March 4, 2026 • 29 mins
The John Kobylt Show Hour 3 (03/04) - Attorney and Pacific Palisades resident Saied Kashani comes on the show to give his reaction to Janisse Quiñones resigning as the head of LADWP. More on David Allen Funston. Peter Breen comes on the show to talk about the US Supreme Court siding with parents in a lawsuit to overturn California's ban th "forced outing" of students.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Caf I Am six forty. You're listening to the John
Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio app. She's gone, She's gone,
She's out. Deenizez thrown to the wolves. But the Boozella's singing.
(00:26):
All the sharing is about Jenise Kenonia is the head
of the DWP. She has left her office. I think
she got a good hard shove from Karen Bass, who's
running for reelection. This is John Cobelt Show I AM
six forty more stimulating talk radio. We're on from three
to six every day and after six o'clock John Cobelt
(00:46):
Show on demand. It's the podcast and we spent quite
some time at the beginning of the show celebrating kenon
Ya's leaving. We are now going to continue with Sayed Kashani.
He's an attorney. We've had him on the show quite
a bit over the last year. He lost his house
in the Palisades fire and Canuonias was famous for never
(01:08):
filling up the reservoir, the Sanienez Reservoir one one hundred
and seventeen million gallons, not a drop, and she also
had over a thousand busted fire hydrants and she never
turned off the electric power when it went through the
electric lines the night of the fire, and then eventually
the power poles fell, the lines hit the brush, and
(01:30):
you had more fires spreading, Sayad Kashani, welcome, How are you.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
Well? Felling better than a year ago?
Speaker 3 (01:39):
You remember? Go ahead?
Speaker 2 (01:44):
I remember, mister Cobolt. You invited me on your show
a year ago after I I appeared before the Department
of Water and Power Commissioners, and one year ago I
asked them not even to ask Quinonos to resign, but
just to put her on lead while they conducted an investigation.
And here a year later, she's out on her ear.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Carently, yeah, she was hired, and we played some old
clips of her, and she was very excited about the
social justice that the DWP was involved in. She was
most attracted to the job because of their equity policies.
I have never heard her say anything about the fire,
the empty reservoir, the electrical lines that night, the fire, hydrants.
(02:30):
You went to some of these DWP meetings, did you
ever hear her discuss anything of any significance?
Speaker 2 (02:38):
No? No, And I'll tell you something else. After the
fire and the losses were filed, she wasn't even allowed
to say anything. I have video of her that shows
very clearly she was given the script in with big letters,
double space, and just read that script and that's all
she ever did. She never answered any questions, and she
(03:01):
was not effective as the CEO at any time. And
I believe that the lawyers realized that she was a
liability from day one, so they just put her on
the bench. And now the mayor has also realized that
she's a liability, and I have some information on that
if you'd like to hear it. Oh well, as you know,
(03:22):
the body, the entity that's supposed to make these decisions
about the CEO is a board called the Board of
Waterpower Commissioners, which I follow now. They have never had
on their agenda, even their secret agenda, any discussion of
removing Jenny's counonos. It has never come up with them.
(03:43):
It's been business as usual. They've never conducted a search,
which normally you at least start a search if you're
going to do a replacement in the normal course. Finally,
what we see here, the announcement that she's resigning, actually
came from the Mayor's office, not from the DWP. So
clearly what happened here is that Mayor Bass sees candidates
(04:08):
nipping at her heels in the election. She sees Quinonos
as a liability, and she dumped her hoping, you know,
that will help her reelection checks.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
Oh, I agree, Yeah, I think that's quite right because
now she doesn't have to deal with all those public
conversations and questions about what would it take for you
to get rid of Jenny's Kinoniez. She only helped burn
down the Palisades, what else does she have to do
to lose her job?
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Well, not only that. Within the last month, as we know,
the court in charge of the lawsuits on the Palisades
very courageously I think, allowed those lawsuits to go forward.
So that's one thing they'd be able to pease facing
tens of billions of dollars in exposure because of Quanonas.
And another thing that we discussed last time is that
(04:58):
Quonos can't even get the reservoir online. It's empty again.
She can't get it repaired, she can't get anything done.
So between keeping the reservoir perpetually empty and potentially bankrupting
the city and the DWP, she had to go.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Yeah, she's making seven hundred and fifty thousand a year.
She was she's paid two and a half times more
than what Bass makes.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
Well. The real number to think about, which I brought
up at the very first hearing, is that she's paid
seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. The cost
to have repaired the reservoir and get it back online
before the fire was one hundred and forty thousand dollars.
If they wouldn't pay that to fix the reservoir, instead,
they paid her three reporters of the movie plus the house.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Yeah, plus the house. I mean that that was a
hell of a package she got the you know you've
got You've gotten to a lot of these meetings, haven't you.
I mean, have you ever heard anybody on the board
ever talk to anyone? Is there any scuttle butt behind
the scenes rumors exactly what was going on with her?
(06:09):
I mean, why, how? Why would she leave the reservoir
empty and the hydrants broken and all the rest of
the sins? I mean, what was going on? The clips
we have of her, she's talking about equity, social justice, diversity,
Earth Day. I don't I don't understand.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
I think she was just there for show. Let me
tell you something that's very telling and I won't name names,
but after I made my presentation a year ago before
the DWP board, I would go to the DOP very
often looking for documents for research and run them too employees,
and they would recognize me from the YouTube or whatever.
(06:49):
They come up to me. EWP employees would come up
to me and say, hey, good job man, thanks man.
Don't tell anyone I said so. Well, I think the
DWP employees rank and file realized that they did not
have a good boss, and she had to go to.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
I just I want the story. I want to understand
the whole story because everybody, because of the lawsuits and
because nobody ever admits any culpability anymore in public. I
just want to know what these people were doing leading
up to it, the day of the fire, the aftermath
of the fire, all the cover ups, all the lives.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
You know.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
I want the big, full length movie version of this, because.
Speaker 2 (07:31):
Well, the lawyers who have brought this case her are
going to find out, and I'm going to find out.
But I'll tell you one thing, it's going to be
a lot harder to get a story out of Jennice
Quinono's because, according to her, and she's specifically announced she's
going back to Puerto Rico. Well, in the old days,
we will call that flight to escape prosecution because she's
(07:53):
leaving the state and the jurisdiction. So just getting her
to testify is going to be a lot harder.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
Yeah, well, I mean it's still part of the US,
but I don't know what the extradition rules are.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
If any extradition is one thing, but even getting her
testimony in the deposition, let alone getting her to testify
a trial, is becoming a lot harder. And I think
that's part of the plan. I think the lawyers that
the GWP is paid now twenty million dollars. Oh uh,
and we're nowhere in the case, so they've already been paid.
(08:30):
I think they were saying, you got to get her
out of this restriction, you go, you got to get.
Speaker 1 (08:35):
Rid of her, and for one hundred and forty five
thousand dollars they could have repaired the cover and filled
up the reservoir, say Ed Kashani. Good talking with you.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Again, My pleasure anytime, sir.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
Thank you for coming on. By the way, coming up
after five thirty, we are going devers five thirty news.
We are going to have an attorney from the Thomas
Moore Society. They're the ones who defended those parents whose
kids were going to transroutin school and the school wouldn't
(09:07):
tell the parents what was happening. And the Supreme Court
blocked a California law which allowed this to go on,
and that will be coming up after five thirty.
Speaker 4 (09:17):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
Follow us at John Cobelt Radio on social media at
John Cobelt Radio, and subscribe to our videos on YouTube.
We put one out most days after the show. YouTube
dot com. Slash at John Cobelt YouTube dot com slash
at John Cobelt's show Still Choking. Gavin Newsom, as you know,
(09:45):
we've gone through this for the past week. About five
or six years ago, he signed a bill which allowed criminals,
even violent criminals, even violent sexual predators who compulsively rape
little girls, to retire as a criminal after the age
of fifty. If you're fifty year older and you served
(10:08):
twenty years of your term, you get to go home
because Newsom says you're retired elderly parole. I call it
elderly at fifty it's a new concept. This guy, David
Allen Thunston was kidnapping and sexually assaulting a number of
children ages three to seven, and since he was sixty
(10:31):
three sixty four years old, and he also he also
had served thirty years in prison, it was time for
him to go. And normal people got very upset over this,
including a judge. Mary Anne Jilliard was a superior court
judge in the sacrament area for twenty seven years. She
(10:54):
retired last summer, and she says Newsom's law allowingly release
of these felons have put the public at risk, including
the mental health diversion laws too, and she told the
California Post California needs to be placed into a conservatorship
(11:15):
because the person in charge, Gavin Newsom, is a danger
to others. As a former judge, and it was over
David Allen Funston was too far for her, and Jilliard said,
as a fifty year old serial child molester, you're eligible
(11:36):
to you're eligible for elderly parole, but still too young
for the senior Grand slam at Denny's criminals who were
ordered to serve life terms or being paroled because Gavin
Newsom and his reckless Board of Parole has given the
green light without regard to public safety. In fact, if
I remember, Funstan had gotten sixty eight years to life,
(12:01):
Jilliard said, there's been a number of bills that have
put us all at risk, including allowing murderers to stay
on parole for as little as one year. Oh yeah,
they let you out on parole early, and then you're
only on parole and have to deal with those restrictions
for one year. They've weakened gang laws. They let felons
who are not on probation or parole to serve on juries.
(12:23):
I didn't know that. Well, there's not a lot of garbage.
Newsom also signed a bill in twenty twenty three which
lets criminal defendants cite virtually any diagnosis to help stay
out of jail. Have you heard this one? Under the law,
a criminal defendant if they have a diagnosis, which can
range from ADHD to substance use disorder. In other words,
(12:46):
you're on drugs, it's presumed it's presumed that the disorder
led to the criminal act. Even serious offenders, you end
up in a lax, poorly enforced mental health program. According
to Jilliard, you can pistol whip an eighty year old lady.
But if you're a pothead, you have cannabis use disorder,
(13:07):
and they presume that was the cause of the conduct.
However well intentioned the program was and might have been,
in reality, it did not come with enough guardrails. It's
been to get out of a jail free card. That's
according to State Senator Sheddon Grove of Bakersfield. Jilliard said
Newsome owns this failure. He needs to do the right
(13:27):
thing and call special session of the legislature and fix
what's broken. She said that she tells victims' families it
was highly likely the perpetrators would be released on parole
during their lifetimes. I would tell victims and their family
members that the legislature is never here on Fridays during
(13:51):
sentencing to see the agony and pain you're going through
because of their reforms. So there's a judge speaking out
on Gavin Newsom being dangerous to the rest of us
to the point that she thinks the whole state ought
to be put in conservatorship, that we need a state
guardian to restore our safety because of the damage when
(14:16):
we come back. Another stupid thing he did is he
wouldn't allow school districts to tell parents when a child
is suddenly announcing he's transgender and has a new name
and new pronouns and he's switching his gender identity. And
(14:38):
some parents have sued and the Supreme Court temporarily blocked
the California law. We're going to talk to Peter Breen
about it. He represented parents and he's had a litigation
at the Thomas Moore Society, a law group. We are
going to talk with Peter Breen next.
Speaker 4 (14:57):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (15:02):
John Cobelt Show. We're on from three to six every day,
and after six o'clock we have the podcast John Cobelt
Show on demand. It's the same as the radio show.
It's there so you could listen to whatever you missed.
You know, for the last week, we've been telling you
telling you about an idiotic law the Gaven Newsom signed
back in twenty twenty which allowed for the retirement of
(15:25):
prisoners once they reached the age of fifty. The prisoners
could retire as a prisoner and be set free even
if you're a serial child rapist. And we've been going
through that story all week, David Allen Funston. Well, Gavin
Newsom has a long list of stupid laws that he signed,
and here's another one. In July of twenty twenty four,
(15:47):
he signed a law that blocked school districts from requiring
staff to notify parents of their child's gender identification. If
you had kids who were starting to talk about being
transgender or any one of the other variations. They they
(16:07):
they couldn't do it. And Supreme Court it's a temporary order.
The Supreme Court said that that California law is blocked.
Also blocked as a rule that required teachers to use
a student's preferred pronouns. And two sets of Catholic parents sued,
represented by the Thomas Moore Society, and we have one
(16:31):
of their attorneys, Peter Breen. He's the executive vice president
and head of Litigation at the Thomas Moore Society, and
they represented the parents. And let's get Peter Breen on how.
Speaker 3 (16:40):
Are you hey? Doing great job, Thanks for thanks for
having me on.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
All right, given given outline when Newsome signed this law,
what what what that changed inside of school?
Speaker 3 (16:54):
Well, and I'll say this, the state of California was
making a bunch of arguments, but they have ackedtually been
pushing this policy since twenty sixteen. That latest law was
only an additional add on to this whole culture of secrecy.
The State Department of Education was putting out FAQ pages
(17:17):
and instructions and model policies for years. It's only that
law maybe put a finer.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
Point on it.
Speaker 3 (17:24):
But we've been fighting this now for three years in court.
But teachers, parents, families had been dealing with this for
years even before that. And the real, i mean, the
upshot of the whole thing is they were forcing teachers
to keep silent and use different sets of names and
pronouns at the parent teacher conference from what was happening
(17:47):
inside the school. You know. We started the case with
two teachers over an Escondido and at the beginning of
the school year, they got an email had seven kids
on the list. These are middle school teachers. Seven kids
on the list who were transitioning, six of whose parents
had no clue and they were forbidden from telling the parents.
(18:09):
Once we got into the case a bit, we got
into discovery, we realized this was a massive, massive issue.
We expanded it to a statewide class action, added parents
parents came to us. We've got one set of parents.
They found out their child was being their daughter was
being treated as a boy at school after she attempted suicide. So,
(18:32):
I mean, just utterly horrible stories happening here. And so
the Supreme Court's decision to say no way is massive.
It's going to have incredible impact, not just in California,
but from coast to coast.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
It's astonishing to normal people that if you have a
kid and they want to change their sexuality and they're
going public with it, and they have new names and
new pronouns that the school doesn't tell the parents, I mean,
it's hard to believe this exists.
Speaker 3 (19:04):
Look, I mean it was Gavin Newsom, Rob Bonta and
the whole bureaucracy. Their position was that children as young
as age two and I'm not even sure how a
two year old could express an alternative gender in this way,
but the children as young as age two heavy they
said the state Constitution of California protected their right to
(19:27):
do that without anybody knowing. Now we think that's crazy.
I mean, that's not you know, the people of the
state of California don't believe that. But either way, the
federal Constitution for centuries has recognized the fact that parents
are the primary you know, they are the ones with
the responsibility for the upbringing of their children. And I'll
tell you the neat thing about this decision. You know,
(19:49):
it's a short decision that happened lightning fast, but the
Supreme Court took precedent from nineteen twenty five talking about
how parents are the you know, they're the ones in
charge of the upbringing education their kids, and brought that
precedent now into the twenty first century. Maybe we shouldn't
have needed it, It was so obvious we should not
have needed to do this. But because of the State
(20:10):
of California's actions, and again there are school districts across
the country dealing with us, we now have this precedent
very clear that every parent has that primary right, you know,
they are the ones raising the child, not the state.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
A few years ago, there was a study of students
at Brown University which found that thirty eight percent of
them decided they were gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and all
the rest right, all the rest of the letters, thirty
eight percent. And since then there's been a follow up
study and they find out in reality, it's only a
(20:47):
very small number proportionate to what the number that they've
always had when they've done these studies. So at that time,
at least a Brown university and probably all over the place,
it was.
Speaker 3 (21:00):
Pressure.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
It was a trendiness. It was wanting to get social
status among your peers. And so you adopted one of
those letters to say, yes, I'm binary, I'm queer, I'm transgender.
And some of these people really took it very seriously,
these kids, and then in a few years they'd reverse it,
(21:22):
they changed their minds.
Speaker 3 (21:27):
And really, I mean, that's even with college kids. College kids,
I mean, and that's bad enough, But now imagine a
bunch of grade schoolers. You know, one of our clients,
she was in fifth grade, and the school lied to
the parents. The parents started to catch wind to this,
flat out lied to the parents. And so what does
a fifth grader know, I mean, what, you're ten years
(21:48):
old at that point, going in and making a very
serious decision like this. And the problem was if if
your Susie came in one day and told the teacher, well,
you know, I'm feeling like Johnny today, they had to
essentially drop everything, change change her pronouns, change her in
the records at school saying you're Johnny, and then have
(22:08):
the separate lists so that we would not tell mom
and dad that Susie is acting like Johnny. Well, without
mental health professionals being involved, without parents being involved, it
could develop into something much more serious. And I'll tell
you one neat thing. So there are almost forty cases,
the Supreme Court noted. One of the justices noted, there
(22:29):
are almost forty cases with similar issues. We're dealing with
this transgender business in the schools, depending in the courts
right now. But one thing that we had that really
I don't know that any of the other ones have.
We had a full record. So the State of California,
you know, they made all these claims. Well, if we
tell parents about this, it'll be harmed with the children. Well,
(22:50):
when you go to court, you know, you can make
all the claims you want out in the public and
in front of a microphone, but when you get into court,
you've got to present evidence. And so we got their
experts under under oath and they had to concede. Parental
involvement is better. So you want the parents involved when
the kids are expressing gender incongruity. Yeah, so it's common
(23:11):
sense for us, right right in.
Speaker 1 (23:13):
The very rare cases, it's true you need to have
the parents helping to facilitate a transition if there's to
be one.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
Yeah, but or you know, I mean, look, you got
this other issue, which is, hey, you know, I believe,
you know, you believe in the Bible, and you go, well,
God created a male and female like and mine is
female not male. So stop treating my daughter like a boy,
you know, stop putting my daughter in the men's restroom,
you know. I mean, so there is a religious element
(23:45):
as well. But the point that the court made again
that they have not made so last year they had
a great religious liberty decisions. So religious parents are supposed
to not have all the LGBTQ books and you know, indoctrination,
so they can opt out of that. That came last year.
But this decision today covers everybody, whether you've got a
(24:06):
religious faith or not, whether your objection is based on
your religious faith or not. It's based on the fact
you're the parent, not the school.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
Thank you very much for coming on. It was a
really good talking about here. Peter Breen from the Thomas
Spore Society who represented the parents in this case. Coming up,
we're going to talk about Gavin Newsom had a furious
response to this. He's highly critical what the Supreme Court did.
We'll play a clip and talk about it more.
Speaker 4 (24:36):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
Podcast released in a matter of minutes after six o'clock.
You can follow us at John Cobelt Radio on social media,
subscribe on YouTube a YouTube dot com, slash at John
Cobelt Show YouTube dot com slash at John coblt Show.
And that first hour of the podcast especially ought to
listen to. We had a full blown, full our celebration
of the demise of Genie Kinonez, the idiot CEO of
(25:06):
LA Department of Order and Power, the woman who didn't
fill the reservoir. Oh and it'll be the featured video
on YouTube as well, so the celebration will can continue
into the night. We just had an interview with Peter Breen.
He was the executive vice president is the executive vice
(25:26):
president and had a litigation of Thomas Moore Society. It's
a litigation firm and they represented a Catholic parents who
objected to a Gavin Newsom law, another disastrous law that
the Supreme Court has at least temporarily blocked. He signed
this law in twenty twenty four, and it banned school
(25:48):
districts from requiring staff to notify parents if a child
became transgender. So if the kid said, I'm switching for
boy to girl, girl to boy, I got a new name,
I got new pronouns, his lass said, well, the school
district cannot require staff to notify parents. Well that's been
(26:14):
blocked right now, No school can require.
Speaker 3 (26:20):
Well no, let me see.
Speaker 1 (26:26):
It banned school districts from requiring staff to notify parents.
Let's play. Gavin Newsom's response.
Speaker 5 (26:36):
What they can't do under the law is fire a
teacher for not being a snitch. And I just don't
think teachers should be gender police. Humble point of view,
and I think this issue has gotten weaponized and our
gay community has been demonized.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
He uses that word all the time whenever there's pushback
on one of his nutty, crazy, extreme ideas, the idea
that if you have a child and he wants to transition,
and he could be very young and he's got a
new name that he only uses at school and he's
got pronouns that he only uses at school and us
(27:18):
parents have no right to know this. That is so
outrageous and preposterous. I don't know of a single parent
who believes that should be the case. It is preposterous
that Gavin Newsom gets to decide whether.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
We all know or not.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
That that that is so.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
And then and then he's outraged that parents objecting, Wow,
this is being weaponized. It's not being weaponized. You took
away parents' rights to know what's going on in their
child's lives, something really important. And what I what I
what I said earlier. A lot of this stuff was
so fatish and trendy and silly. It was all pumped
(28:00):
by social media and TikTok. The idea that your sexuality
or gender is malleable is changeable. When you get thirty
eight percent of the kids at Brown a few years
ago saying they all belonged to one of the letters
LGBTQ plus thirty eight percent, now stop it. That's not
(28:21):
biologically possible. And of course they've done a follow up
study and most of those kids now identify with the
way they're born. They just did it for social status.
They did it to get along. They did it because
they didn't want to be ostracized. There was not freedom
of expression at a lot of universities, certainly not Ivy
League universities. You have to conform. You have to pretend
(28:44):
you were a woman instead of a man, a man
instead of a woman, that you were gay or lesbian
or trans or queer or whatever the new terminology is
going to be. It was all social pressure. It was
confusion for the kids. And then then you start changing
your name and your pronouns, and then the next step
is you start having your body mutilated. So of course
the parents have to know that at one have you
(29:08):
seen some of the teachers. Some of these teachers are
really weird, bizarre, but they get to know and they
get to decide if parents aren't informed. All right, we
are done. We've got Michael Krozer coming up and then Conway.
We'll see you tomorrow. John Cobelt Show Krozier is lit
(29:29):
in the KFI twenty four our newsroom. You've been listening
to the John Cobelt Show podcast. You can always hear
the show live on KFI Am six forty from three
to six pm every Monday through Friday and of course,
anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app KFI AM six
stimulating talk
Caf I Am six forty. You're listening to the John
Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio app. She's gone, She's gone,
She's out. Deenizez thrown to the wolves. But the Boozella's singing.
(00:26):
All the sharing is about Jenise Kenonia is the head
of the DWP. She has left her office. I think
she got a good hard shove from Karen Bass, who's
running for reelection. This is John Cobelt Show I AM
six forty more stimulating talk radio. We're on from three
to six every day and after six o'clock John Cobelt
(00:46):
Show on demand. It's the podcast and we spent quite
some time at the beginning of the show celebrating kenon
Ya's leaving. We are now going to continue with Sayed Kashani.
He's an attorney. We've had him on the show quite
a bit over the last year. He lost his house
in the Palisades fire and Canuonias was famous for never
(01:08):
filling up the reservoir, the Sanienez Reservoir one one hundred
and seventeen million gallons, not a drop, and she also
had over a thousand busted fire hydrants and she never
turned off the electric power when it went through the
electric lines the night of the fire, and then eventually
the power poles fell, the lines hit the brush, and
(01:30):
you had more fires spreading, Sayad Kashani, welcome, How are you.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
Well? Felling better than a year ago?
Speaker 3 (01:39):
You remember? Go ahead?
Speaker 2 (01:44):
I remember, mister Cobolt. You invited me on your show
a year ago after I I appeared before the Department
of Water and Power Commissioners, and one year ago I
asked them not even to ask Quinonos to resign, but
just to put her on lead while they conducted an investigation.
And here a year later, she's out on her ear.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Carently, yeah, she was hired, and we played some old
clips of her, and she was very excited about the
social justice that the DWP was involved in. She was
most attracted to the job because of their equity policies.
I have never heard her say anything about the fire,
the empty reservoir, the electrical lines that night, the fire, hydrants.
(02:30):
You went to some of these DWP meetings, did you
ever hear her discuss anything of any significance?
Speaker 2 (02:38):
No? No, And I'll tell you something else. After the
fire and the losses were filed, she wasn't even allowed
to say anything. I have video of her that shows
very clearly she was given the script in with big letters,
double space, and just read that script and that's all
she ever did. She never answered any questions, and she
(03:01):
was not effective as the CEO at any time. And
I believe that the lawyers realized that she was a
liability from day one, so they just put her on
the bench. And now the mayor has also realized that
she's a liability, and I have some information on that
if you'd like to hear it. Oh well, as you know,
(03:22):
the body, the entity that's supposed to make these decisions
about the CEO is a board called the Board of
Waterpower Commissioners, which I follow now. They have never had
on their agenda, even their secret agenda, any discussion of
removing Jenny's counonos. It has never come up with them.
(03:43):
It's been business as usual. They've never conducted a search,
which normally you at least start a search if you're
going to do a replacement in the normal course. Finally,
what we see here, the announcement that she's resigning, actually
came from the Mayor's office, not from the DWP. So
clearly what happened here is that Mayor Bass sees candidates
(04:08):
nipping at her heels in the election. She sees Quinonos
as a liability, and she dumped her hoping, you know,
that will help her reelection checks.
Speaker 1 (04:17):
Oh, I agree, Yeah, I think that's quite right because
now she doesn't have to deal with all those public
conversations and questions about what would it take for you
to get rid of Jenny's Kinoniez. She only helped burn
down the Palisades, what else does she have to do
to lose her job?
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Well, not only that. Within the last month, as we know,
the court in charge of the lawsuits on the Palisades
very courageously I think, allowed those lawsuits to go forward.
So that's one thing they'd be able to pease facing
tens of billions of dollars in exposure because of Quanonas.
And another thing that we discussed last time is that
(04:58):
Quonos can't even get the reservoir online. It's empty again.
She can't get it repaired, she can't get anything done.
So between keeping the reservoir perpetually empty and potentially bankrupting
the city and the DWP, she had to go.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Yeah, she's making seven hundred and fifty thousand a year.
She was she's paid two and a half times more
than what Bass makes.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
Well. The real number to think about, which I brought
up at the very first hearing, is that she's paid
seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. The cost
to have repaired the reservoir and get it back online
before the fire was one hundred and forty thousand dollars.
If they wouldn't pay that to fix the reservoir, instead,
they paid her three reporters of the movie plus the house.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
Yeah, plus the house. I mean that that was a
hell of a package she got the you know you've
got You've gotten to a lot of these meetings, haven't you.
I mean, have you ever heard anybody on the board
ever talk to anyone? Is there any scuttle butt behind
the scenes rumors exactly what was going on with her?
(06:09):
I mean, why, how? Why would she leave the reservoir
empty and the hydrants broken and all the rest of
the sins? I mean, what was going on? The clips
we have of her, she's talking about equity, social justice, diversity,
Earth Day. I don't I don't understand.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
I think she was just there for show. Let me
tell you something that's very telling and I won't name names,
but after I made my presentation a year ago before
the DWP board, I would go to the DOP very
often looking for documents for research and run them too employees,
and they would recognize me from the YouTube or whatever.
(06:49):
They come up to me. EWP employees would come up
to me and say, hey, good job man, thanks man.
Don't tell anyone I said so. Well, I think the
DWP employees rank and file realized that they did not
have a good boss, and she had to go to.
Speaker 1 (07:07):
I just I want the story. I want to understand
the whole story because everybody, because of the lawsuits and
because nobody ever admits any culpability anymore in public. I
just want to know what these people were doing leading
up to it, the day of the fire, the aftermath
of the fire, all the cover ups, all the lives.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
You know.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
I want the big, full length movie version of this, because.
Speaker 2 (07:31):
Well, the lawyers who have brought this case her are
going to find out, and I'm going to find out.
But I'll tell you one thing, it's going to be
a lot harder to get a story out of Jennice
Quinono's because, according to her, and she's specifically announced she's
going back to Puerto Rico. Well, in the old days,
we will call that flight to escape prosecution because she's
(07:53):
leaving the state and the jurisdiction. So just getting her
to testify is going to be a lot harder.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
Yeah, well, I mean it's still part of the US,
but I don't know what the extradition rules are.
Speaker 2 (08:07):
If any extradition is one thing, but even getting her
testimony in the deposition, let alone getting her to testify
a trial, is becoming a lot harder. And I think
that's part of the plan. I think the lawyers that
the GWP is paid now twenty million dollars. Oh uh,
and we're nowhere in the case, so they've already been paid.
(08:30):
I think they were saying, you got to get her
out of this restriction, you go, you got to get.
Speaker 1 (08:35):
Rid of her, and for one hundred and forty five
thousand dollars they could have repaired the cover and filled
up the reservoir, say Ed Kashani. Good talking with you.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Again, My pleasure anytime, sir.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
Thank you for coming on. By the way, coming up
after five thirty, we are going devers five thirty news.
We are going to have an attorney from the Thomas
Moore Society. They're the ones who defended those parents whose
kids were going to transroutin school and the school wouldn't
(09:07):
tell the parents what was happening. And the Supreme Court
blocked a California law which allowed this to go on,
and that will be coming up after five thirty.
Speaker 4 (09:17):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
Follow us at John Cobelt Radio on social media at
John Cobelt Radio, and subscribe to our videos on YouTube.
We put one out most days after the show. YouTube
dot com. Slash at John Cobelt YouTube dot com slash
at John Cobelt's show Still Choking. Gavin Newsom, as you know,
(09:45):
we've gone through this for the past week. About five
or six years ago, he signed a bill which allowed criminals,
even violent criminals, even violent sexual predators who compulsively rape
little girls, to retire as a criminal after the age
of fifty. If you're fifty year older and you served
(10:08):
twenty years of your term, you get to go home
because Newsom says you're retired elderly parole. I call it
elderly at fifty it's a new concept. This guy, David
Allen Thunston was kidnapping and sexually assaulting a number of
children ages three to seven, and since he was sixty
(10:31):
three sixty four years old, and he also he also
had served thirty years in prison, it was time for
him to go. And normal people got very upset over this,
including a judge. Mary Anne Jilliard was a superior court
judge in the sacrament area for twenty seven years. She
(10:54):
retired last summer, and she says Newsom's law allowingly release
of these felons have put the public at risk, including
the mental health diversion laws too, and she told the
California Post California needs to be placed into a conservatorship
(11:15):
because the person in charge, Gavin Newsom, is a danger
to others. As a former judge, and it was over
David Allen Funston was too far for her, and Jilliard said,
as a fifty year old serial child molester, you're eligible
(11:36):
to you're eligible for elderly parole, but still too young
for the senior Grand slam at Denny's criminals who were
ordered to serve life terms or being paroled because Gavin
Newsom and his reckless Board of Parole has given the
green light without regard to public safety. In fact, if
I remember, Funstan had gotten sixty eight years to life,
(12:01):
Jilliard said, there's been a number of bills that have
put us all at risk, including allowing murderers to stay
on parole for as little as one year. Oh yeah,
they let you out on parole early, and then you're
only on parole and have to deal with those restrictions
for one year. They've weakened gang laws. They let felons
who are not on probation or parole to serve on juries.
(12:23):
I didn't know that. Well, there's not a lot of garbage.
Newsom also signed a bill in twenty twenty three which
lets criminal defendants cite virtually any diagnosis to help stay
out of jail. Have you heard this one? Under the law,
a criminal defendant if they have a diagnosis, which can
range from ADHD to substance use disorder. In other words,
(12:46):
you're on drugs, it's presumed it's presumed that the disorder
led to the criminal act. Even serious offenders, you end
up in a lax, poorly enforced mental health program. According
to Jilliard, you can pistol whip an eighty year old lady.
But if you're a pothead, you have cannabis use disorder,
(13:07):
and they presume that was the cause of the conduct.
However well intentioned the program was and might have been,
in reality, it did not come with enough guardrails. It's
been to get out of a jail free card. That's
according to State Senator Sheddon Grove of Bakersfield. Jilliard said
Newsome owns this failure. He needs to do the right
(13:27):
thing and call special session of the legislature and fix
what's broken. She said that she tells victims' families it
was highly likely the perpetrators would be released on parole
during their lifetimes. I would tell victims and their family
members that the legislature is never here on Fridays during
(13:51):
sentencing to see the agony and pain you're going through
because of their reforms. So there's a judge speaking out
on Gavin Newsom being dangerous to the rest of us
to the point that she thinks the whole state ought
to be put in conservatorship, that we need a state
guardian to restore our safety because of the damage when
(14:16):
we come back. Another stupid thing he did is he
wouldn't allow school districts to tell parents when a child
is suddenly announcing he's transgender and has a new name
and new pronouns and he's switching his gender identity. And
(14:38):
some parents have sued and the Supreme Court temporarily blocked
the California law. We're going to talk to Peter Breen
about it. He represented parents and he's had a litigation
at the Thomas Moore Society, a law group. We are
going to talk with Peter Breen next.
Speaker 4 (14:57):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (15:02):
John Cobelt Show. We're on from three to six every day,
and after six o'clock we have the podcast John Cobelt
Show on demand. It's the same as the radio show.
It's there so you could listen to whatever you missed.
You know, for the last week, we've been telling you
telling you about an idiotic law the Gaven Newsom signed
back in twenty twenty which allowed for the retirement of
(15:25):
prisoners once they reached the age of fifty. The prisoners
could retire as a prisoner and be set free even
if you're a serial child rapist. And we've been going
through that story all week, David Allen Funston. Well, Gavin
Newsom has a long list of stupid laws that he signed,
and here's another one. In July of twenty twenty four,
(15:47):
he signed a law that blocked school districts from requiring
staff to notify parents of their child's gender identification. If
you had kids who were starting to talk about being
transgender or any one of the other variations. They they
(16:07):
they couldn't do it. And Supreme Court it's a temporary order.
The Supreme Court said that that California law is blocked.
Also blocked as a rule that required teachers to use
a student's preferred pronouns. And two sets of Catholic parents sued,
represented by the Thomas Moore Society, and we have one
(16:31):
of their attorneys, Peter Breen. He's the executive vice president
and head of Litigation at the Thomas Moore Society, and
they represented the parents. And let's get Peter Breen on how.
Speaker 3 (16:40):
Are you hey? Doing great job, Thanks for thanks for
having me on.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
All right, given given outline when Newsome signed this law,
what what what that changed inside of school?
Speaker 3 (16:54):
Well, and I'll say this, the state of California was
making a bunch of arguments, but they have ackedtually been
pushing this policy since twenty sixteen. That latest law was
only an additional add on to this whole culture of secrecy.
The State Department of Education was putting out FAQ pages
(17:17):
and instructions and model policies for years. It's only that
law maybe put a finer.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
Point on it.
Speaker 3 (17:24):
But we've been fighting this now for three years in court.
But teachers, parents, families had been dealing with this for
years even before that. And the real, i mean, the
upshot of the whole thing is they were forcing teachers
to keep silent and use different sets of names and
pronouns at the parent teacher conference from what was happening
(17:47):
inside the school. You know. We started the case with
two teachers over an Escondido and at the beginning of
the school year, they got an email had seven kids
on the list. These are middle school teachers. Seven kids
on the list who were transitioning, six of whose parents
had no clue and they were forbidden from telling the parents.
(18:09):
Once we got into the case a bit, we got
into discovery, we realized this was a massive, massive issue.
We expanded it to a statewide class action, added parents
parents came to us. We've got one set of parents.
They found out their child was being their daughter was
being treated as a boy at school after she attempted suicide. So,
(18:32):
I mean, just utterly horrible stories happening here. And so
the Supreme Court's decision to say no way is massive.
It's going to have incredible impact, not just in California,
but from coast to coast.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
It's astonishing to normal people that if you have a
kid and they want to change their sexuality and they're
going public with it, and they have new names and
new pronouns that the school doesn't tell the parents, I mean,
it's hard to believe this exists.
Speaker 3 (19:04):
Look, I mean it was Gavin Newsom, Rob Bonta and
the whole bureaucracy. Their position was that children as young
as age two and I'm not even sure how a
two year old could express an alternative gender in this way,
but the children as young as age two heavy they
said the state Constitution of California protected their right to
(19:27):
do that without anybody knowing. Now we think that's crazy.
I mean, that's not you know, the people of the
state of California don't believe that. But either way, the
federal Constitution for centuries has recognized the fact that parents
are the primary you know, they are the ones with
the responsibility for the upbringing of their children. And I'll
tell you the neat thing about this decision. You know,
(19:49):
it's a short decision that happened lightning fast, but the
Supreme Court took precedent from nineteen twenty five talking about
how parents are the you know, they're the ones in
charge of the upbringing education their kids, and brought that
precedent now into the twenty first century. Maybe we shouldn't
have needed it, It was so obvious we should not
have needed to do this. But because of the State
(20:10):
of California's actions, and again there are school districts across
the country dealing with us, we now have this precedent
very clear that every parent has that primary right, you know,
they are the ones raising the child, not the state.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
A few years ago, there was a study of students
at Brown University which found that thirty eight percent of
them decided they were gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and all
the rest right, all the rest of the letters, thirty
eight percent. And since then there's been a follow up
study and they find out in reality, it's only a
(20:47):
very small number proportionate to what the number that they've
always had when they've done these studies. So at that time,
at least a Brown university and probably all over the place,
it was.
Speaker 3 (21:00):
Pressure.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
It was a trendiness. It was wanting to get social
status among your peers. And so you adopted one of
those letters to say, yes, I'm binary, I'm queer, I'm transgender.
And some of these people really took it very seriously,
these kids, and then in a few years they'd reverse it,
(21:22):
they changed their minds.
Speaker 3 (21:27):
And really, I mean, that's even with college kids. College kids,
I mean, and that's bad enough, But now imagine a
bunch of grade schoolers. You know, one of our clients,
she was in fifth grade, and the school lied to
the parents. The parents started to catch wind to this,
flat out lied to the parents. And so what does
a fifth grader know, I mean, what, you're ten years
(21:48):
old at that point, going in and making a very
serious decision like this. And the problem was if if
your Susie came in one day and told the teacher, well,
you know, I'm feeling like Johnny today, they had to
essentially drop everything, change change her pronouns, change her in
the records at school saying you're Johnny, and then have
(22:08):
the separate lists so that we would not tell mom
and dad that Susie is acting like Johnny. Well, without
mental health professionals being involved, without parents being involved, it
could develop into something much more serious. And I'll tell
you one neat thing. So there are almost forty cases,
the Supreme Court noted. One of the justices noted, there
(22:29):
are almost forty cases with similar issues. We're dealing with
this transgender business in the schools, depending in the courts
right now. But one thing that we had that really
I don't know that any of the other ones have.
We had a full record. So the State of California,
you know, they made all these claims. Well, if we
tell parents about this, it'll be harmed with the children. Well,
(22:50):
when you go to court, you know, you can make
all the claims you want out in the public and
in front of a microphone, but when you get into court,
you've got to present evidence. And so we got their
experts under under oath and they had to concede. Parental
involvement is better. So you want the parents involved when
the kids are expressing gender incongruity. Yeah, so it's common
(23:11):
sense for us, right right in.
Speaker 1 (23:13):
The very rare cases, it's true you need to have
the parents helping to facilitate a transition if there's to
be one.
Speaker 3 (23:21):
Yeah, but or you know, I mean, look, you got
this other issue, which is, hey, you know, I believe,
you know, you believe in the Bible, and you go, well,
God created a male and female like and mine is
female not male. So stop treating my daughter like a boy,
you know, stop putting my daughter in the men's restroom,
you know. I mean, so there is a religious element
(23:45):
as well. But the point that the court made again
that they have not made so last year they had
a great religious liberty decisions. So religious parents are supposed
to not have all the LGBTQ books and you know, indoctrination,
so they can opt out of that. That came last year.
But this decision today covers everybody, whether you've got a
(24:06):
religious faith or not, whether your objection is based on
your religious faith or not. It's based on the fact
you're the parent, not the school.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
Thank you very much for coming on. It was a
really good talking about here. Peter Breen from the Thomas
Spore Society who represented the parents in this case. Coming up,
we're going to talk about Gavin Newsom had a furious
response to this. He's highly critical what the Supreme Court did.
We'll play a clip and talk about it more.
Speaker 4 (24:36):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
Podcast released in a matter of minutes after six o'clock.
You can follow us at John Cobelt Radio on social media,
subscribe on YouTube a YouTube dot com, slash at John
Cobelt Show YouTube dot com slash at John coblt Show.
And that first hour of the podcast especially ought to
listen to. We had a full blown, full our celebration
of the demise of Genie Kinonez, the idiot CEO of
(25:06):
LA Department of Order and Power, the woman who didn't
fill the reservoir. Oh and it'll be the featured video
on YouTube as well, so the celebration will can continue
into the night. We just had an interview with Peter Breen.
He was the executive vice president is the executive vice
(25:26):
president and had a litigation of Thomas Moore Society. It's
a litigation firm and they represented a Catholic parents who
objected to a Gavin Newsom law, another disastrous law that
the Supreme Court has at least temporarily blocked. He signed
this law in twenty twenty four, and it banned school
(25:48):
districts from requiring staff to notify parents if a child
became transgender. So if the kid said, I'm switching for
boy to girl, girl to boy, I got a new name,
I got new pronouns, his lass said, well, the school
district cannot require staff to notify parents. Well that's been
(26:14):
blocked right now, No school can require.
Speaker 3 (26:20):
Well no, let me see.
Speaker 1 (26:26):
It banned school districts from requiring staff to notify parents.
Let's play. Gavin Newsom's response.
Speaker 5 (26:36):
What they can't do under the law is fire a
teacher for not being a snitch. And I just don't
think teachers should be gender police. Humble point of view,
and I think this issue has gotten weaponized and our
gay community has been demonized.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
He uses that word all the time whenever there's pushback
on one of his nutty, crazy, extreme ideas, the idea
that if you have a child and he wants to transition,
and he could be very young and he's got a
new name that he only uses at school and he's
got pronouns that he only uses at school and us
(27:18):
parents have no right to know this. That is so
outrageous and preposterous. I don't know of a single parent
who believes that should be the case. It is preposterous
that Gavin Newsom gets to decide whether.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
We all know or not.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
That that that is so.
Speaker 1 (27:39):
And then and then he's outraged that parents objecting, Wow,
this is being weaponized. It's not being weaponized. You took
away parents' rights to know what's going on in their
child's lives, something really important. And what I what I
what I said earlier. A lot of this stuff was
so fatish and trendy and silly. It was all pumped
(28:00):
by social media and TikTok. The idea that your sexuality
or gender is malleable is changeable. When you get thirty
eight percent of the kids at Brown a few years
ago saying they all belonged to one of the letters
LGBTQ plus thirty eight percent, now stop it. That's not
(28:21):
biologically possible. And of course they've done a follow up
study and most of those kids now identify with the
way they're born. They just did it for social status.
They did it to get along. They did it because
they didn't want to be ostracized. There was not freedom
of expression at a lot of universities, certainly not Ivy
League universities. You have to conform. You have to pretend
(28:44):
you were a woman instead of a man, a man
instead of a woman, that you were gay or lesbian
or trans or queer or whatever the new terminology is
going to be. It was all social pressure. It was
confusion for the kids. And then then you start changing
your name and your pronouns, and then the next step
is you start having your body mutilated. So of course
the parents have to know that at one have you
(29:08):
seen some of the teachers. Some of these teachers are
really weird, bizarre, but they get to know and they
get to decide if parents aren't informed. All right, we
are done. We've got Michael Krozer coming up and then Conway.
We'll see you tomorrow. John Cobelt Show Krozier is lit
(29:29):
in the KFI twenty four our newsroom. You've been listening
to the John Cobelt Show podcast. You can always hear
the show live on KFI Am six forty from three
to six pm every Monday through Friday and of course,
anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app KFI AM six
stimulating talk
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!