All Episodes
Previous Next
March 25, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
29:15
New York Robbery Of Trump...Put On Hold?

A last minute "stay" of ten days was granted to former President Donald Trump in his half-billion dollar "fraud" case, meaning he must come up with $175 million within ten days or the state would begin seizing his assets. Also today: Speaker Johnson invites Netanyahu to address Congress and...who attacked Moscow?

|

Time Text
Trump Bond Reduced 00:14:36
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Happy Monday, Dr. Paul.
Every week to go.
Another week.
Another week.
We don't have to wait very long.
We have a little bit of news sort of within the minutes.
They knew they had to get their news out right before our program so we could talk about it.
That's right.
I'm sure they've been worrying about us.
But anyway, the big news that came out on the internet, Trump's bond reduced a little bit.
$175 billion, it was $550 billion.
$10 billion, half a billion, but now it's down to $175 million.
That's just peanuts now.
But I tell you what, I think even before this came out, you and I were talking, you know, I don't believe this is going to go through.
It just is, it's over the top.
You know what?
I'll bet you there is some second thoughts on them knowing everything they do.
The worse they do to Trump and the more evil they are, the better Trump responds to the people.
The people, you know, they say, oh, they're just radical Republicans.
Boy, there are sure a lot of radical Republicans.
No, I think it's people who are looking for a justice system and not what's going on there.
So the people have been, so they backed off.
So I'm not surprised that we had news like this.
It took it out from 464 to 175.
Still a lot of money.
But I think he can pursue now, if I'm not mistaken, for appeal.
Because that's the whole thing that was done incorrectly here for most people I hear on the television.
That they usually can appeal without being required to put up a half a billion dollars.
That is so bad and so crazy.
And they get punished every time.
But the enemies of Trump never seem to figure it out.
They just go, we'll get him next time.
We'll elect new judges that will promise to do it.
Oh, I've taken an oath of office before I'm in office.
If I get in, I'm going to get that Trump.
And that attitude is out there, even though I guess CNN and MSNBC wouldn't reveal it quite that way.
But I think the American people are starting to wake up because if nothing else, they're partisan and they are conservatives and liberals.
But I think there's a limit to the large majority of Americans that say, you know, you've got to play by the rules.
You know, this is extreme.
And, of course, the radicals on each side say, oh, no, we have to do more.
We have to have more crooked judges and on and on.
But it's interesting because we haven't heard the last of this.
Is he going to get a real appeal, or is it just going to be something rushed through?
So I think a lot of people will feel better.
Even the people who are on the other side will say, hey, why don't they quit this?
It's not helping us.
The more they do this, the worse Biden's numbers go down.
So it's interesting, and I imagine there'll be a few people pondering this today and tomorrow.
Yeah, I mean, it was down to the wire, the 11th hour.
He had to show up to the court, and if he didn't have that half a billion dollars, they were going to start seizing his property, seizing his business, basically.
I mean, it is lawfare on steroids, you know, using the law to declare war against an individual.
Now this came out, if you can, this is just, this is from Ella Lee.
She's a reporter on The Hill, but many other were reporting it just before the show started.
New York State Appeals Court partially granted a stay of Trump's civil fraud judgment, saying the enforcement will remain paused if the dependent posts a $175 million bond in 10 days.
So the point is, well, they are, as I understand it, I'm not an attorney, but as he's appealing the initial half billion dollar judgment, he won't have to put up a bond for that entire amount, only $175 million.
I know we have that in pocket change over in petty cash at the RPI headquarters.
But it only has to put up $175 million, which theoretically is easier to come by, obviously, for Trump.
So he has a little bit of time.
It's a little bit of a stay.
But, you know, they were literally going in there ready to have them start seizing his property.
And I did a couple of clips from the New York Times article just to give a heads up on what we're talking about this morning.
If we can put this first one up.
What we know about Trump's quest for a half billion dollar bond.
Donald Trump failed to arrange a bond to halt collection of a half $454 million judgment.
The New York Attorney General might begin to collect very soon.
Go to the next one.
It tells what's going on with it.
So if he can't post it, which he couldn't, the half billion dollars, the New York Attorney General's office, which brought the fraud case, could begin to collect.
The Attorney General Letitia James, and I believe, if I'm not mistaken, she is a Soros Attorney General, but she could have enforced the judgment, but she gave him 30 days, which expires today.
So she might start slowly, et cetera, et cetera, whatever that is.
But if she wanted to take a more aggressive stance, Mrs. James could freeze some of Mr. Trump's bank accounts, which might send the Trump family business into a tailspin.
Yeah, they're not going to give up.
And it is tragic.
And it's historic in the sense that this is so blatant and so outrageous.
You know, all the shenanigans, I'm sure, have gone on, but reserve rate and a little bit quieter.
But this was out in the open.
It's defiant, you know, for some of these judges to said, even before they were elected or appointed, you know, by Soros or something else, if I'm there, I will, my whole life will be dedicated.
That's what she was in for my whole life.
All my legal resources will be dedicated to getting Trump.
And, you know, there's never Trump or Republicans.
Good, good.
We cheer her on.
But I think it's a beneficial step for at least people maybe to stand back and talk about this a little bit.
But I don't think all of a sudden you're going to see Biden rising in the polls.
I think if anything, when this goes through, because he's at a point where he rightfully gets blamed for everything.
And right now, I'm not sure the preparation that they seem to be making for Kamala is being very successful.
You know, they've always been embarrassed to think that she could be the president.
At least the Republicans had the sense to get rid of a vice president before they got rid of Nixon.
As if that helped us very much on the long run.
But, no, Kamala was down there in Puerto Rico.
But I thought she was in charge of the border.
Well, maybe that was the border.
They started in Puerto Rico or wherever.
Anyway, they were pleased to have her there.
They were singing a song in praise of her and tell her how great she was.
It turns out that the song was highly critical.
So the staff had to go and get her to quit clapping.
Quit laughing for this.
Oh, my gosh.
Well, as you mentioned, I mean, these cases do appear to be falling apart.
Now, the one in Georgia, there are some allegations of corruption, you know, and then some going on down there.
So this is an embarrassment.
This is becoming an embarrassment.
I mean, just thinking about this case, it's literally insane.
And this is from the same New York Times article.
Go to the next one just to refresh.
So what on earth did he do to be guilty of half a billion dollars?
You know, what must he have done?
Well, to refresh, what was Trump accused of?
Ms. James is the Attorney General.
She took Trump, his company, and his adult sons to trial last fall, accusing them of fraudulently inflating the value of golf clubs, office buildings, and other properties to the tune of about $2 billion.
Mr. Trump exaggerated the property values and in his turn, his own net worth to obtain favorable terms from banks and insurers, according to Ms. James.
So, I mean, this is something you could definitely comment on.
Apparently, her accusing him of saying that his properties are worth more than they are, and then the bank loans him the money for it.
Well, isn't the bank's responsibility to do due diligence on it?
Yeah, but she's helping him out too.
Now they're driving the value of these properties down, and it even makes it more obvious what they're doing.
You know, it's not like he, and it is true.
I mean, I think all that defense stuff of the banks take the liberty take the risk, but they don't listen to that.
I think that one thing that's coming out of here is, you know, we have a lot of attorneys, and I think there's some place in our literature, our historic literature, that first we get killed.
But the lawyers, I would say I've had to resort to using lawyers every once in a while.
But anyway, the lawyers are, so if you really want to be a great lawyer, you graduate from an Ivy League school.
You know, when you got to visualize who really runs our Ivory League schools, and then look at what some people are doing, you know, they say, well, maybe there will be a setback.
And, you know, there's always been those among us that would frequently say, you know, your degree isn't worth much anymore.
Your PhDs aren't worth much.
They're sometimes unemployed.
And now these law degrees, maybe even the big shots, well, I graduated from Harvard or some other place.
Maybe people will start questioning.
They're questioning the universities.
And that's the source of so much trouble because it's been going on.
And then you pump in recent years the Soros-type money into getting people elected and these positions.
But it's the incestuous nonsense that have come out of our universities, even our medical schools, and even our law schools that produces people like this.
But they thought nobody could stop them.
And that's why a token victory, you can't even call it a victory, a token effort here coming around for an ounce of common sense, you know, is welcome.
Yeah, I mean, as far as I could break this down, Trump is looking for a loan for a business loan.
He goes to a bank and says, okay, here's what my property's worth as collateral.
It's worth whatever, X billion dollars.
The bank says, okay, that looks good.
Here's the money.
And everything is fine.
And then all of a sudden, the New York Attorney General comes in and says, hey, that's not true.
That's not worth that much.
And their job is to protect innocent people.
Well, where are the people who have suffered?
We want to see the victims.
Oh, you really are supposed to show victims?
Oh, no.
You can't take the word of the bankers.
This is such a farce.
It's a shame that so many people have bought into it, but less and less are buying into it.
And the fact that the polls are almost like a vote about this stuff, and it will be a reflection.
And I think people have been rather discouraged and disgusted with the administration.
And I think the numbers are sort of paying a penalty to them.
It's just so crazy.
You know, a few years ago, I had to take out a loan on my house because I had some things go wrong.
And I'll tell you, the bank does take a very close look at what your house is worth.
I couldn't tell them, hey, it's worth a billion.
Here, have some extra money.
What do you need?
Yeah, what do you need?
I mean, so it's so crazy.
It's between Trump and the bank.
But anyway, here's what happened.
So it went to a judge.
This guy, if you put the next one on, how was he punished when they found out that he inflated the price of his property?
So the judge, Arthur Ngoron, who is a hardcore Democrat, a Trump hater, viciously hates Trump.
Well, he came down hard on Trump, says the New York Times, imposing a judgment of $355 million plus interest, amounting to $454 million.
The judge also imposed penalties that could curb Mr. Trump's influence over his family business, barring him from serving as a top executive at a New York company for three years.
I mean, that sounds like fascism to me.
You know, maybe someday they'll be writing him a note and say, thanks for the help that has ended the insanities that are going on.
You went over the top, and no good luck to you, buddy.
Well, I wanted to just do one thing.
Mike Cernovich is a conservative commentator.
He's an attorney, and he had a couple of tweets that make it even crazier than the way we're representing it.
I'll just go through them really quick.
So he said, Cernovich said today early on, I read the fool Trump ruling fining him a half a billion, and it's worse than reported.
Elizabeth this.
For example, Trump paid back the post office, the Trump DC Hotel, loan in full, and he made a $126 million profit.
The judge stole it all, claiming Trump should never have gotten the loan in the first place.
So he got the loan, he bought Trump Tower, he sold it, made a profit.
She not only took the original back, she took back the profit he made.
And go to the next one.
Cernovitz says, the judge then goes on to say, the profits he made from the post office deal made him other future profits.
But since he shouldn't have had post office deal in the first place, we're going to take away any downstream profits as well.
It's unbelievable.
And I think we would agree with that.
And the last thing Cernovitz pointed out, if you go to the next one, yeah, okay.
So they even went into the severance contract between Trump and his former CFO and invalidated it.
Netanyahu's Congressional Controversy 00:05:41
He said, I've never seen anything like this.
It doesn't even make sense.
Trump paid him, i.e. his CFO, paid him the money.
Trump didn't want it back, but it doesn't matter.
So, and this is that part from the judgment.
He says Alan Weissenberg is the former CFO.
And the judgment says, well, there's evidence that Weissensberg's $2 million separation agreement was negotiated to compensate him for his continued non-cooperation.
So they took back his severance pay.
You know, this is an attack on contracts.
And private property and the free market is based on this because you don't want government doing everything.
That's the way we avoid the government.
Two people come together and both agree to it.
And basically, it's still, people know it, but they don't know about how evil these people are.
And maybe they've just gotten a lot more evil in the last couple years.
And I think there's truth to that too, because there's never been an expression of this much hate against one individual.
It makes a job for us because we want to be, you know, we want to be discretionary.
If he's doing good, we tell him.
If he's doing lousy, we mention it and carry it on.
But this way, it's monolithic.
Even retroactive contracts.
They're avoiding him.
I mean, this means this guy has to be, you know, a devout authoritarian collectivist, but not a communist.
Well, what is he?
He's an authoritarian collectivist who wants to run everybody else's life.
And he lies, cheats, and steals for his own benefit.
Yeah, terrible, terrible.
Well, let's move on to interventionism, not non-interventionism, unfortunately.
And this deals with House Speaker Johnson.
Skip a clip and go to the next one with House Speaker Johnson.
He sees that Netanyahu is in trouble.
He loves Netanyahu immensely.
So House Speaker Johnson says he will invite Netanyahu to address Congress.
So Netanyahu is going to be back.
He's going to address a full congressional session, apparently, according to Johnson.
That's what he wants to have happen.
And it's going to, I guess, Johnson believes it's going to pull Netanyahu's chestnuts out of the fire and get him out of the bind that he's in.
Yeah.
And while I was in Congress, they had these special people come in.
If I'm not mistaken, Castro at one time was one of these special people who came and got to speak before the Congress before he became a hero.
And he was just a good Democrat at that time.
But the people that come before them, Castro was there, but they come up and invite these people.
But like, Blake, well, I'll tell you what, I took it personally.
I maybe shouldn't have.
But I took it personally that that was an insult to me, that I had to listen to somebody that they thought or claimed, or were they boosting him to be a world leader and one of our best buddies because our empire was being built.
So I took it personally, and I couldn't stand going to those events and listening to the speaker.
I was criticized at times.
Well, that's your job.
You go and listen to him.
I thought, well, there's a limit.
I didn't take the oath to office that I would never be absent from listening to a foreign leader on the House floor.
But that's what my reaction is to this.
And here it is.
He will invite Netanyahu.
But I'll bet you that somebody's going to resist that.
Schumer?
Schumer surely wouldn't vote for that.
What?
Did you say?
Did you say he's all for it?
He is.
In fact, turn up that next clip.
Schumer, who criticized Netanyahu, said he should be overthrown in a dramatic statement last week on the floor of the Senate.
Oh, well, this is from the article.
Recovery.
Johnson is a staunch supporter of Israel and its slaughter of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
His first move when he became Speaker in October was to push to a resolution declaring that the U.S. stands with Israel that promised open-ended support.
Now, this is the part.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Sumer welcomed the idea of Netanyahu addressing Congress, despite recently labeling the Israeli leader as an obstacle to peace and calling for new Israeli elections, the height of interventionism in Israeli politics.
And this is a quote.
Israel has no stronger ally than the United States, and our relationship transcends any one president or anyone Prime Minister Schumer said in a statement, I will always welcome the opportunity for the Prime Minister of Israel to speak to Congress in a bipartisan way.
So flip-flop on it.
Well, in this article that we've been looking at in 2002, Netanyahu testified before Congress, urging that the U.S. invade Iraq.
We were fighting it with him back then.
Invading Iraq, pushing the false narrative that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
You know, it's on and on.
So I would think that a sovereign nation should, you know, maybe not avoid it or prohibit it from it, but maybe a little more common sense about how you use your status of our legislative branch of government, the Congress.
And it wouldn't hurt us if we took a vacation when these guys came to town.
Let them talk to our leaders, do something, have dinner with them, play some cards or something.
But no, that's not it.
He has to get that symbolic.
Nordstream Terror Attacks Surprises 00:04:51
You know, Zelensky talked there.
And now he's annoyed because he hasn't been able to get back on.
He wants a second chance.
Well, they come to us, they come to our Congress.
They lie to us and beg for money.
You're right.
I was just going to say Zelensky.
He did the same thing.
Bibi did the same thing in O2.
He lied to us and begged for money or for us to invade Iraq and get rid of his enemies.
It's a real problem.
It'll be interesting to see what happens because Biden has got some trouble with his own party in the House and Senate.
They're not happy with Biden's position.
His carte blanche to Israel for what it's doing to the Gazans.
So we'll see.
It'll be interesting to see what happens there.
There's a big fight in the Democratic Party.
They talk about Republicans fussing, but there's a big fight, and it's over this whole thing of the Palestinians and Israel.
And right now, Israel's getting very difficult.
That's why there's a few bones and little political things and comments to make us, well, we're keeping an eye on Israel to watch out.
They don't go over the top.
But it is a mess.
Yeah.
Well, let's move on.
And I just had a couple of, I thought a couple of interesting things about this.
Now, there was a horrible terror attack.
I don't know if you saw some of the footage over the weekend, Dr. Paul, but near Moscow, awful.
At least four gunmen went into a concert, into a mall, and they slaughtered, now it looks like around 150 people in cold blood.
Nasty, awesomely horrific, horrific.
And then they burned the thing down.
So within a few minutes, the U.S. knew who didn't do it.
It wasn't Ukraine.
It was ISIS.
They knew immediately.
They immediately had all that information.
Ironically, after 18 months, we still don't know who did the Nord Stream 2, but they knew immediately.
But I'm just going to throw this out there, Dr. Paul, because let's have a look at Victoria Newland, who had a hasty exit from government just a few weeks ago, I find very suspicious.
Let's listen to an audio.
This is Victoria Newland in January of 22, just before, a few months before Nordstream was blown up.
You might want to put on your earpiece, Dr. Paul, and listen to Victoria Newland talking about Nordstream.
With regard to Nordstream II, we continue to have very strong and clear conversations with our German allies, and I want to be clear with you today.
If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nordstream II will not move forward.
And a few months after that, Nordstream 2 did not move forward because it was blown up.
But we don't know who did it.
How did she know that?
She's amazing.
She's a clairvoyant.
And here's what she said just a few days before the terror attack in Moscow.
Let's do the first one.
There's two of her talking about this.
Let's hear this.
Mr. Putin's going to get some nice surprises on the battlefield, and that Ukraine will make some very strong success this year.
Just a few, turn it, stop it.
So, just a few days before this attack, she says Putin's going to get some nasty surprises.
And do this next one.
She said this, I think, in the same week.
She addressed the CSIS and said, listen to this one, Dr. Paul.
With this money, Ukraine will be able to fight back in the East, but it will also be able to accelerate the asymmetric warfare that has been most effective on the battlefield.
And as I said in Kyiv three weeks ago, this supplemental funding will ensure Putin faces some nasty surprises on the battlefield.
Just before the money to Ukraine is going to help them with asymmetric warfare, which is what this is, and give him some nice surprises.
And then boom, here comes the terror attack.
Well, I guess there's no doubt about it.
She has been very significant, but we, even before 2014, we talked about her, but really in 2014, we knew what she was up to.
She's a promoter of war.
Yeah.
And she's bipartisan.
She comes across as being very fair-minded, saving the world.
Yeah.
What a tragedy.
And we don't know that she's behind this, but we do know that she somehow seems to make great predictions of what's going to happen.
You know, Mayhem follows her.
But, you know, I guess it's the Russian government that paraded some people out of the stage and said these guys confess they did it.
Pride Flags and Diplomacy 00:03:52
Yeah.
Yeah, they caught them.
I mean, they caught them on their way to Ukraine, but then they said Ukraine has nothing to do with it.
Then why would they be going toward Ukraine?
It doesn't make any sense.
But you say maybe they'll get to the bottom of it.
I always say if they do it now, they still should do it because history can be of some value someday.
You know, it takes a long time for us to wake up.
So that's why I think accurate history is so vital.
Yeah, and I would hate to be these guys.
Obviously, they were beat up.
You know, there's no question about it.
The Russians treat terrorist suspects very, very nastily.
But we have to remain, we have to remember Abu Ghraib, where we treated people we thought were terrorists pretty, pretty badly, too.
So I'm going to close out with another little bit of kind of breaking news.
I didn't mention it to you, but I know that you'd want our audience to hear this.
Now, Stella Assange, Julian's wife, just tweeted this out before we started the show.
If you can do that last clip, please.
She said, this is it.
Decision tomorrow, 10.30 a.m.
Royal Courts of Justice.
She just released this.
The Royal Court of Justice is going to make its decision on Julian Assange tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. I guess local London time.
So if you are a praying person, I would suggest that might be a good idea.
If you have other ways of influencing things, that may be a good idea as well.
At the very least, those who aren't either could cross their fingers and hope that justice will be served.
Boy.
Yeah.
Maybe, maybe.
Let's hope.
Let's hope.
It's a lot better than it was many years here to just sit and nobody saying a word about him.
Yeah.
Well, I'm all done if you want to close out.
I am by bringing up the subject of the bill, the financing bill that is threatening all of the Western hemisphere and the world, the financial system.
Spend, spend, spend, no matter how much, trillions and trillions of dollars.
But there are some good things that come of it.
And I'm being sarcastic.
New government spending bill bans U.S. embassies from flying the pride flag.
Oh, don't we believe in free speech anymore?
But here it is.
United States have permitted the pride flag to at the embassies to fly pride flag in the American flag.
I'm sure they didn't take the American flag down.
Maybe it was down a little bit or something.
But it's so crazy.
But, you know, the Speaker of the House gets credit for it.
He negotiated this.
He got them to talk and said, look, look, we need to get as many votes as we can.
And if we do this, we can get some conservatives saying, that is a good idea.
As if this is the issue.
So this is in the rumor mill.
You know, I don't think we have this in print, but I happen to believe it probably is true.
So he did that.
He got a couple people saying, well, this is really good.
We can brag about that.
And he can get some of his credentials back.
But then the end of the story is that the rumor mill said, oh, yes, but don't worry about it.
They've agreed to let us put it back in later on or get rid of it later on, so that they can fly those flags.
And it's sort of in the category of letting these weird foreign leaders come and get the podium in the House of Representatives and represent dignity and democracy and all that mess.
So anyway, keep an eye on the pride flags.
They may be going up again.
If somebody wants to decorate their house and not damaging to private property next door, let them fly their flag.
But not in our embassies.
That doesn't make a lot of sense.
Export Selection