All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 23, 2026 - Rudy Giuliani
01:33:54
America's Mayor Live (849): Jack Smith Committed Perjury Today, in Defense of Operation Arctic Frost

NA

|

Time Text
Rudy's Allegations of Fraud 00:15:25
Good evening.
This is Rudy Giuliani, and this is America's Mayor Live, live from Palm Beach, Florida.
And a lot to cover tonight and a lot of, well, let's begin with probably one of the most disgraceful lawyers in the history of the Justice Department, long before Jack Smith took on the legal attempt to assassinate Donald Trump by law.
I don't know if they were involved in the other two assassination attempts.
I'm not suggesting they were, except for the fact that it is kind of strange that they did five or six different fraudulent, illegal, in some cases, treasonous plots to destroy Trump.
And then all of a sudden, somebody tried to kill him twice.
And they, speaking broadly, I don't mean Jack Smith in particular, but the Democrat establishment, the Obamas and the Bidens had nothing to do with that.
Now, since there hasn't really been a thorough investigation, I guess we're just not going to know like the Kennedy, like the Kennedy thing.
But if you look at the investigations of the two people that attempted to assassinate the president, there are more questions than there are answers.
And the Secret Service's conduct in the case of the first, it's almost impossible to find anything they did right in trying to protect the president.
It looks like by hooker by crook, they didn't seem to give a damn if he got killed.
In any event, Jack Smith testified today.
And I mean, I can't separate the lies.
He just lied over and over again.
The part that I heard live myself that I can remember from my own head because there are things that he said in the past and things that he said now.
And there's testimony that I gave that apparently has been destroyed.
But in any event, he testified at some point today, I assume under oath, that I had a conversation with the president.
And I think he meant on January 6th.
And that in that conversation, the president told me to delay the vote and do what I could to have our people exploit the violence.
That's a complete, absolute lie.
And I challenge them to produce that transcript.
In fact, I challenge them to just produce my test.
I've been asking for it for four years.
I can't get my testimony.
I can't get my testimony.
I can't get the affidavits they put in to illegally wiretap me and bug me and take my AOL account from the moment I started representing Trump or to raid my law office and security office, which put in jeopardy a lot of my clients who had nothing to do with this and destroyed my practice.
They have to have affidavits for this, particularly since it all was concluded with a letter, not from this lying son of a you-know-what, but from the U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York to the grand jury saying there was no probable cause that I committed a crime.
One of the Obama judges dismissed me from the January 6th case because there was no evidence against me.
He believes that there is.
By the way, he doesn't.
He's a liar.
And the conversation that he's citing with the president, insofar as the president ever saying to take advantage of the violence is a complete, absolute and total lie by a guy who has spent his entire career being being uh, being disciplined by the Justice Department as a unethical prosecutor.
You know how there are policemen who are at the top of the department for the most uh, most um uh medals for bravery.
He's at the top of the Justice Department before uh Garland selected him to do the hit job on Trump for unethical behavior and he really just attempted to do the same thing to Trump that he tried to do to Governor McDonald, which was reversed eight nothing by the Supreme Court.
This is a pathetic uh, this is a pathetic, immoral and completely unethical lawyer.
And I don't.
I mean, I listened to a lot of what else he said and some of it I know for sure are lies, because I have my own personal knowledge of it.
And the others I you know, like the, the stuff that he, the stuff that he did with raiding Mar-Lago, and I mean.
And plus, as I said, they have produced not a single stitch of paper in five years of requests about anything they've said about me.
Not a single thing.
They won't give me my testimony.
They won't give me the affidavits they use to go get my AOL account and convince the judge to sign.
They won't give me the affidavits they use to search my home.
They won't give me the affidavits they use to search and raid my law office and my uh and my uh uh security business.
I've never heard of that.
I had always turned over those affidavits.
In fact, the present Justice Department won't respond to Christina Bobb, who's my lawyer, and give us those affidavits, because we want to see how the probable cause disappeared.
Think of it this way, at some point they went to a judge and they said there was probable cause to raid Rudy Giuliani's apartment, meaning there was probable cause that we think he committed crimes and there's probable cause to do it and we need to.
We need to search his law office, which is extraordinary uh.
I never even heard of that ever being done without it's being a violation of the right to counsel.
But in any event, they had to put something on paper to get some judge even if it's one of these DC make-believe judges to sign it.
I have a right to see that.
They concluded.
They concluded in one case just a year and a half later, in the other, about three years later, that there was and these are the words Is a letter to the grand jury.
There's no probable cause to believe that Giuliani committed a crime.
What happened to it?
If the search was legal, there was probable cause at one point to search me.
By the time they wrote to the grand jury, there was no probable cause.
What happened?
Did the angel Gabriel come with Muhammad and take it up to heaven?
I mean, what happened to it?
So there's only a couple of explanations.
There was no probable cause at the time, and I think that's going to turn out to be somewhat systemic with this lying radical lawyer, Smith, in which case he should be, they should disbar him and put me back.
Or it turned out they were relying on liars.
Because by the time they write to the grand jury, the probable cause, if they had it originally, is gone.
What happened?
Did they kill the person?
Something happened to it.
If there was no probable cause and the judge assigned it, let's find out who the judge is so we can impeach him.
Judges shouldn't be signing affidavits that don't have probable cause.
And we know that the judicial misconduct in this area has been disgraceful, but no one will talk about it.
Lawyers are afraid to talk about judges.
You're not allowed to criticize judges.
You might bring the system down.
The fact that judges take bribes, cheat, steal, and lie, and make decisions that are purely dishonest and political is what brings the system down.
New York, you know, in the four boroughs, is almost completely like that.
Anyone that's participated in the New York City legal system can tell you it is a creature of the crooked Democrat Party and has been since Boss Tweed.
It isn't the people who criticize, it's the people who cheat and lie, make political decisions, let the county leader who puts them on the bench tell them how to decide.
Convict people like Trump of a fraud where there was no loss, so it can't be a fraud.
Convict him of a crime where they weren't unanimous on what the underlying crime was.
There were four possibilities.
They weren't unanimous on any one of them.
First time in the history of Anglo-American law, that happened.
So this is what this Jack character stands for.
He's a slimy looking guy, too, but let's go ahead.
Let's play a little of his swarmy.
This is going through it there.
We're getting you.
Here's one reference to you.
I know that this isn't the one we were citing, but this one I didn't hear.
You just told me about it.
Let me listen to it.
I'll react with you.
Good enough, good enough.
Detailed the overwhelming evidence that Trump had lost Pennsylvania and he knew it.
Despite this, he and his co-conspirators continued to make false statements about that result to advance their criminal plan.
Can you describe the evidence that these were false claims and they knew there were false, including statements by election officials, court cases, and conversations between Trump and his Republican allies in the state?
I recall one particular claim that there were more votes than ballots than had been sent out.
This was a claim that was obviously false because many in even in the campaign knew that the reason for that discrepancy is we were talking about two different elections.
One was the primary and one was the general election.
My team interviewed Rudy Giuliani regarding that claim and he admitted it was wrong.
He admitted flat out that that was a mistake.
And so that's one of several.
With respect to witnesses in Pennsylvania, what springs to mind is the chair of the Republican Party, I believe, in Pennsylvania.
This is relatively early, shortly after the election, had informed Donald Trump that the idea that fraud was the reason was not accurate.
It was because of the counting of mail-in ballots, which was totally normal in this process.
And again, this is someone who is a Republican who supported Donald Trump, wanted him to win.
I submit he would have been a credible witness at trial.
You know, just pray, everyone, pray today for the base two detailed the overwhelming evidence that Trump had lost Pennsylvania.
Well, I mean, that is completely untrue and completely mischaracterized.
What he's talking about as the two, he's talking about two different things, actually.
He's talking about the fact that there was a period of time, the first couple of days after the election, when it was being analyzed, that in one case, irregularities in the primary were confused with irregularities in the general elections.
Those were corrected at the time long before anybody had a chance to talk to that lying son of a you-know-what.
He didn't discover it.
We disclosed it right at the hearing, and you can listen to the tape.
Secondly, there was, at the time of the hearing, a number put out by the Board of Elections where there were considerably more votes than ballots.
And that was then described as a mistake by the board.
And of course, that was disclosed also.
And then we realized as time went on that that happened three, four more times, and that possibly that was part of the scheme because they were out of control.
They didn't know how many votes they had to produce.
He also leaves out about, I would say, anywhere from 300 to 400 items of evidence that prove beyond any doubt that Pennsylvania was stolen, including the driver who brought the ballots down, who now has said that the FBI intimidated him to lie.
He was caught before the election bringing down thousands and thousands of blank ballots that could be filled out later.
And he originally said that this was to fix the election.
He then had a loss of recollection and the FBI couldn't find him.
And he has since said that the FBI intimidated him and kind of lost him for a while.
There also have been discovered Discrepancies of a huge nature between the number of votes cast and the number of votes recorded that would easily account for.
Plus, there are records from Republicans registering and recording and observing at least 700,000 ballots that were illegally processed in that they were not allowed to be examined and to this day haven't been examined.
False Information and NDOs 00:15:00
And they were done mostly in Philadelphia, but also in other places.
That evidence has never been accepted by a court.
The court in turning it down refused to have a hearing, which is unheard of.
And the witnesses who testified before the Pennsylvania committee, none of them were interviewed by a Jack the Liar Smith.
And I can tell you that there are more than enough witnesses, none of which we were allowed to call, that will tell you that when you went to bed on election night in 2020 and Trump was leading Pennsylvania by 750,000 votes with 60 plus percent counted or more than that,
there were several mathematical geniuses who can prove to you that it was statistically impossible to catch up unless you created more votes, which created the constant disparity between numbers of votes cast and numbers of votes counted,
which meant that our evidence that we were giving changed three or four times, but to reflect what they were doing, he explains none of that because he is a lying traitor.
The testimony that I really remember, Ted, however, that is even worse, because this is just one state is when he says that the president and I had a conversation and the president told me to tell, I guess, senators to delay and to take advantage of the violence.
There was never any such conversation.
I want them to produce that conversation.
I want to produce it.
And I want them to produce my testimony.
They also say that I said, that I testified to them that the allegations that I made in Georgia were false.
I never did that.
I've settled that case.
And even in that case, I've never said that because it's not true.
I refuse to say it, even though I might have lost every single thing that I own.
And when I settled the case, I settled it without having to say that.
And for some minuscule percentage of what they had, the crooked DC court was able to get.
I've never even got a trial.
So there's a lot I can't comment on about that, but I sure can defend myself against damn lies like that.
You go produce, Jack Smith, where I told you that I was lying about anything.
You are just one hell of a damn liar.
You really are.
And you go produced that conversation where the president and I discussed taking advantage of the violence.
Or was that destroyed along with the testimony I gave to the J-6 committee where I made fools out of them?
J-6 committee destroyed the evidence.
Why are they in jail?
Right.
I mean, every single one of them should be in jail.
That's right.
Well, do we want to play a little bit more from today's testimony?
This is Representative Brandon Gill.
Mayor, I think you might have hired a guy like this back in your U.S. attorney days.
You're really going to like what you hear here.
Then, Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy's toll records.
Yes, sir, we did.
Yes, you did.
And the subpoena covered the time period between November 2020 and January 2021.
Is that right?
I'm sorry, sir.
Could you say that again?
We're not going to delay like this.
The subpoena covered the time period between November of 2020 and January 2021.
How many days after Kevin McCarthy was sworn in as Speaker did you subpoena his records?
I don't recall, but those two things had nothing to do with it.
It was 16 days after becoming the highest-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives.
You subpoenaed his toll records.
Do you agree that that might reasonably be considered a violation of the speech or debate clause?
I do not, and I want to be clear that the toll or record.
You were collecting months' worth of phone data on the Republican Speaker of the House, the leader of the opposition, right after he got sworn in as Speaker, all around the time of a major vote.
That sounds like a flagrant violation of the speech or debate clause to me, and I think most people agree with me.
And Speaker McCarthy had no recourse, did he?
Because you issued a non-disclosure order ensuring that neither he nor any of the American people knew about these subpoenas.
Is that right?
The toll record, the non-contact toll record subpoenas, we did secure non-disclosure orders for those subpoenas.
You did.
And let me ask you, Mr. Smith, at the time you secured those non-disclosure orders, was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?
The non-disclosure order was based on concerns about.
Was Speaker McCarthy a flight risk?
He was not.
He was not.
Then why did your non-disclosure order refer to him as a flight risk?
It says right here, the court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in flight from prosecution.
Sir, when securing a nondisclosure order, the risks don't have to be associated with the police.
You think that the Speaker of the House is available.
Is this a flight risk?
No, this is not your time.
This is my time.
You think the Speaker of the House is a flight risk?
You think he's going to hop on a plane and leave the country?
No.
What I was trying to explain is with respect to a non-disclosure order, the risks aren't necessarily associated with the subscriber to the phone.
The risks to investigation.
I think that you were using, this is clearly in reference to Speaker McCarthy, and you were using clearly false information to secure a non-disclosure order to hide from Speaker McCarthy and from the American people the fact that you were spying on his toll records.
But I've got more, so let's move on.
In May of 2023, you also issued subpoenas for toll records of nine U.S. senators and an additional representative.
Is that right?
In May of 23, we did issue.
You did, and there were non-disclosure orders in conjunction with those subpoenas as well, right?
That's correct, consistent with department policy and the law.
So again, nobody would know what you were doing.
The senators would, and the representatives would, and the American people wouldn't know what you were doing.
Is that right?
The toll records that we secured and the non-disclosure orders were consistent with policy and consistency.
And you knew whenever you were doing that that there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause.
Is that right?
The toll record subpoenas that we secured were with the concurrence of the public and technology.
Your own analysis says that you knew there was a risk you were violating the speech or debate clause.
I have it right here.
This is an email from John Keller at Public Integrity Section to your team.
As you are aware, quote, as you are aware, there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a member's legislative calls violates the speech or debate clause in the D.C. circuit.
That's from your own analysis right there.
So you did know, didn't you?
Sir, with respect to the item you just put up on the screen, the last sentence states.
Okay.
We're going to get to the last sentence.
And you signed case law in here.
Quote, the bar on compelled disclosure is absolute.
Is that right?
Or do you think that you didn't have to abide by that precedent?
To be clear, this is not, this statement is not from my office.
This is the statement.
This is your justification for those subpoenas and NDOs that you ordered.
This was part of your analysis.
It's a cursory analysis.
I think it's worth noting.
Let's get to that last sentence then.
Quote, given my understanding of the low likelihood that any of the members listed below would be charged, the litigation risk should be minimal here.
In other words, you're using a novel legal theory, which you knew was novel, has never been tested by any court.
You're not charging any of these members.
Nobody's going to know about it because you issued NDOs.
Nobody's going to sue about it.
So sue this.
So who cares?
We're going to do it anyways.
I mean, you walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process.
Chairman, the gentleman's time.
I'm members of Congress, and you know it.
It's absolutely disgraceful.
I yield back.
That kid's a great lawyer.
That was a very, very good cross-examination.
The only thing I can say is he's got a patchy.
That guy is about as big a liar.
You've got to be some kind of partisan jerk off to really buy that guy.
You really do.
I mean, it's disgraceful.
It also suggests to me an answer to what I was talking about earlier about the first of the invasions of my privacy that they did.
And that was several years before they raided my house and my law office.
They took my records from my cell phone.
And they didn't tell me.
So they had to, in order to do that, they had to have gotten an affidavit like you're talking about.
And they had to get a non-disclosure order like you're talking about.
And the Justice Department has never produced that record for me.
And since my privacy was invaded, and I was part of the group that you know, they took their records.
I can't imagine, I have no idea why they're holding it back now.
I would love to see that affidavit that gave them the right.
And it appears as if they did it at the time.
This is before they were investigating me for a crime.
They did that later.
They were doing this because I represented President Trump and they were spying on him.
I'm sure they did a lot of other people.
They wanted to see what his lawyers were planning while they were investigating him.
You can't get much more illegal than that.
And I cannot figure out why the current Justice Department doesn't release those records.
There are a few of us in this position, maybe more than a few.
I know of a few.
But in my case, it would be very interesting to see what they used as a basis for going to get my accounts of my cell phone, my use of my cell phone.
And they never disclosed it to me.
I didn't find out about it until three years after when it came out in the newspapers, a whole group of other people, remember?
All the people that were.
But to this day, the Justice Department doesn't feel they're accountable for it.
They can just violate the rights of a lawyer, violate the right, and in this case, violate the rights of the former President of the United States and future President of the United States.
Actually, it was his rights they were violating.
The attorney client privilege is his right, not mine.
And there's no doubt they subpoenaed my records because they didn't subpoena my records before I was his lawyer.
Maybe they did subpoena it for some other reason, but they won't produce the affidavit, maybe because they're afraid I'll sue their ass off, which I probably will.
That's not to mention the fact that there's at least two other affidavits to justify raiding my house and my law office that they haven't produced.
Even though in that case, they found no evidence of a crime and reported that to the justice, to the grand jury.
I mean, think of that.
They come in, they raid your house, they raid your law office.
As a lawyer, I would have to have presumed they went to court and got an app, put it in an affidavit and got a judge to sign that they were authorized to do it.
The judge had to make a finding there was probable cause.
And then all of a sudden, they tell the grand jury there is no probable cause.
Well, something's wrong.
As a citizen, aren't I entitled to know?
And in the case of Donald Trump, as a citizen, isn't he entitled to know if this was an invasion of his attorney client privilege?
Was this done with his other attorneys?
I suspect it was.
This is all being withheld as of this day.
This is probably the worst scandal in the history of this country by a lot.
And this guy is a disgrace as a human being.
Well, we have with us a current law student and a volunteer from the Iranian community to help the wonderful Iranian people to gain their freedom, Organization of Iranian Communities.
And her name is Mickey Mohameday.
Mickey?
Hi.
Hello.
How are you, Mickey?
I'm good.
Thank you for having me.
So tell me where are you a student?
So I am currently attending Penn State Dickinson.
I don't know if you know former Governor Tom Ridge.
He attended.
Of course, I know Tom Ridge.
Tom Ridge and I have worked very, very closely with MEK, NCRI.
Even though he's a Democrat and I'm a Republican, but we completely agree that Iran should be free and that the NCRI should guide the transition and Madame Rajavi should be in charge of that.
Shah's Son and Iranian Resistance 00:15:49
But I want to hear from you.
Tell me your experiences and your view as an as were you born in America or Iran?
Yeah, so I was born in America.
I'm the first generation, Iranian American, born in America, like I just said.
And I really wanted to take today to just really kind of talk about the Shah or, you know, the Shah's son and how it differentiates from our movement and our organization and what we're doing.
I'm a volunteer with the Organization of Iranian American Communities.
We have lots of rallies, protests.
We take a lot of initiative to mobilize and to implement advocacy and change in Iran.
And we work with the House and Senate to help influence legislation, particularly HRES's, which garner basically like moral and political support from both the House and the Senate.
And so what's really important to distinguish is that we follow Maryam Rajevi's 10-point plan.
I know you've heard about her.
Yes.
And her plan outlines a clear blueprint for a transitional government for a democratic republic in Iran.
Whereas the Shah's son has not once given any sort of platform or anything of his policies so he could share his ideas.
If anything, he's just got in front of a camera and just talked when the crisis happened.
I don't know if you've noticed, but he's never around when it's all quiet.
I've noticed, I've noticed, I've noticed.
I've been involved for 15 years.
I've been in situations where they attempted to bomb us and kill us.
I remember Tom Ridge being there.
I don't remember him being there.
Yeah.
And that's the whole premise of this is that if we allow the Shah's son to go in and take power, first of all, we don't know how his transitional government is going to operate.
Second of all, there are signs that he has foreign adversaries kind of puppeteering him.
And so with that being said, in 1979, let's go back and remember why this Iranian revolution, how did the Islamic regime even come to be?
And that was in 1979 when the Shah fell.
And so for us, so what essentially happened was they traded worse for worser.
And if we go back to the monarchy, we're basically going back from worser to worse.
It's just loop.
Now you're going through the ultimate degree of dictatorship you could possibly go through.
Exactly.
So you can go back to an 80% dictatorship instead of an 100% dictatorship.
But what you can't do is have freedom.
Yeah.
And that's and also let me assure you that here's my guess as having been a prosecutor most of my life.
The Shah, the Shah's, the baby Shah wants to get back so they can continue to steal from your people because they walked out with hundreds of millions and billions of dollars.
And they didn't really give a damn that the people of Iran were starving while they lived a life of royalty.
He's never worked a day in his life and he's lived a jet-set life, never had a job that we know of, and he wants to run a country.
And he has an extraordinary number of contacts that make me very suspicious with the Revolutionary Guard.
The Revolutionary Guard is a terrorist group.
Somebody should investigate him for that rather than have him shoot his mouth off on television.
Yeah.
I mean, in any event, here's why I worry about him.
I think in some ways he acts as a he retards the effort to some extent.
Like when people see that, they could easily get discouraged.
I mean, he's so I can't imagine that the regime minds so much that he's involved.
I think they'd like to see him involved because it can tamper, it can tamper down the, I mean, people can say to themselves, what are we doing?
We're risking our lives so we can be under a king instead of a religious dictator.
Nobody wants to have kings anymore anyway.
No, I mean, you bring up really good points.
I actually wanted to touch on a lot of what you said.
Like, like you said, I mean, we have to ask ourselves, how has he sustained himself in America?
Like you said, no job.
He is living off the Iranian regime's or the Iranian regime's dollar and the Iranian people.
And so like he is simply a symbol.
And you mentioned how the his your concern for some of the people within his inner circle.
You know, during the 12-day war, he actually publicly posted a recruitment link for IR inviting IRGC members to join his initiative.
He reported that about like 50,000 joined him.
And effectively, that is asking like enforcers of the regime to dismantle the very system that they sustain.
And it's like akin to asking the discapo in Nazi Germany to overthrow Hitler.
It's the same thing.
And it's like his inner circle also includes former IRGC figures raising the serious questions about his infiltration, the continuity, and the regime recycling rather than genuine regime change.
And this forces the critical question of like, what is his true relationship with the Islamic Republic?
Like, what is his true relationship?
Is it for reform?
Is it to rebrand?
Like, he seems to just appear episodically, like, he just sporadically.
And like you mentioned, his, like, him kind of, he can, in a way, be a distraction.
And for that reason, he's an asset to the Islamic Republic because of his distraction and way of kind of flooding out what's really going on.
And so that's really important to note.
Like, I, and, you know, symbolism without effective change is not going to, is not going to take us anywhere because once like once this regime falls, if we do not take this moment, this critical timeframe that we have to implement actual change, then we're going to basically put ourselves back in a cycle.
Now, how did you get involved, Mickey, in these efforts to free your people, your, your, your, your people?
Yeah, I mean, so my, my stepdad, he's, he's very involved.
He came to this country when he was 17.
He actually has, his brother was killed in the 1988 massacre.
That's a tremendous massacre of about 20 or 30,000 people from the MEK by the former Ayatollah, I think it was, right?
Yeah.
And one of the worst, one of the worst terrorist acts in history.
Yeah.
And, you know, he was heavily affected by that.
And so when he came to this country, it only makes sense to, you know, and like I said, I am first generation.
And even for me, I have, I, I can't set foot on Iran, but I have this, this undeniable like pull in my heart towards Iran.
And I, I can't simply sit here in a place of privilege and not use my voice.
Yeah.
So that's great.
Mayor and Mayor, we actually met Nikki last year.
And we've stayed in touch.
And boy, she is quite impressive.
Nikki, question for you.
Iranian Americans, your age, your generation, how can we continue to demonstrate to them if because a lot of them, as you know, like you born here have never been to Iran, how do we spread the message that the son of the Shah is certainly not the answer once this murderous regime is removed?
Yeah, I mean, great question.
I think it's quite obviously in our faces.
You know, he's, he has, like I mentioned, no actual plan and no transitional government.
And like, if there is, if there is this space of, if we fail to mobilize, that space will be filled with people like him, the wrong actors and a puppet government that lacks legitimacy.
So what we can do is like recognize and the Iranian opposition, OYAC, MEK, and support them politically, morally, rather than designate IRGC.
And also, we should designate ROGC as a foreign terrorist organization.
You're absolutely right, my dear.
And cut ties.
Well, thank you.
How many, roughly, how many of you are of you are there?
Of the youth.
Yeah.
You know, we're just in Philadelphia.
Pennsylvania, DC.
In the DC area, yeah.
Yeah, I mean, I would say, if you want to give you a number, maybe in the hundreds, like we are all, and all of us have the same drive, the same passion as if we were in Iran right now.
And I think it's, yeah.
And I think it's also important to, you know, just recognize and read it that if this Islamic regime republic falls, it will be because of the Iranians inside of Iran, inside of the country that organize, that mobilize and ultimately compel elements of the security apparatus to switch sides, not because of any politician is in exile and promises a smooth transition.
Yeah, that is absolutely right.
And I think there's a good, I think without knowing the future, which we don't, I think there's a good chance it'll happen.
So it's guided the right way.
And I think Madame Rajavi's plan, people should understand that Madame Rajavi is the acting president of president.
President-elect.
And we like to president-elect of the NCRI, which is the National Council for Resistance to the Iranian dictatorship.
And it's a group of people that are available and have a plan to guide the transition, not to run the government permanently, but to guide the transition.
And the aim is to try to get everything organized once the horrible reign of terror is over and you get rid of the Ayatollah to get it organized so the government can keep running.
And then at the right time, hopefully within six months, less than a year, have an election with a lot of people participating, just like there were a lot of different groups participating in the NCRI.
A couple of nights ago, we had on someone who was a representative of the Azeri community.
So the NCRI, although the MEK started it, now has 23, 24 different groups as part of it.
And the ethnic communities, the non-Persian, like the Kurds and the Aziris, and they really despise the Shah because they were a particular focus of his persecution.
In fact, Of them think he was attempting genocides on them.
So they would, what you would have, if God forbid he ever got control, you'd have a civil war right away.
You'd have the Kurds and the Azeris, the Aziris that try to go to Azerbaijan and the Kurds that try to go to Kurdish Iraq or Turkey, which Erdogan isn't going to like very much.
So she's about the only one in her group that could hold it together.
So I mean, let's not forget that the very prisons that are executing and torturing people right now are the same prisons that were built by the Shah's, the Shah's son or the Shah's father.
Absolutely.
100%.
Yeah, 100%.
I mean, they look alike, so it's hard to.
Son of the Shah's father is what.
He has done, there is no other qualification that he has other than he's the son of the former dictator, which is a hell of a qualification.
Hello, a qualification.
He's been living in America for the past 40 years.
Venture capitals and yeah, it would be as if we instead of having George Washington, we picked one of George the kids, their brother.
One of his brothers could come over and run America.
Well, thank you very, very much.
And God bless you for what you're doing.
It's a great, it's a great cause that you're part of.
And, you know, I always feel, and I tell Madame Rajavi this, when she thanks me for what I do, I thank her for letting me participate.
It's one of the most important things I've done.
So God bless you.
Yeah, thank you so much.
And thank you for having me on.
We'll have you again.
You're very good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a good one.
Nikki's the best.
She's great.
And I've stayed in very regular contact with her.
She's finishing her second year of law school.
And so we'll see.
I mean, I don't know if you've noticed it, and you probably think we're being very selective, but I will tell you we're not.
Well, we are, I guess, but it's not, it's not, it shouldn't in any way confuse you.
This is an enormously talented group of people.
I've told you this before, but they are both in Iran and outside of Iran.
And this is a tragedy, what happened to them.
And to a very large extent, it's a tragedy, part of which, part of which, not all, but part of which lays on the shoulders of horrible foreign policy choices.
The United States State Department.
And the CIA.
Yeah, probably the CIA.
The State Department has a lot of Iranian lovers in it.
Iranian regime lovers.
Oh, yeah.
Iranian regime lovers.
I mean, how the hell did Obama get away with secretly sending ballots of cash?
Yeah, how do you get away with that?
I mean, how do they ever do that ridiculous agreement to let them become nuclear?
I mean, hopefully Marco is getting rid of most of them, but you can't get rid of all of them.
They're hanging around there.
I mean, they've actually had some spies right in the Biden administration for Iran.
Right.
And these are things that they just don't cover.
That's why you got to listen to us.
I mean, do you know that in the last eight out of 12 years, and those would be the last four years of Obama and the four years of Biden and not the four years of Trump.
Drug Dealers of America 00:00:59
The biggest financial support for the regime of terror, the Islamic dictatorship, is the United States of America.
We've given them more money than anybody.
Yeah.
And some of it we gave to them in cash, which makes it sound like we're drug dealers or terrorists.
Maybe we are.
I don't know.
I don't know.
They sure come to the aid of all the drug dealers they can.
Who is ICE thrown out of the country?
So far, about 70% of them have massive criminal records, and the other 30% have serious difficulties.
Right.
But how the heck are you on this?
Specially Ordered Coffee 00:05:00
How are you on the side of the child molesters?
It is something.
Well, we might as well, maybe should we take a quick break?
Yeah, let's take a look.
We have our next guest, another impressive.
Okay, let's take a quick break.
So we'll take a look.
We'll be right back.
And we'll be right back on a very, very busy Thursday in the news.
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 Tunnel to 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.
Wow.
Plus, they got catch-up TV that allows you to go back and watch what you've missed or want to watch again.
Cut your cable in half and get twice as much for free.
Way more channels for half the cost.
After the first year, the subscription then drops to $57.95 monthly, where you change or upgrade anytime.
Go to QUXNow.com and get yours today.
Use promo code Rudy.
Here we are, pretty much at the beginning of the process here at this pristine, I call it a laboratory.
It's not like a factory.
It's like a hospital.
This is the beginning of the process for roasting.
Deep green, very good quality.
Most people don't use this quality.
We deal with small farmers because they 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 going to 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.
To America's Mayor Live, make sure you get your Rudy's coffee.
I just had some.
It's fabulous.
The best.
Now, I know it's very kind of useless for me to say it since it's Rudy's coffee, but I get so many compliments on it that I have to.
And of course, I don't make it.
Darren does, and Darren is terrific.
But I did have something to do with picking out the blends.
The morning coffee, fabulous.
And just right for when you're waking up.
The bold coffee, great in the middle of the day.
If you like, or need to have decaffeinated coffee, fabulous decaffeinated coffee.
And we also have a very specific iced coffee in a can.
In a can, so you can make believe you're drinking beer if you want.
I mean, but I can't tell you how many compliments I get on it.
So I don't feel uncomfortable just reiterating that.
Or I don't feel uncomfortable at all as long as I'm doing this, reiterating the fact you sign up with Tunnel the Towers, huh?
You couldn't do anything better for yourself.
They're doing God's work.
So we now have with us another representative of the Iranian-American community, a woman, quite an accomplished woman who for the longest time was the executive director of AI technology at one of our great companies and now is a consultant,
Could See 140 Cities, 140 Books 00:15:31
but devotes her time or a lot of her time for fighting for freedom for the people who live under the reign of terror and have for some time in Tehran.
Seema Yazdani.
That's right.
And so Seema's joining us.
Her camera just went out.
Let's see if it's back on.
Seema.
Seema, can you hear us?
All right.
So we'll have her on.
Okay, we'll have her on, and then I'll just catch you up on a couple of, I mean, one of the idiots from Iran, their top diplomat.
They call him the top diplomat.
I don't know what it means to be the top diplomat.
Abbas Arachi says that it's the Israelis who are actually doing the demonstrating in Iran.
So there have been demonstrations in 140 different cities in Iran.
Some of them probably have 5,000 people.
And the Israelis have gotten into 140 cities.
They must really control it.
I don't know why the Israelis don't take the place over.
That's the most ridiculous.
Where did this half-whit jackass get to say this?
It's like, these guys are like Jack Smith.
I mean, they just say shit and it doesn't matter.
He says the Israelis are carrying out the demonstrations in order to get America to fight with Iraq.
So there are significant numbers of Iraelis in 140 different Iranian cities.
Gee, I'm going to call Bibi and just tell him to take over.
You don't have a chance.
You might as well, Abbas, how about surrendering now?
You can join Jack Smith in prison.
You're both liars.
There is some consternation and debate and stuff going on in the newspapers that President Trump drew a red line and he said, if you kill any of these demonstrators, we're going to strike and we're going to hit you harder than you've ever been hit.
And that's about two weeks ago.
And although they called off, although they called off the executions, they've killed a lot of people during that period of time.
A couple, they're just like a mowed down in the street.
And they say, well, the president is getting himself into difficulty in losing credibility.
Would you please just calm down?
If you can't figure out what's going on, make sure you listen to my show because I've explained it to you.
The aircraft carrier is now about two days away.
And the reason for the delay is really simple.
It's not that we couldn't take out whatever has to be taken out in Iran.
We wouldn't be able to assure ourselves that we could protect our 14 different bases that are within striking distance of Iran.
And when he does this, he wants to do it like he's done all the others.
God willing, we don't lose any innocent lives, American or Iranian.
And if we do lose lives, we kill the terrorists.
Now, there is SEMA.
Hello, how are you?
Hello, hello, America Mayor.
An honor to be on your show.
Well, it's an honor to have you.
And I want you to tell people your background so they understand.
Because the American knowledge of Iran is very much constricted by a lot of propaganda.
The regime is almost as good as China in warping our press.
You know that.
So to hear from people that have their own experience is so valuable for us.
So go ahead, tell us.
Sure.
After I finished high school, I came to the United States just a few months before the revolution, 1978.
And I've been here since then.
I started computer systems engineering at one of the universities in Michigan.
And I didn't know at the time I would be the first female computer systems engineer in that school.
I finished that, got my master's degree, started my professional work in various startups and a large enterprise company for over 30 years, focused on data, data analytics,
and AI for the past 10 years, and helped build data science team, build a number of applications in the area of learning recommendation engines to help accelerate skills development and basically address the skilled labor shortage gap.
Because as technology grows, we need to also accelerate and make it easier for developing talent.
This is going to continue to be a need for every community, every society, and that's one of my interest areas.
Well, now, so you left right about a year before they overthrew the Shah?
Yes, yes.
When I left, it was October, actually, October 15.
I remember that they had just started the military curfew that, you know, like people, if they were saying not more than if they see three people in the street talking together.
Oh, gosh, we lost her again.
We lost again.
Her camera seems to be going in and out, but we'll get her back on.
Oh, my goodness.
Yeah, I'm kind of interested in what her impression was back then about what was happening.
Did she think they were transitioning to some form of a free government and a republic or a democracy?
And then the Ayatollah took over and hijacked it.
Because I mean, I'm old enough to remember that period.
And when the Shah was originally overthrown, it was only for a short period.
There was a feeling that you would end up with some form of a you'd end up with some form of a democracy, you know, Republican form of democracy.
We use the word democracy very loosely.
It doesn't mean just necessarily the will of the majority.
It means the will of the majority to us with protections for people's rights.
So the impression was that that's where we were headed.
And then all of a sudden they allowed the Ayatollah to come back who had been exiled, Ayatollah Khomeini, the first Ayatollah.
And he was coming back just to be a religious leader and going to the holy city of Kuam and not bother anybody.
But they had secretly organized with these mullahs who really are little gangsters.
They had secretly organized a takeover.
So I was getting, I was getting at the point, when you were watching this from the United States and they overthrew the Shah, what was your feeling about that?
And what did you think would happen before the Ayatollah came in and took over?
Actually, when I was going through high school, I was a big avid reader.
I love to read a variety of books rather than academic and also extracurricular.
I would visit bookstores and libraries.
I'm going to get her on the phone.
Unfortunately, are you there?
Yes, I'm here.
Okay, well, we can hear you if you want to continue.
Yeah, yeah, go ahead.
Yeah.
So all of a sudden, in the last year, we started seeing more books becoming available, a variety of books, and I would read them to become more familiar with what's going around the world, democracy, human rights, and all of that.
Of course, my parents would tell me more about the time of Mossad that they were active during the Mossad time, and they would tell me about nationalization of oil and how come oil, you know, the proceed is not being spent enough equitably across the country.
But we didn't know anything about Khomeini.
I remember I came October 15 as an ordinary like high school student coming here.
I heard about his name here.
So he wasn't known.
He was there.
Nobody called for him to come to be a unifying factor.
He just showed up.
And when I came to university campuses here, then I heard it from other students.
They were talking about the Shah's overthrow, what are the options, and we were constantly following the news with those little subtitles, constantly reading and anxiety, of course, that what will happen.
We saw that in a matter of few months, the value of the currency started going down, but not like now.
But anyway, we could see that, but there is a lot of at the same time hope that there would be democratic opportunities, there would be freedom.
But very soon, when we heard about the executions, and especially I personally, I remember March 8th, 1979, because that was the first revolution, the first large protest that was done against the regime's policy by women, by professional women, by women, doctors, nurses, teachers.
And regardless of their head covering, with their money, they were all participating because Khomeini had just issued a decree that you have to have this forced hijab.
And that was where, and people could tell it's not about the outfit.
It's the beginning of a lot of repression.
And universities, they started seeing some of those.
And so I remember that clearly.
That was one area that we said, what's going on?
What's happening?
Because I was interested in women's freedom and I always followed that.
So very quickly, of course, there were all sorts of newspapers, magazines, various students' organization on campus that they would have book tables and we would go read their books and attend their events.
But very soon I could see that the one that would make more sense were the MEK organization.
They had programs, book clubs, they had theaters, and they would in various forms, they were trying to inform the students that there is a growing, the growing fanaticism is growing and that is dangerous.
This is it's a freedom is the number.
You cannot have democracy without freedom.
And if you don't have freedom, there would be wars.
You don't have peace.
So I learned that the principle of freedom is the foundation.
And what appeals to me as a young student going to university at the time was the speeches and the talk was all about, okay, we made this accomplishment against the dictatorship of a monarchy, which was a hundred years struggle, but we don't want to just forget and be comfortable with as is.
The idea is development.
The idea is freedom, democracy, equality, and justice.
Again, if you're going to have a small group that monopolize opportunities and resources, it's not going to work.
And that educated me along the way that we should have this long-range vision about the society, not just be happy with a few little surface changes.
So you must be quite concerned about all of a sudden the reappearance out of nowhere of the baby shot.
Yeah, you know, in engineering, in the technical world, we have a saying because everybody's problem solvers, they always like to solve tough problems.
We have sometimes you find that the most important problem you need to solve.
That's very important, as opposed to just everything.
Sometimes you have a solution looking for a problem.
I think he reminds me of that.
He sees himself as a solution.
No, he's looking for a problem.
And that's ridiculous.
The technical community or people professionals that we deal with this problem a lot because you have limited time, limited resource, limited talent.
Where do you want to apply that is more fundamental and essential as a platform and you build on top of it?
You want to have reusability, you want to be efficient, you want to be effective.
We don't want to waste resources.
So we always think like that.
And so that's where I think he is wasting this human energy that he's put into this protest, the lives and the intensity against the regime by diverting and creating this side conversation, distracting.
And that's it's like a betrayal as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah, it is.
And so you're a supporter of MEK and Madame Rajavi?
Yes, nationality.
And you believe she could guide a fair and honest transition.
Yes, I do because I've saw them over the past 40 years.
They are always innovative.
That's one thing I like about them.
They're constantly evolving and adapting.
The vision and mission has always been very clear in terms of they don't want necessary power, they don't want, but what they want is to move the government of people by people from the people to them.
And they also constantly are very research-based, evidence-based.
They don't just theorize and talk about theory in theory.
They're very action-oriented and grassroots.
They start, we understand the base of society and the nuances and challenges of various segments of the society and what is the priority.
And especially the 10-point plan is the core root of this regime in terms of repression is discrimination and gender inequality, because half of the society, and given the culture and the history of the Middle East and all of that, this is a very difficult problem.
And she focused on the most difficult problem culturally, socially, historically, and politically.
Guarantees Of Human Rights 00:09:38
And that's the first cornerstone of her 10-point plan from the National Council of Assistance.
I think that's attractive to a lot of professionals in Iran as well as outside Iran because they want to spend their time and energy, develop their talent, they want to develop their society, bring value back to people.
But when there is discrimination, and you won't be able to do that, second is very consultative.
They are constantly reaching out, outreaching, reaching to experts, to scholars, to professionals, and get feedback and adaptive with all the various challenges.
So that's what's very attractive in terms of vision, mission, overthrow of the regime from beginning when they saw there is no more room for parliamentary improvement, you know, passing laws.
Then, when they noticed that the regime is just brutally killing any voice of dissent in 1981, they said that the only option is left is to change the regime.
And they focused on that.
It's not like they change their mind all the time.
And that's, and they keep adapting as various environmental factors, international, domestic, not everything is not going to happen.
They adjust the strategy.
And that is, to me, that's very smart.
And that's let's hope that it goes that way because that would make such a difference.
And Iran has such a great future, such great assets, and particularly human assets.
I mean, terrifically talented people that it could make a very, very big difference, not just for the Middle East, but for the whole world.
Yeah, actually, there was one statistic I saw, I was struck, I think it was from the World Bank, last year, 2024, over 100, two years ago, 110,000 professional, like university-educated, experienced, have left Iran because of the repression.
And the value, like estimated financial value, is like $50 billion.
Just that.
Look at $50 billion asset in one year left.
Let's hope.
I think there's a real chance.
So we're doing everything we can.
Thank you very much for giving us your time, my dear.
We'll see you very soon.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I hope that was helpful.
I'm sure it was.
You need to hear from the people that are directly affected by this to really get a sense of how important that it is.
You keep hearing the 10-point program, and we'll go over all of them tomorrow night.
We'll just put them up for you.
But really, let me just summarize them for you.
They're basically, they're human rights.
They're guarantees of human rights.
We use the word democracy very loosely.
And even our founders made it clear that they tried to make clear that we're not a democracy.
But I think there's another way to look at it.
We define democracy when we add to the definition of it.
A democracy means the majority rules.
And the majority put Hitler in.
So a democracy doesn't necessarily mean freedom.
It can mean oppression for a very substantial group of minorities.
So what we really are as a country is a, you could call it a lot of things.
We call it a republican form of government.
We're not a direct democracy.
We don't all vote on every issue.
We elect representatives to represent our voice, which makes us a republic, really.
We don't have a town hall like they had in Athens where everybody comes in and votes.
And then secondly, we're a democratic republic with a rule of law and with a fundamental rule of law and then other laws.
The fundamental rule of law is our Bill of Rights and our Constitution.
That's what her 10 points are.
They are to guarantee that there's going to be an elected government, but that government is going to be limited in that it cannot interfere with the freedom of women.
It can't interfere with the freedom of religion.
Women have all the same rights as men.
Religions can function.
They don't have to all be Muslim.
They can be Christian or Jewish or whatever.
That they will, and then they go on with a couple of their specific problems, that they'll be non-nuclear.
They will make it a fundamental right that you can't have the death penalty.
And there's a reason for that.
The reason for that is that so many of their people have been killed.
I mean, the entire generation has been wiped out.
The Ayatollahs, the two of them, probably aside from the communist Red Chinese have killed more of their own people than any regime, at least in modern times.
We know just in one period they killed 20,000 people.
Maybe it was 30 back in 1988 and 89 when they just focused on the MEK.
So we'll go over them with you, but they're the guarantees that you would expect in a government that is a government that is going to be ruled by the majority selecting the leaders, but is going to protect the rights of the minority.
And hopefully is going to be a government in which things change and shift, as opposed to with elections every whatever they determine, three years, four years, five years, with a legislative body, elections that'll be monitored by international groups at the beginning so that they're fair.
Madame Rajavi's position is temporary.
I have no idea if she'd run or not run for office, but her major focus is to try to guide the transition and give it some organization and focus, because otherwise you know VCs can go from bad to worse, which has happened in some situations in Egypt, for example, until CC took over.
So I will assure you that everything that I can see looks like we're getting ready for a strike.
We've got any number of assets in the area.
We have a carrier group maybe two days away where we've moved even more assets to the Middle East than we had a week ago.
We've moved US F-15E jet fighters.
They were sent to Jordan.
Each one of our USS Abraham Lincoln and its strike group is sailing within the South China Sea.
It's, as I said, two days away, maybe a day away from the Persian Gulf.
I don't think they're going there for a vacation.
I don't think this is going to be liberty for the sailors, Ted.
Nor do I think the aircraft carrier is there to carry out strikes.
I think the aircraft carrier is there to protect.
So if planes and rockets start coming out of Iran, they're going to get shot down.
That's make it as simple as that.
And if Iran does try to strike back, then the destruction in Iran will become even greater.
So basically, the whole purpose of the strike will be to limit or eliminate their ability to kill demonstrators.
So what does that really mean?
What it really means is the strike would end up with the end of the regime of terror and then some opportunity for them on their own, which they claim they can do on their own.
They're not asking for boots on the ground.
They're not even asking for military aid the way we did with Ukraine.
They are saying, we can handle this.
Just support us.
And of course, the hardest thing is getting the Ayatollah out because he's the one that holds together the regime of terror or the terroristic theocracy, however you want to look at it.
Bannon And The Somalis 00:07:02
Or there are people who say he's just interpreting what Muhammad said correctly.
That if you read the Quran, it's there.
You've got to read it out, not read it in.
You know, we pointed out to you last night the worst of the worst list, which was six, what is it, 160,000, 160,000 or whatever.
But I mean, the people they're arresting are overwhelmingly criminals.
And they're also, and I don't want to go through these lists.
I just, it's disgusting.
It makes me get sick to my stomach.
But every list I see of 10, 12 people, there are four or five perverts.
This invasion, I'm sure, involved terrorists, and I'm sure it certainly involved human traffickers.
There was just one arrested in, there was one arrested in California.
William Eduardo Moran Carballo, who was from El Salvador, one of the Bidenistas, one of the people invited in by Biden from El Salvador.
And he has four human smuggling arrests.
Oh, and two for inflicting injuries on his wife.
See, this is what I'm saying.
Whenever you see these, and I went through the criminal records, a bunch of them the other night.
We'll put out some more of them.
But if you get 10 of them, you see that five of them have perverted kinds of crimes, abusing a three-year-old, raping a woman, beating up their wives.
These are really evil people.
And it stands to reason the way Biden opened the doors.
You're going to send your crap in here if you open the doors like that.
And this is what immigrant group of the 19th century came in and stole $9 billion and then ended up after being here for 15 years that 85% of them are getting government assistance.
There was no government assistance.
You either worked or you starved.
Or you worked together.
Not for the Somalis.
What the hell?
No, no, no.
For the Somalis, the government will help you to survive terrifically, but then you can become millionaires and billionaires by stealing the government's money.
And it really is stealing the money that was intended for other Somalis that are poor, because there are probably some really poor people.
Let's just finish off, since we are in soccer time.
The Supreme Court argument yesterday about Lisa Cook getting thrown out of the Fed and the president's power to throw them out of the Fed looks like it's going to go the other way because the conservatives seem really concerned about affecting the Fed because they have the idea that the Fed is a very, very special institution and they don't want to politicize it.
Like it's not politicized.
Come on.
And what's the point of having something that's not responsive to the people?
We're better off having a president who politicizes it.
We don't like the politicizing.
We throw the president out.
Instead, we got to be subjected to the dictatorial decisions of Putnam Powell.
If you understand him, you're better than I am.
Right.
The Clintons have been held in contempt.
Oh, time.
The House Oversight Committee voted 34 to 8 to hold him in contempt and 28 to 15 to hold her in contempt.
They had to have had Democrats they voted for.
Yep.
Right.
Now, I mean, I don't know how you failed to put them in jail and for much lesser whatever Bannon and Navarro were put in jail.
But of course, Eric Holden never was.
But I mean, he's a Democrat and he's a black Democrat, so you can't put him in jail, right?
It's against the laws.
It's against the rules, remember?
Yeah.
Navarro is a white boulder guy, so you can put him in shackles and Bannon.
You can do anything you want with him.
Except you don't affect Bannon.
He doesn't give a shit.
Screw you.
Also, it's really interesting.
We'll talk a little more about sports tomorrow night as we get ready for the weekend.
But when you think about the fact that we talked about Indiana last night and Kurt Signetti and just being there for two years and turning them around.
But the Patriots have another turnaround.
Everybody thought it would take about 10 years for the Patriots to get back in Belichick, Brady territory.
And here they are on the cusp.
Are they number one seed?
They are not.
They are traveling to Denver and this Sunday they will play the number one seeded Denver Broncos at Mile High Stadium.
Oh God, they're going to have two problems.
One, it's hard to breathe up there.
So they're going to have to get there early and spend a couple of days there and get ready.
I bet you they're there now.
Are they?
Yeah, they should be there at least two days.
Yeah, I agree with that.
You got to get ready.
It really is a difference.
Second, then much worse.
It used to be that only.
You got to get some kind of antidote for the marijuana that pervades the air in Colorado.
I mean, they're in one of the worst states in the country with the Governor Feliz Navidad, right?
Who invited Trendaragua there thinking they were a singing group.
And then they kill.
Feliz Navidad. Feliz Navidad.
I'd like to get that out once.
Those flags, they look like communist flags.
Well, those flags of Colorado.
I wouldn't put it past them.
I mean, Minnesota, Tampon Tim changed the Minnesota flag, literally, to match Somalia.
So I wouldn't put it past Colorado if they didn't do something with some communist country, man.
Why Tampon Slips Matter 00:08:21
But it's funny you bring that up.
Is there actually a Tampon on the flag?
Well, Harmeet Dylan, who's one of the top officials at the Department of Justice, in a podcast yesterday referred to Tim Walz.
And in a matter of just, you know, as she's speaking on a serious topic, she just, without even skipping a beat, referred to him as Tampon.
And it was glorious.
I've been doing that since day one.
You have, right?
We've done it.
And we don't just let up.
I really would like to call him Red Dim.
Well, Trade of Tim.
The guy never has benefits.
China Tim.
One single question about all the trips to China, the fact that they took him right out of school.
He looks like part of the Manchurian candidate movie.
Of course, that was the North Koreans, but the Chinese are the same.
There's a great article in the Wall Street Journal today about the legislature of New Hampshire.
Too bad Dr. Maria's not around.
Maybe we'll leave this for and ask her to cover it on our show.
But you know, the New Hampshire legislature, you know what they get paid?
First of all, it's one of the largest legislatures in the country.
Yeah.
And they get paid $100 a year.
$100 a year?
I mean, that isn't right.
That really isn't right.
$100,000?
$100,000.
$100.
This passed?
No, they've been paid this since the beginning.
1889.
Wait, The legislators get paid $100 a year.
I didn't know that.
And it's been frozen at that since 1889.
Wait, in 1889, they were making $100 a year.
$100.
Yeah.
100.
That's it.
Okay.
Just in case you think I can't read.
No, no, well, I was thinking you said 100,000.
No, I was like, what?
No, no, in New York, they get 142,000.
And that's, you know, that's not counting the commissions.
Or like all the per diem, right?
I'm sure.
Make four or five times more a commission right in New York, if you're a Democrat, the public official salary is salary plus commissions, otherwise known to those of us who are honest, as bribes.
What do you think of the part-time versus full-time legislature?
Because there's an argument they should be part-time or full-time, but I think they should be paid.
You know a requisite amount for their work.
I think it's ridiculous.
You actually probably keep people from running.
Yeah, of course you do there.
People can't afford that.
They can't, they can't, and you end up they have over the years.
I mean, they said well, they get the elite well, you know what the elite has have done to us.
I mean right, the elite have ruined us, right?
Well then, that was my argument, the elite running the State Department for years and running us into the arms of China and Russia.
I have a feeling you had this argument as mayor, but when I was student body president of my undergraduate school, we were paid, I was paid and I and I um defended that, that decision, by saying, you know, students can't afford to run if you don't pay them right yeah yeah, I think that's fair for a mayor.
I would say the same thing, right, you got to take the salary and if you're a billionaire fine, give it up, but yeah, but I mean, most people aren't billionaires and you don't want billionaires to be.
Uh, you inhabit all of government right right, you want uh, regular.
A lot of regular was supposed to be a citizen democracy.
What did you make as mayor?
180 170 180, something like that, I think.
I started it, started at something 130 and ended up at about 180.
I think it's over 200 now.
Well, maybe if they paid by, if it was performance-based pay, you would have uh, you know, made a million.
Yeah, but I don't.
You shouldn't have to.
You shouldn't have to pay for the private sector pays.
You should pay enough so the person can support himself and his family herself and not be subjected to wealth and not be subject.
I don't think.
I don't think it creates the temptation to take bribes.
By the way, I think that's a totally separate thing.
Uh-huh generally, that comes about if you're a Democrat.
It's a character flaw, right?
Yeah, that's a good thing.
They carry it in the in the program.
You know, it's just like they all have a little aboss tweet in them, right?
At least in New York they do um, so I think we've got most of it, most of it covered.
Yeah yeah, Baron Trump, you should know Uh was a hero.
Yes, Baron Trump was on.
Uh has a friend that he communicates with and he was communicating with her and all of a sudden she was screaming and crying and being hit.
So he called the police right there and they came and saved her.
Isn't that amazing?
And, by the way, the back and forth is quite something.
He does sound a little bit like his father.
Let's get not sound.
But you know, I read the words and it's, yeah, but let's see if you'll see if we can get that for tomorrow.
Yeah okay, i'll get you the transcript if we can get that.
You definitely.
You read it and you're like, wow that's, we definitely know who his father is.
Read about our friend, Bob Costello in the post.
Oh, we got to get Bob on.
Well, we got to watch the podcast.
He was part of the podcast for Miranda Divine.
I haven't watched it yet and um, so that's, hold that up.
Can you hold that picture, Bob?
But I won't say what, any Private conversations I had, but I think that's a fine picture of Bob.
I'll just say that.
Well, he doesn't like the picture.
He may have a different view of the picture.
That was full page print.
That picture was used full.
That's a full page of the New York Post yesterday.
Did he say that?
Yeah, he didn't like it.
Well, I told him maybe you need a better PR guy.
No, it's not the best picture.
I agree.
I mean, you know, he's better looking than that.
Yeah.
Well, we'll be back tomorrow.
We will see where we stand with all of these different things in the air, very, very important ones.
A lot of stuff they're lying to you about.
Boy, I bet they're lying like hell on all those CNN things about lying Jack Smith, huh?
Right.
Right.
I can't imagine.
Yeah, well, I will show up more tomorrow.
Just the idea that he was appointed as the special prosecutor when he has a whole record of unethical behavior.
He would never tolerate that if it was a Republican.
If President Trump had to appoint someone to investigate, let's say, he'll pick any, I don't know, the vice president.
Well, suppose he picked me to do it.
And I don't have it.
I don't have an ethical problem, except ones created by liars.
But of course, I would be seen as too partisan.
Well, this guy has to be seen as too crooked.
And I wish they had brought out his prior record because everything he did with Trump, he had done with McDonald.
And that's why Garland picked him.
Garland's no dope.
He picked a guy who knew the drill.
He knew how to bring false charges against someone.
Let him stand long enough so that you affect the election.
And then, well, who cares if the Supreme Court throws it out?
Except, you know, it didn't work in this case.
The public caught onto it because they overdid it.
They were pigs.
He didn't do one.
He did four.
By the time you get to four, it's ridiculous.
And plus, as they pointed out today, give him, people get more time to try a traffic violation.
They were going to give Trump because they wanted to squeeze it in for the election.
That's right.
And how is it every single one of those cases has now either gone away or gone?
All of his cases have gone away.
We still have the one in, believe it or not, in Arizona, which the judge has dismissed, but the prosecutor has a chance to re-file it.
I don't remember getting all this time to re-file cases.
It's a couple of years to re-file a case.
If I had to take a couple of years to refile a case, the judges just dismiss it and say, Julian, you don't have a case.
If you can't re-file it right away, and this woman doesn't want to refile because she's running and she doesn't want to, I don't know what it is.
Who knows?
Praying For Patriots 00:02:33
I mean, they're so crooked in Arizona.
Well, pray for people in Iran, the people in Israel, and the people in Ukraine.
Pray for the people in the United States and in Venezuela.
So many places that we're trying to help now, huh?
Good.
Good.
It's good.
And pray for our president, that he's safe and that he continues to have the tremendous strength that he has.
I'm sure he will, but he needs your help.
God bless America.
It's our purpose to bring to bear the principle of common sense and rational discussion to the issues of our day.
America was created at a time of great turmoil, tremendous disagreements, anger, hatred.
It was a book written in 1776 that guided much of the discipline of thinking that brought to us the discovery of our freedoms, of our God-given freedoms.
It was Thomas Paine's Common Sense, written in 1776, one of the first American bestsellers, in which Thomas Paine explained, by rational principles, the reason why these small colonies felt the necessity to separate from the Kingdom of Great Britain and the King of England.
He explained their inherent desire for liberty, for freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of speech.
the ability to select the people who govern them.
And he explained it in ways that were understandable to all the people, not just the elite.
Because the desire for freedom is universal.
The desire for freedom adheres in the human mind and it is part of the human soul.
This is exactly the time we should consult our history.
Look at what we've done in the past and see if we can't use it to help us now.
We understand that our founders created the greatest country in the history of the world.
The greatest democracy, the freest country, a country that has taken more people out of poverty than any country ever.
All of us are so fortunate to be Americans.
But a great deal of the reason for America's constant ability to self-improve is because we're able to reason.
We're able to talk.
We're able to analyze.
Export Selection