in american history, ok, and they, but no, they want to punish people, the president and people around them the last 4 years, kind of a critical how does that arise? and what's really going on here is a practice that the united states has it engaged in for a number of years. it is not enough to defeat somebody. millie, a bad person, you have to punish that was done in order to teach others a lesson. and a lesson that has to be learned is that never, never, never go down this populist again. so that's why there's all this dog now. i mean, we've had articles in the new york times, new york of your books, the nation that we have to punish donald trump. i haven't quite figured out what it is. they're going to put him on trial for what crime did because of committed. but they know that he's a criminal, that kind of figure out later on what,

what are the crimes, once they subpoena, or his documents or his account, or his bank statements going back out into how many decades they're hoping that they're going to find something that they can put him on trial, or alternatively, just fine, want to import forever and bankrupt him. so what's, what's really going on here is just this. i'm attempting news the legal process to intimidate anyone so that any future off the boat from the end will get the message . don't go down this path unless you want to end up bankrupt or imprisoned. you know, robert, if they want to go after trump and this, this rampage of rage and rebellion, and that means we're going after 73000000 people that voted for him to think. absolutely. i think that's the understated danger here. and it could even be more than that. if the election was as much of

a fraud is some people view that while as they're going to have to really share the lightly here because there are a lot of you just have to go on twitter for example. i mean, it is like the modern version of war is unbelievable. the 2 sides, they don't talk to each other and that's the mainstream media. they've completely blocked any news from, from the the right. it's unbelievable how they're getting away with it. i know myself, i mean, i'm not even in the united states right now, but i feel the fury that i'm sure millions of americans are feeling. i keep my fear on twitter and it's out of all the anger and the rage to be, to have a leader and they're not even talking about the fact that, you know, you can't, you can't even get in is a vile of the fact that they're contesting the outcome of the most consequential election in u.s. history. you cannot find news about this anywhere. it's been totally by rudy giuliani had his press conference with a group of his the goal of an hour.

you couldn't find it anywhere. c.n.n. was m.s. and it was, i think, fox news covered it for, you know, the senate, the in parts. this is going the way of the establishment and the status quo. and so it's really, i think, you're right peter. i think it's really, it's very dangerous. what they're doing, they're playing a role, came the american people in the interesting for me, george is that this is a continuation because as i alluded to in my 1st question to you is that there's no end. there's an no curiosity about the surveillance of the trump orbit and campaign, and even as he was going into the oval office, so that, that in those are facts that don't perpetuate there. there are designs on power and the same thing is happening and they want to ignore things in focus on others. and if you want, if you believe in the rule of law,

you should be picking you. you can't cherry pick these things that you have to have some kind of consistency, or people are going to lose interest in faith in these institutions. and this is something that i've been saying since the start of the trumpet ministration is that they're destroying institutions by cherry, picking the facts, quote unquote, facts that, that serve their purposes and power desires. yes, yes, no question about that. if you remember when just before the election, president trump had his interview with lesley soul of c.b.s. . and he brought up the subject that my campaign was spied on by the obama administration. she flat out denied it because i know i didn't know all the material that has come out. everything that we've known about the cause of page we've known about michael flynn advice of own in the obama oval office. the meetings that peter struck all that. no, i didn't. so this is highly paid. celebrity journalist just simply said no,

we didn't. and that has been the attitude of the media. you give them information, you give them material, you give me it. is this minutes of this meeting? oh no, we're just not going to pay any attention to it. you know, who are you going to believe that these documents are your lying eyes? so the same thing is happening now. you think people are swearing affidavit, so app and david are legal documents. i mean, there's a you, you, you swear an affidavit and the pen penalty of perjury, and they also wearing affidavits that they have seen or elicit goings on during this election. media pay no counter, no evidence, no evidence, no evidence that they keep repeating. and as they say, and this is really disastrous because come january 20th, if biden is indeed swallow and, and right away they got half the country will say he is not my president. he is not here by fraud or hit a member. did they in the,

the disappointing thing for me is that it is george said in his 1st answer, you know, trump is guilty, we just have to find the crime. i mean, it's a very stalinist approach to the legal system here. but i mean, in the case of hunter, by, for example, where there is forensic forensic evidence, i mean, you can read e-mails, you can see pictures, you can, you can, you know, see information about wire transfers of large sums of money conversations. and that, that is real evidence, but in the case of trump, they have to try again, like the 4 years of his presidency, you have to keep, you know, there's a guilty verdict. they just have to find the charges and they don't apply the same standard. the standard is different for donald trump and his orbit, and then someone, for example, the son of joe biden. if you didn't go back to the presidency of george bush, for example. barack obama has just basically were criminals. they opened up doors

that didn't need to the open, committed atrocities, basically libya, iraq, when we go into syria, he came the nobel peace prize winners. so what do they want? you know, the nation piece. i've just read they're talking about going after trump and the very 1st thing they were talking about was going after him for his relationship with stormy daniels. so this is, this is desperate as they are to get this guy out of office. they're going to do absolutely everything they can. but he said before, as we said before, that there is a risk. they're going to push too hard, as there are more than probably a 1000000 americans who support the guy. but on the other hand, they view him. they view don't from as an existential threat to themselves, to the swamps of the so-called deep state, if you will. and that's what he promised to do from the beginning. he promised them

out, and we take them out legally so that now they're, they're in, they're in for what we're doing. you know, to both of you here. i mean, i agree with your sentiment, robert, but he didn't get them out. as a matter of fact, he had quite a few of them is in his administration, and that is on him. ok. that's on him. and his a human resources policy is that mr. nunn, many unmitigated disaster for his administration, george, i mean, again, i know you feel probably very much a samey up and someone like john bolton, you have gerrard cushion or, i mean, what does he know about middle east politics? ok, you know, they can be the deal of the century air. i mean, this is on him as well. you know, at the same time, there is a certain deference to former presidents. ok, and i can point out to both of you when our viewers trumpet ministration. go after hillary. no. yeah, that's right. i think that was really the problem from the stock with donald trump

and he was, he didn't make the drastic changes that he promised. and instead hired a whole bunch of people who are part of the swamp. i mean, john bolton, my compare the jaric cushion, a son in law, giving him ridiculous advice of the middle east and just about everything else. and you know, he had a time to go to the rallies and he would still sound all the themes of 20160 and bring the interventions to an end. we're going to, you know, focus on america for us. but he didn't really carry it out. and i think that really did him in, in this election. it could have done a lot better. but instead he had a mixed message which confused people. and that is why he alternately, you know, been, do what he should have done. you know, i mean, and on top of it he had the entire, almost the entire media landscape against him. ok. which, you know, again, again,

i'd like to reiterate. i mean, for mainstream media, he was a godsend. i mean, i mean, cnn's appears to be on the block, some they need to sell it 18, he needs to sell it. ok. and the only thing that kept their revenues buoyant was donald trump. and that's why robert, for me, you know, it in the, there's a calculus right here to go after trump or not to go after trump, because there's, so there's not just political interests here, or political values here. there's a lot of money in it. i mean, robert going after trump outside of the, the oval office is a grifter, a huge gripped ok. keep it going, keep it going. but as i said, you risk alienating how the country finish up for us. robert? well yeah, and now they're pushing about war and everything like that, whether or not he's going back and he ran for example, talk about money that's. that's really well. what the media wants more than anything right now is the united states since, since the war with iran. and that's one thing he deprived them of

a lot of money over the years. are the money he stole a lot of the military equipment, but let's face it. there's no greater way to make money than war. and he deprived them of that. that's one thing i think or, well i'm, i think trump gave the military more money than any other president here. all right, gentlemen, i'm going to jump in here. we're going to go to a short break. and after that short break, you know, or discussion on some real estate, the world is driven by drama shaped by one person of

the day or thinks we dare to ask them what i can tell you what i want to watch for. you will pull you out of the pit in the mouth and then what about and i did india. it will always be the good. is it also going to hold on a puppy? keep it or don't or don't let you. people come up to the group. come on, there's a number who want to know,

but only if i see writing about nanami as it is about, l. look forward to talking to you all that technology should work for people i robot must obey the orders given by human beings except where such conflict with the 1st law show your identification for should be very careful about official intelligence . and the point is to create conflicts on various chozen with artificial intelligence will summon the demon the obama's protect its own existence is all mixed with

it's been decades since the fall of spain's fascist regime. but old wounds still haven't healed them. thought it was pretty famous before we go to up to me on the bus at the source mean older than just the scene in which we know of newborn babies were torn from their mothers and given away and forced adoption. that only for the feel of them to this day mothers still search for grown children while looking in hope for the parents.

welcome back to cross talk. we're all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle to remind you we're talking about some real names. ok let's go back to budapest, george. there's an interesting article in the new york times titled trump options for attacking iran to stop its probably nuclear program. ok, i mean that when you take trump out of the headline, that's a headline. you could read 20 years ago or 20 years. you could be reading that. and you know, what was really interesting for me is that it's the madman. they read that nixon that is attributed to nixon, is that, you know, he's what the media with the new york times is claiming is that he's a madman wanting to attack iran, just as he's a madman to take troops out of the middle east. you see how they've tied them together. it's really fascinating. i have to say for these dimwits, they came up with a interesting variation to george. very interesting variation of,

if you read that new york times article, it's clearly a total fraud. because i had his opening paragraph, which is they had the nuclear inspectors, they said they're currently, iran has more nuclear material that it's supposed to have under the j.c.b. away. and they said trump about options from his advices. this in the very next census morphed into him and his advisors had to dissuade him from attacking iran. there's nothing. there's no evidence whatsoever that he was planning to attack iran. but then york times resent it in that way because no one's going on. the record, all anonymous that he had to be like, where's all he's doing is what any president would do. ok, because his advice is one of my options yet to be dissuaded. and of course it's very important of how the new york times and other media outlets are presenting

this. because they know that pulling troops out is politically very popular with voters. extremely unpopular with the media and the washington policymaking elite so they can ok, we'll get the 2 together and suggest know what trump is doing is not pulling troops out from lots of countries which would make him popular and his opponents unpopular . no. what is really doing is planning a new war. so you watch out. you like trying but no, no, no, he's actually planning a new war. so it's a total froth. this is the fly by line article incidentally 5 by any i know. but i notice that i noticed that everybody wanted to get on board without one here. you know, robert. the interesting thing is that the media has never been able to address this . and in the end, an honest way is that these foreign adventures, endless war, stupid wars, expensive wars, are simply not popular with the public. and trump,

and, you know, it gets down to maybe what his political calculus is. whenever he may be. the white house is that he wants to be able to say, i tried to keep my promises, but it was the deep state that deny me me achieving those goals. and that what you have is the, you have in this case of the new york times, twisting that around as if you ran in troop withdrawal or have anything in common. they don't actually have anything in common, but they create they, they create this narrative and they fabricate this narrative as if they are the same thing. go ahead robert. 'd what really struck me about the new york times, new york times writers are they were low for anonymous sources or writers and they had it's amazing and they wonder why the print media become so expensive. why does it ever taken 5 journalists to write one piece that's long enough?

but you know good will not. and i would, i would fully suspect, given president here, is that it was, it was written by a deep state property and they just put their name on it. ok, because that's essentially what this particularly the case. that particular case, when it comes to national security issues, it a rough draft is provided and then put their stamp on it. but, you know, robert, you know, staying with you. again, the media has never been able to get their head around the fact that these wars are very unpopular. i mean, i can remember someone making a joke with me and it was a very sick joke. is that after the invasion of iraq that, you know, c.n.n. was already with all the graphics, all they had to do was change one letter to iraq. ok, because it's good for ratings, the way they see those beautiful missiles, probably the most disgusting thing ever said. i'm n.b.c. news, winner of syria. it was being in the early attack here. so i mean the, there's an appetite for war because it's good for ratings they think, but it's not a vote getter and trump intuitively understood that. and we have to say, you know, for all the faults and i talk to george very often here. he didn't start

a new war. i think want him to have the perception by the public that he doesn't keep his promises. and then essentially he's a madman. yeah. it's essentially a way of the more allies using him of wanting war, which actually why one of the reasons the site for closing the border with mexico was to stop these senseless wars. so you have this, these rumors, i mean, this is, you know, a moment of opportunity as well. you know, the trump right now and his administration there, are there bogged down trying to find a way through fraud corruption in the election. the last thing that they're going to be able to do right now is to come out and waste time trying to disprove a near new york times piece. and they spent enough time of that. oh yeah. and i think another thing is the probably trying to put by in on a crash course kind of

a same way that they did with extra. yeah. when he was coming into office, they just obliterated relation to the process. i think they're trying to do the same thing, probably lives of the crash course. but i want to crash course, the iran, exactly as they did with, you know, trial in russia in 2016. you know, there's this, there is something to that, george, i mean, you know, for the, the ruling elites, particularly in the media and all through the g.o.p. and the democratic party is they, they have this phobia in they, they always pull it out when it's, when they i mean, to be politically useful for them. there's the one thing, one of the theories and this ridiculous article is that it's make trouble for biting. and in the early days of his administration, you know, when you look at the foreign policy of the united states is that towards rent for 40 years, it's amazingly bipartisan. but every once in a while they pull it out for as a political cudgel. your thoughts have it is very amusing what you just mentioned

about that theory in the new york times article because it was a clear case of projection because that was exactly what your bottom administration did too. don't trump in this very last days it expelled the russian diplomats imposed sanctions. knowing that that is that it was boxing in its success. so it won't know, this is what trump is probably planning on with by them. when iran, you're absolutely right about the policy of but there is this democratic mindset right now. i mean, the democrats just, you know, they, they just march in lockstep, you know, whatever, whatever the subject you know, once they've given their orders, right? everybody, you say the same thing all the time. and so because it was obama who signed the jay c.p.o. way, all the democrats are supposed to say yes, yes is the j.c.b. . 08 is great. even though the democratic party did dot all support the j.c.b.

away and which is why obama was unable to wrap it by. so that's right. that's on the right now. they say, you know, no, we mustn't do anything bad toward iran because that's trump's policy. whereas we're with obama, but yeah, i mean, i think that in this case it's clear that what they're trying to do is to frighten trump's vote, is to make them abandon trump of this moment saying, oh my look, look, this is what you want. your man's going to do, he's not anti interventionist. he wants to get into a war. so forget about him, just dump him not to come up with the ugly that we're going to like. but george, i mean simple logic would dictate if you look over what's happened over the last 4 years and said, let's say for example, trump wants a war with the rent. you know, what in the deed state, given his 4 years would do anything about it. ok, they just take the papers office desk here. i mean, it is so when chris, you know this, these ideas that they are pushing here is that trump the other side of the story is

of course the troop withdrawal. and how difficult has it been for him to do that? so robert, you know, assuming that, you know, trump is out there a wanting to start a war. i mean, if it wouldn't be for the left and the deep states benefit, they'd never let him do it. so i mean, what was the whole point of the article in the 1st place except, except for trying to intimidate and scare and befuddle trump supporters go ahead robert? well, i think another reason could just be distracting from the fact that they're just not covering election fraud. and this is, this is really the new story of robert. i mean, i just want to say allegations of election fraud. ok. when our parents were there, her face in the looks is not here. and i think that this is just another distraction from the media cover to cover their trail cover up the fact that they have been just visible when it comes to covering this a legit report

a crime. the american people don't come to some fund realization the elections are, are legitimate, and they can be verified and they're transparent. then you just basically just buy american democracy. it's the guy after next year if that's what happened. so there has to be an investigation in the media, is part of that part of the process. of course, we need to have investigative journalism looking into this, looking into these, for example, dominion insistence. the fact that the process is going through overseas, onto its site all, and now we've got an alert unlike another such and such an article, allegedly robert allegedly let's be honest, are really, i don't know because, you know, as i've said to george many, many times election fraud in american politics is legendary. it's part of the system here, but it has to be proven yet. and,

and my point to you is that every single claim should be listened to investigated. and on top of it, i think the media should take much more interest and the people that should take the most interested in is, are the people around by, you know, step up and let's clear this up. there are timelines, there are rules, and there's still plenty of time to get everything on track. ok, but i agree with your assessment here. if they are not taken seriously, then you know, the, the people's belief in this institution is going to wane in. it's in pretty bad shape right now. george, i want to give you the last 45 seconds of me. again going back to this new york times story is that it's really a triumph of the neo cons. you know, they get both ways. they've got both parties have captured both parties and the media. there is the biggest winner after all, this very thing. exactly. because of course, we know from the entirety of the record of the trumpet ministration, that whenever trump wanted to withdraw forces, whether from syria from afghanistan, even from germany,

that white house of indignation in washington and among the media. my god, this is the most lunatic thing you can conceive while withdrawing. pulls us know anywhere. turn out. they turn it around and say, no, no, no, you know, trump is a really, he's a war monger, he's not somebody who wants to draw down forces at all. it is a completely the fraught and i have to jump and you run to the number from overawed served up by the media are excellent, that's all the time we have. i want to thank my guests here in moscow and who doesn't want to take our viewers watching is your next? remember, when i was still seemed wrong. why don't we all just don't call me old yet to see her out just because that's ok. and in detroit,

because the trail when something you find themselves worlds apart, we choose to look for common ground. israel media, a reflection of reality. in a world transformed what will make you feel safe from high salacious, full community. are you going the right way, or are you being led so directly? what is true? what is faith?

in the world corrupted, you need to descend to join us in the depths. maybe in the shallows. then walk by wagon that he will go back, i'll go on or yours will pull you out of the mountains in what about and i didn't do it will always be the good. is it off the shelf home on a passion to keep it or don't know, don't let it be come up looking to do good to keep on going about the how i live and i'm mad at them and the minimum time because

i'm not bad was going to them, but oh, november that i say, i give them their identity. what about nanami? them but i'll be all beings as it is about russia slams america's decision to pull out of the open skies. treaty accusing washington of previously having only a faint commitment to the west and allies of also criticize the news. a texan with a red muscle disease comes to russia for treatment. after being told by code, he would never walk again and spends a shared his story exclusively with r.t. . are used to use this all the time. it was here absolutely necessary. squads, nerve agents exposing the regime in new york times for their moscow correspondent

sounds a bit like something from a spy thriller reveals the outlets pre-term.