Popular Posts

senator anything i'm saying they're constitutionally or great scholar you've argued before the supreme court alan dershowitz has said even though he disagrees with you politically you're one of the smartest debaters and students he ever had uh... am i right on the constitution john you're absolutely right what we are sitting across the board in the legal system is the weaponization in the politicization of the wet of our legal system in over two centuries of our nation's history of a president has never been indicted a former president has never been invited in in just over one year donald trump has been indicted four times bipartisan democrat prosecutors who hate his guts on top of that you have the ridiculous civil lawsuit by letitia james a partisan democrat who ran on the promise to quote get donald trump and got a four hundred and fifty million dollar judgment against him she wants to take a half billion dollars from him for an offense that injured nobody that there was no harm and that the supposed victim who made money on it were giant international banks it is absurd and and here's the most important thing to understand it is not just that democrats hate donald trump they do to be sure but the real target here is you the american voters this is an assault on democracy and democrats love to beat their chest and say we're defending democracy but the reason all of these cases are being brought is because democrats are terrified that the voters in november are going to reelect donald trump is president and they're trying to bring the entirety of the legal system to stop the voters this is the greatest assault on democracy literally in the history of our country and we're seeing it with every elected democrat quietly applauding and celebrating this assault you know uh... where's mary garland so we call the department here heads up it's called correct me if i'm wrong the department of justice i believe in equal justice under the law equal application of our laws correct me if i'm wrong in every one of those trump organization deals when they were applying for loans and applying for insurance policies there was a disclaimer in every one of them saying don't use our valuations by the way nobody led their hundreds of millions of dollars or ensuring hundreds of millions of dollars in property uh... would ever go with somebody else's valuations they have a fiduciary responsibility to do their own so you have a disclaimer in their same don't use our valuations and then if this whole case is about valuation can you explain to me how the judge to this day is still adhering to a value of mara lago at a mere eighteen million dollars when in fact you can't get it to you can buy a two acre lot on the ocean and palm beach florida that's two hundred million this has twenty two acres it has the inner coastal it has the ocean he has a historic building it's got two clubs and i might add it's in pristine condition with fifty some odd bathroom uh... bedrooms and bathrooms so you tell me senator does mary garland not have a duty does he not see what's going on uh... judges like this allowed to sit on the bench and put out half of a billion dollars in fines really is that our country of course mary garland sees what's going on but he wants this to happen mary garland is the most politicized attorney general in history this department of justice has been weaponized and and and listen i want everyone at home to think about in terms of what leticia james argued she says that trump overvalued his real estate will think about it how many of y'all have ever gotten a home mortgage if you get a whole mortgage you go to your bank and say you know what i love this house it's really pretty the backyard i love the flowers and trees i think the houses worth ten million dollars now is there a bank on earth that would say okay if it's worth ten million dollars will give you ten million dollar mortgage no they'll send an appraiser they'll look at it and they'll tell you this is what it's worth that we're giving you a penny more in this instance victim was doish bank a global multi-billion dollar company they know how to value real estate their testimony at the trial is they thought these loans were great loans they were thrilled they said donald trump was a whale they made money on them they wanted to make more loans just like it and you mentioned mara lago the idea that you and i both been to mara lago it's an incredible property the idea that it's worth eighteen million dollars you can't buy a hot dog stand in palm beach for eighteen million dollars when i last saw trumpet mara lago i told him i said i tell you what mister president i'll give you twenty million for right now i don't have twenty million but if you say yes i promise you i can raise it in sixty seconds and and of course he laughed because it is absurd it is a property that is worth hundreds of millions of dollars that's smarmy sanctimonious smiling judge is a vicious partisan who hates donald trump and he loved i'm gonna take a half billion dollars from you because i hate you rule of law be damned and did one democrat new york speak out against it and by the way who in their right mind would do business in new york because you know what first letitia james comes from donald trump but the next business owner who ticks off the democrats in power they're gonna come and take millions from you this is a catastrophic decision for the rule of law in new york senator cruz and i want people to understand that chuck schumer has made senator cruz's number one target uh... and literally tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars are going into texas to smear the senator senator uh... we need you back i'm not very happy with the number your colleagues for not being conservative uh... you have been a staunch steady uh... conservative voice in a fighter we need you back in the senate so we appreciate you being here

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

A chart/infographic titled "Lifetime contribution per immigrant:" listing regions of origin with a green or red bullet and a net dollar figure. Green (positive) entries: North America +$573,000, Scandinavia +$557,000, Oceania +$476,000, Japan +$525,000, UK +$481,000. Red (negative) entries: Somalia -$1.1 million, Caribbean -$675,000, Middle East -$624,000, Latin America -$271,000, Sub-Saharan Africa -$730,000, Central + North Africa -$700,000. A source line at the bottom attributes the figures to an "IZA study (Netherlands, 2024)". The image is a simple text/data graphic on a white background with no photos or additional imagery.

Text in image: Lifetime contribution per immigrant: North America: +$573,000 Scandinavia: +$557,000 Oceania: +$476,000 Japan: +$525,000 UK: +$481,000 Somalia: -$1.1 million Caribbean: -$675,000 Middle East: -$624,000 Latin America: -$271,000 Sub-Saharan Africa: -$730,000 Central + North Africa: -$700,000 Source: IZA study (Netherlands, 2024)

Described automatically. The words above are a machine's reading of the picture, not Trump's.

So does Team Trump have a strong case here. We're gonna ask Sol Weisenberg former white white water deputy independent council on a Fox News contributor So what do you think does he have a strong case here? And what does happen next in this time frame? Well, I'll put it to you this way I Understanding I'm not an expert on New York civil fraud law, but it seems to me. There's some real constitutional problems with 355 million dollar Judgment when there is no victim no financial loss of any kind I think that is a you have a ripe argument you have an argument for a substantive due process violation But the question is has this been preserved at trial? That I'm not I'm not sure of but it just seems to me to be an outrageous Amount given the judges findings that there's no there's no victim no monetary victim here His team says Sol the case quote raises serious legal and constitutional questions Regarding fraud claims findings without any actual fraud So there's a lot of discussion about the message. This is sort of sending businesses In New York or businesses that potentially want to do business in New York Steve Moore was our guest yesterday as an economist And he weighed in on that discussion over the message this lawsuit sends listen These kind of liberal rulings make it so difficult for people to do business there New York needs to restore its greatness But it's not it's not a downward slide and I don't understand why the governor and why a judge would make this decision At a time when New York has to be attracting businesses back not not repelling them Do you think there's anything to that? So all this this debate seems to be growing right now on those who think this is going to send a message to Business owners not to do business here in New York Well, I think the bigger message is it's going to send a message to certain businesses and business owners if you are a Radical conservative or if forget about what your politics are if you if you end up Offending or insulting whatever the current woke orthodoxy is what will happen to you keep in mind? There was no there was no jury here and the judge crows about this in his opinion judge Inger on he says I don't need a jury under under New York law, but that's based on a 2011 opinion that said you don't need a jury Because this is an equitable remedy that means we're not and that monetary damages are incidental, but that isn't what happened here the monetary damages were 55 million dollars so that stands that law on its head and I think that they do have again a Potential constitutional argument here a very strong one if they appropriately raised it at trial So this means more than half of Trump's New York City portfolio could be wiped out next month And that would include two golf resorts a 248 million dollar Tower at the 40 Wall Street building is penthouse at Trump Tower We put some of those up on the screen. This is obviously what's at stake It appears the ladies at the view are having a field day with this Trump civil ruling listen here Trump is going to use this judgment to say look it's a witch hunt they're trying to bankrupt me those other cases are also witch hunts Into some of the public that's gonna resonate. I do think and this is not due to any emotion towards Trump I think the punishment was excessive this Ruling to the number it has been held is slightly playing into the optics that this was political Gee well if they've lost the view on the case they're making here with this fine to Trump I mean never they lost everybody excessive says the ladies at the view Well, you know forget about the optics for a minute It's it's the substance of what was done here And the other argument you mentioned earlier is basically under this special statute That's been in existence for several years. You don't have to have any of the traditional elements of fraud To bring a fraud case such as you know a victim material Reliance so focus on the substance is what I would say and it's outrageous. There's no way you can defend this judgment Wow Really appreciate your analysis on that song great to have you on the program today. Thanks for joining us

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

-To stop the deadly drugs that are poisoning our people, I will deploy the US Navy to impose a full fentanyl blockade on the waters of our region. I had meetings with President Xi. He was gonna give the death penalty to anybody sending fentanyl into the United States. And he was all set to do it, and then we had a rigged election. He was all set, and then nobody obviously followed up. The drug cartels are waging war in America, and we will destroy those cartels. They're gonna be destroyed.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I think first of all, this whole New York justice system bill is fraudulent in the sense that these are elected Democrats. She is an elected Democrat who, as you point out, campaigned for office on a vow that she would use the power of the state to get him, which is the kind of a Soviet way of going about your business. The judge is an elected Democrat. So the whole system is not like what we have in the federal system where you have appointed prosecutors and appointed judges who are vetted by the Senate, at least in the hope that it will ensure that they won't use their power in an abusive way. In this system, they're actually electing people on a promise of going after individuals, individuals who happen to be their political enemies. So that should be troubling enough. But the other thing is, just in terms of like a sort of Eighth Amendment punishment principle, where you have in this case a situation where the penalty they're talking about is so out of whack with the infraction that it ought to back everybody up. I mean, if you want to tell me that maybe they should fine Trump a million dollars because he inflated his assets, you know, it wouldn't be my way of doing a system, but fine. That's not what they're talking about here. They're talking about in a case where you have no victims of fraud, discouraging him of a quarter of a billion dollars or more of profits and putting him out of business under circumstances where there's not a single person or a single entity that actually got defrauded here. There's also this controversy about a gag order and telling President Trump he can't

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.