us. if i may, i want to begin with getting your reaction to what happened in brussels, and if you would, i'd like to share first, though, a headline from the "new york times" two months ago, if we could put that up? as the "new york times" mocked trump as he pointed out the hell hole that was brussels and the fact that the radical islamist terrorists within brussels were a frightening, frightening problem to europe. donald, great to have you with us. your thoughts after i thought in a bit of context, if i may? >> thank you, it's an honor, lou. it was sad, brussels was a great place. a brilliant city, a beautiful, beautiful city, crime-free, and no problem, and this is years ago, and i was there many years ago briefly, but i've never forgotten how beautiful it was. and i have friends that go there quite a bit, and they

hate to go there now. it's a hell hole, they call it, and it's a horrible situation that's taken place. they've let radical islamist terrorists be there. there's a tremendous hatred. they asked me during the debate, they talked about the hatred. i said absolutely there is hatred, i don't want to be politically correct. they were shocked i would say that. there is hatred. brussels is an example of it. don't kid yourself, you go to paris, you have sections of paris where the police don't want to go there and probably have areas where they probably practice sharia law, it's very, very horrible to women. it's horrible in many different ways and you have many other cities that i don't have to mention because i'm not making this call to destroy cities all over europe and the world, but where this happens, bad things happen, bad things happen and terror happens. and i mentioned that, and that's right. i actually mentioned it six months ago and mentioned it

again, relative to a question. the times did a big story i was doing something wrong about brussels. i tell the truth, lou, i tell the truth. lou: they tried to mock you suggesting you were insulting brussels, when, in fact, it turns out you were very prescient indeed. you also took up the issue of restructuring nato, and the issue of greater burden sharing on the part of the european nations in nato, and quickly, senator ted cruz went after you, suggesting that the bombings suggested in brussels suggest that that's a very bad idea. your reaction to the senator's interpretation. >> well, first of all, ted -- i call him lying ted cruz, i've never, ever seen anybody that lied like this guy. i have dealt with people much tougher than ted, but i've never dealt with anybody that lies as much as him. and he's known for it.

he'll lift up the bible high and put it down and lie about things. i've never met anything like it, this is beyond a normal politician. even rubio during one of the debates was complaining that ted lies so much, and i just say this, i want to be truthful. sometimes it's not necessarily politically correct, but people are agreeing with what i'm saying, lou, and you understand it, first of all, i appreciate your honesty. not your support, because you're not supporting me. i've watched so long, including cnn, and frankly fox is lucky to have you. lou: thank you. >> i love your show. that's why i'm doing your show right now. i took the day off. i said i'm going to have a day off. they said will you do lou? i said i will do lou. you tell it like it is, and i appreciate that. but i like to -- maybe i could say the same thing, i like to tell the truth. if it's not good enough and voters aren't going to say,

well, i want trump. that's okay, i'll go back to my life and i'll have a much simpler life. this is a very complicated factor, i will tell you, as well as i'm doing, and i'm doing well, a much more complicated life. i want to tell the truth, someday somebody is going to have to tell the truth because the world is collapsing. you look at what merkel has done in germany. it's a disaster over there. you look at a small part of sweden, where they have a section where people are moving, people are just migrated in, it's a disaster. you look at what's going on throughout the world now, and that our country is so ignorant as to take thousands and thousands of people in that we have no idea where they're from, there's no documentation, there's no anything, and you watch, it's going to lead to lots of problems. lou: donald, we have several reports today that the border patrol in point of fact, is falsifying documents. the homeland security

department is vastly understating the number of illegal border crossers who get away from the border patrol, attempting to apprehend them. fact is that we now know that the obama-led security department and customs and border patrol simply are not doing their jobs at the order of this president and, in fact, falsifying the information about the flow of illegal immigrants and smugglers across that border. >> well, i'm not surprised to hear it. i will say this, lou, i was in laredo, texas, i was there at the invitation of the border patrol, and border patrol people that work for the border patrol. and i think they're incredible. i think they really want to do their job and they're not allowed to do their job. i think they feel very guilty. they're proud people, equipped to do their job, they want to do it, and they're told to

stand back, let things happen. that's not what they do. they're professionals. i was very impressed with them. i really believe if we had the right leader, if we had a leader --. >> i think there's no question. >> i really believe they do a great job, but they're not allowed to do their job, lou. lou: understood, and agreed. let me turn to this exchange of tweets, the cruz pac, super pac, i shouldn't say that, they are actually just anti-trump, they say, led by liz mayer, former deputy campaign director for mitt romney, sending a vicious, to me, a vicious attack on you, and reaching to your wife, then the exchange with you and senator cruz, an exchange of threats, if you

will, an extraordinary display. are you going to continue -- and i've heard you answer this 100 times with probably a hundred different people. seems to me, this is one which when wives are brought into this, it requires a different approach altogether. i want your thoughts in how you're going to proceed and what you think the standard should be? >> i'm glad you asked me the question, i thought it was terrible. first of all it's "gq" magazine, a nice mainstream magazine, a good magazine, they had my wife on the cover. my wife was a very, very successful model, really successful. beautiful woman and all, and she did a shoot for gq, i think it was a cover shoot or a cover picture, but it was a good issue, very successful issue, and it was a shoot for "gq" magazine. so ted cruz knowingly, he said he didn't know, that's why i call him lying ted. ted cruz knowingly in my

opinion this h this article sent all over utah. had the picture saying is this what you want essentially, is this what you want for a first lady? first of all, she would be a great first lady, very smart, have you seen her being interviewed recently, she would be outstanding. but again, as a model, she did shoots and like all of the models they do, that's what they do, it's one of those things and it was famed in such a way that it was a terrible thing and sent to a certain group, and i thought it was disgraceful and ted cruz knew better. just like ted cruz knew and denied it that when during iowa he said that ben carson has quit the race. he's quit the race, he's out of the race, take my people and vote for me, ted cruz because ben carson has left and he's out of the race. now he knew about that, and immediately after the election ended he called ben carson and apologized. that didn't help ben carson.

i would have one iowa if that didn't happen because it took votes away from me. he added a lot of votes to himself. but he lied about it. lou: you are doing pretty well despite that. to my question about a standard here, are you going to assert a standard because of the bringing in wives of candidates is so unseemly. >> i agree with you, i agree with you. i did, i wrote and said be careful because otherwise i'll have to start talking about your situation. now, do i like doing that? no. should that have been done by him? he absolutely knew about it. think it, he doesn't know this is sent and earmarked to a group in utah? he knew about it. lou: personally, i tell you, any super pac working for any candidate should be held, the candidate should be held accountable, and there is no question of the relationship of the people running this super

pac, the money that they are receiving and from whom, so i think the responsibility is usually clear. >> lou, these people, just to finish it, these people worked for romney as i understand it, and romney is with cruz, they all knew about it, and romney no better than they are. he ran a terrible campaign, he choked like a dog. he choked absolutely like a dog, that was a campaign that should have been won easily and he was unable to do it. he quit. he quit. and that last month, and you remember it better than i do, because you had to cover it. he quit. and obama won an election that obama never should have won, and now romney is trying to -- i don't know what his problem, is but he's got big problems, but romney knew about it and cruz knew about it and it was inappropriate, and some people thought it was a fine picture, it was fun, it was the cover of gq. what are you going to do? lou: exactly. and i want to turn to as we wrap up here.

i'd like to get a sense, our audience would like to get a sense from you, you are now confronting not only your opponents in the field, confronting the national liberal media. you are being -- i mean, you are being attacked by what have become junkyard dogs from every corner including the establishment, the gop elites, who are also setting the rules for the convention. they're going to be running the convention and will in effect have the fate of the nominee in their hands if you don't have 1237 delegates. what are your thoughts, as you're going through this battle, because it is -- i can only begin to imagine what it's like to be hit so often from so many quarters by those who one would expect in normal circumstance would actually be supporting? >> it's an amazing thing, i won florida in a landslide, and yet 38 million dollars of negative attack ads were put on me by the republicans.

these weren't the liberals, these were republicans that put them on. club for growth who wanted me to give them a million dollars, when i said no, they went negative like extortion. some of the groups, they spent 38 million in a short period of time, in a two-week period and i won in a landslide. i'm wondering if ads are worthwhile. lou, when you see that and you see they beat marco rubio, the face of the republican party, by 20 points, it was actually, you almost have to question what does an ad mean? why are people spending money on ads? but it is very, very disconcerting when i've added millions and millions of people. and you know because you cover it well, the biggest story in politics today is the millions of additional people that are voting for the republicans, and by the way, the democrats are down 35%. the republicans, some states are up over 100% turning out for the primaries some. people never voted before. many are democrats and many

independents. they should embrace that, lou, if they don't embrace it, they're going to lose the election. a normal republican can't win the election, structurally it can't allow you to win the election. they're going to have another democrat president and that president is going to pick four or five supreme court justices who are very liberal and it will be the end of our country as we know it. it will be a disaster. you would think they'd embrace what's happening. millions and millions of people, you saw it in arizona, people are standing side-by-side trying to get in to vote, for me! they wanted to vote for me. you would think the republicans embrace it. i'll add michigan, noeew york, states they wouldn't campaign it. it's sad to watch. lou: how about wisconsin? >> i think we'll do well in wisconsin. i hope to do well in wisconsin and should do well there.

they're spending millions and millions of dollars on ads and honestly, if somebody else would get this. it's almost like how do you pick somebody that's got millions of less votes. i have three million more votes than anybody else. a massive amount, that's more than voted last time. how do you pick somebody who had millions of less votes. a little bit, the 1237, i think we're going to get there. i've been running against 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 people? how do you get 1237 when you've had to beat all of these additional people? it's a little unfair. lou: some comfort for you in that, and the newest fox poll, just about 60% of republican voters believe the person with the most delegates going into that convention should be the nominee. >> that's great. lou: donald trump, thanks for spending time with us, we appreciate it, thank you so much. >> greatly appreciat