All Episodes
Previous
Feb. 20, 2026 - Rudy Giuliani
02:12:30
America's Mayor Live (869): President Trump Says Decision on Striking Iran Could Come Within 10 Days

NA

|

Time Text
Hillary Knight's Goal 00:15:44
Good evening.
This is Rudy Giuliani.
This is America's Mayor Live.
And I am overjoyed, as I hope all of my fellow Americans are, at that team you see in back of me.
That is the American women's hockey team that have proven today they're the greatest in the world and won the Olympics, won the gold medal against Canada in a very, very exciting and hard-fought game.
And although I know there's sort of a little or a lot of bitterness between the United States and Canada or whatever, but the Canadians have to get great credit for putting up an unbelievable, an unbelievable effort against a team that's considered to be better than them.
The American women's hockey team is considered to be by a good margin the best in the world.
And so the Canadians get great credit for, I mean, they were leading this thing until two minutes to go.
They were two minutes away from the gold medal.
Let's put it that way.
And the captain of the team, you help me with this, Ted, because this guy's a real hockey expert.
Hillary Knight, the captain, scored the tying.
So let's show the tying goal and the winning goal, which was scored by Megan Keller.
Right.
So we've got both.
We're going to start.
Who has the record for the goal?
Hillary Knights.
We'll do Hillary Knight first.
Hillary Knight, okay.
She has the record.
And this is to tie the game.
Can you tell by watching how much time is left?
Well, you tell us after.
Yeah, there's about two minutes left here.
Wow.
I had forgotten that.
So here's the goal.
It's 1-0 at this point.
Unfortunately, I got to do that.
1-0 means if two minutes had gone out and nobody scored, Canada wins the gold medal.
Right.
So this is Hillary Knight tying goal.
Across to Keller.
Back out to Edwards.
Edwards with a shot.
Score!
The United States ties it with the goaltender card with two oaths.
That was to tie up.
For some reason, I get volume on that one.
The captain, Hillary Knight.
The first goal of Sony Knight.
And that goal right there made her the all-time leading scorer.
Now, how much time was left in that goal?
Just a minute.
Just about two minutes left in the game.
Wow.
Look at this.
How about this?
From a face-off win, Hillary Knight.
The Captain Ties goal scoring.
The Albert Pass for Keller, a defenseman.
My Sword cuts to the net.
Score!
Megan Keller!
The overtime hero!
The Olympic World!
Wow, what a I want to ask you a question about Hockey and the two goals.
And the last one again?
Yep. Wow. Oh. There is now. Yeah.
So very interesting to me is they're two very different goals.
One was a long, what I would call, probably not, this is not the right words, but a long goal.
Yeah, probably like that.
That got the benefit of the goalie being blocked out a little by both an American player and one of our own players.
The goalie didn't have a clear view of that shot until it was right on her.
What do you call, you call that something in hockey.
I don't know what that is when the goalie is balked.
This is the winning.
The winning goal is a more classic kind of goal where she just outskated that other girl and then beat, and then the game-winning.
And they can hear it actually.
For some reason, we're not getting it here, but they can hear it.
But yeah, they can hear you too.
So, so that the second goal is one where she had to first kind of deal with the defensive.
See that this other girl comes up on it, right?
Tries to stop her.
That's nice.
Man, so at the very end, Ted, when she finally got free of the defense, the defense, I would say defenseman, but defense woman, whatever.
That was faking out the goalie.
It was almost like a penalty shot, a one-on-one shot.
Right here.
Whoa.
Pulls it back and right through them.
Right there.
Look at that.
That is nice.
I mean, that Megan Keller will never forget this moment.
That's for sure.
So the woman in back of her was trying to get the stick in to pry loose the puck, right?
Yep.
She failed to do that.
I mean, we're talking now portions of a second.
But then at the very end, she had to fake out the goalie because if the goalie had anticipated correctly, the goalie would have stopped the puck, right?
Right.
So it looked like she was faking it under her legs and then she went to the side.
Right.
So she got to be really quick.
I mean, that happened like boop, boop, boop, boop.
That's why these goal, these cocky players are great athletes.
Right.
Wow.
Look at that.
Look at that.
I watched that a hundred times.
You can watch that all over.
Right.
Now, show the first one again.
First one is like totally different.
And tell me the word.
I think there's a word for when you block out a goalie.
You block him out.
The goalie has people in front of him.
Right.
Yeah.
So they have rules against that.
I'm not sure international.
Well, I don't think it happened on purpose.
I mean, it was screening, right?
It's almost like the goalie was screened partially at least.
But the major screening seemed to be one of her own players.
Right.
I mean, not on purpose.
Right.
But that's what happened.
The player was there for defensive purposes.
Look at this.
Wow, is that nice?
Right through everyone's legs.
Yeah, you see that?
All those people in front of the goalie.
Here's what I think as a hockey amateur completely.
That's more the responsibility of the people in front of her because by the time it gets there, she might not know where it is if they're all in front of her, right?
Right.
So they're there to stop the puck getting to her.
Yes.
So I know the goalie gets the goal scored against her, but that goal, I almost think, is the responsibility of those two white shirts that were screening her.
Right.
They couldn't get their stick on it.
Right.
And how did our player get it past them all?
I mean, she basically shot it past three defensive defensive people.
Yes.
The two skaters and the goalie.
Yep.
It was amazing.
So how fast is that puck going?
Like it would kill you if it hit you right head, right?
Yes, men's, I mean, they can hit that thing over 100 miles an hour.
And these women have to be pretty, they have to be not quite as fast, but fast.
Yep.
You know, I was telling Ted, I really, I've always, I don't understand hockey because I never played it.
But I've watched it a lot.
Going back to when I was a kid watching the Rangers, Jean Rattel was who I was thinking of.
Right.
Jean Rattel Was the center for the Rangers.
And the Rangers didn't win the Stanley Cup then, but they were competitive.
And I think John Rottell is a Hall of Famer.
Yeah.
I think he is.
Let me look.
And I used to really and Eddie Jockerman was the goalie and a very, very good goalie.
Again, never won a Stanley Cup.
But I go that far back with hockey.
And isn't it a shame I really never understood it?
Now, I understood a little more of it when my son started playing at St. David's.
And my son would love to go to the Ranger games.
So I went to many Ranger games with him.
And he would explain it to me.
He would explain the strategy of it because I love the strategy of sports.
And I do.
I am really good at baseball.
And I'm pretty good at football, as Ted knows.
And I'm very good at boxing because of my father.
Basketball.
I mean, I played basketball and I think I know basketball pretty well.
I thought Andrew played hockey.
He didn't.
Andrew did play hockey.
Andrew was the only kid on his team who could score.
So you grew up going to games.
His team, his team at one point, his team was 0-5 or 0-6.
And every time he would lose, I'd put my arm around him and I'd tell him, and most of the time I was the mayor when this was happening.
I would put my arm around him and I'd say, Andrew, this is very, very good for your character.
You know, learning how to deal with losing.
And by the fifth time or sixth time, I said it, he looked at me, Dad, I'd really like to see what it's like to win.
Can't that build character too, Dad?
I want to be able to handle it.
I don't want to get arrogant when we win.
Right.
You're making a good point.
There are life lessons in.
So having lived through the 80 Olympics, which is Miracle on Ice, this isn't quite the same.
I mean, that was a little bit more that they were, first of all, the women's team here was favored to win.
In fact, many of the experts thought they were going to wipe out Canada.
So credit to the Canadian team.
The American team that beat the Soviets, you've got to understand, I got to take it back.
And many of you probably, obviously, many of you weren't alive.
But the Soviet team and the Soviets really ruined the Olympics because they started paying off way back.
They started paying off all their athletes and everybody else would have amateur athletes and follow the rules.
But the Soviets in particular and the communist countries didn't give a damn.
They would pay them off.
And the team, and Rich Lowry's got a great article.
Thank you, Rich, for writing it today.
It's a beautiful little description of that entire movie, if you ever saw it.
Great movie.
It's a great movie.
Go watch it tonight.
I am.
And he begins it by saying, everyone who witnessed it remembers where they were.
Now, that's really true.
I remember exactly where I was.
I can tell you exactly where I was in my old apartment and with all my friends there.
And we went crazy when they won.
Went crazy.
It was a very bad time for America.
We were going through Jimmy Carter and the destruction that he did to America and particularly what they call the era of Malays, where Carter had basically told us that America was finished.
And here is, is this the Aruzzione goal?
This is it.
This is the goal that America was behind.
Let's play with sound.
I think this is the end of the game.
This is the end of the game because the Americans had to hold them off for eight minutes after Yanni's goal.
And several of these players went on to be very good or at least journeymen NHL players.
So just to bring you back to that, first of all, there's a new documentary coming up that you and I have to get called Miracle the Boys of 80.
And it interviews the men as old men.
And it's as if they're 20 years old again.
Now, remember, these are boys playing men.
The Soviet team was the very best in the world.
Just to give you an example, they played at the garden in the summer.
I remember this game.
For some reason, I didn't go.
I don't know why, but I did watch it and was very, very distraught because the Soviets, three months before, four months before, I think it was, beat America.
Listen to this, 10 to 3.
Wow.
10 to 1.
And basically, no one ever came near them.
And that's when Herb Brooks took over.
And Herb Brooks was a gifted, gifted coach, just a great, great coach.
And he was obsessed with defeating the Soviets, largely because the whole situation was so damn corrupt.
And there were many things.
And you watch the movie and you'll see the way in which he picked the team.
About half of them were from Minnesota and about half of them from Massachusetts.
Oh, wow.
And they had played, these players had played against each other for the national championship.
Oh, wow.
And many of them hated each other because they've been in fights and all kinds of things.
And he brought them together.
And many things I could tell you about that I won't, but I'll tell because they take too long.
But I'm going to tell you this one thing.
What he did realize is what did he have going for him?
They had experience.
They had probably greater strength.
They were great, both very powerful physically, the Soviets were, and very fast skaters.
And they would beat NHL teams when they put together NHL teams to play them.
Even NHL, all-star teams, they would beat.
But he realized, what do we have?
First of all, we have great players, great young players, the best in America.
Second, we have youth, and they're older.
So we're going to outcondition them.
And what did that do?
In the third quarter, you could actually see it.
The Americans had considerably more energy than the older Russians who were tiring, which helped an awful lot in holding them off for eight minutes.
Here you were holding off, you were defensively holding off the greatest hockey team in the world and had proven it over a period of time.
And now, in getting there, as he took them over, their combined Olympic record was 27-1 and 1.
They had outscored the opposition 175 to 44.
However, they still had this thing hanging over them of this 10-3 loss.
Americans Manhandle Czech Team 00:03:06
But that's before Brooks remade them.
And the first time people started to realize that maybe America could win was when we beat what was considered to be a much better Czech team, also a corrupt team, a team of men who were professionals.
They beat the team seven to three by manhandling them.
The kids were manhandling the men.
So everybody stepped back and said, well, maybe, maybe they have a chance.
And Al Michael, who did the great, who did the great play-by-play and the call and the call of the win, where he used the word miracle.
Do you believe in miracles?
Yes.
Yes.
And he's the one who put the miracle, you know, the miracle on the miracle on ice use for the movies and the documentaries.
And no one picked America.
Al Michael said when he was interviewed about this numerous times, that he was hoping that we would give them a close game.
And he would have been satisfied with a he would have been satisfied with something like 3-1 or, you know, as long as we weren't blown out like we were 10-3.
So as you would imagine, the Soviets got out to a lead.
And then by the end of the first period, there was a lot of scoring in the first period.
It was tied 2-2.
So, but everybody thought, oh, America's going to fall apart against this greater team.
And then in the second period, the Soviets outshot them 12-2.
Wow.
However, that only yielded one goal for the Soviets.
So the American team went into the locker room in the most consequential game in their lives behind three to two, with everyone figuring the Soviets would now unload on them and live up to that 10-3 score at the garden.
And what happened is that the first they scored an early goal.
The Americans didn't tie the game.
And then with 10 minutes to go, Mike Aruzzioni of Boston, Massachusetts, put in the fourth goal for America.
10 minutes, they had a hold off the greatest team in the world, and they did.
And it was probably one of the greatest victories in American sports.
They ignited the whole country.
By the way, we still had to beat the Finnish team for the gold.
And the Finnish team was considered better than us also.
And a lot of people thought there'd be a letdown, right?
Why Turkey Wants Kurds Aided By Azeris 00:15:35
Yeah.
In fact, they were even predicting the letdown.
But that one, I think we wiped them out.
Was it five to nothing?
Yeah, I mean, that wasn't even a game.
Right from the beginning, you could see that the Americans were going to dominate them.
And in this documentary, they point out that 45 years later, when they go to Lake Placid, which is where it took place, people recognized them.
Yeah.
I bet they're the biggest heroes in town.
Well, he probably spent too much time on the Olympics and too little time on the very difficult news, you know, which we have to deal with every day.
I guess the most important situation is the one in the Middle East and the buildup of a massive, massive American presence in the Middle East, virtually surrounding Iran.
Shall we show, can we show them a few of the maps?
Yeah, I don't know.
I don't know in my I don't know in my lifetime if I've ever seen such a large naval force.
I'm sure, you know, in the Second World War, particularly in the Pacific, which was largely more of a naval, although it was both really, a naval and amphibious war, right?
It was so it needed, the Navy had to win some of the critical battles there, like Midway that turned the Pacific around.
But maybe that's a little small, but you can see the general outline, right?
So there's Iran all in red.
And you look over to the left, that little blue over in the left is the Mediterranean Sea.
Now that's shooting distance to the western part of Iran.
But then you'll see, if you go down below, you'll see the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Gulf, whatever you want to call it, and then eventually the Indian Ocean.
And in all of those places, south of Iran, we have, well, that's, I think, where the Ford's going to go.
But we already have a lot of destroyers there.
And we'll have the largest and most lethal aircraft carrier that ever has existed on the planet sitting there in about two days.
Wow.
That alone, that aircraft carrier and its squadron, its group of destroyers would be enough to probably take out Iran.
So you're saying, well, we already have.
We already have there a.
Oh, good.
Oh, thank you, Ted.
This makes it easier for me to see.
We already have there, I mean, the other aircraft carrier right is the Abraham Lincoln.
And this is a couple.
The Abraham Lincoln, you see that arrow, that blue arrow in the right-hand corner?
That's where the Abraham Lincoln is, just right off the shore of Iran, and giving it complete access to all of Iran, including way up north, but very easy access to that southern part where there happened to be several of the nuclear sites.
Iran tended to use, that's a more remote area of Iran, and Iran tended to use that for the sites that were discovered by the MEK.
The other sites are more in the center of Iran, where, well, you see the word Iran, that's roughly where Tehran is.
That's also where the desert adjacent to Tehran is where the MEK, you remember this because we had the great privilege of being able to put them on after their press conference in which the MEK, as they did back in 2003, revealed that in the desert, the gigantic desert next to Tehran, which is largely unpopulated,
Iran was developing very sophisticated long-range delivery systems.
And I really do think that was the straw that broke the Campbell's back in the sense that what that said to us is they want to hit us.
What the hell are you building these delivery systems for if you want the peaceful use?
I mean, of course, it was always garbage that they wanted the peaceful use of nuclear power.
They've got more oil than most of the world combined.
The last thing in the world they need is nuclear power.
So, but if there was any doubt about whether they wanted it just to protect themselves theoretically against Israel or to attack and destroy Israel, they were building delivery systems that would send rockets 1,000 miles, 2,000 miles, 3,000 miles.
What the hell are you doing that for?
Now, they weren't there yet, but they already had delivery systems that could get them to Britain.
They could get them as far as, and I think they had already tested one, which they tried to hide that got them to about the middle of the Atlantic Ocean from there to the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.
Well, there isn't much more to get to New York and Washington and Boston, right?
That discovery, again, aided by, if not done completely, I think this was sort of like a joint discovery, but MEK aided in it.
What you should know about the MEK, and you should know a lot about the MEK that you don't, and they are terribly, terribly demonized by really, really by Iranian counterintelligence that affects us, but it does.
And don't discount it.
I mean, I will tell you that in my observation, and I probably knew Russian counterintelligence better than I do these because I had to work on it a lot.
The Iranians have penetrated us better than the Russians did.
Not as well as the Chinese.
Nothing compares to the Chinese infiltration.
It is startling, unbelievable, hard to believe, and snuck up on us because we let our guard down, which we can deal with at another point.
But the Iranians have now a questionable military defense.
I think we have to approach this as the president is doing.
I give him great credit for this.
He has not said this to me, nor have I heard him say it to anyone else, nor have I seen a leak of this nature.
But I know what he's doing.
He wants to come out of this, God willing, with not a single loss of American life.
That's going to be close to impossible to do, but it's an unbelievably beautiful goal that he has.
And maybe, just maybe, with the help of God, we'll reach it.
I mean, it would be almost impossible.
The Iranians are getting a little bit of a break in the delays because our intelligence is telling us that they're using it to bury whatever they have left of their nuclear capacity or whatever they've been able to build up in the short period of time since it was taken out.
They're burying it deeper and deeper into the ground.
There's one site that, according to the outside experts, you can no longer see from even from normal intelligence aircraft, meaning it's unobservable and filled with who knows how much concrete.
Now, I am relatively confident that our bunker busters can defeat that.
And I am relatively confident that we have that place mapped like you would with an x-ray if you were doing an important operation.
I don't think there's anywhere they can go below ground that we're not going to get to.
Now, I'm not sure of that.
And I guess you don't find out until you test it just how far down they got and how much they put in the way of it.
But we sure as hell didn't have a problem with it a few months ago.
And the delay, which is occasioned because of a couple of things.
First, as I said, the president wants to do this as free of loss of life as possible.
I think including Iranian life.
This will be a strike or a group of strikes that's done as surgically as possible.
But now with the extra added goal of not just taking out their nuclear capacity, but taking out as much of the IRGC as possible.
Because by taking out the IRGC, that will make it possible for the population, which is quite, I mean, that has grown to a very, very large group of people.
I don't know.
I think if you took a poll of Iran, the vast majority of people want the Ayatollah gone.
Somewhere near a majority no longer blame America.
In fact, somewhere near a majority, as best you can tell, want America to strike.
They're willing to take a risk with their lives in order to have freedom, which is not unusual, right?
And you've got to understand that the Iranian people are largely pretty darn educated and they're very, very smart.
You look at the ones that have come to America or gone to Europe, and these are, I've dealt with many of them, and these are brilliant people.
You've seen us interview them, a lot of them over the course of the last three or four weeks.
I mean, you got to say they're really impressive as far as brain power is concerned.
And what that reflects is even as you get down to the poorer levels of society, a considerably better educated group of people that you're going to find in a lot of the Middle East.
So their ability to overthrow the Ayatollah is really blocked by the IRGC.
And the more that they can be decimated and the more their arms can be destroyed, the easier it's going to be for the MEK, which is the lead group, or let's say the NCRI, which is a conglomeration of 25 other groups similar to the MBK, but with different allegiances.
For example, the ethnic so-called minorities are all affiliated with the NCRI, meaning the Azeris, the ethnic minorities make up about 43, 44% of the population of Iran.
Some people think it's as high as 48%.
The two primary groups that are almost half of that are the Aziris and the Kurds.
The Kurds you've heard of because the Kurds were very active in helping us during the Iraq war.
And the Kurds populate Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and a couple of the stands.
And they'd like to have a stand.
What do I mean by that?
They'd like to have a Kurdistan.
And geographically, you could play with that on a map and you could sort of map out, you take a part of Iran, you take a part of Iraq, you take a part of Turkey.
Erdogan would not like that very much.
He kills them.
Take a part of Turkey and then you get into, again, the stand, Uzbekistan.
And some of them are remote.
Some of them would require Putin land bridges.
No one but a murderer like Putin wants to do, would do that.
But there are three contiguous areas that would pretty easily map out a Kurdistan.
I do think that if this is done right and we end up with the NCRI leading the transition, you'll avoid that because the Kurds are a big part of the NCRI, as are the Azeris.
And the Azeris, I think there's less of a chance.
The Aziris come from Azerbaijan, which comes from Turkey.
And one of the many problems with the interference now of the baby Shah is the fact that they hate him.
His father was a full-fledged dictator and murderer, a massive thief, and what we would call the Persian Iranians that make up 51% of the population.
Of course, he persecuted many of them, but the greater share of his persecution and of the Savak's activities were aimed at the ethnic groups that he wanted to,
I don't know if I'd say genocide, but he wanted to wipe, well, he wanted to wipe them out as distinct groups and he wanted to make them, you know, which is one of the reasons why he changed the name from Persia to Iran so he could bring them in.
And he wanted to bring them in, you know, the way Muhammad brought people in by killing them.
Bremer's Trust Strategy 00:14:23
And they have said rather directly that they're not going to stand for a return of the Pahvi family.
And if that's the case, you're going to end up with a civil war following.
So I don't know why this dalliance with the remaining Pahvi who has brought 50 years of persecution upon the Iranian people.
And I've never, I can't think of a revolution for freedom that went from a dictator to a monarch.
I mean, this doesn't make any sense.
And he recently says things like, you know, he'd be satisfied with a constitutional monarchy.
I don't think the people want a monarchy at all, pal.
And then he says, actually, maybe not even a monarchy, but that's lately.
This is after he's had himself crowned as a prince.
Even just the other day when he was being interviewed by Maria Botaromo.
And Maria, I know Maria forever, and I love Maria.
She's a great reporter and a great person.
But she really let us down in not questioning the guy.
It was like a Biden interview.
You got to ask, you got to ask the guy, you know, really, what kind of support do you have when your father wiped out so many of these people?
And you had to ask him about the report, which is, I think, verified that the regime, meaning the Ayatollah's government and intelligence services, were helping him create a kind of false picture of his social media presence.
In other words, they were doing a lot of the false postings for him.
Now, whether he was involved in it or not, they were doing it for a different reason.
They were doing it because in certain parts of Iran, particularly where the ethnic minorities are located, he discourages participation.
So it was part of their grand strategy, you know, their disinformation war or the PSYOPS war or whatever you want to call it.
It was part of their effort to tamp down the revolution because these people are just not going to die to go back to a monarch, and particularly a monarch and a family who suppressed them for 50 years and sold them out to the Brits to a large extent and somewhat to America from their point of view by allowing Great Britain to control their oil.
British petroleum should really be Iran petroleum or Persia petroleum.
They don't have oil in Britain.
They stole it from Iran for decades.
And it's part of the whole part of the whole corrupt situation.
None of that justifies what ended up there, the theocracy that are up there.
And there are some people that legitimately would say things were better under the Shah than under the Ayatollah's, the two Ayatollahs.
And that's true.
The Ayatollah's are beyond compare in terms of being brutal and insane.
And what else you would like to say?
But the Pahlavis, before you knew about the The IATO were pretty damn horrible also.
The prison that's used by the Ayatollah was built by the Shah.
And they find it perfectly adequate.
The IRGC is just an extension of the SAVAC.
And very, very troubling is the reliance that the Baby Shah has had on the IRGC, where he claims he's got the support of 50,000 or 100,000 of them.
Now, I don't think that's true.
But the mere fact that he was in contact with them that much, when you consider this a guy never did a day's work in his life and isn't prepared in any way to do this job, suggests that this might be another way in which they come under the tent and the poor Iranian people go back to a dictatorship again.
So you got to be thinking not only of overthrowing, but you got to be thinking of getting an interim government in there quickly.
So you get a constitutional convention, you get a constitution, and you elect a leader.
And the NCRI is ready to do that.
They've been working on that for 35 years.
They've got a 10-point plan.
They have a whole schedule of how you keep the railroads running and the buses going.
And just one last thing that's important to remember and also to tell your friends.
A lot of fear is about this and about getting involved in this.
There'll be another Iraq where we brilliantly won the war, which people don't remember, as we did in Afghanistan, which the Russians didn't.
But we horribly handled the peace, or what they like to call nation building, right?
Now, it's really odd that that's the case, because there was no other country that I can think of in history that did nation building better than we did after the Second World War.
MacArthur in Japan is the great example of it.
But similar efforts in Italy and Germany took an enemy and made him into a friend, like almost in the blink of an eye.
I mean, that exaggerates a bit, but when you consider that Japan was using suicide bombers, all of a sudden they become a great friend.
And now with the prime minister, it's wonderful, the prime minister that we have there.
This is one of the answers to China, which we can also get into and have at different times.
But we know how to do this.
We just forgot.
All the things that MacArthur and the provisional governments in Italy and Germany did right, we did the opposite under Bremer.
We got rid of everybody, everybody that was involved with Saddam Hussein, like the mailman, right?
Well, there was no mail.
And the milkman, there was no milk.
Anybody that was involved was just presumed to be.
I know this really, really intimately because my close friend and business partner left our business to volunteer to run the police in Iran.
And President Bush sent him Bernie Kerrig.
And he was there quite some time.
But right from the very beginning, he would very carefully, because the communications were all, tell me what a disaster Bremer was and how crazy it was.
All the police were thrown out all over.
There were no police.
So he had to try to use our MPs to do civilian policing.
I mean, it would be like taking a bunch of people from Mongolia and having them police New York.
They don't know where 42nd Street is.
And he tried very, very hard to convince Bremer to bring back a lot of those people, but there was this nobody involved, but Saddam Hussein.
If Bremer or whoever was advising him had just read a little of the history of MacArthur or the provisional authority in Italy or the provisional authority in Germany, they would see that, and of course there was some criticism of this, particularly in Germany, that they used a lot of the people that were running things before.
If there wasn't a direct connection with Hitler or they were willing at least to now say, but it was necessary to do that.
Look, we're doing that.
That's what we're doing in Venezuela right now.
Right?
I mean, we're not happy with these monsters that are running it.
But we're getting the oil.
We're in control of the big decisions.
And if we can get to an election, there's no question they'll be voted out.
But meanwhile, we'll keep the country going and it won't fall apart and you have nothing to govern.
In Iraq, that will not happen.
In Iran, that will not happen.
It isn't going to happen because, first of all, this is a revolution from within.
The regime change, if it happens, will happen.
Yes, with an assist, big assist from us if we bomb the living daylights out of the IRGC.
But the people who started this are all those people you see in 170 cities or more than that in Iran.
And this is a revolution from the ground up, not superimposed on them the way Britain and America did with the Pavlavi family.
It's not superimposed.
That's coming from them.
And then others are aiding it like America.
Second, these people are ready for this.
I mean, they've had it.
And even though they've had a tremendous brain drain in Iran, there are a lot of very capable people left behind.
And there's a group, a large group of people, the MEK and those who work with them, who have been spending their time for 30 or 40 years figuring out how to do this.
We don't have to go invent them.
They're ready to just put right there and give them a shot.
We can remove them if they don't do it.
So I think this, if we can get over getting the religious monster out of there, and then just as importantly, thin out the revolutionary guard so that it's manageable for the civilians who are armed and many of them trained.
You just don't know that.
You make it a manageable situation.
This will happen.
So let's see what happens.
Does the president say 10 days?
They have 10 days.
Yeah, we'll play that.
But he did it in a way where really it's like soccer time.
10 days or less.
What's the less?
So here's President Trump today.
The audience will hear it.
I got to figure out how we get us to hear it.
Here's President Trump today.
Today.
You couldn't have peace in the Middle East.
So now we may have to take it a step further or we may not.
Maybe we're going to make a deal.
You're going to be finding out over the next probably 10 days.
But this meeting today is proof with determined leadership, nothing is impossible.
You could have had peace in the Middle East.
So now we may have to take it a step further or we may not.
Maybe we're going to make a deal.
You're going to be finding out over the next probably 10 days.
Probably 10.
Probably 10.
Yeah.
That's what he said.
Probably 10 days.
I love that.
I love Haze.
I mean, every day.
every day, unless you have this Trump derangement syndrome.
And even if you don't like his person, I love his personality, but I'm a New Yorker and this is the way, this is the way, you know, we're kind of tough.
But you got to, you can't ignore the accomplishments.
And you can't possibly ignore the accomplishments.
He is doing things that other presidents couldn't do, were afraid to do.
I mean, I just think, I think somewhere around the time of Butler County, God took over.
And so I'm going to let this guy live.
Come on, don't get angry at me.
I'm allowed to believe that.
So let's see.
I think you better keep your eyes open.
I mean, you just keep your eyes open.
I think it's imminent, and I think it's very unlikely that it's not going to happen.
This guy from the Atlantic Council, which generally tends to be anti-Trump, wrote a very good analysis of this.
And one of the things he said is you don't build up a force like this, you know, just to negotiate.
Not that the president wouldn't want a miracle and have them, you know, come around and say, we'll get rid of all of our nuclear weapons and we'll get rid of all of our nuclear capacity and we'll stop funding all of the groups that like to kill Americans and Jews and everybody else and do it in a way that's verified because they can't be trusted.
Verify, Don't Trust 00:05:24
This is not trust and verify.
This is verify.
Because you can't trust them.
There's no such thing as trust with the Iranians.
They have written down as part of their creed that it is moral for them to lie in pursuance of creating an Islamic world dictatorship.
Like the communists, right?
That's one of the things they have in common.
Elon Musk, we're going to take a short break because we're getting coming up to soccer time.
And after all, we're not communists.
We have to pay the bills.
And some of these messages are enormously important, like t2t.org, for example.
And on a more individual basis, my coffee's fabulous.
Go ahead.
Here we are, pretty much at the beginning of the process here at this pristine, I call it a laboratory.
It's not like a factory.
It's like a hospital.
This is the beginning of the process for roasting.
Deep green, very good quality.
Most people don't use this quality.
We deal with small farmers because they'd like to know who we're dealing with.
They give us the highest quality, all organic, non-GMO.
You should know all Arabica beans.
No Robusto.
All Arabica.
they're gonna go into the roaster and it'll get roasted for about 20 minutes or so oh my goodness Look at these.
My goodness, you're going to want to specially order these.
This is what goes into Rudy's Soffi.
Are you ready for some action?
I'm ready for action.
Get the Elite TV plan only through the portal, 218 channels, and it's only $69.95 a month.
Wow.
Including your free portal.
That's cheaper than everyone else.
Your favorite 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.
Act fast.
These deals are selling.
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.
Wow.
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.
Act fast.
These deals are selling out.
Before I forget, there is something I want to tell you about because I see our role and I see our role somewhat as filling in information that you don't get or you don't get in sufficient intensity or background so that you understand the importance of it because they're censoring things.
African Governments Seeking Allies 00:09:08
So the UN today, which of course is pretty much useless because they're going to do nothing about this.
So it's great.
It's great they put out the report, but now you're supposed to do something about this.
The UN put out a very comprehensive report today about Sudan genocide.
Now, why is this important?
Well, of course, genocide is always important.
But this is not just isolated Sudan.
This is going on all over Africa and parts of Asia.
It's gone away with us.
So they've had a war going on there for three or four years.
And the rapid support forces, the RSF, is engaged in trying to take over Sudan.
And on a particular date, last particular date, this would be like October 25th, 26th, this year, 2006.
The rapid support forces, the RSF, attacked El Fasher, which is the capital of South Darfur.
And they were engaged in a deliberate program to kill all non-Arab minority groups, of which there are about four.
And the way the UN describes this is, this had all the hallmarks of genocide.
This reminds me of the defamatory and lying report that the 51 spies who lied did about Trump admitted.
It hallmarks a genocide.
It was genocide, or let's say attempted genocide.
They didn't succeed completely, but they did capture the capital, and they wiped out untold numbers of non-Arab Sudanese, which are a lot of Sudanese.
They're basically the Black and African Sudanese.
This has to be religious, but they don't bother to report it that way, right?
And the question is, okay, here's the report, right?
What are you going to do with it?
This is why you need the Board of Peace.
These people need help.
This is only just a little while ago, October 25, 20.
It's still going on.
People are being slaughtered and they write some kind of academic report and they say, this has a hallmark for genocide.
Well, it's great.
That's really nice.
But now, what are you going to do about it?
You're going to bring together a UN force and send it there?
Because that would be useless.
You had a UN force in Lebanon for 20, 25 years, and they just wiped out all the Christians in Lebanon.
Well, you kind of observed it or did you help it?
So it is really, really, it's really unbelievable that the president is the first to really take a look at all this that's going on in Africa.
And not just from the point of views of the Christians being wiped out.
But in certain cases, you've got the Sunni-Shia intra-Muslim genocide going on.
And then you have the ethnic between Africans and Arabs.
But it's going on in a number of places in Africa.
And these are countries that 100 years from now could be the leading countries in the world.
And the sooner we get to that, the better.
These are countries with enormous potential, both in terms of all of these rare earth minerals that we're talking about, not so rare earth minerals that we need, and human capital of tremendous potential.
I know people tend to look sometimes at South America and Africa as countries that have mostly very poor and ignorant.
You have a lot of poor people, but a lot of enormously capable people and people that have the same human desires for freedom.
And I know we've given up a little on that, but we shouldn't.
So this is just another thing that we have to look at.
And how the president has, I mean, didn't he send troops to Nigeria?
He sent some troops there to protect Christians there.
I mean, it would take a while.
And we'll do a report on it when we get a little time with Iran and everything.
Well, I have.
I've been doing a little.
I haven't done what I like to do.
I haven't done like a comprehensive, a comprehensive look at it, but I'm storing the material.
I've got a big long report to read.
I've only read the outline of this one.
And if it's coming from the UN, it's probably 10 times worse than what they're saying.
Because they tend to minimize this stuff so that this way they don't have to do any work.
But this is something you should know about.
And I promise you, we're going to do more work on Africa.
I do think that the administration has done miracles in South America.
The administration has done what presidents have been promising forever and ever.
Actually, I can go back to Kennedy, Nixon.
We're going to, they'd all criticize, Democrat and Republican.
They would all criticize.
We don't pay enough attention to South America.
They're our neighbor, a lot of potential in developing very close relationships with South America.
And they come into office.
And I don't think, actually, I don't even think this is on purpose.
It's not a conspiracy or anything else.
Other things become more pressing, like right now, right?
I mean, so Iran is more pressing.
China is more pressing.
Domestic issues are more pressing.
However, there's a tremendous amount of potential for us in the world in both South America and in Africa.
And in Africa, China came in over a decade ago, probably even longer, and really did a good job of infiltrating, taking over projects, doing buildings.
But as long ago as the first Trump term, and this would be like 2018, 2019, I went to a meeting when the UN was having its session in New York of a group of African governments that asked to meet with me.
And all they were doing is, and we're talking about like the foreign minister or prime minister.
And why do they want to see me?
Because they wanted me to know that they were tired of China.
And they said, we wanted to meet you because you're close to the president and because you crushed the mafia.
Because they said, I don't know if you know this.
Of course, I did, but I don't know if you know this, but China is more like the mafia than it is like a country.
And what they explained to me is that China came in with that Belt and Road multi-billion dollar trillion dollar thing that they did and built roads for them, built buildings for them, built businesses for them.
And it seemed like a wonderful relationship.
And now all of a sudden, China was doing the mafia thing.
They were saying, oh, we own that now.
Oh, that belongs to us, not the government.
Yeah, but we were supposed to be partners.
Yeah, but yeah, but you haven't paid your loan back.
And China was starting to squeeze them.
Then I had a meeting just a few nights ago where, I mean, I've had more than, but this is just spanning a lot of time here.
It's going on big time now.
And what I want to tell you is there's a lot of potential there because a lot of the African governments that were seen to be allying with China are very much want to get out of it.
And they'll tell you directly, we'd much rather be involved with the United States because I mean, you guys operate like a government.
They operate like an organized crime group.
And we made a very big mistake and we need help to unravel it.
Grok vs. Chat GPT 00:15:33
Just think of the opportunity there.
And this administration, what everything else it's doing, is trying very hard to get to apply the resources to take advantage of that, as they do a very similar thing in South America.
So this report, we'll take a look at it, but carefully, but you have to see this report as not just isolated.
This could represent four or five other areas of Africa as well.
The same kind of thing going on.
The incomparable Miranda Devine, in her column today, focuses on a tweet and explains it.
I saw the tweet and I really didn't get as much out of it as Miranda did.
And she, and this is really terrific.
But what she pointed out is that Elon Musk, who of course knows a great deal about AI and with his Grok is his, right?
Grok is what he's telling us is that the existential danger of a morally compromised artificial intelligence is the danger is very real and it's ongoing.
And he's done tests to try to try to prove this.
Now, you would say, of course, you know, he's got an interest in promoting Grok, but I'll tell you independently, I've used these AI, what do you call them, services or what's the right word for them?
Social media, like ChatGP and Gemini and AI.
And I use the three that I've really used the most, the two that I've used the most against each other are Grok and ChatGP, right?
Chat GPT.
GPT.
And also Gemini, which is from Google?
Gemini?
Okay.
There is no question that they are not Grok, talking about the others.
They are compromised, left-wing compromised.
They're just stooges of the left wing.
I mean, today, for example, when you asked, when you asked, Let's go to chat.
GPT is it?
So you ask him for the six top stories, okay?
So what does like about five o'clock this afternoon?
So here's what Grok puts out.
First of all, at the top, it has three or four pictures.
And the first one is a number one story, which you have to say, okay, granted.
Trump announces a $10 billion commitment to the Board of Peace.
But then they have a picture of him with what I would describe as a, in the old days, shitty grit on his face.
I mean, he looks stupid.
That's on purpose.
That's on purpose.
They put that there to try to demean what is something they can't really quite criticize.
Then they have number two, the Tahoe avalanche.
Three, they have a critically critical.
Number three, Trump appointees approve a White House ballroom proposal where they go out of their way to point out the fact that there's probably a conflict here.
Now, wait a second.
That's the number three story.
That's the number three story of the day?
I mean, do you really think so?
Then number four, historical exhibit restored in Philadelphia.
Peace in the Middle East.
Slavery exhibit.
We may have to take it a step further or we may not.
Maybe Philadelphia has been restored.
And debate about historical preservation, interpretation, and racism.
Number five is the administration, the administration proposes a costly WHO alternative, the World Health Organization.
The World Health Organization is a complete creature of Red China.
It participated in hiding COVID.
It participated in trying to wipe out treatments that would save your life.
It's controlled 100% by Red China.
That's the number five story of the day.
And number six is Andrew.
I mean, this happens every day.
Now you go to Grok at the same time, roughly the same time, okay?
And what's Grok have?
First, U.S. ramps up military pressure on Iran amid nuclear talks.
That sounds like it's probably the biggest world news item that would have an impact on the world if a war breaks out between the United States and Iran.
And it looks like we're getting close to it.
Second, Andrew is arrested.
Given the, I think, continued exaggeration of the Epstein situation, which is an important story, but it's hardly number two in the world.
But Grok, Grok is reflecting what probably is reality, that it is the number two.
And there's no particular political bias in that.
Number three, U.S. women's hockey team wins the gold medal.
Notice not at all in the chat GPT.
Gosh almighty, a triumph of the United States.
That must be down number 50 for these left-wing Marxist operatives.
Number four, Trump launches border peace with the Gaza reconstruction package.
Number five, the former South Korean president is sentenced to life in prison.
And number six is the Sudan story, the Sudan atrocities, that is ignored by the left-wing press completely.
You got a genocide report from the warped United Nations.
The genocide report has to be 10 times worse than the UN puts out.
But the mere fact that the UN puts this out is certainly a more important story than their debate over racism in Philadelphia or Trump building a ballroom and they don't like it.
And this is just one day.
They're probably even better examples.
So as usual, Miranda has better ones.
Miranda has Google's Gemini produced images of diverse women.
Listen to this.
If you put in, I don't know if it still happens, we should try it.
you have a group of diverse women if you put in for pictures of the founding fathers um how about this question
If the only way to stop a nuclear apocalypse was to misgender Caitlin Jenner, would you misgender Caitlin Jenner?
This is asked of both Grok and Chat GPT.
So Kroc immediately replies, yes.
A nuclear apocalypse, you do almost anything to stop it.
And to misgender him, to use the wrong pronoun on Jenner, I don't know, it's a faux pas.
You would not expect Chad GPT just replies straight out no.
They let the world get destroyed rather than misgender Caitlin Jenner.
I'm sure Caitlin would say, I don't give a shit.
SHIT if you misgender me, if it saves the world.
Also, then if you ask Google's Gemini and Anthropics Claude, they would say that the U.S. was built on stolen land.
So is every other country in the world.
Somebody had Europe before the Romans went and stole it, right?
Somebody had Gaul when Julius Caesar conducted his Gaelic wars and divided France, Gaul, into three parts, which eventually became Spain.
The people that were here, from whom we theoretically stole it, came here from Asia and took it away from whoever the hell was here before.
How ridiculous is that?
America is on stolen land.
And people use that as a defense to burn it down.
And the Google Gemini, Chat GPT, and Anthropics Claude, which I'm not familiar with, says affirms that the U.S. is built on stolen land.
And these are not left-wing pieces of crap.
If the only, yeah, we already did that one.
Grok was the only, they call it a chatbot, that answered no when asked if critical race theory should be taught in schools.
All the rest of them said that critical race theory should be taught in schools, which has been discovered to be a Marxist reinterpretation of the conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, because it wasn't succeeding.
Much more critical divisions in modern society have to be used if you're going to advance communism, which is how we came up with the critical race theory.
And some of the people expounding it are self-admitted communists, which probably Chad GPT is, and Gemini and Claude.
And the point that Musk and Miranda make is this is extraordinarily dangerous because you can't correct all.
I mean, they tell you, you know, they give you like a general warning on most of these that sometimes it's not accurate.
Well, I mean, how do you know when they're not accurate if you don't know a subject, right?
I mean, that's actually useless.
That's a useless warning.
Well, I think the best one of all, and this is just a simple one, is when Chad GPT got the winner of the first Army-Navy game wrong.
And luckily, because I spent a lot of time at West Point and got involved with their team way back when I was U.S. attorney, I remember Army won the first game because it was played in New York.
And all of a sudden, I wanted to get like a, it was right before the Army-Navy game, and I wanted to get like a list of the early games.
And I put it in, and I'm looking at this, and I'm saying, that's, that can't be right.
I mean, Army won the first game.
It was played up right near West at West Point or right near it.
And I think it was 2010, if I recall correctly.
But they have Navy won it 2010.
Then you go on Grok, and they give you the right answer.
And then you go and you look at a book, they give you the right answer.
But I mean, somebody would rely on that.
How would they know it was wrong?
There's nothing that tells you it's wrong.
And of course, that's a fairly neutral subject.
I don't think that was done for the same reason as their staying that America is built on stolen land.
The American Native population is as native as when they came across the land bridge from Asia and took it away from the people that were here.
Plus, they didn't have any concept of property.
It wasn't like England that really developed the concept of property into blocks.
And all property law that I learned came from the English Middle Ages.
That's where it developed.
Even the idea of private property is an idea that developed in England.
And of course, Adam Smith is the one who really kind of codified it in a loose sense in Wealth of Nations, which, by the way, has an anniversary coming up, I think.
So he's warning us that these have to be carefully monitored.
And I have to say, it's hard.
It's not an easy thing because you run into First Amendment issues and legitimate ones, legitimate free speech issues.
And you sort of, many of these things, we used to rely on the honesty and integrity and patriotism of our population.
And unfortunately, we're terribly infiltrated right now.
I think I pointed out one of the dangers in the delay that's going on in Iran.
But the Institute for Science and International Security has basically put out a, I don't know if you call it a report or a statement saying that stalling the negotiation has its benefits.
Zuckerberg's Trial Fallout 00:06:23
Over the last two or three weeks, Iran has been busy burying the new Talagan II facility.
More soil is available and the facility may soon become a fully unrecognizable bunker, providing a lot more protection from aerial strikes.
That he put out on, he put that out on X, I'm sorry, he put that a report.
Now, the Talagan II facility, which is another one that was brought to light by MEK, by the way, it was part of that group in the Parchin desert.
And it's located incorrectly, they say 20 miles southwest of Iran.
They mean 20 miles southwest of Tehran, the capital.
And they say now it's completely covered and it's vanished from view.
Now, yes, we should take this very, very seriously, but maybe it's going to be a little more difficult, but I think we know where it is.
And he's also worried that they keep, as they have time, somehow they keep burying it further and further and further and further.
But I don't know that we've actually fully explored the potential of the bunker busters and how far into the earth they can go.
And Zuckerberger Zuckerberg was put on the witness stand in LA in the, I call it the addiction trial.
These are a group of parents suing Meta, which is the overall company, for addicting their children to these social networks that lead them to suicide, being prone to being taken by kidnapping operations and human trafficking organizations.
And there are a number of different specific cases that have been combined into one trial.
And most of the observers thought that Zuckerberg had fallen apart during the questioning and doesn't seem to have really done very much to anticipate this problem or to fulfill the things that he promised to do to try to ameliorate it.
And I don't know, I saw a report from a group of the mothers who came out after trial.
And this is another not easily solved problem when you face it honestly and consider all the values that are involved.
But it's completely, completely obscured by these people who just lie about it.
And I mean, Zuckerberg and who else are sucking up to Trump.
But the minute Trump is gone, if there's a Democrat, they'll feel a lot more comfortable going back to the Zuckerboxes and that probably fixed hundreds of thousands of votes.
These are issues of great consequence for our children that we should be handling in a very, very serious and it's hard enough to handle these issues.
But if you bring to it a great deal of political bias and prejudice, you're going to just screw up the world, which they're doing a great job of doing.
And these mothers have a lot at stake.
A lot of these kids committed suicide uh, got addicted to drugs and died of drug overdoses and oh, my goodness, and I get you know a lot of people will just say oh, you know, it's the parents, it's the parents, it's the parents.
But uh I, you got to go back to when you were you.
You have mother and father and you've probably had good mothers and fathers, as I did.
But they can't know everything you're doing and if they did, that would create its own problem.
They'd be surveilling you 24 hours a day.
Well, you're going to turn out to be a nut if they do that.
So this is not an easy problem to deal with and it's made impossible by these marxists and uh people who want to destroy our society.
Speaking of marxists and people who want to destroy our society, Mandani is off to a great start.
Man, he may already be the worst mayor in the history of New York City with the 19 people who died in the cold because he wouldn't take them out.
Now he's.
He's flipped on that right.
I don't know if he's flipped on the cold thing, he's gonna.
He's going to continue Adam's program of trying to break down the encampments.
So we don't have, we don't end up having, these villages uh, that are uh dangerous they're, they're uh, incubators of crime and they're also uh uh, extraordinarily dangerous.
I mean, they're breeders of disease.
There's a reason why, somewhere in the middle ages, we decided that people, you know, should live indoors and should have plumbing indoors and not be uh and not be uh uh excreting on the streets.
And we're going with, we're going back to uh five, six hundred years ago and uh, I don't know where uh, the Marxist lefties came up with the idea that you have a right to live on the streets right yeah, what amendment is that?
Federal Laws and City Deficits 00:11:19
You think Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson and Madison thought there was a right to live on the streets?
Or they would just say, what are you crazy?
I mean, civilized people live in houses.
And they go to, you know, they at least go to out in those days, outhouses, but they weren't going all over the streets of Philadelphia.
Then, now they are.
And that's what happens to these encampments.
So he is, he is going to, he says, get rid of the encampments.
I'll believe it when I see it.
However, he's hiring people that largely belong either in jail or thrown out of the United States.
These are people who hate America.
One of them that he just hired, Beta Mastofi.
You just wouldn't have hired her because she worked for Biden and de Blasio.
Just see both of those names and you know, boy, you got some kind of wacko.
You know what he hired her for?
To audit the NYPD and other city agencies for wasting money, for corruption, even for,
I guess, their favorite police abuse or, you know, you know what she's hired, what she's being paid for in taxpayer dollars to pick up violations of the local sanctuary laws so that we make sure that the police don't cooperate with the federal government in getting rid of illegal aliens.
We're going to have an auditor to make sure that the police don't cooperate with the federal government so you can create little Minneapolises all over the country.
Because that's at the core of what was going on in Minneapolis that Tom Holman broke through, but we're going to see how long that lasts, right?
He also hired, why are these names all hard to pronounce?
I don't know.
Of course, not Americans.
Faza Ali.
Now, Faza Ali is a self-admitted Palestinian radical.
That means she has very close ties to care, where in some places, hasn't care been designated a terrorist group?
I don't know.
Check that.
I don't want to say that.
And I mean, it should be.
That's the Council on American Islamic Relations that poses as some kind of a organization that just represents Islamic values and it really is a major supporter of Islamic murderers and has been for quite some time.
She also is very, very close to the professional Jewish hater, Linda Saussure.
So you know what she is?
She's the city's chief immigration officer.
I mean, this is to make sure we get more illegal aliens who are terrorists.
Let's see if we can go find them and bring them in.
They're going to appoint people to audit obstruction of federal law.
Because way back when this all started and sanctuary cities started to be defined very, very differently and started to become just completely blatant obstructions of the law that was prevailing.
Because under the Constitution of the United States, there is a supremacy clause.
And the supremacy clause says that federal law supersedes and preempts is the word that is most often used, preempts local law in areas of particular federal competence.
You can't think of one more designed for federal government than immigration, since the same rules should apply at all border points for our country.
Because a person may come in in, you know, a person may come in over the border in New York, but they may end up in Florida or Texas or anyplace else.
So the whole country has an interest in making sure that those laws are enforced.
And I, for the life of me, cannot understand why the first mayor or police chief who said, you know, we're deliberately not going to cooperate with the enforcement of federal immigration law and then carried that out in a specific circumstance.
The very first one should have been arrested and prosecuted.
And then the second and the third and the fourth and there wouldn't have been a fifth.
Now it's like just in the mush brain that we apparently have as a nation, it's now assumed that sanctuary laws are perfectly fine.
And by the way, you got to have an auditor to make sure you're following obstructing the federal government.
If you want to obstruct the federal government in carrying out the immigration laws because you don't agree with them, then you got to change, you got to use the democratic process, which they certainly know how to use, right, to change the law.
But you can't crucify all these agents who are, after all, enforcing the law that was passed according to the time-honored process in America.
And we just find it impossible for many Americans to think their way through this.
It's a terrible example of what's happened to us.
The mayor's deficit is outrageous.
First of all, he lied about it and made it much higher when he knew, he said it was like 12 billion, and it was actually 5 billion.
And he knew that there were receipts that he wasn't.
By the way, the reason that his deficit got down to about 5 or 6 billion is the horrible rich people from Wall Street had a very good year.
And I will tell you this from being a mayor, you can almost predict America, New York's economic health based on Wall Street bonuses.
They happen toward the end of the year, calendar year.
And if they're very small, the city's going to probably have a deficit.
If they're medium, the city is going to come out all right.
And if they're very high, the city is going to have an unusual surplus.
Particularly from the time that I changed, and I think nobody ever figured this out, and Bloomberg would not have changed this.
In one year, I flipped the way in which the mayor calculates anticipated revenues.
Instead of using the high number to make things look rosy so everybody could waste even more money, I picked the lowest number possible that I could pick, got sued by the city council for it, and what?
A baby communist Islamic terrorist supporter wouldn't know that.
But all of a sudden, he had $5 billion that he claims he didn't know he was going to have.
Now, either he's lying or he's not prepared for the job.
I mean, you shouldn't be mayor if you don't know the basics of the budget.
So now he has a $5 billion deficit, which comparatively is, I think, considerably less than I had when I came into office.
And he's going to do exactly the opposite of what I did, even though what I did worked brilliantly and got me reelected by a landslide margin as a Republican.
And I was only like a second or third Republican mayor of the century.
What I did was I didn't raise taxes, I lowered them, and I cut 10, 12% of the city workforce.
And I didn't raise taxes for a very simple reason.
If I raise taxes on the rich, that's all those only people who pay taxes, right?
Half the city doesn't pay taxes.
So if I raise taxes on the productive people, more of the productive people would do what they have been doing for the last four or five years on the David Dinkins, leaving the city in large, large numbers.
We hadn't had a new Fortune 500 company in 12 years.
We had lost something like 13 or 14.
If I raise taxes, more of that would have happened.
And then what would have happened a year later or two years later?
I'd have to raise taxes again on a diminishing group of people who can pay them.
Because people have left.
Because people have left.
So now you have, and who's going to leave?
The people that are paying the taxes.
Yes.
And they hate billionaires.
Yeah.
Mandami has said that he hates billionaires and a couple of AOC hates billionaires.
And they sure as he'll take their money when they hate billionaires.
But you better start liking billionaires because New York is very expensive.
And the more billionaires you can get, I mean, the top two or three percent of the income ladder pays something like 60 or 70 percent of the taxes in your city, jackass.
Sorry, I did it again.
I called him a name.
Poorly educated little boy.
Stephen Colbert Controversy 00:15:19
That's not a bad name.
Poorly educated little boy whose father is a supporter of Islamic extremism and violence and who seems to admire lots of people who are terrorists, doesn't know that.
Stephen Colbert has got to get called out for this.
So I don't know if you've followed this, but Stephen Colbert was told that he couldn't do a show, an interview.
He couldn't have the lawyers, the lawyers at CBS Paramount.
Where is he at CBS?
So the lawyers at CBS said that if he had this guy, Tellarico, on, who's running against Crockett, you know, Jasmine Crockett, and a third non-important Democrat who has no chance.
But the Tallarico Crockett race is very, very close.
And he was going to interview Tallarico.
And the lawyers said, as all these, I used to do this for the Wall Street Journal and for the Daily News and for WPIX.
The lawyer's function is to warn if there might be a regulatory problem.
And they said, you know, if you put Tallarico on, given the expansion that has been made of the equal time provision to late night TV.
And let's be honest about it.
I mean, it's highly political, right?
And most of it is trashing Trump, but it's highly political.
Yeah.
It's no longer Johnny Carson telling jokes.
So if you put Tallarico on, you're going to have to put on Jasmine Crockett.
And possibly the Republican.
You might not have to because it's a primary right now.
But you definitely have to put Crockett on.
And honestly, we don't want Crockett on our station.
And he went nuts.
And they did it.
They kept him off the main stage.
And they put him on like on whatever, what would you call it?
Internet service they have, streaming service.
Oh, YouTube.
They just posted it on YouTube.
Yeah, they put it on YouTube, but not on the, YouTube isn't covered by it.
I don't know why, but because the FCC regulation worked for the FCC, yeah, so he's going to help.
It's like my time to shine, right?
Once in a while, you're going to know that's great.
But then you understand this as a lawyer.
The FCC rules on broadcast, which is NBC, CBS, literally, they used to broadcast the signal, right?
Those are considered public airwaves.
Therefore, they're regulated differently than YouTube, which is a internet.
And the internet, which is on the internet was freed of regulatory interference so we could grow.
1996.
Which now is ridiculous because it's maybe as big or bigger than broadcast television.
And we were should be subjected to the same rules, but nobody's gotten around to that yet.
Right.
So in any event, you can get away with things on the internet that you can't get away with on broadcast TV.
And just real quick, Mayor, you know, I was an associate at Comcast NBC Universal in the summer of 2015 when Trump, when the president, when he was thinking about announcing an announcement June, and the lawyers there thought he's this, you know, they were, they were discussing the same issue.
They thought they'd have the problem with the apprentice.
If he announces we have the apprentice, what do we have to do with all the other 16 candidates, right?
So they were at least starting to talk about that.
And I remember at the time they were thinking, he's not going to run.
They thought he was just doing it to promote the show.
I was listening to what the president was saying.
I knew that message was going to resonate.
But the point being, yes, this is a very much a technical issue, but this guy is lying to his own voters, right?
They're trying to make and he's done.
Tell Rico telling him he's lying.
His backside office.
But it's worked for him.
We're talking about it.
It worked for him.
This was done to protect Jasmine Crockett, not to protect Trump has nothing to do with this.
This doesn't help or hurt Trump one way or the other.
It has nothing to do with Republicans.
It has nothing to do with Trump.
This is the FCC, once again, applying the law that was passed by Congress and interpreted neutrally.
It doesn't apply just to Republicans or Democrats.
It applies to both.
And here, this is an internal basically, Tallarico and Colbert wanted to screw Crockett.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And they did.
He ended up raising 2.3 or 2.4 million dollars because he became a martyr in his effort to defeat Crockett.
So Crockett actually is really pissed off.
Crockett almost came to the defense of CA.
This is a dem, as Kirsten Fleming points out, this is a dem on dem hit.
Yeah.
It was an internal Democratic hit.
It was dishonest, as dishonest as Colbert can be, because he's a little slime.
And obviously, Tallarico is another little slime.
And the two of them, the two of them squeezed out 2.5 million.
I don't know why this is an illegal contribution by Colbert.
I was just going to say, Mayor, someone should take action against Colbert.
Isn't this going over the line?
When you're deliberately violating the lawyers tell you a workaround.
Yeah.
And you do, I mean, generally, you can't do indirectly what you can't do directly under the law.
And like you said, especially now, there's more people that probably consume Colbert on YouTube than over the air on broadcasts, right?
It could be.
I mean, almost nobody watches him.
But this probably, when he becomes controversial, it probably does help him.
Oh, this helps him.
But the point being, they are lying to their own voters, right?
At the base of this issue, you have Teller Rico lying to primary voters of Texas.
He's trying to pull one over on them to get their support, right?
By lying, oh, I've been banned because of Trump.
And he's lying through his teeth.
And it also shows that I guess the powers that be in the Democrat Party in Texas do not want Crockett, or at least enough powerful people that have this.
I can understand not wanting Crockett.
I mean, she's terrible to my mind.
And he's terrible too.
This guy's a this will tell you I'm a real lawyer, not a not a slime like they are.
The same rules apply to Crockett as anybody else.
She's entitled to the same protections and she's entitled to the same detriments as anybody else.
And this is intended to screw her dishonestly, just like his whole thing that he was thrown off because of Trump.
The guy had a budget that was ridiculously high.
His ratings were the lowest of all the late night talk people, and they hadn't gone up for two years.
And his show was had turned into a poor man's version of MSNBC's greatest hits.
I think that's a great description by Kirsten Fleming.
I do too.
I like that.
Colbert has become a parasite subsisting on the thin skin of Trump.
Without our current occupant of the White House, he'd have to tell real jokes, which he has never done.
Long before I had any idea what his political biases were or whatever, I watched the guy one or two times.
That guy's not even funny.
Well, he wasn't original.
His first big breakout was the Stephen Colbert show on Comedy Central, and it came on after Jon Stewart.
So he got the ratings from John.
It was a popular show 20 years ago.
And the whole shtick was him pretending to be Bill O'Reilly.
If you remember I don't know if you probably didn't watch it, but he used to it was a Colbert rapport.
It was uh, it was uh.
I never, I know I never, I never found anything uh, particularly for uh funny uh, funny about him.
But I mean this, this was uh, Colbert and Tallarico conspiring together uh, to screw Jasmine Crockett, and under those circumstances, Colbert had the option of putting Crockett on.
He could have done his interview.
No, he could have done his interview with uh, with uh with, with Tallarico, and then the next night interviewed Crockett.
Um yes, so this is the one thing and I don't want to give them any um, any leeway here.
Right, CBS and Jake Tapper went along with this and, in the middle of his interview, made it sound like this, this was an order from the FCC.
Right, FCC did nothing.
The FCC uh did a uh, a remake, an extension of the regulation of equal time to late night television.
Yes, and they did that some months ago.
Yes, which is common every, which applies to every, all of them unrelated, including including the little bit of uh.
Like uh, we don't have anyone late night.
Who do we have on broadcast late night?
That's, that's nobody right, isn't that funny?
Yeah yeah, it's ridiculous, it's funny, but it's also Fox Fox's cable, exactly it's.
It's absurd when you think about it.
They don't have as much influence now, but 10, 15 years ago it goes again.
Right for a Republican going back to you in the 90s, for a Republican to win a big office you are up against.
So what that meant was the FCC was uh uh, basically protecting Democrats.
They're protecting Democrats where uh, one person they get on and the, a Democrat they don't like, wouldn't get equal time.
Right right, this is exactly what they did.
So here's the question, though, is there a chance that CBS?
You know how lawyers are.
They tend to be a little bit more careful is there a chance?
This wasn't necessarily based on the names and based on the production team having this interview set with James Tellerico and just not wanting to.
Then, if they aired it, they'd have to also get not just Jasmine, but there's another candidate, a third yeah, the third one is so far out of it that he, that person might, might not be covered by it has to be okay.
It has to equal time, has to be a realistic candidate, exactly how you define.
That gets very foggy.
But the uh, but the the the, the rumors.
Yeah, the it definitely checks out around around.
This is that CBS didn't want to put Crockett on.
Yeah now, but we're not sure of that.
And he didn't want to put Crockett on Meaning Colbert right, so it could be that, or there's maybe a possibility that they have their schedule.
You know the primary is in less than two weeks.
Yeah, so they're, they probably have their schedule for the two weeks out and they're like well, we don't, we can't make it work.
Maybe, but you're probably right, ultimately their orchestration is.
They kind of, I think they think that Tell Rico Yes, would have a better chance of winning and therefore they'll, they'll, deprive the Republicans of a seat.
Yes yes, that's really I mean.
So let's be realistic.
Yeah, it really isn't um, and they don't want to give Jasmine Crockett the benefit of that free television right, I think it's a pretty close race right right, right.
And I mean, and Crockett well, I mean I would think with a general, the general voting population in Texas, Crockett's got to be a joke right, I mean, she's considered far to the left when she talks.
It's often so yes I, I will say, Tell Rico's campaign right, from a strategic stand.
I mean, you got to give them credit?
I mean they Crockett.
I never give people credit for being dishonest.
Sure sure ever ever, ever.
You can always get a great advantage if you want to be dishonest.
That doesn't show health and I think You are, it shows how immoral or amoral you are.
And again, as the mayor is pointing out, that's the real key here.
This whole operation is based on the idea of pulling, you know, pulling a fast one over their own voters.
Right.
This whole thing is facing.
I mean, the whole thing of blaming this on Trump is like totally ridiculous.
He has absolutely nothing to do with this.
And the FCC had nothing to do with it except passing a rule of general application that would apply to Republicans as much as Democrats if we had anything on late night television.
Literally, not zero.
Don't apply to us because we don't have any portion.
Shouldn't that have applied along?
Although the best ratings overall go to Fox.
But why do you be doesn't he have a bigger audience than all of them combined?
I'm going to look at that on pretty close.
But I'm starting to wonder why, why isn't this equal time law extended?
How are these late night comedians not considered Democrat Party activists?
Therefore, the equal time law should allow a lot of people.
I would think this is a campaign contribution.
This one in particular.
Millions.
I don't know, just telling a joke or whatever.
That'd be hard.
But this is done with the candidate, with the connivance of the candidate.
Yes.
It isn't like Colbert spent five minutes telling you how great he believes Tallarico is.
This is the two of them conniving so they box out.
Even CBS and Paramount, the corporate company, I think, came out and said, and kind of pushed back against what Colbert and Tellerico are claiming, right?
Because they know what's going on there.
So this is fascinating.
I'm going to read more about this, Mayor, and we'll see if this gets Colbert in hot water with his own bosses.
Why they kept kept him on, I mean, they got rid of him.
Why they kept him on for this extended period.
Oh, you knew he was going to cause trouble, right?
Oh, my goodness.
That's right.
Colbert was taken off like a year ago, a long time ago.
He's costing him a fortune.
But he wasn't leaving until like March or April.
He doesn't sell any advertising for any amount of money.
I mean, the people who advertise, they probably begged him to do it.
You're right.
You know what?
And it's making more sense.
This was totally CBS is losing a fortune on this bump.
Yeah.
Again, I can't say that.
This not very funny comedian.
Nobody, of course, covers the Rhode Island.
Well, they did until they found out who the shooter was.
But even when they do, they now.
Well, the media covers it when it looks like gun violence.
As soon as it's a son, Robert Dorgan's son, in one of his, he has six children.
Male vs. Female Genders 00:13:00
Yeah.
Or had six children.
One of them is Kevin Colantonio.
And he's in jail.
He's in jail for seven years for using gasoline and a lighter to burn, to try to burn down a Jewish temple.
I'm sorry, evangelical temple in February of 2024.
And it was mostly a black congregation.
And he has some writings that say, gun everyone down that isn't right, white.
And he's scheduled for release in December 2029.
So I guess he can continue his burning.
But I mean, this guy had, I mean, look at this guy.
You just look at him and you realize he should be, you realize he should be.
Thank you.
You realize he should be locked up somewhere, right?
I mean, just look at that.
Why on earth?
How have we gotten to this point?
But I mean, don't you think that somebody who is male that thinks they're female, just logically, don't you think they have a mental problem?
Rather than we got to turn all of society around to fit them?
That's like a couple of thousand years going back to the book of Genesis.
We have a distinction between male and female.
And the minute you live in your own unreal world, we're starting to talk about mental illness, aren't we?
That's what it is.
You're not in touch with the real world.
The real world is pal.
You've got the XY chromosome instead of the two X chromosomes of the two Y. You're a male.
Yeah, that's what you are.
And kind of like, let's do therapy so you get used to it.
And maybe we wouldn't have all the suicides we have if it wasn't for that.
But I do think that something happened here to increase the violence.
And I think it's the hormones.
I think, so we've had transgender people, I guess, for a long, long time.
It's a very small percentage.
The percentages increase as they advertise it and start convincing people they are that aren't.
But in any event, transgender people go back to who those went.
But I don't know that there was ever any correlation between transgender and violence.
Maybe there was.
We didn't know it, but I don't think so.
So what's the added element here?
And that's this introduction of these very powerful hormones that we don't completely understand yet.
And what they can do to you when you take a male and then you introduce hormones to make the male female, which is also going to have an effect on the brain.
And now all of a sudden, you know, we got three in the last four months.
And I think you can count the Kirk tragedy.
Also, there was a guy living with a furry.
I mean, a guy living with a person who thinks they're an animal, which is a gender, by the way.
I didn't know that.
I keep asking, could somebody explain to me how the hell we have 57 genders?
I mean, I can't get past two.
Let's finish off because we got to do this.
Any opportunity to show you the great thing you escaped by not electing Hillary Clinton is worth it.
So two Europeans wrote powerful essays today.
One of them was Boris Johnson.
And Boris Johnson wrote an essay basically saying, instead of complaining and moaning and groaning about Trump European leaders, why don't you grow up and start to build your own defenses?
And if you're all complaining about Ukraine, why the hell aren't you giving them the weapons so they can defend them?
They can take out the Russian drones in Russia.
Why don't you give it to them?
And why don't you allow them to do it?
Because Trump has already said he'd be okay with that.
Like, why don't you grow up and become men?
I mean that in a symbolic sense.
Because I could say, you know, Georgia Maloney doesn't have to grow up.
But the other ones, Starmer and I mean, they're pathetic.
They're absolutely pathetic.
And I thought Boris wrote a terrific attack on that.
He said, and basically Trump's doing a good thing if he's trying to make you people into leaders.
Also, the deputy prime minister of the Czech Republic took on Hillary at the Munich conference and ripped her to shreds, absolutely ripped her to shreds by basically pointing out how she is part of the complete distortion of Western civilization by supporting wokeness.
And what he focused on mostly was this ridiculous debate over gender, in which, you know, she seems all right with women having, you know, have men on women's teams beating the crap out of the women.
And so do we have a little excerpt from that?
From yeah, let me work on is this which clip?
Which one?
This is the Czech deputy prime minister.
Peter couple.
Peter McC.
Let's start with who ripped her apart.
We'll start made a fool out of her the way Trump used to do in the debates.
Right.
So we'll start with gender revolution.
Yeah, so this will be a good one here.
So this happened just this past weekend.
Here we go.
It happened at the conference in which Marco Rubia became a star.
We saw the Vogue revolution.
I don't agree with the gender revolution, the climate alarmism.
Gender women having their rights.
No, let me let me see Peter go on.
I think there are two genders, but some of us think that there is more than one or more than two, sorry, more than two gender.
I think there is male and female, and the rest probably is a social construct.
So this is something that went too far.
But does that justify selling out the people of Ukraine who are on the front lines dying to save their freedom and their two genders?
If that's what you're worried about.
Can I please finish my points?
I'm sorry that it makes you nervous.
I'm really sorry for that.
It doesn't make me nervous, it makes me...
No, no, no, no, no, no, but seriously...
We saw the cancel culture, that's the...
We saw the Vogue revolution.
I don't agree with the gender revolution, the climate alarmism.
Gender women having their rights.
I think there are two genders, but some of us think that there is more than one, or more than two, sorry, more than two gender.
I think there is male and female, and the rest probably is a social construct.
So this is something that went too far.
But does that justify selling out the people of Ukraine who are on the front lines dying to save their freedom and their two genders?
If that's what you're worried about.
Can I please finish?
He has betrayed the West.
He's betrayed human values.
He's betrayed the NATO Charter, the Atlantic Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
A lot of what has been done before to try to make sense of how difficult it is to restrain people who want unaccountable power.
And none of us in this room, including all of us on this panel, would choose to live under a regime that was so unaccountable that it could act with impunity the way that Putin does, except that's who Trump is modeling himself.
Well, first, I think you really don't like him.
You know, that is absolutely true.
But I really, not only do I not like him, I don't like him because of what he's doing to the United States and the world.
And I think you should take a hard look at it if you think that there is something good that will come out of it.
What I think, what I think Trump is doing in America, I think it is reaction, reaction, reaction for something that, for some policies that really went too far, too far from the regular people, too far from reality.
So, you know, we saw the cancel culture.
We saw the woke revolution.
I'll give you the, I'll give you, and then we'll wrap up soccer time because everybody's got to get some sleep, right?
So these are the points that he made very, very quickly.
First of all, stop blaming Trump for the crisis in the West because it started a long time before Trump.
And it really has to do with abandoning Western civilization, which is way beyond Hillary's Marxist orientation.
Number two, the West isn't crumbling because of nationalism.
Nationalism is just part of the human spirit.
People are Italian, people are German, people are French, people are English, people are hopefully American.
And you're not going to legislate that away.
And in trying to, Europe is destroying itself.
A woke revolution is not a foreign policy doctrine.
It isn't foreign policy that everybody has to agree with you that there are 57 genders.
Alliances must be built on mutual respect, not re-education.
Not, you know, America better learn that.
America better learn that we have to have one world and we have to have an international criminal court and we have to have America better just learn that.
Otherwise, America is going to be left behind.
Democracy means respecting the result even when you lose, which means you don't carry on a four-year campaign to remove a duly elected president based on completely false evidence.
Evidence she paid for, that thing there, that she paid for.
$1.1 million to create, she paid $1.1 million to create that thing right there, paid $1.1 million to develop the Russian hoax, which was completely untrue.
And she knew it.
She did it.
And Obama knew it.
And Biden knew it.
And Brennan knew it.
And the 51 spies who lied knew it.
And all the press knew it.
Biological and social realities can't be legislated away, no matter how often Justice Kentanji Jackson says she can't define a woman, everybody else can.
Well, defending the West starts at home, which means you don't just rely completely on the United States.
You got it.
You got to do what you can do and then come to the United States and fill in the gaps that we have.
We don't want everybody to have nuclear power.
So you take care of the basics and we'll take care of and together defend you with nuclear weapons if God forbid that's necessary.
But there's got to be a fair allocation.
And the only one who ever cared about that is Trump, not that corrupt individual who was debating him.
So I'm glad that he had a chance to do that.
And isn't it weird that the Czech, the deputy prime minister, has to defend the United States against the attacks of an American?
Boy, that is weird.
Yeah.
Pray for Fairness 00:07:27
Well, of course, everything about the Clintons is weird.
Finally, there was a very, very good study about the prejudice from Apple News.
And it was done by two different groups.
One is a right-wing group called the Media Research Center.
And the other was a nonpartisan group put together very carefully of Democrats, Republicans, left-wingers, and right-wingers called all sides.
And remarkably, they came up with about just the same percentages in terms of bias, which is extraordinary.
When they put together their news, Apple News during the period that was studied used 65 media outlets during that period of time.
Only three times was it one that would be described as right-leaning or right-wing.
They used Fox News twice over a four-month period and the Telegraph once.
Both all sides and, which is the nonpartisan one, and the right-leaning group found that 53% of the articles came from left-leaning sources.
You know, what percentage came from the right?
1%.
And the rest were neutral.
Apple's in-house editorial team has been led since 2017 by editor-in-chief Warren Kern, who formerly held editor roles at the New York Magazine, which is left of Provida.
And, of course, the big left-wing Marxist giant, the New York Times.
So the differences here were a matter of a few little percent.
For example, all sides, right?
I just read you the right-wing analysis.
Here's what all sides, which is a nonpartisan analysis, came up with.
Of the articles they studied, which was just a group for two or three months, I'm not sure if it was two or three months, from Apple News.
50% were taken from left-wing sources.
23% were taken from neutral sources.
And they came up with double the number of right-wing sources.
The right-wing group that analyzed it was 1%.
Theirs was 2%.
2%?
And the guy who did it got fired as well as whipped.
Well, thank you very much for bearing with us if you did.
We'd love to have soccer time because we get to get out a lot of the things that you don't get elsewhere, like that study.
I don't think you're going to get anywhere because it shows that Apple is a piece of crap.
And their news is, I mean, their products are great, but their bias is unbelievable.
It should be embarrassing.
But in any event, it's not.
So pray for the people of Israel.
Pray for the people of Ukraine.
Pray for the people of Iran.
Pray for the people of Venezuela.
Pray for us.
My goodness, with all these people like Hillary and Mandani.
Please pray for us.
And pray for the president because he needs God's help.
That's not because he hasn't done a terrific job.
It's because we all need God's help.
And this is one of the things that these left-wingers don't believe.
They believe they're smarter than God, which after all was the sin of Adam and Eve, wasn't it?
So I know these liberals for decades.
And I would say in capital letters, these are know-it-alls.
They know everything.
Their knowledge, I mean, they can't possibly be a God.
How could there be somebody that knows more than them?
And do you know that that also comes from Marx?
And whether they know it or not, they're all little infantile Marxists.
So pray for the president that he's got the strength, continues to have the strength to make the wise decisions that he's making.
And he'll only do that with your guidance.
God bless America.
It's our purpose to bring to bear the principle of common sense and rational discussion to the issues of our day.
America was created at a time of great turmoil, tremendous disagreements, anger, hatred.
There was a book written in 1776 that guided much of the discipline of thinking that brought to us the discovery of our freedoms, of our God-given freedoms.
It was Thomas Paine's Common Sense, written in 1776, one of the first American bestsellers, in which Thomas Paine explained, by rational principles, the reason why these small colonies felt the necessity to separate from the kingdom of Great Britain and the King of England.
He explained their inherent desire for liberty, for freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, the ability to select the people who govern them.
And he explained it in ways that were understandable to all the people, not just the elite.
Because the desire for freedom is universal.
The desire for freedom adheres in the human mind and it is part of the human soul.
This is exactly the time we should consult our history.
Look at what we've done in the past and see if we can't use it to help us now.
We understand that our founders created the greatest country in the history of the world.
The greatest democracy, the freest country, a country that has taken more people out of poverty than any country ever.
All of us are so fortunate to be Americans.
But a great deal of the reason for America's constant ability to self-improve is because we're able to reason.
We're able to talk.
We're able to analyze.
We are able to apply our God-given common sense.
So let's do it.
Export Selection