Former CIA Director John Brennan faces potential prosecution after the House Judiciary Committee referred him for alleged lies to Congress regarding the Steele dossier. Tulsi Gabbard, now leading the Department of National Intelligence, claims the Obama administration, including James Comey and Susan Rice, intentionally manufactured politicized intelligence to undermine Donald Trump following a pivotal December 2016 White House meeting. While the Obama office defends its stance citing a 2020 Senate report, this revelation suggests a coordinated effort to alter election interference narratives, fueling broader accusations of deep state manipulation that extend beyond mere intelligence errors into deliberate political subversion. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, Qwen/Qwen3-ForcedAligner-0.6B, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
The Steel Dossier Controversy00:14:26
This is an unbelievable story.
And when I say that we are living on the front lines of history, everyone, I'm not kidding because what is about to come out, I think, is absolutely positively going to blow your mind.
John Brennan has been referred now to the DOJ officially.
The House Judiciary Committee referring one John Brennan, who's the former head of the CIA under none other than Barack Obama.
And now he's looking at a potential indictment looming for him.
We're going to get into why they believe he is guilty of lying to Congress.
It has to do with that steel dossier, right?
The Russia, Russia, Russia stuff.
Unbelievable.
Meanwhile, oh my gosh, it's like Revenge of the Mean Girls, right?
I'll tell you, they're no match for the Trump women, however.
You got Jen Psaki, one of the former Biden flags, along with KJP, who's out trying to push a book right now, trying to take down a whole bunch of Trump women.
But it's going nowhere.
It's going nowhere fast.
Welcome, everyone, to the program.
Great to have you here.
You know what?
We're back in the top 100 again this week.
We're on a winning streak.
I love it.
We begin today on John Brennan, the House Judiciary Committee referring former CIA director under Barack Obama, John Brennan, to the Justice Department for prosecution.
You have the representative, Jim Jordan, alleging that the former CIA director lied in 2023's testimony about his agency's use of the Steele dossier.
Remember the Steele dossier, which was basically opposition research bought and paid for none other than by Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton got that opposition research.
From her law firm, which had gotten it from something called Fusion GPS, which was an opposition research firm.
And they went out and hired Christopher Steele.
You know the whole drill.
Well, it turns out that that's what basically then launched the entire Russia, Russia narrative.
And we kind of had some inklings of this, right?
But along the way, Tulsi Gabbard, now head of the Department of National Intelligence, uncovered some really important stuff, which has just brought this to a whole new level.
So again, John Brennan basically looking at a possible indictment coming very soon.
from one Pam Bondi at DOJ.
I want to go back to the issue in question because in 2023, John Brennan, who was Obama's CIA guy, was there being asked a whole bunch of questions by Trey Gowdy.
And this is where it's believed he tripped up because he tried to say that the CIA really didn't have anything to do with the Steele dossier and didn't use this as information to try and then weaponize the system against Trump.
And that's what people are saying was in fact wrong, or it's alleged anyway, I should say, that he was wrong on this.
Let's go back and watch that original tape together.
Here we go.
Steel dossier?
I don't.
Do you know if the FBI paid for any portion of the steel dossier?
I don't know.
I know that there are press reports related to that, but I don't know.
I have no first hand knowledge of that.
Do you know whether any of the underlying allegations made in the steel dossier were ever tested, probed, examined, cross examined, whether the sources were examined for reliability, credibility?
I know that there were efforts made by the Bureau to try to understand whether or not any of the information in that was valid, but I just don't have any firsthand knowledge of it.
Do you know if the Bureau ever relied on the Steele dossier as part of any court filings, applications, petitions, pleadings?
I have no awareness.
Okay, now wait.
Did the CIA rely on it?
No.
Why not?
Because we didn't.
It wasn't part of the corpus of intelligence information that we had.
It was not in any way used as a basis for the intelligence community assessment that was done.
It was not.
Wow.
Okay, so that's what could get him.
in a little bit of trouble.
Sometimes it's not what you do, but, you know, the lying about it after the fact.
Well, in this case, it kind of is what you did, shall we say.
All right.
Let's just go with the whole kit and caboodle here.
It's what he did and then what he said or didn't say about it after the fact.
I mean, again, Tulsi's been all over this.
I want to go to the headline as it's coming in.
House Judiciary Committee referring former CIA Director John Brennan to Justice Department for prosecution.
This is coming out of Jim Jordan's office.
He's alleging that the former CIA Director lied in his 2023 testimony, the one that you just saw.
about the agency's use of the steel dossier because it's not just what we saw there, but also that same day you had Representative Gates at the time asking Mr. Brennan a whole bunch of things.
And he again was insisting that they really didn't have any idea about any of this information.
Well, that's not what Tulsi has uncovered.
Okay.
That is not what she has uncovered in any way, shape or form.
Mr. Brennan said, quote, I said that the first time I actually saw it, it was after the election and the CIA, he said, was not.
involved at all with the dossier.
You can direct that to the FBI and to others.
He said, were you aware of the FBI's involvement with the dossier?
He did say yes, because that's an annex of the ICA, the Intelligence Community Assessment that the Bureau had asked to be included there.
It was their purview.
There's not ours at all.
Hmm.
Well, that's calling, being called, I should say, into question in part because of, you see, this meeting that they called in Obama's office December 9th, all of this information, again, coming out courtesy of Tulsi Gabbard at DNI.
And what they had discovered was there was sort of an about face that they knew that the Russians did not actually intervene in a way that would shift the election any way, shape, or form.
But they decided to go with a very different narrative.
We're going to get to that in just a moment.
But first, let's hear from Tulsi herself.
She was talking over the summer with my former colleague, wonderful woman, Maria Bartiromo, about all of this.
Let's listen.
Ordered be published, which contained a manufactured intelligence document.
It's worse than even politicization of intelligence.
It was manufactured intelligence that sought to achieve President Obama and his team's objective, which was undermining President Trump's presidency and subverting the will of the American people.
So, yes, next week we will be releasing more detailed information about how exactly this took place and the extent to which this information was sought to be hidden from the American people, hidden from a Officials who would be in a position to do something about it.
And that's really the point here that I think is most important, Maria.
And you said it in your opening accountability is essential for the future of our country, for the American people to have any sense of trust in the integrity of our democratic republic.
Accountability, action, prosecution, indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to do something about it.
Okay, because the point is that they were trying to undermine democracy, they were trying to steal our democracy.
our great republic effectively by making it really, really difficult for the incoming president who had been elected by the people.
I mean, he won the electoral college.
You can complain about the popular vote all you want, Hillary Clinton, but next time around, he won it all, right?
Popular vote and electoral college.
But he had won the electoral college.
And instead of, say, assisting him in the transition, they did everything they could to make his life utterly miserable and basically get rid of him as fast as they could.
We know this.
And again, Tulsi outlines it.
I want to go through what she's saying.
You saw the document I just showed you.
From Obama's office, the memo, and I've got additional memos I want to show you, but this is a big deal.
This is what he's going to have to answer for.
Leading at the helm, President Obama and his senior most national security cabinet, James Comey, John 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 be.
As a means to basically undermine the entire presidency of one Donald Trump.
You know it, I know it, and he's mad about it.
And he said, you know, just a short time ago, he read through.
What Tulsi had put out, and he said, Look, I think Brennan's going to be in trouble, along with a few other people along the way, right?
On what I read, and I read pretty much what you read, it would be President Obama.
He started it, and Biden was there with him, and Comey was there, and Clapper, the whole group was there.
Brennan, they were all there in a room, right here.
This is the room.
So that was the meeting that I was talking about.
I mean, look, Obama's furious.
I want to get to his response, but before I do, I think it's important to sort of outline what indeed was going on because you had certain things.
Before we get to December 7th, let's actually get first to September 5th, 2016.
Okay.
So September 5th, 2016, this is before the election.
You had an FBI official asking for a change in the draft of a potential ICA on cyber threats, writing, quote, The way it currently reads, it would indicate that we have definitive information that Russia does intend to disrupt our elections and that we are uncomfortable making that assessment at this point.
And an official from an unnamed agency added on, I sort of understood the emphasis to be on Russia probably not having the capability to influence the election, right?
So here they are saying they didn't have the influence.
And then you fast forward to after the election, which would be December 7th, 2016, Clapper's office prepared a text for the presidential daily briefing heading, Activity on and since election day that read, and I quote, we assess that foreign advisories did not use cyber attacks on election infrastructure to alter the U.S. presidential election outcome this year.
We have no evidence of cyber manipulation of election infrastructure intended to alter the results.
Okay, so that seems kind of clear and concise.
But then by the next day, December 8th, officials had a new text that they prepared to read saying Russian and criminal actors did not. impact recent U.S. election results because they wanted to make it sure it wasn't just cyber stuff.
They wanted to make sure everybody knew that there was no malicious attack on any kind of election infrastructure.
The wording was scheduled to be entered in the public record, okay?
Actually not a public, just what they call a PDB, not a public report, but a confidential briefing to President Obama the very next day, which would have been December 9th.
However, Comey's FBI on the afternoon of the 8th unexpectedly withdrew this.
They took it away.
And so now you're like, well, wait, why would they have taken it away?
They said instead, FBI is going to be drafting a dissent this afternoon.
Please remove our seal and annotations of co-authorship about an hour later at 4:53.
That afternoon, they said an official from Clapper's office asked the PDB for the time being, quote, based on some new guidance, we are going to push back publication of the PDB.
It will not run tomorrow and is likely not going to run until next week.
So what was going on?
Well, they had to have their big meeting, right?
Barack Obama because they had to figure out just exactly how they were going to spin this thing.
I mean, he couldn't believe that Hillary Clinton didn't win.
I mean, I know we're going back in time, but gosh darn it, we got to, right?
Look at who was in that meeting.
I mean, you had Susan Rice, you had John Kerry, Andrew McCabe, James Clapper, you had Averell Haynes, Lisa Monaco, Ben Rhodes, a lot of important people, Loretta Lynch, et cetera.
And all of a sudden, there was kind of a new directive.
And the new directive then that followed was that the intelligence community, is, quote, prepared to produce an assessment per the president's request.
For the president's request, that pulls together the information we have on the tools Moscow used and the actions it took to influence the 2016 election.
You see that that's, in plain sight, an explanation of why Moscow directed these activities and how Moscow's approach has changed over time, going back to 2008 and 2012 as reference points.
Whoa okay, Okay, so there you have it.
This came allegedly from an order at the very tippy top.
Okay, so they had this meeting, and all of a sudden, everything that they were going to say changes.
Why?
Because apparently they wanted to be able to say what the media wound up saying.
I mean, they queued it up, did they not?
And they had their lackeys ready to deliver and carry that message coast to coast.
What?
Russia hacking the election to elect Trump is the end of our democracy.
Votes were definitely affected.
Russia hacked the election to tilt it to Mr. Trump.
The Russians definitively hacked the election.
Russia did hack the election.
No doubt.
The Russians hacked the election.
Yes, Russia hacked the election.
Fact, Russia hacked the election.
President elect Donald Trump still not sounding convinced that Russia hacked the election.
The president does not want to come to terms with the fact that the Russians hacked the election.
President Trump says he still wonders if.
If the Russians hacked the elections.
If you can get them to accept the election.
Like, how dare he?
How dare he wonder that?
Because, you see, the intelligence has since discovered that, no, they didn't.
I mean, they had some social media accounts that, you know, played along the way.
And maybe we're having some influence somewhere.
Russia Hacked The Election00:05:43
But let's be really clear.
What has come out is that the Russians didn't actually want Trump to win necessarily, nor Hillary.
They just kind of wanted to play with us, right?
Divide and conquer.
And boy, oh boy, when you get Obama at the helm.
He did Putin's job for him.
Let's be really clear.
He did Putin's job for him.
Take a look at this guy.
He was a couple of jobs ago, Chris Wallace, who used to work at Fox and then used to work at CNN.
I don't know where he works now, but he's asking President Trump shortly after the election, right?
Because nobody's believing he's president.
You had Jimmy Carter coming out.
He's saying, oh, he's not a legitimate president.
He was put there by the Russians.
Okay, like this is bad stuff, guys.
And Trump knew what was going on.
What?
According to the Washington Post, the CIA has concluded that Russia intervened in the election to help you win the presidency.
Your reaction?
I think it's ridiculous.
I think it's just another excuse.
I don't believe it.
I don't know why.
And I think it's just, you know, they talked about all sorts of things.
Every week it's another excuse.
We had a massive landslide victory, as you know, in the Electoral College.
I guess the final numbers are now at 306, and she's, you know, down to a very low number.
No, I don't believe that at all.
You say you don't know why.
Do you think that the CIA is trying to overturn the results of the election?
No, it'd be a lot of concern somehow to weaken you in office.
Well, if you look at the story and you take a look at what they said, there's great confusion.
Nobody really knows.
And hacking is very interesting.
Once they hack, if you don't catch them in the act, you're not going to catch them.
They have no idea if it's Russia or China or somebody.
It could be somebody sitting in a bed someplace.
I mean, they have no idea.
So why would the CIA put out this story that the Russians wanted you to.
Well, I'm not sure they put it out.
I think the.
Democrats are putting it out because they suffered one of the greatest defeats in the history of politics in this country.
And frankly, I think they're putting it out.
And it's ridiculous.
We ought to get back to making America great again, which is what we're going to do.
And we've already started the process.
Unbelievable, right?
Just the whole thing's so unbelievable.
And now we're learning that allegedly Brennan did have a hand in putting this out and may have allegedly lied to Congress when he was asked about all of this.
Of course, he's freaking out right now.
I showed you some sound the other day.
Gosh, he looked like he was right.
Cry right on the set at MSNBC saying, No, no, no, I've been over everything I did.
I didn't think I didn't do anything wrong.
I mean, these guys are very, very clever.
Here he is again, just as all of this came out from Tulsi this summer, insisting, insisting on his innocence.
And of course, MSNBC playing along with the ride to preserve what we believe to be our democracy.
It's particularly important for people who I think are nonpartisan or apolitical, like me.
I'm not a registered Democrat or Republican, I eschew politics, quite frankly.
I have served six presidents, three Democrats and three Republicans.
I didn't agree with all the policies of any of them, but yet I respected them.
I thought that what they were doing was what they thought was in the best interest of the United States.
But our institutions, the Department of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, Defense Intelligence Agency, all of these really are so critically important to our national security, but also global peace and security.
And when we see these institutions being torn down and being used as political footballs, this is really detrimental to, I think, our interests as a country.
And that's why I think it's important for people to speak out, not to do it for political reasons, but to call people out when they're saying things that are wrong, when they're misrepresenting, mischaracterizing the facts.
Because the American people are going to all the different news organizations and they're being misrepresented.
But God forbid anybody call you out, right?
Just to be very, very clear, we're not allowed to call you out.
You guys made that really clear.
I experienced it firsthand, okay?
I can tell you my whole personal experience.
I know that only one side was allowed to call one side out.
We know how they did that and what they did.
Here is Barack Obama's response to it all as Tulsi released this information.
Again, we're going back in time a little bit.
I mean, we're going way back in time, right?
Back to 2016.
But as Tulsi's revealed all of this, and she did so over the summer, the Senate, forgive me, the House Judiciary Committee has been reviewing all this material as well.
And so what we know today is that Jim Jordan has referred all of his gatherings and all of the intel that he was able to put together over to the DOJ, to Pam Bondi for review.
So you know who's really mad about it right now?
Barack Obama.
Here's what he has to say.
So, breaking just moments ago, former President Obama's office responding after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused his administration of using, quote, manufactured intelligence about President Trump and Russia.
Gabbard sending a referral to the Justice Department and calling for, quote, accountability.
President Obama's office saying, quote, nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election, but did not successfully manipulate any votes.
These findings were affirmed in 2020 in the report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then Chairman Marco Rubio.
That report, moments ago, from President Obama's office, the story that we were discussing earlier.
So, Obama's like got all the walls closing in around him.
And he may be at risk here.
I mean, he does have probably presidential immunity.
He can thank Donald Trump for that one, right?
But the other folks around him don't really have the same kind of immunity.
I mean, I do know that there was a whole lot of auto pen stuff going on the last final days of the Biden administration to try and make sure everybody was off the hook.
Presidential Immunity Risks00:02:27
But I don't think it's going to get them that far in part because, hey, if he didn't know what he was signing, we're going to get to that with KJP in a second, then really does any of that exist?
I will tell you, he's very mad and has been very mad about all of this.
One, Rachel Maddow, who does her once a week show over there for now on MSNBC, she's basically declaring this some kind of version of, well, you know, this is somehow, you know, 1930s Germany.
This is like authoritarian, you know what, and uh, well, we know what she is, shall we say?
I mean, she's a bit of a conspiracy theorist, but you know, it's neither here nor there.
Let's just at least listen to her sort of defense of Obama and the rest of them.
Life in the United States is profoundly changing, it's profoundly different than it was even six months ago because we do now live in a country that has an authoritarian leader in charge, we have a consolidating dictatorship in our country.
And it sounds melodramatic to say it.
I know.
Yeah.
But just go with that for a minute, right?
Think in melodramatic terms, think in cinematic terms.
Imagine the cartoon level caricature.
I'm sorry, but she is so cinematic in her flowery language that she tries to employ to take you down some kind of nut job rabbit hole every day.
But okay, let's humor her.
Of what you think a dictatorship looks like.
I mean, it's the police, right?
A massive, anonymous, unbadged woman.
Oh, my gosh.
Oh, my gosh.
I can't take the woman anymore because you know we don't need to see that kind of version of crazy here.
But I want you to at least know what's out there, right?
What did we hear the other day on The View?
Oh, he's sending National Guard to Chicago, to California, so he can quote, steal the election.
This is the insanity.
I mean, like they have no options, guys.
They're totally out of options.
And so they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Okay.
They got caught.
It's all coming out.
There's indictments every which way to Sunday.
And now the media's answer is, oh, well, this is a dictatorship.
And by the way, he's going to steal the midterms.
I mean, you guys must be really desperate.
And you think we're stupid for some reason.
I'll tell you, the American people are a whole lot smarter.
And we're sick of going through everything you put us through.
Banking Legislation Needed00:02:22
And you put us through a lot.
A lot, baby, a whole lot.
I mean, we even had people losing their bank accounts, don't forget, right?
I mean, that was a big deal.
Eric Trump on the show with me the other day, he's got the best-selling book out right now.
And I told him, and he agrees, I mean, like one of the reasons that book is so successful is why?
Because everybody was living some version of this hell for real, really and truly just awful, awful stuff.
But you know what?
There's a chance here, at least when it comes to some of the debanking that went on, and you know, there was a ton of that.
He said he was the most debanked guy in all of America.
He lost 200 accounts in one night.
He said, Trish.
They called me from Capital One.
Can you believe this?
In the middle of the night, and they said, we're shutting down 200 accounts.
I mean, he was running a business, of course.
But that's just crazy to me.
And it's beyond sort of thinkable that that could happen to people.
And yet this is what went on.
And so, you know, together, myself and Four Free Markets, we are basically congratulating the president on the tremendous job he has done in terms of putting forth an executive order to make sure that people are no longer debanked.
But I got to tell you, it's got to go further than that.
It's got to go further because we need some legislation.
From the uh, from the House, from the Senate.
We need legislation basically to ensure that Americans are protected and you know they're not able to take away your bank account based on religion or based on your politics.
I mean this should be basic right.
But we need, we need language in there to protect every American from the other side doing what they actually did.
I mean they did I told you like I had never heard from I was suddenly really really popular at my bank.
They were calling all the time.
We couldn't figure it out like, and they'd ask me all these questions.
I was like guys, I know there's this know thy customer thing, but like you've known me for 20 someone years, Why is it all of a sudden?
And I have friends that lost their bank accounts at Bank of America, for example.
I mean, it was bad stuff.
So we need serious legislation.
It's time to put our thinking hats on and get the writing in there so that this doesn't happen again.
So I encourage you to hit up your congressman or congresswoman.
Make sure go to freemarkets.com to see what you can do there for freemarkets.com because we don't want that ever happening again.
All right.
We got to get to some cat fights here.
Oh, my goodness.
You get some really nasty stuff going on.
I mean, you've got Biden's former flack.
Caroline Kennedy Criticism00:07:51
I mean, this woman, I've known her for years.
Actually, she used to come on my Fox show.
And one of the reasons I'll let you in on a little secret, something that goes on at Fox, you know, when we invite a liberal on, you know, you didn't want them to be all that smart necessarily, right?
Because, you know, if you're moderating a debate, let's say it's Fox.
Okay, whatever.
I'm spilling the company secrets here.
This is not that big a deal.
But anyway, you would basically want to make sure that you know your, your conservative guest, kind of had the upper hand otherwise, you know, i'd have to jump in and help out.
But i'd like them to be able to duke it out and you could always count on this one Kjp to literally have like nothing good to say.
She would trap herself.
I mean especially, for goodness sakes, if you ever talked about the economy with her, forget it.
Sweet lady looks nice on camera but, oh dear, not a whole lot going on upstairs, and that's actually being reflected once again on her book tour.
She's got a book tour where she's trying to, you know, talk about her experience in the White House and i'll tell you she's, She's kind of getting no friends at this point, and she's all over the place, all over the map.
Let's watch.
Now she tells us, now when she's got a book out.
We're always honest.
You couldn't hide the fact that he was aging.
And we saw that there were moments where it showed that he was aging.
No one is denying that.
He is as sharp as ever, as I have known him to be in my engagement and my experience with him.
And I know when I walk into the Oval Office or see him on Air Force One, I have to be on top of my game.
Liar.
Yeah, total liar.
That was from my shorts feed, which I encourage you to follow as well.
But my gosh, I mean, she just used to lie through her teeth every single day.
It was nauseating and really annoying after a while.
Well, now she's out there and she's trying to level an attack on Caroline Levitt, who is the superstar press secretary for one Donald Trump.
And it's not going so well for her because I'll tell you, Caroline destroyed her in less than a minute.
KJP wants to call Caroline deplorable.
It's like KGP.
Like, I'm sorry.
Like, that's over.
Like, Hillary learned that the hard way, right?
Deplorable was not exactly the kind of vocabulary word Americans appreciated being called.
And let me tell you, you start to call this Caroline that, you're going to lose once again anybody that you might have had.
Here is Caroline's response.
She's appearing here with Jesse Waters last night.
She called you deplorable.
And you say?
Well, with all due respect to my predecessor, She is one of the main culprits of the greatest cover up and scandal in American history.
Two.
The podium every day and lied to the press about the incompetence of her boss.
And on this book tour, she continues to lie.
She said this past week that Joe Biden would still be up for the job if he had, God forbid, been reelected in November.
She actually said this week as well on a podcast that Joe Biden did more press engagements than President Trump currently does now.
Any person across the aisle can tell you that is a bald faced lie.
And I will just add, when you talk to the real journalists, not the ones who are actually activists that pose as journalists, but the people who actually care about truth, and there are some of those left in the White House press corps, I work with them every day, they will tell you the Trump White House is the most accessible and transparent White House ever.
Totally.
Not only does the president take questions from the press on a near daily basis, multiple times per day, as he did today, but we also provide truthful and accurate information about what this administration is doing and accomplishing.
And it's a stark contrast to what they had over the past four years, where they were gaslit, where they were told Joe Biden was mentally stable and up for the job.
That was a lie.
Where they were told the administration was doing everything it could to secure the border.
Also a lie.
I'm very proud to work for the greatest president in history.
I know Corrine unfortunately worked for the most incompetent president in history.
So I guess she has a reason to be bitter, but being bitter will not sound.
Boom!
Thank you for that, Caroline.
Love it.
Yes, very nice.
Bitter's not going to work, KJP.
You know, but the meanness is out there, whether you're calling Caroline Levitt a deplorable or whether you're Jen Psaki, another former flack for one President Biden who was an excellent liar.
You got to hand her that.
I mean, I don't think that KJP was the best liar.
Like she'd always get caught in these lies, but Jen did a pretty good job, aka Peppermint Patty.
Remember her?
Remember her?
Well, she's like the classic mean girl.
So she just, for whatever reason, decided to take on Usha Vance, who like, you know, has more class in her little pinky than Jen ever even dreamt of ever having in her whole life.
I mean, Usha, who's a brilliant, well-educated woman and can do like pirouettes around one Jensaki peppermint patty any day of the week.
But for whatever reason, I guess maybe they see JD as a threat.
And so is this a divide and conquer move?
Like, are you going to try and like go after Usha?
Is that your methodology?
I bet you it is.
This is a, I mean, like what they tried to do, right?
With Trump and Melania.
She's trying to go after Usha in this clip.
And it's gross.
I mean, she's just, honestly, guys, like she's a bad person.
I don't know how else to say it.
Kind of a lousy, nasty, bad person with a bad hairdo and a bad haircut.
And I'm sorry.
That's how she got the name Peppermint Patty.
Watch.
I think the little Manchurian candidate, JD Vance, wants to be president.
Mm hmm.
More than anything else.
I always wonder what's going on in the mind of his wife.
Like, are you a little.
You hear that, by the way?
What do you call him?
Manchurian candidate?
The little Manchurian candidate.
So she's really, she's nasty.
She's nasty.
I told you.
Blink four times.
Yes.
We'll come over here.
We'll save you.
And that he's willing to do anything to get there.
And that your whole iteration you just outlined, I mean, he's scarier in certain ways.
He's smarter in some ways.
And he's young and ambitious.
And ambitious.
Agile in the sense that he is a chameleon who makes himself into whatever he thinks the audience wants to hear from him.
Now, what's also true though is JD Vance is not, he's in some ways goodish on paper, if you like what he believes in.
I don't know.
He's goodish on paper.
He's goodish on paper.
You see what I'm telling you?
She's terrified because you know what?
He probably will be the next president of the United States.
So she's gearing up right now.
I mean, they want Gavin, right?
News gum, as Donald Trump likes to call him.
They want Gavin to win this thing.
Watch the whole movement with him.
No way.
I don't think so either.
He's no riz.
It's got no riz, right?
And he's got, he just is a little odd.
And so Trump's odd in a different way.
So I'm skeptical of that.
So yeah, he's got to.
I mean, everything going on right now, and I think we have to be very clear eyed about this, is about trying to manipulate the public around elections.
Whoa.
All right.
So she definitely takes the cake.
Mean girl of the moment.
None of it surprises me.
She has kind of a background, right, in being super mean.
She's a political op.
And by the way, her show sucks.
Okay.
Like her show is a disaster.
So, hey, Jen, good luck.
I wish you all the best because as soon as that company gets spun off in a few weeks at this point, you know, MSNBC is going to get spun off into that company.
They're calling it Versant because NBC, Comcast doesn't want to have anything to do with these people.
Big Pharma Health Care00:03:55
Right.
They're just nothing but a big giant liability costing a whole lot of money.
Well, Jen, I'm not so sure you're going to keep your show because nobody's watching.
Like nobody.
Then again, I guess if you're MSNBC versant and you're just trying to squeeze every little last nickel you can, I guarantee you she doesn't cost much.
All right.
You know, maybe you need to pay up and get Rachel on the air more often.
Not that that's going to help either.
The shutdown continues, guys.
The shutdown continues.
And the view on this is that the Democrats are too afraid.
They just can't do squat.
They're too afraid to move.
Listen to Mike Johnson earlier today.
Nonpartisan CR, they're going to get hammered.
Another insider said in that same story We would have enough votes to reopen the government if people were not terrified of getting the guillotine.
Okay?
They mean it metaphorically, but in a political sense, that's exactly what they're concerned about.
Now, think about the fact that we're just laying out here.
These are simple facts.
We come out here every morning and remind the American people of what's going on.
Do not let them distract you from the facts.
The American people would have an open government if Democrats were not terrified of their radical base.
That is the headline.
Every single one of you should write that.
That's the ugly truth.
The Democrats are not governing in good faith.
They're covering their own tail.
They're out here doing what they want.
You can say that again.
You know what?
It really kind of stinks because we actually ought to have a clean CR and we ought to be able to move towards real negotiations.
The president said to be leaving for China in a short amount of time.
And could there be some kind of negotiation ahead of time?
Not unless they reopen the government, he says.
So they are keeping it shut down, which means more problems for everyone.
It's all over $1.5 trillion that would go to the care of illegals for health care.
You know, you had two, three million people being brought into this country illegally a year.
And Trump's like, no, we're not going to do it.
By the way, all that money, it was supposed to expire anyway.
And let's face it, the health care costs, they're bad, like as it is, right?
They are bad as it is.
It's why I've partnered with.
Conservatives for lower health care.
On this one issue specifically, when it comes to pharma stuff, big Pharma and its arm of lobbyists.
They're working overtime to make sure that Americans keep paying the world's highest prescription drugs.
And Donald Trump has a problem with that.
He does, I mean big time.
It's been a big sort of cause for him.
Um, big Pharma pushes all these government mandates designed to stack the deck in their favor, of course, and their goal in Washington is pretty simple, they they want to escape any kind of accountability, if you ask me, and they do it under this guise of free markets.
But no, They're actually out there blocking free market competition and they're jacking up already outrageous prices.
So it means more government intrusion, bigger profits for them, higher costs for families and for businesses.
It's lousy.
So conservatives for lower health care, they want to see big pharma's agenda getting squashed, if you would, because it's not fair to stick Americans and employers with these very high premiums and drug costs.
President Trump's not backing down.
His administration is cracking down on drug companies that gouge Americans and mislead patients with obnoxious advertising.
You know what I'm talking about.
Meanwhile, conservatives in Congress are introducing reforms to stop. big pharma's games.
This is important to block generics and keep prices high.
So join me together with conservatives for lower health care here in helping to reject big pharma's agenda.
You can go check it out.
PharmaWindfall.com today.
Help lower drug prices.
We certainly need that.
Listen, we are so lucky to be doing all that we're doing here on this show.
I want to thank you for helping us to stay.
What are we number?
Number 66.
Oh no, actually we fell a little bit.
We fell a little bit, but still it's wonderful to see.
And I'm thrilled that we've been able to accomplish so much here on this show.
So thank you for all that you guys do.
I am going to be live once again, right here, you know, on the Trish Regan channel tomorrow.