Full Show: Did Ryan Clark and RG III battle cross the line? Megyn Kelly grills Tapper about Coverup!

Stephen A. Smith is a New York Times Bestselling Author, Executive Producer, host of ESPN's First Take, and co-host of NBA Countdown.

Support the show: http://www.youtube.com/@stephenasmith

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
We got stuff percolating on Capitol Hill. We got stuff
percolating with Bill Belichick and his young girlfriend. We got
a whole bunch of other stuff to talk about as well,
especially in my line of work where RG three and
Ryan Clark have gone nuclear, a lot of stuff to
get into. Needless to say, I'm here for it. Steven

(00:22):
Asmith Show in the house. Let's row what's up? Everybody?
Welcome to the ladies edition of The Steven Ate Smith Show,
coming at you as I love to do it the
very least three times a week over the digital airwaves

(00:43):
with YouTube and of course iHeart Radio. As always, I
like to pause for a moment to give thanks and
gratitude to my listeners, my followers, my subscribers, considering the
millions of downloads we've received over the last few months
courtesy of iHeartRadio, not to mention the one point twenty
two million subscribers we've now eclipsed over the digital airwaves

(01:05):
of YouTube. It just shows how much the show is
growing each and every single passing day. And it wouldn't
be possible if it was if it were not for
your love and support. I really really appreciate it. From
the bottom of my heart or behalf of myself and
my team. I thank you for it. Keep the love coming,
and I'm gonna keep on coming. To continue to be
notified for all of our newest content, Just click the
bell to get notified for that newest content, and you too,

(01:27):
shall consider yourself the latest member of Steven A. Smiths
Show family. And while you're doing that, please don't forget
to pick up a copy of my New York Times
bestselling book, Straight Shooter, a Memoir of Second Chances and
First Takes, now at paperback. Just go to Straight Shooter
book dot com to get yourself a copy. Once getting
that straight shoet of book dot com to get yourself
a copy you see on a screen sometimes it's Straight

(01:48):
Shoot the Media. That's the name of my production company.
I named it after my book, Straight Shoot to Media.
So look forward to stuff coming down the pike because
I can assure you I'm coming with a few things.
Make no mistake about it. As I told y'all, it's
a lot to get into. I don't feel like getting
into the NBA Playoffs just yet because the Minnesota Timberwolves
got blown out in game won by the Oklahoma City

(02:09):
Thunder last night, from the last three minutes of the
half when the Minnesota Timberwolves will turnover machine and let
the Oklahoma City Thunder within four points to a second
half where Oklahoma City outscored them by thirty seventy to
forty at one point. I'm just disgusted at the lop
side of the fair that took place last night. And
I went from thinking that this would be a seven
game series OKC would likely win, to think and I'd

(02:32):
be lucky if this series ended it didn't end rather
in five, because that's the level of dominance we saw
from OKC, who was playing less than forty eight hours
after beating the Denver Nuggets in Game seven, while Minnesota
had five days off and just didn't seem to have
it when it really recounted most in the second half,
courtesy of the New York Knicks playing host and hosting

(02:52):
game one to night in the Eastern Conference Finals against
the Indiana Pacers. I'll be all ribbed up about that.
I think that'll be an epic series, the Knicks in seven.
It could end in six, but for the moment, I
got the Knicks in seven, and as that series progresses,
we'll talk about that. Let me get started, however, with
today's show with a story percolating in sports media, in

(03:14):
that sports media space, involving two colleagues of mine, that
I need to address. It started with Angel Reese and
Caitlyn Clark's confrontation the other night, and it's something that
we had discussed on Monday's show with Monica McNutt. Well, anyway,
Robert Griffin id RG three, as he's affectionately known, my

(03:35):
former co worker at ESPN, went on his podcast platform
and said in the aftermath that it was clear to
him that Angel Reese hates Caitlyn Clark. Before we go
any further, take a listen to what he said exactly.

Speaker 2 (03:50):
So, why do I think Angel Rees hates Kaitlin Clark.
It could be the fact that Eliah Boston had to
save Angel Reese from ending her career. This is a
still shot after the foul that Caitlyn Clark put on
Angel Reese. Angel Reese tried to hit her, but if
it wasn't for a Leah Boston putting her arms in
the way, Angel Rees would not be playing basketball anymore

(04:14):
because she was gonna sucker punch Caitlyn Clark.

Speaker 1 (04:18):
Now you tell me a.

Speaker 2 (04:19):
Time when you've seen somebody get filed on a basketball
court in a professional league where they tried to almost
sucker punch somebody that they were friends with because of
a hard foul. So where was this type of reaction
last year when Angel Rees got choked lamb by Alyssa
Thomas or the Connecticut son y'all remember that she got

(04:41):
filed so hard they kicked a Leah Thomas out the
game with a flagrant two foul.

Speaker 1 (04:47):
What did Angel Rees do?

Speaker 3 (04:49):
Nothing?

Speaker 1 (04:50):
She didn't get up and try to swing on her.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
You know why the reaction was different because of who
did it, And there is a lot of history there
with Kaitlyn Clark and Angel Reese. You guys remember last
year when Angel Reese celebrated Kennedy Carter getting that flagrant
foul on the hip check against against Kaitlyn Clark.

Speaker 1 (05:13):
You remember that on the sideline? Just yeah, baby, get her?
You get her?

Speaker 2 (05:20):
Who celebrates like that for a flagrant file on another
player if they don't dislike that player.

Speaker 1 (05:28):
I'll get into RG three's assertion about Angel Revees getting
ready to suck a punch Kitlyn Clark in a second,
But first I wanted to show y'all. Ryan Clark's response
to what y'all just heard RG three say this is
on a Pivot podcast. Take a look at what Ryan
Clark's response.

Speaker 4 (05:47):
Was when RG three jumps on to the hate train
or to the angry train, and now follows along with
what we saw from Keith Oberman, what we saw from
Date Portnoy as they poured on to areuries to make
her the villain and Caitlyn Clark's heroic or hero story.
The one thing we know about RG three is he's

(06:09):
not having conversations at his home about what black women
have to endure in this country, about what young black
women and athletes like Andrew Ree have had to deal
with being on the opposite side of Caitlyn Clark's rise
and ascension. And to startom, you're a RG three, when's
the last time within your household you've had a conversation

(06:31):
about what she's dealing with. You haven't been able to
do that because in both of your marriages, you've been
married to white women. You haven't had opportunities to have
those conversations to educate you on what they're feeling, what
black women deal with, what they're seeing when they think
of a young Andrew Rease, and the whole time that
he's mimicking Angrew Rease and bobbing his head and moving

(06:53):
his neck. While he's doing this whole piece, his wife
is in the back a mining and clapping, and so
to me, it's just another situation that now this young
lady has to deal with.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
WHOA. That's a little bit deep, and I'll get into
that as well, because some perceive Ryan Clark to having
crossed a line there, especially mister RG three himself, who
did not take colleague to what y'all just heard, posting
another video in response to RC take a look, but.

Speaker 2 (07:24):
Ran you cross the line, man, You made it personal,
and so I really believe there should be no space
in sports media for personal attacks. I've said it before,
but certainly personal attacks against wife and children have always

(07:46):
been off limits.

Speaker 5 (07:48):
Ryan.

Speaker 2 (07:49):
You attack me and my family in a public form
on a level that shows just how low of a
human being you are. You can disagree with me all
you want, challenge my takes, but keep my family and

(08:10):
my wife out of it. That's a boundary that should
always be respected.

Speaker 6 (08:15):
Man.

Speaker 2 (08:16):
Always Ryan Clark personally attacking me and my family because
he disagreed with my sports opinion. It's a bad look
for ESPN. It's cowardly, it's spineless, and it's weak.

Speaker 1 (08:38):
Ooh, I got a problem with the shit that RG
three just said there, and I'll get into that in
a second, but not before I read to you what
Ryan Clark went right back at him after this and said, quote, bruh,
you know what it is with me and you. I
saved you the entire season on Monday Night Football. I

(08:59):
urged people to let you be you, no matter how corny,
how bad a teammate you were. I had your back.
You're a phony, bro, one of the worst teammates I
ever had, both on the field and in TV. You
gotta do what you gotta do. I didn't attack your wife.
I spoke on what you do on social media and TV.

(09:21):
Like I said, I met your wife and she seemed
like a lovely lady that was worth more than the
color of her skin. You be good, bro. All of
this has led some to call for Clark's firing, some
of those wondering loud if Clarke would still be employed
if called out a white colleague for marrying a black woman.

(09:42):
First things, First, couple of things. I don't want to
hear shit about Ryan Clark being fired. I don't want
to hear that. Ryan Clark is my colleague, he is
my friend and brother. He is a good murder, he
is a good man, and he's a good brother. And

(10:05):
there is no way on earth that I would be
quiet if he was fired over something like this. I'm
not saying he's right, and I'll get into that in
a second, but this is not a fireable offense. Now
we're gonna come back, and we're gonna bring it. We're
gonna bring it home. I don't usually talk about ESPN business,

(10:30):
and I'm not about to right now, other than to
say RG three clearly is not like by Ryan Clark.
What Ryan Clark said, that's not something he normally does,
corny phony. Those are the kind of things he said,
specifically about RG three. That's what he feels saving him

(10:52):
on Monday Night football. I assume, and it is an
assumption that he's talking about the Shrapneller criticism that folks
try I had to throw an RG three's direction that
he try to assist in shielding RG three from. But nevertheless,
there's a lot to get into here. The first order
of business to unpack is this RG three. I'm not

(11:16):
as tight with him as I am with Ryan Clark,
but I respect RG three and I do know there's
some sensitivity is there dating back to the days of
you know, when he was called the cornball and obviously
by one of our former colleagues, Rob Park on national television.

(11:37):
And RG three admitted with his interview of me on
his podcast that that's something that has stayed with him
all of these years, and he felt that it has
served to have damaged him. So there's certainly a heightened
level of sensitivity there, and I understand where RG three
is coming from. I don't consider RG three a bad dude. Again,

(11:58):
just because I'm tight with R with Ryan Clark doesn't
mean that I don't respect RG three and we don't
have a cool relationship because we do. We might have
had disagreements over subject matters we discussed in the past,
we might have viewed things differently, but I respect RG three.
I like him. I appreciated the job that he did

(12:19):
on First Take, and personally speaking, I wish he was
still at ESPN, which is what I said on this podcast.
But what I want to address about to directly to
RG three, is this number one, How do you know
Andrew Reis was gonna sucker punch Kaitlyn Clark? What do
you mean We haven't seen stuff like this before. We've

(12:41):
seen plenty of times where somebody will get knocked to
the ground and then they jump up like they gonna
do something and get in one another's face without punches
being thrown. You didn't know that Angel Reaese was going
to suck punch Kaitlyn Clack. You have no evidence of that.
You could have said it looked that way, but to
literally declare that that's what Angel reach was going to do,

(13:04):
that's not factually accurate. So RG three, I think it's
important to point that out because by saying what you
said about Angel Reese, that was serving to villainize her
in a way that would get a reaction from a
black man like Ryan Clark, along with various others, including myself,

(13:24):
who didn't want to jump to that conclusion. You are
right in terms of in my opinion, I don't think
they particularly like each other. I don't think that Angel
Reese likes Caitlyn Clark. When you waving a hand in
her face when you was beating up for the national
title taunting her. But we have to remember that Caitlyn
Clark was taunting opponents all the time doing that. So

(13:47):
when it was her term to get her come up,
and Angel Reach was more than happy to do so.
When LS she was en route to win in a
national title and supplanting Caitlyn Clark in Iowa in the process.
The very next year, Caitlyn Clark came back and Iowa
came back and they gave it to him, and as
a result, LSU went and they fell. In the midst

(14:08):
of all of that, it was a tough season because
Angel Reach was receiving vitriol from critics out there, and
I don't think it was because of basketball. I think
it was because of our behavior towards Angel Reach, which may,
in some people's eyes, assist to whatever level of dissent
she may feel towards Kitlyn Clark. That's neither hear nor dear.
My only point is you use the word sucker punch.

(14:29):
I thought that was a big extreme and I thought
that that was gonna get a bunch of people riled up, potentially,
particularly black men who are protective of black women. So
I saw where Ryan Clark was coming from and refuting
that statement. RG three. Now let me get to Ryan Clark.

(14:51):
I love my man, RC. I thought he crossed the
line when he brought up you RG three being married
not once but twice. It's a white women. There was
no need to go there. But he don't like your ass.

(15:18):
That might have had something to do with it. I'm
not condoning him doing that. I'm not condoning him bringing
that up. If he if RG, if RC had rather
and I had spoke about it in depth, I would
have told him don't go there, don't go there. No

(15:41):
need for all of that, okay, But I want to
emphasize something here that's very very important. RG three. He
never attacked your wife. He never attacked your family. He
was attacking you, and you know it now. That don't

(16:04):
make it correct. The mentioning of your wife. I'll can
see that he did utter a negative syllable about your wife.
He never mentioned your children. So when you say attacking
your wife and attacking your family, your children, how did
he do that? Ryan Clark did not do that. He

(16:29):
talked about you and your behavior. He talked about how
you lean towards highlighting her ethnicity. I don't know whether
it's true or not, I pay no attention to that stuff,
but I know what he said, and what he was
saying was that, and he was saying she was much
more than the color of her skin. He didn't in

(16:50):
no way denigrate your wife, and he never mentioned your children,
not with what I saw. If anybody out there has
an additional clue where you can talk point to RC
attacking or denigrating the wife of Robert Griffin the third
or his children, show it to me. I didn't see

(17:10):
that RG three. I didn't see that. And why am
I bringing that up? Because this is where it comes home,
meaning to ESPN, where you worked for years. When you
sat up there and you said it's a bad look
for ESPN. I guess it's within your right to hit

(17:32):
back at RC since you felt hit at yourself. But
as somebody who works for ESPN, come on, bro, you
know that was some slick shit you was doing right,
because when you said it's a bad look for ESPN,
you know that we work at a place where ESPN's

(17:53):
gonna be Like, what was he talking about, what's a
bad look for ESPN? You didn't have to go there.
That's between you and Ron Ryan said that on The Pivot.
Ryan shows up on Get Up, Ryan shows up on
First Take, Ryan shows up on NFL Live, Ryan contributes
to Monday Night Football. He never mentioned you on any
of those places. Why on his podcast, on a spot

(18:16):
that he owns and operates, would you ignore that to
bring up ESPN because you were trying to get him
in trouble with ESPN. You look into ESPN for help
to try and reprimand him when you should have handled
your own damn self. And I'm talking to you out
of respect. I don't hate you, bro, I don't have

(18:39):
any animosity towards you. I said, for public consumption, if
it was up to me, you still be at ESPN.
I thought you did a damn good job for various shows,
Maybe not Monday Night Football, because that's a team. And
if y'all had vitriol, which is evidently true with one another,
that's not a pairing that works. I get that part.
But there's a multitude of other outlets that you contributed

(19:01):
to on ESPN, and I would have been happy to
still see you there. Them letting you go downsize and
and all of that stuff that's above my pay grade.
I got nothing to do with that, and I'm not
here to question my bosses any more than y'all question
then when they let me go in two thousand and nine.
That's the way it goes sometimes, particularly when you downsize
and monitoring your budget, your expenditures, and you're making decisions

(19:24):
as to what'sn't the best interest of what's not in
the best interest of a network that's business. This with
you and Ryan is clearly personal. What you bring ESPN
in it for you. Trying to get the brother fired
ain't gonna work, not if I can help it. Ryan
Clark is a hell of a football analyst. He represents

(19:50):
our company very very well. I think he is outstanding.
And with all of that that I had to say
about Ryan as an analyst, it's nothing compared to what
I think about him as a man. He is real,
he's authentic. He may not always be right. I don't

(20:11):
think he was right to bring up your wife at
all in any capacity. But Rian's a good brother who
cares and does far more good than bad. I'm proud
to call him a colleague. I'm proud to call him
a friend and a brother. And if you're gonna go

(20:32):
at him, all I'm asking is be accurate. When did
he attack your wife? When do he attack your family?
And why are you talking about him and then bringing
up it's a bad look for ESPN when he said
that on the pivot. He did just say that on ESPN.
What you're doing that for? If you got a problem

(20:55):
with him as a man and you say, keep my
family out your mouth, roll up. I brought him and
tell him. I promise you he won't be hard to find.
I promise you that he will not be hard to find. Now, again,
I want to emphasize you should have never brought up

(21:15):
your wife. I would have preferred that he not do that.
But he didn't speak against her, and he never mentioned
your children that I saw. He mentioned you. He questioned
your authenticity, your realness, your genuineness. He was talking about you,

(21:41):
bro you. He was using that as an example to
highlight who you are, how you think, and what may
shape and formulate your thinking. Now, ladies and gentlemen, that

(22:02):
brings us to a different subject, and we don't have
to go too deep there. I'm a dude who lives
and let lives. I think Ryan Clark is I think
RG three is two and you have a lot of
people who don't have a problem with interracial relationships at all,

(22:23):
and some who do, and maybe they need to be
a more advanced than their thinking live and let live.
But it's not foreign, and it's certainly not foreign for
somebody to be of the mindset that if you're going
home to somebody of a different ethnicity, whether you're white, Black, Asian, Hispanic,
or anything like that. People accuse one another all the

(22:48):
time of being at least somewhat detached from their own community.
Of who you're going home to. It's not from your community.
That doesn't make them accurate, It doesn't make them right,
But you know what else, it doesn't make them sometime offensive.
If he had said something negative about your wife or

(23:11):
your children. RG three, I feel you. He was talking
about you, and he was talking about the person he
sees on social media and a person he has directly
worked with to bring ESPN into the equation. To talk
about it was a bad look. Seemed to me like

(23:32):
you would intentionally look into the network to get him
in trouble instead of dealing with it. Man, the man,
you and him. That's my biggest criticism RG three, Ryan Clark,
don't talk about it. Don't even mention his family. Don't

(23:52):
even go there. Don't even go there. You don't have to.
You're bigger than that, which I know you are, and
let's move on. It's that simple. People gonna have their beliefs,
they're gonna have their stigmas, they're gonna have their interpretations.

(24:15):
It's an opportunity for all of us to educate one another.
But what really really turned me off when when Ryan
Clark said, because you who you've been married to, I said, oh,
don't like that. Just like when you said andrewe is
gonna suck a punch Kitlin Clock. Oh I don't like that.
That's not true. You don't know that. But that last

(24:39):
part when you said it was a bad look for ESPN.
Ryan Clark was on the pivot when I talk about
things that I talk about ESPN is my day job,
where I talk about first take you yourself. R G
three said, you don't like when people bring certain elements
to sports television. Now we disagreed on but the bottom

(25:00):
line is you were making an argument about what should
appear on sports television. Now, he did something on this
podcast which wasn't on sports television. But he's Ryan Clark
and he's on his own podcast, and you brought up ESPN.
Handle it yourself, bro, don't look to ESPN to help.

(25:25):
He violated nothing for ESPN, he violated nothing. And for
those of y'all out there who's trying to sit up
there and bring unwanted attention to Ryan Clark in a
way that could ultimately compromise his career at ESPN, I'm
letting y'all know in advance, you'll have to come through me.

(25:52):
I wouldn't be saying this if he said it on ESPN,
because they got a right to police what's on their airwaves.
He had a personal opinion about RG three that wasn't
aired on ESPN, that was aired on his own platform
that he has every right to say about RG three,

(26:15):
not about anybody else, meaning the family, his family, but him,
and RG three has every right to respond to him
directly without bringing ESPN into it. That's all I'm saying,
Ryan Clark need to be gone from ESPN. Y'all can
miss me with that shit. Ryan Clark is outstanding, outstanding,

(26:43):
not perfect, but outstanding none the less. Nonetheless, this personal
between him and RG three, I hope they work it out.
I hope they resolve it. We don't need all that
animosity in the world because, in their own way or
be it different ways, I happen to believe both are
good brothers, and I'm proud to know both of them.

(27:08):
But I ain't trying to hear anything about people being
fired and all that nonsense. I don't want to hear that.
I don't want to hear that I will raise holy
hell over something like this leading to somebody's loss of
a job. I haven't heard anything like that. I can't
imagine that would happen. I'm not trying to imply that

(27:29):
I know something that I don't know, because I don't
not ever even talked of the ESBN about it. I'm
just talking on behalf of two brothers that I know.
I think they were both right, and I think they
were both wrong in certain respects, which I just articulated.
But miss me with all of this hooplab about Ryan

(27:49):
Clark need even lose his job, y'all crossing the damn line,
and that I'm not gonna sit oddly by over something
like this. Hell no, hell no coming up? Is Bill
Belichick engaged to Jordan Hudson. I'll welcome the man who
has been leading the way on reporting about the controversial couple.
These controversial in some people's eyes, one only Pablo Torre.

(28:10):
He's up next right here on The stephen A. Smith Show.
And later Megan Kelly calls Jake Tapper to the carpet
for possibly withholding important information about Joe Biden in real
time to benefit the sales of this book down the road.
I need to get into that too, So don't go away.
It's the steven Ate Smith Show in the house. Be
right back, hi. Everybody, listen up with all the big

(28:34):
time sports action that's happening each and every day, The
stephen A. Smith Show wants to make sure you are
taking advantage of it all. That's why we've partnered with
the Prize Picks, the best place to win cash while
watching sports. The app is really easy to use to
make a lineup. All you have to do is pick
more or less on a few player stats. Choose from
any of your favorite players Luka, Doncic, Jimmy Butler, and

(28:54):
Zach Lavine all in the same entry, then sit back
and watch. The list is absolutely endless. Play prospects in
over forty states, including California and Texas. Best of all
Prospects will give you fifty dollars when you play your
first five dollar lineup. Wanna lose, You'll get fifty bucks.
Just use promo code says and download Prospects right now again,
download the app and use code essays to get fifty

(29:16):
dollars instantly after your first five dollar lineup. Prospects, run
your game. Welcome back to Stephen A. Smith show. Bill
Belichick is back in the news again today thanks to
his girlfriend Jordan Hudson or is she his fiancee? I
don't know. After The New York Times reported earlier this

(29:37):
week that the Miss Main pageant contestant shared with someone
that she was engaged to Belichick. TMZ published photos yesterday
showing that Belichick's boat, famously called eight Rings in honor
of the Super Bowl wins with the Patriots and the Giants,
has a new paint job that now reads one plus
eight rings end quote. This is fueled the already rampant

(29:59):
speculation about their relationship status moving toward marriage, as reports
continue to come in that those in Belichick's in the
circle have serious concerns. Joining me now to discuss this
is the man who has been leading the charge on
reporting on this romance. He was a longtime colleague of
mine at ESPN and is now the host of the
Peabody Award nominated Pablo Torre finds Out podcast. Pablo Torre

(30:24):
is in the house. What's going on, Pablo? Long time,
no speak man.

Speaker 3 (30:27):
How you doing, Rene. It's good to see you. Beyond
just from afar when you're court sided at a game.
It's been too long, and this is a strange circumstance
under which we meet again.

Speaker 1 (30:39):
It's absolutely concerned, strange, but it's really really good to
talk to you. It's been a while, man, Good to
talk to you. Good to see you doing so well.
Let's get right to it. What have you heard about
whether or not Belichick and Jordan Hudson are engaged. What
can you tell the world.

Speaker 3 (30:53):
Yeah, so I've been deeping this rabbit hole for months now,
and what I can tell you is that as recently
as March, Bill Belichick was asked by a close friend,
are you engaged to Jordan Hudson, who at that point,
by the way, was twenty three. Now she's twenty four,
And Bill Belichick told that friend directly, no, I am not. Simultaneously, though,
Steven A. As we examine what the most highly paid

(31:15):
public employee in the state of North Carolina is up
to his personal and professional lives being merged and blended.
What we're also hearing, what I am also hearing, at least,
is that Jordan Hudson has in fact been telling multiple
people that they are engaged. And so this is one
of those classic messes that are familiar to anybody who's
been following this saga. And I've been reporting on this,

(31:38):
talking to eleven different people who have directly dealt with
both of them in this new phase of Bill Belichick's life,
all of whom observe that the man is acting in
a way that, as you well know, is so deeply
opposite to the man that we thought we understood for
about twenty years.

Speaker 1 (31:55):
Why is this story so compelling, particularly to somebody like yourself.
I mean, he is so I think it's seventy three,
she's twenty four. That's a forty nine year different. A
lot of people are uncomfortable with that stuff. A lot
more people don't care. Why does Pablo Tory care talk
to us about that?

Speaker 3 (32:12):
It's a great question. My mom asks me this question
as she's wondering why I go from being nominated for
a Peabody winning an Edward R. Murrow or to caring
about this and to me, this is a story about power,
dievn A. It's a story about public figures. It's a
story about what it means when a guy gets a
job at North Carolina to lead young men and is
hired under the pretenses of him being a lot like

(32:35):
the guy that everybody at Carolina remembered from when he
was the coach of the New England Patriots, the GM
of the Patriots, a guy known for a couple of things, right,
a lack of distraction, discipline, privacy, and truly an undefeated
record against the media. And so this story is not
merely like an age gap relationship story. And frankly, I

(32:55):
don't care about the age gap so much, even though
I think it is certainly interesting. I'm not here to
yuck Bill Belichick's youngs. Right, He's not the first older
man to be intrigued by a younger woman. That's not
what's new here. What's new is the fact that we
knew this guy in a very distinct way, such that
he was one of the most defined characters we've ever

(33:15):
seen before, with all of those ways that he defined
himself very deliberately and proudly. And now the question is
why is he acting so differently, who is advising him,
and what does it mean that he has handed power
to a twenty four year old that he met on
a plane when she was nineteen.

Speaker 1 (33:36):
I want you to explain how he's acting so differently.
I don't see much of a difference. I remember seeing
him at Boston Celtics games with a former girlfriend after
he had gotten divorced. I remember seeing him as an
individual that really didn't want to talk to the media
at all, and when he did, it was certainly begrudgingly.
In this particular instance, he was coming out with a book.

(33:58):
I saw this interview. She was pretty assertive in that
interview or whatever, and to me, that fell right in
line with him, only from the standpoint of he's only
talking to you because he's promoting the book, and oh,
by the way, having her be so invasive and so
demanding during that interview that prevented him from having to
be the bad guy for once. I really didn't see

(34:20):
much of a difference. So when you say there's a
difference in his behavior, articulate to our audience what you're
seeing in terms of his behavior that so diametrically opposed
anything that we've seen from him before.

Speaker 3 (34:32):
Yeah, I would say, yeah, that CBS the Sunday Morning interview.
That was just the glimpse, the first glimpse that the
public had into the ways in which, wait a minute,
there's a new person who seems to be having influence
over Bill Belichick. The reason he's acting so differently, as
I have observed it is because when he left the Patriots,
when the NFL basically said you are no longer wanted
here as a coach, certainly as a GM you had

(34:53):
to pivot to being a public figure, which means that
a guy who has protected Steven and you know how
this works, a guy who was protected did by an
inner circle in a football building, a professional football building,
had to figure out what do I do now? And
so when he is not insulated by the structures, truly
the structures and scheduling of the NFL, he, as we

(35:15):
all saw, hiboted to media. He launched about half dozen
different media projects in which it was now you're coming
to Bill Belichick because he now for the first time,
wants to talk to the public, and he wants to
be accepted and followed and subscribed to and appreciated as
somebody who has many interesting things to say. And certainly
when he was a coach, we saw him give you know,

(35:36):
fifteen hundred word paragraph log answers about long snappers. But
this now was Bill Belichick saying I'm here to be
in public, and the person behind the scenes who was
steering him. What I'm reporting is that the person behind
the scenes who was in charge, the boss of his
media ventures, the COO of Belichick Productions, is Jordan Hudson.

(35:56):
And so when it comes to how is he behaving,
it is the part about what his business was, And
now it's the part not merely going to Carolina and
being a college coach, in which he has to appeal
to young men, young people and be online in this
era of name, image and likeness, right, he has to
be somehow fluent in the Internet for the first time,
which is what he has turned to Jordan Hudson initially for.

(36:18):
When I talked to former players or Bill Belichick at
the Patriots, what they say is that the most shocking
part is that this man, his private life was supposed
to be private. You saw him court site. You saw
him on Nantucket. You saw his former longtime girlfriend of
fifteen years, Linda Holliday, bring him out to parties, bring
him around to those things. But this kind of thing

(36:39):
where he's being held up rather, I mean he is
holding her up by his feet, doing yoga on the beach.
She's dressing as a mermaid, all of this stuff. You know,
this is where his former players are like whoa, whoa
wa whoa, willingly posting that that's not the bill that
we knew.

Speaker 1 (36:58):
Well, what about the awe argument that the bill that
we knew had to alter his way of life and
his way of thinking to some degree because the NFL
didn't want a six time champion as a head coach
an eight time champion overall, when you take into account
the two defensive coordinator positions that I'm sorry, the two
titles that he won as a defensive coordinator with the

(37:19):
New York Giants, but the Atlanta Falcons job in particular,
along with various other jobs that were available and mentioned,
he couldn't get those jobs because he was considered the past.
You had young thoroughbreds, You had young bloods that were
now running organizations that didn't want a football genius like himself,
as somebody that they would have to communicate with an
ultimately answer to in some kind of way because he

(37:41):
would be the head coach of a franchise. What about
the notion that that forced and compelled him to make
this shift, because obviously he took a college job when
we all know he would have preferred to be in
the NFL.

Speaker 3 (37:53):
Yeah. Look, the biggest signal was in the contract he
signed at UNC because June first, which is right upon us,
is a big day. Even a before Jordan Hudson became
this public figure in the CBS interview and elsewhere, we
knew that there was a clause in that contract that
said the buyout that Bill Belichick could exercise on June
first dropped from ten million dollars to one million dollars, right,

(38:14):
ten times less. That was his option if he wanted,
in fact, if he got, in fact, the offer that
never came from the NFL and is not forthcoming in
any regard at this point. So it's always been about
him wanting the NFL and having to settle for a
different version of his life. And look, I don't have
a lack of sympathy for anybody who does one thing

(38:37):
at a genius level forever and then is said, with
no uncertain terms, he is told, with no uncertain terms,
you're not wanted here anymore. You're over the hill. Right.
That is a human experience as well. I am not
saying that that is not at play here, But the
question of what you do next is where we're discovering
Bill Belichick. Really for the first time, Bill Belichick, not

(39:00):
in the NFL context. I remember what Bob Kraft, of course,
the owner of the Patriots, once said to our colleague
Seth Wickersham. He said Bill Belichick was an idiot savant,
which is to say he is an absolute, unimpeachable genius
when it comes to the football, but everything else, right,
he's not. And we're just discovering the ways in which

(39:21):
that might be true, which we haven't had visibility into
for twenty years.

Speaker 1 (39:28):
Just about a couple more questions before I let you
get on out of here, Pablo, And I really appreciate,
because I know you got to run soon. Do we
even care about this? If Jordan Hudson is not twenty
four years of age, if she's considered.

Speaker 3 (39:39):
I would right now listen the tabloid storm the hurricane.
You're absolutely right. This is catnip for everybody who wants
to say. This is a story that you probably can
deduce already without even clicking on the story.

Speaker 1 (39:54):
Right.

Speaker 3 (39:54):
It is an age gap relationship. This is a gold digger.
This is worse. This is somebody who is I've seen
her accused of being an only fans model A and
works a call girl. Right, My reporting does not indicate
that that is the case at all. This is the
story to me of an ambitious young woman who in
some ways reminds me of Silicon Valley. And I'll explain

(40:15):
why I say that, because I went to school. I
went to college with these Silicon Valley people, and they
are ambitious, and they are young, and they don't know
what they don't know. But they go into industries and
they blow them up. They blow them up, and they
leave a trail of wreckage behind them because they don't
understand a really key thing, which is unintended consequences. So
it's not that Jordan Hudson isn't in some way clever

(40:36):
or ambitious or driven or determined or a real aspiring
PR person. It's even that you've worked in comms around
comm's people pr people for as long as anybody at
this point, and you know that when you are the story,
you have failed in your job. And so the question becomes,
is Bill Belichick keeping her around in this way because
she is good at her job? Or is it because

(40:59):
as his own family only fears. According to sources around
the Belichicks, he doesn't totally realize the damage being done
to his legacy, to Carolina, to that program, to this
understanding of him. Wait, we were so.

Speaker 1 (41:13):
Close out about that. Listen. First of all, let me
say this, in the interest of full disclosure. I remember
when I covered the Philadelphia seventy six ers and Larry
Brown was the head coach and at the time he
was fifty six years of age and his wife was
twenty six. I mean, and that wasn't the only person
that I saw with someone considerably younger than them. I
don't understand how that could potentially equate to tarnishing the

(41:36):
legacy of a Bill Belichick when his legacy is completely
tied to football excellence. That's it. Outside of his foot
of football excellence, nobody has pretty much given the damn
about Bill Belichick and his life or his quality of
life or how he lives his life. All they've ever
cared about was what he did on the football field

(41:56):
as a coach. So, now that he's on a collegiate
level instead of a repro level, if he goes to
Carolina and win, or whether he wins or loses, that
might be a determining factor as it pertains to how
his legacy has looked upon. But I don't think his
personal affairs with who he chooses to have as a
girlfriend or a wife there we say, is going to

(42:18):
impact his legacy. Is that what you're implying.

Speaker 3 (42:21):
No, I'm saying that the football stuff on the field,
his coaching record unimpeachable, the decision making around it has
been what's been called into question by everybody. And so
when it comes to look, when I'm God forbid we
write the oh bit for Bill Belichick one day, the
first paragraph absolutely needs to be around the football. The

(42:42):
question is the Carolina experiment right now, And what I'm
told from Carolina is that his own inner circle, the
higher ups, the administrators at the university are all saying
that Jordan Hudson cannot be involved with our program. She
is not welcome in the building. They don't want her
around because as there have been records now public records
requests that have shown that she is asked to be

(43:04):
c seed on every single email, She has been spotted
in videos on the field. She is his representative, his
first lady in lots of ways. It's not merely that
this is a younger woman. Is that this is a
woman who seeks power and has received it. Okay, And
now the question is how do you deal with that?

Speaker 1 (43:21):
Part last question? Two? Parts number one, has she been
officially banned by the university or is it just that
they don't want her around? And they've made that clear,
but they're not demanding that she be banned and that
she not be around. That's number one. And number two,
do you think that Bill Belichick ever coaches a game
at North Carolina? Do you think that's a job he
walks away from before this season even begins because of

(43:43):
all of this stuff involving her.

Speaker 3 (43:46):
Last on what I'm reporting, Yeah, I no, two great questions.
What I'm reporting is that number one, there has been,
in no uncertain terms, the message from the top of
the university to the football program that she cannot be
associated with the program anymore. She shouldn't be in the building.
She shouldn't be on the field. Now they have pushed
back on that by saying, in a bit of an
interesting PR statement Sandwich, that Jordan Hudson is not employed

(44:09):
by the university. They confirm that for the first time
in refonse of my reporting, and that she is only
involved with Bill Balichick in the personal capacity as his
PR representative, but that she is welcome in the building.

Speaker 5 (44:19):
Right.

Speaker 3 (44:19):
So, I cannot speak to how North Carolina maybe adjusted
what their messaging was since my report came out. They
did not answer my request for comment, nor do they
fulfill my Public Record's request on that front. But the
second question about whether he makes it a game, my
suspicion right now is that the way he is handling
his press tour indicates and which he says to Michael Strahan,

(44:41):
he says to Christine Williamson at the ACEC meetings. He
says it to Ryan Clark, our colleague, right, he says,
she is off to the side. This is only personal,
This is not football. If he's going to agree to
that in real terms, and everybody at Caroline is going
to get to frankly calm down because they can do
their jobs in the way that they were hoping to

(45:02):
as a normal program might then I think he makes it,
of course, to week one. Do I think he lasts
for more than a year, steven A for a team
that you know didn't win seven games last year. I
would set the line absolutely at one season, a one
and done scenario.

Speaker 1 (45:17):
So what I especially since he's got the one million buyout,
because I think an NFL team could potentially come calling,
especially if he's successful at North Carolina and that one
million dollar buyout as opposed to being ten million dollars.
I think it's something that is doable, and I think
they hear return to the NFL. Pablo Torre, appreciate you man,
Thank you so much for taking time out of your
business schedule. I know you got to run, so get
on out of hend.

Speaker 3 (45:36):
Thank you again, anytime, Stevin A anytime?

Speaker 1 (45:39):
All right went on with Pablo Torre. He's doing a
good job obviously covering this story. I mean for me personally,
ladies and gentleman, I mean, Towe eat his own. When
I thought about his personal life, I'm like, damn, if
it's consensual. She's an adult, he's an adult. Ain't my
cup of tea going with somebody that damn young. But
that's that's his thing. That's his thing. Like I said,
I've covered numerous executives, coaches, et cetera that messed around

(46:00):
with people considerably younger than them. I don't think that,
you know, this is something that could potentially affect his legacy.
What I will say, however, is this, it is interesting
that she's his pr representative because that is him empowering
her to some degree when she kept interfering, you know,
with the questioning to Bill Belichick during that interview. It's

(46:23):
one thing I know that she's his girlfriend. It's one
thing for people to look at her and say, hey,
as his girlfriend. You know, look at how invasive she was.
It's another thing entirely when you us PR rep. Because
I've seen many PR reps conduct themselves that way during interviews.
I've seen PR reps stop interviews from people when they
didn't like the line of questioning. So that does change

(46:45):
things a little bit. I didn't realize she was his
pr representative. No matter which way you slice it, the
man is older, he's divorced, he's got three kids. He
had a girlfriend for a while and then they broke
up with her, and now he's doing this. In the end,
it is entirely possible that Bill Belichick may have the
last laugh, because he's happier than the pig and mud

(47:06):
than most of us. Some would say that if indeed
it ends up going to that point, I don't know,
And to be quite under with you, I don't give
a damn. All I care about is what he's doing
in the breaking any laws, all right, and he's not
committing any crimes, and they're in a consensual relationship. That's
their damn business. What I care about is how he's

(47:27):
gonna look coaching the Carolina Tar Hills as head coach
on a collegiate level, and whether or not he's gonna
ever get back into the NFL as a head coach
because he's not somebody that deserved to be without a
head coaching job. Think about the teams that would be
better off in the National Football League if Bill Belichick
was coaching them, as opposed to some of the other
coaches that they have to answer to. I'm just saying,

(47:49):
I'm just saying. Coming up. Jake Tapper himself of CNN
is facing a lot of questions about his newly released
book on the Biden administration from Meghan Kelly. Are the questions,
fear Lord, You'll see what I'm talking about. Plus Marco
Rubio Butt's heads with Democrats over Trump's foreign policy, and

(48:11):
I've got some thoughts on that as well. All of
that coming up next right here on The Stephen A.
Smith Show. Don't Go Away. Welcome back to steph A.
Smith Show. After a long build up of promotion and
leaked excerpts, a new book by journalist Jake Tapper and
Alex Thompson is shedding new light on the cognitive decline

(48:33):
of former President Joe Biden. The book, entitled Original Sin,
depicts alleged attempts by the president's family and close aids
to shield his mental lapses from the public. This may
be one of the most highly anticipated political book releases
in sometime, but it has many including the Daily Shows
John Stewart and The Women of the View, questioning if

(48:57):
one of CNN's lead anchors was with holding information critical
to the public for the benefit of selling copies. Another
one of those people was Megan Kelly. Please take a
look at this.

Speaker 7 (49:10):
Over here in my ecosphere. We were covering all of
these It wasn't just falling down, it was getting lost.
It was some of the stuff you report in your
book we knew and we were reporting on, like the
multi jump cuts in the videos of him, or it
was obvious he couldn't get through a one minute take.
It was clear to us that he was using teleprompter,
and there was some reporting on that at the time,

(49:33):
all of which the White House was denying. Now with
the current White House, I have some connections with the
Joe Biden White House.

Speaker 3 (49:39):
I had none, but you did.

Speaker 7 (49:41):
There was an attempted cover up. It could only ever
work if you allowed it, if the press allowed it.

Speaker 3 (49:47):
Some of us tried not to, and some of us
were complicit.

Speaker 6 (49:51):
The Biden white House did not like me. Okay, this
is I do not have great connections with the Biden
White House.

Speaker 3 (49:58):
Well, clearly a lot of s.

Speaker 7 (50:00):
We talked to over two hundred sources for this book
called and worked.

Speaker 3 (50:04):
I know.

Speaker 1 (50:05):
That's the point is that they were not being honest.

Speaker 3 (50:08):
That's how the Street Journal get it.

Speaker 7 (50:10):
In June of twenty twenty four and Jake Tapper and
CNN couldn't find sources for this story.

Speaker 3 (50:14):
Then before he dropped out.

Speaker 6 (50:17):
Annie Lynsky and Shavon Hughes did an amazing job in
their reporting and they should be heralded.

Speaker 3 (50:25):
And I heralded them.

Speaker 6 (50:25):
I had them on my show right after the debate
to talk about their great reporting.

Speaker 1 (50:30):
To the debate.

Speaker 7 (50:31):
But you did not put them on when they published
that story, which was before the debate.

Speaker 3 (50:37):
Correct.

Speaker 6 (50:38):
I don't know what the booking situation was, but it
wasn't because I didn't want them. I'm sure I will book.
I'm sure I said that day. Let's book that did they? You?

Speaker 7 (50:46):
You put on a Democrat and you allowed the Democrat
to rip on the report as a Rupert Murdoch sponsored
hit piece.

Speaker 6 (50:54):
No, it's just that that's what we're going to do,
if we're going to do this, let's just stick to
the facts here, Okay, when there is a damn.

Speaker 7 (51:04):
That's what I've been doing all along. Didn't miss the
biggest story of the century when it comes to presidential politics,
and one of us did out.

Speaker 1 (51:17):
Let me say this, ladies and gentlemen, just as an aside,
I've been a guest on Megan Kelly's show at least
a couple of times. I'll probably be back on in
a week or so. You don't say to Megan Kelly.
Let's stick to the facts. I've seen on a real

(51:39):
time with Bill Mark. I saw her there. I've been
watching her for years. I respect the hell out of
that woman. She does not play, she does not pull punches.
She gives you facts, she lives on them, and on
top of it all, when there are personal relationships involved,

(52:03):
as was the case with Pete Hegseth in route to
him becoming our secretary of Defense, she was very transparent
about her relationship with him. She does not play. She
is not a joke. She is legit. I respect the
hell out of that woman, I really do. And to
say let's stick to the facts, I would like to

(52:27):
say Jake Tapper was in trouble then, but it was
actually before then, but certainly at that particular moment in time,
he's supposed to be coming on this show soon. I
hope I do half as good of a job as
she did, because she had it all. The fact remains

(52:50):
that there were people who had come on CNN, who
had appeared on Jake Tapper's show, like Laura Trump Dead,
and he summarily dismissed them, which he openly admits. He
confessed to having a private conversation in the aftermath of
learning the facts and essentially apologizing to Laura Trump at

(53:13):
that particular moment in time. Does that make up for
how dismissed if he was towards her, I don't know.
I would encourage everybody to go and watch that interview
from start to finish. I would encourage everybody to look
at what she was saying and to really really get

(53:33):
into the weeds of it all. I was afraid I'm
gonna throw myself out here now. I called out Joe
Biden and the diminished mental acuity and a lack of
ferv and the incapacitation that so many that people were
alluding to. I called it out a year in advance.

(53:55):
I got a viscerated, a viscerated and I'm not quote
unquote conservative, so I can relate to Megan Kelly sitting
before him and being pretty pissed off because the conservative
media was right, the conservative media was right, and the

(54:21):
liberal media wasn't just wrong. The challenge is wasn't intentional. Now,
I'm not here to accuse Jake Tapper that I'll ask
him when I speak to him, but there is no
doubt that one of the issues that's really permeating that
can't be avoided is that the Democrat the Democratic Party,

(54:48):
was demanding that you flow with and you vibe with
what they wanted you to, and if you did it,
they were ready to have your ass canceled. Which is
why you had so many people lamenting cancel culture. Which
is why you have somebody like me Vinnie from the
PbD podcast, Love you, bro, Love you. But this is

(55:11):
why you have people like me saying, Yo, we're pretty
ticked off because those are not things we knew. And
when you see the Democrats engaging in the level of
duplicity that you don't like, you're offended by it. Now,
somebody like him would say, well, we were there with
Trump all along, Well, that sounds like a loyalty the

(55:33):
Trump instead of loyalty to America. Just because that's your
dude and you were vibing with him, don't mean you
knew factually and definitively that there was truth being told
about the Democrats that the rest of us were oblivious to.
Meggan Kelly came to find that out along with others.
My Man Sean Hannity says, religiously, Hey, liberal media is dead.

(56:02):
This is what he was talking about, the Mark Levinz,
the Sean Hannity's, the Clay Travis's of the world, and others,
the Magan Kelly's of the world. What can we say
to them at this particular moment in time, if you
are a Democrat who bought in to the Democratic Party

(56:24):
willing to engage in cancel culture when it came to
anybody who would dare verbalize a dissenting opinion to what
they were putting out there, what can we say. CNN
was clearly guilty of it. We all show. We saw
Joe Scarborough, saw Joe Scarborough going on MSNBC with Morning Joe.

(56:47):
We saw him on the national airwaves saying raving about
President Biden's health and acuity. We saw it. But there
was clearly evidence to the contrary, and when that evidence
was revealed, people on the left engaged in condemnation towards

(57:13):
those who did have the guts to tell what clearly
has now become the truth. You can get into the
timing of Jake Tapper and his book coming out and
how the publicity of it all is venturing around Biden's
announcement that he has an aggressive form of prostate cancer.

(57:33):
You can lament that all day till the cows come home.
You're trying to sell a book. You're trying to sell
a book. You wrote the book, you put in the work,
You got a right to promote the book. But the
point is CNN and other platforms, if indeed you engaged
in the kind of behavior that dissuaded and minimized and

(57:54):
dare I say condemned those who were dare challenge the
mental acuity and the health and the overall health of
Joe Biden. What do you have to say for yourself? Now?
It is a legitimate question. It is a legitimate question.

(58:16):
Our poored Jake Tapper for showing up to Megan Kelly show.
He knew it wasn't gonna be easy, but boy did
he get raped through the Kohls by her with nothing
but facts, Nothing but facts. And now, if you're the
Democratic Party, please understand that when I said Monday, you're
the political version of Lance Armstrong, Please understand I'm not

(58:37):
backing up from that statement one minute, one bit.

Speaker 5 (58:39):
I mean it.

Speaker 1 (58:42):
Lance Armstrong was lying through his damn teeth about taking
performance enhancing drugs when he was accused of it. He
didn't just deny it. He tried to ruin the lives
of those who were telling the truth about them. And
now that we reflect on what transpired with Joe Biden

(59:03):
and how complicit the Democratic Party appears to have been
in all of that, what are we to say about them?
It ain't about Trump, it's not about Kamala Harris. It's
about that party from won't coachure to cancel culture vibe

(59:25):
with us, or you gotta get bounced out of here.
You got rid of your own. Andrew CMO's a problem
until he leaves office. Then all of a sudden, practically
all the cases go away. Ol Franken and his behavior
as a comedian is a problem, even though you had
him lock Stock and Barrel in a Senate seat for

(59:47):
the Democrats in Minneapolis, and then all of a sudden
he's out, and now stuff don't matter that much anymore.
Time and time and time again, the Democrats have eaten
their own and spit them out. Hell. Listening to Bernie

(01:00:14):
Sanders speak, one would argue, you're doing it to him.
This is bad, this is very bad. And I think
that as Jake Tapper goes around a circuit promoting his

(01:00:36):
book and the more facts we learn from this book,
I think irreparable harm is going to be done to
the Democrats. I think the midterms are in jeopardy. I
think the presidency in twenty twenty eight is in jeopardy.

(01:00:57):
It's really bad, y'all. It's really bad. Moving on to
my last subject, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Senator
Chris van Holland, a Maryland Democrat, engaged in the heated
exchange Tuesday as the nation's top diplomat defended the Trump
administration's foreign policy. While testifying to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,

(01:01:17):
Van Holland criticized Rubio on his handling of issues ranging
from the freezing of humanitarian assistance in Sudan during a genocide,
deportations to El Salvador El Salvador without due process, and
revoking student visas. Rubio did it back down. Take a
look at this exchange.

Speaker 5 (01:01:37):
We didn't always agree, but I believe we shared some
common values, a belief in defending democracy and human rights
abroad and honoring the Constitution at home.

Speaker 3 (01:01:48):
That's why I voted to confirm you. I believed you.

Speaker 5 (01:01:51):
Would stand up for those principles.

Speaker 1 (01:01:54):
You haven't.

Speaker 5 (01:01:55):
You've done the opposite, and I have to tell you
directly and personally that I regret voting for you for
Secretary of State.

Speaker 1 (01:02:02):
I yield back.

Speaker 8 (01:02:04):
I respond, well, first of all, your regret for voting
for me confirms I'm doing a good job. First of all,
I'm actually very proud of the work we've done with USAID.
For example, I don't regret cutting ten million dollars for
male circumcisions in Mozambique. I don't know how that makes
a stronger and more prosperous as a nation. I don't
regret psychosocial support services I raised.

Speaker 5 (01:02:25):
I respond, Senator, i'd ask you to suspend. You had
seven straight minutes. I chose to use my time that way,
Mister Chairman, that's my right.

Speaker 3 (01:02:34):
To please suspend that way.

Speaker 1 (01:02:36):
Secretary review, Well, I can go on.

Speaker 8 (01:02:38):
I mean, there's other things here. We spent two hundred
and twenty seven thousand dollars for Big Cat's YouTube channel
from USAID. We spent fourteen million dollars for social cohesion
in Malli, whatever the hell that means. So I can
go on and on. I got the list here, and
there's more that I didn't even bring the whole list
in the case of El Salvador. Absolutely, absolutely, we deported
gang members, gang members, including the one you had a

(01:02:59):
margarita with, and that guy is a human trafficker, and
that guy is a gangbanger, and that and and the
evidence is going to be clear in the days that.

Speaker 3 (01:03:09):
Rubio has the chairman, he can't make unsubstantiated.

Speaker 5 (01:03:13):
That Secretary of Rubio has the floor, and Ruo should
take that testimony the federal Senator, United States, because he
hasn't done it under oath.

Speaker 1 (01:03:21):
Good Lord, let me say this, perhaps will reflect on
some of the decisions that the Trump administration has made
and will continue to make regarding El Salvador, regarding Sudan

(01:03:42):
and other nations, regarding foreigner foreign relations, and we may
find that we are appalled by some of those decisions.
With respect however, to Chris van Holland, Senator Chris van Holland,
their administration has the right to make it. You lost

(01:04:07):
their party one, and we will see through the prism
of history what decisions were right and what decisions was
wrong based on an administration. I am not getting into
specifics about what Senator Chris van Holland was lamenting, nor

(01:04:28):
am I going to favor Marco Rubio's response, even though
I loved how he started off by saying, the fact
that you object shows that I'm doing a good job
because he's letting them know I don't agree with you,
ass and I got that part. But we have to
understand that Marco Rubio officially one of the most powerful

(01:04:48):
people in America, Okay, overseeing not just our country, not
just in terms of Secretary of State, but national security.
This man is a incredibly influential individual. Are we gonna
sit here and question the qualifications of Marco Rubio, who
has been a senator for years, who is a former

(01:05:10):
presidential candidate who got re elected in the state of Florida.
We know who Marco Rubio is. He's not unqualified. He's
not incoherent, he's not inarticulate. He's not devoid of intelligence.
He certainly isn't absent or devoid or oblivious to an
understanding of policies that affect the United States of America.

(01:05:33):
Last time I checked Senator Chris van Holland, he's not
there to agree with you or to be agreeable to you.
Their administration one the Democrats laws because you were focused
on things not like this. You were focused on other
stuff in an effort to win an election, and as

(01:05:54):
a result it cost you. Then have an elected official
go over to El Salvador to be with Abrego Garcia.
Forgive me if I don't have his full name in
front of me. Where were you when Biden was in office?

(01:06:16):
Were you willing to go there? All I'm saying is,
this is Senator Marco Rubio, who is now the Secretary
of Defense and is in charge of our national security
or national intelligence. He's a very influential individual, very experienced,

(01:06:40):
knows what goes on, knows the inner workings of Capitol Hill.
He just may now I agree with you and you
saying that you wouldn't have voted for him. So what.
I don't like the fact that the Ukraine Russia war
has not been resolved. I don't like the fact that
we see pro Palace Indian supporters in the streets of

(01:07:01):
America and beyond in an uproar off of the things
that we're being told is happening over in Gaza and beyond,
and that hasn't been resolved by the Trump administration. Who
swear mister Trump himself, who saw up and down President
Trump himself, who swore up and down we're gonna resolve
this in a one day, even though we all knew

(01:07:22):
that wasn't true. And perhaps whether it's usaid, whether it's
foreign affairs, no matter what, perhaps we would look at
them and find down the line they were more wrong
than right. But I love how we act. Like when

(01:07:43):
we lose an election, you got the right to try
to dictate what the winning party and then winning administration
elects to do. That's why they're in office and you
are not. So I just think we need to think
about those things along those lines and understand what's going

(01:08:06):
on here. I think it's important.

Speaker 3 (01:08:11):
I know this much.

Speaker 1 (01:08:13):
We want to question the intent of Mark Rubio. He
works for President Trump. As a subordinate. You might have suggestions,
and you might have things that you want to do,
and there we say, you might do things differently, but
damn it. When you're subordinate, you're subortinate. For a reason,
he's the boss. President Trump is the boss. Marco Rubio

(01:08:38):
has to flow with what he wants. When Marco Rubio
gets into the presidency, if that ever happens, he might
do things differently, but as long as he has to
answer to that man, he's gonna have to capitulate, at
least to some degree to what the man wants. I
watch y'all going off about Trump going at the President
of Ukraine when they were in the office. In the

(01:08:58):
Oval office. What's Walko Rubiore supposed to do? Stand up
and go off to the president right in front of
the cameras. Y'all are reaching. When you're the subordinate, you
can make suggestions, but ultimately you have to capitulate to
the person in charge period. Y'all know that, Which makes

(01:09:20):
what was going on yesterday or the other day with
Van Holland grandstanding and getting back to Jake Tapper, here's
what I will say, based purely on the Megan Kelly interview,
not knowing anything else at this particular moment in time
because I haven't read the book, obviously, If all of

(01:09:41):
these assertions are true, it's gonna be real interesting to
watch the fallout directly involving Jake Tapper because other people
have been let go for what some would surmise is
less feel me. I'm just saying it's gonna be really

(01:10:07):
interesting to watch what happens. That's it for this edition
of the Stephen A. Smith show. I got to get
on out of here, but i'll holler at y'all in
the next couple of days. Until then, peace and love.
Everybody be safe. God bless