John Cardillo examines the U.S. Embassy’s May 2018 move to Jerusalem amid Trump-Giuliani tensions over Stormy Daniels’ hush money case, while Eric Schneiderman’s resignation exposes violent abuse allegations—including choking and threats—from four women, contradicting his progressive feminist image. Legal scrutiny reveals potential felony charges like official misconduct and coercion, with Mueller possibly leveraging state-level cases to bypass federal pardon limits. Meanwhile, Mexico’s aggressive deportation tactics near Guatemala, spurred by Trump’s April 2018 NAFTA threat, surpass U.S. efforts, yet face domestic political resistance, underscoring broader failures in border control. Cardillo questions left-wing hypocrisy and Mueller’s perjury trap strategy while framing Giuliani’s media blitz as a calculated distraction to undermine the investigation. [Automatically generated summary]
Today on off the cuff declassified, the New York State Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, resigned in disgrace.
I'll tell you all about it.
Rebel managing editor Tiffany Gabay joins me to discuss the U.S. Embassy in Israel moving to Jerusalem.
Celebrations are already underway.
Is there a little rift developing between Trump and Giuliani because of Giuliani's media appearances?
We're going to discuss it.
And guess who is deploying a large deportation force to their southern border?
I'm going to tell you, four women have come out and accused New York State Attorney General, well, he's only a New York State Attorney General until close of business today, Eric Schneiderman, of being a sick, creepy statist.
Yeah, they alleged that he wanted them to call him master.
He called one of them his brown slave, and he would beat them, typically during sex, and after he was drunk, I mean, just mack them till their ears rang and bled, choked them till they couldn't breathe, called them all kinds of degrading names, spit on them.
Well, he would do this without their consent.
Now, Snyderman issued a statement saying, and I'll find you the statement, the New Yorker broke the story.
Snyderman issued a statement saying that it was all consensual.
He said, quote, in the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity.
I have not assaulted anyone.
I have never engaged in non-consensual sex, which is a line I would not cross.
Well, the women are not accusing him of that.
His statement is very selective.
His statement is saying that he never engaged in non-consensual sex.
That's not what the woman, that's not what the women are saying.
What the women are saying is that he was involved in fetishes that rose to violence.
Now, one woman, Manning Barrish, she's a bit of a socialite in New York.
She didn't, wasn't with him for his money or anything else.
She's not suing him for money.
She said that he started to become a control freak right after they met, wanted her to have a tattoo she had lasered off.
It was painful and expensive.
And she says, in retrospect, it was the first step of Schneiderman trying to control her body.
This is where her story gets really disturbing.
This is from the New Yorker.
About four weeks after they became physically involved, she says Schneiderman grew violent.
One night they were in the bedroom of his Upper West Side apartment, still clothed, but getting ready for bed and lightly baiting each other, flirting.
As she recalls it, he called her a whore and she talked back.
They had both been drinking and her recollection of their conversation is blurry.
She says what happened next is vividly clear.
Schneiderman, she says, backed her up to the edge of his bed and quote, all of a sudden, he just slapped me open-handed and with great force across the face, landing the blow directly onto my ear.
It was horrendous.
It just came out of nowhere.
My ear was ringing.
I lost my balance and fell backward onto the bed.
I sprang up, but at this point, there was very little room between the bed and him.
I got up to try to shove him back or take a swing, but he pushed me back down.
He then used his body weight to hold me down and began to choke me.
The choking was very hard.
It was really bad.
I kicked.
In every fiber, I felt I was being beaten by a man.
She said she finally got back on her feet.
She was crying and in shock and said, are you crazy?
To her astonishment, he accused her of scratching him.
At one point, she can't remember if it was at this moment or later in a conversation he told her, you know, hitting an officer of the law is a felony.
He was using the power of his office as New York AG to beat women.
And if they resisted, threatening them with arrest and prosecution, she says she would never come back.
She left the apartment, telling him she would never come back.
She said, I want to make this absolutely clear.
This was under no circumstances a sex game gone wrong.
This did not happen while we were having sex.
I was fully dressed and remained that way.
It was completely unexpected and shocking.
I did not consent to physical assault.
And in the following days, this woman confided to friends that he had done this to her.
One of them was the author Salman Rushdie, who she had dated previously.
They remained close friends.
And he says that the version she told him back then is comporting with the story she's telling today.
She went to a doctor.
This went down in 2014.
This all happened about four years ago, September 2014, three and a half years ago.
The doctor, Dr. Gwen Corovin in Manhattan, removed crusted blood from her ear.
Now, this woman, Manning Barrish, says that she told the doctor that it was from using a Q-tip and she perforated something in her ear.
But she now says, Well, I was embarrassed and I was afraid of him, which is not uncommon for female victims of this kind of abuse.
It's not uncommon.
In fact, it's quite common.
The doctor, then, when asked by the New Yorker, could this injury have been consistent with a slap? said yes or a Q-tip, certainly one or the other.
Now, what makes me believe the woman's story is the timeline.
She claims he was physically abusive, beat her, hit her in that ear.
She heard ringing.
She had vertigo.
She lost her balance.
And then shortly thereafter, she goes to an ear, nose, and throat specialist.
I believe that he beat her more than I believe it was a Q-tip because I always tell you, timelines are critical in investigations, and her timeline, the interval between her being beaten and going to the doctor, are very close.
That makes a lot of sense.
I also tell you when things make sense in an investigation, they're typically true.
Well, that makes a lot of sense that her visit to the doctor was related to her being beaten by Schneiderman and not because of using a Q-tip.
Barris at Schneiderman, she and Schneiderman were together off and on for nearly two years.
She said that when they had sex, he often slapped her across the face without her consent, making her feel emotionally battered.
She says that he criticized how she looked and dressed and controlled what she ate.
She's five foot seven and she dropped to 103 pounds, looking emaciated.
He would also make her consume large amounts of alcohol.
Now, he had another mistress who was darker skinned.
She looks to be somewhere in Asia.
And he would call her his brown slave.
He made this woman call him.
I'll see if I can find her name here.
Yeah, her name is last name is Selvara Tanam.
Selvara Tanam.
I can't even pronounce it, but this woman is Harvard educated.
And she, wow.
Otanya Elvara Tanam, Tanya Silvara Tanam.
She's the other person on the record.
So Ern, Michelle Manning Barish and Tanya Silvaratanam are on the record.
This Silvara Tanam, he called her his brown slave and made her call him master.
He also made her tell him she was his property.
And if she didn't do it, he would beat her up and choke her and everything else.
Now, remember, Eric Schneiderman was a guy who was at the forefront of the hashtag Me Too movement.
Oh, a big liberal crusader for women.
But he was beating them behind closed doors.
The Many Faces of Corruption00:07:41
Now, these are the ones we know about.
Four women that talked to the New Yorker, two on the record, two off.
They're the ones we know about.
How many women did this guy beat that didn't come forward?
The most disturbing part of this is the beatings.
Far and away the beatings, but equally as disturbing is the fact that he threatened them with the weight of his office if they dared blow the whistle.
This guy was an arch criminal.
Now, he's not alone.
There have been a lot of political scandals in New York, predominantly involving Democrats.
And I have a story here from the New York Times on that.
Over the last decade, more than 30 have former or state office holders in New York have been convicted of crimes, sanctioned, or otherwise accused of wrongdoing.
But before we get to that, I want to talk to you about one of Schneiderman's buddies, and that's Robert Mueller.
Back in August of 2017, Reuters and a few others broke a story.
Mueller, New York Attorney General, cooperating on Manafort probe.
And the reason they would do that is that presidential pardons only extend to federal crimes.
So if Mueller couldn't take down Team Trump, but he gave info to Eric Schneiderman to try to charge them in New York State, the federal presidential pardon wouldn't apply to state crimes.
And this was like Mueller's insurance policy.
You know, Mueller being the insurance policy most likely that Peter Stroke and Lisa Page talked about.
Well, Mueller knew he was playing fast and loose with exculpatory evidence, and there was really nothing on Trump.
So if you can't get him federally, then find a willing partner at the state level.
And how telling is this that Schneiderman was that guy?
Schneiderman, somebody who weaponized his own office for his sick, sadistic sexual perversions, threatening women into silence or the power of his office, would work alongside Control Freak who hates Trump and wants to bring him down Mueller.
So let me read you a piece of this Reuters story from last.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team is working with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on its investigation into President Donald Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, and his financial transaction.
This was a political story.
I'm reading it from Reuters.
And of course, citing unnamed people familiar with the matter, Politico reported Mueller's team, which is investigating possible possible collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia and Schneiderman's aides have shared evidence and talked frequently about a potential case in recent weeks.
The cooperation, quote, could potentially provide Mueller with additional leverage to get Manafort to cooperate in a larger investigation into Trump's campaign, as Trump does not have any pardon power over state crimes.
Now, this is unprecedented, but it shows you that Mueller would be willing to work with the bottom of the barrel, the most biased political hacks, for the sole purpose of taking down Donald Trump.
He would be willing to work with anybody as long as he could take out President Donald Trump, get him impeached, smear his reputation.
I had people, very senior people in the Department of Justice, tell me when I asked them, I said, look, what's the deal with Mueller?
Is he an ethical actor?
Is he a decent guy?
They said he despises Trump.
He doesn't feel Trump was worthy of the presidency.
He feels that Trump never should have won, that it was Hillary's job, and he will do anything he can to take out Donald Trump.
This was their opinion.
They worked with Mueller.
They know Mueller.
They hear the whispers.
Their opinion, people I know a long time, but man, it sure comports with the way Mueller is acting against a sitting president.
I'm going to be talking later in the show about some new developments in regards to Mueller, but this is about Schneiderman.
Schneiderman decides to ally with Robert Mueller.
But it doesn't surprise me that Schneiderman is dirty because here's this New York Times story.
The many faces of New York political scandals.
I'm going to read you some of these.
William F. Boylan Jr., Assemblyman Democrat, convicted on bribery charges, including requesting $250,000 to pay his legal fees and a separate corruption case and other federal crimes.
Nelson El Castro, Assemblyman, the Bronx, Democrat, perjury.
Mike Cole, Assemblyman Erie County, Republican, one of five Republicans.
Censured after sleeping at the home of a female intern, censured, criminally charged.
Pedro Espada Jr., senator of the Bronx, convicted of siphoning hundreds of thousands of dollars from Dennis H. Gabrizak, assemblyman, Erie County, New York Democrat, sexually harassing members of his staff.
Efren Gonzalez, Senator of the Bronx, guilty to using hundreds of thousands from his nonprofit to pay for personal expenses.
Diane Gordon, assemblywoman, Brooklyn Democrat, convicted of bid-rigging for a land developer in exchange for building her a house in a gated community.
Alan Hevesy, the former New York state controller, pleaded guilty to using state workers to chauffeur his wife, pleaded guilty to his role in a sprawling corruption scandal involving the state pension fund.
Alan Hevesy was actually a professor of mine in college.
Unfortunately, he's a nice guy.
It's too bad he did these things.
He was actually a Democrat, a liberal, New York state political hack, but pretty nice guy.
He treated me very well in that class.
But he did what he did, and he paid the price.
Sam Hoyt, assemblyman, Buffalo, Democrat, was banned from having interns in his office.
I wonder why.
Curly Huntley, Senator Queens, Democrat, stealing state grants, falsifying evidence.
Oh, and the list goes on.
Sexual harassment, corruption, obstruction of justice, lying to the FBI, fine, $330,000, extortion, racketeering, and all but five are Democrats.
These charges are amazing.
Soliciting payments, taking $4 million in bribes, bribery, extortion, conspiracy.
Elliot Spitzer and his prostitutes.
More bribery, fraud, and extortion.
Ada L. Smith, Senator Queens, Democrat, convicted of throwing a cup of hot coffee in the face of an aide.
This is New York politics.
All right.
This is New York politics.
This is Tammany Hall, 2018.
The old Democratic network, old Democratic network, and overwhelming Democrats.
Out of the 30 cases profiled here, and there are more, but the Times took the 30 most prominent cases of the last 10 years.
Only five were Republicans.
And we had the one Republican who was only censured.
The others, the other Republicans, obstruction of justice and tax charges, witness tampering.
Another one lied to the FBI, a process, crime.
Let's see what the fourth and the fifth.
Obstructing Nick Spano, obstructing the IRS, and Republican.
So obstructing the IRS.
Oh, Dean Skellos, bribery, extortion, and conspiracy.
He was a Republican senator from Long Island.
These are all recent cases in the last couple of years.
But out of the 30 they profile, 25 are Democrats.
This is really the old Tammany Hall political machine.
But Schneiderman and Elliot Spitzer, well, nobody deserved to fall harder than these guys because they were sanctimonious guys.
They acted holier than now and they weaponized their offices.
And what Schneiderman did was even worse.
Spitzer used a hooker.
There was no indication she ever abused him, but he was putting people in jail for the things he was doing.
So that was bad enough.
But Schneiderman was beating women, beating women for sexual, his sexual perverse fantasies, beating and choking these women, threatening them with prosecution if they told anybody, threatening to have them charged with assaulting a federal, a law enforcement officer on a felony charge, state law enforcement officer on a felony charge, if they fought back after he beat them.
Israel And The Peace Message00:09:01
And this guy was celebrated by the left because he wanted to take down Trump.
He was their golden boy.
They swooned over this guy.
Swooned over this guy.
And it is, well, there is no more fitting end to Eric Schneiderman's career than him having to resign in disgrace and watching all the liberals, all the liberals who celebrated this guy now hiding in their little rackets.
So much going on in the world.
Most notably, the U.S. Embassy in Israel is moving to Jerusalem.
We're recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
Donald Trump finally treating Israel as the ally it is, reversing eight years of Obama's hostility towards the Jewish state.
We also have, well, a pretty creepy story about the New York Attorney General, Eric Schneiderman, having to resign in disgrace.
Here to make sense of it all as someone with deep ties to Israel, rebel managing editor, and my good friend Tiffany Gabai.
So, Tiffany, the embassy in Israel, and thanks for being here.
The Embassy in Israel opens officially on Monday, correct?
Correct.
Okay, but the celebrations, I know there are parties.
Some mutual friends of ours have gone over there.
They got over there yesterday, today.
They're going in.
Some pretty big celebrations this weekend.
Do we expect, you know a lot of people over in Israel.
You speak to people in the Middle East.
Do we expect an increased chance of some kind of attack from Iran, for Netanyahu, embarrassing them on this Iran deal around the opening of the embassy?
Or do they know that's a bridge too far, in your opinion?
Is it a bridge too far?
And will that be met with international force that Iran doesn't want to see?
I don't think anything is necessarily a bridge too far.
Iran is already the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism.
Its proxies are Hezbollah and Hamas.
They are on Israel's borders daily, you know, trying to wreak havoc and causes as many Jewish deaths as possible.
So do I think that they are going to try to escalate some violence?
Absolutely, but I think Israel is well prepared for this and is cognizant of that fact.
But in terms of moving the embassy, this was a hugely symbolic move.
Now, we passed the- Yeah, so go to that, Tiff.
What does this mean to the world?
You know, we hear about it and Americans, especially Americans who truly believe in Judeo-Christian values, are very happy about this move.
They're glad the president did it.
But what message?
You're a student of this.
You've written extensively about this very subject.
What message does recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and opening the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem send to the global community?
Well, correct.
So first of all, in 1995, Congress actually passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act.
And so, you know, we've basically been promising to do this for quite some time.
Trump is the first person who has actually made good on that promise.
And here's what's very important to note.
Anyone who has followed history has known that Israel has repeatedly tried to make concessions for peace, right?
Whether it was the, you know, the Camp David negotiations and when Ehud Barak offered basically Arafat pretty much everything he wanted and he rejected the deal.
And even Saudi Prince Bandar, I believe it was, blamed Arafat for the ensuing violence that happened after that escalation and after that rejection of peace.
So this has happened repeatedly.
One of the other things to note is that it isn't just about Jerusalem, right?
The idea, whether it's Hamas and in their charter from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.
This isn't just about them wanting Jerusalem.
They want all of Israel and they want the Jewish people dead and wiped off the face of the map.
Iran now wants the Shia Crescent.
They want to essentially, Iran as a nation state is essentially picking up where ISIS left off when we crushed him.
And now they're trying to create their own essentially caliphate, right?
By carving through Syria, eradicating Israel, assisting Hezbollah in taking over Lebanon, which is a move to further.
You know, Hezbollah is Lebanon.
You know, there is no differentiation there.
Yeah, but now Hezbollah is officially going to control Lebanon.
They've always controlled them by force and with proxies, but now with these pickups in the legislature there in the parliament, it looks like they're going to actually have standing as legitimate political figures.
Correct.
Now, what this embassy move does is show the world, like, look, we have been conceding.
We have been trying to offer peace, you know, from the get-go.
And America as Israel's ally has kind of, you know, obviously been supportive, depending on the administration.
You know, George W. Bush was a great Israel supporter.
Obama was not.
I don't think Israel has had a better friend than Trump.
I mean, a lot of people thought, you know, GW was incredibly pro-Israel.
And in retrospect, you know, we definitely see some moves that the Bush administration made that were not in Israel's best interest.
But this is, because it tells the world and it signals to the Arab world and Iran and its proxies more specifically that we mean business.
America does have Israel's back.
And Jerusalem is the undivided capital of the Jewish state.
And we're on to your game or hopefully the Western world is catching on to Israel's enemies game that this isn't about peace.
This isn't about a two-state solution.
This isn't about Jerusalem because they would not be happy even if they had all of Jerusalem as long as there wasn't as you know the state of Israel and the Jewish people living side by side.
They would never be happy.
They want all of Israel and they've made that very clear.
And it isn't just Hamas, but it is also the Palestinian Authority.
When you look at Palestinian Authority school textbooks, when you look at their media outlets and what they push every day, they push that it is your national and religious obligation to murder Jews, to become Shaheeds, that the right of return, which in the Palestinian mind is the right of the return to all of Israel, that that is non-negotiable.
So it never was about Jerusalem.
Right, right.
One of the things that they do respect, however, is force, and they respect strength.
And this is a display of strength.
And I think it sends a very important message.
And it has to send the message, quite frankly, to your last point, that the United States and Israel are absolute allies.
And if you attack one, you're attacking the other.
If you do decide to hit Israel-Iran, you're not just going to be met with Israeli F-16s, but you're going to be met with the might of the United States military.
Right, right, precisely.
Which is, I think, critically important.
And I'm not so sure.
This is going to be a very telling day.
Today, at some point, Donald Trump is going to most, well, the conventional wisdom is going to scrap the Iran deal.
The arguments from the left, if it wasn't such a serious situation, are almost laughable.
Oh, no, this is now going to force us to take Iran's nukes away and use force, use military force.
They try to build them again.
Oh, no, what's Iran going to do now?
Now they might actually pursue a nuclear weapons program.
I mean, are these people tone deaf?
Do they not realize Iran was doing that the whole time?
And now we at least get inspections or we take them out?
Yeah, Iran has been doing that.
And first of all, and this is what I say, you know, some of my colleagues who are a bit kind say, oh, well, you know, with these leftists, they really were so naive that they actually believed Iran.
No, I don't think they believed Iran unless they, you know, were lobotomized.
I don't know how one could be that stupid.
I think it's literally that they hate the Israel, hate Israel, excuse me, and the U.S. so much, you know, that this very much all of their progressive ideology.
And just as they, you know, are wishing Marx a happy birthday the other day.
Michael Moore wished Hollywood.
I will tell you this.
I think Barack Obama and John Kerry despised Israel.
Think Ben Rhodes might be a mentally challenged adult.
I think I'm not so sure he doesn't fall into the lobotomized category because this guy is still tweeting, defending the policies of the Obama administration.
It's like Baghdad Bob with Ben Rhodes out there on social media.
Netanyahu gets 105,000 individual files proving Israel has a nuclear weapons program.
And he's a war criminal.
And he's a war criminal.
And Ben Rhodes is a partner in peace.
Yeah, he's a partner in peace.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Boss is a partner in peace.
Khomeini and Rwani are great guys who are misunderstood by the United States.
We're showing you the plans for their, what is it, five atom bombs that were, excuse me, atom bombs that were five times stronger than Iran.
Yeah, what he wanted was five warheads.
And the best part of this is that they didn't even have a translation in Farsi for the 10 kiloton TNC.
So it just said 10 KNTNT.
Why We Listen Wrong00:08:48
I mean, this was like a satire.
Like, hey, we're building nukes.
And the Obama administration, the former officials, they're still denying it happened.
And that's precisely why Netanyahu, such a great communicator, gave this presentation in advance of Trump's announcements.
This was obviously all coordinated.
He wanted to build a case for Trump, who I hope is going to announce that he's going to nix and he's going to use, you know, he's going to use these files and this incredible Intel operation that was pulled off as the basis for that.
And I certainly hope so.
I know that, you know, listen, dealing with this abysmal Iran deal has been a hallmark of his campaign and his presidency.
So I'm really hoping and expecting some strong action.
And it's the embassy opening.
Yeah.
And look, I think that, you know, if Netanyahu were a far-left sympathizer of Democrats or ally of Democrats, this presentation would have been called historical, groundbreaking.
But what is being called is, oh, it's old news.
It to me was reminiscent of when Adelaide Stevenson during the Cuban Missile Crisis showed the photo at the UN, the blown-up photo of the Russian missile sites in Cuba.
It was the same kind of smoking gun boom you're convicted even before the trial.
He didn't get anywhere near the media love fest that the Kennedy administration got back in the 1960s, but his presentation was every bit as powerful and every bit as absolute.
Right.
Exactly.
All right, let's switch gears, Tiff, and talk about maybe the creepiest freak out there in politics.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.
I don't even want to joke about this because this guy beat women.
This guy, to satisfy what appears to be some strange sexual fantasy, would beat women.
And what I didn't like was his nuanced statement.
I never had, I'll paraphrase it, but it was, I never engaged in unconsensual sex.
It was all consensual role play.
But the women never accused him of sexual assault.
They say he physically beat them.
In fact, one of the women, Michelle Manning Barris, says, my clothes never came off.
This guy beat me up.
This wasn't sexual.
He never denies beating them.
He simply denies engaging in inappropriate sexual activities.
Sexual or non-consensual.
That's right.
Right.
Exactly.
What a terrible, terrible guy.
And this fall, I'm sorry this happened to these women.
I wish it had never happened.
But this fall could not have happened to a more sanctimonious sanctimonious phony.
He was out there prosecuting everybody and he was beating women behind closed doors.
Absolutely.
Sanctimonious, telling everybody, you know, how they should live and what they should do.
You know, going after Trump left and right.
And ironically, what leading the charge against Harvey Weinstein, which just gives great cover, doesn't it?
When you are a sexual predator or some sort of deviant.
Now, listen, there are a few very remarkable things about this case.
This kind of deviancy can happen to anyone.
I'm not going to sit there and say, oh, look, he was a Democrat.
Oh, look, you know, Republicans have had their fair share of weirdos.
So I'm not going to necessarily go there except to say and point out the hypocrisy that this is a person who was apparently leading the Me Too movement.
And I'm not sure if you knew this, but as a state senator, he drafted a bill that would criminalize strangling women, essentially, in this sort of setting as a pre-sexual association.
He wanted to criminalize it.
Exactly.
So this is a person who has clearly hid behind his progressive politics and ideology.
And what is so interesting is his victims are women who are feminists and who are progressives.
They're all successful.
They were all successful.
One Harvard graduate, one a wealthy socialite.
The other two haven't come forward.
They had money.
They're not doing this for money.
You know, the other thing that was just as chilling, as disturbing as the accounts of the beatings was him weaponizing his office.
Oh, you scratched me in attacking a law enforcement officer as a felony.
I am the law.
Threatening these women with prosecution.
Or if they were to believe their allegations that he threatened to kill them if they were to break up with him.
He needs to go to prison for years, for years.
People are sick of law enforcement abusing their authority.
And I'll tell you something else.
I think he just put another nail in the prosecutorial coffins of Comey and McCabe because now the national hackers are up again.
Wait a second.
Another chief law enforcement officer abusing his authority?
I think that a jury is going to smile less favorably or a judge on everyone who's involved in scandal at the top of law enforcement agencies because this now put it back into the headlines and it was starting to quiet down.
Well, it was.
And again, it does go to abuse of authority.
It does go toward the fact that this is a person who is supposed to be the strongest against sexual predators and leading these charges and investigations.
And it is very disconcerting.
It's very disconcerting that he was honored by feminists and progressive groups.
Well, he had a D behind his name.
That's all it took.
I don't believe Andrew Cuomo, the governor, didn't know.
These women spoke to people.
That political and society circle in New York is very small.
I grew up there.
I worked in politics up there.
It's very, very small.
I failed to believe people in power didn't know.
They were just afraid of Schneiderman and they were protecting the D-brand.
I don't have any evidence of that.
No one's told me that, but I know the way this world works.
These women were out there talking to their socialite friends.
People knew they chose to turn a blind eye.
I'm fairly certain that people knew it is a very small circle.
And I will say, and this was even admitted by one of his, you know, his victims or alleged victims, is that she didn't say anything at first because she thought the work he was doing was so important and good.
And she didn't want to derail him.
So that you would subject yourself to being beaten and spat on and abused for the good of the party.
It just, you know, it's really perverse.
It's Stalin.
It's Stalin and Khrushchev-esque.
It's like Lavrentiy Berria and the old KGB.
I mean, this is what this seems like to me.
Yes, indeed.
So it's, it's, listen, I think that, you know, hopefully he'll get his just desserts.
And I think that it couldn't happen to a worse, more sanctimonious critical and despicable person.
Listen, people have their sexual piccadillos and behind closed doors, what happens, you know, between two people is on them.
This is something else.
This clearly Allegations seem very plausible.
This was not sexual.
This was not consensual.
This is something that's truly abusive and sick.
Yeah, this was felony assault.
I mean, this was felony assault in New York State.
Well, it'd be misdemeanor assault unless he used, but actually, felony rises to a felony when he then uses the power of his office to silence them.
And there's a whole host of charges.
Now, 2014, I don't remember offhand the statute of limitations on misdemeanor assault.
This would probably be a first-degree misdemeanor assault, but I think it's around five years.
So I think that's a good idea.
Yeah, and a couple of cases happened sooner, right?
2016 into 2017.
Well, he can still certainly be charged if they choose to go forward.
But I think the abuse of authority and the official misconduct charges for abusing his office, threatening them, the coercion charges, the arrest charges.
You could even argue unlawful imprisonment because they stayed in his home under fear of prosecution by him if they left.
If I were the investigator on this, there's a lot of charges I'd be leveling against this.
There are a lot of charges.
That's up to you.
No, I was just going to point out the one other piece of left-wing hypocrisy and all this.
So these are the empowered women and their feminists.
And believe me, I'm not trying to poke fun at them in any way.
What they went through, which I actually happen to believe their accounts seem very credible was horrible.
But to have expected his then-girlfriend, who was a woman of color, refer to him as master, and what did he refer to her as?
He made her say she was his brown slave and his property.
And he would hit her and choke her harder until she said it.
Yeah.
So, you know, I'll just leave that there.
Really nice guy.
Leave that bit of left-wing hypocrisy right there.
Crazy As a Fox Strategy00:14:50
I think the only justice in this will come when he gets to Rikers Island and the other inmates find out what he did.
And hopefully he's not in protective custody.
Tiffany, as always, my friend, thank you.
An absolute pleasure.
Take care.
We have to have you on more often.
Talk soon.
Looking forward to it.
Is a rift growing between Donald Trump, President Donald Trump, and Erica's mayor, and now one of the lead lawyers on Trump's legal team, Rudy Giuliani.
Well, Politico and some other outlets claim there is.
Now, of course, these are all anonymous sourced stories.
The allegations are that the president is frustrated and upset with Rudy Giuliani's media tour, and he feels that Giuliani is giving the Stormy Daniels story life that it wouldn't have otherwise had.
Now, I do have to agree with this, but I feel there's another strategy at work.
Giuliani is a smart and strategic guy.
I fail to believe that he would just go off half-cocked on this media tour without consulting with Donald Trump.
I just don't believe that's something Rudy would do.
I think there's a strategy at work here because they're both strategically cunning New York guys.
I don't see Giuliani just saying, From Bath, I'm going to go off and do this on my own.
Now, what Politico is saying is that President Trump has shaken up his legal team in the last three weeks, and he's still not happy.
The president has been griping to associates that Rudy Giuliani, his new personal attorney, has failed to shut down the Stormy Daniels hush money saga.
And he has expressed frustration that Giuliani's media appearances are raising more questions than they are answering, turning the story into a days-long drama, happed by the admission on Sunday that the president may have made similar payments to other women.
For now, White House aides say Giuliani still is a direct line to Trump, almost daily.
And nobody in the West Wing is eager to insert themselves between what they call the two irascible New Yorkers by yanking Giuliani off TV.
But some aides said they expect the president to fire Giuliani if his behavior doesn't change.
Now, Giuliani in a phone interview this week pushed back against the notion that the president is unhappy, telling Politico, if I'm not up to it, I don't know who is.
I know the Justice Department better than just about anyone.
But there's some merit, even if these allegations are not true, even if this is just more mainstream media nonsense.
And they're quoting Neil Eggleston, who acted as Barack Obama's counsel.
Even if this is all nonsense, there's some merit to what's being reported.
Giuliani, at first, you know, and I still believe he has a strategy.
At first, I thought what he's doing is a good idea, but now he's creating a story where there isn't one.
Now, I get what I think I should say, I get what he's doing.
I think what he's doing is he's putting all this dirt out there because none of it's illegal.
You see, the Stormy Daniels story looks bad, but it's not illegal.
There's nothing illegal about settling a lawsuit.
It might look distasteful.
It might offend the moral sensibilities of some.
It might offend the ethical sensibilities of others, but it's not illegal.
You can settle a lawsuit.
Your lawyer can advance the money.
You can pay your lawyer back.
Now, Michael Cohen might have some questions because the timing of the payment, October 2016, is conspicuously close to the 2016 election.
And the FEC might step in and say, well, sure, it looks like you did that to help Donald Trump not have negative information on him surface right before the election.
So we see this as an in-kind political donation.
In that case, the Trump campaign would have to say, okay, we abide by the FEC ruling.
We're going to return that money to Michael Cohen.
Or Trump can say, I've already paid him that money back.
I paid him that money back.
Reconcile it with me.
We don't want anything.
We didn't want any favors.
So it's not really something anybody ever goes to jail for.
All right.
We see the stories about Rosie O'Donnell exceeding the max campaign contributions to Democrats.
Most of the time, when that happens, the FEC issues a warning.
The campaign treasurer reconciles it.
The money's returned.
End of story.
It's not this massive crime, which is why I believe the federal judge Ellis and guys like Alan Dershowitz and even Giuliani are right.
Mueller is just trying to twist arms with the most meaningless statutes that are never enforced to try to build an impeachment case on Trump.
But Giuliani should probably start to tone down the rhetoric if there's not, now, caveat that, if there's not a grand plan in place, which I believe there may very well be.
There may very well be, may very well be, a real plan here, a plan to make a very big difference in this investigation by getting all the stuff out in front that's dirty and salacious, but not illegal.
And then Mueller is left with nothing because then you explain to people, well, it doesn't look good.
It doesn't sound good.
It doesn't feel good, but it's not criminal.
And that is what I feel Giuliani's primary strategy is.
Get all the craziness out there, get people talking about it, then have the legal team say, well, we analyzed this, this, and this.
None of it's criminal.
You may not like it, but it's not criminal.
And if you don't like it, worry about it in 2020 when Trump runs again, which it will be forgotten about.
So if that's the play, then it's a very smart legal strategy.
Very, very smart.
And if Cohen has to be thrown under the bus, so be it.
That's life.
It's the presidency.
I don't predict Cohen.
If he didn't do anything else other than this payment, I don't predict Cohen is in a whole hell of a lot of hot water.
But I do believe Judge Ellis was right when he told the special counsel's team, look, what you're doing here is ridiculous.
You don't care about the crimes Paul Manafort committed.
You want to take down Donald Trump, and you're going to twist every arm you can to do it, even going outside of the scope.
It was a very, very bad week for Robert Mueller.
Some more information is going to be coming in the next couple of days.
So, I'm going to reserve a more comprehensive report on that for later in the week here on the show, because there's some more info I've been told is coming out.
I'll wait and see if that happens.
Because I always want to bring you the most current information, the most comprehensive.
No sense in doing half a story, and then three days later, something else coming out, and then we've got to do it all over again.
Do it right.
It's always better in this business to be accurate and right than it is to be first.
I know that the new trend in media is to be first, but what good is being first that we have to print 15 retractions, or I have to apologize to you on air because I got it wrong.
I'd rather bring it to you right the first time, just a better policy.
Now, I personally think that the president's prior legal team before Giuliani were highly ineffective.
Ty Cobb and John Dow did nothing.
They really just kissed up to Mueller.
They were so afraid of Mueller, they kissed up to Mueller.
They didn't want themselves to be subject to Mueller's investigation, so they were almost acquiescent to Mueller.
And that's not Trump's style.
Giuliani and Trump share a style.
They're both New York guys, they're combative.
They get in your face, they swing first, and then they keep swinging even when you're down.
So, I have a lot of faith that this is some crazy as a fox strategy between Giuliani and Mueller to throw things a little off balance, put all this craziness out there, make it seem illegal, but it's not illegal.
Come out and say, Well, it's all dirty, but it's not illegal.
Now, Mueller, what do you really have?
You have anything?
Because it sure seems like you don't.
All that stuff you wanted to talk about.
Well, you know, it sounded bad, and it would have been great for an impeachment case, but that's not what you're about, right?
I mean, you're a special counsel, you're a man of integrity.
You wouldn't play in the gutter just to impeach a president.
That's not within your scope, that's not within your mandate.
What's in your mandate?
So, we got all this nonsense, this noise out of the way.
We know that's not illegal.
Rudy got that out there.
What do you have?
Have anything?
Don't talk about that because that's not illegal.
You're not going to talk about payments to Stormy Daniel.
None of that's illegal.
What do you have on Russia collusion?
What do you have in line with the scope of your memo, Mueller?
And Mueller's answer is going to be nothing.
It's going to be nothing.
So, that's why I'm very cautiously optimistic about this strategy because I think it makes a lot of sense.
It makes a lot of sense.
What they're doing is they're just popping Mueller's balloon.
He's got a balloon filled with a lot of hot air, a lot of speculation, a lot of conjecture, a lot of salacious details.
None of it illegal.
That makes Trump look bad.
It blocks his agenda.
It gets impeachment rumblings going.
It hurts Republicans in the 2018 midterms.
Pop it.
Pop that balloon of hot air is truly what I believe Giuliani's doing.
Now, Ty Cobb left recently.
I think that was a good departure.
Emmett Flood came in.
Now, there's rumblings that Emmett Flood might replace when this thing is all said and done.
Don McGahn as White House counsel.
Now, Don McGahn has done a very good job as White House counsel.
He's a name you don't hear much, but his job is to make sure that everything the president does, says, and says is legal.
His job is to make sure that things are going on in the West Wing and the White House.
The policies are legal.
They're in line with the Constitution, that they don't overstep, that they don't favor a business.
So his job is to just make sure that everything the White House does is legal.
It's a pretty massive job.
And Don McGahn receives high marks, well, from everybody.
Really receives high marks from everybody.
Now, this political story speculates that Don McGahn will eventually move on, which wouldn't be a scandal.
McGahn is a very qualified guy.
He did very well in the private sector.
He'll be going on two years as White House counsel.
Why not step into the partnership at a law firm again?
As it is, I believe made the late 60s, 50s.
I'm sorry.
And still a young enough guy to enjoy the money, put his due, he paid his dues, he put his time in.
He should step into a two, three to five and six million dollar a year equity partnership at a white shoe law firm after being the White House counsel.
Let me read you this.
So Flood's hire was a long time coming.
Trump, White House counsel counsel Don McGahn, Kelly, and Ty Cobb all have been in rare alignment with their shared view and desire to bring him on board.
McGahn himself has advocated for his hiring for over a year.
The president never made clear what the reporting structure of his Russia team would be when Flood's hiring was announced, according to two people familiar with the case, creating uncertainty about whether Cobb and Flood would be co-equal or one would report to the other.
In fact, the president initially told several aides that Flood would replace McGahn, who had been the lead lawyer inside the White House on special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation for several months.
But McGahn has decided to stay on at least for now.
And he could do so for several more months, should another vacancy arise on the Supreme Court, where several people close to him said he's eager to lead the confirmation battle if one happens.
And I think Don McGahn should stick around for a little while longer.
I hear nothing but great things about him, but Emmett Flood would be a great person to replace McGahn.
But again, if McGahn were to leave, the mainstream media is going to make it seem like a scandal.
The White House counsel is resigning because he sees all the illegality and, oh my God, he doesn't want to be part of it.
He's leaving.
That's a sign that Trump is going to jail.
No.
Just means that he did his year and a half, nearly two years in the administration, and he's going out to make the big money.
That's just the way these things go.
Who wouldn't do that?
$180,000 a year to work 15, 16, 17, 20 hours a day is no money.
You do it to have that on your resume and to go make the really big bucks when you get out.
It's blood money.
And when you leave, it's money well earned.
Now, this is all very telling about the legal team and Giuliani's strategy because we're finding out, here's a story from the Washington Times.
We're finding out that Robert Mueller, an NBC News, reported this.
Here's their tweet.
Rudy Giuliani confirms to NBC News that special counsel Robert Mueller rejected a Trump team offer for the president.
This was yesterday, for the president to answer written questions in lieu of a sit-down interview.
Giuliani says this happened about 10 days ago during his first meeting with Mueller.
This is why we heard all the subpoena talk.
Mueller has refused to accept written answers and questions from Donald Trump.
He wants a sit-down interview.
And what that tells me is this is a perjury trap.
That's all this is.
This is a perjury trap where he can trip Trump up, charge Trump with a bogus process crime.
That'll be pardoned.
You can't charge a sitting president.
You don't need an indictment on the process crime.
You could charge it with a misdemeanor, and it doesn't need to go to a federal grand jury.
So the conventional wisdom, prevailing wisdom is that you can't indict a sitting president.
You don't need an indictment for a misdemeanor charge.
And they could very easily charge Trump with misdemeanor process, with a misdemeanor process crime, misleading statements, lack of candor to federal investigators.
That will stain the presidency.
That's what Mueller is trying to do.
He's setting up a case for impeachment.
Now, Giuliani has said that he doesn't want Trump to be interviewed orally and under oath by Mueller.
He wants Trump to have the, he said that he wants Trump to get the Hillary treatment.
And he's right.
Hillary was questioned, not under oath.
No notes were taken.
Hillary was treated like a friend by the FBI when she was under criminal investigation.
Her entire team was given immunity.
There is a disgusting double standard here.
And Mueller is being a rock in a very hard place.
If he's not willing to give the sitting president the same treatment that was given to Hillary Clinton, well, Trump should fight that subpoena.
What Mueller is doing is disgraceful.
The impropriety around Mueller is disgraceful.
Mueller's cooperation with Eric Schneiderman is disgraceful.
But this is particularly bad, that Mueller wants to take out the president of the United States.
He knows there is no Russia collusion.
Mueller's mandate is not to investigate Stormy Daniels.
Mueller has no scope to investigate Stormy Daniels.
Jeff Sessions needs to unrecuse and take that case back over.
Mueller should be investigating Russia collusion.
There was none.
There was none.
He indicted a Russian bot farm to make it seem like there was, but there was no allegation of collusion.
The Russians put ads on Facebook.
He indicted them for paying for Facebook ads.
There's no proof of hacking.
Look at Russia did those things, and I'm sure they did those things.
Mexico's Deportation Force Checkpoints00:06:33
You do that to them, they do it to us.
The Chinese do it to both of us.
We do it to both of them.
Iran does it.
North Korea does it.
We do it back.
The nature of cyber warfare in the world in which we live.
Mueller is indicting computer code.
It is ridiculously beyond stupid.
But now, Mueller not wanting to take written answers from Trump puts into perspective Giuliani's, well, he's confusing public behavior.
But I now, you know, I believe, like I said, strategy is to take the wind out of Mueller's sails.
Get all that stuff out in the open.
Don't let Mueller operate in secret.
Leak what he's looking at.
And I think that's what Giuliani is doing very deftly, very subtly.
I think Trump is enjoying every minute of it.
If you read Trump's tweets, he's more emboldened.
The FBI is in disarray.
The special counsel's office is completely biased.
And Americans are sick and tired of the double standard.
Hillary Clinton was treated, like I said, like a friend by the FBI.
Mueller wants to take out a sitting president.
Americans see this.
They're sick of it.
And the amount of Americans who want Mueller's probe to end is now approaching 50%.
It was down near 30-some odd percent.
It's up in the high 40s now, and it's rising about two points a month.
And that's even growing.
That margin is escalating.
As we get closer to the midterm, soon, over half the country is going to want to see Mueller's probe end.
A lot of anger at Jeff Sessions being directed at Jeff Sessions.
People want him to step in and do something, but they now see that this really is.
It really, truly is what President Trump calls it.
Robert Mueller is engaged in a witch hunt.
And Rudy Giuliani sees it.
He's been on the other side of that table.
And in a very unique way, he's fighting back.
As the government of Mexico rails against the U.S. for being strict on immigration, or Donald Trump wanting to be stricter on immigration, our laws are still lax, still a joke.
Mexico, the global hypocrites, is deploying what NPR is calling a formidable deportation force near its own southern border.
From the story, on the Suichate River dividing Mexico and Guatemala, or it looks easy to cross north without papers.
A young mustachioed man is pulling a makeshift raft across the river, quiet river via two ropes connecting the countries.
The crossing costs four Quezales, 10 pesos or 50 U.S. cents.
The raft captain says that nearby migration officials rarely intervene.
The impression that Mexico is lax on immigrants disappears as you head just a little north, as you head a little north.
Some guy named Gustavo Rivera says, quote, they put up a lot of checkpoints.
He's a bus driver.
There's immigration agents, federal police, soldiers, and local police.
I don't get many migrants on the bus anymore because of the checkpoints.
Interesting, right?
How these checkpoints now in southern Mexico, a little north of the Guatemala border, Guatemala, a vicious, vicious place, by the way, how they started after that migrant caravan marched up through Mexico, got to our border, and we were like, not so fast.
Mexico wants you, they can keep you in the thousand or so migrants.
We've taken in about 30 to 50.
Oh, now Mexico is thinking we don't want 1,000 Guatemalans, Hondurans, and Salvadorans now, do we?
So we better get real.
We better start fixing this on our end.
Now, Trump tweeted back on April 1st last month.
Mexico is doing very little, if not nothing, at stopping people from flowing into Mexico through their southern border.
And in the U.S., they laugh at our dumb immigration laws.
They must stop the big drug in people flows, or I will stop their cash cow NAFTA, need wall.
Well, I truly, in my heart of hearts, believe one of the reasons Mexico is putting this deportation force on the border is because Trump gave him a call and said, games are over.
I'm not Obama.
Stop the nonsense, or I'm cutting off NAFTA.
I'm going to choke you economically.
And at the end of the day, that's what gets countries to move the needle.
You choke North Korea economically through China.
You put pressure on China.
You put tariffs, choke North Korea economically.
They can't feed their own people as it is.
They back off.
We're going to choke Iran economically by being the world's largest net exporter of oil and natural gas by 2023.
Europe would rather buy from us than Iran.
Iran, they're going to be good little mullahs on the nuclear deal that we fully expect President Trump to scrap at some point today.
So economic pressure does a lot.
Now, what this article says, rather than amassing troops on its border with Guatemala, Mexico stations migration agents, local and federal police, soldiers, and Marines to create kind of a containment zone in Chiapas state.
With roving checkpoints and raids, Mexican migration agents have formed a formidable deportation force.
Since the southern border plan launched, Mexico has deported more than half a million Central Americans, almost 82,000 last year, according to data from Mexico's Interior Department.
Since 2015, Mexico has deported more Central Americans annually than U.S. authorities have, and in some years, more than twice as many.
So who the hell is Mexico to condemn us for deporting Mexicans who come illegally?
This is amazing.
It's such an effective force that some government officials try to give migrants workarounds.
We often tell migrants to travel at night.
You're always going to have crazy liberals who want to tell people how to skirt immigration laws.
But look, and of course, the priests and the far left version of the Catholic Church, today the Mexican government is hunting migrants without sympathy, even though the exact same thing is happening to Mexicans at the U.S. border.
The border security measures here in Chiapas are even harsher than on the U.S.-Mexico border.
They should be.
Nations should care about their sovereignty.
I would love us to put deportation zones in South Texas and in Arizona and in New Mexico and herd them in with military and CBP and ICE and Homeland Security investigations and then push them back south across the border.
That's a really smart tactic.
Kudos, Mexico.
Great job on you.
But of course, liberals here in the U.S. would never allow that.
Even Republicans here in the U.S., like Jeff Flake, oh my God, they'd be crying tears if we were to do something like this.