All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 6, 2025 - Rudy Giuliani
01:25:32
America's Mayor Live (728): Witkoff Meets Putin Ahead of President Trump’s Aug 8 Deadline for Russia
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good evening.
This is Rudy Giuliani and welcome to America's Mayor Live.
Live from Dover, New Hampshire.
And with our eyes on Moscow, huh?
So Steve Whitkov today had a meeting with the special envoy Dmitriev.
who is theoretically a pro-American advisor to Putin.
I don't know how true that is.
And then he had a two-hour meeting with Putin, called the president, president calls the links.
President Cole Zelensky, end result is that the president and Putin are going to meet at the request of Putin, as was the meeting with Whitcoff.
And it's going to be as early as next week, because this will involve a short extension of the August 8th deadline.
That was the 50 or 60 day deadline.
that was restated a while ago and August 8th was the date on which if they didn't stop killing people in Ukraine, we were going to hit them with an enormous secondary sanctions.
Now, we're doing that with India anyway.
I think that's just between India and us.
India has been buying, well, they buy about 30% of Russia's oil, which is what keeps Russia going.
Between China and India, they're really financing the war on Ukraine and the killing of the Ukrainian people.
which if you need to know Putin's good faith about this, as he was sweet talking, or if he does sweet talk, I don't know, as he was trying to charm, you see how they shake hands and Whitkov.
A couple hours earlier, the Russians attacked a purely civilian target in Zaporizhzhia and it was a holiday resort.
They killed several people.
They wounded about 10 or 12 and every single one was a civilian.
There weren't any military there at all.
And it was It was sort of a sign of their bad faith.
So I wish we keep that in mind.
I wish we keep that in mind as we're dealing with that.
And I wish Steve does too.
I don't know if it's true because there's an awful lot of play acting that goes on here, but there are people that think he was charmed a little too much by Putin.
So he's shaking the hands of a guy that's got a hell lot of blood on those hands.
Now that doesn't mean you can't negotiate with him and it doesn't mean you shouldn't negotiate with him because to avoid war, you got to do a lot of things, right?
At the same time, you've got to know who you're dealing with.
And you also have to realize that...
I mean, that doesn't take a genius to figure that out, right?
The war is still going on.
And he's bombing the hell out of Ukraine and killing Ukrainian people as we sit here and talk about.
So there's got to be some urgency that goes with this.
And somebody's got to stop dealing with Putin like he's a friend.
He's not a friend.
He's not a friend of humanity, or at least not acting like one.
what we have to achieve is very, very difficult.
And therefore, it's not going to take a meeting with Putin.
It's going to take showing him that he can't constantly get us to put off these deadlines by holding out the idea that he's going to have a peaceful solution.
There's got to come a point where we just put our foot down.
and really inflict tremendous pain on him.
Now, these secondary sanctions will do that.
Now, we are going to hurt them no matter what happens here because this is really between us and India.
So yesterday, we covered, I think quite extensively, how India has, you know, for a number of years, carried on like a two-faced relationship with Russia and with us on the theory that we need them because of China.
Well, frankly, they need us more than we need them because of China.
I mean, we could deal with China.
It's great to have India.
But it's not great to have allies who double cross you.
That's why I like Israel as an ally.
And they don't double cross you.
stay with you and look look at that look how they paved the way for us to be very successful in iran but a year of bombing and getting rid of all the proxies that were in our way and that's the kind of ally uh you need uh not an ally that that is uh you know double dealing by by by buying russian oil 30 not just buying a little bit 30 that's a big
contribution to the murder and slaughter of Ukrainian people and to what is regarded in Western Europe as an attack on Europe.
So let's see what happens.
The thinking of the experts on India is they don't give a damn that they have in the past been able to bull their way through this and they think they're going to be able to do that again.
And Modi has very firmly said, you know, they should be allowed to deal with Russia.
If they want to deal with Russia, they should be allowed to deal with Russia.
He's not going to be pushed around by the United States.
Well, a lot of people have said that who came and made agreements with us.
So let's see what happens.
Their economy, although it is, I think it's sounder than China's.
I just have the sense that it's built on a more solid foundation than China because they haven't, it doesn't mean they still don't have a lot of poverty, but they haven't deliberately left people behind, whereas China has left behind about 40% of their population.
who are living in third world poverty.
India has some of that problem also.
So it'd be a hard.
comparison, particularly because China doesn't give you the right numbers.
You don't really know what's going on with the Chinese economy.
You just know it's in terrible trouble.
Well, here's some good news.
New York City, in the first seven months of this year, has the lowest number of shootings ever.
The lowest number of shootings ever in the history of New York City, both shooting incidents and shooting victims.
The high, you should know it was in 1993, which is the year before I became mayor.
That's under David Dinkins, who theoretically said he started the reduction in crime.
Now, how can he have started the reduction in crime if he has the record for the most shootings and shooting victims?
He also has the record for the most murders.
No mayor in the history of New York has ever had more than 2,000 murders except him twice.
So cut the crap and the Democrats who do not acknowledge what I did for New York City.
I like to say that Dinkins really started the crime.
Times doesn't.
Yeah.
Well, how about you stick this in your throat, Times?
New York City just ended up right now, as of July 31st, this is the fewest number of shooting incidents and shooting victims that we've had.
The previous low.
was, well, in one case it was last year and in another case it was 19.
Now that's the good news.
Here's the bad news.
Overall crime, although it is down slightly so far this year, is way up compared to 2020 and 2021 before Adams came into office.
In fact, when he came in in 2020 and 2021, it was roughly 52,000.
And right now it's 68,000.
That's why the people of New York feel oppressed because it may be that shootings are down, but most people.
aren't affected by shootings.
I mean, murder is a terrible crime.
It's the worst crime of all.
And it gives you a pretty good indication of the criminality of your society.
but it doesn't affect a large number of people.
The crimes we're talking about, these index crimes, like home invasion and car theft, like the carjacking that resulted in the crime in the beating of that fine young man who was protecting his girlfriend, Mr. Korostein.
Big balls.
Those are the things that really affect people, and that's up substantially since 2019, 2020, and 2021.
So, yes, I congratulate the mayor and the police commissioner for getting some degree of control.
And so far, as we enter the eighth month, pretty much the eighth month of the year, they look like they may end up with a year in which they have the lowest number of shootings and shooting victims since we've been recording this.
And that's an achievement.
The highest number, again, as I said, was in 1993.
So we'll have to see what happens in the rest of the year.
But it's good news, bad news.
The bad news is that index crimes, that's the overall group of crimes, which, you know, are 20 times the number of murders and shootings, is up.
And that affects a much larger number of news.
New Yorkers.
Now, here is a very, very good question.
All of this was achieved by much tougher policing.
And I think the police commissioner would be the first one to tell you that they could probably have done a lot better if they hadn't cut a billion dollars out of the police budget and gotten the New York City Police Department down to the lowest level it's been at since before I was mayor.
I mean, I had 51,000.
They have 35,000, 34,000.
Big difference.
And their reduction in crime is really based on police arrest strategies, completely opposite of what mandami wants to do which is to Whether he defund the police is a very interesting.
He's now saying that.
He really didn't mean it.
And he doesn't think we should defund the police.
Well, in order to not defund the police, and this is the same thing as Adams, who's in his stomach said a bullshit artist, they got to refund the police.
Nobody explains that they took a billion, the crazy, insane New York City Council.
the same New York City Council that wanted to allow illegal aliens to vote, even though it violates the New York Constitution directly, that the..
reality is that the strong city of New York right now is the people are feeling an increase in crime.
And they're feeling, even though the amount of crime is substantially less than the amount that I grew up with by a lot.
So think about it.
When I, the year before I was mayor, there were 1900 to 2,000 murders in New York City, about 2,000.
Yeah, 2,000 and there had been 2,200 and 2,400 and 1,900 the most murders in a four-year period ever in the history of the city.
There were major riots.
Immediately, my first year in office, crime came down.
And we got control of it right away.
And we did it with all of the things that the socialists oppose.
We did it with the broken windows theory.
paying attention to small things as well as big things.
We did it with very heavy penalties on major criminals.
We did it with career criminal programs where we singled out people who had long records of crime like when you read about now these people who have been arrested 40 or 50 times that are raping people.
We focused our attention on the illegal aliens who are criminals.
And since we had 400,000 illegal aliens and the immigration service could only deport 2,000, we tried to make that 2,000 count.
not for some theoretical purpose, but for the purpose of making New York City safer.
We didn't invite hundreds of thousands of people to come in and give him credit cards like Adams did.
I think that's why he can't get out of single digits.
People aren't forgiving him for that.
And the reality is that he'd be a lot better than Mondami.
I mean, I can't honestly not criticize the things that he's done.
But compared to what this insane idiot will do there.
Well, so.
good news, bad news.
Index crime's way up compared to the period coming into 2020.0 and 2021 and uh shootings shooting incident shooting victims are down to the lowest that they've ever been at this stage and murder's got to be pretty damn low too if if shooting and shooting victims are down then murder has to be uh pretty pretty damn low um so
I don't know what we're going to do.
Right now, it seems as if.
the polls indicate that Mandani will win.
And you could.
So you have him and you have Adams, who's running as an independent because he felt that he couldn't win the Democratic primary, probably right.
You've got Cuomo, who was defeated in the Democrat primary, but has kind of said to himself, I still have a chance.
And we have Curtis Sleewitt, the Republican candidate who ran last time.
There's no chance that those three could sit down and try to figure out who has the best chance and give up their personal ambition to support that person.
There's no chance that could happen, which to me immediately says to me they're not going to be great mayors.
But we don't have the luxury of trying to find a great mayor.
God, I take an incompetent mayor right now over a communist.
This guy's going to get a substantial number of people murdered.
I mean, there are several articles among the cognizanti the intelligent people in new york about how all these numbers bringing down certain crimes are going to be ruined under mandami uh i mean a lot of it also has to do with the morale of the police department and morale is very very subtle when you have a guy that's calling the police department racist and uh cold-blooded killers and you think they're going to go out and function for you or
they're protecting their backside I mean, some of the heroes will, but not everybody's a hero.
So this is a very, very critical period.
I can't.
I can't ignore this.
And I don't know if the crooked media is covering it, but some of the left-wing people have criticized this very, very strongly.
What Jim Acosta did, who is a thoroughly dishonest, thoroughly despicable human being, is put on an interview with a I guess what would you call an AI created figure?
A robot?
But the guy pretended to be Joaquin Oliver, who was one of the 17 victims of the horrible slaughter at 2018 slaughter at Parkland, Florida Massacre.
And he asked him questions and then used AI.
artificial intelligence right i guess uh by inputting uh many things about joaquin uh AI then gave the answers.
Now, first of all, the answers are based on what was inputted.
We have no idea what was inputted.
And very strangely, the answers that came out sound exactly like Acosta's sort of religion on gun control.
That's the answer to Parkland.
It wouldn't have happened if we had gun control.
That sort of thing.
Look, there are people who believe that.
There are people that argue that.
But we have no idea what Joaquin Oliver would say.
And it's a complete fraud to have a computer decide what he would say in order to create some emotional pull on people to support this.
Now, in fairness, his family seems to be okay with this.
But, and of course, we have great sympathy for his family.
But the reality is that this gets way beyond his family and it gets to the basic integrity of what you see on the airways.
This is a complete fraud.
The answer is a complete fraud.
It's the answer of a robot.
It's the answer of a computer.
Should we play it?
Here's a...
What a horrible creepy he is.
Absolutely.
You want to show this for gun violence.
Great question.
I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support, and community engagement.
We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard.
It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding.
What do you think about that?
I think that's a great idea, Joaquin.
I would like to know what your solution would be for gun violence.
Great question.
I believe in a mix of stronger gun control laws, mental health support, and community engagement.
We need to create safe spaces for conversations and connections, making sure everyone feels seen and heard.
It's about building a culture of kindness and understanding.
What do you think about that?
I think that's a great idea, Joaquin.
Oh, I love Jim's.
Jim's responding.
Tell me that isn't creepy.y.
And then you got Jim responding to this.
I'm like, it's surprising.
He didn't ask him, who do you think is the best reporter in America?
And he would have said, that very good question.
Jim Acosta.
Jim Acosta does the best job of lying of any reporter in America.
And that's the basic quality of an American reporter today, or at least 80% of them.
You have to be able to lie.
and keep a straight face.
and Acosta, you're very, very good at it, even though you're stupid as hell.
I mean, you could have...
Very creepy.
You're in control of the input in the machine.
Yeah.
Look at this.
So why doesn't a consultant interview himself?
And I don't know if this is, I guess.
They take a picture.
I'm guessing they take a picture.
Five years later, this is some kind of a recreation of what the computer thinks he would look like today.
Is it?
Okay.
I imagine.
You're right.
It would include a...
Right.
So they probably fast-fast.
I think he died when he was.
18.
18.
Unfortunately.
Gosh, is that awesome?
He was 17 when he died.
Yeah.
Now he'd be 25.
That's what you forget.
That's a not a 17 year old that you see in there.
I'd want to know if Jim approached this family, which I'm guessing that's the case.
I would want to know if, and I want to respect this family who's, you agree for the rest of your life.
Did he approach the family or did the family approach him?
I have no idea.
And I think.
Shame on him if he approached that family.
You have to.
If you're approaching.
I don't think.
I think the family.
This is not.
Right.
You're now trying to affect American laws, American public opinion, and the safety of my children and your children and everybody else's child by pushing a controversial political theory.
A dangerous, arguably a dangerous political theory.
I mean, you know, look, the people who believe in gun control, let's say they really believe in it.
But the people who don't are equally insistent and I think a lot more logical.
Here are some basic things about gun control that gun control pretends that you're going to be able to bring down the amount of gun violence by controlling behavior, just by the control.
That's what laws do.
But the people who you're trying to control are already uncontrolled.
If you're going to violate the law to commit murder, you're going to have a real problem violating the law to get a gun.
Now, if you think you can confiscate all the guns in America, There are a lot more guns than there are illegal aliens.
We're going to get rid of the illegal aliens faster than we get rid of the guns.
I mean, the estimates are there are probably as many guns in America if not illegal guns as there are people so let's let's take the conservative lower number there about 250 million illegal guns in America so now you put in gun control and you stop legitimate people who are willing to comply with gun control laws from having guns so they can get shot without being able to defend themselves And
of course, the illegal people who are uncontrolled anyway, why would they pay attention to gun control laws when they don't pay attention to laws on theft or laws on rape or laws on home invasion or laws on carjacking or laws on murder.
Well, of course they won't pay attention to it.
So the guns will be in the hands of the criminals.
And you just got to be, you have to be grown up enough to realize that we start with a base of, when you consider legal and illegal guns, of about 400 million guns in America.
of which the majority are illegal.
And there's no conceivable law enforcement theory that I know of that's going to go collect 150 million to 200 million gunsuns in the next 10 years.
Not with the ability of organized crime and others to hide them and obstruct us.
And you'd have to give up enforcing all the other laws and just enforce that one.
And then that would have consequences.
So it's a childish, silly, typical.
pie in the sky liberal solution that pays no attention to the actual facts of life.
And I've been a Democrat and a Re republican it's a long time ago that i was a democrat and uh i think uh gun control has its place uh in terms of making sure that guns aren't in the hands of illegal people to the extent that we can.
But you've got to say to yourself, you're not going to do that perfectly.
We already have those laws.
In many of the states where we've had these massacres, we have pretty darn strict laws.
And these people go right around them.
So in the case of what happened today in Ford Stewart, the guy had a personal gun.
So I don't know if it was legal, illegal.
It would seem to me, given his record, he probably would not be affected by any conceivable gun control law that we would have, because although he did have an arrest for DUI, he had no other record.
So it would just be now that there would be implications in his ability to have a gun, and he hasn't been convicted yet of DUI.
So it would have had no impact on.
what happened today at Fort Stewart, for example.
But instead, you know, the computer thinks it would.
It's bad enough that liberals who have no sense of life and what it's really like when they develop their opinion say, but now we're going to have computers do it, Ted.
Yeah.
Well, I mean, I didn't think there could be anything worse than liberals.
I think computers could be worse because they're programmed by liberals.
Right.
Why didn't, why didn't, if Acosta wanted to be honest, why didn't he just jump on the other side of the screen and answer the question himself?
Right.
I mean, and I said everything that Acosta believes.
Right.
Let's, there, right.
I mean, this idea, let's, I kind of want us to get off this idea that he just interviewed an ai generated person the man just talked to himself using the photo of a deceased child to push a policy an anti-second amendment policy position right i mean this i'm that's what happened i'm pretty sure that that's a uh an avatar it's an avatar which means it's not real it is a human being it's not it's not we don't know if that kid would really look at that now right the poor kid on the computer you know they do this a lot they used to do
this a lot even before ai right They a lot of people used to find it fun.
You know, they could take a young person and show you what you're going to look like 13 years old.
Yeah.
That's essentially what the computer did.
The computer looked at his face.
I don't know what it looked at.
It looked at things.
I don't know if it did a good job or a bad job.
How do I know what he's going to look like today?
And it isn't him.
It isn't a human being.
We're going to have computers now influence our public opinion.
We're supposed to input to them.
They're not supposed to tell us.
give us advice on our opinions.
They're not experts on anything except what we give them.
This is like a really dangerous use of AI by this creep piece of crap shit, Acosta.
This is Jim Acosta talking to himself, right?
This is Jim Acosta talking to himself.
He's talking to himself.
He's talking to himself by recreating a dead person.
A dead child.
This was a 17-year-old child, which tragically ended at 17.
At 17, and that's just the reality.
And whether, you know.
Whether on a personal level people can deal with that or not is one thing and I appreciate that and sympathize with it but on a governmental and in the in fairness to the rest of this country that has to live with these opinions and laws, this is a horrible thing to do.
And I think whether the family agreed with it or not, it's really taking advantage of them too.
Right.
But this is dangerous.
And I'm actually growing concerned with the coverage of it, right?
I think we need to stop covering this as an interview.
Well, I think, hasn't there been a lot of left-wing...
Yes.
Yes.
Good point.
And I wanted to actually, I was, He's going to destroy himself eventually anyway.
He's really over the line.
This is way over the line.
When you consider how bad the CNN and NBC and NBC people are to be over the line means you're in some kind of a really evil.
Doesn't this also expose him that like for what he always was?
If you're pulling something like this off and he's independent now of CNN, doesn't this just say about everything we need to know about the rest of this?
This guy has no integrity.
To do this means you have no integrity.
Right.
All you're looking for is a buck or whatever he gets.
So we're going to take a short break.
And we'll be right back.
Are you ready for some action?
I'm ready for action.
Get the Elite TV plan only through the portal, 218 channels.
and it's only 69.95 a month.
Wow.
Including your free portal.
That's cheaper than everyone else.
Your favorite sport.
Movies.
News.
Even daytime dramas.
We're talking about ESPN, OAN, Newsmax.
Channels you can't get anymore in certain areas.
Compared to the competition, this is a way better deal.
Endless selection.
Not to mention all the free music channels.
There's over 700 premium and classic movies all ready to go.
Wow.
Plus they got catch up TV that allows you to go back and watch what you've missed or want to watch again.
Cut your cable in half and get twice as much for free.
Way more channels for half the cost.
After the first year, the subscription then drops to $57.95 monthly, where you change or upgrade anytime.
Go to quxnow.com and get yours today.
Use promo code RUDY.
U.S. Army Major Scott Smiley paid a high price serving on Nation.
Scott was leading his platoon in Iraq when a blast sent shrapnel through his eyes, leaving him blind and temporarily paralyzed.
Scott would become the first blind active duty military officer.
before medically retiring years later.
Thanks to friends like you, the Tunnel of the Towers Foundation gave Scott and his family a mortgage- free, specially adapted, smart home.
Show your support for America's Heroes.
Now, donate $11 a month to Tunnels and Towers at T2.
Here we are, pretty much at the beginning of the process here at this pristine, I call it a laboratory, it's not like a factory, it's like a hospital.
This is the beginning of the process for roasting.
Deep green, very good quality.
Most people don't use this quality.
We deal with small farmers because they'd like to know who we're dealing with.
They give us the highest quality, all organic, non-GMO.
You should know, all Arabica beans.
No robusto.
All Arabica.
They're gonna go into the roaster and it'll get roasted for about 20 minutes or so.
Oh my goodness, look at these.
Look at these.
My goodness.
Look at these.
Look at these.
want to specially order these.
This is what goes into Rudy's coffee.
Look at it.
It's ridiculous.
Well, here we are back again and Ted and I were having a little off-the-record conversation about the next topic, which is after we just did this thing on Acosta, I don't know how you could be more hypocritical or more dishonest or, but the Democrats are.
So.
Just think about this.
They want to point out how terrible the Republicans are in Texas for responding to.
advice from the Justice Department that four or five of their districts may very well run afoul of the current interpretation of the Voting Rights Act, which has changed substantially in the last two or three years, admittedly under a conservative court, but that's still the law.
So it isn't as if Abbott's doing this all on his own.
The Justice Department has warned them that these four or five districts could be in violation of the constitution by being drawn solely on the basis of race.
Now, it is, I mean, it is, we don't know yet if there's going to be an across the board change in the Voting Rights Act.
There have been a lot of changes in it where on a case-by-case basis, you can look and say, well, there's no reason now.
to be discriminating in order to remedy discrimination because that's what the Voting Rights Act did.
Voting Rights Act said that historically blacks had been treated so unfairly that now we're going to allow a certain amount of unfairness and draw up districts that empower blacks, even though you could technically argue that you are excluding people and making decisions based solely on race, which is a direct violation of the 14th Amendment.
And the Supreme Court accepted that logic for a long time.
30 years and then about 10 12 years ago started saying well a lot of the things that were that required that kind of very strange discriminator in order to end discrimination, violate the law in order to remedy the violation of the law.
In particular jurisdictions, that's no longer necessary.
So they have removed the voting rights application for certain states and certain places.
And they've done it on a case-by-case basis.
And they've never faced the question nationally.
and across the board, has the rationale for the Voting Rights Act ended so that there's no longer a justification for discriminating against white people, Chinese people, Hispanic people, just to empower one group of people?
Has the consequences of the interference in their right to vote been remedied?
Well, if you're just honest about it and not just a freak that just says anything that you think the left wing will accept, the answer is that that's a very difficult question.
And I can see people of goodwill disagreeing about that.
And I look at the court and there are several justices that have questioned this for years.
And just a week ago or was it two weeks ago?
I'm not sure.
The Supreme Court has taken up a case in which they originally avoided answering that question.
And now they're going to take the case back.
for the specific purpose of giving us an answer to that question in the early part of their new term, which will be in October.
So by the end of the year, we'll have an answer to this.
And broadly, now it is very, very, very possible that in Texas, we know the answer to it already, if in fact they have created a substantial number of black districts and they have black representation, because you can do it on a case-by-case basis.
That's number one.
Number two, It's hypocrisy of the worst time for the Democrats to get all upset about Abbott doing this when they do it all the time.
Every one of their states is so gerrymandering it's ridiculous.
So today, Rich Lowry, I think, did this analysis.
So congratulations, Rich.
It's a good job.
And he focused on the 13th congressional district in Illinois.
Because strangely, they went to the state that, in fact, these independent organizations that are against gerrymandering consider to be the biggest violators.
Illinois is, I mean, New York is pretty damn bad.
They even changed the court.
California is terrible, but Illinois is supposedly the worst.
Here's one.
So, I mean, every time they get a chanceance, I mean, look, that's a congress That may have been that's from 2020, 2021.
That's the fourth congressional district.
That's a congressional district.
That is a congressional district, mayor.
That is a congressional district.
Look how it loops up and around.
Looks like the Palestinian Authority.
That's absurd.
It looks like the Palestinian Authority where you have to drive through Israel.
There it is.
Look at that.
That's the, that is the, so that was what the capture as many times as possible.
And this is the state these Texas Democrats went to, by the way.
So that, so that district, which that's the fourth district.
Yeah.
The one that, the one that Rich concentrated on is the thirteenth congressional district.
Okay.
And when you see this, it's really hilarious.
It looks like a snake.
Yeah.
I'm going to get that one next.
It's a jagged, narrow strip of territory with no obvious rhyme or reason as it traverses six counties.
Now, unless you're remedying historical discrimination that hasn't been remedied yet, you're not supposed to, in America, draw congressional lines based on race.
That's about as racist as you can get.
I never understood the actual rationale for this anyway, that we're going to combat racism by doing the opposite racism.
All it does is perpetuate it.
But in any event, we're beyond.
that now.
So Rich points out that the 13th congressional district was fashioned in the redistricting after the 2020 census.
And it was what they attempted to do is to take far-fung Democratic districts and put them in a district that gave Democrats the advantage.
That 13th district had been a Republican district going back to Lincoln pretty much.
And in 2022 it flipped to a Democratic district.
And it looks like a ridiculous snake.
I'm going to have it up in just a second here.
So let's take a look at how the Democrats deal with this.
In Illinois in 2020, which is the last census, right?
Based on the census, Illinois and the drop in population lost one district.
So they had to redistrict because they lost a district.
They were able to write lines.
So that the Democrats, that's it.
That's the 13th district.
That's absurd.
Those are six counties.
Little slippery.
little slivers of six counties.
That's absurd.
I mean, you just look at it.
One of the things that they say is normally, under normal circumstances, the districts have to have some logic, like it should be one congress, one county or two counties.
should be contiguous.
That kind of thing is You pick those areas in order to remedy what happened 170 years ago, which many people say has been remedied already.
We've had a black president.
This isn't This isn't some emergency situation where we have to throw our laws out and advantage one group over another.
I mean, the Supreme Court has decided that in many, many different cases.
So that stupid little 13th District.
So 2020, they lost a seat.
It's a democratic state in all.
In all logic and whatever, you'd lose one Democrat seat if that happened.
You know what they were able to do in 2020 in rigging this?
Before 2020 census, it was 13 to 5 a Democrat advantage.
After they got a chance to gerrymander, they ended up with a 14-3 Democratic advantage.
So they gained a Democrat seat.
and they lost two Republican seats, even though they were just deprived of one district.
They took it out of the Republicans.
And according to the website 538, which is an independent website that analyzes how unfair these gerrymandering, it's the worst gerrymandered state in the country.
Again, they go from 13-5 democrat advantage they take away a district they get a chance to redo the map and they ended up with a 14 to 3 democratic advantage now Take a look at the vote.
In that election that did that, that ended up with two less Republicans and one more Democrat.
The Republicans got 44% of the popular vote in the Illinois congressional races, and they ended up with 18% of the congressional seats.
How is that possible if you're not cheating through gerrymandering?
Again, 44% of the people of Illinois in 2022 voted for Republicans.
Republicans have only three out of 17 seats.
What's 44% of 17, right?
But eight, seven or eight, right?
Yeah.
Yeah.
They didn't gerrymander grossly.
Worse than anything that I don't know.
I don't know if the Republicans in Texas are recommending anything like that.
they're actually being told they have to correct things like that.
Now, the Texas legislature.
the estimate is it could net Republicans another five House seats.
And again, this is based on the Justice Department advice.
And the Louisiana case at the Supreme Court will decide early part of the next term.
That means in October, they'll hear argument.
They probably won't decide until around the end of the year.
will decide if this whole thing now is unconstitutional.
It seems to me that it is.
Now, when the Democrats controlled the Texas legislation, which they did up until from the Civil War up until 2022, it was grossly aligned.
And Lyndon Johnson had a lot to do with this in favor of Democrats.
When the Republicans took it over over a period of time, they have, they have, to the extent they can do it with the Voting Rights Act, creating some control on what they do, they've realigned it.
And of course, the state has turned very heavily Republican.
Now let's look at another state where Gavin Newsom, you know, is going like, if he doesn't too much., he's going to hurt himself.
He's not really a manly guy.
So he's going to redistrict again.
He just did it.
And so did Hokul Poko.
She just redistricted.
Actually, they can't without a constitution.
In New York, she has to get a constitutional amendment in order to do what she's threatening to do, which is totally, I mean, just complete lie.
In the case of California, Republicans won 40% of the congressional vote in 2024.
and they have only 17% of the congressional seats.
So tell me the Democrats don't do this.
And what Texas wants to do, if they wanted to change all of the district that was cited by the Justice Department, they would end up with a ratio.
on the Republican side that would be less severe than California, where you had 40% of the congressional vote for Republicans, but only 17% of the seats.
It would be slightly better than that for the Democrats.
So what is this hypocrisy all about?
they both have an interest in preserving their political party why the democrats want to preserve the party of slavery has always been a mystery to me but they do and i guess they have a right to do it i think everybody everybody uh well certainly in new york was extremely moved by the death of this beautiful young lady,
Martha Nolan, who was found late Monday night, well, I don't know if she was found late Monday night, but late Monday night they heard screaming from the docks at the Montague Yacht Club.
And she was found at midnight at approximately 12 a.m.
They found her body dead.
She was pronounced dead at the scene in a boat in the Montague Yacht Club.
And she is a 33, oh, she was a 33 year old woman.
She came to the United States at the age of 26 from Ireland.
She started launching immediately a summerwear brand called East Times East in the Hamptons in 2023.
And it already had become enormously successful.
And her, Her actual name is Martha Nolan O'Sullivan Terra.
Oslaterra, which is a very interesting name, Martha Nolan-Oslaterra.
She was found unconscious on a vessel docked at the Montau Yacht Club at approximately midnight.
Professionally, she's known as Martha Nolan, and she is very, very well liked and very well thought of in eastern Long Island.
And she just had been interviewed on a podcast in which she listed the goals that she had set for herself when she came from Ireland.
and she had reached them.
So I guess there's a, someone put out the fact that it looked like there was no foul play involved.
Well, they better have a pretty good explanation for that.
And we'll have to stay on top of that.
It's just a terrible, terrible, terrible thing.
Maybe she had an illness that I don't know about or whatever, but they're not giving out those facts.
They're just saying very generally that they don't think there was foul play involved.
Yet the yacht club members said they heard screaming.
And when they got to her boat, there she was dying or dead.
But she died.
She was dead by the time the first responders got there.
Israel, Netanyahu.
is now saying that he's going to call for the full military occupation of the Gaza Strip to fight Hamas and free the hostages.
that if he's forced to do a ceasefire without achieving the goal that they set, which is to destroy Hamas, which is not just an academic goal, it's a goal necessitated by the fact that Hamas is dedicated to the extermination of the Jewish people, right in their constitution.
And that's all they've been doing since the time they first were formed, killing Jews and Americans after that.
which is just really carrying on what Muhammad told them to do.
So if you end up, we call them Islamic extremists.
They're just doing what's written down in the Quran.
I don't know how extremist they are.
They are extremist if you think about the fact that they're murderers, but so was Muhammad.
So let's cut the shit and talk to each other honestly about that religion.
It's been a destructive force in the world from the day that the pedophile murderer established it.
And they are dedicated religiously to the extermination of the Jewish people.
I don't see anything change in that.
So why do you want them as your neighbors?
When they wake up in the morning and they train all their kids, including the ones that aren't part of Hamas that are in the West Bank who are Palestinian, they train them to kill you.
And Jordan and Egypt knows that because they won't let them in because they've done murders there as well.
So Netanyahu is preparing to call for the full military occupation of the Gaza Strip.
because they want him to agree to a ceasefire before he's accomplished 100% his goal of wiping out Hamas.
Now, right now, this would not be a terribly major change in things.
Right now, Israel occupies 75% of Gaza.
So this would be another 25%.
Gaza has now about 2 million people, and they're mostly huddled on the western shore, which means up against the Mediterranean Sea.
And actually, there's only one area.
of Gaza where they think that they haven't cleaned out Hamas as effectively as they can.
It's basically along the west coast, along the Mediterranean coast, about halfway north-south, if you remember how Gaza is confirmed at Der el-Salah.
So this is going to be a very interesting part of the negotiations if Bibi puts this on the table.
I don't see how you can say, well, I mean, they will say no to the Israelis, but I don't see how in fairness you can say no to them since at least at this point nobody is saying that the palestinians have to agree to accept the state of israel and stop contesting the fact that the jewish
people should be there now i don't know how they can abandon that it's part of their religion It's built into their religion.
And it isn't their interpretation of the religion.
It's what the Quran says and the hadith.
So this is going to be an interesting part of it.
The president has said that he's going to take over, the U.S. is going to take over the humanitarian aid distribution in Gaza because he's concerned about famine.
And people around President Trump have said he doesn't want babies to starve, nor does anyone.
Netanyahu says that the numbers are grossly exaggerated by Hamas and largely caused by the fact that Hamas kills or stops a lot of the humanitarian distribution of food and other things and takes it for themselves.
And they don't allow Israel to come in and function correctly.
Or at least in enough parts of Gaza so it really interferes with the distribution of food.
So I guess it makes sense for us to do it.
and find out for ourselves who's telling the truth.
But this could lead, I mean, we're talking about boots on the ground and this could lead to American casualties.
Hamas has no compunction at killing Americans.
They kill a lot of Americans.
They do.
And Palestinians have too.
I mean, that Arafat specialized in killing Americans.
The PLO, which is the forerunner of Fatah, which has now gone from being a terrorist organization, being an organized crime, money grabbing extortionist operation.
So basically you have two groups fighting for control of the Palestinians.
The ones that's thoroughgoers.
going to convert everybody and if they don't get converted we're going to kill them and several of his people who sound like you know they're like Fatah said, hey, Muhammad, you know, if they want to pay us money, what the hell?
We can let them sort of exist as second-class citizens.
They just pay us tribute.
Now, there are Islamic scholars who say that shows how tolerant the religion is.
It'll allow you to exist.
If you pay extortion, you can exist.
If you don't, you get killed.
That's about as free an existence as the mafia are allowed at its height.
If you wanted to have a store, you had to pay them off.
That's freedom.
Well, that's Muhammad's version of freedom.
Not the classical.
American Western civilization definition of freedom.
But of course, they're not part of Western civilization.
In fact, they've tried very, very hard to destroy Western civilization, the way they destroyed the civilization of Persia, Nubia, vast parts of Africa, and Asia.
I mean, they tried to wipe out the Hindu people.
They failed in that because there's so many of them.
But they succeeded in wiping out four or five distinct groups of people, languages.
This is all part of their history that is treated in a dishonest way, both by our academics and by our media.
And you're not allowed to say this.
God forbid you should do a movie about it, right?
I don't know what they would do to you.
The president is really raising an issue that's close to my heart, and that's the debanking issue.
because he personally has these experiences of being thrown out after January 6, 2021, having been thrown out by the Bank of America, I think it was, and by J.P. Morgan.
First, he said he was booted by JP Morgan.
I had hundreds of millions.
I had many, many accounts loaded up with cash.
I was loaded up with cash and they told me, I'm sorry, sir, we can't have you.
You have 20 days to get out.
You've got to be kidding.
I've been with you for 35, 40 years.
Then he was denied services by Bank of America.
During the interview, he named both JP Morgan CEO, Jamie Diamond, and Brian Moynihan of Bank of America, stating both refused to come to his defense.
He said, Moynihan, quote, was kissing my ass when I was president.
When I called him after I was president, deposited a billion dollars plus and a lot of other things, more importantly, to open accounts, which bank always like.
And he said, he can't do it.
Senator Tim Scott is pushing legislation outlawed to banking.
Now, it's very rare that you, through personal experience, know that something is true.
They did this to me.
Banks that I had been doing business with for 30 to 40 years threw me and my company out.
And this is before I had any financial difficulties that were created by Biden.
And the Biden lawyer who brought the case that ended up in the $148 million judgment, a lot of people don't know that the lawyer who did that was Hunter Biden's law partner.
But I just want you to know that.
And we've resolved it now.
that is what created my serious economic problems And but I was debanked before any of that happened when I wasn't worth what Trump was, but 10, 12 million net worth.
Now I could also tell you that when that happened, I would talk to my friends who also were Trump supporters, and that happened to all them.
When the president says it happened to my supporters, I can give a big list of people because they helped me in finding other banks that would still do business with us.
Smaller, regional, wouldn't have the same level of services, but at least they were honest and decent people.
But what they're saying about these, what the president is saying about these banks is 100% true.
They don't even deny it very much.
They don't even deny it.
And also it goes, the president did say something today, and I would amend it a little.
He said it was mostly my supporters.
That's true.
After January 6th, uh 2021 it was basically his supporters myself and navarro and bannon and uh stone and you know all those people uh but they've been doing that to conservatives before they were doing it to right to life people.
They were doing it to MAGA people, even that go back to 2016, even goes back a little bit to the Obama era with the IRS.
They've been using financial pressure to try to destroy anything that amounts to a conservative movement.
But I think the provable part, that's very easy to prove because I can give them 20 people that were debanked by these two-faced people.
Charles Gasparino has a great article.
Sources at the banks, the largest and second largest in the U.S., confirmed the case stemmed from the controversy surrounding Trump's actions on January 6 and threats from President Joe Biden's bank regulators that banking, the former president's money, put them in danger of falling afoul of rules that prohibit financial institutions.
from doing business with individuals and companies that present a reputational risk.
So I don't know what's going to happen with the legislation.
You know, it's one thing.
I don't know if there's going to be some kind of action against these banks.
I think there should be.
I think it's very provable.
As long as you get out of the corrupt District of Columbia District Court, which maybe has changed a little with the election, but it's got to be the worst court in the history of America.
at the banks, this is in the New York Post, tell the Post that Biden's banking cops at the Office of the Controller of the Currency, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve often use the nebulous nature of the edict to go beyond to banking money launderers and drug kingpins and focused on political enemies.
But we know they did.
Right.
So I'm glad that Trump is, you know, Trump, remember when he said, you know, they're doing it to me, but they're going to do it to you.
That's true.
Right.
They did do it to all of us.
Yeah.
And this is one of the things they did.
The spokesman for JP Morgan said, we don't close accounts for political reasons.
Bullshit.
So thank you, President Trump, for standing up for all of us.
And I'm sure it goes way beyond the people I know.
I don't know everyone, but I can't think of a Trump supporter that didn't have, I mean, major Trump that didn't have this problem.
A prominent Trump supporter or a Trump supporter who embraced some of the controversial issues that you weren't allowed to say or think.
as if we were the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.
In addition to that, Tulsi Gabbard in her interview with Miranda Devine points out that as soon as she started raising issues about the administration, I think it was what was she still a Democrat?
They started following her and they put her on a list to be searched and watched at the airport and her husband.
They went through this extreme and in-depth search of me.
And oh, by the way, my husband was also placed on the domestic terror watch list.
Why are you doing this?
she said.
Now, I'll tell you.
They took away my, they took away my, what do you call that?
Apple.
No, the international travel thing.
Oh, yeah, TSA pre-check.
TSA pre-check.
So all of a sudden, I don't have it and I go to TSA and they say, well, this came from Washington.
Really?
Yeah.
Oh, I didn't know that.
I got to try to get it back, but they took that away about a year and a half ago.
Wow.
This is all true.
So the country of my grandparents, Italy, is going to build a bridge oh yes from mainland italy to sicily and it's going to be the largest suspension bridge in the world um now it isn't the largest bridge but remember suspension bridge means it's way above the sea or the ocean or the sea really um so
that boats can go under whereas a lot of bridges are built right into the right on the level of the water.
So Ted was very concerned that Italy was misrepresenting saying it would be the largest suspension bridge.
Because he said the bridge in Michigan is a Mackinac.
Mackinac is longer, but it isn't a suspension bridge.
It's a suspension bridge, but a suspension part of it, but not for two miles.
Yes.
I learned a lot today with that, and you remember it.
So, so, um, I'm going to get a picture of this bridge here.
This is really very, very interesting.
Yeah, I'm looking for, I mean, yeah, something cool about.
suspension bridges right the engineers have designed the bridge with two 13 1310 foot tall steel towers And so there'll be no central tower and the boats will be able to go freely through.
And remember, that's a pretty important passageway because I'm sure it's used by a lot of ships that use the Suez Canal.
Oh, there it is.
There you go.
Looks like the Varizano Bridge.
I didn't realize how close.
Oh, two miles.
That's something.
I don't know what the currents are like, but I mean, great swimmers could probably swim in.
I bet they have.
Right.
I don't know what that's there for.
Sicily, right?
I swear to God, that looks like the Verizano Bridge.
It does.
That picture looks just like the Verizano Bridge.
I guess there's only one Italian.
If there's one Italian bridge, there's going to be more than one.
Now, it looks like they've revealed some more things about the den of iniquity that was Epstein's home.
And I'm getting really annoyed at this focusing on Trump when the connections of Bill Clinton to Epstein are so...
I think he denies that he went to the island with him numerous times.
There's no allegation and no fact that suggests that Trump ever did that.
In fact, he didn't ever do it.
Also, you don't have a picture of Trump like this one that was in Epstein's house.
Yeah, but I'm going to put up in a second here.
This is quite the photo here.
He had a 21 bill signed by Gates that said I was wrong.
He had a sculpture of a woman in a bridal gown dangling from a rope.
And for some reason, he had all kinds of framed fake eyeballs.
He had a prize copy of Lolita, which was a 1955 novel.
about a pervert who repeatedly rapes a 12-year-old girl.
that he had become obsessed with.
Check this out.
Right here.
And there he is.
That's a real picture, a real painting, right?
There were also pictures, but not in that kind of compromising situation of Saudi Arabia's crown prince Muhammad bin Salman.
There was a picture of Donald Trump.
but a picture that's about 20 years old.
And also a picture of John Paul II, of John Paul II.
So, but I don't think John Paul II was dressed the way Clinton was.
Also pictures of Richard Branson and Elon Musk.
So, Elon, I don't know, maybe you should stop throwing your little allegations around.
I think this is the first picture you were referring to.
This is a creepy one right here.
Then there are a lot of other things that they...
right here that's weird that's the uh so weird i would i wouldn't i wouldn't feel comfortable in that He definitely was a weird guy.
I will say one of the first things I did, Mayor, back in 2022, I realized how close he was to your place.
And I walked up there.
Yeah, actually, I still don't know.
Where exactly?
I believe it's 72nd.
Like just up Madison Avenue and then a block towards Central Park.
So I was on 66th Street.
Yeah, he was either 71st or 72nd around there.
66th.
So six blocks, seven blocks away.
Yes.
71st Street.
Was it a single townhouse or was it a townhouse it was big yeah i mean like around that area bloomberg has a townhouse but they're they're two connected to each other and the 73rd townhouse that was connected except theirs was connected in a very strange way the bloomberg townhouse is one townhouse and another townhouse that are connected to each other the rockefeller townhouse goes through the block So I don't remember what street it was on, but like it's on 73rd and 74th Street.
Oh, so there was an entrance on both.
Yeah.
Nice.
That's convenient.
If you have vast amounts of money, you can do things like that.
Especially in New York with those one-ways.
That's very convenient.
So here was a post that, I think this was X, or it could have been truth, I can't tell.
It comes from someone known as The Hat.
So this is not exactly somebody that, but I think it expresses the truth.
For all lefty pieces of cheats out there trying to link President Trump to Epstein, just remember this, it was President Trump.
who banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago and President Trump was never on his island.
There was no picture of President Trump sitting in a chair with a blue dress on Epstein's wall.
That was slick Willie Clinton.
I hope more information does come out because I think it's going to sink slick Willie.
And I want to know about him and what he was doing with Epstein.
And then somebody replies to the hat by saying a blue dress seems to be slick Willie's downfall.
That it was the blue dress.
sperm on it.
Yep.
How did we get a president like that?
Taking advantage of the crazy.
So Giselle Maxwell is opposing the release of the grand jury testimony.
Her lawyers wrote to oppose the motion probably made by the government, right, to release the grand jury testimony.
Right.
Our lawyers, Jeffrey Epstein is dead.
Whatever interest the public may have in Epstein, that interest cannot justify a broad intrusion into grand jury secrecy in a case where the defendant is alive.
Her legal options are viable and her due process rights remain.
Um...
Well, I mean, there's something to that.
But she is convicted.
She's serving a 20-year prison sentence.
She's trying to get a review of her December 2021 conviction.
It's an interesting argument.
I mean, there's not much law on releasing grand jury testimony.
The court is allowed to do it in the interest of justice.
The only case I can think of off the top of my head is the one involving Mario Biaggi a long time ago when, and it actually came up when he was running for mayor of New York and one of his opponents or prospective opponents.
leaked to the press that he had taken, I probably have the number wrong, but that he had taken the Fifth Amendment 48 times in the grand jury.
This was an investigation about getting money for private citizenship bills.
I don't know if congressmen can still do this.
It used to be that a congressman could make you a citizen.
They just put in a private bill.
And of course, those who were crooked were getting paid for that.
And this was an investigation because a lawyer very close to He was like the bagman.
Or at least that was the theory of the government.
So Biagi was called into the grand jury and he basically just took the Fifth Amendment 50 times.
Then when he was running for mayor, one of his opponents knew that, put it out to the press, the press printed it, and now Biaggi was asked, did you take the Fifth Amendment in the grand jury?
And he said, no.
He lied.
The U.S. attorney of the Southern District at the time, wouldn't he know Seymour, who was my boss, went to court.
I wasn't involved in the case.
I was just a baby.
He went to court before Judge Palmieri and asked for a release of the grand jury testimony in the interest of justice because this man had made a gross misstatement to the electorate.
Biaggi comes in and opposes the motion.
He might as well.
Did you take the, just think about this.
Here's Biaggi, who I eventually convicted.
I didn't actually, I did.
It was under my jurisdiction.
It was my case.
But Howard Wilson is the one who did it.
Great job.
Biaggi was a thoroughgoing crook.
So what?
He was a Democrat in New York.
I mean, they're all.
almost all like that.
You just got to look under their fingernails.
I don't know if you remember where that comes from, but I'll let you think about it.
You got to look under their fingernails.
Well, okay.
I'm going to ask you now to go over and listen to Dr. Maria on Windell TV.
She's going to do a really good analysis of what happened today.
I know that.
And it can supplement a lot of what we did on our first show, but we haven't been able to do on this show.
And we'll be back tomorrowrow and we'll see how things are moving along with trying to get the war in Ukraine at least under control.
And also what's going to happen in Israel with these competing issues with regard to America taking care of the humanitarian aid and Netanyahu, if he is going to be sort of forced.
to do a ceasefire because before he adequately deals with Hamas being able to occupy Gaza.
Those will be very, very interesting issues that we're going to have to see how they play out.
And of course, who knows what else is going to happen.
Every day you get a surprise.
You come to us and we'll let you hear all sides of it or we'll let you hear the side of it that they're going to cover up.
Sometime I'll do an analysis of how little they cover of the stuff that we cover.
Well, pray for the people of Israel and the people of all the Ukrainian people who are still being slaughtered.
as Putin sort of jerks around.
And the people of Iran who kind of are on the verge of being able to get rid of the reign of terror, a little pat on the back might help.
And also the people of Israel, of course, and the people of America.
And for our president, so that he continues to make wise decisions.
He's really been extraordinary.
That doesn't mean you have to agree with all of them, but you have to say there's enough there that everybody...
So take care of him, dear God.
Take care of all of us.
We'll see you tomorrow.
God bless America.
It's our purpose to bring to bear the principle of common sense and rational discussion to the issues of our day.
America was created at a time of great turmoil, tremendous disagreements, anger, hatred.
It was a book written in 1776 that guided much of the discipline of thinking that brought to us the discovery of our freedoms, of our God-given freedoms.
It was Thomas Paine's Common Sense, written in 1776, one of the first American bestsellers, in which Thomas Paine explained, by rational principles, the reason why these small colonies felt the necessity to separate from the Kingdom of Great Britain and the King of England.
He explained their inherent desire for liberty, for freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the ability to select the people who govern them.
And he explained it in ways that were understandable to all the people, not just the elite.
Because the desire for freedom is universal.
The desire for freedom adheres in the human mind and it is part of the human soul.
This is exactly the time we should consult our history.
Look at what we've done in the past.
and see if we can't use it to help us now.
We understand that our founders created the greatest country in the history of the world, the greatest democracy, the freest country, a country that has taken more people out of poverty than any country ever.
All of us are so fortunate to be Americans.
But a great deal of the reason for America's constant ability to self-improve is because we're able to reason, we're able to talk, we're able to analyze.
We are able to apply our God-given common sense.
▲
Export Selection