0:06

You know Yeah,

0:52

baby, it's episode 236

0:54

of Ask the Inspector

0:56

on Friday Night, February

0:59

7th, 2025. Jeff Norman

1:01

and Scott Ritter with

1:04

you, as we always

1:06

are, Friday nights, for

1:08

the loquacious version of

1:10

Ask the Inspector, two

1:12

glorious hours of Ask

1:14

the Inspector, two glorious

1:17

hours of world-class geopolitical analysis.

1:19

And look who's on the

1:21

scene tonight. One of Scott's

1:23

favorites. Notice I said one

1:25

of your favorites. I don't

1:27

want any of the other

1:29

dogs to overhear it. This

1:31

is the wingman. This is Ice

1:33

Man. He's not hurt. If I don't let

1:35

him do this right now, he won't leave

1:38

me alone. So now he needs his

1:40

affection. Hopefully he will leave me

1:42

alone. He was jumping around my

1:44

lap here. No, I understand that

1:47

too. I need a certain amount

1:49

of affection as well. In fact.

1:51

Obviously I weren't so far

1:53

away maybe. So let's

1:55

see, what do we have

1:58

tonight? We have news. of

2:00

a new podcast that is for

2:02

your vast Russian audience and a

2:04

sub stack post that describes it.

2:07

The Russia House with Scott Ritter

2:09

and you can read that at

2:11

Scott Ritter.com and it debuted yesterday

2:13

right? It did yes we we

2:16

we had a little bit of

2:18

a glitch not of our doing.

2:20

The Russia House, the purpose, I

2:22

mean, the methodology that we're using

2:24

is two unique posts per week.

2:27

On Tuesday, I'll post an article

2:29

that will be the theme of

2:31

the week. Last week, the article

2:33

was Game of Drones, was the

2:36

name of the article, basically about

2:38

drone warfare in the, you know,

2:40

in some of the unique. fallout

2:42

from it. You know, when we

2:45

talk about PTSD, it's a unique

2:47

kind of warfare where you literally

2:49

are killing somebody on camera up

2:51

close and personal and it's a

2:54

unique skill set. And then I

2:56

published a, we did an interview

2:58

with community Patrovski. He's a Ukrainian

3:00

writer, screenwriter and journalist who, while

3:03

he was at the front line,

3:05

met a... but a Russian soldier

3:07

who Talk to him about drone

3:09

warfare and so he he got

3:12

involved in making electronic warfare Equipment

3:14

to help defend Russian soldiers from

3:16

You know Ukrainian drones, so we

3:18

had a discussion of more of

3:21

a philosophical discussion about a drone

3:23

warfare and the role and everything

3:25

looked good for the launch and

3:27

we launched went live and immediately

3:30

subscription service, but a freeze on

3:32

processing subscriptions because apparently their AI

3:34

ran through the drone article and

3:36

decided that I was promoting violence.

3:38

Oh my God. And, um, AI

3:41

is the ban of our existence.

3:43

And so they, you know, so

3:45

then they, that was our big

3:47

launch. I mean, you know, so

3:50

all the people that tried to,

3:52

you know, sign up for subscriptions

3:54

were frustrated by it and, uh,

3:56

there wasn't anything we could do.

3:59

We waited until the next morning

4:01

as soon as Alexandra, who is

4:03

the, you know, the, the, the,

4:05

the, the producer of this and

4:08

the producer of this and, and,

4:10

and, and, and, and, and, and,

4:12

and, and, co-collaborator on this, all

4:14

the fine graphics in the program

4:17

put together by her as well

4:19

as music. She contacted and got

4:21

it cleared up and we're good

4:23

to go. So we're good. But

4:26

you know, the purpose of the

4:28

Russia House is to fill a

4:30

void that was created. I think

4:32

everybody here remembers when I was

4:35

doing the Scott Ritter Show with

4:37

a solo view of live. And

4:39

I was doing a number of

4:41

unique interviews with a lot of

4:44

very interesting... you know, Russian military

4:46

officers, politicians, academicians, things of that

4:48

nature. They just provided a unique

4:50

opportunity to hear the Russian voice

4:52

and get the Russian perspective on

4:55

critical issues of the day. In

4:57

September, the Department of Treasury issued

4:59

new sanctions against Russia. They sanctioned

5:01

RT Sputnik and then individuals affiliated.

5:04

And they also set down sort

5:06

of this blanket, you know, warning

5:08

that even if you do business

5:10

with people who aren't those, if

5:13

anybody you do business with has

5:15

50% funding sourced from any sanction,

5:17

you know, sanction any or combination

5:19

thereof, then they're sanctioned and you're

5:22

sanctioned. And so I went to

5:24

Silovio Live and I said, I

5:26

need to do my due diligence

5:28

here. What's your financials? like and

5:31

at first they they they were

5:33

going to cooperate but I think

5:35

the powers of B came back

5:37

to him and said we're not

5:40

open of books because of the

5:42

Department of Treasury is sinking sanctions,

5:44

screw them. And yeah, you know,

5:46

I agree, but that I can't

5:49

do business with you because I'm

5:51

not going to set myself up

5:53

to, you know, get into a

5:55

legal bind. So we finished, but

5:58

just think about it. They shut

6:00

down the Soul of You of

6:02

Live opportunity, and this, if anybody

6:04

does know, a Vladimir Solov is

6:06

one of the biggest. media personalities

6:09

in Russia. Very close to the

6:11

problem. Now, I'm not saying that

6:13

that makes me close to the

6:15

criminal error. What I'm saying is

6:18

his production company could get almost

6:20

anybody to come on and be

6:22

interviewed. And this was valuable because

6:24

again, I wasn't here to promote

6:27

Russian propaganda. I was in charge

6:29

of the interview. I asked the

6:31

questions. I picked the topics, but

6:33

the goal was to let these

6:36

voices be heard. What happened on

6:38

September 16th, or 13th, 16th, I

6:40

believe? We almost went to war,

6:42

nuclear war, you remember that, when

6:45

Joe Biden invited Sir Starmer in,

6:47

if they signed the document, Russia,

6:49

Anatole, Antonov, the ambassador, threatened the

6:51

nuke. I mean, big stuff. Then

6:54

we went on and Biden green

6:56

lit the use of attackam's missiles.

6:58

Russia used the Arresianic missile. We

7:00

almost got the nuclear war again.

7:03

Could you imagine the quality of

7:05

interviews we would have had if

7:07

this program... I could have brought

7:09

people who made the freaking Arashnik

7:11

and interviewed them. I could have

7:14

brought generals that were involved in

7:16

strategic rocket forces. I could have

7:18

brought the politicians that rewrote the

7:20

Russian nuclear doctrine. I could have

7:23

brought them all on and do

7:25

what the CIA is supposed to

7:27

be doing, finding out what the

7:29

hell is going on inside their

7:32

minds. And I could have presented

7:34

that to the American people. During

7:36

a presidential election cycle when that

7:38

kind of information is invaluable, which

7:41

is why the United States government

7:43

shut it down and that must

7:45

tell you that you weren't able

7:47

to do that Pardon must kill

7:50

you that you weren't able to

7:52

kill me but it also it

7:54

I mean it deprived the public

7:56

of being in light deprived the

7:59

public I mean screw me this

8:01

is about the bigger picture of

8:03

we almost went to nuclear war

8:05

the fall and a lot of

8:08

it was driven by the ignorance

8:10

of the US government in exploiting

8:12

the ignorance of the American people

8:14

who were told to be afraid

8:17

of the Russians because they don't

8:19

understand the Russians and here we

8:21

had an opportunity to explain the

8:23

Russian point of view to the

8:25

American audience which triggered the Department

8:28

of Justice's decision you know They came

8:30

at me because of the Foreign Agent

8:32

Registration Act. I'm sure we'll

8:34

talk about this later, but it

8:36

wasn't just that. This was part

8:39

of the Department of Justice's, you

8:41

know, Maline Influence Hit Squad. These

8:43

are the guys that were directed

8:45

by Joe Biden. Take out anybody,

8:48

anybody who's putting forward a,

8:50

an argument that runs counter

8:52

to American policy. And if

8:54

you can spin it so it looks

8:56

like he's doing the Russian bidding, go

8:58

after. That's why the FBI agents

9:00

came to my house. That's why they

9:02

took my passport and that's why they

9:04

shut everything down. They didn't want

9:07

you to hear these voices. And I'm at

9:09

the point right now where you know what?

9:11

Screw. And it took a while because I

9:13

mean, there are so many technical

9:15

hurdles. There's so many legal hurdles

9:17

that have to be. You can't

9:19

just do business with Russia today.

9:21

If you think you can and you go forth

9:23

and you step wrong, you step in a

9:26

legal minefield and while you may not go

9:28

to jail, you're going to spend a

9:30

lot of time on a court paying lawyers

9:32

to explain why you failed to do X,

9:34

Y, and Z. But I've navigated

9:36

these very successfully. We've put

9:38

together a business relationship

9:40

that isn't a business relationship because

9:42

I'm not allowed to do business

9:44

in Russia. But it's one that it

9:47

makes it sustainable from the Russian

9:49

point of view. And it gives

9:51

me access to Russians to interview

9:53

and get that information out.

9:55

It is a subscription-based service.

9:58

And the reason is... the sustainability.

10:00

You can't ask somebody to put

10:02

the level of professionalism into, it

10:04

would be the equivalent, Jeff, if

10:07

I came to you and said,

10:09

you're going to do all of

10:11

this for free, Jeff, all the

10:13

ATI stuff, why for free? You're

10:15

just going to do it and

10:17

give me all the time you

10:20

have and all that and you

10:22

don't get any money. But meanwhile,

10:24

I'm going to demand so much

10:26

of your time that you can't

10:28

go get another job. How long

10:30

would you survive on that? You

10:33

wouldn't. And we can ask Alexander

10:35

and my partner to do the

10:37

same thing. She has to be

10:39

able to make a living. She

10:41

has to be able to pay

10:43

for all this. Translators are pretty

10:46

expensive. And we need, you know,

10:48

because it's a Russian language program,

10:50

we need the translator. So it's

10:52

a subscription-based service. And I will

10:54

say this, that there's also the

10:57

chance if enough subscribers are there,

10:59

hint, hint, please help people, that

11:01

we can build a war chest

11:03

so that later on when it

11:05

comes time to go to Russia.

11:07

will have the ability to do

11:10

things, to take on new adventures,

11:12

take on new projects, to bring

11:14

the Russian perspective to the United

11:16

States. None of that happens for

11:18

free. And so an investment in

11:20

the Russia House isn't just an

11:23

investment in acquiring knowledge and information

11:25

and getting these unique insights, and

11:27

it's an investment into the future

11:29

as well. You're basically buying into

11:31

a program of cooperation and collaboration

11:33

between the United States and Russia

11:36

between an American citizen, Russian citizens,

11:38

American citizens, Russian citizens. This is

11:40

what needs to happen if we're

11:42

going to break free of this

11:44

paradigm that we're currently in, where

11:47

we were very dangerously close to

11:49

a nuclear war. Now we've dodged

11:51

that bullet, but we ain't out

11:53

of the woods yet. There's still,

11:55

you know, some, a lot of

11:57

work to be done, and this

12:00

work doesn't happen for free. So

12:02

the Russia House is at opportunity.

12:04

We've got some great interviews lined

12:06

up. Russian Chechen reconciliation with the

12:08

Minister of Information from the Chechen

12:10

Republic. We will be talking with

12:13

a Russian war blogger, not about

12:15

what's happened on the front line,

12:17

everybody does that, but about the

12:19

war blogging industry. How did this

12:21

come about? How did they become

12:23

so big and so influential and

12:26

things of that nature? Then we

12:28

talked with a Russian historian about

12:30

the 1990s, but again, the difficulty

12:32

of writing history in Russia today.

12:34

the unique challenges that are posed

12:36

as a Russian to balance the

12:39

environment that you're in. How do

12:41

you write about the 1990s when

12:43

just 10 years prior to that

12:45

you didn't have access to the

12:47

archives because it was the Soviet

12:50

times? Now it's 1990s and you

12:52

have competing political, you know, not

12:54

total information but political... drive to

12:56

tell a story that's not ready

12:58

to be cold. These are challenges

13:00

to the historian. How do you

13:03

tell that story today? So we

13:05

talked about that, the historyography and

13:07

the approaches, the methodologies. The goal

13:09

here isn't to do your traditional

13:11

interview. The goal here is to

13:13

approach topics that are known to

13:16

people with a Russian perspective, but

13:18

coming at it in a different

13:20

manner to make it more approachable,

13:22

entertaining, and informative. Well, we've

13:24

been flashing on the screen how to

13:26

subscribe. I think the simplest way is just

13:29

to go to your telegram channel, which is

13:31

accessible to anybody. And there, you can

13:33

find a link to subscribe. Now, there's one

13:35

thing I don't understand from what you said,

13:37

Scott. First of all, congratulations on figuring out

13:40

a way to get past all these hurdles

13:42

that confronted you. And it must have been

13:44

very frustrating after figuring it out to

13:46

then have this AI. contraption whatever the hell

13:49

it's called through that curve value but does

13:51

that mean that nobody saw the show at

13:53

the schedule time because it's subscription only or

13:56

did you just simply rescheduled

13:58

the time or what

14:00

was the effect of

14:02

that? Well,

14:04

we posted the show

14:06

onto the, there's a

14:09

telegram channel that can

14:11

only be accessed by subscription.

14:14

And so anybody who, you

14:16

know, click the link to subscribe, it

14:18

takes you to the channel and clears

14:20

you in, they weren't

14:22

able to access the information

14:24

because you have to be a

14:26

subscriber to get into the

14:29

channel. So yeah,

14:31

it's just... But the

14:33

next day they were able to? Yeah, you

14:35

can do it right now. Everybody can

14:37

do it. Plus, you know, we've got an

14:39

ongoing advertisement campaign, you know, where we

14:41

put out excerpts of the interview, we put

14:44

out excerpts of the article so people could

14:46

get teased in. And again, I

14:48

apologize for people. Everybody knows

14:50

that I have a history of not putting

14:52

anything behind a paywall, but I

14:54

hope I've explained why this had to happen

14:57

this time because we need

14:59

to be sustainable. And

15:01

there's no apologies there, unless

15:03

you're willing to write a

15:05

check straight up front and say, here's the money

15:07

you need to operate that

15:09

we have to

15:11

charge you. And you're

15:14

getting high quality interviews,

15:16

high quality production value. It's not

15:18

like we're charging you to spoon

15:20

feed you crap. And I have

15:23

to warn the audience too. There'll

15:27

be more paywalls out there. That's

15:30

just the reality of life

15:32

right now. Warning, warning, paywall's

15:34

coming. Jeff and I have

15:36

something to tell you what

15:39

it is yet, but it

15:41

will be a paywall

15:43

as well because you can't

15:45

put in this much effort and

15:48

not be able to pay the bills at the end of

15:50

the month. You know

15:52

who might be

15:54

able to write

15:56

a check, Scott,

15:59

that would make

16:01

the paywall unnecessary?

16:03

Is Ryan. Last

16:06

night on the

16:08

winers, he was

16:10

drinking. a bottle of wine

16:13

for which he paid $200. I

16:15

think anybody who can afford $200

16:17

for one bottle of wine can

16:19

write a check to us for

16:22

like a hundred grand. What do

16:24

you think? Damn right. Ryan, do

16:26

the right thing, Ryan. Do the

16:29

right. Fill that pen up with

16:31

ink baby, write the check. All

16:33

right, let's get to the questions

16:36

from our beloved audience. And Ryan,

16:38

by the way, will be joining

16:40

us later in the show with

16:42

questions that come in live during

16:45

the podcast. So post that on

16:47

whatever social media channel you're watching

16:49

us on now, make it concise,

16:52

make it interesting, and hopefully Ryan

16:54

will pick your question. The first

16:56

question I mean is from actually

16:59

the first two. Let me, because

17:01

they're both very similar. Fred Collins

17:03

and Cheyenne, Wyoming, how do you

17:05

feel about the reforms to the

17:08

FARA branch of the DOJ by

17:10

newly minted Attorney General Pam Bondi,

17:12

and what would be any possible

17:15

implications for your situation? Tom Baker

17:17

in Memphis, Tennessee, very similar question,

17:19

how do you feel about your

17:22

situation as it may relate to

17:24

the recent changes to DOJ with

17:26

regards to FARA? by Attorney General

17:28

Pam Bondi. Is that lady cow?

17:31

Is that what we're talking about?

17:33

What's that? Is that her mom?

17:35

I don't know. It's just an

17:38

awkward posture. But what do I

17:40

think? Let's let's put it this

17:42

way. I am not a foreign

17:45

agent and I've never operated as

17:47

a foreign agent. And I'm just

17:49

going to start off by stating

17:51

the obvious. When I got paid

17:54

$250 for an article for each

17:56

article I wrote to RT, which

17:58

is, you know, it's beneath the

18:01

median payment for articles of that

18:03

nature in the United States. Here

18:05

is a, my check is in here from

18:07

Consortium News for the article

18:10

I wrote for them. Apparently

18:12

I'm a paid agent of

18:14

the consortium. I'm Joe Lawy,

18:16

you son of a bitch, you owe

18:18

me. But they pay me for articles.

18:21

Imagine that. You write an article and

18:23

you get paid for it. You do

18:25

labor and somebody compensates you three years.

18:27

It depends on how much time I

18:30

put in an article on it. A

18:32

lot of time into an article. Yeah,

18:34

so it's, you know, sometimes it's beneath

18:36

minimum wage. But the point is, okay,

18:39

I get paid by RT $250 and

18:41

I'm a fricking agent of Russia in

18:43

the minds of people. Whereas all the

18:45

god damn journalists, independent

18:48

journalists in the world

18:50

are getting millions of dollars from

18:52

the United States government, but they're

18:54

independent and free and free and

18:57

free. Guys, this is the absurdity

18:59

of this situation is unbelievable for

19:01

the US government to call me

19:04

a Russian agent because I on

19:06

my own initiative research and write

19:08

an article that could be published

19:10

anywhere. The articles I published in

19:13

RT could literally be unplugged from

19:15

RT and published in Consortium News

19:17

published in The American Conservative. In

19:19

fact, let me give you a

19:22

news flash. Every once while I

19:24

would submit two articles to RT and

19:26

they would say well we can only

19:28

run with one right now or we

19:30

can't run Russia one right now because

19:33

we're full and I would unplug it

19:35

from RT and I would give it

19:37

to the American Conservative or give it

19:39

to Consortium News who would publish it.

19:41

It's the same thing. There is no

19:43

Russian voice, Russian spin, none of that.

19:46

It's got rid of writing an article

19:48

but I'm apparently a freaking Russian agent

19:50

because what I was writing scared the

19:52

crap out of the United States government.

19:55

you know and i think what what what

19:57

triggered them i mean this is and this

19:59

is what i They've been investigating

20:01

me, this Russian aspect, for two

20:03

plus years. We know that because

20:05

they brought in a folder with

20:07

my intercepted emails that they pulled

20:09

around and said, hey, this email

20:12

is from a year and a

20:14

half ago. I'm like, really, how

20:16

did you get permission to do

20:18

that? You son of a bitch?

20:20

There's a big question. What am

20:22

I accused of? How did you

20:24

get permission? Am I accused of

20:26

a crime? Am I accused? They're

20:28

just doing it because they can

20:31

do it because they can do

20:33

it. That's the thing. I contacted

20:35

the Russian embassy in December of

20:37

2022. And I said, I would

20:39

like to meet and talk about

20:41

Russophobia in America today with Ambassador

20:43

Anatole Atteva. And we scheduled a

20:45

meeting. And I went and I

20:47

discussed, I discussed on him, but

20:50

also with members of his staff.

20:52

And during that discussion, as we

20:54

discussed Russophobia. Somebody provided me with

20:56

a draft op-ed that the ambassador

20:58

had written. It couldn't be published.

21:00

It used to be if a

21:02

Russian ambassador wrote an op-ed piece,

21:04

the Washington Post would pick it

21:06

up or the New York Times

21:09

pick it up. It happens all

21:11

the time. But now because of

21:13

Russophobia, the Ukrainians said, you can't

21:15

publish that stuff. So he had

21:17

nothing. He said, here's some ideas

21:19

I had. I said, you know,

21:21

let me incorporate it. So I

21:23

took it, but what I did

21:25

is rather than take his narrative,

21:28

I broke it up. And so

21:30

I took, you know, a paragraph

21:32

here and I led off of

21:34

my article with that and then

21:36

I came back and I quoted

21:38

it in an article that's extensive,

21:40

that his op-ed piece only constitutes

21:42

a small part of it. But

21:44

I emailed back and forth with

21:47

the Russian diplomat who gave it

21:49

to me. I said, this is

21:51

what I'm doing, is an okay.

21:53

Did I misrepresent the ambassador in

21:55

any way? You're taking direction or

21:57

the FBI could take a direction

21:59

from the Russians. That means you're

22:01

in violation of the FARA because

22:03

you can't, now you are a

22:06

PR guy and I said, screw

22:08

you. I'm a journalist. This is

22:10

what journalists do with their sources.

22:12

We make sure that we quoted

22:14

them properly. We make sure we

22:16

didn't put it, you know, we

22:18

didn't get it wrong. You can

22:20

go to hell. But the thing

22:22

is, the FARA law is you

22:25

are only a criminal under foreign

22:27

agent registration act if you willfully

22:29

fail to register. Willfully being the

22:31

operative word. What normally happens in

22:33

fair instances is you get investigated

22:35

by the fair unit of the

22:37

Department of Justice. And if they

22:39

think something's wrong, they send you

22:41

a letter. They say, dear Scott,

22:44

we think you're a foreign agent

22:46

of Russia because you've done X,

22:48

Y, and Z. We require the

22:50

following documents. We ask you to

22:52

provide the following clarifications. And then

22:54

you either tell them to pound

22:56

sand. or you give that to

22:58

him, then they come back and

23:00

say, we have determined that you

23:03

are a foreign agent and therefore

23:05

you much register under the, you

23:07

know, under the, under far law.

23:09

You can again challenge it and

23:11

go back, but the point is,

23:13

it only becomes a criminal act

23:15

is after all you've run all

23:17

your appeals and everything, you fail

23:20

to register and you keep doing

23:22

that, which they, now that's a

23:24

criminal violation. So the thing is

23:26

they provide these letters, the far

23:28

letter. That's a thing. That's not

23:30

what the Biden administration did. What

23:32

they did is they told the

23:34

National Security Division of the Department

23:36

of Justice and the National Security

23:39

Division of the FBI to treat

23:41

every potential far violation as a

23:43

Russian act of espionage seeking malign

23:45

interference in the presidential election because

23:47

anytime you whisper to a Russian

23:49

according to the Democrats, you're conspiring

23:51

against the United States to help

23:53

Donald Trump win the presidency. They

23:55

spent two years intercepting my phone,

23:58

intercepting my email. monitoring everything I

24:00

do. They finally came to the

24:02

house. If they get to the house,

24:04

they had to go to a judge. They had to do

24:06

probable cause, which means they lied through

24:08

their freaking teeth. A judge signed off on the

24:10

search warrant. They told the judge, this

24:12

is the probable cause. This is what we

24:14

believe is happening. And if we go to

24:17

his house and we gain access to the

24:19

things we're asking you, which is on my

24:21

electronics, we believe we will find this happen.

24:23

They lied about what they thought was

24:25

happening, and they never found what they

24:27

thought they were going to find or

24:30

what they claimed to find. They just

24:32

came to harass me, to put pressure

24:34

on me, to get me to back down, like

24:36

that works. But, you know, so there's

24:38

where we are on this. And the

24:41

reason why I gave you

24:43

all that background is that

24:45

this is literally the politicization

24:47

of the Justice Department against

24:49

somebody in violation of their constitutional

24:52

rights. Two things. signed two executive

24:54

orders. One was that basically the

24:57

attorney general was supposed to cease

24:59

and desist all attacks on free speech.

25:01

You can't have people go after people

25:03

because they politically disagree with the government

25:06

can't do that. No government. That's what

25:08

the government did to me. They didn't

25:10

like what I was saying. They came after two,

25:13

the weaponization of the intelligence

25:15

apparatus. And I have been,

25:17

you know, the CIA and

25:19

the FBI legal adashay in

25:21

Ukraine are receiving direction from

25:23

the Ukraine intelligence to shut me down.

25:25

We know this is happening. And so

25:27

we have those two things, but

25:30

until Pam Bondi takes action, those

25:32

are just two executive orders. She

25:34

has now taken action. She has

25:36

now taken action. She has basically,

25:39

I've got, I've got the section

25:41

of the memo here. It's a

25:43

little bit of legales, but the

25:45

key. sentence I guess is that yeah

25:47

recourse to criminal charges under foreign

25:49

registration act shall be limited to

25:52

instances of alleged conflict similar to

25:54

more traditional espionage by foreign

25:56

government actors meaning that if I

25:58

were directed to spy on the

26:01

United States, you're directed to carry

26:03

out a specific direction. But the

26:05

other thing is that it can't

26:07

be, you know, free speech, a

26:09

journalist, doing a journalist job, you

26:11

know, can't be, there's just nothing.

26:14

But it's to end the risk

26:16

of further weaponization and abuses of

26:18

prosecutorial discretion. This 100% applies to

26:20

me. I've spoken to my lawyer,

26:22

and my lawyer says this 100%

26:24

applies to me. So we are

26:27

going to be engaging with the

26:29

Department of Justice and the FBI

26:31

to get my computers back to

26:33

get everything they seize back to

26:35

get the 21 boxes of documents

26:37

they took from my house and

26:40

to get them to shut this

26:42

thing down and then to find

26:44

out if there's any linkage between

26:46

this nonsense and the seizure of

26:48

my passport to get my passport

26:50

back. But the bottom line is.

26:52

As I've said all along, everything

26:55

the U.S. government did was illegal

26:57

and constitutional and will be fought.

26:59

We finally have somebody in the

27:01

White House who's willing to stand

27:03

up for the Constitution. And those

27:05

two executive orders prompted Pam Bondi's

27:08

order. So I, you know, looking

27:10

good. You're not home free. But

27:12

we need her now to follow

27:14

up. And I will be making

27:16

this request. The people who submitted

27:18

the probable cause to the judge

27:21

need to be investigated. Who gave

27:23

them the orders to fabricate this

27:25

document? Because I can guarantee you

27:27

that probable cause is 100% fabrication,

27:29

exaggeration, misrepresentation, done on purpose. Now

27:31

I know she can't investigate the

27:34

judge, but the judge should be

27:36

asked some very serious, but why

27:38

the hell did you sign off

27:40

on this? What the hell was

27:42

going through your mind? Why know

27:44

why? Because it's a family probate

27:47

court from Rensselir who basically... bribed

27:49

somebody and they made him a

27:51

federal judge. They took a probate

27:53

court judge from Rensselaer County who

27:55

knows nothing about the Constitution and

27:57

they made him a federal magistrate.

28:00

And now the FBI comes to

28:02

him, they picked him because he's

28:04

stupid, because he's ignorant. And they

28:06

said, sign this thing, and he

28:09

signed off on it, and FBI

28:11

agents came into my house, my house,

28:13

my home. Americans, you understand

28:15

the fury. This is sacrosate.

28:18

This is my home sacrosan.

28:20

You can't come in here. It

28:22

belongs to me. It's, this is my,

28:24

you don't get to do that in

28:26

America. You don't get to do that and they

28:28

did it. I'm a lie. To harass me. And they

28:31

don't do it just to me, they do

28:33

it to everybody. There's thousands of Americans

28:35

that had this happen. If you're

28:37

not sickened by this, then you

28:39

don't belong in this country. And

28:42

what frustrated me is that I brought this

28:44

up to the Biden administration. Well,

28:46

of course, they're not to investigate themselves

28:48

because they're the ones who gave

28:50

the orders, but I brought up

28:53

to Congress. They don't care. And

28:55

that's the harsh truth. Congress

28:57

doesn't care about the

28:59

rights of Americans. At all.

29:01

That's one of the interesting

29:03

things and very positive byproducts

29:05

of this whole situation is

29:07

that the guilty parties are

29:09

essentially exposing themselves by objecting

29:11

to corruption being exposed. This

29:13

organization, I don't know how

29:15

much you're paying attention to

29:17

the various people who are

29:19

objecting to this. An example

29:21

here, this is public citizen,

29:23

which was an organization Ralph

29:25

Nader started, and they're upset

29:27

that the Farah disclosure law

29:29

is being revoked. This

29:31

by the way public

29:34

citizen also objects to

29:36

the dismantling of USAID

29:39

I'd like the law just let

29:41

us know who is speaking

29:43

Oops did you just give

29:45

away something Craig Holman

29:48

who is speaking? Who is

29:50

speaking? Do you understand

29:52

that you have no say

29:55

over what I say that

29:57

Congress? Nobody does free speech

29:59

who is Speaking, you're saying

30:01

that speech is offensive. This guy

30:03

should get the hell out of

30:06

life. I mean, it's not uncommon

30:08

for foreign agents to conceal their

30:10

efforts through nondescript nonprofits, USAID, secretly

30:13

on your money, USAID. Two such

30:15

foreign agents last year pleaded guilty

30:18

to do exactly on gutter. I

30:20

want him to come on our

30:22

new program and talk about FARA.

30:25

I want to eviscerate him on

30:27

national TV. I want to gut

30:29

him. I want to leave him

30:32

bleeding on the floor. This guy

30:34

is a moron. What does he

30:36

mean? Speek. You can't. What happens?

30:39

They're not very strong when it

30:41

comes to free speech. This organization

30:43

also is one of the biggest

30:46

proponents of overturning Citizens United. Biggest

30:48

what? Proponents. Well, I'm on the

30:50

side now. I'm with them. Yeah.

30:53

Yeah. Take money out of policy.

30:55

Let's get them on. Let's get

30:57

them on. I hope I get

31:00

them. We're lure men with, we're

31:02

going to start off with the

31:04

softball question. Citizens United. How do

31:07

you feel about? Well, you already

31:09

said you want to destroy them.

31:11

Pro tips, Scott. That's not the

31:14

the best tactic for learning and

31:16

guessing. I will ruin them. But

31:18

no, you know me when I

31:21

interview people. I'm very polite in

31:23

all this. Absolutely. They may not

31:25

know it though. All right, next

31:28

question is from the whiz in

31:30

Denmark. I have a feeling that

31:32

since the Ukraine war began, Zelenski

31:35

was not allowed to be killed

31:37

by the Russian military in fear

31:39

that it would turn the Ukrainian

31:42

population against the Russians and make

31:44

him a martyr. Can't really see

31:46

it the other way around as

31:49

he has been out publicly without

31:51

fear of his life and showcasing

31:53

himself as a big man. Couldn't

31:56

the Russians kill him if they

31:58

wanted to? Yes. they could. They

32:01

don't want to. Not only that,

32:03

why would they? He's the head of

32:05

a state. You don't go around,

32:07

first of all, Russia's not

32:09

at war with Ukraine. Please

32:12

understand that, ladies

32:14

and gentlemen, please understand

32:16

that. Russia's not at war

32:18

with Ukraine. So you don't

32:21

go around in assassinating heads

32:23

of state. That's a bad

32:25

thing to do, especially if

32:27

you're a head of state. And

32:29

Russia said right in front, we're not

32:32

going to kill you. There's no reason

32:34

to. And the longer this war goes

32:36

on, Zelenski has become the greatest ally

32:39

of Russia. He doesn't realize it, but

32:41

Zelenski helps Russia every single day

32:43

he opens his mouth. He's a force

32:45

multiplier. Why would Russia kill him? There's

32:48

no reason for Russia to kill him.

32:50

Now, if there were war, then Zelenski

32:52

becomes a legitimate command and

32:54

control target and could be killed,

32:56

but again. If you get into the

32:59

business of killing heads of state,

33:01

what goes around comes around, calm

33:03

as a bitch, and you know, you

33:05

just start a process, you don't want

33:07

to go down. So there's no

33:09

reason for Russia to kill Zelenski.

33:11

And then Russia doesn't want

33:14

to kill Zelenski. So I think

33:16

I've answered that question. Indeed.

33:18

Aildor? That might be the

33:21

pronunciation from Bulgaria? What will

33:23

happen if the U. I'm

33:26

sorry, what will happen with

33:28

the U.S. Biolaps program? Which

33:31

agency is responsible for them?

33:33

Who is going to take

33:36

over? Has Trump mentioned them

33:38

in his program? Has

33:40

the death of General

33:43

Kirilov stopped any investigations?

33:46

I'm just trying to figure out

33:48

a last sentence. Stop the

33:50

investigations by whom? By Russia?

33:52

No. Russia doesn't stop investigations

33:54

because somebody's killed. This isn't

33:57

America. This isn't the soft

33:59

western country. Russia will investigate

34:01

this until they get to where

34:03

they need to be on the

34:05

investigations. They have the documents that

34:08

we've already seen, you know, Kerala's

34:10

deputy come forward and take over

34:13

the reins and continue to aggressively

34:15

call out what Russia believes are

34:17

the crimes of the United States

34:20

in pursuing offensive biological weapons convention.

34:22

These programs are under the auspices

34:24

of... the Department of Defense. And

34:27

there, I think these were programs

34:29

that were done under the Nunn-Lugar

34:31

Act, cooperative threat reduction funding was

34:34

involved. And they just, they spun

34:36

out of control. I think we've

34:39

talked about this in the past,

34:41

where these things started out as

34:43

legitimate employment vehicles for Ukrainian. biological

34:46

weapon specialists to keep them gainfully

34:48

employed so that they didn't take

34:50

their skill set elsewhere to people

34:53

who could pay higher salaries. That

34:55

was one of the main ideas

34:57

behind this. And then what happened

35:00

is it just became we're seeing

35:02

this. I explained this before and

35:04

I think people might have rolled

35:07

their eyes half the time because

35:09

as soon as I get into

35:12

corruption all they're like, oh God,

35:14

they're due to your deep state

35:16

corruption. Well, I hope USAID. investigation

35:19

has blown that off and everybody

35:21

understands just how deeply corrupt all

35:23

of this is the cooperative threat

35:26

reduction program is a money printing

35:28

cash cow which when you're the

35:30

business of being corrupt is just

35:33

what you need and so what

35:35

happens is Congress always the same

35:38

thing guys it's Congress and money.

35:40

Congress decides that they're going to

35:42

buy influence and all this stuff

35:45

provide you know employment vehicles for

35:47

you know their their their supporters

35:49

it's done this way and So

35:52

they had this thing that everybody

35:54

agrees is a good thing. And

35:56

then they said, well, they're just

35:59

going to keep expanding it and

36:01

expanding it and expanding it. And

36:04

so what happened in Ukraine is

36:06

when they tried to branch out

36:08

and do other things, you know,

36:11

people came back and said, no,

36:13

we're not going to do other

36:15

things. You know, people came back

36:18

and said, no, we're not going

36:20

to do that. They said, well,

36:22

what about biological, oh yeah, we

36:25

can do that. It's a make

36:27

work progress. And the money goes

36:29

into people's pockets, this money flows

36:32

in, people get jobs, that, da,

36:34

da, da. And this thing spun

36:37

out of control to you what?

36:39

Had a dozen biolabs in Ukraine

36:41

doing what? And here's the thing.

36:44

When you have the Department of

36:46

Defense and Biolabs, you know, we're

36:48

not supposed to have an offensive

36:51

weapon biological capability against the treaty,

36:53

against the law. But what we

36:55

do in the United States is

36:58

we have defensive biological weapons programs.

37:00

which means that we have to

37:03

defend against potential attacks by others,

37:05

which means we have to do

37:07

investigations into what potential agents could

37:10

be developed by other people. So

37:12

we are building, building, growing, offensive

37:14

biological agent. When you go to

37:17

the hazmat specialist course or something,

37:19

whatever, in Dugway, you know, you...

37:21

get exposed this kind of stuff.

37:24

It's the same thing when I

37:26

went to the chemical weapons course

37:29

down in Alabama. You know, we're

37:31

not supposed to be producing Sarah

37:33

nerve agent and VX nerve agent

37:36

because those are, that's nerve agent.

37:38

The chemical weapons convention says you

37:40

can't produce chemical agent. But when

37:43

I went in there, you get

37:45

exposed to live Sarah nerve agent

37:47

and live VX nerve agent. Now

37:50

it's not supposed to be enough

37:52

to kill you. but it's supposed

37:54

to be enough to register on

37:57

the detection equipment that you're using

37:59

because I'm being trained as a

38:02

hazmat specialist, a hazmat technician to

38:04

go into a hazardous area and

38:06

do detection, mitigation, etc. And so

38:08

we do it in as realistic a

38:11

possibility as you know scenario

38:13

is possible. So they produce

38:15

sarin nerve agent and then they

38:17

go in and they put sarin nerve

38:19

agent out there and we go

38:22

in and we investigate. And it

38:24

comes up positive on our

38:26

sarin nerve agent detectors, etc.

38:29

But we don't call the

38:31

chemical offensive chemical weapons program.

38:33

It's a defensive chemical weapons

38:35

program and what we are

38:37

producing is used to You know prepare

38:39

us to be better defensively It's the

38:42

same thing with biological if you're going

38:44

to go in and do anthrax detection

38:46

you need it could be 22 Bile

38:48

you're right Cassandra. I'm not I said

38:50

12. It's probably 22 What's

38:53

tin? Bile weapons labs among

38:55

friends? It's no big deal.

38:58

Come on. But anthrax. How

39:00

do you test for anthrax?

39:03

How do you test for

39:05

anthrax? How do you test

39:07

whether the equipment

39:09

protects you, etc. You

39:12

have to produce anthrax.

39:14

And it has to

39:16

be produced in tubes. And

39:18

then these tubes are used

39:21

in the various... biotraining facilities and

39:23

they you know squeeze out just the

39:25

right amount they do what they need

39:27

to do to turn into a powder

39:29

and all that kind of stuff. Well

39:31

we lost one of those tubes after

39:33

9-11 and it ended up making its

39:35

way into envelopes that got mailed around.

39:37

We make botulin of toxin, we make

39:40

smallpox, we make everything. Apparently we also

39:42

fund China in the Wuhan lab to

39:44

do COVID. You know, it's crazy what

39:46

we do. And now so now you have

39:49

these people saying this is defensive, this

39:51

is defensive. We're going to start producing

39:53

offensive biological weapons, but we're going to

39:56

call it a defensive weapons program.

39:58

And that scam works as long

40:00

as no... one's asking questions, but

40:02

when Russia comes in and captures

40:04

the documents and starts going through

40:06

the documents going, what the hell

40:08

are you doing here? Because to

40:10

the Russians, I can guarantee you

40:12

if the situation was reversed and

40:14

we captured Russian documents showing that

40:16

they had biological weapons labs in

40:18

Mexico that were developing strains that

40:20

only exclusively got white Norwegian heritage

40:23

people in Minnesota sick. We go,

40:25

that's dangerous. That's an offensive biological

40:27

weapons program. That's what we're doing

40:29

in Ukraine. It's an offensive biological

40:31

weapons program that we claim to

40:33

have that has purely defensive characteristics.

40:35

But no. And so, you know,

40:37

what's going to happen here? We

40:39

know that there are some people

40:41

in the United States that are

40:43

worried about it. I can guarantee

40:45

that if Russia and the United

40:48

States start talking again to normalize

40:50

relations that this is going to

40:52

come up. And I can also

40:54

guarantee you that these programs will

40:56

probably be shut down in the

40:58

future because they're very dangerous programs.

41:00

And as we saw, you know,

41:02

it's still not known exactly what

41:04

happened with COVID, but you know,

41:06

there's suspicions that came out from

41:08

a lab. Some people make a

41:10

compelling case, it came out of

41:13

Fort Detroit, the American lab. Why

41:15

wouldn't it? Because we're doing all

41:17

sorts of crazy crap. Maybe we

41:19

did it. Other people say it

41:21

came out of Wuhan. Some people

41:23

still say it's, it's, it's a

41:25

came out of it's a came

41:27

out of a It doesn't matter

41:29

what the truth is there. We

41:31

have to acknowledge that what we

41:33

don't want is a situation where

41:35

it comes out of a lab.

41:38

And so we should be funding

41:40

any programs that produce biological agents

41:42

at the laboratory that could get

41:44

released into the wild and cause

41:46

a global pandemic. So yeah, they

41:48

should shut these things down. We'll

41:50

see what happens. Okay. We have

41:52

a voicemail message from our friend

41:54

Phil. London, very provocative, but in

41:56

my humble opinion Scott, a most

41:58

valid question. Will the

42:00

Mexican cartels assassinate Trump? In my

42:03

view, if Trump is serious about

42:05

taking them on, with the help

42:08

of the deep state opposed to

42:10

Trump, the cartels will kill him.

42:12

They might try. And he says

42:15

it like just because they decided

42:17

they want to that they'll be

42:19

able to, but they won't necessarily

42:22

be able to. The president's one

42:24

of the, you know, if you

42:27

want to kill the president of

42:29

the United States, you probably can't.

42:31

He's a public figure. The Secret

42:34

Service tries their hardest, but nothing's

42:36

perfect. And we saw him butler

42:38

Pennsylvania. How close someone came. You

42:41

know. So it's a theoretical possibility.

42:43

But, you know, the cartel, it's

42:46

not, this is what people need

42:48

to understand. For the leadership of

42:50

the cartel, this isn't about defending

42:53

a country where you die for

42:55

honor. It's a business. The cartel

42:58

exists to do one thing and

43:00

one thing only, and that's make

43:02

money for the cartel leadership. War

43:05

is that which doesn't make money.

43:07

So the cartel, if you kill

43:09

the President of the United States,

43:12

understand this, the United States will

43:14

never rest till every one of

43:17

you are dead. And that's a

43:19

fricking promise. And as an American

43:21

citizen, I won't allow the United

43:24

States to rest until every cartel

43:26

member is hunted down and slaughtered

43:28

and killed. All right, you don't

43:31

get to kill the President of

43:33

the United States. You don't have

43:36

that option. If you choose to

43:38

exercise that option, then you will

43:40

all die. That's just the reality

43:43

you think the United States is

43:45

you go all right. Yeah, no

43:47

big deal No, we're gonna hunt

43:50

you down and we're gonna kill

43:52

you. We're gonna ruin your businesses

43:55

wherever you are because we're bigger

43:57

than you were better than you

43:59

and we have more staying power

44:02

than you. And we're fighting for

44:04

something that you're not fighting for,

44:06

which is national pride. You're

44:09

just fighting for money. So,

44:11

and I think the cartel knows

44:13

this, which is why they haven't

44:15

gone around, killed governors and all

44:18

this stuff. They work on bribery

44:20

judges, etc. But the cartel

44:22

knows that there is a line that

44:24

you can't cross in the United

44:27

States. you know it looks like

44:29

we're going to be destroying the

44:31

cartel they might come back but again

44:33

they're businessmen their whole

44:35

goal once America turns on them

44:38

will their goal will be to

44:40

minimize the damage done and to

44:42

try and you know slip away

44:44

and and and reorganize to make money

44:46

they want to make money so we'll

44:48

see what what what happens here

44:51

but I don't think the cartels

44:53

can try to kill the

44:55

president. That would be the

44:57

dumbest thing in the world for

44:59

the to ever try. Yeah,

45:02

that's a good point. It's

45:04

just not likely to produce

45:06

a good outcome for them.

45:09

I didn't even think about

45:11

that and that's sort

45:13

of obvious. Once again,

45:15

a great answer from

45:17

our favorite weapons inspector.

45:19

Let's take a phone

45:22

call, shall we, Scott?

45:24

you lose it. You've

45:26

talked before about how

45:29

America's diplomatic skills has

45:31

atrophied. One thing I

45:33

was thinking about is the

45:35

era of the INS treaty,

45:38

weapons inspectors, nuclear proliferation treaties,

45:40

those were all many many

45:42

years ago. I'm worried that

45:44

the expertise and the people

45:47

who know that skill and

45:49

know how to successfully pull

45:51

something like that off diplomatically

45:53

and implement it are retiring

45:56

or becoming too old to

45:58

do these sorts. of things.

46:00

Is there anything that you can

46:02

do, anybody can do to prevent

46:05

that? Thank you. Thanks for the

46:07

call. That's a problem that I've

46:09

discussed many times and it's, it's,

46:12

it's, it's, you're absolutely right. Muscle

46:14

memory, the I&F treaty was the

46:16

culminating moment, I think it's a

46:19

proper word, a serial correct me

46:21

if I'm wrong, culminating sort of

46:23

like the... the final conclusion of

46:26

decades of intellectual systemic diplomatic training

46:28

on arms control. We had to

46:30

learn how to talk about arms

46:32

control with the Russians. Sit down

46:35

with them. If you go read

46:37

the histories of the salt treaty,

46:39

the strategic arms limitation talks, how

46:42

the Americans and the Russians learned

46:44

to do business with one another.

46:46

work through cultural differences, linguistic differences,

46:49

terminology, to the point where they

46:51

were speaking the same language. And

46:53

then, and then, and then, you

46:56

know, once they, they, they get

46:58

into a role, they're able to

47:00

understand and not feel threatened by

47:03

people, you know, where the Russians

47:05

put it forward a proposition, we

47:07

would say, no, we're, you know,

47:09

we're going to do this and

47:12

they wouldn't get upset. And you,

47:14

and you, and you, and you

47:16

work on it. And then in

47:19

the end, you know, you know,

47:21

you know, you know, you know,

47:23

you know, We invented something, we

47:26

created this unique thing called a

47:28

weapons inspector, but nowhere in the

47:30

military system was there a military

47:33

specialty called weapons inspector. And so

47:35

what happened is, you know, the

47:37

first of us were handpicked. So

47:40

our respective services knew that this

47:42

was a unique assignment. They plucked

47:44

us out, they plucked us in,

47:46

and they said, you're going to

47:49

go do this unique thing. But

47:51

then this unique thing became a

47:53

full-time job. And with You know,

47:56

when I was plugged in, there

47:58

wasn't anything called a weapons inspector.

48:00

We had no idea what it

48:03

was going to be to be

48:05

a weapons inspector. We just made

48:07

it up. We wrote the book.

48:10

But then you wrote the book

48:12

and so now you know what

48:14

the skill sets are that you

48:16

need. And now you have to

48:19

go to the military and see,

48:21

I need the following skill sets.

48:23

But the military isn't recruiting or

48:26

training to meet that skill set.

48:28

And you have to pluck people

48:30

out of competing military specialties specialties

48:33

that they've And now you're plugging

48:35

them in and you're ruining careers

48:37

because the military, there's not enough

48:40

inspectors to justify a standalone, you

48:42

know, career path for inspector. But

48:44

we did it anyways, but the

48:47

system was already resistant. But then

48:49

we started to shut down the

48:51

treaties and we stopped doing the

48:53

negotiations. And negotiations are the byproduct

48:56

of a lot of work, intelligence.

48:58

The CIA had something called the

49:00

Arms Control Intelligence Staff, and it

49:03

worked for the Director of Central

49:05

Intelligence, and its job was to

49:07

collect intelligence and assess intelligence of

49:10

an arms control nature to support

49:12

the arms control policies of the

49:14

United States. But then when you

49:17

get out of the arms control

49:19

business, they dissolved aces, they called

49:21

an aces, and they dissolved it,

49:23

and you lost that capability, that

49:26

focus. Instead of being focused on

49:28

arms control you became focused on

49:30

you know a whole bunch of

49:33

other competing tasks that didn't necessarily

49:35

have anything to do with arms

49:37

control When you stop doing inspections

49:40

that you already have a problem

49:42

where you get the military to

49:44

start saying, okay, maybe we can

49:47

start looking at creating this, but

49:49

we need a big enough pull

49:51

of manpower to do this. And

49:54

then you stop doing inspections, and

49:56

that pull shrinks, and the military

49:58

is back to, we can't give

50:00

you anybody, because now you're ruining

50:03

somebody's career, it's not, so you

50:05

get not the best people, is

50:07

what happens. And then you forget

50:10

how to negotiate. You're not talking

50:12

the common language anymore. The trust

50:14

and confidence, it's Paul Nietzsche. Paul

50:17

Nietzsche. was a man who began

50:19

his career, I think, right at

50:21

the end of World War II.

50:24

He was one of the people

50:26

that went into the post-bombing studies

50:28

of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And he

50:31

went on to be in the

50:33

National Security Council. He's the guy

50:35

that gave us MSD 68, I

50:37

think it is. The containment theory,

50:40

he wrote that during the Korean

50:42

War. He was a coal warrior,

50:44

like you wouldn't be. Paul Nietzsche

50:47

finished his career as the INF

50:49

negotiator. This is a man who

50:51

was there when the ABM treaty

50:54

was negotiated there with the strategic

50:56

talks, strategic arm limitation talks one

50:58

and two. He was there for

51:01

I&F, he made I&F happen. He

51:03

closed the deal on that and

51:05

he created the conditions that led

51:07

to strategic arms introductory. We don't

51:10

have Paul Nietzsche's anymore. We haven't

51:12

been growing them. We don't have

51:14

people that do arms control anymore.

51:17

if we were to resume arms

51:19

control negotiation with the Russians, we'd

51:21

have to start all over. And

51:24

the Russians are the same way.

51:26

In both the United States and

51:28

in Russia, we've subordinated what should

51:31

be a state department lead, arms

51:33

control, to the military. Well, the

51:35

last person you want representing you

51:38

in arms control is the military,

51:40

because the military is not in

51:42

the business of controlling arms. We're

51:44

in the business of building missiles,

51:47

developing plans to use the missiles,

51:49

and now you're asking the military

51:51

to rein themselves in. Military doesn't

51:54

do very good at reining themselves

51:56

in. They need civilian leadership to

51:58

rein them in. And so, yeah,

52:01

you're... 100% right that we this

52:03

is at your feed one of

52:05

the things that I will be

52:08

working on this year is promoting

52:10

the concept of of bringing back

52:12

an arms control disarm an agency

52:15

an agency within the Department of

52:17

State solely focused on the business

52:19

of arms control to begin lifting

52:21

weights now we may have to

52:24

start out with the you know

52:26

just the bar you can't do

52:28

anymore because I've at at at

52:31

your feed but after a while

52:33

that bar is good slap on

52:35

10 Now you're doing more, slap

52:38

on 45, you're doing more, get

52:40

to that, you know, you're pinching

52:42

250 and you're doing all right.

52:45

But we need to, we need

52:47

to get in that business again,

52:49

especially if we're going to sit

52:51

down with the Russians. And the

52:54

Russians are going to have to

52:56

start doing the same thing too.

52:58

They've watched. Anatole Antonov is retiring.

53:01

There's nobody left. They're going to

53:03

have to invent them and we

53:05

have to start all over again.

53:08

But no, it's a great point.

53:10

Okay, let's take another call. Good

53:12

evening, you're on with Scott and

53:15

Jeff. What's on your mind? Hi,

53:17

thank you for taking my call.

53:19

Sorry, let me just put this

53:22

on mute. My question had to

53:24

do with... Well,

53:26

first of all, I just

53:28

want to speak to the

53:31

subscription issue. I used to

53:33

have a subscription with the

53:35

Washington Post and since I

53:37

started, you know, consuming a

53:40

lot of the Ask the

53:42

Inspector, not so much reading

53:44

the articles because I just

53:46

read too much during the

53:48

day. So I switched my

53:51

subscription over from Waco, which

53:53

was just kind of garbage

53:55

to the the Scott Ritter

53:57

sub stack. And so I

54:00

just encourage. that if they

54:02

do consume this and find

54:04

it beneficial which many do

54:06

a small contribution is really

54:08

the least that we can

54:11

do and I for thank

54:13

you I salute a question

54:15

so that will that will

54:17

have to be it for

54:20

tonight keep up the good

54:22

work guys oh all right

54:24

that's it no question thank

54:26

you well remember his number

54:28

and if he calls back

54:31

put him to the front

54:33

of line we'll take his

54:35

question Please lower your thing

54:37

the computer thing. Okay. The

54:40

thing a magic. Hello. Hello

54:42

to you. Good evening. Good

54:44

evening. How are you? Shalom.

54:46

I'm I'm good. Thank you.

54:49

Shalom. Tonight. I just have

54:51

a simple factual question for

54:53

Mr. Scott Ritter. It's about

54:55

after October 7. When Israel

54:57

began their military occupation and

55:00

carpet bombing of Gaza Mr.

55:02

Scott Ritter, please refresh my

55:04

memory at that point Did

55:06

I hear you say that

55:09

Israel is doing this military

55:11

action with no military strategy

55:13

for combating for fighting Hamas?

55:15

Or is my memory mistaken?

55:17

Did I dream that you

55:20

say that or did you

55:22

say that? That's my question

55:25

All right, what is the answer

55:27

Mr. Scott Ritter? So did I

55:29

say that Israel is doing, what

55:32

I said is the following. I

55:34

know exactly what I said. I

55:36

said that. Well clearly we picked

55:38

the right person to direct the

55:41

question to Mr. Scott Ritter. Mr.

55:43

Scott Ritter, well thank you for

55:45

the promotion. What I said is

55:47

that Israel, the Israeli military was

55:49

not prepared for October 7. What

55:52

had happened, it took them by

55:54

surprise. And therefore they went into

55:56

reactive mode. And that means that

55:58

they're not acting off of a

56:00

plan of action, something that they

56:03

prepared to do. They're reacting to

56:05

a situation that was unprecedented. You

56:07

know, this major thrust by Hamas

56:09

out of Gaza deep into Israel,

56:12

massive casualties, putting a panic into

56:14

the Israeli military, go back in

56:16

shocking the Israeli government and Israeli

56:18

population, demanding that something be done,

56:20

and so they get sucked into

56:23

a trap that Hamas had laid

56:25

for them, and the Israeli army

56:27

wasn't ready for this trap. They

56:29

didn't have a plan. They were

56:31

just there to kill, to close

56:34

with, to destroy, but not to

56:36

defeat. They didn't have a plan

56:38

to defeat Hamas. They didn't have

56:40

a plan to defeat Hamas. You

56:43

might disagree with that. Ask the

56:45

Israeli soldiers that don't want to

56:47

go back into Gaza. Ask the

56:49

Israeli generals about what the impact

56:51

the fighting in Gaza had on

56:54

the morale of the Israeli army.

56:56

Ask the generals how proud they

56:58

are of the idea of how

57:00

they performed under duress in Gaza.

57:02

This is one of the greatest

57:05

shanes for Israel. And even the

57:07

Israeli army today is reflected on

57:09

saying we did not do well

57:11

here. We not only failed to

57:14

perform militarily, but our troops, morale

57:16

broke down, discipline broke down. These

57:18

people were committing mass murder. And

57:20

if you're in the military, that's

57:22

not your business. Death is my

57:25

business. You want to oppose me?

57:27

I kill everybody who opposes me.

57:29

But this was mass murder. These

57:31

were people that went in and

57:33

committed genocide, committed war crimes, laughed

57:36

about it, bragged about it, filmed

57:38

it. And then they got totally

57:40

out of control and allowed Talmutic

57:42

fanatics to take over and say

57:45

you can rape Palestinians and God

57:47

wills it. And then when they

57:49

arrested the rapists, the people defending

57:51

the rapists, stormed the prison to

57:53

free the rapists saying we must

57:56

be allowed to rape Palestinians and

57:58

the Israelis went okay. So

58:00

yeah, Israel wasn't ready for

58:02

this Israel didn't have a

58:04

plan for this and the

58:06

results spoke for themselves. Who's

58:08

in control of Gaza today?

58:10

Israel or Hamas? I stand

58:12

by every word I see.

58:14

All right, next question is

58:16

from Evelyn in the United

58:19

Arab Emirates. Do you think

58:21

Trump even listens to vloggers

58:23

like you, Mr. Scott Ritter,

58:25

or his advisors at least?

58:27

It would be a good

58:29

thing if he listens to

58:31

people other than the ones

58:33

around him. I don't know

58:35

what Trump is. I'd be

58:37

surprised if Trump listened to

58:39

me. He's the President of

58:41

the United States. He has

58:43

better things to do. But

58:45

maybe indirectly. I mean, they

58:47

say, for example. his son

58:49

feeds him information about you

58:51

know good podcasters and things

58:53

like that. I mean I

58:55

know for a fact that

58:57

people close to Trump listen

58:59

what they what what gets

59:01

to Trump I don't know

59:03

I know that this show

59:05

has influenced people who influenced

59:07

Donald Trump we know that

59:09

So I like to believe

59:11

that we're having an impact.

59:13

There's, you know, I think

59:15

that we influence the discussion

59:17

at large and that that,

59:19

you know, when you add

59:22

our voice to other voices,

59:24

it becomes a crescendo that

59:26

can't be ignored. I'd like

59:28

to believe that we were

59:30

trying to do made it

59:32

to JD Vance's circle. So

59:34

I'd like to believe that

59:36

we're having an impact. I

59:38

mean, but you know, I'm

59:40

not here to advise the

59:42

president, although I keep telling

59:44

to call me. I'll help

59:46

you out. We can get

59:48

out of this rush of

59:50

mess together. You know, fire.

59:52

Three. But if you're free,

59:54

free information. Now you're going

59:56

to get a call from

59:58

Vauvin and Lexus, pretending to

1:00:00

be Trump. Well, it could,

1:00:02

yeah. Look, here's my deal.

1:00:04

Let's Syria and I spend

1:00:06

one night in the Lincoln

1:00:08

bedroom in the White House,

1:00:10

so we can take selfies,

1:00:12

and then I'll give you

1:00:14

all the information you want.

1:00:16

That's my price. That's like

1:00:18

a good deal. You have

1:00:20

a different price? Tell me

1:00:22

what it is. We're in

1:00:25

a negotiation here. That's right.

1:00:27

This is the air of

1:00:29

negotiation, right? The air of

1:00:31

a negotiation. Make it a

1:00:33

crazy Trump-like demand. You're going

1:00:35

to go crazy. You sleep

1:00:37

in the Lincoln bedroom. Trump,

1:00:39

we get your bedroom. But

1:00:41

the point is, I do

1:00:43

think that... that we have,

1:00:45

I know for a fact

1:00:47

that we have impacted decision

1:00:49

making at the national level.

1:00:51

I can't say that we've

1:00:53

done that consistently, etc. but

1:00:55

you know, I also believe

1:00:57

that we've had a major

1:00:59

impact on how the American

1:01:01

public views certain issues. We've

1:01:03

definitely had an impact on

1:01:05

free speech. We're going to

1:01:07

have an even greater impact

1:01:09

on free speech if Pam

1:01:11

Bondi's thing. you know, unfolds

1:01:13

the way it should unfold.

1:01:15

But also on nuclear weapons

1:01:17

and the potential nuclear war,

1:01:19

we had a huge impact

1:01:21

on that that resonated all

1:01:23

the way up to the

1:01:25

man himself. So, you know,

1:01:28

this isn't just... Well, I

1:01:30

can't say. But, you know,

1:01:32

we... This isn't just spinning

1:01:34

our wills. We're actually... we're

1:01:36

having an impact. And I

1:01:38

would say that we. Look

1:01:40

at it, it's sort of

1:01:42

touching. It's funny. I went

1:01:44

to Washington DC for that,

1:01:46

for the whole inauguration thing.

1:01:48

And I was, yeah, I

1:01:50

saw you there. Yeah, and

1:01:52

so I was with my

1:01:54

daughter in Anya Kay and

1:01:56

we were taking the taxi

1:01:58

to the hotel and the

1:02:00

guy was from Eritrea. Okay.

1:02:02

Then the next day I

1:02:04

got a hold of a

1:02:06

Eritrean. I call another cab,

1:02:08

it's an Eritrean. Apparently there's

1:02:10

a lot of Eritreans around

1:02:12

there, Ethiopians and Eritreans. But

1:02:14

at the book event, a

1:02:16

gentleman from Eritrea came up

1:02:18

and gave me a signed

1:02:20

book signed by somebody close

1:02:22

to the Eritrean leadership. And

1:02:24

basically it wasn't in there,

1:02:26

it was an invitation from

1:02:28

the leadership of Eritrea to

1:02:31

go to Eritrea and talk

1:02:33

to them about issues because

1:02:35

the government of Eritrea watches

1:02:37

this show. and listen to

1:02:39

what we say. And then

1:02:41

I've been called by other

1:02:43

people around the world that

1:02:45

say, no, no, no, people

1:02:47

listen to you. So this

1:02:49

show isn't just having an

1:02:51

impact here in the United

1:02:53

States. We're having a positive

1:02:55

impact around the world. And

1:02:57

of course, we're pissing a

1:02:59

lot of people off. I

1:03:01

have a feeling, I was

1:03:03

invited to go to Germany

1:03:05

next month. I don't know

1:03:07

if I'm my passport to

1:03:09

be back or not, but

1:03:11

after watching the Germans roused

1:03:13

people for freedom of speech,

1:03:15

I ain't going to Germany.

1:03:17

not until their government changes

1:03:19

and they changed their whole

1:03:21

approach to free speech and

1:03:23

all that, but I'd be

1:03:25

a fool to get off

1:03:27

an airplane in Germany without

1:03:29

a letter of immunity signed

1:03:31

by the Chancellor himself. And

1:03:34

even with that, I don't

1:03:36

think that flies, but you

1:03:38

know, the Germans, they're insane.

1:03:40

The Austrians just roused our

1:03:42

good friend Richard Medhurst, threatened

1:03:44

him with 14 years in

1:03:46

jail, because he's a journalist

1:03:48

who's saying anything. England's got

1:03:50

totally crazy. Did you see

1:03:52

that most recent thing where

1:03:54

England's unsealed a secret order

1:03:56

against Apple and they want

1:03:58

access to all of the

1:04:00

encrypted stuff that Apple does

1:04:02

globally, including that which touches

1:04:04

American citizens. Apple should go

1:04:06

to the Donald Trump and

1:04:08

say, do you really want

1:04:10

to surrender America's personal private

1:04:12

protection to the British? Donald Trump should

1:04:14

tell the British, well, who do the

1:04:16

British think they are to come into

1:04:18

the United States? They're doing this on

1:04:21

their own now? I mean, previously, I

1:04:23

guess, in the Biden administration,

1:04:25

they were acting on behalf of us, right?

1:04:27

But they're doing it on their own now? all

1:04:29

of the encryption of iPhone

1:04:32

users. Why? Because the British

1:04:34

are in the business of arresting.

1:04:36

I mean, it's ridiculous. A

1:04:38

guy got arrested for raping a

1:04:41

very young child, and I think

1:04:43

they gave him three years, and

1:04:45

somebody got arrested for

1:04:47

reposting a blog about Hamas,

1:04:50

and they got seven years.

1:04:52

I mean, this is England. It's

1:04:54

kind of crazy. It's insane.

1:04:56

There is no free speech anymore

1:04:59

in England and Germany and

1:05:01

almost anywhere in here. I

1:05:03

used to get invited to

1:05:05

Switzerland. I'm sure they're going

1:05:07

to issue an invitation. But

1:05:10

they just arrested a past

1:05:12

any journalist in Switzerland

1:05:14

and deported them. Why would

1:05:16

I go to Switzerland? I mean, this

1:05:18

is this, the world has gone crazy.

1:05:22

All right, let's move on

1:05:24

to the next question. This

1:05:26

is from Abe in Japan.

1:05:29

Who holds the primary influence

1:05:31

over the executive office of

1:05:34

the United States of America?

1:05:36

Is it Miriam Adelson or

1:05:39

are other individuals or groups

1:05:41

playing a more significant role

1:05:43

in shaping the administration's decisions

1:05:46

and policies? Can I

1:05:48

just say before you answer

1:05:50

this whole? Mirian Adelson thing.

1:05:53

What's missing from the

1:05:55

story is, why would Trump

1:05:58

need her money? in the

1:06:00

future? So therefore, like, what's the

1:06:02

leverage at this point? Is she

1:06:04

going to put a hit out

1:06:06

on him? Is she just going

1:06:09

to be angry at him? Am

1:06:11

I missing something, Scott? No, you're

1:06:13

not missing anything. Look, when you're

1:06:15

a candidate, unfortunately, the reality of

1:06:17

American domestic politics is that you

1:06:19

have to basically kiss up to

1:06:21

the Jewish lobby. There's a lot

1:06:24

of money out there, Citizens United

1:06:26

Jeff, money in politics, bad stuff.

1:06:28

A lot of money out there

1:06:30

that corrupts a lot of things,

1:06:32

and she gave a hundred million

1:06:34

dollars. And you can't say it

1:06:36

didn't accomplish anything because my understanding

1:06:38

is the hundred million it was

1:06:41

supposed to get her the vice

1:06:43

presidency, because she was lobbying hard

1:06:45

for her husband's little pet boy,

1:06:47

you know, little Marco. you know

1:06:49

was was was the pet project

1:06:51

of her husband and so she

1:06:53

wanted to honor her husband's legacy

1:06:55

and get little Marco into the

1:06:58

White House as the vice president

1:07:00

and Trump said not just no

1:07:02

but hell no that isn't going

1:07:04

to happen and he picked JD

1:07:06

Vance but he still took the

1:07:08

hundred million so she came and

1:07:10

she said give him something else

1:07:12

he'll be a good boy I've

1:07:15

talked to him little Marco was

1:07:17

promised not this bad you in

1:07:19

the back and so little Marco

1:07:21

is now the secretary of the

1:07:23

secretary of state. That's what $100

1:07:25

million bought you. Now if you

1:07:27

think about anything more than that,

1:07:29

ask Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister

1:07:32

of Israel. So just ask him,

1:07:34

look at his hands on the

1:07:36

podium while Trump is issuing his,

1:07:38

you're reading from his notes that

1:07:40

nobody knew about what he was

1:07:42

going to do in Gaza. Old

1:07:44

BB's white knuckles on it, going,

1:07:46

what the hell am I hearing?

1:07:49

Look at his eyes. He's like,

1:07:51

what is going on here? He

1:07:54

basically he was humiliated on the

1:07:57

stage by Donald Trump 100 million

1:07:59

dollars by that and then Donald

1:08:02

Trump sat with him later on

1:08:04

and Trump said yeah I'm gonna

1:08:06

negotiate with Iran. BB came over

1:08:09

to get America to bomb Iran.

1:08:11

Come on BB, put your hands

1:08:14

on the podium. It's a little

1:08:16

hard to pick that footage, you're

1:08:18

exactly right. Wait wait, wait, don't,

1:08:21

get the other hand. Oh, no,

1:08:23

white nutslet baby. Now, closing on

1:08:26

his face. He hasn't the Foggis.

1:08:28

Frickin' clue. It's now sinking in

1:08:30

that Donald Trump is making it

1:08:33

up as he goes along and

1:08:35

Bibi's like, this wasn't I pre-briefed.

1:08:38

Your staff told me something different

1:08:40

and now look at it, look

1:08:42

at the defensive posture, slanted away.

1:08:45

He is totally taken by surprise.

1:08:47

$100 million bought all that. So

1:08:50

let's just stop it with this

1:08:52

stuff. You know, you want to

1:08:54

know who influences Donald Trump more

1:08:57

than probably anybody? Malania Trump. If

1:08:59

you don't think that she has

1:09:02

him whipped solid, you don't watch

1:09:04

their relationship. Donald Trump, of course,

1:09:06

he's not going to, you know,

1:09:09

she's not going to make policy

1:09:11

for him, but if you want

1:09:14

to talk about somebody who has

1:09:16

him by the, it's Malania, not

1:09:18

Miriam Adels. And if you think

1:09:21

Donald Trump's afraid of the Jewish

1:09:23

lobby, now that he's president, he

1:09:26

needed the Jewish lobby to get

1:09:28

elected. Even though we now know

1:09:30

that the Jews voted against him,

1:09:33

they voted for Biden. Donald Trump

1:09:35

knows that too. And guess who

1:09:38

has very thin skin and is

1:09:40

very vindictive. Uh, Donald Trump. And

1:09:42

guess who he believed the last

1:09:45

time in his office? BB Netanyahu.

1:09:47

Guess who he hates right now?

1:09:50

BB net Yahoo. 100 million dollars?

1:09:52

Nah. It doesn't buy what you

1:09:54

think it buys. Donald Trump is

1:09:57

doing what he believes is best

1:09:59

for America. Jeff knows this and

1:10:02

he knows that how I feel

1:10:04

about Donald Trump. But I will

1:10:06

say this right now. Donald Trump

1:10:09

is the most honest president we've

1:10:11

had in that office in modern

1:10:14

history. No president has been as

1:10:16

direct and honest to the American

1:10:18

people as Donald Trump has. It

1:10:21

gets ugly and it gets painful

1:10:23

sometimes because you're just sitting on

1:10:26

what are you saying but there's

1:10:28

no subterfuge. He's not hiding anything.

1:10:30

He's not being slick. Just straight

1:10:33

up saying it. What president has

1:10:35

been that honest? None. Not Joe,

1:10:38

not Barack, not any of them.

1:10:40

Not slick willy not even w.

1:10:42

Donald Trump straight up the most

1:10:45

honest man the White House has

1:10:47

ever had because he doesn't care

1:10:50

Look what he's doing. Look at

1:10:52

the There's no policy. There's no

1:10:54

political finesse and anything he's doing

1:10:57

in Washington DC right now. He's

1:10:59

a fricking steamroller That's honesty. It's

1:11:02

ugly, but it's honesty. So I

1:11:04

don't think Trump is under the

1:11:06

control of anybody but Donald Trump.

1:11:09

And even then, sometimes I wonder,

1:11:11

because he just says and does

1:11:14

things that are just crazy. But

1:11:16

he's honest about it. Not trying

1:11:18

to hide anything. Straight up, tells

1:11:21

you. I love his answers. The

1:11:23

brutal efficiency of his answers. If

1:11:26

you're a reporter, you say something

1:11:28

stupid. He says, what a stupid

1:11:30

question. What was the last time

1:11:33

a president did that? What was

1:11:35

president? Well, thank you for the

1:11:38

very probing and provocative question there.

1:11:40

Donald Trump's like, who the hell

1:11:42

are you? What's your education? Where

1:11:45

do you come from? You know,

1:11:47

he says everything we're thinking. Like,

1:11:50

what kind of question was that?

1:11:52

You'll say it straight up. What

1:11:54

kind of question is. Never mind.

1:11:57

Just. Remember Angel firstly, this is

1:11:59

his son. In New Zealand, yeah.

1:12:02

Online media reports show Chechen Seoul.

1:12:04

to fight against Russia. I thought

1:12:06

the Chechen people loved Putin, so

1:12:09

why are they fighting for Zilenski?

1:12:11

Be careful about the term Chechen

1:12:14

people. You might be talking about

1:12:16

Chechen person or persons. Look, the

1:12:18

Russian Chechen conflict, there were two

1:12:21

of them, were very bloody affairs.

1:12:23

And there were, when the... when

1:12:25

the second Russian Chechen conflict wound

1:12:28

down, there were many Chechens on

1:12:30

the losing side of the conflict.

1:12:33

The Chechen government, first Ahmadiyurov and

1:12:35

then now his son, Ramzan Kedarov,

1:12:37

have made a concerted effort to

1:12:40

reconcile with the Chechens because the

1:12:42

Chechens are very clanish people, very

1:12:45

close-knit people, and they also, they

1:12:47

operate under blood feuds that take

1:12:49

very seriously. So if you go

1:12:52

around killing Chechens, You create problems

1:12:54

that manifest themselves for a long

1:12:57

time to come. But there was

1:12:59

amnesty efforts. There's effort to bring

1:13:01

people in under amnesty. But there

1:13:04

were people who refused to come

1:13:06

in to yield, and they fled.

1:13:09

They went into diaspora, and many

1:13:11

of them went into diaspora in

1:13:13

Ukraine, where they are today fighting

1:13:16

for the Ukrainians. These aren't the

1:13:18

Chechen people. These are traders to

1:13:21

the Chechen nation. These are people

1:13:23

who have turned their back on.

1:13:25

the Chechen people. You're Chechen in

1:13:28

name only. And so yeah, no,

1:13:30

you're wrong. 110% wrong. I think

1:13:33

I have some insight on that.

1:13:35

I don't know. Jeff, did I

1:13:37

at one time speak before 25,000

1:13:40

heavily armed Chechen soldiers in Groseny

1:13:42

at the invitation of Ramzan Kaderov?

1:13:45

Well, I didn't count them. I

1:13:47

might have been 25,000 and four,

1:13:49

but there was a whole bunch

1:13:52

of those guys. And I think

1:13:54

I have some insight into the

1:13:57

Chechenman. I spent a lot of

1:13:59

time in the mosque that has

1:14:01

been built in honor of Akhma

1:14:04

Kaderov. I went to the Akhma

1:14:06

Kaderov Museum and saw the desk

1:14:09

where he and Vladimir Putin negotiated

1:14:11

into that conflict. I've spoken to

1:14:13

Chechen representatives at every level about

1:14:16

the situation in Chechnya. You know,

1:14:18

one of the places... that my

1:14:21

daughter's not because I had the

1:14:23

privilege of taking both my daughters

1:14:25

to check you know Vico joined

1:14:28

me in in 2023 and then

1:14:30

Patty was able to join me

1:14:33

in January 2024 and one place

1:14:35

we went to was this there's

1:14:37

a town shallow name is the

1:14:40

name of the town and it's

1:14:42

where bloody fighting took place both

1:14:45

in the first war the second

1:14:47

war hundreds of Russian soldiers were

1:14:49

killed there, thousands of Chechen were

1:14:52

killed there, the Russians bombed it,

1:14:54

the civilian population, and it was

1:14:57

a hotbed, the center of the

1:14:59

Chechen resistance. And yet today, somebody

1:15:01

who was there, who fought against

1:15:04

the Russians in the first war,

1:15:06

came over to Ramzon-Qedareside in the

1:15:09

second war, has built this resort.

1:15:11

And it's a family place. So

1:15:13

you go to Shali and you

1:15:16

go in and there's this fantastic

1:15:18

resort where there's a lake and

1:15:21

it got these little... bungalows out

1:15:23

in the middle of the lake

1:15:25

where they bring in the Shash

1:15:28

leak and it's a great restaurant

1:15:30

and everything. And it pieces broken

1:15:33

out all over. These aren't, you

1:15:35

know, these aren't people looking for

1:15:37

a fight with Russia. In Grozny

1:15:40

itself, I've watched the interaction between

1:15:42

the Chechen population, which is by

1:15:45

and by large a very conservative

1:15:47

population, and Russian tourists who come

1:15:49

in because Chechnya is part of

1:15:52

the Russian Federation. And the Russian

1:15:54

terrorists that come in, you know,

1:15:57

unfortunately, many young Russians, especially young

1:15:59

Russian women, there we go. Yeah,

1:16:01

I don't know. I might have

1:16:04

an insight into. you know, who

1:16:06

is that guy speaking for in

1:16:09

Russian? Hold it, let me count,

1:16:11

what? Hold it. Two, three, four,

1:16:13

five, six, nine, nine, eleven, twelve,

1:16:16

three, four, six, seven, nine, nine,

1:16:18

twenty, one, one, one, one, one,

1:16:21

one, holy, that's a lot of

1:16:23

Chechens. They just go on forever,

1:16:25

trust me. Look at it, man.

1:16:28

They just went on forever. It

1:16:30

was the craziest thing in the

1:16:33

world. Nice glasses. Now, now, some

1:16:35

people did point out. The guys

1:16:37

with the stern face are looking

1:16:40

at me because they're saying you

1:16:42

can't speak Russian boy, but at

1:16:45

least that was trying, you know,

1:16:47

and so it's too bad. You

1:16:49

can't, you can't get, you can't

1:16:52

get the, the, that's Ramzankadir. The

1:16:54

girl that's standing in your, girl

1:16:57

standing next to me, there's, there's

1:16:59

my good friend, this girl in

1:17:01

the coke, that's Alexander Ziriana's fiancé,

1:17:04

now wife, she was supposed to

1:17:06

be my translator my translator, my

1:17:09

translator, my translator invited me up.

1:17:11

They said, don't worry, she'll translate

1:17:13

for you. And as we're walking

1:17:16

up, her name's Olga. She was

1:17:18

hilarious. She's like, I don't want

1:17:21

to do this. Please don't make

1:17:23

me do this. Please don't make

1:17:25

me do this. Please don't make

1:17:28

me do this. Please don't make

1:17:30

me, I said, don't worry. I'm

1:17:33

walking up the microphone and I

1:17:35

got this. Step up the thing.

1:17:37

I'm like, I just started going

1:17:40

in there just like, holy shit.

1:17:42

No, no, no, no, no, no,

1:17:45

no. Marina hasn't heard this yet.

1:17:47

She doesn't want to hear it.

1:17:49

She is afraid to listen to

1:17:52

it because she knows that it

1:17:54

will be horrible and she'll be

1:17:57

forever ashamed of me. But look

1:17:59

at Cadero, he could barely hold

1:18:01

his face. That guy doesn't speak

1:18:04

much worth a damn. He's speaking

1:18:06

in front of my men. But

1:18:09

that's his son, the guy with

1:18:11

the guy with the guy with

1:18:13

the K-13. The guy with the

1:18:16

K-13. That is the man at

1:18:18

Lord. If you go back, his

1:18:21

name is Lord, he's now the

1:18:23

Prime Minister of Chechnya. Also, Abd

1:18:25

al-Adana was up there, Adam was

1:18:28

up there. I mean, this was

1:18:30

the big leadership, but that was

1:18:33

all there. Pardon? Well, Alexander Ziriana

1:18:35

of my host, you saw his

1:18:37

picture there, he was there, he

1:18:40

was there, he's got the name.

1:18:42

The subtitles make it seem like

1:18:44

you were speaking just fine. The

1:18:47

grammar is literally horrible. And there's

1:18:49

some creative translation where they sort

1:18:52

of, did they give me a

1:18:54

dagger? Yeah. Right there, baby. My

1:18:56

Chechen dagger. Given to me by

1:18:59

Apdi Aladonov himself. I tried shaving

1:19:01

with it. The FBI came in,

1:19:04

because you know, they went through

1:19:06

a little, they freaked out and

1:19:08

everything, right? Well, is that knife?

1:19:11

Yeah. Was that from? At the

1:19:13

Al-Adhanov? Fetch a warlord? He's a

1:19:16

general in the Russian army. He's

1:19:18

a chess warlord. Yeah, he is.

1:19:20

So, I got this nice little

1:19:23

presentation box. And then it is

1:19:25

a medallion to Akhma Kedir, that's

1:19:28

the father of Ramzah. It was

1:19:30

given to me by Lord. And

1:19:32

he basically said, we don't give

1:19:35

this to anybody. And he said,

1:19:37

you better treat this with respect

1:19:40

or else. And I'm like, don't

1:19:42

worry, it'll be right on my

1:19:44

desk, get a place of honor.

1:19:47

And it is. I make sure.

1:19:49

See guys, I treat it with

1:19:52

respect. No, look, the Chechens are

1:19:54

great and they they have the

1:19:56

history that they they have. And

1:19:59

this is one of the things

1:20:01

that I'll be talking to the minister

1:20:03

of information about in

1:20:06

upcoming episodes of the Russia House

1:20:08

is the history of the

1:20:10

reconciliation between Russia and Chechnya

1:20:12

because I think it's one of

1:20:14

these untold stories. How do you get

1:20:16

people who were finding this vicious

1:20:19

life and death war to not only

1:20:21

end the war, but get to where we

1:20:23

are today in Chechnya, a nation

1:20:25

that's totally rebuilt. I mean, this

1:20:27

is Zelenski. I don't know if you

1:20:29

saw his statement the other day. The rut,

1:20:32

it's like he's trying to insult

1:20:34

the Russians. The Russians, the

1:20:36

Russians blew up Groszni. It

1:20:38

destroyed Groszni. And today Groszni

1:20:40

is totally rebuilt as a modern

1:20:42

city. Yeah, it is, isn't it? You

1:20:45

know, that's what happens when you make

1:20:47

peace with Russia and living, but

1:20:49

I was getting to the point, these

1:20:51

Russian girls come in, these tourists,

1:20:53

and you know, Russian women are beautiful

1:20:55

bodies, and they wear... dresses that

1:20:58

show off their beautiful bodies and

1:21:00

they go to mosques and they do

1:21:02

these stupid telegram things. You've

1:21:04

seen it where is a telegram?

1:21:06

Not telegram. Not take. Instagram.

1:21:09

Instagram. Instagram. Yes, where

1:21:11

they, where they, you know, they jump in

1:21:13

the air and kick their legs up and

1:21:15

do their thing and they get their picture.

1:21:18

The person taken and then the person looked

1:21:20

at, no, do it again. They jump up

1:21:22

and they flip their hair around and that

1:21:24

and you're in a mosque. in a mosque

1:21:26

and the Chechens are watching this

1:21:28

and I watched the Chechens. The

1:21:31

Chechens went up and said, excuse

1:21:33

me ma'am, I would just ask that you

1:21:35

show a little respect and oh no, just

1:21:37

one more. It's really disrespectful for

1:21:39

you to do this, but you

1:21:41

have a good day, man, you know, and then

1:21:44

they left. I mean, so there's, you

1:21:46

know, there's some cultural issues, but the

1:21:48

Chechens are cool as hell. They're

1:21:50

not, they're not violent, like... Oh, she

1:21:52

insulted us, we're going to kill every Russian

1:21:55

in this city. They're just like, no, there's

1:21:57

a law in church, you know, that for

1:21:59

every mosque... goes up there has to

1:22:01

be an Orthodox church that goes up.

1:22:03

And so there's a lot of Orthodox

1:22:06

churches in Chechnya. Totally rebuilt. I don't

1:22:08

know why we started with the whole

1:22:10

church. Oh, because of Chechen people fighting

1:22:13

on the side of Ukraine. I can

1:22:15

guarantee you this is the truth. The

1:22:17

Chechens that are fighting inside of Ukraine.

1:22:20

If they try to come home, they'll

1:22:22

be killed by their families for shaming

1:22:24

their families. Show you how hardcore the

1:22:27

Chechens are the Chechen the Chechens are.

1:22:30

There were some guys from the

1:22:32

Ahmad Special Forces that were fighting

1:22:34

and they got taken prisoner. Now

1:22:36

my understanding is that they were

1:22:39

wounded, knocked unconscious, and taken prisoner.

1:22:41

And then they were released and

1:22:43

returned home. Kedirov came and said,

1:22:45

you will not treat these people

1:22:47

as anything other than traders. These

1:22:49

are prisoners of war coming home.

1:22:51

They are traders. They are traders.

1:22:54

They are traders. They are traders.

1:22:56

They allowed themselves to be captured

1:22:58

to be captured. Chechen's don't allow

1:23:00

themselves to be captured. They should

1:23:02

have once they recovered taken a

1:23:04

pencil and started stabbing people to

1:23:07

death, forcing the enemy to kill

1:23:09

them, but they will be, they'll

1:23:11

be treated. Or in the families

1:23:13

were like, you've shamed us, you've

1:23:15

shamed us. So these guys all

1:23:17

had to, these were heavily wounded

1:23:20

people, volunteered to go back to

1:23:22

fight to restore their honor. You

1:23:24

understand? What will happen to these

1:23:26

so-called Chechens that are fighting with

1:23:28

the Ukrainian side when they're captured

1:23:30

if they're captured by the by

1:23:33

the Russians and the Chechens get

1:23:35

their hands on them? If you

1:23:37

think that the Chechen people are

1:23:39

fighting on the side of Ukraine

1:23:41

You don't know the Chechen people

1:23:43

you don't know the Chechen people

1:23:46

you don't know the Chechen nation

1:23:48

All right, let's take a phone

1:23:50

call angel firstly that was a

1:23:52

good question. We got a great

1:23:54

story out of Scott and we

1:23:56

uncovered us some of the best

1:23:58

footage that we have in the

1:24:01

U.S. tour of duty vault. Hey

1:24:03

there you're on with our favorite

1:24:05

weapons inspector. top of the evening

1:24:07

to you? What's on your mind?

1:24:09

Top of the evening from the

1:24:11

top hat? Is they calling from

1:24:14

the not yet terrorist state of

1:24:16

Canada? How are you? Good evening,

1:24:18

gentlemen. Pretty good. How are you?

1:24:20

Good, good. Thank you. Thank you.

1:24:22

So I called last you guys

1:24:24

and I, you know, I put

1:24:27

a question out. I thank you

1:24:29

for answering. I was a question

1:24:31

regarding the... whether Russia would go

1:24:33

beyond its borders right now in

1:24:35

the annex territories and go towards

1:24:37

the Dessa and actually listen to

1:24:40

an appreciated caught answer it kind

1:24:42

of put some things in perspective

1:24:44

so thank you for that Scott

1:24:46

um I'm just gonna keep it

1:24:48

brief but this is a little

1:24:50

precious version was gonna yeah it's

1:24:53

too late for that already No,

1:24:55

but since the local crisis version,

1:24:57

I was going to talk about

1:24:59

the rare earth minerals or whatever

1:25:01

Trump said he was going to

1:25:03

take from Russia's some payment for

1:25:05

Ukrainian weapons. But I think Scott

1:25:08

addressed that with the judge yesterday

1:25:10

before. Just ask the question. Yes,

1:25:12

yes, so my question generally, Scott,

1:25:14

is where do you see the

1:25:16

three hotspots right now, Russia? Russia,

1:25:18

Ukraine, the Middle East, and China

1:25:21

at the end of Trump's presidency.

1:25:23

I know it's a thankless proposition

1:25:25

to kind of just, but since

1:25:27

it is a loquacious version, I

1:25:29

was just wondering what your thoughts

1:25:31

are on that, where do you

1:25:34

see the world basically in those

1:25:36

three spots in four years? Thank

1:25:38

you very much for your time

1:25:40

and I'll hang up and listen.

1:25:42

Okay, thanks, bye-bye. It's a loquacious

1:25:44

version Scott, you know, in case

1:25:47

you forgot. Quacious questions, that's okay,

1:25:49

good question, good question, it's always

1:25:51

good question. It's always good to

1:25:53

hear from our Canadian neighbors, and

1:25:55

I hear from our Canadian neighbors.

1:25:57

You know, there's a lesson we

1:26:00

have. The Russians and the Chinese,

1:26:02

you know, when they when they

1:26:04

ask, you know, you know, about

1:26:06

their relationship, they both give the

1:26:08

same answer, you know, why do

1:26:10

you get along with the Russians?

1:26:12

Why do you get along with

1:26:15

the Chinese? Now, we're neighbors. choice.

1:26:17

If you can't get along with

1:26:19

your neighbor, you're sort of screwed.

1:26:21

We have to get along with

1:26:23

your neighbors. And so for all

1:26:25

the people there that are picking

1:26:28

on the Canadians and the Mexicans,

1:26:30

stop. There are neighbors. Okay, doesn't

1:26:32

mean we have to agree on

1:26:34

everything. We're allowed to have differences.

1:26:36

But there are neighbors. And if

1:26:38

we don't get along with them,

1:26:41

we're in for a world of

1:26:43

hurt. And so, you know, yeah,

1:26:45

I welcome the call from Canada

1:26:47

because we're neighbors. It's a great

1:26:49

question. I welcome. I wish we

1:26:51

get a call from Mexico. We're

1:26:54

neighbors. We have policy differences. That's

1:26:56

okay. But we're neighbors. We have

1:26:58

to get along. We have no

1:27:00

choice. And the Russians and the

1:27:02

Chinese have figured that out. And

1:27:04

for any American... politician thinks that

1:27:07

we can drive a wedge between

1:27:09

Russia and China. The only way

1:27:11

you're going to successfully drive a

1:27:13

wedge is if you physically separate

1:27:15

them, you know, by which you

1:27:17

can't do. They got a huge

1:27:19

border connecting them. So, three hot

1:27:22

spots. I think this Ukraine conflict

1:27:24

is going to resolve itself by

1:27:26

the summer. I think Boudon of

1:27:28

the head of Ukrainian intelligence is

1:27:30

right. Ukraine may not exist by

1:27:32

this summer. And there's nothing Trump

1:27:35

could do to change that. So

1:27:37

it's going to resolve itself. The

1:27:39

question is, what will be going

1:27:41

on in terms of a greater

1:27:43

European security framework? Is Trump able

1:27:45

to manage that? What are, what,

1:27:48

you know, I believe that NATO

1:27:50

is going to dissolve. That's going

1:27:52

to create an interesting power vacuum

1:27:54

in Europe. What's going to replace

1:27:56

that? I think the European Union

1:27:58

is going to fracture and if

1:28:01

it doesn't, does all together, will

1:28:03

reimagine itself. But he has a

1:28:05

sombrero. That's okay, you can call,

1:28:07

I got a thick American accent,

1:28:09

so, you know, I'm surprised people.

1:28:11

can understand me. But just be

1:28:14

concise with accent. No, I'm talking

1:28:16

to the potential caller, just be

1:28:18

concise with an accent. That's all

1:28:20

right. But so I think I

1:28:22

think Europe is a problem that

1:28:24

there is a solution there to

1:28:26

be had, but you got to

1:28:29

get this Ukrainian conflict ended the

1:28:31

correct way. And I don't know

1:28:33

if Trump's figured out the correct

1:28:35

way yet. So. I think that

1:28:37

this is one of those issues

1:28:39

that the war will be over,

1:28:42

but I don't think that the

1:28:44

European aspect of the stability factor

1:28:46

will be resolved by the time

1:28:48

Trump's first first, only his second

1:28:50

term ends, his presidency ends. The

1:28:52

Middle East, the Arab-Israeli conflict is

1:28:55

not going to be resolved any

1:28:57

time soon. The

1:28:59

key question right now is what

1:29:01

the future of Israel is going

1:29:04

to be, not just the Middle

1:29:06

East. Israel, I continue to say

1:29:08

Israel has been fatally wounded. Now,

1:29:10

people maybe will be able to

1:29:13

say they're just wounded, they're not

1:29:15

fatally wounded, it's a serious wound.

1:29:17

We'll see, but I do think

1:29:20

that, you know, sepsis has set

1:29:22

into the Israeli body and that

1:29:24

it's not going to... ride this

1:29:26

thing out. There are too many

1:29:29

problems with Israel, internal problems that

1:29:31

aren't going to be resolved, problems

1:29:33

that will manifest themselves violently in

1:29:35

a domestic fashion and as well

1:29:38

with their neighbors. I think Trump

1:29:40

is going to find himself to

1:29:42

be extraordinarily frustrated by Israel. Remember,

1:29:45

Trump is the guy that before

1:29:47

he was elected when talking about

1:29:49

an Israeli conflict. He said there's

1:29:51

two parties here. that need to

1:29:54

negotiate to make peace. And we

1:29:56

know that one party doesn't want

1:29:58

peace. That's Israel. And

1:30:00

he knows this and he

1:30:02

knows who's to blame. Benjamin

1:30:05

Netanyahu. That's why he put up the

1:30:07

the the clips of Jeffery stacks,

1:30:09

you know, who was who

1:30:11

was condemning Netanyahu Trump knows

1:30:13

who Netanyahu Netanyahu is.

1:30:16

That's why he humiliated him on

1:30:18

the stage like he did. But

1:30:20

I don't think Trump's going

1:30:22

to solve this problem. This

1:30:24

is a problem that is very

1:30:26

complicated and is going to

1:30:29

require a a lot of change

1:30:31

in how the world recognizes that

1:30:33

the world has to change its

1:30:35

approach towards the Arab-Israeli conflict, or

1:30:37

otherwise you just end up repeating

1:30:39

the failed practices of the past,

1:30:41

which is why he put out

1:30:44

there this audacious, ridiculous proposal about

1:30:46

Gaza, because that represents a

1:30:48

total break with anything anybody's

1:30:50

ever discussed in the past.

1:30:52

It's a whole new approach, which means now

1:30:55

to... when you're addressing the Arabs

1:30:57

really conflict, you have to

1:30:59

address what Trump said, which

1:31:01

means you've now changed the

1:31:03

dialogue because you're responding to

1:31:06

that, not this, but it's going

1:31:08

to take some time. And there's

1:31:10

a lot of facets involved. One

1:31:12

of the interesting facets is Iran.

1:31:14

And I do believe that Trump

1:31:17

is serious about negotiating

1:31:19

a final salute. That's

1:31:21

a horrible term to

1:31:23

use. lasting solution to

1:31:25

the problem of Iran's

1:31:27

nuclear program. Again, no

1:31:29

success is guaranteed there.

1:31:31

His whole piece through

1:31:33

strength approach, speaking of

1:31:35

the threat of, what did he

1:31:37

call it? The, um, gosh. Yes.

1:31:40

What are you referring to? His

1:31:42

approach of putting some, you

1:31:44

know, overwhelming force or

1:31:46

there's, there's, there's, there's a,

1:31:49

his approach of putting some,

1:31:51

you know, The maximum pressure,

1:31:53

the maximum pressure campaign, that's just

1:31:55

a stupid way to go in and

1:31:58

start a discussion, but you know... Gosh,

1:32:00

he ended up meeting three times

1:32:02

of Kim Jong-ung after threatening to

1:32:04

blow him off the face of

1:32:06

the earth and calling him what

1:32:09

a rocket man. So, you know,

1:32:11

Trump's approach is, you know, non-traditional,

1:32:13

we should say. But who knows

1:32:15

where they go, but I do

1:32:18

think he's serious about that. And

1:32:20

that one, if he's able to

1:32:22

get those negotiated, negotiation started, I

1:32:24

do think he can reach closure

1:32:27

with that issue even before his,

1:32:29

before his midterm. That's something that

1:32:31

could happen. in the next year,

1:32:33

two years. And then that sets

1:32:36

the stage, because once you, you

1:32:38

know, settle the Iran aspect of

1:32:40

the Middle East equation, it simplifies

1:32:42

what you need, what needs to

1:32:45

happen, because Israel is no water

1:32:47

able to distract everybody going, buddy

1:32:49

wrong, buddy wrong, buddy wrong. If

1:32:51

you resolve that, Israel now has

1:32:54

to focus on the harder part,

1:32:56

which is Hamas Hezbollah and the

1:32:58

West Bank. Nobody's come up with

1:33:00

a solution. But what it is

1:33:03

is a recognition that what was

1:33:05

being done in the past didn't

1:33:07

work and was never going to

1:33:09

work. And so you have to

1:33:12

come up with something totally new.

1:33:14

He put an audacious, particular proposal

1:33:16

out there. People are going to

1:33:18

have to respond to that. Then

1:33:21

China, I mean, this is, this

1:33:23

is, or, you know, it's, it's

1:33:25

funny. We haven't heard too much

1:33:27

about China, from the. Now we

1:33:30

have a dog who's attempting to

1:33:32

educate us about the Chinese problem.

1:33:34

No, Maria, don't worry about it.

1:33:36

That the audience loves Tigan. That's

1:33:38

Tigan. She's a very old lady

1:33:41

who She gets sometimes overwhelmed by

1:33:43

the The the liveliness of the

1:33:45

three little puppies and so she

1:33:47

was just letting them know that

1:33:50

she doesn't appreciate them dancing around

1:33:52

her head, but That's okay. That's

1:33:54

why we have dogs in this

1:33:56

house. I'm a dog lover and

1:33:59

Sorry, I know we're supposed to

1:34:01

be professional here and you know

1:34:03

that but You're invited into my

1:34:05

home and that means you get

1:34:08

my dog sometimes China, I think

1:34:10

she's going to make herself hurt.

1:34:12

China, I don't think Trump is

1:34:14

adequately fleshed out his China policy

1:34:17

because he's, you know, he frankly

1:34:19

has Europe, Russia, and in the

1:34:21

Middle East right now that are

1:34:23

dominant, plus the whole Mexican border

1:34:26

thing and the deportee thing and

1:34:28

trade war with Canada. So China

1:34:30

hasn't appeared. And then the show

1:34:32

again, just how complicated China is

1:34:35

Trump came out today and said,

1:34:37

nah, I'm serious about denuclearizing North

1:34:39

Korea. Well, there's another distraction. So

1:34:41

that means that he and little

1:34:44

rocket man are going to probably

1:34:46

have another meeting play golf. Maybe

1:34:48

this time he'll give him an

1:34:50

American armored presidential car. Because he

1:34:53

asked to match, this is Trump,

1:34:55

he has to match. Remember Kim

1:34:57

Jong got that big Russian. armored

1:34:59

vehicle for Putin. Trump has to

1:35:02

give them the American ones just

1:35:04

to make up for it. Kim

1:35:06

Jong-un will have the coolest fleet

1:35:08

of presidential vehicles imaginable if he

1:35:10

plays his cards right. But I

1:35:13

mean, so we don't know how

1:35:15

Russia, how Trump is going to

1:35:17

approach China yet. There haven't been

1:35:19

the serious trade negotiations. There hasn't

1:35:22

been a major policy statement made

1:35:24

about China yet. So we don't

1:35:26

know. We do know that he's...

1:35:28

peripherally attacking China with what he's

1:35:31

done with the Panama Canal. Marco

1:35:33

Rubio going down and getting the

1:35:35

president of Panama to withdraw from

1:35:37

the Belt and Rose Initiative to

1:35:40

talk about withdrawing the Hong Kong

1:35:42

companies that were managing the Panama

1:35:44

Canal all to keep Chinese influence

1:35:46

away from that. You know, but