All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 27, 2024 - Sean Hannity Show
37:03
Future of NYC Mayor Adams - September 26th, Hour 2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
Hour two, Sean Hannity Show, 800-941.
Sean, if you want to be a part of the program, we are keeping our eyes on this hurricane now bearing down on the east coast of Florida into the Tampa, Tallahassee area, right into the panhandle up through Georgia.
We just had Governor DeSantis on.
I just urge everybody to please be safe.
And I know it's for a lot of people, you want to reluctantly resist any government order, but it's always better to be safe than sorry.
I don't need you or anybody in your family getting hurt.
It's just not worth it.
They are expecting some storm surges as high as and swells up to 20 feet.
Winds now.
It's a category three hurricane that we're looking at, and it's going to be rough for a couple of days.
Storm surges are expected to be very high.
We had Weatherbell.
I've been checking in with Weatherbell.com's Joe Bastardi about all of this.
So we'll continue to monitor every bit of it.
We did have the special counsel in the J6 case bring forward the full case post the Supreme Court decision regarding presidential immunity that had to be altered severely.
And it seems like the main argument is, well, this was, even though he was president, every action that Donald Trump took was really candidate Trump.
I don't think it was candidate Trump.
It was President Trump.
And, you know, but for a Obama-appointed judge that, you know, doesn't seem to care about what has always been a 60, some say even 90-day, supposedly informal policy of the Department of Justice not to bring politically charged information to the public in the days leading up to an election.
They're doing that anyway.
We'll talk to David Schoen in a minute.
He points out rightly that it's a violation.
It violates a provision in the DOJ manual.
But the bottom line is, if the judge allows this information to be put before the public, there is no meaningful opportunity for President Trump to rebut any and all of this.
And the media is going to quote it, and then Donald Trump will be under a gag order.
I mean, you simply can't make it up.
In another case, we have out of New York, the appeals court in New York.
Some of the judges, one judge, you know, about this Judge Ngoron, the guy that stuck to the $18 million value of Mar-a-Lago, ignored a top realtor.
He wouldn't even allow the guy to testify, a guy that knows Palm Beach real estate as well as anybody, that this property was much closer in value to $1 billion than $18 million, and he's just stuck to this ridiculous valuation.
And then, of course, the $500 million judgment.
One judge called the penalty troubling, wondered if the state's policing and private business transactions amounted to deterrence or mission creep.
Anyway, a five-judge panel in the state's intermediate in the appeals court in New York City quizzing the attorneys representing President Trump in the AG's office during oral arguments.
And at times, the judges appeared dubious of both sides, but often judges and appeals courts ask pointed questions of both sides.
I can't imagine they're not going to see the bias in this case.
Certainly, at some level, this is going to be overturned.
I don't think there's any doubt about that.
Also, we are following the story of the mayor of New York City, the first mayor in New York City history, who has been charged with accepting bribes from wealthy foreign business people, including at least one Turkish government official.
He's also accused of campaign finance fraud.
You know, just reading from what we know so far, Eric Adams, the defendant, compounded his gains from the straw contributions by using them to defraud New York City and steal public funds.
New York City has a matching funds program that matches small dollar contributions from individual city residents with up to eight times their amount in public funds to give New Yorkers a greater voice in elections.
Adams campaigns applied for matching funds based on what were known straw donations, fraudulently obtaining, it goes on, as much as $2,000 in public funds for each illegal contribution.
Adams and those working at his discretion falsely certified compliance and applicable campaign finance regulations, despite Adams' repeated acceptance of straw donations, relying on the concealed nature of the illegal contributions to falsely portray his campaigns as law-abiding as a result of those false certifications.
The mayoral campaign received more than $10 million in public funds.
And that and a series of people around the mayor also being charged.
And I mean, this has now been ongoing.
This is not a surprise.
We played in the last hour under no circumstances.
Eric Adams says, will he resign?
Listen to what he says.
Is there any circumstance by which you would resign?
No, no, listen, I'm here.
I was elected by the people of this city, over 700,000 strong.
And this is a city.
This is a city that is extremely resilient.
This is a city that we have gone through some difficult and hard times, and we're going to continue to move forward as a city.
And that's what that's shown.
I think the narrative here that's missing, 10 months ago, when my phones were removed, we have not gone backwards.
We have not stood still.
We showed how we operate during difficult times.
And when you say, who's the point person that's going to deal with business communities, who's going to deal with the business surveillance of the city?
The point person is Eric Adams.
I'm the mayor of the city of New York.
And I have a competent team.
You're not a competent team of deputy mayors, a company, a competent team of people are going to continue to lead forward.
And we're excited about that.
All right.
So he's being defiant.
And now a series of high-ranking officials in his administration gone charged.
And, you know, and this is going to be a big deal.
He also claims that his comments about how illegal immigration and that crisis is going to destroy New York City has put him at odds with federal prosecutors.
You know, I think he's got a big problem before him.
It's kind of going to be a cut-and-dry case.
Either he took the money, knew about it, or didn't.
And I would assume they wouldn't go after a sitting governor if they didn't have substantial amount of evidence, but you never know.
And joining us now to weigh in on all of this, we have David Schoen, civil liberties attorney, former counsel for President Trump, Mark Bernovich back with us, former federal and state prosecutor and AG of the great state of Arizona.
Welcome both of you.
David, let's start with you.
And first, let's start with Eric Adams and what you see going on there.
Well, it's a very complicated situation.
Obviously, it's a very long speaking indictment.
They obviously have interviewed and gotten to so-called cooperate some of his aides in the past.
The details could only have come from them.
We're going to see how it plays out.
But I'll say this, and I only can speak for myself.
If he does resign, what comes after him and Mr. Williams is not going to be good for the city of New York or for the American people, quite frankly.
He's taken a very, this Germany Williams taken a very left-wing position on police conduct and on even international issues.
He weighs in on.
He's drawn a moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas, essentially.
Well, I mean, it's been New York City is, look, I left New York for a lot of reasons, not the least of which I was not liked at all in New York City.
And I didn't spend much time there because I lived in Long Island.
But when I did spend any time in New York City, I just got to the point, Attorney General Bernovich, I just felt like anybody that was with me, that I was putting them in jeopardy.
I mean, you wouldn't believe the hostility that exists for me in that city.
Well, New York City is the kind of places where good ideas go to die.
And unless you're an illegal immigrant, I think the government essentially doesn't care about you anymore.
They're people's personal safety, personal spaces, and everything else.
I mean, I do think that perhaps Mayor Adams' biggest crime was not including any kickback or cash for the big guy, if you know what I mean.
I mean, even Hunter Biden knows better than that.
And so it really, timing-wise, I talk about this all the time as a former prosecutor.
You look at the three T's, timing, type, and theory of a case.
The fact that Mayor Adams had come out and said some derogatory things about the Biden administration's border policies, timing a suspect.
The fact that you have a type of case where literally, just like with President Trump, they're going back a decade to try to find stuff that's really, quite frankly, beyond the statute of limitations, should be really troubling.
And then you look at this theory of this case.
My goodness, Sean, it's going on boondoggles and, you know, it's a crime that half the people in Washington, D.C. better lawyer up right now.
I mean, come on.
And, you know, the reality is, is that I think that Mayor Adams is probably, you know, even demanding to stay at the St. Regis, his defense is going to be all he wants is the same hotels that illegal migrants are getting from the Biden administration.
Yeah, I mean, one of the conversations they have is Adams to Turkey.
The promoter stated in part, fundraising in Turkey is not illegal, but I think I can raise money for your campaign, quote, off the record.
The Adams staffer inquired, well, how do you declare the money here?
And the promoter responded, he won't declare it, or we'll make a donation through an American citizen in the U.S., a Turk, or I'll just give cash to him in Turkey, or I'll send it to America, and he will make a donation to you.
And then the staffer replied, I think he wouldn't get involved in such games.
They may cause a big stink later on, but I'll ask anyways.
And the staffer then asked, how much do you think would come from you?
And the guy said $100,000.
And the Adams staffer said, $100,000?
Do you have a chance to transfer that here?
We can't do it while Eric is in Turkey.
And then he said, well, let's think.
So, I mean, if that conversation is correct, that doesn't sound particularly good in my view, David Schoen.
No, I think that's right.
There's a tremendous amount in this long indictment that sounds very bad and sinister.
But remember, the prosecutors got to pick and choose what they would put in, and they get to choose the context and so on.
And, you know, Sean, I don't know if there's any bigger defender of the presumption of innocence than you are on your show every day when the issue comes up.
And so that's where we are now in this case.
You know, he's presumed innocent, and unless and until they can prove otherwise, he has been, has had a career of being a law and order man.
And let me add one thing, Sean, is that I think it's important to remember, look, when I worked at the GO, when I worked at the Department of Justice as an assistant U.S. attorney, there was a time not that long ago, 10, 15 years ago, where everyone respected DOJ and knew that they would never bring a case unless they were 99% sure they were going to get a successful conviction and they knew someone was guilty.
Unfortunately, I think in the last decade, we have seen a lot of politicization of the Department of Justice.
And that's why I think a lot of people are more suspect when they see this stuff and they look at the timing.
And, you know, obviously you look at things in the best light.
The prosecutor, like David just said, they get to pick and choose what's part of that indictment.
But the reality is that, you know, where's the quid pro quo?
I mean, you know, you've got this issue with, you know, this money from Turkey or these trips or whatever, but did that affect his official conduct?
And then you have the second question I think that's being glossed over by everyone is why in the heck are New York City taxpayers subsidizing politicians with all these matching funds?
Like millions of dollars is essentially welfare for politicians.
To me, that's a much greater crime in a lot of ways.
Yeah, I think so.
What is your reaction to the appeals court?
I know it's hard to read questioning from judges on an appeals court of the Supreme Court.
Do you, David Schoen, do you interpret anything from what the judges said in this particular case?
I'd say the one line that really kind of stood out to me was you had one judge on the court calling the president's penalty troubling and wondering if the state's policing of private business transactions amounted to deterrence or mission creep.
That's a pretty powerful line.
Right.
I agree 100% with what you said in your introduction.
This judgment cannot stand on appeal.
I've said that to the folks involved, I've said that all along.
This is a very broad executive law, this section, 6312.
They call it, you know, fraud, except that it doesn't require any material misstatement, any reliance, any loss by any victim, which is also something that the court noted today.
They asked whether this law has ever been applied in a situation where there's no loss of any kind.
But I'll tell you this also.
I think there's an issue in this case that the lawyers have missed.
And I think it's a very important one for the American public.
And that is 6312, according to a decision by that New York Supreme Court, a different judge, Judge Ramos, on the same court as Engron, has said there's no right to a jury trial here because damages are incidental to it.
It's really something for injunctive relief to stop a business practice and all of that.
In this case, the hundreds of millions of dollars under no circumstances could be considered incidental.
And in 2021, Judge Stanton in the federal court, in the U.S. court for the Southern District of New York, had the same statute before him in federal court, and he held that there is a right to a jury trial.
So a court literally a block away held there's a right to a jury trial, and here they've held there's no right to a jury trial.
Just a judge, politically appointed, elected judge, can make this decision to really strip a company of hundreds of millions of dollars when the banks made money and were tickled to death to make these loans.
It's so true.
Last word we'll give to you, Attorney General Bernovich.
Yeah, I think there's all sorts of issues on appeal.
Obviously, there's a statute of limitations issue.
There's the fact that this is an unprecedented crime.
You can't even point out the victims.
You can't explain it in 30 seconds or less.
And frankly, there's an Eighth Amendment, 14th Amendment issue that the U.S. Supreme Court has been very in tune to.
When you have these excessive fines, they essentially end up acting like a criminal penalty.
And the fact that literally every day there's, what, $114,000 in interest and penalties?
I mean, it just really shocks the conscience.
So I can't imagine any federal court will, especially the U.S. Supreme Court, will allow this to stand.
All right.
Appreciate both of you.
Attorney General Bernovich and David Schoen.
Quick break.
Donald Trump, we expect at the bottom of the hour will carry that for you and much more straight ahead.
You're watching Hurricane Helene now headed, barreling a category three towards Tallahassee, the panhandle up into Georgia.
We'll continue to cover and monitor.
We expect Donald Trump at the bottom of the half hour with oppressor.
We'll get to your calls.
We expect President Trump in a press conference at the bottom of the hour, 800-941 Sean is our number.
We are monitoring Hurricane Helene, now a Cat 3 officially, as it is barreling now towards the coast near Tallahassee and into the panhandle and then up straight through Georgia.
Georgia is expected to get hit very hard.
We don't know what some of the storm surges are going to be like, but we've got to pay very close attention to that.
If you're in these areas, I just urge you to please, you know, put your safety, security, your family safety, security above, I don't know, any thought that, well, I'm just going to ride this out.
Category three can become a category four.
And you know what?
People die during hurricanes, and just don't let it be you.
You know, I used to say to my kids all the time, don't be the kid throwing up in the bushes.
Is that a good advice, Linda, or is that bad?
No, I think that's great advice.
You should never be the one throwing up in the bushes.
All the years I became a bartender, there's certain rules that I learned.
You want to know what they are?
Drinking 101, drinking 102, drinking 103, or 104.
101 is everybody has a number.
Everybody's number is different.
How do you define a number?
The number of drinks somebody can have, and it's unique to every individual.
It's weird.
But the number of drinks you can have before it changes or alters your personality.
That's how you define your number.
Now, I would say probably your number is very low.
Is that a fair statement?
My number?
Yeah.
Oh, no, my number is very high.
That's such a crock.
I worked in bars and restaurants for how many years?
Right, but if you have a drink and a half, you get this giddy smile on your face that just normally isn't.
Well, there's a difference between buzzed and drunk, in my opinion.
Okay.
Where your personality changes is when the number kicks in.
Now, it manifests itself in different ways for different people.
And, you know, God forbid I say different sexes, right?
For men, it tends to manifest itself in, you know, them being macho and aggressive.
And for women, this is just my observation.
I'm giving you my observations as a bartender all those years.
They tend to be a little more flirtatious.
That's what I observed in all the years that I tended bar, which was a lot of years.
And so that's like 101.
Know your number and don't go past whatever your number is.
Number two, don't ever do shots.
It's stupid.
If you do shots or if you mix alcohol, that is just really dumb.
That's actually not mixing your alcohol is number two.
If you want to start out with beer, stick with beer.
You're going to do wine, stick with wine.
If you don't do shots and you don't mix your alcohol, don't ever drink a Long Island iced tea.
Or if you go to New Orleans, don't drink a hurricane.
It's the dumbest drink you can ever have.
And it almost guarantees you're going to get pretty Adam Schiff-faced and you're going to be puking in the bushes, which is rule number three, 103, which is, you know, I tell my kids, don't be the idiot that's throwing up in the bushes because you drank too much.
And, you know, I mean, kids are always going to make mistakes and experiment when they're in college and drinking.
I don't know how you avoid it, really.
I mean, there's certain things you just got to accept as a parent that you don't even, I don't even want to know about it.
Does that make sense to you?
Because you have older kids.
I do.
I mean, I have two kids in college, and I know that I never drank in college, but I was an anomaly.
You know what I mean?
But I know they're drinking.
I know.
I was 12 years old washing dishes every Friday, Saturday, Sunday night, 13 hours a cook.
Every Friday, Saturday, Sunday night.
I'd finish at 2, 2.30 in the morning.
I'd go sit at the bar.
I'm 12 and 13 years old.
It is a little weird.
I'm not going to lie to you.
I mean, we never let any of the younger kids when we were working.
And, you know, I was a cocktail waitress.
I didn't let any of the younger kids drink.
All right.
Well, whatever.
They didn't really care.
It wasn't a big deal.
I was a bartender.
The legal drinking age was 18, but I started when I was 17, and nobody really cared.
Well, yeah, that still happens today.
Okay.
So, you know, now, did I have to learn a few lessons the hard way?
Unfortunately, yeah, I did.
And more than a few, to be very honest.
And, you know, I did realize that I actually had a high number, but I just then became a lightweight as I got older.
I just don't feel like doing it.
Listen, it's not good for you.
Drinking too much is not good for you.
Honestly, you should eliminate it from your diet if you're able, but if you want to have one or two on the weekend, go for it.
Knock yourself out.
Not listening.
One or two on the weekend.
One or two a night.
Oh, God.
You can't do that.
No.
It's terrible for you.
It's bad for you.
I can't if I want to maintain my incredible figure.
That's just a joke.
No, it's, you know, the only dumb thing I do is stupid jewels, but I've been switching to the gum.
I'm making the transition.
Anyway, let's get to our busy phones while we wait for President Trump at his press conference.
Janice is in Louisiana.
Hey, Janice, how are you?
Glad you called.
Sean, it's a privilege to get to speak to you, man.
I haven't talked to you in so long.
And I want to tell you that I think you are doing a fabulous, wonderful, and marvelous job with this campaign talking about letting people know about Kamala and your Kamala files and everything here and what she has to say.
When she says she hasn't changed her views on things, she really means that.
She really does.
I could talk to you all day.
Here's the problem.
And we're going to call you back later in the show or tomorrow because it's not fair, but because President Trump's beginning his press conference, okay?
And God bless you.
You've made my day.
Here's President Trump at Trump Tower.
You make mine, too.
Have a good day.
For nearly four years, we have been living through the worst border crisis in the history of the world.
There's never been anything like it, which has brought untold suffering, misery, and death upon our land.
The architect of this destruction is Kamala Harris.
When you look at the four years that have taken place after being named border czar, Kamala Harris will be visiting the southern border that she has completely destroyed, from what I understand tomorrow.
Why would she go to the border now, playing right into the hand of her opponent?
I mean, you take a look at this.
Why would you do that?
There can be no justification for what she's done.
There's nobody saying, oh, gee, she's done a fabulous job.
She's done the worst job probably in the history of any border, not just our border.
She keeps talking about how she supposedly wants to fix the border.
We would merely ask, why didn't she do it four years ago?
It's a very simple question.
I can say this with everything she has.
She talks about borders and taxes and all these different things.
Her policies on tax, by the way, are terrible, but I can say it for everything.
Why didn't she fix it almost four years ago?
She's got no plans, got no talent, got no ability to do it.
I'm here today to present you with the facts and only the facts about how Comrade Kamala Harris willfully threw open our border, helping to virtually destroy our country.
Our country's never been under siege like this.
Four years ago, Kamala inherited the most secure border in U.S. history with the lowest illegal immigration on record.
You know the chart.
I love that chart.
I love that chart.
I probably wouldn't be here right now except for that chart.
Those who violated our borders were captured, detained, and quickly sent back home under the Trump administration.
But on her first day in office, Kamala Harris terminated every single Trump policy that sealed and secured the border.
She ordered an immediate stop to the completion of the border wall.
It was almost complete.
We built hundreds and hundreds of miles of wall, and it worked.
I always said walls and wheels.
Everything else is obsolete, but walls and wheels, and this wall worked.
And we were ready to build and throw up another 200.
Could have been done within weeks.
Everything was complete.
The wall was all built, ready to go, laying there, ready to be fixed.
All they had to do is throw it up, and you would have had an extra 200 miles of wall, far more than I promised in the election.
She suspended all deportations.
She instituted catch and release across the entire southern border.
And we had catch and release also, but we released in Mexico.
Her catch and release was to release in the United States and never see them again.
She sent Congress a bill demanding amnesty for all illegal aliens, every single illegal alien, even if they're criminals, even if they're murderers, even if they're drug dealers, human traffickers.
She wanted amnesty for everybody.
Radical left.
This is a radical left person.
She terminated Remain in Mexico, something that took me and a lot of talent, a lot of other people, but it took a lot of talent to get from the President of Mexico, a good man.
But we got it.
You had to remain in Mexico.
You couldn't come in under any circumstance.
You weren't allowed into the United States until we checked it out, and many people did not come in and were not allowed to come in because they didn't check out.
They were drug dealers.
They were gang members.
They were in jail for murder in a couple of cases.
We wouldn't let them in.
And she canceled every safe third agreement.
Anybody here, I think, would know what that is, but that was a horrible thing that she did.
And she canceled Remain in Mexico.
Here we have something, Remain in Mexico.
You have to explain it.
She canceled.
She ordered ICE to halt the removal of virtually all criminal aliens, including MS-13 gang members, the worst gang anywhere in the world, they say.
Evil, evil gang.
She ended all of our programs that we instituted to stop child and woman trafficking.
The trafficking is at a level now that it's never been before.
I had it down to the lowest level it's been in 32 years because we had such a strong border they couldn't get through.
But now it's the worst it's been in 32 years plus.
And then she lost, and this is probably the worst statistic of them all, 325,000 children.
Think of that.
Three and a half years.
She lost 325,000 children.
And they're either dead, being sold into sex slavery, or just plain missing.
Think of the number, 325,000.
If that were a Republican instead of her, and she was the border czar, she says, well, I wasn't the border czar.
She was.
And tomorrow she'll make a case that, oh, she did a fairly good job.
She can't say much.
You can't justify it.
She should save her airfare.
She should go back to the White House and tell the president to close the border.
He can do it with the signing of just a signature on a piece of paper to the Border Patrol.
Instead, she's going there to try and convince people that she wasn't as bad as everybody knows she was.
She was the worst in history.
Grossly incompetent, weak, and ineffective.
And all you have to do is ask Brandon Judd, Border Patrol.
You could ask any of them.
Tom Holman, we had the best people that we've ever had, and they said Trump was the best president on the border ever.
She ripped up every single reform that we put in place to stop asylum fraud.
She ended a travel ban that was unbelievably successful.
We had the strongest travel ban anywhere in the world, and it was upheld by the United States Supreme Court.
She canceled Title 42.
That was a medical title.
She canceled it very hard to get.
And altogether, she took 93 executive orders that I put on, all which made the border the best border we've ever had in recorded history.
And she terminated them along with the pressure.
All right, for stations along the Sean Hannity Show Radio Network, we are going to continue President Trump's press conference into the top of the hour and stay with us for continuing coverage.
In less than four years, 21 million illegal aliens at least.
That's the real number you don't hear that year.
15, 16.
Sometimes you hear 17.
The number is at least 21 million.
And on top of that, you have gotaways.
That's gottaways.
That's people that came over or got away.
And they've stormed across our border like nobody in history on any border anywhere in the world.
There's never been any border in history where you had millions of people storming us like that.
No third world country would allow it.
But she allowed it because she's incompetent.
She allowed it because she never went there.
She says she went once, but it was not the right location.
It was a location that was very mild and no danger.
She never went there.
She's going there tomorrow after almost four years.
She's going there tomorrow to try and show you what a great job she did.
But even now, the numbers are terrible.
And remember, they're flying people over, and they haven't stopped that.
They're flying hundreds of thousands of people over the border right now.
They never stopped that.
They didn't think they'd be caught, but they were two weeks ago.
From prisons and jails, mental institutions and insane asylum, all these assane asylums where you have the sickest people, mentally ill people, and terrorists at record levels.
We've never had terrorists come into our country like this.
They come and they keep coming and coming and nobody has ever seen anything like it.
People that go to the border, they look professionals and they said there's never been anything like this in the history of the world and they are destroying the fabric of our country.
She did nothing to stop any of it.
In fact, she encouraged them to keep coming.
And you know that.
For years she did.
Only recently did she say, oh, well, we're going to try and put a stop to it.
And I ask again, you know, this should be the why didn't she do it speech.
Why didn't she do it?
All of these things, including unrelated elements to what we're talking about now, like taxes, like military, like so many other things.
Why didn't she do it?
She's got plans for the future.
Why didn't she do it?
She's been there almost four years.
Kamala created a brand new program to fly in migrants from Venezuela, Haiti, and Nicaragua and resettle them in American communities, including small towns all across our nation, but in particular in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, and North Carolina.
Nobody can believe it.
These towns have been destroyed.
And the mayors of the towns and the governors of the states can't talk about it because they're embarrassed that they allowed it to happen.
In addition, through her phone app, something totally new now, it's a phone app for migrants, where migrants call in, highly sophisticated migrants.
She's allowed virtually unlimited numbers of illegals to press a button, schedule their illegal immigration appointment at our ports of entry, and show up to be released into the interior of our country.
Can anybody believe this?
And they're invading our towns.
It's an invasion of our country like no country has ever had to suffer before.
And this was purposeful.
They did this on purpose.
This was not a mistake on their part.
They did this on purpose because their policies are so wrong and so evil and so unfair.
And there's only three reasons they'd want to do that.
Number one, they're incompetent.
And I'm not sure that that's the reason.
Number two, they want it for the votes.
And number three, you know what that one is.
We don't have to talk about that one.
But there can only be a very few reasons because they're destroying our country at a level that's never been seen before.
Importantly, as part of this conjob, it's a conjob.
None of the illegal aliens she is smuggling in through the ports or on the airplanes.
Think of it.
Big jet planes loaded up with migrants flying into the middle of our country and going to Iowa and lots of other states.
They've all become border states.
We only have where it's been a mass invasion.
These were two beautiful, successful towns, idyllic.
And they're in trouble, big trouble, and very unfair.
The people want to leave.
They want to get out.
But everyone's afraid to say, I want to get out because they want to be politically correct.
And other towns just like them, hundreds of them all over America.
Americans have watched their communities destroyed by this sudden, suffocating inundation of illegal aliens.
It's an inundation.
It's an invasion.
This influx has overwhelmed our schools.
They're taking the seats of students that can no longer go there, and they don't even speak English.
They're trying to fire a lot of people and hire interpreters.
Can you believe that?
They want to get rid of some people.
They want to hire.
Springfield is looking, the mayor said it the other day, looking for interpreters because nobody in all of the 32,000 people that took into the town, think of this.
You have a town of 50,000 people, and almost instantly you have 32,000 people, in this case from Haiti.
Most of them don't speak English, so they're looking for interpreters.
You have to get them out.
We have to save our country.
You have to save these towns.
They flooded the job market with low-wage migrants, but many cases, migrants that also have horrible criminal records, murder, drug dealing, so many different things.
A lot of human traffickers.
And it's mostly human traffickers in women.
▲
Export Selection