Search Posts

which it's election interference at the highest level. It's in disgrace. It's in coordination with the White House and Joe Biden, because you can't win a campaign fairly. And we're going through it. I think it is indeed a terrible witch hunt. We're going to have a news conference a little bit later on. As you know, I want to speak. I want to make this summation. At this moment, the judge is not letting me make this summation because I'll bring up things that he doesn't want to hear. And it's a very unfair drought. Nobody's seen anything like this. I don't have ever seen anything like this. We have a situation where a statute was used that doesn't give me a jury, so I have no jury. I really have no rights, and it's -- and nobody thinks it's constitutional. People -- legal scholars are writing about it. Like, it's something they've never seen before. So, it's interference. It's political interference. And it's something that shouldn't be allowed. So, I am hoping to speak and to help my lawyers reveal all of the defects of this case. It should have never been brought. Very, very strong financial statements. They thought it was the opposite. They had no idea because I'm a private company, and then they saw them knock their socks off. You couldn't believe it. But great financial statements. Everything is good. We have a level of detail in our defense that nobody has ever had. This is a case that you had never been brought up, and it was brought up. And it's very unfair. And it's very bad for New York State. Companies are fleeing. People are fleeing. The streets are driving. And Letitia James -- that's all she thinks about is get drunk. She's been dreaming about it for years. And it's -- but now it's not the way a state should be run, because this is a state that's been in big trouble. You have all the businesses fleeing, and yet the people fleeing, the people that pay taxes, people that don't pay taxes are coming in. So it's not what you want. So I want to thank you. We're going to have a news conference today. We don't know the time. We'll notify you. But sometime in the early afternoon at 40 Wall Street. So we'll give a news conference where we can actually speak and have a microphone here, because even then, they don't want us to have. They really don't want us to speak too much. So we'll see whether or not the judge allows me to speak. Perhaps he won't, but I certainly would like to. Thank you very much. So a couple of things there. Election interference, which Hunt, you heard, hoping to speak before the judge is what he's referring to. Not so sure that's going to happen. And talking about Letitia James, the A.G., she's been all about, quote, "Get Trump." She's been dreaming about it for years. That little tidbit at the end about a news conference sometime later today at 40 Wall Street. 40 Wall Street is one of the eight properties that's been talked about in the state of New York, primarily New York City, but in the state of New York that have been under question during this civil trial there downtown. The other thing he said is that this case should never have been brought. And join us from our honor.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

-Donald Trump has just been kicked off the ballot in Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection against the United States on January 6th, and under the 14th Amendment, he's constitutionally prohibited from holding office. Therefore, Donald Trump's name will not appear on the ballot of the Republican primary in Colorado and therefore not appear on the ballot in the general election in Colorado. That is, unless the U.S. Supreme Court takes the case. Donald Trump will be appealing the ruling, and the Supreme Court has until January 4th to announce if it will take it. We expect the Supreme Court to hear it before this Colorado thing sets a precedent and affects Trump's ballot access in other states. Colorado lawsuit was filed by a Soros-funded outlet decided by an all Democrat-appointed Supreme Court and the Democrat Colorado Secretary of State within a split second was celebrating on MSNBC. -Look, I believe he incited the insurrection. There were big questions around Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, and the Colorado Supreme Court has weighed in in a very loud way. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has to apply to the presidency because, if not, it's a get-out-of-jail-free card. -The Trump campaign responded to the lawsuit just now, saying, "Democrat party leaders are in a state of paranoia over the growing dominant lead President Trump has amassed in the polls. They have lost faith in the failed Biden presidency and are now doing everything they can to stop the American voters from throwing them out of office next November. We have full confidence that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly rule in our favor and finally put an end to these un-American lawsuits." Remember, Biden won Colorado by nearly 14 points. This was never about Colorado's ballot access. This was about having a targeted lawsuit aimed at setting a precedent to knock Trump off dozens of state ballots and disqualify him by any means necessary from the presidency, therefore denying the people their right to vote. Charlie Hurt joins me now. So, we expect the Supreme Court to take the case and what do you think is going to happen, Charlie? -I think, without a doubt, they have no choice but to take up this case because -- and I think you're exactly right about this -- they're trying to set a precedent. This will open the floodgates. You'll have left-wing lunatic states all around the country trying to do the exact same thing, and you're exactly right there. This has very little to do with ballot access in the general election. It has to do with barring Donald Trump from getting the Republican nomination. I thought his statement was really interesting where he said Democrat leaders have lost faith in Joe Biden. That's true, but Democrat leaders have also lost faith in democracy, and that's what we're seeing in Colorado today. The Democrats in Colorado are so afraid of allowing American voters to vote and pick the next president. They are willing to do extrajudicial things, complete highway robbery here, in order to thwart the people's choice from being on the ballot. To them, preserving democracy requires destroying democracy, and that's who we're dealing with. These people are unhinged. They're lunatics, and they're very dangerous. -Yeah, I mean, it's more than voter suppression. It's more than voter intimidation. It's the elimination of the voter. You can't vote for the guy you want to. It's as simple as that, and it's because the court ruled, in their opinion, he's an insurrectionist. He's not been charged with insurrection. He's not been convicted of insurrection. It's just their opinion that that's what happened. -Yeah, and that's such an important point. We hear the word "insurrection" thrown around all over the place. Everybody wants to sort of hide behind that, but literally Jack Smith, who would charge Donald Trump with absolutely everything, including jaywalking, if he could get away with it, didn't even charge Donald Trump or most of the rioters on January 6th with insurrection. And by the way, another thing that I think is kind of an interesting point here is that Donald Trump faced the trial that a president faces in the United States Senate over the January 6th riots. He was charged with impeachable offenses, and he was found not guilty there. And that's obviously not the same as a court of law, but that is a very significant factor in determining whether or not this guy committed insurrection or whatever. But the other thing I think is also interesting is that these people are -- they are so determined to thwart democracy and to prevent people from voting for who they want to vote for that, to them, January 6th, that was the Civil War to them. There is no difference between that and a four-year horrifying, the deadliest war in our history. To them, it's the same thing. If it meets their political objective, they don't care. -Do you have faith in the Roberts Court? Remember, last time, they didn't even take his appeal on the 2000 election. They just didn't even take it. -Yeah, I actually do, because I think that this court, if I were to define the Roberts Court, it is that they want -- they don't want courts determining everything. They believe -- and if you look back at the Obamacare ruling, what was the court's ruling? The ruling was, "Congress, you built this monster. You deal with it." And they kicked it back to Congress. And there's a lot of criticism about that decision. And I agree with that criticism, but the main thrust of it is that they don't want the courts running the country. They want legislatures to run the country. And we saw that with the Dobbs decision as well. And I think that if that's your mindset here, then you have to look at this crazy lunatic court in Colorado and say, "We're not gonna let these people deny Americans the right to vote for who they want to vote for in the next election." -Charlie, it would be nice if we could just have an election where no one interfered -- not the Chinese, not the Russians, not the FBI, not the CIA, not some wacko judge in Colorado. Just let the people vote like we've always done, and it shakes out how it shakes out. Is that too much to ask? -Yeah, that would actually be really nice if we didn't -- if we'd have an election where the CIA and the FBI doesn't take Kremlin talking points and run with them to rig our election. I would love that. -Yeah, just a nice, normal, clean election. -Let the children fall where they may. -Right. Thanks, Charlie.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.