Trish Regan dissects an alleged ethics scandal involving AOC, citing unitemized Met Gala gifts and claims of attempted flight to avoid vendor bills, while linking Democratic polling lows to socialist endorsements. She highlights CIA Director John Ratcliffe's potential indictments of former officials for election interference hoaxes and celebrates a new EU-US trade deal featuring 15% tariffs and $750 billion in energy commitments. The episode concludes by analyzing Dan Bongino's shock over public corruption, JD Vance's defense of Epstein list transparency, and rising Trump poll numbers driven by skepticism toward the Epstein narrative. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, Qwen/Qwen3-ForcedAligner-0.6B, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
AOC Fines and Big Deals00:02:27
And here we are.
We're live.
Welcome to the show, everyone.
I am Trish Reagan.
We got quite a day here ahead of us.
My goodness.
AOSC's antics finally getting called out.
We're going to talk about all of that and the fines that she's going to have to pay.
It gives you, shall we say, some insight into Juan Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's character, right?
If nothing else, I'm telling you, unbelievable, unbelievable, unbelievable.
Everybody else is supposed to pay.
And we've got a few other things we want to get into today because did you see the sound over the weekend?
I mean, this is kind of a big deal.
What we heard, the likes of perhaps the CIA director saying he wants indictments, actual indictments.
This was quite something from Director John Radcliffe.
I just want to play you a quick bit from this.
So, what I think I hear you saying is there is still an opportunity for indictments, potential prosecutions, accountability from those people who may have lied under oath, like John Brennan, James Comey, and perhaps Hillary Clinton.
Well, that's why I've made the referrals that I have.
DNI Gabbard has made referrals.
And why we're going to continue to share the intelligence that would support the ability of our Department of Justice to make fair and just claims against those who have perpetrated this hoax against the American people and this stain on our country.
Director, one other question on this.
Tulsi, as well as President Trump.
So it's kind of a big deal.
We got a lot, a lot.
So AOC, of course, getting hit with all this stuff.
Because that Met Gala a couple of years ago, finally, the chickens coming home to roost, shall we say, on that.
You get Democrats panicking right now over their new poll numbers.
And believe me, they should be panicking because these are not good.
They're not good at all.
And they look as though they're increasingly turning to communist candidates.
No joke.
We got to dig into that a little bit here today.
I also want to talk about the EU trade deal because this is incredible.
I mean, I'm here, by the way, guys, like I'm here in Ireland, and what is the front page of the paper here today?
EU US deal averts trade war.
They are thrilled in Europe to get this trade deal, but I'll tell you, it's very, very good for us, for the US.
So we get to talk about that win.
It's coming, as I said, while Radcliffe is talking about potentially indicting Hillary, Brennan, Comey.
Ireland Front Page Trade Win00:15:32
And then there's this other story.
I mean, amid all the wins, right, and the jump in poll numbers for Donald Trump, you've got.
Dampongino saying some things over the weekend that basically have caused a lot of eyebrows to have gone up.
So we'll get into all of it here.
Make sure you subscribe to the show.
It's really, really important.
Gosh, we're getting up there, right?
We're like nearly a million subs now.
It's crazy.
So thank you for everything you guys do.
Make sure you subscribe.
I am live.
I can see your comments in real time.
Really.
So I look forward to hearing everything from you.
But we begin here today on this.
Horrible news about AOC.
I mean, she's been what, the darling of the Democrat Party for how long now?
Remember that tax the rich dress that she wore?
Well, she's being hit now with fines.
This is like kind of a big deal.
This was kind of a scam at the time.
We're all like, what is she doing going to this dinner that costs like $30,000 a ticket?
And the boyfriend went too.
And she's all dressed up like the little princess going to the ball there, apparently in thousands and thousands of dollars worth of.
Paraphernalia, right?
The dress, the shoes, the jewelry, et cetera.
And here's the kicker: like, she tried to get around it.
She was like, okay, well, you know, I'll pay you back.
And then she wasn't even paying them back.
She's like trying to skip town on the bills.
Oh, true communist for you, right?
You know, somebody else's problem.
Let somebody else pay.
So they did this 26-page report.
And basically, they found that she was trying to accept all kinds of gifts.
All kinds of gifts via rented apparel, but she wasn't actually even itemizing these things correctly.
So I guess that the gown, believe it or not, was worth just thousands and thousands of dollars.
And so they were trying to get away with what you would possibly pay on rent the runway.
And so it was a much smaller number.
She wanted to pay just a thousand bucks for the boyfriend's goodies that he got, but apparently there was a much, much larger price tag on it.
And we haven't even gotten into the $35,000 thing, right?
Apparently, you kind of can accept something if it's for charity.
And so, Anna Winter was trying to give her this $35,000 ticket thing.
I don't know.
The whole thing was super suspicious.
But then, what got even worse was that she didn't even bother to pay her bills when they were due.
So, for example, the designer of that Tax the Rich dress apparently was an African American woman.
She's trying to support.
Support minorities with their work.
And they had come to some kind of agreement for what she was going to pay for the dress.
And then she never even paid the bills.
So, like, the vendors were like, hey, apparently, whoever designed the handbag was like, hey, are you going to pay for this?
Are you going to pay for this?
Are you going to pay for this?
And I guess AOC really didn't have any intention of paying for it.
But why does that not surprise me?
Why does that not surprise you?
Like, this is kind of how it works, right?
This is the whole communist thing.
It's somebody else's problem.
And so, you know, she feels not compelled in any way, shape, or form to actually carry her own weight or, in this case, pay for her own dress.
I mean, she wants to go to the ball, but God forbid she pay the bill.
So now she's getting hit with all these fines.
But I kind of don't think it's enough.
I mean, she was obviously skirting the ethics rules.
Then they agreed that she was going to pay the money, and then she didn't.
Paid the money.
Come on.
I mean, again, I guess it's to be expected for a socialist.
For a socialist.
And you know what?
I'll tell you, the Democrats are really struggling right now because all they got are socialists or communists for that matter.
AOC herself out there backing this man, Dami, who's just a disaster.
He wants to actually decommodify housing.
He doesn't want you to be able to own a home.
And somehow he thinks that's going to help New York City.
Wow.
Wow.
He just got married over the weekend, by the way, at some palatial estate that his family owns in Uganda.
I mean, this is like champagne communism on steroids.
Give me a break.
Anyway, AOC loves them, of course.
I think a lot of people just need to get to know folks before they issue an endorsement.
And I hope that this conversation can be constructive to bringing the party together and rally behind our nominee.
Oh, wow.
Oh, you just need to get to know him.
You just need to know he's really and truly going to take all your money and redistribute it to everyone that he sees fit.
This is what these people are doing.
I mean, case in point, she wants to wear a multi-threatening.
Thousand dollar gown, have it designed especially for her, but she does not want to have to pay the bill.
Okay?
They always want somebody else to pay.
All those private jets that she and Bernie go on for their fight the oligarchy tour, somebody's paying for those, but not AOC, not Bernie Sanders.
This is the whole problem, right?
With socialism over and over again.
You see it, you see it throughout history.
And yet she likes this meme Donigue.
She wants him to win.
There's another one, another commie, and I guess Minneapolis that they're pushing too.
AOC thinks that this is going to send Democrats a message.
Huh.
We have a choice to listen to that message that people are sending us or not.
This isn't just about Mr. Momdani as an individual.
This is about the message that the people of New York City are trying to send to our party.
I just have to say, if that guy wins, I'm really, really, really glad I got out of New York City when I did.
I mean, I'm really glad for a variety of reasons.
I was fortunate enough to get out before 2020.
But wow, I mean, just think of what it's going to do to real estate values.
Think about everybody who can leave will leave.
AOC, who basically lost out.
On thousands of jobs that were going to pay six figures.
They were big money jobs from Amazon, right?
Because she didn't want it in Queens.
Because, God forbid, we actually have jobs from a corporation.
We don't want those.
Don't you see?
We're supposed to work for the government.
And then when you work for the government, then they can decide who is successful and who is not.
So this woman is a total deadbeat.
This woman is skipping out on bills that she owes to vendors, small time designers.
Minority designers that helped her out so she could go to Anna Winters' big shindig and make a big name for herself with Tax the Rich.
Turns out, though, she's not going to pay for anything.
Again, it gets back to the whole root cause of their problem.
And I'll tell you this they're realizing that they're in trouble over there on that communist network, shall we say?
What shall we call it?
Socialist, if we're being friendly?
I'll just call it a communist network.
MSNBC, Reverend Al Sharpton is talking about how.
You know, maybe they do need to look at socialism right about now.
Woo!
And speaking of polling, a new Wall Street Journal poll shows Democrats getting their lowest approval number among voters in 35 years, with Republicans outperforming them by nearly 20 points.
How big of a red flag should this be for Democrats a year before the midterms?
And what can they do to improve their perception among voters?
It's red everywhere, Rev. And it's not just a red flag.
This is a blaring red alarm that Democrats should not ignore.
And I say that thinking about how angry people are because Democrats specifically ran on a platform in 2024 about how dangerous Donald Trump is, how he would lead an authoritarian type of regime in this administration, and how he is now acting on that.
And Democrats have yet to. formulate an explicit comprehensive response to someone that they identified as a threat.
They're not treating him as a threat.
There's these attempts to use normal tactics and politics that no longer apply to the playbook or the reality that we're experiencing.
And I think it's important for Democrats to listen to this and recalibrate, even including how they treat candidates who do excite voters, who do expand the number of people engaging in elections.
And of course, I'm talking about New York City mayoral candidate, the Democratic nominee, Zorhan Mamdani.
The fact that Democrats have not overwhelmingly endorsed his campaign and then see this type of polling, which showed them down, means that they need to reset themselves, not only in responding to Donald Trump, but also in engaging younger candidates who are expanding the base and exciting the public, because that's something that they're going to need critically in 2026.
In other words, just turn to communism, and then you can get the youth vote, and everything will be just great.
Wow.
I mean, I get that their poll numbers are down, I get that they're doing really, really badly.
I get that Donald Trump is going up in the polls.
Gosh, again, he just got that massive trade deal done with the EU.
It comes on the heels of the one he did with Japan just last week.
I mean, it's like win after win after win.
So that's your answer.
You're just going to like throw in the towel and say, to hell with it, to hell with America, to hell with capitalism.
We're going to turn to these crazy socialists like AOC.
Yeah, guys, that's how bad it is in the Democrat Party.
Another example, this guy, I don't know if he's still on MSNBC or not, but he was speaking about this recently.
Listen in.
When you fight, you're going to piss somebody off, excuse me.
And so I think, you know, when Donald Trump won in 2017, 2016, I spent the next year talking to all sorts of people, trying to understand how did this guy win the presidency when he ran, he was opposite everything Republicans told me that they wanted in a president.
And the number one through line, the through line was, he fights.
And what Democrats are now demanding of their leaders is that they know, I think Democratic.
Party faithful.
They know that their leaders are in the minority, that there's not much that they can do.
But you're just going to sit there and just let this happen?
We need you to stand up and fight, give voice to the fear and the anger and the frustration that's out there in the country, not just among Democrats, but just Americans who see this chipping away at democracy that they don't like.
So you have to fight.
And don't worry about ticking someone off or hurting a certain constituency.
In the end, it's about saving the country, saving our democracy, and then you can put the pieces back together later.
But I think Beto O'Rourke is absolutely right.
If Democrats aren't willing to fight now, then it's going to be too late come 2028.
Stop waiting for a savior.
You are your own savior.
Fight?
I mean, that's some really loaded language, don't you think?
They want to fight, fight, fight.
In other words, they hate Donald Trump so much.
They hate the success that he's seeing, that he's having, that they've got to double down and fight.
They've got to resist, even if it means basically standing in the face of actual law.
I mean, I'm thinking about the sanctuary cities, et cetera, and mayors that are taking on enormous risks, like the mayor in Chicago or the mayor in.
You know, they have out in Los Angeles, Karen Bass, or you think about Michelle Wu in Boston.
I mean, look, even the New York City mayor, Eric Adams, is running into this.
They are willing to just fight no matter what because they do not want him to succeed.
And yet he's succeeding really and truly in spite of all of them.
And, you know, they can double down on AOC all they want.
I don't think that that is going to end well for them.
I think that's going to be kind of, how shall we say, quite a disaster, right?
But they've got all kinds of disasters that just seem to.
Keep piling up one after another.
They keep coming, right?
Remember to subscribe, share, like, comment.
Did you see what's going on with Radcliffe?
The director of the CIA coming out and saying, you know what?
Comey, Brennan, Clinton.
You're probably all going to get indicted.
This is major, you guys.
He appeared, John Radcliffe, on my friend Maria Bartolomos' show, former colleague over at Fox.
I want you to hear this.
And it's pretty.
It's pretty serious at this point.
Watch.
So, what I think I hear you saying is there is still an opportunity for indictments, potential prosecutions, accountability from those people who may have lied under oath, like John Brennan, James Comey, and perhaps Hillary Clinton.
Well, that's why I've made the referrals that I have.
D.I. Gabbard has made referrals.
And why we're going to continue to share the intelligence that would support the ability of our Department of Justice to make fair and just, bring Fair and just claims against those who have perpetrated this hoax against the American people and this stain on our country.
Director, one other question on this.
That's a big deal.
Okay, so Tulsi Gabbard, head of the DNI, and now John Radcliffe, head of the CIA, are both coming out and saying, Pam Bondi, we're going to need you to move forward on this because we have now discovered intelligence that they deliberately tried to suppress the will of the American people.
They did not want Donald Trump to have a successful term, and Obama and his cronies allegedly worked together and schemed to undermine the entire Trump presidency from the very beginning.
I want to share with you what David's shown.
He was the attorney for Donald Trump during the impeachment crisis.
I mean, I guess there were a couple of those, right?
Anyway, his point is yeah, accountability is coming and it can.
He explains why.
Watch.
Could Obama.
Comey and Brennan at the least face.
Let's put President Obama to the side just for a second.
As for the others, I mean, if the evidence really shows what is being talked about now and it can be proven, then certainly those others could be charged with seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 2384, undermining our government, undermining the will of the voters, certainly obstruction of justice, certainly perjury.
They'd all be entitled to the presumption of innocence, but those are the kinds of charges that could be brought.
So you're undermining the will of the people.
And those charges could be brought forward, and they could find themselves in a whole bunch of trouble.
I mean, we talked about Clapper.
I played you the sound from Clapper last week.
He admitted, he's like, Look, I'm lawyering up.
I'm lawyering up because I have to, right?
In light of everything.
He was head of the DNI before.
I mean, this is pretty unbelievable.
Illegitimate President Elect Charges00:06:56
And you know, I think back on it.
And how they were still trying to sell this bill of goods.
Remember during the 2020 election when it came out that Hunter Biden's laptop was really quite something?
And the FBI knew that he was under investigation.
They knew that the laptop was real.
And yet, what did we have?
We had all these intel spooks, right, coming out, 50 of them, 51 ex spies and spooks and hacks to say, oh, no, no, no, that was just misinformation.
Fed to you via the Russians and Rudy Giuliani.
Somehow they had to get him in on that because he happened to be the guy that had the laptop.
And they were still pushing this.
Even at the debate, this is great.
Donald Trump's like, are you kidding me?
Or we're still going with the Russia, Russia, Russia thing?
Watch.
Talking about race right now, and I do want to stay on the issue of race.
President Trump, you have to respond to that.
Please.
Because look, there are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he's accusing me of.
Is a Russian plant.
They have said that this has all the care.
Five former heads of the CIA, both parties, say what he's saying is a bunch of garbage.
Nobody believes it except his and his good friend Rudy Gianni.
You mean the laptop is now another Russia, Russia, Russia hoax?
That's exactly what he's going.
Is this where you're going?
This is where he's going.
The laptop is Russia's laptop.
Gentlemen, I want to stay on the issue of race.
You have to be kidding.
Here we go again with Russia.
We're going to continue on the issue of racism.
Okay.
Well, here we go again.
Right back where we started because they tried to push a narrative according to Tulsi Gabbard's intel 114 pages released, along with some new stuff.
Actually, page 17 on Clinton is really, really worth checking out.
I'm going to show you some excerpts from it.
Anyway, you know when it looked like she wasn't that stable, et cetera?
There may have been a reason for that.
Anyway, the Russians had a ton of intel on Clinton that they didn't use.
Why?
Oh, apparently they didn't really care who won the election.
But you wouldn't know that.
With the way the media carried on and with the way the intelligence operatives they carried on.
I mean, you can start right with Jimmy Carter.
Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016.
He lost the election and he was put into office because the Russians interfered.
Trump knows he's an illegitimate president.
The president elect, although legally elected, is not legitimate.
I don't see this president elect as a legitimate president.
You said you believe that Russia's interference altered the outcome of the election.
I do.
We have a president who is, in fact, it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may, in fact, not be a legitimate president.
The one thing that Trump is fearful of when it comes to his being president is that finally we will see how illegitimate his victory actually was.
I have an objection.
North Carolina.
I object because people are horrified.
He's an illegitimate president.
Do you believe Trump is a legitimate president?
What I believe is that there's no question that the outcome of this election was affected by the Russian interference.
But there actually is a cloud of illegitimacy.
So that legitimacy is in question, yes.
So that was a very tainted election.
And in that sense, it's illegitimate.
I mean, wow.
I mean, that is third world banana republic style stuff.
And the way they carry on and they say it so emphatically, and they get so many special people out there saying it, you might have actually thought it was true.
Except when you read some of the documents, it just didn't add up.
Like the actual dossier, for example, this didn't really feel like a piece of intel, but it felt like opposition research, which is what it was.
And, you know, if Donald Trump really, really, really so passionately wanted Trump to win, then why wouldn't he have released some of the dirt he had on Clinton, for example, right?
I mean, apparently there was plenty of it.
I mean, just look at what came out.
This is bad.
Page 17 that got released internal claims that Hillary was on heavy tranquilizers.
I mean, whoa, right?
I mean, that's a doozy.
And suffering intensified psycho emotional problems.
Evidence of severe health ailments like type 2 diabetes and heart disease.
There were internal DNC communications that Obama and others found Hillary's health to be extraordinarily alarming.
And then there was evidence, you know, this is not as big a deal.
I'm not surprised she did this, though, of secret meetings with religious leaders where Clinton was offering some significant increases in funding from the State Department in return.
For their support.
So the point being, like there was plenty, plenty that you could have used, but for whatever reason, he didn't.
He didn't use that.
And now it's all coming out, and Tulsi, she wants indictments.
She'd like Obama to be arrested now.
In fairness, you know what?
I have to be transparent with you.
Like, I don't know if that's really going to happen because, because remember, the Supreme Court made a decision on immunity.
But you know, some of these other folks, they're not going to have that.
And all of those pardons that got handed out, Like candy, 8,000 plus in one day, those auto pardons.
It looks like those things are going to be null and void.
So I think there's going to be a few folks up a creek without a paddle, shall we say.
But Tulsi's right.
Like this is a big deal.
Brennan, James Clapper, and Susan Rice and others essentially making a very intentional decision to create this manufactured, politicized piece of intelligence with the objective of subverting the will of the American people.
Who in November of 2016 delivered a historic victory to President Trump, defeating Hillary Clinton.
And President Obama and his team, their goal was to essentially not accept the decision of the American people and to use this manufactured, politicized intelligence as a means to enact what would become essentially a years long coup against President Trump.
You have gone into great detail over these years of what the effects of this document and this decision have resulted in.
Obviously, a years long Mueller investigation that cost taxpayers almost $40 million, two congressional impeachments, endless smears and attacks against not only President Trump, but his family.
He had senior members of his team who were.
She goes on, but it's unbelievable.
It's unbelievable the damage that they did.
View in Crosshairs of Administration00:14:04
By the way, damage to her as well.
I mean, Hillary's team was the one planting it with the New York Times that somehow Tulsi was a Russian spy.
You know, she may not have an axe to grind or anything, or maybe.
I mean, the list of the people in the room that were plotting this thing allegedly together.
It's really all pretty darn shocking.
And you know what else is really bad, guys?
Guess who was involved as well?
The media.
The media.
The media totally like bought it all.
Totally.
I mean, it's wild to me.
For goodness sakes, I mean, Hillary Clinton out there on The View, The View, which is now coming under fire, shall we say, by none other than the FCC chair who's calling him out, Brendan Carr.
I mean, because, well, you want to talk misinformation, for goodness sakes, and you don't even have to.
Take my word for it and say, okay, their opinion is misinformation.
Like the things that they're actually trying to play off as facts, they're getting their own fact checkers going after them for.
I mean, unbelievable.
We got to get to that in a second.
But first, I want to give a shout out to my friends over at Balance in Nature, code word Trish, 35% off, free shipping.
You know, I'm really into ingredients.
I've gotten more so into ingredients.
Probably, I credit RFK Jr. actually with this.
And so, you know, all those things, those fillers and things that get put into stuff.
And you have to look, right?
I'm a mom, I got kids.
Lost cereal boxes, and I'm like, wait a second, does it have the red dye?
And so I credit him with this, and I started looking at the balance in nature stuff.
The good news is they don't have any of that stuff, but they've never had any of that stuff.
A lot of vitamin products, they actually do not.
These guys, I encourage you to check them out.
I take the fruits and veggies, fruits and veggies, they have a lot of different things though on there.
35% off balanceinnature.com.
You can also give them a ring, give them a call anytime.
Use my name, use my name, Trish, T R I S H. That's your code.
1 800 246 8 75 1.
That's 1 800 246 8 75 1.
Do that because you'll get a good deal and a money back guarantee.
But I'm looking at everything that happened.
I could tell you, it's really something to think that Hillary Clinton is out there going on the view.
I mean, fascinating that she would choose the view to push her line of thinking, which, by the way, is the very show that's quote, on hiatus right now that the White House says may not be coming back.
And Brendan Carr, the head of the FCC, who's breathing down.
Bob Iger's back every two seconds of the day, right over at Disney, which owns ABC.
He's actually saying something similar.
But you know, it makes sense given that Hillary was choosing to provide her misinformation right there on ABC News airwaves.
There is no denying that the Russians interfered in the election.
Right.
Whether or not they had willing or unwitting help from the Trump team, they interfered and they did so to help him and hurt me, and they did so to destabilize our democracy.
And they have not stopped.
I mean, there's been enough public testimony before Congress now by very distinguished, experienced intelligence professionals who all say the same thing.
This is a clear and present danger to our country.
And I think it's important, and I would say this if the roles were reversed, if I had won the Electoral College and I were in the White House and the intelligence services, I've served with them, I've worked with them, I've read their analysis, both on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
And as Secretary of State.
You know, they don't always get it right, but these are patriotic, hardworking, dedicated men and women.
And if they had come to me and told me, you know, we believe that this election was interfered with, we believe that it was influenced, and we believe the answer.
I would have done this, that, and the other.
Yeah, right.
Well, anyway, she was out there on The View, as were others, pushing their message.
And you know, Brendan Carr, he's the head of the FCC right now.
So he's the guy that actually holds all the cards for ABC.
He could say, hey, you know what?
I don't want any of these stations to be affiliated with ABC because, well, the FCC controls their airwaves still.
That's kind of a problem for ABC News and The View, don't you think?
He was asked about this on Fox this week.
I want to play you his answer.
It's pretty good.
Let's go to The View, shall we?
Joy Behar, yesterday, said this.
First of all, who tried to overthrow the government on January 6th?
Wait, let me think.
Who was that again?
That was not Obama.
The thing about him is that he's so jealous of Obama because Obama is everything that he is not trim, smart, handsome, happily married, and can sing Al Green's song, Let's Stay Together, better than Al Green.
And Trump cannot stand it.
It's driving him crazy.
Jealousy is not a good color.
That from yesterday, who knows what happens today?
The White House chose to respond to that.
And this is what they said Joy Behar is an irrelevant loser suffering from a severe case of Trump derangement syndrome.
It's no surprise that the View's ratings hit an all time low last year.
She should self reflect on her own jealousy of President Trump's historic popularity before her show is the next to be pulled off air.
Is the View now in the crosshairs of this administration?
Look, it's entirely possible.
That there's issues over there.
I mean, again, stepping back this broader dynamic, once President Trump has exposed these media gatekeepers and smashed this facade, there's a lot of consequences.
I think the consequences of that aren't quite finished.
And look, the view's got a lot of challenges there.
It wasn't that long ago, I think one episode, one show alone, they had to stop, interrupt the show, and read four separate legal notices to try to avoid legal liability.
So I'm not surprised to hear people saying that their ratings are struggling.
Wow.
Sir, where does this end then?
Look, I think we need a course correction.
You know, it's time for America's legacy broadcasters to return to promoting the public interest.
And just recently, you know, Skydance, which is looking to acquire CBS, wrote letters to the FCC committing to serious change, to trying to root out bias, to putting in place an ombudsman that would address these issues, to returning to unbiased, trustworthy journalism.
That's where we have to go.
And I think we're getting some wins along the way.
It's trust but verify at the end of the day.
You know, we're not where we need to go.
But I think this legacy media really needs to reorient.
Or they're going to continue to run into issues like Colbert, where it just doesn't make economic sense to run a partisan circus.
It's so true, right?
Like people are trying to say, oh, well, that's the administration trying to throw its weight around with Colbert.
But in reality, it was so partisan that guess what?
Advertisers didn't want to go near it.
So it was losing 30, 40, some estimates were even higher, a million dollars a year.
You just can't continue to operate like that.
And it's weird to me that they somehow think that, oh, a show should be on the air because it's a brand, because it stands for CBS.
I'm sorry, if you're losing 30, 40 million bucks, you really shouldn't be on the air anymore.
I think they can get someone a little bit cheaper and run a thinner operation.
You're all going to be better off.
So, okay.
It was doing all right in the ratings.
Well, so is The View doing all right in the ratings.
But even the CEO of Disney, which runs ABC, has tried to sit these women down and say, okay, enough already.
Like it's nauseating.
It's just one point of view constantly.
There's no diversity of thought in anything that they do.
Really?
I mean, they got like some token conservative on there, but the rest of them are one way all the time.
And so I think as viewers, right, you're sick of it.
I get it.
You're sick of it.
And it's good for me and it's good for people that.
Are willing to speak their mind and have some original thinking, shall we say, and are coming at these angles, all of these stories from different angles.
It's good for us.
But for the networks, like, I don't get it.
Like, don't you guys see the handwriting on the wall?
People are tired of it.
Advertisers are tired of it.
You guys are done because you know what?
It's a new game.
There's a new way to reach America now.
And it's something actually Donald Trump figured out very successfully early on.
And they tried to shut him off.
Think about Twitter, for example, canceling his account.
He found the workarounds and he continues to find the workarounds to reach people directly.
And you can do it nowadays, as again, the FCC chair is pointing out in this interview with our friends at Newsmax.
Yeah, something really significant is happening right here.
And it goes back to President Trump.
When he ran for office again, he ran directly at these legacy national broadcasters.
And for years, People cowed down to the executives behind these companies based in Hollywood, in New York, and they just accepted that these national broadcasters could dictate how people think about topics, that they could set the narrative for the country.
And President Trump fundamentally rejected it.
He smashed the facade that these are gatekeepers that can determine what people think.
And everything that we're seeing right now flows from that decision by President Trump.
And he's winning.
I mean, look, PBS has been defunded, NPR has been defunded, CBS is committing to restoring fact based journalism.
You see it, you know, everything from, you know, Joy Reid is gone at MSNBC.
All these things aren't isolated pinpricks.
They go back to this emperor has no clothes moment where President Trump stood up to these legacy media gatekeepers and now their business models are falling apart.
Yeah, totally falling apart in real time.
It's sort of just amazing to see.
I just can't believe that they were so dumb.
But listen, this is all they were feeding us.
Remember that guy, I can't even remember his name.
Gosh, he has a podcast now, I guess, but he used to be on CNN.
And he was so flippant and so just, the attitude.
Anyway, he's caught.
They're all caught.
They were all part of the game, shall we say.
Don Lemon, that's it.
Here we go.
Maybe the biggest lie of all.
Repeatedly and with no facts to back him up, making the outrageous claim that the so called deep state spied on his campaign.
He did it again today.
But I hope it's not true, but it looks like it is.
It's not true.
It's a lie.
Did the intelligence community spy on President Trump and his campaign?
No, we did not.
This is not just an angry president popping off.
This is a deliberate and coordinated effort to save his presidency, to cast doubt on the Russia investigation by repeating a lie, repeating it every chance he gets.
And that repetition is a key part of the strategy here, because if you hear him say the same thing over and over and over, it gets into your head.
You may even start to wonder if there's some truth to it.
Okay, so let's fast forward to 2024.
Let's fast forward to today with all that Tulsi has revealed.
But here we go.
New report accusing President Obama's CIA of curating the 2016 Russia collusion hoax by asking foreign intelligence agencies to illegally spy on the Trump campaign.
John Brennan had identified 26 Trump associates for the Five Eyes to target.
A source confirmed that the IC had identified them as people to.
Bump or make contact with or manipulate.
They were targets of our own IC and law enforcement, targets for collection and misinformation.
And that's what they did.
I mean, we had George Papadopoulos on the show.
He explained exactly how it all went down.
And they were targeting people on different campaigns.
I mean, he, for example, had worked on Ben Carson's.
They targeted him on Ben Carson's and they targeted him on Donald Trump's.
His point was they wanted intel on Republicans in general, any Republican that might have had a shot at winning.
So now, You might ask yourself, why aren't they covering all of Tulsi's intel that she just released?
Why are they digging in their heels on this?
Molly Hemingway of Ron Fox had a very good explanation I want to share with you.
Watch.
What happened when you go back to 2016 is the Obama administration hid intelligence showing that Russia's meddling in the 2016 election was no big deal.
They suppressed that because they didn't want Donald Trump to know about it.
Then they immediately began leaking to the Washington Post and to the New York Times.
False things, things that weren't true, the opposite, that Russia had conspired with Trump to steal the election.
And the Washington Post and New York Times, when they were asked to publish these things that were not true, they just went ahead and did it.
They took the word of John Brennan and other sources like that who had made these false claims.
Then the Obama administration manufactures a completely fake intelligence assessment, again with this claim that Russia had conspired with Trump to steal the election.
And they leak that to the media as well.
Well, when they were receiving these leaks, the media did what?
Whatever these people wanted.
They pushed this absolutely delusional conspiracy theory for years.
And now that we know that, and it was a fake story, now that we know the real story, and the real story is shocking, the Obama administration suppressed real intelligence and then they manufactured fake intelligence for the purpose of undermining a legitimately elected administration.
The media are hiding it.
And why?
Because they were complicit in the crimes that were committed.
They can't very well report what actually happened because the whole conspiracy would have gone nowhere.
If the media hadn't been so willing to just republish these lies from Obama officials?
Tariffs, Rebates, and Happy Sides00:05:15
I mean, wow.
I thought you did a pretty good summary of it.
She was very succinct.
So I wanted to play it for you, but it's just mind boggling and it's terrifying because it's really showing you how dangerous it can be if one group gets in charge and tries to fully take over.
And that's what they were doing.
So, yeah, there's a lot of members in the media that are going to be in trouble right now.
I think their businesses fundamentally are flawed.
I think advertisers are staying clear.
The other reality that's seeping in is that, hey, that's not how people are consuming their news anymore, right?
You could cut the cord, you can come over here.
It's a whole big savings for you.
Plus, you get much more.
And you know what you really get?
Total, utter transparency.
Because I have no incentive to say anything other than what I believe to be the truth.
I have no incentive other than to bring you all sides and, well, a little in my opinion too, right?
But I'm not going to sit there and carry the water for somebody else.
Because my boss is telling me to do it.
That's the difference.
Reminder to subscribe, share, like.
But I think that, you know what?
The views days really will be coming to an end, not just because of the administration, but just because the economics of that model, they really, really don't make any sense anymore.
No way, no way, right?
Like it just doesn't add up.
But you know what?
We did get some really good news today.
Really, really good news.
I mean, I got to tell you, I liked this because I'm.
In Ireland right now, and this was can I show you here?
The Irish Examiner this morning, front page EU US deal averts trade war.
They're really happy over here, they're relieved.
They're like, thank goodness.
So, there's going to be a 15% tariff, and they are going to actually commit to buying something like 750 billion dollars worth of US energy.
There's like another 600 million dollar investment being made in the US.
I mean, who else would have done this?
You think Biden could have gotten this done?
I want you to hear.
Uh, Ursula, she's the woman that runs the EU.
She's speaking with Donald Trump as they're announcing all of this, and again, they're seemingly pleased with his punch.
But wow, I'm telling you, he had some really good leverage because the reporter's like, Is there anything in it for us?
and watch what she says.
Anyone else?
Yes, ma'am.
I have a question for the EU Commission President.
What are the U.S. concessions?
What is the U.S. giving up in the deal?
So, the starting point was an imbalance, a surplus on our side and a deficit on the U.S. side.
And we wanted to rebalance the trade relation.
And we wanted to do it in a way that trade goes on between the two of us across the Atlantic, because the two biggest economies should have a good trade flow between us.
And I think we hit exactly the point we wanted to find.
Rebalance but enable trade on both sides, which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic, and that was important for us.
I'm just going to say, I don't think the Europeans really wanted the rebalance.
I think that was a Trump thing.
All right, so we did get that rebalance, and it's a big deal.
Some of the Europeans aren't quite as happy about it.
They're saying, quote, one ambassador telling the Financial Times, there's no hiding the fact that the EU was rolled over by the Trump juggernaut said one ambassador, quote, Trump worked out exactly where our pain threshold is.
Okay, fine.
But you know what?
Here's the good news.
Here's the good news.
We're still going to trade together.
We should, right?
We're friends.
So we should have all that trade.
And, you know, what's fair is fair.
Like, it doesn't make sense.
If you guys are going to put tariffs on us, then why can't we reciprocate with tariffs on you?
So this is a big deal.
It's actually going to bring in a ton of money.
As I said, $750 billion.
That they have committed to in terms of energy buys, which will go to U.S. energy, which is very good, as well as a $600 million investment in the U.S. Here's Trump talking about it.
I mean, he's even thinking maybe we get some tax rebates.
He was asked specifically about this and he seemed to like the idea.
Let me show you.
Thinking about that, actually, we have so much money coming in.
We're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt.
But we're thinking about a rebate.
That is a very good thing.
We're thinking about a rebate because we have so much money coming in from tariffs that a little rebate for people of a certain income level might be very nice.
It might be very nice indeed.
So, there could be some rebates coming.
Who knows?
I'll tell you, it is a win, it's a big win.
And we've had a lot of wins lately on the economic front.
It all adds up to good things, certainly for the energy sector, as I said, $750 billion.
Dan Epstein Answers and Good Stuff00:13:55
And this is going to go into new energy production, into shale.
And you know what?
We need it because this is a good sector to have.
We've talked about this before.
A lot of people are like, oh, you know, energy, energy, it's bad and this, that, and the other.
And I'm like, hang on.
Like, imagine if you didn't have it, for goodness sakes, people.
Imagine if there were no fossil fuels or if you were like some countries in Africa where you don't have the access, right, to it.
Think of the lives that we're able to save as a result of our energy industry.
So, you know, as much as people want to put it down over and over and over again, I think you got to actually take a look at some of the good stuff, right?
Some of the good stuff, and we've talked about this before, you know, I just think it's a mistake to completely, completely demonize, you know, what you have for life saving infrastructure out there.
Yeah, it's been a way for billions of people to come out of.
Poverty.
So you get activists blaming fossil fuels for everything.
But you know, there's actually a different story that should be told, that can be told.
And I think it's exciting to know about that.
You can learn more.
You can learn more.
The tagline is don't be fossil fueled.
You get it.
You get the full picture at oilfacts.com, brought to you by NASDAQ listed prairie operating company.
It's a high growth, low cost producer of safe and responsible American energy, shale, right?
Again, oilfacts.com, oilfacts.com to learn more.
More.
But all of these trade deals, they're really, really pointing towards good, good stuff ahead.
Okay.
And that's great.
And you know what?
Markets like that, right?
So if you have not bought my 76 research for a dollar a month, a dollar, use code word dollar for the first two months, then it goes to $9.95.
But if you don't like it, you can get out, even though you've only given us a dollar.
We'll give you the dollar back.
Okay.
People tend to like it because we're pretty smart.
It's myself and a longtime friend who managed.
Billions of dollars on Wall Street for 20 years, and Rob Horton, he's really, really, really good at finding those companies.
I've got a pretty good sense of the macro environment myself, so go check that out 76research.com.
Today, I want to get to this other story because this came out over the weekend.
Dan Bongino is a good friend of mine, I've known him for many years.
We work together, of course, at Fox, and I have nothing but the utmost respect for Dan, he's really true blue.
I don't know.
I can't even sort of game this one out other than to suggest that maybe he's found out some things he really wished he hadn't found out.
So, over the weekend, he kind of contributed to this frenzy around the whole Epstein story.
And it left a lot of people, including yours truly, a little bit frustrated because I'm like, okay, Dan, like, put up or shut up, right?
What do you got?
Like, why are you teasing us here?
This was a heck of a tease that he put out there.
I'm going to read it to you right now.
Curious to get your thoughts on it.
During my tenure here at the As deputy director of the FBI, I have repeatedly relayed to you that things are happening that might not be immediately visible, but they are happening.
The director and I, he wrote, he's referring to Kash Patel, we are committed to stamping out public corruption and the political weaponization of both law enforcement and intelligence operations, a priority for us, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Here's the good part, right?
He said, oh, wait, this is not the one I wanted to show you.
We're going to have to go back and get another.
Oh no, this is it.
This is it.
Okay, here.
This is exactly.
I should have highlighted it.
Here you go, guys.
This is the key sentence as I'm looking at it together with you in real time.
When he says, But what I've learned in the course of our necessary investigations into these aforementioned matters has shocked me down to my core.
We cannot run a republic like this.
I'll never be the same after learning what I've learned.
And then he goes on to say, you know, we're going to keep doing these investigations and we all deserve answers.
And as with any investigation, I cannot predict where it will land, but I can promise you an honest and dignified effort at truth.
Not my truth or your truth, but the truth.
God bless America and all those who defend her respectfully, Dan.
It was quite a note to send, right?
And again, I think very highly of him and I know how much he loves the president.
Well, I mean, that's what he said, right?
You know, he's never going to be the same.
And we can't run a country like this.
And this is more than just him taking a shot at Pam Bondi.
I mean, I can tell you with pretty good authority and my own sourcing that there was a moment there where it was like him or her.
Okay.
Like he was like, if she's not going, like basically, he was not going to stay.
So I think he had a lot of issues with however Bondi's been conducting the investigation.
But this goes deeper than that because now he's talking about the republic overall.
So, you know, again, we're in a live show, so I'm kind of curious to see your comments and just reactions to see what you're thinking about.
You know, I don't know what exactly he was trying to allude to there, but it kind of got everyone into a frenzy.
And now you get the Democrats that are coming out swinging.
You've got people within the MAGA movement that want and deserve answers.
And I think we're kind of left saying, okay, well, what's really, really, really happening here?
And I don't know if we're going to get.
Much in the way of answers.
Bongino seems to be promising that he's going to do his best, but he came forward with that tape, right?
That tape that was supposed to answer a ton of questions, and turns out there were three minutes missing.
Meanwhile, you have, I'm going to say her name right, Glenn, Glenn, right?
Who was being interviewed by Todd Blanch, the president's attorney, there in her Tennessee prison.
It looks like she's going to be speaking.
James Comer is bringing her in to testify from prison on August 11th, and she's trying to push the Supreme Court.
To try and reverse her case.
It's like a high stakes game.
And I think we're all sitting there going, but why, right?
I mean, but why?
This is important.
This is a soundbite today of the Vice President, JD Vance, responding to a reporter who starts asking about where we are on this story and, like, why is it like suddenly it's like every time you think you're there, you're coming up against a dead end?
And he gets really annoyed.
Watch.
The reasons the U.S. government should shield the client list of Epstein from the public and what you have to say about any relevance to that here today.
Well, let me say just a couple of things.
First of all, the president has been very clear.
We're not shielding anything.
The president has directed the attorney general to release all credible information and, frankly, to go and find additional credible information related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.
He's been incredibly transparent about that stuff, but some of that stuff takes time.
You've got to assemble that stuff, you've got to compile that stuff, you've got to redact some victims' names so that you protect the victims.
But the president has been very clear.
He wants full transparency.
He's asked that from the attorney general, and I know because I Talk to her all the time.
The Attorney General is hard at work on that issue right now.
But I think I got to make an observation that there's an interesting thing about this case that the American media seems to totally ignore.
For four years under Joe Biden's Department of Justice, the media didn't give a damn about the Epstein files or about the Epstein case.
And now, all of a sudden, and he's not wrong, the media's all over it, right?
Well, why would that be?
Well, I think it's pretty obvious.
They think that somehow they've got Trump ensnared in something.
I'll just go back to what Alan Dershowitz said, and he's seen all of the files.
He needed them in terms of discovery, et cetera, to defend himself.
He said judges were locking this stuff up.
He's seen them, and he's come out and said, Look, there's no current politician, no current politician that's badly implicated in any of this.
So that would seem to take Donald Trump off the table.
The other thing that I would just say is if they had the information, right, you want to talk about it, if Democrats had that information, you don't think they would have used that?
I mean, they would have been playing that stuff all day long.
They think that they have something now, and the fact that Donald Trump, for whatever reason, seems to be, or his administration seems to be backing away from it, is like a man from heaven for the Democrats.
And so they're piling on, and then you have people that are saying, wait a second, we were talking about this for four years.
I mean, Bonchino was talking about it for four years on his show, so he's like, wait a second, why aren't we getting answers?
Donald Trump had something to say on that today.
Watch.
I don't do drawings.
I'm not a drawing person.
I don't do drawings.
Sometimes people would say, would you draw a building, and I'll draw four lines and a little roof?
You know, for charity stuff.
But I'm not a drawing person.
I don't do drawings of women, that I can tell you.
They say there's a drawing of a woman, and I don't do drawings of women.
And also, you know, Epstein was always a very controversial guy.
I was at a very high position, you know, pretty much all my life, in all fairness.
I've been doing this for a long time.
I had the top show on television, I had the number one bestsellers, I had everything, right?
And I was a very successful business guy.
He was a very controversial guy.
Who would do a controversial drawing?
Now, with that being said, they say there were many letters done by many people, and many big people, you know, big successful people.
But I just don't.
When you talk about files, I just keep going back.
And other people, too.
Even the enemy says this thing is not correct.
Because if we had it, we would have used it on the guy.
It's a bad issue.
They say it's a good issue for Trump.
Do you know that my poll numbers are up four and a half points since this ridiculous Epstein stuff?
My poll numbers have gone up four and a half points because people don't buy it.
Okay, people don't buy it.
And he's gone, and we want to focus on trade deals.
I want to focus on the deal we just made with the European Union, which is the biggest trade deal in history.
It's the biggest deal, I think, in history, not just a trade deal.
So if they would have had something, they would have used it.
Yeah, I'm sure they would have.
But again, people are asking natural questions.
I mean, when Dan Bondino puts that out there, what's Dan trying to do, right?
You know, they're going to have to, I think, satiate people somehow.
Maxwell's an attorney.
Glenn, well, he said her name a few times, so I think I got it now.
But anyway, he came out and talked about her naming possibly 100 people.
Listen.
I think Glenn did a wonderful job.
She literally answered every question.
She didn't say, you know what, don't ask me that.
I'm not going to talk about this person.
She was asked maybe about 100 different people.
She answered questions about everybody, and she didn't hold anything back.
No.
Well, okay.
So maybe we got some intel.
I don't know.
But I think Dan's statement was a little bit cryptic and a little bit concerning.
And you gotta ask yourself about that.
And maybe he's preparing to leave.
Maybe he wants out.
I mean, when you say that you basically, it's hard to know what you know now.
We're like, but Dan, what is it?
Tell us.
Tell us.
Don't leave the little breadcrumbs.
I mean, this is actually, I'm sure, some people in the Trump administration have gotta be kind of annoyed about that.
And they're annoyed because they're like, wait a second, you're just adding fuel to the fire, right?
And now everybody's like super curious.
What exactly does he mean by that?
We don't know.
But again, you look at what's going on in the world, and it's been win after win after win after win.
Like a lot of good stuff is happening, you guys.
And that's, I think, you know, you got to keep your eye on the ball and you got to keep the full picture, right, in mind, because, you know, maybe we'll find some stuff out, maybe we won't.
I think it's actually pretty complicated.
I've talked about it before.
And I think that I wouldn't be surprised if some of these theories are.
True.
I really, really wouldn't be surprised.
I told you I spoke with a source who spoke to Epstein the day before he died.
It was actually his doctor, and he was in great spirits and had sort of none of the characteristics of somebody who was about to do what he allegedly did.
So it's a mystery, and I think everybody would like some closure on this one.
But we also, as I said, can't lose sight of what needs to happen for the world and for the country.
And we've got great trade deals.
And we've got inflation coming down.
We've got some smart people in there like Scott Besant telling Jerome Powell, hey, buddy, you know, you're not that good at your job there at the Fed.
And I think, you know, bottom line is we're going to come out for the better.
He's swinging for the fences, shall we say, big time.
Big time.
I know, I'm looking at you guys.
Bongino's mad and he wants to tell us.
And, you know, he probably just, well, he can't, you know, whatever you sign when you go to work for the FBI.
This is why we reporters, we really shouldn't be in the government.
I'm telling you, I could never do that job.
Bigger Subs Able to Keep00:01:42
People had asked me before, even to be a spokesperson or something.
I'm like, I couldn't, because you know what?
I'm way too opinionated.
And I'm not always going to agree with you guys.
And I need to be able to have my own voice and my own viewpoint and be able to communicate directly.
With all my peeps, right?
With all of you guys.
So thank you for being here.
And, oh, you know, he's saying it was not in reference.
I hear you, David Hughes.
I'm going to add you to the broadcast.
I don't know.
Like, that's kind of funny to me.
I'm sure everybody lost it on him.
They were like, Dan, what the heck are you doing?
And after the fact, he's like, oh, no, no, I wasn't talking about what you thought I was talking about.
I don't know.
I mean, I'm sure there's just a lot of stuff that goes on.
And it's a big eye opener for him.
And for all of us, right?
Scott Collin, good to see you in the house.
Again, we are totally live.
You know, I tried to come to you guys live over the weekend and we were having some internet issues.
Can you believe that?
Here in Ireland, I was joking that Rosie O'Donnell had gotten a hold of my feed or something.
Thank you.
Yeah, we're network news.
You know what?
This, the Trish Regan Network, which we hope will grow bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger.
So you guys are part of that, right?
We're almost at a million subs and we're going to be able to keep adding to.
Everything that we do here, but make sure you subscribe, share, hit the bell so you know exactly when I'm live, and help me because we're in this journey together.
We are on, I say it all the time, I'm going to say it again, we're on the front lines of history, and we're finding the truth in real time together.