July 10, 2026 • 32 mins
HUD Sec. Scott Turner LAHSA loses federal funding
Jeremy Padawer Jonathan Rinderknecht Mistrial
Spencer Pratt Was Right
Kamala Harris Word Salad Don Lemon Show
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
I AM six forty. You're listening to the John Cobelt
Podcast on the iHeartRadio app CAF I AM six forty
more stimulating talk radio. John Cobelt Show. Welcome run every
day from three to six and if you miss anything
after six o'clock John Cobelt Show on demand. That's the podcast.
And let's get right into talking with the Secretary of
(00:23):
Housing and Urban Development in the Trump administration, Scott Turner.
They have an Office of Inspector General and after they
did investigations and audits, they found that LASA here in
LA is an absolute disaster. That's the Los Angeles Homeless
Services Authority. The County of LA has already pulled out
(00:44):
of it. We talk about it frequently. This is the
jointly run homeless agency that controls billions of dollars in
homeless spending and a fair amount used to come from
the federal government over the last five years, a billion
dollars from the Feds. And now we're going to talk
with Scott Turner because he's shut the spigot off. Welcome, Secretary,
(01:06):
How are.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
You doing great? John, Thank you so much. I appreciate
that introduction.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
I'm glad you did what you did. I'm sure you're
well aware. But we've been talking about this for many
years now. How just corrupt and wasteful and fraudulent. The
whole homeless industry is out here. Talk about what housing
and urban development used to do for LASSA and why
you cut it off.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Okay, great, So, as you alluded to, you know, we
did our investigation of LOSSA and found a lot of
waste and fraud and abuse. And under President Trump, you know,
the paradigm shift here is this, We're not just going
to fund an industrial homeless complex. We're gonna fund results, John.
And when you look at LASA, LASA has received a
(01:53):
billion dollars over the last five years that it pertains
the homelessness and hundreds of millions of dollars a year
with no results. And not only do they not have results,
but through our investigation we found fraud. For example, the
agency's former CEO had to resign because of a conflict
of interest violation where they funneled two million dollars of
(02:15):
federal funds that was under Losless control to her husband's employer,
and there's other things. There's no results, there's no accountability,
and so we suspended loss, So we cut off the
funding and continue our investigation.
Speaker 1 (02:30):
Some of the numbers that you found have been eye
popping since they've been getting all this funding, I guess
just over the last let's say, twelve thirteen years, homelessness
in LA has increased one hundred percent.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
That's right. Yeah, So in spite of them, you know,
LA is the epicenter, if you will, of homelessness. LA's
problem is a drug addiction and a mental illness problem,
not a homelessness problem. And the leadership there, as you know,
has been less than admirable. They have not been good
(03:05):
stewards of a taxpayer dollars a billion dollars over the
last five years, hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
Homelessness has gone up one hundred percent since twenty thirteen,
since the federal government adopted the housing first model, which
is a failed model. And LA literally is the epicenter
for that. And so because of that, we have to
(03:25):
cut off the spigot, take inventory, and run a new
play because the plays they've been running have been failing
the people there in California.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
Why do you think they're so resistant to actually helping
people who are severely drug addicted and mentally ill. You
can see it with your own eyes. You don't need
to study. Why don't they want to help these people?
We have twenty two hundred people a year who die
in the streets in La County, twenty two hundred. That's
twenty five thousand in the last twelve years.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Right. Well, because the government since twenty thirteen set up
this housing first model. They say, you know what, we
can just house people, warehouse them, you know, inside of
you know, these living conditions, apartments or what have you.
And then people in there still drug addicted, opioid dying.
There's no continuum of care. It's all in the name.
(04:14):
There's no continuum of assistance. But you know, you pop
up four hundred coocs around the countries, You follow the people,
create boards that have CEOs, they have leadership. There's waste,
there're fraud. That's why they're against it. Just follow the
money and follow the fraud and the abuse. We have
now under President Trump because of this fraud, well said, listen,
(04:36):
housing versus failed. We're gonna concentrate on getting people treated,
transformed into a life of self sufficiency. There's four point
zero four billion dollars in the COEOC program that is
the most funding ever and yet homelessness has increased dramatically.
So there's a shift here. We're going to care about
the people that are experiencing homelessness, that are drug adict
(05:00):
have mental illness, get wrap around services around them, and
get people treated, transformed and back to a life of
self sufficiency.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Do you yeah, I have. I think they set up
this housing first ideology in order to cover all the
theft and corruption because they have stuck with it so
long and it's so obviously a failure, right and it is.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
You know, we talk as a staff here and I
have such a wonderful team here at HUD that cares
about the mission, that cares about the people that we serve.
And you know, when you run into the bunds of
ideology and activism, you know from the courts, you know
from people that are in this industry, you know you're
(05:46):
doing something right when you actually want to go in
and take rip the band aid off, exposed to failures,
put the care of the people first. Then that's when
you run against run up against resistance. But we are
laser focused on bringing these transformations to the CEOC.
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Program, right, Yeah, I want you to get into a
little detail here, since you know there is a pool
of money available for LA to use. So what are
the demands that you're going to make on LASA or
the successor to LASA, whatever agency the city and county
comes up with to handle the funding funding. What are
(06:25):
you going to tell them must be done and how
they're going to have to prove it?
Speaker 2 (06:30):
Well, you know again right now it is under investigation.
We have just tubbished our twenty twenty six no fold
for our continuous care and all of those The language
in there has been laid out about the transformation and
that I explained to you about this is no longer
how the first this is wrap around service. That's about
(06:51):
one point three billion dollars for wrap around services. This
is treatment, transformation, transition out of homelessness to self sufficiency.
But the number one thing that we're looking for, which
LASA has not provided is results. We're not just funding
programs or you know, a warning units field. The results
is what we're looking for. As success is not how
(07:13):
many people you have in the complex, but the success
is how many people you get out of homelessness treated
transformed into self sufficiency. That's what we're looking for.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
You know, what I noticed in some of the information
sheets that you sent us is is that you often
they simply don't have the proper information. They don't have
answers to your question, or they have false answers, or
they don't they don't have records that they kept. They
can't explain where a lot of this money went.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
That's exactly right, that's the fraud. You know, they can't
even determine you know, who's who are? You know how
you paying for empty rooms? You know who's there, who's
living there? And when you can't when you can't nail
that down and give us information on that, then you
know what the light is shining on your That's what
happened here at Loston. That's why our funding has been pulled.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
How long is it going to take to change the
system out here so the money ends up actually helping
people who are drug addicted and mentally ill. How long
will this process take before you think something good will happen?
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Well, you know, right here at HUD we're ready right now.
You know, that's why we publish our new no folk.
You know very succeed very clear, you know about how
we want this to go and so you know, well
again you know it's in litigation as investigations going on,
but we're ready to implement this right now, and we
have a great team and great partners around the country
that are doing the work. So I would say, you know,
(08:40):
it was yesterday is when it needed to happen. But
this is a top urgency for US.
Speaker 1 (08:46):
Is LASA. What's left of it? Are they cooperating with
your department now?
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Well, that yet to be determined. Again, you know, we're
investigating them now, but it's a serious issue that they
can no longer hide behind.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Scott Turner, the Secretary for Housing and Urban Development in
the Trump administration, thank you for coming on. And it
is really great that your agency is doing this and
that this is going to be the beginning of the
great cleanup I hope.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Ind thank you so much for your encouragement. I appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
Job all right, Scott Turner, Housing and Urban Development Secretary.
We got more coming up.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
Hey Fi Am six forty live everywhere on the iHeartRadio
app YouTube, I go to YouTube dot com slash at
John Cobalt Show. Subscribe becoming member. We're on from three
to six on the radio and streaming, and after six
o'clock it's the podcast John Cobelt's Show on demand. And
the big story was hung jury in the case of
(09:53):
Jonathan Rinderkinesh, accused of arson in the in the Paddle States.
We talked with his attorney, Steve Hainey at three point thirty.
We're going to replay it. It was a most unusual
interview and I laid out some of the what I
thought is the obvious evidence against his client and wait
(10:15):
to hear's reaction. Let's talk now with extremely interested observer
Jeremy Paddlework. He is a businessman who's on our show
a number of times. He's been one of the leading
voices and activists about the Palisades fire and the massive
failure of all the government agencies. And we're going to
(10:36):
talk to him. Start off with his reaction to this
hung jury in the criminal trial. Jeremy, how are you?
Speaker 4 (10:45):
I'm doing all right? How are you to hear from you?
Speaker 1 (10:48):
It's good to have you on. What was your reaction
after hearing this morning that it's a hung jury and
a likely retrial.
Speaker 4 (10:57):
I wasn't surprised, you know. Look, I wasn't surprised that
the jury came back ten to two in a scenario
where they have been provided an enormous, essentially task to
find this person responsible for literally everything, in a scenario
(11:21):
where the government, our city, our state has taken zero accountability,
learned nothing, and decided to find a scapegoat. Of course,
the first scapegoat was a you know, climate change or
a natural disaster like a wind condition hurricane force wins,
(11:42):
both of which you know is not true. And so this,
this is their next scapegoat. And that's that's the way
it played out.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
Do you think he's guilty of anything?
Speaker 4 (11:55):
Sure, you know, I think I think he's guilty of
potentially having set the fire intentionally or accidentally. He certainly
was there, Okay. Is he guilty of anything? All right? Look,
my initial reaction to say, sure, maybe that's going too far.
(12:16):
Maybe the truth is maybe he didn't do it, okay,
And if he did it intentionally, it's a very unusual
thing to do something intentionally after manifesting a dream come true.
Because of course, they showed that he had been at
least thinking about this over the course of time.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
Oh yeah, I mean an extensive chech ept creativity, creating
a painting showing a forest on fire and people running
screaming and rich people laughing on the other side of
the wall. I would think there were definite And he
did that five months ahead of the fire. It was
a definite message to place like the Palisades.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
In my mind, I get it.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
And let's put it this. Maybe he did do it,
and maybe he did it intentionally, but it is very
unusual for someone who takes an intentional act and to
immediately call authorities, to call authorities twelve times, something to
that effect seems to be unusual. At the very least,
you'd have to admit that's unusual. Now, after that occurred,
(13:22):
he had a choice to make. He chose to reach out.
And in fact, the irony of all of this is
that if he is culpable, if he is the guy
that set the fire, he showed more I don't know,
second guessing and accountability than our mayor and our governor
(13:44):
have post fire. And I realized that saying that is
a bombastic statement, But think about what has occurred here.
You have a guy that called twelve times, then you
have a city and a state that are grossly negligent
for all of their activity or inactivity, and they haven't
admitted square one.
Speaker 1 (14:07):
It is astonishing. I mean, he made way more I'll
give you that, he made way more calls than Karen
Bass did because Karen Bass was in Africa, so she
didn't know what it was going on. She had less
involvement than he did in trying to rectify things.
Speaker 4 (14:23):
Yeah, look, I have compassion, and my heart tells me
that even if this was an individual that set out
to do a bad thing, that at the very least
he attempted to mitigate this, and by the way, under
those circumstances it found guilty. I do believe someone like
that should go to jail for life because it did
(14:45):
result in the deaths of many people and losing my
house and losing thousands of homes. With that said, there
is a difference, and we should be treating individual we
should be we should be telling individuals, we should be
displaying and modeling that if you do something and you
are immediately accountable for it, that that should mitigate to
(15:09):
some extent. You still may go to jail for your life,
but at the very least the villainization and tagging absolutely
everything on this guy as a result of what may
have been purposeful, may have been accidental. But as of today,
ten out of twelve people said there wasn't enough there.
You shouldn't tag everything on them.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
I imagine you don't want this to distract from the
culpability of everybody in local government and the DWP and
state government.
Speaker 4 (15:44):
Yeah, I think two things can be true simultaneously. I
think that you can have a bad actor, and I
think you can also have a grossly negligent second actor.
And in this particular case, I mean, imagine you have
someone that may or may not have set a fire
intentionally or accidentally. I mean they didn't even get in
(16:06):
a any thing from the jury that would say that
they believed he did it despite evidence. And yet after
that occurrence, you had seven days to remedy this.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
You had state.
Speaker 4 (16:21):
Grounds where there were very specific rules of engagement that
the citizens that lived, the taxpayers lived around those rules
of engagement, were completely unaware of these rules of engagement.
Around the milk vetch plant, Okay, you couldn't attack it
from above, you couldn't drop a fire retardant on it,
you couldn't dig or mud it out from below, So
(16:42):
you were limited to observation, and you were limited to
imaging some sort of imaging, and they did none of
that except for throwing some water on it and then
leaving shortly after, despite rocks too hot to touch and
smoke billowing from tree stumps. All of those things are
also true.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
Jeremy, thank you for coming on with us again. We'll
talk soon.
Speaker 4 (17:04):
Okay, thank you.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Jeremy patterwerk ed He's homeowner in the Palisades.
Speaker 3 (17:11):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
I Am six forty Live Everywhere, iHeartRadio app John Cobelt's show.
We are Live on KFI. Subscribe to become a member
of YouTube dot com slash at John Cobelt's show. We
got the podcast going to be released in an hour
on the iHeart app Anything Else the Free Press. Sam
Kinoniez and we have had Sam on a few times
(17:39):
over the years. He covered a lot of the story
of the border, the immigration, and the drugs, and he
is one of the more reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent people we've
had on the show, both in his writing and when
he comes on the radio as a guest, and he
wrote a piece for The Free Press about Spencer Pratt
(18:02):
and says, don't dismiss Spencer Pratt's loss. And it's long,
and I wish I had time to read the whole
thing for you. The Free Press is a subscription because
they have a paywall, but boy, it's worth it just
to read this story. Let me tell you this though,
but he distilled to the heart of the problem that
(18:25):
the city of Los Angeles and the state they're housing
first policy, where you put drug addicts in a house
before you treat them, is outdated and wrong. And the
reason for this is in the past thirteen years or so,
(18:49):
there are two new drugs out on the market. Pratt
referred to one as super Myth, and that's as good
an aime as any. It is a hyper pure form
of meth coming out of Mexico, and it quickly drives
users to psychosis, and psychosis leads to homelessness. And those
(19:16):
meth addicts on the street, and there are thousands of them,
they weren't squeezed out because of the economy. They were
squeezed out because the math started destroying their brains. And
I remember, and I've said this often that I don't
remember homelessness outside of the little skid rowbox being a problem.
(19:37):
Even when Garcetti ran for office the first time in
twenty thirteen, I don't remember that being an issue. I
don't remember them debating it very much, talking about it
very much, because it was. But he says the super
math started invading Los Angeles beginning in the twenty twelve
twenty fourteen timeframe, and Mexican hyper pure Mexican myth arrived
(20:05):
to dethrone crack around twenty thirteen twenty fourteen. That became
the number one drug. Then the homeless tents start to spread.
Then in twenty eighteen, Fedidel arrived, combined with the myth,
and he said, that's when homelessness became skid rowifiede if
there's going a turn there, skid rowifide. So it was
(20:28):
in that period from about twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen to
twenty eighteen, maybe five six years, where the thing exploded
and everybody's going what the hell, And Karen Vass and
Garcetti and Knewsom clung to, well, we have to have
housing first.
Speaker 4 (20:45):
Now.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
They conveniently clung to that because they could get a
lot more money for it, and then their developer friends
could come in and steal the money, which they had
by the billions. So I think that's theirs. They must
know by now that housing first doesn't work because we've
tried this for twelve years. It's been a failure. So
(21:07):
they know, but they don't care. Don't ever say all
they care it's good intentions, They're just misguided. No, they
don't care. And this is really lucrative. The old theory
is that homelessness has economic roots. No, our homelessness in
(21:28):
LA has almost entirely is almost entirely due to the
super meth and the fentanyl, and there's no real solution
to their homelessness. You have to first consider what those
drugs do to a human being's mind and body. Giving
needles is just asking for trouble. And he said the
(21:54):
problem is is nobody's been allowed to talk about this.
And he says the tent campments are one long public
death row.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
They are.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
He says two thousand, two hundred homeless people die on
county streets every year. Think about that, two thousand, two hundred.
So over the last twelve years of this scourge, about
twenty five thousand people have died in our streets, just
in La County twenty five thousand. Pratt spoke bluntly about
(22:33):
issues that hadn't been discussed plainly in LA for some time,
and many Angelinos, he writes, thirsted for this and much
of what burdens the city today is connected to the
methan fentanyl, homelessness, encampments, disease in the encampments, typhus, rape, pimping, trash,
(22:57):
the street light stripped of copper, the fire department energy
drained by the enormous number of calls to the deranged
homeless people, and it goes on and on. And Pratt
channeled the anger of manny Angelinos who experience this daily
homelessness firsthand, and Kenuna said something that's very disturbing to me.
(23:19):
They all told Kennas that they're seeing the same thing
Pratt is talking about, and they're angry about it. But
few of those that Kenunya spoke to said they would
vote for him, but they appreciated his frank talk. That's
where the breakdown is that I don't understand Betts and
Ramin created this situation. It's metastasized into stage four society
(23:46):
cancer in La Pratt is coming and saying this is
what's going on. Everybody goes, yeah, yeah, I agree, you're right.
I'm as angry as you are, Spencer. But few said
they would vote for him. Now, what kind of psychosis
is that? Because he was loosely associated with Trump, that's
(24:13):
probably a big part of it. Not only does meth
cause psychosis, but the existence of Trump causes psychosis in
people's brains. Trump had nothing to do with the meth
in fentinyl. In fact, by closing the border, according to Cononias,
(24:36):
meth and fentanyl has supplies have dropped. Fentinyl supplies have
been dropping since twenty twenty three. Overdose deaths began falling
at the same time. But the myth still it's really
easy and cheap to make. It's so abundant. He writes
that he's interviewed people in MacArthur Parker who said it's
(24:56):
basically free. The myth is so plentiful, it's selling for
practically nothing. And instead people voted for Bass with the
failed homeless policy who burned down the Palisades. Romin got
(25:20):
a lot of fake votes, but some voted for her
when she fought against getting rid of encampments Pratt they
agreed with, but I'm not going to vote for him.
That is a psychosis that's worse than the meth psychosis
that the homeless have. All Right, we come back, got
(25:42):
around of the moistline coming up, and all right, that
was gonna make an appearance on YouTube. That's just so exciting.
I'm sure people can hardly wait it is. I heard
you caused the CRITI sensation yesterday people were reacting to you.
I'm not gonna because I don't want to start it
up again, and then I'll eat this, this this vegan
(26:04):
thing you have.
Speaker 3 (26:05):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Can I Am six forty live everywhere on the iHeartRadio
app John Cobelt Show ron from three to six after
six John cobelt Show on demand on the iHeart app. Well,
let's take a break from all the intense news today
and enjoy enjoy a Kamala Harris word salad. She served
(26:33):
up some more. Apparently, Don Lemon, you talk about the
conversation between two vegetables. Don Lemon talking with Kamala Harris
on his video podcast, and it's hard to explain some
(26:56):
of this, So we're just gonna play it and see
what you think. Play cut number eight.
Speaker 5 (27:00):
I believe you know, don I really truly believe this.
We each have light inside of us, and we need
to know that that is what inspires our hope as
much as anything external to ourselves. And when we feel
that and not allow an election or an individual to
(27:20):
dampen that light and instead light let that light kind
of carry us in particular for moments of darkness, that
that we not only act on that hope, but we
inspire that hope in each other, and in particular at
this moment, it is so important that we not only
(27:44):
have hope, but that we understand that that should be
a verb, which means that hope has to go hand
in hand with action.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Hope is a verb. It is a noun. You can
have hope right, or you can hope something good all happen,
which makes it a verb. She, I guess doesn't know
that hope is a verb. She said it should be
a verb. Now what do you think the rest of
(28:19):
that was? Had she run for governor, you know, she
would have gotten the nomination and we'd be looking at
at that right now. People would actually vote for this lady,
and I'm going to die, and no one's ever going
(28:41):
to explain why anybody would vote for her. I'm not
going to know. There's more to this clip, right, Play
somewhere has.
Speaker 5 (28:51):
To go hand in hand with action, and that action
includes the overcoming the obstacles. There's a throw in front
of us in terms of access to the ballot. That
that hope, combined with the action, will result in us
winning the midterms. That hope, combined with action will allow
(29:11):
us to celebrate Juneteenth in all of the traditions that
involve good food and dance and laughter and family and community.
And that we will also understand that that hope is
consistent with a commitment to the fight, the fight for
(29:33):
equality and for freedom and for justice.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
And if you watch the video, Leomon is sitting there
and just like nodding along as if this makes sense. Wait,
we've got more. We have another bowl. She hasn't decided
whether she's going to run for president or not.
Speaker 5 (29:57):
Oh my, I have not decide, to be honest with you,
but I've been spending a lot of time traveling the country,
as we talked about earlier, and listening to folks and
you know, I think that that people want a leader
who is willing to take risks as opposed to just
(30:20):
doing what is popular. I think people want to know
that they are being seen and heard, and that you
know that that their leaders, whether they're at a local, state,
federal level, or in the White House, are looking first
at the people, you know, not looking at themselves in
the mirror, but looking at the people and listening and.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
Looking at you know what. What I'm hearing.
Speaker 5 (30:49):
What people really want is that their first priorities are
the first priority of their president and their leaders. And
that really does start with affordability, you know, regardless of
the age of the person, whether you're talking about gen
z to you know, to seniors, affordability around housing, affordability
(31:14):
around healthcare, you know, for so many, affordability around childcare.
Speaker 2 (31:20):
That's what people want.
Speaker 1 (31:22):
Wow, it leaves you stunned. I'm speechless. I what's wrong?
There's something wrong. I don't know if it's the sharp Nay.
She could be taking big puffs. Might I got a
(31:45):
hold of some of your gummies? Maybe too many of them.
Maybe when you pap a gummy, do you talk like that?
I just don't speak.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (32:02):
Don Lemon says, since they're Google eyed, like he can't starstruck,
you can't believe can't Maybe makes sense to him.
Speaker 4 (32:09):
There you go.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Could have been the governor of California. Could have been
the governor of California. All right, Now, here's an update
from the KFI twenty four hour 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
Speaker 3 (32:33):
App KFI Am six More stimulating talk
I AM six forty. You're listening to the John Cobelt
Podcast on the iHeartRadio app CAF I AM six forty
more stimulating talk radio. John Cobelt Show. Welcome run every
day from three to six and if you miss anything
after six o'clock John Cobelt Show on demand. That's the podcast.
And let's get right into talking with the Secretary of
(00:23):
Housing and Urban Development in the Trump administration, Scott Turner.
They have an Office of Inspector General and after they
did investigations and audits, they found that LASA here in
LA is an absolute disaster. That's the Los Angeles Homeless
Services Authority. The County of LA has already pulled out
(00:44):
of it. We talk about it frequently. This is the
jointly run homeless agency that controls billions of dollars in
homeless spending and a fair amount used to come from
the federal government over the last five years, a billion
dollars from the Feds. And now we're going to talk
with Scott Turner because he's shut the spigot off. Welcome, Secretary,
(01:06):
How are.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
You doing great? John, Thank you so much. I appreciate
that introduction.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
I'm glad you did what you did. I'm sure you're
well aware. But we've been talking about this for many
years now. How just corrupt and wasteful and fraudulent. The
whole homeless industry is out here. Talk about what housing
and urban development used to do for LASSA and why
you cut it off.
Speaker 2 (01:33):
Okay, great, So, as you alluded to, you know, we
did our investigation of LOSSA and found a lot of
waste and fraud and abuse. And under President Trump, you know,
the paradigm shift here is this, We're not just going
to fund an industrial homeless complex. We're gonna fund results, John.
And when you look at LASA, LASA has received a
(01:53):
billion dollars over the last five years that it pertains
the homelessness and hundreds of millions of dollars a year
with no results. And not only do they not have results,
but through our investigation we found fraud. For example, the
agency's former CEO had to resign because of a conflict
of interest violation where they funneled two million dollars of
(02:15):
federal funds that was under Losless control to her husband's employer,
and there's other things. There's no results, there's no accountability,
and so we suspended loss, So we cut off the
funding and continue our investigation.
Speaker 1 (02:30):
Some of the numbers that you found have been eye
popping since they've been getting all this funding, I guess
just over the last let's say, twelve thirteen years, homelessness
in LA has increased one hundred percent.
Speaker 2 (02:44):
That's right. Yeah, So in spite of them, you know,
LA is the epicenter, if you will, of homelessness. LA's
problem is a drug addiction and a mental illness problem,
not a homelessness problem. And the leadership there, as you know,
has been less than admirable. They have not been good
(03:05):
stewards of a taxpayer dollars a billion dollars over the
last five years, hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
Homelessness has gone up one hundred percent since twenty thirteen,
since the federal government adopted the housing first model, which
is a failed model. And LA literally is the epicenter
for that. And so because of that, we have to
(03:25):
cut off the spigot, take inventory, and run a new
play because the plays they've been running have been failing
the people there in California.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
Why do you think they're so resistant to actually helping
people who are severely drug addicted and mentally ill. You
can see it with your own eyes. You don't need
to study. Why don't they want to help these people?
We have twenty two hundred people a year who die
in the streets in La County, twenty two hundred. That's
twenty five thousand in the last twelve years.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
Right. Well, because the government since twenty thirteen set up
this housing first model. They say, you know what, we
can just house people, warehouse them, you know, inside of
you know, these living conditions, apartments or what have you.
And then people in there still drug addicted, opioid dying.
There's no continuum of care. It's all in the name.
(04:14):
There's no continuum of assistance. But you know, you pop
up four hundred coocs around the countries, You follow the people,
create boards that have CEOs, they have leadership. There's waste,
there're fraud. That's why they're against it. Just follow the
money and follow the fraud and the abuse. We have
now under President Trump because of this fraud, well said, listen,
(04:36):
housing versus failed. We're gonna concentrate on getting people treated,
transformed into a life of self sufficiency. There's four point
zero four billion dollars in the COEOC program that is
the most funding ever and yet homelessness has increased dramatically.
So there's a shift here. We're going to care about
the people that are experiencing homelessness, that are drug adict
(05:00):
have mental illness, get wrap around services around them, and
get people treated, transformed and back to a life of
self sufficiency.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Do you yeah, I have. I think they set up
this housing first ideology in order to cover all the
theft and corruption because they have stuck with it so
long and it's so obviously a failure, right and it is.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
You know, we talk as a staff here and I
have such a wonderful team here at HUD that cares
about the mission, that cares about the people that we serve.
And you know, when you run into the bunds of
ideology and activism, you know from the courts, you know
from people that are in this industry, you know you're
(05:46):
doing something right when you actually want to go in
and take rip the band aid off, exposed to failures,
put the care of the people first. Then that's when
you run against run up against resistance. But we are
laser focused on bringing these transformations to the CEOC.
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Program, right, Yeah, I want you to get into a
little detail here, since you know there is a pool
of money available for LA to use. So what are
the demands that you're going to make on LASA or
the successor to LASA, whatever agency the city and county
comes up with to handle the funding funding. What are
(06:25):
you going to tell them must be done and how
they're going to have to prove it?
Speaker 2 (06:30):
Well, you know again right now it is under investigation.
We have just tubbished our twenty twenty six no fold
for our continuous care and all of those The language
in there has been laid out about the transformation and
that I explained to you about this is no longer
how the first this is wrap around service. That's about
(06:51):
one point three billion dollars for wrap around services. This
is treatment, transformation, transition out of homelessness to self sufficiency.
But the number one thing that we're looking for, which
LASA has not provided is results. We're not just funding
programs or you know, a warning units field. The results
is what we're looking for. As success is not how
(07:13):
many people you have in the complex, but the success
is how many people you get out of homelessness treated
transformed into self sufficiency. That's what we're looking for.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
You know, what I noticed in some of the information
sheets that you sent us is is that you often
they simply don't have the proper information. They don't have
answers to your question, or they have false answers, or
they don't they don't have records that they kept. They
can't explain where a lot of this money went.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
That's exactly right, that's the fraud. You know, they can't
even determine you know, who's who are? You know how
you paying for empty rooms? You know who's there, who's
living there? And when you can't when you can't nail
that down and give us information on that, then you
know what the light is shining on your That's what
happened here at Loston. That's why our funding has been pulled.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
How long is it going to take to change the
system out here so the money ends up actually helping
people who are drug addicted and mentally ill. How long
will this process take before you think something good will happen?
Speaker 2 (08:19):
Well, you know, right here at HUD we're ready right now.
You know, that's why we publish our new no folk.
You know very succeed very clear, you know about how
we want this to go and so you know, well
again you know it's in litigation as investigations going on,
but we're ready to implement this right now, and we
have a great team and great partners around the country
that are doing the work. So I would say, you know,
(08:40):
it was yesterday is when it needed to happen. But
this is a top urgency for US.
Speaker 1 (08:46):
Is LASA. What's left of it? Are they cooperating with
your department now?
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Well, that yet to be determined. Again, you know, we're
investigating them now, but it's a serious issue that they
can no longer hide behind.
Speaker 1 (09:00):
Scott Turner, the Secretary for Housing and Urban Development in
the Trump administration, thank you for coming on. And it
is really great that your agency is doing this and
that this is going to be the beginning of the
great cleanup I hope.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
Ind thank you so much for your encouragement. I appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
Job all right, Scott Turner, Housing and Urban Development Secretary.
We got more coming up.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (09:28):
Hey Fi Am six forty live everywhere on the iHeartRadio
app YouTube, I go to YouTube dot com slash at
John Cobalt Show. Subscribe becoming member. We're on from three
to six on the radio and streaming, and after six
o'clock it's the podcast John Cobelt's Show on demand. And
the big story was hung jury in the case of
(09:53):
Jonathan Rinderkinesh, accused of arson in the in the Paddle States.
We talked with his attorney, Steve Hainey at three point thirty.
We're going to replay it. It was a most unusual
interview and I laid out some of the what I
thought is the obvious evidence against his client and wait
(10:15):
to hear's reaction. Let's talk now with extremely interested observer
Jeremy Paddlework. He is a businessman who's on our show
a number of times. He's been one of the leading
voices and activists about the Palisades fire and the massive
failure of all the government agencies. And we're going to
(10:36):
talk to him. Start off with his reaction to this
hung jury in the criminal trial. Jeremy, how are you?
Speaker 4 (10:45):
I'm doing all right? How are you to hear from you?
Speaker 1 (10:48):
It's good to have you on. What was your reaction
after hearing this morning that it's a hung jury and
a likely retrial.
Speaker 4 (10:57):
I wasn't surprised, you know. Look, I wasn't surprised that
the jury came back ten to two in a scenario
where they have been provided an enormous, essentially task to
find this person responsible for literally everything, in a scenario
(11:21):
where the government, our city, our state has taken zero accountability,
learned nothing, and decided to find a scapegoat. Of course,
the first scapegoat was a you know, climate change or
a natural disaster like a wind condition hurricane force wins,
(11:42):
both of which you know is not true. And so this,
this is their next scapegoat. And that's that's the way
it played out.
Speaker 1 (11:52):
Do you think he's guilty of anything?
Speaker 4 (11:55):
Sure, you know, I think I think he's guilty of
potentially having set the fire intentionally or accidentally. He certainly
was there, Okay. Is he guilty of anything? All right? Look,
my initial reaction to say, sure, maybe that's going too far.
(12:16):
Maybe the truth is maybe he didn't do it, okay,
And if he did it intentionally, it's a very unusual
thing to do something intentionally after manifesting a dream come true.
Because of course, they showed that he had been at
least thinking about this over the course of time.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
Oh yeah, I mean an extensive chech ept creativity, creating
a painting showing a forest on fire and people running
screaming and rich people laughing on the other side of
the wall. I would think there were definite And he
did that five months ahead of the fire. It was
a definite message to place like the Palisades.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
In my mind, I get it.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
And let's put it this. Maybe he did do it,
and maybe he did it intentionally, but it is very
unusual for someone who takes an intentional act and to
immediately call authorities, to call authorities twelve times, something to
that effect seems to be unusual. At the very least,
you'd have to admit that's unusual. Now, after that occurred,
(13:22):
he had a choice to make. He chose to reach out.
And in fact, the irony of all of this is
that if he is culpable, if he is the guy
that set the fire, he showed more I don't know,
second guessing and accountability than our mayor and our governor
(13:44):
have post fire. And I realized that saying that is
a bombastic statement, But think about what has occurred here.
You have a guy that called twelve times, then you
have a city and a state that are grossly negligent
for all of their activity or inactivity, and they haven't
admitted square one.
Speaker 1 (14:07):
It is astonishing. I mean, he made way more I'll
give you that, he made way more calls than Karen
Bass did because Karen Bass was in Africa, so she
didn't know what it was going on. She had less
involvement than he did in trying to rectify things.
Speaker 4 (14:23):
Yeah, look, I have compassion, and my heart tells me
that even if this was an individual that set out
to do a bad thing, that at the very least
he attempted to mitigate this, and by the way, under
those circumstances it found guilty. I do believe someone like
that should go to jail for life because it did
(14:45):
result in the deaths of many people and losing my
house and losing thousands of homes. With that said, there
is a difference, and we should be treating individual we
should be we should be telling individuals, we should be
displaying and modeling that if you do something and you
are immediately accountable for it, that that should mitigate to
(15:09):
some extent. You still may go to jail for your life,
but at the very least the villainization and tagging absolutely
everything on this guy as a result of what may
have been purposeful, may have been accidental. But as of today,
ten out of twelve people said there wasn't enough there.
You shouldn't tag everything on them.
Speaker 1 (15:32):
I imagine you don't want this to distract from the
culpability of everybody in local government and the DWP and
state government.
Speaker 4 (15:44):
Yeah, I think two things can be true simultaneously. I
think that you can have a bad actor, and I
think you can also have a grossly negligent second actor.
And in this particular case, I mean, imagine you have
someone that may or may not have set a fire
intentionally or accidentally. I mean they didn't even get in
(16:06):
a any thing from the jury that would say that
they believed he did it despite evidence. And yet after
that occurrence, you had seven days to remedy this.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
You had state.
Speaker 4 (16:21):
Grounds where there were very specific rules of engagement that
the citizens that lived, the taxpayers lived around those rules
of engagement, were completely unaware of these rules of engagement.
Around the milk vetch plant, Okay, you couldn't attack it
from above, you couldn't drop a fire retardant on it,
you couldn't dig or mud it out from below, So
(16:42):
you were limited to observation, and you were limited to
imaging some sort of imaging, and they did none of
that except for throwing some water on it and then
leaving shortly after, despite rocks too hot to touch and
smoke billowing from tree stumps. All of those things are
also true.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
Jeremy, thank you for coming on with us again. We'll
talk soon.
Speaker 4 (17:04):
Okay, thank you.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Jeremy patterwerk ed He's homeowner in the Palisades.
Speaker 3 (17:11):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
I Am six forty Live Everywhere, iHeartRadio app John Cobelt's show.
We are Live on KFI. Subscribe to become a member
of YouTube dot com slash at John Cobelt's show. We
got the podcast going to be released in an hour
on the iHeart app Anything Else the Free Press. Sam
Kinoniez and we have had Sam on a few times
(17:39):
over the years. He covered a lot of the story
of the border, the immigration, and the drugs, and he
is one of the more reasonable, thoughtful, intelligent people we've
had on the show, both in his writing and when
he comes on the radio as a guest, and he
wrote a piece for The Free Press about Spencer Pratt
(18:02):
and says, don't dismiss Spencer Pratt's loss. And it's long,
and I wish I had time to read the whole
thing for you. The Free Press is a subscription because
they have a paywall, but boy, it's worth it just
to read this story. Let me tell you this though,
but he distilled to the heart of the problem that
(18:25):
the city of Los Angeles and the state they're housing
first policy, where you put drug addicts in a house
before you treat them, is outdated and wrong. And the
reason for this is in the past thirteen years or so,
(18:49):
there are two new drugs out on the market. Pratt
referred to one as super Myth, and that's as good
an aime as any. It is a hyper pure form
of meth coming out of Mexico, and it quickly drives
users to psychosis, and psychosis leads to homelessness. And those
(19:16):
meth addicts on the street, and there are thousands of them,
they weren't squeezed out because of the economy. They were
squeezed out because the math started destroying their brains. And
I remember, and I've said this often that I don't
remember homelessness outside of the little skid rowbox being a problem.
(19:37):
Even when Garcetti ran for office the first time in
twenty thirteen, I don't remember that being an issue. I
don't remember them debating it very much, talking about it
very much, because it was. But he says the super
math started invading Los Angeles beginning in the twenty twelve
twenty fourteen timeframe, and Mexican hyper pure Mexican myth arrived
(20:05):
to dethrone crack around twenty thirteen twenty fourteen. That became
the number one drug. Then the homeless tents start to spread.
Then in twenty eighteen, Fedidel arrived, combined with the myth,
and he said, that's when homelessness became skid rowifiede if
there's going a turn there, skid rowifide. So it was
(20:28):
in that period from about twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen to
twenty eighteen, maybe five six years, where the thing exploded
and everybody's going what the hell, And Karen Vass and
Garcetti and Knewsom clung to, well, we have to have
housing first.
Speaker 4 (20:45):
Now.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
They conveniently clung to that because they could get a
lot more money for it, and then their developer friends
could come in and steal the money, which they had
by the billions. So I think that's theirs. They must
know by now that housing first doesn't work because we've
tried this for twelve years. It's been a failure. So
(21:07):
they know, but they don't care. Don't ever say all
they care it's good intentions, They're just misguided. No, they
don't care. And this is really lucrative. The old theory
is that homelessness has economic roots. No, our homelessness in
(21:28):
LA has almost entirely is almost entirely due to the
super meth and the fentanyl, and there's no real solution
to their homelessness. You have to first consider what those
drugs do to a human being's mind and body. Giving
needles is just asking for trouble. And he said the
(21:54):
problem is is nobody's been allowed to talk about this.
And he says the tent campments are one long public
death row.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
They are.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
He says two thousand, two hundred homeless people die on
county streets every year. Think about that, two thousand, two hundred.
So over the last twelve years of this scourge, about
twenty five thousand people have died in our streets, just
in La County twenty five thousand. Pratt spoke bluntly about
(22:33):
issues that hadn't been discussed plainly in LA for some time,
and many Angelinos, he writes, thirsted for this and much
of what burdens the city today is connected to the
methan fentanyl, homelessness, encampments, disease in the encampments, typhus, rape, pimping, trash,
(22:57):
the street light stripped of copper, the fire department energy
drained by the enormous number of calls to the deranged
homeless people, and it goes on and on. And Pratt
channeled the anger of manny Angelinos who experience this daily
homelessness firsthand, and Kenuna said something that's very disturbing to me.
(23:19):
They all told Kennas that they're seeing the same thing
Pratt is talking about, and they're angry about it. But
few of those that Kenunya spoke to said they would
vote for him, but they appreciated his frank talk. That's
where the breakdown is that I don't understand Betts and
Ramin created this situation. It's metastasized into stage four society
(23:46):
cancer in La Pratt is coming and saying this is
what's going on. Everybody goes, yeah, yeah, I agree, you're right.
I'm as angry as you are, Spencer. But few said
they would vote for him. Now, what kind of psychosis
is that? Because he was loosely associated with Trump, that's
(24:13):
probably a big part of it. Not only does meth
cause psychosis, but the existence of Trump causes psychosis in
people's brains. Trump had nothing to do with the meth
in fentinyl. In fact, by closing the border, according to Cononias,
(24:36):
meth and fentanyl has supplies have dropped. Fentinyl supplies have
been dropping since twenty twenty three. Overdose deaths began falling
at the same time. But the myth still it's really
easy and cheap to make. It's so abundant. He writes
that he's interviewed people in MacArthur Parker who said it's
(24:56):
basically free. The myth is so plentiful, it's selling for
practically nothing. And instead people voted for Bass with the
failed homeless policy who burned down the Palisades. Romin got
(25:20):
a lot of fake votes, but some voted for her
when she fought against getting rid of encampments Pratt they
agreed with, but I'm not going to vote for him.
That is a psychosis that's worse than the meth psychosis
that the homeless have. All Right, we come back, got
(25:42):
around of the moistline coming up, and all right, that
was gonna make an appearance on YouTube. That's just so exciting.
I'm sure people can hardly wait it is. I heard
you caused the CRITI sensation yesterday people were reacting to you.
I'm not gonna because I don't want to start it
up again, and then I'll eat this, this this vegan
(26:04):
thing you have.
Speaker 3 (26:05):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Can I Am six forty live everywhere on the iHeartRadio
app John Cobelt Show ron from three to six after
six John cobelt Show on demand on the iHeart app. Well,
let's take a break from all the intense news today
and enjoy enjoy a Kamala Harris word salad. She served
(26:33):
up some more. Apparently, Don Lemon, you talk about the
conversation between two vegetables. Don Lemon talking with Kamala Harris
on his video podcast, and it's hard to explain some
(26:56):
of this, So we're just gonna play it and see
what you think. Play cut number eight.
Speaker 5 (27:00):
I believe you know, don I really truly believe this.
We each have light inside of us, and we need
to know that that is what inspires our hope as
much as anything external to ourselves. And when we feel
that and not allow an election or an individual to
(27:20):
dampen that light and instead light let that light kind
of carry us in particular for moments of darkness, that
that we not only act on that hope, but we
inspire that hope in each other, and in particular at
this moment, it is so important that we not only
(27:44):
have hope, but that we understand that that should be
a verb, which means that hope has to go hand
in hand with action.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Hope is a verb. It is a noun. You can
have hope right, or you can hope something good all happen,
which makes it a verb. She, I guess doesn't know
that hope is a verb. She said it should be
a verb. Now what do you think the rest of
(28:19):
that was? Had she run for governor, you know, she
would have gotten the nomination and we'd be looking at
at that right now. People would actually vote for this lady,
and I'm going to die, and no one's ever going
(28:41):
to explain why anybody would vote for her. I'm not
going to know. There's more to this clip, right, Play
somewhere has.
Speaker 5 (28:51):
To go hand in hand with action, and that action
includes the overcoming the obstacles. There's a throw in front
of us in terms of access to the ballot. That
that hope, combined with the action, will result in us
winning the midterms. That hope, combined with action will allow
(29:11):
us to celebrate Juneteenth in all of the traditions that
involve good food and dance and laughter and family and community.
And that we will also understand that that hope is
consistent with a commitment to the fight, the fight for
(29:33):
equality and for freedom and for justice.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
And if you watch the video, Leomon is sitting there
and just like nodding along as if this makes sense. Wait,
we've got more. We have another bowl. She hasn't decided
whether she's going to run for president or not.
Speaker 5 (29:57):
Oh my, I have not decide, to be honest with you,
but I've been spending a lot of time traveling the country,
as we talked about earlier, and listening to folks and
you know, I think that that people want a leader
who is willing to take risks as opposed to just
(30:20):
doing what is popular. I think people want to know
that they are being seen and heard, and that you
know that that their leaders, whether they're at a local, state,
federal level, or in the White House, are looking first
at the people, you know, not looking at themselves in
the mirror, but looking at the people and listening and.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
Looking at you know what. What I'm hearing.
Speaker 5 (30:49):
What people really want is that their first priorities are
the first priority of their president and their leaders. And
that really does start with affordability, you know, regardless of
the age of the person, whether you're talking about gen
z to you know, to seniors, affordability around housing, affordability
(31:14):
around healthcare, you know, for so many, affordability around childcare.
Speaker 2 (31:20):
That's what people want.
Speaker 1 (31:22):
Wow, it leaves you stunned. I'm speechless. I what's wrong?
There's something wrong. I don't know if it's the sharp Nay.
She could be taking big puffs. Might I got a
(31:45):
hold of some of your gummies? Maybe too many of them.
Maybe when you pap a gummy, do you talk like that?
I just don't speak.
Speaker 2 (31:58):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (32:02):
Don Lemon says, since they're Google eyed, like he can't starstruck,
you can't believe can't Maybe makes sense to him.
Speaker 4 (32:09):
There you go.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
Could have been the governor of California. Could have been
the governor of California. All right, Now, here's an update
from the KFI twenty four hour 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
Speaker 3 (32:33):
App KFI Am six More stimulating talk
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
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.