All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 4, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
26:36
NYC Mayor Breaks With Dems: 'Cancel Me - I'm For Deportations!'

New York City Mayor Eric Adams has shocked the Democratic establishment by vowing to work with the Trump Administration and the incoming "border czar" on illegal immigration and the crime it has brought to his city. Also today more crossing the aisle: Sen. Bernie Sanders says he's willing to cooperate with Trump's "Department of Government Efficiency" on matters such as cutting Pentagon waste.

|

Time Text
Mayor Of New York 00:15:24
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.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you?
Doing well, doing well.
And we have some interesting stuff to talk about.
It's not earth-shattering, but it could be, could lead to a better time.
One thing I want to start off with is to talk about the mayor of New York.
He's been in the news.
And I was just thinking to myself in the message to you, I wonder what his whole life has been like.
Has he always been against cancel me program?
Now that he's fearful, he's against that program.
It's canceled.
But, you know, you live and learn, I guess.
And he's decided that, I dare you, I am sick and tired of this all.
And besides, I want to stay mayor.
And he's reading the tea leaves, and it says that you have to cave in.
And maybe the people of this country did have a message.
Maybe it was a mixed message.
Maybe it wasn't perfectly clear on exactly what the new president will do.
But I tell you what, it was a clearly different thing than what the Democrats have had to support.
And they're waking up, and this is happening many times.
But Eric Adams woke up, and he just said that, I dare you, you cancel me.
And I've decided to talk to the president-to-be, which should be no matter who's there.
You know, I think a libertarian is more open to that because we're so confident.
If you're liberal, that's okay.
We'll play on your liberal side of you.
Oh, okay, you're a conservative.
We could play to that and always get a door open to get a conversation going.
But anyway, in this case, he said no longer cares what leftists think, and he thinks mass immigration and the whole works is bad, and he will get some grief.
But right now, he seems to be handling it quite well.
It'd be interesting how this turns out.
I think politically he's not going to be destroyed by challenging the Democrats.
I think the people who have now started to challenge the Democrat machine are doing well.
They get a lot of TV coverage, even on the conservative station, in a sincere manner.
They're saying, well, enough is enough, and this is my position now.
Yeah.
Well, Democrat Party heads exploded with him saying this because, you know, for the last, what, how many years, we heard that Trump is literally Hitler, literally Hitler.
And now you hear Eric Adams, who is definitely a person of the left, as I recall it, extremely totalitarian during COVID.
So not a friend of Liberty's, but here's him saying, you know what?
I agree we've got a problem.
Go ahead and put this first one up.
This is written by Steve Watson at Moderna E News, recognizing we've got a problem.
And you know what?
The American people have spoken.
And he takes that on board and says, you know what, I'm going to talk to President Trump's people.
Now go to the next one.
Here's a quote from what he did say.
He said, I reached out to Trump and I shared I would like to sit down and speak with him and hear what are his ideas.
Because I don't want people talking at each other.
I want people to talk to each other.
And I made it clear I'm not going to be warring with his administration.
I'm going to be working with his administration, he said.
And then he also said, I'm looking forward to sitting down and seeing how we do better in New York.
The voters communicated loudly and clearly.
We have a broken immigration system that needs to be fixed.
Yes, that is the very liberal mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, saying that sentence.
Because there will be a lot of challenges because, you know, it took them a while to condition the people and to cause all this harm.
So even if you make the corrections, you know, if you're making corrections from excessive spending, for instance, and you cut back, people are going to feel the difference.
Well, I'm not getting my money anymore.
But they don't realize they weren't getting the money worth anything if prices weren't up.
So they are going to feel this, and some of them are going to be yelling and screaming, and they already are deciding we have to start organizing.
But I think they're just shaken up so badly they don't know exactly what to do because they're on the wrong side of the issue.
And pragmatically speaking, they're out of money.
That's one thing it is.
The people are out of patience from doing it.
And the whole philosophy of interventionism, whether it's in money or war or civil liberties or immigration, they're out of it.
It has nothing to do with protecting a Republican, I'll say Republic, a type of government, which we were handed and warned, if you're not careful, you're going to lose it.
And I think people recently are starting to say, hey, you know, maybe we could lose this.
Maybe we will not automatically get our checks in the mail because we have a problem.
And that's essentially what Eric Adams did.
You know, he can't win by saying, I'm going to take care of it.
It's not going to work.
That failed, and the American people have spoken.
I remember at the time, you've said it, I think, many times.
What particularly annoyed you was seeing these hotels in New York kick out all the paying customers to bring in a bunch of immigrants, illegal immigrants, to stay in the hotel and charge the rest of us for it.
You know, and I think they recently bought a hotel because it wasn't doing well and it was empty and because there's a recession going on, there's all kinds of problems.
So New York City buys it, they're going to fill it with illegals.
That'll last long.
It'll be on the ground.
But, you know, now here are a couple of things I just looked up separately because he's saying, yeah, there is a problem and I'm willing to reach across the aisle and work.
Now, that used to be a little more common than it has been lately.
But I just grabbed a couple of quick statistics.
Now, do that first bonus clip.
I just wanted to add a little bit of color to what we're trying to point out.
Now, this is a recent piece in the New York Post.
New York City is now home to over 58,000 criminal migrants, including more than 1,000 gang members.
And that's the ICE, the Immigration Department, saying that.
And the second one is from, I think, New York Daily News, that second bonus clip.
This gives you a little bit of a context of what the mayor is talking about.
A staggering 75% of all New York arrests in Midtown are migrants.
Police sources estimate.
So he's clearly identified there is a problem and he's got an open mind to work with people to figure out how to solve the problem.
They play on righteousness because we will do this.
It's important.
But we cannot violate the civil liberties of any one of them.
But they're allowed to come in.
And I claim if you take over a city and do what they do and live off other people, that's like walking into your house and defending yourself.
I say, you can't come in here.
Don't take your 25 refugees.
You get out of here.
But when a city does that, oh no, you can't do it.
We have to protect civil liberties.
But what they should do is protect everybody's civil liberty equally.
And if people are taking from one to give to the other ones, because they more or less are very, very aggressive.
And the Democratic Party plus others have capitulated.
This is what amazes me is to say, you know, whatever you want, just come in.
I still, from the very first time I ever gave a thought to this, I said, beware, someday we might have an invasion.
This has to be considered like an invasion, you know.
And sometimes I wonder whether it's the invasion of barbarians.
Yeah.
Well, you can see it in the way the vote turned.
You know, you have a party that has completely turned a deaf ear to people's concerns, actual people's concerns about this every day.
And then you have, you know, Trump for better or for worse.
We don't know if he's going to do what he says.
However, however, he understands that it's a problem and he addresses it.
And so I think that's why it's so important.
Now go to this next clip because this, now I just showed you the stats on crime.
I described a couple of quick ones to show you.
Yes, it is a big problem over there.
Now put on that next regular clip.
Adams also asserted, if you can find that one, because here's now back from the original article.
Adams also asserted that those who are here committing crimes, shooting at police officers, raping innocent people, have been a harm to our country.
I want to sit down and hear their plan, i.e. the Trump administration plan, on how to address them.
There are people who talking about it.
I'd love to sit down with the borders are and hear his thoughts on how we're going to address it.
Now here's something interesting that he did say else.
And this is really important.
This was going viral yesterday.
It's a clip.
No, go back, please.
It's a clip from Hillary Clinton.
You're going to want to need to get your earpiece out.
Maybe we can get that out for you.
It's a clip from, leave that up, please.
It's a clip from Hillary Clinton.
If we put that last clip up that you had.
The post that was just up there.
Thank you.
So he pointed out that if you go back and Google Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, Google what they said about those who commit crime in our city, in our country.
He said those who commit crimes need to get out.
Now let's actually listen to that clip.
This is Hillary Clinton sounds to the right of Donald Trump on immigration in this clip.
If we can find that first video, I think it's the only video we have.
You can put that up and listen to Hillary.
I think it's 30 seconds.
Sorry, I'm running you ragged back there.
But let's listen to Hillary Clinton in 08.
So I think we've got to have tough conditions.
Tell people to come out of the shadows.
If they've committed a crime, deport them.
No questions asked.
They're gone.
If they've been working and are law-abiding, we should say, here are the conditions for you staying.
You have to pay a stiff fine because you came here illegally.
You have to pay back taxes.
And you have to try to learn English.
And you have to wait in line.
Just think if she had developed a position, a moral position, that you ought to tell the truth.
You ought to stick with it.
You shouldn't flip-flop according to what's happening in politics.
She had a pretty good position there.
Just think of where she'd be in the political life and the life of the country if she would have stood all on that position.
And she might have been able to reduce some of the suffering that we're going through right now.
But all of a sudden, they can switch like that, switch their, you know, adjust their philosophy, which means that truth is not of interest to them.
Yeah.
Well, that Hillary Clinton literally could be Trump's borders are right now.
Take that 2008 Hillary Clinton and put her in there.
She'd be fine because what she said is very, very strong.
If you commit a crime, boom, you're gone.
But if you're taxpaying, you do all your stuff, then you have to pay a stiff fine.
You've got to learn English.
You've got to get to the back of the line and wait your turn.
And then maybe we'll let you stay.
Considering the party now, the Democratic Party now, that's pretty strong.
No, that says too bad for them and for the country that they didn't stick with this, but it's a struggle.
You know, it's easy to switch around for political reasons and offer these generous offers, but it's really tough going the other direction.
That's why the message is out there.
Trump has spoken well, and Hillary, we can always use Hillary to defend our position.
And this to me is, you know, it has to be academically and ideological position.
People have to have a thought.
In her case, she did.
She was so clairvoyant.
She didn't know.
She probably didn't even hardly know Trump back then.
Stealing his speech.
Well, the last one is from the same article because it's kind of how we started it.
And what I find interesting about this is that Adams clearly now understands that cancel culture is not a winning political proposition because he uses it in a derogatory way.
If you can put up that last one, Adams argued that cancel culture is making people too afraid to tell the truth.
And then he said, well, cancel me because I'm going to protect the people of this city.
And if you come into this country and this city and you think you're going to harm innocent New Yorkers and innocent migrants and asylum seekers, this is not the mayor you want to be in the city under.
So that's kind of an interesting challenge.
You want to challenge?
You want to cancel me?
Go ahead.
Give it a shot.
See, well, cancel me because I'm going to protect the people by telling you the truth.
And that to me would be the big issue.
And, you know, politicians are trained to sort of mix it up a bit.
And that is not their goal.
You and I witnessed that in the Congress.
It's demagoguery, is what they use.
It's a different kind of speech.
There's always the good people, but they're pushed off into a corner someplace.
They don't become committee chairmen and that sort of thing.
Yeah.
Well, the next one, if you're ready to move on, is kind of a similar theme, which is a return to what you always did when you were in the House, which is the idea of working with the other party, working with the opposition, not being, you know, hiding behind some stupid political label.
And so this is the next one.
This is from the New York Post, if you put that up.
Bernie Sanders admits Elon Musk is right.
Back'd Doge if it makes major cuts in this department, dot, dot, dot.
And you know what he's talking about.
He's talking about the Pentagon.
He said, okay, you know, I'm interested in working across the aisle with Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy if they were going to do this.
Yeah, I was always disappointed that although we worked with him and we did okay, but we also knew that his heart wasn't exactly where we were on this issue because he always mentions the social things and his heart is drawn to the people who suffer.
We might say, yes, we too, but we try to understand how bad economic policies create that and bad monetary policy creates that.
So he argues this case, but I think that it was nice that we could talk to him.
And he would, when he had an idea, I think it was, I think the first time he came to me, it was a vote on the Export-Import Bank.
And remember, he came to me, yeah, I'll go sponsor that.
And as I remember, that was a conservative Republican.
As I remember, I think he had pretty talented staff too, you know, which you can get a bunch of knuckleheads up there.
But he had some smart people on his staff, and they were really good to work with.
Government Care Debunked 00:07:27
But now here's a little bit more from the article, if you can put that next clip on.
This is from the New York Post article about Bernie Sanders.
It says, apparently you can teach an old Doge new tricks.
Ha ha ha.
Okay, that's a joke, in the article.
But lefty Bernie Sanders turned to Head Sunday with support for President-elect Trump's planned new Department of Government Efficiency, providing it takes aim at the Pentagon's cushy budget.
Quote, this is a quote from Bernie, he put it on X. Elon Musk is right, the Pentagon with a budget of $886 billion just failed its seventh audit in a row.
It's lost track of billions.
So he's saying, okay, let's take a look at this.
Yes, and it is good.
They have to do that and cut back.
But I have a belief that, and we've talked about it, matter of fact, yesterday, we talked about, you have to eliminate things like this because it's inefficient, but it's the nature of bureaucracy and welfarism and runaway spending for pseudo-national defense.
They have to lie about, oh, they're here, they're here to get us, and they're going to bomb us tomorrow, and therefore you better, or you're not an American, and you don't like the troops.
At the same time, they're stirring up trouble.
How many people have died?
Even, well, people would even argue the case to a degree of First and Second War.
But since World War II, just think of how many American dollars have been spent and American lives, then also innocent lives.
And other people, I mean, it is unbelievable how much wealth was just burned up in a smoke, you know, and then they wonder why there's still poverty in the world.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, there's this fallacy that our nation's security is dependent is a function of the amount of money spent on quote-unquote defense.
And that's just absolutely untrue.
And so many people have done so much work on this.
We talked a lot about the defense death spiral that the military reform movement of the 80s talked about, which is you're going to spend ever more money on weapons that are less efficient and effective.
We've already seen this with the F-35 and many other weapon systems.
You're spending more and you're getting less.
The good news is that you can actually protect the U.S., even in its interests, if you want to go that far, for a fraction of the money that we spend.
We just have to think better about it, not send $200 billion to Ukraine, not getting involved in overthrows in military actions overseas.
You know, it can be done.
We can be secure with the fraction of the money.
See, I think the one thing that I concentrate on in a theoretical discussion with somebody who wants more of that, I think they always should be asked, where are you going to get the money?
And, you know, make them say it, well, the government will take care of it.
Yeah, where does the government take care of it?
And just work on it constantly to point out you have to steal it.
And you're stealing this money, and now who are you stealing it from?
Well, we know you're stealing it from the people.
And the less protection you have, everybody is designed to take care of the average person, the middle class, but they're the ones who pay, and those are the ones that have died over the years.
So they keep arguing that this is the case.
But the working people, they will be taxed, but they don't pay much taxes.
The bottom 40%, they don't pay much.
But they pay through the nose because they're the ones who suffer.
Right now, I think the employment situation is much worse than the government's admitting.
So that's working it in.
We're working into this recession that's going on, and that will hurt the people that we've been helping the most, so to speak.
And what people have to come to realize and get excited about, you know, the more freedom I have, and where we're permitted to keep what we earn, the incentives come back, and those are the societies that have been, you know, the most prosperous.
And we have a good bit of that over the centuries, you know, the last two or three hundred years.
But that is fading, and that's why I think all this type of stuff is good, and we have to talk about it, but I think you have to still point to the total principle of what we're doing is a violation of liberties and dumping it on the people who are least defended.
And they don't care about that because all they have to do is say, oh, we're the ones who want to help you.
We want to take to you.
And even if you come here and you have a bad record, you came from such and such country, we believe in civil liberties for everybody.
And preaching that nonsense.
And all of a sudden, people wake up and say, you know, it's not working.
Well, there's been a fair number of people, probably ever since the progressive era, that said this can't work.
You know, there was tremendous argument against the Federal Reserve and the debasement of currency.
And there was a big deal when the gold window was closed and the window was open for endless inflation.
And who are suffering?
The people who are paying the highest prices.
Do you think the people who are making two, three, four hundred thousand dollars a year care about the loaf of bread?
And there's many that are a lot richer than that.
They do not pay the bill that welfare warfare says.
Well, there's a little more good news even in this article, and that is if you can skip one and go ahead to the one last week, Representative Roe Conna.
If we can, I think that's just skipping one and moving on to the next clip.
Last week, Representative Ro Conna, Democrat from California, now he is a relatively, he's progressive, and he's quite often good.
But he echoed Sanders in suggestion that Democrats are willing to collaborate on attacking potential wasteful spending, at least in the DOD.
When it comes time to cutting waste, fraud, and abuse and opening the five primes to more competition, there are Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee who will work with Elon Musk and Doge Conna posted on X.
So that is a good sign.
And they're saying, oh, the Dems are willing to cut the DOD, but they probably won't want to cut welfare.
And you mentioned this before the show.
If you want to look at where the big money is, it's not in a couple of food stamps.
It's not in a pool for the inner city kids.
It's this trillion-dollar military budget.
And it should be easier than the rest.
But, you know, the people in charge of the propaganda is so powerful that even you can remember the times when the people were against the preparation for war in the Middle East.
And they did statistics.
The American people, 70% of the people, why are you going to war there for?
But, you know, they just paused a little bit, a little bit slower, then made up horrendous stories on what was happening.
And people did change their mind as a reflection of the propaganda on the three majors.
But guess what?
We have X now.
You're more likely.
It's not going to be perfect, but I tell you what, you're going to get a better option because we even get to put stuff on the X as something.
And we get it seen by a lot of people too, which is great because we've struggled to have it seen.
Pumped for Freedom 00:03:32
So anyway, I think those are a couple of pretty good news stories today.
And we need a little bit of cheering up.
So I'm going to close out if you think we're ready.
And if you just skip to that very last clip, I've got some good news.
I want to thank everyone who participated on Giving Tuesday to help the Ron Paul Institute end the Ron Paul Liberty Report.
If you can put that very last clip up.
So we had matching funds.
I got a note from our very, very generous benefactor.
And he said, you know what?
You've reached a fifth of your goal.
I'm going to extend the period.
It's going to run out just after Christmas.
So we have from now until just after Christmas to get that, to release that $100,000, the rest of the $80,000 that our generous donor will match.
So every dollar you send the Ron Paul Institute is $2.
Every $100 is $200 and so on.
So please keep that in mind.
I know everyone's gearing up for the Christmas season, but the end-of-year fundraising is absolutely critical for nonprofit organizations such as ours.
So please consider that donation.
I have put a link in the description so that you can participate.
Thank you very much for participating yesterday.
Very good.
You know, over the years, I've emphasized working with people who disagree with us.
But the truth is there's always going to be people who disagree with us.
And no matter whether it's just Republicans and Democrats or socialists or whatever.
But I think what is very neat about this whole thing is the freedom philosophy, the libertarian approach, really opens the door to everybody.
Listen.
And I think that's why if you hear somebody whisper a little bit about libertarianism at a national election, there's a lot of people who say, I believe that.
That sounds so reasonable.
And that to me is exciting because people will come together and understand that I think what happens is we lose it, especially because we don't have it in it.
It's not pumped into their heads.
Freedom is not pumped into the heads of the college student.
Matter of fact, the opposite is pumped into their heads.
Now you have to have states running and telling us what to do.
But if they finally understand this, it should be very exciting about the positive things that happen.
The freer society is, the richer the society is, the less poverty there is, the less starvation there is.
I believe that so sincerely, but it's going to be imperfect because man is imperfect.
But in the meantime, if you say we just need more government, more spending, and more intervention, and more bosses, it's not going to work.
So that is the reason we have to continue this.
But we have to really build the case for freedom and how positive it is.
It's a moral principle.
It's a constitutional principle.
And it's a basic principle that everybody should be able to look at and then work it out.
Work out the difference between, you know, the Bernie Sanders position, who are good on, you know, foreign policy and some of the civil liberties, and find out who will agree on white thing and get the principle that will bring people together.
And that to me is the individual principle of personal liberty, which is the thing.
If we had that, we'd have a lot more peace in this world.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection