Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.

All right, welcome to the Dan Bongino show. Post-election day special, not post-election special because the election's not over, despite the fact that the media has decided they're going to try to coordinate their king, Joe Biden. Yeah, well, just go according to that thing called the Constitution. Thank you very much. You're going to love this interview, as you well know, because I've said it with every interview show. I always taped the intro after. Why?

Because I want to tell you what's ahead and what's ahead here you're going to love. I have one of President Trump's attorneys, the great Ellis and former mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, both at the forefront of this fight for a free and fair election. Ladies and gentlemen, here is what's coming up in this interview brought to you, by the way, by Express VPN. Ladies and gentlemen, express VPN, protect your online activity from prying eyeballs today.

Get a VPN. Don't wait. Go to a VPN dot com slash Bongino. So what's ahead? We talk about Dominion. What's the Minyon Dominion? You mean like a movie or something like that? No, I mean the software system used to process votes that had some really strange anomalous events happening. Mayor Giuliani and Jenna both have some really interesting information you may want to hear. I also go into some of these legal fights ahead, potential paths forward, and why the legitimacy of this election matters and why at this point, there's a whole lot of open questions that have to be answered here.

It's a real deal. The future of the country is at stake, please don't miss the interview, especially Mayor Giuliani at the end and Ellis listener, her comments on Dominion's voting system and this computer automation you should be very skeptical of. We have a lot of sponsors. We appreciate your patience today. They really want to be here and talk to you, ladies and gentlemen. Today's show brought to you by our friends at Stamps.com this holiday season, more people will be mailing stuff than ever before.

It means the post office is going to be busy. You don't have time for that. Stamps.com brings the post office and now UPS shipping right to your computer, mail and ship. Anything from the convenience of your home or office. Stamps.com saves you money with deep discounts you can't even get at the post office. Stamps.com is a must have for any business, whether you're a small office sending out invoices, an online seller, fulfilling orders during this record setting holiday season, or even a giant warehouse sending thousands of packages a day, Stamps.com can handle it all with ease.

Simply use your computer to mail any to Sibley's. You can be a beneficial US postage 24/7 for any letter, any package, any class mail. I got ahead of myself anywhere you want to send it. Once your mail is ready to schedule a pick up or drop it off, it's really that simple. It's Stamps.com. You get five cents off every first class stamp, add up to 40 percent off priority, mailing up to 62 percent of ups shipping rates.

We'd be lost without it. Not to mention it's a fraction of the cost of those expensive postage meters. Stamps.com is a no brainer. Why? Because it saves you both time and money. Who's better than you? Don't spend the minute of your holiday season at the post office this year. Sign up for Stamps.com instead. There's no risk with my promo code. Dan, Dan, my first name. You get a special offer that includes a four week trial plus free postage and a digital scale.

No long term commitments or contracts. Just go to Stamps.com, click on that microphone at the top of their homepage and type in Dan that stamps.com. Enter Dan by clicking the mike from the top of the homepage. Stamps.com never go to the post office again. All right.

Let's go to part one of this interview, a good friend of mine, Jenna Ellis. All right. Welcome back to the show. For the second time, a very popular guest, our good friend, Jenna Alice, member of the Trump legal team here, fighting the good fight for a free and fair election. Jenna, thanks for joining us. Really appreciate it. Thanks so much for having me on, Dan, this is a really, really critical issue for our country and free and fair elections is part of our guaranteed by the constitution of a republic.

Yeah, I mean, without it, we're a Third World Republic. I mean, what's the difference at that point if we can't elect the president the right way? I mean, it's just disgraceful. So I have a Mayor Rudy Giuliani, coming up next, and I'm going to ask him a series of questions I'd like to ask you as well. So there are a bunch of controversies going on around the vote right now. One of them I keep hearing, I get this from my audience a lot.

I get a lot of emails on it. Is the presence of this company Dominion in this voting counting software, some controversy surrounding Dominion? What can you tell us about it? What do you know? What's the controversy? Is it real? Yeah, well, it's definitely real and more will be coming out over the next few days, we are investigating and the information, Dan, is just shocking. And what you need to know about Dominion is that this is a foreign company, but it also has a US office that's based out of Denver, Colorado, actually my home state.

And they have been systematically embedding software being used by the US elections in various states, up to possibly thirty eight states, at least twenty eight that we're aware of. And they have as a feature, not just a bug, but as a feature, the ability to cancel votes, manipulate votes. Look at the vote tallies. This is where we're seeing you know, there were reports of so-called glitches that had six thousand votes that were for President Trump that miraculously disappeared and then 6000 given to Joe Biden.

And so this is where this kind of software that is being that has been used for the election is is really, really problematic. And this could impact the entire nation, because even though, of course, we're looking right now at six particular states that either have legal suits or recounts, this Dominion voting system, this is is just incredibly problematic. And this isn't just about glitches. This is about intentional fraud.

How prevalent was the use of this Dominion software throughout the country? Was it a couple of states? A lot of states was in separate jurisdictions within states. How prevalent was it? Twenty eight that we're aware of so far, so very well, right, and the pushback, you say twenty eight. What really?

And yes and so on. I posted a link on my Twitter page that everyone should read to the Texas secretary of state. It's a memo that was given by an assistant attorney general there in Texas that's talking about the reasons that he did not recommend that the state of Texas certify the Dominion voting system back last year because of all of these problems with intentional fraud and how it could be abused. This is a four page memo that's incredibly important. And we've seen how Dominion voting system has been used in other countries to manipulate elections.

And so this is an incredibly, incredibly important discovery. And as I'm sure Mayor Giuliani will tell you, this is something that I really believe is we are on the brink of the most important and prevalent scandal in the United States history.

Yeah, I plan on asking him the same question. Having said that, is there is there evidence out there that this was used in other countries and that fraud was actually perpetrated using this Dominican software? Because that would be helpful. You're a lawyer. I was a former investigator. I'm thinking evidence, case evidence, past history here. Do we have any of that? Yes, and that's what we're uncovering and, you know, it's really important to distinguish between the court of public opinion and the court of law.

And so this is why we're putting together all of the information, all of the sworn affidavit, all of the evidence that we are compiling. And Rudy Giuliani's team, Sydney police team, our Trump legal team, we're putting all of that together so that we can file suit as appropriate and that we can get this evidence in front of the appropriate judge in the appropriate jurisdictions and make sure that we get this to life. So, you know, for the mainstream media, Dan, just saying that there's no evidence of fraud, they are intentionally turning a blind eye because they want to coordinate Joe Biden and say, oh, just trust us, this is fine, trust, but don't verify.

That's absolutely right.

I'm not waving you off. That would be disrespectful. I just them it's directed at no one. No one takes him seriously anymore. You and I both know that. You know, we talk a lot. We've you had the PPTA, POAGS, the spy gate thing. They say you. Oh, it never happened. Despite we have the actual spies name and the checks we get, no one takes them seriously. They do have a dangerous effect at times when they do this stuff on our republic by promoting misinformation.

I get that. But you're a lawyer. I don't remember what is in Article two. Was it Section two, clause one or Section one clause? I've never saw the role for you.

Yeah, it's not there. Correct, that I didn't I didn't miss that. The media not OK. So there is no role for the media in declaring the president elect. But having said that, that's the great Paul. I had a question because she wanted to she wanted to get this from you, given your legal expertise and being close to the president on this.

This is not a constitutional crisis here. We're taking advantage of the legal process that Al Gore took advantage of in a disputed vote count in 2000. The presidential electors don't meet till December 14th. The grace period is from December 8th to the fourteenth to figure it out within the states. And even if they can't figure it out, there is still a process within the states to get us to a president. Correct. The media keeps making out like this is unprecedented chaos.

Well, there are there is precedent. So unprecedented is a nonsense word here in this case. Well, yeah, it's just trying to pretend that, you know, this is just somehow some kind of mess that our founders couldn't have possibly contemplated. It's not like they weren't familiar with corruption. Right. So I would encourage everyone to read Federalist 68 by Alexander Hamilton. And it talks about the mode of appointment of the United States president. And he talks about why in promoting the ratification and the adoption of the US Constitution, which included at the time, you know, we've had amendments, but including at the time, Article two, which includes the Electoral College and gives to the states, the state legislatures, importantly, not just any actor on behalf of the state.

The state legislatures determine the manner by which the electors are appointed so that we have these safeguards in place in case of corruption or foreign influence. And Hamilton specifically talks about how it would be. It's so incredibly important to prevent against corruption in the mode of appointing our president. And that's why we have the Electoral College to make sure that there isn't that kind of influence. Because he was saying, wouldn't it be the creature that the foreign actors want to appoint as our chief magistrate to get influence into our United States of America.

So even back at the adoption of the US Constitution, they contemplated this. We have processes. It's only been eight days since the election. We're uncovering a lot of stuff, fraud, irregularities, exactly why everybody needs to calm down.

It's been eight days. The media, everybody needs to relax in the media. So we're good over here in the Trump side. You know, I'm not worried about violence from conservatives ever. That's a leftist phenomenon. And what they're doing is it's one of these transference things where they're transferring their impulses onto us. Everything's OK. But this is I love the constitutional process and I find it fascinating. But let's grounded in real world right now. So let's say the Trump legal team, the campaign apparatus uncovers massive fraud in Pennsylvania, potentially enough.

And I'm going to ask again, Mayor Giuliani, about Pennsylvania as well, where there seems to be a lot of shenanigans, so to say enough that could potentially change the vote in the election. We produce these affidavits, eyewitnesses. So what would happen in the state of Pennsylvania if indeed by December 8th they legitimately can't figure out who won the state of Pennsylvania? What what happens there? Yeah, so in that eventuality, which is entirely possible, given all the all kinds of things going on in Pennsylvania, if the election results are irredeemably compromised, we can't determine who is the victor legitimately, then there are a couple of ways that this could go.

The most likely outcome is if a judge looking at this cannot fashion a remedy, which means, I mean, the judicial branch wants to make sure that they're not just overturning election results when they don't have to. If they can fashion a remedy that would preserve the integrity of the election and get to a legitimate outcome, they'll do that. But if they can't, then the Constitution provides that the state legislature, because they are representatives of the people of Pennsylvania, that electorate, then the way to enfranchise them, not disenfranchise them, make sure that they are enfranchised, is to say that then the state legislature can get together and can appoint and select the electors.

That's one possibility. And the court could direct the legislature to provide that legislative remedy. There is. And if this becomes more widespread than Pennsylvania and there isn't a determined winner by January 20th, then the Constitution also provides that the US House of Representatives then can determine who the next president will be. And that's important because it isn't just it isn't every every legislator, every representative at that point, they get to vote. It's by it's by state. And so we have actually more Republicans in terms of the control of how that works constitutionally, in terms of how the House account would work under the Constitution.

So if we get to the point where nobody gets 270 or we get the point of irredeemable compromise on a large variety of states, then the House of Representatives could intervene at that point. So, OK, let's walk through this.

So I don't I want to I want to go step by step. So let's say, for example, again, the evidence comes out that the Pennsylvania vote is compromise, that there was there was fraud they can't account for. You know, I was asked before the show, again, by the legendary Paula, like, how do you prove fraud? I mean, if you have a bunch of affidavits to say ballots were changed and there's no way to see and there's no way to see, in fact, the change in the ballot because it was already processed and it was destroyed, you have to go by these affidavits you sworn off.

That's all you have. And it happens all the time in crimes. There's an eyewitness. I saw him rob a bank than anyone else. So, you know, it's just me. So if it's compromised, the Pennsylvania state legislature, there it by December 8th. If we don't, there's a safe harbor. I think it's December 8th to December 14th where the state legislature has to make a decision about how to direct their twenty two presidential electors. If that doesn't happen by then, you're saying then the House of Representatives gets together and the Pennsylvania state delegation, which is, I believe, 20 members, and there are more Republicans, I believe, in Pennsylvania than Democrats gets one vote.

Right. So Pennsylvania, their congressmen and women get one collective vote. You assume the Republicans vote Republican, the Democrats vote Democrat. Then that presidential vote for the state of Pennsylvania would go to Donald Trump. Is that am I getting that right? Exactly.

Yes. And so and that would happen in that collective scenario where each state gets one vote, then that would happen in the instance that there is no determined winner at all throughout throughout the whole United States. So, for example, if we're only if at the end of the day, we're we're still only dealing with states that Joe Biden still is at 270 and those states are certified. But Pennsylvania, they're irredeemably compromised at that point. It's not outcome determinative because he still has enough electoral votes.

But this is where it matters because we're dealing with at least six states right now. And so I think that the map that shows that the currently removing those six states from the count, neither President Trump or Joe Biden is at the 270 mark without those states being certified and actually knowing the legitimate results in those states. So that's where then it would go to the House of Representatives if neither candidate gets to 270.

I should have put that in there, that if Pennsylvania is having their issue and Biden's that two to seventy six or two, eighty two, whatever it may be then, or President Trump or President Trump, there's no you know, there's no House of Representatives vote.

And by the way, that is not unprecedented either. That has already happened. Where the House of Representatives has had to do that, I think was Rutherford B. Hayes or whether this has already happened. It's you know, again, the media wants you to believe right now that that chaotic elections, which we're going through now because of the coronaviruses, this absurd, outrageous Maylin system, they want you to believe this is some unprecedented human event. It's not it's not even unprecedented, you know, it's not since we just had it in 2000 where we had chaos.

Enough even to remember that, actually. So, yeah, I mean, two thousand but old enough to remember that. Yeah. I remember going through or making that statement and saying every legal vote needs to be counted. We need to go through the process. And you know what? I give him props. Is the Democratic candidate for saying that. Why isn't Joe Biden saying that and saying, you know, there are allegations here that are very significant.

We want to make sure to protect the election integrity and we will go through that process. But he actually has a verified Twitter account. That's the president elect's transition team. I mean, this is so ridiculous that they're rushing to judgment and they are they're acting like this is so unprecedented and it's absolutely not. My mom sent me a text message photo from this T-shirt in a catalog that says, I really miss when the media called these precedented times because we're actually unprecedented times.

It's not unprecedented.

I know they want you to every time there's a reason. Let me tell you what I think is going on here, though, behind this coordinated media, social media, cultural effort to, you know, crown a monarch and Joe Biden, despite the fact that there's no rush to do so and we don't know he won the election. I was an agent with the Secret Service in 2000. And I remember very well the chaos surrounding the Bush v. Gore election.

And I had some, you know, some friends who were on both sides of the aisle because, you know, we're not a partisan enterprise. And some of them told me later on that the biggest mistake they felt Gore made in that, because, by the way, they still think they won that election. They didn't. Can we just put that away? But they still believe they want Gore still thinks he won that election, which is absurd.

I mean, we could do a whole show on that invented the Internet and he could point he thinks a very excellent were very well done. He also thinks he's environmental and environmentalist with his private jet. But that's another story. So they think they won the election. They said their biggest mistake there and the reason they believe they lost in the courts is not a legal loss. They think the legal loss was due to the lack of political capital they had because it got out that Gore was going to concede.

He, of course, stopped short of a concession speech. And once that got out, they felt like it was inculcated in the American psyche that Bush was the president and Gore was trying to steal it from him. And this is their take, I know, because I've heard it from him. And they felt like the biggest mistake was losing the political initiative, which led to the loss of the legal initiative. So my theory on this is the same Democrat operatives, Ron Klain, the announced chief of staff to a president elect.

We don't have for Joe Biden, but he's there. By the way, I've seen your social media post on that. They're hysterical. But what they're trying to do now, and I think Klain is probably leading this, is saying we need to win the political initiative. You need to let the American people know the media will be behind us. You're the president elect, even though you're not. And Ed will look like if President Trump wins, it'll look like he stole it.

Your thoughts? Oh, absolutely. And they're going to push that narrative to make it seem like somehow President Trump just won't concede. And in fact, the mainstream media is also behind this. And they're pushing this narrative that Joe Biden is peddling and his handlers are pedaling to say that somehow he is the president elect. Not one state has certified their election results yet. And we have challenges in multiple states from Team Trump for an injunction preventing certifying results until we have audits, until we get to the bottom of this.

So, of course, they're doing this because they're hoping to litigate this in the court of public opinion like they did the impeachment hoax, like they did Russia collusion narrative, like they've done everything else. And I think you're right. They look back in 2000 and they think, you know what, Gore appeared too reasonable. And so because of that and people actually knew that the judicial branch is not a political branch, it's an unbiased, impartial arbiter.

And because we actually conceded that and recognized the fact that the judicial branch is an unbiased arbiter, then when they actually handed down this opinion, everybody knew President Bush was the genuine legal victor and they lost that election. And so now they're trying to push through this narrative so that if and when Donald Trump does get a second term and if he gets to 270 or however this turns out, if he gets inaugurated for a second term, if they couldn't even concede that he was the legitimate president in twenty sixteen, when we didn't have all of these allegations and everything, the legal battles that are going on, they are certainly not going to concede 20, 20, and then they are just ready.

You just said a moment ago, Team Trump, conservatives, we're not about violence and burning down the country. We love our country. We're patriots. You better bet. Then you're going to come out stronger with the riots, the looting, everything else, and try to burn this country to the ground only because they can't stand our American system. And they cannot see in the fact that we have a rule of law. We are not a nation of rulers.

We don't coordinate monarchs. We elect presidents freely, not the media, does it?

Yeah, the media does it all the time. Yeah, I live in a conservative area. There are no boards on any windows here. We're OK. I mean, they you know, the media outlets have again coronated Joe Biden, the next president elect, despite no constitutional role to do that in an election still in flux. And again, there's nobody out my street. Burn the place down. I'm going to take a quick break here. We come back on the other side of the break.

I want to go into specific states. What do you think the issues are where you think we may be able to, you know, to get some free and fair vote counts and where you think we could have significant problems? We'll be right back. We're talking to Jenna Ellis, member of President Trump's legal team and a good friend of the show. We'll be right back. All right. Thanks for your patience. Hope you're enjoying this great interview with Jenna Ellis.

We got a couple of sponsors here. We appreciate your time. Ladies gentlemen. Everyone wants to keep their home and family safe, whether it's from a break in a fire, flooding or a medical emergency.

Simply Safe Home Security delivers award winning 24/7 protection. We simply say if you don't just get an arsenal of cameras and sensors, you get the best professional monitors in the business. They've got your back day and night ready to send police, fire, EMTs when you need the most straight to your door, simply safe as an arsenal of sensors and cameras. They protect every inch of your home. We've got one right there. You can set it up yourself in about 30 minutes.

It's super easy. Simply saves process professionals and take over monitoring your home 24/7. Ready to send help the moment. God forbid there's an alarm. Plus, we're simply safe.

There's no long term contract, no hidden fees or installation costs we use simply safe here. We love it right now.

My my listeners get a free home security camera when you purchase a simply safe system at simply safe dotcom. Dan Bongino, you also get a 60 day risk free trial. So there's nothing to lose visits simply safe dotcom, by the way, that simply with an I simply I simply save dot com slash. Dan Bongino for your free security camera today that simply saved dotcom. Dan Bongino, we have another sponsor you know well. We're all getting tired of online censorship here, folks, right?

I know I am. It's why we love Express. Let's talk about online censorship. The left wants to silence and remove any voices they don't agree with. Twitter and Facebook were supposed to be open platforms.

I don't need their content moderators acting like the op ed section of The New York Times. So instead of letting social media sites revoke your right to free speech, how about revoking their right to your data? I don't know. I love that idea. I love it. I'm just throwing that into read there because I do love it. Now, you could just deactivate all your social media media accounts, but will you be given the left what they want in the first place instead use express VPN?

Well, why would you do that? Well, I'm going to tell you why. Ever wondered how free to access sites like Facebook make all their money? Well, by tracking your searches, video history and everything you click on and then selling your valuable data. That's how when you use Express VPN, you anonymize much of your online presence by hiding your IP address. Nice. It makes your activity much more difficult to trace and sell to advertisers and express VPN couldn't be easier to set up.

You just tap one button on your phone or computer and you protect that express VPN also encrypts 100 percent of your data to protect you from hackers and Internet bad guys. It's finally time to say no to censorship and take back your online privacy today. Go to express VPN Dotcom Bongino. By visiting my special link, you'll get an extra three months of express VPN service for free. Again, that's Express VPN and Dotcom Bongino Express VPN dot com Bungeni. Protect your data today.

Don't wait. Now back to my interview with Jenna Ellis. All right. We're back with Jenna Ellis, a real fighter and a member of President Trump's legal team. And I must add, because I don't have guests on my show that are squishes a real patriot and someone who actually cares. You know, a lot of sadly, a lot of grifters in D.C. who are in this for them. Jenna is in it for the fight. Don't forget that later on.

So, Jenna, if you don't mind, I'd like to go through some individual states. So Pennsylvania is just as we've been talking about, a hotbed of problems. And I think we can both be candid with each other that if we don't clean up what's going on in Pennsylvania without there believe, 22 Electoral College votes, the chances of President Trump points out are highly unlikely. So we have to clean up Pennsylvania and the mess that happened there. What do you think happened?

I've seen various accounts of potential fraud there from Lindsey Graham alleging nursing homes where coordinated it appears, coordinated efforts at the same time to get upwards of twenty five thousand ballots. I've seen charges of, you know, six hundred plus thousand votes being counted, illegally counted in a method not prescribed by Pennsylvania law.

What do you think the best avenues to getting a free and fair vote count in Pennsylvania are?

Yeah, well, this is going to matter not just the outcome of this election, but for every future election, and that's part of why and that's actually a huge reason why President Trump is fighting, because this can't happen again in another election. I mean, we're going in two years for the midterms. It's going to be incredibly important and for the next presidential election. And so what's happening in Pennsylvania, unlike 2000, where you had one narrow issue, we all remember the hanging chads in Florida.

You had the the issue in Florida was one thing with ballots and that got corrected. And Florida is actually has a good system now. And in Pennsylvania, you have not only allegations of fraud with the vote counts, the ballot types, the late deadlines going against the the state law. But we don't even have meaningful access that's required by law for our certified watchers to actually go and observe what's going on. So even with what we can prove, which is multifold in the state of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia specifically, there is a lot that is happening that's in the shadows.

And it's the mainstream media's Washington Post that their their catchphrase and slogan is Democracy dies in darkness. What are they hiding? You're going to be transparent. That's a really big concern, not just in Pennsylvania, but also in Michigan. And so can we can you clear that up for me for a minute?

I want to just suddenly, if you don't mind, forgive the interruption. But there has been conflicting stories about access poll watcher access on the Republican side in Pennsylvania. I heard Pam Bondi and Corey Lewandowski suggest they weren't. There are people not being allowed in the Republican side to watch. And you have election officials come out. This is all a hoax. What's the real story there about the poll watchers? Yeah, well, of course, you know, the election officials have every reason to say, oh, sure, you know, we did everything fine, don't look at us, don't look here.

And what the mainstream media is focusing on is that Team Trump, through our lawyers, did say it was a non zero number that were allowed in, meaning some were. But that doesn't mean that just because a couple of people were and there across the room and are having to try to take videos of something that's happening one hundred feet away. That's why we're using this term meaningful access, because if you're being let in just a couple of people all the way across the room and you can't actually see what's going on, that doesn't count as actual poll watching.

So there is a distinction there. And you have to read and then you and I know this, and this is why the Bungeni report and this podcast is so huge in America right now, because you're willing to tell the truth and you're willing to pass those distinctions, not just say, oh, well, there was a non-zero number that was granted access. Well, when you actually first that, what does that mean in practical reality? That means we couldn't tell what what was going on because not enough people were in there watching and actually able to observe.

So they're playing kind of like almost a euphemism game like they did with Spygate. Well, president wasn't spied on. It was a, um, documented confidential informant who was paid by the government to visually and audio wise observer. Yeah, we call that a spy. You numb nuts. I mean, this is what they do. So what you're saying is, yeah, they're not lying when they say all Republicans were let in. But what they're saying is, yeah, we had this big floor vote counters and we just let in a couple of people here while we could have been doing anything we wanted over there because we didn't let anyone over there.

Am I reading that right? This is always a scam with wallet.

It's always I mean, they don't want to call them looters. It's undocumented shoppers right now. Let's not call them criminals because that's so they play word games all the time. And what matters to a court of law is what actually happened and whether or not the law and the intention of the law was followed. And so, like what we also have in Pennsylvania, when we got the court order to say, yes, you have to allow the pollwatchers meaningful access.

So what they did is say, OK, well, then we will then move the fence where the poll, the Republican poll watchers were will move that six feet closer to the ballot counters. And then what they also did is moved the ballot counters six feet further away. But all that was reported was, oh, yeah, they they moved the fence up by six feet. Well, that's completely meaningless. All you've done is just have the same scenario just in a slightly different location.

Well, is there a chance that I'll ask Rudy this later as well? If Pennsylvania law dictates that some meaningful access towards people of both parties ought to be clear, I Democrats should have access to I am all about free and fair elections. One hundred percent. If we lost. If we won, we won. But it should be fair. I've heard a number thrown out there that something in the neighborhood of six hundred thousand Pennsylvania votes were counted this way.

Are those votes then potentially invalidated later because Pennsylvania couldn't follow their own? Not my rules. I live in Florida. It's their own home state law.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, and this is what will be a very tricky question for the court is what to do with that then? Because if you have and if you can't prove and they can't prove, then the burden then would be on the election officials. If you say, OK, for this period of time, there was no meaningful access, we don't know what was going on. No one actually knows. Then what do you do with those votes?

Do you cast them out completely and say they were totally invalid? Do you fashion some sort of remedy that the court will try to say, well, let's go back and get them recounted? But do we know exactly how many which ones were any ballots intermingled? Were any of them modified during that time? I mean, all of these things have to come out in court and then a judge will have to listen to arguments from both sides as to what the judicially and constitutionally appropriate remedy is.

And it's very likely done at this point with everything that's going on in Pennsylvania. I keep using this term irredeemably compromised. Our good friend Tom Fitton is using this term as well to say that there's just at some point you just can't put it back together in a way that is actually appropriate for either candidate. Because you're right, this is not just about President Trump. This is also about Joe Biden. It's about every American who cares about election integrity.

And no matter who they voted for, we have to make sure that the outcomes are legitimate. So as the umpire in the baseball game, for example, the judicial branch cannot be team red or blue. They have to be unbiased and completely fair and impartial. And the remedy is going to be the really big question here. What do you do? Yeah, I mean, I agree.

You know, entropy. Disorder, you can't unring that bell, I mean, once you've got the fraud again, I was talking to my wife before the show. She had this question here, and she's right.

If you force someone or pressured someone to coerce someone to switch a vote and they switched it, the only thing you have is a person's word. If they're willing to admit that they did it. I mean, it's like seeing a bank being robbed again. If you have an eyewitness and he's the only eyewitness, you know, and it was done in the middle of the night, and if he recants, you don't have anything or doesn't say anything. So that's kind of the issue with.

But getting into circumstantial evidence, you know, can come into play. And, you know, you don't have to necessarily have direct evidence like a video of the bank being robbed. You can have the circumstantial evidence of, you know, the fingerprints, all of these other things. You can also have eyewitness testimony, have the credibility of the people and say, OK, well, are we going to believe somebody who was an eyewitness who's willing to sign that under penalty of perjury versus an election official that may have a motive for lying?

And so you have to assess the credibility of the witnesses. So all of this comes down to saying, you know, we have to do this through the court of law and the judicial process, not the court of public opinion. Doesn't matter what anyone on the mainstream media thinks, that anybody's credibility, it matters what can be proven in court. And this is why at the end of the day, it's probable that the only appropriate remedy for Pennsylvania is going to have their state legislature acts to appoint their electors unless we get to that point.

We were discussing before about nobody reaching 270 zulily about Pennsylvania. Their state legislature really needs to look at this and they may have to act on behalf of the people who elected them, which is completely part of enfranchisement, of the voice of the people.

You know, I'm glad you brought that up, because most criminal cases in my prior line of work are circumstantial evidence. I mean, everybody, you know, very few cases have a direct eyewitness or some video or audiotape of the crime that went down. You know, they were in the store at the certain time counterfeit bill was passed. There's a fingerprint on the bill. Someone saw him walking out later. I mean, that's how these cases are built.

But having said that, another piece of circumstantial evidence of these just bizarre statistical anomalies we see that continue to pile up in this election. And one of them I addressed on my show and I'd like to get your thoughts on is having run for office myself on a down, down, down the ticket. I ran in Maryland when the governor was running. And the governor's race is at the top of the ticket. And in my congressional district where I ran, I was the second race down, I believe, because I don't think it was a Senate race on the ballot.

So the governor to top me that so you can predict, generally speaking, what they call Rohloff, how many people are going to go and vote for governor or vote for president, whatever, at the top.

And I just say I'm done. I don't know anything about the congressman or I'm just don't care. And they leave. There's no requirement to vote for everyone that you can vote for, but you don't have to vote for and you could vote for a ballot initiative and go home. So having said that, we can generally predict based on history, I'll just throw out and I'm making these numbers up. But just for the sake of, say, one hundred people, one hundred percent of people show up, vote for president, 80 percent vote for the senator, then 70 percent vote for congressman.

We've seen some real anomalies in this election in Pennsylvania and elsewhere where a whole boatload of people seemingly voted at the top of the ticket and then down ballot. A whole lot less of them voted down ballot. What are the suggestions made to me, Jenna, was that it could could be evidence of fraud because in an effort to speed up potentially spurious ballots, they didn't want to vote down the whole ballot. It takes a lot of time. They just checked the president at the top and said, here you go, take it.

Any thoughts on that?

Yeah, well, it's definitely suspicious at minimum. And it's something that has to be weighed again in court. And the ballots themselves, at what point did they come in? And you also have the method of signature matching matching against registered voters to see if these are duplicative ballots, to see if there is someone who's actually a resident of the state in a current living resident of the state. That's why these safeguards and these ways of making sure that this is a valid ballot is so important.

And then also one of the things that we're looking at in Pennsylvania with a recount, there's a security envelope, an outer envelope for any of the ballots that were mailed in. And so if you have this huge stack of ballots that only has the top of the ticket that's marked or otherwise suspicious or even just otherwise recounted period, when you have all of these, you know, these ballots that we weren't granted meaningful access to observe, if you don't have a matching security envelope for that ballot, then then that's an indication that it's a fraudulent ballot because you're supposed to have both of those two things to legitimize it as this is somebody who actually turned in this ballot correctly and it should be invalidated by law if there isn't that.

Outer security envelope. Yeah, didn't I heard something about security envelopes that were thrown out? Is that information accurate that in some cases we have the ballot, but not the envelope which is required?

That both. Yeah, and that's what's so interesting as well as so if you have if you don't have the matching security envelope for all of these, just single ticket, you just top of the ticket, Ballards, then those should be invalidated. But it also works and cuts to the other side as well, that if you want to destroy and discount genuine ballots, then you destroy the security envelope to basically invalidate them after the fact if they are legitimate ballots.

So all of these things and this is why it's so important to have poll watchers of both sides full and fair transparency. And this is part of the reason that I think that Pennsylvania is irredeemably compromised because there are so many different ways and methods and means that these ballots can be manipulated, false and fraudulent, illegal ballots can be added. I mean, just so many different ways that now that we've had such a long time that we haven't had meaningful access, then who knows what has happened.

So it's going to be very difficult for either side or even the election officials to prove that there wasn't something that happened illegal either way.

And this is important. This isn't just a legal argument. I'm going to take a quick break. I want to ask you on the other side of that, I want to get into a potential Supreme Court case and the political argument here, which the media is not helping with.

This has to be considered legitimate by the only people that matter. That's the citizens of the country. If they don't consider an election legitimate, you know, this is a win for the people, by the people. Last time I checked. And so I want to get to that. We're going to take a quick break. We're talking to Jenna Ellis, one of the attorneys, an excellent attorney on President Trump's legal team. We'll be right back. What an interview.

I Alex. She's fantastic. Love having her on. We have another sponsor Today show brought to you by our friends again. So what's next year's technology for skincare? What if you could try it free? Well, for a very limited time, you get the gene you sell for bags and puffiness to try in the comfort of your own home for a four month free. You only pay shipping. You'll also get the Gennie cell retinol ultra brand new for 20 21.

Also Free Retinol. Ultra's perfect for sensitive skin. This cutting edge technology uses a natural retinal alternative with all the proven clinical effects of retinol without any irritation. Also free. You'll be the judge, wriggle free, clean, smooth and vibrant skin, a face where you can't see on the eye bags or even fine lines, wrinkles and crow's feet, or you simply don't pay. Go to Zhenyu Cell Dotcom, that's Chenu Cell Dotcom, the combination of Jenny sulpher bags and puffiness and retinal ultra will take care of bags under the eyes, fine lines, laugh lines, firmness, smoothness and give you a younger texture guaranteed.

Or you simply don't pay for your 30 day free trial. Log on to Jenny Cellcom. Jenny, you saw that. Com That's Jianyu CEO Dotcom go today. Now back to my interview with Jenelle's. All right. Welcome back. Jenna Ellis, terrific lawyer on the Trump legal team. So before the break, I was talking about potentially some legal fights here that could make it to the Supreme Court when we get to that. I also want to get to how the political implications of this are really damming if the American people don't believe this to be a legitimate outcome.

But first, Jenna, you being a lawyer, one of the things that concerns me, I was reading a piece in The Wall Street Journal the other day is that there's been a unilateral rewriting of the law, especially in Pennsylvania, by people who have no authority to do it, and most notably the Supreme Court in Pennsylvania. The high the courts in Pennsylvania have said that the law, which is crystal clear in Pennsylvania, ballots must be received by Election Day at a specific time, which was November 3rd.

That's what the law says. It doesn't say if the courts think otherwise. It doesn't say received by November 3rd unless there's a storm. It doesn't say unless there's an outbreak of a virus. However, it doesn't say any of that. The courts in Pennsylvania got involved and said, no, we don't think that's cool. So we're going to say that votes can be received three days after Election Day. That's again, folks. That's nowhere in the Pennsylvania law.

Now, as a result, Supreme Court Justice Sam Alito has said, Pennsylvania, you must then if you're going to do this, you must segregate post Election Day ballots you received illegally after November 3rd in case there's a message so we can count them later. Is John Roberts going to take this case, is it going to go back to the Supreme Court? What's the status of that? And did Pennsylvania even segregate the ballots? Yeah, well, that last question is the most important one, did they follow the law because we know that election officials did not follow the court order to grant Team Trump and the pollwatchers meaningful access.

So where's the confidence that they actually followed that order to segregate the ballots? That would be the first question. And this whole election timeline appeal is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. They declined to take it up before the election because they said there's a legal principle that's called ripeness, which basically means that I can't sue you. Dan, if I say, you know what, I think that Dan is probably going to come over and steal my chocolate out of my my freezer tomorrow.

So sport, punish him right now. I'm going to sue him today. I have to wait till there's actual harm. I have to wait until I have evidence that you actually came and stole my chocolate and and out of my fridge and then file. And so what the Supreme Court basically said is there's not a harm that's occurred yet. And that was problematic. We thought we did think it was right because the the Pennsylvania election officials and the governor, who are not the legislature, no civics, one, two, one only legislatures can make law and they can only make law that comports with their state and federal constitutions.

But if you're not the legislature, you can't make laws. And so they allowed this. So we knew this was going to happen and they should have been enjoined then. But the Supreme Court decided to wait on it. Alito in that instance and Thomas, great dissent, saying you're just kicking the can down the road. Well, now we're down the road. And so this is pending before the US Supreme Court to see what they're going to do about it.

But we did get a great victory today in Pennsylvania from a judge who said that the secretary of state gave the guidance on November 1st. So two days before the election, saying that ballots that were cured up to nine days with voter ID after the fact. That's right. And she said no. That judge said no, you have to go by state law. And this is incredibly important because the executive branch, which includes the governor, the secretary of state, all of these election officials, they cannot change or create law or manipulate the process unilaterally.

They cannot do that. The court also cannot. I've seen so many people on Twitter saying, well, the court can't substitute a judgment for the will of the American people. That's not what we're asking them to do. When the courts rule like they do on every other legal issue, they are simply applying the law as written from the state legislatures and the US Constitution to the facts in the case and requiring that that all of everything that happened has to be according to the law.

And if there was a breach of the law, what is the remedy? They're not substituting their judgment or simply requiring that the law, the rule of law prevails.

Yeah, that's what I'm going to ask Mayor Giuliani about that later as well, the cured ballots, because that's an important legal victory. But I just want to I just want to go back quickly, because this is super important at the Supreme Court. Take this case, because even if this election doesn't work out and the president loses for the importance of the republic, voter integrity and election integrity, it's important to know that election law matters. Just to be clear, getta the excuse me, the Pennsylvania legislature could have rewritten the election law to say, no, no, we're going to give it a three day grace period after Election Day to receive ballots.

They chose not to. The law is crystal clear. Vote by November 3rd or your vote doesn't count. They didn't do that. So if the courts can just now jump in and scrap this and the Supreme Court doesn't intervene, is there some kind of a due process?

You know, I mean, you know, the case to be made here, equal protection, equal protection claims. I know. Forgive me. I was, you know, equal protection case to be made here where there's different voting laws across the country.

Exactly the case that we've made. That's exactly what we're arguing in front of the Supreme Court is to say this matters not just to the integrity of this election, but to every future election, that it is a concrete principle of the separation of powers in our US Constitution and the Pennsylvania state constitution that says that the governor, the secretary of state, they're not the legislative branch. They cannot make the law, and neither can the courts. Just refashion the law and rewrite the law according to what they think is the best preference.

They can't do that. The Pennsylvania state legislature has not acted. But if they did so, let's look at Nevada, for example, because their governor did the exact same thing that the Pennsylvania governor did ahead of the election and tried to use the pandemic as a pretext to shift the date and to allow late ballots for Meilin purposes. Because of the pandemic in Nevada, their state legislature decided to rescue the Nevada governor. And change their lot, but even then, even in that instance, and then you at least have the legislature that's intervening, but even then there's an equal protection argument to be made to say, well, deadlines matter.

And of course, you can't treat you can't treat voters who get their ballot in on time as some second tier by someone who is maybe voting provisionally and then they mail in their ballots. So there are still arguments that just because the legislature has acted, that doesn't mean they've acted constitutionally.

We've seen a state legislature can't come in and say an unconstitutional law.

A state legislature in New York can't come in and say we'll probably lose badly in court, say no, no, no. Our Election Day goes until the new year, February of 2012. They probably will. So, you know, because liberals watch the show to Janis. So we have to talk in simple terms. Is that what you're suggesting, that, yes, even though the legislature, according to the state legislature, according to the Constitution, can appoint the electors and determine their election law, that's only within reason because we need a uniform national election according to the Constitution.

And if a state were to say, no, no, we're going to vote for the president right into the new year, that they would probably get thrown out. So you're saying there's still a chance, even in Nevada, this stuff could happen?

Yes, and so what's happening in Pennsylvania is unconstitutional, just as a basic question. The legislature didn't act in a state like Nevada where the legislature did act. You still have to scrutinize that staying within the margins of the Constitution because Congress has set the first Tuesday of November as Election Day. That's not up to the states. It's simply the manner by which their electors are chosen. They don't get to set election that you don't have Election Day in 50 different days.

So, I mean, and that's that's a constitutional question. That's actually a federal question. So we have this separation even then. So even Nevada, what they did, even though it was by their state legislature, that is still unconstitutional. And so Pennsylvania is actually is just in an even worse and crazy, unethical, illegal situation.

Well, that was a great segue to my my final question here for you, which is which is this and you've been great. I think a lot of us have gotten a really terrific legal education that we can all use before the next election, because this this just can't happen again. I mean, this is a national and international disgrace. What happened here, the legitimacy question, you know, we have 71 million people voted for President Trump. Seventy one million a record for a Republican.

It's not even a close second. It was an extraordinary turnout. The only person who ever got more or says they got more right now is Joe Biden. This is a big movement. It's not going anywhere. And the hard reality is persistent allegations of fraud affidavit access denied. People putting up posters to block out people viewing and voting is not helping. And if tens of millions of those people simply don't accept the legitimacy of this, we have a real problem.

We live in a constitutional republic, the world's greatest democracy in the history of sentient beings. We can't flush this down the toilet bowl here over one presidential election. We have to get to the bottom of what actually happened. I hate that term. Get to the bottom. But in this case, it's actually true. And we have a political problem out there where we have people who feel like they've been disenfranchised. Can we use this moment going forward, do you think?

Because, you know, we've got a lot of Republicans to do their voter I.D. uniform national election.

They clean up state laws on voter, clean up the voter rolls. We got dead people vote. Do you think we have a moment now to do something? Yes, and I'm so glad that you asked this question about legitimacy, because we need to be doing all of those things and every state needs to have their Republicans, conservatives petitioning the legislature to do things like implement voter ID, signature matching some of these just very basic election safeguards. But in terms of legitimacy, that is actually a legal term.

It's not just a court of public opinion term. It's not a feelings based term. It is a factual question. When you talk about legitimacy, this is why it's so important that we have a judicial branch that is willing to be impartial and independent and fairly apply the law to the facts. Because if legitimacy is a political question, then it turns on which candidate you supported and it will. And we will always be a broken and ununified nation when Joe Biden is talking about let's unify the country.

This isn't about feelings. It's not a political question. It's about facts and it's about law. Legitimacy comes in only when you know that things have been transparent and they've been done according to the law, which is objective. And it is the highest rule in the nation. How you get to, for example, a legitimate result in a baseball game or any other sporting event in an Olympic event and anything else when you know it's a legitimate result. People are bummed when their team loses, but they know that it was free and fair when there's been transparency and when the judges are fair and when they know that there was no modification of flat footballs or any sort of manipulation of the clock and timings or anything like that, when they knew that everyone played according to the rules.

And that's why you have judges in every event where you have a winner and a loser, you have to make sure that legitimacy does not turn on feelings. It turns on fact and it turns on the law. And that's where you see these activist liberals. They want to turn legitimacy into a political question and into a feelings based question. And that's why they're going to court, though, seeing for all of these social issue things, they know that it's not actually about feelings.

They want a legitimate ruling from the court because they know that a court is actually the designated arbiter that provides legitimacy in our country. And so when we have these court rulings that the Supreme Court and our judicial branch has to intervene, otherwise there will be no legitimacy. In fact.

Yeah, no, you're absolutely right. And and and it deeply concerns me, worries me a lot, because this is I love this place. You know, we you and I are patriots. Chenna, I really appreciate it. Your time has just been invaluable here. My audience, this was a real legal legal 101 for election. So we appreciate, you know, we'll have you back again sometime. Thanks a lot for your time. We got Mayor Giuliani coming up next.

We'll ask him some of the same questions. So thanks a lot. We really appreciate it. Thanks so much, Dan, I really appreciate being able to explain the Constitution, and I'm in this for the fight to preserve our republic, and I love that President Trump this as well.

I know you enjoyed that interview with Ellis. I know I did. That's how I know you enjoyed it. I hope you did. It was really terrific. Now, coming up next, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who always tears it up. He is never given a disappointing interview on this show ever. So you're not going to want to miss that. Got a couple of sponsors here. Thank you again for your patience. Really appreciate it. These are great companies.

Want to talk to you. Magic Spoon.

Ladies, gentlemen, growing up, cereal. It's one of the best parts of being a kid when it. But I had to give it up because I looked on the back of the box. It was full of sugar and junk that you really shouldn't be eating. Well, Magic Spoon Magic Spoon is our new favorite in the Bongino household.

We are all candidly addicted to it. It's really that good. Zero sugar, 11 grams of protein and only three grams of carbs in each serving a magic spoon. You can't beat that. And it tastes absolutely fantastic. I can't get enough that we go through boxes of it. A lot of you have asked how you can finally build your own custom variety box. Well, you can choose from their best selling cocoa frutti, mouthwatering frosted and blueberry flavors, plus brand new flavors, peanut butter and cinnamon.

It tastes amazing. Honestly, too good to be true with the emails we get for this are spectacular. Quite a few pictures and e-mails. People send me an eating that it's so good. Magic spoon. It's keto friendly, gluten free, grain free, soy free, low carb and GMO free. Go to magic spoon dotcom slash Bongino to build your own custom variety box and try it today. Be sure to use our promo code by Jenova Checkout to get free shipping and Magic Spoon is so confident in their product it's backed with a one hundred percent happiness guarantee.

So if you don't like it for any reason, they'll refund your money. No questions asked.

You like it a lot. A lot, a lot, that's magic, Phone.com slashed by Geto and use the code Bongino for free shipping. We thank Magic Spawn for sponsoring the podcast.

Things Rather sponsored is our new favorite appliance in the kitchen there. Because I like to eat healthy. The power of fryer appliances take up a bunch of space. My wife, Paula, she can't stand that. We don't have that much room. We don't live in some palace. Sixty two thousand square feet.

That's why I'm so excited about a new partner. The Power Xolair Fryer Grill. You can replace eight kitchen appliances with the power zl. It's an air fryer, a grill, rotisserie convection oven, pizza oven, griddle, deep fryer and toaster oven. And it makes the best chicken nuggets ever. All of that stuff. And one, I still love nuggets. I'm a Nuggets guy that Power Excel cooks with hot air, not oil, saying cook healthier.

You know, I'm a health nut with up to 70 percent fewer calories from fat. And you can cook for the whole family if it's over four times more food than a traditional air fryer and cooks much, much faster to save you time. The secrets, the heating elements from above side and below the grill play, combined with turbo blades that are angled to distribute the heat evenly throughout the entire cooking surface, comes with a ton of accessories like a nonstick grill plate, super easy to clean up, crisper tray, baking pan, drip, tray and oven rack in the all dishwasher safe.

So clean up is really easy. I have to clean up duties in the house, so I like that. It's like they sat down, thought about all the problems with cooking appliances and decided to start solving them. That's why it's the number one brand of air fryers in the US. The power air fryer comes with a 90 day money back, guarantee money back, guarantee Paulas empanadas in that air. Fryer, by the way, are absolutely spectacular.

I just want to throw that in there. Right now, they have an exclusive offer just for Dan Bongino. So, listen, if you go to try Power Excel Dotcom and use promo code Bongino, you'll receive 10 percent off plus free shipping and a free cookbook. So had to try Power Excel dot com and use our promo code. Bongino one last time for this incredibly affordable deal. Try to buy power. P We are XL Dotcom and use promo code.

Bonjean Are you going to love it and throw some nuggets in there too. And empanadas will even slip you the recipe. Check them out, try power zl back home, use promo code Biaggio.

Now onto the great former mayor of New York City, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani. All right, welcome back to the show for, I don't know, the tenth time or whatever the audience seems to love former mayor of New York City, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani. Thank you for coming back, sir. I appreciate it. Thank you, Dan. Always a pleasure to be with you. Likewise, I feel the same, so let me get right into it. You are on the front lines of this fight, just like you've been on the front lines of seemingly every fight for the last two decades.

Now, this fight for election integrity in a free and fair election, which the media has seemingly given up on, they've already coronated a new king. We're not doing that here. So I was going to ask you first about some problems during the election. I wanted to hit on this dominion, this problem with Dominion, this software system. I know. Can you give me a little bit of a background on audience what's going on here with the fight against this system?

I can tell you your as usual, Dan, you're on target. Dominion is a Canadian company, which, of course, immediately raises the issue. Why do we have a foreign company counting our belt? And letting our vote get outside the United States, which is what happens, but Dominion really doesn't do it, Dominion has a software that it gets from a company called Smartmatic. Smartmatic is is a company that it's a Deleware company on by my name, but it's owned by Venezuelans, Venezuelans who are close to Chavez and Maduro, whom they actually count the vote and they count the vote in Barcelona, Spain.

So the vote goes from here to Barcelona, Spain. They count it and they kind of give it back to us, Candy, a software change the vote. Any way they want? Absolutely. Make it flip it around, change it. In one case where they got caught in Antrim County, Michigan, it actually had it flipped, it had Biden winning two to one. This is a county where Trump carried it by sixty four percent last time.

So when the local people saw it, they said, what's going on? And it got flipped, they say, accidentally by Dominion, which really means by Smartmatic. Now, let me tell you the history of Smartmatic Smart Smartmatic is a company that actually was established by Chavez. And the whole purpose of it was to steal elections. That's their expertise, stealing elections. So. And as far as we can tell, Smartmatic owns Dominion. There's a company in embittering in between called Indro.

So we're basically having our votes counted by Venezuelans who are close to our enemy, Maduro. Oh, just in case you want a little more interest in this, I believe it was Smartmatic up until a few days ago, their CEO. Was one of the closest people to you, guess the. Who how about the biggest donor to the Democratic Party, the Black Lives Matter, yet not Soros? Don't even tell me. Come on now. Are you kidding me?

Because, you know, he's like I have a whole chapter in my book on that with Soros and Ukraine and all that. You got to be kidding me. This is one of Soros is top guys, was the CEO of Smartmatic. They took him off a couple of days ago.

Oh, my gosh. And one of them and one of the key people in Dominion is a big supporter of anti. So if someone is someone on the team here looking at what's the audit trail, I mean, how do we know reliably that their vote counts are in fact, genuine and authentic? We don't. We don't know that. We don't know that and what what is how was there no due diligence in picking this company? I mean, the state of Georgia picked this company to Republican state, however.

The governor's former, I think it was chief of staff is now one of the chief lobbyists for Dominion and Smartmatic. You know, it's astounding, Mr. Mayor, why am I always hearing this stuff from you, Hunter, Biden, the whole Ukraine thing?

I mean, the mainstream media should be looking at this. Because we have a country that is now afflicted by censorship, there's an Iron Curtain and it's an absolute Iron Curtain. I mean, today. Today, we submitted evidence in court, they keep saying there's no evidence of fraud claims. I mean, we've submitted two hundred affidavits. Affidavits are evidence and they go so far as to point out that it's four thirty in the morning in Detroit. All of a sudden out of nowhere, one hundred thousand ballots appeared.

They look like they look like something that was like prohibition when Al Capone was delivering his stuff, many crates and carts and shopping bags, they put them on a big table and he observes, we have two of them. There are public affidavits from them, said that every vote was forbad.

So every single vote for Biden, the chances of that being statistically zero. After they finished the vote at two or two thirds and they saw it in Detroit, they had finished all of the mail order ballots. They got a communication that they were about one hundred and thirty thousand votes still behind. Remember, he was ahead by three hundred thousand. They didn't want to wake up the next morning with him ahead. So all of a sudden, after about forty five minutes is a big commotion and these ballots start coming in the back door.

And our two witnesses say that all these ballots were thrown on tables and they started counting them furiously and they were both dead throughout most of the count and they never heard any other name but Biden and one of them got a chance to see a lot of the ballots and the ballots had by his name and not even any other Democrat. Not even a damn check. And they were counting them furiously because they were on this kind of time line to get this vote down, get the vote down, get the vote down.

Get the vote. Get. Now we can prove that in court. Mr. Mayor, I got topic because it's important I address this to my audience earlier in the week, we've seen some statistical anomalies here showing a high percentage of people who only voted for the presidency on Biden's side and didn't vote down ticket. Now, you and I, having run for office, you know, it's there's a pretty consistent amount of people that what they call Rohloff, they vote for the top of the whether the mayor of New York at the top or the president and don't vote down ballot.

But that number seems to be very different this time. And the suggestion by some out there is that in an effort to stuff it full of Biden ballots, they didn't even bother voting down ballot. They just crossed the Biden name and sent them in. Do you have some evidence of that?

I can't I can't explain all of it. But as to these 100000, these are obviously a ballots they had to have produced that night or many of them. So I had to do it real quick. What happened is, I think in both Pennsylvania and in Michigan, they were shocked by the lead that he had. They were ready for one hundred, maybe one hundred and fifty thousand lead based on last night. Remember, he only won those states five percent.

Yeah. All of a sudden, he's in Pennsylvania. He's ahead by eight hundred thousand votes. They were completely knocked out. And they had to do a lot of vote created in order to catch up. They had prepared mail order ballots, they had gone through this whole mail order thing to wipe him out, but it did matter because he got he over performed anything they could imagine. He was ahead by seven hundred thousand in Pennsylvania. He was ahead by three hundred thousand in Michigan.

He was ahead by equal amount in Wisconsin, actually by a larger percentage. I mean, how could it be in all these states where he was ahead all of a sudden by the next morning, he's either behind a fallen way beyond that? Strange. It's just not statistically. Pennsylvania is statistically impossible. I have a few questions on Pennsylvania, Mr. Mayor.

ONOn Pennsylvania. So Lindsey Graham, Senator Graham was on Fox News a few days ago and it mentioned that there was another. And there's a lot of anomalies here, sir, as you can well imagine. Very strange. Yeah. Yeah. And one of them was a roughly twenty five thousand requests for ballots. Mail ballots came in from nursing homes around Pennsylvania. And those requests all conveniently came in at the same time, which is really odd considering the fact that that doesn't typically happen.

The suggestion being Pennsylvania, where ballot harvesting is illegal, that there's a possibility that those ballots were requested by people other than the actual voter. Have you seen anything like that?

Yes, we have seen we have I can't say right now we have comprehensive proof of that, but we have isolated cases where that happened. We have comprehensive proof of the hundred thousand ballots. We have comprehensive proof in Pittsburgh that we weren't allowed to inspect three hundred and thirty thousand ballots all together account that we can prove that we weren't allowed to inspect the six hundred and thirty thousand. And our argument is those ballots are unlawful under the laws of the state of Pennsylvania, the Constitution, many people wouldn't remember this, but the Constitution says that the state legislature runs federal elections.

The Constitution says that the state legislature sets the rules, so when they created this crazy mail ballot thing, which many people objected to because of fraud. They added a very strict observation requirement. They said it's absolutely necessary that the ballots be examined by both sides. In Michigan, they actually attached the misdemeanor penalty for failure to do it because they were so afraid that, you know, once once you take a mail order ballot or a mail in ballot and you remove the outside envelope.

You can no longer check. So that observation becomes very, very important. We're going to take a quick break. We're here with former Mayor Rudy Giuliani ahead in this fight right now. We'll be right back in a second. Today's show also brought to you by our Friends at Relief Band. Folks, we've all been there. We've all been nauseous. Rough night out, get sick. A lot of that, sadly, come in my way. You know, the feeling it's terrible.

Runs a good day, a good night. It is one of the worst feelings to be nauseous. We've all been there while our new partner relief band is the number one FDA cleared antinausea wristband that has been clinically proven to relieve nausea and vomiting associated with motion sickness, morning sickness, chemotherapy, anxiety, hangovers, migraines and so much more. The product is one hundred percent drug free, non drowsy, fast acting and provides all natural relief with zero side effects.

The technology was originally developed over twenty years ago in hospitals to relieve nausea from patients. But now to relief ban. It's available to the masses.

You obviously know folks now. I took them on as a sponsor. I can't wait to have to use this. I cannot wait.

How it works is relief. Band stimulates a nerve in the wrist that travels to the part of the brain that controls nausea. Amazing, right? Then it blocks the signal your brain is sending to your stomach, telling you that you're sick. Relief band is the only the only over-the-counter wearable device, the only over-the-counter wearable device that's been used in hospitals and oncology clinics to treat nausea and vomiting.

If you know someone who deals with nausea, relief and makes a great gift this holiday season, help someone help someone reclaim their life from the fear of nausea. Right now, Relief Ban has an exclusive offer. Just for Dan Bongino listeners. If you go to relief band dotcom and use code promo code Bongino beyond Giammo, you'll receive 20 percent off. So head to relief band Dotcom and use our promo code.

Bongino for 20 percent of that's r e l i.e. FBA and relief band Dotcom use promo code MANGINO for 20 percent off. Thanks for being part of the show. I think you all understand that relief band dot com promo code. Mancino now back the former mayor of New York City, Rudolph Giuliani. All right.

We're back with former Mayor Rudy Giuliani leading this legal fight right here for a free and fair election. So we were talking about Pennsylvania. You noted that there are potentially 600000 ballots that, according to Pennsylvania's own law, may, in fact be illegal ballots. This could change everything in Pennsylvania. So what we're asking the court to do is to declare those ballots, as the law says, unlawful. They shouldn't be counted. You can't certify the vote with these unlawful ballots mixed in and to deduct that number from the number in Philadelphia and the number in Pittsburgh.

So roughly it would be three hundred and thirty thousand in Pittsburgh in about an equal number in Philadelphia. And since Biden won both of those by. Eight out of 10 and seven out of 10, Trump would get back to a margin of about three hundred thousand. Which, given the fact he was ahead by seven hundred thousand on election night, is probably the right number. That's the real mail in ballots reduced in. And mathematical experts have looked at it and said ahead between seven and eight hundred thousand votes, with sixty five percent of the vote counted, the statistical probability that Biden could overcome them was close to zero.

Wow, that's interesting. Can I ask you another question on Pennsylvania, because Pennsylvania, without Pennsylvania, we have nothing. I think we can all we have to win Pennsylvania, but we just had a recent court victory in Pennsylvania. So all is not lost. A judge ruled in our favor about cured ballots, it seems, in Pennsylvania. Both the secretary of state and the courts in Pennsylvania have shockingly taken on the role of the legislature. I don't know if they rewrote the constitution while we weren't looking or what the state constitution, but secured ballots where they can reach out and say, hey, listen, you got to come back with ID.

Your ballot is invalid. The Pennsylvania law was very clear. It had to be done by November 9th. Well, the secretary of state in Pennsylvania said, no, no, no, we'll give you a few more days to fix it. And we just won that fight. Correct, with the judge said, no, no, that's not what the law says. You can cut that crap out right now. Those ballots are out. So that that's a big victory, correct?

Yeah, that's that's a big victory. And it's a victory that'll knock out some votes. Remember, we're only fifty thousand votes behind in Pennsylvania. And when you consider. The numbers where we were excluded from being able to observe when you consider those, and then there's another area where they cheated, Justice Alito made it clear that you could not submit a ballot for counting after November 3rd, 8:00. And if what you had to do with those is segregate them and put them in a separate pile, we can argue over them later.

Well, we have many witnesses in both Pennsylvania and in Michigan. That ballots that were marked for five and six were backdated to three. Direct witnesses who saw it happen and we have a witness who was told to do it, yeah, now that's important. Those efforts were also invalid and I think they're going to get the justice done angry.

Well, this is what I'm concerned about. The Supreme Court ruling on that was clear, but they didn't make a clear ruling on the validity of the ballots. So we're in a conundrum here. Pennsylvania law, again, is clear. It says submit the ballot by Election Day, which was November 3rd this year. It's no good, which is in a controversial law vote on Election Day. And it's not a vote. Well, right. Well, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, just like the secretary of state, usurped the legislative role and said, no, no, that's OK.

We're going to accept ballots three days after Election Day, which is the law is crystal clear. It doesn't say that. So Justice Alito said keep those votes aside. But here's what I'm worried about, Mr. Mayor. I'm hearing rumblings that if the vote set aside and segregated are not enough to change the outcome, that Justice Roberts may not take the case, which is ridiculous, because even if we lose this, this is a clear violation of election law.

Yeah, also, we're never going to know how many really came in later. Because many were backdated. So those votes, those votes where they have to decide whether they should count or not, have already been merged into the overall vote. Because they backdated. I'm pretty sure we can do an estimate of the number, but we can never give you an exact number. We have a group of witnesses that say that they were instructed and that others were instructed to backdated and they did.

They backdated it from the fourth to the third, from the 5th to the third. Maybe by looking at them, you can reconstruct it, but maybe not. So that violation of the order. Should, in fact, lead, first of all, the contempt for the people who did it, and secondly, it should it should help to cast such a shadow of systemic fraud when you consider all the other things that were done that they should clearly award those votes to to Trump.

I mean. I don't know how to describe it. Philadelphia was, yeah, it sounds like a train wreck. And what bothers me, Mr. Mayor, here is how you having been running Southern District and here no one knows the justice system in the courts better than you spend your entire life. You had a Supreme Court justice was unequivocal, segregate the ballots that come in after Election Day so that if we rule, they are invalid pursuant to the law.

We have a number and it appears to me call me crazy that Pennsylvania said, screw you, will do what we want. Is there no penalty for this? They didn't segregate the ballots.

I mean, what happens now is that instead instead they force the ballots. They made it appear as if they came in on the 3rd. They did the same thing in Michigan. And there we have the testimony not of a political partisan, but a bit of a thirty seven year city worker in Detroit who was forced to do it.

Oh, my gosh. I want to get to a few. I know we're short on time, so I want to get to just a few more states before we got to run. Mr. Mayor, just quickly on Arizona, listen, I spoke out openly about the ridiculous early call for Arizona, which was absolutely unwarranted. It's been called again now by outlets repeatedly. And we're getting close there in Arizona. Is there any chance the result in Arizona could could eventually go our way or those numbers just.

Yeah, I mean, both Arizona and Nevada have very similar claims of Republicans being excluded from the male vote counting. I think you're going to have those claims in at least 10 states, which leads to a different argument, which is how did this all happen, coincidentally? Did all these. Corrupt city bosses, because that's where it happened. It only happened in cities they control like that. How did it happen that the boss in Pittsburgh and the Boston Philadelphia and the one in Phoenix and the one in Milwaukee all decided to keep Republicans out that day?

You don't keep the other side out of absentee ballot count, it's almost almost a tradition. I've never heard of that before. We have absentee counting all the time. You have a Republican on one side, you have a Democrat on the other side. They look at the envelope, they say yes or no. If they say no, you put it in a pile for a judge to take a look at all of a sudden. This new law, with special emphasis, has been put on the right to observe.

In 10 jurisdictions, Democrats throw the Republicans out. Somebody had to call that shot. It just didn't occur at all. I mean, the Angel Gabriel didn't come to all these guys and tell them, keep out, the Republicans keep out, the Republicans keep out, the Republicans. Some genius Biden camp is the one who did it, or DNC, and I think we could get discovery of their emails, that correspondence, and we should be able to question them as to whether there was any communication about this as a strategy, because everything that I can see says to me it has to be a strategy.

I just don't believe in, you know, 10 coincidences.

Well, the strategy to me and what something I discussed the day after Election Day, it seemed pretty clear if there's a coordinated effort here to stop what appeared to be a landslide. Again, Electoral College was what I would do if I were going to do it is stop the count. Stop the hemorrhaging. If you're losing, stop the count. Wake up in the middle of the night when no one's paying attention. Because what you don't want to do is you don't want race is call, because then political momentum builds and you don't want the media to turn.

So you stop the count. Therefore, the race can't be called. Have everyone wake up in the morning, dump a bunch of ballots, show up, you know, whether legal or not, restart the count. Look out, guys. Ahead, stop the hemorrhaging. All of a sudden, you don't call Florida, don't call Texas, despite the fact that they were won in absolute roots and let the media political capital build up. Call in president elect.

And next thing you know, you've anointed your king when you don't even have a free and fair election certified yet. That's how I would do it.

There's your next book then. Yeah, right here, by the way. Yeah, go ahead.

You're pretty much on target. That's exactly what happened. And the only thing the only thing that threw the most here and hopefully let them make enough mistakes so we can prove it. They never expected they were going to have to make up as many votes as they had to make up, at least in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. They were in a panic. They let it go too long, and in Philadelphia, there's no doubt they waited too long to pull the string, they should have done it when he was ahead by three or four hundred thousand, but they let it run up to seven hundred thousand, which gives you an idea of how bold they are in trying to steal.

I mean, you just can't you can't legitimately make your way back from seven or eight hundred thousand with sixty five percent of the vote cast.

Mr. Mayor, thank you for joining us. I really appreciate it. That was a really informative interview. Thank you very much that I really enjoyed the interview.

What do you say when you say after that interview that the stuff about Dominion, the material he presented there about Dominion software, you know, the left will say, oh, it's a conspiracy.

You know what they do? That's what they always do. I'm not really interested. We need to know our elections are free and fair if it turns out the software was fine and there were no malfunctions, terrific. I mean, that that's great. But we should be looking we've got one last sponsor I want to get to an announcement on the other side is you're not going to want to miss Fox Today show was also brought to you by friends that I target this year.

Remember, it reminded us of many things, including how important it is to look after our families, the ones we love. We need to be prepared this holiday season, give the gift of safety and practice. Give them I target pro. I get a ton a ton of emails about the system.

You have the right to self-defense, but also a moral obligation to be safe. Most of us don't have the time to train consistently and ammo can get really expensive. That's why I target was invented. What is it? It is a laser round that goes in the firearm. You have now no manipulations necessary. Safely unload it. You insert the laser and it comes with a target and an app and you can practice in the safety and security of your own home.

You don't need any live ammo. You can practice your grip side, alignment your sight, picture your breathing, your muscle memory, your stance, your aim. All of that I target for people can't put this down. I target programs in all the major calibers, even two to three and five, five, six. Today you can save 10 percent plus get free shipping with the offer. Codan, I gave this to my dad by the way, last year for Christmas to see loved it.

Go to I target pro.

That's the letter I target for get 10 percent free shipping with the offer kodansha checkout. This is the smartest way for you to practice. It pays for itself in just a few days.

That's the letter I target Broadcom. I target pro dotcom use offer Codan again. I target pro dot com offer Gaudin. This makes a great gift train. You're going to need it right. You got to be proficient. I target Broadcom use offer code Codan. Ladies and gentlemen, we have another special coming up next month. We'll announce the date soon. We're going to do a wrap up for the year. A deep state special.

We're going to have a few surprise guests on the show and we're going to talk about a whole bunch of things here, hopefully we'll have some resolution on this election. By then, we should the electors meet December 14, but you're not going to want to miss it. Thanks for your patience today with the show in your time. I hope you enjoyed it. I certainly did. We will see you again on Monday.

You just heard Dan Bongino.