February 12, 2025 • 32 mins
The John Kobylt Show Hour 2 (02/12) - Joe Khalil comes on the show to talk about Democrats targeting Elon Musk during the first DOGE hearings. Pres. Trump might be taking back money meant for California high-speed rail. You're a "NIMBY" now if you don't want toxic debris from fires removed and placed in your area.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can't find AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt Podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
If you miss anything, tune in on the iHeart app
after four o'clock. It's John Cobelt on Demand. John Cobelt
Show on Demand. That's what it's going something like that.
The podcast versions the same as the radio John Cobelt
Show podcast. That works, John Cobelt Show Podcast. All Right,
(00:25):
my name just I can't even pronounce.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
My name easily.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
People have a hard time with your last name.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
It's very I know I do too. I stumble it
over it all the time.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Let's uh coming up after in the next segment, if
we're gonna Debra's news and then we're gonna go away
one thousand dollars, and then I'm gonna tell you I'm
rooting for this so bad. It is possible that Trump
could take away over four billion dollars in high speed
rail money that they have not spent yet. They have
(00:59):
gotten state and federal government contributions totaling four billion dollars
never spent. It's in an account. Most of that came
from the federal government during the Biden administration. Is Trump
going to go after it. We'll talk about that coming up.
You know, that would really imperil the Bakersfield to Merced
(01:22):
leg of the project, which is the only leg they're
even trying to construct now.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Joe Khalil is the.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
Capitol Hill correspondent for a News Nation, the cable TV
News network, which does great work. And there is now
a Doge subcommittee in Congress, led by Marjorie Taylor Green, and.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
They want to partner up with Musk's.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Department of Government Efficiency and maybe legislation past legislation that
Musk says would be appropriate.
Speaker 1 (01:57):
Let's get Joe Khalil.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
On how you doing.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I'm doing good. They had the first hearing.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
Today, Yes they did. This is the Doge Subcommittee in
the House, and you know, I got to say it
was probably more substantive than I expected. I was, frankly
kind of expecting an s H I T show, you know,
because Doge has really been at the center of, you know,
the biggest frustrations and fights between Democrats and Republicans over
(02:27):
the last couple of weeks here on Capitol Hill. And
definitely there was some of that. There was some partisan
back and forth, some tense moments, you know, some I
guess viral, you know, clips for social media. But there
was also what I perceived anyway was was a willingness
from Republicans and from Democrats to actually take a look
(02:47):
at certain parts of federal spending, whether it's in medicaid
or whether it's in payouts or something else where there
is fraud, where there is abuse, where you know there's overspending,
and maybe try to find by Parson waste to clause
some of that back. There was a wide acknowledgment that
that is a problem that exists. The disagreements and then
the heated moments did come over Elon Musk and his
(03:10):
authority and whether you know his trying to scale back
federal agencies like USAID or the Treasury Department or you know,
the US Department Education. You know, he's trying to end
these agencies, whether that's legal what they are doing, whether
they're doing it in a way that you know allows
Congress to have a voice in it. So that was
the kind of thing we expected. But again, if you
(03:33):
go back and watch the whole thing, a bit more
substantive than I think a lot of folks expected.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Today, Trump is the one who will make decisions on
whether they can close down agencies. It's funny how Musk
is taking all this incoming fire, but he doesn't have
any real powers. He's like an outside consultant. He's set
up an office and he's recommending to Trump to do
this and that, cut this, you know, defund that. But
(03:59):
Trump hassed to sign off on all this. But Trump's
not getting a fraction of the criticism that Musk is getting,
which is fascinating.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
Yeah, it is really interesting, and you wonder if maybe
President Trump you know, knows that and sort of benefits from,
you know, not having to take the incoming that Elon
Musk is getting. You know, I think the reason that
there's the perception among Democrats certainly they are trying, they
are pushing that that message is that, you know, over
(04:28):
the weekend before us AID had its funding frozen, it
was Elon Musk on X posting I think like three
dozen times about you know us A I D and
very making very bold statements about you know, this agency
is a criminal organization and it has to shut down.
We're going to put it through the wood shipper. I
think at one point he said it must die and
(04:50):
then that you know, that was Saturday Sunday and then Monday,
all of a sudden, the agency's website is like shut
down and closed down. So, you know, it offers, whether
that's the reality or not, this perception that he is
the driving force behind some of these closures and the
fact that it's DOGE representatives we know DOGE is led
by Elon Musk that are literally going to these offices,
(05:13):
knocking on doors and you know, doing these sort of
interviews with certain people, telling certain agency heads that they
no longer you have a job at these agencies. So
that's sort of fueling the democratic frustration here. But it
is a very interesting dynamic. You're right.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
The Democrats keep positioning this as if it's some kind
of hostile takeover. But Trump has invited Musk and Musk's
crew into government and they are real government employees, now, correct.
I mean, you have to go through a process to
work for the government, and Musk has gone through that process,
and there is legitimate a government employee is a set
(05:51):
of employees as anybody else's.
Speaker 4 (05:54):
Yeah, I think, I mean, I think that's right. I
don't think there's any disputing, you know, just surely practically
and legally that anybody who works for Doge works for
the government, works legitimately for this administration. You know, I
think that where the pushback comes from from the other
side is you know, they say things like if USAID,
(06:17):
for example, it was strengthened by it was you know,
founded by executive order, but was written into law by Congress,
that if you want to end the program entirely or
significantly cut it, you need Congresses say in that. Or
if Congress appropriates ten billion dollars for USAID and Doe says, no,
(06:38):
you only can have one billion, and we're taking back
the rest because they think it's a waste of federal funds,
that that cannot be a decision that is made just
by Doge. That Congress is saying Democrats and Congress are saying,
you need to come back to Congress and make your
case for why nine billion out of that ten needs
to come back and Congress needs to approve it. Congress
is a majority Republican, by the way, So I am
(07:00):
if Elon Musk did come back to Congress, for example,
and ask for some of the things that he wants
to move forward, that he very well might have a
receptive audience for those things.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Yeah, And Trump's argument is, I have to spend money
that's going for fraudulent programs because Congress authorized the money
not knowing that the programs are fraudulent. That's uh, well,
I guess all this is going to end up in
court eventually.
Speaker 4 (07:27):
Yeah, you know. I mean so it's interesting, like there
are there are definitely if you look at I think
any government agency, government program with a fine tooth comb,
what you're going to find is there is a lot
of waste, there's a lot of fraud. I think President
Trump and Elon Musk were absolutely correct in pointing that out.
At the beginning of their administration. You know, he was
(07:48):
riding this wave of popularity, and you heard a lot
of Democrats say, we are absolutely down for you know,
working with dose. Actually, I remember some two dozen Democrats
at that point raising their hand for the Dose committees
and saying, let's do it, let's work on this kind
of stuff. I think what starts to happen is when
the cuts actually go into practice all of a sudden,
(08:09):
It's like this program that benefits people in one state,
or this program that benefits people in a different state.
You've got representatives from those states, and actually sometimes that's
Republicans too, saying, hold on this. Actually, you know, here's
why we need this. So what we're doing, what we're
seeing now from the Trump administration, mostly led by Senator
excuse me, Secretary Rubio, by the way, is when it
(08:30):
comes to things like foreign aid, Rubio is saying, anybody
who has a case for why their funding was not
waste or not fraudulent, come back to us, explain it,
and we can make exemptions for program A or program
B or program X. So I think you're starting to
see that now, which is I think somewhat satisfying some
(08:54):
of the Democrats. But Republicans seem to be very okay
with the way that that system's working now.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
All right, And of course, you know a year ago, no,
but nobody on either side was for any of this.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
It's just fascinating.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
This stuff has been building up for decades and nobody
said a peep about it.
Speaker 4 (09:09):
Yeah, I mean there were you know, Elon Musky, it
was was absolutely an accelerant. And you know, there were
people that talked a lot about, you know, we need
to find waste and cut it out and root it out.
It was being done at a snail's pace and he
came in and he said, you know, let's torture all
this stuff. And so now you're seeing the rapid action
happen and some some rapid you know, response to it.
(09:31):
But we all hope as Americans that what ends up
as a product where you know, you are able to
claw back some of that money that's wasted and money
that's going for legitimate stuff continues to go for a
legitimate stuff. So let's see how you know, the next
couple of months here developed.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
All right, Joe, thanks for coming on, of course, happy
to do it.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
All right, Joe Khalil, Capitol Hill correspondent for a News Nation,
the cable TV network News Network. Are we come back
speaking a clawback? Is Trump going to claw back over
four are billion dollars from California high speed rail, which
is the biggest, most wasteful project you will ever see
in your life. That's coming up next.
Speaker 5 (10:09):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
We spent a lot of time today on the tremendous
amount of corruption and waste that Elon musk Is is
finding in Washington, d C. And you know, you know
what's funny is for all the squealing going on, you
can't argue against any of this stuff. I mean, I mean,
my favorite so far, just because this story came out
(10:37):
just a couple hours ago, was that they've got a
limestone mine in Pennsylvania, and when people want to retire
from the federal government, they send in an application to
get their benefits and it goes to the limestone mine,
twenty three stories under the earth, and that's where they
process by hand the pay paper work. And it really
(11:01):
is paperwork. There's no computers, no technology, nothing electronic, and
all the retirement papers are put into manila folders and
they're stacked in cardboard boxes on metal shelves. This thing
was built in nineteen fifty five, and it looks and
runs exactly the way it did in nineteen fifty five.
(11:23):
It takes months and months to retire from the federal government.
They don't have any computerized, digitized records at all. They're
carrying around manila envelopes and putting them in boxes. And
this is a mine shaft, and the processing slows down
whenever the mine shaft elevator breaks. This is the government,
(11:48):
and the government here in California is just as incompetent,
just as backwards. And we've had this long running show
right in front of our eyes. For seventeen years. We've
been hearing about high speed rail and nothing's been built.
And there's a story today in the Fresento b that
(12:13):
they've already spent eleven and a half billion dollars eleven
and a half billion dollars on high speed rail. You'd
think there'd be something to show for it. This is
state money, federal money, and there's almost two billion more
budgeted from now until June. And they think Trump is
(12:40):
gonna come in and start clawing back some of the
money because there's over four billion dollars remains unspent. It's
sitting in the bank accounts. They got their first grant,
it passed in eight they got their first grant from
Obama in two thousand and nine, and there's four billion
(13:03):
dollars plus that is unspent.
Speaker 4 (13:07):
The U.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
And they had an interview with Brian Kelly, who recently
stepped down. He ran the rail authority for six years. Boy,
I'd like to put this guy in there, inject him
with truth serum. Imagine you've run this thing for six
years and you have nothing to show for it, and
you spent billions. Remember, their their goal is to build
(13:33):
the high speed rail from Merced to Bakersfield, and there's
no interest that anyone has in taking that route. Although
technically it's going to be from the town of Shafter
to the town of Madera. Shafter is near Bakersfield. I
think it's an open field at this point on both ends.
(13:55):
I mean, what kind of a crime is this going
to be? After they end up spending tens of billions
of dollars and all you get is Shafter to Madera.
Shouldn't people go in prison. Shouldn't they go to prison
and be tortured. They should be sent to El Salvadoran
prisons with all those tattooed gang members. That's what should
happen to these high speed rail executives and the consultants.
(14:20):
Kelly told the Fresno b last year, I look at
how we're doing in Mersadenberykersfield with those extensions, and we
still have to get more federal money to get them done.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
There's no reason to get them done. There's no market
for this.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
And what's going to be needed for San Francisco to
La is we're going to need a federal partner to
say get that done. Well, it ain't going to be
Trump that Trump should go and grab all this money back,
because how could this not be illegal? How could this
not be criminal? Here are the various grants they got.
(15:02):
They got a grant of twenty four million from the
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity program. The hell
is that twenty five million they got the next year
for the same program, twenty million in twenty twenty three,
two hundred and two million in twenty twenty three from
the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program. Then they
(15:26):
got three hundred million in in awards to pay to
acquire land and design and construct Fresno's high speed rail station.
Who wants high speed rail and you end up in Fresno,
that's a disappointment. I want to get the Fresno and
(15:46):
I want to get the Fresno fast. I want to
get the Fresno now, and I'll spend billions to get
the Fresno one hundred and seventy one miles and Brian Kelly,
the former CEO, talks like the this is entirely normal,
Like it's entirely normal to spend eleven billion dollars and
have a train that nobody wants that goes nowhere, and he.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
Keeps insisting we need a federal partner.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
How about no, I mean, I am going to have
a party if Trump finally shuts this thing down for good.
What a horrific waste. This is our money. I take
it personally. I get pissed off every week. Every week
I look, I have how much in taxis they take
out of my check? And I get pissed off because
I know it's going for this nonsense. All right, we
(16:30):
come back. One word I hate or it's actually an
acronym nimbi, and the New York Times used it, and
it's over the toxic waste from the LA fires. You're nimby.
Now if you don't want the toxic waste, then you're yeah, no, no,
nobody wants that. But it's used as as some kind
(16:52):
of an insult. We'll talk about this coming up.
Speaker 5 (16:55):
You're listening to John Cobel's on demand from KFI Am
six four.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Their newsom was here in California yesterday. You see that jacket.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
He was well, he looked, he looked very handsome. He
did what what kind of jacket. Is that it's a blazer. Yeah,
but it wasn't a normal blazer. It was stylish. John,
Is that what it is? Kind of matched the pants,
didn't it.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
Uh? I don't look at the pants. I saw the jacket. Anyways,
we're very dressed up to uh have a news conference
on toxic waste.
Speaker 5 (17:31):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
People are very angry in the towns where they're dragging
the toxic waste from the fires, and the New York
Times can be really hateful against normal people who live
in the suburbs, in single family homes with families, because
people who live in those kind of homes, and I
(17:54):
know much of our audience lives that way in suburban
single family homes. The progressives the New York Times, they
hate you and when you don't want things in your
neighborhood that they think you should find appropriate, such as,
you know, drug treatment, halfway houses, homeless shelters, affordable housing.
(18:21):
You know, if you you, you know, you you work
all your life, you want to live in a nice
neighborhood with the civilized people, and you don't want raft
and affordable housing is code word for riffraff, and they
want to force the riffraff on you when they want
to force the drug addicts, they want to force the
homeless people on you.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
But they're not going to live in those areas.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
Oh no, no, no, you'll never. I am sure you
go to an area that has what's the other ethan
is a mixed housing. Find me like an Allied Times
journalist that lives next door to affordable housing. Find me
a politician that lives next door to some kind of
a homeless shelter. Yeah, it's forever. So they've come up
(19:01):
with this said, this insult, this epithet. A nimby stands
for no in my backyard.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
You probably know that.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
And so the Times has the new Nimby battle over
waste from the La Fires. Now, if you don't want
toxic waste in your neighborhood, you are now a nimby.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
That is ridiculous because nobody is going to want toxic waste,
and nobody that you would be an idiot to want that.
Speaker 2 (19:29):
That's right, The New York Times and they got the
Katie selig Hey suss him and Az and Mimi Dwyer
think that you should inhale poisonous toxins.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
Okay, then let's move them into those areas and let
them inhale the toxins.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
Oh, I'd like to find their addresses and see where
they live. I'm sure we can.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Yeah, so they So you're a Nimby and you're you're
you're to be disrespected, insulted, shunned. I'm a Nimby. We've
got to turn that into something positive.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
We need to.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
We need Nimby flags, nimb Nimby bumper stickers, Nimby T shirts.
Speaker 1 (20:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
No in my backyard, No toxic waste, No homeless shelters,
no drug rehab, no affordable housing with crazy people inside.
So Newsom went to Alta Dina, now the Alta Dina
toxic waste. And I know what this stuff is. This
is asbestos. This is lead that was in all the paints.
(20:30):
This is the lithium ion batteries that all melted, and
the stuff has been in the air. And if you've
lived near Pasadena and Altadena area, lived on the West side,
we've all been breathing this. They quote one woman here
names Catalina. She's a real estate agent in Duarte where
they want to put where they've put one of the
(20:50):
toxic waste sites. She said the smoke exacerbated her asthma.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
I was wheezing.
Speaker 2 (20:57):
I know I had a horse voice. I was wheezing
for a few day. I have the same and I
know this poisons in my lungs. And who knows when
it's gonna turn into something, right, maybe we're all going
to get weird tumors in ten years. And this is
the part that got me as skeptical as the New
(21:18):
York Times is of you know, Trump and Musk. If
it's federal bureaucrats, they always believe. Federal officials say the
four temporary sites processing the debris pose no threat to
public health or to the environment. Well, why don't they
use the standard that they use with Musk?
Speaker 1 (21:37):
Prove that.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
Let's have details. How do you know none of this
stuff is a threat to my public health or to
my environment? Because the next paragraph says this is one
of the most complex removal efforts in US history. An
EPA official assured this crowd in Duarte. They had this
town hall meeting. Apparently people were yelling, or as the
(22:00):
Times puts it, emotions ran high. That means they were
yelling at all these these mayors and these EPA officials
and EPA officials assured the crowd that the hazardous materials
would be properly packaged and transported, and the audience started yelling,
do the right thing, fight another place. So the waste
(22:24):
they're packaging up and they're taking to temporary sites, and
that those temporary sites is what has residents in those
neighborhoods screaming bloody murder. They don't know how long those
sites are going to be in use. I mean it
could be months. And here's newsome. These sites are being monitored,
they're being assessed, and we're going to hold everyone to
(22:46):
a level of accountability as it relates to those sites
coming back cleaner than when they found them. Okay, So
I'm reading this this morning, right, and I was I
was remembering something. Remember two and one, the nine to
eleven attacks. World Trade Center was hit and it was
on fire and there were huge clouds of toxic materials
(23:10):
and gases and smoke, and Christine Todd Whitman was the
head of the EPA. This was under the Bush administration,
and the Bush administration was a huge disaster. I knew
Christine Todd Whitman a little bit because back when we
did our show in New Jersey. She first ran for
senator and lost, and then ran for governor and won.
(23:33):
And I interviewed her a number of times in studio.
Speaker 3 (23:36):
Did she tell you never to go to New York again?
Speaker 2 (23:39):
Well, I interviewed her before all this happened after, but
she was like she seemed nice, she was smart, she
was moderate and reasonable. After she was done being governor,
she ended up in the Bush administration running the EPA,
and the most important job she had was to tell
(23:59):
the truth about what the air was like around the EPA.
And she issued a statement a week after the World
Trade Center collapsed, and it said, I'm glad to reassure
the people of New York that their air is safe
(24:21):
to breathe and their water is safe to drink.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
This was a week after the crash.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
There's still clouds of toxic smoke in the air and gases.
And since then she's always maintained she was simply passing
on what government scientists were telling her. She was warning
those working at ground zero to wear respirators, but dismissed
(24:50):
concerns over the surrounding area, which was engulfed in the
same dust and ash. Three days after the attacks, she
said the good news continues to be that air samples
that we have taken all have been at levels that
caused us no concern. Well, it was completely wrong. Could
not have been more wrong. And I found this article
(25:13):
from twenty sixteen. More than thirty seven thousand people registered
with the World Trade Center Health Program. It was a
federal organization to help those affected by exposure to the toxins.
Many have chronic respiratory illnesses or cancer. More than eleven
hundred people at the time died, a lot of firefighters
(25:34):
and police officers and workers. The number included first responders
who were at Ground zero and people who lived worked
in the surrounding area. Over eleven hundred people died, and
this was almost ten years ago. I don't know what
the total is. And she says now she cringes every
year at the anniversary because she knows she's going to
(25:56):
get more crap. She said some years ago. If people
are dying from this and I have not seen the data,
and they believed that everything was fine, then you have
to blame the message they were hearing. And what they
were hearing was that the air quality and Laura Manhattan
at the time was okay, except it wasn't okay because
you just trusted whatever the dumbass bureaucrats told her.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
Why can't people just be honest. I get that people
will panic, of course, but just be honest. So you
know what, the air is toxic. It's bad. We don't
know how long it's going to be bad, but it's bad.
Wear a mask every day. We're protect yourself.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
Whitman said it was known that asbestus led and other
toxins that's the same toxins from this fire were in
the wreckage of the twin towers, and that those working
on rescue and recovery should wear respirators.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Most did not.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
So I'm telling you people in the Palisades area Malibu
where they had that toxic site at will Rogers Beach,
people in Alta Dina along the foothills out to d'Arte,
do not believe Gavin Newsom, do not believe the EPA,
Do not believe anybody. There's toxins in the air, and
(27:11):
you breathe in too much of this, you're going to die.
We've already seen it happen with the World Trade Center.
This is no different. It's the same same materials, it's
the same lead and asbestos and chemicals.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
Don't trust.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Do not trust Gavin Newsom telling you that the readings
are going to be checked and monitored. It's a lot
to Huey, all right. The government cannot be trusted on
this stuff.
Speaker 5 (27:35):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI Am sixty.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Oh, I want to play a clip here. This was funny.
I actually heard this.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
I was driving yesterday evening and I sometimes listened to
the audio version of CNN and Fox, and I had
on Anderson Cooper and he had one of those panels
and they were discussing Trump and Musk right, and on
the panel was a new Hampshire governor, Chris Sanunu, former governor.
(28:05):
He just he just stepped down after serving I don't
know how many terms. And also Jeffrey Tuban. I have
surprise Like Jeffrey Tubin. Last I heard of him, he
was caught pleasuring himself on camera at some Zoom meeting. Yeah,
I mean, nothing ruins your career anymore, which I guess
is a good thing. But you could even he's like
(28:27):
moaning and groaning and because he has he also worked
for a magazine. I think it was the New Yorker
and so they had a New Yorker Zoom meeting and
he was doing his thing, not knowing the audio was
still on any event, He's on this panel Chris Sanunu.
And Sununu was pushing a point that Anderson Cooper was saying, Hey,
(28:50):
Musk isn't showing any evidence, he isn't showing details. Why
should we trust this? And Snunu was saying, hey, what
do you want him to do? Bring ten thousand pages?
So listen to this. Because Anderson Cooper loses his temper
and calls Sanunu a bad word.
Speaker 1 (29:04):
I have to be clear.
Speaker 6 (29:05):
To complain about this administration about transparency. When this president
takes open questions on a daily basis, yet Joe Biden
didn't show up for a press conferences six months is insane.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
These guys are being extremely transparent.
Speaker 6 (29:17):
They don't have to sit there and take the questions,
but they do. That's all on the website, it's all
out there.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
It's not transparency to say things that have no factual background.
Speaker 1 (29:27):
I mean to say we're cutting.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
You know, we've found a billion dollars trillion dollars in
waste with no specifics.
Speaker 6 (29:33):
That's just talk that's not transparent. It's twenty three days
in here, guys, twenty three days. You're you're you were
talking about two point three billion that was saved last year.
These guys are saving two point three billion a day.
Speaker 5 (29:43):
No, well, it's.
Speaker 1 (29:44):
Incredible, that's what they're saying. But where's the game.
Speaker 6 (29:48):
You're not going to be satisfied till he shows up
at ten thousand pages. He's giving very specific things he's giving,
but he's not actually giving any evidence of that. It's
all going to come because what they also said was
if we have to go to Congress, we'll go to Congress, right,
but we'll show.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
Where some of the details that have come out, like
the you know, fifty nine million dollars spent on luxury hotels,
it's actually not.
Speaker 6 (30:11):
There's about the femal money that was used for migrants.
That was, yeah, FEMA money for migrants. That's okay.
Speaker 2 (30:17):
Now no I'm not saying it, so I'm not saying
it's okay.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Don't put words so when.
Speaker 6 (30:20):
You stop, that would stop that process.
Speaker 2 (30:22):
Don't be the portrayal on what I'm saying is the
portrayal called d word is.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
Just not factually accurate. He's talking about luxury hotels.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
There you can. I'm not I'm not a big look.
Speaker 1 (30:33):
I wasn't hurtan to send you saw what FEMA does
and I believe it.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
I guess so Anderson Cooper said, don't be a D word.
Speaker 1 (30:41):
And I heard this because.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
They didn't bleep it out on the honey audio and
that can't be.
Speaker 1 (30:48):
It's completely at a character and uh.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
And then a few minutes later at the end, Cooper apologizes, I.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
Want to apologize.
Speaker 4 (30:56):
I was mean.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
I was I was route to you and I never.
Speaker 6 (31:00):
Are you kidding. I grew up with seven brothers and anybody.
I want to know what I'm normally called. That's one
of the nicest things I've been called all week.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
It's no but that I have homes. No, No, it's
not it's I don't know said that, I really do.
We're all friends. I mean, I like to.
Speaker 6 (31:17):
Keep it, keeps it hot. It's post eight o'clock, have
some fun on CNN.
Speaker 1 (31:20):
I don't want to do that.
Speaker 2 (31:21):
I don't want to do that. That's why nobody watches.
I watch every night. And we're going to cause guests
the D words, all right, when we come back, We're
gonna have wear oaks On from ABC News, the legal analyst,
Uh to try to explain, well, uh, there's inspector generals
that have been fired by the White House. They're now
(31:42):
suing the Trump administration saying these firings were illegal, and uh,
there's all kinds of legal fights because, uh, people are
saying you can't freeze billions of dollars in spending without congression,
congressional approval. Judges are issuing rulings all over the place,
(32:02):
and we're gonna have royal orcs try to sort it out.
Coming up next, Debor Mark Live in the CAFI twenty
four hour Newsroom. Hey, you've been listening to The John
Cobalt Show podcast. You can always hear the show live
on KFI AM six forty from one to four pm
every Monday through Friday, and of course, anytime on demand
on the iHeartRadio app.
Can't find AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt Podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
If you miss anything, tune in on the iHeart app
after four o'clock. It's John Cobelt on Demand. John Cobelt
Show on Demand. That's what it's going something like that.
The podcast versions the same as the radio John Cobelt
Show podcast. That works, John Cobelt Show Podcast. All Right,
(00:25):
my name just I can't even pronounce.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
My name easily.
Speaker 3 (00:28):
People have a hard time with your last name.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
It's very I know I do too. I stumble it
over it all the time.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Let's uh coming up after in the next segment, if
we're gonna Debra's news and then we're gonna go away
one thousand dollars, and then I'm gonna tell you I'm
rooting for this so bad. It is possible that Trump
could take away over four billion dollars in high speed
rail money that they have not spent yet. They have
(00:59):
gotten state and federal government contributions totaling four billion dollars
never spent. It's in an account. Most of that came
from the federal government during the Biden administration. Is Trump
going to go after it. We'll talk about that coming up.
You know, that would really imperil the Bakersfield to Merced
(01:22):
leg of the project, which is the only leg they're
even trying to construct now.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Joe Khalil is the.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
Capitol Hill correspondent for a News Nation, the cable TV
News network, which does great work. And there is now
a Doge subcommittee in Congress, led by Marjorie Taylor Green, and.
Speaker 1 (01:46):
They want to partner up with Musk's.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Department of Government Efficiency and maybe legislation past legislation that
Musk says would be appropriate.
Speaker 1 (01:57):
Let's get Joe Khalil.
Speaker 4 (01:59):
On how you doing.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
I'm doing good. They had the first hearing.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
Today, Yes they did. This is the Doge Subcommittee in
the House, and you know, I got to say it
was probably more substantive than I expected. I was, frankly
kind of expecting an s H I T show, you know,
because Doge has really been at the center of, you know,
the biggest frustrations and fights between Democrats and Republicans over
(02:27):
the last couple of weeks here on Capitol Hill. And
definitely there was some of that. There was some partisan
back and forth, some tense moments, you know, some I
guess viral, you know, clips for social media. But there
was also what I perceived anyway was was a willingness
from Republicans and from Democrats to actually take a look
(02:47):
at certain parts of federal spending, whether it's in medicaid
or whether it's in payouts or something else where there
is fraud, where there is abuse, where you know there's overspending,
and maybe try to find by Parson waste to clause
some of that back. There was a wide acknowledgment that
that is a problem that exists. The disagreements and then
the heated moments did come over Elon Musk and his
(03:10):
authority and whether you know his trying to scale back
federal agencies like USAID or the Treasury Department or you know,
the US Department Education. You know, he's trying to end
these agencies, whether that's legal what they are doing, whether
they're doing it in a way that you know allows
Congress to have a voice in it. So that was
the kind of thing we expected. But again, if you
(03:33):
go back and watch the whole thing, a bit more
substantive than I think a lot of folks expected.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
Today, Trump is the one who will make decisions on
whether they can close down agencies. It's funny how Musk
is taking all this incoming fire, but he doesn't have
any real powers. He's like an outside consultant. He's set
up an office and he's recommending to Trump to do
this and that, cut this, you know, defund that. But
(03:59):
Trump hassed to sign off on all this. But Trump's
not getting a fraction of the criticism that Musk is getting,
which is fascinating.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
Yeah, it is really interesting, and you wonder if maybe
President Trump you know, knows that and sort of benefits from,
you know, not having to take the incoming that Elon
Musk is getting. You know, I think the reason that
there's the perception among Democrats certainly they are trying, they
are pushing that that message is that, you know, over
(04:28):
the weekend before us AID had its funding frozen, it
was Elon Musk on X posting I think like three
dozen times about you know us A I D and
very making very bold statements about you know, this agency
is a criminal organization and it has to shut down.
We're going to put it through the wood shipper. I
think at one point he said it must die and
(04:50):
then that you know, that was Saturday Sunday and then Monday,
all of a sudden, the agency's website is like shut
down and closed down. So, you know, it offers, whether
that's the reality or not, this perception that he is
the driving force behind some of these closures and the
fact that it's DOGE representatives we know DOGE is led
by Elon Musk that are literally going to these offices,
(05:13):
knocking on doors and you know, doing these sort of
interviews with certain people, telling certain agency heads that they
no longer you have a job at these agencies. So
that's sort of fueling the democratic frustration here. But it
is a very interesting dynamic. You're right.
Speaker 2 (05:30):
The Democrats keep positioning this as if it's some kind
of hostile takeover. But Trump has invited Musk and Musk's
crew into government and they are real government employees, now, correct.
I mean, you have to go through a process to
work for the government, and Musk has gone through that process,
and there is legitimate a government employee is a set
(05:51):
of employees as anybody else's.
Speaker 4 (05:54):
Yeah, I think, I mean, I think that's right. I
don't think there's any disputing, you know, just surely practically
and legally that anybody who works for Doge works for
the government, works legitimately for this administration. You know, I
think that where the pushback comes from from the other
side is you know, they say things like if USAID,
(06:17):
for example, it was strengthened by it was you know,
founded by executive order, but was written into law by Congress,
that if you want to end the program entirely or
significantly cut it, you need Congresses say in that. Or
if Congress appropriates ten billion dollars for USAID and Doe says, no,
(06:38):
you only can have one billion, and we're taking back
the rest because they think it's a waste of federal funds,
that that cannot be a decision that is made just
by Doge. That Congress is saying Democrats and Congress are saying,
you need to come back to Congress and make your
case for why nine billion out of that ten needs
to come back and Congress needs to approve it. Congress
is a majority Republican, by the way, So I am
(07:00):
if Elon Musk did come back to Congress, for example,
and ask for some of the things that he wants
to move forward, that he very well might have a
receptive audience for those things.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
Yeah, And Trump's argument is, I have to spend money
that's going for fraudulent programs because Congress authorized the money
not knowing that the programs are fraudulent. That's uh, well,
I guess all this is going to end up in
court eventually.
Speaker 4 (07:27):
Yeah, you know. I mean so it's interesting, like there
are there are definitely if you look at I think
any government agency, government program with a fine tooth comb,
what you're going to find is there is a lot
of waste, there's a lot of fraud. I think President
Trump and Elon Musk were absolutely correct in pointing that out.
At the beginning of their administration. You know, he was
(07:48):
riding this wave of popularity, and you heard a lot
of Democrats say, we are absolutely down for you know,
working with dose. Actually, I remember some two dozen Democrats
at that point raising their hand for the Dose committees
and saying, let's do it, let's work on this kind
of stuff. I think what starts to happen is when
the cuts actually go into practice all of a sudden,
(08:09):
It's like this program that benefits people in one state,
or this program that benefits people in a different state.
You've got representatives from those states, and actually sometimes that's
Republicans too, saying, hold on this. Actually, you know, here's
why we need this. So what we're doing, what we're
seeing now from the Trump administration, mostly led by Senator
excuse me, Secretary Rubio, by the way, is when it
(08:30):
comes to things like foreign aid, Rubio is saying, anybody
who has a case for why their funding was not
waste or not fraudulent, come back to us, explain it,
and we can make exemptions for program A or program
B or program X. So I think you're starting to
see that now, which is I think somewhat satisfying some
(08:54):
of the Democrats. But Republicans seem to be very okay
with the way that that system's working now.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
All right, And of course, you know a year ago, no,
but nobody on either side was for any of this.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
It's just fascinating.
Speaker 2 (09:05):
This stuff has been building up for decades and nobody
said a peep about it.
Speaker 4 (09:09):
Yeah, I mean there were you know, Elon Musky, it
was was absolutely an accelerant. And you know, there were
people that talked a lot about, you know, we need
to find waste and cut it out and root it out.
It was being done at a snail's pace and he
came in and he said, you know, let's torture all
this stuff. And so now you're seeing the rapid action
happen and some some rapid you know, response to it.
(09:31):
But we all hope as Americans that what ends up
as a product where you know, you are able to
claw back some of that money that's wasted and money
that's going for legitimate stuff continues to go for a
legitimate stuff. So let's see how you know, the next
couple of months here developed.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
All right, Joe, thanks for coming on, of course, happy
to do it.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
All right, Joe Khalil, Capitol Hill correspondent for a News Nation,
the cable TV network News Network. Are we come back
speaking a clawback? Is Trump going to claw back over
four are billion dollars from California high speed rail, which
is the biggest, most wasteful project you will ever see
in your life. That's coming up next.
Speaker 5 (10:09):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
We spent a lot of time today on the tremendous
amount of corruption and waste that Elon musk Is is
finding in Washington, d C. And you know, you know
what's funny is for all the squealing going on, you
can't argue against any of this stuff. I mean, I mean,
my favorite so far, just because this story came out
(10:37):
just a couple hours ago, was that they've got a
limestone mine in Pennsylvania, and when people want to retire
from the federal government, they send in an application to
get their benefits and it goes to the limestone mine,
twenty three stories under the earth, and that's where they
process by hand the pay paper work. And it really
(11:01):
is paperwork. There's no computers, no technology, nothing electronic, and
all the retirement papers are put into manila folders and
they're stacked in cardboard boxes on metal shelves. This thing
was built in nineteen fifty five, and it looks and
runs exactly the way it did in nineteen fifty five.
(11:23):
It takes months and months to retire from the federal government.
They don't have any computerized, digitized records at all. They're
carrying around manila envelopes and putting them in boxes. And
this is a mine shaft, and the processing slows down
whenever the mine shaft elevator breaks. This is the government,
(11:48):
and the government here in California is just as incompetent,
just as backwards. And we've had this long running show
right in front of our eyes. For seventeen years. We've
been hearing about high speed rail and nothing's been built.
And there's a story today in the Fresento b that
(12:13):
they've already spent eleven and a half billion dollars eleven
and a half billion dollars on high speed rail. You'd
think there'd be something to show for it. This is
state money, federal money, and there's almost two billion more
budgeted from now until June. And they think Trump is
(12:40):
gonna come in and start clawing back some of the
money because there's over four billion dollars remains unspent. It's
sitting in the bank accounts. They got their first grant,
it passed in eight they got their first grant from
Obama in two thousand and nine, and there's four billion
(13:03):
dollars plus that is unspent.
Speaker 4 (13:07):
The U.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
And they had an interview with Brian Kelly, who recently
stepped down. He ran the rail authority for six years. Boy,
I'd like to put this guy in there, inject him
with truth serum. Imagine you've run this thing for six
years and you have nothing to show for it, and
you spent billions. Remember, their their goal is to build
(13:33):
the high speed rail from Merced to Bakersfield, and there's
no interest that anyone has in taking that route. Although
technically it's going to be from the town of Shafter
to the town of Madera. Shafter is near Bakersfield. I
think it's an open field at this point on both ends.
(13:55):
I mean, what kind of a crime is this going
to be? After they end up spending tens of billions
of dollars and all you get is Shafter to Madera.
Shouldn't people go in prison. Shouldn't they go to prison
and be tortured. They should be sent to El Salvadoran
prisons with all those tattooed gang members. That's what should
happen to these high speed rail executives and the consultants.
(14:20):
Kelly told the Fresno b last year, I look at
how we're doing in Mersadenberykersfield with those extensions, and we
still have to get more federal money to get them done.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
There's no reason to get them done. There's no market
for this.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
And what's going to be needed for San Francisco to
La is we're going to need a federal partner to
say get that done. Well, it ain't going to be
Trump that Trump should go and grab all this money back,
because how could this not be illegal? How could this
not be criminal? Here are the various grants they got.
(15:02):
They got a grant of twenty four million from the
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity program. The hell
is that twenty five million they got the next year
for the same program, twenty million in twenty twenty three,
two hundred and two million in twenty twenty three from
the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program. Then they
(15:26):
got three hundred million in in awards to pay to
acquire land and design and construct Fresno's high speed rail station.
Who wants high speed rail and you end up in Fresno,
that's a disappointment. I want to get the Fresno and
(15:46):
I want to get the Fresno fast. I want to
get the Fresno now, and I'll spend billions to get
the Fresno one hundred and seventy one miles and Brian Kelly,
the former CEO, talks like the this is entirely normal,
Like it's entirely normal to spend eleven billion dollars and
have a train that nobody wants that goes nowhere, and he.
Speaker 1 (16:08):
Keeps insisting we need a federal partner.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
How about no, I mean, I am going to have
a party if Trump finally shuts this thing down for good.
What a horrific waste. This is our money. I take
it personally. I get pissed off every week. Every week
I look, I have how much in taxis they take
out of my check? And I get pissed off because
I know it's going for this nonsense. All right, we
(16:30):
come back. One word I hate or it's actually an
acronym nimbi, and the New York Times used it, and
it's over the toxic waste from the LA fires. You're nimby.
Now if you don't want the toxic waste, then you're yeah, no, no,
nobody wants that. But it's used as as some kind
(16:52):
of an insult. We'll talk about this coming up.
Speaker 5 (16:55):
You're listening to John Cobel's on demand from KFI Am
six four.
Speaker 2 (17:01):
Their newsom was here in California yesterday. You see that jacket.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
He was well, he looked, he looked very handsome. He
did what what kind of jacket. Is that it's a blazer. Yeah,
but it wasn't a normal blazer. It was stylish. John,
Is that what it is? Kind of matched the pants,
didn't it.
Speaker 2 (17:20):
Uh? I don't look at the pants. I saw the jacket. Anyways,
we're very dressed up to uh have a news conference
on toxic waste.
Speaker 5 (17:31):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (17:32):
People are very angry in the towns where they're dragging
the toxic waste from the fires, and the New York
Times can be really hateful against normal people who live
in the suburbs, in single family homes with families, because
people who live in those kind of homes, and I
(17:54):
know much of our audience lives that way in suburban
single family homes. The progressives the New York Times, they
hate you and when you don't want things in your
neighborhood that they think you should find appropriate, such as,
you know, drug treatment, halfway houses, homeless shelters, affordable housing.
(18:21):
You know, if you you, you know, you you work
all your life, you want to live in a nice
neighborhood with the civilized people, and you don't want raft
and affordable housing is code word for riffraff, and they
want to force the riffraff on you when they want
to force the drug addicts, they want to force the
homeless people on you.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
But they're not going to live in those areas.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
Oh no, no, no, you'll never. I am sure you
go to an area that has what's the other ethan
is a mixed housing. Find me like an Allied Times
journalist that lives next door to affordable housing. Find me
a politician that lives next door to some kind of
a homeless shelter. Yeah, it's forever. So they've come up
(19:01):
with this said, this insult, this epithet. A nimby stands
for no in my backyard.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
You probably know that.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
And so the Times has the new Nimby battle over
waste from the La Fires. Now, if you don't want
toxic waste in your neighborhood, you are now a nimby.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
That is ridiculous because nobody is going to want toxic waste,
and nobody that you would be an idiot to want that.
Speaker 2 (19:29):
That's right, The New York Times and they got the
Katie selig Hey suss him and Az and Mimi Dwyer
think that you should inhale poisonous toxins.
Speaker 3 (19:40):
Okay, then let's move them into those areas and let
them inhale the toxins.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
Oh, I'd like to find their addresses and see where
they live. I'm sure we can.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Yeah, so they So you're a Nimby and you're you're
you're to be disrespected, insulted, shunned. I'm a Nimby. We've
got to turn that into something positive.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
We need to.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
We need Nimby flags, nimb Nimby bumper stickers, Nimby T shirts.
Speaker 1 (20:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (20:09):
No in my backyard, No toxic waste, No homeless shelters,
no drug rehab, no affordable housing with crazy people inside.
So Newsom went to Alta Dina, now the Alta Dina
toxic waste. And I know what this stuff is. This
is asbestos. This is lead that was in all the paints.
(20:30):
This is the lithium ion batteries that all melted, and
the stuff has been in the air. And if you've
lived near Pasadena and Altadena area, lived on the West side,
we've all been breathing this. They quote one woman here
names Catalina. She's a real estate agent in Duarte where
they want to put where they've put one of the
(20:50):
toxic waste sites. She said the smoke exacerbated her asthma.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
I was wheezing.
Speaker 2 (20:57):
I know I had a horse voice. I was wheezing
for a few day. I have the same and I
know this poisons in my lungs. And who knows when
it's gonna turn into something, right, maybe we're all going
to get weird tumors in ten years. And this is
the part that got me as skeptical as the New
(21:18):
York Times is of you know, Trump and Musk. If
it's federal bureaucrats, they always believe. Federal officials say the
four temporary sites processing the debris pose no threat to
public health or to the environment. Well, why don't they
use the standard that they use with Musk?
Speaker 1 (21:37):
Prove that.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
Let's have details. How do you know none of this
stuff is a threat to my public health or to
my environment? Because the next paragraph says this is one
of the most complex removal efforts in US history. An
EPA official assured this crowd in Duarte. They had this
town hall meeting. Apparently people were yelling, or as the
(22:00):
Times puts it, emotions ran high. That means they were
yelling at all these these mayors and these EPA officials
and EPA officials assured the crowd that the hazardous materials
would be properly packaged and transported, and the audience started yelling,
do the right thing, fight another place. So the waste
(22:24):
they're packaging up and they're taking to temporary sites, and
that those temporary sites is what has residents in those
neighborhoods screaming bloody murder. They don't know how long those
sites are going to be in use. I mean it
could be months. And here's newsome. These sites are being monitored,
they're being assessed, and we're going to hold everyone to
(22:46):
a level of accountability as it relates to those sites
coming back cleaner than when they found them. Okay, So
I'm reading this this morning, right, and I was I
was remembering something. Remember two and one, the nine to
eleven attacks. World Trade Center was hit and it was
on fire and there were huge clouds of toxic materials
(23:10):
and gases and smoke, and Christine Todd Whitman was the
head of the EPA. This was under the Bush administration,
and the Bush administration was a huge disaster. I knew
Christine Todd Whitman a little bit because back when we
did our show in New Jersey. She first ran for
senator and lost, and then ran for governor and won.
(23:33):
And I interviewed her a number of times in studio.
Speaker 3 (23:36):
Did she tell you never to go to New York again?
Speaker 2 (23:39):
Well, I interviewed her before all this happened after, but
she was like she seemed nice, she was smart, she
was moderate and reasonable. After she was done being governor,
she ended up in the Bush administration running the EPA,
and the most important job she had was to tell
(23:59):
the truth about what the air was like around the EPA.
And she issued a statement a week after the World
Trade Center collapsed, and it said, I'm glad to reassure
the people of New York that their air is safe
(24:21):
to breathe and their water is safe to drink.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
This was a week after the crash.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
There's still clouds of toxic smoke in the air and gases.
And since then she's always maintained she was simply passing
on what government scientists were telling her. She was warning
those working at ground zero to wear respirators, but dismissed
(24:50):
concerns over the surrounding area, which was engulfed in the
same dust and ash. Three days after the attacks, she
said the good news continues to be that air samples
that we have taken all have been at levels that
caused us no concern. Well, it was completely wrong. Could
not have been more wrong. And I found this article
(25:13):
from twenty sixteen. More than thirty seven thousand people registered
with the World Trade Center Health Program. It was a
federal organization to help those affected by exposure to the toxins.
Many have chronic respiratory illnesses or cancer. More than eleven
hundred people at the time died, a lot of firefighters
(25:34):
and police officers and workers. The number included first responders
who were at Ground zero and people who lived worked
in the surrounding area. Over eleven hundred people died, and
this was almost ten years ago. I don't know what
the total is. And she says now she cringes every
year at the anniversary because she knows she's going to
(25:56):
get more crap. She said some years ago. If people
are dying from this and I have not seen the data,
and they believed that everything was fine, then you have
to blame the message they were hearing. And what they
were hearing was that the air quality and Laura Manhattan
at the time was okay, except it wasn't okay because
you just trusted whatever the dumbass bureaucrats told her.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
Why can't people just be honest. I get that people
will panic, of course, but just be honest. So you
know what, the air is toxic. It's bad. We don't
know how long it's going to be bad, but it's bad.
Wear a mask every day. We're protect yourself.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
Whitman said it was known that asbestus led and other
toxins that's the same toxins from this fire were in
the wreckage of the twin towers, and that those working
on rescue and recovery should wear respirators.
Speaker 1 (26:44):
Most did not.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
So I'm telling you people in the Palisades area Malibu
where they had that toxic site at will Rogers Beach,
people in Alta Dina along the foothills out to d'Arte,
do not believe Gavin Newsom, do not believe the EPA,
Do not believe anybody. There's toxins in the air, and
(27:11):
you breathe in too much of this, you're going to die.
We've already seen it happen with the World Trade Center.
This is no different. It's the same same materials, it's
the same lead and asbestos and chemicals.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
Don't trust.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Do not trust Gavin Newsom telling you that the readings
are going to be checked and monitored. It's a lot
to Huey, all right. The government cannot be trusted on
this stuff.
Speaker 5 (27:35):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI Am sixty.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Oh, I want to play a clip here. This was funny.
I actually heard this.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
I was driving yesterday evening and I sometimes listened to
the audio version of CNN and Fox, and I had
on Anderson Cooper and he had one of those panels
and they were discussing Trump and Musk right, and on
the panel was a new Hampshire governor, Chris Sanunu, former governor.
(28:05):
He just he just stepped down after serving I don't
know how many terms. And also Jeffrey Tuban. I have
surprise Like Jeffrey Tubin. Last I heard of him, he
was caught pleasuring himself on camera at some Zoom meeting. Yeah,
I mean, nothing ruins your career anymore, which I guess
is a good thing. But you could even he's like
(28:27):
moaning and groaning and because he has he also worked
for a magazine. I think it was the New Yorker
and so they had a New Yorker Zoom meeting and
he was doing his thing, not knowing the audio was
still on any event, He's on this panel Chris Sanunu.
And Sununu was pushing a point that Anderson Cooper was saying, Hey,
(28:50):
Musk isn't showing any evidence, he isn't showing details. Why
should we trust this? And Snunu was saying, hey, what
do you want him to do? Bring ten thousand pages?
So listen to this. Because Anderson Cooper loses his temper
and calls Sanunu a bad word.
Speaker 1 (29:04):
I have to be clear.
Speaker 6 (29:05):
To complain about this administration about transparency. When this president
takes open questions on a daily basis, yet Joe Biden
didn't show up for a press conferences six months is insane.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
These guys are being extremely transparent.
Speaker 6 (29:17):
They don't have to sit there and take the questions,
but they do. That's all on the website, it's all
out there.
Speaker 2 (29:21):
It's not transparency to say things that have no factual background.
Speaker 1 (29:27):
I mean to say we're cutting.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
You know, we've found a billion dollars trillion dollars in
waste with no specifics.
Speaker 6 (29:33):
That's just talk that's not transparent. It's twenty three days
in here, guys, twenty three days. You're you're you were
talking about two point three billion that was saved last year.
These guys are saving two point three billion a day.
Speaker 5 (29:43):
No, well, it's.
Speaker 1 (29:44):
Incredible, that's what they're saying. But where's the game.
Speaker 6 (29:48):
You're not going to be satisfied till he shows up
at ten thousand pages. He's giving very specific things he's giving,
but he's not actually giving any evidence of that. It's
all going to come because what they also said was
if we have to go to Congress, we'll go to Congress, right,
but we'll show.
Speaker 4 (30:03):
Where some of the details that have come out, like
the you know, fifty nine million dollars spent on luxury hotels,
it's actually not.
Speaker 6 (30:11):
There's about the femal money that was used for migrants.
That was, yeah, FEMA money for migrants. That's okay.
Speaker 2 (30:17):
Now no I'm not saying it, so I'm not saying
it's okay.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
Don't put words so when.
Speaker 6 (30:20):
You stop, that would stop that process.
Speaker 2 (30:22):
Don't be the portrayal on what I'm saying is the
portrayal called d word is.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
Just not factually accurate. He's talking about luxury hotels.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
There you can. I'm not I'm not a big look.
Speaker 1 (30:33):
I wasn't hurtan to send you saw what FEMA does
and I believe it.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
I guess so Anderson Cooper said, don't be a D word.
Speaker 1 (30:41):
And I heard this because.
Speaker 2 (30:42):
They didn't bleep it out on the honey audio and
that can't be.
Speaker 1 (30:48):
It's completely at a character and uh.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
And then a few minutes later at the end, Cooper apologizes, I.
Speaker 1 (30:56):
Want to apologize.
Speaker 4 (30:56):
I was mean.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
I was I was route to you and I never.
Speaker 6 (31:00):
Are you kidding. I grew up with seven brothers and anybody.
I want to know what I'm normally called. That's one
of the nicest things I've been called all week.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
It's no but that I have homes. No, No, it's
not it's I don't know said that, I really do.
We're all friends. I mean, I like to.
Speaker 6 (31:17):
Keep it, keeps it hot. It's post eight o'clock, have
some fun on CNN.
Speaker 1 (31:20):
I don't want to do that.
Speaker 2 (31:21):
I don't want to do that. That's why nobody watches.
I watch every night. And we're going to cause guests
the D words, all right, when we come back, We're
gonna have wear oaks On from ABC News, the legal analyst,
Uh to try to explain, well, uh, there's inspector generals
that have been fired by the White House. They're now
(31:42):
suing the Trump administration saying these firings were illegal, and uh,
there's all kinds of legal fights because, uh, people are
saying you can't freeze billions of dollars in spending without congression,
congressional approval. Judges are issuing rulings all over the place,
(32:02):
and we're gonna have royal orcs try to sort it out.
Coming up next, Debor Mark Live in the CAFI twenty
four hour Newsroom. Hey, you've been listening to The John
Cobalt Show podcast. You can always hear the show live
on KFI AM six forty from one to four pm
every Monday through Friday, and of course, anytime on demand
on the iHeartRadio app.
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
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
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.