All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 2, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
24:00
'Mediator' Trump Approves Intel For Deep Strikes Into Russia

: The self-proclaimed mediator in the Russia/Ukraine conflict, US President Donald Trump, has according to the Wall Street Journal given the green light to share US intelligence and targeting information with Ukraine to enable deep strikes into Russian territory. He is also reportedly considering sending Tomahawk missiles, which have a range of 1,500 miles and can carry nuclear weapons. Will Russia respond?

|

Time Text
Escalation and False Flags 00:09:04
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Well, good.
Why don't we start off today, Daniel, with something we've been talking about?
I was counting up the years, probably 10 or 11 years since 2014.
But the final answer is not in yet.
I don't know when we first talked about what kind of support we're given.
We knew about a coup coming on, and that was the big deal, changing the government of Ukraine.
But subsequently, there's been on again, off again, a lot of weapons spent and sent, a lot of money wasted, a lot of robberies of American taxpayers.
It goes on and on.
But it looks like it never stops.
But they were cautious.
They didn't give them a nuclear weapon yet.
And there was a mileage limit.
Oh, we'll let them fire in for 500 miles, but not the biggies, not the ones that can go 1,500 miles.
But all of a sudden, the news is, here it is on this article, U.S. to provide Ukraine with intelligence for missile strikes deep inside Russia.
Does this mean an escalation?
You know, even if nothing comes of this, it's looking for the possibility that it could end up in escalation.
Because more or less, that principle is what bugged the Russians, because NATO, you know, fell down on their promises.
We won't get within striking distance.
We're going to stay away from your borders.
Then on again, that changed.
So Russia changed their opinion.
So right now, so the mileage does have an important point about how Russia might interpret this.
I don't think that means today or tomorrow, hopefully, that there's no big bombing of Moscow, but it could happen.
There could be a false flag or who knows what could happen or a so-called justification.
We have to do it.
They just bombed New York or some who knows what.
But the stage has been set.
It's been steady.
And I think probably a third of our programs, maybe even more, over these last 10 years, has emphasized the danger that we have put ourselves in.
At the same time, yesterday we talked about how many different spots are potential danger for us.
And they failed to really be concerned about the spending and the economic crisis and the economic collapse that is a consequence of this very foolish foreign policy.
Yeah, I think what this tells us is that the neocons are now firmly in control of U.S. foreign policy.
There's no question about it.
There was a while that JD Vance was kind of a voice of reason, and people were hoping that he would be a little closer to the realist camp.
But he gave a very fiery interview over the weekend that shows that he's on board with the neocons.
Now, put that first clip up.
This is what we're talking about.
U.S. to provide Ukraine with intelligence for missile strikes deep inside Russia.
People may say, well, hold on.
We've been helping them all along.
Yes, that's true to a degree.
But from what I understand, when President Trump first took power in his second term, he rescinded that targeting information for deep strikes into Russia.
And according to the Wall Street Journal, he's going to reestablish that sharing of intelligence.
Now, a couple of things about this, Dr. Paul.
Of all, it reaffirms the assertions of the Russians and others that the U.S. is actually the one pulling the trigger.
Because if we have to give them the targeting info and we have to operate the weapons themselves, then these are U.S. missiles being fired by Americans into Russia and maybe even Moscow.
You know, you might look at it this way: if you buy a gun for someone, which is what we do, we give them weapons.
If you buy a gun for someone, you tell them who they need to kill, you tell them where that person is and how to get there.
What would a judge say if you said, don't look at me, I'm not part of this murder?
Of course, it wouldn't be that way.
It would be you would be an accessory to the crime.
You would be part of the crime.
Well, that's exactly what the Trump admission has decided to, administration has decided to do with this new move.
You know, Russia, you know, has alluded to it, but I don't think it was over the top.
But I'm betting, though, that they aren't very happy about this.
And they have to be dealing in their own minds.
What should their strategy be?
But when do they do it?
You know, is it just when they get the information?
But, oh, well, they can't even shoot them themselves.
And the Americans might make more sense than the Ukrainians.
But that would be a big bet.
You know, that would be more reasonable.
But they're so far removed.
Each step here is a step away from the foreign policy that we talk about of non-intervention.
And the non-intervention means we wouldn't have even gotten started.
We wouldn't have had it in 2014.
But each one of these steps, and I don't know how many times we have mentioned one step further, escalation.
And who knows what the Russians are actually thinking about, but they can't be saying, oh, why don't we talk to the Americans?
Maybe we can open up our pipelines and sell more oil.
You know, they're fighting with Europe, and all we're doing is paying Europe to give them more money to make sure that Russia never becomes a trading partner.
I mean, they were on their way to a decent relationship, and all of a sudden, NATO, under our control, comes in and says, no, that doesn't make any sense.
Besides, we want to sell oil.
We don't want to, you know, expand the oil availability.
So we come in there, and who knows?
They may have even had something to do with those oil pipelines being blown up.
Well, you know, the question you asked us a minute ago is how would Russia see this?
Well, it's always a good idea, and we always do it ourselves here on the show, to put yourselves in the shoes of the others.
Now, we know that President Trump has been threatening to go after Mexico's drug gangs, whether they have permission from the government or not.
So what if Mexico turned to China and said, the U.S. is threatening us?
China said, okay, we're going to put a bunch of weapons in there.
We're going to tell you where the U.S. keeps its weapons.
We're going to give you the coordinates.
We're going to show you how to shoot them.
Better yet, we'll actually be there shooting them for you.
And you can hit the Americans.
You can hit their energy resources.
You can hit their gas resources.
And it'll be fine.
It'll be totally justified.
How would the U.S. view that?
We would view it as an act of war by China.
So why are the Russians any different?
And they would say it's all a consequence of illegal drugs that have come to this United States under all kinds of propaganda associated with it to stir up more trouble.
Yeah.
That's what the people hear about.
And it's this absurdity that Trump keeps repeating that this isn't my war.
I'm just a mediator.
I'm going to solve it.
I should have solved it.
I could have solved it.
I would have solved it.
You can't solve this war by giving more weapons to a losing Ukraine.
Even here's the other thing that they're thinking about is the tomahawks.
As you started out in your intro, the 1,500-mile range would enable them to hit Moscow proper.
You can't, and they're nuclear capable as well.
And the Russians said that they will look at a nuclear-capable missile as a nuclear missile.
They do have a nuclear policy.
So the idea that sending these a couple of Tomahawk missiles deep into Russia, first of all, it's not going to change the battle on the ground.
It just won't.
It may mess up a Russian city.
It may blow up the Kremlin, but it won't change the course of the war.
The war has already been decided.
Even Viktor Orban, the prime minister of Hungary, has said several times, this war is over.
Russia has won.
Now we just need to sort out the peace.
I mean, that's obvious on the battlefield.
It's obvious when you look at how many Ukrainian soldiers, Doug McGregor was on with Colonel Davis yesterday, and he said up to 1.8 million Ukrainian soldiers gone, maybe 100,000 Russians gone, despite what Trump is being told by Kellogg.
The war, by every measurement, is over.
So why would you want to escalate right now when there's really no gain?
It's all downside, zero upside.
Peace Process 00:03:09
You know, ultimately, it's the opinion of the people, the people, the United States citizens who, you know, pay the bills.
And when they say enough is enough, now they have started to look at that and say, you know, we're not doing well.
We're barely living with your economy.
And they are arguing that we should cut back.
So there is some of them waking up and saying enough is enough.
And that, of course, was a tragic way the Vietnam War ended after we destroyed a lot of lives and killed people and a lot of property.
And now it's this opinion about what the American people think.
You know, they say, oh, no, we don't even have a vote.
We're not even going to consider it.
But indirectly, they will have a vote and an influence on this because even if they don't do it with a consensus, there will be a reality that empires come down because they spread themselves too thinly around the world.
That's how great empires have lasted a long time until they feel like they'll conquer the world.
But eventually the laws of economics rule a king.
So that's what we're into tradition.
But when we see these things, I do, and I'm sure you hope for the same thing, that the people would wake up and say, well, why do you let your congressmen do this?
And yet they still do.
They find one or two or three that vote against that stuff the whole time, honoring their oath of office, and they get to be the enemy of the people with a top dog on the way down.
We have to stop these people blurting out the truth.
And we're sick and tired of that.
And we're going to have to stop these people from getting any attention whatsoever.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, I'm going to just do a quick summary from DD Geopolitics, who I've been on their show before.
I think they're very good.
If you can go to that one, that DD Geopolitics summary, I think it just gives you a good sense of what it's all about.
Go forward one or two.
There we go.
So breaking U.S. to provide Ukraine with intelligence for strikes inside Russia.
Trump's approved expanded intelligence sharing.
So this is something new.
We've got to keep that in mind.
Expanded intelligence sharing to help Ukraine hit deep inside Russian territory.
For the first time, U.S. agencies and the Pentagon will supply Kiev with detailed targeting data for long-range missile strikes on energy and infrastructure.
The goal is to deprive Moscow of oil revenue, disrupt logistics, and pressure the Kremlin after peace talks collapsed.
What peace talks, really?
Officials say Ukraine will now be better positioned to strike refineries, pipelines, and power plants.
Washington's also waiting transfers of Tomahawks, 1,500 miles.
Barracuda is 500 miles.
Universities And Crony Capitalism 00:11:46
No final decision has been made.
They have some commentary about this.
DD Geopolitics does European allies like idiots welcome the move.
German defense officials said deep strikes are essential to cut Russian supply lines and level the battlefield.
None of that will happen.
So anyway, we'll keep an eye on it.
Dangerous move.
Very, very foolish move on the part of Trump, listening to the wrong people.
But let's go on to another foolish move by Trump if we can put that next one on.
And this is something, this is something you've been hitting up for a long time.
And this is absolutely go to the next one, actually, if you don't mind, right up your alley.
This was from the Wall Street Journal as well.
White House asks colleges to sign sweeping agreements to get funding advantage.
What on earth is that about, Dr. Paul?
You know, to summarize it, the big issue here is control and a restriction placed on the First Amendment because they want to own the colleges, but they want to own everything else.
Who the professors are, what their political views are, and the whole works.
And that is done by money.
You know, they bribe people, they get people dependent on it.
And actually, when they go through this, some of these, you know, they might say 10 things that have to be done, and they might want to appeal to some of the conservatives out there.
So they might have something to say, well, that is not too bad about that, but the principle is so bad.
Why should we be telling them what to do?
And where does this authority come from?
You know, these are universities that are supposed to be teaching institutions, but it turns out that they're just the vehicles, and it's been going on for a long time.
One place that really bugs me is how many professors in these universities write, you know, very, very authoritarian articles about the Federal Reserve and why the Federal Reserve is so necessary and doing well.
And it's all propaganda.
So anything touching on this, I put it in the category of crony capitalism because it isn't just a couple of professors and their board of directors that are involved.
I mean, they have a lot of money, they have a lot of investments, and they see this as something that is very important.
So I think they represent the deep state in this sense.
And also, it's a connection between our universities and our corporation, the corporations, and the corporations being involved in the lobbying groups in Washington.
So it is a system of government.
And I harp on it frequently about the definition of fascism and some of the complaints about fascism, where I think it's a combination of big government and big business, which believe me, hasn't shrunk in the last year or two.
I'll tell you what, that continues to increase.
No kidding.
Well, here's what it's all about.
If you go to the next one, it's a 10-point memo.
The Trump administration is laying out a set of operating principles that it wants universities to agree to in exchange for preferential access to, as you said it, Dr. Paul, federal funds, money, money, money.
The expansive 10-point memo dubbed the Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education puts forth a wide-ranging set of terms the administration says are intended to elevate university standards and performances.
Now, if you go to the next one, here are some of the things that it's about, Dr. Paul.
They want to ban the use of race or sex in hiring and admissions, freeze tuition for five years, cap international student enrollment at 15%, require the SAT or a similar test, do away with grade inflation.
But a lot of it talks about campus political climate.
It asks universities to assure a vibrant marketplace of ideas on campus, bar employees from expressing political views on behalf of their employer unless the matter affects the school, seeks to create a more welcoming environment for conservatives, asking colleges to make governance changes and abolish departments that purposely punish, belittle, or even spark violence against conservative ideas.
Now, on the surface, a lot of this sounds fine.
They should be like this.
College, we wish they would, like you say, they should be in the business of teaching.
We know that most of them aren't.
We know that a lot of them are dominated by knucklehead professors who have their own hobby horse that they want to shove down your throats.
Two of my three, well, one's out of college now, but they were luckily.
They both went to conservative, my middle daughter's going to university, conservative universities, more or less.
They haven't had to deal with a lot of knucklehead professors, but I can sympathize with those whose kids are in these schools.
So on the surface, it sounds good, but it's what you've always said.
They're holding out this carrot, but there's a stick too.
You've got to do what we say.
They get dependent on the money, too.
And then it's not like it's a sacrifice by some people to do this.
They believe it's an absolute right because they know what's best for people's education.
But there's also a limit to how much can happen.
You know, this has been evident in the last year, especially, is the universities are being criticized over the speech issue on Palestinians versus Israel.
And that has helped us on some of this polling that shows that the American people and the young people and young Republicans and conservatives are saying enough is enough while we're doing this.
So I think this is an example of us seeing a shift.
And I argue the case that the people have to understand it.
And it's a risky thing on who understands what.
But I think that it's been pretty clear about people being more engaged over the Palestinian issue than anything else.
But the politics that get involved when there's money flowing into the social issues involved.
And the other big one, and I've already mentioned the Federal Reserve, is the educational system.
They want to have controls of that.
So if you don't do what we tell you, the Fed is a good example, mainly because Republicans and Democrats say, well, they have to be independent.
You can't trust the Congress or anybody else.
They can't, especially they say, you can't trust the market.
Yeah.
You can't trust the market to decide what the interest rates ought to be.
Well, I think the clear lesson here is conservatives don't want to shrink government.
They want to control government.
Yeah, I think.
And that's exactly what it is.
And if you go to the last one, the compact comes as the Trump administration, this is exactly what you're just saying, Dr. Paul, has for months battled against universities over allegations of anti-Semitism and concerns about diversity of practices.
Of course, their explanation, their definition of anti-Semitism is anyone who criticizes the secular government of Israel has nothing to do with harassing Jewish people.
They've expanded that.
And of course, a lot of the kids on campus that are being persecuted for anti-Semitism are actually Jewish kids protesting Israel's policies.
But that is exactly what you say.
And then they say some schools, including Columbia and Brown, have struck multi-million dollar deals with the administration, while others are holding out.
That's exactly what you've been saying.
They'll sign away anything for that money, money, money.
And that's why this is much closer to understanding fascism.
You know, when you see this combination, you know, whether it's the corporations and pharmaceuticals or in medicine, now it's in education.
It's a combination of control.
Yeah, at times, you know, the Antifas, you know, I don't think they're looking for some social issue that they're going to dwell on.
And they come up with this.
But I think that if people keep their eyes and ears open to see the combination, and the worst danger about all this is once the corporations get involved and they benefit from this, they said, see, freedom of the market doesn't work.
Free enterprise doesn't work.
Look at what happens when you have free market.
And exactly the opposite.
It's when the markets become less free, is when they can come in and manipulate.
It's not freedom when they steal money to the middle class and start manipulating things where the corporations and the banks benefit.
And then they turn around and say, yeah, we got to stop out free markets because, you know, they turn upside down and they start punishing the people.
But so I think words are important, understanding is important.
Ideas are important.
And they have to know exactly who's pulling the strings because we simplify our foreign policy.
Non-interventionists stay out of entangling alliances.
And that should not be difficult to understand if you want more money going into the pockets of the American people and making us much healthier and wealthier and safer.
Absolutely.
Well, I'm going to close out.
This concludes my week here.
I want to thank everyone for watching the show this week.
I do have a link here at the end of the description, if you go to the description, where you can help support the show by making a tax-deductible donation to the Ron Paul Institute.
You can donate through crypto, through cash or credit.
And we appreciate very much your continued support for the program.
And I'll kick it back over to you, Dr. Paul.
Very, very good.
I too want to thank our viewers for tuning in.
We need you because the method for us to get our message, which should be the American message in a true sense of the word, and to the true message of what liberty is all about.
And I say changing the attitudes of the people.
And that is not done at the universities.
We're arguing against the universities depending on the university.
That doesn't mean that you can't find some good universities.
Some of them are still private, believe it or not.
And even in some of the worst state-run schools, even though they're mixed in there, there are some that are still very, very good.
But how often do you run into a professor in the economic department that's a true believer and understand and understand Austrian free market economics and hard money?
Not a whole lot.
So it's best to leave it to the people.
And I have a lot more confidence in the people sorting it all out than I do if you elect a few people and put them in government.
And when they make a mistake, it affects everybody.
People say they don't like liberty because every individual is responsible for themselves and they will mess up their lives and we'll have to take care of them.
No, in a free market, if you mess up and you could, that you're the one that has to make change change attitudes and get the help that you need.
But if you expect them to do these things and get by with it, I think we're making a mistake.
It's very simple.
If we want a free society, we have to reject it foreign policy, like I said.
All we have to say is we believe in non-intervention, stay out of entangled alliances, and believe we ought to take care of ourselves.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection