The Real Threat Isn’t AI: Why Misinformation Is More Dangerous

[Music] Hi and welcome back. It's good to be here. I hope everybody's enjoying their holiday time. And uh we got rained out today. We were going to have another little get together and outdoor barbecue, but nothing but rain, so I figured I'd do what I enjoy doing on my spare time, and that is keeping people up to date on current and accurate information. Anyway, let's move right into it. Uh if you check out the comments on some on my previous video of uh John Mshimer, you're going to find that several people had mentioned uh you know this is AI don't you? Well yes I do. As a person who's been making YouTubes and over,200 of them as a matter of fact and happens to use AI in my thumbnails because of its speed and how much time it saves me. I would think I'd have a little bit of a grasp of what is AI and what is not. However, that's of no importance. People have been assuming that if something's AI, it's automatically bad and automatically false. So, with that in mind, I'm going to get you to watch this video uh that the same person, Professor John Mshimer, did a few days after I uploaded that video with a well-renowned YouTuber uh Judge uh Napolitano. And, uh he's pretty much famous all over the place. I consider him a patriot bringing out truth, not what you want to hear, but actual truth. And hopefully that's going to help and move us along in a better direction. Sit back, watch this video, and then I want you to compare pretty much every statement that was mentioned on the AI is also mentioned on the personal interview. I'll pick it up on the other side. [Music] [Music] Hi everyone, Judge Andrew Npalitano here for judging freedom. Today is Thursday, December 18th, 2025. Professor John Mir Shimemer will be here in just a moment. What are the consequences, the unintended consequences of a thoughtless and needless war? Professor Mayor Shimemer, welcome here, my dear friend. Thank you for accommodating my schedule. What are the international consequences? Start with geopolitical and and perhaps economic of uh the American military seizing an oil tanker with a 100 million barrels of oil in it and then purporting to blockade the country from which it came Venezuela. Well, I think what the administration is trying to do here is figure out a way to get out of the corner that they've boxed themselves into uh in this Venezuela situation. I mean, we decided early on that we were going to get tough with Venezuela uh that it was this great threat to the United States uh and that we would be able to deal with it rather easily. But that's not proved to be the case at all. And what you see the Trump administration doing is fishing around for a way to deal with this problem. And that basically means getting rid of the maduro government and uh taking this huge problem that we've created uh off the table. And you remember at first Trump was talking about the fact that the CIA was operating inside Venezuela. Uh and then he escalated further and we started destroying those boats and killing innocent people on board those boats. Then he started talking about a land invasion or hinting at a land invasion. Then he said that the airspace over Venezuela was closed and now they're seizing tankers. uh and they're talking about putting some form of blockade uh on Venezuela. All these different approaches are due to the fact that the Trump administration is unable to figure out how to deal with the Maduro government in a way that they can save face. They are in a real pickle. The administration is in a real pickle. And that's what explains what's going on with the seizing of this particular ship and the blockade that's now been announced by Trump. You know, you mentioned the changing I wouldn't even call them theories, the changing arguments advanced for the interference with Venezuela. In 2017, his first year of his first term, when he addressed the joint session of Congress, he famously introduced the person he said was the president of Venezuela. And it was this young man, Juan Guyaido, who by the way today is a grad student uh in Miami, Florida. Anyway, at the time they introduced him as the true president. The Congress gave him, you know, a profound and lengthy um standing ovation and we were going to get him back there because he's the one who won the election. All right, fast forward and well, it's fentinel. Well, turns out the Drug Enforcement Administration, his own, says no, the fentanyl is made in Mexico. Then it's cocaine. Then his drug enforcement administration said no. Venezuela once did send cocaine here, but they don't anymore. Then two days ago, he said Venezuela stole our land and stole our oil. Could he possibly think that a natural resource under Venezuela belongs to the United States? My point is, you're right. He's boxed in and now scrambling for a justification for the boxing in. The boxing in according to Colonel Wilkerson is costing a billion dollars a day. >> But I just want to say what you said is very important and what I said is very important. But we're talking about two different things and it just shows you how desperate the administration is. You were talking about the rationale or the different ration plural for what they're doing and how that shifts. and talking about the different strategies that they're using and how that has been over time. And what you see is that they're flailing. He's boxed himself into a corner. You know, when I see this case of Venezuela, for some reason, I always think of uh his uh campaign uh in the uh Middle East against what's that small country that was uh uh lobbing missiles at Israel and in the Red Sea. The Houthies, the Houthies, right? >> Yemen, right? Campaign against the Houthies. You remember he said earlier this year that Joe Biden just hadn't been tough enough with the Houthies and he was going to get tough with the Houthies and he was going to finish them off quickly. And after a month he quit and he admitted that the Houthies were tough ombres and we couldn't defeat the Houthies. >> Oh. Oh, you're you're omitting something. $500 million later, a half a billion dollars later he quit. >> Yes, exactly. But it's just the Houthi's case is another instance of where he backed himself into a corner, right? It's, you know, you're talking about unintended consequences. He thought the consequence of attacking the Houthies would be that we would decisively defeat them quickly and cheaply. And that proved not to be the case. And this is exactly uh the box that he's in in Venezuela. Uh the Trump administration, and this is true of American national security elites in general, do not have a very healthy sense of the limits of what you can do with military power or and that that involves threatening to use military power, which is what you've seen pretty much up to now, visav Venezuela, or even using military power. And this goes to the case of the Houthis, right? There just real limits to what you can do. And uh and we constantly get ourselves into these messes thinking that we're going to be able to use military uh force to solve a political problem that really at heart needs a political solution, not a mil military solution. >> But you uh travel the world, you speak to world leaders, you speak to and interact with academics. What is the reaction to murdering people on the high seas, stealing an oil tank with 100 million gallons of uh crude uh oil in it and a naval blockade which under the Geneva Convention is an act of war? Well, I think that most people around the world and many people in the United States think the Trump administration is out of control when it comes to foreign policy. It just doesn't know what it's doing. It's the gang that can't shoot straight. Uh this applies to Ukraine. It applies to Venezuela. Uh it applies to Iran, to the whole Palestinian issue. Uh you know, President Trump likes to advertise the fact that he's been a great success in foreign policy, that he's shut down eight wars, he should get a Nobel Prize. This is just not a serious argument. The guy has actually failed at almost every turn. Uh there are hardly any cases where he's been successful. Uh you know, you look at the Iran situation, the Israelis and the Americans are threatening to attack Iran again. I thought they told us that in June they produced a great success. They had solved the Iran problem. Well, if they had solved the Iran problem, why are we talking about attacking Iran again? Ukraine, it's obvious to almost everybody that uh we have not found a solution there. And this is a bad situation. It just gets worse with time. The Gaza situation, that one hasn't been shut down. The idea that there's a ceasefire in Gaza is a joke. The Israelis don't believe in ceasefires and that applies not only to Gaza, it applies to Lebanon as well. And then we go to Venezuela, which we were just talking about, where they're boxed in. So, the idea that President Trump has the magic touch is not a serious argument. Well, uh, whatever became of Tony Blair as the governor general of, uh, Gaza and Donald Trump as the president of the Gaza Peace Board, >> Trump is more concerned with changing the name of the Kennedy Center, which they purportedly did today, >> to the Trump Kennedy Center. >> I mean, you know, this peace board that he was going to set up to run Gaza, that's nowhere, right? And then he was talking about bringing in an international for force uh to maintain peace uh in Gaza. Uh and they can't get any country to anti-up troops to send in until Hamas uh is disarmed. And they can't disarm Hamas because Hamas won't disarm until there's a meaningful Palestinian political authority in control uh in Gaza. and there's some sort of meaningful political horizon at the end of this diplomatic process and there is none. So Hamas is not going to disarm and it's highly unlikely that any country is going to put peacekeepers in there. Uh and the end result is we're nowhere inside of Gaza. Uh which is exactly what you'd expect. And again, as I said a few minutes ago, the Israelis violate this ceasefire on a daily basis. as they violate the ceasefire in Lebanon on a daily basis. >> Let's uh switch over to uh Ukraine. Two days ago or earlier this week, uh Chancellor MS at a meeting in Berlin in the presence of President Mcronone uh Prime Minister Stormer and Steve Whit and Jared Kushner and others pronounced a proposal for a ceasefire in Ukraine. You know, as soon as I heard him say ceasefire, >> yeah, >> I knew immediately, no matter what followed it, it would be rejected by the Russians. You know, that they've been very clear. How many times did Dimmitri Pascov and and Sergey Lavrov have to say, "We're not interested in a ceasefire. We know what happens in a ceasefire. The enemy regroups and rearms. We're not interested in a ceasefire." Okay. But what followed was even more absurd. a Ukrainian military of 800,000 troops supported by US intelligence, no NATO, but EU troops in a neutral Ukraine. And are you ready for this? Russian demilitarization into Russia 150 miles along the Russia Ukraine common border. And when he said this, not a peep out of the mouths of Kushner or Witco. Well, what does that mean? It's very hard to say. I mean, it's just so This is all just so nutty. I mean, Witco has visited Putin in person probably five times now. Yeah. >> And on December 2nd of this year, Witoff and Kushner spent five hours with Putin. They spent five hours and Putin surely told him what the Russian demands are. The Russian demands have not changed since the beginning of this war. Okay. So Kushner and Witoff surely know what the Russian demands are. That's December 2nd. Then December 14th and 15th you have these meetings in Berlin and the Americans are there. Wickoff is there and uh they come out of the meetings with some sort of set of proposals that is 180 degrees out from what the Russians want and is an in-your-face statement to the Russians. Why would you do that? I mean, what's the purpose of Witco going to talk to Putin if he's going to completely ignore what he says and then come up with opposing proposals? It just makes no sense at all. This negotiation negotiating process is going nowhere. It's a farce. It really is a force. Well, Trump has boxed himself in. He has a secretary of state whom he won't let negotiate with the Russians because they know and he knows that the secretary of state is a neocon who would like to see the war continue. Instead, he sends two real estate agents who can't have a grasp of the nuances of diplomacy and history and culture when dealing uh with the Russians. Is it any wonder President Putin is fed up? I'm going to run a clip in where he really is fed up. In the clip, there's two translations of this Russian word. I don't want to get too deep into the grammar, but one translation is political lackey, and the other translation is piglets. Watch this. Cut number 18. Everyone universally believed and thought that they would utterly destroy and completely break up the vast nation of Russia in a very short period of time, expecting a swift and decisive outcome. and the European political lackey immediately joined in this work of the previous American administration, hoping to profit from the collapse of our country to take back for themselves something that had been lost in previous historical periods and try to take revenge. As has now become abundantly clear to everyone in recent times, all these numerous attempts and all these profoundly destructive plans against Russia have completely and utterly failed without exception. Angry, probably angrier and getting fed up, Professor Marshimemer. >> Yeah, I find it hard to believe that it's taken him this long to get this angry. It should have happened much earlier. uh these shenanigans have been going on for so long now uh that it's hard to believe. It's hard to believe that Putin has put up with this. You can see from his comments that he really is much angrier at the Europeans than he is at the Americans, >> right? >> I think that he believes that Trump was genuinely interested in reaching some sort of peace agreement. And I think it is true that Trump was genuinely interested. It's just that Trump can't execute. And the Europeans made sure that he did not execute. The Europeans have played their hand very well, as has Zalinski, and they've thrown all sorts of monkey wrenches in the diplomatic process, and the end result is there's no deal. But Putin is really angry, as are his lieutenants, with the Europeans, and that's reflected in his calling them a bunch of pigglets. Here's um foreign minister Lavough who's a little bit more temperate but no less certain in what he's saying. Chris number 17. >> As for the United States behavior including in the Caribbean, well of course we almost all of the countries cannot accept that apart from the Europeans. We are very much concerned by the actions of the US Navy and by the jingoist statements by the Pentagon that in addition to the unlawful actions on striking the civilian vessels without any judicial actions in the Caribbean. They now plan the land operation. Of course, all of that undermines the hopes that one can try to have a settlement under the current international system. Hopes that one might have a settlement under the current n international system. Russians speak for grand reset between the United States and Russia disturbed by what's happening in the Caribbean. Professor, >> I I don't think what's happening in the Caribbean matters that much. Uh it matters on the margins. I I think the Russians know from their dealings in Ukraine with the Europeans, with the Americans, and with the Ukrainians that this one has to be settled on the battlefield. I think the Russians are fully aware of that. There's not going to be any diplomatic solution uh to this war. it's going to be settled uh on the battlefield and the Russians have very powerful incentives. I've said numerous times to take as much territory as possible and to make sure that Ukraine is a dysfunctional rump state so that it can't cause Russia much trouble moving forward. And I also think, and there's all sorts of evidence, if you listen to what the Russians are saying, that they believe that even after you get a frozen conflict, there are going to be poisonous relations between Russia on one side and Ukraine and the West on the other. Uh, in a very important way, they're preparing for a long war. Uh, that war will not be hot all of the time. It will be a cold war for a substantial portion of the time, at least after you get a frozen conflict, but uh you're going to have terribly nasty relations in Europe between the Russians on one side and the Ukrainians and the Europeans on the other for a long long time. This is a disastrous situation. The fact that President Trump was unable to shut this war down uh is uh is disastrous. It would have been so good if he could have done that. I'm not sure that he could have done it under the circumstances. It was a herculean task to shut this war down. But there's no question that he didn't even come close because he really just didn't know what he was doing from the beginning and his advisors were in were inept in the extreme. Yesterday, the United States Senate passed the uh same NDAA, National Defense Authorization Act that the House passed. I won't get into it. There's a lot of controversial things in there, including a 25% hold back on the funds until Secretary the Secretary of Defense, who calls himself the Secretary of War, releases the videos of all the killings in the Caribbean. But that's not my point. My point is that is that in there is $400 million for Ukraine and Trump's going to sign it. Chris has uh a funny uh full screen of Trump giving a speech and all of a sudden Joe Biden is right there on his shoulder. I mean, this is shades of Joe Biden. Why is the federal government of the United States borrowing $400 million because they don't have the cash and sending it to Ukraine? Well, uh, Congress allocated the money. Uh, it's not clear that Trump asked for the money. As you know, Congress, you know, in the form of Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, and others is super hawkish on Ukraine. Uh, so I'm sure they put the money in there. Uh, and uh, $400 million is actually not a lot of money. Uh, I mean, >> well, you're right. You're right. Under Joe Biden, we gave them $265 billion. >> Yeah. >> Right. There there's Trump with his least favorite predecessor standing behind him because they often argue the same things but in different words. Yeah. >> Uh, and different terms. But this is the most This is cash, by the way. the 400 million to the most corrupt country in Europe. The corruption is rampant as understood by children, by academics, by religious, by journalists, by everybody. And they're sending more cash there. >> Yeah. But the really important question is whether Europe can successfully steal those Russians as those Russian assets in Euro clear and give uh Ukraine over hundred billion dollars uh to help it stay afloat for the next two years. That's the big issue. Four, you know, $400 million just doesn't matter that much. Our intrepid uh correspondent in Brussels uh Dr. Gilbert Doctoro reports that notwithstanding as of the end of the day in Brussels notwithstanding enormous pressure put on him the prime minister of Belgium has not yielded and will not permit an invasion of his banks. I don't know what his politics are in Nevada, but he obviously understands the banking system and what would happen to it if this money was stolen. And he understands private property. >> Yeah. Well, he's also well aware that Euro Clear where the money is located is in Belgium, right? uh if there are uh legal consequences down the road and somebody has to pay back the money, he lives in mortal fear that that country will be Belgium. And a number of the other European countries, the bigger European countries have assured him that wouldn't be the case. But in this day and age, does anybody believe what another country says? >> No, of course not. Of course not. I would also note to you just quickly, judge, I count about seven different countries that are opposed, seven European countries, yes, that are opposed to stealing the money. The United States has made it clear it's opposed to Europe stealing the money as has the IMF. So, uh there are a lot of forces raid against uh this scheme, but it still may go through. So Vander Lion and Kaya Callus changed the voting system. It's not one vote per country. It's now weighted votes based on your population. So their hope is that France, Germany, uh Great Britain, whoever else is on their side will outweigh the votes of the of Hungary and the Baltic states or whoever else is supposed to. But I don't think it matters because the Belgians are just not going to do it. >> I'm not sure how that works. Uh I think the uh major countries that are pushing this scheme forward are just very fearful that if there's that much opposition, including from Belgium, uh which houses Euro Clear, uh this will cause all sorts of problems down the road. My sense is they can ram it through anyway, even if Belgium doesn't agree. Uh but uh >> well, how they're gonna get it out of URL? They'd have to hire bank robbers. >> I mean, would that be on them? >> Yeah. Um, if the United States invades Venezuela, invades, do you think that the Trump administration and the Hegs Seth Pentagon have thought about the unintended consequences? >> Uh, I think they've thought about the consequences. You don't even have to go down the road of unintended consequences. The consequences are pretty obvious. It would be disastrous. Uh it's a huge piece of real estate. There are a lot of people there. The terrain is not exactly uh ideal terrain for invading and conquering a country. There would be a lot of resistance. And furthermore, once we got in there, how would we get out? As you and I know from much experience over time, it's very easy for the United to get United States to get into places like Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. But getting out is another matter. And I think getting involved in a place like Venezuela and then trying to do social engineering because you want to understand that if we invade Venezuela, our goal is not to sort of go in and capture some trophy and then get out. Our goal is to go in and do social engineering. Social engineering at the end of a rifle barrel. We know what the historical record tells us about how successful we are at doing that sort of thing. And the answer is that we hardly ever succeed. We fail almost every time. So I think it's extremely unlikely that we will invade with largecale ground forces. I mean they may send in small teams of special force units, but uh it's hard for me to imagine they'd be foolish enough to invade uh with a large-scale ground force. And if they do uh we will pay a significant price to put it mildly for doing that. >> Uh Professor Ramir Shimemer this morning um judging freedom had in 2025 99 million 500,000 views. So, we are on the cusp uh of breaking that 100 million mark for the second uh consecutive year. It'll probably happen either over the weekend or sometime on Monday or maybe uh Tuesday. Thank you so much for the substantial material selfless contributions that you have made to that. I hope I hope this will continue in the new year. I hope we see you again before Christmas. We're we're only on for a short week next week because Christmas is Thursday, but I hope that um uh I hope we can I can pick your brain one more time in 2025. >> Yeah, I'd be glad to talk before Christmas. Uh and uh I would just say to you, I commend you for uh running this show. Uh you're providing a tremendous public service. uh given that we live in a world where the mainstream media does not serve us well uh does us one disservice after another I think it's just wonderful that there are people out there like you who have platforms that invite you know all sorts of people like me Jeff Sachs Max Blumenthal Aaron Mate uh and so forth and so on onto the show uh we uh I think collectively do a lot of good >> I think we do we do have our det tractors though, but I think we do collectively uh a lot of good. Thank you, Professor Mir. Shammer. Have a great weekend and uh we'll Chris Chris will find a way for us to do this one more time in the first half. Chris can do anything. He'll find a way for us to do one more segment and the first half of next week. >> Okay, judge. Have a good day. >> Thanks. You as well. All the best. Tomorrow, Friday, the end of the day, the end of the week at 4 PM with Larry Johnson and Ray McGovern. This will be the last one of the year, the intelligence community round table. Justin Npalitano for judging freedom. [Music] [Music] Now that you've had a chance to view that video, I want to take a moment and discuss technology. It is a subject that is really becoming misunderstood to a dangerous level. And I want to kind of enlighten you and let you know technology is and always will be neutral. What determines technology for good or bad is the wielder or the user of that technology. For example, take a look at when the ancients went from bronze to iron. It could have been used for benefit or it could have used for negative purposes. Take a look at the printing press. It could have been used to print proper, good, wholesome information that helps society, or it could have been used to spread propaganda, pornography, what have you. Jump up a hundred years or so. Take a look at the internet. The internet could be used for positive or negative. I rest my case. Just look at the current situation we find ourselves in. What about 3D printing? It could be used the same way. It can be used for medical purposes. It could be used for construction. It can be used also to produce things that will adhere to a negative outcome. AI is no different. So folks, whenever you're seeing generated videos, understand from someone who produces them and has over 1,200 of them. It's a great timesaver. Pay more attention not to the edit, but to the material. Okay? A lot of people are really waning off guard here that just because something is AI generated, it's wrong, it's negative, and it cannot be good. Folks, step away from AI. We've been fed a bunch of crap through propaganda long before AI was even available to us. So kindly keep that in the back of your mind and you'll be better off because you know again it's not the uninformed who are dangerous. They're just going to come out and say gosh that's a question I don't know anything about. It's the misinformed that are going to be dangerous because they're going to hold to one side regardless of how wrong or how dangerous it is. Which is why I always said the most dangerous weapon known today, it's not state-of-the-art military weaponry, weaponry rather. It is an ignorant citizenry because that is what will give the green light to vote to push forward with that weaponry. Keep that in the back of your mind. And I'm going to come out with another video in a few days. I'm still enjoying a little bit of holiday time with the family and I'm going to come out and continue on a little bit about the belt and road that's coming through the Caribbean and I'm going to go into a little bit more of the history about the West's uh rules-based society versus the East in terms of a non rules-based society and how that seems to be taking over. Once again, it's a paradigm shift and people will have the opportunity to adapt or people will have the opportunity to fall behind. And that's there's no other way to look around that. It's a fact and that's all there is to it. Many people resisted the car when it came out saying it will never replace the horse and buggy. Many people said the internet was a fad. Many people said crypto is going to fall by the wayside. And many people are saying AI generated videos, they're dangerous. No, they are not. It's the wilder who's producing them. Good information, good results, propaganda. We're leading down the road to war. I'll talk with you soon. [Music] [Applause] [Music]