March 10, 2025 • 33 mins
The John Kobylt Show Hour 2 (03/10) - LA County DA Nathan Hochman comes on the show to talk about why he is asking to withdraw a motion for resentencing for the Menendez Brothers. More on the Menendez Brothers. The San Jose mayor wants to start arresting homeless people. The people running high-speed rail say they want to ask Pres. Trump for more money.
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.
Speaker 2 (00:00):
I am six forty you're listening to the John Cobel
podcast on the iHeartRadio app. You missed a good first hour.
You should hear it on the iHeart app for the
podcast John Cobelt Show on demand. We're gonna post it
after four o'clock. Stories that we'll I think be covering
quite some time. Karen Bass deleting all her phone messages
(00:23):
from the week of the fire.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
No cover up there.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Denise Kenoniez, the DWP head. We might be spending seven
hundred thousand dollars on security for her. Yeah, she makes
three quarter a million a year and can't afford her
own security. But now we're going to pay so she
can be driven to work. So she could be driven
to work. So when she gets to work, she decides
(00:50):
not to fill up the reservoir for another day. That's
apparently what she does with her time. Now, let's talk
to Nathan Hockman, the La County DA. You remember last
year George gascon filed emotion to resentence Eric Lyell Menendez
for the murders of their parents from thirty six years ago.
(01:12):
Uh most famous, one of the most famous cases in
America and the Menendez brothers if they got resentenced, it
would likely mean they would be set free because they
would get resentenced in effect to time served. And Nathan
Hockman says no, and so he's asking the court to
(01:33):
withdraw that petition. Let's get him on now see his reasoning. Nathan,
how are you pretty well?
Speaker 1 (01:38):
John? Thanks for inviting me on.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
I see in the news stories that you say the
Menendez brothers have been consistently lying about a number of things,
and that is what one of the reasons you think
they should not be eligible for resentencing. Hearing talk about
what you say they lied They lied about sure well.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
To set the stage for what we did today. The
Menendez case has been on three different tracks. The first
track was initiated back in May of twenty twenty three,
involving a habeas motion, but they said there was new
evidence to get a new trial, not a new sentencing,
and not to get out, but a new trial. We
actually opposed that last month because of the very technical
(02:22):
standard and high hurdle they have to meet. We said
they didn't. The second track is this clemency a direct
shot to the governor, where you basically say the governor,
use your constitutional utililateral power to commute the sentence and
release the Menendez's. The governor could have done that for
the moment he entered office in twenty nineteen. He could
(02:42):
do it today or tomorrow. That's his power and his
power alone to exercise. The third track is this re
sentencing track. This is a California statue that not many
other states have, and it says that if you meet
certain criteria, a judge has the power to turn in
this case, a sentense of life without the possibility of
parole to life with the possibility of parole. But we
(03:05):
have argued that to meet that standard, a particular defendant
has to exhibit full insight into their criminal actions and
completely accept responsibility for the breath of their criminal conduct
before you can determine that they no longer pose an
unreasonable risk of danger to the community. And one of
(03:25):
the analogies that we drew was from how the governor
treated the parole decision for Sir Hansor Head As a
twenty twenty two decision, the governor came down on for
the guy who assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy back in
nineteen sixty eight and had been up for parole sixteen times,
and on the sixteenth time. The first fifteen times it
(03:45):
was denied. The sixteenth time the parole board said, Okay,
this guy has to get parole. He's seventy seven years old,
he's been in prison for fifty four years. He was
twenty four years old when he committed the offense. He
had no prior criminal history, He'd been successfully taking programs
in prison. His risk WORE was the lowest possible. He
(04:07):
needs to get out. The governor, though, denied parole, and
the governor said that notwithstanding all those very pro parole
factors that we should have allowed him out. The fact
that Sir Hansir Hand did not exhibit that full insight
into his criminal conduct, his stories about the murder changed
over time, prevented the governor from granting him. Paroi said,
(04:29):
basically that overcame all the other factors, and Sir hands
her Hand, even though he's old and diminishing health, remained
an unreasonable risk to day of danger to society. So
too did we take the position the Menendez case. We
analyzed tens of thousands of pages of trial transcripts, prison records,
hundreds of hours of videotape, testimony. We spoke to every
(04:52):
Menendez family member that wanted to speak to us, over
twenty of them, interviewed Prosecutor's law enforcement, and spoke to
the Defense Council. For a thorough and exhausted review. We
realized that the Menendezes had not exhibited that full insight
to their conduct because they persisted for over thirty years
in saying that their parents were going to shoot them
(05:14):
the night of August twentieth, nineteen eighty nine, so they
preemptively had to kill them first. We analyzed it and
going back into all the premeditation that they had engaged in,
all the purchasing of shotguns, the lying about it, all
the stories, they came up and said that the Menendezes
had basically never accepted full responsibility for the fact that
(05:35):
their self defense defense was a fabrication and that they
suborned perjury or attended to suborn burgery from many friends
to make arguments like that their father was a violent
rapist of Lyle's girlfriend, that the mother was trying to
poison the family, or that they were trying to get
a handgun the day before the murders, which wasn't true
(05:56):
at all. And then we said, but we're going to
get the Menendez is a pathway that if they finally, unequivocally,
sincerely come clean and say effectively that look, all those
were lies, we made them up, and we finally have
embraced what the full truth is of what our brutal
murders involved, that at that point they'll have new insights
(06:20):
that the court can consider in deciding whether or not
they've been rehabilitated and posed this danger to society. And
at that point the DA's office will also reconsider whether
we go forward on a resetencing motion. But at this point,
without exhibiting those insights, our position is that they do not.
They continue to pose an unreasonable risk of danger the
(06:43):
community in the same way that Sir Hands or Hand does.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
They went to great lengths to plan the killing, and
the idea that they are claiming self defense is really
preposterous just looking at a basic rundown of all the
things they did leading up to the murders. They had
a very detailed plan over a period of time.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
On I mean two days before the murderers, they don't
go to La to buy the shotguns. They drive all
the way down to San Diego at Friday night traffic,
get down to San Diego and use fake IDs in
a fake address to buy the shotguns and the AMMO.
Then they go ahead and before the murderers, they come
up with an alibi where they're going to be a
(07:29):
batman the movie and they're going to have tickets to
prove it, and then meet their friends at the Taste
of La event afterwards. Then when they actually go in
and they shotgun their appearance over twelve times, they stage
the shotgun blast to look like a mafia chille shooting
their father from the back of his head, shooting their
mom while she's already shot bleeding on the ground. They
(07:52):
reload the shotgun and put it against her right cheek
and pull the gun at point frank rage. And then
they shoot each of their parents into the kneecaps to
make it look like a mafia hit. And then they
go ahead, and they did pick up all the shotgun
shells from the room, and he discarded the shotgun shells
and the bloody colling in a gas station dumpster and
(08:12):
throw the shotguns over the cliff on Moho and drive.
And then when the police would they engage in quite
a dramatic series of events where Eric goes ahead and screams,
I'm going to kill them. I'm gonna He's going to
go after the killers. He believes that they tortured his parents.
Who would do this? Of course it was Eric and
Lyle who actually did it, and a lie they persisted
(08:35):
in for six months. So we're saying, basically they came
clean with that original lie, the lie being we didn't
do it, the mafia did it, But they haven't come
clean with all the other lies that they persisted in
for the last thirty years.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
You say that they had never come clean on sixteen
out of twenty major lies that they've told about this case.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
That's correct. We actually filed a chart with the court
and the men endue and their counsel, so if they
ever want to come clean, we let them know exactly
what their lives were, how they could finally admit that
they've been lying, and at that point that might be
their pathway to convince a judge that they have sincerely
embraced these new insights into their crime and should be
(09:19):
considered for resetencing and rehabilitation.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
Well, I'm glad you explained so much, and I think
people listening you should read the news stories and details
about the case that Nathan Hawkman laid out today because
thirty six years a lot of people either weren't around,
weren't conscious enough, or forgot what went on. And I
think a lot of the uh television shows about the case,
(09:44):
just in the interest of time, if nothing else, have
glided over a lot of the glory details which show
how premeditated and just psychotic the whole thing was.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
I think you're right. I think you know, the memories
fade as to what actually happened. You know, in the
original motion that my predecessor filed, they spent just over
three pages on description of the crime. We spent over
sixty pages of our eighty seven page motion that we
filed today describing everything that occurred on the crime and
(10:17):
you know, inciting it to the actual trial transcripts that
we're deriving the information from. So I encourage anyone who
wants to go to the DA's website, which is DA
dot La County dot gov. You can get a copy
of what we filed both here and in the habeas matter.
You can also look at the video that we came
(10:37):
up with called Anatomy of the Menendez Case. It goes
through the whole procedural history of the Menendez case in
order to understand how the system works.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
Nathan Hockman, La County DA, thank you for coming on
and explaining.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
All this my pleasure. Thank you again for having me on.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
All right, Nathan Achman, more coming up, Deborah Mark. Oh,
we're going to talk about the San Jose me who
wants to throw homeless people in jail?
Speaker 3 (11:02):
Now we're talking.
Speaker 4 (11:04):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (11:11):
You see, you see, that's the thing, the Menendez brothers trial.
And I wasn't even living out here when they killed
the parents, but when we got out here, we experienced
the trials. And but then thirty years go by and
there's no way to remember all the details. Like Nathan Hakman,
the La County DA who he just had on, said, yeah,
(11:34):
memories fade, and a lot of people weren't weren't born
or were young children and didn't know anything about about
all the details of the murders and the trials. See
that the details matter and what happens. By the way,
we had Hawkman on because he filed today in court
(11:54):
to withdraw the petition to resentence the Menendez brothers. This
was a Gascone production, and so Hawkman's trying to undo it.
And like he said, he goes they had a sixty
seven page offering to the court, and I think what
was the numbers he used? Was this sixty seven pages
(12:15):
just to explain the crime? I think, yeah, that's what
it was, uh, And that's what it takes. You actually
explain the details of the crime and what led up
to it, their premeditation, their plans, and then the aftermath.
It's clear this is not was not an impulsive move
by any means. This this was like a what they
(12:35):
what they tried to make it look like a mob
hit because it was. It was the way the mob
did it. When you have a mob hit, there's a
lot of premeditation and then there's an after plan.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
But who remembers all that stuff?
Speaker 2 (12:52):
And now you have all these these dopey young girls
who get all their news from a TikTok video. That's
a Randell puts up. How long do TikTok videos go?
Speaker 5 (13:04):
I never have gone on TikTok?
Speaker 3 (13:07):
Eric, How long gives it tick? Does it have a
time limit? TikTok videos?
Speaker 2 (13:12):
I know some TikTok videos that are like over ten minutes, right,
but I don't know if there's a limit. No, But yeah,
I mean the trials take weeks and weeks and probably
most of the videos on this or you know, a
minute or so, and you just you have patrol people
who can make money putting nonsense videos summarizing the Menendez case,
(13:34):
knowing that young girls are going to get whipped up,
their hormones are going to get whipped up, to try
to have sympathy for these cute Menendez boys who are
not cute boys anymore. They're in their fifties and they
have been scamming portions of the public now for thirty
six years with their phony maloney stories. They're psychotic liars.
Speaker 5 (13:53):
Well, you can also watch the documentary on Netflix. There's two.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Yeah, now see I never had I never had a
chance to watch those.
Speaker 5 (14:03):
I watch them both.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
I mean, are they generally accurate, because again they're they're
compressing a complicated story, and.
Speaker 6 (14:09):
Yes, yes, they they are they but I mean one
of them shows exactly talking about the mob hit going through, uh,
the doctor, the psychiatrist going through, you know, buying the
rolexes and doing all the things they did after the murders,
the course, the whatever. So yes, because I thought.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
One of the documentaries was the reason there was more
sympathy for me.
Speaker 6 (14:35):
Then yes, But then there was one where you can
see one of the brothers talking about all the abuse,
and so that's the one that you're talking about where
it really it talks about how he was abused by
the father and the mother didn't do anything. It really, yes,
but it's still it still shows and talks about the
(14:56):
actual crimes.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
But yes, yeah, but they were they were they were
twenty one and eighteen when they did this.
Speaker 5 (15:03):
I think I'd have to look at a camera.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
Well anyway, at least one of them was an outright adult,
and when you're you can't let's and it wasn't really
self defense. They weren't being imminently threatened. They were old
enough obviously to uh drive cars, so you can get
out of the house and get away if there was
some kind of imminent threat or if there was actually
(15:27):
abuse that day, if you know, who knows how much
of it's true, And at this point I don't particularly care.
I think it is obvious that they're psychotic, and if
you're psychotic, that never changes that goes on forever. There's
no rehabilitating psychotic.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
It is a.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
Mental disorder. It's actually even more than a mental disorder.
There's a certain physical chemistry, physical structure of the brain.
They don't have a conscience, they don't have remorse, they're
not capable of having remorse. They don't know what it is.
They try to mimic remorse by watching it in other people.
(16:11):
They try to mimic sensitivity, They try to mimic having
a conscience, but they don't actually have one. It doesn't matter.
Killing somebody, shooting them in the head has as much
impact on their psyche as eating a grape. It has none.
And it's difficult for people to understand this because most
(16:31):
of us don't know a psychia, a true psychotic, intimately,
a true psychopath, we don't know one. There aren't that many.
There are sociopaths, but a psychopath who can violence as
oh by, you know, it's obviously extremely rare. So it's
hard for us to really understand what's that like, what's
(16:52):
that like to have no conscience to say or do anything,
and it doesn't bother you, You don't flinch, there's no remorse,
there's no guilt. That's the thing. There's no guilt. These
two don't feel any guilt. These two aren't sorry about
anything because they can't. The way their brains are structured,
probably inherited from their dad, because their dad was his
(17:14):
own monster and never had any guilt or remorse. If
the stories are true about what dad did to the sons,
well they got his same brain structure. But you don't
let ever let him out. All right, we come back.
We'll talk about the San Jose mayor wanting to arrest
the homeless.
Speaker 4 (17:33):
Yay, you're listening to John Cobel's on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
You can follow us at John Cobelt Radio on social media. Yeah,
Hakman's request to withdraw the resentencing for the Menendez brothers
is eighty seven pages, and I think sixty of the
eighty seven were about the details of the crime. So
all the idiots in the country have to stop watching TikToker, instagram,
(18:03):
summaries and ed. We'll just spend the time and read
the eighty seven page document and then tell me that
the Menendez brothers ought to be free, And same thing
with those idiot family members too. They had it. Looks
like they had a pedophile and two murders, murderers in
the family, and when he counted back in nineteen eighty nine,
(18:23):
nobody did anything about it. Onto the San Jose mayor,
I really am enjoying what's going on in the rest
of the country, and at the same time, I'm almost
sad how we don't get to participate in the party
because across the country, obviously you have Trump and Elon
(18:44):
musk eviscerating much of the waste in government. They're starting
to there's a long way to go, and yes they'll
make mistakes and overreach and all that, but it's going
in the right direction. And you see you see just
billions and billions of dollars being saved, and you see
a lot of Democratic leaders saying, you know enough, we
(19:09):
went down a bad road here. We got to start
tacking back. For example, Eric Adams, the New York City mayor,
who in a lot of ways is a disaster of
a mayor, and he's very unpopular, but at least he
had the good sense to realize a sanctuary city policy
that protects illegal aliens illegal alien criminals is really stupid
(19:29):
and bad for the rest of us, and that's going
on in a number of democratic jurisdictions, including here in California,
because you have cities such as Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco,
and Fremont, that I decided that having encampments of homeless
(19:51):
people in the streets is no longer cool. It's not
something to be embraced. That enough of the needle and
the sentinel, and the meth and the feces and the filth.
That's over and the latest mayor to join the parade.
What I'm saying, it seems like Los Angeles is the
only one that's not moving an inch on anything. You know,
(20:17):
Karen Bass has poured two years and billions of dollars
into homelessness for what well up In San Jose, the mayor,
Matt Mahon, a Democrat, said, it's proposing this plan. Homelessness
can't be a choice. After three offers of shelter, we
(20:38):
hold people accountable for turning their lives around, which means
after three offers of shelter, if you're still sleeping out
in public, you go to jail.
Speaker 3 (20:51):
You go to jail.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
You don't get to sleep on the sidewalk, taking a
poop p and all over the place. Vomiting, leaving all
your filth and garbage, injecting your heroin and your fentanyl
and snorting your meth, acting like a lunatic terrorizing people. No,
San Jose, that's done. Matt Mayhan, we had him on
(21:15):
the show. We should get him on again because he
was one of the mayors who endorsed Prop thirty six,
which turned theft into a crime again in public drug
use into a crime, and fentinyl crimes became a real
thing for the first time. But once the Supreme Court
(21:39):
said that every city and county in California and everywhere
can can forcibly remove homeless encampments, a lot of towns,
a lot of cities have done just that. And what
Mayheon decided to do is they spend a lot of
(22:01):
money on interim housing and shelters. So now they have
two thousand units available or in development. But the thing
is they're building real rooms, they're building actual structures. It's
not like Los Angeles where nothing gets built because we
have so many criminals in government and in the nonprofit
(22:24):
homeless industry.
Speaker 3 (22:25):
Nonprofit.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Apparently they have fewer criminals in that industry in San Jose,
but now they're down to about a third of the
vagrants who were offered interim housing and refusing. I remember
there was a day that Gaven Newsom said publicly he
didn't believe there was anybody refusing housing. Well, Mayheon says,
(22:48):
it's about a third of them. No matter what you offer,
no matter what you try to sell, they're not buying.
So here's this proposal. City council would have to approve it.
If you reject offers of shelter, you would face escalating punishment,
starting with a written warning and ending with a possible arrest.
(23:09):
They got forty four hundred people who are living on
the streets or in cars or abandoned buildings, and he
says mental health and addiction issues are what people. Yeah,
they can't make their own decisions. He says because of
mental health. Well, yes, obviously that's been obvious for ten years.
(23:32):
It's not a lack of housing, it's not income inequality.
It's that they're crazy or they're taking bad drugs. Those
are the two reasons. Because anybody else who's not on
drugs or is not insane figures out what to do
pretty quickly. It's not that complicated. And he says that's
(23:56):
how you break the cycle. And he's absolutely right. So
that's two things. Now that you have a democratic mayor
who has realized, by the way, this is the way
all mayors used to operate, not that long ago, in
our lifetime. Didn't matter if you had a Democrat or
(24:17):
a Republican mayor, a liberal or conservative or whatever.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
There's this basic stuff.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
It's like, no, you don't get to live on a
public sidewalk and leave all your waste and your drug paraphernalia. No,
that's just a know without debate, and that's a problem.
Everybody got sucked into debating this. Everybody got sucked into
feeling bad and feeling starry. And the progressive criminals were
(24:45):
really good at manipulating people's emotions, manipulating their minds to
make you feel guilty like you did something wrong.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
You didn't do anything wrong. You went to work.
Speaker 2 (24:57):
You're just more privileged. It's like, it's not a privilege.
You go to work, you earn money, you can buy shelter.
That's not a privilege. That's normal life. You work in
exchange for your work, you get money in exchange for
the money, you buy some shelter. You have to do that.
That's mandatory in modern society if you want to go
(25:21):
live on the land in a tent, at least would
would you go into the desert somewhere or deep into
the woods.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
But not in front of my kid's school.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
But we had jack holes like Eric Garcetti who actually
tolerated it and embraced it. And so do you know
do you know this, I just read this yesterday. California
is twelve percent of the population. We have fifty percent
of the street homeless in the country. We have fifty
(25:57):
percent of all the street vagrants who are living outdoors
in public spaces, twelve percent of the population, fifty of
the let's call me outdoor homeless. So, and it's not
the weather, because other cities that have a lot are
(26:19):
bad weather cities like Seattle and Portland, and good weather
places like Florida, for example, is largely good weather.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
They don't have this kind of issue.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
It was our stupid left wing progressive policies and the
stupid politicians and people stupid voting patterns. That's what created
the mess. Nothing else, all right, When we come back, boy,
this is a day of scandals. When we come back,
the head of the high speed rail, the CEO wants
(26:55):
more money. They're out of money. Money is gonna be
taken away from them. And now he said, well, if
we don't get more money, then this project, this is
gonna take forever to build. Well, it's already taken forever.
This is how they do it, you see, this is
(27:16):
how they keep paying themselves. Well, you spend all this money,
we got to keep going. Say no, we can stop that.
We could write that off as a loss. We'll talk
about it. We come back.
Speaker 4 (27:24):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI Am.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Six after three o'clock. Michael Munks from KFI News. We
talked about this on Friday. The Los Angeles Homeless Services
Authority a complete disaster. Boy, it's just piling up for bass,
isn't it. They did an audit and found that billions
(27:50):
of dollars has disappeared.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
They don't know where the money went billions.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
The auditors Alvarez and Marcel they did an audit in
just four months ago. The La County Auditor Controller found
the same thing here in the city of La Now,
the Los Angeles.
Speaker 3 (28:16):
Homeless Services Authority is.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
A joint venture between the city and the County and
the city spends a billion three on homelessness, and that's
ten percent of the city's total budget and services one
tenth a percent of the population, which is why they
don't spend money on a fire department, which is one
(28:40):
of the reasons the Palisades burned so badly, because they
spend ten percent of the city's budget on one tenth
percent one tenth of one percent, zero point one. You
cannot mismanage the city more than Karen bass'es. We'll get
to that coming out after three o'clock. Here is more
(29:05):
criminal theft and corruption. There was a board meeting for
the High Speed Rail Authority and the new CEO, Ian
chowdry Chou d ry Dri says, we're gonna keep asking
for federal money from Trump.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
They have no choice.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
They're out of money too, told your last hour of
the city's out of money. Well, high speed rails out
of money, and if not, it's gonna pose a risk
to the schedule. This guy says this with a straight face.
You know, according to the proposition passed in two thousand
(29:52):
and eight, by twenty twenty five years ago twenty twenty,
we should have had the entire rail sys and built
from Sacramento to San Francisco to Los Angeles, to Anaheim
to San Diego. That whole thing should have been built
five years ago. Instead we've got nothing. And now Ian
(30:15):
Chowdrey says, well, we need more money, and you're gonna
ask Trump for more money. Seriously, you're gonna do that.
Kevin Kylie is a Republican representative from northern California. We've
had him on the show when he was in the
state legislature, and he is asking the FBI Director Cash
(30:38):
Battel to investigate high speed rail seventeen years. This is
from the California globe. Seventeen years, no track, no trains,
thirteen billion dollars gone, seventeen years, thirteen billion.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
If I told you in two.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Thousand and eight that by twenty two, twenty five, we'll
have spent thirteen billion dollars, what would you imagine the
world would look like? Could you imagine no trains and
no track after the thirteen billion.
Speaker 3 (31:14):
I tell you they're good at this though.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
They are good at stealing the money and then sitting
at a commission or a committee hearing and giving a passionate,
detailed explanation as to why they need another thirteen billion
or another one hundred and thirteen billion dollars. This is
just a criminal operation. Here's what Trump said on Tuesday.
(31:41):
And if you don't like Trump, tell me what does
he say in this paragraph that's incorrect. The train that's
being built between Los Angeles and San Francisco is the
worst managed project I think I've ever seen. We're going
to start an investigation of that, because it's not possible.
I built for a living, and I buil on time,
on budget. It's impossible that something could cost that much.
(32:04):
They made it much shorter, so now it's at little
places way away from San Francisco, way away from Los Angeles.
We're going to start a big investigation on that because
I've never seen anything like it. Nobody has ever seen
anything like it. It's the worst managed project I think
I've ever seen, and I've seen some of the worst.
I've read that every person who would ride the train
(32:26):
could instead take a limousine back and forth, and you'd
have hundreds of billions of dollars left over. It is
the worst overrun that there has ever been in the
history of our country.
Speaker 3 (32:38):
Tell me what he said that's wrong. It's not even exaggerated.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
He's absolutely right, and Kevin Kyley's asking the FBI to investigate.
And this, this Chowdry character, the new CEO Ian Chowdry,
is actually actually going to the federal government. He's going
to Trump to ask for more money. And because if
Trump won't give it, then this is not going to
be built on time because they're out of money. They're
(33:06):
broke because it's all been stolen. Speaking of money being stolen,
Michael Monks, CAFI News, Los Angeles Homes Services Authority another
massive audit, second one in four months, same thing, billions missing,
What the hell Where'd it go? Coming up next? Debra
(33:27):
mark Live, 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.
Speaker 2 (00:00):
I am six forty you're listening to the John Cobel
podcast on the iHeartRadio app. You missed a good first hour.
You should hear it on the iHeart app for the
podcast John Cobelt Show on demand. We're gonna post it
after four o'clock. Stories that we'll I think be covering
quite some time. Karen Bass deleting all her phone messages
(00:23):
from the week of the fire.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
No cover up there.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Denise Kenoniez, the DWP head. We might be spending seven
hundred thousand dollars on security for her. Yeah, she makes
three quarter a million a year and can't afford her
own security. But now we're going to pay so she
can be driven to work. So she could be driven
to work. So when she gets to work, she decides
(00:50):
not to fill up the reservoir for another day. That's
apparently what she does with her time. Now, let's talk
to Nathan Hockman, the La County DA. You remember last
year George gascon filed emotion to resentence Eric Lyell Menendez
for the murders of their parents from thirty six years ago.
(01:12):
Uh most famous, one of the most famous cases in
America and the Menendez brothers if they got resentenced, it
would likely mean they would be set free because they
would get resentenced in effect to time served. And Nathan
Hockman says no, and so he's asking the court to
(01:33):
withdraw that petition. Let's get him on now see his reasoning. Nathan,
how are you pretty well?
Speaker 1 (01:38):
John? Thanks for inviting me on.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
I see in the news stories that you say the
Menendez brothers have been consistently lying about a number of things,
and that is what one of the reasons you think
they should not be eligible for resentencing. Hearing talk about
what you say they lied They lied about sure well.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
To set the stage for what we did today. The
Menendez case has been on three different tracks. The first
track was initiated back in May of twenty twenty three,
involving a habeas motion, but they said there was new
evidence to get a new trial, not a new sentencing,
and not to get out, but a new trial. We
actually opposed that last month because of the very technical
(02:22):
standard and high hurdle they have to meet. We said
they didn't. The second track is this clemency a direct
shot to the governor, where you basically say the governor,
use your constitutional utililateral power to commute the sentence and
release the Menendez's. The governor could have done that for
the moment he entered office in twenty nineteen. He could
(02:42):
do it today or tomorrow. That's his power and his
power alone to exercise. The third track is this re
sentencing track. This is a California statue that not many
other states have, and it says that if you meet
certain criteria, a judge has the power to turn in
this case, a sentense of life without the possibility of
parole to life with the possibility of parole. But we
(03:05):
have argued that to meet that standard, a particular defendant
has to exhibit full insight into their criminal actions and
completely accept responsibility for the breath of their criminal conduct
before you can determine that they no longer pose an
unreasonable risk of danger to the community. And one of
(03:25):
the analogies that we drew was from how the governor
treated the parole decision for Sir Hansor Head As a
twenty twenty two decision, the governor came down on for
the guy who assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy back in
nineteen sixty eight and had been up for parole sixteen times,
and on the sixteenth time. The first fifteen times it
(03:45):
was denied. The sixteenth time the parole board said, Okay,
this guy has to get parole. He's seventy seven years old,
he's been in prison for fifty four years. He was
twenty four years old when he committed the offense. He
had no prior criminal history, He'd been successfully taking programs
in prison. His risk WORE was the lowest possible. He
(04:07):
needs to get out. The governor, though, denied parole, and
the governor said that notwithstanding all those very pro parole
factors that we should have allowed him out. The fact
that Sir Hansir Hand did not exhibit that full insight
into his criminal conduct, his stories about the murder changed
over time, prevented the governor from granting him. Paroi said,
(04:29):
basically that overcame all the other factors, and Sir hands
her Hand, even though he's old and diminishing health, remained
an unreasonable risk to day of danger to society. So
too did we take the position the Menendez case. We
analyzed tens of thousands of pages of trial transcripts, prison records,
hundreds of hours of videotape, testimony. We spoke to every
(04:52):
Menendez family member that wanted to speak to us, over
twenty of them, interviewed Prosecutor's law enforcement, and spoke to
the Defense Council. For a thorough and exhausted review. We
realized that the Menendezes had not exhibited that full insight
to their conduct because they persisted for over thirty years
in saying that their parents were going to shoot them
(05:14):
the night of August twentieth, nineteen eighty nine, so they
preemptively had to kill them first. We analyzed it and
going back into all the premeditation that they had engaged in,
all the purchasing of shotguns, the lying about it, all
the stories, they came up and said that the Menendezes
had basically never accepted full responsibility for the fact that
(05:35):
their self defense defense was a fabrication and that they
suborned perjury or attended to suborn burgery from many friends
to make arguments like that their father was a violent
rapist of Lyle's girlfriend, that the mother was trying to
poison the family, or that they were trying to get
a handgun the day before the murders, which wasn't true
(05:56):
at all. And then we said, but we're going to
get the Menendez is a pathway that if they finally, unequivocally,
sincerely come clean and say effectively that look, all those
were lies, we made them up, and we finally have
embraced what the full truth is of what our brutal
murders involved, that at that point they'll have new insights
(06:20):
that the court can consider in deciding whether or not
they've been rehabilitated and posed this danger to society. And
at that point the DA's office will also reconsider whether
we go forward on a resetencing motion. But at this point,
without exhibiting those insights, our position is that they do not.
They continue to pose an unreasonable risk of danger the
(06:43):
community in the same way that Sir Hands or Hand does.
Speaker 2 (06:47):
They went to great lengths to plan the killing, and
the idea that they are claiming self defense is really
preposterous just looking at a basic rundown of all the
things they did leading up to the murders. They had
a very detailed plan over a period of time.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
On I mean two days before the murderers, they don't
go to La to buy the shotguns. They drive all
the way down to San Diego at Friday night traffic,
get down to San Diego and use fake IDs in
a fake address to buy the shotguns and the AMMO.
Then they go ahead and before the murderers, they come
up with an alibi where they're going to be a
(07:29):
batman the movie and they're going to have tickets to
prove it, and then meet their friends at the Taste
of La event afterwards. Then when they actually go in
and they shotgun their appearance over twelve times, they stage
the shotgun blast to look like a mafia chille shooting
their father from the back of his head, shooting their
mom while she's already shot bleeding on the ground. They
(07:52):
reload the shotgun and put it against her right cheek
and pull the gun at point frank rage. And then
they shoot each of their parents into the kneecaps to
make it look like a mafia hit. And then they
go ahead, and they did pick up all the shotgun
shells from the room, and he discarded the shotgun shells
and the bloody colling in a gas station dumpster and
(08:12):
throw the shotguns over the cliff on Moho and drive.
And then when the police would they engage in quite
a dramatic series of events where Eric goes ahead and screams,
I'm going to kill them. I'm gonna He's going to
go after the killers. He believes that they tortured his parents.
Who would do this? Of course it was Eric and
Lyle who actually did it, and a lie they persisted
(08:35):
in for six months. So we're saying, basically they came
clean with that original lie, the lie being we didn't
do it, the mafia did it, But they haven't come
clean with all the other lies that they persisted in
for the last thirty years.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
You say that they had never come clean on sixteen
out of twenty major lies that they've told about this case.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
That's correct. We actually filed a chart with the court
and the men endue and their counsel, so if they
ever want to come clean, we let them know exactly
what their lives were, how they could finally admit that
they've been lying, and at that point that might be
their pathway to convince a judge that they have sincerely
embraced these new insights into their crime and should be
(09:19):
considered for resetencing and rehabilitation.
Speaker 2 (09:21):
Well, I'm glad you explained so much, and I think
people listening you should read the news stories and details
about the case that Nathan Hawkman laid out today because
thirty six years a lot of people either weren't around,
weren't conscious enough, or forgot what went on. And I
think a lot of the uh television shows about the case,
(09:44):
just in the interest of time, if nothing else, have
glided over a lot of the glory details which show
how premeditated and just psychotic the whole thing was.
Speaker 1 (09:56):
I think you're right. I think you know, the memories
fade as to what actually happened. You know, in the
original motion that my predecessor filed, they spent just over
three pages on description of the crime. We spent over
sixty pages of our eighty seven page motion that we
filed today describing everything that occurred on the crime and
(10:17):
you know, inciting it to the actual trial transcripts that
we're deriving the information from. So I encourage anyone who
wants to go to the DA's website, which is DA
dot La County dot gov. You can get a copy
of what we filed both here and in the habeas matter.
You can also look at the video that we came
(10:37):
up with called Anatomy of the Menendez Case. It goes
through the whole procedural history of the Menendez case in
order to understand how the system works.
Speaker 2 (10:47):
Nathan Hockman, La County DA, thank you for coming on
and explaining.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
All this my pleasure. Thank you again for having me on.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
All right, Nathan Achman, more coming up, Deborah Mark. Oh,
we're going to talk about the San Jose me who
wants to throw homeless people in jail?
Speaker 3 (11:02):
Now we're talking.
Speaker 4 (11:04):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (11:11):
You see, you see, that's the thing, the Menendez brothers trial.
And I wasn't even living out here when they killed
the parents, but when we got out here, we experienced
the trials. And but then thirty years go by and
there's no way to remember all the details. Like Nathan Hakman,
the La County DA who he just had on, said, yeah,
(11:34):
memories fade, and a lot of people weren't weren't born
or were young children and didn't know anything about about
all the details of the murders and the trials. See
that the details matter and what happens. By the way,
we had Hawkman on because he filed today in court
(11:54):
to withdraw the petition to resentence the Menendez brothers. This
was a Gascone production, and so Hawkman's trying to undo it.
And like he said, he goes they had a sixty
seven page offering to the court, and I think what
was the numbers he used? Was this sixty seven pages
(12:15):
just to explain the crime? I think, yeah, that's what
it was, uh, And that's what it takes. You actually
explain the details of the crime and what led up
to it, their premeditation, their plans, and then the aftermath.
It's clear this is not was not an impulsive move
by any means. This this was like a what they
(12:35):
what they tried to make it look like a mob
hit because it was. It was the way the mob
did it. When you have a mob hit, there's a
lot of premeditation and then there's an after plan.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
But who remembers all that stuff?
Speaker 2 (12:52):
And now you have all these these dopey young girls
who get all their news from a TikTok video. That's
a Randell puts up. How long do TikTok videos go?
Speaker 5 (13:04):
I never have gone on TikTok?
Speaker 3 (13:07):
Eric, How long gives it tick? Does it have a
time limit? TikTok videos?
Speaker 2 (13:12):
I know some TikTok videos that are like over ten minutes, right,
but I don't know if there's a limit. No, But yeah,
I mean the trials take weeks and weeks and probably
most of the videos on this or you know, a
minute or so, and you just you have patrol people
who can make money putting nonsense videos summarizing the Menendez case,
(13:34):
knowing that young girls are going to get whipped up,
their hormones are going to get whipped up, to try
to have sympathy for these cute Menendez boys who are
not cute boys anymore. They're in their fifties and they
have been scamming portions of the public now for thirty
six years with their phony maloney stories. They're psychotic liars.
Speaker 5 (13:53):
Well, you can also watch the documentary on Netflix. There's two.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Yeah, now see I never had I never had a
chance to watch those.
Speaker 5 (14:03):
I watch them both.
Speaker 2 (14:04):
I mean, are they generally accurate, because again they're they're
compressing a complicated story, and.
Speaker 6 (14:09):
Yes, yes, they they are they but I mean one
of them shows exactly talking about the mob hit going through, uh,
the doctor, the psychiatrist going through, you know, buying the
rolexes and doing all the things they did after the murders,
the course, the whatever. So yes, because I thought.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
One of the documentaries was the reason there was more
sympathy for me.
Speaker 6 (14:35):
Then yes, But then there was one where you can
see one of the brothers talking about all the abuse,
and so that's the one that you're talking about where
it really it talks about how he was abused by
the father and the mother didn't do anything. It really, yes,
but it's still it still shows and talks about the
(14:56):
actual crimes.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
But yes, yeah, but they were they were they were
twenty one and eighteen when they did this.
Speaker 5 (15:03):
I think I'd have to look at a camera.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
Well anyway, at least one of them was an outright adult,
and when you're you can't let's and it wasn't really
self defense. They weren't being imminently threatened. They were old
enough obviously to uh drive cars, so you can get
out of the house and get away if there was
some kind of imminent threat or if there was actually
(15:27):
abuse that day, if you know, who knows how much
of it's true, And at this point I don't particularly care.
I think it is obvious that they're psychotic, and if
you're psychotic, that never changes that goes on forever. There's
no rehabilitating psychotic.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
It is a.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
Mental disorder. It's actually even more than a mental disorder.
There's a certain physical chemistry, physical structure of the brain.
They don't have a conscience, they don't have remorse, they're
not capable of having remorse. They don't know what it is.
They try to mimic remorse by watching it in other people.
(16:11):
They try to mimic sensitivity, They try to mimic having
a conscience, but they don't actually have one. It doesn't matter.
Killing somebody, shooting them in the head has as much
impact on their psyche as eating a grape. It has none.
And it's difficult for people to understand this because most
(16:31):
of us don't know a psychia, a true psychotic, intimately,
a true psychopath, we don't know one. There aren't that many.
There are sociopaths, but a psychopath who can violence as
oh by, you know, it's obviously extremely rare. So it's
hard for us to really understand what's that like, what's
(16:52):
that like to have no conscience to say or do anything,
and it doesn't bother you, You don't flinch, there's no remorse,
there's no guilt. That's the thing. There's no guilt. These
two don't feel any guilt. These two aren't sorry about
anything because they can't. The way their brains are structured,
probably inherited from their dad, because their dad was his
(17:14):
own monster and never had any guilt or remorse. If
the stories are true about what dad did to the sons,
well they got his same brain structure. But you don't
let ever let him out. All right, we come back.
We'll talk about the San Jose mayor wanting to arrest
the homeless.
Speaker 4 (17:33):
Yay, you're listening to John Cobel's on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
You can follow us at John Cobelt Radio on social media. Yeah,
Hakman's request to withdraw the resentencing for the Menendez brothers
is eighty seven pages, and I think sixty of the
eighty seven were about the details of the crime. So
all the idiots in the country have to stop watching TikToker, instagram,
(18:03):
summaries and ed. We'll just spend the time and read
the eighty seven page document and then tell me that
the Menendez brothers ought to be free, And same thing
with those idiot family members too. They had it. Looks
like they had a pedophile and two murders, murderers in
the family, and when he counted back in nineteen eighty nine,
(18:23):
nobody did anything about it. Onto the San Jose mayor,
I really am enjoying what's going on in the rest
of the country, and at the same time, I'm almost
sad how we don't get to participate in the party
because across the country, obviously you have Trump and Elon
(18:44):
musk eviscerating much of the waste in government. They're starting
to there's a long way to go, and yes they'll
make mistakes and overreach and all that, but it's going
in the right direction. And you see you see just
billions and billions of dollars being saved, and you see
a lot of Democratic leaders saying, you know enough, we
(19:09):
went down a bad road here. We got to start
tacking back. For example, Eric Adams, the New York City mayor,
who in a lot of ways is a disaster of
a mayor, and he's very unpopular, but at least he
had the good sense to realize a sanctuary city policy
that protects illegal aliens illegal alien criminals is really stupid
(19:29):
and bad for the rest of us, and that's going
on in a number of democratic jurisdictions, including here in California,
because you have cities such as Berkeley, Oakland, San Francisco,
and Fremont, that I decided that having encampments of homeless
(19:51):
people in the streets is no longer cool. It's not
something to be embraced. That enough of the needle and
the sentinel, and the meth and the feces and the filth.
That's over and the latest mayor to join the parade.
What I'm saying, it seems like Los Angeles is the
only one that's not moving an inch on anything. You know,
(20:17):
Karen Bass has poured two years and billions of dollars
into homelessness for what well up In San Jose, the mayor,
Matt Mahon, a Democrat, said, it's proposing this plan. Homelessness
can't be a choice. After three offers of shelter, we
(20:38):
hold people accountable for turning their lives around, which means
after three offers of shelter, if you're still sleeping out
in public, you go to jail.
Speaker 3 (20:51):
You go to jail.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
You don't get to sleep on the sidewalk, taking a
poop p and all over the place. Vomiting, leaving all
your filth and garbage, injecting your heroin and your fentanyl
and snorting your meth, acting like a lunatic terrorizing people. No,
San Jose, that's done. Matt Mayhan, we had him on
(21:15):
the show. We should get him on again because he
was one of the mayors who endorsed Prop thirty six,
which turned theft into a crime again in public drug
use into a crime, and fentinyl crimes became a real
thing for the first time. But once the Supreme Court
(21:39):
said that every city and county in California and everywhere
can can forcibly remove homeless encampments, a lot of towns,
a lot of cities have done just that. And what
Mayheon decided to do is they spend a lot of
(22:01):
money on interim housing and shelters. So now they have
two thousand units available or in development. But the thing
is they're building real rooms, they're building actual structures. It's
not like Los Angeles where nothing gets built because we
have so many criminals in government and in the nonprofit
(22:24):
homeless industry.
Speaker 3 (22:25):
Nonprofit.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Apparently they have fewer criminals in that industry in San Jose,
but now they're down to about a third of the
vagrants who were offered interim housing and refusing. I remember
there was a day that Gaven Newsom said publicly he
didn't believe there was anybody refusing housing. Well, Mayheon says,
(22:48):
it's about a third of them. No matter what you offer,
no matter what you try to sell, they're not buying.
So here's this proposal. City council would have to approve it.
If you reject offers of shelter, you would face escalating punishment,
starting with a written warning and ending with a possible arrest.
(23:09):
They got forty four hundred people who are living on
the streets or in cars or abandoned buildings, and he
says mental health and addiction issues are what people. Yeah,
they can't make their own decisions. He says because of
mental health. Well, yes, obviously that's been obvious for ten years.
(23:32):
It's not a lack of housing, it's not income inequality.
It's that they're crazy or they're taking bad drugs. Those
are the two reasons. Because anybody else who's not on
drugs or is not insane figures out what to do
pretty quickly. It's not that complicated. And he says that's
(23:56):
how you break the cycle. And he's absolutely right. So
that's two things. Now that you have a democratic mayor
who has realized, by the way, this is the way
all mayors used to operate, not that long ago, in
our lifetime. Didn't matter if you had a Democrat or
(24:17):
a Republican mayor, a liberal or conservative or whatever.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
There's this basic stuff.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
It's like, no, you don't get to live on a
public sidewalk and leave all your waste and your drug paraphernalia. No,
that's just a know without debate, and that's a problem.
Everybody got sucked into debating this. Everybody got sucked into
feeling bad and feeling starry. And the progressive criminals were
(24:45):
really good at manipulating people's emotions, manipulating their minds to
make you feel guilty like you did something wrong.
Speaker 3 (24:53):
You didn't do anything wrong. You went to work.
Speaker 2 (24:57):
You're just more privileged. It's like, it's not a privilege.
You go to work, you earn money, you can buy shelter.
That's not a privilege. That's normal life. You work in
exchange for your work, you get money in exchange for
the money, you buy some shelter. You have to do that.
That's mandatory in modern society if you want to go
(25:21):
live on the land in a tent, at least would
would you go into the desert somewhere or deep into
the woods.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
But not in front of my kid's school.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
But we had jack holes like Eric Garcetti who actually
tolerated it and embraced it. And so do you know
do you know this, I just read this yesterday. California
is twelve percent of the population. We have fifty percent
of the street homeless in the country. We have fifty
(25:57):
percent of all the street vagrants who are living outdoors
in public spaces, twelve percent of the population, fifty of
the let's call me outdoor homeless. So, and it's not
the weather, because other cities that have a lot are
(26:19):
bad weather cities like Seattle and Portland, and good weather
places like Florida, for example, is largely good weather.
Speaker 3 (26:28):
They don't have this kind of issue.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
It was our stupid left wing progressive policies and the
stupid politicians and people stupid voting patterns. That's what created
the mess. Nothing else, all right, When we come back, boy,
this is a day of scandals. When we come back,
the head of the high speed rail, the CEO wants
(26:55):
more money. They're out of money. Money is gonna be
taken away from them. And now he said, well, if
we don't get more money, then this project, this is
gonna take forever to build. Well, it's already taken forever.
This is how they do it, you see, this is
(27:16):
how they keep paying themselves. Well, you spend all this money,
we got to keep going. Say no, we can stop that.
We could write that off as a loss. We'll talk
about it. We come back.
Speaker 4 (27:24):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI Am.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Six after three o'clock. Michael Munks from KFI News. We
talked about this on Friday. The Los Angeles Homeless Services
Authority a complete disaster. Boy, it's just piling up for bass,
isn't it. They did an audit and found that billions
(27:50):
of dollars has disappeared.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
They don't know where the money went billions.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
The auditors Alvarez and Marcel they did an audit in
just four months ago. The La County Auditor Controller found
the same thing here in the city of La Now,
the Los Angeles.
Speaker 3 (28:16):
Homeless Services Authority is.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
A joint venture between the city and the County and
the city spends a billion three on homelessness, and that's
ten percent of the city's total budget and services one
tenth a percent of the population, which is why they
don't spend money on a fire department, which is one
(28:40):
of the reasons the Palisades burned so badly, because they
spend ten percent of the city's budget on one tenth
percent one tenth of one percent, zero point one. You
cannot mismanage the city more than Karen bass'es. We'll get
to that coming out after three o'clock. Here is more
(29:05):
criminal theft and corruption. There was a board meeting for
the High Speed Rail Authority and the new CEO, Ian
chowdry Chou d ry Dri says, we're gonna keep asking
for federal money from Trump.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
They have no choice.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
They're out of money too, told your last hour of
the city's out of money. Well, high speed rails out
of money, and if not, it's gonna pose a risk
to the schedule. This guy says this with a straight face.
You know, according to the proposition passed in two thousand
(29:52):
and eight, by twenty twenty five years ago twenty twenty,
we should have had the entire rail sys and built
from Sacramento to San Francisco to Los Angeles, to Anaheim
to San Diego. That whole thing should have been built
five years ago. Instead we've got nothing. And now Ian
(30:15):
Chowdrey says, well, we need more money, and you're gonna
ask Trump for more money. Seriously, you're gonna do that.
Kevin Kylie is a Republican representative from northern California. We've
had him on the show when he was in the
state legislature, and he is asking the FBI Director Cash
(30:38):
Battel to investigate high speed rail seventeen years. This is
from the California globe. Seventeen years, no track, no trains,
thirteen billion dollars gone, seventeen years, thirteen billion.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
If I told you in two.
Speaker 2 (30:57):
Thousand and eight that by twenty two, twenty five, we'll
have spent thirteen billion dollars, what would you imagine the
world would look like? Could you imagine no trains and
no track after the thirteen billion.
Speaker 3 (31:14):
I tell you they're good at this though.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
They are good at stealing the money and then sitting
at a commission or a committee hearing and giving a passionate,
detailed explanation as to why they need another thirteen billion
or another one hundred and thirteen billion dollars. This is
just a criminal operation. Here's what Trump said on Tuesday.
(31:41):
And if you don't like Trump, tell me what does
he say in this paragraph that's incorrect. The train that's
being built between Los Angeles and San Francisco is the
worst managed project I think I've ever seen. We're going
to start an investigation of that, because it's not possible.
I built for a living, and I buil on time,
on budget. It's impossible that something could cost that much.
(32:04):
They made it much shorter, so now it's at little
places way away from San Francisco, way away from Los Angeles.
We're going to start a big investigation on that because
I've never seen anything like it. Nobody has ever seen
anything like it. It's the worst managed project I think
I've ever seen, and I've seen some of the worst.
I've read that every person who would ride the train
(32:26):
could instead take a limousine back and forth, and you'd
have hundreds of billions of dollars left over. It is
the worst overrun that there has ever been in the
history of our country.
Speaker 3 (32:38):
Tell me what he said that's wrong. It's not even exaggerated.
Speaker 2 (32:43):
He's absolutely right, and Kevin Kyley's asking the FBI to investigate.
And this, this Chowdry character, the new CEO Ian Chowdry,
is actually actually going to the federal government. He's going
to Trump to ask for more money. And because if
Trump won't give it, then this is not going to
be built on time because they're out of money. They're
(33:06):
broke because it's all been stolen. Speaking of money being stolen,
Michael Monks, CAFI News, Los Angeles Homes Services Authority another
massive audit, second one in four months, same thing, billions missing,
What the hell Where'd it go? Coming up next? Debra
(33:27):
mark Live, 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
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.