All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 24, 2025 - Judging Freedom - Judge Andrew Napolitano
26:53
Prof. Glenn Diesen : Zelensky Appeals for Arms to Fight Russia at the UN
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Napolitano here for judging freedom.
Today is Wednesday, September 24th, 2025.
Professor Glenn Diesen will be here with us in just a moment on Do You Believe What Happened at the UN?
President Zelensky publicly appealing for more arms.
And President Trump saying he supports a Ukrainian win.
But first, this.
My friends, if you care about your liberty and your right to control your own future, you need to hear about this.
From October 10th to 12th, Mikel Thorpe, host of the Expat Money Show, is bringing together top experts from around the world for the Expat Money Online Summit, and it's completely free to attend.
You'll learn how to legally protect your wealth, secure second residences and citizenships, reduce your tax burden, and own property abroad, all to safeguard your freedom.
This year's focus is on Latin America, where opportunity is booming.
Argentina is shifting to free markets.
El Salvador is undergoing a dramatic transformation.
And Panama and Paraguay are offering simple residency programs.
A plan B is no longer optional.
It's essential.
Reserve your free ticket at expatmone summit.com.
And if you want VIP access with special perks, including lifetime replay access and exclusive VIP panels, use promo code Judge for 20% off your upgrade.
That's expatmone summit.com.
Promo code Judge.
Professor Deason, uh, welcome here, uh, my dear friend.
I appreciate the sort of last minute arrangement uh by which you've agreed to be with us.
Before uh we start our usual uh uh QA back and forth.
I must tell you that I just came from uh a meeting uh with the president of Iran.
I wish that you could have been there.
Scott Ritter was there, Professor Sachs was there, uh, and our friend um Max Blumenthal was there, as well as our other friend Medea Benjamin.
But uh the president of Iran, I must tell you, gets it.
He understands the power of the American Zionist oligarchs over the Congress and the president.
He understands the maniacal nature of the Israeli regime.
He understands the danger to uh Iran.
He understands the danger of negotiating with the United States.
Um, and he's ready.
He's ready for whatever Israel and the U.S. might hurl at him.
This was an off-the-record meeting, but I don't think he said anything, which I've just summarized that was private uh or secret.
Uh, but I do want to talk to you about the latest uh events on the international scene.
The hot news here in the U.S. today, of course, is that after his disjointed, I think I'm being charitable speech to the UN yesterday.
I'll let you put in your own adjective, of course.
Uh, President Trump sat down with President Zelensky.
President Zelensky made an appeal uh for more arms, and President Trump said in a follow-up uh tweet on his own uh venue, which he calls Truth Social, that he expects uh Iran can win and can gain back all of the land now under Russia control, including uh Crimea.
This isn't even conceivable, much less possible.
I'll read it to you so I'm not misstating what the president said.
I think Ukraine with the support of the European Union is in a position to fight and win in caps, all of Ukraine back in its original form.
All right, I won't editorialize because the original form goes back to Catherine the Great.
With time patience and the financial support of Europe, and in particular NATO.
I'm editorializing now.
Later, NATO's principal financier is the U.S. The original borders from where this war started, it is very much an option, why not?
I mean, people are just scratching their heads here today.
I was on the great game with our mutual friend uh Dmitry Symes.
The Russians are laughing at this, basically saying this is just another one of his off-the-wall comments, we don't even take it seriously.
However, Professor Giesen, the neocons who dislike you and me and everybody else on this show, who believe that they can use Ukraine as a battering ram with which to drive Vladimir Putin from office, who don't care how much blood is uh spilled, they are rejoicing.
Your thoughts.
Well, I did see an interview with uh Lindsay Graham in which he couldn't uh conceal his excitement that now the United States will begin to send its most advanced weapons, and this time without any restrictions.
So uh I I'm not sure what to make of this.
Uh Trump had this in in the past, he did this 50 days, then it became a 12-day countdown in which uh he would have this punishment for Russia, and instead uh they announced the meeting in Alaska.
So he goes a bit uh back and forth, and uh uh but but even his messages now, which is uh quite belligerent in nature, uh again, I can't believe they're really going back to this idea that Ukraine is winning and they're gonna take all their territories back.
No one really believes this, but of course, once he said this, Zelensky also went all in uh talking about how much land they're liberating, and yeah, so they they are creating an alternative reality.
Uh but it has to be said that at the same time uh there's not much content in what Trump says in terms of uh what commits him to action, because he tells the Ukrainians uh to go on the offensive, uh do it now, and the Europeans should uh finance it.
Uh, but again, go on offensive.
However, he makes the point that this will be financed by Europe.
He even made the point to the Europeans that if uh Russian jets fly over your territory, shoot them down.
And when I asked if he would uh back it up, uh provide uh security if the Russians retaliate.
Uh you will have to see, it depends on the circumstances, which is something that will cause a lot of insecurity or uncertainty, at least in Europe.
He also calls for this crippling sanctions against uh Russia, but first Europeans will have to do it.
And he's quite aware that this will be uh suicide for Europe.
And you know, he's talking about security guarantees, but only after the conflict.
So it is all this real tough talk, and at the same time, none a lot of it doesn't necessarily translate into anything at all.
When when you say um it will be disastrous for Europe, do you mean the Russians will retaliate militarily, or the Europeans will put themselves, if this is even possible, in a worse financial situation than they're in now?
Oh no, I think on the economic front, the Russians do not really have to retaliate because the Europeans will destroy themselves.
If they do secondary sanctions on Russia, which means they're gonna have to put sanctions on uh on large powers such as China and uh India.
I mean, these countries are not gonna bend to the threats of the European Union.
So once they go down this route, they have to put sanctions on the world.
Now, what's gonna happen with Europe then?
They're gonna have even less economic prosperity, they will develop even more dependence on the United States.
And uh, you know, if they thought uh Trump was a bit abusive before, uh putting forward this uh really unfavorable trade agreements.
Well, imagine if they sever themselves from all other uh economic centers of power, then there's only the United States, the only game in town.
Then uh any horrible deal the US puts in front of them will be the best possible deal there is so uh they're they're they they were well aware of this.
They they knew this in advance, uh, that they talked about this several years ago, that this is why you have to diversify.
This is why we should avoid conflicts in Europe, because we will have too much security dependence on the US, then the Americans can start to demand economic and political loyalty.
So this was kind of predictable.
So if the Europeans go through with this, this will destroy their economies even more, and it will make them uh political hostages of the United States.
So it's it's I I I can't, I mean, I would say I can't believe that they would actually go through with something like this.
But again, they they continue to do a lot of things which I thought were just too stupid to be done, but they go through with it anyways.
How do you think the Kremlin uh reacts to this?
And before you answer I don't know if you're familiar with this American phrase, your English is excellent, and you've been here many times, you probably are.
It's an insult.
Trump called Russia a paper tiger.
I mean, to Americans, a paper tiger is someone who claims to be strong, uh, possesses uh a strong self-will, but it's really a weakling.
Watch this, cut number 22.
It's been a terrible war, it should have ended, and uh Russia should have stopped it.
But uh they've been three and a half years and they've gotten that so far.
So we'll see what happens.
But the other side can fight too, and they've proven that maybe it's a paper.
It could be that Russia is a paper tiger.
I don't know what they are, but three and a half years of fighting and killing everybody, of killing 7,000 people a week for nothing.
For nothing.
So it's a very sad situation.
But most of you have seen the recent statement I put out a little while ago.
And I'm glad you got it.
But I feel that way.
I really don't feel that way.
Let them get their land back.
Yep.
So we'll see how it all works out.
Neither you know I are shrinks.
I can't really figure out the half-smile, half smirk on the face of uh the French uh president.
But back uh to my question.
How does uh the Kremlin react in your view to uh Trump's uh statement about Ukraine can win and caps?
And how does the Kremlin react when he says Russia is a paper tiger?
Do they put any credence in what the president of the United States of America says when he speaks like that?
Well, it's um almost a challenge because by calling Russia a paper tiger, they're suggesting that uh well they're they're weak, and if they're weak, then uh uh the US and NATO can do something more provocative.
They can have enjoy escalation control.
They can uh you don't have to fear any uh yeah, powerful retaliation from Russia.
Now, of course, the whole paper tiger comment it doesn't really make much sense if you look at how much it's not just Ukraine, uh the entire collective West, uh, all of NATO has thrown in all the weapons it has, uh the log offer the logistics, the training, they've been supplying mercenaries, they've done uh uh offering this intelligence, they've done the war planning for them, they've done the targeting, they even operate some of the weaponry.
So uh this is uh all of NATO going after Russia.
So uh, you know, they can throw the paper tiger comment back, but it's it's very dangerous uh language.
But uh I I think that the Russians uh uh take well that they've seen this going back and forth several times.
Former President Dmitry Medredev Medvedev made some comments about this.
Uh but but overall I think that uh uh what what the what they're predicting, which is also something I've been warning for a while, is whenever the Ukraine begins to struggle and lose on the battlefield, we've seen over the past three and a half years that NATO begins to escalate more powerful weapons, they're crossing other all the previous red lines.
Now, now that we're moving towards the end of this war, the Ukrainian army obviously is on this last plague.
Uh, it's very predictable that NATO countries will begin to escalate in a very dangerous manner, given that they don't really have that many more weapons to send.
So they're gonna have to do something quite radical.
And I think through this lens, they're now uh yeah, maybe becoming more uh more and more concerned.
Now they can't walk away from any of this because they consider this to be an existential threat, which means that they're gonna have to start to prepare for going up the escalation ladder.
Do they bring out uh orishnik missiles?
Uh, should they uh prepare a more powerful nuclear deterrent?
Uh so these are the things they have to um consider because you can't just throw out this this kind of language and then assume that the counterpart won't react.
What um what is your understanding, uh Professor Diesen, of this controversy that keeps coming back, even though it's two weeks old now, of drones over Poland, the origin of these drones and the reason they were there.
How how do you uh view this and tell us your understanding of it, please?
Well, it's uh I of course I I don't uh sit with any information which you wouldn't have access to, so I can't uh tell the origin of this.
I have spoken with uh I did an interview with the um with the Russian representative at the United Nation, Dmitry Polyansky, and well, him is essentially saying what uh Moscow saying, which is that uh they had nothing to do with this, uh that it was likely uh a false flag operation, uh possibly some drones the Ukrainians had intercepted and brought down, and then they sent it in.
Now, I again we shouldn't take at face value what Russia says, but uh it has been done in the past that Zelensky tried to pass off uh uh Ukrainian interceptor missiles, which ended up on the uh Polish side of the border and claimed that they were Russian, and why?
Well, if you're on your last leg, you would like to bring in NATO into the war.
Uh so I'm not I'm not really sure, but the rhetoric though across Europe is quite concerning because everyone talked about a drone attack, and no one challenges uh whether or not this is actually correct.
But even the but even the poles now have come out.
Tusk, he confirmed that the so-called attack uh didn't actually involve any drones with warheads, so they're decoy drones.
And uh so using this word attack is quite uh yeah, extreme.
It's it's also it's also incendiary for the European uh neocons, of which there are plenty in Poland, and were which lead Germany, uh Great Britain and France.
Um, if you look at what preceded this, we recently had this uh huge scandal.
Uh only uh I think it was the week before the the airplane of uh uh von der Leyen, uh president, uh was uh also well allegedly then attacked by Russia by its GPS signals were being jammed.
Now, this was proven to be fake.
Uh there was no jamming, and it uh it uh it flew in one circle and landed in 10 minutes, and there was no indication that Russia had done anything.
So this was a propaganda stunt.
But what happened?
You saw in the media, everyone was super excited.
Oh, look, the Russians are evil, here's our smoking gun.
And uh you saw something similar with this uh well, what they call the drone attack on Poland, which didn't have warheads.
Uh immediately the Europeans were very disappointed that Trump didn't take a harsher stand against uh your yeah, so I'm I'm skeptical, at least.
Your um European colleague who appears on the show uh all the time, uh Gilbert Doctorow says this you'll probably agree, says this is right out of the MI6 playbook, that this is exactly what uh they don't have much of a military, the British, but but their um intelligence community is actually more uh aggressive than the American, according to uh Gilbert Doctorow, and this is what they do.
If he's right, then CIA knew about this because they share everything, don't they?
Yeah, no, well, it's uh it's um it's strange that there's no more demand for accountability or evidence.
The same goes with the Russian jets uh being allegedly over Estonia, uh these three jets.
Uh I would like to see evidence because keep in mind that we've gone through the Russia gate years, years and years where every day in the headlines there were uh claims which is proven to be false.
This was uh followed up by the Biden laptop scandal, also proven to be false.
We had the story of the uh the Russians putting bounties on American soldiers' head in Afghanistan, also false.
So we have all these fake stories, but uh there's never any accountability.
And uh no one demands evidence because you know, for God's sake, who would want to be seen as uh uh coming to the defense of the Russians?
But this is not what this is about.
This is about making crazy allegations, uh whipping up the War hysteria and uh taking us closer and closer to war.
Here's uh President Zelensky.
Uh this may be today.
I don't know if it's today or yesterday.
Uh excuse me, it is earlier today at the UN asking for help, Chris.
Cut number 27.
Yesterday.
Yesterday we had a good meeting with President Trump, and I also spoke with many other strong leaders, and together we can change a lot.
Of course.
Of course, we are doing everything to make sure Europe truly helps.
And of course, we count on the United States.
I appreciate the support we are receiving.
Yes, much depends on the G7 and G20.
But in the end, peace depends on all of us, on the United Nations.
So his English is not that great, but it's clear what he was uh what he was asking for.
Is any country besides those crazy neocon-led European countries going to give military equipment or uh buy them for the Ukrainians?
No, I think uh well, if you we keep using this language that uh Russia is isolated, uh the world denounces it, all of this, but uh about 85% of the world population live in countries which do not put sanctions on uh Russia, and uh I uh I think it's simply because most of the world sees this as a conflict, correctly so, between NATO and Russia being fought over Ukraine.
So uh this idea that the whole world will now rally against Russia, I think it's uh yeah, it's it's fantasy.
And uh so this is again primarily NATO countries, of course.
The US have allies, uh South Korea, Japan, Australia who will send weapons.
Uh, but the the quantity which is needed, I think this is a key problem because uh this limits what you can do now.
The Ukrainians can't uh can't get enough manpower, and furthermore, uh the US also have limited capabilities, limited amount of weapons.
This is something we often get the impression in Europe that our leaders do not understand.
They think that what is preventing the United States from flooding Ukraine with weapons again is just a lack of political will.
So if we can just uh create uh enough of an emergency or convince Trump how bad the Russians are, how evil they are, then we can get the political will, and then we can go back to the Biden times when we uh flooded the Ukraine with water with sorry with uh weapons.
But you but we run out of Ukraine soldiers and we run out of weapons.
Uh Biden recognized this towards the end of his presidency as well.
It's not the political will, it's the uh it's actual weapons we have to send.
There's not that much more to go.
And uh as and I think the overarching message that I got from Trump was uh they they would they you know hope that the Europeans will of course increase the conflict with Russia, step up the war, they can win, blah blah blah.
But at the end of the day, he's uh he's referring to outsourcing the war to the Europeans.
They should pay for it.
And if America can make some money of it, all that's wonderful.
But overall, it will be Europe's responsibility.
And uh, and this is uh uh so I I think the they will probably wake up tomorrow after the big party and start to actually think about what they actually received from Trump.
And I don't think necessarily got what they wanted.
This is a new division of labor.
I'm going to segue to uh the Middle East uh for just a minute.
Uh the current president of Syria, well, he calls himself the president of Syria, uh, is of course a former notorious uh Taliban uh leader.
That poster that you see, stop this terrorist up to 10 million dollar uh reward, uh, was released in 2017 by the United States State Department.
He, of course, fought against the US military in Afghanistan and uh was eventually captured and incarcerated under the authority of the four-star commanding general at the time, General David Petraeus.
Watch how the times have changed.
Cut number 24.
As you know, Mr. President, I spent over 37 years in the US Army, uh, And I was a soldier, not a diplomat.
So I hope you'll forgive me if I speak with the directness of the old soldier that I am as I get the first question out of the way.
Because the fact is that we were on different sides when I was commanding the surge in Iraq.
You were, of course, uh detained by U.S. forces for some five years, including again when I was the four star there.
And here you are now as the president of Syria.
I just want you to tell you really, on behalf of all the people who are here, uh, that this conversation has truly filled me with enormous hope.
Uh it has been very, very heartening and illuminating.
Um, your vision is is powerful and clear.
Uh, your demeanor itself is is very impressive as well.
Um, how are you holding up under all this pressure?
Uh are you getting enough sleep at night?
Uh again, I've been there.
Uh, and it is so very, very hard.
And you're many fans, and I am one of them.
Uh, we do have worries.
This is a man who's cut people's uh arms and hands and heads off.
Uh, and David Petraeus is uh is groveling to him like that.
I well, you know, we superimpose the wanted poster on his image.
I represent to you that he was actually there.
The the real tape of that shows uh the two of them uh speaking to each other.
But David Petraeus is of course not only the former uh commanding uh general of our forces in the Middle East, a four-star general.
They don't issue a fifth star anymore these days.
Uh it's also the former head of the CIA.
I can't believe that groveling.
Can you?
Oh, it's well, it it is quite incredible, but uh who is it?
Jake Sullivan who said that uh in the Syria or Libya uh Al Qaeda on our side.
Uh you know, this more or less what is referring to.
The you know, we weren't his claiming we were on the opposite side.
Yeah, they were fighting against Al Qaeda and ISIS.
But uh, you know, through the years, they also began to use these uh groups as uh proxies.
So it's um this idea that I'm I mean it's the argument that Jelani now is reformed.
He's uh you know, we put him in a suit, so now his terrorist days are behind him.
The only thing I take away from this is that we now have uh very officially allied ourselves with uh uh terrorists.
I mean, they if you see what's happening in Syria these days, it's just uh yeah, gruesome.
And this is happening uh yeah, we with our backing.
So this is I mean, he almost this meeting almost hit the September 11 um uh anniversary, and it's quite incredible.
Even post a picture on of himself with the New York skyline in the background.
So 24 years later, they're back.
It's uh it's quite extraordinary.
It's uh it truly is.
Uh Professor Dizon, thank you very much.
Thanks for hopping on in front of the camera with such a little notice.
I owe you one.
Uh I know sometimes you come to the U.S. I hope we can get together and have a meal together if you're in the New York City uh area, and I look forward to working with you right here next week.
Thank you, Professor.
Thank you.
Sure, all the best to you.
Coming up at three o'clock today, uh Dan McAdams, whatever happened to the freedom of speech.
Is this a freedom of speech moment with Jimmy Kimmel back on air and Google admitting it allowed the government to pressure it to silence the government's critics, one of whom has been a guest on this show, a member of the United States Senate who's also a physician.
We'll talk about all this with Dan McAdams right here at 3 o'clock.
▲
Export Selection