FBI Director Patel reveals why Trump’s Mar-a-Lago was raided under Biden’s leadership | Recap

All right, it's been a great pleasure joining us now is FBI Director, top 10 most wanted people. You finally got her. You want to give us a moment of thanks to the FBI, great keeping us safe. Who did you nab, Cash? Hey, Larry, it's great to be with you. And under President Trump's leadership about protecting the homeland and our way of life, the FBI continues to go to the ends of the earth to chase violent criminals and terrorists and anyone who will do us harm

So today I'm prepped captured Cindy Singh who has been a fugitive for multiple years out of the state of Texas the state of Texas in 2023 charged miss Singh with the capital murder of her own six-year-old child her own six-year-old child She fled the our partners in the government of India and overseas. We literally captured her for the first time in two and a half years. She is now in the state of Texas and also thanks to our great partners at the Department of Justice and the Attorney General, she'll also be facing charges of

feloniously evading prosecution for those heinous state charges. And just to show you what the FBI and the G-Men are doing here and the women are doing here, that is our fourth top ten capture and arrest in the six months of Donald Trump's tenure. That is as many as Joe Biden did in four years. On top of that we're getting folks like people who were involved in the Abigail bombing and we've already captured one of those folks thanks to our collaboration with Director Ratcliffe. So the FBI is back to going after violent criminals and defending the homeland because

that's what Donald Trump's mandate was elected to do.

This is why, I mean I'm glad you broke the news here, more to the point, this is why the FBI should be great. You and the FBI are helping to clean up Washington, D.C., which was badly in need of getting cleaned up.

Can you say a word on that one?

Absolutely, Larry.

Look, thanks again to President Trump. Is it his initiative to clean our streets and rid him of violent criminals starting in our nation's capital? Let me speak to just briefly what the FBI did last night. FBI had 41 arrests last night, including six gun seizures and eight drug seizures. That's eight drug seizures and six guns off our streets.

Now the totality and the brilliance of the Trump administration and the Department of Justice combining forces with DE authorities, in just one week alone, we have 550 total arrests of violent criminals, including dozens of firearms and 40 drug seizures

to include homicide assaults all here in our nation's capital. Larry, I live here now for most of the time and when you walk around the streets you'll notice the difference and that's what President Trump was talking about when he said we're dirty General Todd Blanche in making these arrests with our collective partners. We're using a whole of government approach. All federal authorities are all in with our state partners. Yes, terrific stuff. We had Attorney General Bondi on the show, talked about it, and you've given us some

more data. Thank you for that. We appreciate it. Now, I got to say, though, Director Cash Patel, my judgment at least, just one Indian's judgment, came in the prior administration. I get that.

But I have a lot of questions about that. First of all, Mar-a-Lago, a president's home for heaven's sakes. How could that have happened? Those questions is the same of terms of origination. It was a total weaponization and politicization by the FBI and DOJ and the Biden administration dating back to the Obama administration that led not only to Russiagate, as you opened up with, but to the invasion of Donald Trump's private home in Mar-a-Lago. There was, as we now know, thanks to the federal courts, there was no constitutional basis

to do so. There was no lawful predicate to open that investigation. But once you let the politicians run, the FBI and DOJ, and weaponize it against their political opponents, like they have done for years against Donald Trump. Back to Russiagate and to his home, we are now showing and exposing again the weaponization.

And to your second point, once we rid, and that's what we're doing here at the FBI, ridding this place of its former leadership structure that did that weaponization, and we're giving accountability to the American peeps at a great rate to publicize what we're finding so the American public can read it for themselves. Cash, has there been a full investigation of the Mar-a-Lago invasion? Why, where, when, who did it? You talk about the leaders. I guess we can blame the leaders of the FBI but there are a lot of people on the ground. I

don't know how that all works. Question, has there been a major league investigation? I don't think the public is aware of one or if there is what the conclusions were. Look, Larry, on this one, as you know, I got to be careful in terms of what investigations we formally have open. But you know this for me, I've been on the Russiagate beat for about a decade, getting back to my time with Congressman Chairman Devin Nunes, exposing the corruption at the FISA court, the illegalities and the weaponization there, and the involvement of Hillary Clinton's

campaign to directly fund and weaponize the Department of Justice and the FBI. And what I'm committed to here as the director of FBI is to root it all out. And here's the thing, Larry, we are answering questions publicly so the public knows what we're doing in terms of whether or not we have an investigation. Putting that aside, these documents show that people in leadership positions may have lied. Brennan, Clapper, Comey, we are not going to leave one document unturned.

That is why we are going out throughout this building and throughout the country and finding these materials that they wrote down in burn bags and tried to destroy. And all of it, in my opinion, we are going to show the public, at least through the declassification process and the documents we're producing, that it is public. And whether or not this investigation is – we, me specifically, have shown the American public time and time again of the weaponization.

And now I'm the director of the FBI, to Donald Trump and we have a great Attorney General in Pam Bondi and where we can find accountability we are joining forces literally on a daily basis to do so, especially on the matters involving Russiagate. No one knows it better than the team we've built here. Listen, I know you've been on this show many times. We've talked about it on this show many times.

We've talked about it on the radio show, but Cash, can you say there is an investigation of the FBI's role in that invasion? I am of course overseeing the current matters that the FBI involved themselves with from Russiagate on, and whether or not there's an open investigation, Larry, I think you know that I can't answer that, but I think you know that our partners across the IC would not be divulging this type of information if it did not

serve some sort of use for me specifically here at the FBI I can't speak for them and of course I won't speak to any charging decisions on any matters that will come with the collaboration of our great partners at DOJ who work hand in hand with us every day. I know. All right. Let me ask a follow up, though. Have the leaders, it's under a different regime. You came in, you're there now, the leader. But have the old leaders who assigned this and directed this operation, have they been dismissed from the FBI? Every single person that has been found to have weaponized or participated in that process

has been removed from leadership positions. And if and when we find any others that are involved in this, as you know, this is a 37,000 person agency. We are going to take swift action, just like we have, and just look at the record of the people that have been dismissed for their actions and what they're saying when they get out there about how they personally opined about the

weaponization of this place just like one of Peter Strzok's friends did recently this past week. That's how we know we're finding the right folks and we're gonna keep doing it. It's not done yet but we're gonna stay on it. Alright, I get it. Thank you for that answer. I mean you're going as far as you can go. Another question. Why was Mar-a-Lago invaded? What were they looking for?

This is speculation. No one knows to this day. I mean, it happened to us several years ago. We'll probably be talking about this for years ahead. The subject of Russia came up at the Alaska meeting of the two leaders, Russia and the United States. Creating a crime where one did not exist.

The answer has been definitive. There was no crime. There was no predicate to go and invade Donald Trump's home. We have answered that definitively. Now you know me, working backwards from that point, we are going to hold people accountable who weaponized that system of justice.

Ten predators. So we can go after more terrorists. So we can find the other people involved in Abbey Gate. These are the cases that matter to the FBI, and the distractions, to put it mildly, from the prior leadership regime are what thwarted the American public's belief and credibility in the FBI.

And so when they do raids like Mar-a-Lago, now the American public knows, and we are working into those matters to say, why did you do it? We know there was no reason. Now it's time for accountability, and that's who we're talking to. And by the way, Larry, I'd like to announce on your show,

if you got nothing to hide, and you were DOJ and FBI before, you're welcome to come talk to us we're gonna come find you and we're gonna put you in an investigative position and posture that will make you feel very uncomfortable kind of like you did when you weaponized the government

the only different your mind that the progenitors of this whole Russiagate nonsense was a buck Barack Obama and be Hillary Clinton and the Clinton campaigns there any doubt about that they were B, Hillary Clinton and the Clinton campaign.

Is there any doubt about that? They were the, I mean, the Intel and the FBI ran with the ball, the media ran with the ball, but Hillary Clinton's campaign invented this whole Steele dossier and Barack Obama, you know, gave it new legs by getting a changed intelligence assessment after the election was over. Is there any doubt in your mind that that's basically correct?

No. And look at the ICA that was just declassified by Director Ratcliffe. The Intelligence Community appropriate procedures and Brennan and Clapper and Comey put their thumb on the scale and said oh this has this document has to be written in such a way that it shows such a baseline. Look that's not me saying it. That's in the documents. And that's why this investigations of this matters are. But there weren't many that did so credibly.

You bet we did.

So you bet we did. It infuriated me. It infuriated me. Okay. I listen, it's quite true. I worked for Trump.

Okay. And I'm a supporter of Trump, but I did it because this is an American thing. We have to restore the integrity of our law enforcement system here to make America, you know, great again, to coin a phrase. Kash Patel, last minute, just got to ask you this. It's a lot smaller beer than what we've been talking about. But this business is about mortgage fraud.

We had Senator Adam Smith. We got in New York the Attorney General Letitia James. Does the FBI do the investigating for mortgage fraud? Generally speaking, it's a multi-agency effort and when we receive referrals we reach out to the experts at FFHHA and all the other institutions like the Federal Reserve that you're talking about and we say, hey, if this is a matter that you want us to look at, you

got to provide us with all the documentation and we will take a thorough look at it and work with our partners at DOJ. I mean, if you have a contract, we've all done it or most of us have done it. You have a contract and it says, is this your primary residence? What's so hard about that? It's like binary.

Yes. No. Yes.

No. There's no fudging, yes or no. I don't understand what's so hard about this. There's like this disease breaking out.

Yeah, and listen, we are going to route out any sort of corruption, especially public corruption, because that's what President Trump promised the American people. And that's what this FBI is going to deliver, whether it's mortgage fraud or public corruption. I think you just saw a couple of takedowns by the FBI in the last month of two sitting mayors and police officers who were publicly involved in corruption, I believe in New Orleans and elsewhere. So that effort's not coming and we've got a lot more public corruption cases that we're

building here as we speak. FBI Director Kash Patel, thank you ever so much. We appreciate your time. I know you're a very busy chap. Good luck. God bless. Thanks, Larry. Great to be with you.

Well, the Golden State is the gold standard in a lot of things. Rampant crime, homelessness, skyrocketing cost of living, and a governor determined to stick it to the president however he can. They're now also the gold standard in unemployment. California's unemployment rate now the highest in the country at 5.5% in July, above the national rate of 4.2%.

California's tech sector is dealing with one of the toughest markets in years. Companies are getting rid of the jobs they overhired for during COVID, and a growing number of workers are getting replaced by AI. Instead of addressing it,

Newsom is blaming Trump's war on affordability and small businesses. John, I'll start with you on this. Is California going to drive the rest of the country into recession? I think this idea that it's a I that's the problem is a canard, and it's probably the policies coming out of the governor that's driving people and companies out of California.

You know, Jerry, I agree with you, but perhaps a little bit of disagreement on AI that's perhaps slow down hiring, if not resulting in a loss of jobs in tech. But the real problem is too much regulation and taxes are just too darn high in California. That's what's driving companies out. It's also the quality of life. My goodness, I mean you have all of this homelessness in San Francisco and Los Angeles and crime to worry about, influx of illegal aliens.

I've had enough of this. So people are leaving, businesses are leaving, you know, primarily taxes being way too high, the cost of living is too high, real estate's too high, in large part because of regulations. Good luck.

Yeah, and I also think another point is Gavin Newsom constantly says, we have the fourth largest economy in the world, something like that. You have the fourth largest economy in the world, and you tanked its unemployment on top of everything else you just listed.

So that is not an accomplishment of yours. And when we talk about AI, I think California is a really good example, because they are the same type of people that are pushing for a rise in the minimum wage. They want $15, $20, $25.

We are seeing AI already displace workers now. Imagine the impetus to do that when minimum wage is artificially jacked up to where the market can't actually adjust to that.

Let's go back to that theme a little bit about the Governor Newsom there trying to undermine the President. This whole gerrymandering story. Have you been following this, Brian? I've been following this indeed, yes.

So, yeah, what do you make of this?

Newsom wants to start up his own gerrymander campaign.

Well, I think it's fascinating because you can cause something like this to backfire if you're Newsom. I don't think Californians actually like what he's doing. I think they think he's doing it for himself. I love the fact that the governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger, no fan of Trump, by the way, no fan of Trump, is out there saying this isn't right. In fact,

it was Arnold Schwarzenegger who basically helped to spearhead a new way of doing districting in California that at least took it out of politicians hands. And now he's out there saying Newsom's screw- Newsom's not easy to do business there. And now you've got the problem that Newsom is creating. If a governor who has gone rogue and is working solely could see gains in some ways coming out of all of this mess because of how much people dislike Newsom's self-serving approach here.

Dan?

The all-caps social media posts from Gavin Newsom, him trying to do his penny any imitation of President Trump. The stench of desperation out of Newsom. If you needed another thing to drive people out of California, maybe that's it. When he was given his little shindig speech about the gerrymandering last week and he said Los Angeles the most diverse city in America. I'm like no not not even close. I even know that off the top of my head. I live in the JC. Everything that comes out of the

pompous pompadour's mouth is a lie. He can't even, he can't, that he ought to be careful. AI, if it's going to put, and if it is putting people out of work, it's coders, it's career software developers. Claude from Anthropic, the latest generation, Claude 4.0, which came out earlier this year. Best coding generator on the market, as a friend of mine told me, an H-bomb for careers. Making money so recklessly. If you call something AI, they're going to throw money at it.

And so other industries in tech, other areas are being starved. Look at what Microsoft just laid off a bunch of people in video games. The entire video game industry is imploding, is collapsing in on itself. That's California. What's Newsom doing about it to save it, to encourage funding? He knows all of these people up north in the valley. He can't make sure that these sectors of tech are healthy

and having money directed there, no. He's down jawbone and in front of a group of donors about nothing and it's very clear, he supports people who are in this, cuts in the country, another thing.

I just wanna give a jump bulk here on this story about David Brooks, the columnist from the New York Times saying redistricting efforts in Texas by GOP peers

is like mustard gas on democracy.

Brian.

What about Illinois?

And Massachusetts, I'm sorry, but the hypocrisy.

Like if you're going after Texas like you better that you better be way down the list of other states that you're going after and I just I will Say it again like I don't buy that doomsday because I actually think if you when you Gerrymander in ways that are fundamentally unfair it can sometimes backfire on you and it might I I don't think it's gonna backfire in Texas, frankly, but it might in California. And you, and by the way, if you do it

in a really unjust way, everybody can see it because the maps show it in all the ugly colors

and all the little snakes in the district.

I knew that would work, all right, okay.

Oh, did I get fired up enough for you?

That's what I wanted, okay. Okay, coming up, as students prepare to get back in the classroom, legal battles over school choice

are playing out across the country.

And now, it's a great pleasure joining us, General Jack Keane, Fox News Senior Strategic Analyst. General Keane, you are a busy fella, working overtime. We thank you very, very much for helping us out this evening. First question, I guess, is have you learned anything more

after the Zelensky conversation? And failing that, what is your perspective on this land swap and, you know, potential

red line? Yeah, well, a couple of things. One is I think Zelensky handled himself very well during the Oval Office meeting and certainly the introduction to the security guarantee meeting with the Europeans, which we all witnessed in stark contrast to several months ago when he managed to blow up the meeting in the Oval Office in front of international American media.

So that was a vast improvement. And I really think, which has already been said, all I can do is underscore it, is the significance of what President Trump has done here. First of all, so our audience understand, Larry, he has been talking to these European leaders

and Zelensky for weeks. And they dialogue virtually or on the phone on a regular basis. A case in point, after an exhausting day at the Alaska summit, sometime between 1 a.m. and 2.30 in the morning on Air Force One, which has very good secure comms, he spoke to Zelensky and all those European leaders for an hour and a half and finished up the conversation on the tarmac because they didn't want to leave those secure comms even though they had landed. And so this dialogue has been continuous

for some time. But bringing them together and talking to each other is always more vital than a virtual or even a phone call. So he understood that. But think of that. He calls them, it's early Saturday morning their time, and he says, listen, I want you to come to Washington on Monday and we'll have a meeting with Zelensky and we'll iron

out what these security guarantees are and what a kind of a counterofferer if Zelensky's willing to do it would look like. Well that's Saturday morning that means they're all flying Saturday Sunday to get here and they most all of them were here last night given all the security stuff I saw going on in in town last night so that's that's an amazing response given who those leaders are. But it also in my mind it demonstrates their commitment and the resolve here. They are really about this. They're dead serious. And you know Putin brought a lot of this on himself. You have one of the new NATO members there in Finland. Sweden is the other one since he went to war, NATO has now agreed to go from

2% to 5% on defense. I mean that is extraordinary. They are all in. At the last Rome meeting when everybody was physically together, the NATO leaders told our US team, look it, money is not going to be an object for us. We are in this, okay?

We're going to see this thing through. So Trump knows that and he's bringing them together for even stronger resolve and commitment going forward and to work with Zelensky here on what is adequate security guarantees. I think that conversation has to go first before Zelensky can put on the table a counteroffer to Putin which is take the Donetsk region and freeze everything else and what has he given up in that?

Nothing. Not a thing. He quote says security guarantees would be reasonable but there's no hair on any of that. He already has a spokesperson out there saying for him today, it's in the media right now, that there's no way that we will ever agree to international troops in Ukraine. So the pushback is already coming from Putin on that subject.

So there's hard work ahead. But listen, we cannot underestimate these European leaders, Zelensky and the president, working on this together to forge a deal with Putin in a trilateral meeting. They're going to go in there with a bit of the wind on their back for sure, and we'll see what comes of it.

Putin, we know who he is. He likely will not agree to anything immediately. He'll agree to study it, look at it, drag it out, deflect it with other issues, drag out negotiations.

How do we know that? That's what he's been doing for six months. So it remains to be seen. But I give the president a lot of credit for what's been happening here today. I call it War of Speed, and I think it's really quite remarkable. And you're right, every step of the way that you've described. We're going to put the map up back on the wall, the Ukraine map up. I mean, I don't see this may be a necessity. You know, some things in life are unfair. It just seems like whatever happens, Ukraine is going to be treated unfairly.

Putin is going to get virtually everything he wants, General Keene. That's my hypothesis. Feel free to disagree. But the way this momentum is going for peace, and I think, I don't know, I think the rest of the world wants peace. They want an end to this war that probably shouldn't have started in the first place.

It's going to be, some things in life are unfair. We're going to have to deal with the future. Future bridges will be crossed whenever they're going to be crossed. But I think, I think unfortunately Putin's going to get an awful lot, perhaps everything

he wants, sir.

Well, that would really be unfortunate. I think negative things would happen as a result of that for sure If these security guarantees have the teeth in it that that it should have and you know, whether the United States participants I think they should Because we already have fire brigades in there. We can slip some troops in the Ukraine easily It's a political issue in the United States, largely in the Republican Party.

I kind of get that, you know, what the issue would be here. But if you look at it from what really would get to Putin, that's one of the things for sure would get to him. And, you know, the idea that this is about forever wars, that's nonsense. If we're given the European troops a security guarantee that we're going to go war of putin uh... reattacks were already there let's add that's for a little bit more prevention from that happening by

putting at least a minimum amount of troops on the ground but i don't want to make it about the united states troops on the ground the real issue is putin here and and how he is going to deal with the that deal with the reality of this. I gotta believe, Larry,

that we have told Putin in no uncertain terms, maybe President Trump hasn't said it to ruin the relationship, but I gotta believe Rubio or one of his guys have told their counterparts, if you stiff us on this at the trilateral,

the president's gonna crush your economy. And he's got the Congress behind him to support it. And they've got to know he really means business. After his decisive attack to take down Iran's nuclear program and end the war a day later, that's a clear neon sign that he means business. And certainly he's already increasing military assistance to Ukraine.

They take it seriously that he means it on tariffs and sanctions, or otherwise he never would have asked for the meeting Putin. It was about India and the 50% tariff. And you know better than anybody, because you're my economic mentor here, that we can go into the SWIFT transactions and not shut them down in six months.

Yes. We can go at them immediately. Yes. And start taking his revenue away. Yes. And begin to put them out of business.

We can. We can clobber.

So we got we still have a hammer. Just quickly, sir. I think the security guarantee part is therefore essential because I'm you know, I'm not that optimistic about the land swap. That's why I think the security guarantee is so essential. I think I've got to.

I think President Trump is speaking. Did someone whisper that in my ear? And I've got to pardon. No, Trump's not speaking. OK, so we can finish this, General. I think the security guarantee is going to be absolutely essential.

The red line that you drew before, that's the key to preserving Ukraine and making this a, you know, making this OK. It's not going to be perfect, but it's I think that's the key. Please. You know, what's your take on that?

That's just so essential, I think.

I think it I think is the strength of the deal. And if Zelensky sees that this has really got some teeth in it, there's some troops, there's some air power support is obviously going to be intelligence. They're going to up build him militarily because China, Iran and North Korea are going to continue to arm Putin, even though there's an agreement. But I think what will happen if and if there is a commitment, I think there should be,

that it should be ratified by the Senate so it has legs beyond the Trump administration. That gives Zelensky a lot of running room, Larry, in terms of options he doesn't want to do now, but he may be willing to do if he's got that and he could trade something he probably wants his nuclear power plant back in Zabarizia and some of the terrain around that he will probably want some things back at Hirshhorn. I don't know all the things he wants to do but I'm sure he's

got a list and would he be more willing to make this deal over this key terrain and swap something out for it if he had security guarantees? Only he can answer that. But I know it's a realistic question for him to consider once those security guarantees are committed to.

Yes. General Keene, thank you, sir. I know you're on all day. We appreciate your services and your knowledge and your insights. We appreciate it very very much

We have a thing going on right now in DC We went from the most unsafe place anywhere To a place that now people friends are calling me up Democrats are calling me up and they're saying sir I want to thank you people that haven't gone out to dinner in Washington, D.C. in two years are going out

to dinner and the restaurants the last two days were busier than they've been in a long

time.

All right. There you have it. Joining us now is U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. A.G. Bondi, you must be doing something good since you federalized this Washington, D.C. story. You must be doing something good since you federalized this Washington DC story even people going out to dinner even President Trump No, maybe he went out to dinner. I don't know but I'm told wait. I say over 400 arrests

Total now 137 over the weekend and you're cleaning the homeless. Tell us about it because this is like a miracle story

Yeah, Larry. This is all done done of course at the directive of Donald Trump. He's making our world safe and he's certainly going to make our Capitol the safest place in the country. Larry, to put it in perspective, Washington DC had the fourth highest homicide rate in the country, right here in the Capitol. Six times higher than where you are right now in New York City. Higher than Chicago, higher than other major cities, and it had to stop. So President Trump knew this and he said we're going to federalize it. We have been working hand in hand with our great men and women in the Metro Police Department,

the Transit Authority. We've brought in the Park Police, the National Guard, all of the agencies that fall under me. The FBI, Kash Patel is doing a great job. DEA, Terry Cole, ATF, US Marshals, Gowdy Saralta is managing the whole thing. Terry's also managing it. I was out there every single night this weekend at the command center with all of our law enforcement and buffer the t-shirts they were wearing you could not tell who was with what agency it was such camaraderie such cooperation the stories they tell every night about keeping DC

safe they've taken 59 guns off the streets right here just this weekend they got 21 guns Larry to hear it was amazing the stories they were telling me. Saturday night, before they went out, before it was even dark, they performed a traffic stop. All these guys got out, bailed out of the car, took off, caught the majority of them. Three guns under the seats in the car. One was an assault rifle. That's the kind of crime that was happening right around the corner from us in our nation's capital.

Larry, not only that, Donald Trump's gonna make it beautiful again. He's been out taking the graffiti off of our beautiful monuments, off of the streets, off of the businesses. We're gonna clean up the city at his directive,

and the people are loving it,

and the law enforcement officers are loving it. AG Bondi, I'm told by friends that Union Station has been cleaned up and the homeless have been moved to other places to get help, whatever they need help. But if you can clean the homeless up, that would be remarkable. And maybe some other cities, there's a story in the, I think it's front page of the Journal today or anyway, a story in the Wall Street Journal. Downtown Los Angeles is gone.

It's absolutely gone. The stores that everyone's left is practically a deserted city because of the homeless problem, which is so gigantic. You may be giving us an example of how to handle it in Washington, D.C.

That's exactly right. And I was out in L.A. for work a couple of weeks ago. I was with Bill Asale, our U.S. attorney. They had to stop the cars to pick up a homeless man who was just sitting in the middle of the road. No one was doing anything.

The beautiful businesses had spray paint on them. Places were boarded up. I had never seen L.A. like that in my life. And President Trump is not going to let that happen anywhere around our country. If the governors are going to disregard it, the president certainly is not.

Part of this story in Washington, D.C. is also a sanctuary city problem. It is no longer a sanctuary city. And you've said sanctuary jurisdictions should not receive federal funds if they do not cooperate with ICE. And you are not reluctant to enforce that. Tell us more about that, because that, in some sense,

is a big part of the criminal problem.

It sure is. And they had sanctuary policies here in DC. No longer. They've been working with us. You have to tell us if there are illegal aliens in your database.

If we're arresting someone, we are going to know if they're an illegal alien. So last week I sent out 32 letters to mayors around the country, and I've leaked to seven governors telling them, you better comply or you're next.

If they don't comply with this, Larry, we're gonna work with our other agencies to cut off their federal funding. We are going to send in law enforcement just like we did during the L.A. riots, just like we're doing here in Washington, D.C. And if they're not going to keep their citizens safe, Donald Trump will keep them safe.

That's what this is all about, making America safe again.

That was his only directive, and that's what we're doing. Attorney General, so I'm just reading on this sanctuary city, you sent notes out 12 states, 10 major cities, New York City, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Philadelphia, major major cities. We fret about that a lot here in New York City. Are they complying? I mean, how is this working? Some are, some are not. We've here in New York City. Are they complying? I mean, how is this working?

Some are, some are not. We've already sued New York. We've already sued Illinois. And if they don't comply, we're going to sue them. We're gonna take away your federal funding. You're going to have to comply.

We're gonna send in law enforcement. If you're not gonna do your job, we're gonna do it for you to keep our citizens safe. Our great men and women in the National Guard are ready to go. They have been working hand in hand with our park services here in D.C. Again, everybody is working so great together. The Metro police are loving it.

The Transit Authority police, Larry, down in the Metro, they're loving what we're doing because they can actually now arrest people. They have federal officers with them, they're buddied up, and they are making arrests, keeping Americans safe, and keeping our capital safe. You know, families want to come here.

Today I was looking, and there were so many families out, because kids are still on summer vacation. All of our museums are free. The Smithsonian is free. You have our beautiful monuments. You have the zoo. And families deserve to be able to go there.

Listen, our law enforcement officers are telling us that people are coming up to them on the street. And they said a lot of people are walking by whispering, saying, thank you, thank you, thank you. They're hearing stories every single night and day of people saying that they feel safe now to walk their own neighborhood where they live because of what our great men and women in law enforcement are doing at the directive of the president.

And going out to dinner, according to the president.

And going out to dinner.

Attorney General Pam Bondi, I know you're busy. Thank you ever so much for coming on.

We appreciate it, ma'am.

Thank you. Gentlemen, now is Gatestone Institute senior fellow Gordon Chang. Gordon, good to see you. And you're raising China in a new op-ed. You say China is the biggest winner of the Trump-Putin summit. Why is that?

Well, China does not want to see the war in Ukraine end. And we know this because of Foreign Minister Wang Yi's conversation with Kayak Kalas of July 2nd. She is the EU foreign policy chief. And Wang Yi said that China does not want Russia to lose, because if it does, then the United States will focus on China and East Asia.

Well, if the war ends, however it ends, the U.S. similarly will be able to focus on China in Asia. So I think China is feeding this conflict with support for Russia, all-in support, including

troops in Ukraine, and it wants to make sure that the U.S. is kept off focus.

Yeah. So what can the U.S. do at this point to convince China that it is not in its best interest, if it wants to be a good actor on the world stage, is not in its best interest to support

Russia's war?

Unfortunately, I don't think we can appeal to Beijing's better interests. Beijing believes and defines its interests in a way which is very different than we think that the way it should. The only way that we get China to move in a better direction is to impose severe costs on China. And so far, the Trump administration has been unwilling to do that.

On August 6, they imposed an additional 25 percent tariff on India for buying Russian oil. But China buys more Russian oil than India does, and we have not imposed those tariffs on China. China looks at that and says that the United States is weak. Now, I don't agree with that, and I'm sure President Trump doesn't, but that's the way the Chinese see it.

And that's important, because that motivates motivates them and that encourages them to be even more aggressive

with regard to Ukraine trade and everything else for that matter. Yeah I mean that's why it's it's so difficult to try to understand where a trade deal is going. And President Trump has been very careful here. He you know he shows what is possible in terms of his positioning on China, but then sometimes he backs off, because he doesn't want a full-out World War III with China, because he knows we're so reliant on the Chinese supply chain. And in the meantime, he's trying to strengthen America to get the supply chains here. But you know, so far, we don't have the specifics on how the trade deal changes with

China.

We're still in that temporary mode.

We are, by the way, waiting on details between the EU and the U.S. on the final details of the trade deal there. But let me get your take on these final arguments now underway in Hong Kong. This is for the trial of the pro-democracy media mogul Jimmy Lai. Of course, we've been among the few really covering this. And we keep a focus on it because it represents all

that China has done to squash free speech. A lawyer representing Jimmy Lai said this. It's not wrong to support freedom of expression. It's not wrong to support human rights. It's not wrong to try to persuade the government to change its policy, nor is it wrong, not wrong to love a particular administration

or even a country, because you can't force someone to think in one way or another. Jimmy Lai faces life in prison if convicted under a national security law imposed by Beijing after anti-government protests happened in 2019. Jimmy Sun and Free Jimmy Lai campaign leader Sebastian Lai was with me just last week. He told me there's no chance his father is going to get a free free and fair trial this

week.

Watch.

He's not going to get a fair trial. There's no chance of a fair trial. You know, I think anybody seeing the length of this trial, the conditions of this trial knows that it's completely politically motivated. My father is in jail in Hong Kong for essentially courage, because he decided to stand up for freedom and democracy and stay and defend his journalist.

So there's so much at stake in this trial. All the freedoms of Hong Kong are being put on trial, and there's just no chance that he's going to get anything close to a on trial. And there's just no chance that he's going to get anything close to a fair trial.

Gordon, what's your reaction?

Sebastian Lai is right. This trial shows the evil nature of the Chinese regime. And by the way, the people in Taiwan must be looking at this because they see the way China has treated Hong Kong, and that's the way that China would treat Taiwan or any other country. This is a really important issue. We've seen the inhumane treatment of Jimmy Lai in prison. We have seen the intransigence of both Beijing and Hong Kong.

Now, I'm sure that Beijing does not want to see Jimmy Lai die in custody, because if that were to occur, he'd become even more of a martyr, even more of a symbol than he already is. But unfortunately, you have the Hong Kong government. This whole trial feeds into their national security narrative, the one of John Lee, the chief executive of Hong Kong. And so, there is going to be a very difficult time for Jimmy to try to get him free.

And President Trump deserves all the credit for actually talking about Jimmy Lai's predicament in custody.

Yeah, he has been so smart on the China relationship. But Gordon, I mean, what do you make of this headline that I just read a moment ago, that Russia has launched a massive aerial attack on Ukraine, including 574 drones and 40 missiles this morning? We're confirming details of this, but how is this acceptable? After President Trump went all the way to Alaska to meet with Putin, the Europeans went all the way to the White House to talk about this, and now we're back at it?

Russia is back at it on Ukraine? and China is back at it supporting? What can be done?

Well, what can be done is that we cut off all the flow of money to Russia. No oil sales, no sales of anything else, because if there's no money, there's no war. And this war stops really quickly if we are able to not only increase our sanctions, but enforce them, because we have not been enforcing sanctions to the extent that we should. So really, this is an issue. Putin is not going to change.

This is Putin's operation. He's the war criminal of the 21st century. And so we've got to realize we can't entice him into good behavior. Unfortunately, we've just got to defeat him. I know that's politically unpopular. But the problem is, if we don't defeat him, if we leave him in possession of Ukrainian

territory, we open the door to war in East Asia, because China then think it can grab territory from neighbors and keep it. So, there's a lot on stake here. It's not just Ukraine.

This is the future of Asia.

All right. We will be watching all of that. Gordon, great to get your take, as always. Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Maria.

Gordon Chang.

We'll be right back.

Stay with us.

Joining me right now, the head of the U.S. Federal Housing FHFA, Director and Fannie Mae chairman, Bill Pulte. Bill, great to see you this morning. Thank you so much for being here.

Of course, always good to see you.

I want to get your take on all of the news and of course that criminal referral that you sent over Lisa Cook and others on mortgage fraud. But first talk to us about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. What is President Trump looking to do

with these mortgage originators, enormous companies?

Well the president did something great if you recall in his first term and that is doing nothing. Everybody wanted to basically steal this company from the American taxpayers and President Trump deserves great credit for saying no thank you. We are going to do what's in the best interest of people. Maria, he wanted to, he got approached rather, to sell these companies for about $100 billion,

if you can believe that, $150 billion. Today, that value is worth anywhere between $500 and $700 billion. I think it's going to a trillion and potentially even higher. So President Trump has exercised great judgment and he'll exercise, in my view, that same judgment in deciding whether or not to do something with regard to Fannie and Freddie.

Well, this is a big story. A lot of our viewers want to know about it. Investors love these companies because they're incredibly important. What are we talking about? Seven trillion dollars in assets between the two companies' balance sheets?

Yeah, 7.8 trillion, and it's going higher. And frankly, it's going to continue to go higher. These are in my view, in terms of assets, the biggest companies in the world, these two biggest companies. And no other president until President Trump showed up on the scene even knew that they existed.

Biden didn't really know anything existed. He certainly didn't know Fannie and Freddie existed. We came in, there were 16,000 people working from home. We ordered them all back to work. We're getting the earnings going. Money's pouring in like never before. And it's all because President Trump

is making this a priority.

And has the president decided on the lead banker to take these companies public once again?

Is it gonna be a $30 billion IPO?

He has not made any decisions. That will be on his own time, in his own way, in his own form. And I would defer to the president on what or if he wants to do anything here. This is entirely up to him. He has the best instincts, frankly, of anybody I've ever met. And I've met a lot of really successful people. So I'm going to rely on his instincts.

If he says go, we'll go. But that's entirely up to the president.

When would a deal be happening later this year?

We'll see that again that's entirely up to the president. I think we have a bunch of different options. I would say this the demand for this product, the demand for this deal is so significant the president has had and we've had banks calling us they're still calling us. I mean you could have all of the banks in the world want this deal so So we'll see what happens. But it's got to be done if it's done on the president's terms. And I'm very confident it will be. And frankly, I think it's going to be oversubscribed.

Yeah. And I know that executives from Bank of America and Citi and JP Morgan have been in the Oval Office trying to get this business. But I want to talk about the scandals that we're talking about as well today, because we are now looking at 10 years of scandals against President Trump. We're going to get to Lisa Cook and potential mortgage fraud in a moment, but it started with Russia collusion, went into impeachments, indictments, even January 6th, according to Ed Martin at the DOJ.

And here's what Ed Martin told me yesterday. Got to get your take on this.

Watch.

And there's a group of us working on January 6th. What we've learned is that the federal government, the Department of Justice, but other aspects targeted these citizens. They basically turned government on to make the hoax work. So I'm not talking about somebody that pushes a cop. That's a charge you can look at and charge.

I'm talking about that the FBI and others were putting American citizens on terrorism watch lists, they were auditing their IRS tax returns, they were targeting the American people, they were taking massive amounts of resources and moving them from fighting child trafficking

and fighting real corruption and saying we have to move everybody to look at the Capitol siege. It was a political hoax that was driven by Garland, Lisa Monaco and others. This guy named Robert Jackson, who is the prosecutor guy. What you see is Lisa Monaco's Justice Department acting in ways we've never seen before. This is going, and when we show all that and we're writing reports regularly on it, it's not one aspect.

The federal court system was used in a way, the jails were used in a way to punish people. That was foreign.

They didn't do this to the terrorists after 9-11, and they were doing it to American citizens.

What about the January 6th committee? Did they destroy evidence? Is there criminality there?

Of course, of course, we're all in that too. And trust me, a lot of people did not get a pardon that were involved in the select committee and they ought to be keeping an eye on their mailbox because there's a lot to be asked about.

I mean, Director, what they did here was put people who were going and, you know, peacefully protesting against the election on no-fly lists. And the DOJ did nothing about it. It feels like you finally have some resources in the DOJ. You've sent several criminal referrals. All the while, we actually may have witnessed mortgage fraud.

Tell me about the criminal referral that you sent to the DOJ over Lisa Cook. What did she do specifically, Bill? Well, Lisa Cook has big problems. They're going to continue to get bigger. Her statements that she made last night, I think, only make her situation worse. It's very odd to see people try to twist back ways, sideways and upside down to justify mortgage fraud. This is a very serious crime, mortgage fraud. It carries up to 30 year present sentences.

I believe the president has ample cause to fire Lisa Cook. Whether he wants to do that or not is entirely up to the president. However, we will go where mortgage fraud is. If mortgage fraud is with a Republican or a Democrat, it doesn't matter. If you commit mortgage fraud in President Trump's America We're going to come after you and Lisa Cook is no exception to that I've also been very surprised Marie. I would say with the lack of response and the

The mismanagement that continued mismanagement by Jay Powell throughout all of this, you know You would think when there's an alleged crime that somebody would be able to handle things properly But unfortunately, I think Jay Powell is actually walking himself into this whole situation. He used the federal spokespeople last night, the Federal Reserve spokespeople, to circulate her statement. I don't know why anyone would support somebody having and declaring on a mortgage contract

that they have two primary residences. That is fraud, and we are going to prosecute it, and I hope that the DOJ will take it very

seriously. So according to mortgage documents you write to the DOJ, to Pam Bondi, that Lisa Cook falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms?

Well of course you can't declare that you in her case she had a home in Michigan and then two weeks later she goes she had a home in Michigan, and then two weeks later, she goes, she gets a loan in Michigan for her home. She declares it as her primary principal residence. And then literally, literally two weeks later, she goes to an Atlanta condo, buys an Atlanta condo,

secures a loan, and also declares that as her primary residence. We all know primary or principal, that means one. That means the lead dog. That means what house are you living in. And in this case, we have a Federal Reserve governor who's in charge of setting interest rates,

running this entire economy, right hand to Jerome Powell, committing, in my view, mortgage fraud. This can't happen. I think it gives the president enormous cause to fire her.

I think she will resign. Frankly, I think she's very stupid if she doesn't resign.

Well, President Trump posted on Truth Social Lisa Cook should resign. Bill, of course, this is on the heels of your criminal referral. You listed in that referral how she listed two different homes as her primary residence. In a two-week period, you also sent criminal referrals over others. Now, Cook responded. She says, I have no intention of being bullied to step down.

I am gathering accurate information to answer any legitimate questions, Bill. Is that the statement you're referring to, saying that that's not adequate?

Well, not only is that not accurate, I mean first of all intention of being bullied. The question for Ms. Cook is very simple. Did you sign these mortgage documents? Of course she did. And then on top of that, did she also declare primary residency in both Michigan and Atlanta? The answer is yes.

So you know she can play this all she wants, but, you know, people are smart. And I'll tell you this right now. This is like the most viral story in the country right now. People are sick and tired of one rule for certain people and another rule for other people. And it's got to stop.

And I think it's going to stop with the Federal Reserve governor. And frankly, I would be surprised if she's not suspended by the Federal Reserve this week. I mean, why are they going into Jackson Hole talking about this nonsense? This is supposed to be the biggest week for the economy. And here we've got this circus clown running around saying that she's being bullied when really she was committing mortgage fraud.

Well, I mean, you also sent criminal referrals to others.

Do you have grand juries in place for this, for Lisa Cook, for Adam Schiff?

Well we send criminal referrals all the time. That's what's funny about this is people are saying, oh well, you know, this is selective. No it's not. When we get mortgage fraud, we are going to prosecute it. And we are not prosecutors, so what we are going to do is we are going to refer that to the Department of Justice for mortgage

fraud. Why should Lisa Cook be exempt from that? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. And whether it's Adam Schiff or Letitia James or frankly any other Republican, if you commit mortgage fraud, there should be consequences. You know, this risks the rule of law.

This risks the integrity of the institution that we have. This risks the safety and soundness of the mortgage bond market. We can't have that. We either have to have a safe and sound bond market that everybody agrees to certain rules, or we have to have this mayhem where a Federal Reserve governor can say that she's outside of the law.

No one is above the law.

And, you know, what Ed Martin said from the DOJ over the weekend when I spoke with him is that when you get a criminal referral, it opens the door to actually investigate what is going on here. And he said, when you're lying about one thing, you're often lying about something else. When you're committing a crime here, you might be committing a crime there. So it opens up a bit of a Pandora's box.

Well, Marie, I'll tell you something that we haven't really discussed publicly, and that is we're also probing her Massachusetts property. You know, these are things where you get a tip in and then all of a sudden you learn that they have another loan here, another loan there. And it's concerning because, as you know, I oversee not just Fannie and Freddie, but I also oversee the Federal Reserve home loan banks.

And one of the banks that's involved in this investigation, unfortunately, is a member bank of the federal home loan banks. I am the regulator, President Trump. Under President Trump's leadership, I am the regulator. So I have a duty to do this. When I got Senate confirmed, I swore in my testimony that I would oversee mortgage fraud. So we're going to go wherever the facts are. We're going to turn that over to the DOJ.

And if they decide to impanel a grand jury on this, which I believe that they will. I believe that the DOJ will open up an investigation in this. I think it's just a stain on the Fed, and I think it's very disrespectful, both to the country, to the president, and frankly, even to the Federal Reserve,

for this lady to stay in office.

Well, look, grand juries, what is this gonna take? 18 months or something?

I mean, when you get a criminal referral, this could go on now for a year. No.

No.

No. I mean, you can move very quick. I mean, look, this is a black and white situation from my perspective. It's either did she sign these documents or not? You know, it's funny as they tried to go after President Trump on, you know, complete nonsense. He was totally innocent.

In this case, you see these signatures, did you sign this document or did you not? And you know, she can say whatever she wants, but at the end of the day, the facts speak for themselves. And I'll tell you, this is the hottest story in the world right now, Maria, for the very reason that people get it. You can't go and fraudulently represent things that aren't true in order to procure a loan. And the elites and the wealthy class, this is why President Trump won in a landslide because the people are sick and tired of this crap.

Yeah, but putting mortgage fraud aside, I mean, President Trump has issues with just the ineptitude of the Fed. The president has accused Chairman Jay Powell of hurting the housing industry. He said this on Truth Social, Could somebody please inform Jerome Too Late Powell that he is hurting the housing industry very badly. People can't get a mortgage because of him. There is no inflation, and every sign is pointing to a major rate cut. Bill, if we were to see a rate cut next month, the president will obviously, you know, be

able to say, look, I told you so. But are we talking about a bloated situation, regardless of whether we're getting cuts at all? They put all that money into the new headquarters. I was told, I mean, I'm about to interview Christine Lagarde at the European Central Bank,

and I'd like to know how different the ECB is to the Fed. I mean, the Fed has how many branches? How many offices?

How much money spent just on headquarters?

Well, it's crazy, but first I wanna just distinguish, Maria. First, I just wanna distinguish, Maria, if this is okay. I want to put the regulator hat and the other hat aside for a second with regard to Lisa Cook because obviously those are alleged crimes. So let's shift into the political side of things. I think those are very important to keep different. As it relates to the political side of things and as it relates to policy, which is what

you're talking about in terms of interest rates, he has gotten this so wrong that I'm very concerned with the damage that it's doing to the housing market. And I think it will do damage to the housing market for up to two years after he's gone. So time is of the essence with regard to cutting these rates. We've already seen homebuilders laying off people. We've seen homebuilders restrict supply.

This may be in the best interest of homebuilders, but it's not in the best interest of Americans. The rates, the interest rates need to be at 1%. And frankly, I hope that whoever becomes Fed chair takes them down to 1%, if not lower. We have a president who's extremely competent. The president is unlike Biden. Biden didn't even know what inflation was. This president came in and crushed inflation.

So you have a president that will continue to crush inflation. He will continue to keep inflation low, rates need to be at zero or one percent at the

highest. Yeah well you don't see a lot of that in the mainstream media that's for sure. They completely missed the point when Joe Biden sent inflation to 40-year highs. 9.1 percent, we're all the way back down to 2 percent under President Trump. Bill we're gonna be watching your work under President Trump. Bill, we're going to be watching your work. Obviously, huge story. We appreciate your time this morning. Thank you, sir.

Welcome back. California Republicans are suing to block Governor Newsom's plan to redraw California's congressional House map. Assemblyman Tree Taa, who represents California's 70th Assembly District, writes this on X. California's Constitution requires bills to be in print for 30 days, but that safeguard was ignored by bypassing the provision. Sacramento has effectively shut voters out of engaging in their own legislative process. The gentleman now is Montana Congressman Ryan Zinke. Congressman, it's great to see you.

Thank you so much for being here. I want to get your take on this redistricting because there are growing questions surrounding who in California actually drew up these district maps. How do you see things?

Well, I think this is round three of the districting wars, which is, for America, not a good thing. You have Texas, you know, followed now by California. And look, Maria, there are only 40 seats, 40 nationwide that are competitive. And making these seats non-competitive

where they're safe Democrat seats, certainly not good for California. There's some great members out there, but it sends a signal to America that we can't solve our problems unless we gerrymander our district.

So for America, I don't think it's a good thing, but it's round three of what I see is a prolonged districting war.

Well, I mean, it's been a long districting war by the Democrats. I mean, they have been redistricting and changing maps now much more aggressively than the Republicans ever have. I spoke with this, with the former Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, on Sunday. Here's what he said about Gavin Newsom's moves, watch.

Gavin is now trying to run for president, so what he's proposing to do is go against the Constitution of California, have the legislature vote to take these lines. They don't even draw these lines. They just introduced them this Friday

when no one's paying attention. They let, in Washington, D.C., the DCCC, send them these lines. And you gotta think about what this means to California. Now going against the Constitution, but instead of having nine competitive seats,

it will only have two. So it's not a five-seat change. This is a nine-seat change. They take in counties, they go split counties 116 times, cities 145 times. This independent commission took 35,000 different comments coming in. Even the legislators not even commenting. This is politicians picking the voters, not the voters selecting their elected officials. Well, I can't say this reminds me of the 2020 and 2024 election where the Democrats selected

Kamala Harris back in 16. They selected Hillary Clinton. None of these people were elected. What does this mean for the GOP? How many seats will the GOP lose in California? And what's the

impact here?

Well you know no one knows California or Congress better than Kevin McCarthy and I think he was spot on. We had seven seats, they're going to go down to maybe two of the Republicans. But this is this is exactly right. Gavin Newsom is running for president. There is no question about that.

This is a press point. It does violate the California constitution. It also violates America's conscience on how we elect our representatives. Again, this is the political, I think the Republicans certainly have a case

against California, they violated their own rules, and we'll see, but this is gonna open up a broader war. You have Wisconsin, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin said they won't. But after this, everything is now on the table, and we'll see what happens. But again, I think this blatant from California political move, it will have further effects.

And we'll probably look at the response by some of the Republican states as we go through this. Again, there's only 40 seats. As soon as you knock it down to now could be as competitive across the country. It's not a good thing.

Well, we'll be watching that. Meanwhile, the president really having some serious wins here. The White House announcing Russia's Vladimir Putin has agreed to a bilateral meeting with Ukrainian President Zelensky after President Trump's historic efforts toward brokering peace in the region. Watch this.

President Trump spoke with President Putin by phone, and he agreed to begin the next phase of the peace process, a meeting between President Putin and President Zelensky, which would be followed, if necessary, by a trilateral meeting between President Putin, President Zelensky and President Trump. As the president said, Vice President Vance, Secretary Rubio and Special Envoy Whitkoff will continue to coordinate with Russia and Ukraine to make this happen as soon as possible.

What's your take on this? NATO military leaders are expected to hold a virtual meeting today, Congressman. They wanna hash out specifics on security guarantees for Ukraine. And the president was very clear,

no boots on the ground from America, but the US could help from the air. How do you see that playing out?

Well, I think this is what leadership looks like. It's amazing to me that anyone would criticize where we're at as a country and what President Trump has done thus far. I mean, he's got a face to face with Putin. That's it, that couldn't be done.

And now it's a face to face between Zelensky and Putin. They said that couldn't be done. At the end of the day, I think President Trump has been very, very clear, is that his goal is peace. Stop the killing. You have between 2,000 and 5,000 people dying every day in the front line. The Donbass people there want peace. Crimean Peninsula, as Trump would say, is off the table for it to go back or stay with Ukraine, no matter

how you look at it. And I think it'll end up probably with a land bridge between the Crimean Peninsula and Russia. So I think President Trump has done an unbelievable job against long odds. He's engaged in it. I think he hasn't changed where the mission focus is. It's peace.

Meanwhile, DNI, Telsey Gabbard, has removed the security clearances of 37 current and former intelligence officials, saying they manipulated the intelligence. We know that they did. It includes Joe Biden's former assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research, Brett Holmgren, former Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, Stephanie O'Sullivan.

She's accused of being involved in the Obama-era probe into Russian influence over the 2016 election, the whole Russia probe. Gabbard defending the decision, saying, in part, being entrusted with the security clearance is a privilege, not a right. Your reaction?

Well, I think this is a greater play. Look what happened during 45 and Trump's first term. You had national assets spying on the president. That's what Russian collusion was about. Then you had national assets again spying on the president, and that was the Ukraine crisis over obstruction of justice.

And you had national assets spying on the president when he left office, that was Mar-a-Lago. So you had national assets, our intelligence community, spying on a president before, during, and after his presidency. People have to be held accountable.

I think this is a great first step. But look, when you have national assets politically going against a president in office and before and after, look, this is exactly where the swap is. We say, hey, there's a deep swap. This is exactly where it's at.

Well, I mean, are we ever going to see accountability here, Congressman? This has been a decade

of scandals against President Trump. Well, you know, and I had the same thing all of us had when during 45, the secretaries, you know, they went after me. There was all the lies, internal investigations that clearly were political without basis or substance. They did that with the president. And I do believe we're going gonna get the bottom of it.

You have clapper, again, you have senior members of the administration listening to President Trump's private conversations and political conversations, you know, through wiretapping, so to speak, listening to people's phone calls. So yeah, I think at the end of the day,

we're gonna have accountability and we're gonna go after what people did. You can't ignore blatant and unethical actions by a former

administration. Yeah. All right, Congressman, we're going to be watching your work on this

for sure. Ryan Zinke, good to see you. Thank you, sir. We'll be right back.

And the New York Appellate Division tossed out New York Attorney General Letitia James' massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump, his sons and the Trump Organization. The penalty hit a half a billion dollars worth of interest. The judges, though, slammed Letitia James for violating Trump's constitutional rights. This case now goes to New York's highest court. The panel upheld the findings that Trump and his company was still viable.

But we're going to dig into it with why the entire case could get tossed out. Let's bring in former counsel to President Trump, Fox News contributor, Kellyanne Conway. Kellyanne holds a Juris Doctoral degree. Kellyanne, let's show what the judges

were saying in this case. What is your reaction when you heard about it? Because this is one of the weaponization cases against Trump.

I felt relief and elation and justice not just for President Trump, his sons, the Trump organization, but really all of us. This was a runaway politicized judge who, if you go back and just listen to his comments from the bench, it was very obvious, Elizabeth, he was trying to be judge, jury, persecutor, prosecutor, and God, he made these ridiculous comments about, I've seen no remorse, therefore the penalty must be higher. He banned Eric and Don Jr., the Trump sons, from trying to do business in New York for

two years from the Trump organization, applying for bank loans and the rest of it. The appeals court did put those restrictions on hold. But just think about that. The 100% of the judgment was about a half a billion dollars. And of that, 2% were to be paid by Alvin Weisselberg, who did go to prison, and Don Jr. and Eric, the rest by Donald Trump. It's a huge vindication, but it should scare us all.

This is an ancient history. This happened last year. This happened in February of 2024.

It did. I want to get your, you know, the judges though, appear to be setting the stage to get this case tossed out from the appellate decision in New York. Yes. Let's get your reaction to this. They cited Letitia James abuses of power that quote the Attorney General repeatedly campaigned on using her office powers, office's powers to pursue Trump, believing it would be politically popular. This was selective enforcement. She failed to prove her case.

Her case has grave constitutional concerns. It was based on the vague testimony of a convicted perjurer, meaning Michael Cohen. This case is a new invention of Letitia James, her own devising specifically for the purpose of prosecuting Trump. They've never seen a case like this before, that her case was unprecedented, and she stretched the New York law.

What do you say, Kellyanne?

I say it's going to be very difficult for the last court, the ultimate court in New York, to ignore what the appellate court has said. What are they going to say? None of that is true. We have Letitia James on tape. She promised to do this. She was tweeting ridiculous juvenile

things like roses are red, violets are blue. No one's above the law. That includes you. Same applies for her now. You know, I think by now she thought in 2025 Donald Trump would be broke behind bars. She'd be governor of New York. Yet he's the president of the United States. This appellate court has tossed out this. We have one more court to go for true justice. And she, I would call her irrelevant, but she's relevant in one way. It looks like she committed mortgage fraud,

and she put her father as her husband. Bill Pulte over at FHFA has showed us the documents that prove her. Lisa Cook, one of the seven governors on the Fed board, she's another one, who's lied. Adam Schiff.

This is, look, these are true violations of the law, Elizabeth, but it's also important because each one of them has gone against Donald Trump, and each one of them has said nobody is above the law. But this is such a remarkable day because the depth, I think the extent to which, and you pulled the best passages from the appellate court decision, the extent to which they shot down every claim in that court.

Sometimes appellate divisions, they can put out a one or two page statement. They took the time and the care to go claim by claim, statement by statement, and really blow holes in them. And I think it's just a great day for justice.

We have one more court to go. President Trump thanked his legal team who were against the odds, thanked his sons, thanked the Trump Organization, and really thanked everybody who stayed with him, not just politically but legally. Elizabeth, 15 short months ago he was sitting in a courtroom, another courtroom, in another case, in the freezing cold. They thought they'd put him behind bars. The man's president of the

United States. He's riding high and today he's literally riding with the police and the National Guard in DC to see the fruits of him cleaning up this great city where I live.

Yeah, that could be happening this hour. Kellyanne, thank you so much for being on the show tonight. Thank you. It's always wonderful to see you again.

Welcome back. Investors are on FedWatch this week ahead of Jerome Powell's annual Jackson Hole speech this Friday. They're hoping for any clues into whether the central bank may finally start to cut those rates. The speech coming at an especially pivotal time as tariff tensions drag on and the labor market has shown some signs of slowing. Not to mention, President Trump hasn't let up on his pressure campaign when it comes to Jerome Powell. Just this morning, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant said interviews for an incredible group of potential

Fed shares will start after Labor Day. So as we close in on Jackson Hole, we're reminded in years past that news definitely comes out of this conference. All the financial networks will be covering it, Mark Tepper including us, but my question to you is does it matter this year? Is Jerome Powell a big fat lame duck? I do think it

matters. I think you know right now there's an 83% chance of a September rate cut. I think we need that. I mean, we certainly have some, some situations here in the United States that are problematic. You look at the fact that housing is the least affordable it's ever been. Right now, existing homes are $33,000 more than new homes. Like that just doesn't even make sense, but that's due to the fact that people locked in three percent mortgages a few years ago and they're unwilling to sell their home and take on a

seven percent mortgage. Businesses need affordable capital to access so that they can purchase machinery, so that they can execute on growth plans, so that they can hire people. We need a lower cost of capital. And if you remember back at Jackson Hole last year, Powell did make a bit of a dovish pivot right before he rolled out that 50 basis point bazooka cut the following month.

I would expect that despite the fact that we had a one-time pop in the PPI number, hopefully he thinks that's transitory. He told us for years and years and years. And they make the decision to cut and give us at least a 25 basis point cut.

Brian, do you think he'll do it or you think he's going to dig his heels in?

You know what?

Because of Donald Trump. OK, so I am not the guy you typically hear saying that Powell's super, super political and it's all despite Donald Trump. I'm not saying that's not true, but I usually don't say that. But I think he's going to try very hard at this meeting to say nothing that suggests a rate cut is coming. I think he is going to be what's an animal that just sits on the eggs. And if

you get anywhere close, it'll just like you talk about a lame duck. He's not a lame duck. He's like a goose, a mother hen on the eggs, right? And he doesn't, he doesn't, he doesn't, that's very interesting.

I'm not sure, is that interesting?

I'm not sure where you're going with that.

Keep going.

Because I think actually, I think a little bit of the political animosity is taking over in him. I think it's going to take him to say the time for cutting is now. And Powell's not going to give that to him. Even if they decide to cut in September, he's not, he's going to studiously not say that

in Jaxal because I think a little bit of that spite is going to operate.

Do you think Marcus, he still goes along with the same narrative, which is tariff trouble is coming. I'm waiting for it.

It's coming. I'm waiting for it. It's coming, you know. Tariff trouble is here. Debt to income is the issue that he needs to solve for. And he was talking about, I want to make capital cheaper for companies. I agree. I'm one of those people. But debt to income is the thing we don't talk about.

We talk about discretionary dollars. Discretionary dollars come when your debt is lowered, not in its principal balance, but in its monthly variable balance. And the only way to have the thing be a soft landing for consumers is the tariffs are there. How do you hurdle it? You bring the variable payments down in my house and in your house, and you give me the discretionary dollars to be able to absorb it. Big difference.

That sounds like cutting interest rates to me. It's cutting interest rates, but- I'm trying to interpret that. But cutting interest rates for the knowledge that the consumer is suffering and the tariffs are not going away.

One thing I mentioned in the commercial break is that there were 71 corporate bankruptcy filings in the month of July. And that surge that surges past the pandemic high. The total number for the first seven months of this year is 446. I can go through a lot of the companies that have filed, but like several high profile bankruptcies, Del Monte Foods.

What did Rite Aid file for bankruptcy? I don't wanna say that. Over leveraged high rates, right? But you said that the the revolving debt is also a huge problem, right?

Revolving debt for corporations is massive today I look at some of my businesses and I have a you know If you have a billion dollars of debt a quarter of a point a big deal

I'm also worried about commercial real estate for that reason to people who have adjustable rate mortgages have been saying to me I don't know how much longer I can go and that's something that President Trump would have his eye on and a good pulse of too because he's

a real estate guy. You know I think I think it's important when we're talking about tariffs and the potential inflation for us to understand the scope and magnitude of what worst-case scenario could look like for consumers if a hundred percent of those tariff costs were actually passed on to consumers and not eaten by corporations, which is not what's happening right now.

But as a country, we generate $25 trillion of personal income every year. We import $3.3 trillion of goods. We are starting to narrow in on a 13 to 14% effective tariff rate on those goods, which is roughly 450 billion.

All of that equates to a 1.7 percent tax on consumers, which has been more than offset by the one big, beautiful bill.

So at the end of the day, if that's worst case scenario for consumers, we can deal with

it. But that's it. You've got a little bit of a timing problem there, because the tariff bite hits before the taxes, which is why some people said, why didn't they do the taxes first, then do the tariffs, whatever. But that's your timing problem, and that'll matter, because if in the short term the tariffs

bite more, then you get a guy at scenario, the consumer only gets stuck with a third

of the tariffs. I think that the foreign country that's sending the item over, the exporter and the importer on this side realize they both have to do something. They've been doing maybe more than they will. But I can't see a scenario where they pass the entire cost off to your. The elasticity isn't there. Yeah. The elasticity isn't there.

One last thing on inflation, right? Inflation typically is where demand is massively outpacing supply. That is not the inflation we're talking about today. We're saying demand isn't any higher. The cost of the product's higher. Now is demand going to go down?

That's the question.

Which would be deflationary.

Right.

In the longer run what I feel like you've always been saying come down and you're freeing up dollars out of your

Household because it becomes a tax on consumers and then they would be consuming less if they can help it

The tariffs are a tax the tariffs are a value-added a sliver of a value-added tax. I don't think that it's inflationary It's a one-time hit if it stays. And we can discuss this later, but as I predicted, the Democrats and liberals are already salivating over what has been put in place. It's not going to go anywhere. And mark my words, liberals will layer on additional consumption taxes on the American people.

And we're on the road to a value added tax and an income tax together Like you're up to pay for there's like a resort with all these other fees on top of your hotel room. Yeah to the ginormous

Entitlements of Social Security Medicare which Congress can't Hotel California. I want to check out. Exactly.

All of these politicians bought you a ticket and you can't get rid of it. You're on the road and you can't get, you're on the train so to speak and you can't get off. No cancellation policy. The one thing, the only, mark my words, this is my prediction, I could be dead wrong, well not dead wrong, just cold wrong.

The only reason that longer term interest rates have not blown out to the upside, particularly given how much the deficit that we're running, which is going to be north of $1.8 trillion this year, the interest, how much we're rolling over, it's a third. Every 12 months we have to roll over a third of the debt held by the public. And then the interest expense that we're trying to manage, $100 billion a month on average so far this fiscal year. The only reason that longer term interest rates have not blown out to the upside is the market thinks that the Federal Reserve is controlling inflation so if investors start to think

the Fed's not on top of it you could see a longer term interest rates go up.

A 10-year takes off you're in trouble. All right we'll be watching that.

Make DC safe again it is that simple you dumb hippies. FBI Director Kash Patel earlier gave us all the goods on how it's happening. In just a few weeks.

Thanks again to President Trump. His initiative to clean our streets and rid him of violent criminals starting at our nation's capital. Let me speak to just briefly what the FBI did last night. FBI had 41 arrests last night, including six gun seizures and eight drug seizures. In just one week alone, we have 550 total arrests of violent criminals, including dozens of firearms and 40 drug seizures to include narcotics, meth, fentanyl, cocaine, and violent crimes such as rape, homicide, assaults, all here in our nation's capital.

And here now live in studio, Fox News contributor, former NYPD inspector and attorney, Paul Mauro. Paul, great to see you. So this is the hill these old, elderly hippies wanna cop a squat on. And that's standing up for criminals and violence

and not standing up for victims and law-abiding residences. But part of it isn't, I think, just cleaning up DC. It's setting an example for every kind of leader across the nation and shining a light on those who won't enforce the law.

Yeah, and I think that's actually part of the strategy as Vice President Vance kind of laid it out because let's remember, they have more leverage in DC, they being the Trump administration, because it's federalized already and they have this 30 day window under the codicil

that's in the home rule law to enforce. The problem is they can't export that to other cities around the country because they're not federalized the way DC is. So what they want to do was show, and it's working, that look if you enforce, if you actually do the work, it actually works. It actually will happen. You'll get

criminals off the street and you'll have your citizenry be safer. But as you can see there is this far far left aspects of the Democratic Party, which is where all the ambition and energy is. And it's funny, it's either the young or the very old hippies, as the vice president pointed out, that were sort of colluded here to resist any common-sense reforms to the criminal justice nonsense that we're seeing going on in the blue cities.

Yeah, Paul, crazy concept. You enforce the law, crime goes down. Novel concept, right? I wanted to ask you, so the Trump administration is investigating police officials and whether Washington, DC falsified crime records to make it appear as if crime were down.

Also, we know back in, I think it was July, a police commissioner was suspended as well for potentially cooking the books. What do you make of that? And how much do you think that's happening

in some of these other blue cities?

Well, again, it goes to the schizophrenia in the Democratic Party on this issue because they want to contend that they are a law and order party, right? But they just don't want to do anything like locking anybody up. And so a better answer for them,

if you're sitting where they are, is to cook some books. Now, look, it hasn't been proven in a court of law, so we'll have to see how it shakes out. You know, we got the

investigation going on. But I can tell you, there's cooking the books and then there's cooking the books. officer, which is what this guy was reportedly the commanding officer of one of the precincts, you have the ability to downgrade crimes, to mess a little bit with what exactly happened. Maybe you lose the complainant, so you get rid of the crime. It never ends up in the index.

And so consequently, you can drive crime down artificially. And that looks to be the contention here. And yet, despite all of that, the conditions were still terrible. Anybody who's gone through Union Station recently, and I go through fairly regularly, terrible. You know, as soon as you get off the train, you can sense it. And never mind walking around in the area,

I've done that as well. So they had this problem, and rather than actually address the problem through the enforcement that everybody knows works, see, we got this right. In the 90s, broken windows worked, but they just can't deal with it.

Boom.

Live through it.

Moving here in late 93, live through it.

Exactly.

When the murder, like number of murders, was at north of 2,200 in New York.

That's right.

What is it now?

1,300?

It looks like it's going to be about 300, which is astronomically lower but that's not the proper metric in my estimation is people live here because you can see the conditions the quality of life has not

commensurately improved. We were talking about in the break it's the a lot of it's the seriously mentally ill on the subways that they don't know how to handle. I want to move on to this though yeah Adam Schiff has launched a legal defense fund in response to the Department of Justice investigation into mortgage fraud.

This came from Bill Pulte referral letter. He's the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency. And this is in front of a grand jury in Maryland. Tish James, AG, here in front of a grand jury in Maryland. Tish James, AG, here in front of a grand jury in Virginia. And then also, we have today Bill Polte has also kind of waved the flag about similar charges

against Fed Governor Lisa Cook. But I digress. He needs a legal defense for it.

Yeah, I mean, apparently he can't afford his own attorney and by the way He's gotten a very high-powered attorney reportedly his attorney for this mortgage fraud is preper our former head of DOJ here in New York the head of the New York Southern District, which is like the premier district in the country That's not a cheap date Okay So he's gone high and then he expects other people to fund it and all I can do is to say that you know it

tracks because this is Tish James's Strategy as well except she got it through the legislature and consequently the taxpayers of New York are on the hook for her defense They started a 10 million dollar fund to defend themselves from Donald Trump right around when they started to look at her for the mortgage fraud. So this is a pattern.

Well, Paul, it's important to remember that no one is above the law.

Apparently.

We were told this.

Listen, who knew they got Capone on taxes? Who knew that mortgage fraud was gonna be the thing that was gonna come out of the woodwork? And it's Tish James that opened this up because that's what she went after Donald Trump for. The difference is that in Donald Trump's case, there's absolutely no complaint, there's no contention that anybody lost any money because he paid the loans back. The banks wanted to give it and he took it.

In the cases that we're talking about here, Tisch, James, Schiff, and this third piece, there is the possibility because a lower rate was achieved, that the banks were cheated, and that's why the case could be federal.

But also, just with SHIFT as an example, this was a Fannie Mae loan. It's not just the low rate, it is the low, low down payment. So if you lie about a place being a primary residence, that just is bank fraud But you're defrauding the federal government and the American taxpayer

That's right, because we all own a piece we all and every taxpayer is guaranteed a piece of that mortgage We've all been there if you don't like I can't live in New York and work here and then say Cincinnati's my primary residence, any lender would say no, except maybe Schiff's Lender.

I know people.

Schiff appropriately named.

Exactly, and he's just proving it every day. I know people who live outside of New York have to come here regularly to work and literally keep a log and make sure to the day that they have the majority of their time outside of New York so that they're not breaking

any tax laws. Apparently Congress and the rest of the Democratic regime here seems to be immune. Yeah, Paul Murray, the best. Thank you guys.

Appreciate it. Good to see you. The gentleman now is the man himself, White House Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing, Peter Navarro. Peter, great to see you. Thank you so much for being here. Good morning, Maria. Great to be with you. I know you've got another op-ed coming out soon this week on the Russia collusion and this last 10 years of scandals. But let's start with India and their, what you say, funding Putin's war machine.

How are they doing it, Peter?

There's a general perception that somehow India needs Russian oil to basically power its domestic economy, but that's just wrong. If you go back to when Russia invaded Ukraine back in February of 2022, India didn't buy virtually any Indian oil, almost zip. I mean, it's like 1%, right? So Russia invades and then you immediately see this surge of oil purchased by India.

So you ask yourself what's going on. What's going on is the Russian refiners got in bed with the Indian refiners. Russia offers these refiners a steep discount on the crude and they partner with the Indian refiners and then they sell the refined products at premium prices to Africa, Asia and Europe and that funds the war machine.

And so it's like over a million barrels a day Africa, Asia and Europe, and that funds the war machine. And so it's like over a million barrels a day of Russian oil are sent back to fund the war machine. Now think about that. So what that means is that we wind up having to pay more, Europe has to pay more for defense, the US have to send Ukraine more, and it's because of the Indian profiteering. And the big subtext here,

Maria, is the fact that India is the Maharaja of tariffs, got highest tariffs in the world, non-tariff barriers. So think about what India is doing to the United States, right? It steals our jobs. It slows down our growth with their unfair trade practices, okay? So we take a hit there. And then when it gets into this profiteering scheme

with Russia to send oil to basically the Kremlin laundromat for the crude oil, basically it forces US taxpayers to pay more to help Ukraine in the war. So it's just insanity. Look, there's a lot of roads that run to peace,

and President Donald J. Trump is the most incredible peace president we've ever seen. One of those roads runs right through New Delhi, and India needs to stand up here for the world, for democracy. It's the biggest democracy in the world by the amount of people and it's basically in bed with the Russians and that's not

conducive to peace. If India tomorrow stopped buying Russian oil that would go a long way towards getting Putin to the ultimate yes that we need and that Donald Trump and his one that that thing Maria I was all four years in the White House first term I've never seen anything like what President Trump did with those European leaders putting them together with Zelensky and talking about how to proceed forward. That is just, I mean that

that will go down in history for the ages. But I mean look Peter, it doesn't

look like India is gonna stop, right? I mean you're right, the meeting was unprecedented and finally we're actually having the beginnings of a conversation to end this war after four years of no efforts, it appears. It doesn't look—I mean, these secondary sanctions is an interesting idea. Isolate Russia until they stop.

But India is not on board.

Well, let's see what happens, as the boss says, with India. What I hope I've done with the Financial Times article is basically sensitize the world that this Indian argument that somehow they need it to keep the heat on or the air conditioning on, it's just wrong. They don't need that oil. Full stop. They don't need that oil. It's just the Russian refiners are partnering with the Indian refiners.

They don't create a lot of jobs. They just profiteer. So that's wrong, as is the high tariffs and non-tariff barriers and insurgency. I mean, look, they can keep doing what they're doing, but Donald Trump is going to keep doing what he's doing, and that's going to mean the high tariffs to stop them from selling Russian oil, buying Russian oil, and high tariffs to get their trade barriers down.

Let me move on. I have a couple of other things to talk to you about in terms of these 232 tariffs that we're talking about this morning. The U.S. expanding the 50 percent steel and aluminum tariffs onto more than 400 products, including wind turbines, cranes, appliances, EV parts, other heavy equipment, the Commerce Department calling it a crackdown on loopholes, saying

that these higher tariffs will revitalize the American steel and aluminum industry. I know from U.S. steelmakers, they're delighted by this, because they've been dealing with dumping of these products at much cheaper levels. But I mean, you're also talking about unmanned aircraft systems a lot of other Goods that we weren't expecting with a 50% tariff. How do they?

How do they use these loopholes to get cheap products into America and put US makers at a disadvantage Peter?

So in the beginning before the Trump steel and aluminum tariffs back in the first term, back in 2018, they dumped steel and aluminum full stop. Okay, so when Donald Trump put the tariffs on, what they began to do, Brazil, Russia, China, all the big steel producers, is they start to take the steel or aluminum and turn it into downstream products. We call that derivative articles, right?

So to evade the core tariff. So it's a strategic game. There's a lot of moves in the game. What we're doing is we're anticipating what they're doing. And so we basically do it that way in order to protect the industry. Remember the goal here is to get 80 percent or higher capacity utilization in both our steel and aluminum industries get new investment particularly in the aluminum industry which just we lost

several foundries during the Biden years. And that things on life support. We need to bring them back for national security purposes. And we can't be doing that if they get around the tariffs by just making the steel and aluminum, morphing them into derivative products.

So that's what that's all about, Maria.

I got you. All right. Let me move on to what's going on in terms of the weaponization. DNI, Tulsi Gabbard, is removing the security clearances of 37 current and former intelligence officials, saying that they've manipulated intelligence, as we have just learned from all of this declassification.

The list includes Joe Biden's former assistant secretary of state for intelligence and research, Brett Holmgren, former principal deputy director of national intelligence Stephanie O'Sullivan. She's being accused of being involved in the 2016 Obama-era probe of collusion between Russia and President Trump, of course, which was a complete made-up story by Hillary Clinton's team. I want to get your take on this last 10 years of really scandals and efforts to take down

President Trump. And when I spoke with Ed Martin over the weekend—he, of course, is the head of the weaponization unit at the DOJ—he said, Peter, it's a lot of the same people, those same people who tried to do you in, OK, and sent you to prison, those people who came up with these lies about President Trump, they're still out there trying to take down President Trump and it went from scandal to scandal including January 6th. Watch this, here's Ed Martin, watch.

We know the birthday of the Russia hoax. It's December 8th, 2016, where the Obama administration, including Obama, said don't put the truth out, lie, and then we had the Russia hoax that went on for 10 years. And every time they get in trouble, meaning the deep state and others, they throw another hoax out.

And all we're doing at DOJ, and all we're doing across the government, is saying, get the truth out. When you're a liar, you lie, not just on one thing. When you're a cheater, you cheat, not just on one thing. When you're a cheater, you cheat not just on one thing. When you're doing corruption, you generally don't just do it on one thing. So we have, that's our, that's our, what we're asked to do as prosecutors. It's

always the same. The same people on December 9th, 2016 in the Situation Room in Obama's White House are playing the same game all these years. That's

unbelievable. Peter, you lived it, it impacted your life

severely, what can you say? Well I've got a blockbuster article coming out in Breitbart today that focuses on one person, it's FBI agent Walter Gere Dina and he's the guy that arrested me at Reagan and perp walk my fiance, put me in handcuffs, leg irons. Wow. And he got fired, good for Cash Patel, couple weeks ago, the media's trying to make him a martyr.

But here's what's so interesting. He's the thread that takes us across the entire arc of the attacks on Donald Trump and his associates from 2016 all the way right up to the day that guy got fired. And it starts with the Steele dossier.

I don't know if you know this, Maria, but this guy, Walter Giordina, was one of the FBI agents who greenlit the Steele dossier after he read it and said, yeah, that's okay, go forward. And that, of course, begat crossfire hurricane and at the same time you had another Operation who's called crimson river renamed red, Missouri in that one

Falsely accused the Trump campaign of receiving ten million dollars from the Egyptian government is a total fraud But Giordina was at the center of that and then Giordina went to the Mueller report, he served on that. All of this, by the way, is because of the efforts of Senator Chuck Grassley, who's done a beautiful job getting these whistleblower documents. And the whistleblowers allege that Giordina wiped his hard drive so that we couldn't get

his records.

Wow. He got an award for the Mueller people. I mean, it's crazy stuff. And then there was another thing, Maria, called the Emoluments Clause, where they went after Trump saying he got money from foreign lobbyists and state governments illegally, but it was just a phishing expedition.

And they've got whistleblowers allege that what Giordina did was simply that, a fishing expedition. And then the last one was the Arctic Frost, which was the fake electors one, which there was nothing fake about President Trump's efforts on that. But Giordina basically ensnared Jeff Clark, John Eastman, all of those folks as well as

Trump. So this guy is the seed. Read the Breitbart article when it comes out.

Is the accountability him getting fired or are we gonna see something more than that? I mean they have destroyed people's lives.

I call for a full investigation of this guy and everybody else I name Obama, Clinton, Comey, Page, Strzok, Brennan, Clapper, all the way down the line. And Ed Martin, that man, that man is a bulldog and he's going to get to the bottom. I love Ed Martin. He's going to get to the bottom of it.

Well, I mean, I enjoyed the conversation we had on Sunday and he also made the point that January 6th and everything they did around January 6th was an effort to shut

down any speech or conversation about 2020 and the election. So we're gonna down any speech or conversation about 2020 and the election. So we're gonna

follow his work for sure and yours as well. Peter great to see you. Thank you, sir.