April 13, 2026 • 38 mins
Can you say Brinkmanship? The President threatens, the Democrats and mainstream media panic, and Iran capitulates. There is a history lesson in this week's "did they really just say that" cuts.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can you say brinkmanship? The President threatens the Democrats in
mainstream media panic and Iran capitulates. There's a history lesson
in this week's Did they really just say that CUTSI
Nancy Shack, I'm Ben Parker. This is newspite.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
We're giving them till tomorrow eight o'clock Eastern time, and
after that they're gonna have no bridges, They're gonna have
no power plants, stone ages.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Yeah, and we need to be invoking the twenty fifth Amendment.
Speaker 4 (00:40):
But this is a very dangerous moment and a very
dangerous president.
Speaker 5 (00:44):
We should stop an out of control president who is
causing such harm to the American people.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
We have a completely unhinged president.
Speaker 6 (00:52):
There's nothing more fulfilling than being involved in a sacred
operation like this one to rescue one of our airmen
from behind enemy lines.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
That was former Iran CIA station chief Dan Hoffman talking
about the rescue of a weapon specialist who was shot
down in an F fifteen over Iran who was unrescued.
President Trump told us about this in his ran dress
an address after the fact. Cut one o two.
Speaker 7 (01:26):
Late Thursday night, an American F fifteen fighter jet went
down deep inside enemy territory in Iran while participating in
Operation Epic Fury, where we're doing unbelievably well well at
a level that nobody's ever seen before. The entire country
could be taken out in one night, and that night
(01:47):
might be tomorrow night, it.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
Might be could be, you know, but heroes rescued our
downed airman. And here again is Dan Hoffman on Fox
Cut one.
Speaker 8 (01:59):
This is the shades out of the Normandy invasion, where
we would try to deceive the Iranians into thinking that
we were exfiltrating him from someplace else, reportedly a maritime exfiltration,
to throw them off the scent of what was really
happening at the time. Look, I can tell you from
my experience at the CIA, there's nothing more fulfilling than
(02:21):
being involved in a sacred operation like this one to
rescue one of our airmen from behind enemy lines.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
So, and then a former F sixteen pilot over on Fox,
his name is Dan Rooney. He kind of explains what
happens in the plane. And these guys are trained. All
members of the service get trained in survival, but the
Air Force, in particular Navy Air Force get trained by
a school that just does that nothing else. Those people
(02:50):
who train them only do survival. They don't have split
duty with anything else, and they teach them exactly what
to do from the moment something hits your plane to
a So.
Speaker 9 (03:02):
This missile slams into this fighter jet and then the
ejection sequence starts right And why they didn't eject together
is because of the catastrophic unexpected event here that ends
up with the pilot and the weapon systems officer separated.
So you eject out of this aircraft. First thing you do, obviously,
(03:23):
is make sure you have a good canopy. We are
prepared for this sequence. It is memorized. We're going to
hit the ground and then we are going to evade
as quickly as possible. Obviously, with this kernel, the weapon
systems officer, it becomes very difficult because he is injured.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Yeah, it was an amazing rescue and Fox was reporting
that it was also historical because two people are rescued
at the same time cut for.
Speaker 10 (03:47):
A Fox News has learned that after the fighter jet
was shot down on Friday, the weapon systems officer hiked
to an elevated mountain ridge where he hit and waited
for retrieval. The pilot of The jet was rescued by
US special forces on Friday, but President Trump said they
waited to confirm as to not jeopardize this second operation.
The president added, quote, this is the first time in
(04:07):
military memory that two US pilots had been rescued separately
deep in enemy territory. The IDEF said they avoided striking
this area as American planes and helicopters flew at a
low altitude.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Now happy ending, everybody thrilled. But this whole operation was
complicated by are you ready for by the press.
Speaker 11 (04:28):
There was a leaker.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Who let it be known that we had a man
down in Iran when the Iranians didn't know there was
a man down in Iran. And you can imagine that
had some serious consequences, and President Trump.
Speaker 11 (04:44):
Is really, really, really pissed about it. Cut one hundred.
Speaker 7 (04:50):
They basically said that we have one and there's somebody missing. Well,
they didn't know there was somebody missing until this leaker
gave the information. So whoever it is, we think we'll
be able to find it out because we're going to
go to the media company that released it, and we're
going to say national security, give it up or go
to jail.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
I think that's appropriate, And the president explained why this
was such a big deal letting this information out cut
one hundred A.
Speaker 7 (05:18):
When they did that, all of a sudden, the entire
country of Iran knew that there was a pilot that
was somewhere on their land that was fighting for his life.
And it also made it much more difficult for the
pilots and for the people going in to search for him.
All of a sudden, they know that there's somebody out there,
(05:41):
they see all these planes coming in. It became a
much more difficult operation because a leaker leaked that we
have one, we've rescued one, but there's another one out
there that we're trying to get and none.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
To make it better, around did something that just really
makes you wonder how we actually got this guy out
cut one hundred B.
Speaker 7 (06:05):
So actually, the country Iran put out a major notice
you all saw it, offering a very big award for
anybody that captures the pilot. So in addition to a hostile,
very talented, very good, very evil military, we had.
Speaker 12 (06:25):
Millions of people trying to get into order.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
And random farmers running around.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
Imagine that kind of a you know, oh my god,
this is more money than that. This sets them up
for life. Of course, everybody's looking for him, and so
according to according to President Trump, they're going to find
that leaker cut one hundred c Well, we have.
Speaker 7 (06:43):
To find that leakuer because that's a sick person. Probably
didn't realize the extent of how bad it was. I
can't imagine that the person did.
Speaker 12 (06:51):
But we're going to find out. It's national security.
Speaker 2 (06:54):
And the person that did the story will go to
jail if he doesn't, and that doesn't last long.
Speaker 12 (07:01):
And I think everybody would understand it.
Speaker 7 (07:03):
They put this mission at great risk, They put that
man at great risk, and they put the hundreds of
people that went in looking for them because everyone now
knows that we're going in.
Speaker 11 (07:15):
Is he right?
Speaker 1 (07:15):
I mean, do you think that these people should be
jailed for what they did, divulging divulging national security issues
that in danger, actually physically endangered many people's lives.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
Well, you know, it's a tricky situation.
Speaker 13 (07:29):
And as someone in the press, you know when your
boss is saying, find out as much as you can
and get it on the air asap. Here's the thing,
I don't know that the full extent of how this
gout learned and how it got leaked. If you were
told something, say off the record or secretly or privately,
and you still went and leaked it, I would say yes,
they should kick it right in between the legs. However,
(07:50):
if you're digging for information and you find some and
you report.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
It, there is an exception to the press is right
to and that is national security right. That is in
fact an exception to that.
Speaker 13 (08:04):
I understand. But my point is, unless let's put it
this way for me, it's a gray area depending on
the situation at hand. Yes, they lead, I mean, this
is what we're saying. We got to find out more information.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
I mean, just oh, they've admitted they leaked it. At
this point, they've identified themselves.
Speaker 11 (08:20):
They leaked it. They didn't care that.
Speaker 13 (08:22):
I'm curious because I am curious about how the person
and I'm going to say it because I think it
does matter it informantive how they look. Okay, So here's
the thing, right, the media person gets information from either
from digging it up or being told it. Now, yes,
that person has some culpability, but whoever told that person
(08:47):
also has some culpability, because should they really be telling
the media, Hey, guess what, we got some information.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
Let me tell you about it.
Speaker 13 (08:55):
So I think there's more here than just the surface
layer of the onion. So whoever that Israeli person was,
now the US only has so much control over Israel
called Benjamin det Nyahu and say.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
Hey, that guy's but they do have control over the
American press. And so the guy finds out that there's
a down to US airman that the Iranians aren't aware of.
So let's just send a telegram to the IRG and
tell them to look for this guy who's been injured
and who is fighting for his life in the mountains
in Iran. So I mean, that is so irresponsible. This
is one of those things where you check with the Pentagon,
(09:29):
and people who are writing these stories know that they
need to check with the Pentagon and say, you know, hey,
is it okay to release this yet? And you know
what the response is from the Pentagon, not yet, Wait
till we have.
Speaker 11 (09:41):
Them in the air, and then you have it. It's yours.
Speaker 13 (09:44):
And I think any member of the press who's been
doing this long enough, and it doesn't have to be
war related, it could be a murder investigation. It would
be any good thing you get told sometimes don't say
anything until we say it's okay to say something.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
I get that, and.
Speaker 13 (09:58):
I agree this what this person did was was a
number one wrong. But again we got to beat the
person about the head and shoulders who told the media,
because that media person.
Speaker 11 (10:10):
You just point out, we have no control over in Israeli.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
I understand.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
So this is not about the Israeli. This is about
the American citizen who put another American citizens live at risk.
Not that doesn't even talk about the people who had
to go in and rescue him and risk their lives and
who were injured by the way. So it's that to me,
absolutely it deserves jail time. And if it's somebody like
an Axios reporter who's not part of the traditional mainstream
(10:35):
reporting who may not know all the rules, I don't
care because you know what it shows.
Speaker 11 (10:41):
It basically shows us.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
This is an example you check, But I mean, breaking
a story lasts for like you know, you get credit
for that for like fifteen minutes, and you risked somebody's
life to do it. You have to learn that if
you're going to play as a press person, whether you're
mainstream media, whether you are fringe media.
Speaker 11 (11:00):
Whatever you are, you.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
Are held responsible for your actions, and to me, this
was atrocious and I absolutely think that jail time is deserved.
Speaker 13 (11:07):
Which gets back to something we've talked about ad nauseam
before is look, there are journalists, very few at this
point who are real journalists. And then there are these
press people who are fine because they're they're doing their
press thing, and then there's I want to be well,
there's want to be press, want to be journalists who
really are just looking to get clicks or views or whatever.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
So you throw this up as an example of what
can happen to you if you don't play the rules.
Speaker 11 (11:32):
So if you didn't know what the rules.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
Are before, you do now and you know that you
could face jail time, and then it's not.
Speaker 11 (11:37):
A game that people's.
Speaker 1 (11:39):
When you're dealing with a story where people's lives are
at risk, you have to act responsibly no matter who
you are.
Speaker 3 (11:44):
Well, absolutely, I mean we all follow the rules of
you know, legitimate. That's why the rules.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
This needs to be done, I think, because you need
an example of this will happen to you if you
do not, if you do not pay attention to what
the appropriate thing to do is I don't care if
you're Aunt Mabel doing a podcast out of your garage
and somebody slips you a piece of information, or if
you're a UPI reporter or an AP reporter, you have
to follow the rules. And the rule is you don't
(12:09):
put people's lives at risk. I'm not talking about embarrassing somebody.
I'm not talking about, you know, risking a libel suit.
That's bad enough. You put people's lives. People could have
been killed and people were injured because of what you did.
So therefore you need to be held accountable for it
as an example, first of all to yourself or what
(12:30):
you did, and secondly to everybody else who's contemplating doing
something in that field.
Speaker 13 (12:34):
There is another little caveat here, and I agree with
what you just said. So if you're a journalist or
a press person or a blogger or whatever the hell
you are, here's the deal. If you don't. If you
get information, and it doesn't matter who you get it from.
It could be from you, could be from me, could
be from an Israeli operative, from anybody. Right, you get information,
(12:56):
you go, oh well that's interesting. Then you have to
get it confirmed.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
Right.
Speaker 13 (13:00):
You can't just take what somebody says and go, oh,
well that happened. So there's two things here. One, you
didn't go up the chain and say hey, is this true,
and they would have said no, or they would have
denied it because they didn't want to get anthing out,
or they would have said yes, but you can't report it.
So there's that. Then here's the other thing. If you
didn't get it confirmed, you you yourself as the reporter,
(13:22):
it turned out to be true, but you, yourself, as
a reporter, don't even know it's true. So you could
you either put somebody's lives or many lives at risk,
as this person did, or you're just blabbering out freaking
false information. So no matter which side of the coin
this heads or tails, didn't matter because this journal journalist,
(13:43):
this person didn't follow normal rules and chains of command
of journalism, which first of all is you need to
confirm information. Just because you heard it in a bathroom
doesn't make it true.
Speaker 11 (13:57):
To live by.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Yeah, I'm a bum, I.
Speaker 11 (14:01):
Think that's really good. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:02):
Well, this whole leaker story did not improve the president's temper,
and he was really ticked off, and almost after he's
saying I'm going to destroy the leaker.
Speaker 11 (14:13):
He then turned around and said, I'm going to destroy her.
On cut one O four A.
Speaker 12 (14:17):
I can tell you they're negotiating. We think in good faith.
We're going to find out.
Speaker 2 (14:22):
We're getting the help of some incredible countries that want
this to be ended because it affects them.
Speaker 12 (14:29):
Also a lot of people are affected by this. But
we're giving them.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
We're giving them till tomorrow eight o'clock Eastern time, and
after that.
Speaker 12 (14:39):
They're gonna have no bridges, they're gonna have no power plants.
Stone ages.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Yeah, bomb them to the stone ages. And that was
just the beginning. Then he got really mad and he
was going to bomb the bleep out of them. So
and he put something up on social media that just
told exactly what he was thinking of the situation. This
was reported by Jake Tapper on CNN verbatim, with a
(15:08):
disclaimer at the beginning, don't let your children hear this.
Cut number five.
Speaker 14 (15:12):
The injured airmen survive being shot down behind enemy line.
Scenn has learned by hiding alone in a mountain crevice
before he was rescued in a massive effort involving hundreds
of American military and intelligence personnel. But if you were
wondering how the success of that operation might affect the
President's posture toward Iran moving forward, wonder no longer. He
has just threatened Iran in extraordinary graphic terms, giving the
(15:35):
Iranian regime just over a day to either make a deal,
reopen the strait of horror moves, or face hell. If
your children are watching, be warned the president did not
use polite language. Quote Tuesday will be power plant day
and bridge day, all wrapped up in won in Iran,
there will be nothing like it. Open the straight, you
crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
Just watch. We should know that.
Speaker 14 (16:00):
Destroying civilian power infrastructure is generally considered to constitute a
war crime under international law, though the president could argue
that the infrastructure has dual use and also is utilized
by Iran's military.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
I just want to point out, by the way, that
President Trump is not the first president to bomb a
power plant. In fact, almost every president's done it in
some form or the other. But this statement by the
President caused Democrats to lose their minds again. Yeah, just
you know, whatever was left it started spitzing out again,
and it's amazing to me, given the fact that Democrat
(16:34):
presidents have also bombed power plants and I didn't hear
the send. I think their objection was basically to his
foul language, which really that's your concern. Here's Stephen A.
Smith in a Twitter video Cut six.
Speaker 15 (16:45):
Look, I ain't no damned support of Iron Okay, leading
sponsored terrorism, all of that stuff they want to do
in Israel, stuff they've already done to America. I ain't
no support of that. But you're the president of the
United States. You go on social media with a profanity
laced tirade and then you're gonna end it by saying
(17:08):
praise beat a Llah. How do you think that's gonna
help that? How do you think that's gonna help us
throughout the world. I mean, seriously, for Muslim country, Muslim
countries that in iron it never ends with this guy,
(17:34):
it never ends.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
Let the music going. Can I play the music?
Speaker 11 (17:37):
What's going on when he's in a cafe?
Speaker 1 (17:39):
But then here's akouche Kadori on MS having the same issue.
Speaker 11 (17:44):
Cut seven.
Speaker 16 (17:45):
I mean, this is a very unprecedented statement. We have
the president of the United States basically declaring his intent
to commit war crimes. Right, you've accurately described the law.
You're not supposed to be targeting civilian infrastructure, and even
in countries that you are nominly at WARWI And this
is just a further escalation of the Trump administration sort
(18:07):
of lack of interest in domestic international law.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
Right.
Speaker 16 (18:10):
It started with the boat strikes off the in the
international waters off the central Right. Then we've had the
deposing of the Venezuelan president, we had the war in Iran,
and now this which is disgraceful, absolutely disgraceful coming from
our US president. And the language is disgraceful, the claims
(18:31):
are disgraceful. This is I mean, this is a historically
terrible communication. This is the sort of thing I hate
to say it that you would expect to be introduced
into war crimes tribunal in the future.
Speaker 11 (18:41):
Oh, for God's sake.
Speaker 1 (18:42):
First of all, they weren't war crimes when Obama and
Clinton bombed power plants for some reason. But it's a
war crime apparently when Donald Trump does it. One and two,
given what we're doing, your.
Speaker 11 (18:54):
Issue is his language.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
We're at war with Iran, who's threatened US with missiles
and nuclear weapons and you're pissed off, as the President swore.
Speaker 13 (19:01):
You know, had this not if we weren't where we
are right now, if we were a week week and
a half when the President wrote this, if we were
if we were that morning we were doing this show
that that whole social media post and all that stuff,
it almost could have been a truth control, you know,
because you go absolutely, I mean that yeah, look, I mean,
but it's not.
Speaker 11 (19:21):
A freaking war crime.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
You know, It's like okay, And and I think it
all had a purpose because the President used that that
social media post man as a jumping off point, because
he got even worse the next morning he started he
said again that the that the moment was going to
be eight pm on April seventh, deadline or are you
(19:45):
ready for this? His post was now he's going to
bomb the entire Iranian civilization out of existence Obliteration Day.
That's what he posted on truth social And if you
think the Democrats were just a little off, and the
response to you know, stone age, listen to this. This
(20:07):
is a montage of Democrats having a complete breakdown over
the Trump Iran ultimatum Cut six B.
Speaker 9 (20:14):
We need to be demanding that Congress can dem today,
and we need to be invoking the twenty fifth Amendment.
Speaker 4 (20:19):
But this is a very dangerous moment and a very
dangerous president. We have someone that is completely unfit for
office right now sitting in the White House.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
We should stop an out of control president who is
causing such harm to the American people.
Speaker 9 (20:34):
We have a completely unhinged president who is threatening massive
war crimes.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
So that was Rocanna, Rep Garcia, Corey Booker, and I
forget who the last guy was, but so that was Democrats.
Speaker 11 (20:47):
Oh my god, to Obliteration Day.
Speaker 13 (20:49):
There was a hose, I mean there were We could
have played that cut for an hour and a half.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Yeah, ye, yes, reactions exactly. And then this is Nicole
Wallace on MS warning that tens of millions of human
beings are now in danger.
Speaker 11 (21:00):
Cut seven A.
Speaker 17 (21:01):
Hi, everyone, it's four o'clock in New York with the
fate of tens of millions of humans right now on
a knife's edge. Because if nothing changes in the next
four hours and Donald Trump falls through and the things
he said out loud, his public threat, we may all
soon be witnessed to a military assault so generationally and
intentionally brutal that war crimes aren't just possible that they
(21:24):
become US policy. But again that is only if you
take Donald Trump at his word.
Speaker 11 (21:29):
That's risky. So here's an odd twist that.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
I started thinking about last night, because last night there
was a ceasefire. So the eight o'clock deadline rolled around,
but within hours before that, the Pakistanis actually negotiated with
Iran on our behalf on both sides. The they were
like intermediaries. She's fire for two weeks, so that nobody
was bombed into oblivion. I think that the temper tantrums
(21:58):
that the Democrats had, Oh my god, this is horrible
war crimes. He's going to kill millions of people. All
of that stuff, I think persuaded the Iranians. Their President
Trump meant what he said that he was going to
irreparably harm them and destroy their culture completely. And so
hours before the deadline, they agreed to cease fire. And
(22:22):
I wouldn't be surprised if that's what Donald Trump intended
all along. He made outrageous statements. The mainstream media and
the Democrats picked it up and took it as fact,
and they're angst their their fear mongering persuaded the Iranians
that Donald Trump meant what he said, let's stop, and
because nothing else has stopped them.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
I'm sure, what do you think.
Speaker 13 (22:44):
Lots of well, lots of people reacted, obviously, from the
pope to the lawmakers to people, you know, the man
on the street kind of thing. But here's the thing
about President Trump, and we've look, we've done this truth
control thing for forever. He says what is in his head,
and whether that's good or bad as a president of
the United States, talk amongst yourselves. But he's so he
(23:06):
says this stuff. But here's the thing, whether he meant
it or whether he didn't mean it.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
It worked.
Speaker 12 (23:13):
Yeah.
Speaker 13 (23:13):
It seems like a lot of his threats, the things
that he says that people go, I can't believe he
said that.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
I think I think the reason why is because a
few times he has he says something outrageous and he
follows through, he does it, and people, oh my god.
Speaker 11 (23:27):
He did it. And I think that with the statement that.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
He made yesterday regarding Obliteration Day with the press and
the dams in Congress, they sold it, sold it, sold it,
and they're like, oh my god, he's out of control.
Speaker 11 (23:41):
What can we do.
Speaker 1 (23:41):
We got to get him out office. He's des trying
the world, and the Iranians believed it.
Speaker 13 (23:45):
Imagine for a second, and you have to imagine it,
because it didn't happen. But so President Trump becausemes out
and he says, and we're going to obliterate you and
blah blah blah and back to the Stone ages and
that okay, he says all this stuff stay and then right,
and then the Democrats come out hold the pre conference
and go, yeah, he doesn't mean any of that stuff.
How do you think this would have played out? They
reacted like, oh my god, Iranians are gonna be killed everywhere,
(24:08):
and the Iranians were going maybe just going to kill
us all, yeah, we should think this.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Let's think this.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
So I'm wondering it was that happenstance, you know that
they just happened to help?
Speaker 11 (24:19):
Was it doesn't invite me?
Speaker 1 (24:21):
Or or did President Trump understand what would happen if
he made those outrageous nams, because let's face it, he
really went beyond what he's ever done before. I mean,
he did those statements, which is saying something, which is
saying something, and they were outrageous statements. I don't think
they're impeachable statements. But I mean they were like the
Democrats do, but they were outrageous statements.
Speaker 11 (24:43):
But you know, this is Donald Trump, It's P. T.
Barnum in the White House.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
So you you know, but I think with the making
the outrageous statements, he knew that that was tossing a
match into the gasoline pool where the Democrats and the
mainstream media live and set it on fire and watch
them sell it. It wasn't I think that's what happened.
I think he knew what it was gonna happen.
Speaker 13 (25:04):
It was a different time. I don't want to compare
Apple's to oorages, but I'm gonna kind of compare them
a little bit. It was a different time.
Speaker 12 (25:11):
Uh.
Speaker 13 (25:11):
There was no social media, there was no twenty four
hour news cycles. There was no this that. Uh, if
you think back, it wasn't quite as harsh per se
because Trump came on camera and said all this stuff
and he wrote all this you know, f us in
social media. This didn't exist. But you know, you think
about the Potsdam Declaration right during World War Two, where basically, uh,
(25:32):
Japan was told cut the crap or we're gonna cut
you in half. I mean the threats were made against
Japan as well. Now again it's a different time, it's
a different place. You drop to nuclear We saw him
and then they said hmm, okay, right, and.
Speaker 11 (25:48):
Where was that boat?
Speaker 13 (25:49):
Yeah, and there this in mind, which because I don't
want people to say, well, you're you know, you're favoring truck. Listen,
Trump said what he said. It worked at least for now.
We'll figure out what happens in the future.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
But so.
Speaker 13 (26:00):
He's a Republican president who a lot of people hate.
They have the syndrome. But the person who was the
United States president at the time of the Potsdam Declaration,
which basically told Japan cut the crapper, We're we're gonna
end this badly, was a Democrat. So look, it happens
they do it because look, I think I think that
a president's main goal is protecting America and America's people
(26:26):
now at the time, at the end of World War two,
and I know we're friends with Japan now and I
have a lot of Japanese friends, and YadA, YadA, YadA,
But at the time, it was are we gonna die
or are we gonna kill the Japanese? We're gonna kill
the Japanese. And I think, here President Trump, especially why
he started it in the first place. You know, them
having a nuke and a missile that could reach you know,
Western Europe. So is protecting the American people? I say,
(26:49):
I think because I think. I don't know. I wasn't
in any of these meetings, but there are a lot
of parallels between what Trump did today and what was
on or said to the Japanese in nineteen forty five.
And look, it's a different time and place again, like
I said, there's no social media and all this other stuff.
Speaker 3 (27:10):
But I don't why you also pissed off? Now?
Speaker 13 (27:15):
I would listen. I would be the first, maybe the second,
to be pissed off. If Trump said all this and
then he went in and he dropped seven nukes on
Turan and he killed millions and millions of innocent Iraneans,
I would be like him. Maybe that was too much.
But look to say a threat and then have it work,
why you so? Why you're so angry?
Speaker 11 (27:35):
And a cease fire and cease fire right for two
weeks at least fire.
Speaker 13 (27:39):
And I don't know how this is going to help.
And of course by the time you hear this, and
by the time you hear this two years from now,
you'll know. But you know, they're opening this straight of
hor moves at least, so maybe that will help a
little with the oil deal.
Speaker 11 (27:50):
It's gonna be a million dollars a ship. Yeah, okay, And.
Speaker 13 (27:53):
So look at least for now, and I say for
now based on when I'm saying this, it worked. Yeah,
let's we can revisit how the president speaks. We do
truth controls all the time, so we've already been talking
about how the president speaks. So they shouldn't be a
surprise to anybody.
Speaker 3 (28:10):
But it worked well, I guess.
Speaker 13 (28:13):
So here's the question, and I'll ask you it because
you're the only one sitting next to me.
Speaker 11 (28:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
Do the ends justify the means? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (28:20):
Okay, in this case, they do, you go. I don't
think they always do, but they do here.
Speaker 12 (28:23):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (28:24):
Good.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
So there were some other utterances, non Iran utterances of
note this week, Just a couple I wanted to share
with you.
Speaker 12 (28:32):
One.
Speaker 1 (28:32):
It's the Massachusetts governor more Heally hit a new record
for patronizing people and this cut. She put out a
Twitter video explaining how high energy prices had happened in
terms that everyone will understand. She used donuts cut thirteen b.
Speaker 18 (28:52):
Energy bills are high. Everyone can see that. So lowering
your energy bills is my top priority. Now how does
that happen? That's a little more complicated. So let's talk
about energy in a way that everyone understands.
Speaker 11 (29:04):
With munchkins. Picture this.
Speaker 18 (29:06):
You're at work or school wherever it's nine am and
no one's eating breakfast. Someone shows up with one of these.
Demand is high. Everyone wants a munchkin or two or three,
but we've only got twenty five. That's where we're headed
with energy.
Speaker 11 (29:20):
So how do we fix that?
Speaker 18 (29:21):
See this glaze munchkin that's wind. Massachusetts already has an
offshore wind project, lowering our energy bills as we speak,
and we need more. It's affordable, homegrown energy and it'll
create thousands of jobs. This sprinkled munchkin that's solar. Solar
is the cheapest, fastest way we can bring more energy
into Massachusetts. This chocolate munchkin that's storage. Storage is when
(29:44):
we take energy off the grid when it's cheaper, and
we store it like you do in a battery, and
then we use it later when we need it most.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
Can I ask why the box isn't storage that the
munchkins came in, because.
Speaker 11 (29:56):
I think that would be good. But oh my god.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
And can we point out, by the way, that this
is not why we have an energy issue in Massachusetts.
We do because Governor Heally bragged about stopping the gas
tankers from coming in here so we don't get cheaper gas. Basically,
that's why we have an energy problem. She has killed
everything but green energy. That's what's caused the problem here.
(30:18):
But just in case you're really, really stupid, she wants
to explain it to you with donuts because everybody knows
nobody is as smart as a governor of Massachusetts, and
we can't we can't possibly comprehend it unless she uses
food as a demonstration.
Speaker 13 (30:32):
You know what I don't understand because, of course, for
those who are from this area as we are, you know,
the whole Dunkin thing really doesn't revolve around their donuts.
It revolves around their coffee. I'm surprised she didn't use
like iced coffees and lots of refreshers and boxes of
this is this box of Joe represents solar energy? Yeah,
(30:52):
this extra large refresher represents wind High Iane.
Speaker 1 (30:59):
Yeah, I know, I know, I mean it was just
it was incredibly you explained it to her, she would understand,
you're patronizing people, your treating Look, they're stupid. What do
you mean she wouldn't understand. I mean, that's how far
gone it is. And it's endemic by the way, and
the Democrat Party. And then there was another cut this week.
This is NBC's Kristin Welker. She hit a new record
(31:22):
for stupidity while being arrogant at the same time. See
if you can catch the problem in this cut cut thirteen.
Secretary Johnson weigh in on that point and the fact
that there is no head of DHS right now at
a time.
Speaker 13 (31:34):
When DHS is shut down?
Speaker 18 (31:36):
Does that do real damage?
Speaker 11 (31:39):
Okay?
Speaker 1 (31:39):
Can I point out to you so that she just
did that this week? We have had a Secretary of
DHS for two weeks now, Christy Nome, as we all know,
is OUSTD and former Senator Mark Wayne Mullen was sworn
in two weeks ago. He has been in office for
two weeks. So this NBC anchor is apparently oblivious to
the fact that there is, in fact a current Secretary
(32:02):
of Homeland Security, by the way, by the name of
Secretary Mark Waynemullet, by the way.
Speaker 13 (32:07):
So I would guess that she either didn't know or
forgot that there was one, or or or just as
likely from that group of people, they knew there was
one but didn't want to acknowledge it and just swept
it under the rug.
Speaker 11 (32:23):
We don't they lied to anybody.
Speaker 1 (32:25):
We don't have a Yeah, so anybody listening, anybody who's
listening to NBC who is not a serious news person,
meaning a lot of people like myself and I work
in industry. But even if I didn't, I watched news.
I watch multiple sources of news. I watch Fox, I
watch CNN, I watch NBC, ABC, I watch news, I
read read papers, I go on. You know, I'm very
(32:47):
interested in news, and so I hear something, I don't
take it as fact. I find out for sure. And
that's just what I've always done. In this particular case,
there are a lot of people who watch a news
source and they believe what they hear on that news
source because they don't check it out anywhere else. They
don't have time, their lives are busy, so they go
(33:08):
to one place that they think can be trusted, and
that's what they use for news.
Speaker 11 (33:11):
In this case, you had a.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
News anchor, Welkoer on NBC who just lied to those
people saying there's no head of DHS. So those people
now think, oh my god, DHS is rudderless during a war.
And you know, how can that be national security? Well
it can't be, because we have ahead of DHS. She
just she either is too stupid to know, which is
(33:33):
scary with an anchor or, as you point out, she
just lied to people deliberately.
Speaker 11 (33:38):
It's one of those two things without.
Speaker 13 (33:40):
Naming names, you know, and in the old days, and
I don't want to sound like that old guy right
where a kid.
Speaker 11 (33:46):
But I walked to school uphill both ways.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
Tell you when I kid way tonight.
Speaker 13 (33:52):
But you could watch the news or listen to the
news on the radio, or read the news in the newspaper,
and most of the time it was unless it was
an op ed piece or some other thing. Most of
the time you didn't have to say, well, I just
heard that on this station. I better go find twenty
seven other stations to confirm what they said it was true.
And by the way, if it wasn't true, like if
(34:15):
somebody uttered something that was oh, we got the wrong information,
they would make a correction immediately, like, sorry, we told
you the wrong stuff. Are bad oops on us? Now
now these stations, a lot of them are across the board,
you know, left to right, then center. They intentionally mislead,
misdirect or in some cases perhaps lie, and they never
(34:38):
go back and fix it because because there's nothing to fix,
because in their mind they're doing a service for the
public by telling them what they want you to know,
not what you should know, not what's truthful. But so
it's a different world we live in, as I've said before,
but it's just it's horrible because again, you could just
come on the air and say so today we don't
(35:00):
I have a director of a DHS. A matter of fact,
the president fell down the hill. He's not around anymore,
and the vice president's a drown in a surfing accident.
You could say anything you want, anything you want, and
half the people, because they don't follow up on things
and they're not even paying attention.
Speaker 3 (35:16):
Half the time, we'll go, oh my god, that's really
that happened. It's just ridiculous.
Speaker 13 (35:22):
And they would never come back and say like like Okay,
in theory, let's say NBC made a mistake when Kristen
said what she said, fair enough, people make mistakes. The
next segment, she should have come back and said, I
just said there was no head of DHS. There has been.
He was appointed. He's been there for two weeks. His
name is Mark Wayne Ullen. I just can't remember his
name because he's got too many first names and it's
(35:43):
really confusing.
Speaker 3 (35:43):
Whatever. But they should have corrected it, and they didn't, and.
Speaker 11 (35:47):
That makes me think it's a lie.
Speaker 13 (35:48):
That's the question you have to ask yourself, is Okay,
they got it wrong.
Speaker 3 (35:52):
Why didn't they correct it?
Speaker 11 (35:53):
Because I didn't want you to be corrected. So that's
what I think. I think you're absolutely right.
Speaker 6 (35:56):
Right.
Speaker 1 (35:57):
So we end each week with a truth control and
it is our champion truth Controller President Trump. This week
he's at a presser and he says, basically, the Iranian
people are begging the US to keep attacking, keep bombing.
It was you serious about this cut one twelve?
Speaker 5 (36:17):
You've said Iranians would be mad if you stop these attacks,
But why would they want you to blow up their
infrastructure to cut off their power? Wouldn't that be punishing
Iranians for the actions of the regime.
Speaker 19 (36:28):
They would be willing to They would be willing and
it's suffering. They would be willing to suffer that in
order to have freedom the Iranians have. We've had numerous intercepts,
please keep bombing, bombs that are dropping near their homes,
Please keep bombing, do it. And these are people that
are living where the bombs are exploding. And when we
(36:50):
leave and we're not hitting those areas, they're saying, please
come back, come back, come back.
Speaker 12 (36:56):
These are the people. I don't know what they do.
All I can tell you is they want freedom. They
have lived in a world that you know nothing about.
Speaker 2 (37:06):
Is a violent, horrible world where if you protest you
are shot.
Speaker 11 (37:11):
Truth any science, truths.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
Well, absolutely without a doubt.
Speaker 13 (37:16):
And now not every look at I don't think every
Iranian feels that way. But I think there's a very
big portion of Iranians who want their dictator rulers and
to go away so they can have a country.
Speaker 3 (37:28):
Oh that looks at.
Speaker 13 (37:30):
Look, they'll be their own country, they have their own religions,
they have their own lis that's that blah blah blah.
But more like us and I say that because if
you think before the revolution in the seventies that led
to the capture of American hostages, it was pretty western there.
The things were pretty groovy. Yeah, so I do I
(37:50):
think that a good portion. I don't know the percentage.
I'm not going to make up a percentage like some
news organizations would do. But I think there's a pretty
good percentage of Iranian people who are like, yeah, come on,
let's get this out of here, because I got crap
to do when I want a better job and I
want to watch I want to watch sitcoms on TV
streaming after six tonight.
Speaker 3 (38:09):
I mean not really. So it is the president's telling
the truth.
Speaker 13 (38:11):
Maybe not for every single Iranian, but I think as
a whole on it does.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
I think.
Speaker 11 (38:18):
So let us know. If you agree with Ben, you
can contact us on.
Speaker 3 (38:22):
X Are you truthing it or are you trolling?
Speaker 11 (38:26):
I think it's a little bit of both.
Speaker 3 (38:28):
Yeah, as a lot of times it can be with Trump.
Speaker 1 (38:31):
Yes, So if you agree with Ben or and or me,
you can contact us on X at news Bye three,
also on Facebook at news Byte. We upload a new
episode every single Monday, So check back next Monday and
see what new offerings we have. Meanwhile, have a great week.
Speaker 11 (38:47):
I'm Nancy Shack, I'm Ben Parker. This is news Bite.
Can you say brinkmanship? The President threatens the Democrats in
mainstream media panic and Iran capitulates. There's a history lesson
in this week's Did they really just say that CUTSI
Nancy Shack, I'm Ben Parker. This is newspite.
Speaker 2 (00:26):
We're giving them till tomorrow eight o'clock Eastern time, and
after that they're gonna have no bridges, They're gonna have
no power plants, stone ages.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Yeah, and we need to be invoking the twenty fifth Amendment.
Speaker 4 (00:40):
But this is a very dangerous moment and a very
dangerous president.
Speaker 5 (00:44):
We should stop an out of control president who is
causing such harm to the American people.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
We have a completely unhinged president.
Speaker 6 (00:52):
There's nothing more fulfilling than being involved in a sacred
operation like this one to rescue one of our airmen
from behind enemy lines.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
That was former Iran CIA station chief Dan Hoffman talking
about the rescue of a weapon specialist who was shot
down in an F fifteen over Iran who was unrescued.
President Trump told us about this in his ran dress
an address after the fact. Cut one o two.
Speaker 7 (01:26):
Late Thursday night, an American F fifteen fighter jet went
down deep inside enemy territory in Iran while participating in
Operation Epic Fury, where we're doing unbelievably well well at
a level that nobody's ever seen before. The entire country
could be taken out in one night, and that night
(01:47):
might be tomorrow night, it.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
Might be could be, you know, but heroes rescued our
downed airman. And here again is Dan Hoffman on Fox
Cut one.
Speaker 8 (01:59):
This is the shades out of the Normandy invasion, where
we would try to deceive the Iranians into thinking that
we were exfiltrating him from someplace else, reportedly a maritime exfiltration,
to throw them off the scent of what was really
happening at the time. Look, I can tell you from
my experience at the CIA, there's nothing more fulfilling than
(02:21):
being involved in a sacred operation like this one to
rescue one of our airmen from behind enemy lines.
Speaker 1 (02:29):
So, and then a former F sixteen pilot over on Fox,
his name is Dan Rooney. He kind of explains what
happens in the plane. And these guys are trained. All
members of the service get trained in survival, but the
Air Force, in particular Navy Air Force get trained by
a school that just does that nothing else. Those people
(02:50):
who train them only do survival. They don't have split
duty with anything else, and they teach them exactly what
to do from the moment something hits your plane to
a So.
Speaker 9 (03:02):
This missile slams into this fighter jet and then the
ejection sequence starts right And why they didn't eject together
is because of the catastrophic unexpected event here that ends
up with the pilot and the weapon systems officer separated.
So you eject out of this aircraft. First thing you do, obviously,
(03:23):
is make sure you have a good canopy. We are
prepared for this sequence. It is memorized. We're going to
hit the ground and then we are going to evade
as quickly as possible. Obviously, with this kernel, the weapon
systems officer, it becomes very difficult because he is injured.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
Yeah, it was an amazing rescue and Fox was reporting
that it was also historical because two people are rescued
at the same time cut for.
Speaker 10 (03:47):
A Fox News has learned that after the fighter jet
was shot down on Friday, the weapon systems officer hiked
to an elevated mountain ridge where he hit and waited
for retrieval. The pilot of The jet was rescued by
US special forces on Friday, but President Trump said they
waited to confirm as to not jeopardize this second operation.
The president added, quote, this is the first time in
(04:07):
military memory that two US pilots had been rescued separately
deep in enemy territory. The IDEF said they avoided striking
this area as American planes and helicopters flew at a
low altitude.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Now happy ending, everybody thrilled. But this whole operation was
complicated by are you ready for by the press.
Speaker 11 (04:28):
There was a leaker.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
Who let it be known that we had a man
down in Iran when the Iranians didn't know there was
a man down in Iran. And you can imagine that
had some serious consequences, and President Trump.
Speaker 11 (04:44):
Is really, really, really pissed about it. Cut one hundred.
Speaker 7 (04:50):
They basically said that we have one and there's somebody missing. Well,
they didn't know there was somebody missing until this leaker
gave the information. So whoever it is, we think we'll
be able to find it out because we're going to
go to the media company that released it, and we're
going to say national security, give it up or go
to jail.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
I think that's appropriate, And the president explained why this
was such a big deal letting this information out cut
one hundred A.
Speaker 7 (05:18):
When they did that, all of a sudden, the entire
country of Iran knew that there was a pilot that
was somewhere on their land that was fighting for his life.
And it also made it much more difficult for the
pilots and for the people going in to search for him.
All of a sudden, they know that there's somebody out there,
(05:41):
they see all these planes coming in. It became a
much more difficult operation because a leaker leaked that we
have one, we've rescued one, but there's another one out
there that we're trying to get and none.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
To make it better, around did something that just really
makes you wonder how we actually got this guy out
cut one hundred B.
Speaker 7 (06:05):
So actually, the country Iran put out a major notice
you all saw it, offering a very big award for
anybody that captures the pilot. So in addition to a hostile,
very talented, very good, very evil military, we had.
Speaker 12 (06:25):
Millions of people trying to get into order.
Speaker 3 (06:28):
And random farmers running around.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
Imagine that kind of a you know, oh my god,
this is more money than that. This sets them up
for life. Of course, everybody's looking for him, and so
according to according to President Trump, they're going to find
that leaker cut one hundred c Well, we have.
Speaker 7 (06:43):
To find that leakuer because that's a sick person. Probably
didn't realize the extent of how bad it was. I
can't imagine that the person did.
Speaker 12 (06:51):
But we're going to find out. It's national security.
Speaker 2 (06:54):
And the person that did the story will go to
jail if he doesn't, and that doesn't last long.
Speaker 12 (07:01):
And I think everybody would understand it.
Speaker 7 (07:03):
They put this mission at great risk, They put that
man at great risk, and they put the hundreds of
people that went in looking for them because everyone now
knows that we're going in.
Speaker 11 (07:15):
Is he right?
Speaker 1 (07:15):
I mean, do you think that these people should be
jailed for what they did, divulging divulging national security issues
that in danger, actually physically endangered many people's lives.
Speaker 3 (07:27):
Well, you know, it's a tricky situation.
Speaker 13 (07:29):
And as someone in the press, you know when your
boss is saying, find out as much as you can
and get it on the air asap. Here's the thing,
I don't know that the full extent of how this
gout learned and how it got leaked. If you were
told something, say off the record or secretly or privately,
and you still went and leaked it, I would say yes,
they should kick it right in between the legs. However,
(07:50):
if you're digging for information and you find some and
you report.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
It, there is an exception to the press is right
to and that is national security right. That is in
fact an exception to that.
Speaker 13 (08:04):
I understand. But my point is, unless let's put it
this way for me, it's a gray area depending on
the situation at hand. Yes, they lead, I mean, this
is what we're saying. We got to find out more information.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
I mean, just oh, they've admitted they leaked it. At
this point, they've identified themselves.
Speaker 11 (08:20):
They leaked it. They didn't care that.
Speaker 13 (08:22):
I'm curious because I am curious about how the person
and I'm going to say it because I think it
does matter it informantive how they look. Okay, So here's
the thing, right, the media person gets information from either
from digging it up or being told it. Now, yes,
that person has some culpability, but whoever told that person
(08:47):
also has some culpability, because should they really be telling
the media, Hey, guess what, we got some information.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
Let me tell you about it.
Speaker 13 (08:55):
So I think there's more here than just the surface
layer of the onion. So whoever that Israeli person was,
now the US only has so much control over Israel
called Benjamin det Nyahu and say.
Speaker 1 (09:07):
Hey, that guy's but they do have control over the
American press. And so the guy finds out that there's
a down to US airman that the Iranians aren't aware of.
So let's just send a telegram to the IRG and
tell them to look for this guy who's been injured
and who is fighting for his life in the mountains
in Iran. So I mean, that is so irresponsible. This
is one of those things where you check with the Pentagon,
(09:29):
and people who are writing these stories know that they
need to check with the Pentagon and say, you know, hey,
is it okay to release this yet? And you know
what the response is from the Pentagon, not yet, Wait
till we have.
Speaker 11 (09:41):
Them in the air, and then you have it. It's yours.
Speaker 13 (09:44):
And I think any member of the press who's been
doing this long enough, and it doesn't have to be
war related, it could be a murder investigation. It would
be any good thing you get told sometimes don't say
anything until we say it's okay to say something.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
I get that, and.
Speaker 13 (09:58):
I agree this what this person did was was a
number one wrong. But again we got to beat the
person about the head and shoulders who told the media,
because that media person.
Speaker 11 (10:10):
You just point out, we have no control over in Israeli.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
I understand.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
So this is not about the Israeli. This is about
the American citizen who put another American citizens live at risk.
Not that doesn't even talk about the people who had
to go in and rescue him and risk their lives and
who were injured by the way. So it's that to me,
absolutely it deserves jail time. And if it's somebody like
an Axios reporter who's not part of the traditional mainstream
(10:35):
reporting who may not know all the rules, I don't
care because you know what it shows.
Speaker 11 (10:41):
It basically shows us.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
This is an example you check, But I mean, breaking
a story lasts for like you know, you get credit
for that for like fifteen minutes, and you risked somebody's
life to do it. You have to learn that if
you're going to play as a press person, whether you're
mainstream media, whether you are fringe media.
Speaker 11 (11:00):
Whatever you are, you.
Speaker 1 (11:01):
Are held responsible for your actions, and to me, this
was atrocious and I absolutely think that jail time is deserved.
Speaker 13 (11:07):
Which gets back to something we've talked about ad nauseam
before is look, there are journalists, very few at this
point who are real journalists. And then there are these
press people who are fine because they're they're doing their
press thing, and then there's I want to be well,
there's want to be press, want to be journalists who
really are just looking to get clicks or views or whatever.
Speaker 1 (11:28):
So you throw this up as an example of what
can happen to you if you don't play the rules.
Speaker 11 (11:32):
So if you didn't know what the rules.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
Are before, you do now and you know that you
could face jail time, and then it's not.
Speaker 11 (11:37):
A game that people's.
Speaker 1 (11:39):
When you're dealing with a story where people's lives are
at risk, you have to act responsibly no matter who
you are.
Speaker 3 (11:44):
Well, absolutely, I mean we all follow the rules of
you know, legitimate. That's why the rules.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
This needs to be done, I think, because you need
an example of this will happen to you if you
do not, if you do not pay attention to what
the appropriate thing to do is I don't care if
you're Aunt Mabel doing a podcast out of your garage
and somebody slips you a piece of information, or if
you're a UPI reporter or an AP reporter, you have
to follow the rules. And the rule is you don't
(12:09):
put people's lives at risk. I'm not talking about embarrassing somebody.
I'm not talking about, you know, risking a libel suit.
That's bad enough. You put people's lives. People could have
been killed and people were injured because of what you did.
So therefore you need to be held accountable for it
as an example, first of all to yourself or what
(12:30):
you did, and secondly to everybody else who's contemplating doing
something in that field.
Speaker 13 (12:34):
There is another little caveat here, and I agree with
what you just said. So if you're a journalist or
a press person or a blogger or whatever the hell
you are, here's the deal. If you don't. If you
get information, and it doesn't matter who you get it from.
It could be from you, could be from me, could
be from an Israeli operative, from anybody. Right, you get information,
(12:56):
you go, oh well that's interesting. Then you have to
get it confirmed.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
Right.
Speaker 13 (13:00):
You can't just take what somebody says and go, oh,
well that happened. So there's two things here. One, you
didn't go up the chain and say hey, is this true,
and they would have said no, or they would have
denied it because they didn't want to get anthing out,
or they would have said yes, but you can't report it.
So there's that. Then here's the other thing. If you
didn't get it confirmed, you you yourself as the reporter,
(13:22):
it turned out to be true, but you, yourself, as
a reporter, don't even know it's true. So you could
you either put somebody's lives or many lives at risk,
as this person did, or you're just blabbering out freaking
false information. So no matter which side of the coin
this heads or tails, didn't matter because this journal journalist,
(13:43):
this person didn't follow normal rules and chains of command
of journalism, which first of all is you need to
confirm information. Just because you heard it in a bathroom
doesn't make it true.
Speaker 11 (13:57):
To live by.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Yeah, I'm a bum, I.
Speaker 11 (14:01):
Think that's really good. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:02):
Well, this whole leaker story did not improve the president's temper,
and he was really ticked off, and almost after he's
saying I'm going to destroy the leaker.
Speaker 11 (14:13):
He then turned around and said, I'm going to destroy her.
On cut one O four A.
Speaker 12 (14:17):
I can tell you they're negotiating. We think in good faith.
We're going to find out.
Speaker 2 (14:22):
We're getting the help of some incredible countries that want
this to be ended because it affects them.
Speaker 12 (14:29):
Also a lot of people are affected by this. But
we're giving them.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
We're giving them till tomorrow eight o'clock Eastern time, and
after that.
Speaker 12 (14:39):
They're gonna have no bridges, they're gonna have no power plants.
Stone ages.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Yeah, bomb them to the stone ages. And that was
just the beginning. Then he got really mad and he
was going to bomb the bleep out of them. So
and he put something up on social media that just
told exactly what he was thinking of the situation. This
was reported by Jake Tapper on CNN verbatim, with a
(15:08):
disclaimer at the beginning, don't let your children hear this.
Cut number five.
Speaker 14 (15:12):
The injured airmen survive being shot down behind enemy line.
Scenn has learned by hiding alone in a mountain crevice
before he was rescued in a massive effort involving hundreds
of American military and intelligence personnel. But if you were
wondering how the success of that operation might affect the
President's posture toward Iran moving forward, wonder no longer. He
has just threatened Iran in extraordinary graphic terms, giving the
(15:35):
Iranian regime just over a day to either make a deal,
reopen the strait of horror moves, or face hell. If
your children are watching, be warned the president did not
use polite language. Quote Tuesday will be power plant day
and bridge day, all wrapped up in won in Iran,
there will be nothing like it. Open the straight, you
crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell.
Speaker 3 (15:58):
Just watch. We should know that.
Speaker 14 (16:00):
Destroying civilian power infrastructure is generally considered to constitute a
war crime under international law, though the president could argue
that the infrastructure has dual use and also is utilized
by Iran's military.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
I just want to point out, by the way, that
President Trump is not the first president to bomb a
power plant. In fact, almost every president's done it in
some form or the other. But this statement by the
President caused Democrats to lose their minds again. Yeah, just
you know, whatever was left it started spitzing out again,
and it's amazing to me, given the fact that Democrat
(16:34):
presidents have also bombed power plants and I didn't hear
the send. I think their objection was basically to his
foul language, which really that's your concern. Here's Stephen A.
Smith in a Twitter video Cut six.
Speaker 15 (16:45):
Look, I ain't no damned support of Iron Okay, leading
sponsored terrorism, all of that stuff they want to do
in Israel, stuff they've already done to America. I ain't
no support of that. But you're the president of the
United States. You go on social media with a profanity
laced tirade and then you're gonna end it by saying
(17:08):
praise beat a Llah. How do you think that's gonna
help that? How do you think that's gonna help us
throughout the world. I mean, seriously, for Muslim country, Muslim
countries that in iron it never ends with this guy,
(17:34):
it never ends.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
Let the music going. Can I play the music?
Speaker 11 (17:37):
What's going on when he's in a cafe?
Speaker 1 (17:39):
But then here's akouche Kadori on MS having the same issue.
Speaker 11 (17:44):
Cut seven.
Speaker 16 (17:45):
I mean, this is a very unprecedented statement. We have
the president of the United States basically declaring his intent
to commit war crimes. Right, you've accurately described the law.
You're not supposed to be targeting civilian infrastructure, and even
in countries that you are nominly at WARWI And this
is just a further escalation of the Trump administration sort
(18:07):
of lack of interest in domestic international law.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
Right.
Speaker 16 (18:10):
It started with the boat strikes off the in the
international waters off the central Right. Then we've had the
deposing of the Venezuelan president, we had the war in Iran,
and now this which is disgraceful, absolutely disgraceful coming from
our US president. And the language is disgraceful, the claims
(18:31):
are disgraceful. This is I mean, this is a historically
terrible communication. This is the sort of thing I hate
to say it that you would expect to be introduced
into war crimes tribunal in the future.
Speaker 11 (18:41):
Oh, for God's sake.
Speaker 1 (18:42):
First of all, they weren't war crimes when Obama and
Clinton bombed power plants for some reason. But it's a
war crime apparently when Donald Trump does it. One and two,
given what we're doing, your.
Speaker 11 (18:54):
Issue is his language.
Speaker 1 (18:55):
We're at war with Iran, who's threatened US with missiles
and nuclear weapons and you're pissed off, as the President swore.
Speaker 13 (19:01):
You know, had this not if we weren't where we
are right now, if we were a week week and
a half when the President wrote this, if we were
if we were that morning we were doing this show
that that whole social media post and all that stuff,
it almost could have been a truth control, you know,
because you go absolutely, I mean that yeah, look, I mean,
but it's not.
Speaker 11 (19:21):
A freaking war crime.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
You know, It's like okay, And and I think it
all had a purpose because the President used that that
social media post man as a jumping off point, because
he got even worse the next morning he started he
said again that the that the moment was going to
be eight pm on April seventh, deadline or are you
(19:45):
ready for this? His post was now he's going to
bomb the entire Iranian civilization out of existence Obliteration Day.
That's what he posted on truth social And if you
think the Democrats were just a little off, and the
response to you know, stone age, listen to this. This
(20:07):
is a montage of Democrats having a complete breakdown over
the Trump Iran ultimatum Cut six B.
Speaker 9 (20:14):
We need to be demanding that Congress can dem today,
and we need to be invoking the twenty fifth Amendment.
Speaker 4 (20:19):
But this is a very dangerous moment and a very
dangerous president. We have someone that is completely unfit for
office right now sitting in the White House.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
We should stop an out of control president who is
causing such harm to the American people.
Speaker 9 (20:34):
We have a completely unhinged president who is threatening massive
war crimes.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
So that was Rocanna, Rep Garcia, Corey Booker, and I
forget who the last guy was, but so that was Democrats.
Speaker 11 (20:47):
Oh my god, to Obliteration Day.
Speaker 13 (20:49):
There was a hose, I mean there were We could
have played that cut for an hour and a half.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Yeah, ye, yes, reactions exactly. And then this is Nicole
Wallace on MS warning that tens of millions of human
beings are now in danger.
Speaker 11 (21:00):
Cut seven A.
Speaker 17 (21:01):
Hi, everyone, it's four o'clock in New York with the
fate of tens of millions of humans right now on
a knife's edge. Because if nothing changes in the next
four hours and Donald Trump falls through and the things
he said out loud, his public threat, we may all
soon be witnessed to a military assault so generationally and
intentionally brutal that war crimes aren't just possible that they
(21:24):
become US policy. But again that is only if you
take Donald Trump at his word.
Speaker 11 (21:29):
That's risky. So here's an odd twist that.
Speaker 1 (21:34):
I started thinking about last night, because last night there
was a ceasefire. So the eight o'clock deadline rolled around,
but within hours before that, the Pakistanis actually negotiated with
Iran on our behalf on both sides. The they were
like intermediaries. She's fire for two weeks, so that nobody
was bombed into oblivion. I think that the temper tantrums
(21:58):
that the Democrats had, Oh my god, this is horrible
war crimes. He's going to kill millions of people. All
of that stuff, I think persuaded the Iranians. Their President
Trump meant what he said that he was going to
irreparably harm them and destroy their culture completely. And so
hours before the deadline, they agreed to cease fire. And
(22:22):
I wouldn't be surprised if that's what Donald Trump intended
all along. He made outrageous statements. The mainstream media and
the Democrats picked it up and took it as fact,
and they're angst their their fear mongering persuaded the Iranians
that Donald Trump meant what he said, let's stop, and
because nothing else has stopped them.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
I'm sure, what do you think.
Speaker 13 (22:44):
Lots of well, lots of people reacted, obviously, from the
pope to the lawmakers to people, you know, the man
on the street kind of thing. But here's the thing
about President Trump, and we've look, we've done this truth
control thing for forever. He says what is in his head,
and whether that's good or bad as a president of
the United States, talk amongst yourselves. But he's so he
(23:06):
says this stuff. But here's the thing, whether he meant
it or whether he didn't mean it.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
It worked.
Speaker 12 (23:13):
Yeah.
Speaker 13 (23:13):
It seems like a lot of his threats, the things
that he says that people go, I can't believe he
said that.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
I think I think the reason why is because a
few times he has he says something outrageous and he
follows through, he does it, and people, oh my god.
Speaker 11 (23:27):
He did it. And I think that with the statement that.
Speaker 1 (23:30):
He made yesterday regarding Obliteration Day with the press and
the dams in Congress, they sold it, sold it, sold it,
and they're like, oh my god, he's out of control.
Speaker 11 (23:41):
What can we do.
Speaker 1 (23:41):
We got to get him out office. He's des trying
the world, and the Iranians believed it.
Speaker 13 (23:45):
Imagine for a second, and you have to imagine it,
because it didn't happen. But so President Trump becausemes out
and he says, and we're going to obliterate you and
blah blah blah and back to the Stone ages and
that okay, he says all this stuff stay and then right,
and then the Democrats come out hold the pre conference
and go, yeah, he doesn't mean any of that stuff.
How do you think this would have played out? They
reacted like, oh my god, Iranians are gonna be killed everywhere,
(24:08):
and the Iranians were going maybe just going to kill
us all, yeah, we should think this.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Let's think this.
Speaker 1 (24:14):
So I'm wondering it was that happenstance, you know that
they just happened to help?
Speaker 11 (24:19):
Was it doesn't invite me?
Speaker 1 (24:21):
Or or did President Trump understand what would happen if
he made those outrageous nams, because let's face it, he
really went beyond what he's ever done before. I mean,
he did those statements, which is saying something, which is
saying something, and they were outrageous statements. I don't think
they're impeachable statements. But I mean they were like the
Democrats do, but they were outrageous statements.
Speaker 11 (24:43):
But you know, this is Donald Trump, It's P. T.
Barnum in the White House.
Speaker 1 (24:45):
So you you know, but I think with the making
the outrageous statements, he knew that that was tossing a
match into the gasoline pool where the Democrats and the
mainstream media live and set it on fire and watch
them sell it. It wasn't I think that's what happened.
I think he knew what it was gonna happen.
Speaker 13 (25:04):
It was a different time. I don't want to compare
Apple's to oorages, but I'm gonna kind of compare them
a little bit. It was a different time.
Speaker 12 (25:11):
Uh.
Speaker 13 (25:11):
There was no social media, there was no twenty four
hour news cycles. There was no this that. Uh, if
you think back, it wasn't quite as harsh per se
because Trump came on camera and said all this stuff
and he wrote all this you know, f us in
social media. This didn't exist. But you know, you think
about the Potsdam Declaration right during World War Two, where basically, uh,
(25:32):
Japan was told cut the crap or we're gonna cut
you in half. I mean the threats were made against
Japan as well. Now again it's a different time, it's
a different place. You drop to nuclear We saw him
and then they said hmm, okay, right, and.
Speaker 11 (25:48):
Where was that boat?
Speaker 13 (25:49):
Yeah, and there this in mind, which because I don't
want people to say, well, you're you know, you're favoring truck. Listen,
Trump said what he said. It worked at least for now.
We'll figure out what happens in the future.
Speaker 3 (25:57):
But so.
Speaker 13 (26:00):
He's a Republican president who a lot of people hate.
They have the syndrome. But the person who was the
United States president at the time of the Potsdam Declaration,
which basically told Japan cut the crapper, We're we're gonna
end this badly, was a Democrat. So look, it happens
they do it because look, I think I think that
a president's main goal is protecting America and America's people
(26:26):
now at the time, at the end of World War two,
and I know we're friends with Japan now and I
have a lot of Japanese friends, and YadA, YadA, YadA,
But at the time, it was are we gonna die
or are we gonna kill the Japanese? We're gonna kill
the Japanese. And I think, here President Trump, especially why
he started it in the first place. You know, them
having a nuke and a missile that could reach you know,
Western Europe. So is protecting the American people? I say,
(26:49):
I think because I think. I don't know. I wasn't
in any of these meetings, but there are a lot
of parallels between what Trump did today and what was
on or said to the Japanese in nineteen forty five.
And look, it's a different time and place again, like
I said, there's no social media and all this other stuff.
Speaker 3 (27:10):
But I don't why you also pissed off? Now?
Speaker 13 (27:15):
I would listen. I would be the first, maybe the second,
to be pissed off. If Trump said all this and
then he went in and he dropped seven nukes on
Turan and he killed millions and millions of innocent Iraneans,
I would be like him. Maybe that was too much.
But look to say a threat and then have it work,
why you so? Why you're so angry?
Speaker 11 (27:35):
And a cease fire and cease fire right for two
weeks at least fire.
Speaker 13 (27:39):
And I don't know how this is going to help.
And of course by the time you hear this, and
by the time you hear this two years from now,
you'll know. But you know, they're opening this straight of
hor moves at least, so maybe that will help a
little with the oil deal.
Speaker 11 (27:50):
It's gonna be a million dollars a ship. Yeah, okay, And.
Speaker 13 (27:53):
So look at least for now, and I say for
now based on when I'm saying this, it worked. Yeah,
let's we can revisit how the president speaks. We do
truth controls all the time, so we've already been talking
about how the president speaks. So they shouldn't be a
surprise to anybody.
Speaker 3 (28:10):
But it worked well, I guess.
Speaker 13 (28:13):
So here's the question, and I'll ask you it because
you're the only one sitting next to me.
Speaker 11 (28:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (28:17):
Do the ends justify the means? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (28:20):
Okay, in this case, they do, you go. I don't
think they always do, but they do here.
Speaker 12 (28:23):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (28:24):
Good.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
So there were some other utterances, non Iran utterances of
note this week, Just a couple I wanted to share
with you.
Speaker 12 (28:32):
One.
Speaker 1 (28:32):
It's the Massachusetts governor more Heally hit a new record
for patronizing people and this cut. She put out a
Twitter video explaining how high energy prices had happened in
terms that everyone will understand. She used donuts cut thirteen b.
Speaker 18 (28:52):
Energy bills are high. Everyone can see that. So lowering
your energy bills is my top priority. Now how does
that happen? That's a little more complicated. So let's talk
about energy in a way that everyone understands.
Speaker 11 (29:04):
With munchkins. Picture this.
Speaker 18 (29:06):
You're at work or school wherever it's nine am and
no one's eating breakfast. Someone shows up with one of these.
Demand is high. Everyone wants a munchkin or two or three,
but we've only got twenty five. That's where we're headed
with energy.
Speaker 11 (29:20):
So how do we fix that?
Speaker 18 (29:21):
See this glaze munchkin that's wind. Massachusetts already has an
offshore wind project, lowering our energy bills as we speak,
and we need more. It's affordable, homegrown energy and it'll
create thousands of jobs. This sprinkled munchkin that's solar. Solar
is the cheapest, fastest way we can bring more energy
into Massachusetts. This chocolate munchkin that's storage. Storage is when
(29:44):
we take energy off the grid when it's cheaper, and
we store it like you do in a battery, and
then we use it later when we need it most.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
Can I ask why the box isn't storage that the
munchkins came in, because.
Speaker 11 (29:56):
I think that would be good. But oh my god.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
And can we point out, by the way, that this
is not why we have an energy issue in Massachusetts.
We do because Governor Heally bragged about stopping the gas
tankers from coming in here so we don't get cheaper gas. Basically,
that's why we have an energy problem. She has killed
everything but green energy. That's what's caused the problem here.
(30:18):
But just in case you're really, really stupid, she wants
to explain it to you with donuts because everybody knows
nobody is as smart as a governor of Massachusetts, and
we can't we can't possibly comprehend it unless she uses
food as a demonstration.
Speaker 13 (30:32):
You know what I don't understand because, of course, for
those who are from this area as we are, you know,
the whole Dunkin thing really doesn't revolve around their donuts.
It revolves around their coffee. I'm surprised she didn't use
like iced coffees and lots of refreshers and boxes of
this is this box of Joe represents solar energy? Yeah,
(30:52):
this extra large refresher represents wind High Iane.
Speaker 1 (30:59):
Yeah, I know, I know, I mean it was just
it was incredibly you explained it to her, she would understand,
you're patronizing people, your treating Look, they're stupid. What do
you mean she wouldn't understand. I mean, that's how far
gone it is. And it's endemic by the way, and
the Democrat Party. And then there was another cut this week.
This is NBC's Kristin Welker. She hit a new record
(31:22):
for stupidity while being arrogant at the same time. See
if you can catch the problem in this cut cut thirteen.
Secretary Johnson weigh in on that point and the fact
that there is no head of DHS right now at
a time.
Speaker 13 (31:34):
When DHS is shut down?
Speaker 18 (31:36):
Does that do real damage?
Speaker 11 (31:39):
Okay?
Speaker 1 (31:39):
Can I point out to you so that she just
did that this week? We have had a Secretary of
DHS for two weeks now, Christy Nome, as we all know,
is OUSTD and former Senator Mark Wayne Mullen was sworn
in two weeks ago. He has been in office for
two weeks. So this NBC anchor is apparently oblivious to
the fact that there is, in fact a current Secretary
(32:02):
of Homeland Security, by the way, by the name of
Secretary Mark Waynemullet, by the way.
Speaker 13 (32:07):
So I would guess that she either didn't know or
forgot that there was one, or or or just as
likely from that group of people, they knew there was
one but didn't want to acknowledge it and just swept
it under the rug.
Speaker 11 (32:23):
We don't they lied to anybody.
Speaker 1 (32:25):
We don't have a Yeah, so anybody listening, anybody who's
listening to NBC who is not a serious news person,
meaning a lot of people like myself and I work
in industry. But even if I didn't, I watched news.
I watch multiple sources of news. I watch Fox, I
watch CNN, I watch NBC, ABC, I watch news, I
read read papers, I go on. You know, I'm very
(32:47):
interested in news, and so I hear something, I don't
take it as fact. I find out for sure. And
that's just what I've always done. In this particular case,
there are a lot of people who watch a news
source and they believe what they hear on that news
source because they don't check it out anywhere else. They
don't have time, their lives are busy, so they go
(33:08):
to one place that they think can be trusted, and
that's what they use for news.
Speaker 11 (33:11):
In this case, you had a.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
News anchor, Welkoer on NBC who just lied to those
people saying there's no head of DHS. So those people
now think, oh my god, DHS is rudderless during a war.
And you know, how can that be national security? Well
it can't be, because we have ahead of DHS. She
just she either is too stupid to know, which is
(33:33):
scary with an anchor or, as you point out, she
just lied to people deliberately.
Speaker 11 (33:38):
It's one of those two things without.
Speaker 13 (33:40):
Naming names, you know, and in the old days, and
I don't want to sound like that old guy right
where a kid.
Speaker 11 (33:46):
But I walked to school uphill both ways.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
Tell you when I kid way tonight.
Speaker 13 (33:52):
But you could watch the news or listen to the
news on the radio, or read the news in the newspaper,
and most of the time it was unless it was
an op ed piece or some other thing. Most of
the time you didn't have to say, well, I just
heard that on this station. I better go find twenty
seven other stations to confirm what they said it was true.
And by the way, if it wasn't true, like if
(34:15):
somebody uttered something that was oh, we got the wrong information,
they would make a correction immediately, like, sorry, we told
you the wrong stuff. Are bad oops on us? Now
now these stations, a lot of them are across the board,
you know, left to right, then center. They intentionally mislead,
misdirect or in some cases perhaps lie, and they never
(34:38):
go back and fix it because because there's nothing to fix,
because in their mind they're doing a service for the
public by telling them what they want you to know,
not what you should know, not what's truthful. But so
it's a different world we live in, as I've said before,
but it's just it's horrible because again, you could just
come on the air and say so today we don't
(35:00):
I have a director of a DHS. A matter of fact,
the president fell down the hill. He's not around anymore,
and the vice president's a drown in a surfing accident.
You could say anything you want, anything you want, and
half the people, because they don't follow up on things
and they're not even paying attention.
Speaker 3 (35:16):
Half the time, we'll go, oh my god, that's really
that happened. It's just ridiculous.
Speaker 13 (35:22):
And they would never come back and say like like Okay,
in theory, let's say NBC made a mistake when Kristen
said what she said, fair enough, people make mistakes. The
next segment, she should have come back and said, I
just said there was no head of DHS. There has been.
He was appointed. He's been there for two weeks. His
name is Mark Wayne Ullen. I just can't remember his
name because he's got too many first names and it's
(35:43):
really confusing.
Speaker 3 (35:43):
Whatever. But they should have corrected it, and they didn't, and.
Speaker 11 (35:47):
That makes me think it's a lie.
Speaker 13 (35:48):
That's the question you have to ask yourself, is Okay,
they got it wrong.
Speaker 3 (35:52):
Why didn't they correct it?
Speaker 11 (35:53):
Because I didn't want you to be corrected. So that's
what I think. I think you're absolutely right.
Speaker 6 (35:56):
Right.
Speaker 1 (35:57):
So we end each week with a truth control and
it is our champion truth Controller President Trump. This week
he's at a presser and he says, basically, the Iranian
people are begging the US to keep attacking, keep bombing.
It was you serious about this cut one twelve?
Speaker 5 (36:17):
You've said Iranians would be mad if you stop these attacks,
But why would they want you to blow up their
infrastructure to cut off their power? Wouldn't that be punishing
Iranians for the actions of the regime.
Speaker 19 (36:28):
They would be willing to They would be willing and
it's suffering. They would be willing to suffer that in
order to have freedom the Iranians have. We've had numerous intercepts,
please keep bombing, bombs that are dropping near their homes,
Please keep bombing, do it. And these are people that
are living where the bombs are exploding. And when we
(36:50):
leave and we're not hitting those areas, they're saying, please
come back, come back, come back.
Speaker 12 (36:56):
These are the people. I don't know what they do.
All I can tell you is they want freedom. They
have lived in a world that you know nothing about.
Speaker 2 (37:06):
Is a violent, horrible world where if you protest you
are shot.
Speaker 11 (37:11):
Truth any science, truths.
Speaker 3 (37:14):
Well, absolutely without a doubt.
Speaker 13 (37:16):
And now not every look at I don't think every
Iranian feels that way. But I think there's a very
big portion of Iranians who want their dictator rulers and
to go away so they can have a country.
Speaker 3 (37:28):
Oh that looks at.
Speaker 13 (37:30):
Look, they'll be their own country, they have their own religions,
they have their own lis that's that blah blah blah.
But more like us and I say that because if
you think before the revolution in the seventies that led
to the capture of American hostages, it was pretty western there.
The things were pretty groovy. Yeah, so I do I
(37:50):
think that a good portion. I don't know the percentage.
I'm not going to make up a percentage like some
news organizations would do. But I think there's a pretty
good percentage of Iranian people who are like, yeah, come on,
let's get this out of here, because I got crap
to do when I want a better job and I
want to watch I want to watch sitcoms on TV
streaming after six tonight.
Speaker 3 (38:09):
I mean not really. So it is the president's telling
the truth.
Speaker 13 (38:11):
Maybe not for every single Iranian, but I think as
a whole on it does.
Speaker 3 (38:18):
I think.
Speaker 11 (38:18):
So let us know. If you agree with Ben, you
can contact us on.
Speaker 3 (38:22):
X Are you truthing it or are you trolling?
Speaker 11 (38:26):
I think it's a little bit of both.
Speaker 3 (38:28):
Yeah, as a lot of times it can be with Trump.
Speaker 1 (38:31):
Yes, So if you agree with Ben or and or me,
you can contact us on X at news Bye three,
also on Facebook at news Byte. We upload a new
episode every single Monday, So check back next Monday and
see what new offerings we have. Meanwhile, have a great week.
Speaker 11 (38:47):
I'm Nancy Shack, I'm Ben Parker. This is news Bite.
Popular Podcasts
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 Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.