All Episodes
Previous
Nov. 18, 2025 - Rudy Giuliani
01:06:12
America's Mayor Live (801): President Trump Focuses in on America's Affordability Crisis
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good evening.
This is Rudy Giuliani, and this is America's Mayor Live from Palm Beach.
If you were listening, I concluded the show on Wendell TV, Rudy Giuliani show, raising questions about Zelensky.
This is a very, very complicated message I'm about to deliver to you.
I am a supporter of Ukraine unequivocally in the war against Russia.
I believe we should have stopped, we should have stopped Russia from going into Ukraine because I also believe we have a treaty obligation to do that.
And Biden just, you know, as he did from so many others, just ignored the best interests of the United States and our treaty obligation.
And unlike many of my conservative colleagues, I believe that Ukraine and Russia and what's going on there directly bears on the national security interests of the United States, including in the bigger picture of China.
If Russia is successful, we're in a lot of trouble.
If we can defeat Russia, we go a long way in knocking the hell out of China and pushing them back and also affecting their confidence.
So please understand that as the backdrop of what I'm going to tell you.
I also think Zelensky is a major crook.
I don't think it.
I know it, because I investigated Biden up and down in Ukraine and was interfered with and blocked, including by the United States government.
Even the United States Senate wouldn't take it up and look at it because they were afraid.
But I was there, went to Ukraine.
I've seen the files myself.
There is no doubt that Zelensky is sitting on massive evidence of corruption that affects the highest levels of our government and his.
In fact, completely unjustifiably and showing what a scoundrel he is, he's sitting on evidence of huge amounts of money stolen from his people that could be recovered for the benefit of his people, but he's not doing it.
Now, is he doing that because he's afraid or is he doing it because he's making a fortune too?
I think it's probably a combination of both.
But now there's, now it's, now it's kind of coming out.
Three guys were arrested last week and they took massive amounts of money.
It was in the energy industry, which is exactly the industry that bribed the Bidens.
And the biggest company in the industry then, Burisma, gave the Biden somewhere between $10 and $20 million to fix the case against them that would have forfeited all of their money to the Ukrainian people, which should have gone to the Ukrainian people because it was stolen from them in the first place by Zelyshevsky, who at that time was probably one of the worst and the biggest oligarchs and organized criminals in Ukraine.
And he publicly had the Bidens on the payroll for a absolutely lying purpose, but it was public.
And also, Obama, and tell me Obama wasn't involved, knew it and didn't do anything about it.
You do not let your vice president son get employed by one of the biggest organized criminals in a country that bribes people if there isn't something in it for you if you're a miserable creep like Obama and you come from Chicago and we don't even know where you come from actually, Obama.
You come out of something or other.
And now when we see what's going on, what went on with Biden and we see the communists in New York and the communists on the West Coast and the communists here and the communists there, you are exactly what I thought originally.
You were a creation of, you were trained as a Marxist and an anti-colonialist, whatever the hell that is.
And for sure, as an anti-American.
And I still think your wife has only one comment about America still on record, that there was nothing good about America until the plant got elected.
You.
So I don't know.
A lot of people have a lot of strange mythology and stuff about Biden by Obama.
Never been fooled by him.
Never been fooled by him.
From the day he emerged, it was an absolute joke.
And Zelensky.
Zelensky's got lots of evidence.
I can't say it goes back to you, Obama.
I can say I'd love to look at it because it didn't start with Biden.
I know that.
And if it didn't start with Biden, who did it start with?
Because it started in about 2010, 2011.
Who was president in 2010, 2011?
Prince Obama.
King Obama.
Did you ever hear the Franklin Templeton Bank?
Franklin Templeton.
Yeah, I wish Obama here is just because maybe he'll sweat a little that I know all about the Franklin Templeton Bank, Barry, Barry and Michelle.
That's what they were known as at one time.
Barry?
Barry, yeah, Barry Obama.
In school, he was Barry Obama in school.
That was when he was listed as a Christian.
When he was a Muslim, which he was also listed as in school, he was Barack Hussein Obama.
So Zelensky has these three people arrested.
Nobody asks, was Zelensky involved in this?
I mean, these guys were taking millions of dollars in bribes all during a war going on.
Wow.
Now it gets really close to home.
The guy presently arrested Mendick is Zelensky's business partner.
They own the production company, Vartal95, which is the one that made him famous in a stupid show where he played in a comedy, where he played a prime minister trying to deal with crooked oligarchs, hopefully better than he does.
And so his guy is now accused of paying bribes and asking for kickbacks for government contracts from the government of his business partner.
It's starting to get a little close, babes.
Sounds like we're looking at possible, looking at a possible bag man, like what Hunter was.
Mendick co-owned the entertainment company with the president and according to not our president, with the Ukrainian.
With the illegitimate president of Ukraine, because he hasn't been elected.
He's in office by, he says something the law of Ukraine allows him to hang over because he's been at a republic.
That's what they do in South America, right?
Your time is up.
They bring the military in and you get your third term and then the fourth and then you become like Putin.
Right.
Where are the Democrats?
Where are the Democrats who here in our own country talk constantly about democracy and protecting the elections?
Democracy.
Where are they on Ukraine's...
Yeah, but where are they in the files of Ukraine?
I will tell you a comment that I'm allowed to repeat from an honest investigator, of which there are many, by the way.
When we say this about Ukraine, can we please make a distinction between the oligarchs and the politicians and the wonderful people of Ukraine?
That's important, right?
It's a country that's pretty darn well educated.
It's a country that's extraordinarily industrious.
It's a country of a large number of very religious people, different types of Christian, but very religious.
Right.
Now, the country deserves a lot better than the horrible governments they've had and horrible governments.
Also, the Soviet Union and Hitler.
I mean, Stalin focused on them and tried.
Stalin tried to do a genocide on them.
That's right.
I don't know.
He killed millions and millions of Ukrainians, and it was covered up.
It's covered up in England.
The Communist Party in England covered up.
There's a great movie.
I'll get you the name of it that you can watch.
You get all the details about it.
The man-made famine back in the early 1930s.
Is that what you're talking about?
Yeah.
I mean, there were a lot of collaborators with Hitler and with Stalin and the English government, which is one of the reasons why Churchill was excluded as much as he was.
He was the only one who focused clearly on how evil both of them were.
Wow.
Isn't that and warned Roosevelt after the war, you know, we only made an alliance with Uncle Joe because we have, not because we liked him.
He's just as dangerous as, and Roosevelt didn't listen.
And then Roosevelt died and Truman completely overrated president.
Not at the time.
He was hated at the time, but the left-wing press has really overrated him.
I submit that if Dewey had been president and not him, like an American, there'd be no red China.
Wouldn't exist.
They'd have been wiped out by MacArthur.
When they came in to North Korea with their troops in 1950, 49, 50, 51, they were a decimated country.
The Chinese Communist Party didn't have two pennies to put together.
They had been in a brutal war with Japan, in which if it weren't for us, Japan would have destroyed them.
And then they were in a brutal war with Chiang Kai-shek, who ran the Nationalist Party, which actually controlled China, and they overthrew him.
He fled to what is now Taiwan, and they had just taken over the government, having gone through 12 years of brutal war.
We had escaped using about a million men that we were going to use in Japan to occupy them and take them over because we used two atomic weapons.
That's why Truman justified using the atomic weapons.
He was told we would kill a million Americans if we had to occupy Japan because the Japanese would fight to the last Japanese before they give up the island.
Do you agree with that decision?
I agree with the decision.
I think the million is exaggerated, but I agree with the decision.
I think you're talking about 300 or 400,000 more Americans that would have been killed.
And there's no reason why we should spare Japan having attacked us that way.
And it turns out that those atomic bombs killed less people than a lot of other things that wars did.
And their after effects, their after effects were much more limited than they were thought to be.
I would have made the same decision he made.
But remember, that was a decision affecting Japan, not communists.
What did Truman do before that?
He allowed Russia to enter the war against Japan.
In between the two bombings, we bombed Hiroshima.
The next day, Russia declared war on Japan so they could get a peace of Japan, so that Uncle Joe, possibly a bigger killer than Hitler, could get a peace of Japan.
Now, why is that?
Because of the communist advisors around Truman.
What I'm saying to you now is very highly controversial, but absolutely true.
And becoming more and more and more documented.
And President Trump should go back and release a lot of those files.
And you're going to find out that a lot of our policy starting with, well, really starting heavily with the Roosevelt administration, was run by the Soviet Union.
Right.
So you don't give the Soviets, you know, Russia takes so much credit for World War II these days.
Real credit for World War II.
There's another bunch of communist bullshit.
So they don't is that they had to withdraw hundreds of thousands of troops from the Soviet, the Germans, how to withdraw.
Some people say as many as a million troops.
The exact numbers that they historically list is 800,000.
He had to withdraw 800 troops from fighting Russia to stop Eisenhower from entering Berlin.
He put him in a place called the Bulge, which is really a large part of the border between France and Germany.
And we didn't know they were there.
It was done surreptitiously in a brilliant maneuver, by the way.
The German army was an enormously skilled opponent.
They moved anywhere from 800,000 to a million men across Europe.
And we had underestimated what we were going to face by half, which is why Eisenhower announced we'll be in Berlin by Christmas.
And we were still fighting for Berlin on the 4th of July.
And probably would have had a harder time taking it if we hadn't had Patton come up through the south of France with an army that hadn't even fought.
So is this the and one and just won every battle and could have taken Berlin.
This is the Battle of the Bulge right here.
Yeah.
And the movement.
That's Nazi Germany in red.
That's the U.S. in blue.
So that's the first advances that they made in two years for Germans.
See how we have to increase the number of troops?
We went from about 500, we had to put 200,000 more in.
Now we're starting to bring them down.
That's brilliant.
I've never seen that.
That's brilliant.
Yeah.
So what did it start off at about 500,000?
The number of troops there?
260, but quickly up to 300.
You're going in the other direction now?
Yeah.
No, this is the same direction.
Waterloo.
So Brussels is up here on the upper left.
And then Bonn, so Germany's the red.
And this is just the date is of in the upper right.
So this is December 29th, 1944.
This is New Year's Eve.
But notice how we had to increase the number of our troops.
We're now at 700,000.
We almost had to double the number of troops to what we thought we were going to need.
And Germany's losing troops.
Yeah.
A lot of those troops you see right there were taken right out of Russia.
To keep the number.
Yeah.
And the German generals, the German generals stopped about halfway through that, halfway through what you're watching, the German generals stopped reinforcing because they knew they were going to lose.
And of course, the generals, a lot of the German generals wanted to overthrow Hitler.
A lot of them have been killed, including the two leaders of the German army.
So it was very, very strange.
So when Russia says we won the war, the fact is they would not have won the war if America had, none of them would have won the war if America hadn't entered.
If America had stayed and said, we're not going to go help Europe, we're not going to go help Russia.
They'd all be speaking German now.
That's amazing.
A person who knows that and would tell you that if he were alive, and when we go visit him in heaven, he'll tell us that.
But we'll continue our show in heaven, hopefully, after I get out of purgatory, which I'm going to have to spend some time in.
So Zelensky partner is now heavily involved in this with kickbacks.
And the question is, it's very, very often the case when your business partner is collecting kickbacks, they're collecting them.
And you're in public office, they're collecting them for you.
And then there are all these rumors about property that he has.
And I don't know, this is probably not the best time to investigate them, but it should be done because it could be one of the reasons why they haven't been more effective.
And they have been pretty effective.
But if a lot of this money is getting diverted, they'd have been more effective, right?
So Michelle Obama says that women cannot be elected president right now.
America's not ready to elect a woman.
Do you think that, Ted?
I mean, you said it.
You said at best, Mayor.
You said at best.
It's not that America's not ready to elect a woman.
It's just that, you know, they're not ready to elect a corrupt one or one that just.
Honestly, if you think, right, that the 16 election was honest.
Right.
Okay.
If you think that.
And we had a popular election system.
Right.
Right.
Hillary Clinton to be the president.
Well, no, no, no, no.
Right.
Because President Trump would have ran a different campaign.
I know he did.
He would have.
But if you just look at the numbers.
Because I hate Halloween.
I think you make that point all the time.
This popular vote thing is a bunch of garbage.
Because we, that was particularly a case where they did it.
They didn't make the same mistake in 20, but in 16, they ran as if the election was going to be decided by the popular vote.
So they didn't go back to certain states.
Michigan.
Yeah.
They didn't go back to certain states.
And we ended the campaign in Michigan.
Genius idea.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, Bannon was focused, and so was the president, on the electoral vote.
So when he had to make a choice as to the last couple of places to go, you're going to say, well, why did he go to New Hampshire?
Because he realized that three electoral votes might decide the election.
They knew it would be like this.
And they made the decision based on in the swing states that we have a possibility of winning.
Let's put them in order of where we have the best possibility of winning.
One, two, three, four, five, six, seven.
Well, we got to drop out the bottom three.
All the time.
And we got tired for four states.
So you had to drop out Minnesota, if I remember correctly.
Yeah, yeah, I dropped out Minnesota because there's a better chance.
I remember the decision.
The decision was somewhere out west, I'm guessing.
Michigan is a better possibility than Minnesota.
Pennsylvania is a better possibility of Minnesota.
Wisconsin.
And I'm the one who argued really hard for Pennsylvania.
They don't want to go to Pennsylvania.
They said Pennsylvania, like New Jersey, fools us all the time.
Wow.
We think we're going to win.
They flirt with us and then the unions come in and they kill us.
And I said, I said, this time it's different.
Trump is a perfect candidate for Pennsylvania.
He's going to win Pennsylvania.
And you know Pennsylvania.
Yeah, that's why I know he won in 20.
No way he's going to lose Pennsylvania.
Was it Dick Parsons who lost?
No way when you consider that Pennsylvania is affected by three things big time.
The loss of the steel industry, the loss of the coal industry, all done by Democrats making deals overseas, right?
Right.
Crime, big time.
And they are the only state that I can think of in recent times that's elected a Democrat who was pro-life.
So the pro-choice issue, even though it hurts him in the suburbs of Philadelphia, not so much in the suburbs of Pittsburgh, doesn't resonate in the rest of the state.
So Amish country.
It operates a teeny bit.
I'm going to say not like quite like a southern state, but a little bit like a southern state.
And of course, you have Roman Catholics.
You have think like Indiana.
Oh, even more.
Even more.
That area of Pennsylvania is very religious.
I mean, I guess you're right.
Indiana's mixed up north.
You got a lot of Catholics and you got a lot of evangelical Protestants in that area.
And a little bit of Amish.
Oh, yeah.
And by the way, Trump got the Amish to vote.
Right.
They never voted before.
Why do you think they were voting?
Because morally, his platform appealed to them.
And the Democrats had gone, you know, they would consider the Democratic platform satanic.
Right.
So when you only win by the point is, in many ways, whether she won, didn't win, that was a representative number of votes that a woman got on which you could win.
It wasn't as if she ran and she got, you know, 20 million votes.
A lot of votes for a woman who, let's face it, was an awful candidate.
Right.
Imagine if she were a good candidate.
We probably wouldn't have won.
Right.
And being a female and the way the Democrat Party stresses factors like that, if anything, you would think that would help her in a Michigan.
Nobody likes her.
And when she appears, she probably loses votes.
And think of the pressure on some people to give it to Kamala Harris in 2024.
What did I say in 2024?
The more Kamala appears, the more votes are going to go down.
You told me that three years ago when I met you when I started.
Very few political strategists will agree with this.
A couple of geniuses have actually utilized it who are political strategists.
That you have for you.
Yeah, but they used it for other people too.
There are certain candidates who lose votes when they campaign, particularly ones that are highly, that are highly pushed by the press in a phony way.
For example, Kamala consistently in her campaigns, if you look at her, always won or lost.
Well, she always won narrowly when she won.
When she lost, she got creamed.
And the reason is she would start as the perimeter favorite.
Even as attorney general, she won very tight.
And the more she appeared, the more people would say, she can't even talk.
So the best way to run her would be the David Garth way.
He never let her appear and put on citizen ads, which Garth invented, which because he ran people who couldn't talk.
And they would say, oh, I know Camilla Harris.
She was the best attorney general that ever existed.
She saved my life.
I know Camela Harris.
She was the district attorney.
She got the worst criminals.
I know Camela Harris.
She goes to my church.
She's very religious.
And then, and Camela would say, this is Camela Harris, hopefully.
Or she'd probably say, this is Russia.
And Russia is a big country.
And Ukraine's a small.
No, this is Camela Harris.
And what am I saying?
And I agree with this message.
That's all she had to say.
Now, she might have had a hard time with that.
Hillary is an unpleasant human being.
I mean, she's an unpleasant human being personally.
So speaking.
It comes through.
It comes through.
Bill, on the other hand, Bill, I mean, she may be a better person than Bill or a worse person.
I have no idea.
But Bill comes across as a very charming, likable guy.
She comes across as a pain in the, you know what?
I would agree with that.
And there are men like that, too.
I mean, there are men who appear and they can't look at Schumer.
Speaking of election ads, you think Schumer got elected on his campaign?
Schumer got elected on money.
Child feels threatened here.
Learning is replaced by fear, and parents are left dreading the unthinkable.
That's why Rudy is driving drug dealers off school grounds away from kids.
And Rudy Giuliani strongly supported Rudy Cruz's fight to expel students who carry guns or use weapons.
That's a Garth ad.
Incredibly, on this vote to expel these dangerous students, Ruth Messinger's appointee was the only one to vote.
I got to go back to 89.
This is a 97 one.
By this point, I mean, that's like Schumann that there ever was one.
That wasn't done because I was too stupid to do that.
I was probably too lazy to do it.
I won that election by 18.
How about this show?
Oh, you're right.
You didn't talk in that one.
That was David Garth.
David Garth.
That's a David Garth.
Yeah, we got to get you talking.
That's what he would do.
I hate to use it for myself.
That's what he would do if he was stupid.
Because he thought I was stupid.
Well, here's a night.
Okay, we got to recover from that.
Here's a 1993.
This was a Garth ad, too.
Put it on.
I think I.
I know, yeah.
I got to push these buttons here.
Here we go.
This is 1993.
All right.
So this is the second time he ran, the first time he won.
Rudy.
He's honest and he's very kind.
When I first met Rudy, he seemed strong and at the same time gentle.
And I liked that.
I thought, this is the kind of man I want to be the father of my children.
And Rudy is such a great dad.
I wish all those people who think he's so tough could see him with children.
That's the real Rudy.
See, that's smart.
Rudy Giuliani for mayor.
That's also a Garth ad.
And then I know exactly what he was doing.
That was an ad that was dealing with my single biggest negative.
Too tough.
Too tough.
It puts you in your young family.
If you took away the too tough thing, I was going to win by 12%.
If you put it in, I was winning by about two.
So let's listen to Andrew Norris.
Let's fast forward to Trump's press conference.
Yes, this is where he talked about the challenge of the World Cup.
That's right.
And the opportunity of the World Cup, which will be a great, great event.
30, 35, maybe more matches in the United States.
At least have been the equal of the Super Bowl in terms of audience and both there and internationally.
Then when you get to the end internationally, it dwarfs the Super Bowl.
Right.
So this is today, today at the White House.
This is the president had members of FIFA, you know, Secretary of State, Secretary of Homeland Security, and a lot of people recognize the next person.
Much more important, and honestly, without her work, without Secretary of State Rubio's work in the State Department, this would not happen.
Without your leadership and your vision, this would not have happened.
I think two key points, one that the Secretary of State already highlighted, this is a welcoming message to the world without going around the safety and security procedures.
It's so key to make sure this World Cup is safe and secure, and the White House Task Force is working every day to make sure that's the case.
And also, as Congressman LaHood said, the economic benefits for American businesses, both small and large, from a $30 billion event like this.
So, really, thanks to all the White House task force members, from Secretary Rubio to Secretary Noam, to notice of funding opportunities that went out to the cities and states last month were really key from the safety and security perspective.
To Deputy Chief of Staff Luna, who is integral in this whole process, to the White House task force members that are standing in the back of the room today and that couldn't be here without your hard work, this would not have happened.
And I really can't thank you enough for really the best team I've ever been a part of.
And also to FIFA, to the President Johnny Infantino, my good friend Carlos Cordillero, your desire to make this World Cup the best yet, it's contagious.
Every single day I come in and think, what can we do to make this even better?
And, Mr. President, your vision more than anything.
I think it takes a unique visionary to be able to go and see a sporting event and realize that this can be one of the greatest cultural events in world history.
And I think there are very few people aside from the 45th and 47th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump, that can do that undertaking.
So thank you.
Thank you very much, Chrissy.
Well, Mr. President, thank you for Andrew.
I love her.
I love her.
She's a great secretary.
Yep, we got to say that, man.
So that's the same little kid you saw swinging a bat.
Isn't that something?
The same little kid you saw swinging about.
Or he learned well.
Taking over my inauguration as mayor.
Yeah, that was another thing.
At that time, he thought he was sworn in as mayor, too.
Right.
He thought we were joint mayors because he campaigned with me all the time.
Right.
So what is the poor kid going to do with politics?
I mean, he has it in his that's right.
He used to go around with me every place I give a speech.
And then he, and then my inaugural speech, I had gone over with him.
I used to take care of him at night.
I would go over it with him.
And he was actually interrupting me where he thought I wasn't reading the script because I tend to extemporaneous.
And so where I wasn't going to describe a point, say, Daddy, Daddy, here.
Here's it.
So we'll take a show.
William Giuliani, I, Rudolph William Giuliani, do solemnly swear, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of New York, the Constitution of the state of New York, and the charter of the city of New York, and the charter of the city of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of mayor of the city of New York, the office of mayor of the city of New York, according to the best of my ability,
according to the best of my ability.
So help me, God.
So help me God.
What was that?
Did you see him say thank you?
Yeah.
He thought he was sworn in.
I asked him afterwards, why'd you do that, Andrew?
He said, Well, I thought I was supposed to do it.
You went over the whole speech with me.
I thought I was supposed to do it with you.
That's why I couldn't get mad at him.
It's probably my fault.
Which, Jonathan, let me forget.
She was very upset because people criticized us for being that people had two views.
He was just a very energetic, very interested young kid who, you know, just very enthusiastic.
The others were the parents are spoiling him.
The parents let him do this.
They let him take over the terrible parents.
And she was much more sensitive about it.
And I used to say, screw him.
Okay.
So women can win.
We have made that point.
Just we got to get one who isn't a crook like Hillary or can't talk like Camela.
Just got to get a good Camilla can't think or talk.
That wouldn't be good in the present.
President's got to be able to talk.
Well, I guess not.
They could use, Kamala could have used the same auto pen, right?
Yeah.
It was right there.
You don't need an auto.
Biden proved we don't need a president.
We just need an auto pen.
Now, it's going to kill a lot of people.
I was going to say, it didn't turn out to be.
A lot of people died because of Biden, right?
Right.
Wow.
Do you know that the Communications Decency Act of 1990 something or other has a provision in Section 230, which gives all these all these internet companies that put things on the internet that it protects them from liability?
Yes.
Because it says, you know, it's all very, it's all very, it's sort of like just a public marketplace, and therefore they can't be responsible for what's on it.
However, didn't that end when they started using algorithm formulas to figure out what they were going to put on and not put on?
Right.
Like when they kicked me off?
Absolutely.
And put on a different message, or they kicked off Bannon or they kicked off how many?
A couple of hundred conservatives?
Or when they kicked Trump off.
Presidential candidate in the president of the United States.
They just took him off because they didn't agree with his message.
Right.
Right.
Their ability to use Section 230.
So they are manipulating it.
And a regular network like even the horrible ones, ABC, NBC, CBS, they are responsible.
Right.
Now, the argument that people will make is didn't help very much.
But maybe it does now that Trump is suing the living daylights out of them.
But he's got a great case against BBC.
I'd love to have that case.
Wow.
You got him splicing it 56 minutes apart, changing the whole meaning of what he said.
Right.
Man.
That's the best thing he's doing.
No, no, it's not.
There are a lot of more important things.
But it's really very, very unique.
He's suing them because the cases are so clear.
And, you know, in England, they don't have the libel protections that we have.
England does not have a first, it doesn't have a constitution or a First Amendment.
So England even allows a certain number of criminal penalties for libel and defamation.
So the idea of, you know, America has this Times Against Sullivan protection where if you libel me, let's say, even now that I'm not a public official, but because I wasn't, because I'm famous, right?
I'm a public official, public figure.
Just lying about them is not enough.
You have to lie about me with intent, with knowledge and intent.
You have to know you're lying.
You can do some substitution through reckless disregard, but that's tough.
Like it was so obvious to you that it was false and you printed it anyway.
But that requires a trial and a real big trial and a lot of proof where you are putting in circumstantial evidence and then you're saying, well, they knew this and they knew this and then therefore they knew they were lying.
Now, instead, if you had like an admission that they were lying, right?
Right.
Then, but to do what they did, first of all, I think even in America, it would overcome times against Sullivan to go through 56 minutes a day and take out the two parts where he talks about being peaceful.
And instead, put them together and then put fight, fight, fight.
And when he's talking about fighting against corruption, not fighting at the Capitol.
I think that would pass muster.
But in England, it doesn't matter.
They don't have any such protections for the press.
And so he's going to sue him in England.
And he's got one against Australia, too.
And I don't know if you can sue the government of the UK because the government owns the BBC.
Yeah, well.
Even more than we own NPR.
I mean, NPR, we contributed to.
We didn't own it, which I thought was wrong.
But they own BBC and they own, and Australia owns their station that maligned him.
So how is how would you could you do it through some sort of uh do we have any like treatment?
No, you bring a suit in London, bring a lawsuit against BBC, the owners, the editor, the people who are involved in it, and the government of Great Britain.
As an American citizen?
Yeah, you're allowed to.
Okay.
You're allowed to sue.
But foreigners can sue in America if they're harmed.
Right.
We can't, we can't.
Let's say you beat somebody up on the streets and he's a German.
He can bring a tort suit.
Obviously, we prosecuted, but he could sue the person who beat him up for assault.
Right.
And that would be enforceable.
Or if you defamed and if you defamed a foreigner in an American paper, they can come to America and sue.
They have the same rules.
If it's the prime minister of Germany, he's going to have to show it was malicious.
Whereas if it's just a regular German citizen, he'd be just like me.
Now, can you sue the royal family?
Well, I don't know.
They probably have immunity.
And I bet the crown or who owns the BBC?
It probably would be a very bad.
This is pure guess.
My guess is you can only get to the government if it if you can show knowledge, somehow they knew about it.
So they probably would be able to get it dismissed.
But this is pure guessing because I don't know English law.
But I'd sue him just for the hell of it.
Let them make the motion to dismiss.
And it's obvious that over the years, they've let the BBC turn into a left-wing rag or a communist rag, even.
Yeah.
And now a Muslim rag.
I mean, they're going to be an Islamic government country.
And I mean, the Church of England will be the mosque.
Right.
People are living the Anglican church left and right, and they're either not religious at all or they become Roman Catholics.
There is a column by Miranda Devine today that was so needed.
She was busy.
And Dr. Maria tried to get her on, and we tried to get her, but she was busy today.
We'll get her on.
The column I really recommended to you, it goes through something that's been bothering the hell out of me for a long, long time.
And that is the inability to really investigate the two attempts to murder President Trump.
And the same garbage we go through all the time with the Kennedy assassination and this thing and that thing and this thing and that thing and this thing.
This is absurd.
And all it does is take a system of justice that's been ruined by the Democrats into being, you know, I don't know.
There are people, maybe they exaggerate maybe, but they say this is like being in Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, or you can't get a fair.
Look what they did the January 6th.
Look at the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia.
It's one biased, prejudice judge after another.
The two guys that attempted to murder President Trump, they're the only two guys in history that we don't know anything about.
I mean, their life disappeared after they attempted.
This concentrates on the Butler shooting and on Thomas Crookes.
But the same thing is true of the one at the golf course.
That guy was in Ukraine, different countries that should be investigated.
And it should be transparent.
His trial's over now.
They never brought up any of that in the trial.
What the hell?
It's an awful coincidence that he was in Ukraine before he attempted to kill the president and a couple of other countries.
Nothing in the trial about who funded him, who paid for the trip.
Nothing in the trial about who funded him at all.
The FBI announced the day after the shooting in Butler.
And to me, my antenna went off.
All of my instincts were aroused and they're still aroused and haven't been satisfied.
Somebody for the FBI was being questioned.
I think the agent in charge of the investigation, I don't think it was the crook who runs it, but was the agent for the investigation, I think.
And he said, they asked him questions about the investigation.
And he said, it's too early.
You know, it's too early to draw any conclusions.
It's too early to do, too early to say anything.
And then they said to him, is this a conspiracy?
No.
Nobody else was involved.
No one.
Well, now, and of course, the press, which is either crooked or press doesn't bother to ask the obvious question.
I mean, man, these guys, I never would have hired them to be trial lawyers for me in the U.S. Attorney's Office.
Their mind doesn't work.
First question, how can you tell us you don't know anything about it because you haven't investigated it yet?
But you've determined one of the most complex things you could determine.
You've proved the negative, but nobody else was involved in it.
This is 18 hours after.
Aren't you lying your backside off, you creepy make-believe FBI agent?
How can you even say that?
How can you have said that and this and not have me walk out of here thinking you are a cover-up artist and a liar?
It is too early to make any statements about the investigation.
Well, first of all, you have found out things, so that's a lie.
You just didn't want to.
And maybe it wasn't a smart thing to.
I don't know.
I realize it's very sensitive to comment on investigations.
I also realize you don't figure out in 24 hours that nobody else was involved and you haven't had a chance to investigate it yet.
And you've just decided nobody else is involved.
We're going to do a Kennedy from day one.
Just a single shooter.
That's it.
Nobody else was involved.
Even though Lee Javi Oswald was in Russia, he was in Cuba.
A little nerd like that was traveling to both those places and there's no involvement.
Now, I don't know if they were or they weren't involved, but I know they're deliberately hiding stuff from us when they do stuff like that.
And now it's a year plus later, and we still don't know anything about Crooks.
So somebody was enterprising enough to go prove that Christopher Wray was lying under oath.
Now let's see if we're going to prosecute him.
Christopher, I mean, two FBI directors in a row, right?
Are effing liars.
Christopher Wray testified on July 13th, 2024, that the Bureau had found nothing in Crooks' online history that pointed to a motive or political ideology.
His deputy a week later, Paul Abade, told Congress that comments posted on one of Crook's social media accounts appear to reflect anti-Semitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature.
And that was it.
If you read Miranda, you'll find out that there were no other injury reactions on the line.
You'll find out that from January to August of 2020, there were longer than that.
I'm sorry.
That's when he did the backflip.
That if you look at Crooks's online activity, which the FBI has covered up and denied existed and lied about under oath, that originally wasn't a body.
Abade did not, Abade left it appear as if they were, his motivation was purely anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant.
However, he left out three years of internet activity, where there are at least 17 accounts uncovered by the FBI.
He had an account on YouTube, he had an account on Snapchat, he had an account on Venmo, Zell, GroupMe, Discord, Google Play, Quizlet, Quora, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
And between the ages of 15 and 17, he was profusely online.
And what you'll see is a guy who switched.
He was very pro-Trump.
And at some point, he was radicalized into violent rhetoric and obsession with political violence.
The official narrative claims he acted alone and without a clear motivation, ideology, or digital footprint.
All of that's untrue.
If you go through what this guy discovered.
And none of this was referenced in the final congressional report, which was released in December 2024, including 737 public comments on YouTube as Tom Crookes 2178.
Up until about 2019, he was a very, very strong supporter of Trump.
He described Trump as the literal definition of patriotism.
He even issued threats against Democrats like the squad and others.
He talked about, he had a clip in December 12, 2019, in which he said, murder the Democrats.
In early 2020, all of a sudden, boop, total flip.
He's now complaining about Fox News, about Trump and Republicans, and their complaints about mail-in voting being completely false.
On January 23, 2020, responding to a Jonathan Turley comment on Fox.
Keep in mind, the only reason we may know about any of this is because of Trump's stupidity.
Then he points out that his people have become a cult.
How can you people call others sheep, but you are too brainwashed to realize how dumb you are in following Trump.
He wrote that on February 26, 2020.
This is the guy that, a short while earlier, he wanted to kill Democrats.
He described Trump as a racist.
He criticized Trump's pandemic resolve too slow and everything he's doing now should have been done.
Then it became increasingly radical and violent.
By August 2nd, by August 5th, 2020, Crooks wrote, IMO, the only way to fight the government is with terrorism-style attacks.
Sneak a bomb into an essential building and set it off before anyone sees you.
Track down any important political, political politicians, military leaders, and try to assassinate them.
That's right online.
to assassinate them um he operated uh he operated one on paypal under the name rod swanson You know who Rod Swanson was?
Rod Swanson was the FBI agent in charge of the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting.
And he also served on Mueller's protective detail.
And he studied all those, used that.
So Rod was interviewed.
Rod says, I don't know anything about that kid or his family.
I don't even use PayPal.
I don't even know how to set up a PayPal account.
When told of Crooks' online threats, he said there was no way the FBI would not be aware of what he had posted.
That those are routinely, they are routinely picked up by the Secret Service, if not by the FBI.
And if not by the FBI, the Secret Service sends them to the FBI.
No matter how, this is the FBI agent, no matter, now retired, no matter how ridiculous the allegation, no matter if it's COVID or not, somebody is going to knock on somebody's door and follow up.
If they investigated that kid, there's a record of it, and there's an assessment about his level of threat.
If the FBI had that information about him, I can't even imagine they would not have reached out to me right away.
He was using my name.
So what's going on?
I mean, this is extraordinarily shocking.
But I'm beyond being shocked.
Tyler, like Tyler Robinson, who had been interested in furries, right?
And in exploring gender identity, this guy, Crooks, referred to himself as they them.
He was on the platform DeviantArt, which is an online hub for furry art and furry and furry activity, which what does furry mean?
Furry means you think you're an animal.
And it also involves a sexual fetish with animals.
He had two accounts on DeviantArt.
And the account suggested he had an obsession with scantily clad cartoon characters sporting muscle-bound male bodies and female heads.
He also communicated with a guy who uses the name Willie Tenez, who's a member of a Norwegian neo-Nazi group, the Nordic resistance movement, as well as using Maoist phrases that create the suspicion that he had been educated about that.
He also had contact with Russian and American intelligence.
And shortly after his contacts with this guy in Norway, who was a neo-Nazi, the guy's online presence disappeared.
So who knows what or who he really was, right?
And the FBI has, of course, refused to contact as to whether Crooks was ever investigated at any time before Butler.
Was he under investigation?
Was he a person of interest?
And if he wasn't, why not?
Since he had made scores and scores of comments that any reasonable FBI or Secret Service would put him in a category as a threat to do an assassination.
And on July 24, 2024, Ray testified didn't have any prior information about the shooter.
What would be the motivation of the FBI and Secret Service?
I think we should first get the facts.
What do we care what the motivation was?
If they did it, they should go to jail.
They'll tell us the motivation.
So you're saying the fact alone that this wasn't speculation what the motivation was, but you're saying the fact that this wasn't really the FBI spent three, four years dedicated to framing Donald Trump.
Now, the FBI took an investigation of Russian collusion and concluded three times that he didn't do it, but continued to do it.
They took a piece of crap investigation and spent $30 million on it.
So they should, you would agree with what the Post is calling for a new investigation?
You damn right I would.
A new investigation.
And I can think of one person that could lead to FBI directors after all who were major liars, perjurers, and scoundrels.
I mean, Ray was a horrible guy.
Taking you out of contention, I can still think of some good people to run that.
An independent investigation.
But I mean, the best guy I'm looking at, but I know you don't like to make it about you.
Well, maybe they are investigating it.
I mean, he said she creates the impression that the present FBI doesn't have a real interest in this.
But we'll have to ask her if that's what she said.
She creates the impression.
I don't want to put words in Miranda's mouth, but I do want to interview her.
And they don't respond even now under cash, my good friend, to the requests of Congress.
Senator Johnson requests for information have been uniformly rebuffed.
This is what she writes, including under Director Kash Patel.
He says he's been stonewalled by the FBI consistently.
And we know how straight and honest he is.
But we're not going to let this up.
This has got to come out.
We can't talk.
I mean, and if it isn't done now, it'll never get done.
It was never done with Kennedy at the right time.
And now it's pretty darn clear that Lyndon Johnson covered the whole thing up and fixed the Warren Commission.
And to me, he's the biggest suspect.
You've always said that.
Lyndon Johnson is the number one suspect.
Well, I don't have to say it.
It's obvious.
He has the guy with the most motive.
If you're not politically fixing a case or fixing a case, right?
The person with the most motive is the one you focus on the most.
In fact, you sort of go after that one first and even try to disprove it.
Because if you finally charge somebody else with the murder, a really good defense lawyer is going to make the case against the person with the most motive and say you avoided him.
And how can you have proved it beyond a reasonable doubt if somebody has a bigger motive than this guy and you didn't investigate him?
Now, that's a pretty common successful defense in the few cases where there is a successful defense.
So we're going to spend more time on this.
So I'm not going to go into greater detail.
We do know a little bit more about it, but she knows a lot more than we do.
And Miranda Devine has endless amount of courage.
She is probably one of the most courageous reporters that exists and one of the most truthful.
And if she's got this same instinct that I have, I know it's correct.
Meanwhile, Mondani is making a complete, I mean, some people thought, oh, if he wins, he'll go to the middle.
This guy doesn't know what the middle is.
He's a professional communist and supporter of Islamic terrorism.
All the people he surrounds himself with are Islamic extremists, including his father.
Then he selects Linda Khan to be his transition chief.
Now, Linda Khan was, you know, hanging off, had fallen off the left cliff of the Biden administration.
I mean, she's about as left as you can get.
She was the ex-Federal Trade Commission chair who was determined to destroy every business in America because businesses are bad and capitalism is bad.
One person said, I would hire this person, her, if I were dead set on crafting Soviet-style centralized control regime, instituting repressive policies and destroying the economy.
Oh, this was Dan Loeb who said it, by the way.
He did put his name on it.
Oh, wow.
He was a billionaire.
Governor Hochul, of course, stands in the way of his being able to do about half of what he wants to do.
But that is not exactly a courageous, a courageous protector.
I mean, Governor Hochul, first of all, is working with a horribly deficient brain or IQ or IQ numbers, I don't think even registered.
But she's also running for re-election.
So she's like a rabid dog.
And so she's got a really difficult problem because if she, let's take the one about free buses, right?
She runs the MTA.
She has the majority vote.
And governors use the majority vote to completely control the MTA and cut the mayor out.
All governors do.
And they should.
They have the power.
So he cannot provide free buses unless she does it.
The MTA is without any doubt bankrupt, which is why they have to keep raising the fair.
Because no matter what they do, no matter how much they get subsidized, they find a way to lose money.
They're also part of the New York City and New York State Democratic machine.
So figure that a large percentage of their money involves bribes, kickbacks.
What you think of as inefficient isn't inefficient.
The inefficiency is created so that people can steal money.
You do a contract, you have 20 cost overruns.
The contract was for 30 million.
The contract ends up costing 150.
Democratic mayors change it for inflation, have been doing that for 150 years.
Even under Koch, who was himself honest, it was happening all the time.
How do I know it?
I convicted them of doing it.
But I'm about the only one who ever convicted them of doing it.
Everybody just leaves them alone and they just steal like crazy.
I mean, nobody bothered to inquire.
I mean, the U.S. attorney has to be asleep all day, or I don't know what.
But all you have to do is look at the budget of New York and compare it to the budget of Florida.
And you realize New York is stealing left and right.
The budget of the city of New York is equivalent to the budget of the entire state of Florida.
They're the same.
Sometimes New York is higher, about $130 billion for each.
Florida has 22 million people.
New York has 8.5 million people.
Plus, New York gets the help of New York State as well as the federal government.
New York State has a budget that is over two times Florida's.
Florida has 22 million people.
New York State has 18.5 million.
What's that extra half, that extra half beyond Florida for?
A more efficient government?
Hardly.
A cleaner city or state?
If you take a look at upstate New York, what's happened to it?
Happier citizens?
I don't know.
People are leaving New York in numbers that are absurd, only to be equaled by New Jersey and California.
People are coming to Florida and you can't stop them.
So for half the amount of money, Florida is having 50 times more success.
So what's happening to that money?
Why would the same thing cost three times more for New York buying it than Florida?
Hmm, I wonder why.
Don't wonder too well.
Don't hold your breath.
The percentage of crooks in New York politics, which is Democrat politics, would shock even me.
Well, it wouldn't actually.
And I say Democrat because it's not a democracy.
It's owned by the Democrat Party by virtue of brainwashing Republicans.
Right.
So we'll be back tomorrow.
Tomorrow night.
We got plenty to go into.
We got plenty to go into.
I'm sure Mamdani will not let us down.
I do want to spend a little time on the basketball scandal because it's very interesting.
they got two mafia malls and mob malls involved.
The two mothers.
It's the strangest thing.
This guy's ex-wife and wife are both involved.
So I guess as part of the divorce settlement, she kept her piece of the mafia operation.
It's been an interesting.
We have some really good suggestions about what to do about that.
We'll figure out what happened to Chris Boyd, who was shot.
The Jets player.
Yeah, he was shot and he looked like he wasn't going to make it.
And we're going to tell you about the Algerian immigrant in New York who was released five times of sexual abuse only to do it again.
Democrat criminal philosophy.
And also, I've been meaning to cover this for a couple of days, and I'm going to save it for tomorrow night as a tease.
But Jack Schlossberg, who is the grandson of John F. Kennedy.
Right.
It cannot be.
There got to be something wrong.
I'm going to show you a picture of this guy.
If this is the grandson of John F. Kennedy, something seriously went wrong going back maybe 100, 200 years in the gene pool.
This is probably one of the biggest clowns and jerks I've ever seen.
So he's running for office, and we're going to show you the pictures of him.
Right.
Man, if New York elects him, not only are they brainwashed, they're insane.
Right.
He's running.
Go to Lindell TV.
You can see a follow-up on a lot of these.
A very, very, very good.
There he is.
There he is doing the Nazi salute.
See him?
Jeez.
Pray to God that this guy doesn't get elected.
So go over to Lindell TV.
Come back tomorrow.
Pray for the people in Israel and the people in Ukraine and the people in Iran.
Pray for us and pray for our president.
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.
There 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.
▲
Export Selection