All Episodes
Nov. 15, 2024 - Stay Free - Russel Brand
56:34
“I Can PROVE Biden Took CORRUPT Money From Ukraine” – Rudy Giuliani on The Biden Crime Family –SF494
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
Thank you.
In this video, you're going to see the future.
Hello there, you awakening wonders.
Thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
It's Friday and what a special day it is because we're joined by Rudy Giuliani and we're going to be talking about the ramifications of Trump's recent election and what it's like to move through the various offices of public life, sometimes opposing mafia bosses as an AG, being America's...
Sort of, well, mayor during the 9-11 crisis and catastrophe.
And now I feel like he's in a sense America's granddad.
He's a sweet and adorable gentleman who has incredible insights when it comes to the peculiar permutations in American political life and the way that power migrates between parties.
I confronted him outright.
About, like, the Republican Party during the Cheney and Bush years was certainly the party of war, the party of the new American century.
How can we make claims objectively about the Democratic Party being corrupt without addressing the corruption of the Republican Party?
And will Trump be able to govern the way he campaigned?
What is the significance of independent media versus legacy media?
And I talked to him about his book, The Biden Crime Family.
There's a link in the description if you want to get that book for yourself.
If you're watching this on YouTube, We'll only be there for the first 15 minutes precisely because YouTube are a member of the Trusted News Initiative.
YouTube are a platform that move in alliance with the systems of censorship that control free speech and ensure that you're only given information that makes you dumb.
Not the information that's accessible to you on Rumble, where sometimes it is a bit crazy.
But at least you can speak freely.
And if you're not an awakened wonder yet, become an awakened wonder.
Join me for my conversations with brilliant Christian thinkers and leaders.
Not so we can make you into some muted little Christian, but so that we can make you a radical warrior, such as we saw in the book of Acts.
May the tongues of fire be upon you.
May the heavenly discourse unfold before us all here.
May we challenge power.
In his name.
If you're watching us on YouTube, we'll be there for a few more minutes, then we'll be exclusively streaming on Rumble.
Okay, without further dilly-dallying or hullabaloo, let's introduce Rudy Giuliani.
Rudy, thank you for joining us.
I'm not even going to ask what's under that blankie in the background.
All I want to know is the truth of the way you think and the way you feel.
Thanks for joining us today, sir.
Well, it's nice to be with you, Russell.
Last time we met was at the RNC. I was pretty excited to encounter you.
And like, it's when you meet someone that you've known about for a long time, sometimes you get a carousel of flashes of all the times that person has permeated your consciousness because you've been a global figure since 9-11.
At that point, as we discussed when we met previously, a much-vaulted and vaulted hero.
Subsequent to that, under the era that I guess we're going to call like the advance of globalism under the auspices of liberalism.
There's been times where you've been attacked and derided and I know what that's like because I've had it happen to me as well.
Do you believe, as many people do, that this current and recent victory of Trump's is the advent of a new era?
What concerns do you have that the kind of insidious and institutional powers that most people call globalism or the deep state or the blob or the swamp, so many euphemisms for it, do you think they'll be able to maintain power or are you optimistic and excited about this victory?
Well, I am optimistic and excited.
I don't fool myself into thinking it's just self-executing.
I see it as a very decisive first step.
And therefore, we have to build on it by essentially having the results that we had the first time we had control of the government.
And this can be harder now, because when Trump took over in 17, the country and the world was not in such catastrophic condition as it is today.
I mean, just look at the condition of war and peace, right?
So he had to settle the ISIS war that the incompetent Obama created, and he did quickly.
And then he created peace.
Historic peace agreements in the Middle East.
Ended ISIS like that.
Settled down Syria in a minute.
Contained...
Contain Putin.
The only president Putin hasn't invaded under is Trump.
He invaded under Bush.
He invaded under Obama.
He invaded under Biden.
Same thing with Xi Jinping.
He was not nearly as aggressive as he is now.
And he had the guy in North Korea in his back pocket.
I used to listen to some of those conversations.
The guy used to think of him as his big uncle.
And so we...
We're in worse shape now.
Our economy is...
They've done incalculable damage to our economy.
They've done incalculable damage to our society.
They've divided us more the way latter-day communists divide, the way Gramsci wrote, which is based on race rather than on poverty.
But we have exactly the right man to cure it.
So it really depends on do we show them In a very quick period of time, that they were being led down the wrong road.
And that our greatness lies in the core institutions that we have.
Do we restore free speech?
Do we restore a proper balance between religion and government?
Do we restore, oh my goodness, the criminal system?
I mean, it was very, very completely contradictory that they were attacking him for wanting to take democracy away and wanting to prosecute his enemies when he never did that.
He had the opportunity to do it.
I know that better than anyone else.
I recommended prosecuting Hillary Clinton in 2017.
And he had the wisdom to say, we don't do that in America.
We don't prosecute.
We're not a banana republic.
What do they do?
They've prosecuted well over a hundred of his people, from little cases to the people that they tortured for January 6th, right?
People that got him in conditions worse than some of the prison camps.
And plus, they prosecuted Bannon, put him in jail.
They put Navarro in jail and leg irons.
They have virtually bankrupted me.
If you wanted to check for me now, I no longer have a checking account.
Because at the instance and direction of Hunter Biden's former law partner and a lawyer for the crooked...
Ukrainian company Burisma, which I uncovered, they have tied up all of my assets with a completely phony case of $145 million to these women where there is a tape recording of their doing what I said they did, which has been doctored.
I still have it.
I can still show it.
But neither in my court proceeding with the Bar Association or in Washington, Have they let me put in a defense?
So these women are getting $145 million, and you can see the younger one just putting the ballots in, one after another, one after another, one after another.
I'm entitled to draw a conclusion based on that.
I did.
And even if I was wrong, it's not $145 million.
Meanwhile, the federal judge here, who is a lifetime Democrat activist, And a judge with serious conflicts of interest has tied up everything I own before the judgment's affirmed on appeal.
Because they want to take my property away before I maybe win on appeal.
And then when I try to get it back, first of all, it'll be worth a lot less.
And then the things that really mean something to me, like the things that I got during and after 9-11 and during the Afghanistan war, And things that I have from the time that I prosecuted the mafia and former Nazis and my grandfather's watch.
They won't let me even keep those.
Even to keep it until the appeal is decided.
Why?
Because it's not a case, it's a cause.
And people involved in it are part of an organization that goes around torturing Trump lawyers.
And they're still doing it even after the victory.
It's outrageous.
And it's not just me.
There are some not as bad.
There are some worse.
And this is the thing we have to straighten out in America.
America realizes that we have seriously destroyed our system of justice under these crooked Democrats.
Wow, Rudy Giuliani, even listening to your first answer of my opening question, it's impossible not to receive the flavors of a life spent in various aspects of public life.
As Attorney General, Taking on the mafia as mayor of New York, comforting your city, country and to a degree the world as it became clear that we were embarking on the new epoch where power was shifting and altering.
Not only the power that emerges when non-state terror, but terror.
Ideological terror can enter and influence the international stage and international discourse.
But also, that was the time when there was some appetite to curb and control the powers of the new search engines, in particular Google, that likely would have been managed and governed differently had it not been for 9-11.
Of course, as a supporter of Trump, an advocate for Trump, and lawyer for Trump, you've entered in a different aspect of public life and power.
And it's clear that you've been around power in lots of forms for a very long time.
The first time we spoke, you talked to me about your I think it was your mother or grandmother and her significant influence in formulating your morality and your ethical systems.
I sometimes feel, Rudy, if I may call you Rudy, that if you've been around the power that exists in the judiciary that has now been, even by your own account, perverted into lawfare, the lawfare that's been deployed against Trump, I know that I've experienced some extraordinary things where media interests,
government interests, and judicial interests have aligned and cooperated in order to create what I heard Robert Malone call fifth generation warfare.
Attacks that can emerge now from amorphous sources.
It's not clear who your enemy is.
Now that bureaucracies and institutions have been captured, it's surprising the ways that people can be brought down.
Remember, okay, right, we're going to have to stop you there.
The rest of this conversation, start the countdown.
We'll only be available exclusively on Rumble.
Jump!
Out of that system of damnation which loathes you.
And join us in the sweet stream of freedom where I'll be talking to Rudy about the ongoing analogy of corruption that exists in American political life, i.e.
Is the state just a mafia crime family?
You're going to love this conversation.
Click the link in the description.
Join us there.
And if you haven't seen Break Bread yet, you've got to watch Break Bread now, particularly my conversation.
With the great J. John, you have to become a member of our Awaken Wonder community to benefit from that.
There's a link in the description.
You can do that now.
Let's get back to Rudy Giuliani without further delay.
Rudy, you've confronted crime power before in the form of the Mafia when you were Attorney General.
You've dealt with having significant power as mayor of New York during one of the most significant periods in New York's history.
And now we're discussing how power has become this new utensil, this new weapon.
And I suppose to, in a sense, reframe my first question.
I'm asking whether or not the like you said, it needs to be executed.
I wonder whether the election of Trump will be enough to ensure that even, say, something as personal as your case will be handled differently.
Or are those cogs within cogs?
those wheels within wheels, those kinds of institutions and machines, Unable to be controlled through government.
And if they can't be controlled through government, if censorship's going to continue, if lawfare's going to continue, Trump is still facing the possibility of conviction, am I right?
Or at least he's facing sentencing.
If those threats still exist, both for you as an individual, Trump as an individual, America as a nation, but beyond that...
All loosely understood as new bureaucratic power that appears to be in the service of globalism, I wonder what kind of movements, what kind of alliances, what kind of conversations we need to be having to address that.
For example, with your own cases, are you confident that you are going to succeed and win and get back your grandfather's watch?
Or do you believe that those kind of heirlooms and perhaps the values that those heirlooms represent might be chewed up in the cogs of a rather less delicate machine, the machinery of globalism?
Wow.
That's a very, very good question and probably the challenge of our age.
I am relatively certain that this will be straightened out.
Over a period of time.
And that Trump will make major inroads.
And we're going to be a lot better off next year and the year after and the year after that.
But if you ask me the specific question, will there be irreparable and has there been irreparable damage done already?
The answer is yes.
If they succeed, let's just take the watch.
And it represents a lot of other things.
They can give me the value of the watch in money.
They cannot give me back the watch that my grandfather had on the shores of Genoa over 100 years ago when he came to the United States for whom I am named and to whom he left it because I'm named for him.
And they can't give me that back.
Those things, they are doing irreparable damage to.
And the law would usually, if we were operating under the usual angle of American law, the law would not allow that because it would say it does irreparable harm.
And we'll stay that.
We'll let them take the things that they can replace with money.
But we won't let them take the things they can't replace with money.
Unfortunately, we have a judge who has been an activist, a left-wing Democrat all of his life.
He allowed me no exemptions.
The law actually would provide exemptions for them.
And he's ignored it.
So I think Trump will make progress.
I think we're going to be a lot better off.
There will be...
You can never give back to Steve Bannon the four months of his life that he took completely unjustifiably.
You can't give back to the people that were in Roger Stone's house the shock and the trauma of having soldiers invade his house, FBI agents disguised as soldiers with machine guns and CNN being brought in to film this farce.
You can't bring back what the Attorney General has done to a 71-year-old woman for merely protesting abortion.
She didn't touch anybody.
She didn't hurt anybody.
She's spending 14 months in jail.
And you're not going to restore the couple of hundred people that they put in conditions worse than Guantanamo for January 6th, where, yes, there were some that deserved punishment.
But none of them deserve that kind of punishment, and some of them didn't deserve punishment at all.
And we still have an outstanding murder case that hasn't even been addressed, and that's Ashley Babbitt.
I mean, she was killed under circumstances that I can tell you as a person who has prosecuted homicide cases and had that reviewed from day one, because I had that on day one by experienced homicide detectives.
That's a first-degree homicide charge.
This woman was a 5'2 woman who was unarmed.
There were anywhere near a dozen to 16 police around who easily could have restrained her.
And she was shot for no reason by a cop who can't possibly meet the defense of, I reasonably felt my life was in jeopardy.
He had behind her, he had police officers dressed up as like SS with machine guns.
There was no need for him to shoot her.
He had people dressed up that way on his side.
And then they hit him for four months.
They've lied about him.
And for them, it doesn't matter that there's an unresolved murder.
I come from a tradition in New York, the police department, there's no such thing as a murder case that we stop investigating.
We'll investigate a murder case from 200 years ago if we can get evidence.
Why?
Because human life is so important to us.
And we want to make sure that if we have a chance, if you consider murder, it's going to enter your mind that this is worse than anything else.
Well, every single member of that January 6th committee couldn't give a damn that Ashley Babbitt was murdered.
They actually faked and exaggerated murders that didn't take place.
The police officer they gave a state funeral to died of natural causes.
What an outrage.
You don't think Nancy Pelosi knew that?
And staged it with her daughter who's a Hollywood producer?
These are things that have to come out.
Because if they don't, we'll do them again.
And they have to be taken out like a cancer from our culture.
For us, I consider what happened to us not dissimilar to the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
What they try to do, starting with Obama, is rip away our culture.
That's why they burn down statues.
That's why they burn flags.
That's why they kneel during the national anthem.
That's why they spit on images of America.
That's why they falsify, like, 1619, the history of America.
That's why they change statues, because people didn't do enough about slavery.
But they keep the name Democrat Party, which did everything about slavery.
There's no name more associated with slavery that should be changed than the Democrat Party.
It was for 100 years to party as slavery.
It fought a civil war.
Under the banner of the Republican Party, 200,000 to 300,000 white men died to save black men.
On the other side, they were trying to enslave black men.
And they keep the name Democrat Party.
And they try to paint us as racist because, number one, they've got a history of racism.
And number two, they're practicing Marxist, the new version of Marxist racism, which was outlined in the 40s by an Italian communist named Gramsci, in which you use race for wealth or poverty.
And you divide a long race because they figured out we are easily susceptible to that.
And we had it almost solved until Obama came along.
And Obama started the racial division of America.
And what do Democrats do every chance they get?
They try to racially divide us.
And they are the actual races.
Hey, there's a few things.
One is, it appears that what we're talking about is that...
There appear now to be no institutions or political parties that can lay claim to the necessary objectivity in order to govern.
In order to run a judiciary, the population needs to believe that the judiciary are Just that they are acting in accordance with principles that are somehow universal, even transcendent, that go beyond the interests of any individual or group, that we can rely on genuine justice.
Now, say a minute ago you said up until the point of Obama, America was on the right track, but I don't know much about politics or history or really anything, but I do know that immediately prior to Obama was George W. Bush, and I do know that the Bush era was defined by the Iraq wars, and I do know that the Iraq wars should be regarded as illegal.
And one of the great disgraces of the contemporary Democratic Party and their campaign was their willingness to kowtow to and align with Dick Cheney, who's probably someone you know in that, and I'm not judging him as a human being.
I'm just saying that he seems...
It seems to loosely represent the idea of republicanism in the Gulf War eras as being at the service of entities like Halliburton.
And what it seems like to an outsider is that there were corporate, globalist and economic interests as laid out in the New American Century project that, as obviously you're aware, sort of set out an agenda to go to war with a variety of countries.
Many of those wars have happened, except the Iran one.
That's not happened yet.
Fingers crossed that that one doesn't unfold any day now.
And what I would say is that this loss of faith in the institutions of America ultimately leads to a loss of faith in America.
Now like most nations, America had to build itself With the idea that somehow America's destiny was connected to the determinations of a God and a God principle.
One nation, under God, the right to pursue...
These constitutional claims and their claims in the Bill of Rights...
Start to fall apart if you don't believe in God, if you don't believe in justice, if you don't believe in many of the categories that have been dismantled up to now.
And I agree that the problem with centrist, globalist, cultural Marxist, leftist entities that have taken power around the world in my country under new Labour and now Labour under Keir Starmer, that appear to be in control of France under Macron, Canada under Trudeau that appear to be in control of France under Macron, Canada under Trudeau and under the Biden crime family about who you've written and about whom I'd like to talk
It appears that by replacing God, the state can lay claim to the powers that human beings have always attributed to God.
But Rudy, don't we have to, in all honesty, acknowledge that hypocrisy and corruption is not a phenomena that lies on one side of the political aisle, that you and I are hypocritical, that you and I have done things that are corrupt, that we are capable, we are fallen,
In fact, indeed, the reason I'm mentioning this now is because when your justice system is built on the idea of a God and therefore principles that are irrefutable, then what's also built into that in my tradition as a Christian is the idea that we are fallen.
And that we are broken.
And that no one's got the right to judge one another except in alignment with God.
So, like, a lot of people, when you list, like, Roger Stone and Steve Bannon, I like Steve Bannon a lot.
He's a radical dude.
And Roger Stone, these people, to the left, to the mainstream, to the mainframe, this is a cast of villains, a motley crew.
Correct.
Probably they'd include you in that, in that sort of cast of characters.
I am definitely included in that, yes.
So then what's our responsibility when it comes to, you know, rebuilding these institutions, whether that's the judiciary or America itself, to acknowledge our own failings and our own failures so that what gets built out of any Trump movement isn't just their version of a corrupt and hypocritical system?
So my conclusion at the end of the 1980s, when I finished being the third-ranking official in the Justice Department and had prosecuted probably more cases successfully than anyone else in the 20th century, was that neither political party had a monopoly on virtue or vice.
That both had levels of corruption, that they were easily influenced by lobbyists and pressure groups, I brought a case to take the Teamsters away from organized crime and to separate them from Las Vegas.
And when I brought it in 1988, every presidential candidate, Republican and Democrat, condemned me.
And they wanted Ronald Reagan to fire me.
Except one, and that was George Bush.
He defended me.
And the reason is they all suck up to the Teamsters Union.
And they all want money from the Teamsters Union.
And George Bush merely said, Giuliani's just doing what Robert Kennedy started.
Everyone knows the Teamsters Union is corrupt.
Well, they all did, and they all worked with it, and they all tried to get money out of it.
So we have corruption on both sides.
I mean, the next chapter in the book that revealed Biden is the $5 million that the McConnells got from her father, Who is one of the richest men in red China.
And he happens to come from Taiwan.
Now, that's got to set off all kinds of bells.
That red China makes you one of the richest men, but you come from Taiwan.
And five million went to McConnell.
From that day on, McConnell never attacked China.
Not terribly different than the $21 million they gave Biden, except McConnell is a Republican and Biden's a Democrat.
That probably accounts for the fact that McConnell put tremendous pressure on the senators who wanted to reveal the 50 years of Biden corruption.
Because he knows if that gets revealed, the next chapter in the book is him.
So I'm not telling you the Republicans are any better than the Democrats.
It just happens to be The moment we are in history, it's the Democratic Party that has the monopoly on corruption right now.
And I do have to say one thing.
Democrats and Republicans, including through Clinton, pretty much left the court system alone.
I don't think under Trump you can find unfair use of the judiciary.
He did not prosecute Hillary, who could have easily been prosecuted, or Comey for lying on a Pfizer document.
I happen to be one of the people that established Pfizer.
Lying on a Pfizer document puts in jeopardy many of the reforms that came after 9-11 that allowed extraordinary power because we want to protect our national security.
Not that we want to go after a presidential candidate.
It exists because Of the threat of Russia.
It exists because of the threat of Islamic terrorism.
It has to be dealt with very, very carefully and judiciously.
When I sign an affidavit to get a search warrant, it's going to get reviewed.
When I sign an affidavit to do a national security surveillance and put bugs on you and put cameras in your room, nobody ever gets to review it.
Just me and the judge.
I better be one honest dude if I'm not going to misuse that.
And we had a pretty good history for a while of honesty.
So what Comey did should have been prosecuted for the good of the country, not because of Trump.
Because people should have the fear of God in them not to ever lie on a FISA warrant in order to take your rights away.
And this is the thing they've done that's unforgivable.
So they were the first administration in history to prosecute their opposition.
Well, of course, in all of South America, they do that regularly.
Maduro got a chance to have an election because Biden sent him a lot of money and bought oil fruit.
As soon as he started the election, and Biden asked him to have a free and fair election, he saw what Biden was doing.
First thing he did is arrest his main opponent.
Oh yeah, we'll have a free and fair election without him.
Biden tried to do that.
Four times.
He couldn't get it done.
But he did get him convicted.
Except the American people saw behind it.
They saw, this isn't America.
We don't do this.
We've been around a long time.
Jefferson and Adams at one time, before they became friends, were great enemies.
But when Jefferson won, he didn't prosecute Adams for the alien the sedition was.
At that point, they hated each other, but they didn't prosecute them.
I can give you plenty of examples of that.
And it's something that we always understood would have us quickly decline into a dictatorship if you start doing that.
When I stepped over that line, and that's got to be corrected.
That's got to be corrected.
It never has to happen again.
I believe in history that will make the Biden administration The one that trashed the Constitution the most of any administration in American history.
They just acted extra Constitution.
You know, Rudy, the metaphor of the United States of America as a criminal organization is a metaphor that's been explored in films like The Godfather.
The idea, really, that what you're dealing with is just sets of gang interests As a person that has deep experience of prosecuting the mafia, has experience as a public official, as a mayor, and as a legislator, and as someone who's just written a book called The Biden Crime Family, how accurate and realistic Is that?
Is there something about the relatively, you know, you said we've been around a long time, but America, you know, for an Englishman, is a very young country.
So, like, so you sort of look at, like, how various institutions emerged, and you can see the various gangs kind of appeared at the same time, and one gang goes the bureaucratic and governmental route, another gang goes the more sort of Direct violence route.
So do you think that's something almost in the molecular structure of America?
You know, like, because I know that people on the other side say that Trump's like a gangster.
He employs his kids.
He talks like a gangster.
He acts like a Don.
But your assessment of the Biden family as criminal is, you're saying, is based on, you know, demonstrable evidence of taking bribes, the relationship with Burisma and all that.
Here's the difference.
During the last debate in the last election, not the last one, the one before, in 2020, Trump accused Biden of taking money from China.
Biden denied it.
It was absolutely true.
And he accused him of taking money from China.
The reality is that Trump has never taken a penny from China.
And Biden has taken $31 million.
It's all proven.
And the idea that it didn't go to him is completely belied by the fact that his son...
On an email in December of 2018 says that over 30 years, I've given half my income to Pop.
And plus, there's plenty of evidence that Hunter was paying for things as a way of laundering the millions and millions he took from our worst enemy.
Now, shortly after becoming president, Biden gave up an airbase 400 miles from China.
That's unthinkable.
I mean, that is, that someday, if God forbid we go to war with China, an American president will curse him for doing that.
There's no explanation for it.
His entire military was against it.
But then they kept their mouths shut because they're a bunch of pansies who were too afraid of getting fired.
They were.
They're a bunch of, you know, we talk about the Nazi prison guards, right?
If I were a general on his staff and you gave away a base 400 miles from China, Next thing I do is hold a press conference and accuse them of treason or insanity, one or the other.
I mean, we can't get an airbase now within a thousand miles of China.
And in the kind of wars that we're going to fight with missiles and missile defense, proximity is golden.
That goes back to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Why did Kennedy want to keep Khrushchev out of Cuba?
Because he beat 90 miles from the United States?
We were 400 miles from China.
We gave it up with $85 billion worth of arms in it that the Taliban took.
Oh, let me also point out that that same base, Bagram, which was the most modern base in Asia, was 400 miles from Iran and 500 miles from Russia.
You couldn't have a more strategic base.
Now, I'm supposed to ignore the fact that he gave that up, and in the prior five years, his family got $31 million from China.
The only dispute we have is they say it didn't go to him.
But imagine if Dwight Eisenhower or John F. Kennedy or Ronald Reagan had gotten $21 million from the Soviet Union.
If their family had gotten $21 million from the Soviet Union, they would have been executed.
They would have been executed if that happened.
And what has happened to us is, and I think the biggest thing to change is going to be the media.
How to get them to stop becoming...
I don't even think they're journalists now.
They're...
However you would describe the key organs that were in the Soviet Union under Pravda is what they are now.
They literally repeat propaganda and repeat it almost in the exact words.
You know, quid pro quo, quid pro quo, quid pro quo.
This will be a blockbuster.
This will...
All of them say it.
The politicians and the silly people on television.
And then it turns out they arrested poor George Papadopoulos who didn't do anything.
So there's a lot to straighten out.
And I think Trump has got to restore things.
He's got to show that the courts can run fairly.
They did run fairly under him.
I can't think of a complaint of a court decision in the criminal law Where someone felt that Trump intervened to have a political person harmed.
That was pretty much sacrosanct.
I don't think you can find Trump in any way taking democratic rights away from people.
That's like a canard.
He didn't limit free speech.
He wasn't In fact, his free speech was limited.
He didn't make deals with the prevailing monopolizers of speech to limit speech.
He just spoke, and they limited him.
So I think comparing his people to the current upper echelon of the crooked Democratic Party is like, there's not a moral equivalent.
Yeah, there are bad people on our side, but they're nothing like on the other side.
It's like comparing Hamas and Israel.
Israel has its problems, Israel has its issues, but Israel is going to try very hard not to kill civilians because they know it hurts them to do it, among other things.
Hamas is going to use civilians in order to effectuate their insane goal of wanting to eliminate the Jewish people.
So, You can't compare the two things.
Now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now, it could change.
We could be the bad guys and they could be the good guys.
It just happens to be in history right now.
The very upper echelon of the Democratic Party has been seized by these people who have evil motives.
And they've got to clean it out.
And I really recommend they clean it out, change the name of the party, and who knows, in four years they can have a majority party.
I think you might be right.
Certainly there are signs that what's happening is more significant than the ordinary vicissitudes of national politics because we are in a globalist era.
That doesn't mean that we should all yield to a new world order.
In fact, across the world, it's pretty plain that people are rejecting that idea.
There are protest movements across the world that are usually being condemned using legacy media as either racist or bigoted or unnecessary or out of touch.
But these protest movements are forming around agriculture in India and across Europe and in your country.
They're forming around free speech in Ireland, across Europe and in my country and obviously in yours and in Canada.
So globalism and the sets of bureaucracies that form around what appears to be a centralised authoritarian agenda is the defining issue of our day.
And it was, in fact, Steve Bannon that said some time ago that you will see a resurgent populism.
And Trump is, I guess, the main avatar of that populism.
But he was also deliberate to say was Bannon himself.
He said that you could have different iterations of populism.
It needn't be right-wing, patriotic, nativist.
It could be left-wing.
What I feel might be shifting is bigger even than the phenomena of American politics and Donald Trump.
There's been ongoing talk about whether or not the American empire is under threat.
And immediately before the election...
The stories that seemed to me to be most significant were seeing those BRIC summits taking place and meetings between Brazil and China and Russia and the threat to drop the petrodollar and the fact that Korea had troops in Russia.
I was thinking, wow, we're moving towards It seems more like the first world war than the second, but it looks like we're on the edge of global conflict.
And I suppose that movements of that scale are, one way or another, led by technology and matters of dominion.
And we're living in this new information age where the former bureaucracies and elites, I don't think, are able to handle the power that they have and the power that's emerging.
And I think in your diagnosis of the Democrats and the fluctuation between malign interests running the Republican Party and malign interests running the Democratic Party and the potential for that vacillate is important because it seemed like, you know, even though George W. Bush had two terms in the midst you know, even though George W. Bush had two terms in the midst of this, that from Clinton through Obama right up to now, it seemed like we were in the era where globalism and global power was able to use the Democratic Party
It's vassal.
And that Trump 2016 was an athema and anomaly.
And now, though, I think that because of the way the independent media is emerging, because of the connotations of independent media when it comes to running various institutions of government, i.e., there could be full accountability, there could be more transparency, there's likely to be a greater demand for transparency.
I thought it was really fascinating, Rudy, that...
Elon Musk and Vivek Guramaswamy in their new Department of Government Efficiency are apparently declaring that everything, all of their measures and suggestions, will be openly sourced and publicly available.
And this, I think, is potentially the direction government could go in.
We could start seeing maximal electoral power rather than minimal.
Trump's talking about with the hot topic, hot button issue of abortion, giving it to the states that there will be no federal ban or federal edicts, but states will have more power.
And I wonder if this new technology, Rudy, is so significant in the way that we communicate and the collapse of, you know, CNN appears to be collapsing, MSNBC appears to be collapsing because of the emergence of this ability to communicate.
I wonder if you believe, like I do, that we'll start seeing the institutions of power themselves being impacted and affected by technology.
A hundred percent.
Even in the four years between 2020 and 2024, there's been a major difference.
In 2020, when I got the hard drive, and then I brought in Steve Bannon to help me get it published, and we couldn't get it published.
Except for The Post.
He and I and several others went on all of the, let's call them the new media, the independent media.
I described it to Steve as, there's an iron curtain of censorship on the hard drive.
And it's our job to go around it.
Go on local television stations.
Go on the podcasts that existed then.
Go on the independent shows that existed then.
Even Fox was Partially censoring us, and then completely.
And on the day of the election, we were kind of happy to see that 50% of the American people were aware of the hard drive, even though it had never been on ABC, CBS, CNN. This election, the saturation of the Trump message was about 85%.
If we had the media then That we had now.
We would have gotten the hard drive out in 2020.
It would have gotten to 85% of the American people and we never would have had the issue of was the election stolen, wasn't it stolen?
Because that hard drive, the minute you look at it, you realize he's, whoever you want to describe it or the dimensions of it, he's a very big crook.
I mean, it would prove immediately that he's lying about not knowing about his son's business.
There's even his own voice In a message that he left, it was on describing his son's Chinese business.
It would have destroyed him.
And polls taken afterwards said that 20% of the people that voted for him would have voted against him.
So we already are at a stage where we can contest with the...
I always find we change the names, you know, the legacy media, the deep state media, the organized media.
Their power...
To control an election in 2020, they couldn't control this one.
They tried as hard.
I mean, they tried very hard.
I mean, between them and the Biden people, I mean, in some ways they went further.
They prosecuted him four times.
They convicted him.
The American people elected a convicted fellow as president of the United States because they didn't believe in the conviction.
Not only that, the conviction helped him.
You know, the last case is in Arizona, and they were going to put him in the case in Arizona, which I happened to be in, but not him.
And they left him out because they decided if they prosecuted him one more time, he might win by acclamation.
He was set to go into that case.
And the Democratic National Committee told the Arizona Attorney General, because it's a carbon copy of the case in Georgia, Everybody else is in there.
I'm in there.
Mark Meadows is in it.
Professor Eastman.
And then a whole bunch of people we never met.
The people in Georgia and the people in Arizona I'm indicted with and so-called conspired with, I never met them.
I'm only learning who they are now.
So it worked this time.
And that media you're talking about, the new media, which has yet to really be formed, That's going to be the most powerful media.
It's going to be even more powerful in 28.
It just keeps growing and American people get their information the way they want to.
And I think that is safer.
That is safer for free speech.
A convicted felon was elected president.
That shows you a number of things.
It's just not working.
They're not able using lawfare, using propaganda, using censorship.
It doesn't work anymore.
And what I think it indicates, what might flow out of it, is that This space won't only be about the communication of a message, it will be about the establishment of power.
That's my prediction, Rudy, that people say we want to run this community according to these principles.
I feel that it could move from advocating the message of political groups to becoming political groups.
In a way, that's already been foreshadowed by Syriza in Greece, which happened to be left-wing.
Podemos in Spain happened to be left-wing.
And I would say some of the right-wing movements across Europe right now is you'll start to see, I think, political figures emerging from this media.
Trump, I think, is by far and away an unprecedented outlier.
But I think you'll get political figures in the UK and across Europe That can essentially govern online, communicate online, bypass, expose legacy media, expose corrupt judiciary.
That's where I think it will go.
And in the end, I guess it will start to be able to change laws and not necessarily...
Well, in my country, it could establish a constitution.
In yours, you know, it could be used to enforce or alter one.
I think you're absolutely right.
I think that's the direction.
And I think in America, it's right wing of necessity because this is where the right wing had to go.
Like when I described to you, when we had to put out the hard drive, we were banging our heads up against a stone wall.
We had to go around the stone wall.
And there weren't anywhere near the number of outlets we have now.
But there were enough, so we got a decent message out.
And since then, they've increased by quantum leaps.
And at some point, at some point, Somebody will try to corrupt that too.
And we'll have to watch out and be careful and maybe make another change.
But I mean, the reality is that for now, this is the way to fix it.
So we preserve maybe the most important thing that guarantees our democracy, and that's free speech.
I think the rights coming from God work this way.
If you believe in God, but our founders also said that these rights come from nature.
You can believe in God or not, but the rights come from, they belong to you because you're a human being.
And they would often say, from the supreme being or nature's God.
And so some of our founding fathers were very religious, some were modestly religious, and some were agnostics.
Probably not atheists at that point, but agnostics.
And so it doesn't, even constitutionally, we do have an alternative.
They come from God or nature.
But they're beyond government.
Human beings didn't give this to us.
Either God gave this to us or the fact that we're human.
These are the minimum things that the dignity of a human being requires.
Free speech.
How about being convicted by a unanimous jury?
I like to point out that Donald Trump is the first guy since before the Magna Carta that was convicted either in England or America of a crime without a unanimous verdict.
I mean, Yeoman in 14th century England had unanimous verdicts.
But he was convicted in that case without a unanimous verdict.
They gave the jury a multiple choice.
Four different possibilities.
We don't know if they're unanimous on any of them.
It would be impossible for an intellectually honest American jurist not to reject that.
It would be impossible for a jurist in your country not to reject that.
That's one of the things we share in common.
A criminal case, unanimous verdict.
It's 800 years old, and they changed it for Donald Trump.
Yes.
It's brilliant to see how what they call democracy was no longer the will of the people, but a set of institutions that they considered to be their fiefdom and their principality to utilize however they saw fit. but a set of institutions that they considered to be And like you, Rudy, I'm generally optimistic that the will of the people is towards freedom.
People believe in freedom and will do their best to identify and recognize which characters or totems or leaders that appear temporarily on the public stage, like all of us must, one day as an attorney general or a public prosecutor, one day as the mayor of New York, next as an advocate for a powerful populist leader, It's amazing to talk to you always, Rudy, because you've been inside of so many lives.
I think the analysis is enormously important because I think in order to straighten it out, we have to understand it.
And the only way we can understand it is by analyzing it, talking about it, reading about it, asking about it.
I mean, you have to understand what's happening to you to fix it.
Yeah.
I think, you know, there's a great deal of confusion.
And this election has helped to...
Clarify it.
And we're lucky that this election went the right way.
I mean, up until the moment that I saw the first returns come in, people would ask me, if you had talked to me the day before the election, I would have told you, under all usual circumstances, all objective circumstances, he's going to win, and he's going to have a landslide, or as much of a landslide as you can have in a divided country.
He'll take everything he can possibly take.
However, I'm not sure.
I'm not sure now.
I'm not sure after what happened in 2020.
And I'll be sure after it's over.
So it worked out right.
And it has us off on the right start.
And it's a question of what we do with it now.
Rudy Giuliani.
Thank you so much for sharing your insights and expertise with us again.
Thank you.
Enjoy it as usual.
Yes sir.
Look forward to it next time.
Yeah, me too.
Thank you.
Good luck with everything you're confronting.
I hope you get your grandfather's watch back.
I pray that you do.
I hope that's not gone forever.
Thank you.
Thank you so much for joining us, Rudy Giuliani.
Remember, we have conversations like this every single week.
And if you're an Awakened Wonder, you can join me for Christian conversations that will really change the way you think about Christianity.
Tucker Carlson so far, Ruslan, and my teacher J. John did it this week, as well as Eric Metaxas and Carl Lenz.
There's been brilliant conversations.
Also, let me know who you want to see conversations with.
Okay, well that's it.
It's been a fantastic week.
If you haven't watched my conversation with Robert Malone yet, the one we put up yesterday, you should watch it now.
You'll feel better educated after it.
Let me know when you're full of our conversation with Rudy Giuliani and let me know who you want to see next.
We'll be back with you Monday, of course.
Not for more of the same, but for more of the different.
Until then, if you can, stay free.
Export Selection