All Episodes
Previous
Nov. 22, 2025 - Rudy Giuliani
01:03:47
America's Mayor Live (805): Zohran Mamdani meets with President Trump at the White House
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, and this is America's Mayor Live, live from Palm Beach, Florida, as we look back at Washington.
And I must say at 3 o'clock, 3.30, 4 o'clock this afternoon, I was exceedingly surprised to see not just the cordial reception and conversation between Mamdani and the president, because unless you do it, the president is always cordial and respectful.
But what appear to be sincere warmth and enthusiasm for the first communist elected as mayor of New York City, who has announced plans that would destroy New York City and has spent his lifetime as only an eight-year American trashing this country and what we believe in.
Now, maybe he made a conversion.
It happened to St. Paul on the way to Tarsus.
Maybe it happened to, I mean, it happened to St. Paul on the way to Damascus.
St. Paul of Tarsus had a conversion on the way to Damascus.
Well, maybe he did.
Or maybe the president's got a grand scheme here.
Maybe he hopes he really will change.
And all I can tell you is I am confused.
To me, that guy right there represents the end of America.
If that's where we are, we're in very, very deep shape.
I think the rest of America should be warned about him so they don't elect people like him and they don't fall for his charm, which is merely a deadly charm that will take away American free enterprise and American freedom.
Ted, you're going to have to explain it to me.
There are any number of strategies that we could posit for the president doing this.
Get him off guard, see if he's going to fail, try to change his thinking, whatever.
But I go back to how deeply committed he is to communism and socialism, right in his own very family.
The fact that he's really not an American.
Yeah, I know he took his oath eight years ago.
That's even a question of doubt as to whether or not he didn't lie about his involvement with a communist organization.
But having said that, since he's been here, all he's done is taken positions hostile, not only to the United States, but to the basic values that Abraham Lincoln said, make an American.
I mean, his virulent hatred of the Jewish people is, as I think, just symbolic of his hatred of Western civilization.
And after all, that's what the president is protecting, isn't he?
When we say he's the head of the free world, he's the head of Western civilization.
Now, the president is one shrewd operator, and maybe he's got one up on him.
And we'll see.
We're going to have to see.
But that still doesn't mean that there isn't a certain shock.
I think I would have been far better off with a more open discussion of how they intend to bridge the gaps in between them.
Is he still going to attempt to make the buses free?
He's got to convince Hochul of that, which will be hard.
She's running for reelection.
On the other hand, she's seen the power of his vote on the Democrat side.
It's gonna be a tough choice for her.
None of it will have to do with the good of the people.
None of it does with that.
In his case, I think it's for the good of our becoming a communist part of the communist regime.
He's been trained for that.
You've never had an American political candidate that more clearly is an out-and-out, avowed, aggressive communist.
Just a week ago, he was attacking the president bitterly.
And now he's smiling and making it look like he's his father.
Yes, politicians are allowed to do that.
When they do that too much, I don't trust them.
So that one remains to be seen.
He's got a lot of things he's got to try to put into motion.
Some of it is so foreign to America that it'll be shocking.
And with a very, very left-wing city council and a state legislature that caves to the left wing and a governor who will make decisions based on her re-election, not the good of the city or state, he could get a good deal of his agenda through.
Now, for example, the free buses could be interfered with by the Department of Transportation because they get subsidies from the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Transportation could say we don't want to subsidize free buses.
What impact would that have, a major impact or not?
I don't know for sure.
The housing plan, of course, can do the same thing.
If he's going to impose rent control, which the mayor is a very big proponent of, although he does it in a slightly different way.
He doesn't call it rent control, but it is.
You can't raise your rent.
No one knows better than the president that that is a disaster.
I mean, left-wing economists, possibly even communist economists, know that.
So this is going to be a question of how does he react when Mandami seeks to fulfill the promises that he made to his electorate.
And this is a very demanding electorate.
They already had a meeting yesterday, and they're pushing him to support a candidate against Jeffries who is, I mean, they bring these people, some of them seem to be coming out of terrorist training camps.
And they're not Americans.
These people are not born in America.
They come here.
They were just became citizens.
And then they say, and why do I say they're not Americans?
Because I go by the Lincoln definition.
There's certain basic things you have to agree to on the precepts of America to be an American.
And they clearly make it clear that they want us to be something different.
Look at the battle that they're having in Michigan over Sharia law.
They want to impose their law as a matter of religious freedom over our law.
Well, I don't know.
I don't remember any very, very Orthodox Jew trying to enforce their laws.
I mean, at one time, the Old Testament said you could stone people.
I can't remember Jewish people stoning anybody in a long time.
So the Sharia law says you stone people.
They want to do that in Michigan.
They want to stone people.
How about, you know, you can have three, four wives.
Even Utah did away with that with the Mormons.
And then the things you can do to a woman under Sharia law.
It's ghastly.
It's yeah.
Now, now they have succeeded in London, or not in London, in England, maybe even in London, where they have a turncoat mayor, Islamic mayor.
Have you been following what's been going on in Dearborn, Michigan, Mayor?
No, but you, I should have gotten we have people there on the ground.
I have, I have in Texas, but not as much in Dearborn.
Tell me, so, of course, in Dearborn, a and maybe we'll get some of these guys on.
Um, we know a number of them.
Um, so Dearborn is like the lightning rod.
I mean, it's it's way out front.
Dearborn has been an Islamic community for 30, 30 years or so, and at certain times was thought of as one that where full assimilation could take place, and that stopped maybe about 20 years ago.
And now it's become it has certain elements of Muslim extremism built into the population.
I know that from my own time.
So, what's going on there now?
So, what we had in and so what I want to do here, let's get this picture here.
Let's get this video here.
This is from Nick Shirley, who was recently honored by James O'Keefe for his work as a citizen journalist.
Here are some, I believe, Muslim Americans in Dearborn, very upset with a group of self-described Christian.
I guess they're Christians, they were coming to Dearborn, they were protesting the large Muslim population.
And we'll play the clip of how some of these locals reacted.
They're hearing what's happened is they attempted to murder Quran and people are freaking out Why would I get you?
Why?
I haven't done anything.
I got word out on.
And you're getting heated.
You're pulling over, you're popping out.
I thought you're ready to brawl.
I was gonna blast if I didn't see the cops.
I swear to God, that's it.
It's a I don't care to me.
I don't care my life.
I don't give a let somebody blast me.
I don't give a just because of the burning of the Quran that attempted to burning that motherfucker's life up and his family.
That's it.
It's on camera.
I will that mother's life up.
Let him come to me face on face, face to face.
I'll kill him.
I'm a mother's soul.
That's it.
You're killing him.
I'll kill him.
Murder.
I mean, I got a little confused as to the players in that.
The last player, obviously, was a Muslim.
Yes.
Who was angry because somebody burned a Quran?
Yes.
And he wanted to kill the person.
Yes.
So that's the penalty for burning the Quran, killing someone.
That's what this individual seems to believe.
What's the penalty for burning the Bible?
Go ahead.
I mean, in America, what's the penalty for burning the Bible in America?
It's, I'm guessing, for the most part, protected.
However, I'm sure there's some instances where you can't have an open flame.
But that's not really, that's a, you know, that's not content related.
Yeah, I mean, I don't know of any law that makes it a crime to burn the Bible.
We don't even make it a crime to burn off flag.
We say it's unconstitutional.
I guess if you had a law against burning the Bible, they would say you're establishing a religion, the Christian religion.
I think that's how they get around prayer in school.
You can't say a prayer in school because it's establishing a religion.
Can you say a non-denominational prayer?
No, you can't say a non-denominational prayer because it's establishing a religion.
No, it's not.
No, it's not.
The naked pure belief in God, I don't think it's a religion.
I mean, it can be an individual belief of yours.
You know, I believe the earth is round.
I believe in God.
I don't go to church.
I'm not talking about me.
I'm giving you a hypothetical.
I believe in God.
If I have a prayer that's a non-denominational prayer, I'm not establishing a religion by just acknowledging that there are a large number of people in this country that believe in God.
I'm not establishing the Catholic religion.
I'm not establishing the Methodist religion.
I'm not establishing the, if I put out a if I put out candles or a candelabra at the time of Hanukkah, I'm not allowed to do that because by putting out a candelabra and lighting it in the public square, I established a religion, even though across the street there's a major scene.
Hardly sounds like establishing, it sounds like a multitude of religions.
But this is the crazy interpretation of our Constitution that was read into it by virtue of following Marx's edict to do everything you can to get rid of God and the belief in God.
And look where he's left us.
Look at the unbelievably screwed up society we have without guidance from our creator.
So the question in Texas now is whether the governor can declare CARE and the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.
He got a lot of help today with a report that was put out detailing chapter and verse of how the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization.
Now, if you need proof of that, there's something wrong with you.
They are actually the forerunners of Hamas and still support Hamas and are still in league with Hamas, which is why Egypt will not allow any Palestinian in, not just Hamas, but any Palestinian in, because the Palestinians voted for Hamas.
Yeah, and if you think there isn't terrorism in the West Bank and Christian and Jewish hatred in the West Bank of Palestine, you're dead wrong.
There's as much there as there is in the South.
Well, I should say as much, but there's still a very large percentage of it there as there is in Gaza.
So when you're asking the Jews to negotiate on this, there's just no way they're going to negotiate, making permanent for the rest of their existence neighbors to the north and south, and then a whole group of others that could come in behind them that are religiously committed to the destruction of the Jewish people.
One would have to be insane to do that, and they're not.
And to say they have other options is just wrong.
They were driven out of their other options by something that to a very large extent Mamdani either denies or minimizes and Fuentes does the same thing, which is an amazing, amazing thing.
I can tell you, and I will in a podcast that I'm working on, tell you my own experience of my own research on it and my cases that I conducted against two major Nazi prison camp guards and the records that I saw and the photographs that I saw and the eyewitnesses that I spoke to, including high-ranking members of the American military.
And these people go around saying it was exaggerated.
They haven't done the research that I've done.
They just say that either because they are committed communists, committed Islamic to the Islamic religion, which calls for the destruction of the Jews or the elimination of other religions, including Christian, or they're just playing some kind of cruel game where they want to get ratings.
These are very, very important subjects because if we turn our back on them and we become complacent about it, all of this could repeat itself if it isn't already repeating itself against the Christians in Africa.
So I'm getting anxious about the fact that there isn't enough of a reaction to this that I thought would happen in the country of the free and the brave.
There are a lot of people reacting, but there are a lot of people reacting the wrong way.
And you're talking about the pushback in Texas.
Yeah, the pushback in Texas is wonderful.
Where's the pushback all over the country?
They don't just want Texas.
Oh, yeah, right.
They're not stopping there.
But I mean, they are trying by doing Texas, they are trying to show something.
They're trying to show that they can assert themselves in your backyard.
Because from the day it started, or from the day that Muhammad went bad, which is about less than halfway through his conquest, it's not been about convert.
No one sits down and tries to convert you to the Muslim religion.
They threaten you with death.
An entire country, you know, like Iran, was converted by wiping out all the people who practiced the opposite religion, the Zoroastrian religion, which was a pagan religion with a lot of scientific aspects to it, in place of a religion that was invented by an epileptic madman and killer.
If you can't read even a brief history of his life and not see that, somebody is brainwashing him.
And boy, a lot of people have been brainwashed, haven't they?
Wow.
And a lot of people have been frightened into saying what I'm saying.
They've been frightened into pulling out the Quran and reading it to you.
But we're not frightened.
Right, Ted?
Right.
Screw them.
Not at all.
Stick your fatwa up your fatwa.
That's a good, that's a good line.
We should put that on a shirt.
It's been there a long time.
I mean, I've got it.
I got maybe two or three.
I don't even know where they are.
Can't find them.
Maybe they expire after.
Maybe they have a statute of limitations.
And they're so we've got to check Sharia law.
You know, I was thinking, somebody proposed this to me the other day.
They said, you know, you've been disbarred by the Biden people, which, by the way, is a real atrocity.
They did that.
But in any event, you've been disbarred by the how hard would it be for you to learn Sharia law and practice it?
You know, they're very practical people.
They know what a good lawyer you are.
And if you convinced them that you would turn sides, they'd probably take you as a lawyer.
I don't know if they have that many good lawyers in with Sharia law.
I mean, how?
I don't, I've never, I don't know if they're lawyers or they just threaten people, you know?
But I mean, do they actually argue cases?
And like that, if you if your daughter is pregnant and out of wedlock, I imagine there's a multiplicity of interpretations of you can kill her, right?
Yeah, I wonder how that's a good question.
I can't imagine they kill all their daughters who are pregnant out of wedlock.
I mean, depends on the, I guess it probably depends on the read.
That punishment exists, but it has a lot of discretion.
It is not widely used.
But the fact that it even exists, right?
But what about the girl in Iran whose head and hair was showing and they killed her?
I mean, they're serious.
And why does the media here cover for them, cover for this sort of activity?
The media and like you said, a lot of the politicians in Washington.
Because it's perverted.
Our media is made up of a lot of young men and women who are perverted.
They think it's cool.
They think it's cool, I guess.
How do I know?
I mean, they do.
Maybe it's their bosses who have economic interests in oil, like Republicans.
Some Republicans went wrong on that and changed the trajectory that was going on with Reagan, where we were beginning to get the Jewish vote.
And, you know, and right now, Fuentes and Tucker Carlson are doing the best they can to change it again.
Let's see if we can reintroduce anti-Semitism.
Gee, we're doing so well with the Jewish vote.
Let's see if we can introduce anti-Semitism.
And that is not what really troubles me.
What the hell?
I mean, I learned at the foot of the greatest president the following.
You got to constantly keep your head straight.
Relationship with Israel is based on the best interests of the United States.
The reason we go the extra mile for Israel is really simple.
They go the extra mile for us.
And who can define that better than me, the president?
I know that.
I know that.
And therefore, I'm with them.
And that's been proven true then when I got a chance to get involved deeply myself in security.
Well, we're going to take a short break and we'll be right back.
And we'll be right back on this very busy Friday evening.
U.S. Army Major Scott Smiley paid a high price serving our nation.
Scott was leading his platoon in Iraq when a blast sent shrapnel through his eyes, leaving him blind and temporarily paralyzed.
Scott would become the first blind, active duty military officer before medically retiring years later.
Thanks to friends like you, the Tunnels of Towers Foundation gave Scott and his family a mortgage-free, specially adapted smart home.
Show your support for America's heroes now.
Donate $11 a month to Tunnels of Towers at t2t.org.
Are you ready for some action?
I'm ready for action.
Get the elite TV plan only through the portal.
218 channels, and it's only $69.95 a month, including your free portal.
That's cheaper than everyone else.
Your favorite sports, movies, news, even daytime dramas.
We're talking about ESPN, OAN, Newsmax, channels you can't get anymore in certain areas.
Compared to the competition, this is a way better deal.
Endless selection.
Not to mention all the free music channels.
There's over 700 premium and classic movies all ready to go.
Plus, they got catch-up TV that allows you to go back and watch what you've missed or want to watch again.
Cut your cable in half and get twice as much for free.
Way more channels for half the cost.
After the first year, the subscription then drops to $57.95 monthly, where you change or upgrade anytime.
Go to QUXNow.com and get yours today.
Use promo code Rudy.
Act fast.
These deals are selling out.
Here we are, pretty much at the beginning of the process here at this pristine, I call it a laboratory.
It's not like a factory.
It's like a hospital.
This is the beginning of the process for roasting.
Deep green, very good quality.
Most people don't use this quality.
We deal with small farmers, but they'd like to know who we're dealing with.
They give us the highest quality, all organic, non-GMO.
You should know all Arabica beans.
No Robusto.
All Arabica.
they're gonna go into the roaster and it'll get roasted for about 20 minutes or so oh my goodness Look at these.
My goodness, you're going to want to specially order these.
This is what goes into Rudy's coffee.
Oh, well.
Welcome back to America's Mayor Live.
The litigation over the Comey jury, you remember whether Lindsay Halligan had properly presented the case to the jury has been held by the Eastern District of Virginia as,
well, it hasn't been held proper yet, but the Justice Department backed Lindsey Halligan, pointing out that the entire testimony had been heard by the grand jury, that the magistrate of the grand jury approved the technical change, which a magistrate can do, because it wasn't a substantive change.
And finally, and finally, that the vote was what we call a true bill.
So we'll have to see what U.S. Magistrate Judge Lindsay Valla says, and just exactly if there's a bias to her opinion, or she's going to give an actual lawyer's opinion.
There's been a lot of discussion about Venezuela, and that is proceeding ahead.
And an analysis has been done about the cartel of the suns, which is tied directly to the political leadership of Venezuela.
It's also the largest cartel in Venezuela, and it's the one that has, if not the most, has the biggest share of the cocaine market in the United States.
It deals also in fentanyl, but fentanyl it leaves more to the Mexicans and the Chinese.
And the reality is that the hits that have been made on the boats have done great, great damage.
So far, it's 22 boats that have been hit, and the ships sit outside of Caracas doing maneuvers and getting Maduro very, very nervous and calling around looking for places of people who would take him.
And I don't know, the usual place they go is Putin, but geez, I don't think he has much room or money.
Right.
I guess Maduro can pull the money out of all the money he's gotten from killing Americans with drugs.
Meanwhile, the Democrats in Congress want to stop the president so Maduro can stay there and continue to kill Americans.
What is the purpose of trying to stop the president from taking Maduro out?
What?
I mean, you really think this guy is good for America?
I mean, not just good for America, but you really think this guy isn't one of the reasons why Americans die in larger numbers than they should.
And I know you're going to tell me it's about our demand.
No, it's not.
It's about both.
The supply of anything is not exclusively determined by demand, nor is it exclusively determined by supply.
And if you are an apologist for drugs because you like to smoke weed, people for generations have been saying, you can't stop this at the border.
This is a question of demand.
Well, I mean, there are a lot of things we could do about demand that Democrats don't do.
I put them in jail or having required a rehabilitation, which they won't do.
So let's put that aside.
But what our experiment with their absolutely idiotic idea of making cannabis legal has been that, sure, as the demand became legal, which was believed to bring the demand down, the demand went up.
And to meet that demand, the supply went up.
And to meet that demand, the supply became even more toxic and more damaging and more destructive to your brain.
And the illegal operators who were supposed to be put out of business by the legal operators just became richer and tripled their customers.
New York is very, very proud of all the legal shops they have.
They're five times more illegal.
They charge more and you get better stuff.
So maybe you become an addict through the legal, and then you can't get from the legal all that you want.
So you start doing business with organized crime or the cartels.
Happens all the time.
Legalize a drug or a commodity of some kind that's been illegal.
You're not going to cut it out.
You're going to increase it dramatically.
And when you increase it dramatically, the people who are dealing with it illegally set up a black market that's geared to outperforming the more rigid and regulated legal process.
This is axiomatic.
Every liberal who've argued the opposite against me should now come, bow down at their feet and say, Mayor Juliana, you were correct.
And the only reason I'm doing this is because a lot of people got killed based on my recommendation.
We've also found how damaging to the brain marijuana is, the drug that was being given by parents to their children because they smoked it.
What asshole parents, huh?
The kids are going to turn out to be as screwed up as they are with psychiatric bills even greater.
Because we found that unlike alcohol, which was always their comparison, right?
Alcohol was their comparison.
Alcohol is not good for you.
Not as bad as even just a little bit of marijuana.
Alcohol doesn't have the same impact on the brain.
It doesn't have the same impact on parts of the brain that have to do with cognitive function and behavior control.
What does that lead to?
It leads to being Biden or a murderer.
Is it a drug of an entry drug?
Yes and no.
And the yes is so big that it's dangerous.
What do I mean by that?
What I mean by that is there are people, many that took marijuana when they were young who don't use it.
There are many people who took marijuana and have died of drug overdoses later by taking other things or even marijuana.
So if you want to tell me that it's a, if you want to tell me it's an entry drug for one third, but not for two thirds, isn't that too many?
When we're talking in the millions and I mean, is this like really a necessary product that people have to have?
Painkiller?
There aren't other painkillers.
No shortage on painkillers.
Are they more addictive?
I don't know if they are.
What I do know is from the studies that I've seen, I can't locate one that's as damaging to the brain.
For some reason, marijuana has qualities in it.
And I could have Dr. Maria go through it in great detail with some of the others, has qualities in it that peculiarly affect two areas of the brain.
Not even cocaine and heroin is, at least with regard to that kind of damage, is damaging.
Cocaine and heroin do more damage, a lot of it to your physical organs.
Marijuana.
Right to here.
And alcohol can do some damage to the brain, but much, much less.
And it also does damage to your physical or like your stomach.
I mean, really, serious social alcoholics very often develop tremendous problems with their stomach.
I forgot the one that's the most common.
It's not stomach cancer.
What?
Colon.
No, no, no, not colon cancer neither.
It's a condition of the stomach that comes about largely from over, not just from drinking too much, but from drinking too much.
Oh, wow.
But comparison straight up and up, its effect on the brain is nothing as compared to marijuana.
And remember, a lot of these studies were done three, four years ago.
And marijuana, well, as compared to 20 years ago, it's about 10 times more powerful.
As compared to about four or five years ago, it's probably three or four times more powerful.
So when you stop the crap of legalizing and will you stop just a false reporting that it's, I don't know, somehow it's like it's good for you.
What are you kidding?
Right.
Good for you.
Come on.
Good for you.
Yeah.
Well, we have some breaking news this hour, Mayor.
Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia is announced.
I'm a Democrat.
She is actually announcing that she's resigning from Congress effective January 5th, 2026.
To run for.
We don't know.
I'm going to go through the message.
This is hot off the press.
She wrote a four-page note that she just posted.
So we'll read up on that.
That's more than I really want to know.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Four-page of who these people think they are.
Okay.
You know, when I see this volatile behavior, this may have, maybe there's something wrong.
Maybe something going on with her.
There has to be.
This is shady.
She's going to quit Congress after hurting Trump and possibly costing us a seat.
Let's see where.
I mean, we'll see where that seat is.
It might be a safe red seat.
Let's find out.
She'll get a deal with CNN or MSNBC.
Oh, yeah.
And you know what I mean?
She's cashing out.
It's disgusting.
But we don't know.
We don't know for sure.
We know that.
That last part was just me guessing.
I mean, I have.
Let's see, right?
I have an old and very cordial relationship with her, which is in grave jeopardy based on the way she's been acting.
Maybe she doesn't even care, but you know, I do.
And I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt because this is odd behavior.
Now, there was some talk.
I mean, the beginning of this that I can tell was she wanted his support for running for governor.
I've heard that.
And he sent, instead of saying no, which I think he probably would have, but he was trying to give her some, prepare for it.
He or one of the people around him sent her a poll showing that she was getting wiped out and therefore that this wasn't a good move for her.
House leadership was.
And, you know, remember, she, unlike the other, she was at one time the quintessential Trump Republican, right?
She, Warren Bobert, Gates, MAGA, right?
MAGA, MAGA, MAGA, Big MAGA, and big letters.
All of a sudden, a lot of those guys, the conservative caucus, wanted to get rid of McCarthy, right?
Right.
Right.
Well, she was a very big surprise.
She was with McCarthy.
That was the first move, looking like she was going mainstream.
And I kind of supported her for that.
I thought the idea of disrupting the Congress was not a good idea.
And then she stayed with, she stayed with, she stayed with what would you call the more or the less right-wing Republicans for a while on that issue, right?
Yep.
Did she have a place in leadership?
I don't believe so, but I'm going to do some, I'm doing some reading.
That'd be interesting because she would, I mean, she, she had worked really, really hard to do that turnaround and get Johnson elected.
Right.
And I think she remained pretty much loyal to Johnson, right?
I believe so.
Yes.
Not outside of this, some of the Epstein stuff.
But she, I mean, she's been going rogue since before Epstein.
Yep.
We'll see if you can find out what the backstory is on her getting out.
So that is breaking news tonight.
Miss Palestine.
Miss Palestine, Nadine Ayub, who claims to be a 27-year-old U.S. and Canadian citizen, is married to the son of Hamas's most wanted prisoner, Marwan Barghudi.
And she has a child named after him.
She has hid that.
He's serving five life sentences in Israel.
She has hid that.
And it's unclear if she is still married and she still has custody of their daughter.
Now, is she really Miss Palestine?
No one can find evidence of a Palestinian beauty contest selecting her.
She was, however, self-proclaimed, she was proclaimed by the Dubai-based Miss Palestine organization.
So that's pretty good.
You know who's in charge of it?
She is.
So she took her own organization.
She took her own organization and she named herself Miss Palestine.
And she is the wife of the son of one of the biggest five-time life sentence Palestinian Hamas, Palestinian Liberation Organization, Fatah, who knows, murderers.
The ones that Mamdani likes.
Now, the Democrat Socialist Association had a meeting last night on the eve of Mamdani's love fest with President Trump.
I wonder how they feel about that.
Right.
And they are now putting on a big, big push for Zoran, who is at the height, I would imagine, of his political strength, right?
Just won an election.
Right.
Going into, if you're not, that's not true.
Sometimes you gain it later.
But very often, this is the honeymoon thing.
And he's a Democrat.
They don't take honeymoons away from Democrats.
It's hard not to take it away from him because he's a terrorist lover.
Right.
It's pretty simple.
So they are now setting their sights on a minority leader of the House, Hakeem Jeffries, who DSA says is a caricature of the movement against them.
And they are nominating a city council member named Che Osays.
Now, Che Osay, obviously, is named after Che Guevara, a murdering communist of the worst kind.
And they want him to run against Jeffries.
And this would be in the 36th district, which is Bedford, Stuyvesant, and Crown Heights.
Did Jeffries ever endorse Momdani?
He did at the very end and very reluctantly.
And since then, there's been a thing saying that Jeffries has called Mamdani a caricature of the movement.
So there isn't good relations between them, I guess.
Will Mamdani support K and Stuyvesant, Crown Heights?
Well, I mean, Bedford-Stuyveson is 80% black.
Crown Heights is split between Hasidic Jews and Blacks.
But this, it would seem to me that he is pretty, that the minority leader is safe as you can be.
Yeah.
Not like, not like, not like some of the others that were taken out.
Well, who did AOC beat?
I know that was the first time.
Well, she beat the number three guy in the house and one of Madame Pelosi's favorites.
But that was more of a split district, and he was pretty damn lazy.
Right.
But I don't, I mean, who knows?
I'm not going to make a guess on that one now.
Now, one of the things that has to be affecting the president is a Fox poll where a plurality of respondents, 46%, say that they are personally hurt by the Trump White House's economic actions, while only 39% say that it made no difference.
And only 15% said it helped.
Now, this is a Fox poll, similar to a poll in 2024 where 47 percent said the Biden administration negatively affected them financially, while only 17 percent said that it helped them.
He has 15% that said they helped.
Pretty accurate on Biden.
Right.
So it could be, although the president, I'm sure, will brush it off and say he doesn't read the polls.
Oh, come on.
And do they affect him?
Yeah, of course they do.
And then they should, a little bit.
I mean, you're the president of the United States, right?
You got to be watching.
This poll is not inconsistent with a bunch of others that people are upset with his handling of the economy.
And he is frustrated because he's doing everything he can.
But he's finding out something that American presidents should know going in.
The economy is a crapshoot.
You can do all the right things and it doesn't work or doesn't work right now.
You got to do a long-term view of it like you do if your investments in the stock market.
You've got to do this fundamentally intelligent things for what is essentially a capitalist system and hope they're going to work.
And they will work.
But they're very stubborn.
They'll work when they work, not when you want them to work.
And here's the only question I would put into my analysis because my analysis is correct.
It's pretty much universally correct since Adam Smith.
However, it's a different economy than the economy I was used to.
It's a little bit less a capitalist economy and a little bit more a top-down economy all over the world.
So do the same things work?
I would say yes, fundamentally.
And I think the reason why his tax cut this time didn't have the same impact as his tax cut last time is that his tax cut this time, which he says is the biggest ever given, is actually a continuation of what we had gotten used to.
So back when he did it the first time and he dropped taxes a third or whatever, right?
And despite the liars, he did it for the middle class and the poor, which created more work and more jobs for them than ever before, including Black and Hispanic people.
That isn't happening now.
That's baked in.
It would have been a disaster if the Democrats had revoked it.
We'd be in a depression, probably.
But the mere fact that we continued it, and yes, we did add to it, and that's going to have some impact.
But the additions we made now are nothing like the revolution that he did back in 18 or 17.
So the point of that is he can't expect that his tax cuts are going to have that shock effect on the economy that they did last time that took us to soaring heights.
And therefore, he's got to do other things.
They're going to fundamentally help.
And the economy is fundamentally good.
Even the increases in prices under him are not what would normally have been considered inflationary.
No, they'd be considered minor.
3%, 2% is the ideal.
Anything below that is no inflation at all.
Anything above it is inflation.
3%, which is only 1% is mild inflation, which is what we have right now.
But we have high prices.
So you say, Juliana, you're a jackass.
How can we have?
Because we had catastrophic inflation.
Some of that came down, but not all of it.
So you take over inflation at a certain period.
So Biden took it over like this, right?
And he took it to here.
Trump took it over from here.
It goes up here.
All you do is feel this.
You don't feel that only this tiny part is Trump and this big part is Biden.
And trying to explain that to people sounds like you're whining.
And he has tried that a little bit.
He hasn't sounded like he's whining yet, but I would suggest calm it down and just get those prices down.
Now, can a president affect all of them across the board?
No.
Can he affect a couple that could wake people up?
Sure, he just did it.
Bananas, coffee.
Thank you.
Coffee.
Ruby coffee, go buy it.
Yes, got to get it.
Get it now so you have it for the holidays in case it goes up again.
It's really good.
It's really good.
Even if you're a liberal Democrat and you watch me to see how I screw up, get it and try it and see if there isn't one thing we can agree on.
I've actually gotten liberal Democrats to agree on it.
But already.
And they're alive.
I'm only kidding.
I'm only kidding.
So what do you think of this thing that the president people put out in which they say that the craziest congressional ad I've ever seen in which a group of congressmen go on and tell people in the military not to follow orders.
They tell, don't follow illegal orders without any definition of what's legal or illegal.
That's why.
I mean, on what basis am I not going to follow an illegal order?
Let's say I'm a soldier.
I'm 20 years old.
I graduated from high school.
I get the basic little chorus on military law.
I'm going to base it on my opinion where the Supreme Court is split 5'4.
Okay.
I mean, I can't.
It's 6-3 right now, isn't it?
What?
No, but it's, but I'm using a hypothetical.
Oh, okay.
So here I am.
I'm told.
Okay.
Marine Battalion, tell you that we're going to take this hill, says the lieutenant or captain.
You heard from your friend that there are children on the top of the hill.
And you heard that taking unnecessary.
Yeah, that looks like, it looks like the beginning of 60 minutes, doesn't it?
Yeah.
We can watch it.
When you're done speaking, we'll watch it.
My name is Lydia Upperdoop, and this is 60 Minutes.
My name is John Humpednicker, and this is the biggest lying show in the history of television.
But we get away with it because we're left wing.
So all these people here who were in the military are telling them all the message is, is don't obey disease illegal orders.
They don't give these poor people that are telling this to any guidance on how the hell they determine it's an illegal order to protect themselves against court-martial.
So here's an example.
I don't know if it's a good one, but I once listened to a great seminar about military ethics that had this.
And I'm going to vary it a little, then I'll tell you the real one.
Suppose I'm a Navy.
I'm a Navy.
I'm a Navy, whatever, a Marine, rather.
And my battalion is getting ready to go take the hill.
And myself and a couple of my fellow Marines had actually done surveillance at the top of the hill.
And we told the captain, you know, Captain, there are a lot of children mixed in with the enemy have a lot of children in the redoubt with them.
And they have them there to protect them and say that we kill civilians.
But meanwhile, they're shooting at us and killing us.
But we think it's illegal to take it now.
Let's retreat and come back another day.
The captain says, no, we got to take it now.
That's what the colonel told me.
And we're going to have a much bigger landing later.
And if we don't clean this out, they're going to die instead of us.
So we got to take the hill.
Order, take the hill.
Do you not follow it?
You say, well, you know, in my case, I have an individual.
The other guys can go.
But from my point of view, Captain, I believe I'm ruling as Justice Humpedinker.
I am ruling that this is illegal and therefore I'm not following your order.
And then the rest of them hear it.
And since some of them really believe it's illegal and the others don't want to get killed, they all say, no, we're not going to go up the hill.
Now, these people have been in the military.
They probably have been, maybe not, maybe yes.
They've to have been faced with ambiguous orders.
If everybody in the army becomes a determinant of what's legal and illegal, you don't have an army.
Legal questions, I mean, some of them are easily black and white, but not the kind they're dealing with.
You know, go to the local grocery store, private, get me some beer and kill the people in the grocery store.
Okay.
I can say, okay, let me bring you in to the brig now.
But what I'm telling you, in the middle of battle, with a close question as to what's legal, lawful, and ethical, That has to be left to you've got to follow orders.
Unless it is so clearly illegal that the whole world will agree with you.
What are they doing?
They're destroying the army.
So they put out this thing saying that.
They put out this thing saying that you're not supposed to follow orders.
That's all it is.
Repetitious.
What they try to do is illustrate these people.
We're all in the military.
They're all attractive, all in the military.
And they all say, don't follow orders, don't follow orders.
They don't give you any help at all on how to make that determination.
That's outrageous.
That's outrageous exploitation of them.
You know, this is the way some of the lower courts feel when the Supreme Court just denies a petition or grants a petition and doesn't tell the courts why.
There could be 10 reasons why.
Now, when they get faced with a question, they don't have any guidance.
What they're saying is the Supreme Court to move things quickly.
And this is both liberal and conservatives are not giving them enough guidance.
It's largely because Rubbits is afraid to take a stand.
And people on the court, I think, even justices are annoyed about that.
But that's a different thing.
It's not life and death.
So the president's people put out a thing condemning this, right?
Well, the president did.
The president said this is awful.
But then somebody else added that the penalty should be death.
He didn't put down the penalty at all.
But it went out on his thing.
Yeah, but treason has read borderline trees.
Should we watch it?
Yeah, watch them?
Yeah.
We should watch it right now.
but i want to finish soon but yeah go ahead wait a minute uh so this is i'm more interested what the president said but yeah play a few Don't play all of them.
I tell you what, play two or three of them and you'll get the foot.
Play it.
I'm Senator Alyssa Slotkin.
Senator Mark Kelly.
Representative Chris DeLuzio.
Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander.
Representative Chrissy Houlihan.
Congressman Jason Crowe.
That was a captain in the United States Navy.
Former CIA officer.
Former Navy.
Former Army Ranger.
Former Republic.
No, no, I mean, I put it off as a person want to speak directly to members of the military.
We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now.
Americans trust their military.
But that trust is at risk.
This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.
Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution.
Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad, but from right here at home.
Our laws are clear.
You can refuse illegal orders.
You can refuse illegal orders.
You must refuse illegal orders.
No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.
We know this is hard and that it's a difficult time to be a public servant.
But whether you're serving in the CIA, the Army, or Navy, the Air Force, your vigilance is critical.
And know that we have your back.
Because now, more than ever.
The American people need you.
We need you to stand up for our laws.
Our Constitution and who we are as Americans.
Don't give up.
Don't give up the ship.
That's astounding.
I'm telling you why it's astounding.
They don't tell you how to make a determination of what is legal or illegal.
And probably more than anywhere else, they know how very, very often in the situations they're talking about, that is damn ambiguous.
Courts, lower court says the illegal, upper court says legal, upper court says illegal, and then the Supreme Court rules five, four one way or the other.
And you're going to make that determination on a battlefield and disrupt the battle and get people killed.
That's why the president is very upset.
But now, what was put out?
What's the language of what was put out?
Do you have that?
It was, it ended, it ended, it ended with the death penalty, which has, oh, here it is.
It ended with the death penalty.
And here's what it says.
President Trump lashed out Thursday at six Democratic lawmakers who released a video on social media urging service members to disobey illegal orders.
Again, with nothing further, helping them figure out what's illegal orders by the administration.
It says it's called seditious behavior at the highest level.
Trump thundered on truth social Thursday.
Each one of these traitors of our country should be arrested and put out and put on trial.
Their words cannot be allowed to stand.
We won't have a country anymore.
An example must be set.
The president then reposted messages of support from users of his social media platform, including one who wrote in all cabs, seditious behavior for punishable by death.
That's the opinion of one person put out on his post, yes, okay.
But one person.
Right.
By the way, in a strained argument, yes.
That's probably right.
It would depend on what order you suppose you did it because you really were a coward and then you ran away.
It's an illegal order.
I'm not going up the hill, Captain.
What's illegal?
I'm not going up the hill, Captain.
Right.
Meanwhile, we're having a big argument with this guy, and people are killing my men.
Awful.
I don't know what the answer to that is.
I mean, in the Civil War, the answer would be the captain could kill him.
Oh, wow.
Captain could kill people.
I mean, the way they would stop people from running away, if they ran away, they shoot them in the back.
And isn't it just also dangerous in that it's going to give people perceived permission, right?
Like you said, to not do something for a different reason, and then they'll just fall back on this.
Look, I got senators and congresspeople telling me that I was supposed to do this.
Yeah.
And sometimes in battle or in an emergency, and I sure know about emergencies, you can actually, if you do it all together and you do it consistently and it's slightly the wrong thing, you're going to save a lot more people than if you fight, fight, fight, fight, and are totally disorganized.
And everybody does.
And that sounds weird, but you know, human conduct is not perfect.
And in the military, we have to have quick, decisive action or people get destroyed.
That was a disgraceful thing.
I just wish that person didn't ratchet it up by saying something that's defensible.
But my God, let's use some common sense in terms of turning off people that don't pay as much attention to this as we do.
We have to understand.
And this is what I think went wrong in the Epstein thing also.
We've got to understand that a lot of people just pay some attention to it.
We've got to bring those people in if we want to continue to govern.
We can't frighten them away.
Even if what we're saying has some kind of justifiable argument that would take a lawyer one hour to make, maybe we avoid that, huh?
For the purposes of winning friends and influencing people, which is what politics is all about, ultimately, with the truth.
Well, with that, we're going to sign off tonight.
We're preparing a great podcast.
Over the weekend, it'll come out.
It will be an analysis of what was said in the Tucker Carlson interview, mostly by the subject, but trying to come to a fair conclusion on just exactly what is he?
What is he to the MAGA movement, to the Republican movement?
How dangerous is he?
Was it right for Tucker to put him on or wrong?
If it was wrong, why did he do it?
If it was right, did he handle it properly?
Those questions.
We'll try to give you as unbiased an opinion as possible now that things have calmed down just a little bit with a great deal of evidence, trying to show you how we came to the conclusion that we came to.
And it'll probably come out on Saturday, right?
Worst case scenario to be out on Sunday on X.
And to get it, hit subscribe.
Take it for a month.
It'll cost you less than two cups of inferior coffee at a diner.
And don't have the inferior coffee.
Come home, get yourself a blender, a brewer.
You know, take the beans, put them in.
It takes a little while.
And now you have a great cup of coffee every morning.
Fabulous.
There's Rudy Giuliani.
I'm asking you all to pray for the people in Ukraine who are being offered a very, very tough deal, it looks like.
The people in Israel who have a ceasefire while war is going on.
And for the people of Iran who are still suffering under the regime of maniacal, theocratic dictatorship.
And let's pray for the people of our country and for our great president so that he makes the right decisions.
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.
▲
Export Selection