Here is the full transcript of political commentator Col. Douglas Macgregor’s interview on Judging Freedom Podcast with Judge Andrew Napolitano episode titled “US/Ukraine Mineral/Security Deal: Insane or Provocative?”, premiered on May 2, 2025.
Listen to the audio version here:
Introduction to the Ukraine Mineral Deal
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Hi, everyone. Judge Andrew Napolitano here for Judging Freedom. Welcome to this Special edition with Colonel Douglas MacGregor. Colonel McGregor, thank you for joining us. You and I communicated late last night when the government revealed that it had signed a minerals agreement with potentially a security guarantee with Ukraine. And we decided we should be discussing that this morning. The US is a co-belligerent against Russia. The President is surrounded by neocons who want the war to continue and by American firsters who truly want the war to end. Why? A mineral deal involving United States interest in the dirt in the earth in Ukraine now, while we’re negotiating with the Russians.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: I think on the one hand you have this desperate need or perceived need to, quote, unquote, get a win for the President. And the President, who made lots of, I would say, incautious statements about the war in Ukraine, had told everyone, well, I can end this in a day that, of course, has gone by the wayside. And now I can sit down and force these two people to negotiate with each other. Well, that hasn’t worked. And he’s been trying to get Zelensky to sign on for a ceasefire. And Zelenskyy, of course, has been unwilling to do so unless it meets his needs, which is obviously to continue the war.
So I think they decided if we can get something on paper that looks like Americans are going to benefit. In other words, somehow or another, Americans are going to get a trillion dollars worth of mineral wealth out of Ukraine. Well, then the President looks like a winner. This is the transactional mentality that he’s adopted, and everyone goes home happy. In truth, they’re never going to see anything remotely like that.
And what’s even more discouraging is there is contained in this agreement the promise of American military assistance as part of the reciprocity involved with our first, access to whatever mineral wealth is there. And then secondly, most of this is really about oil, gas and aluminum. I’m not sure why we are desperate for any oil or gas that comes out of Ukraine. I would think that would go probably to Europe as far as aluminum is concerned. I’m sure we can always use it.
But the real question is, why would this president put what started out as a very good attempt to normalize relations with Moscow and to bring this war to an end, has now suddenly changed. Horses run back to Zelenskyy, who is about as reliable as the wind at this point. I mean, he is literally the captain of the Titanic. And then presenting some agreement that he signed as evidence for, for goodness and power and strength. And glory for Trump makes no sense.
Concerns About Military Assistance
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Zelensky isn’t even the legitimate lawful head of state. I don’t even know if some new government wanted to come in and say, well, he wasn’t the government. He was pretending to be the government. You don’t have access to these materials. President Trump or President Fill in the blank after Trump leaves office. But most troubling to me, and this is what piqued my interest as I was about to go to sleep last night, is the U.S. military assistance. I mean, this has got to be dead in the water for Putin. What does that mean? U.S. troops on the ground in Ukraine?
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Well, obviously, we don’t know precisely what it means, but the fact that we are going to tie ourselves in any way, shape or form to this dying Ukrainian state and regime presents a threat to Russia. For the reasons that you’ve outlined, we are ultimately a belligerent in this war. Ukraine is simply the facade for our war against Russia. One would assume that President Trump understands that, and if he genuinely wants to end it, he’s got to abandon it.
I think if you’re sitting overseas right now, wherever you are, you sort of see the United States government like a teenager on TikTok who watches for a while, slides to a new video, and then says, oh, I’ve changed my mind. I’m going to look at this now. There doesn’t seem to be any consistency. We have a crisis of inconsistency in policy and behavior in Washington.
Diplomatic Missteps
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Talk about. I wasn’t going to go there yet, but I have to now talk about a teenager on TikTok. Chris, put up the two full screens. One from the Iranian professor and one from Pete Hegseth. This is the Secretary of Defense of the United States to an Iranian professor, not an official of the government. “We see you’re lethal in CAPS support of the Houthis. We know exactly what you are doing. You know very well what the US Military is capable of. And you were warned. You will pay the consequence at the time and place of our choosing.”
Is this the professor? “We see your lethal support for the Zionists, the child killers, the rapists. We know exactly what you are doing. You know very well what the resistance is capable of. And you were warned you will be remembered as an accomplice to the Gaza holocaust.” Hegseth’s posting preceded the professors. Is this any way for the Secretary of Defense to behave when the president has his personal emissary negotiating with the Foreign Minister of Iran?
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Well, of course not. It’s ridiculous. These discussions if you want to call them even a coherent discussion, I don’t think this is. But whatever you’re going to talk about in terms of potential action that the United States government may take, that should be done in private.
But then virtually everything that we’ve witnessed with the Trump administration since the President took over is a sort of unending reality TV show. There’s no sense of the value of closed door diplomacy where you can talk frankly back and forth and both sides can develop trust and confidence that whatever they say will not be broadcast across the airwaves.
Unfortunately, we failed to do that. So we’re now conducting policy in the public forum. And apparently this man, Mr. Hegseth, has decided that he’s also, in addition to being the Secretary of Defense, that he has a role in the State Department and is virtually a deputy president. He’s now talking about policies that may be implemented when he is in no position to do such a thing. He’s the last man that should say anything about the use of military power. And when he does speak, it is after careful deliberations by the President, the Secretary of State, and the rest of the national security team. There’s no sense of it. And again, that’s why it reminds me of a teenager on TikTok. Just go from one TikTok video to the next with no current span of attention that makes sense.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: To add to this absurdity, here is General Kellogg yesterday on Fox News boasting that the Ukrainians, not the Russians, the Ukrainians, have agreed to 22 of his points, none of which he elaborates on. Watch this out of London last week.
[VIDEO CLIP STARTS] COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Where we sat down with the Ukrainian team, with the Europeans as well, and we had 22 concrete terms that they’ve agreed to.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: What they want to at the very.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: First, and what they have is a very comprehensive and permanent ceasefire that, that leads to a peace treaty, when I mean comprehensive sea, air, land infrastructure for at least 30 days. Why is 30 days important? Because it can build to a permanent peace initiative. And the reason why 30 days is important, it stops the killing. That’s what President Trump wants to do. [VIDEO CLIP ENDS]
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: This is the man who proposed that NATO divide Ukraine into three parts. For the Russians, excuse me, for the British, the Americans and the French. This is more absurdity, Colonel, is it not? How can the Kremlin take this gentleman seriously?
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Well, I can tell you that the Kremlin does not, and that’s something that I would think President Trump should be made aware of. If he doesn’t already understand it. Kellogg is treated in Russia as a cartoon cutout, as someone who is unworthy of any serious attention. They know about his daughter’s financial commitments in Ukraine and how she and his family has enriched itself involved with what’s going on in Ukraine. And so called non governmental contacts. They don’t take him seriously at all. In fact, I thought they made it very clear never to send the man back.
But again, this is the sort of thing that really ruins your national standing beyond the borders of the United States. First of all, who is Kellogg speaking for? He’s not speaking for the President, he’s speaking for the Ukrainian government. He’s essentially standing up and pitching for Zelensky. I’m not sure that’s what President Trump sent him to Kiev to do. So that’s the first question.
The second question is our commitments are already questioned by people. Normally Americans keep commitments for the length of one election cycle. We’re not even managing it to do that. We’re keeping commitments for a week. Everything that Kellogg said is antithetical to the interests of normalization with Moscow has nothing to do with what President Trump and Rubio and others met the Russians to discuss. In fact, it undermines all of that, just as Trump’s own signature on this largely meaningless document that promises a trillion in mineral wealth contributes to undermining our relationship with the Russians.
I mean, why would you bother with any of this? There are no rare earths to speak of in Ukraine. I don’t know what they think they’re going to get. And as I said, it’s mostly about oil, gas and aluminum. And the Russians have already spoken up and said, we will sell you whatever you want in terms of rare earths. And we’ve ignored that out of hand. It none of this is in the national interest, Judge, and I’m talking about American national interest. We look like the Keystone Cops, right? It’s time for the President to put an end to it.
Russian Response
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: As if to make us look worse, here is the most sophisticated and respected diplomat on the international scene, almost as if he’s responding to General Kellogg. Chris, cut number six.
[VIDEO CLIP STARTS] LAVROV: If you want a ceasefire just to continue supply arms to Ukraine, so what is your purpose? You know what Kaia Kallas and what’s his name, Mark Rutte, said about the.
INTERVIEWER: The NATO Secretary General and the European Union.
LAVROV: They bluntly stated that they can support only the deal, which at the end of the day will make Ukraine stronger, would make Ukraine a victor. So if this is the purpose of the ceasefire, I don’t think this is what President Trump wants. This is what Europeans, together with Zelensky, want to make out of President Trump’s initiative. [VIDEO CLIP ENDS]
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: He sees right through all of this.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Of course, you know, the sad part is that in his case with Putin, as is the case with all the Russian leadership, it’s the leadership in Moscow speaks with one voice. Putin’s policy positions, conditions for a ceasefire, conditions for the end of the war. All of those things are spelled out. They’ve been spelled out for months. Everyone knows what they are, and everyone stays on the text. In other words, they’re on the same sheet of music.
President Trump needs to get control of his administration. There are too many people that are pursuing policy goals that are completely divorced from what President Trump has said repeatedly that he wants to achieve. And his number one objective was to end the war and restore relations with Russia. Now, that’s where everyone should be. Obviously, that’s not the case. Now, he’s apparently fired Mr. Waltz from his position. Perhaps that will help, since Mr. Waltz is a strident advocate for war with everyone. Frankly, that could help, but I don’t know.
Japan’s Reaction to US Trade Policies
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: It’s interesting. It’s almost as if he anticipated your advice by firing Mike Waltz, an ardent Zionist and classic neocon and aggressive warhawk. I don’t know where any of this is going to go. Colonel, switching gears a little bit, if we could. You and I watched a Japanese Member of Parliament on the floor of their House of Representatives address the Japanese foreign minister, and he was quite critical. And perhaps this is the Japanese perception of President Trump’s tariffs. We’ll run the clip, of course, with an English translation, in just a minute. But it appears as though the unthinkable is happening in the modern era. Japan choosing to work with trade with China rather than the United States. So, Chris, I don’t remember the number of the clip, but can you run it, please?
[VIDEO CLIP STARTS] UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: What the US is saying is already an impossible task. The theory is already a mess, and there is no consistency whatsoever. However, if Japan were to negotiate about what they have been saying, to put it bluntly, it would be like a delinquent kid extorting someone. If Japan listens to the and bends the other way in response to the impossible demands of bargaining and deals, it will set a bad example. As a customary and historical precedent, if you get mugged and put money in their hands, the will come back to mug us again. He’s not a straight partner, so he won’t listen to our straight talk. Anyway. I hope that you will never give in to the American extortionists. I know it’s harsh to say, but they are extortionists. [VIDEO CLIP ENDS]
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: That’s the way the Trump tariffs are being perceived by our closest Asian ally our second greatest after China, Asian trade partner.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Well, remember, Judge, we have roughly 120 installations, military installations in Japan.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Wow, 120.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Yes. Now, they’re not all giant, but there are that many installations. You’re talking about intelligence installations, offices, as well as shipyards, air airfields and so forth. We have an enormous stake.
US Military Presence and International Relations
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: How many, how many troops are there?
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: I’m sorry, what?
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: I’m sorry, Colonel, how many troops are there approximately?
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: You know, I hesitate to say, but you’re probably 30 or 40,000 spread across a significant number. Yeah. Well, the other thing is, and this is something that, you know, I’ve said repeatedly for several years now, that no one in the United States is hearing from anyone in Washington, and that is no one in Asia is interested in going to war except us. In other words, if you go to Japan or go to Vietnam or go to the Philippines or somewhere else and preach war against China, they’ll be polite to you, they’ll listen to you, but they think you’re out of your mind and they have no interest in it.
Everyone in Asia wants access to the same thing, the Chinese market and China’s market is vitally important to everyone over there. So you’ve asked them now, in the context of these tariffs, to choose, and they’ve chosen the Chinese market because they can sell into it and they can buy out of it, and they can do it all in their own currency without using dollars.
So the only thing we’ve done with this tariff is offended people that were formerly friendly to us and proven ourselves to be fools because of our complete lack of consistency. I loved his statement about a delinquent child extorting someone. You know, I think the teenager with a TikTok is probably closer because I don’t think that President Trump thinks in terms of extorting anything. I think he thinks he’s legitimate and justified in what he’s doing.
And he’s done this in a blanket way. That was the problem from the very beginning. And what this man goes on to talk about, which you can hear from people like Luke Groban or James Ricards or any number of other people, Jeffrey Gundlock, DiMartino, Booth, all of them talk about the ridiculous mathematics behind the decision on what the tariffs should look like, because that’s not how you arrange these kinds of things. Unfortunately, the whole administration looks like a clown show. And that’s what this Japanese is saying. Let’s not hitch our wagon to this crazy clown show. Let’s stick with consistency.
And I think that’s what Americans need to understand right now. I think this is something that President Trump needs to understand and get away from all of this nonsense. Firing people is a good way to do it, but it also depends very heavily on him and what he says, he says an awful lot. And one day it sounds attractive to some people, the next day, it’s horrifying. That has to end.
China-US Relations and Trade Policies
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: This is very serious stuff, Colonel. Pepe Escobar, who’s a regular on this show, just finished a week in Shanghai interviewing government officials, industrialists, and academics. The Chinese are firm in their determination that they can survive, thrive, and prosper without the United States, and that they will not kowtow to a 245% absurd, the number tariff. President Xi won’t even call President Trump to ask for relief from this because that’s out of the Chinese character.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Well, you know, as a matter of politeness, we haven’t been very polite to any of these people. President Trump has never called to talk with President Xi and explain his position and what he’s trying to achieve. And these people are not stupid, and contrary to popular belief, they’re not evil. They’re not all determined to see the death and destruction of the United States. That’s a lot of nonsense.
So you pick up the phone and say, I’d like my representatives to meet with yours and iron out some concerns that we have regarding trade. As you know, we have this big trade deficit. You talk to people, people listen to you, and they respond to you, and you work things out. We don’t seem to have understood any of that. This bullying tactic of threatening people is a failure in the international system. It’s a bigger failure now than at any point in our history, because we are no longer the indispensable nation in economic terms.
And we need to stop talking about the use of military power all over the Middle East against everyone that doesn’t like Israel or doesn’t support Israel or is prepared to fight against Israel. That’s not going to help matters. That’s not going to help Israel. Contrary to popular belief, especially when you attack Houthi tribesmen in Yemen. I mean, it’s incomprehensible. These people have managed to shut down a $239 billion United States Navy. It seems completely incapable of doing a damn thing about them. Well, if you can’t do anything about them militarily. What are you going to do? Talk to them? Is that possible? There’s no sense of diplomacy, no strategy. Everything’s impulse driven.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: President Larry Johnson reports that we’re going to do this. Larry Johnson reports that the federal government has spent over $500 million in the past month and a half on drones and missiles attacking the Houthis. And they barely laid a glove on them. $500 million down the drain. I came across a clip from a retired Australian general. I wonder what you think of it. He’s warning of World War Three. He believes it’s already started. There may be some things in here with which you disagree, but here’s what he had to say. I don’t know or know of this fellow. He does work for one of those think tanks at Georgetown University. So you know who funds it.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Right.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: But here’s General Ryan cut number 10.
[VIDEO CLIP STARTS]
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: In many respects, we’re already there. I mean, I think historians in 100 years will look back and go, the third world war started in February 2022. You know, there are many elements that…are still a phony war.
I mean, we saw that at the beginning of World War II. Right. That’s what we’re seeing in the Western Pacific. You know, the Middle east has been at war for some time. It’s going to be at war for a long time to come. I think Russia has made it very clear that it has aggressive designs in the Baltics and in Scandinavia, as well as against Poland and Ukraine.
So we’re kind of already there. But it’s a mindset that, that we need to have, and it’s something that our Western politicians really have to contemplate. Hardly, because they’re going to have to have a different balance of domestic and foreign investment in their budgets.
[VIDEO CLIP ENDS]
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Now, is this worth listening to? The Defense Department budget is already a skosh below a trillion. Trump’s new budget actually has it over a trillion. And I’ve never heard of Putin expressing designs on Poland.
The Changing World Order
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: General Ryan suffers from the malady that is common inside the Beltway and across the Anglosphere. He lives in the world of 1945. We are not entering a so called multipolar world, Judge. In reality, what we’re seeing happen now is that the world that existed before the Second World War is roaring back healthy and strong into existence.
We’re dealing with civilizational states like China and Japan and Russia, states that were destroyed, they’ve recovered, and we’re behaving as though they still have an obligation to do whatever we tell them to do, and that’s outrageous. At the same time, our position in the world, which was inevitably going to decline in terms of our GDP participation and economic output, it is at a point right now where we are no longer the indispensable nation.
Economically, we are a great power, and we’re dependent upon trade, but we’re no longer in a position to dictate. That’s the problem with all the institutions that grew up under Bretton Woods that now Bessement says he wants to breathe new life into. Well, it’s a little late, because other institutions are going to emerge. People are going to do business in different ways. They are not necessarily going to follow our line.
The question is, do we adapt to this? Do we become a good neighbor and cooperate where it makes sense to do so, or do we remain belligerent and bellicose and continue to complain and threaten whenever anybody does anything we don’t approve of? I think Ryan is stuck in that world. That’s all he knows. That’s all that most people in Washington know. If you tell them that Iran is a civilizational state in its own right, they scoff. They scoff at everyone in the world right now, thinking that they are the center and they are innately superior. And for some reason, we are now hooked to Israel in ways that put us in severe risk, certainly in the Middle east and other parts of the world, because they take a very similar position.
India-Pakistan Relations
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: If this were some gathering and you had just said that at the podium, I would have stood up and led the standing. Applause Colonel, brilliant analysis. Last subject matter. Are India and Pakistan on the verge of war?
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Well, you know, that’s an important question, and I’m hearing lots of interesting things here, but I turned to some people that are actually Indian and know something about it, and I asked them, and they simply pointed out to a fact, and that is that Modi and lots of people in the United States don’t like him because he’s, quote, unquote, a Hindu nationalist. But Modi thus far has really followed the Putin model. He’s exercised enormous restraint.
Whenever there have been disagreements and there has been any exchange of gunfire. It’s always been very, very limited. It’s always been carefully targeted. And every effort has been made to avoid the very thing that everyone is worried about right now, which is open war. And there’s not much evidence that either the Pakistani government or the Indian government really want to go to war to the point where it would destroy their countries. And I think that’s something that we should keep in mind.
So, no, I don’t think an all out war is likely. I think we’ll pass through this particular crisis phase and Modi will behave as he has in the past, with great restraint. I wish we would behave with more restraint.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Colonel McGregor, thank you very much for your time. I know you’ve already spent a half an hour with us earlier in the week, but we wanted to have the benefit of your analysis of this breaking news. Deeply appreciated. Have a great weekend. Look forward to seeing you next week, sir.
COL. DOUGLAS MACGREGOR: Sure. Thank you, Judge.
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO: Of course. And coming up later today at 2:00 on all of this, Colonel Larry Wilkerson. And at 3:00 on all of this, including China and Japan, Professor John Mearsheimer, Judge Napolitano for judging freedom.
