Dan Bongino Gets DESTROYED By Dave Smith & Ducks Debate!
Dan Bongino has returned to independent media after leaving his post as FBI Deputy Director, and is now back to being a bombastic "Twitter tough guy" after failing to deliver accountability when he actually held power. Guest host Keaton Weiss highlights Bongino's attacks on critics like Dave Smith while contrasting them with his record of defending official narratives around Jeffrey Epstein's death and other high-profile scandals. Keaton cites Jimmy replying on Twitter, arguing that Bongino damaged his credibility by shielding institutions and elites, then lashing out at independent commentators who demand transparency. The episode frames Bongino's online rage as a collapse driven by hypocrisy, ego, and the inability to answer for his own past claims. Plus segments on JD Vance's bonkers, gaslighting defense of the Minneapolis ICE shooting, Tucker Carlson decrying the lack of humanity demonstrated by many Americans' response to the ICE shooting and the Trump administration's latest dodge to avoid releasing all of the Epstein files. Also featuring Jenin Younes, Chris Keene and Kurt Metzger!
Come see me on tour, February 20th in Lansing, Michigan, February 21st in Milwaukee.
Go to jimmydoor.com for a link for tickets.
Establishment media sucks, all gaslighting, so good luck, bullshit we can't afford, he's fomenting this, whoa-oh-oh-oh, watch and see as he's jacked off the median speeds and jumps the medium and hits him head on, it's the Jimmy Dore Show.
Welcome to the Jimmy Dore Show, everybody.
Keaton filling in for Jimmy while he is on the road.
So let's do a segment.
I got to shout out Malcolm for titling this segment, The Bongino Dialogues.
I thought that was really good.
Got to give a shout out to the production team here.
Let's start the Bongino dialogues because Dan Bongino, former deputy FBI director, is back doing what he loves, which is talking like he's really going to do something if and when he's given the opportunity to do it.
If only this guy were in some sort of position of influence at some point, maybe there would have been some force behind these words.
But instead, we are left with just the words once again.
So here he comes, January 5th, out of the job, back to social media world.
Good to see you all.
I missed you.
Thanks for everything while we worked on cleaning up.
Working in the working in the administration was the experience of a lifetime.
I'll have some announcements coming up, but I'm taking a couple days to spend with the family.
A couple of things.
Thank you for your interest in the show and its return date.
So he's going back to the podcast.
We will have something for you soon.
The Trump team is not kidding around.
It's an otherworldly experience from the other side.
He's determined and focused.
And having been around quite a few presidents, this one broke the mold.
All right.
So far, it's a nice, hey, good to be back.
But it doesn't take long for him to go negative on the crowd here.
If we blocked you, it's because we care so little about your bullshit that we deem it not worthy of even seeing.
If you're bitching and whining about it, that means you can't exist without seeing and commenting on ours.
You'll need to get over that.
We do it because there's nothing black pillars and anti-Trumpers want more than to create division and drama.
Wearabout results, and we'll talk about some of it soon.
Love you all, and thanks again, Flaming Elmo Emoji.
All right, so a little bit of hostility there for a welcome back message, but all right.
Follows that up with, let me add this, and one more thing.
From the jump, so there's no confusion.
I started in this movement as a candidate during the Tea Party movement, and I began my political commentary career shortly thereafter.
I helped build this movement, and I sure as hell am not going to let it be hijacked by a group of black pillars, life losers, grifters, and bums.
We are a movement guided by truth.
Ha!
That's the whopper of the year so far.
I know the year's only nine days old, but man, that is a contention for bullshit statement of the year.
Yeah, movement, movement guided by truth.
The essence of conservative ideology is the preservation of eternal truths.
We are not, yeah, there are only two genders and only one Epstein perpetrator, right?
Those are the eternal objective truths of the conservative movement.
We are not the latest thing group.
We are not political cannibals.
I've watched quietly from the inside while doing the job I was hired to do, but I'm back now, and it's time to restore balance to the force.
I don't even know what the hell that last thing says.
I'm not even going to try it.
I know it's embarrassing to admit I don't know how to pronounce it, but I feel like if I try and pronounce it and fuck it up, it's going to be more embarrassing.
So I'll cut my losses right there.
Sorry, Dan.
You got me on that one.
As we get ready to make some announcements about the future of the show, I also want to warn the haters and the zeros.
We've been at this a long time.
We live for this stuff.
This isn't our first, second, or 10th rodeo.
We've seen a lot of dip shits come and go.
We revel in making you angry enough to show your asses.
It's glorious.
We've got midterms coming up, and there's no time for bullshit.
This administration is cooking and real change simmers.
If you're spending your entire day bitching and whining with three-fourths of the team still to go term, pardon me, still to go, then please find the exits.
There's no time for it.
It's not infighting when you excise a cancer killing the host.
It's outfighting because you're not part of any movement I'm familiar with.
Looking forward to big things ahead.
Can't wait to tell you about it.
Dan.
All right.
Well, sir, this is a Wendy's.
But Matt Gates had a response to this.
He said, when did Dan Bongino run for office and how did he perform as a candidate asking Grock?
So Bongino takes the bait, says, Maybe if I spent more time at shady parties with moneyed insiders, I would have won.
I heard you know a bit about that.
You've always been a dick, by the way, grifting off your daddy like a suckling little doggy.
When I first met you in the panhandle, I knew you were a piece of shit.
It's written all over that phony face of yours.
I thought this guy quit the FBI to spend more time with his family.
Talk about how much he misses his wife.
He's stuck at the office.
He gets back.
He spends all day calling people bitches and posers and phonies and suckling little doggies on Twitter.
I thought your wife missed you.
I thought your family missed you.
Why don't you go play catch with your kid?
Jesus Christ, what a fucking lunatic.
Anyway, Dave Smith had his own welcome back message for Dan Bongino.
Here it is.
After talking about this all the time, and you saw him right there in the clip saying, don't let up.
Don't let up on the Epstein thing.
We got to keep talking about this.
None of this makes sense.
What you didn't see there is he even went as far as one time on the Tim Poole show.
He said, he said, I have it on good authority that Jeffrey Epstein worked for Middle Eastern intelligence.
Could be any of those Middle Eastern countries, of course.
But so he said all that.
Then he goes in there.
He says, he's seen the files.
He killed himself.
That was approximately two months before the official position of the administration was that the files don't exist.
So he said he's seen the files and he's killed himself.
And by the way, as you know, because we followed this whole crazy train, right?
You know, the end result of it is that the bill passed.
The files are to be released.
Great.
So now we all get to see it, right?
I mean, I understand they just missed a deadline, but of course, this administration is that they ran on being the most transparent administration in history, right?
So we're going to get all that information.
So this will be great.
So let's see what Dan Bongino saw.
Yeah, it's a good point.
I mean, the law says they're supposed to release the files.
So does that oblige Dan Bongino to keep his mouth shut or could he say what he saw, right?
I mean, the law that they just passed commands transparency.
So isn't Danny Boy in a position to provide some transparency?
I got to tell you, that'd be a killer first episode back.
He wants to hype the return of his Rumble show.
One way to do that would be to I'm going to spill the beans on the Epstein files.
So good observation there.
I mean, Dan Bongino, by the way, you're coming back to podcasting now.
The files have been declassified.
I'm not a lawyer, but pretty sure you can tell us now.
It's not classified information anymore.
You can tell us exactly what you saw, exactly how you were able to look the American people in the eye and guarantee and promise that he killed himself.
And you know that for a fact.
I mean, you must have seen some really strong evidence in order to know that for a fact.
What we've seen so far is a fake AI image of Epstein attempting to kill himself in some way in a cell, but it was clearly determined that that wasn't a real video.
So, what is it that you saw, Dan?
I mean, look, dude, if you want to come back into this world, in this world here, as you knew before you went into government, in this world, the currency is honesty, the currency is the truth.
So, tell us, man, you went into government, looked us all in the eye, and made up a big fat fucking lie that you don't know.
And you know it.
You know, you did that.
So, now you think you're going to be the one to come back into this, you know, the podcast and game, and you're going to be policing this space, the black pillars.
Like, okay, the black pillars, the black pillars.
All right.
Well, there you go.
Final cut tile says, take this video of comic Dave Smith and distribute it to Dan Bongino comment sections.
That must be how Dan Bongino found out about this because he was not happy about that, as we will learn in a couple of minutes.
But first, let's play Dan Bongino's return to podcasting.
Here he is on Silverlock being interviewed about the current state of the movement as being afflicted by black pillars and naysayers.
Black pillars, where everything sucks all the time, is like, well, we're demanding accountability, but you're not great.
So am I. That's how you're endlessly complaining about things you don't know, even don't know anything about.
Like, that's all you do.
Like, he'll shut down the border, 10 people across some other.
Why wasn't it zero?
Okay.
Well, can you just acknowledge going from a million to 10 is a big deal?
That way, and there's a cost to that.
And the cost you see is in polling numbers around the midterms.
You can't let this negative vibe constantly set in.
That doesn't mean healthy debates about.
It's like Walter Sopche telling the dude, you can't let this negative energy carry you into the tournament.
We can't, I don't want you carrying this negative energy into the tournament.
Policy are not welcome.
Hey, I'm not a big tariff guy.
I've said that a thousand times.
Debating policies are fine.
Debating policies are fine.
I think a lot of the so-called damage from the tariffs was dramatically over-exaggerated.
Oh, really?
Well, you know, I would like you to tell some of the meatpackers in Nebraska that the damage from the tariffs has been exaggerated, or maybe the farmers in Iowa who can't sell their product anywhere because they haphazardly implemented tariffs without building any kind of industrial base here.
No, I would love for you to go into the heartland on a tour and tell them how the tarot, the damage from the tariffs has been exaggerated.
People who don't like them have to acknowledge that now.
The economy's motoring, 4% growth, but the black pill complains.
4% growth is great for the richest 1%.
That's great for the investor class, 4% growth.
Go ahead.
Ask any ordinary person how their economic situation is.
And whining all the time about the administration of it.
It's just like, man, what team are you on?
Oh, what team are you on?
What team are you on?
You know, it's funny.
The exact same thing is happening on the right as what happened on the left, you know, after 2016 and really since 2016, where the sort of a lot of the Bernie people split off.
You know, some of them voted for Clinton and then some of them refused to fall in line.
That kind of represents where we are in this sort of corner of the space.
And what did people say about us at the time that we were being disloyal to the team?
Essentially, that we were closet right wingers who had become agents of the right, who had turned our back on the team.
Notice, what is the right saying about Tucker Carlson now?
What are they saying about Candace Owens now?
Right.
What are they saying about the conservative voices who are refusing to fall in line behind the Trump program?
They say you're carrying water for the left.
Alex Jones calls Candace Owens a closet globalist.
She's working for the globalists.
Again, this appeal to team loyalty when you cannot defend the substance of what you are saying, it's the oldest trick in the book.
And people on the left side of things have gone through this for the past 10 years.
And now you're going to see this splintering off on the right.
Let's let Dan finish.
Man, so you don't have to watch.
It's okay.
There's a door.
You know, go find the freaking exits because I don't really give a shit.
I'm not here for anybody's money or anything like that.
I'm too old for that shit.
All right.
All right.
Well, he's back on Twitter now.
Again, the Lib Blackpillar symbiote is a funny little organism.
It's even led by a comedian.
Comedian.
You mean like this comedian?
Yeah, it seems pretty obvious who you're subtweeting there, right?
Quote, comedian.
These morons can't even follow their own battle plan.
Quick example: I do a guest hit last night on a podcast, and the LBP symbiote starts rage tweeting.
No one is going to watch.
When it was the number one live stream in its slot, the LBP symbiote, which is the lib blackpillar symbiote, for those who are new to this, melted down again, claiming that was us there to attack you.
Do these clowns know how this business works?
And when you point out here on X what a bunch of dipshits they are, they start rage engaging again.
I've been dealing with these tools for 15 years, and this is why they always implode.
They're just too stupid to coordinate.
Today's lesson is concluded.
Thanks for reading.
Go.
I guess he's got a subscribe link or something in the comments.
Once again, this is a guy who says he missed his family while he was at the FBI.
So Dave Smith recognizes that.
He says, Yeah, yeah, nice story.
Why did you lie through your teeth about Epstein?
It's amazing how this guy just acts like the last year didn't happen.
Even in this day, I've been dealing with these people for 15 years.
Yeah, what were you doing last year?
What were you doing last year?
Because I think you were more or less a member in good standing of the click that has now turned on you until the last year.
I think the last year, how you spent your last year, is why you're having a problem with people now, if I had to guess.
So, Bon Gino comes back.
Hilarious that you not only missed the news cycle for the past year.
No, he didn't miss the news cycle for the past year.
He paid attention to the news cycle for the past year, and that's why he doesn't like you anymore.
But that you also knew you were the moron referenced in the post.
Watching you advertise your dip shittery on a series of debates over the past year was my guilty pleasure while I was working.
God, now go back to your mama's spare room and write me some jokes and get your shine box too.
My shoes got a scuff last night while lighting up the live stream while your clowns were rage posting.
Thanks.
Dan, big tough guy, big tough guy.
If only he had as much smoke for the Epstein clients as he has for Dave Smith, maybe Dave Smith wouldn't dislike him so much.
We all knew you were talking about me, says Dave.
You were just too much of a bitch to say my name.
That's wild that you had time to watch all of my debates.
What with all of the demands, your work covering up pedophilia, which will be your legacy.
Make no mistake about it.
Sorry, that was a double there.
So Jimmy Dore, host of the show, chimes in and says, didn't do a thing he said he was going to do after he got power, held nobody accountable for anything, but did manage to destroy his reputation by lying to cover up for the deep state and pedophiles, and is now spending most of his day being a fake Twitter tough guy after failing to be an actual tough guy.
Wow.
Yeah, no, now that he has no power, he's go get your shine box.
My shoes got a scruff on them, right?
You're a little bitch, right?
Meanwhile, this is Dan Bongino in power, right?
This is his actual personality.
This is Dan Bongino when the chips are down.
Dan Bongino, under pressure, asked about the circumstances surrounding the death of Jeffrey Epstein.
Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide.
People don't believe it.
Well, I mean, listen, they have a right to their opinion, but as someone who has worked as a public defender, as a prosecutor, who's been in that prison system, who's been in the Metropolitan Detention Center, who's been in segregated housing, you know a suicide when you see one, and that's what that was.
He killed himself.
Again, you want me to get?
I've seen the whole file.
He killed himself.
I know it's hard work.
The guy looks like he's about to cry every time he was interviewed.
He looks like he's about to cry.
Here he is once more, this time talking about the circumstances around the assassination attempt of Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, saying there's no big explosive there.
Maria, Cash is not kidding.
We have been personally briefed extensively on every single detail, nugget, tendril of this case.
One is actively in court right now.
So out of respect for the case, it's probably more appropriate that I stay quiet on that.
However, I'm not going to tell people what they want to hear.
I'm going to tell you the truth.
And whether you like it or not is up to you.
If there was a big explosive there, right?
Given my history as a Secret Service agent and my personal friendship as a director does with the president, give me one logical, sensible reason we would not have to, if you can think of one, there isn't.
There isn't.
Well, you tell us.
It clearly was.
Like I said, the guy's a mess.
This is Dan Bongino when his job is to actually do the things he talked about doing on his podcast for all those years.
This is how he acts under pressure.
Big tough guy on X, big tough guy behind a microphone, big tough guy to comedian Dave Smith.
Comes Epstein, comes to Butler.
Not such a tough guy.
And as I mentioned before, let's remember how hard it was on Dan Bongino personally taking this job as deputy FBI director because, you know, he really missed his family.
He missed his wife.
Up everything for this.
I mean, you know, my wife is struggling.
I'm not a victim.
I'm not Jim Comey.
It's fine.
I did this and I'm proud I did it.
But if you think we're there for tea and crumpets, well, I mean, Cash is there all day.
We share our offices are linked.
He turns on the faucet.
I hear it.
He's there.
He gets in like six.
That guy microwaves a samosa and I smell it.
I say, Jesus Christ, would it kill you to have a grilled cheese once a week?
Unbelievable.
Morning.
He doesn't leave till seven at night.
You know, I'm in there at 7:30 in the morning.
You know, he uses the gym.
I work out in my apartment, but I stare at these four walls all day in DC, you know, by myself, divorced from my wife.
Not divorced, but I mean, separated, divorced.
And it's hard.
I mean, you know, we love each other and it's hard to be apart.
But you're doing some great things.
It's hard to be apart.
Okay, so if it's hard to be apart, then why don't you spend some time with your wife as opposed to rage tweeting the lib black pill symbiote or whatever the fuck you call it, right?
And call Dave Smith a bitch who needs to shine your shoes.
That's it.
Take a little break.
Take a little break.
I miss my wife so much.
I miss my family.
I can't stand being away from you.
The second he's back.
He's on X eight hours a day, rage tweeting at the haters and the losers.
It's pretty amazing that he expects people to buy this fake tough guy act after humiliating himself at every opportunity for the past year.
He looked completely miserable every chance we got to see him as deputy FBI director, which, you know, you could have made work for you, I suppose, if you come back out here and you, you know, act with the appropriate humility, right?
I mean, the alternative would be to come back out here and say, you know what?
That job was above me.
That shit is too much for me.
I'm going to, you know, take a little while to reassess my options, and I'll see you all when I feel comfortable talking again.
I think people would have had a certain modicum of respect for that.
This, this is just a crash out, man.
It's a crash out, and it's a funny thing to see.
It really is, because in times as severe as these, we all need a good crash out for a little comic relief every now and then.
So I guess thanks, Dan Bongino, for providing us that.
Hey, you know, here's another great way you can help support the show: you become a premium member.
We give you a couple of hours of premium bonus content every week, and it's a great way to help support the show.
You can do it by going to jimmydork.com, clicking on join premium.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business, and it's a great way to help put your thumb back in the eye of the bastards.
Thanks for everybody who was already a premium member.
And if you haven't, you're missing out.
We give you lots of bonus content.
Thanks for your support.
Welcome to the Jimmy Dorr show, everybody.
Keaton Weiss here with Janine Eunice.
So you mixed it up with the Vice President of the United States this week on Twitter.
This was your initial reaction to the ICE killing in Minnesota.
You write, I'm a former defense attorney and currently a civil liberties attorney with no political dog in this fight.
I watched the video at least 10 times from different angles and at different speeds and waited to offer an opinion, which I still reserve the right to change if additional information changes the calculus.
It is very clear that the officers instigated the confrontation, which now I understand you've kind of modified that based on the new footage where it seems like the wife was kind of mixing it up with the officer.
The woman initially tried to wave them past her.
ICE officers have no authority to search a U.S. citizen or arrest her unless there's probable cause to believe she's harboring undocumented individuals.
Not a contention here.
A woman surrounded by masked armed men who have no law enforcement authority over her has every right to try to escape.
Video shows her steering wheel is turned to the right, clearly an attempt to leave without hitting anyone and steer clear of the officer standing towards the front of her car.
That officer had time to step to the side, which is where he was when he shot her.
Even a real police officer would not have the right to shoot at her for trying to flee.
This is well established in the case law.
Deadly force may not be used simply to prevent someone from getting away.
Given that the ICE officers had no law enforcement authority to begin with, and the video footage shows she was trying to escape a perceived threat, not to kill anyone, the crime is all the more inexcusable.
Praying for the victim's family, especially her children.
I'm already, I'm also praying for all the conservatives who are so unprincipled and lost.
They're excusing this terrible crime and gloating over a death that will leave three young children motherless because of the victim's politics.
Okay, so before we get into JD Vance's response now, because we do have new information based on the new camera angle, which I will just play one more time so we have it for this clip.
So that was the end.
Here's the beginning.
I'm not mad for it.
Show your face.
I'm not mad.
That's okay.
We don't change our plates every morning.
Just so you know, they'll be in the same plate when you come talk to us later.
That's fine.
U.S. citizen, former South America, you want to come at us?
You want to come at us?
I say go get yourself some lunch, big boy.
Go ahead.
Out of the car.
Okay, so either with the benefit of hindsight or based on any of that new video, is there anything about that original tweet there that you'd like to adjust or revise or clarify in any way?
Well, as we, as we said, it, you know, I wouldn't say so readily that the officers had no, you know, they instigated the confrontation.
It looks like, you know, at least there was something going on with the wife.
Some kind of I mean, none of this justifies, you know, in the end, doesn't change my opinion, but probably it doesn't seem like she was just sort of innocently sitting there and there was nothing that gave rise to this.
There may have been something with the wife.
And then, as I said, I overstated the fact that ICE officers don't.
There were a couple of times I used phrases that I would change.
Yeah, that's the part I would like to clarify.
They have no authority to search U.S. citizen or arrest her unless there's probable cause to believe she's harboring undocumented individuals.
They also do have authority to arrest people for other federal crimes, but none of that was at issue.
I don't think there's any claim that she that I know of that she was committing anybody was committing a federal crime.
So I could have been a little more careful there.
And then later on, when I said, given that the ICE officers had no law enforcement authority to begin with, I should have been more, you know, in this specific circumstance is what I would have said if I were to rewrite that.
Sure.
Based on the contention now that I suppose there was no crime being committed until the confrontation happened, right?
Is that kind of what you're saying?
So when they say get out of the fucking car, like do they have authority to approach her that way in a very hostile manner?
I'm not sure which that matters.
But yeah, like, was it within their authority to do that?
Because it seemed like they were telling her, get the fuck out of the car because her wife was kind of talking smack to the officers.
So maybe they didn't want to just leave it at that.
Maybe they wanted, I mean, who knows what they want.
I mean, we've seen videos of ICE officers going wild on people.
So who knows what they wanted to do?
But yeah, the point of clarification is just what their authority was in that situation until this happened.
So as I, they don't have like traffic enforcement authority.
So, you know, if the fact that Ms. Good may have been breaching some traffic, you know, made some traffic violation, it wouldn't be enough to do anything or to stop her to order her out of the car.
They just don't have the ability to do that, the authority.
So they were already abusing their authority.
And I, I mean, you know, I, I guess I initially, based on what I saw initially, I thought she might have been scared.
She might not even realize these were ICE officers.
And you have, you know, you're a woman with a bunch of masked men surrounding your car telling you to get out.
Like maybe she just freaked out and drove away.
It seemed like she probably knew they were ICE officers.
So that the sort of the further evidence has changed how I assess what happened initially, but not my ultimate conclusion.
Okay, great.
Okay.
Thank you for that.
So now we'll get into the beef, so to speak, with JD Vance.
So JD Vance quote tweets you and makes you ultra viral overnight.
He says, this is preposterous.
First of all, she's not waving the officers through and has no right to do so, even if she were.
She is waving another car through before the officers approach her car.
Second, the officers are not randomly searching her.
They are approaching her vehicle because she is violating the law, namely she is obstructing a lawful enforcement operation.
You're not allowed to walk up to or drive up to people who are enforcing the law to make it harder for them to do their jobs.
Now, I would say the new video makes that point a little less obvious.
I think the new, at first, I saw her parked kind of awkwardly, and I think, okay, maybe this is a civil disobedience thing where she's trying to block the street or whatever.
It seems now that she was just dropping her partner off and hung around long enough for things to get hairy between her wife and the officers.
But here, I'll read the rest of this.
I agree with you there.
Okay.
Third, this defense attorney is drawing a meaningless distinction between ICE officers and a real police officer.
Again, you're not allowed to interrupt lawful enforcement operation, which is exactly what this woman was doing.
Fourth, the officer didn't discharge his weapon to prevent her from fleeing.
When he discharged his weapon, she had pointed the vehicle at him and pressed the gas.
He discharged his weapon in self-defense and other angles of the video show the woman clearly hit the officer with her car while accelerating.
The gaslighting is off the charts and I'm having none of it.
This guy was doing his job.
She tried to stop him from doing his job when he approached her car.
She tried to hit him.
A tragedy, absolutely, but a tragedy that falls on this woman and all of the radicals who teach people that immigration is the one type of law that rioters are allowed to interfere with.
Okay, so I will toss to you, as I think is appropriate, since this was directed at you.
You respond to any of that in whatever order you like.
Yeah.
So, I mean, I think we've talked about number one.
I sort of take that back.
Well, I take back like how the, you know, she may have been waving them through, but there was, it wasn't, I don't think she was just on the side of the street like, come on.
And then this happened.
There was a little more to it.
So we talked, you, I agree entirely with your analysis about obstructing a lawful enforcement operation.
It doesn't appear that that's the case at all.
It appears she was just dropping her wife up.
Again, facts could come to light that would change that.
But as far as we know now, nothing to nothing, no reason to doubt that she was doing what it appears she was doing.
Okay.
And the thing about this too, about this, this second paragraph here, just you're not allowed to walk up to or drive up to people who are enforcing the law to make it harder for them to do their jobs.
The implication of that is that the consequence for that can and should be whatever the ICE officer decides to do, up to and including shooting you in the face three times.
Like it's a very deceptive way of framing it.
Like, let's say she wasn't allowed to do it.
Okay.
If she wasn't allowed to do it, do you know how to make an orderly arrest without creating a panic that ends in shooting her three times in the face?
Like to me, this is really obscuring the operative question, which is, was use of lethal force justified?
If she was committing a crime, you could arrest her if you have proper training.
Now, maybe the backbenchers from the Fargo Bowling League that they give $50,000 signing bonuses to to be ICE officers aren't capable of doing an arrest in an orderly way.
Isn't the option available to call the city police and say, hey, we have a person here who's causing a problem.
We need you to come make an arrest.
At which point the police show up and do it the way trained professionals knock on wood because with cops, you never know, but they're more trained than these people.
I think that's a safe assumption.
Like to me, he keeps accenting that she shouldn't have been doing what she was doing.
And even if I can, even if I would grant him that, I would never grant you that because she was doing something she shouldn't have been doing, a fatal shot was justified.
Exactly.
Now, that's a really good point.
And I'm glad you made it.
And that's why I sort of keep going back to the fact that the only question in the end is whether he had a reasonable belief, both objectively and, you know, he reasonably believed, reasonably believed and did believe at the time that he fired the shots that his life was in danger because of her car or someone else's life was in danger.
And I, again, I think the evidence is pretty conclusive on that point, but we can so ICE officer and real police officer.
I mean, again, as we've said, not allowed to interrupt a lawful enforcement operation.
No evidence that she was, but even if she was not a reason to shoot her in the face three times.
Also, is there no meaningless, is there no meaningful distinction between an ICE officer and a real police officer?
I mean, it seems to me like there ought to be.
There is.
I mean, they are by definition.
I mean, every time there's an interaction with an ICE officer, every time a protester is arrested for, you know, blocking a gate outside a facility, they insist, this administration insists that's a federal crime because you are disrupting a federal proceeding, right?
If you were just blocking city hall, that would not be a federal crime, right?
So there certainly is a meaningful distinction between an ICE officer and a real police officer.
And the attempt to blur that line is quite troubling for pretty obvious reasons, I think, no?
Yeah.
And I mean, ICE's purpose is supposed to be to enforce immigration law.
So they're not supposed to have any authority over U.S. citizens.
The only reason they ever would is if you were obstructing their ability to carry out their enforcement of immigration law.
But that, again, no reason to believe that was happening here.
And so that means no authority to enforce traffic law.
Got it.
Okay.
So one last thing before we get off of this topic.
JD Vance obviously did a press conference here where he spoke on this further and blamed the media for misrepresenting this case.
Actually, walking out here, somebody sent me a photo of a CNN headline about what happened in Minneapolis.
And this is the headline.
I'm just going to read it.
Outrage after ICE officer kills U.S. citizen in Minneapolis.
Well, that's one way to put it.
And that is the way that many people in the corporate media have put this attack over the last 24 hours.
And I say attack very, very intentionally because this was an attack on federal law enforcement.
This was an attack on law and order.
This was an attack on the American people.
The way that the media, by and large, has reported this story has been an absolute disgrace.
And it puts our law enforcement officers at risk every single day.
What that headline leaves out is the fact that that very ICE officer nearly had his life ended, dragged by a car six months ago, 33 stitches in his leg.
So you think maybe he's a little bit sensitive about somebody ramming him with an automobile?
What that headline leaves out.
Okay, now that to me is an astounding comment.
The idea that the emotional state of the officer based on past trauma is at all relevant to the case.
If the guy is that high strung based on that past trauma, maybe he shouldn't be out on the street.
Like the idea that, well, he's been having a rough time lately is an excuse.
I mean, that's just preposterous, to borrow his own word, which he directed at you.
It's absurd.
Yes.
I mean, to be fair, if I were the defense attorney of the officer, I would definitely bring that up to establish that might be the belief.
Yeah.
Right.
His subjective belief that he was in danger, but it doesn't go to the reasonable belief.
And it certainly does, you know, it only establishes that it was some kind of negligence or recklessness on the part of his supervisors to allow him to continue his operations if he was so traumatized.
Right.
It's still a wrongful death, right?
Even if that acquits him of some intent or whatever, you know, that doesn't change the fact that it's a wrongful death.
In fact, you could argue that makes the state more liable for this because why was a guy carrying that kind of trauma out on the street doing this, right?
So that to me, that's just, it's just an insane thing to say.
Well, he was having a rough go of it lately.
I mean, what, what the hell, man?
And I mean, talking about insane things, like if I am a serious person and a high-ranking government official, I'm not going out on the day that a woman is shot by one of my employees.
I mean, ICE officers work for the executive branch, so technically they're like the vice president's employee and immediately defending them and calling her a domestic terrorist.
I don't think JD Vance used those words, but Christine OM and Donald Trump did.
I think they send Vance out because he's the least unhinged among them.
Yeah.
I mean, my response is, this is a horrible tragedy.
Let's conduct a thorough investigation and the administration is not going to comment on it until that investigation has concluded.
This is not a serious, this is not serious.
This is just politics.
Yep.
I mean, Christine Ohm responded to it clearly before she even knew what happened.
She made up this crazy story about how they were digging their way out of a snowbank and they were attacked by a descendant.
Like she clearly didn't know the first thing about what happened.
She either made it up or she was, it was like a telephone game gone wrong where she got the complete wrong story because when you saw her initial statement, watch the video, she was not describing in any way, shape, or form what actually happened.
All right.
We got a little more of JD Vance here.
Is that that woman was there to interfere with a legitimate law enforcement operation in the United States of America?
What that headline leaves out is that that woman has is part of a broader left-wing network to attack, to dox, to assault, and to make it impossible for our ICE officers to do their job.
So that means you could shoot them in the head three times?
Like even if what you're saying is true, that's why you have a Department of Justice.
That's what investigations and indictments are for.
The idea that any of this justifies what happened is just bonkers.
It's just, it's insane.
I mean, talk about gaslighting.
He accused you of gaslighting.
This is gaslighting.
This is absolutely gaslighting.
But this appeals to the, you know, his followers, or I don't know how you put it, the mega people.
I don't know the broad brush, but they love, you know, they just are happy she's dead because she didn't share their politics.
And they barely conceal it.
No, they just barely conceal it.
No, they just appeal to outrage.
How dare she do what she did?
As if that justifies this.
If the media wants to tell the truth, they ought to tell the truth that a group of left-wing radicals have been working tirelessly, sometimes using domestic terror techniques to try to make it impossible for the president of the United States to do what the American people elected him to do, which is enforce our immigration laws.
The president stands with ICE.
I stand with ICE.
We stand with all of our law enforcement officers.
And part of that is recognizing that you people in the media, not everybody in this room, but many people in this room have been lying about this attack.
She was trying to ram this guy with her car.
He shot back.
He defended himself.
He's already been seriously wounded in law enforcement operations before.
And everybody who's been repeating the lie that this is some innocent woman who was out for a drive in Minneapolis when a law enforcement officer shot at her, you should be ashamed of yourselves, every single one of you.
Questions.
So again, that is just completely deceptive framing.
First of all, whether she was just an innocent woman out for a drive is irrelevant to the question of should she have been shot three times.
The second thing, when he says there that she was trying to hit him, that seems provably untrue now, based on even the new video.
It seems based on the new video, as soon as she put it in drive, she cut the wheel to try and flee.
So that just to me is just blatantly untrue.
It's so malicious.
It's said in such bad faith.
Any final reaction to anything we just heard?
Yeah, I mean, so what he's trying to do is just make his, you know, the people who already like the administration just, you know, they satisfy their bloodlust.
They love it.
They love this.
They're very happy that she died.
I can't, I mean, I'm sure you've seen some of the disgusting tweets from people like Matt Walsh just basically celebrating it, saying she's a lesbian who was trying to stop Somalis with 68 IQs being deported.
So she met the end.
She met a humiliating end.
He stopped short of saying she deserved it, but you can see that.
You could read between the lines.
I mean, they're very happy about this because of her identity and her politics.
And that's ultimately what this is about.
This is, that's what this is about.
And that's why they keep on focusing on things other than those one or two seconds when he fired the shots, because this is somebody that they think deserves to die because of who she is.
Yep.
I agree.
I agree.
Welcome to the Jimmy Dore show, everybody.
Keaton here with Janine Eunice talking about the ICE shooting in Minneapolis.
Tucker Carlson weighed in on his newsletter here.
This went pretty viral today.
Tucker Carlson on ice shooting of Renee Good.
How come so few conservatives are viewing this story through a human lens?
And why when something similar like the killing of Charlie Kirk happens on the other side, did many on the left celebrate because they thought his political positions were wrong?
We have a guess.
Violence around the world is desensitizing Americans to violence at home.
So I think I should just read this entire statement here.
This is the newsletter that Tucker Carlson puts out.
A woman got shot in the face.
Yes, yesterday's Minnesota ICE shooting, the video is violent, bloody, and tough to watch.
Please only click the link if you can handle it, is providing plenty of material for conservatives to score political points.
The victim shouldn't have blocked the road with her car.
Hundreds of hysterical protesters launched into their typical routines last night, and liberal leaders like Jacob Frey, who immediately declared it's time for ICE to get the fuck out of Minneapolis, are predictably behaving like children.
That's all true, but it should be secondary to the tragedy of Renee Nicole Goode losing her life.
The 37-year-old was an American citizen and reportedly the mother of a kindergarten-age child.
Did we disagree with her views on immigration?
Probably, but that shouldn't matter.
Her death is a tragedy, regardless of her partisan affiliations, ideological beliefs, or who pulled the trigger.
A woman got shot in the face.
How come so few conservatives are viewing this story through a human lens?
And why, when something similar like the killing of Charlie Kirk happens on the other side, did many on the left celebrate because they thought his political positions were wrong?
We have a guess.
Violence around the world is desensitizing Americans to violence at home.
Think about what just happened in Venezuela.
That Donald Trump's backers, I'm sorry, Donald Trump's backers are celebrating Nicholas Maduro's abduction as a victory for justice, freedom, and American prosperity, while his opponents fear it was a manufactured act of nation-building globalism detrimental to our national interests.
This piece's purpose is not to weigh in on the debate, but it's worth acknowledging what neither side seems bothered to mention: the attack's death toll.
Sorry, I hit the wrong button.
There we go.
Then, of course, there's Gaza.
This skips ahead one paragraph.
Americans have grown so accustomed to tales of the IDF's U.S.-backed barbarities that we've reached a state of numbness.
The fact that Israel has reportedly slaughtered over 400 Palestinians since agreeing to its ceasefire doesn't even register as news.
Our tax dollars continue to fund the Israelis' mass killings, making the shooting of just one little old woman, just one little old woman in Minnesota seem entirely inconspicuous, but it isn't.
The same goes for Russia.
We get it.
Permanent Washington thinks Vladimir Putin is a very bad man, but that doesn't mean we should cheerlead as untold numbers of his citizens get their limbs blown off in frozen European battlefields.
Violence is grotesque, and it is always grotesque, even if you earnestly believe that certain displays of it advance a greater good.
Two things can be true at once.
If the United States were a better place, everyone, regardless of their politics, would pause when something like the Minneapolis shooting happens and at least recognize the human tragedy.
But that doesn't happen because, compared to the countless overseas killings our government routinely brings about, Good's death doesn't seem like such a big deal.
She's just another headline.
How can the situation improve?
America's leaders must stop normalizing bloodshed.
That means pulling the plug on funding ethnic cleansing, viewing war as the last option rather than the first.
And please, for the love of God, no more Lindsey Graham frothing over the titillating excitement of killing people.
A step back and a deep breath would make our country and the world a more humane place.
So he is basically citing the imperial boomerang theory that what we do overseas comes back here, and that desensitization to violence overseas leads to that here at home.
And I'll give you an example of some of the responses that he is talking about here.
Here's Jesse Waters highlights that Renee Nicole Goode, the woman killed by ICE, had pronouns in her bio and leaves behind a lesbian partner and a child from a previous marriage.
Lost her life was a self-proclaimed poet from Colorado with pronouns in her bio.
A 37-year-old white woman named Renee Goode.
The Daily Mail says she leaves behind a lesbian partner and a child from a previous marriage.
She was a disruptor, though she considered herself a legal observer, but there's no evidence she had a law degree.
Now, ironically, Jesse Waters is a lesbian with children from a previous marriage.
I don't know if you knew that.
But, I mean, just unbelievably cruel and calm.
So, so what's the implication there?
That because she has pronouns in her bio, it should be open season to shoot her in the face.
I mean, like, the implication there is that she's part of the woke tribe and therefore she deserves to die.
I mean, that is essentially what he's saying.
That's the subtext there.
Yeah, there's no question.
Yeah, and I think we touched on it earlier with people like Matt Walsh, and also the way JD Vance is reacting.
I mean, what they're trying to do is say, because in the end, legally speaking, as I keep saying, the only thing that really matters is, you know, what he reasonably believed when he fired those shots.
All of this other stuff is just noise.
But what they're trying to do, of course, is try to convince the American public that she was a worthless person who deserved to die.
And so it doesn't really matter in the end.
And probably because they know that the officer wasn't justified.
So they're, you know, that's why if they really thought he was, they could really focus on the fact that he believed his life was in danger when those shots were fired.
Yeah, absolutely.
And then this, I mean, this is just even more nihilistic.
This is a video.
This is a picture, a meme from Wall Street Maeve, which is one of the more viral MAGA accounts recreating the George Floyd killing.
First of all, implying Derek Chauvin was a hero for killing George Floyd.
Disregard the wrong face.
For some reason, it went around on the internet that that woman was the victim.
She was not.
So this was the wrong woman's face.
And this is obviously an AI image.
But tell me that is not just, that to me is beyond sadism.
That's straight up nihilism.
I mean, like, that to me is what this is.
Like, you're basically a death cult at this point.
Yeah.
Like, if you are, if you are making these, like, you think it's fucking funny.
And again, just to bring it back to the first segment, which will be clipped separately, you know, one of the reasons why you were canceled by the left before you were canceled by the right is over your opposition to COVID authoritarianism.
A lot of the same people who think that this is funny were outraged that they had to wear a mask at a supermarket, right?
So like, and so like, you're going to tell me that you're anti-authoritarian because you don't want to take a vaccine, but then you're going to share this around as if this is a big fucking joke that a woman got shot in the face three times.
Like, is there anybody like where, where is the, where, where are the same people on earth who could understand authoritarianism, authoritarianism, pardon me, for what it is, no matter where it surfaces?
Like, yes, the COVID protocols were authoritarian.
And so is this.
How hard is that for people?
Like, like, it really is.
You feel the society coming apart because there is no mass of humanity left to recognize both of those two things and balance them in their head at the same time, I feel.
Yeah.
I mean, I think what turned out to be the case was a lot of people on the right who were against the COVID measures were actually, it was just sort of personal.
They like didn't, you know, to that, I don't want to wear a mask.
I don't want to get a vaccine.
But it wasn't sort of a universal recognition that people deserve to live free from government.
Apparently, apparently.
Yeah, going back to what we were talking about earlier, I think a lot of us took them at, you know, in good faith when they were making those arguments, sort of hoping that they meant them from a place of principle.
But I'm sorry, man.
Like, if this is what you're about, you're no humanitarian.
You're no anti-authoritarian.
Sorry, I don't mean to cut you off.
I just pisses me off.
I can agree more with you.
Go ahead.
Did you have anything to add to that?
No, no, I think that.
I mean, I guess one more thing I was thinking was the, you know, Charlie Kirk, a lot of, there were some distasteful things that people on the left said.
Sure, there were, of course.
Yeah.
People on the right, you know, pointed out how gross it was to celebrate somebody's death.
But they're doing it.
The same people are doing it with her.
And, you know, I'm not going to defend what some people said about Charlie Kirk.
Certainly not.
I don't think we should celebrate anyone's.
No, I agree with you 100%.
I was saying it at the time that people should really not do that.
Forget about like what it invites, which is a fascist crackdown on free speech.
Just, it's not good for your soul to do that.
So, no, I agree with you.
But I was, I mean, it's more justified in his case if it's going to be because I mean, he had said some pretty grotesque things about Muslims and other groups of people.
Whereas, you know, Renee Good is not on record, to my knowledge, saying anything extremely racist or sort of dehumanizing about other groups of people.
So, and Charlie Kirk was a public figure who that I think subjects you to more criticism.
So, again, not excusing it, but like it's a little bit more excusable in that case than it is in this case.
No, this is the irony.
I mean, that's a great point, and it speaks to another irony of this.
The only thing they know about this woman is that she didn't comply.
And what is what is the mantra of the sort of conservative COVID dissidents?
Is we will not comply.
That's their hashtag, right?
When the next pandemic comes around, don't bother telling us what to do because we will not comply.
The only fucking thing they know about this woman is that she didn't do what she was told, and for that, they're glad she's dead, right?
I mean, it's just really disgusting, it's really disgusting, and it's bleak, and uh, it's really upsetting because, and I think, you know, broadly speaking, we're in the same boat as these sort of like politically homeless types who every once in a while get sort of nudged to a certain camp, and then you see what that's about, and you're like, oh, no, not for me.
Yeah, yeah, all right.
Well, Janine, thank you so much.
It was so great to meet you.
I'm so glad we could do this.
We invited you on before you went viral, and then you went viral.
I'm like, oh, now she's not going to come on.
She's probably got a million people knocking down her door to come on.
So, thank you very much for taking the time.
It was really great to meet you.
Can you tell people where they can follow your work?
Yes.
Janine Eunice Esquire, ESQ, actually, is my Twitter handle.
J-E-N-I-N-Y-O-U-N-E-S-E-S-Q.
And I work for the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee as mostly doing First Amendment work.
All right.
Outstanding.
Well, it was great to meet you.
Thank you so much for having me.
Of course.
Thank you so much.
Bye-bye.
We're back, folks.
Oh, my God.
Welcome to the Jimmy Door Show.
I am your guest host, Chris Keene, filling in for Jimmy.
He's on tour in Hawaii right now.
I'm here with the very funny Kurt Medzker.
Hey, remember the Epstein files?
Remember those things?
God, it's been so long I almost forgot they existed.
I don't remember.
Oh, well, yeah, so we'll hear about them.
Let's go.
Welcome back.
The Department of Justice is reviewing a mountain of documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.
More than 12,000 documents have already been released, but over 2 million remain undisclosed.
The Justice Department was expected to release everything.
I don't have 2 million documents about diddling.
That seems excessive.
2 million documents on the convicted sex offender by December.
That was under a law passed by most of Congress late last year.
Officials now say they need more time to sort through papers, photos, videos, and audio files stored in the FBI's system.
Need more time.
Only 1% of the Epstein files have been released.
After all this time and all this crap, 1% of the Epstein files.
Remember this?
Remember phase one of the Epstein files?
That feels like decades ago at this point.
Phase one.
There's been a new avatar movie since the last, since, since this is the DC cinematic universe, it's not going anywhere.
Exactly.
The Snyder cut would we're gonna get uh GTA 6 before we get the Epstein files.
Release the Snyder cut.
God, phase one.
Phase two never happened, I guess.
And this is what happens when they release stuff.
This is what, here's the Epstein files.
Look at all that.
Look at all that info we got.
That's BLM did it.
That's what I mean.
Exactly, yeah.
BLM was on Epstein Island, apparently.
Yeah, so even when they release files, this is what we get.
So the U.S. Justice Department has released less than 1% of Epstein files filing reveals.
The Department of Justice has released less than 1% of the files.
A court filing has revealed as Democrats step up criticism of the Trump administration's lawlessness for keeping records under seal.
The department conceded that only 12,000 documents totaling 125,000 pages relating to the disgraced financier and trafficker Jeffrey Epstein have been published to date, despite a federal law requiring the vast majority to be released by December 19.
Pam Bondi, the U.S. Attorney General, wrote a five-page update to Paul Engelmayer, the federal New York judge overseeing the case on Monday, asserting that efforts to protect the identities of Epstein's victims were a priority and had slowed the process.
They've been saying that the whole time.
They're protecting the victims by never releasing these files.
Seriously?
Better late than never, I guess, right?
Yeah.
There you go.
There are more than 2 million documents potentially responsive to the act that are in various phases of review, she wrote in the letter co-signed by Todd Blanch, her deputy, and Jay Clayton, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
Democrats, however, remain determined to press the Justice Department over the Epstein documents despite other stories such as the capture by U.S. forces of Venezuela's President Maduro dominating the news cycle.
What are they trying to hit?
Right, yeah.
Maybe if there's some oil in the Epstein documents, we'd fucking get these.
They hide some oil in the files.
Maybe we'll find, maybe we can comb through.
Yeah, the files are covered in oil.
Then we'd have all 2 million.
All right.
What are they trying to hide, Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader said in a post on X on Monday, accusing the Justice Department of failing to submit a required unredacted list to Congress of all government officials and politically exposed persons named or referenced in the files?
It's been 17 days since the Trump DOJ first broke the law and failed to release all the Epstein files.
It's been 14 days since the DOJ released anything at all, with the DOJ doing everything in its power to delay and obfuscate.
The releases so far, he said, were heavily redacted and contained none of the key documents and no new information on the 10 alleged Epstein co-conspirators.
Blanche insisted last week that the department was committed to transparency and protecting victims.
Here we are again, where we're protecting victims by never releasing these files.
That's great.
At this point, if I was a victim, I would just be like, I don't, don't protect me.
Just release the damn files.
This is not helping me.
Hundreds of people had sacrificed time over the holidays to work on the case.
Oh, that's a fun way to spend to spend Christmas.
Looking at pictures of Trump blowing Clinton.
It's happy holidays.
It truly is an all-hands-on-deck approach, and we're asking as many lawyers as possible to commit their time to review the documents that remain, he said.
Required redactions to protect victims take time, but they will not stop these materials from being released.
They're determined.
This has been going on for years at this point.
The department said before Christmas that federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the FBI had uncovered more than a million more documents not included in its initial review and that it might need a few more weeks to comply with the law.
How do you accidentally stumble upon a million documents?
Don't you think they would have you didn't see a million documents that they just show?
Oh, there's the million documents I didn't see.
I don't even understand that.
Ro Khanna, a Democratic California congressman, and Thomas Massey, a Kentucky Republican, said last month they were considering filing an inherent contempt lawsuit against Bondi in an effort to speed up the release.
Documents published in the first tranches of release since December 19 have offered some insight into Epstein's operation, facilitated by his girlfriend, Jislene Maxwell.
Epstein had a girlfriend.
I can't get a girlfriend.
Epstein's got a girlfriend.
Jesus.
Who is Kurt?
Just me crying again, Kurt.
Yeah, have you tried not to talk about it?
I'm trying to turn this show into my dating profile.
That's what I'm trying to do.
So Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year sentence for child trafficking, but no major new revelations.
Shocker.
No revelations.
Marina Lacerda, a victim of Epstein who met him when she was 14, spoke to The Guardian last month after the first batch of papers was released.
She said she wanted the British former royal Andrew Mountbatten Windsor.
That just sounds like a diddler name.
Mountbatten Windsor.
He was a diddler.
Lord Mountbatten was a diddler.
Oh, yes.
Famous diddler.
Yes.
A close friend of Epstein and Maxwell to be brought to justice in the U.S. One of the papers detailed alleged efforts by Mountbatten Windsor, once known as Prince Andrew, to get Maxwell to fix him up with inappropriate friends.
Yeah, that's a lot.
That could be a lot of people.
I think of Kurt as an inappropriate friend.
What would that be?
Normal-age women?
Adult-age women.
Yeah, normal-age women.
I want to do something kinky tonight.
I want to have consensual sex with an adult.
That's the real Fergie.
Get her crazy.
Inappropriate friends.
Well, she sought friendly and discreet.
Wait, friendly and discreet and fun girls for him.
Okay.
Mountbatten Windsor has denied any illegal behavior.
He's a good guy.
It's not illegal when the prince does it.
That's true.
That's a good point.
And here we have.
The fact that these Epstein files still, there are millions of more documents that they're still reviewing at this point.
You know, if this were a private law firm with 5% of the resources of the DOJ, this would have been done by the deadline.
And they just missed another deadline.
That's a great point.
Like, wow, how is this taking so long?
I feel like any professional law firm would have this taken care of.
It doesn't make any sense.
Which is the report to Congress, which is supposed to list all of the politicians that are in their files.
And also, they're supposed to justify all the redactions 15 days after the first 30-day window.
Justify all the redactions.
The entire thing is redacted.
Like Kurt said, it looks like the black square in 2020.
The whole thing's redacted.
How do you justify it?
But the biggest problem isn't that they're missing the deadlines, it's what they're redacting.
So they're citing the Privacy Act, and they're trying to pretend like that overrides a law that we just passed that says you can't withhold records to prevent embarrassment.
They're also citing FOIA standards, which don't apply to our law when they're trying to say that they don't have to release internal decisions.
But our bill specifically says release internal decisions.
So, what are you going to do about it?
we're looking at that we're looking at that we're looking at that you know what I love that guy.
He's such a prick because I know they hate his guts for that.
Yeah.
He is looking at it.
Because I'm like, screw all the legal shit.
Like, half of the Congress are traders.
They should go into Wood Chipper, is my feeling.
But, but, you know, you're not going to have any real action like I thought Trump would do.
I thought maybe Trump would be the guy to put them people in wood chippers, but he's one of those people.
Yes, 100%.
And it doesn't matter what happens.
These people just do whatever they want, apparently.
I mean, like he said, it's been since December 19.
They were supposed to release these things.
They don't get released.
When they get released, it's a black square.
I don't know that we're ever getting these files, but yeah, let's hold out hope that one day, one day they figure it out.
What do you think, Kurt?
You think it's going to happen?
As I like to say, we may never know what country that Jeffrey Epstein was working for.
Hey, become a premium member.
Go to JimmyDoorComedy.com.
Sign up.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
All the voices performed today are by the one and only the inimitable Mike McRae.
He can be found at MikeMcRae.com.
That's it for this week.
You be the best you can be, and I'll keep being me.