubio purporting to call for a 30-day ceasefire as if,
okay, President Putin, here it is, take it or leave it.
Is that sophisticated diplomacy?
No, no.
And, you know...
Putin made it very clear.
He was very professional and diplomatic in his response.
Oh, that's interesting to know.
We'll take that into account, but there are some nuances.
And I think, you know, as Alistair Crook elucidated on your show earlier today, you know, laid out in quite a bit of detail, you don't just say, hey, we've got to ceasefire.
You know, there are a lot of details that have to be hammered out in terms of...
You know, how's that ceasefire going to be monitored?
Who's going to be responsible for observing it?
What are the conditions that are, you know, how does it get implemented?
A lot of details that have not been addressed at all.
And that really goes to the inexperience of Rubio in this regard.
He didn't even know better.
And so I don't think it was a deliberate slight.
I think it was just a matter of ignorance.
What do you expect will happen tomorrow when President Trump and President Putin speak, Larry?
Do you expect Trump to be sweet and charming?
Or do you think that Trump thinks he can intimidate Vladimir Putin?
Oh, no.
I think Trump will be...
And you see the two sides of Mr. Trump.
And in public, this bombast, chest-thumping, enraged orangutan.
But behind the scenes, he's very kind and almost goes overboard to want to be liked and show some real personal interest in people.
So I think with Putin, he's going to be Mr. Kindness.
And he'll come out at the end and go, that was the best call ever!
We've got the most done of anybody ever in the history of the world of having phone calls with Vladimir Putin.
You know, it'll be that kind of thing.
And Putin will be looking at, you know, Lavrov and the others going, man, that guy needs to adjust his medication.
You know, we need to get on a level playing field here.
Putin is going to deliver to him, look, here's what we need, Mr. President, if you want to try to get to a deal.
What cards or leverage, if any, does Trump have to play or employ in this phone call?
None. Look, the reality is, from Putin's standpoint, he can say, Mr. President, are you sincere in wanting to bring about peace?
And if Trump says yes, then all Putin has to say is then...
Why are you continuing to provide weapons and money and intelligence to Ukraine that they are using to attack and kill Russians with?
So if you're sincere about bringing it into this war, stop enabling it.
Stop facilitating it.
Stop being the one who is allowing Ukraine to do this.
Otherwise, you know, I hear your words, but all I'm looking at is your actions.
You know, if Putin says something like that, Trump's going to have to step back and say, okay, what is it we're trying to do?
Are we sincere about trying to achieve a peace?
Do we know if the same amount of military equipment that Biden sent is continuing in that pipeline?
We have no reason to believe that it's diminished at all, do we?
I don't know.
I honestly don't know.
Ships that have tried to deliver military equipment through Odessa that have been blown up by the Russians.
We know that there were some military shipments coming out of Poland that were intercepted and destroyed.
And then you've got the more fundamental problem of even if that materiel gets through, who's going to use it?
Because the Ukrainians are suffering significant losses, both in terms of territory and manpower.
You remember when, a week ago today, you and I were privileged to spend a few hours with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
If I said it, Lavrov.
Yeah, no, you said it right.
Ray, who's not wearing any green today except a little tiny bracelet that nobody can see all over me.
Afterwards, we said to him, Would you consider a ceasefire?
And he basically said, why would we?
Knowing how close they are to achieving their goals.
Surely Rubio and Wyckoff and Waltz and Trump understand this, no?
No, I don't think they do at all.
I don't think they've taken time to really read and understand the history.
To appreciate the fact that for the last...
For 21 or 11 years at least, there have been repeated offers and deals from the West to create a ceasefire to bring a halt in the fighting.
There's one that happened in 2014.
There's one that happened in 2015 after the Battle of Dybalzova, in which Ukraine lost.
And again, the Europeans interceded, please ceasefire, and the Russians foolishly went along with it.
Thinking that there was a genuine opportunity to achieve peace, instead they used it just to re-arm, re-equip the Ukrainians for the next battle.
The same with the peace talks that took place in April of 2022.
So, repeatedly, the Russians, and this is a point that Lavrov made to you and me and Mario in our session, that You know, they've seen repeated negotiations like this, and every time it's ended in failure.
And so Russia's come to the conclusion that that can't be trusted.
You know, Russia's not Charlie Brown.
They're not going to run up and try to kick the football again.
They've recognized Lucy is a nasty piece of work and not to be trusted.
And in this case, the West is Lucy with the football.
How much longer do you think?
I mean, let's say that nothing happens with this Rubio-Waltz-Witkov proposal.
How much longer do you think it will last?
The Russians are within hours of killing or expelling all Ukrainian troops from Korsk.
That has turned out to be a catastrophic disaster for the Ukrainians.
And they continue very slowly.
President Putin has the patience of...
Whatever. Tremendous patience moving westward.
How much longer can the Ukrainians last, no matter what the Trump administration sends them?
Well, I think their own intelligence chief would not.
It was on the record, said they couldn't last much past June.
That June would be sort of the end of the line for them.
So they are losing.
It's not just the actions up in Kurs.
Putin gave a deadline of 11 p.m. Eastern time Sunday night, which was 6 a.m.
Monday morning.
At that point, the Ukrainian troops had to surrender or else they would be considered legitimate military targets and would be destroyed.
So we're now 12 hours past that deadline.
I suspect that Putin's following through on his threat.
But you've seen down in the south in Zaporizhia, the Russian army has now been advancing in a way that had not done so three weeks ago.
And all along the front in Donetsk and Luhansk, they're moving forward.
So Ukraine's on its heels.
And it is unlikely to be able to turn around and stop the Russian advance.
Russia's content to continue the military operation, and the West is going to be flailing about, trying to come up with a diplomatic solution, but it certainly doesn't include a temporary ceasefire.
Russia's not going to buy off of that.
I often wonder if the American side knows that, given...
Trump's bombast and notorious tendency to change his mind, given Mike Waltz and Marco Rubio's voting records when they were in the House and the Senate, respectively, which was arch neocon.
Right. I wonder, Larry, if they truly understand the Russian mentality, or if this is just sort of a charade because they like their jobs.
Yeah, no, I don't think they seriously understand it.
I don't think they've had either the education or the personal experience to take time to try to just understand the very simple point, what Ray McGovern has always said.
Listen to what the Russians say.
You know, there's no great mystery here.
We've heard Putin say it.
We've heard Lavrov say it.
We've heard Sergei Rybkov say it.
We've heard Maria Zakharova say it.
You know, they all say it.
Medvedev says it.
They don't vary.
It's not like they come up with different sheets of music and are singing different tunes.
They're singing the same tune, and they've said it over and over and over and over.
But what we've proved from our standpoint on the West is we're really bad listeners, and we don't pay attention to what they say.
And then when they do, What they say, we have surprise.
Right. Golly, I never thought that would happen.
Larry, you're the best, Larry.
Thank you very much.
Thank you for your time and for your analysis.
We'll see you again with that non-green-wearing youngster on St. Patrick's Day.
We'll see you on Friday.
We're going to pull his Irish passport over that.
Thank you, Larry.
All the best.
Thanks, Judge.
Sure. Coming up later today at 2 o'clock this afternoon, Scott Ritter.
At 3 o'clock this afternoon, Professor Jeffrey Sachs.
Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.
▲
Export Selection