All Episodes
Previous Next
April 13, 2025 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano
24:22
Ray McGovern : How Close is WWIII?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
Today is Monday, April 14th, 2025.
Ray McGovern will be here with us in just a moment on how close are we, how close are we to World War III?
But first this.
The same experts that predicted gold at $3,200
an ounce now predict gold at $4,500 or more in the next year.
What's driving the price higher?
Paper currencies.
All around the world they are falling in value.
Big money is in panic as falling currencies shrink the value of their paper wealth.
That's why big banks and billionaires are buying gold in record amounts.
As long as paper money keeps falling, they'll keep buying and gold will keep rising.
So do what I did.
Call my friends at Lear Capital.
You'll have a great conversation.
And they'll send you very helpful information.
Learn how you can store gold in your IRA tax and penalty free or have it sent directly to your doorstep.
There's zero pressure to buy and you have a 100% risk-free purchase guarantee.
It's time to see if gold is right for you.
Call 800-511-4620.
800-511-4620 or go to learjudgenap.com and tell them your friend the judge sent you.
Ray, welcome here, my dear friend.
Do you subscribe to the Alistair Crook thesis that the Trump foreign policy team is essentially bitterly divided between neocons who want the war in Ukraine to continue?
the Steve Whitcoff and his crew that want to negotiate a grand reset
Judge, I'll make a prediction.
I'll say that there'll be heads turned here and heads rolling.
I think that Kellogg will be dismissed this week.
He and Rubio and Waltz are speaking from or singing from a different...
Sheet of Music witnessed the fact that just within the last day, this terrible Russian attack on Sumi was described by the President of the United States as a mistake.
I've been given information that it was a mistake, says Trump.
What does Kellogg say?
I made a note of it here.
It crosses any line of this decency.
So we have a division here.
But in my view, and I must say in the view of all the commentators in Russia, that Trump is the man, okay?
Trump is the man, and Witkoff is his delegate, and Rubio, Waltz, Kellogg are diversions which the man will be able to overcome.
Now, we can't be sure of that.
There is division, but that's my view.
Do you have a reaction to Russia's Palm Sunday attack?
I think it was terrible, and I was told they made a mistake.
But I think it's a horrible thing.
I think the whole war is a horrible thing.
I think the war is...
For that war to have started is...
An abuse of power.
You said they made a mistake.
You were told they made a mistake.
Do you mean it was unintentional?
They made a mistake.
I believe it was.
Look, you're going to ask them.
This is Biden's war.
This is not my war.
I've been here for a very short period of time.
This is a war that was under Biden.
He gave him billions and billions of dollars.
He should have never allowed, if he had any brain, which he didn't have and doesn't have, and now it's being proven.
He wouldn't have allowed that war to start.
I would have absolutely not.
That war would never have taken place.
But remember this.
This is Biden's war.
I'm just trying to get it stopped so that we can save a lot of lives.
They happen to be Ukrainian and Russian lives.
But all I want to do is get it stopped.
That was last night, Palm Sunday, April 13th, the president en route from his home in Florida to the White House.
Now, one wonders why General Kellogg is still there.
One wonders why he would make an absurd proposal for European security forces to stay in Ukraine, knowing that President Putin would never accept it and has already condemned it.
And one wonders why, if the President of the United States wants to stop the war, he doesn't just stop it.
The legislation that authorizes All of this military aid is simply to the president's discretion.
Just as Joe Biden accelerated it, Donald Trump could stop the flow of military goods in a heartbeat, and he could stop the use of American intel to target Russian targets in a heartbeat.
Take it from there.
Well, Judge Kellogg has been flitting around Europe selling cornflakes to the Brits and the French.
And the Germans.
I mean, he's really out of it.
These proposals are crazy.
Now, he may think that he has the support of people like Rubio and Waltz, but I question how long they're going to be around.
Trump is in control, and he has Whitcoff doing his bidding.
Whitcoff was a big success in Oman over the weekend.
The White House is crowing about how a new relationship with Iran might be possible now in that meeting again.
On Saturday.
So what I'm saying here is that these guys are diverse.
They may think that they have more power within the Republican Party and within the body politic than they do.
And, you know, nothing is certain.
Everybody's entitled to their own opinion.
So there is division in my view, but Trump is still in charge.
And with respect to, you know, ending military aid and intelligence support, well, that's a card that Trump has.
I mean, the aid's going to run out anyway because of the pipeline, and there's no new aid appropriated by Congress.
So, you know, if I were Trump, I don't know what to do.
But it makes sense to me that the aid and the intelligence, you know, we can negotiate about that.
That's the only card that Trump has.
He's not going to play it just yet.
I defer to him on that, whether that's a smart idea or not.
I just don't know.
I understand his animosity towards and criticism of former President Biden, but it's Trump's war now.
It's been Trump's war briefly, but it's his war now because we understand how easy it is for him to terminate the military aid and to terminate the intel.
Chris, you can put that screen back up again, please.
That, of course, is General Kellogg.
Ukraine could be divided like post-war Berlin.
I mean, Foreign Minister Lavrov, we'll play an interesting clip from him in just a minute, and President Putin have made it clear, absolutely clear.
That that would be unacceptable and the war will continue.
The last thing they want is NATO troops at their border.
That's the reason they fought this war, is to make sure NATO is not going to be in Ukraine.
It's as if Kellogg is in another planet.
Of course.
Again, he's selling cornflakes.
He's out of it, okay?
Now, the business about continuing aid, as I said, it's sort of the only card that Trump has.
And it remains to be seen how much opposition is collected behind the people like Kellogg.
I don't think that Kellogg has much influence.
Why is it that he was named the representative and all of a sudden he was sidelined?
And I don't place much store by Waltz or by Rubio either.
So it's, you know, when you talk about whether it's Biden's war or Trump's war, I mean, there's very seldom occasion when I agree with Trump, but my God, can't Trump very easily prove this is Biden's war?
That everybody and his brother advised against it?
And Trump is...
He can play this card very effectively.
And as you saw him in the plane, he's heeding the advice of Steve Bannon, if you will, and others saying, don't let this war become your war, Mr. President.
That's what this is all about.
And I think that Trump can dissociate himself.
If it goes on much longer, the public will begin to recognize that it's his war.
It's his war now.
But of course, Joe Biden started it.
Joe Biden spent...
Over $200 billion.
I realize Congress authorized the money, but it was all subject to the president.
But the subject to the discretion of the president has been Donald Trump's discretion since noon on January 20th, and he's exercised that discretion so as to permit the flow of military arms to continue and the active assistance of intel to continue.
Yeah, look, Josh, the way I look at it, Trump won the election because most of the American people were against this damn war.
Right. So he's got a really strong hand here, and that shouldn't be forgotten.
The American people want to support.
Efforts to end this war.
That's different.
It's gone on too long.
And the Americans want to end it.
And so do the Russians.
And when you have a confluence of interest between Putin himself and Trump himself, you've got the goods to make a deal.
And as I say, I don't think that Trump wants to play his card on the military side and the intelligence side just yet.
But you play it.
And when the aid runs out, you know, because the money runs out.
Well, that's going to be automatic.
He's not going to renew that.
Over the weekend, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov addressed a security conference.
Our friend and colleague Jeff Sachs was also at the same conference and also addressed it a day or two before.
But here's an interesting question to an answer.
By Foreign Minister Lavrov, the core of the question has to go to, hey, when James Baker told you guys that NATO would not move one inch farther east, why'd you make him write it down?
Chris got number 10. Do you feel that it's perhaps the West's failure?
Some of the institutions and bodies that they have set up after World War II, you've described it as a...
Failure, that's how you said.
And the fact that you're talking about a greater Eurasia partnership, aside the military, aside the strategic perspective, is that a success in the 21st century?
NATO should have been dissolved in the first place, after the Soviet Union ceased to exist, after the Warsaw Treaty ceased to exist, and there were voices in the West saying, guys, let's now concentrate on OSC.
Let's give it some push, and let's be all in one organization.
Some people ask, why didn't you insist on a written guarantee?
You know, in the Russian history, since 17, 18 century, when the trade was booming, nobody signed any contracts.
They shook hands.
Was that a word of honor?
They shook hands, the world of honor, and it was never violated.
So probably those who were running NATO at the time of what we are discussing did not inherit those traditions.
But NATO not only stayed, remained, it was basically announced that this would be the only organization which can guarantee your security.
Everybody, yes, has the right to choose security alliances, but this cannot be done at the expense of diminishing the security of others.
This is John Mearsheimer's realism, the recognition of the sovereignty and legitimate security needs of all other countries.
Yes, Judge, that's the Realism School of International Relations.
I don't know what the others are called.
I find myself having participated in that Realism School for about 30 years.
So John Mearsheimer and Lavrov have it right, and John Mearsheimer is not in Lavrov's pocket, okay?
Now, when he talks about individual security, I mean, this is a big deal.
This was concretized by...
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the OSCE, in 1999, saying, look, security is indivisible.
No one organization or country can pretend or want to be the supreme power as NATO has done, okay?
That's what Lavrov said.
Now, just a codicil on this.
There is no individual security for a country without mutual security, okay?
It's sort of like the golden rule is now an imperative in international relations.
You don't do something that you don't want to have done to you if you're a superpower, just without saying.
Now, the other thing is the humor, the incredible diplomacy that he uses.
Oh, it just occurred to me, says Lavrov.
Oh, it just occurred to me, you know?
Maybe we're dealing with dishonorable men.
Back in the 17th, 18th century, you know, there were no contracts.
We shook our hands and we honored them.
They weren't violated.
I guess that the people in NATO, I guess they don't have any ancestors that come from Tsarish Russia, and so they don't know that tradition.
I.e., they lie through their teeth and, you know, they do this kind of treachery.
And so we're aware of that, but that's the deal.
Now, that was sort of a new wrinkle.
When I was in Moscow about, what, nine years ago, I talked to a fellow who was there with Gorbachev when all these things were done.
I said, why wasn't this written down?
His name was Kuvaldin.
He's a professor now at Moscow University.
He says, Mr. McGovern, I'll give you the two.
Standard answers.
The Germans had not bought into this yet.
I mean, we needed German buy-in, and the Warsaw Pact still existed.
And now I'll tell you the real reason.
We trusted you, Mr. McGovern.
We trusted you.
There's no more trust.
I'll just say that there has been no trust since the likes of Victoria Nuland came in, but there's a new era right now.
Peskov, Putin's spokesperson, is talking about increasing trust.
So is Putin himself.
So I'm surprised at this, but they wouldn't be saying it.
They wouldn't be going out on this limb if they didn't think it was worth trying.
How many times have we heard Jim Baker quoted about the not one inch further?
Hundreds, maybe thousands.
How many times has he denied that he said that?
In public?
Not once.
Well, yeah.
Bill Bradley, a good friend of people who follow Russia, went to Baker and said, come on, be honest here.
You know, what did you do?
Have your fingers crossed behind you?
What happened?
And Baker would say one way or another, look, he's a smart Texas lawyer.
The Russians didn't think to ask to have it written down.
That was a big error.
And so he diddled them.
Now, it's really easy when you look at the outcome of that to say that no wonder Gorbachev is despised widely in Russia because he gave the store away.
What Bill Bradley tried to get from Baker has not been forthcoming, but the documentation is replete with these things from all the major players.
Now, let me just add one more thing.
Why is it that the U.S. is so crazy about this disorder?
Why is it that no one will admit this problem?
Well, it's because of the likes of people who run the Georgetown Foreign Service School, okay?
Two of them were national intelligence officers, and one of them...
Still disputes that there was any promise at all about one inch or not one inch to the east.
So I can give you their names.
They're both women.
They were both national intelligence officers during that key period when they should have objected to what happened in the promise to invite Ukraine and Georgia into NATO.
They didn't.
They went along.
Because, well, they didn't really promise.
Well, he didn't really promise.
And, you know, these are sort of personal sidelights.
But, my God, you know, this is really important.
And here is Lavrov saying, here's another wrinkle.
Just occur to me, these people are not honest and you can't trust that word.
Was Prime Minister Netanyahu truly stunned and surprised?
When a week ago today, President Trump, in the prime minister's presence, announced to the press that the United States would be negotiating directly with Iran, or do you think Trump had given Netanyahu a heads up and he argued in private vigorously against that and lost the argument?
What's your take on that?
It's hard to know about Trump, Judge.
Netanyahu was appalled that Trump said that out loud at that press conference.
I would guess that, you know, before they went in there, Trump probably said,"Oh, by the way, we're going to talk to the Iranians." And,"Oh, let's start the press conference." I have a guess that's the way it happened.
I didn't, you know, I'm not a specialist in reading faces.
I didn't see anything particularly interesting in Netanyahu's face.
I think one should look under his chair to see, well, let me just say, I didn't see it in the face, but I think he was terribly disappointed.
And the rest of the week played out in such a way that Netanyahu, if he wants to try to bousetrap Trump now, I think he realized that it's not going to work.
And so I think we're in a better situation now with respect to peace and not war against Iran.
Here's Pete Hegseth.
The significant part is what he says at the very end, referring to the Defense Department as my department.
I'm going to ask you, after you listen to this clip, I'll tell you now what I'm going to ask you.
If the neocons really want war, they want a war with Iran, and they want the war to continue in Ukraine.
Chris, number nine, please.
He's dead serious that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
He's said that for 20 years.
He's been consistent.
That is clear.
But he's also dead serious that if we can't figure this out at the negotiating table, then there are other options to include my department to ensure that Iran never has a nuclear bomb.
We hope we never get there.
We really do, Maria.
But what we're doing with the Houthis and what we're doing in the region, we've shown a capability to go far, to go deep, and to go big.
And again, we don't want to do that.
But if we have to, we will to prevent the nuclear bomb in Iran's hands.
What would he have said if she had said, she would never ask this, hey Pete, why do the Israelis have a nuclear weapon?
How could he have answered that truthfully?
No, what she should have said, Judge, in my opinion is, hey, Dick Tracy, you're pushing on an open door.
You ought to talk to the intelligence people.
They have said consistently that for the last 22 years, Iran has not been working on a nuclear weapon.
Go read the annual threat assessment of...
Two weeks ago, for God's sake.
So, you know, if you don't want a nuclear weapon, well, you're pushing it open.
Make sure you don't fall on your face, guys, because it's done.
You don't need to worry about this.
Now, there's lots more at stake here.
Of course, the neocons, do they want war?
You know, I put myself in Putin's place, all right?
What does he think?
Well, yeah, these guys have no experience, real experience.
Iraq, Afghanistan, that's not war.
They have no experience of real war.
They don't know what they're talking about.
And so, you know, that's big.
When you have people who don't know really what war is, and we do, 80 years after the war, the real war, this is dangerous.
So, again, if I'm in the Kremlin, I'm going to say, Mr. Putsi, this is crazy.
This is crazy.
But these guys have no idea what they're really talking about.
And they do have some influence on Trump, not as much, we hope, as plain speakers like Whitcoff, who can analyze the situation and tell Trump what kind of a weak hand he has on
Ukraine and that he can have a strong hand with respect to Israel and Iran.
Ray McGovern thank you my dear friend.
We'll look forward to seeing you.
It's a pleasure.
It really is.
And we'll look forward to seeing you at the end of the week with that youngster at the Intelligence Community Roundtable.
All my best to you.
Thanks, Judge.
You're welcome.
And the youngster, Larry Johnson, will be here at 1130.
Kivork Almasian, who will really tell us what's going on in Yemen and in Syria, will be here at 1 o'clock.
And at 3 o'clock...
▲
Export Selection