All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 7, 2025 - Rudy Giuliani
57:35
The Rudy Giuliani Show: Thursday, August 7, 2025
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
There we go.
We're right here.
I'm glad you got this thing here.
Oh, hello.
The mayor just had a great joke.
Sorry, we I did.
I had a very good joke, but it was he missed it a little bit..
Well, nothing to joke about this, but the question, I'm a little confused, Ted, about the president and Putin and the summit.
Now, I know yesterday it started off with Putin was meeting with, I guess, some of Trump's people, right?
And he said...
And the president said, the president had reported that, that Putin wanted a meeting.
Yep.
He spoke, after he spoke to his people, he calls Zelensky and they apparently agreed that a meeting would be a good idea.
I don't know what terms or whatever.
Then last night I thought they confirmed that there would be a meeting.
The Kremlin did not.
No, no, no.
Today, I don't know.
I was listening to him, and it sounded like there was going to be a meeting, but then he said, they asked him, well, you know, tomorrow's the deadline for imposing the massive subcontinent.
And his answer to that, I thought he had actually put that off until the meeting.
I thought that.
But today he said, well, it's up to Putin.
Sounded like tomorrow is still the deadline.
So I don't know if that means it's up to Putin going through with the meeting or whatever.
Or if Putin's going to ask for too much time, he's going to say no.
But there is a little uncertainty to it.
And they haven't said a date or a place.
That's right.
Is he going to go to Moscow and take a look at all those big bubbles that he once said he might bomb?
That's right.
And I believe that the Russians have offered, they've proposed the UAE as one potential site.
That would be certainly a, the UAE would be a better, a better, more neutral place than Qatar in the sense that Qatar, despite the fact that I think he wants to patch things up with Qatar, and I hope he does, because Qatar was a good friend before the new, the new emir who has swung too far to sucking up to the extremists.
But at any event, although the last couple of months he seems to be Since Trump made his visit there, he seems like he's been 100% in the decisions.
But in any event, I think the UAE is a little more neutral.
Yeah, that'd be a good place to do it, halfway.
I mean, it's a fair thing.
I mean, I don't see why one of them can't go to the other one city.
I mean, I guess if the president went there, it would look like he was conceding.
And if Putin came here, it also might be a little too much of a media.
At least the media has to travel there.
You can't imagine the surge.
Imagine if he came to Washington.
I mean, we wouldn't be able to even get a flight there.
I mean, Bush hosted him.
at his Crawford Ranch, correct?
What?
Bush hosted Putin in Crawford, Texas.
Imagine if he did it in Palm Beach, kind of small.
Imagine if he did it in Palm Beach, Carlisle, Lago.
Which he has met world leaders there, right?
Yeah, he met Z there, Zhijinme.
And I'm sure he travels with quite the entourage, right?
I'm guessing.
But it wasn't as...
The world attention wasn't on it, maybe.
Everyone's watching this.
This is...
Now, Kennedy and Khrushchev didn't meet during the Cuban missile crisis.
They were on the phone.
The confrontations were on the phone.
Interesting.
In fact, they resolved it a very smart strategy in which they literally had a letter from Khrushchev agreeing to the terms.
And then they had a statement from one of the representatives, either at the UN or in the foreign office, challenging it.
And the latter was the one challenging it.
And they came to Kennedy and his brother and they said, well, let's respond to that.
I think it was Robert who said, why don't we ignore that?
And why don't we just respond to the letter?
That's just a statement.
This is a letter with Khrushchev's name on it.
Right.
He said, well, that comes, this comes after.
He said, well, things like that happen, right?
We can't be faulted for responding to the thing we have in writing.
Right.
Which they did., and apparently there must have been, it's never been resolved that I can see in Russian history.
People have written about this, but no one's really resolved quite what happened.
But there probably was a split, like we have often, between those who wanted to go to war and those who said, Come on, you better agree with the guy, he's being reasonable.
And Khrushchev was probably on the latter side, although his people eventually dropped him were probably on the other side.
And so he sent the letter off, and when he got the answer, we agreed to it.
And he turned to Shibron.
And it was a great moment because I was a kid then.
Diplomacy.
and i was in the rotc at the time i was already thinking well don't have to let me in now with my bad ears because they're gonna need me um and um so well we have some comments from the president if we want to play him from the oval office today yeah let's see what he says does putin have to meet and before you and putin have to meet or you hope no Are you willing to,
that's actually important because the president, President Putin said this morning, he was pretty dismissive of this idea of meeting with who was?
I don't know.
I didn't hear about meeting with him.
He doesn't have to meet with Zelensky.
Is that what you're saying?
No, he doesn't.
No.
No.
So what do you think they'd like to meet with me?
They would like to meet with me and I'll do whatever I can to stop the killing.
So last month they lost 14,000 people killed last month.
Every week is 4,000 or 5,000 people.
So I don't like long waits.
I think it's a shame.
And they're mostly soldiers.
They're Ukrainian and Russian soldiers and some people from the cities where missiles are lobbed in and you'll lose 35, 40 people a night, which is terrible.
But no, mostly it's soldiers and you're talking about.
On average, 20,000 a month.
20,000 people are dying a month, young, generally young people, soldiers.
It is, now I know him, and I think you've probably all gotten to know him watching him.
You can see what's motivating him.
I mean, a lot of people are trying to figure out, you know, is he an interventionist, which sometimes he sounds like?
Is he an isolationist, which sometimes he sounds like?
Which is what a president should be.
President should be neither.
You know, know when to hold them and know when to fold them.
That's what a president should be.
Right?
So.
So I think if people are wondering why is he giving Khrushchev, how do you like that?
Why is he giving Putin the extra?
It's to save those lives.
He's not a prophet of what's going to work and what's not going to work.
You've got to try.
And if there's a chance of it's working, and the fact is that both, we're in the hands now of two people.
that are very different.
One has a moral base.
You can see his reaction to people dying.
And I've seen Putin's reaction to people dead and dying.
And there's no re doing now is just, I don't even know if it helps him.
I mean, if he's going to take more of Ukraine, well, then go take it.
But to kill 35 civilians a night just for the hell of it, he's not going to convince Ukraine to submit to him by killing 35 people a night.
He's just taking their lives for nothing and cutting off families that he's never met.
It's obviously a man with no conscience.
What you're looking at is a man with a conscience, but also a man who understands his role in keeping us safe.
And you've got to balance those two things.
So this could be, up until now, the most important meeting that he's going to have.
And it would rank with one of the three or four most important meetings we've had at Russia, including when it was the Soviet Union.
The Reykjavik meeting probably is the one before this that was extraordinarily important.
Kennedy and Khrushchev had a meeting after the Cuban Missile Crisis.
that led to really significant gains and reductions in nuclear weapons, which we quite conscientiously did for about 10 years.
That's all ended.
But they've never been increased to the massive levels they were before.
And then after the Cold War was over, we were able to get more accurate measure.
We had exaggerated the amount of weapons that the Russians had.
So when we were making demands on them for reductions, it really was from a much higher base.
So the reductions are much tougher on them.
So I think...
I think this meeting will take place.
I think you cannot ignore the possibility that Putin is playing for time.
Now, it's really silly because it's not going to be silly for the people who die in that period of time.
So please don't think that.
I mean, as a result of his taking more time, he's going to kill more people.
And it's not going to mean anything.
it's not going to affect the final result.
The questions here are quite I'm going to put them on a little piece of paper and here's the test.
Is Ukraine going to agree to any form of permanent Russian occupation of the territory they took.
Is Russia willing to give back all or some of the territory they took?
That's part one of the discussion, the territory.
Number two, how does Ukraine assure itself that now that we have peace, you're not just going to do it again, particularly after Trump is out of office?
Because it seems like, I mean, I would say that.
You've done three attacks on the four presidents, and the only one that ever restrains you is this guy and the only one that ever can bring you to a table to negotiate even if you're lying about the negotiation is him so when he's not around what are you going to be you're going to become crazy and aggressive again so we have to assure our people this never happens to them again that's a reasonable request from zelensky and a reasonable request from the ukrainian people so that would mean they need they need to to to to to make permanent some kind
of security arrangement a promise from russia isn't what the paper is written on they already have a promise from russia not to do this based on giving up their nuclear weapons so i mean i i would just laugh at that.
So the real question is, are they going to, are they willing, are they willing, both of them, are they willing to trade land, which means they've got to meet somewhere in the middle is Ukraine willing to allow Russian occupation is Russia willing to give back some of what it took by invasion I think if you don't get a balance like that you can't resolve this And
I think if the balance was that Russia didn't have to give anything back, this would be viewed as a great victory of Putin over Trump, over the United States, which is not a good thing.
Actually, it's an extraordinarily bad thing.
So I think that's the turning point here.
And the one that has to be.
And to do that, it seems to me from the outside, again, that more pressure, more has to be at stake for Putin than has been put at stake.
So far, he's been able to avoid everything.
by just saying, oh, you know, we're interested in peace.
Give us a little more time.
And then his people put out proposals that are absurd, proposals that nobody could agree to.
Also, you have to note that they are pretty ruthlessly attacking Ukraine.
Now, maybe they have been throughout, and we didn't pay as much attention because we're going on all the time.
And there was some logic to it then.
But now we're theoretically ending a war.
So why do you kill more people?
Leader of a country who has a conscience, even if he...
Putin is a maximalist.
Let me kill as many people as possible give me a little more time so i have two more weeks to kill more people there's no reason to kill anybody right now and for a guy who protested he's some kind of orthodox christian i don't know what kind of orthodox christian he is you're gonna meet an awful lot of people up there that uh that he killed so trump trump when questioned about this yesterday and today um gave somewhat of um Not conflicting answers.
I think his answers reflected the truth of the situation we're in.
Is the meeting going to take place?
Good chance, yes.
Are we going to be able to resolve this?
And then his answers there were, well, I haven't been able in the past.
That doesn't sound like he's going into it with great optimism that this is going to work, but it has to be done to get to the next step.
I think that's more the reality of things.
And then the question is, it's going to be him and Putin.
Will it include Zelensky?
What do you think, Ted?
So whether or not he, let's say they set up a meeting and let's say they pick a neutral side like the UAE or whatever, Switzerland, whatever.
Is it a one-on-one summit?
Trump and Putin, or is it Trump, Putin, and Zelensky?
And again, on that, he's been not definitive, but he said he would entertain the idea of all three.
That would be.
Yeah.
So if if if Putin would agree to that, wouldn't that be Putin kind of.
Is he actually trying to get this thing to a, is he trying to get an off-ramp to end this thing?
Or is he just simply playing this out as long as he can?
I mean, there is also a difference in how they interpret what has to be done.
Putin sees a division between resolving the war and improving and fixing the American-Russian relationship.
Trump and the Trump administration have said they're all part of the same package.
So that would, if that were the case, that would naturally lead to a two-part.
So Zelensky would be part of the discussion that involved Ukraine, and then Trump and Putin would be able to discuss the other issues.
That's a little bit of a false division because it's unrealistic to say that the situation in Ukraine doesn't affect our bilateral relationship.
That's a big impact on it.
Right.
Because a Russian total victory there would be a great defeat for the United States.
And so the Kremlin is reporting that preparations are ongoing and that this meeting could happen as soon as next week.
That's the latest we have, of course.
That's what all those arms deals are about.
A lot of those arms that we talked about that, even some that we sold the other day to NATO countries.
I think a lot of them were shipped even before they were sold.
I mean, we've been shipping arms to Ukraine.
There was about a one week period where we stopped.
And that was only certain arms but if they get to go ahead they've got an awful lot of arms to use that have been stock stacked up so let's see what happens i want to make a i think the key statement from trump to understand his evaluation of is and he's not you know he's he's he's he's a journal optimist right i've been disappointed before with this one that sounds like a guy that's pretty damn upset Well,
he was also asked whether the deadline was still standing for the sanctions in reference to Russia, and the president deferred to Putin to make that call.
The president said, quote, we're going to see what he has to say.
That's going to be up to Putin.
Yeah, I don't know.
I don't think we know enough to know what the operative position is, what's going to change it.
But I guess agreeing to a meeting is one of them, right?
I think it also puts pressure on Trump to decide this quickly and not put it on the more people he kills.
Because he said, well, the more time you give him, the more people he's going to kill.
i mean you almost have to say it's got to be unbelievable on a president i don't want a president to do how to work on two wars at once.
But we have some critical points coming up in the whole situation in Israel and Hamas in particular.
So the president made two decisions, well, he didn't make two decisions, but he took two actions yesterday that almost seemed to be in conflict with each other.
But if you put them together, you can figure out what his policy is.
One was the U.S. is going to take over the humanitarian distribution of food.
The U.S. is going to take it over and not use the U.N. as we did for a long time, except they turned out to be an agent of Hamas.
So one could say parts of the UN are a terrorist organization.
Now one couldn't just say that they are.
And then Israel has attempted and Hamas boxed them to the extent that we've attempted.
They haven't given us access to a lot of places.
So I'm sure that Netanyahu is completely frustrated by the fact that the starvation of the Hamas people.
of the Gaza people has to do with Hamas.
The Jews, the Israelis have no objection to their getting food.
They do have objection to being shot when they' leave it for Hamas to give it out, they don't give it out.
That's just the truth that the distorted, lying, communist, left-wing, horrible press doesn't tell you.
I wouldn't say I'm surprised, but I think you start to get to see how this is going to resolve itself
And you never know if those are real or those reactions are to keep their extremist street quiet.
And a lot of them are, not real.
So there seemed to be no big objection.
If anything, more of it's up to him if he wants to occupy Gaza.
I mean, if you think about it, there's no, nobody else is recommending a better solution.
The president's recommendation, nobody took up.
I mean, he said that the other Arab countries should step up and take a large portion of this population so we can re reconstitute Gaza as a really first-class state, not a state that is riddled with corruption and overwhelmed by terrorism.
There's no point creating another terrorist state, is there, unless you're a crazy, idiotic, anti-American, anti-common sense, anti-human life Democrat.
I mean, all you have to do is really sit down with the president of Jordan and the president of Egypt and say, do you want a Palestinian state?
Well, they would say for the record, yes.
Why would you want a Palestinian state when you won't take any?
I mean, why should Israel have on its border a group of people that you won't take into Jordan or Egypt?
That would be the answer.
The answer is they would like to see the Palestinian question just gone.
Because they really ultimately, although they've come to terms with it, deep in their...
not the general population are saying oh that's too much of a burden it can't be done we can't well they're already occupying 75 of it That's got to be just ridiculous left-wing horseshit.
Of course, if I lived in Israel, I would want the Israeli military, certainly in the next couple of years as Gaza things settle down in Gaza and the West Bank I'd want a great deal of security of my own and not trust anybody else I sure wouldn't trust the Europeans I mean they want to establish they want to establish a terrorist state on on their border so that seems to be that seems
to be moving in that direction and Hamas does not seem any more ready to agree to the this is the same thing that has prevented solving this problem for the last 30 years.
Hamas will not agree to recognize a Jewish state because one of the one of the major pillars of that religion is to wipe out the Jewish religion either by extermination, conversion or the special category of submission, which means taking money from them.
That's the organized crime aspect of Muhammad.
So we're going to be right back and when we come back we'll talk about how Some of these economists that predicted the end of the world and the depression by now because of Trump's tariffs have turned out to be wrong.
So why aren't they being held accountable so we don't pay attention to them anymore?
We'll be right back Whether it's being a weekend where you're spending time with your family, feeling your best is the key to doing the things you love.
That's why I'm excited to tell you about Nirvanta.
It's a natural solution designed to help you stay active and live well naturally.
Nirvanta is a topical blend of all natural essential oils like frankincense, myrrh, and a proprietary gold standard plant stalk extract.
It's perfect for your hands, feet, knees, back, or anywhere else that needs a little extra care.
Use Nirvanta proactively as part of your daily maintenance routine and you're guaranteed you're going to feel the difference.
Simply massage Nirvanta in for at least 60 seconds, two to three times a day to get the best results.
And if you're not completely satisfied, you get your money back.
No questions asked.
There's simply no risk and no reason not to try Nirvanta today.
Right now you get 15% off with code Lindell exclusively at Nirvantahealth.com.
So stop reaching out for that medicine cabinet.
Get Nirvanta instead and experience the difference.
Go to Nirvantahealth.com.
Use code Lindell to get 15% off today.
Nirvanta Health.
Live well naturally.
Friends, we all know the truth.
Big farmer and the federal bureaucracy have made a mess of health care in this country.
And boy, that's that's an understatement.
President Trump signed an executive order to bring prices down.
And that's a great step.
But we know that real change takes time.
There's one pharmacy that is already stepping up.
I want to tell you about all family pharmacy.
They're not waiting.
They're taking action now with a summer sale that gives you the power to take control of your health.
Right now, through the end of June, you get 20 percent off site wide.
insurance required.
Did you hear that?
20% off.
Site wide.
No insurance required.
They work with licensed doctorstors in all 50 states and they ship fast straight to your door.
Whether it's ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, methylene blue, antibiotics, emergency kits, or your daily prescriptions.
This is the time to stock up.
If you believe in medical freedom, if you're tired of waiting for someone else to fix things, do what I do.
Take action.
Go to allfamilypharmacy.com slash Lindell.
and use promo code LINDEL20 LINDEL20 for 20% off your entire order.
That's allfamilypharmacy.com Lindell.
Promo code Lindell20.
Let's protect our families, defend our freedom, and make America healthy again together.
With everybody talking about making America healthy again, I thought today would be a great day to talk to all my fellow patriots about the importance of making your homes healthy again.
Well, we have proudly partnered with Airwaterhealing.com and their revolutionary whole home air purification system.
The V3 from Airwater Healing does 3,000 square feet.
of purification it eliminates dust mold viruses and odors but here's the part I love they require no filters to ever be changed and virtually no maintenance whether you suffer from asthma allergies seasonal bronchitis or just want to protect your family from the flu or even greater threats Don't wait to get your V3 from Airwaterhealing.com today.
Use code Lindell for 20% off in savings and free shipping.
That's promo code Lindell at Airwaterhealing.com.
The last time President Trump was in office, gold soared 50% and silver went up a huge 53%.
Americans who invested in silver and gold during Donald Trump's first presidency are very happy that they did it.
And right now, gold continues to soar to the highest numbers in history.
These gains are just an appetizer for what's to come.
Some market analysts are saying that gold is predicted to rise another 30% in the next year alone.
So now's the time to invest in gold and silver, and that's why I partnered with Fisher Liberty Gold.
Fisher Liberty Gold is a conservative owned and operated precious.
metals investment company.
They even helped my good friend President Trump get elected through their contributions to Turning Point USA and other conservative groups.
I have dedicated my life to ensuring that people get the best sleep ever and in addition to owning my pillow I can now sleep well at night knowing that you can all protect your savings with precious metals with Fisher Liberty Gold.
With Fisher Liberty Gold you can sleep well knowing that your retirement is secure.
And if you call now you're going to receive your very own presidential gold guide and qualify for up to $20,000 in free silver.
But wait, there's more.
Call now or text medals to 26786 to receive your presidential gold guide from Fisher Liberty.
And for a limited time, I will send you a free My Pillow for qualified accounts.
This presidential gold guide from Fisher Liberty will tell you exactly why you need to own gold even while Donald Trump is president.
And just by calling in, you get a free My Pillow for a limited time for qualified accounts and up to $20,000 in free silver.
So don't wait.
Call 1-888-4-Gold-19 or text medals to 26786 today.
That's 18884 gold 19 or text medals to 26786 today to receive your free MyPillow and up to $20,000 in free silver.
The Purple Heart wasn't created for politicians or generals.
George Washington designed it for the ordinary soldier.
Those who got wounded got back up and kept fighting.
One of them was my father, U.S. Marine Nicholas Castronova, a Purple Heart recipient now interred at Arlington.
National Cemetery.
I can only imagine how proud my father would be to watch me reporting on the air from the White House on National Purple Heart Day, thirty years after he died, under a president that I believe he would have truly respected.
Fun fact, the original Purple Heart, created by then General George Washington in 1782, was actually made of cloth.
It was called the Badge of Military Merit and was the first US military award that could be earned by merit, not by rank.
It was created for the ordinary, yet extraordinary soldier.
There were others like my father, Curry T. Hayesyes, who earned ten Purple Hearts in Vietnam, and Albert Ireland, wounded nine times in World War two and Korea.
Regular men Unbreakable Spirit.
A total of 1.8 million brave American soldiers spanning all American wars have received the Purple Heart Medal.
Some recipients became household names.
NFL star Pat Tillman, actors Charles Derning, Audie Murphy and James Arness, Oliver Stone, author Kurt Vonnegut, heroes on the battlefield and beyond, and of course, the great president John F. Kennedy, who served as a lieutenant in the US Navy.
Kennedy was killed by the Purple Heart in World War two after his patrol torpedo boat was rammed and slice in half by a Japanese destroyer.
Kennedy hurt his back badly during the explosion, but swam for hours, towing a wounded crewman by clenching the man's life vest strap in his teeth, saving the man's life.
Today, President Trump honored them all with a ceremony at the White House, recognizing the sacrifice behind the scar.
Today we give our lasting thanks to you and your unbelievable families.
We want to thank you very much for being here.
It's my great honor.
The Purple Heart is not just a medal.
proof that freedom has a cost and somebody paid it.
My father wore his Purple Heart quietly.
He never boasted, never asked for praise.
He just carried it like so many others.
Today I stand in this place of honor and I speak for him.
I speak for the courage that he showed, the pain that he endured, and the silence that he kept.
This is for him and every hero like him who never asked to be called one.
Reporting for Lindell TV from the White House on National Purple Heart Day, I'm Cara Castanova.
Oh, we're so proud of her, aren't we?
Now I've known Cara for quite some time and she's a good friend and I didn't know that.
I didn't know that.
And it's really quite, It does explain a lot.
She's an extraordinarily brave and extraordinarily talented person and very dedicated and very patriotic.
But you can see that for fear that I'm going to be accused of being a racist or some kind of eugenicist, it's in the genes, huh?
From her dad to her.
Cara, congratulations.
And God bless your family and your father.
The tariff situation now, we're into it big time, and they were just wrong.
Now, one or two things is necessary.
Columbia Professor Joseph Stieglitz, Stieglitz, Stieglitz.
Stiglitz should either give back the Nobel Prize or apologize.
Or maybe show that he actually is a really bright guy and say I was wrong.
You know, here's the problem.
Even these great experts, these policies and these things are not a matter of a science that we have reduced to yes or no or objectivity.
This is a economics is a economic.
And a lot of it is instinct and a lot of it is emotion and a lot of it is unpredictability.
And when these guys, you know, throw around these titles and they come from these Ivy League Marxist schools, what they're giving you is their biased view, not a really honest evaluation of the pros and the cons.
So there's a great article in the post yesterday.
I think it was yesterday.
Could be today, but it's by John Lott, who has done some very, very great work even on voter fraud.
And John points out something that is very, very important.
And it's a very short column, so it'll take you all time to read it, and it's a very big idea.
And it's this.
What they missed is there's nothing different between a tariff and a tax.
And money is fungible, and it's all a question of how much money you're taking from people and how you're doing it, and what's the alternative impact of it.
I can show you that there's a way to tax and where you say, well, when you tax, if you lower a tax, you're going to lose money for the government.
I can show you how to lower a tax and make more money for the government, depending on what kind of, I'll give you an example.
So you lower the sales tax from 6% to 3%, and your sales go up 100%.
Now you're collecting more from 3% than you are from 6%.
This isn't a supernatural enterprise that only Joseph Stieglitz understands.
And it's quite obvious that he's not as big an expert as he thinks he is, because what he predicted would happen didn't happen, just the opposite happened.
This has had an enormously positive impact on the American economy and on the dynamics of world trade.
Nor do they seem to realize that there's there are more than one reasons one reason why you impose tariffs just like there are more than one reason why you impose a tax.
Yes, you impose it for revenue.
But we have what you call sin taxes, right?
We impose very, very heavy taxes, many, many states do on cigarettes.
We do on alcohol.
on things that we think are not good for people.
Whether we should be doing that or not, we do.
When you consider that a tariff, of course, is not an imposition on us except indirectly, then, of course, there should be a lot of considerations going into a tariff beyond economic.
It's a function of foreign policy.
What I mean by that is, so why is he raising the tariffs with India right now?
He already raised them.
He already raised them based on the inequality and unfairness.
of their taxes as opposed to ours.
I think they were sitting at about 25% and they had a deal to reduce them.
But now that they.
insist on keeping Russia rich by buying 30% of their oil, Russian oil, so that they can continue to kill innocent Ukrainians, he's hitting them with a, he already has done that.
He's hitting them with a much higher tariff.
Now, that, yes, that's going to bring money into the United States.
And it may affect prices in the United States.
But it has a value that...
It's like, oh my gosh, you know, Kennedy, Reagan spent an enormous amount of money deploying the cruise missiles.
It probably created some of the deficit and some of the debt that he promised to resolve, but he wasn't able to, because his other two promises were more important and they were somewhat inconsistent with that.
But in the long run, how much money has that meant to the United States that we got rid of the Soviet Union?
Russia's bad, but believe me, the Soviet Union was very different.
We wouldn't have allies like Poland and Hungary if the Soviet Union were around.
And there'd be an awful lot of people that from the time it ended to now that we just wouldn't be alive.
So you have to sit back and say that Trump does not use tariffs in the traditional one question analysis.
He uses them as a, sometimes as a substitute for war.
It's a lot better than war and it saves you a lot more money.
And it seems to work.
There are some countries that resist.
But you think of all that have come to the table.
And you think of all the investment he's gotten to the United States.
Without the tariffs, he wasn't getting that $100 billion from Apple.
He's got to make sure he gets it now.
Because they've been known to promise and not deliver.
But he's going to get a big chunk of it.
You can be sure of that.
That wouldn't happen.
Now, how do you offset that against the impact of the tariff?
it's not one for one, but it does have an offset.
So these Nobel laureates like Joseph Stevens never consider that.
It's like that doesn't matter.
I mean, you're so stupid, you don't understand.
I don't know.
Maybe they're not as good as they claim to be.
The other one is Justin Wolfers.
He's from the University of Michigan, Ted.
And Justin Wolfers, who's an economist at the University of Michigan, called them impressively destructive.
What a stupid statement.
I mean, what a condescending, idiotic, dumb statement.
from a guy who's supposed to be an intellectual.
Impressively destructive.
What the hell is impressively destructive?
Yeah, very, very, very, very small.
very very smart justin but i mean great choice of language uh terribly wrong about economic policy and somebody who obviously doesn't really understand the economy so maybe you should be uh predicting the weather uh there are also some right-wing economists who went after him those two guys are you know lefty lefty go let's have a let's have a special ceremony on marks his birthday Then we have George Mason's Donald Boudreau,
who had very strong opposition to it, but also didn't seem to understand it.
And the point that they're making is that the same rules and the same impact and the same effect of tariffs is the same as all taxes in the first place.
So you just got to evaluate it in comparison to all taxes.
And tariffs were at about an average of 2.4%.
The income tax, the top rate was 43.4%.
So one's going to have a lot more impact than the other.
And the other, the corporate tax was at 27.5%.
The tariff rate stood at 2.5.
So now if we push it up to 15%, it still is considerably less significant than the other taxes that we're imposing on people.
And when you look at that 15% or the 27% or the other, you have to look at the countervailing benefits it brings to not only the government, but it brings to our society.
And the tariff has a lot more positive benefits to it.
if it's orchestrated correctly and in the hands of a genius like Trump than the income tax or the corporate tax, which is pretty much just destructive.
All right.
And the only way it becomes constructive is if you make it competitive, if you know how to play with the reduction of it so that because the burden exists and you reduce the burden, you end up in more economic activity.
Democrats, what I just said to you is most of the dogs I know would understand that better than most of the professional Democrats who would go, what?
Huh?
If you want to look at a group of clowns, people, I love Texas.
You should understand that.
It's one of my, like New Hampshire.
I have a couple of really favorite states other than my own, New York, and Florida, which is now my state.
And one of them always had been New Hampshire, where I am right now.
But one of them is Texas.
I love Texas.
And I have a good friend from Texas who is a typical, wonderful, beautiful Texan.
And he is so proud of Texas like Dr. Maria is of New Hampshire.
And everything about Texas is terrific and wonderful.
And they brag about it all the time.
And that's what good New Yorkers do.
Not the ones who vote for scumbag Mandami, but good New Yorkers.
And I used to say to him, I'm very comfortable with Texans because you have kind of an arrogance like New Yorkers do.
You're very proud of where you come from.
Now that used to be true of a lot of New Yorkers.
I don't know.
That's sort of decreasing when you get the kind of people we have now.
But I don't understand these people who are running away.
How is that a strategy?
And what you make this is a big moral purpose to avoid gerrymandering and you do it all over the country.
Assume they're right.
And and Abbott is just doing this and Trump for partisan advantage.
But isn't that what you did in New York?
Isn't that what you did as as described by all the all the independent expert is the worst example ever, Illinois?
Isn't that what you do in California?
I mean, you look at the statistics we put out last night.
I'd love to look at it for other places like Michigan and whatever.
But, you know, the Republicans win forty five, forty four percent of the.
the congressional vote and they have 18 percent of the seats and you haven't whacked that up in an unfair way for partisan advantage.
Well, of course you have.
And that's that's that's that.
We're talking about Illinois and New York is not terribly different.
And California is just as bad.
So let's assume that's where Texas is headed if it isn't there already.
So before the Republicans took over, it was the other way around.
You basically couldn't get into Congress if you were a Republican.
There were only three Republicans in Illinois, and 42% of the vote in the election that elected three Republicans was for Republicans.
And there are like 17 Democrats and three Republicans.
At 44%, there should be a difference of one or two congressmen.
If it were.
if it would redistrict in a fair and impartial way.
So why are they why are they acting like silly babies over what is a political tool that's used aggressively by both political parties?
Maybe it shouldn't be.
Many people think it shouldn't.
Maybe there should be stricter laws that crooked judges can interpret their way out of.
But right now it is.
Since they do it on both sides, it sort of evens itself out.
It doesn't distort democracy.
If only one side did it and the other other didn't, it would distort democracy.
So this is the silliest thing I've seen.
And when you watch them on television, you say to yourself, oh, I can see what they're doing if they're stupid.
Every single one of them I've seen it looks like a mental midget.
Now, how about the one, how about the one, can we put her on?
I mean, this is Jolanda Jones, who described what Abbott and the others are doing there in Texas as being like the, she can't even pronounce Holocaust, Holocaust.
That's a 19.
And I will list to the hollow people because they are like, how was somebody in a position to kill them people?
Because of redistricting.
Hitler spent several years redistricting the Bundestag.
He was really terrible.
Did you know that Hitler was a big gerrymander?
Yeah, that was crazy.
Do you think she knows who Hitler is?
Well, she knows it was the Second World War.
And I think, let's listen to her.
The way they quote it here, they say very strictly what she said was, and I will list to the whole.
people cost are like how was somebody in a position to kill all them people obviously the english language kind of challenges her right i do believe we have her comments oh yeah let's listen So we're going to have that ready.
That's topic 13.
Kansas City Representative and Missouri Democratic.
No, no, no, no, no.
Let's represent her.
This is another.
Ashley Oni.
I'm from Kansas City.
This is not it.
And I am here because I stand firmly with the representatives in Texas and the senators in Texas who had to flee their state.
We didn't flee.
We didn't flee.
Well, I mean, they had to leave their state and they're claiming.
I put in.
They are claiming we're not really running away from Texas.
So somebody should have said, oh, let's see if we can examine that.
Hey, yo, yo, where are you now?
I'm in Illinois.
Well, OK.
you have to show up for work tomorrow like all of us have to do?
No, I'm a member of the legislature.
I can do whatever I want.
I can take bribes too.
So do we have our president genius?
Does she have a Nobel Prize?
Okay.
So they're working on that, getting us that clip.
But, yeah, what we just saw was another example of the Democrats showing there.
Yeah, they really are.
Thank God we saved Texas from them.
I would imagine this is going to go even further to push Texas Republican.
Well, I'm going to go on to another subject until we're ready.
And that is, we have just a few minutes.
The race in New York is beginning to become a, well, I'm not saying it is a national race now, without any doubt.
Now it was before, but Pocahontas moved it up to that level when she announced the other day that Mandami should be the face of the Democrat Party.
So I'm going to accept her challenge and make him the face of the Democrat Party.
So today it was revealed.
in a questionnaire that he filled out for, I don't know who, it doesn't matter, Staten Island Advance, that he is a very, very big opponent of charter schools.
You don't really need the questionnaire.
He's voted against charter schools consistently and aggressively, and he's made extremely derogatory statements about them, which means that, among other things, as a thoroughgoing communist, he will do everything he can to make sure that children, particularly minority children, continue to have terrible educations.
The New York City public school system is a disgrace.
It's a scoring on TES, about 50 to 75%.
percent less than when I was mayor and it wasn't doing as great as it should when I was mayor.
I didn't have control of it.
Since I left, it's gone down 50 to 75 percent and the spending has gone up about 80 percent so you can do a chart you can do a chart of all the scores reading math so let's go back to 1995 96 the score the scores uh the spending has gone like this the scores have gone like that see all that money here all that money here that was stolen by the teachers union Yeah,
That's so that you don't, a lot of that money never gets to a classroom.
It gets to making another teacher a bureaucrat.
They can work even less than four hours a day.
It means they can take two years off and get paid.
And half of that was absolutely unnecessary.
It didn't happen to the rest of the country.
And kids are probably going to be permanently disadvantaged by that so that the teachers can be the privileged members of the party.
It defies the fact that we should have realized from the very beginning that the teachers union was a terrible terrible negative force in the American democracy because it was started by a bunch of communists and conducted as a communist enterprise.
Well, speaking of communists, Mayor, we do have that clip ready.
I know we just have a minute left if you want to play it for us.
Yeah, let's play yo yo.
Yolanda Jones.
And then integration happened and everybody thought they accepted us.
They don't accept us.
They are showing us who they are.
We should believe them.
And we better have the courage to stand up.
Otherwise, we will fall for anything.
And in this country, we will be defeated, deported.
I mean, we will lose all of our rights.
And if you think it can't happen, it can.
And I will liken this to the Holocaust.
People are like, well, how did the Holocaust happen?
How is somebody in a position to kill all of them people?
Well, good people remain silent.
Or good people didn't realize that what happens to them can very soon happen to me or somebody I love.
And so you and even if you made it, man, you hav have an obligation to help people who can't because God forbid they end up targeting you and your family.
Let's take her as being in good faith.
Because of her intellectual incapacity, she's hurting people that need help seriously.
How stupid was that?
Hitler came to power through redistricting.
And if they had only...
Well, on that thought.
If you vote Democrat, you're as stupid as she is.
So pray.
We're going to end this show saying, pray for everybody in harm's way who are involved in these wars or need liberation, but pray for the people of the United States to retain our common sense and for a president who's leading us in that direction.
▲
Export Selection