Low Level Losers Leaking

Low Level Losers Leaking 

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Yes, this is Charleston's Morning News with Kelly and Blaze.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
We're covering this morning's top stories. The State Department is
supporting President Trump's direction in the Iran Israel ceasefire as
things continue to hold. As he left the White House
yesterday morning, Trump used some salty language while saying he
wasn't happy with either country continuing to trade fire. State
Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said the good thing about the

(00:28):
president is you never have to guess what he's thinking.
Brews added that any ceasefire deal is fragile, but Trump's
doing the world a favor by continuing to push it forward.

Speaker 3 (00:39):
Yes, he went from dropping B two bombs to F bombs. Boy,
that caught the flat footed press.

Speaker 4 (00:48):
Yesterday.

Speaker 2 (00:50):
Yeah, I mean had to a laugh out loud when
you could see his frustration, and you know, he's like
these two countries continue. He's like, they've been fighting so long,
they don't know how to stop, and they don't know
what the f they're doing.

Speaker 4 (01:04):
And then of course they're a phrase.

Speaker 3 (01:05):
The undefeated. Internet did what the Internet does. And I
don't know about your feed and how your algorithm works,
but the AI baby videos are everywhere in my feed
and the baby Trump's out there.

Speaker 4 (01:23):
The videos are just, oh.

Speaker 3 (01:26):
My goodness, cussing babies. I don't know, maybe it's just
my humor, pretty hilarious.

Speaker 2 (01:36):
He's frustrated, and so he's trying to, you know, keep
them to their word, because they both agreed to this
ceasefire and then they kept, you know, blobbing bombs at
each other, and Israel was He expressed his frustration with
Israel too.

Speaker 3 (01:52):
Oh yeah, well it almost felt even more so with
Israel during that quick you know, pass by with the
press yesterday, and of course he's in NATO. This is
a big story we'll get into here coming up. Meantime.
You've got Fox, CBS, all these others reporting that this
ceasefire is holding this morning. That's quite a different story

(02:13):
than what we were talking about this time yesterday.

Speaker 2 (02:15):
Well we'll see for how long, right, I mean, I
don't know, you know, does anybody expect that this will
be a lasting piece?

Speaker 4 (02:25):
Well, one would hope.

Speaker 3 (02:27):
Well, there's a renewed sense of hope with this president
who kept us out of war in his first term.

Speaker 2 (02:35):
So I you know, yeah, well I'm too cynical to
believe that.

Speaker 3 (02:40):
Well, I'm sure, there are plenty of people who feel
the same way. I mean, you certainly. I mean it's understandable.
History has proven, as he said, you know, you know,
dropping his F bomb yesterday, this has gone on for
how long. He's ready to turn the page. He's ready
for something different, He's ready for peace. He is one person.

(03:04):
The analogy I found interesting in some of the memes,
even the talking heads are and actually it may have
even come from Vice President J. D.

Speaker 4 (03:14):
Vancen' home me to it.

Speaker 3 (03:15):
But it's like two brothers fighting, like the little brother
and you know, the whoever throw the cousin in there.
They're fighting with each other, and here comes the big brother.
Trump's the big brother saying nope, we're not fighting, you know,
separates the two and then turns his back and they
just go right back to fighting again. I mean, we
certainly can understand that well.

Speaker 2 (03:36):
I mean it's yeah, but I mean that's overly simplistic.
I think, you know, the it's more like the hat
Field and the McCoy's over except over how many years
longer than that? Way, more multi generational than even the
hat Field and McCoy's right. Pretty soon you forget what

(03:57):
you're fighting about, you know, just it's intrinsically ingrained in
you to go at each other's throats. So I don't know,
we'll see. I mean, I hope for peace, but I'm
also realistic enough to know that I'm not hanging my
hat on.

Speaker 3 (04:16):
This ongoing conversation about Operation Midnight Hammer and its success
certainly questions this morning.

Speaker 4 (04:23):
Welcome into a Wednesday edition of the program.

Speaker 2 (04:26):
An early intelligence assessment of the US military strengths in
Iran reportedly claims it did not completely destroy the country's
nuclear program and likely set it back by only months.
Multiple outlets are reporting about the highly classifying document produced
by the Defense Intelligence Agency and US Central Command. The
report says the US believes there was significant damage, but

(04:48):
that was mostly two structures above ground. The White House
has slammed the reporting, calling the alleged assessment flat out wrong.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegsath says the US attacks in Iran
obliterate Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons. Hegsath said in
a statement that based on everything he's seen, he feels otherwise.
Hegsath said the impact of the bombs is buried under

(05:10):
a mountain of rubble in.

Speaker 3 (05:12):
Iran, so who do you believe here the quote low
level loser in the Intel community and CNN or Secretary
of Defense Pete Hegseth and our president.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Well, I mean, so what are you saying that the
reporting that this report exists is wrong?

Speaker 4 (05:32):
The CNN?

Speaker 3 (05:35):
What I find interesting is that the assessment of this
CNN Pentagon correspondent who put this out there? Talking about, oh, well,
this is a gal who's been used by the deep
state to pedal all kinds of things, like the theory
that Hunter's laptop, you know, was not real. I used

(05:55):
the Steele dossier as you know, a legitimate and something
to go on. There's a lot out there, including I said,
quote the low level loser in the Intel community who
put this, you know, alleged assessment out the Caroline Levitt.
That quote came from her, the White House Press secretary.

(06:16):
She said, you know, the alleged assessments flat out wrong, right,
and so the classified as a top was classified as
top secret.

Speaker 2 (06:25):
Well, it was leaked, and obviously it goes against the
narrative of the administration. Now it may be wrong, but
it's not like the left wing media.

Speaker 5 (06:36):
Is making it up.

Speaker 4 (06:37):
I find it interesting.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
She seized on it and ran with it. But it
exists as far as I can tell.

Speaker 3 (06:43):
Well, I don't want our intel community to have low
level losers in it. So if we know this to
be the case, like, let's take care of that. First
of all, I mean, what low level losers in our
intel community who are leaking? Apparently, so glad you exposed yourself.
I hope that we take care of this.

Speaker 2 (07:06):
Well, the leaking's the problem. And then you know, they
wonder why nobody was notified that they're in Notice how
it didn't get leaked because nobody was notified plans for
this attack. So you know, they need to do something
about this leaking and stop it.

Speaker 4 (07:21):
Yeah, clear attempt.

Speaker 3 (07:22):
She goes on to say, Caroline Levett to demean President Trump,
to just credit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a
perfectly executed mission to obliterate around s nuclear program. We've
heard that word over and over again used by the
President and others, obliterate. So you know, with regards to

(07:43):
a round nuclear program, she says, everyone knows what happens
when you drop fourteen three thirty thousand pound bombs perfectly
on their target. Total obliteration. So there's questions this morning.
Of course, I mean the assessments are still coming in.
They could be weeks before we know actual assessments of
this accurate ones.

Speaker 2 (08:03):
Well, you know, I don't know the report exists, and
it was leaked, and that's a major problem. Now is
the report accurate? Now that's different to me. I mean
that's the second prong of this. I mean, I don't
know do we trust the Defense Intelligence Agency in the
US Central Command or maybe they're assessments wrong, And maybe

(08:25):
it's not you know, playing politics. Maybe it's just wrong.
As Pete Hegseth said, the real evidence is under piles
of rubble in Iran. Now was the enriched uranium even
still there? So even if it was successful in getting
down into these bunkers, what if they move the equipment
and the enriched uranium out of there before the strikes?

Speaker 4 (08:47):
So that's been put out there.

Speaker 3 (08:49):
Meanwhile, the US military has said the operation went as
planned and that it was a quote overwhelming success. So
if our US military is saying it's an overwhelming success, great,
In the coming days and weeks and however long ahead,
you want to you want to define what overwhelming success is.
We know that the goal was for Iran not to

(09:10):
have nuclear weapons.

Speaker 2 (09:11):
So well so, and so when the military says it
was an overwhelming success, I think they may be describing
their mission and not the fact that we obliterated the
It could be that not the fact that they obliterated
you know, Iran's capabilities, but that they successfully carried out
their mission, which was to bust these bunkers. So the

(09:35):
military could have been successful in their mission. But if
the bunkers were empty, then then maybe we did only
set it back months. You know, I don't know. I'm
just trying to sort through the information that's out there.
So don't jump on my behind. That's that's just a
a a plea to you, you know, before you pick

(09:58):
up the phone and.

Speaker 5 (09:58):
Like blaz stop being a liberal and all of these things.

Speaker 4 (10:03):
I'm sure it'll still happen.

Speaker 5 (10:04):
I'm sure it will too.

Speaker 3 (10:06):
The leak being reported by CNN this morning, you have
Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff calling for an investigation.

Speaker 4 (10:13):
It's outrageous. It's it's tracinus.

Speaker 3 (10:16):
So it ought to be investigated.

Speaker 4 (10:18):
Treasonous.

Speaker 5 (10:19):
Well, the leak is treason us.

Speaker 2 (10:22):
But you know, all this leaking and playing politics with
classified information man. You know, look at how they went
after Trump for Merrill Largo and even rate it is,
you know, for having so called classified documents, but they
don't care when the narrative suits their needs.

Speaker 4 (10:43):
Well, I listen, I hear you. There, we can go.

Speaker 3 (10:46):
You know, I mentioned before the right break where think
about how many people would have said the election could
have turned out differently last go round, previous to now
Trump two point zero that if people understood knew the
Hunter's laptop was not missing disinformation. There's you know, all
kinds of leaking that's gone on that has been reported

(11:07):
to you know, I do air quotes sometimes on these
reporting by the propaganda press that you know, they run
with some of this that's just outrageously wrong, incorrect, and
is disinformation despite what their job's supposed to be, which
is to have credible sources.

Speaker 4 (11:24):
You and I understand that.

Speaker 5 (11:26):
Well.

Speaker 2 (11:26):
You know, on the other hand, if you know, what's
the role of like whistleblowers and things like that. So
if you have a report that says the opposite of
what the administration is telling you, would you feel a
responsibility to get.

Speaker 3 (11:43):
It out there depends, I suppose on how many sources
you mean, if you just got one whistle blower, one person,
I mean, no.

Speaker 2 (11:53):
I'm saying so, and I'm just trying to be impartial here.
All right, So you have the Defense Intelligence Agency, the
US Central Command saying that they think that it likely
set back the nuclear program in Iran by only months.
And then you have the administration saying we obliterated their

(12:15):
ability to do this, and you know, we totally wiped
it out. So is there a responsibility for whistleblowers to
point out that, Well, that's not what your internal communications
are saying.

Speaker 3 (12:31):
I suppose they could put it out there and this
administration can debunk it and say otherwise, which is exactly
what they've done.

Speaker 5 (12:38):
So this is what's happening right now.

Speaker 3 (12:41):
Well, meantime, we're getting reaction this morning, some of it humorous.
We got a quick message this morning. We know the
report is true, just like the email you won the
Zimbabwe lottery.

Speaker 2 (12:54):
Well, I think you know, people are quick to judge
the report. Like I said, it's two different things. So
one is the issue of leaking the report. The other
one is all right, is the report accurate or is
the report wrong? So instead of attacking the leaker and
I agree, it's a problem and the leaking has to stop.
But at the same time, I think they could be

(13:15):
more robust in saying why they think this report is
wrong instead of just they disagree with it. Now, maybe
there's security concerns or something more classified that they don't
want to tip their hat on onto. How they know
this or why they know this, I don't know what
the answer is. All they can do is speculate, but

(13:37):
I think it would be more helpful to their position
if they were able to come out and say, well,
we disagree with this report and here is why. So
what's the status of the Big Beautiful Bill? Treasury Department
Secretary Scott bessen says the Senator is on track to
vote on the GOP megabill on Friday. Bessont shared the
information after meeting with GOP senators in the Capitol and

(13:58):
added that the President would be fully involved in helping
gather support for the bill. In the final days, The
Treasury secretary predicted that Senator and House Republicans would reach
a deal on raising the cap on state and local
tax deductions known as SALT that should happen in the
next twenty four to forty eight hours. According to Bessant.
He also predicted the legislation would pass the House quickly

(14:21):
and make it to President Trump's desk by the fourth
of July deadline. And that's a self imposed deadline, by
the way. Senate majority leader John Thune says, lawmakers in
his chamber we'll stay in the nation's capital until they
passed President Trump's Big Beautiful Bill. In a Fox News
z op ed, John Thune said he's confident the Senate
will get the bill across the finish line.

Speaker 4 (14:41):
Man, that's all great news.

Speaker 3 (14:42):
Let's hope, wish and PRAI so we have so many
consumers sitting on the sidelines, not spending, concerned about the future.
I mean, the Big Beautiful Bill is not just lowering
tax rates helping us keep more money in our pockets,
but it's preventing the largest tax hike in hist And
I know that they have to go back and forth
on this, and you mentioned Salt, so I think people

(15:05):
are learning a lot about you know, maybe some of
the things we didn't realize were going on with regards
to who pays what and on the backs of whom.

Speaker 2 (15:14):
Well, I mean, this shows you why you know, it's
paralyzed a lot of times.

Speaker 5 (15:18):
And you know, so.

Speaker 2 (15:20):
You have you have people that are opposed because they're saying, well,
the cuts don't go far enough, but they can't even
cut the salt deductions, and so salt is you know,
you pay state and local taxes and then you're allowed
to deduct up to a certain amount of those on
your federal tax return. So in high tax states you

(15:42):
get to deduct a whole lot more than you do
in low tax states. So they wanted to lessen the
impact that you know, in the divergence there between the
two and lower how much you were allowed to deduct
off of your federal taxes in these high tax it's
like New York and California among them. And they can't

(16:04):
even get that done because the Republican representatives in those
states are worried about re election and so they don't
want to limit the amount that the taxpayers in these
high tax states can deduct on their federal taxes. So
it shows you, like why, you know, why people are like, well,
where are the cuts? And how come you can't get

(16:25):
this done? Because you can't even get this small little
thing like a assault done well.

Speaker 3 (16:30):
And looking in your direction, Kentucky, Senator Rand Paul, who's
a hard no on this because of the fiscal spending,
he says, so they've kind of left him behind with
the leverage. There's only three votes to spare in each chamber,
so pay attention to that.

Speaker 2 (16:47):
Yeah, I mean, they don't seem too concerned with Rand Paul.

Speaker 3 (16:51):
You know all these others on the list, I mean
some of the usual suspects, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, but
some not usual suspects, Tom till Us and North Carolina.
He's concerned about rural hospitals closing. Josh Holly and Missouri's
on the list of five that are you know, questionable
here even as late as this morning.

Speaker 4 (17:12):
Well in fighte all that positive, Well, because.

Speaker 2 (17:14):
They're concerned with you know, how they're handling Medicare or
rather Medicaid right and snap benefits and things like that.
So it shows you that they're worried about their reelection
and that you know, they're not in these solidly read
areas they're going to elect them no matter what, at
least that's not what they think. And my point about

(17:34):
Ran Paul was even Ram Paul came out and said, well,
I can be persuaded to vote for this, but they
don't want to persuade him because they think in that
process they're going to probably kill the bill. So so
round and rounded goes.

Speaker 3 (17:50):
Yeah, fifty one votes we need to pass. It's amazing
what the Big Beautiful Bill covers. A lot of people
have said, oh my gosh, it's too much in one bill.
On the other here, I was actually talking with the
State Treasurer Kurtis Loftus's office about this because I caught
it yesterday.

Speaker 4 (18:06):
Looking into the Big Beautiful Bill.

Speaker 3 (18:08):
I mean, this big beautiful bill would include covering homeschool expenses.

Speaker 4 (18:13):
That's huge.

Speaker 3 (18:15):
Anyway, there's a lot more yeah this bill than's being
talked about.

Speaker 2 (18:20):
Yeah, I mean I'd like to see less of that.
I mean, you know, both sides just give away money.
I mean, let's get back to responsible spending. We're thirty
almost forty trillion dollars in debt. When are we going
to stop? So oh great homeschooling, so all these credits
that they can pat themselves on the back for passing,

(18:42):
for passing out to people. I mean, I'm not against
homeschoolers or anything else, but you know what, we have
to be fiscally responsible. Let's get our tax right down,
cut the taxes, let's ramp up the military, and then
let's pay off our debt, and then maybe we can
talk about giving people tax breaks for homeschooling and things
like that. That's my position.

Speaker 3 (19:01):
Well, that's why so many people are calling this bill
too big, including too much. At the end of the day,
this bill has to stop the largest tax hik in
history on you and me, So I.

Speaker 2 (19:12):
Agree with that. With the taxes part, I also agree
with you know, there's money in there, and they're trying
to introduce even more. And China is outpacing us in
shipbuilding and all these other things, and they've built a
staggering amount of ships, which should be alarming to people.
They've built more in the last year than we have

(19:35):
in decades.

Speaker 4 (19:36):
And there's tax and centives and breaks for that.

Speaker 2 (19:39):
Well, you know, I don't know about tax and centives
and breaks, but there's funding for it, and I'm not
opposed to that. But when you start singling out people,
I give us all a tax break, I mean, you know,
I just limited it to certain sects of people. Moving on,
This is not some gorilla marketing attempt to celebrate the
fiftieth en of over three of the movie Jaws. Another

(20:03):
shark bites being reported on South Carolina's hilton Head Island.
The victim, identified as a teenage girl, is recovering after
she suffered leg lacerations consistent with a shark bite on
Sunday afternoon. The latest incident was around noon on Sunday
and Colony Beach Park. That's according to Hilton Head Island
Fire Rescue. It came less than a week after a

(20:24):
twelve year old girl was also bitten by a shark.
That victim also suffered a non life threatening injury to
the leg and was airlifted to a hospital in Savannah.
According to the fire department, I'm.

Speaker 3 (20:37):
Glad that you said it was a shark bite, not
an attack. I can't stand when they report attacks. It's like,
hold on, these are animals who think your food.

Speaker 2 (20:47):
Well, I mean, you can still label that as an attack.

Speaker 3 (20:52):
Sounds far more sinister than what's really going on.

Speaker 4 (20:55):
When you get a the.

Speaker 3 (20:56):
Os, you're clearly you're on the plate just saying, well.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
If something's trying to eat you, I think there's nothing
wrong with calling that an attack. If if there's some
bear charging at you in the woods attack.

Speaker 3 (21:11):
So what I think interesting here is that this was
reported on Sunday afternoon. How often do you hear like,
don't go out on the water before sunrise or after
sunset because that's when you know sharks feed.

Speaker 5 (21:24):
Well, what I always think of and.

Speaker 2 (21:28):
I was at the beach not long ago, and I
saw people like hanging out under the pier that people
are fishing.

Speaker 4 (21:33):
Off of and everything, and I'm never understand.

Speaker 5 (21:36):
I'm like, you get away from there, man.

Speaker 4 (21:38):
Yeah, your fish bait literally a.

Speaker 5 (21:40):
Shark bait at that point.

Speaker 1 (21:43):
Thanks for listening to the Charleston Morning Use podcast Catch
Kelly and Blaze weekday mornings from sixty nine