9


Be sure to share these materials with friends, kin, and workmates.
Prof. Mohammad Marandi : LIVE from Tehran, Iran - 8AM
Judge Napolitano - Judging Freedom
Streamed live 9 hours ago
Prof. Mohammad Marandi : LIVE from Tehran, Iran - 8AM
In this episode of Judging Freedom (July 31, 2026), host Judge Andrew Napolitano interviews Professor Mohammad Marandi from Tehran, Iran. The discussion focuses on the ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran, characterized by Marandi as a state of active, undeclared war.
Key Discussion Points:
- US-Iran Relations: Marandi argues that the Trump administration lacks credibility and that US rhetoric only fuels negative sentiment within Iran (1:42). He highlights the impact of the ongoing US-imposed siege on Iranian ports, which he describes as an act of war (2:47).
- The 'Status Quo' Agreement: Marandi discusses the failure of recent diplomatic efforts, noting that the US violated key commitments of an informal agreement, specifically by opening a separate corridor in the Strait of Hormuz (18:50 - 20:50). He describes current conditions in the Strait as hostile, with recent military engagements involving shipping vessels (21:00).
- Regional Conflict: The conversation touches on the broader regional situation, including the ongoing crisis in Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank. Marandi suggests that Iran is deliberately maintaining restraint toward the Israeli regime to allow internal political divisions within Israel to deepen before the upcoming October elections (9:34 - 10:35).
- Iran-Ukraine Involvement: They address a recent incident involving a Ukrainian strike on an Iranian ship (23:45). Marandi asserts that this action had US intelligence support and notes that the Ukrainian foreign minister subsequently contacted Iran, appearing to distance themselves from the incident (24:32).
- Iranian Outlook: Marandi concludes by stating that Iran's ultimate objective is to ensure that its defensive capabilities are sufficient to deter any future attacks, while simultaneously putting pressure on the current US administration in the lead-up to midterm elections (25:31).
COL. Lawrence Wilkerson : Does Trump Know He Lost His War?
Judge Napolitano - Judging Freedom
Streamed live on Jul 30, 2026
Streamed live on Jul 30, 2026
This video features a discussion between Judge Andrew Napolitano and Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson regarding the current state of conflict involving the United States, Iran, and Israel. The primary theme is the critique of the Trump administration's foreign policy and military strategy in the region.
Key takeaways from the discussion:
- Critique of Strategy: Colonel Wilkerson argues that the current U.S. strategy lacks a defined objective beyond bombing, which he suggests is ineffective and unsustainable (8:33-8:50). He emphasizes the dangers of proceeding without a clear end state or strategy.
- Regional Conflict: The conversation highlights that the conflict is expanding regionally and possibly globally (1:45-1:48). Wilkerson warns of a developing theater of war spanning from the Arctic down to Chabahar and Bandar Abbas (6:40-6:48).
- U.S.-Iran Tensions: Wilkerson discusses the impact of President Trump's threats, suggesting they undermine trust and damage the credibility of the U.S. position (5:07-5:18). He asserts that the U.S. is losing the conflict (5:24-5:31).
- Role of Israel: The speakers discuss the role of Benjamin Netanyahu, suggesting that his actions in Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank are contributing to the regional instability (8:56-9:12, 10:50-11:15). Wilkerson mentions that Iranian leadership may be waiting for an opportune moment to strike, given the target-rich environment (11:39-11:52).
- Military Preparedness: Wilkerson expresses concern over the depletion of U.S. war stocks and munitions, noting that combatant commanders are signaling that the current pace of operations is unsustainable (7:32-7:48, 13:12-13:21).
- The Threat of Escalation: Both speakers discuss the fear of nuclear escalation and the potential for wider conflict, including risks related to Ukraine and NATO (25:41-26:37).
The conversation concludes with a discussion on historical precedents, such as the Jonathan Pollard case and the influence of intelligence files, reflecting on the complexities of U.S.-Israeli relations (29:51-31:48).

