December 16, 2025 • 35 mins
The John Kobylt Show Hour 3 (12/16) - Attorney Mark Geragos comes on the show to talk about a new lawsuit that has been filed on behalf on Palisades Fire victims. UCLA did a study that said the reservoirs would not have made a difference in fighting the January fires. More on the scandal surrounding the homeless shelter that was supposed to go on Ocean Ave. San Diego's school district has a form to change your gender and identity for students.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can't I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt Podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
We are on every day from one until four o'clock.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
After four o'clock, it's John Cobelt Show on demand, it's
the podcast on the iHeart app. We covered the Rob
and Michelle Reiner press conference about their murders live first
hour of the show. If you want to hear that,
and it's entirety. Nathan Hakman, the district attorney, leveled the
two first degree murder charges with the possible death penalty
(00:31):
on the table. And we also had Royal Oaks on
in the second hour to discuss the legal aspects of
you know, why is it first degree not second degree?
How manslaughter plea could be involved in this case? So
you want to hear all of that, it's the iHeart app.
John Cobelt's Show on Demand. Now onto another attorney, Mark Arragus.
(00:58):
Mark Arragos is getting into the Pacific Palisades case. He
has a homeowner who's filing a lawsuit against City of
La County of La LA's DWP and Mayor Karen Bass
over all the failures before, during, and after the fire.
Let's get Mark Garragos on how are you, Mark.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
I'm wonderful. How about you? How are you today?
Speaker 1 (01:21):
I'm doing well? What going on?
Speaker 3 (01:23):
What you're not kidding?
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Well, you're a client. What was his situation in the fire?
What happened to him?
Speaker 3 (01:31):
Well, it's one of these situations where at least at
first you thought, well, at least the structure was spared,
but then you see what's happened since then surrounding the area,
and what a disaster it's been, and then all of
the subsequent kind of looking at this thing, and it
(01:54):
just looked like it was a lights run and nobody
was home. In terms of minding the story here, I
don't even understand the gives credit to the Feds for
doing a report, give credit to the fire department, And
we're based in a fire station in downtown LA and
(02:15):
I've always paying attention to them, and they were early
money on all of the problems with the city and
what the city wasn't doing. And it's just a I
would say it was a comedy of airs, but it's
been a complete tragedy for everybody involved. Polis, which is
the mayor and them kind of dealing with it said,
(02:37):
you've documented better than anybody.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Yeah, I am still stunned, even after talking about this
for a year, that those those weather warnings were so
strong for you, five six days ahead, extreme fire warnings,
extreme wind warnings. They used all the apocalyptic language you
(02:59):
could find in the dictionary the National Weather Service did
in order to describe what potentially could happen. And I'm
not aware of any preparation meeting that anybody in the
LA government had to address what was gone.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
I don't even understand it. I mean, I really don't.
You You rely on the government for some basic functions,
and the idea is that they're supposed to protect you,
and it's almost as if they did everything possible to
not protect And that's just very disconcerting. And I'm looking
forward to the discovery in this case. I think the
(03:36):
discovery matty people on their own and requiring, you know,
the after reports and what was done in real time,
and the kinds of clearing palls that were done were ignored.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
You know, I got a lot of friends in the Palisades.
It's next door to me, and we were affected to
the extent that we lost our power and we couldn't
use the water. And then the thieves on our neighborhood
because there were no police. I mean, there's no power,
there's no water, there was no police. But we didn't
Our neighborhood didn't burn. We were a couple of miles away.
(04:09):
But I remember thinking in the middle of it, it's like, Wow,
this is a complete collapse of the government. You're really
on your own. And we had to hire a guy
who was somebody's electrician in the neighborhood, and he had
a pistol and we were paying him, along with a
couple of neighbors, one thousand dollars a day to stand
outside and shoot any of the looters that might come
(04:31):
on our property.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
That's what That's well, that was our reality.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
I like you, I was out to data adjacent and
we were evacuated. I my spent of anecdotal theory or
off the wall theory. Is the only reason that the
fire didn't jump and hit us is because JPL was
right there and they weren't going to let that burn.
But they be looting the home invasions immediately after, and
(04:57):
we did the same thing. All the neighbors banded together
a kind of are narrow and private police force in
order to police the neighborhood, and you start to realize
that the social contract is very, very fragile. And this
exposed exactly all of the problems with the government in
not being prepared. It's the one thing that they literally
(05:20):
were doing.
Speaker 1 (05:23):
Why do you think that is they don't care?
Speaker 3 (05:26):
I will, I think to some degree now I just
can't accept the fact that people don't care, and just
I don't think that that is it. I think that
I think when you say lazy, I think of it
as intellectually lazy. I think that it's that you have
to be prepared, you have to understand these things that
(05:49):
you have to have pe of systems and advicement was
obvious that there were no systems, or whatever systems were
in place were completely ignored. It's the intellectual lazy or
the system challenges.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
And everything failed, the preparation, the execution, and the reaction
to the fire afterwards, and on a state level and
county and city. I mean, everything failed, and I didn't
think that was possible.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Well, and you know the I often invoke Adam Corolla.
He's the longtime friend, one time the best partner of mine,
was invallible and has been documenting in his laws and
the predictions that he was making and they've all basically
come true. It's looked like kind of a profit in
some ways, saying when people understand the jump through again
(06:45):
a permit, what you have to do in order to
get todig navigate the governmental it's astonishing and it's played
out exactly that way. Here we are knocking on the
door of a year and where's the rebuild? As anything?
There just is. The non responsiveness is apalling, and it's
just I think people have to be held accountabus.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
So who do you want to talk to the most?
What departments or what officials do you want to depose
for your client's loss?
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Really, I really think I want to get into the
fire department and the mayor's office and the emergency response.
I want to find out who actually was responsible, who
didn't want the trigger so to speak on getting some
to your point, I mean not only preparation, but right
in the after, and that is exactly what we want
(07:36):
to find out. What I think we've kind of detailed
in the lawsuit as to what we see so far,
what we've toddled together from the various reports, and we'll
plan on doing an expansive discovery deep dive into this
and to make it like once we get through it
(07:58):
as we're doing it, But.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Why do your client decide to call you for an
individual lawsuit rather than join the thousands that are working
with the other attorneys.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Now, it's interesting because early on I was I did
what's called a nine to ten action for them because
they suspected that and others as well, that this was
a governmental failure, like you thought, and so we filed
what it called nine ten actions early on, which were denied.
Nine tens are the what the legislature is imposed a
(08:33):
duty that you file and you get denied doing almost
routinely by the governmental entities to hold them accountable they
I think because I'd got a history of the fulling
up against the government, whether it's for civil rights actions
or other things, and this one a very cost and
governmental failure. That's one of the things that attracted me
(08:56):
in new litigation.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
All right, Well, well, when you find things out, and
if you want to share anything from your investigations and depositions,
please always come on the air, because we're looking for
as much information as possible to explain why these people
did or didn't do everything. I mean I can't think
of one thing that any level of government did right
(09:18):
and did competently in the whole mess.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
And still take a look like, yeah, don't totally me
go take a look. It's wild when you look at it.
We're almost a year out or a couple of weeks
away from the year anniversary, and the devastation is still unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
All right, Mark, thanks for coming on, Thank you, Bye bye.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
All right, Mark Geragos, who's got a client who's suing
everybody La City County, the mayor, DWP over the damage
his house suffered from the fire. And when we come back,
would you believe this? UCLA has something called the Water
(10:06):
Resources Group, and the researchers have done their own study
on whether the reservoirs would have made a difference if
the one hundred and seventeen million gallon reservoir Sentienez Reservoir
in the Palace, would it have made a difference. It
was if it was full instead of bone dry empty.
(10:27):
You're not going to believe their answer. I'll tell you
about it we come back. You're listening to John Cobelt
on demand from KFI AM six forty. If you want
to follow us at John Cobilt Radio on social media
at John Cobelt Radio, and if you want to subscribe
to our YouTube channel, it's YouTube dot com slash at
(10:49):
John co Belt Show. A little bit different YouTube dot
com slash at John Cobelt Show to subscribe to the
YouTube channel where we're putting longer segments on, and then
it's at John Cobert You for everything else. The UCLA
has something called the Water Resources Group. It's researchers led
by Gregory Pierce, and almost within I think I mentioned this.
(11:14):
We had Rick Caruso on the day after the fire,
very shortly thereafter, and he said in passing and I
didn't even catch it, but he was talking. He already
identified all a lot of the stuff that had gone
wrong with the anticipation and execution of fighting the fire,
(11:35):
and he said something about the reservoirs were dry, and
I didn't know what that meant, and we just moved
on to something else, and then it turned out he
was talking about the Santienez Reservoir one hundred and seventeen
million gallons it's supposed to hold, and it was empty.
And that became a huge focal point of the anger
(11:56):
and the outrage because the La Times did a big
story detail how they drained it because the cover had
torn and it took them a year to replace. The
cover didn't cost very much money. It wasn't a difficult job.
It was just the inertia, the stupid laziness of government
(12:17):
workers at the DWP.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
I don't know else. We were just talking with Mark Erragos, like,
what is it?
Speaker 2 (12:22):
What is it with the government workers? Nobody prepared for this,
nobody executed. This was all doable, This was all preventable.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
What's wrong with you? People?
Speaker 2 (12:32):
When you get up in the morning you decide not
to do anything, but periodically the reservoir would come, you know,
be a debate point and people, you know whatever, plants
the best administration had online in the comments section.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
Let's say at the La Times.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
Well, the reservoir wouldn't have made a difference all the reservoir.
Of course, it would make a difference. And as I
talked to people involved in the fire, and I mentioned
the other day, I talked to a guy who prevented
his home and two other neighbors homes from burning because
he had two and a half inch hose and he
used I think swimming pool water and he kept the
(13:13):
roofs wet, and they survived the fire, where other homes
in the neighborhood did not. Two and a half inch
shows he'd had it because a fire had burned down
his family home back in the nineteen seventies when he
was a little kid, and so he always kept the
fire a hose on the property just in case. And
(13:40):
he said, nobody showed up to fight the fire, and
firefighters would say, well, we're out of water. We're out
of water. So now here comes Gregory Pierce, director of
the UCLA Water Resources Group, that wanted to decide whether
the intense focus on the water supply meant that the
dry high dance had uniquely hampered the Palisades firefight or
(14:04):
whether this happened all the time. And they claim that
the hydrants often sputter out because you lose pressure. You
have the burning homes hamorrhaging water. Right the pipes are
(14:24):
melting down and busting, and then there's too many fire
truck hoses and everybody else drawing on a limited supply.
And the report says fire hydrant performance in the Palisades
seems to represent the rule rather than the exception. The
only difference is that the hydrant performance did not make
(14:45):
the headlines of news stories of other fires. Even though
there's plenty of water available in the system, it's not
possible to pump enough water to the fire area all
at once to meet the flow rate demand. Even if
the Yes Santienez Reservoir had been full, the hydrants could
(15:05):
not have maintained pressure. I don't and that last quote
was from the state investigation. Now, that just makes no
sense to me. If everybody's using the water at the
same time and that reduces the water pressure. But if
(15:28):
you have one hundred and seventeen million gallons constantly flowing
into the system, it's going to extend the life of
their fire fighting capabilities.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
And if it is.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
The lack of water pressure, then how could Los Angeles
have for one hundred years, and we've had a number
of fires over the years. How could you have a
system that doesn't work when you need it most. How
could that be the standard fire hydrant system that we've
been living with all this time? How does that happen?
(16:11):
Nobody ever designed a better system to supply enough water
for a major fire. Nobody ever thought of it, Nobody
drew it up, nobody voted to pay for it.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
I don't understand this.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Well, then where would one hundred and seventeen million gallons go, right,
It would come out of the reservoir, it would go
through the system.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
They had three.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Million gallons available, three separate tanks that were full, and
they used that. And even if much of the town
would have burned anyway, they would alway, said somebody that
one hundred and seventeen million gallons would have saved somebody
a lot of somebody's.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
I'm just.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
The reservoir was there. It was built nineteen sixty four
specifically for a fire. So you're telling me they built
a reservoir. But it didn't matter if it was filled
or not. And it didn't matter if we had ten
reservoirs or twenty reservoirs. It didn't matter. All the fire
hydrants would have run dry anyway. None of that makes
sense to me. And if it did make sense, then
(17:37):
why didn't you get a different system. And of course,
if they had just set the fire crew and kept
it there from the January first fire, they would have
put out the re kindling right away, and it really
wouldn't matter how many if the hydrants worked, or if
the reservoir was full, it wouldn't matter. They would have
put out the fire right up there immediately. All right,
(18:02):
more coming up, We've got some. We've got a I've
been telling you about the Ocean Avenue mental mental patient buildings,
two of them, two mental patient buildings on Ocean Avenue
in Santa Monica that the city and the county tried
(18:24):
to sneak in without telling the residents and there was
a huge blowback. Well, the developer involved in the project
is speaking out. I'll tell you about it next. You're
listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
One to four o'clock.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
We're on live every day on KFI and on the
iHeart app streaming, and then after four o'clock we transformed
into a podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
John Cobelts Show on demand.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
You can hear what you missed, and we talked extensively
about the Rob and Michelle Reiner murder case, Nick Reiner
getting charged with two first degree murder counts from Nicknathan Hawkman,
and you listen to the first hour of our show,
you'll hear the Nathan Hackman press conference that we carried live,
and also a lot about Nick Reiner's life and all
(19:12):
the years on drugs and the eighteen rehabilitations and things
that he said which might have let him down the
drug road, the pressure he felt coming from somebody with
a really famous dad and a really famous grandfather, Robin
Carl Reiner.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
So we covered all that.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
We also had Oil Oaks on in the two o'clock
hour talking about the specific charges and why first degree
and not second degree murder could manslaughter end up coming
into the picture. So all that coming up in the
first two hours of the show, and you should hear
that on the podcast. Now, this situation in Santa Monica,
(19:51):
Ocean Avenue, which I'm very familiar with. It overlooks the
beach and the ocean. It's right across the street from
what was a beautiful, beautiful park called Pallasted Park. And
along Ocean Avenue there's residential homes. Eventually you get into
(20:12):
hotels and restaurants, but on the northern end it's residential homes.
And in that area they were going to place not one,
but two buildings that were going to house severely mentally
ill people, severely mentally ill homeless people. We're going to
(20:32):
be moved in I think about fifty of them between
the two buildings.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Imagine that.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
Imagine you live on those blocks or around the corner,
because all the side streets leading to Ocean Avenue and
the Ocean are mostly residential. Yeah, all residential. There's no
there's no commerce at all. And suddenly you got you
got fifty mentally ill homeless patients wandering around because, as
(21:05):
the former mayor Lenna ne Grete said, it's not a
locked facility, it's not a hospital. If they want to
wander off for lunch, if they want to go to
the park, they want to leave the program, nobody's forcing
them to stay. They can just leave for the day
and meander in the neighborhood and have a psychic have
a psychosis break outside. These are like forty fifty people
(21:29):
who can all have psychotic breaks from reality at any
given moment, and they'd be wandering in this residential neighborhood
across from the nice park, across from the beach in
the ocean. Who did this, Well, we've gone through the
whole mechanism. The thing is, nobody told you know. It
was the city, it was the county, It was the
(21:51):
Saint Joseph's Hospital, it was you know some nonprofit guy
and I'm going to tell you about him in a second.
But but nobody, nobody told the residents. Residents found out,
they completely freaked out, and all the politicians ran for cover,
but they knew what was going on. Now here's a
central character in this that we have not spoken about yet. Leo.
Speaker 1 (22:15):
Who's still Nikoff? Who's still Nikoff?
Speaker 2 (22:18):
P U s t I l n I ko V
Pusta Milcoff. I'm going to call him Leo. Leo has
talked with the Westside Current dot com and admitted that
they made mistakes in rolling out this project, and he's
blaming the bureaucracy that kept information reaching the public. How
(22:39):
about this, Leo, It's not about the delay in information.
It's about this way this idea was even even conceived,
even considered, let alone well on the way to implementation
without anyone's knowledge.
Speaker 1 (22:54):
How about this?
Speaker 2 (22:56):
No mental health facilities in residential neighborhoods, No severely mentally
ill homeless people in residential neighborhoods, and they're not even
locked down. How about no? Never, don't even think about it.
You're out of your mind. Who the hell are you now?
(23:16):
That's expensive, real estate. You're right near the ocean. That's
millions of dollars in real estate. And you get fifty
severely mentally ill patients allowed to run out on the loose.
Speaker 1 (23:31):
No, no, no.
Speaker 4 (23:33):
Never, And that's got to be the uh yes, NIMBYs.
Not in my backyard, not in my front yard, not
on my block, not within ten miles of me, out
out and somebody's got to get that through the thick empties.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Well can they be thick and empty at the same time. Yeah,
their skulls are made a cement block, and inside the
cement block is dead air. And I'm talking about the
city council. I'm talking about this County Supervisor Lindsay Horvath.
She is a disaster and she claimed she was blindsided
(24:14):
by this that the Department of Mental Health didn't inform
her office about the project until the funding had been secured.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
Oh stop it. How many people.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Know about a project where a guy comes in and
he goes, you know, I'm going to run two buildings
fifty mental patients, fifty severely ill mental patients, and you
know I'm taking guests, I'm taking tax money here. Yeah,
a lot of people knew about it, and they also
knew the best thing is to try to get this
jammed in, move the people into these two buildings. It
(24:47):
would make it more difficult to get rid of them.
Speaker 1 (24:51):
You know, ask.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
Ask for forgiveness, that permission. It's the oldest game that
every little kid learns. That's what they were doing. And
Leo the developer, he said, he understands why they objected.
The location became public about a month before its launch.
He said he and his partners were talking with the
(25:15):
city for a six month period. He said, at any
point officials had the opportunity to notify the public, so
that nobody in Santa Monica City government ever told the public.
The city council, no, whoever runs all these idiotic departments
(25:38):
or these commissions that allow this sort of thing, nobody knew,
or no they knew. Nobody told. Nobody told because they
knew every single resident would hate this, hate it. This
stuff should be banned forever from residential neighborhoods.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
And any variation on it.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
No drug rehab centers, no alcohol all centers, no homeless shelters,
temporary homeless shelters, permit and homeless shelter shelters, mental health,
drug treatment, all of it. None of it in residential neighborhoods.
Not for five minutes. No, this guy Leo was still
in the cough has owned and operated twenty one buildings
(26:22):
for the last year under the skid Row Housing Trust.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
So this guy.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Is This guy's running some kind of homeless empire. And
he thought using the Ocean Avenue properties was a good
idea because they need mental health and addiction services. Yeah,
but not in a residential area, he says, on skid
(26:52):
Row there's a shortage of it. And he said, would
have been nice to open building in downtown, but there's
already a lot of those services.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
In that area.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
It makes it difficult to get projects funded. I don't
know what that means. Why would it get Why because there's.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
So many other.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Homeless mental health service buildings there? Why would it be
hard to get it funded? And the bottom line is,
who gives a crap about your problems? Then go find
another remote area or some industrial area or the desert
or somewhere in the Angelus mountains, or maybe put them
all on a boat and tow them out to see
(27:35):
and do the treatment there.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Always only you know, we really.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
Can't do this, and we really can't go there, and
we've got nobody cares about your problems. You brought you
wanted to bring fifty mental patients to my neighborhood. How
fast can I kick you in the ass and get
you out of town?
Speaker 1 (28:00):
Nobody? This is the plan.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Of course, the Santa Monica City Council and the Santa
Monica bureaucrats are all for this because they believe that
people who have jobs and own homes aught to be
punished for their success, and they have to take in
their fair share of drug addicts and mental patients and
homeless people. That it should be spread equally throughout the districts.
(28:24):
This idea has been around for years in LA and
in La County. It's part of the progressive ideology that
we all have to share. It's like, no, we don't
have to share in this. No, I don't want this. No,
there should be designated areas in the city where you
take care of it. Let all the mental patients live together
on the same block and they can all scream and
howl at the moon and entertain each other. Not here,
(28:47):
not ever, fifty of them, and they're not locked in.
They're not locked in, so they could wander into the
restaurants while you're trying to have lunch. They could bother
your kids while you're sitting in the park on a blanket,
playing with your two year olds, while you're walking your dog.
(29:09):
You can have fifty of these people running around. Lindsey Horvath,
she ought to be the first one put in one
of these mental health institutions, along with almost everybody on
the Santa Monica City Council and the county supervisors, all
of them. This is really avirid behavior. All right, more
(29:31):
coming up. You're listening to John Cobel on demand from
KFI A six forty. I just have a few minutes,
but I wanted to mention this. Maybe we'll get into
more detail tomorrow. There is a watchdog group called Defending
Education and they have gone through the website of San
(29:52):
Diego Unified School District. They went to the Equity and
Belonging section and what you'll find there contains a name
and gender identity change form for students. You can change
your name and you could change your gender identity. That's
(30:13):
on the resources page saying that students have a right
to privacy and that includes the right to keep private
their transgender status or their gender non conforming presentation at school,
which this adds up to saying parents have no right
to know you. See you fill out this forum and
(30:35):
they think that gives some special rights to the kids,
and nobody at the school can inform the parents. Although
does that ever work? Don't the parents figure it out?
I mean, if you're a guy who's telling everybody at
school that you're a girl and you've got a new
(30:55):
name and a new gender and a new look, somebody's
calling mom and dad, I don't know how you pull
that off. According to this, students have the right to
openly discuss and express their gender related identity and expression
at school. See if you think this stuff is over,
it's not over. It may be laying dormant. And they
(31:20):
get to decide when, with whom and how to share
private information. You're supposed to put your legal name, your
identification number that you have at the school, and the
student's legal sex, including first names.
Speaker 1 (31:37):
Oh jeez, pronouns. I mean, I really thought that was dead.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
When I see that on somebody's email, it's like, oh
my god, this person must be a headache. And on
the youth advocacy page, there's a slideshow lgbtq IA plus
terminology a slide that has listed twenty eight sexual orientations
and nine gender identities nine stop nine gender identities, transgender,
(32:14):
cisgender female, sis, gender male, non binary, demo girl. What's
a demo girl? I never heard of this. That's a gender,
a gender. It is not a gender. A demo girl,
a demo boy, gender fluid. I've heard some of these terms,
some of these I never heard of. What the hell
(32:36):
do they mean? You could be a third gender person,
You could be an a gender person. Oh here, you're
gonna say a demi girl or demi boy, someone who's
is defined as someone who partially identifies as a girl
or woman, a demi boy, someone who partially identifies as
(32:57):
a boy or man, partially a boy and partially what else?
Speaker 1 (33:02):
And which part of you and what part of the
day or what days of the week.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
The demi prefix is meant to communicate the belief that
gender is partial, not whole, and that the other part
of their gender identity can be anything but this is
like multiple personality disorder. A third gender, according to the slides,
is someone who identifies with a gender completely different from
the binary genders. Twenty eight sexual orientations. Wait a second,
(33:33):
hold on, now, I see the thing is they're still
they're still promoting this at the San Diego Unified School
District twenty eight Sexual Orientations, which includes androsexual, panoramic sexual,
(33:54):
gray sexual, biromantic, homosexual.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
How does anybody think of this? This is this is
so baffling and absurd. I don't are.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Students still talking about this stuff because I think it
was like a craze for a while, because it gave
you social status, and then, like all crazes, all fads,
that kind of faded away, and you look back at
it and go, did we really do that?
Speaker 1 (34:32):
Did we really?
Speaker 2 (34:33):
Did we really walk around describing ourselves this way? What
do you think all these people are going to be
like when they're forty? You think anybody's going to be
doing this stuff when you're you're when you're grown up
and you got a career and you got a family,
and you got a house, and you got mortgage payments
and car payments, and you're paying half of your salary
and taxes, you're gonna be spending around telling your your
(34:55):
buddies on on the weekend. It's like, you know, I'm
a demi boy, Hey, yeah, yeah, all right, We've got
Conway coming up, and Michael Krozer has the news live
in the KFI twenty four hour news run. Hey, you've
been listening to the John Covelt Show podcast. You can
always hear the show live on KFI Am six forty
from one to four pm every Monday through Friday, and
(35:17):
of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
Can't I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt Podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
We are on every day from one until four o'clock.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
After four o'clock, it's John Cobelt Show on demand, it's
the podcast on the iHeart app. We covered the Rob
and Michelle Reiner press conference about their murders live first
hour of the show. If you want to hear that,
and it's entirety. Nathan Hakman, the district attorney, leveled the
two first degree murder charges with the possible death penalty
(00:31):
on the table. And we also had Royal Oaks on
in the second hour to discuss the legal aspects of
you know, why is it first degree not second degree?
How manslaughter plea could be involved in this case? So
you want to hear all of that, it's the iHeart app.
John Cobelt's Show on Demand. Now onto another attorney, Mark Arragus.
(00:58):
Mark Arragos is getting into the Pacific Palisades case. He
has a homeowner who's filing a lawsuit against City of
La County of La LA's DWP and Mayor Karen Bass
over all the failures before, during, and after the fire.
Let's get Mark Garragos on how are you, Mark.
Speaker 3 (01:18):
I'm wonderful. How about you? How are you today?
Speaker 1 (01:21):
I'm doing well? What going on?
Speaker 3 (01:23):
What you're not kidding?
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Well, you're a client. What was his situation in the fire?
What happened to him?
Speaker 3 (01:31):
Well, it's one of these situations where at least at
first you thought, well, at least the structure was spared,
but then you see what's happened since then surrounding the area,
and what a disaster it's been, and then all of
the subsequent kind of looking at this thing, and it
(01:54):
just looked like it was a lights run and nobody
was home. In terms of minding the story here, I
don't even understand the gives credit to the Feds for
doing a report, give credit to the fire department, And
we're based in a fire station in downtown LA and
(02:15):
I've always paying attention to them, and they were early
money on all of the problems with the city and
what the city wasn't doing. And it's just a I
would say it was a comedy of airs, but it's
been a complete tragedy for everybody involved. Polis, which is
the mayor and them kind of dealing with it said,
(02:37):
you've documented better than anybody.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Yeah, I am still stunned, even after talking about this
for a year, that those those weather warnings were so
strong for you, five six days ahead, extreme fire warnings,
extreme wind warnings. They used all the apocalyptic language you
(02:59):
could find in the dictionary the National Weather Service did
in order to describe what potentially could happen. And I'm
not aware of any preparation meeting that anybody in the
LA government had to address what was gone.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
I don't even understand it. I mean, I really don't.
You You rely on the government for some basic functions,
and the idea is that they're supposed to protect you,
and it's almost as if they did everything possible to
not protect And that's just very disconcerting. And I'm looking
forward to the discovery in this case. I think the
(03:36):
discovery matty people on their own and requiring, you know,
the after reports and what was done in real time,
and the kinds of clearing palls that were done were ignored.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
You know, I got a lot of friends in the Palisades.
It's next door to me, and we were affected to
the extent that we lost our power and we couldn't
use the water. And then the thieves on our neighborhood
because there were no police. I mean, there's no power,
there's no water, there was no police. But we didn't
Our neighborhood didn't burn. We were a couple of miles away.
(04:09):
But I remember thinking in the middle of it, it's like, Wow,
this is a complete collapse of the government. You're really
on your own. And we had to hire a guy
who was somebody's electrician in the neighborhood, and he had
a pistol and we were paying him, along with a
couple of neighbors, one thousand dollars a day to stand
outside and shoot any of the looters that might come
(04:31):
on our property.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
That's what That's well, that was our reality.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
I like you, I was out to data adjacent and
we were evacuated. I my spent of anecdotal theory or
off the wall theory. Is the only reason that the
fire didn't jump and hit us is because JPL was
right there and they weren't going to let that burn.
But they be looting the home invasions immediately after, and
(04:57):
we did the same thing. All the neighbors banded together
a kind of are narrow and private police force in
order to police the neighborhood, and you start to realize
that the social contract is very, very fragile. And this
exposed exactly all of the problems with the government in
not being prepared. It's the one thing that they literally
(05:20):
were doing.
Speaker 1 (05:23):
Why do you think that is they don't care?
Speaker 3 (05:26):
I will, I think to some degree now I just
can't accept the fact that people don't care, and just
I don't think that that is it. I think that
I think when you say lazy, I think of it
as intellectually lazy. I think that it's that you have
to be prepared, you have to understand these things that
(05:49):
you have to have pe of systems and advicement was
obvious that there were no systems, or whatever systems were
in place were completely ignored. It's the intellectual lazy or
the system challenges.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
And everything failed, the preparation, the execution, and the reaction
to the fire afterwards, and on a state level and
county and city. I mean, everything failed, and I didn't
think that was possible.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
Well, and you know the I often invoke Adam Corolla.
He's the longtime friend, one time the best partner of mine,
was invallible and has been documenting in his laws and
the predictions that he was making and they've all basically
come true. It's looked like kind of a profit in
some ways, saying when people understand the jump through again
(06:45):
a permit, what you have to do in order to
get todig navigate the governmental it's astonishing and it's played
out exactly that way. Here we are knocking on the
door of a year and where's the rebuild? As anything?
There just is. The non responsiveness is apalling, and it's
just I think people have to be held accountabus.
Speaker 2 (07:07):
So who do you want to talk to the most?
What departments or what officials do you want to depose
for your client's loss?
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Really, I really think I want to get into the
fire department and the mayor's office and the emergency response.
I want to find out who actually was responsible, who
didn't want the trigger so to speak on getting some
to your point, I mean not only preparation, but right
in the after, and that is exactly what we want
(07:36):
to find out. What I think we've kind of detailed
in the lawsuit as to what we see so far,
what we've toddled together from the various reports, and we'll
plan on doing an expansive discovery deep dive into this
and to make it like once we get through it
(07:58):
as we're doing it, But.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Why do your client decide to call you for an
individual lawsuit rather than join the thousands that are working
with the other attorneys.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Now, it's interesting because early on I was I did
what's called a nine to ten action for them because
they suspected that and others as well, that this was
a governmental failure, like you thought, and so we filed
what it called nine ten actions early on, which were denied.
Nine tens are the what the legislature is imposed a
(08:33):
duty that you file and you get denied doing almost
routinely by the governmental entities to hold them accountable they
I think because I'd got a history of the fulling
up against the government, whether it's for civil rights actions
or other things, and this one a very cost and
governmental failure. That's one of the things that attracted me
(08:56):
in new litigation.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
All right, Well, well, when you find things out, and
if you want to share anything from your investigations and depositions,
please always come on the air, because we're looking for
as much information as possible to explain why these people
did or didn't do everything. I mean I can't think
of one thing that any level of government did right
(09:18):
and did competently in the whole mess.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
And still take a look like, yeah, don't totally me
go take a look. It's wild when you look at it.
We're almost a year out or a couple of weeks
away from the year anniversary, and the devastation is still unbelievable.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
All right, Mark, thanks for coming on, Thank you, Bye bye.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
All right, Mark Geragos, who's got a client who's suing
everybody La City County, the mayor, DWP over the damage
his house suffered from the fire. And when we come back,
would you believe this? UCLA has something called the Water
(10:06):
Resources Group, and the researchers have done their own study
on whether the reservoirs would have made a difference if
the one hundred and seventeen million gallon reservoir Sentienez Reservoir
in the Palace, would it have made a difference. It
was if it was full instead of bone dry empty.
(10:27):
You're not going to believe their answer. I'll tell you
about it we come back. You're listening to John Cobelt
on demand from KFI AM six forty. If you want
to follow us at John Cobilt Radio on social media
at John Cobelt Radio, and if you want to subscribe
to our YouTube channel, it's YouTube dot com slash at
(10:49):
John co Belt Show. A little bit different YouTube dot
com slash at John Cobelt Show to subscribe to the
YouTube channel where we're putting longer segments on, and then
it's at John Cobert You for everything else. The UCLA
has something called the Water Resources Group. It's researchers led
by Gregory Pierce, and almost within I think I mentioned this.
(11:14):
We had Rick Caruso on the day after the fire,
very shortly thereafter, and he said in passing and I
didn't even catch it, but he was talking. He already
identified all a lot of the stuff that had gone
wrong with the anticipation and execution of fighting the fire,
(11:35):
and he said something about the reservoirs were dry, and
I didn't know what that meant, and we just moved
on to something else, and then it turned out he
was talking about the Santienez Reservoir one hundred and seventeen
million gallons it's supposed to hold, and it was empty.
And that became a huge focal point of the anger
(11:56):
and the outrage because the La Times did a big
story detail how they drained it because the cover had
torn and it took them a year to replace. The
cover didn't cost very much money. It wasn't a difficult job.
It was just the inertia, the stupid laziness of government
(12:17):
workers at the DWP.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
I don't know else. We were just talking with Mark Erragos, like,
what is it?
Speaker 2 (12:22):
What is it with the government workers? Nobody prepared for this,
nobody executed. This was all doable, This was all preventable.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
What's wrong with you? People?
Speaker 2 (12:32):
When you get up in the morning you decide not
to do anything, but periodically the reservoir would come, you know,
be a debate point and people, you know whatever, plants
the best administration had online in the comments section.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
Let's say at the La Times.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
Well, the reservoir wouldn't have made a difference all the reservoir.
Of course, it would make a difference. And as I
talked to people involved in the fire, and I mentioned
the other day, I talked to a guy who prevented
his home and two other neighbors homes from burning because
he had two and a half inch hose and he
used I think swimming pool water and he kept the
(13:13):
roofs wet, and they survived the fire, where other homes
in the neighborhood did not. Two and a half inch
shows he'd had it because a fire had burned down
his family home back in the nineteen seventies when he
was a little kid, and so he always kept the
fire a hose on the property just in case. And
(13:40):
he said, nobody showed up to fight the fire, and
firefighters would say, well, we're out of water. We're out
of water. So now here comes Gregory Pierce, director of
the UCLA Water Resources Group, that wanted to decide whether
the intense focus on the water supply meant that the
dry high dance had uniquely hampered the Palisades firefight or
(14:04):
whether this happened all the time. And they claim that
the hydrants often sputter out because you lose pressure. You
have the burning homes hamorrhaging water. Right the pipes are
(14:24):
melting down and busting, and then there's too many fire
truck hoses and everybody else drawing on a limited supply.
And the report says fire hydrant performance in the Palisades
seems to represent the rule rather than the exception. The
only difference is that the hydrant performance did not make
(14:45):
the headlines of news stories of other fires. Even though
there's plenty of water available in the system, it's not
possible to pump enough water to the fire area all
at once to meet the flow rate demand. Even if
the Yes Santienez Reservoir had been full, the hydrants could
(15:05):
not have maintained pressure. I don't and that last quote
was from the state investigation. Now, that just makes no
sense to me. If everybody's using the water at the
same time and that reduces the water pressure. But if
(15:28):
you have one hundred and seventeen million gallons constantly flowing
into the system, it's going to extend the life of
their fire fighting capabilities.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
And if it is.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
The lack of water pressure, then how could Los Angeles
have for one hundred years, and we've had a number
of fires over the years. How could you have a
system that doesn't work when you need it most. How
could that be the standard fire hydrant system that we've
been living with all this time? How does that happen?
(16:11):
Nobody ever designed a better system to supply enough water
for a major fire. Nobody ever thought of it, Nobody
drew it up, nobody voted to pay for it.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
I don't understand this.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Well, then where would one hundred and seventeen million gallons go, right,
It would come out of the reservoir, it would go
through the system.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
They had three.
Speaker 2 (16:45):
Million gallons available, three separate tanks that were full, and
they used that. And even if much of the town
would have burned anyway, they would alway, said somebody that
one hundred and seventeen million gallons would have saved somebody
a lot of somebody's.
Speaker 1 (17:09):
I'm just.
Speaker 2 (17:12):
The reservoir was there. It was built nineteen sixty four
specifically for a fire. So you're telling me they built
a reservoir. But it didn't matter if it was filled
or not. And it didn't matter if we had ten
reservoirs or twenty reservoirs. It didn't matter. All the fire
hydrants would have run dry anyway. None of that makes
sense to me. And if it did make sense, then
(17:37):
why didn't you get a different system. And of course,
if they had just set the fire crew and kept
it there from the January first fire, they would have
put out the re kindling right away, and it really
wouldn't matter how many if the hydrants worked, or if
the reservoir was full, it wouldn't matter. They would have
put out the fire right up there immediately. All right,
(18:02):
more coming up, We've got some. We've got a I've
been telling you about the Ocean Avenue mental mental patient buildings,
two of them, two mental patient buildings on Ocean Avenue
in Santa Monica that the city and the county tried
(18:24):
to sneak in without telling the residents and there was
a huge blowback. Well, the developer involved in the project
is speaking out. I'll tell you about it next. You're
listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
One to four o'clock.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
We're on live every day on KFI and on the
iHeart app streaming, and then after four o'clock we transformed
into a podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
John Cobelts Show on demand.
Speaker 2 (18:49):
You can hear what you missed, and we talked extensively
about the Rob and Michelle Reiner murder case, Nick Reiner
getting charged with two first degree murder counts from Nicknathan Hawkman,
and you listen to the first hour of our show,
you'll hear the Nathan Hackman press conference that we carried live,
and also a lot about Nick Reiner's life and all
(19:12):
the years on drugs and the eighteen rehabilitations and things
that he said which might have let him down the
drug road, the pressure he felt coming from somebody with
a really famous dad and a really famous grandfather, Robin
Carl Reiner.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
So we covered all that.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
We also had Oil Oaks on in the two o'clock
hour talking about the specific charges and why first degree
and not second degree murder could manslaughter end up coming
into the picture. So all that coming up in the
first two hours of the show, and you should hear
that on the podcast. Now, this situation in Santa Monica,
(19:51):
Ocean Avenue, which I'm very familiar with. It overlooks the
beach and the ocean. It's right across the street from
what was a beautiful, beautiful park called Pallasted Park. And
along Ocean Avenue there's residential homes. Eventually you get into
(20:12):
hotels and restaurants, but on the northern end it's residential homes.
And in that area they were going to place not one,
but two buildings that were going to house severely mentally
ill people, severely mentally ill homeless people. We're going to
(20:32):
be moved in I think about fifty of them between
the two buildings.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
Imagine that.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
Imagine you live on those blocks or around the corner,
because all the side streets leading to Ocean Avenue and
the Ocean are mostly residential. Yeah, all residential. There's no
there's no commerce at all. And suddenly you got you
got fifty mentally ill homeless patients wandering around because, as
(21:05):
the former mayor Lenna ne Grete said, it's not a
locked facility, it's not a hospital. If they want to
wander off for lunch, if they want to go to
the park, they want to leave the program, nobody's forcing
them to stay. They can just leave for the day
and meander in the neighborhood and have a psychic have
a psychosis break outside. These are like forty fifty people
(21:29):
who can all have psychotic breaks from reality at any
given moment, and they'd be wandering in this residential neighborhood
across from the nice park, across from the beach in
the ocean. Who did this, Well, we've gone through the
whole mechanism. The thing is, nobody told you know. It
was the city, it was the county, It was the
(21:51):
Saint Joseph's Hospital, it was you know some nonprofit guy
and I'm going to tell you about him in a second.
But but nobody, nobody told the residents. Residents found out,
they completely freaked out, and all the politicians ran for cover,
but they knew what was going on. Now here's a
central character in this that we have not spoken about yet. Leo.
Speaker 1 (22:15):
Who's still Nikoff? Who's still Nikoff?
Speaker 2 (22:18):
P U s t I l n I ko V
Pusta Milcoff. I'm going to call him Leo. Leo has
talked with the Westside Current dot com and admitted that
they made mistakes in rolling out this project, and he's
blaming the bureaucracy that kept information reaching the public. How
(22:39):
about this, Leo, It's not about the delay in information.
It's about this way this idea was even even conceived,
even considered, let alone well on the way to implementation
without anyone's knowledge.
Speaker 1 (22:54):
How about this?
Speaker 2 (22:56):
No mental health facilities in residential neighborhoods, No severely mentally
ill homeless people in residential neighborhoods, and they're not even
locked down. How about no? Never, don't even think about it.
You're out of your mind. Who the hell are you now?
(23:16):
That's expensive, real estate. You're right near the ocean. That's
millions of dollars in real estate. And you get fifty
severely mentally ill patients allowed to run out on the loose.
Speaker 1 (23:31):
No, no, no.
Speaker 4 (23:33):
Never, And that's got to be the uh yes, NIMBYs.
Not in my backyard, not in my front yard, not
on my block, not within ten miles of me, out
out and somebody's got to get that through the thick empties.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
Well can they be thick and empty at the same time. Yeah,
their skulls are made a cement block, and inside the
cement block is dead air. And I'm talking about the
city council. I'm talking about this County Supervisor Lindsay Horvath.
She is a disaster and she claimed she was blindsided
(24:14):
by this that the Department of Mental Health didn't inform
her office about the project until the funding had been secured.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
Oh stop it. How many people.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Know about a project where a guy comes in and
he goes, you know, I'm going to run two buildings
fifty mental patients, fifty severely ill mental patients, and you
know I'm taking guests, I'm taking tax money here. Yeah,
a lot of people knew about it, and they also
knew the best thing is to try to get this
jammed in, move the people into these two buildings. It
(24:47):
would make it more difficult to get rid of them.
Speaker 1 (24:51):
You know, ask.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
Ask for forgiveness, that permission. It's the oldest game that
every little kid learns. That's what they were doing. And
Leo the developer, he said, he understands why they objected.
The location became public about a month before its launch.
He said he and his partners were talking with the
(25:15):
city for a six month period. He said, at any
point officials had the opportunity to notify the public, so
that nobody in Santa Monica City government ever told the public.
The city council, no, whoever runs all these idiotic departments
(25:38):
or these commissions that allow this sort of thing, nobody knew,
or no they knew. Nobody told. Nobody told because they
knew every single resident would hate this, hate it. This
stuff should be banned forever from residential neighborhoods.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
And any variation on it.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
No drug rehab centers, no alcohol all centers, no homeless shelters,
temporary homeless shelters, permit and homeless shelter shelters, mental health,
drug treatment, all of it. None of it in residential neighborhoods.
Not for five minutes. No, this guy Leo was still
in the cough has owned and operated twenty one buildings
(26:22):
for the last year under the skid Row Housing Trust.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
So this guy.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Is This guy's running some kind of homeless empire. And
he thought using the Ocean Avenue properties was a good
idea because they need mental health and addiction services. Yeah,
but not in a residential area, he says, on skid
(26:52):
Row there's a shortage of it. And he said, would
have been nice to open building in downtown, but there's
already a lot of those services.
Speaker 1 (27:03):
In that area.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
It makes it difficult to get projects funded. I don't
know what that means. Why would it get Why because there's.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
So many other.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Homeless mental health service buildings there? Why would it be
hard to get it funded? And the bottom line is,
who gives a crap about your problems? Then go find
another remote area or some industrial area or the desert
or somewhere in the Angelus mountains, or maybe put them
all on a boat and tow them out to see
(27:35):
and do the treatment there.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
Always only you know, we really.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
Can't do this, and we really can't go there, and
we've got nobody cares about your problems. You brought you
wanted to bring fifty mental patients to my neighborhood. How
fast can I kick you in the ass and get
you out of town?
Speaker 1 (28:00):
Nobody? This is the plan.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Of course, the Santa Monica City Council and the Santa
Monica bureaucrats are all for this because they believe that
people who have jobs and own homes aught to be
punished for their success, and they have to take in
their fair share of drug addicts and mental patients and
homeless people. That it should be spread equally throughout the districts.
(28:24):
This idea has been around for years in LA and
in La County. It's part of the progressive ideology that
we all have to share. It's like, no, we don't
have to share in this. No, I don't want this. No,
there should be designated areas in the city where you
take care of it. Let all the mental patients live together
on the same block and they can all scream and
howl at the moon and entertain each other. Not here,
(28:47):
not ever, fifty of them, and they're not locked in.
They're not locked in, so they could wander into the
restaurants while you're trying to have lunch. They could bother
your kids while you're sitting in the park on a blanket,
playing with your two year olds, while you're walking your dog.
(29:09):
You can have fifty of these people running around. Lindsey Horvath,
she ought to be the first one put in one
of these mental health institutions, along with almost everybody on
the Santa Monica City Council and the county supervisors, all
of them. This is really avirid behavior. All right, more
(29:31):
coming up. You're listening to John Cobel on demand from
KFI A six forty. I just have a few minutes,
but I wanted to mention this. Maybe we'll get into
more detail tomorrow. There is a watchdog group called Defending
Education and they have gone through the website of San
(29:52):
Diego Unified School District. They went to the Equity and
Belonging section and what you'll find there contains a name
and gender identity change form for students. You can change
your name and you could change your gender identity. That's
(30:13):
on the resources page saying that students have a right
to privacy and that includes the right to keep private
their transgender status or their gender non conforming presentation at school,
which this adds up to saying parents have no right
to know you. See you fill out this forum and
(30:35):
they think that gives some special rights to the kids,
and nobody at the school can inform the parents. Although
does that ever work? Don't the parents figure it out?
I mean, if you're a guy who's telling everybody at
school that you're a girl and you've got a new
(30:55):
name and a new gender and a new look, somebody's
calling mom and dad, I don't know how you pull
that off. According to this, students have the right to
openly discuss and express their gender related identity and expression
at school. See if you think this stuff is over,
it's not over. It may be laying dormant. And they
(31:20):
get to decide when, with whom and how to share
private information. You're supposed to put your legal name, your
identification number that you have at the school, and the
student's legal sex, including first names.
Speaker 1 (31:37):
Oh jeez, pronouns. I mean, I really thought that was dead.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
When I see that on somebody's email, it's like, oh
my god, this person must be a headache. And on
the youth advocacy page, there's a slideshow lgbtq IA plus
terminology a slide that has listed twenty eight sexual orientations
and nine gender identities nine stop nine gender identities, transgender,
(32:14):
cisgender female, sis, gender male, non binary, demo girl. What's
a demo girl? I never heard of this. That's a gender,
a gender. It is not a gender. A demo girl,
a demo boy, gender fluid. I've heard some of these terms,
some of these I never heard of. What the hell
(32:36):
do they mean? You could be a third gender person,
You could be an a gender person. Oh here, you're
gonna say a demi girl or demi boy, someone who's
is defined as someone who partially identifies as a girl
or woman, a demi boy, someone who partially identifies as
(32:57):
a boy or man, partially a boy and partially what else?
Speaker 1 (33:02):
And which part of you and what part of the
day or what days of the week.
Speaker 2 (33:09):
The demi prefix is meant to communicate the belief that
gender is partial, not whole, and that the other part
of their gender identity can be anything but this is
like multiple personality disorder. A third gender, according to the slides,
is someone who identifies with a gender completely different from
the binary genders. Twenty eight sexual orientations. Wait a second,
(33:33):
hold on, now, I see the thing is they're still
they're still promoting this at the San Diego Unified School
District twenty eight Sexual Orientations, which includes androsexual, panoramic sexual,
(33:54):
gray sexual, biromantic, homosexual.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
How does anybody think of this? This is this is
so baffling and absurd. I don't are.
Speaker 2 (34:18):
Students still talking about this stuff because I think it
was like a craze for a while, because it gave
you social status, and then, like all crazes, all fads,
that kind of faded away, and you look back at
it and go, did we really do that?
Speaker 1 (34:32):
Did we really?
Speaker 2 (34:33):
Did we really walk around describing ourselves this way? What
do you think all these people are going to be
like when they're forty? You think anybody's going to be
doing this stuff when you're you're when you're grown up
and you got a career and you got a family,
and you got a house, and you got mortgage payments
and car payments, and you're paying half of your salary
and taxes, you're gonna be spending around telling your your
(34:55):
buddies on on the weekend. It's like, you know, I'm
a demi boy, Hey, yeah, yeah, all right, We've got
Conway coming up, and Michael Krozer has the news live
in the KFI twenty four hour news run. Hey, you've
been listening to the John Covelt Show podcast. You can
always hear the show live on KFI Am six forty
from one to four pm every Monday through Friday, and
(35:17):
of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!