- 6/11/2025
In this revealing Forbidden News interview 🎙️🕵️♂️, Professor Gilbert Doctorow, a leading expert on Russia-West relations, dives deep into the mindset of the Kremlin 🇷🇺. What is Putin’s strategy? How does Moscow view the West’s actions? 🌍⚖️ Gain rare insight into Russia’s political thinking, media control, and long-term goals — far from the filtered Western narrative 🚫📺. A must-watch for anyone trying to understand the real power moves behind the headlines 🔎🔥. #GilbertDoctorow #ForbiddenNews #KremlinThinking #RussiaAnalysis #PutinStrategy #Geopolitics #RussiaVsWest #HiddenTruth #UncensoredNews #WesternMedia #ColdWar2 #TruthMatters #GlobalPolitics #PoliticalInsight #DeepStateExposed #UkraineConflict #WorldPowerPlay #ExpertAnalysis #PoliticalAgenda #RealNews
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:30Hi, everyone.
00:34Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom.
00:36Today is Wednesday, excuse me, June 11th, 2025.
00:41Professor Gilbert Doctorow will be here with us in just a moment.
00:44Just what is the Kremlin thinking and what is the Kremlin planning to do next?
00:51But first this.
00:52While the markets are giving us whiplash, have you seen the price of gold?
00:56It's soaring.
00:57In the past 12 months, gold has risen to more than $3,000 an ounce.
01:02I'm so glad I bought my gold.
01:04It's not too late for you to buy yours.
01:07The same experts that predicted gold at $3,200 an ounce now predict gold at $4,500 or more in the next year.
01:17What's driving the price higher?
01:19Paper currencies.
01:20All around the world, they are falling in value.
01:24Big money is in panic as falling currencies shrink the value of their paper wealth.
01:31That's why big banks and billionaires are buying gold in record amounts.
01:36As long as paper money keeps falling, they'll keep buying and gold will keep rising.
01:43So do what I did.
01:44Call my friends at Lear Capital.
01:46You'll have a great conversation and they'll send you very helpful information.
01:51Learn how you can store gold in your IRA tax and penalty free or have it sent directly to your doorstep.
01:59There's zero pressure to buy and you have a 100% risk-free purchase guarantee.
02:06It's time to see if gold is right for you.
02:09Call 800-511-4620.
02:12800-511-4620.
02:15Or go to learjudgenap.com and tell them your friend the judge sent you.
02:19Professor Doctorow, welcome here, my dear friend.
02:24Thank you for accommodating my schedule and thank you for all of the off-air communications
02:31that we have informing me of your very thoughtful observations.
02:36Are you satisfied that the Kremlin is satisfied that the drone attack two weekends ago was certainly
02:47perpetrated with the help of the British and probably perpetrated with the help of the United States?
02:56I think that there's an article in today's Financial Times which the viewers of this broadcast should follow up.
03:09I'm not a fan of the Financial Times regarding their Russian coverage because they're quite biased.
03:14But occasionally they come up with something that is important that cannot be ignored.
03:18And today was the day.
03:19They had one of the reporters interviewed the people responsible for developing the drones
03:25that were used in the attack on these four Russian air bases, housing their strategic triad bombers.
03:34And it comes out from that, that the Ukrainians were entirely capable of carrying out this act on their own.
03:42Of course, you go back 18 months, and of course, 18 months ago, no doubt,
03:47the United States and Britain helped them to decide where to attack, what to attack,
03:52and maybe even the mechanics of the attack, not to be an attack from long distances, but from short distances.
04:00I have little doubt that the British, with their extensive espionage network across Russia,
04:06would have been facilitators in helping the Ukrainians to decide how and where they would hide their drones for eventual use,
04:16kind of sleeper drones, we can call them.
04:19But as it regards the attack itself, I don't think that the Brits or the Americans had anything,
04:25whatever it had to do with it, because the Ukrainians were capable.
04:28And this is an important fact, which is overlooked by, unfortunately, by the whole, virtually the whole of independent media.
04:36We all assume that the Ukrainians are helpless fools, that they just throw their lives away by combating the Russians,
04:44without their own means of producing weapons, and they're entirely dependent on what they get from outside,
04:52often, often, which is misaligned with their needs.
04:57Now, the point that came out of this article today is that the Ukrainians are surely ahead of the United States
05:05and ahead of Great Britain in drone warfare.
05:08And why shouldn't they be?
05:10They're doing the battle on the battlefield, not the Americans or the Brits.
05:13And they are up against an opponent who had to catch up in drone warfare, but has done, and the Russians.
05:22And let's say they are peers now.
05:24They both are the world's leading fighters of drone warfare.
05:30Now, why do I say that about the Russians?
05:32Because I watch Russian television, which some people disparage,
05:35but if you watch it properly, you'll get something interesting and useful.
05:38The useful point is that the targeting of all Russian activity now on the front is not satellite reconnaissance.
05:47It is reconnaissance drones.
05:50That gives them instantaneous location of targets in, yes, that's the article,
05:59instantaneous location of targets, even faster than you get from satellites,
06:06because they're farther out, and it takes longer for real-time information to arrive.
06:11The Russians are doing it, so why should the Ukrainians do it?
06:15They're not stupid.
06:16They're very good at computer games.
06:18It is the media narrative, and this is not mainstream.
06:24I mean, this comes to me from guests on this show, who are former intelligence officers themselves,
06:33that Ukrainian intel is wedded at the hip and subservient to MI6 and CIA.
06:41Is that necessarily proving to be accurate 100% of the time?
06:45It's accurate some of the time, not all of the time.
06:49It depends on what weapons we're talking about.
06:51And when you talk about drones, as I say, the Ukrainians and the Russians are way ahead of everybody else.
06:57So what kind of help do the Ukrainians need from Britain?
07:00None.
07:00Once the drones were put in place, and this is months, if not years ago.
07:05Well, do they have the intel or the satellite capability of knowing where the Russian targets are
07:10without British or American assistance?
07:12You don't need satellite reconnaissance.
07:14That's the whole point.
07:16The war is now done by drones which have artificial intelligence, and they are doing their own targeting.
07:23That's what this article is all about.
07:25And I say it is believable.
07:28I understand that this supports the overall editorial position of the Financial Times,
07:33which is not the position of you or me or nearly all of our viewers.
07:38That's not the point.
07:39It doesn't make their information less accurate.
07:42And it's accurate.
07:43Agreed.
07:44And as you know, I devour the Financial Times every day, even though many times I grit my teeth at their editorial policies.
07:53Watch Foreign Minister Lavrov on Monday on this very issue.
08:00So, Chris, cut number eight.
08:01It is obvious that the Ukrainian side is doing everything possible, but it would be absolutely helpless without the support.
08:12I was tempted to say Anglo-Saxons, but probably without Saxons, just without the support of the British.
08:18Although, you never know, probably by inertia, some U.S. special forces would be involved in that.
08:28But the British actually are behind all those things.
08:32I'm 100% sure.
08:33Agree or disagree?
08:36Or is this misleading when he says the British are behind it?
08:39He didn't say they paid for it or they crafted it, but they're behind it.
08:45It's misleading intentionally, which is another way of saying he's lying.
08:48I don't see no reason to believe that Mr. Lavrov is an angel.
08:54He isn't.
08:54Why should he be?
08:55Angels do not serve at top levels of government for 20 years.
08:59They get thrown away long before that.
09:01So, of course, he's saying what the current Kremlin policy is.
09:05My insistence is that we as observers and as analysts should keep our sense of detachment from all sides, including the Russian side.
09:16Is the Kremlin finding credible or not credible President Trump's denials of U.S. knowledge and awareness?
09:28Because we do have this ambiguous statement from Secretary Hegseth, which I'll play for you in a minute.
09:34But what does the Kremlin think of Trump's denials to President Putin on the phone?
09:38If we follow up the logic of the article we were just discussing, I think President Putin was 100% confident
09:46that Trump knew nothing about this.
09:49He knew nothing about it because there's nothing to know.
09:52The actual implementation or execution of this attack on the basis was 100% Ukrainian when it took place.
10:01I'm not speaking about the planning or the assistance in putting these drones where they were.
10:07But that goes back months, if not years.
10:10In the present tense, the Ukrainians did it themselves.
10:14Therefore, I'd say that Putin had to know the capabilities of those drones, and therefore he would know that Trump wasn't informed
10:25because the U.S. and intel didn't know exactly when this would happen.
10:29Here's Secretary Hegseth, so it's long.
10:34Chris will stop it after he says following the drones in real time.
10:39He both, he says both.
10:42U.S. knew, and he's under oath before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
10:47And he says both.
10:49We didn't know anything about it.
10:50Oh, and by the way, we followed the drones in real time.
10:52You tell me what you think this means.
10:54Cut number 10.
10:54Are we seeing the ushering in of a new era of warfare, the use of drones from afar?
11:03After all, these drones were smuggled into Russia, hidden for a great span of time,
11:13and then activated from 2,500 miles away.
11:17Are we prepared, both defensively and offensively?
11:26It was a daring and very effective operation that we were not aware of in advance
11:32and reflects significant advancements in drone warfare,
11:37which we are tracking in real time inside Ukraine.
11:40Okay, we didn't know about this, but we tracked drone warfare in real time inside Ukraine.
11:47I don't know if you realized what he said with the second part,
11:50but I have to ask you about the first part.
11:52Is that credible that the U.S. didn't know about this?
11:56Let's parse what he said.
11:58Because you're smiling as I am over...
12:01Let's be very careful about this.
12:03He didn't say that we follow this attack.
12:05He said we follow drone warfare, generic, right?
12:10I mean, you can interpret it as you wish.
12:12I interpret it as a generic statement.
12:14We are monitoring drone warfare because the United States is interested.
12:19They have to have capability in this too, eventually.
12:22But he did not say that we saw this in real time.
12:25You satisfied that the United States did not play any role in this,
12:32notwithstanding what Foreign Minister Lavrov said?
12:35And then we'll jump to another aspect of this.
12:39Lavrov was...
12:40Look, Lavrov is not an independent party.
12:43He has been the loyal servant of whoever is his boss.
12:47When he was working for Putin in Putin's first terms in office,
12:52he was Putin's man and he was supporting completely the foreign policy
12:57that Putin sketched for him.
12:59When Medvedev took over and was promoting a foreign policy,
13:03I wouldn't say 180 degrees opposite,
13:07but let's say 90 degrees at variance with what Vladimir Putin was doing,
13:13Lavrov became a loyal servant of that policy.
13:15He is today a loyal servant of the latest Russian explanation of their policies,
13:23which is what you were just saying.
13:28Why would the Kremlin want to promote the false idea
13:33that someone was involved in this if they weren't?
13:36Are they looking for an excuse to attack another country and widen the war?
13:40I don't think so.
13:41Well, the country involved was specifically named.
13:44They want to attack the United Kingdom.
13:47And let's face it.
13:49The Brits have been behind most every monstrous thing that has gone on in Russia,
13:56whether it's Navalny killing or it's the Bucha massacre,
14:02which these are all false flag catastrophes that they put at the door of Russia.
14:09Who is behind this?
14:10MI6.
14:11No question about it.
14:13They have run way ahead of the Americans in this monstrous activity.
14:17The Russians know it perfectly.
14:19If they were to sink, let's just ask this question.
14:22If the Russians were tomorrow to sink two British nuclear submarines,
14:27what would come out of that?
14:28Nothing.
14:29The Brits can't do a damn thing without American permission.
14:33And Washington is not going to let them go to war to see the United States cities hit the next day by Russian ICBMs.
14:41If Donald Trump is telling the truth, and if Pete Hegseth is telling the truth,
14:47who's running American foreign policy?
14:50Are it rogue CIA agents, or was the CIA's hands clean of all this?
14:56Look, this is a very important question you're asking,
14:58and I've been in the middle of a debate over this,
15:01and even comments on my appearance last week raised this question.
15:04Oh, a doctor says that the deep state is dead.
15:09Ha, ha, ha.
15:10I'm sorry.
15:11My words have been misinterpreted intentionally.
15:14I always say there's always a deep state.
15:16The question is what kind of deep state?
15:18A deep state, by definition, is bureaucratic continuity.
15:22Officials have 20, 30-year careers, and they see administrations come and go.
15:28That is normal, and it should give some stability and moderation to policy.
15:33There's nothing wrong with that.
15:33The question is, have they been purged to introduce a single policy or approach to policy?
15:43Under Dick Cheney, they were.
15:45American State Department and the agencies were purged.
15:52People who knew anything about Russia, Eastern Europe, were thrown on the street.
15:56A lot of the career analysts were thrown on the street,
16:01and a large part of American intelligence was outsourced to commercial operations using open sources.
16:09Now, all right, then that created a new deep state,
16:13which was deeply hostile to what you believe, what I believe, and I think most of the viewers believe.
16:18Mr. Trump, in his first days in office, has had another purge.
16:23And the deep state, when he threw out, I don't know how many, was it 40,000 employees of USAID or more or less on the street,
16:30that was going at the jugular vein of the neocon control of the federal government.
16:35So when we speak about rogue CIA, I don't believe it for a minute.
16:39I think those people have been, I've gotten the fear of God in them.
16:43If Trump stops all USAID to Ukraine, can Ukraine continue to maintain the war using its superiority in drone warfare?
16:59Unclear.
17:00But the notion, there have been apocalyptic statements by my peers in the last week or two,
17:08how Ukraine is going down the drain, how it's going to be overrun,
17:13how the Russians will be at the Dnepra tomorrow, I don't agree with that.
17:18These are hyperventilating.
17:21Does that mean that Ukraine will go on for 20 years?
17:24I hope not.
17:25But I also, again, keep our distance.
17:29Let's keep our distance from everybody.
17:31I keep my distance from Mr. Medinsky when he said,
17:34well, the leader of the Great fought for 21 years against Sweden.
17:37We can do the same.
17:38No, you cannot do the same.
17:40Mr. Putin will likely not be in office five years from now, let alone 20 years from now.
17:47Russia's event.
17:48Russia got into this war in February of 2022 for one specific reason.
17:54They had a window of opportunity where they knew that strategically they were five to ten years ahead of the United States in weapon systems,
18:04particularly in hypersonic missiles and not only.
18:07And they had made themselves sanctioned proof in the eight years while the United States was building up Ukraine.
18:16The Russians were building up themselves.
18:18So on these two grounds, they were, I had a window opportunity that will not extend forever.
18:25The Europeans now are throwing hundreds of billions of dollars into defensive districts.
18:30There will be results.
18:31What is the pressure, if any, from either his inner circle elites or the public perception of the war going on and on and on,
18:43on President Putin?
18:45Is that pressure to maintain the slow, methodical, patient, inexorably slow pace of the war,
18:54or to just get it over with once and for all?
18:58We cannot say with any certainty.
19:01And let me be specific why.
19:03Look, I follow, you know, as I've mentioned elsewhere,
19:07this particular program has a very large followership in Russia.
19:13They now have, judging freedom is now, in a few hours after it goes on the internet,
19:21it is available in Russian with a voiceover or synchronized lips, the whole thing, AI control.
19:28Beautiful.
19:29And it gets 100,000 views.
19:31It gets as many views per program, per individual and per topic, as you get in the English original.
19:39Now, I look occasionally at these broadcasts, these videos, I look at the comments section,
19:46and I can tell you I don't like what I see.
19:48There is a very strong xenophobic current, anti-Western current.
19:54They are not kind to you, they're not kind to me, they're not kind to anybody in the West.
19:59Now, is that justified?
20:00Of course it is.
20:01Isn't it nice to see?
20:02It certainly isn't.
20:03So these people are defending Mr. Putin, by the way.
20:07They are questioning you or me or anybody who suggests in any way that Russia does not support their president.
20:16So that is a strain that is certainly present and that Mr. Putin's advisors, no doubt, are watching.
20:23At the same time.
20:23As you have written, Russia is not the brutal, murderous dictatorship that it was in 1942.
20:31It's now a democracy in which people can express their opinion and Putin relies in large measure for everything he does on popular support, as it should be.
20:41I agree.
20:42By the way, the latest proof that it's not what it was in 1942 were the pictures of the returning young men who were prisoners of war and were released in the exchanges that took place on Monday.
20:56And they were interviewed with smiling faces and the people like Medinsky and others who were interviewed were speaking about humane policies.
21:07Now, let's remember what happened in 1942, 1945.
21:10Russian prisoners of war returning for Germany were incarcerated if they weren't shot.
21:15That was the dictatorship of the 1940s of Mr. Stalin.
21:20That is worlds apart from Russia today.
21:23Is Mr. Putin susceptible to the currents of popular thinking in Russia?
21:31Of course he is.
21:32Last question or last subject matter, Professor Doctorow.
21:38The Ukrainian nuclear assets, who has them?
21:42Does Russia have them?
21:44Does the United States covet them?
21:46Are they still Ukrainian?
21:48Let's go back a few weeks.
21:49This was something, a subject which I believe we discussed.
21:53And again, I got some real flack from readers of my essays on this subject.
21:58It's like, well, what right does Mr. Trump have to make claims on the Ukrainian nuclear reactors as a source of possible revenue to offset the shipments of arms to Ukraine during the Biden administration?
22:15Well, it sounded like a really peculiar thing.
22:17Where did he pull this out of other than the fact that there will be money there?
22:20It's clear, all of the coal burning and gas and the oil burning, traditional power generation has been knocked out by the Russians.
22:32And I didn't touch the nuclear plants.
22:36They've been shut down because of risk of the war, but they can be started up instantly.
22:41And so this would be a likely source of important revenue, which Mr. Trump would like to tap into.
22:46But there's more to it than that, and it's not my saying.
22:49It was the Russian deputy minister of foreign affairs, Vyapkov, who was quoted in Kommersant, which is one of the more responsible business-oriented daily newspapers and online newspapers in Russia, as saying, we'll have to talk to the Americans about this.
23:06He's speaking about the Zaporozhye nuclear plant, which is Europe's largest and, of course, Ukraine's largest, with six reactors on site.
23:14We have to speak to the Americans about this, because, you know, four out of the six reactors are now fueled by Westinghouse.
23:22And there are American technicians there who supervise the transition.
23:27So it's more complicated than it looks.
23:30Can't make this stuff up.
23:31Professor Doctora, thank you very much.
23:33Your analysis is always scintillating, even if you are iconic.
23:37I welcome it here.
23:38I welcome your views.
23:40And, of course, I welcome all of our Russian viewers, and thank you for reminding me that they are out there.
23:47I did have the opportunity to speak via the Internet to a Russian gathering put together by our mutual friend, Dmitry Symes, and I'm happy that it was well-received, particularly when I referred to Russia as Mother Russia.
24:03Professor Doctorow, thank you.
24:05All the best.
24:06We'll look forward to seeing you next week.
24:08And coming up later today, at 11 o'clock this morning, Professor – oh, God, I don't remember who we have on.
24:17At 11 o'clock, Colonel Douglas McGregor.
24:25Bear with me a minute here.
24:28Sorry for that.
24:29But at 11 o'clock, Colonel Douglas McGregor.
24:32At 3 o'clock, Daniel McAdams, who's not new to the show, but who's going to talk about do we still have a constitution?
24:39And at 4 o'clock, what are the British up to?
24:41With our former British diplomat, Ian Proud.
24:44Judge Napolitano for Judging Freedom.
24:45And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:46And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:47And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:47And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:48And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:48And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:49And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:50And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:51And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:52And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:53And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:54And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:55And at 11 o'clock, we'll see you next week.
24:56Transcription by CastingWords