Trish Regan celebrates Fani Willis's dismissal due to Nathan Wade's undisclosed relationship and critiques Attorney General Pam Bondi for missing the September 30, 2025, statute of limitations on James Comey's indictment. The host condemns the "Sedition Six" lawmakers, discusses the "Arctic Frost" investigation into FBI agents targeting conservatives, and speculates Marjorie Taylor Greene might replace Kara Swisher on ABC's The View. Regan also details proposed $2,000 tariff rebates and "Trump baby boom accounts" funded by $200 billion in revenue to address the $38 trillion national debt, concluding with gratitude for American founding principles. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, Qwen/Qwen3-ForcedAligner-0.6B, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Case Thrown Out00:03:23
Hello, everyone.
Welcome to the show.
I am Trish Regan.
Happy Thanksgiving.
I got the pilgrim outfit on and everything.
All in the holiday spirit.
Well, we got a lot going on today.
And it's kind of as I predicted.
I hate to say I told you so, but I'm going to do it.
I told you so.
Okay.
What did I tell you?
This whole thing was going to get thrown out.
And boy, Fanny's out on our, you know what, Fanny, like you're, as the president's once said, Fanny Willis is just in more humiliation right now.
Her case against the president.
that Georgia election case, you know, the one that he got the mugshot out of, which now sits right outside of the White House, ladies and gentlemen.
Yep, it's gone by forever.
Fannie, you've been humiliated.
The Democrats have been humiliated.
Just another one going down in history, showing how politically motivated and deceptive these people were.
Meanwhile, we've got an update coming to you on the two National Guard troops.
I don't actually want to say dead at this point because they have been shot.
Let's correct our lower third on this one because we're getting information into us right now as I speak to you from the West Virginia governor who is clarifying his earlier report that they had died.
It is now not clear, he said.
So again, we're watching the story very carefully.
The president, of course, furious about this, understandably so, and pointing the finger back at the quote-unquote seditious six as he has labeled them because you have six members of Congress that have come out really wildly and encouraged them.
military to somehow defy orders.
And yes, it's more nuanced than that, but the implication of what they're doing, I'm just going to tell you guys, it's never been done in history.
Never, ever, ever, ever.
Like not even during the Civil War did you have anybody preemptively trying to say these things.
I mean, once again, it's Hitler.
We're going back to Nuremberg.
They're giving you the whole German spiel.
But the reality is he has not done anything illegal and they can't point to anything illegal.
So why the heck are you guys doing this?
Pambani's going to be out on her, you know what?
You know what?
She screwed up.
I'm sorry.
You know what?
I call it like it is and I like her and I wish it wasn't this way, but there was the Epstein debacle with the rollout of the files, number one.
And now number two, you're going to let Comey get away.
That smug, you know what?
He's getting away scot-free.
Don't tell me about your stupid appeals because the stupid appeals are not going to work.
Legally, they're not going to work.
That's just a bunch of, you know, sweet dreams and nothingness.
You effed up big time.
And I think it's time that we get some adults in the room.
We're going to talk about all of that, guys.
Meanwhile, we begin today on Fannie Willis' final humiliation here.
I mean, as if dating Nathan Wade wasn't enough.
Fannie Willis has just seen her entire case against the president thrown out of court, and CNN was forced to have to report it.
This must have killed them, considering how much went into playing up Fannie and playing up the Georgia Rico charges, trying to say that this president Tried to steal an election because he dared to question the vote in Georgia.
She was then disqualified from the case because of an undisclosed romantic relationship with another prosecutor.
Absurd Political Situation00:02:43
And that is how this case now fell into the hands earlier this month of a prosecutor who was assigned the job of trying to find someone to take on this case.
He said that he couldn't because there were too many conflicts and he took it on himself.
Now we're seeing the results of that.
And that is that he is saying that they are not going to move forward with this case.
And he summarized it in part by saying that he.
Made this decision by examining the case file, examining what the jury had been presented, and also considerations of the law.
You know, he says that, you know, contesting an election is not unlawful, but, you know, and that is part of the reasons for why he decided not to move forward with the charges at this point.
Yeah.
Well, it's over.
Okay.
It's over.
It's over.
And Fanny, oh, excuse me.
Fanny.
Oh, we've been through this one before, haven't we?
I recall.
All these local cases like Fanny, Fanny.
It's spelled Fanny.
It's spelled Fanny like your ass, right Fanny?
But when she became DA, she decided to add a little French, a little fancy.
Fanny.
It's Fanny.
Yeah.
Like, you know, you're behind, okay?
Like, sorry, that's her name.
Anyway, she didn't appreciate any of that and still doesn't, I'm sure.
But, you know, I don't know.
Put a U in there or something so people don't say it the way it looks.
While they over there running their mouth, I'm over here paying them no mind.
See, I'm so tired of hearing these idiots call my name as Fanny in a way to attempt to humiliate me.
Because like silly schoolboys, the name reminds them of a woman's rear.
Okay.
I guess I'm in that camp too, right?
You can count me as a silly schoolboy.
Anyway, Fanny, Fanny, whatever.
You're done.
You know, you were a bad lawyer to begin with.
You brought this Rico case, which by the way, we said at the time was absurd.
I mean, like absurd.
And absurd because let's just say, like, that's not usually done in a political case.
That's what you use in, say, like, a A mafioso case, right?
Like a big kind of crime case where you want to try and get one to try to get to the other to try and get to the other.
In this particular situation, you were talking about a political situation, which, by the way, is sort of protected under First Amendment policies.
Timing Around Election00:04:09
He did not believe, he still to this day does not believe that he lost in Georgia.
And so he was not willing to accept that.
And he wanted votes counted and recounted.
And he wanted to go back and make sure that he triple checked and over and over and over again.
And they were saying, you can't do that.
Well, last I checked, you actually could.
In fact, what do you think?
The hanging Chads was all about, right, guys?
I mean, you should be able to double check some of these things, but apparently not if you're Donald Trump, right?
That was how they had already, by the way, when we think of the six members of Congress that came out and tried to warn the military against any kind of acts that might be later viewed as illegal, think about what they were doing ahead of the election.
They were trying to warn everybody, oh, he might steal it, he might steal it, he might steal it.
And then when he dared to go back and say, hey, can we like take a look at Georgia again?
They were like, oh, you know, we told you so.
And then Willis goes out and gets the mugshot, the infamous mugshot, which then, you know, is now, you know, what else?
I'm the Oval Office.
How's that for irony?
She indicted 19 people in this.
She had a lot of chaos surrounding this because there was no way, everybody said like there was no way that this case could actually be followed up on in like a year as they wanted it to be because they were timing it around the election.
It would take five to 10 years.
She, Also, had a whole lot of other problems.
I mean, we're talking personal problems, really serious personal problems, because turns out she hired her BF, yeah, the lover boy that she had a fling with, Fanny's favorite squeeze, who apparently is still in the picture, believe it or not, Nathan Wade.
And she claims she didn't know that you couldn't hire the boyfriend with the taxpayer money.
Come on.
Are you aware?
that Fulton County requires you to disclose any relationship with someone that you're doing business with?
I'm not aware.
And I know often that time things are confused with state constitutional officers in county, but I'm not aware.
Not aware.
Not aware.
Oh, you, wow.
You know, she's just lying.
I mean, that's like, you could ask a fifth grader that.
Do you really think that that like makes any sense?
Anyway, we know that, you know, accordingly, back, this was a few months ago, Court was already being looked at pretty suspiciously, or rather, the case was being looked at rather suspiciously by the court because they said we were reversing the trial court's denial of the appellate's motion to disqualify DA Willis and her office.
The filing states, as we conclude, that the electric district attorney is wholly disqualified from this case.
The assistant district attorneys, whose only power to prosecute a case is derived from the constitutional authority of the district attorney to have appointed them, has no authority to proceed.
Okay, that was back when they took her off of this case, which meant there was no office and no one to actually pursue this.
Eventually, it dwindled down to this other guy and he concluded concluded that they had no case.
Okay, now you tell us.
Now you tell us.
I mean, we had to sit through listening to this guy telling us all about the details of his many cruises and other trips to Belize with Fanny.
When did your romantic relationship with Miss Willis begin?
2022.
When?
In 2022.
Early 2022.
So you were appointed in November of 2021.
Yes, ma'am.
And your relationship started early.
What's early?
January, February?
Around March.
Around March.
But you two met at an October 2019 judicial conference, correct?
Yes, ma'am.
That testimony directly contradicts earlier testimony from one of Willis's former good friends who said the relationship began well before Wade testified it did and predated his hearing by the DA.
You have no doubt that their romantic relationship was in effect from 2019 until the last time you spoke with her?
Statute of Limitations00:15:32
No doubt.
Did you observe them do things that are common among people having a romantic relationship?
Yes.
Such as, can you give us an example?
Hugging, kissing, disaffection.
All before November 1st of 2021, correct?
Yes.
Okay.
I'm sorry we even had to watch that.
But one final one, because this guy is so idiotic, he actually went on MSNBC and said this.
Our relationship was professional.
Our relationship grew organically over time.
It was something that was not deliberate or intentional.
I made the statement earlier that workplace romances are.
As American as apple pie, right?
That was not to make light of the situation.
Oh my God.
So he's just a bad dude.
But here's my one concern about this.
And this is what brings it back to present day.
What role did Merrick Garland have in any of this?
Like, what was the Biden administration doing in terms of trying to guide this whole process along?
Because we have learned that Nathan Wade actually went multiple times to the White House.
That was like.
You know, paid for by the way by Atlanta taxpayers, Fulton County taxpayers.
So Merrick Garland started to get quizzed about this by Matt Gaetz.
And we'll leave Matt Gaetz's personal situation aside.
But listen to the questioning because this is pretty good and this is pretty important.
These state and local prosecutions against Trump, you can clear it all up for us right now.
Will the Department of Justice provide to the committee all documents, all correspondence between the department and Alvin Bragg's office and Fonnie Willis' office and Letitia James' office?
The offices you're referring to are independent offices of state and local.
I get that.
The question is whether or not you will provide all of your documents and correspondence.
I get that.
That's the question.
I don't need a history lesson.
Well, I'm going to say again, we do not control those offices.
They make their own decisions.
The question is whether you communicate with them, not whether you control them.
Do you communicate with them and will you provide those communications?
We'll make a request, we'll refer it to our Office of Legislative Affairs.
But see, here's the thing.
You come in here and you lodge this attack that it's a conspiracy theory that there is coordinated lawfare against Trump.
And then when we say, fine, just give us the documents, give us the correspondence, and then if it's.
Wow.
Okay, so listen, guys, I mean, that's a big part of this entire question, right?
What exactly was the Biden administration doing?
And there's like so much we have to get to, right?
There's just so much.
And we've got to know more about the Hunter Biden laptop stuff.
We got to know more about going after sitting U.S. senators and a member of Congress, eight of them, right?
Tapping their phones.
Oh, no, we're not supposed to say that.
We're supposed to say logging phones, right?
Everybody's all over Josh Hawley because he used the word tapping.
You're not supposed to say that.
But I would just say that like all of this is getting really. really, really weird.
And you need somebody in charge that can actually manage this and really do a good job.
And I'm not confident.
I am not confident.
Let me just start from this, right?
There is a lot of stuff as we go into this Thanksgiving weekend that is sort of like, like those hanging chats, right?
Just hanging out there.
We need to count them.
We need to go through them.
We need to make sure that we have some accountability for whatever went down.
And I think a lot of funny things went down.
And I cannot tell you how frustrated I am, how angry I am that James Comey is going to get away with it on a technicality because someone didn't know how to turn in her homework.
That someone is Pam Bondi.
And Pam Bondi, you know, I believe in tough love and I like her.
Okay, don't get me wrong.
And I do think she has the president's best interests at heart.
And I think he likes her a lot too.
But I don't care about friendships at this point because right now I'm going to tell you, she dropped the ball.
All right.
She dropped the ball.
Eric Seberg, he never should have had the gig.
Someone okayed him.
I guess the Democrats liked him.
Donald Trump eventually got rid of him on September 20th, but he got the gig on January 21st, 2025.
And it was a temporary gig because they were waiting for approval.
Pam did not come in until February.
In our comments, and I want to, I see a piece of my mind asking if he can be recharged.
I'm going to get to that because he technically could, but he'd have to like perjure himself again or allegedly perjure himself again in testimony.
And I, Wouldn't be surprised if we actually see the oversight committee try and take him back up.
But he's a smart guy, all right?
He's a smart guy.
Like, this is what you got to be aware of, okay?
Hello, everyone.
He's a smart guy.
I'm not so sure that she is that smart a girl.
I really am not.
And I wish her well.
But here's the problem.
They put Siebert in there.
Now, that's on whoever decided to do that, okay?
Because I think Matt Gaetz was originally going to go in as AG, and eventually it became Pam Bondi's gig.
And Siebert preceded her by like a month or so.
But here's the thing.
Like, if you're Pam, And you know, the most important thing to this president is probably finding out whatever Comey was doing behind the scenes.
I mean, they were already talking about him having perjured himself in front of Congress, lying under testimony back in 2017, saying, you know, he really hadn't been working with any reporters.
And then it turned out that maybe he had.
So they had that and they wanted to use that and they wanted to get an indictment.
Now, you know, we're not going to debate like whether you should or whether that's, you know, because a lot of people would say, oh, the DOJ shouldn't be doing that.
Forget about that for just a second.
Let's just, let's all be big boys and gals here and just know that, you know what?
Don't kid yourself.
You want to talk about a politicized DOJ.
You look at Obama.
You look no further than Biden.
So he goes in there and he knows that he wants Comey to be indicted.
He puts Pam in the slot after putting Eric in.
Eric is supposed to be the guy who's going to bring this thing forward.
Well, little do they know.
Guess who's hanging out in the Eastern Virginia U.S. Attorney's Office?
James Comey's son-in-law.
I mean, you can't make this stuff up, you guys.
What the heck is the son-in-law doing?
He's like, you know, friends with Eric.
I'm sorry.
That's not okay.
You got a mole in the whole operation telling pops, hey, you know, this is what I heard today and this is what I heard yesterday and this is what I hear is coming next week.
So that's a big problem.
Pam didn't know about that.
Pam also didn't seem to have any kind of understanding of the statute of limitations, which was expiring on September 30th of 2025.
So she knows she's got 120 days with Eric, right?
And she also knows that September 30th, 2025 is coming up.
But, well, maybe I'm assuming too much here.
Maybe she had no clue because maybe she's not keeping track of any of these things, in which case I say, once again, failing to turn in the lousy homework, right?
Like you have an idea, you want to make sure that you get this guy indicted, James Comey, and they're telling you, we're working on it, we're working on it, we're working on it.
Don't you bother to check their deadlines?
Don't you say, like, I'm a parent.
I have kids.
I look at the syllabus.
I'm like, okay, when is that homework due?
Pam, that was your job, right?
You were his boss.
You should have been saying, when is your homework due?
Oh, September 30th, 2025.
That is the statute of limitations.
Like, you can't go back, guys.
You can't.
They're going to say, oh, we're appealing.
If I have to hear this one more time, but you know what?
Caroline's just doing her job.
It's not her fault.
And she's not a legal scholar and she doesn't know.
But there's no, this is appealing to nowhere, nowhere.
Because, by the way, The statute of limitations has run out.
The only thing they could possibly say is, okay, well, we're going to put somebody else new in.
The days are done, right?
Because you had 10 days.
The only thing you could have done at that point, the way the law works, is for the justices in the state to have then appointed somebody to become the U.S. Attorney.
That's how it goes.
Like you ran out the clock.
And I'm sure they did this deliberately.
You guys are too darn stupid to actually pay attention to the darn deadlines.
Look at the freaking syllabus.
All right, here's Caroline.
Well, what I will say is that everybody knows that James Comey lied to Congress.
It's as clear as day.
And this judge took an unprecedented action to throw these cases out to shield James Comey and Letitia James from accountability based on a technical ruling.
And the administration disagrees with that technical ruling.
We believe the attorney in this case, Lindsay Halligan, is not only extremely qualified for this position, but she was in fact legally appointed.
And I know the Department of Justice will be appealing this in very short order.
So maybe James Comey should pump the brakes on his victory lap.
No, she actually like I know we want to believe that, but that's called spin.
Okay.
And that's why I could never be press secretary like ever I'd be the worst press secretary you'd ever met because I just can't spin anything I am too much of a straight shooter and I actually care too much about what the president is trying to accomplish and the people that he's trying to help to sit there and be like a okay.
Yeah, Pam Bondi I'm buying it and you're gonna somehow appeal this into something You're not appealing it into anything because here's the deal You had 120 days for your temporary appointment.
I get it Pam you didn't pick him somebody else picked him And clearly they didn't vet them.
And I'm going back to Laura Loomer because Laura Loomer said, vet, vet, vet, vet, and vet again.
Make sure that they're actually on your side.
So the minute she figured out he wasn't on the side, but I don't think she ever figured it out, she should have tossed the guy.
He should have been fired.
He should have been, she should have gotten in there.
And in February, she's sitting there going, okay, where is it?
Where is it?
Where is it?
We got a statute of limitations coming up on September 30th.
And I know that you got to get this thing done.
And if he couldn't pull it off, then she needed time.
You understand this?
For the judges to select somebody else.
So that they could have somebody who was legally authorized to move forward on all this.
Now, granted, the judge said they're dismissing this without prejudice.
That's important in terms of Letitia Dames.
So, hey, Tishy, you're not off the hook yet.
They're coming back for you because there is no statute of limitations on you.
But in terms of Comey, she blew it like absolutely positively blew it.
And then you couple this together with some of the other stuff like the Epstein files to nowhere, for goodness sakes.
And you've got those things coming out very soon as well, right?
Donald Trump ordered a 30 day release of that.
So we're talking about sometime within the next 22, 23 days, we're going to get that.
So Pam's got to be on her game.
And I don't know if she's up to the task in all seriousness.
And I say this as somebody who really legitimately likes her, thinks she's a nice person and thinks she has the best intentions.
But, you know, being a nice person, looking good on TV and having the best intentions, that and a cup of coffee will get you nothing.
You need a kick ass, badass, really good.
Executive function, high executive function can manage all these U.s attorneys all over the place.
Because you got Swallow you're going after.
You got Shifty Shift you're going after.
You still got Lucia James that you got to go back and file again another indictment for.
You got a lot of work.
You got to figure out what the heck was going on with Jack Smith and uh, the FBI that was collecting tolling records on all of these various U.s senators.
That is big stuff, okay.
You got to figure out what was going on with Fanning Willis and Nathan Wade and whether or not Merrick Garland was actually directing that whole investigation.
Why did he go so many times to the White House?
These are questions that need to get Answered.
And so you need a darn good FBI and you need a darn good DOJ.
Now, yesterday, there were a lot of rumors that Andrew Bailey was somehow going to replace Kash Patel at the FBI.
And it's interesting to me because that one actually never even crossed my mind.
And I don't have any inside info on this.
Like a lot of people, oh, you know, you talk to so-and-so or so-and-so.
On this one, it's common sense.
You have to get rid of her.
She effed up, okay?
She really effed up.
She didn't turn in the homework on time.
She missed the deadlines.
She should have gone to the president in March and said, you know what, this guy, Eric, he's not going to move forward on this case.
And because of that, we need to take him out and we need to give time because here's the way the law works.
The local justices are going to have to decide on someone.
So we need to make sure all that happens.
But, you know, look, I mean, maybe it's entirely possible that she was, forgive my French, was screwed from the beginning, right?
Because whoever put this guy in was actually the one that did the disservice because he was unwilling to move forward with an indictment.
I can tell you, you can indict a ham sandwich.
So like it's not hard to get an indictment.
And looking at what I've looked at, looking at what Tulsi Gabbard has looked at, looking at what has already been released, it is pretty clear as day that there was some there, there.
and you had reason to pursue something and now he gets to laugh off into the sunset?
I don't think so.
Here's the deal.
Peace of my mind asking in the questions.
And by the way, it's great to see you guys here right ahead of the holidays.
I appreciate your loyalty and you being here.
Could they get him on something else?
And the answer is if he lies again.
So that was 2017.
All right.
So he already testified again in 2020 and they were like, you know, what do you think?
He's like, well, I'm sticking by the testimony of 2017.
The other thing is he could take the fifth.
So you're up a creek without a paddle.
And I'm just enormously frustrated because I think that, you know, for the most part, you've got good people there, certainly on the economic team.
Besant couldn't pick a better Treasury Secretary.
You've got a fantastic Treasury Secretary in Besant.
We're going to talk about $2,000 checks coming up and paying down debt and all that kind of stuff.
He's great.
Howard Lutnick, he's okay.
He's not Besant, but he's okay.
He's pretty good.
At least they're sophisticated enough.
They understand financial markets.
I'm not confident the legal team.
Is really there.
I mean, Halligan, fine, but she doesn't have any prosecutorial experience.
So, you know, I don't know what to tell you.
You guys need to step it up.
You need a better team.
And it's not fair to Dan and it's not fair to Cash that they're out there getting all this evidence.
And then you get, you know, a bunch of people, you know, who's on first chasing each other around.
It's like Mr. Magoo, and they can't actually get anything to the finish line.
Because they're missing deadlines.
So now there is a rumor out online that the co deputy FBI director, Andrew Bailey, could possibly be moving up to replace Pam Bondi.
Don't forget, the president came out and personally said yesterday because MSNBC was reporting this.
They heard a different rumor.
Again, like I saw this rumor, this has been reported a few different places, including there's a Twitter account called Breaking Report or something.
Missing Deadlines00:05:41
It's pretty good, actually.
Pam was going to be replaced by none other than this co deputy FBI director, Andrew Bailey.
And I'm just wondering about his background here because, you know, he'd have to be, one would think, an attorney.
I guess he actually served as Missouri's attorney general from 2023 to 2025.
So that's interesting to see.
And I would assume then he has a legal background of some sort.
Yeah.
Yes, he does.
University of Missouri School of Law.
Okay.
Well, here's what I would say I, you know, fine.
He just has to be.
Vigilant.
Like, again, the military background is good.
I like that.
Army ROTC.
He was in the Iraq War.
This is all good because people in the military, like, they get deadlines, right?
They know that, like, things have to happen.
And the problem with the legal business is I know it's a technicality.
And Caroline and everybody else and Pam can complain, oh, it's a technicality.
But guess what?
It's a freaking technicality.
And if you don't actually dot the I's and cross the T's, then you are screwed.
It's done.
It's over.
Comey gets to walk away.
Thanks.
Thanks.
For nothing.
So, Andrew Bailey, we're interested.
If you can do what you need to do, if you can make sure that people follow through, if you can run things, again, executive functioning skills, right?
We need somebody who's not worried about the TV appearance, who's not going on with Hannity.
I'm sorry, I love Hannity, okay?
Nothing against Hannity.
who's not worried about that stuff, but is worried about the job and seeing it through to the finish line.
That's all that matters here.
Okay.
We want results at this point.
And I'm not willing to take the risk again.
So again, you got Epstein files coming our way.
Oh, it'll be an exciting December right before Christmas.
Really great for some people, right?
The president was trying to avoid this.
By the way, people are like, oh, he's he, you know, they think he's guilty.
No, here's the deal.
He knows that actually some people are going to get mentioned in there.
that maybe don't deserve to be mentioned in there.
And there's going to be innuendo and this and that just because Jeffrey Epstein happens to be gossiping or talking about them.
And that's who you actually are, you know, he might have been trying to protect.
So a whole bunch of things are going to come out and you're going to have to like look at this and distill what's real, what's not, and actually figure out who are the bad guys that you got to go after.
In the meantime, we still have Tishy Baby.
Okay.
We need round two, indictment number two.
You got to prepare that.
Forget the appeal.
You go again.
You indict this woman when you have the proper person in the slot.
Do it the legal way.
Okay.
There's that.
Then you've got to make sure that Eric Swalwell, if in fact you have information from Bill Pultey suggesting that he has a mortgage fraud on his plate, I'd be going after that.
You've got in Maryland, you've got to be babysitting your Maryland U.S. attorney because the Maryland U.S. attorney is supposed to be looking into Andrew Schiff and concerns there about alleged mortgage fraud.
And then you got the big whopper, and that's Jack Smith's investigation.
That they engaged in.
I mean, that they felt that it was perfectly fine and dandy to be out there.
Arctic Frost, it was called Arctic Frost.
My gosh.
Going after the cell phone records.
Here's Trump a few weeks ago, like firing up all these things.
They did actually fire one of the agents at the FBI that was believed to have been involved in this stuff.
I mean, they've now widened the investigation.
400 conservatives were allegedly targeted.
Grassley's been all over this from the beginning.
Some cell phone companies actually cooperated with this, others did not.
been informed by Verizon that at least 11 members with Verizon accounts were affected.
That includes a hard line for Senator Cruz's office and a staffer cell phone for former Senator Leffler.
AT&T informed me they challenged the legal basis for Jack Smith's efforts and Smith backed down.
Okay, so good to know about AT&T.
Okay, like I actually have one Verizon phone and one AT&T phone.
I might need to ditch one of those considering where their loyalties are.
I got to say, like this is, you know, so he's implicated in all of this.
Jack Smith is somebody that they got to be looking at.
And I just go back to, can Pam do it?
Like they're going to turn over information to her.
Cash and Dan, and I guess Andrew too.
And like she needs to actually be able to take the ball and run with it all the way to the end zone.
And hey, okay, maybe she doesn't have to get to the end zone.
That's actually the U.S. Attorney's job in any given district, but she is their boss.
So she needs to make sure that they're dotting their I's and crossing their T's and not just singing sweet nothings into her ear to try and evade what really needs to happen and to try and run out the clock, which is exactly what happened.
Malicious Prosecution Error00:08:23
Okay, I'm sorry.
You can talk about these appeals all you want.
It ain't happening.
I wish it would.
I like to say, you know, it's not over till it's over.
It's not over till the fat lady sings, in this case, Letitia James.
Sorry.
But, and she will, by the way, get her day in court and it won't be pretty for Tishy because that actually, wow, I should show you guys some of that.
I mean, you've already seen some of this stuff.
I don't want to, I don't even want to get into the Comey stuff because it's too darn frustrating, right?
Because we're like, okay, but there's this and there's this and there's this and there's this.
It's like, it doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter because you didn't turn in your damn homework on time.
You flunked.
Okay?
Thanks, Pam.
Unbelievable.
So, you know, she's going to have to figure something else out.
And I'm not saying you got to, she can serve in some capacity, in some way.
I'm sure the president very much likes her.
She very much likes him.
They have a very, you know, friendship-wise, they're very good friends.
And he knows that she has his best interests at heart.
She's just not able to do it.
All right, like you got a team and you pick someone because all they really I know they care about me.
I know they care about me, but you know, if the wires aren't connecting upstairs, they can care about you all they want.
They're not going to get the job done.
They can't, they're incapable.
You know, it's like you know you're, you're in uh, calculus and they give you a calculus test, but you never studied calculus or maybe you got no aptitude for math so you're gonna flunk it because you just can't do it.
Like in her case, I don't think that she has the aptitude and the capability and the executive functioning skills to know when the deadlines are and to know, yeah hey, by the way, ego too, like maybe the ego is too big.
If you can't do it, get somebody who can thank you very much, go out and hire somebody from a really good law firm that's going to make sure that you do what you need to do.
And she didn't do that.
So I I, I don't have any excuse and you know I, I feel foolish because i've, i've defended her this whole time, even through the Epstein debacle.
I'm like okay, hang on, hang on, hang on.
They want to be careful, they want to protect victims.
They want to do this, they want to do that.
I've had it Because we, you and me and everyone else, we deserve better.
We don't deserve to get laughed at by the likes of James Comey and have to listen to him go on and on about malicious prosecution because this was not malicious prosecution.
That's what he's going to say, okay?
This was a technicality.
She didn't do her homework.
She didn't turn it in.
Maybe she did it.
She just didn't turn it in.
And he's going to sit there and tell you it's malicious prosecution.
This was not malicious prosecution.
James Comey, you deserve to be prosecuted.
You got off, you lucky SOB.
Because at the end of the day, she wasn't smart enough.
She was not smart enough.
She didn't do the job.
But there's still hope for Letitia.
Okay?
Letitia's facing indictment number two.
Maybe Pam hasn't realized it yet because she's going to whisper all these sweet nothings about appeals and try and jam the news cycle with appeals.
But the answer on this one is you go back for round two with Letitia James and you file another indictment.
You get another indictment.
Again, this was a decision that was released without prejudice, meaning they can go back.
They can appeal.
It's not going to do any good for James Comey again because of the statute of limitations, but it will do good for Letitia James.
You can go back all day long and uh and you should, although again, it's the appeal.
You know, in this case, they're going to be able to somehow either get another indictment or appeal this.
Wait for the quote unquote legit U.S. attorney to come in, and again, the U.S. attorney.
I'm sorry, guys, this is the rule.
You know, I don't make it up, this is the law.
Eric left or was fired or whatever.
And imagine this 10 days.
They only had 10 days.
So, of course, you know, 48 hours later, they stuff Lindsay in there and then she has like seven or eight days to come up with the indictment.
It's absolutely unbelievable.
Like, I just cannot believe that they screwed up so enormously.
Anyway, they can go back with Letitia.
And I just would ask that they get good people.
I mean, look, her meat is good.
If she's up for it, Harmeet is a good lawyer.
I want a good lawyer.
I want a kick-ass lawyer that doesn't care about being on television, that's not going to go out and just say, well, I got to be on Hannity and God knows what else tonight.
I want a real lawyer that knows how to manage people.
And when someone is not able to do the job, you know what?
You can get rid of them.
Because again, Letitia, they get stuff for days.
And by the way, credit to Lindsay, who had to go out and find all this stuff.
They've got the, the principal residence that she declared.
Oh no, that's just that.
That's just an error.
That was the power of attorney error we already explained.
That says Letitia.
Here's the second home rider.
Second home rider, wow uh, apparently she said she was going to occupy it as her, as her, as her, like primary vacation residence and she might, you know, rent it out like a little bit here and there, but it was actually going to be primarily occupied by her.
Well, that wasn't the case, because the electricity bills alone were registered to somebody else.
And then i've showed you guys this, the insurance documents that came out.
This is courtesy of Lindsay, this is government exhibit six.
They found that uh, she checked off the months that she was going to be there and that she was going to be living there, but it turns out that she wasn't living there.
The nieces were living there.
Oh, and on top of it, Mike Davis, who's a former attorney for the president, said it's worth knowing that she came out and said that the house was actually going to be just occupied by a single adult, which would have been her, but no children.
It turns out it was actually her niece and the niece's three children.
This is one of the houses in question.
So it's like they had a little family compound there in Norfolk, Virginia.
Letitia James, who did everything in her power to destroy the president, who tried to actually bankrupt him, accusing him of some version of mortgage fraud because he valued his property.
How dare he value it himself at a number she felt was unjust because she felt it was worth $18 million Mar-a-Lago.
I mean, she's such an idiot.
for goodness sakes.
Now she thinks she's like a real estate investor.
She's going to value properties.
And oh my gosh, it was only worth 18 million.
How dare he get a loan from Deutsche Bank for more than that?
You know, Letitia, I would have bought it for 18 million.
And you know, you clearly, you know, you and your little $100,000 properties there, I don't think that you really understand what Oceanfront at Mar-a-Lago is really worth.
We all collectively, guys, together, we would have pitched in and done a GoFundMe.
We could have bought it for $18 million.
Gosh, this lady.
And to think that she was out there ready, willing, and able, chomping at the bit, actually.
I'll never forget this day or this report on ABC News where she was promising if she had to go in and take Trump Tower, she would.
Four days after a judge ordered Donald Trump to pay $355 million for a decade of fraud, New York Attorney General Letitia James says she's prepared to do everything she can to make sure the former president pays his fine, including, she told us, seizing the buildings that bear his name.
If he does not have funds to pay off the judgment, then we will seek, you know, judgment enforcement mechanisms in court, and we will ask the judge to seize his assets.
Extraordinary Incompetency00:04:38
I just got a friend, a friend is a Newsmax anchor was calling me literally in the middle of the night.
I said, I'm live on the yard, I'm live on the yard.
You guys caught me.
This is what makes it fun, right?
This is what makes this whole thing so different from all that scripted TV.
And hopefully you are subscribing because you like the transparency and all the good stuff.
Often you see me during the sound bites.
That one, I was getting a phone call.
Now I'm going to drop my phone.
So hopefully everything's okay with my friend.
I will tell you this, Letitia James.
Deserves everything that's coming her way.
And the one good thing about this whole, I mean Comey that that makes me sick to my stomach, that makes me unbelievably angry, because it's like one of those errors that's so avoidable and so frustrating when they make something like that.
But I will tell you that they can still go back and they can get Leticia James, and I think they will.
And so part of this is making sure that you have the right team, that you get the right person in.
I don't know if it's Andrew Bailey.
I like the military experience because that means that you know he's by the book.
I like um, that he's already at the FBI, so he has a good working relationship, I would assume, with Dan and with Cash.
And the funny thing is the idea that somehow, some way, you had Msnbc reporting that Kash Patel was out while i'm reporting what I think.
And again, i'm i'm deliberately not like source oversourcing this, because this is You know, we're seeing rumblings online.
We're seeing even the commentary from you guys.
I'm telling you what is totally logical.
All right.
Like I don't even want to pollute it with what anybody is thinking.
I am telling you what I would do.
And I'm telling you what I think the president should do because he's a nice guy.
Like he can be a softy.
OK, he really is a nice guy.
And he likes Pam.
But you can't have a situation where your team is dropping the ball this badly.
It is a team and the whole country.
is on his side and we need someone for us.
Adriana Valentino writing that she doesn't have, you don't think she has good intentions.
You know, I've seen that from some of you guys.
I've seen that from some of you.
I actually, I don't, you know, I do think, I know that some people think that she's, you know, that this was all deliberate.
I don't think, I think she's just incompetent.
I mean, I'd like to say she's a brilliant badass and she had this whole thing wired.
No, it's pure incompetency.
Really?
I mean, there is incompetency and it often exists within political circles.
I remember when I was first at Fox during 2016, and I actually hosted one of the first presidential debates.
Remember how big they were, that we had so many candidates?
So I was actually anchoring, well, I anchored two of them.
And so I had a lot of the candidates on my show from time to time.
One of the things that sort of amazed me, I'll just share this with you anecdotally.
The two candidates that would call you back like in a second would be the office of Carly Fiorina.
Don't forget, she had been at HP.
She was in the business world and the office of Donald Trump.
Always you would get a call back and everybody else forget about it.
Why?
Because they came from the world of politics.
And I wasn't used to that because you see, I've been a business reporter my whole career.
And I'm like, I don't get this.
These people don't call you back.
Like I'm chasing down Ted Cruz.
I had to go finally.
You know where I went?
I went to the head of his finance committee.
Ha ha.
Again, dealing with people in business because people in business get, you know what, done.
And people in politics, they don't.
No joke.
There's an incompetency that's actually quite extraordinary.
I mean, the swamp is serious.
And so this incompetency, in my estimation, like just breeds throughout.
And so I don't want a politician there.
I want a real lawyer.
Like a good lawyer.
I want somebody who's going to get stuff done.
I mean, I would say, the one thing against Andrew is that he was the AG in Missouri.
So again politics, I don't love it, but he was in the military, so that's good.
Illegal Military Orders00:15:55
That's the other thing.
Like anybody in the military, they call you back too.
It's the people in politics that just have their you know what up there, you know what.
They just don't know the time of day.
And so I I consider this a massive failure and they've got to make a change, and it's got to happen Fast, because we got a lot hanging out there.
We just do.
I mean, here's, let's go back to Andrew McCarthy.
He was on Fox trying to explain this to the morning anchor on Fox.
And he was like, look, this is not good.
This is like a week before it all went down.
And I was kind of hoping and praying, okay, well, maybe they can go back and this appeal and this and that.
Let me just tell you, I've done a lot of exhaustive research over this over the last, say, 36 hours since this whole thing broke.
Not happening.
There's, I mean, they can go back for an appeal.
The appeal will get shut down.
So thanks again for nothing.
Here's Andrew.
And this really isn't any fault of Lindsey Halligan's.
The statute that she was appointed as interim U.S. Attorney under allows the president or through the Attorney General to appoint an interim U.S. Attorney for 120 days.
And by the time Halligan got the job, her predecessor, Eric Siebert, had already served the 120 days.
So, they have a good argument that she's probably not qualified under that statute.
So, what's the pushback then?
Take her side.
Well, I think the pushback is what the Attorney General and the Justice Department want to argue is that authority to prosecute in the United States comes not from the District U.S. Attorney, but from the Justice Department and the Attorney General.
So, in order to try to firm this up, what Attorney General Bondi did was appoint Halligan as a special attorney and say that that was effective as of three days before Comey was.
Indicted.
The problem is she didn't do it till October 31st and she's trying to backdate it.
I don't know if that's going to work with the court.
All right.
So, what would the move be?
Okay, we'll get another attorney.
Is that correct?
Is that one way to explain it?
This could be much ado about nothing because they could disqualify her, but there's another statute that says the government would have then six months to bring a new indictment.
Okay.
So, you get the six months for the new indictment.
There's a statute of limitations.
Okay, that's the problem.
Okay, that again is the problem.
Fine for Letitia.
You go after Letitia all day long, but you bombed.
Okay, Bondi bombed bombshell.
Bondi bombed, and so here we are.
Okay, so we need more.
We deserve more.
We we we got to have a better situation.
Meanwhile, you know, for goodness sakes, these idiots out there in Washington, D.C., saying all kinds of Junkola, right?
The Sedition Six, as they're being dubbed.
We don't have to watch this, but you know what I'm talking about, right?
I'm Senator Alyssa Sachin.
Senator Mark Kelly.
Representative Chris DeLuzio.
Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander.
Representative Chrissy Holder.
La, la, la, of which, by the way, Andrew Bailey, who's being rumored to maybe replace Pam Bondy, uh was a jag attorney.
My dad was actually a jag attorney.
Um paid for uh his, his law school anyway in Vietnam.
But uh, so fine, you get a jag attorney.
But is this really appropriate?
Like, how is this in any way appropriate?
Like, if you go in and you enlist in the military, they tell you all this, you know your rights fine, but to take that out on stage and we're talking center stage, and to blast it all over social media and it's all over the news and It's as though it's a giant psychop and they're trying to prep somebody for something.
And you think about what just happened today, right?
You think about what's going on with the National Guard.
And we have just learned that two members of the National Guard were shot, possibly three.
We don't know their status because it's been reported differently by different sources.
Some people have said that they have, in fact, died, and the other is in very, very serious condition.
And now we're hearing from West Virginia's governor that they may not have and that he is just asking that everybody wait on that.
So out of respect to their families, of course, and to this news cycle, I want to be very cautious on that.
But I would just say, like, what's going on?
So now National Guard members feel that they're going to be under attack.
Are you guys trying to suggest that they shouldn't be able to protect themselves?
Remember, we had to hear from the Chicago police saying, listen, you attacked members of the National Guard because they were doing this a few weeks ago.
And the Chicago police chief was like, listen, we're being told that we can't go in and help.
Brendan Johnson, thank you very much.
Pritzker, thank you very much.
They're being told they can't go in and help.
That's unbelievable to me.
But the police chief was like, you better believe, like they have a weapon and they run the risk of using it if you're attacking them.
And now we see a situation in D.C. where they literally were attacked.
So I don't think that this is going to end well.
And what I would say is you guys have no business going out there and saying all the.
Crapola that you did.
The FBI is now seeking interviews with the Democratic lawmakers who said to the military, if there is an illegal order, don't follow it.
Aren't folks in the military not supposed to follow illegal orders?
So this is.
Again, but why are we making such a big deal of this right before Thanksgiving, right?
Let's listen to Scott Jennings here in this CNN interview.
Gosh, that guy looks a lot like Rachel Maddow.
Obviously, you're going to have two groups of people that see this.
Completely differently.
I mean, when I saw that video, I was outraged for the president because it's obvious what the Democrats were trying to do.
They were trying to create a narrative that the president had, in fact, given illegal orders.
Nobody's yet named an illegal order.
All the people in the video went on TV and got asked, What are the illegal orders?
None of them could name an illegal order.
Ilessa Slotkin, who's supposed to be the moderate and the smart person in that group, said, Well, you know, we have this movie, A Few Good Men.
I mean, it was so unserious, but the point was clear.
They're trying to program their political party.
Half the country into believing that the president has given an illegal order, which has not happened.
And so he's outraged.
Every Republican that I know is outraged.
The legalities of this, the investigatory part of this, I'm less sure about.
But I'll tell you this it's not good to treat the military like pawns.
These Democrats shut down the government 43 days and didn't pay them.
And now they're out here using them in this illegal order video, which is obviously political.
I think some people, you know, in our coalition are thinking they keep treating the military like pawns.
It's very disrespectful to treat the military this way.
Yeah.
I'm sorry.
You shouldn't be doing this.
By the way, this has never, ever, ever, ever happened in history.
And I went back and did a whole search, certainly not in modern day, but it has never happened.
Like even in the Civil War era, you weren't so preemptive where you were trying to, again, psychop, right?
You have a whole bunch of intel people out there.
I want to share with you that President Trump has ordered 500 more troops to D.C. after national.
Guard incident.
After the National Guard incident.
So, this is.
And by the way, the mayor of D.C. has just announced that she's not going to run for mayor again.
She approved of all this.
She actually liked this.
She was like, oh, finally, like we're actually getting to be a safer city and we needed these resources.
And she's a Democrat.
They were like, how dare you?
But she's a logical person on the side of making sure everybody's safe.
I mean, it was like one thing after another.
Even the media was like, you know, You tell us DC is safe, but my friend, you know, when she was leaving the channel the other night, the station, she got mugged.
Or, you know, my other friend, like, had their car hijacked.
I mean, anecdotally, it certainly didn't feel safe, right?
Even if somehow the stats were showing a better picture because the police may have been pressured in various ways.
And I've heard this from so many sources that know people within the police department.
There's a lot of pressure on them not to actually make these arrests because they need their numbers to look better.
So there you go.
Anyway, the president was proud that the murder rate had gone down and the crime rate had gone down.
Mayor of DC was actually kind of proud, and she's standing there with the president happy about it all.
And then this happens, interestingly enough, right after right after the Sedacious SIX, as he calls them, came out with their little video.
And what?
What were people promising?
I'll tell you what they were promising.
Let's go to Buzz Patterson, who's just a you know, a retired veteran of the AIR Force, saying bad things are gonna happen if you, if you, try and encourage this, because what does the military rely on?
Order, following orders, and of course you're not going to follow an illegal order.
But why are you telling people all around the world that work for our, our armed services?
Why are you telling them to question everything?
And, by the way, why are you threatening them with what could come when you get into office?
Listen to Buzz.
Hey everybody, this is Buzz Patterson.
I'm a retired AIR Force lieutenant colonel, retired AIR Force pilot, combat veteran and at one time I was the military aide to president Bill Clinton and carried the nuclear football and actually lived in the White House.
So, I've been around.
I was actually, during my military service, deployed to 70 countries and fought in three wars.
So, I feel like I've got a dog in this hunt.
I am very appalled at what the Sedition Six has done with their video.
I think it's a violation of their oath of office, and especially in the case of Senator Mark Kelly, I believe it's a violation of the UCMJ.
And I hope that President Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth hold them accountable.
Well, Pete's trying, okay?
So, again, Trump.
announcing right now sends Right now, sends 500 more troops, National Guard troops to DC.
It's like they want something bad.
Buzz was even more explicit.
I want to go to this one for you.
They are violating and they are politically using their positions to undercut the command of President Donald J. Trump and they're circumventing the chain of command.
Congress and members of Senate are not in the chain of command.
President Trump is, however, as our commander in chief.
So I fully support going forward with whatever prosecutions are warranted and legitimate, and I think they are, on these individuals.
They use their positions, military and in the intelligence community, to expose, I think, and put at risk Those of us who serve in uniform.
I think that what's going to happen is because they violated the military chain of command, people are going to die.
They undercut the underpinnings of the military, which is good order and faith and trust in their leadership.
And in my estimation, what they did was treasonous and seditionist.
And I hope they are prosecuted to the full extent.
Again, my name is Buzz Patterson.
I served in combat, I've served for 20 years.
And I am outraged by what has happened by the Democrats.
And I fear for what's going to happen to our young soldiers.
sailors, airmen, and Marines, if they choose to violate what is a legal order, which will ruin their lives and ruin their careers.
Thank God, guys.
God bless.
So why would they do this?
Okay, know your rights.
Fine.
What has Donald Trump done that is quote unquote illegal?
What has he done?
Nothing.
They can't even tell you.
They can't even tell you what he's done.
So this is just designed, you understand, to freak everybody out.
And then maybe, God, I even hate to say this, like plant the idea, right, in people's heads because they want to cruise towards some kind of civil war with their resist, what?
He's trying to clean up DC.
He's putting the National Guard there.
Okay.
The mayor's like thrilled.
She's like, thank you.
Look at these murder rates declining in real time.
Like, we actually needed this help.
We didn't have any money.
We couldn't do this.
We didn't have the resources.
And then you get Brandon out in Chicago who somehow thinks that you ought to open up all the prisons because it's racist to put anybody in prison.
Oh, yeah.
I got that sound for you, too.
But here is the official statement from the Department of War.
By the way, Department OF WAR, uh, going after Mark Kelly here saying that he basically may be in violation of the Uniform Code Of Military Justice, 10 Usc 688 and other applicable regulations, a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated, so they've opened up an investigation.
Meanwhile, the FBI wants to bring in these six people for questioning and they don't want to come in for questioning.
Well, we won't even go in for questioning, I mean, don't you?
I mean, if you feel that passionately about things, why not go in for questioning?
Meanwhile, Mark Mark Kelly Got slammed by Pete Hegseth on Twitter because Senator Kelly said, Look, when I was 22 years old, I was commissioned as an ensign in the U.S. Navy and I swore an oath to the Constitution.
I upheld that oath through flight school, multiple deployments on USS Midway, etc.
He's going on and on.
He was also, of course, an astronaut.
And he wrote back, Pete did.
So, Captain, which he put in parentheses, Kelly, because he doesn't really feel like the guy's really in it, right, for the military right now because it's become so political.
Not only did you, you're sedition video, as he calls it, intentionally undercut good order and discipline, but you can't even display your uniform correctly.
The medals are all out of whack.
So, hey, hey, if you're recalled to active duty, we're going to start with a uniform inspection.
So it was kind of a, haha, you know, kind of funny little message there from one Pete Hegseth, who is now the head of the Department of War.
Oh my goodness, you would not believe the way MSNBC freaked out over this one.
It was like they had a total conniption fit, or shall I say.
Ms. Now.
Oh, Gloria Steinem might like that one.
She would have loved that.
Ms. Now.
So, on Ms. Now, is that named after Rachel?
Is she a Ms.?
Anyway, they're having a meltdown this morning.
They cannot believe, they cannot believe that Pete Hegseth, head of the Department of War, would say such a thing about Captain Kelly.
Unlawful Commands Alleged00:15:02
Watch.
Just a moment ago, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, yeah, responded to Senator Mark Kelly.
Because Kelly put up a picture of his naval uniform.
And Hegseth is saying, So, Captain Kelly, which he put in quotes for some reason, not only did your sedition video intentionally undercut Gordor and discipline, you can't even display your uniform correctly.
Hegseth claims that the medals and rows are out of order.
And he says, I kid you not.
The Secretary of Defense says to the United States Senator and war hero, responding to this picture, he's an astronaut.
Quote, When and if you're recalled to active duty, it'll start with a uniform inspection.
Jesus.
That is what the Secretary of Defense is focused on right now, saying he'll threaten the United States Senator and astronaut.
A veteran with a uniform inspection in addition to potentially sedition charges.
Well, you know, sorry guys.
I realize, you know, you don't care how you look.
You're liberals after all, right?
Those uniforms, it doesn't really matter.
Well, it matters to Pete.
It does actually matter to many members of the military.
They wouldn't wear their uniforms incorrectly nor their medals incorrectly.
You know, maybe it's been a few years for Captain Kelly.
Listen, I'm just going to say this.
And, you know, we feel horrible for his family and what his wife, Gabby, went through, et cetera.
I'm just going to say this.
Don't put a video like that out there at a time like this.
That is so unnecessary.
On top of which, they're actually trying to threaten people.
Think about that, you guys.
On MSNBC, they're reminding everybody, CNN as well, they're having all these guests on who are going to remind you that if you're in the military and you participate in anything that Trump wants that they later will determine is illegal, You are SOL.
I mean, it's really threatening.
It's highly politicized.
It is deliberate.
It is an attempt to basically cause friction and chaos amongst the rank and file.
And it's unacceptable and un-American and disgusting to politicize the military like this.
And yet, what are they doing over on the Ms. Network?
MSNBC.
Watch.
What do you think as a lawyer, what do you think the consequences should be for people who are abiding by Following these steps from the commander in chief when they seem to be complete overreaches of power, they're following unlawful commands from Donald Trump.
And if you're committing offenses, what are the unlawful commands?
He's saying they've already followed unlawful commands.
What are they talking about?
Here we go.
And your defense is going to be, I was just following orders.
You know, that didn't work out so well at Nuremberg.
Okay, because we got to go back to the Nazis every single time.
When in doubt, you just go back to Nazi Germany.
There you have it.
I mean, as though Donald Trump has killed six million people, for goodness sakes.
This is disgusting.
It's like they don't know their history.
They don't.
They're not smart people.
It certainly didn't work out so well for Lieutenant Cali when he, you know, engaged in mass murder, the Melay massacre.
And, you know, Pete Hegseth just doing whatever Donald Trump tells him to do, like initiating a criminal investigation that could result in a court martial of Senator Kelly for simply stating, Accurately, what the military law provides, or Kash Patel's FBI opening criminal probes of members of Congress for speaking the truth.
You know, that is something that will someday, when the rule of law comes back into the light of day, will have to be tackled.
They'll have to be held accountable for those abuses.
It's going to be accounting for all of this and remembering all of it.
Glenn Kirchner, thank you so much for being here, helping make sense or explain a lot of this.
It was Jen, like, taking her notebook out.
Accounting for it, keeping tabs, who did what.
I mean, we're still not over everything that you guys did to us.
Let's be very, very, very, very clear.
I mean, I'm sorry.
They're out in the open.
They're saying, hey, we're going to investigate it.
You did it behind the scenes.
You went and started collecting the phone records on eight sitting members of Congress without telling anybody about it.
I mean, please don't even get me started.
But this is what they're peddling out there.
They're trying to scare the living bejesus out of all our military members.
I mean, right before Thanksgiving, what a lousy crap.
Thing to do.
Sorry I, you know I, I just i'm so disgusted by this, I I can't tell you, between what's going on at DOJ and this, i'm i've had it and this is this Gallegos guy, senator Gallegos, and he did some little video in his car the other day where he just swore and I was like you know what I don't feel like having to clean this up because it meant that we had to bleep out every other word.
He said, so i'm not playing that, but he did go on CNN and he said something else, without the swears, because he knows he can't do that on CNN, but he's got a filthy dirty, potty mouth.
If i've ever heard one here.
He is saying how he's going to go after everybody Into Senator Kelly.
What is your level of trust in the U.S. military justice system if it were to get that far to handle this?
I trust them actually a lot, and for a couple reasons.
Number one, these are professionals.
They are also swearing to the Constitution of the United States.
They know that there will be fallout and consequences if they are used in a hard way to basically railroad someone like Senator Kelly.
Donald Trump's going to be gone a couple years.
And if you're part of the military that is going after sitting senators, sitting members of Congress, and part of the weaponization of government, there will be consequences, without a doubt.
So I think there's going to be a lot of officers that are going to be part of this potential tribunal, if they want to call that, they're going to be looking over their shoulders because they know that Donald Trump will be gone and they will not have that protection.
They're going to have to do the safest thing possible, which is follow the Constitution of the United States and you'll be fine.
What is that?
Oh my gosh.
All right.
So now, if you happen to be in the National Guard and you were deployed to D.C., is Gallegos coming for you?
Was that a threat?
Because he thinks that's illegal.
Who's to say it's illegal?
Nobody's actually said it's illegal.
The mayor's welcomed the National Guard.
Heck, out in California, they didn't want the National Guard.
But you know what?
Donald Trump sent him in anyway, sent him.
Anyway, and the Ninth district court decided that yeah, that was the thing to do.
So uh okay, you can refuse orders.
And then what do we do?
We're gonna have chaos.
I mean, you're gonna need jag officers, like you never thought.
I mean hey, we thought chat GPT was gonna put lawyers out of business.
Not in the military apparently, because you're gonna need jag officers for days and days and days and days forget the border crisis you guys will all be uh, working overtime because everybody wants to fight Donald Trump, Your commander in chief in the military.
You understand how nuts this is?
Like totally, actually bonkers.
And again, I go back to this has never before happened in history, ever.
Okay.
Not even during the Civil War when obviously we didn't like each other very much.
All right.
Not even then.
And it didn't happen during the Iraq War where obviously, again, there was a lot of tension.
It didn't even happen during the 60s or Vietnam.
For goodness sakes, this is brand new.
And it's, by the way, a total invention.
Of the Intelligence Department.
Think about all of these people.
You got Slocken, the former CIA analyst.
You got Maggie Goodlander from my home state of New Hampshire live free or die great place.
Unfortunately, they elected her.
She is Jake Sullivan, former head of the NSC under one Joe Biden's wife, also a former intelligence op.
And then you get the military.
They put them all out there because they're trying to send a message and they want that message to be heard loud and clear.
And apparently it was on a very stupid show, Because the media is very, very stupid, especially the ladies that adorn the little couch or table, or whatever it is, on the set of the soon to be canceled View.
And know who you're talking to.
He's not only a national hero, but he's the husband of someone who was shot in the head at an event.
He is the epitome of the beginning of some of the most damning examples of political violence we've seen.
So know who you're talking to.
But I also like, we always talk about how Trump came in on America First, America First.
A week ago, we saw him defending a Saudi.
Prince over a reporter.
And now he's turning to a deep public servant that he disagrees with and jumps straight to traitor hang him.
You've got to have some perspective on what you're stoking here.
Because I would argue that what Mark Kelly did was, Alyssa, reading what's already obvious.
These are the oaths they take.
They're repeating it in case people that they can relate to in our military services are put into a situation, which for the first time in our history, they may.
Remember when Mark Esper had to tell Donald Trump you couldn't shoot protesters in the legs?
Oh, yeah.
There's the Constitution and laws, lawful and legal things, and then there's shoot the protesters in the legs.
They might come up against the situation.
What's going on?
Is he just like losing it a little bit?
I don't know, but he.
No, you guys are losing it because you know your show's about to be canceled very, very soon.
I think it's just sort of Bob Iger's prerogative.
He's trying to keep the thing on the air just to spite Donald Trump.
Anyway, you want to talk about fake news, you have no further to look than ABC's The View.
And in that case, they're trying to suggest that Donald Trump wants to go out and shoot American citizens.
In the case of what happened today, We have learned that the suspect is in custody.
Somebody tried to shoot National Guard members.
I mean, this is why I'm saying, like, you got to watch the rhetoric right around a time like now.
500 troops ordered to D.C. after this situation.
And it's the right thing to do because now you actually have to secure the city.
And now the Democrats will tell you, no, you don't have to secure the city, that the security is going to come from the city itself.
And yet the mayor is like, please, and she actually announced i'm out, i'm not even running again as mayor, because she's trying to do the right thing for her city and the city and the Democrats, they all hate her because she's saying hey, we need this support, we need this help.
I'm really, i'm blown away by by how crazy all of this is.
And again, it's politics all right, it is politics they're.
They're trying to to freak people out, they're trying to divide the military, which has never been divided before, and they're doing it for a political purpose.
And before you doubt that, think about what I want to show you.
Some of you guys saw this.
I played this yesterday.
Kara Swisher, who was kind of a big deal tech reporter.
And now she kind of seems like just such a has-been.
I mean, maybe she's trying to get a job over at Rachel's Ms. Network.
But she has become so left.
And she had my friend Scott there on her program.
And listen to what she says.
Because she starts to say that the 51X spooks and spies, when they came out with that, Hunter Biden laptop letter where they just flat out lied to us all that that was just politics.
Well, I didn't see it as politics because you know what?
Those were like intelligence professionals and it made everybody like stop and think.
But you know what?
Fool me once.
Shame on you.
Fool me twice.
Shame on me.
And what I see these people doing, the six of them together, is they're trying to fool America again and we will not be fooled.
And by the way, it is as this lefty loon admits, total.
Politics.
The story was true.
There wasn't really any dispute of that other than from these 50 people who come from government, who are in and out of government when Democrats are in power.
That's politics to me, Scott.
That's, I mean, you're not naive.
They were making their case, just like you would say Trump just did with whatever issue he has.
Well, I don't agree that it is just a simple matter of making your case when you use your government title and you use your intelligence bona fides and you use all your credentials to flat out lie to the American people.
They didn't know that.
That was a political argument, but they were saying this is Russian disinformation.
What you're reading is directly out of the Kremlin.
Right?
Okay, so this is what's happening again.
So why are the Democrats telling military members to refuse orders?
Of course, you can refuse your orders.
If you think it's illegal, you have every right to refuse your order.
Everybody knows that that's in the military.
Why are they blowing this up into a giant story?
There's an ulterior motive here.
And you know what?
It's an ulterior motive that, frankly, like not even Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough, Scarborough, whatever, is totally buying.
I mean, I'm sorry, but when you've lost Joe on Morning Joe, I don't even know what to tell you guys.
And if I have a criticism of what the Democrats have been saying, well, they fumbled the ball this weekend.
But from the very beginning, when they say you don't, you know, it's such a Democratic thing to do.
You know, you don't have to follow illegal orders.
You know what a Republican, you can't follow illegal orders.
It's against your oath.
And it is against their oath.
So here's what Senator Alyssa Slotkin of Michigan, who was part of the effort, said yesterday when asked by ABC News to be.
Specific about what illegal orders are being issued by the White House.
This is great, by the way.
This is absolutely great.
This woman is so unbelievably clueless, which tells me she's really not the brains behind this op because she can't even answer the questions.
Watch.
So let's talk right now.
Do you believe President Trump has issued any illegal orders?
To my knowledge, I am not aware of things that are illegal, but certainly there are some legal gymnastics that are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything related to Venezuela.
Okay, wrong answer.
Well, I'm sorry, with all due respect, wrong answer.
President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, does have, Jonathan Lemire, wide latitude.
Look at his face.
He's like, this is the anchor.
This guy employs me.
What do I say?
And by the way, Joe's right.
The president does have huge latitude.
I mean, think about the strikes that Obama did and Bush and everybody else.
Dangerous Retribution00:07:15
I mean, for goodness sakes, you're going to take that away?
Watch.
And the Senate can take that up, but he has wide latitude on strikes.
Ask Barack Obama and drone strikes.
Ask George W. Bush and drone strikes.
There we go.
But where we know the president has said, I am going to give illegal orders to people in the military.
Is when he was on Air Force One coming back.
I forget where he was coming back from.
Okay, so now he goes on this whole thing because Trump thinks that he could do this, that, and the other with the military.
And whatever.
Like the point is, is that Slocken has no clue.
None of them have any clue.
They're trying to say that it is illegal to send troops into D.C.
Well, he's showing them, right?
500 more going in because of what just happened.
Meanwhile, in Chicago, they're fighting it like you wouldn't believe.
We don't want any national guard in Chicago, and you know what else?
We're going to make sure that ice can't come to Chicago, because we don't care how many illegal criminals are here.
In fact, we don't care how many criminals are here.
We don't want anybody going to jail.
We don't actually want to penalize crime.
It's going to be a big giant free-for-all.
As though things weren't bad enough on the south side of Chicago as it is, Brandon's got big plans for you there.
Guys lovely, we cannot incarcerate our way out of violence.
We've already tried that And we've ended up with the largest prison population in the world without solving the problems of crime and violence.
The addiction on jails and incarceration in this country, we have moved past that.
It is racist, it is immoral, it is unholy, and it is not the way to drive violence down.
It's racist to put people in jail.
You heard it from the guy who's like got actually horrible, horrible numbers on crime.
The streets of Chicago, some of the most dangerous.
In the world, okay?
Not in the country, in the world.
And he says, we're not going to send anybody to jail because it's racist?
Excuse me.
Okay.
Listen, there's a lot of things that can be done to solve for challenges.
We ran a short the other day.
This was fantastic.
It was a group of economists, and there were several that were black economists, and they were saying, you know, here's the differentiating factor here.
You know, when you look at families that have a mother and father and, you know, went to college, you know, those families actually do really, really, really well.
And it has nothing to do with race.
So, what is the answer?
all day long.
You know what you can take away from that?
It is family.
Let me see if I can find it for you because I just thought it was a brilliant thing for him to have said and a brave thing because, yeah, ever since Johnson, frankly, Lyndon Johnson, who decided to really screw things up by incentivizing people with the wrong things, right?
Money if you don't have a man in the house, money if you don't work.
It's like, well, you know, of course.
And that really screwed people up, you know, for generations.
And we got to get away from that.
We don't want to go back to the mamdomies and the lyndon Johnson types of the world.
We got to get away from that.
And I think a lot of people in Chicago know that.
And I think a lot of people, a lot of people, you know, everywhere know that.
I really want to show you this.
I'm going to see if I can find it for you because I think it's well put, it's well said, and it's worth hearing, guys.
It really is.
So let me continue looking for that because I'm not going to be able to do it justice the way this guy could.
But in the meantime, think about this.
You know, Eric Swallow saying a similar thing.
This guy wants to run for governor, by the way, out in california take over Gavin Newsom slot.
The guy who had a, oh, I don't know what we call it, with Fang Fang.
What a name.
I realize it's a cultural difference and it's a different language, but wow, he really liked Fang Fang.
So much so that the FBI had to alert him about Fang Fang.
And then Fang Fang disappeared, like just into thin air.
We don't know what happened to Fang Fang.
Apparently her handlers in China must have called her back.
Anyway, here's Eric, baby, talking on one of those networks.
Oh, the Ms. Network.
The Ms. Network.
About how you can't go into places like Chicago or California, for that matter.
Where is the rule of law in the United States today?
It's a lawless United States.
The Department of Homeland Security should just change its name because that's not what they are doing right now as they chase our immigrant community.
But we have to, as Democrats, make it clear to Republicans as we seek and intend to go into the majority that.
They are going to have to answer for this, and it's all coming out because I promise you, right now, they think they're invincible.
They let these ICE agents be invisible, and they don't think we have the balls to hold them accountable because they look at the way we've acted in the past where we didn't flex when we had power.
It's not about retribution, it's about accountability.
Yeah, you don't have the balls to do anything, honestly.
Just saying.
And I bet you Fang Fang would agree with that.
Anyway, I digress.
The point being, They want this retribution and it's a really dangerous type of thing.
So Chicago now, D.C., all at the epicenter of it.
Remember, I promised you as we looked at Brandon Johnson saying that jail was racist and we have to fix for all this racism.
Here's, I'm going to be honest, what's really going on.
And don't forget, America elected a black president not once, but twice.
Okay?
So don't give me that crap anymore.
You actually have to fix your cities, and there's a way to do it.
When you do look at the racial wealth gap, yes, there is a gap based on 2019 data.
The median wealth of the average white family is about $160,000 more than the median wealth of the average black family.
But take into account just two other factors family structure and education.
The median wealth of the average married, college educated black family is about $160,000 more than the median wealth of an average single parent white family.
So, perhaps there are factors beyond just race that if we were being honest in this conversation, we could collectively tackle and come up with solutions.
In other words, despite what BLM wants to tell you, family matters.
Yeah.
Okay.
So, Brandon, you might actually want to think about that before you think about letting everybody loose out of jail because, you know, it's racist to jail people.
And, of course, you know, according to the Dems, it's, uh, Illegal, illegal to send the National Guard to DC as Donald Trump is doing with 500 more going in, or to Chicago or California or Charlotte or anywhere else.
Losing Your Story00:15:16
What the specific illegal acts are that your Democratic colleagues were referring to there?
Well, it's very clear in this code for the military that you cannot follow unlawful orders.
And, you know, that would be, I'll just use an example.
Some of the judges have now found in certain cities that it is not legal to send in the National Guard.
And those National Guard members have come home.
Some of them are still there.
But if their commander were to tell them, hey, go out on the streets and do this and that, that's not following the order that is in law.
So I just use that example.
I'm sure.
You just use that example.
I'm sure there are more, she says.
Okay, so what about the 500 National Guard troops that have just been ordered to D.C.?
Are you going to go back after the fact?
And arrest all of them.
That's what they're actually saying they're gonna do.
So i'm gonna change this.
We're saying Democrats are throwing whatever at the wall.
No, they're more than throwing they're.
They're they're like lighting this thing on fire with kerosene.
I don't even know what to say about them right now, because they are trying to stir a.
I'll just put it on here.
You know what.
I hate to say this, but this is exactly what they're doing.
That's what this is.
They're trying to get some kind of civil war going on, and it's just gross and they've got to stop, because it's not.
It's getting dangerous at this point.
It's just unacceptable.
Meanwhile oh, down in Texas, you guys, i'm sorry that you have this woman as your congressional representative for a short period of time longer, but guess what?
She's gerrymandered, if we want to use that word, right out of her district.
Okay Jasmine bye-bye bye-bye bye-bye, bye-bye.
She's looking for a bigger office, so she's looking for a bigger stage, and she somehow thinks that she's one of the leaders of the Democrat party, which i'd say, hey, go for that.
We'll take that all day long, Jazzy Crockett, representative of the Democrat Party.
And she's out there, caught defending illegals, saying that they People who are here illegally are what make America great.
It's sort of wild because I think we can all be pro immigration.
Like nobody's anti immigration.
But illegal immigration, the way Joe Biden did it, inviting millions and millions and millions of people here and then giving them free this, free that, free this, free that, free this, free that, with the promise of maybe one day voting for Democrats.
Oh, we see through that pretty darn fast.
And so do your constituents, Constituents, Jazzy, if you have any now, watch.
This is not the best of America.
I know someone promised that they would make America great.
I am telling you that they are doing just the opposite.
I am telling you that we are a land of immigrants.
It is time to do immigration right.
It is time to make sure that we live up to the promise of this country.
The idea that someone ran and said that I will get rid of the bad guys.
Yet we know more than 50% of the people that are currently being detained in custody have no criminal records at all.
Zero, nada.
So tell me why you are taking those people out of their communities.
They are our neighbors, they are our friends, and frankly, they contribute to the fabric of this country.
They are what make this country great, not your thuggish ICE agents who literally are spitting on our Constitution, as well as everything that we think patriotism ought to be.
Okay, just to be really clear, Congress wrote these laws.
Congress does not allow for illegals to be here in the country.
Congress does not allow for illegal immigration.
And yet, Jasmine is holding up people who are here illegally up on a giant pedestal and then saying anybody who works for government as an ICE agent is the scum of the earth because they're trying to uphold the law.
Think about that.
I mean, it's like, you know, Eric Swallow saying, how dare you uphold the law?
We're going to come after you for upholding the law.
I mean, you people, you're kind of losing your story here.
And Jazzy, I realize you're really scraping the bottle of the barrel.
You know, you're going for people who can't vote for you, and you're going for a community of people that, I mean, I guess they make up 0.01% of the population, but she wants you to know.
She's also all for illegals that are transgender.
And the transgender illegals need to be able to get their medicines to be trans.
This is really gonna play in Peoria, as they say, right?
Here's Jazzy Crockett at it again.
Let me just be clear as it relates to trans folk.
First of all, we can't trust this administration to do right by any reporting.
If they don't want to report accurate job numbers, honey, I don't expect to get accurate information about trans folk.
I just want to be clear about that.
In addition to that, we have seen that this administration has been very clear about taking away the The personhood of trans folk specifically, not just when it comes to ICE, but we know that we just got them talking about how someone will be classified as it relates to their passport in and of itself.
So, this is why this dashboard matters.
This is why the leadership of the Oversight Committee matters because we can't tell these stories.
We won't know these stories, but I can tell you trans people are loved too.
So, they've got loved ones, and those loved ones need to make sure that they understand that we stand for everybody in this country.
We understand.
That they really should be respected in a way that this administration never will.
So, I want you all to know that you have a safe space with us.
Please tell your stories.
I know it is not easy to trust a government that is attacking everybody.
I get it.
I don't trust them.
I'm being perfectly honest, but you can trust us.
So, make sure that you're using the dashboard that we've set up.
Tell the stories of your loved ones.
We need to know who's being disappeared.
We need to know whether or not they are missing their medications because they need medication as well.
We understand people are going through transition, we get it all.
So make sure that you are giving us the information.
Because, you know, Jasmine, that's really going to play well in Texas for you.
Oh, boy.
Priorities, right?
Priorities.
I mean, again, I would just say a few things going on here tonight.
One, we need somebody good at the DOJ, okay?
We just do.
We got a lot coming our way.
We got the Epstein files coming out.
We need somebody good.
Two, 500 more troops. going into Washington, D.C., of which now the Democrats are threatening to come back and arrest those very people that are being sent there that are part of the National Guard.
I mean, that's just wild to me, right?
Three, you got Alyssa Slocking coming out the other day with her grand video of being dubbed by the administration as the Seditious Six, and she's suggesting somehow that the National Guard might randomly start shooting at people in America.
And then somehow two of the people are shot.
You know, it kind of, it sort of makes you wonder what that was all about.
I have a lot of concerns.
And I think that we should be asking more questions here, right?
Of the so-called Sedacious Six, because it's like they were trying to seed something.
So that's very, very, very concerning for me.
Again, on the legal front, there's a lot coming our way and we just need to be really, really smart about this.
Fannie Willis, you know, that's done.
That's over.
Thank goodness.
The other thing I would leave you with is, you know, when you think about all that's happening right now and the need for more transparency in America and the need for, shall we say, a media that's more authentic and more real, especially as things heat up.
Again, I do think that Pam Bondi is at risk of being out in the very, very near future.
You've got Donald Trump.
Also, meanwhile, doubling down on his attacks on ABC.
And I think this is going to be another story to really watch just over the coming days, okay?
Because he's already telegraphed things very, very clear.
And we just saw ABC suggest that the National Guard is going to be shooting people, similar to what Slocum's talking point was, right?
So there's kind of like a script and they're following it.
On top of which, as we look forward to the next couple of weeks, we've got the likes of ABC saying things like this on The View.
Isn't it obvious that Trump was involved with Epstein?
I mean, there are a thousand times.
There are more pictures of him with Epstein than pictures of Kim Kardashian of herself.
Yes.
Right.
How many more things do we have to see before people believe that he was involved with WND?
Yeah.
So there's that.
And then there's the ABC News reporter asking Trump about the Epstein documents and why they hadn't been released earlier.
I mean, hey, we were curious.
Why didn't Biden release?
administration released them earlier.
They had four whole years to do it, right?
And she did this right in front of MBS while simultaneously, you know, going for the jugular with him on the Khashoggi stuff.
It was kind of just an awkward moment.
Again, I don't dispute that you should be able to ask these questions.
It just felt like a really aggressive and her voice and everything about it.
I'm not going to play you the question, but I am going to play you his answer because it's important right now.
Again, knowing that ABC is under fire, knowing that there is a script, A script, so to speak, and knowing that the FCC is conducting an investigation into them, just listen to what he said.
He just upped the ante, and I think this is going to get big over the next couple days.
Border.
As far as the Epstein files is, I have nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein.
I threw him out of my club many years ago because I thought he was a sick pervert, but I guess I turned out to be right.
But you know who does have?
Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, who ran Harvard, was with him every single day.
Night every single weekend.
They lived together.
They went to his island many times.
I never did.
Uh, Andrew Weissman are here.
All these guys were friends of his.
You don't even talk about those people.
You just keep going on the Epstein files and what the Epstein is is a Democrat hoax to try and get me not to be able to talk about the 21 trillion dollars that I talked about today.
It's a hoax.
Now I just got a little report and I put it in my pocket.
Of all the money that he's given to Democrats, He gave me none, zero, no money to me, but he gave money to Democrats.
And people are wise to your hoax.
And ABC's, your company, your crappy company, is one of the perpetrators.
And I'll tell you something, I'll tell you something.
I think the license should be taken away from ABC because your news is so fake and it's so wrong.
And we have a great commissioner, the chairman, who should look at that because I think when you come in and when you're 97%.
Negative to Trump, and then Trump wins the election in a landslide.
That means obviously your news is not credible, and you're not credible as a reporter.
So I've answered your question.
You should go and look at the Democrats who received money from Epstein, who spent their time.
Larry Summers was with him all the time.
That creep of the fund guy was with him all the time.
What's his name?
Reed Hoffman.
I don't know Reed Hoffman, but I know he spends a lot of money on the radical left.
Reed Hoffman, in my opinion, should be under investigation.
He's a sleazebag.
And those are the people, but they don't get any press, they don't get any news, and you're not after the radical left because you're a radical left network.
But I think the way you ask a question with the anger and the meanness is terrible.
You ought to go back and learn how to be a reporter.
No more questions from you.
Who else has a question?
You know, again, there's a way to ask things.
You get more flies with honey, as they say, and she just doesn't know how to ask.
them because they're just like, as you said, somebody's like gearing you up for combat, so to speak.
And, you know, consequently, it turned into kind of a you know what show.
So right now, ABC's in the hot seat.
ABC's in the hot seat.
So what is ABC going to do about it?
I think they're going to hire MTG.
MTG going to the view.
That's the word on the street.
Look, these rumors are swirling right now because you see the FCC is investigating.
ABC News and ABC News needs to prove somehow that they get some conservative bona fides.
So what better way to do it?
What better way to do it than to bring in MTG and maybe then you might actually have some real fireworks on the show.
You got Whoopi versus MTG.
I mean, we're talking Circus City, right?
I mean, the producer in me thinks that could be actually entertaining to watch, right?
Whoopi versus MTG.
Of course, you kill two birds with one stone because maybe you get a shot at helping your ratings.
Maybe you get a shot at saying, well, we hired a conservative.
And then here's the real motivator, guys.
They get to say, uh-huh.
We can help destroy MAGA because MTG is now anti-Trump.
She says she's the original MAGA.
We put her on TV every day.
We try and court the audience.
And then all of a sudden, you're going to have a celebration.
I mean, look at how nice they were to her and her, how nice she was to them because you see, she was auditioning.
That's what that was about.
That was a big old audition.
I said it at the time.
I'm like, whoa, she's going to go to ABC News.
Smart play.
I mean, I'd do that if I were Bob Eiger.
QAnon conspiracies anymore.
Oh, I went over that a long time ago.
I mean, we.
So you've changed.
Well, no, I haven't changed.
I was a victim, just like you were, of media lies and stuff you read on social media.
You all have attacked me many times on this show.
We have.
Because of things that you read about me that weren't true.
Or clips we've seen.
Or clips you've seen that took me out of context.
No, but not even true in the last couple of months.
Let's take a second, guys, from getting that.
It's like, you can't keep doubling down on all our fake news.
We're getting the go, sign.
That was what Whoopi was communicating there somehow.
Media Lies and Context00:10:14
But, you know, she went on The View.
She gave a big speech about how, you know, kumbaya.
I just want everybody to get along.
I've seen the light of day.
Oh, because I really need a job.
And Bob Iger seems to want to hire me.
And by the way, he's got to do something.
He needs a conservative on the show.
And Alyssa's going to be out on maternity leave, like by February, I believe.
She's been blasting meanwhile.
Like she's the one who's like calling out Marjorie Taylor Greene for bowing out of the fight.
It's kind of funny because, you know, she's no fool.
She's like, I think my job might be done.
Yeah, I think they might be hiring Marjorie to take my place and probably for a pretty penny more than me.
Ah, here we go.
So this is the article that was in Media Eight.
It says the Views Alyssa Farah Griffin blast Marjorie Taylor Greene for bowing out of the fight too early.
So funny that she's the only one that did, right?
The Views conservative voice said she diminished her power by stepping away from Congress.
Well, She diminished her power because she wants to go and work on your show, Alyssa.
And hey, there's going to be an opening, we hear.
So Griffin said she had mixed feelings about her as a voting member of Congress, as feckless as Congress may seem to be.
You know, she's bound out of the fight too quickly.
She went on to say she's resigning in early January from her seat, but we all know and expect DOJ is going to stonewall.
So you're getting out of the fight before the fight is over.
Well, she's resigning in early January.
Very convenient timing because Alyssa is expecting her first child with her husband.
In February.
Da-da-da.
All right.
That makes sense to me, right?
Totally makes sense to me.
Just the television producer in me, just the talent in me.
Like I could feel that one coming a mile away.
Now, we'll see.
We'll see.
They may still be trying to work out a deal.
And Marjorie doesn't want to leave a penny on the table.
So we'll see if Iger can cough up the money to pay her.
But he's thinking, hey, it works, right?
I get maybe the FCC off my back.
Because I suddenly got a conservative and I got one that can fight a little bit more.
I mean, Alyssa's too refined and sophisticated to get down in the trenches with the likes of Sonny and Joy and Whoopi, who can barely spit out her words and has to look at all her note cards all the time because the producers are telling her what to say.
She's got her talking points, bullet points, boom, So you get Marjorie on there who can really get out her dukes.
And then you got good television.
Maybe somebody will actually watch.
And then if they do, hey, isn't this great?
We have a conservative that can chip.
away at the MAGA base.
We divide and conquer.
You see, divide, divide, divide and conquer.
As though Alyssa Slocum wrote the playbook.
We wish Marjorie all the best.
I think that will be a miserable job, but maybe she can make a little money.
I'm sure she needs a little money, despite having apparently traded quite successfully.
A lot of Congress members are trading a little bit too successfully, I would say, there on the stock exchange.
on committees, you know, this committee in sectors and with companies that they would, in theory, know quite a bit about.
But apparently that's the fringe benefit of being in Congress.
It shouldn't be.
It's absolutely wrong.
Tariff checks.
You think those are on the way?
What do you guys think?
Do you think you're going to see a 2K check?
I don't think you're going to see it this year, so don't hold your breath.
But I do think it could be in the cards for 2026.
So the White House is making it really, really clear over and over again that they want this stuff.
I want to go to some sound of Scott Besson speaking on Fox and Friends about the $2,000 potential rebates that could be coming your way.
Let's take a listen.
That's the most financially responsible thing to do?
Well, there are a lot of options here.
The president's talking about a $2,000 rebate, and that would be for families making less than, say, $100,000.
Have you decided on that yet?
We haven't.
Okay, so that's interesting.
I just want to say it's for families making less than $100,000.
Thousand dollars.
So they're really trying to target middle-class Americans uh, people who don't have as much money coming in the door.
These are always tricky things, because you know what if you're working four jobs?
What if you're working three jobs?
Your wife and you are, like you know, burning the candle at both ends because you need to make a little extra money and then you get penalized.
So i've heard some people say that if you really want to make this thing happen and if you really want to call it a tariff rebate, you're going to have to extend it to every American, otherwise it's not authentic enough to be a tariff rebate because Theoretically, if it's revenue that's coming in for the United States Of America because of these tariffs, then everybody should be able to partake in it.
But let's continue to listen to Scott Besson.
In discussion.
But the other thing to think about, Brian, is that what we did with the tax bill is actually financing the president's no tax and tips over time.
So, security and the big refunds you're going to see are a result of that.
So, that's another payment to the American people.
And then the other thing you're going to see in the middle of the year are these Trump accounts.
Every child born retroactively to January 1, but for the next three years, is going to get a thousand dollar account that's going to be invested in the U.s stock market.
So that's another thousand dollars for working families.
So yesterday.
So that's good, that's actually.
It's a really good thing that the Trump baby boom accounts.
Um it's look, he's, he's committed to trying to do what he can to get some more money out there.
He does want to pay down the national debt.
He wants to use the tariffs to try and do that.
But he explains it pretty well.
He actually did this um, pretty substantially.
I I actually haven't heard As good an Interview.
I mean, people, I guess they're just not asking about it.
They should.
And the next time he gets on any of these programs, they really should push on this.
But OAN asked the question a couple of months ago, and he was pretty forthcoming on his intentions.
Let's listen.
We also might make a distribution to the people, almost like a dividend to the people of America.
How much are you thinking for that, sir?
Well, we're thinking maybe $1,000 to $2,000.
Be great.
Inflation is completely stable, it's around target rate.
And the country is ultimately taking in unprecedented amounts of tariff revenue, more than $200 billion at this point in time, sir.
What do you believe this extra source of revenue can be put towards, and how big of a game changer is it for your administration?
Well, ultimately, you know, because we're talking about just kicking in, they're just starting to kick in.
But ultimately, your tariffs are going to be over a trillion dollars a year, in my opinion.
We're going to do something.
We're looking at something where, number one, we're paying down debt because people have allowed the debt to go crazy.
But you know with growth with the kind of growth we have now the debt is very little relatively speaking You grow yourself out of that debt.
It's not a question of paying it you grow yourself out and the numbers are so much bigger than they ever were The numbers we have now are bigger than they ever were So when you have 36 trillion dollars in debt a year ago or two years ago and you have a lot less revenue coming in then you have 37 or 38 it's not 38 yet, but it will be And the numbers are so much bigger all of a sudden 38 you're under levered Whereas for 36, you were highly levered.
We're not highly levered anymore.
Now, with that being said, we'll pay back debt, but we all but he said, we all want to be able to do something for the people, and that's a big part of his agenda.
I would say this, though, a lot of people and legal scholars and economic scholars are saying this is easier said than done.
You've got to come up with a law to actually make this happen, because the Treasury can't just say, okay, we're going to do this.
Congress has to actually enact this in a law, and this is something that Besson explained recently in a program on fox.
I just want to listen into this because I think you got to think about this, especially as we go into midterms.
And you got to think of this as a political football, too.
I mean, I do know that Trump wants to be able to deliver on this.
But if you've got to have Congress on your side, I don't know if the Democrats will get on board with this.
They should.
I mean, they should, right?
Because, you know, they're all about giveaways.
This could be like a whole universal basic income kind of thing re-inverted in a capitalist sense.
Imagine that.
So they should be on board, but we'll see.
And I imagine it's going to become a political issue as, again, as we head into midterms, because you're going to need congressional approval, as Besant, Treasury Secretary Besant, explains.
Watch.
Secretary, is he going to be sending these direct payments to Americans of $2,000 or more?
We will see.
We need legislation for that.
And again, President Trump is all about solutions, Maria.
And everything is on the table.
But I will tell you that, again, thanks to Him keeping his campaign promises to working Americans with the working class, no tax and tips, Social Security overtime.
We are going to see a big bump in the first quarter with the refunds and the real incomes.
President Trump has also talked about sending $2,000 refunds to, and that would be for working families, we'll have an income limit.
Those could go out.
And then, Maria, the other thing that is going to happen in July, Families are going to be able to apply for any child born from January 1st, 2026, for the next three years, is going to get a Trump account that's $1,000 for each newborn that's going to go in the stock market, and that's going to be invested for the next 18 years.
So, President Trump is committed to getting the money back to families.
I like that idea again.
Economic Newsletter Signup00:03:41
Yeah, I do too.
I think it's really kind of a neat, very, very cool idea.
And look, you know, if you do get a little of this, one of the things that Vesson has also talked about is the need to invest and the need to save.
And I can't echo that enough.
I encourage you guys to go over to my financial website, 76research.com.
76research.com.
It's like 1776.
You get it, right?
We're coming up on the 250th anniversary.
There's a reason we chose the number 76.
76research.com.
You can also go to investinmaga.com.
That's the free version of it.
76research.com.
Use my code word dollar for a dollar a month.
You get a subscription to our newsletter where we're kind of giving you the rundown of what's going on in the economy, what's going on in the markets, stocks sometimes that we like.
You can also get the model portfolio access.
I encourage you guys to do that.
It costs a little bit more money, but check all that out.
There's three model portfolios on the website, but at least if nothing else, at least get the free one.
Go to investinmagatoday.com, invest in MAGA, or sign up for the newsletter at 76research.com with code word dollar.
My gift to you this Thanksgiving.
We have so much to be thankful for, right?
I mean I mean, really, I know things aren't perfect and I know that we're, you know, fired up and we want more and who doesn't.
And we want to make sure that the policies are enacted and they are seen through and that we don't get into a you know what storm of more impeachments because that's what could come our way if the Democrats were to take over Congress.
I don't think they'll get the Senate, but you know, you know, I know.
And yet, you know what?
We live in a great country where despite all the insanity that you see from the media, look at that.
He still won, right?
He still won.
And I think that that is something to be grateful for, because the American people, you know, when push comes to shove they always get it right.
We always get it right.
We live in a great country.
We need to pass this great country on to every generation so that this freedom and this opportunity can continue for everyone.
If you haven't subscribed to the show, please make sure that you do do that now.
Subscribe and and hit the bell so you know when i'm here live.
I hope you have a wonderful Thanksgiving.
I can tell you I am so thankful for all of you.
We have grown this channel to over a million subs thanks to, well, my craziness to get on here live every day, even when we didn't have the microphone working.
So I, and your craziness and willingness to sit here and slug through it with me, right?
So like we're in it together, guys.
I thank God for you.
I thank God for this wonderful country that has afforded so many of us great opportunity.
And that's what it is, right?
It's not guaranteeing outcome.
It's guaranteeing that every kid has a chance to do something great.
and that you are never defined by your present, but you can move forward to the future.
That is one of the gifts that we have here that is original, that is totally American.
And because people were willing to make the sacrifices and take the chances that they took so many years ago.
So thank you to our founding fathers, to the pilgrims.
You know, I got the outfit on and everything today.
Thank you to you guys.
And let's keep making America great.
Have a very happy Thanksgiving.
And I'm going to see you here with a lot of content over the weekend.