Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz confirmed on Thursday there were at least 26 FBI 'confidential human sources' were present at the January 6, 2021 rally-turned-riot on behalf of Donald Trump's 'stop the steal' efforts.
While this technically confirms outgoing FBI Director Christopher Wray's assertion that no FBI agents were involved in orchestrating or organizing the invasion of the U.S. Capitol building, Ryan says the devil is in the details of exactly who was there and what they participated in while on the FBI payroll and/or informant roster.
Jimmy Sengenberger, columnist and investigative reporter for The Gazette, joins Ryan to discuss his latest article entitled 'Democrat darling Jodeh — just another radical leftist.'
Democrat darling Jodeh — just another radical leftist | Jimmy Sengenberger | Denver-gazette | gazette.com
While this technically confirms outgoing FBI Director Christopher Wray's assertion that no FBI agents were involved in orchestrating or organizing the invasion of the U.S. Capitol building, Ryan says the devil is in the details of exactly who was there and what they participated in while on the FBI payroll and/or informant roster.
Jimmy Sengenberger, columnist and investigative reporter for The Gazette, joins Ryan to discuss his latest article entitled 'Democrat darling Jodeh — just another radical leftist.'
Democrat darling Jodeh — just another radical leftist | Jimmy Sengenberger | Denver-gazette | gazette.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal authorities.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
We have not been able to.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
And neither have state or local law enforcement of authorities,
corroborate any of the reported visual sightings. To the contrary,
upon review of available imagery, it appears that many of
the reported sightings are actually manned aircraft that are being
operated lawfully. The United States Coast Guard is providing support
to the State of New Jersey and has confirmed that
(00:29):
there is no evidence of any foreign based involvement from
coastal vessels. And importantly, there are no reported or confirmed
drone sightings in any restricted airspace.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
John Kirby from just a little bit earlier today here
on Ryan Schuling Live, you can text at five seven
seven thirty nine alongside Kelly COUCERA. Jesse Thomas in the
control room right now. And I trust him a whole
hell of a lot more than I do John Kirby
or anybody in the Biden administration. The problem is, I
just don't I don't believe you, John Kirby. I don't
(01:03):
believe anything they're telling us. And I'm not coming at
this as somebody traditionally through the years who's been a
conspiracy theorist like Gary Busey in Black Sheep. You know
somebody that's prepping. I'm not a prepper for the end
of the world armageddon. Maybe I should be. I don't know.
I don't have a bunker, established, soundproof, et cetera. I
(01:25):
don't have years stocked up of goods and wares and
staples and rations.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
I'm not that guy. Not to a certain degree.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
I think Michael Brown might be at the undisclosed location
down in Taos. Well, I'm not supposed to say that.
He says it all the time New Mexico, you know
where he is. But when John Kirby says this today,
he's assuring the media, assuring Americans that these are actually
manned aircraft and they're operating lawfully in airspace over New Jersey.
They're not foreign based drones. There's nothing to see here,
(01:56):
there's nothing to worry about that. Why did it take
so long then for there to be this statement issued
by anybody from the Biden administration. I mean, just yesterday
there was a press conference and they were denying that
they were foreign based drones from an Iranian mother ship,
as had been alleged by New Jersey Representative JEFFA and
(02:17):
Drew in Congress, but they were leaving the void open
for interpretation and extrapolation and invention of any kind of
conspiracy theories that might fit into that space. Now, John
Kirby goes, we'll hold the phone a minute here. You know,
if it was something serious, we would take it seriously.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
We certainly take seriously the threat that can be posed
by unmanned aircraft systems, which is why law enforcement and
other agencies continue to support New Jersey and investigate the reports,
even though they have uncovered no malicious activity or intent
at this particular stage. While there's no known malicious activity occurring,
the reported sightings there do, however, highlight a gap in authorities.
(03:00):
So we urge Congress to pass important legislation that will
extend and expand existing counter drone authorities so that we
are better prepared to identify and mitigate any potential threats
to airports or other critical infrastructure, and so that state
and local authorities are provided all the tools that they
need to respond to such threats as well.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
And so he passes the buck and passes this off on.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
Congress needs to pass relevant legislation to help regulate these things.
I'm not buying, are you? Five seven seven three nine, Kelly?
I want to bring you into the conversation. You heard
what Representative Jeff Andrew had to say yesterday that very
well placed, highly respected sources had told him that these
drones and now they're saying they're not drones were part
(03:43):
of an Iranian mothership spy apparatus that was denied by
the State Department and by the DoD And now Kirby
comes out with this noise.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
My question, perhaps you have others.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
If they are manned aircraft operating lawfully in the airspace
above New Jersey and Staten Island right off the coasts there,
what are they? Who are they? I'm not an aviation expert,
maybe jesse As, maybe you are. Maybe somebody in our
audience is. But shouldn't there be flight logs or something
like that to tell us, Okay, this is who was
(04:14):
flying these planes, this is the airspace they were in
at what times? There would have to be some record
of this, right?
Speaker 4 (04:20):
Well, of course the FAA would have every plane in
the sky right now and they should be able to
track those things, right, So why hasn't the FAA come
out and say listen, there completely, we have a flight
plan for this, they're manned, we have records of this.
Nothing okay, And why is Kirby issuing a statement right
(04:41):
now and not the FAA coming out and saying this
is what it is. Everybody calmed down, and Dragon actually
made a very decent point this morning and saying listen,
if these were professional, like if this was Google earth
mapping something or that, Google would have said it's this
(05:02):
is us and would have taken credit for it. But
nobody has done that. It's just this whole cloaked mystery
at this point. And no, I agree with you. I
don't buy Kirby's story either.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
I just watched Diehard too, so I know how this
all goes down, right the airport, at the airspace. Great
points that you made, Kelly, there would be some kind
of flight manifests, because if there is air traffic at all,
legal or otherwise commercial or private, it is it has
to be logged by the FAA, because that's how you
(05:35):
avoid plane crash exactly.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
And also, how come there are no helicopters investigating them
or flying alongside of them, or doing some sort of
surveillance on them. If there's no threat to them, why
aren't we investigating it further? And I don't buy this
whole other speculation that, oh, it's just a bunch of
hobbyists that are out there, you know a country, yeah,
(06:00):
dinking with some stuff and they built some stuff in
their backyard and now they're just testing it out.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I don't buy it. I don't either.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
I'm not just gonna take for granted or at face
value what we're being told. And it's not me trying
to start any conspiracy that they have lost our trust.
And this is part of the number one priority and
aim and goal of the incoming Trump administration Kelly to me,
is they need to rebuild faith and trust with the
(06:29):
American people in our government institutions, agencies, bureaucracies to the
degree that that's possible because so much damage has been
done over these last four years. These agencies have been politicized,
they've been weaponized, they are partisan in many ways.
Speaker 4 (06:45):
Very good point. And you know, just so we have
the whole story here, let's look at what the DoD
was concentrating on. They were putting mothers and tracking them,
the FBI and the CIA, and you know, they were
looking at them for going to school board meetings. We
were making sure that at the DoD we had men
(07:08):
who could fly planes in women's white suits. That was
really important. And so yes, I agree with you. There
has to be somebody like a Pete Hegseth that is
going to put his foot down and say no more
of this crap.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
I don't know how he went back to this. Represent
Jeff Van Drew is not a kook, He's not a nut.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
He's a former Democrat recently converted of the last several
years to Republican. He represents people in the state of
New Jersey. He has a vested interest in this. The
New Jersey city councils and the General Assembly, legislatureor whatnot.
Even Governor Phil Murphy. I don't think that he can
be satisfied with the answers we're getting, or more importantly
not getting with regard to these unidentified flying objects and
(07:50):
being literal here, not saying UFO, start the X files music.
You know, que the Martians no, but we don't know.
We don't know, and they've only filled in the blanks
to a certain degree. And we went from Jeff Van
Drew telling us yesterday you know this is from an
Iranian mothership. We got to start shooting these things down
out of the sky. To John Kirby assuring us nothing
(08:11):
to see here. It's like Leslie Nielsen with everything exploding
behind him. Everything's fine, you know, go back to your
every day lives. You have nothing to worry about.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
That's the thing. Though. I don't believe you, and I
don't trust you.
Speaker 4 (08:21):
Well, riddle me this. Why did it have to fly
over Trump's golf course?
Speaker 3 (08:28):
That when you factor in total picture here right in context,
the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, the assassination attempt in
West Palm Beach at Trump's other golf course there, and
now we've got whatever flying over this airspace and we're
not being giving a full detailed explanation as to the who, what, where, why,
(08:49):
and how these things are happening. Why were they a
mystery for so long? How long was that seventy two hours?
Not mate needymore a full week? And then finally Kirby
comes out with this, plays it Nope, And another reason
why I'm not buying it.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
Kind of the theme of the show today.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Is there was a Inspector General report released today about
potential FBI involvement, agents or assets or informants. However you
wanted to find that because you really need to unwind it.
When it comes to outgoing disgraced FBI Director Christopher Ray,
he mince his words, he parses words, He chooses his
(09:27):
words carefully, as you'll hear in just a moment. And
he was adamant when he framed it a certain way
that the FBI had no involvement and the provocation of
the storming of the Capitol on January sixth, twenty twenty one.
Will come to find out there were FBI assets in
that crowd that day, to what level they had involvement
(09:49):
in storming the capitol. It wasn't zero. It wasn't zero.
Here's David Spunk from Fox News.
Speaker 5 (09:56):
The report reveals that there were a total of twenty
six fidential human sources in the crowd that day.
Speaker 3 (10:03):
Twenty saved funt to his life and the Justice Department.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
He has got the news for us, David Sandra.
Speaker 5 (10:07):
Three of those were authorized and tasked by the FBI
to be there on January.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
Sixth, twenty twenty one.
Speaker 5 (10:13):
We're coming up on four years since that day of
the Capital ride. This ig report specifically focuses on the
FBI's handling of confidential human sources, or as we know him,
FBI informants. For years, the outgoing FBI Director Chris Ray
has been pressed on reports of undercover agents. According to
this new report, there were no undercover FBI agents. However,
(10:35):
there were three confidential human sources tasked by the bureau
to be in the crowd on January sixth to specifically
watch what the report states is concerns over domestic terrorism.
Out of those three, Sandra and John, one entered the capital,
two others entered a restricted area. The report says the
FBI did not encourage or authorize any sources to go
into the building or a restricted area.
Speaker 3 (10:57):
It doesn't matter. Those three were on the radar of
the FBI. Who knew their whereabouts and who they were?
For all we know they were on the payroll in
some way as a paid informant. There was some kind
of deal, and Christopher Ray refused to reveal that truth,
that detail. Why why was that being withheld? He can't
hide behind this Kakamamy notion that it's an ongoing investigation.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
We can't now shut up if you're a leader.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
If you're the director of the FBI and you knew
there was some kind of malefeasance that day, you owed
it to the American people for whom you work to
have a specific, detailed explanation. These three elements went rogue,
and this is what we know about it. This is
what we can tell you. Maybe you withhold their names.
Maybe it's Ray Apps. We don't know that yet. That
has not been revealed. But the fact that we have
(11:43):
to find out not only after the fact. The point
of the matter is it's almost four years later. People
are being held in custody now for several years kind
of in this purgatory state. Some committed violent crimes, many
did not, Some are being charged, others may be don't know.
(12:03):
Smunt continues with his report here on those three FBI
human sources. Now again, trying to pin Ray down on
this is like trying to nail jello to a wall. Okay,
they're not hired uniformed FBI agents.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
That doesn't mean they.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
Weren't informants, sources assets of the FBI, and that matters
just as much it should.
Speaker 5 (12:26):
In addition to the three confidential human sources, the FBI
told there were twenty three that were there on their own. Now,
they had worked with the FBI in the past on
other cases, but not specifically on the January sixth rally.
Some of them entered a restricted area as well. And
what stands out in this report, John and Sandra, none
(12:46):
of the confidential human sources that enter the US capital
or a restricted area were prosecuted by the DCUs Attorney's Office.
Remember this is an office that is still arresting nearly
four years later and prosecuting people.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
Why not want this case now?
Speaker 5 (13:01):
In a response to the Inspector General, the DCUs Attorney's
Office says the following. The DCUs Attorney's Office generally has
not charged those individuals whose only crime on January sixth,
twenty twenty one was to enter the restricted grounds surrounding
the Capitol, which has resulted in the office declining to
charge hundreds of individuals. And we have treated the confidential
(13:23):
human sources is consistent with this approach.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
And now by it, I don't buy it. They say,
generally they're playing word games. Generally we don't. That leaves daylight.
That leaves an opening for them to say, yeah, there
are some being held in custody being charged who simply
entered the Capitol that day that happened. They can't deny that,
So they parse through that with that word generally. And
(13:47):
if you're charging everyday Americans who were there of their
own volition to support Donald Trump and they ended up
in the Capitol and the police were escorting them through
the capital. That includes the shaman, you know with the
weird hat, the buffalo hat in the face paint. Did
you watch the video of this that was released to
Tucker Carlson, Completely harmless, walking through, very casually, very calmly.
(14:11):
There are Capital Police uniformed offices there. They're going not
untouch anything. Come on, guys, you know, settled down a
little bit. There was nothing nefarious going on with regard
to a lot of these people that were in the
Capitol who ended up later being charged, including that shaman.
Then why weren't these three confidential human sources of the
FBI charged? The FBI claims that they went rogue. FBI
(14:35):
had nothing to do with the initiation the provocation of
those three assets. They are assets of the FBI going
into restricted space or into the Capitol building. If others
were being charged for that what's good for the goose
has to be good for the gander. Otherwise, in my opinion,
everybody needs to be pardoned from that day that did
(14:56):
not commit a violent crime where there is direct evidence
of harm being on to an individual even property. At
this point, if you're going to let these three off
the hook, if the testimony of Repps is buried and
not featured in prime time like that whole circus of
the January sixth Non Select Committee Unselect Committee was, and
(15:18):
you're protecting Rey Epps, Adam Kinzinger, Liz Cheney, Benny Thompson,
Nancy Pelosi. Just remember back then, every Trump protester, rallygoer
on that day has been pilloried and vilified by everybody
in that committee except for Reyps. Why is he special?
(15:40):
Why was he singled out for special protection and said no, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
He testified in a skiff, it was off camera. He's fine.
Speaker 3 (15:49):
I know he's on video saying we need to go
into the Capitol building more than once, at least twice,
maybe three or more times. We have people chanting at him,
fed fed fed. He was a provocateur that day? Was
he an asset of the FBI that day? This report
from the IG raises more questions than it does provide answers.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
Here's spun in the conclusion of his report.
Speaker 5 (16:10):
Outgoing FBI Director Christopher Ray, who announced that he would
be stepping down in the next few weeks yesterday, has
been pressed on the FBI's role on January sixth. Here's
just one clip from last year.
Speaker 6 (16:21):
If you are asking whether the violence at the Capitol
on January sixth was part of some operation orchestrated by
FBI sources and or agents, the answer is emphatically say no,
saying not violence orchestrated by FBI sources or.
Speaker 5 (16:38):
Agents, confidential human sources tasked by the FBI, or not
undercover agents. These are people that belonged to groups like,
for instance, the Proud Boys the Oathkeepers, and then became
paid FBI informants at certain points in time while still
being members of their groups. And of course John and
Sandra others are not putter of any group and just
decided to show up to the Capitol for whatever reason
(16:58):
and still work with the FBI on the side and
provide information. And we're of course waiting for more information
from Capitol Hill to see if the White House has
anything the Department of Justice, the FBI as this report
just breaking now with the Inspector General.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
So think of it in these terms.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
I don't go back to the Ray comment just a moment,
but these are just like mafia rats for the Proud Boys,
the three percenters or whatever that have turned tail and
become informants for the FBI. Maybe they were threatened with
other kinds of prosecution. They cut a deal, They're in
some kind of protection program by the FBI.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
But Christopher Ray sliny.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
Weasel that he is listen to this caveat that he
tries to set. This is a rhetorical technique where you
re ask the question the way you wanted to be asked,
and then you answer it.
Speaker 6 (17:51):
If you are asking whether the violence at the Capitol
on January sixth was part of some operation orchestrated by
FBI sources and or agents, the answer is emphatically no, no,
say not violence orchestrated by FBI sources or agents.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
The keyword there, orchestrated. We're not saying it had to
be orchestrated, Christopher Ray. Were they part of it? Were
they party to it? Did they encourage it? Did they
participate in it. They didn't have to orchestrate it or
plant he is doing. It's a red herring that he's
(18:28):
sending out there. He's answering this kind of hypothetical that
he sat, not the actual question. Go back and watch
that testimony. You'll see him slither. He's a snake, and
I'm glad he's gone. There's no way he could stick around.
Speaker 6 (18:43):
If you are asking, well, violence at the Capitol on
January sixth was part of some operation, no orchestration by
FBI sources and or agents.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
The answer is emphatically, think about that parenthetical he just
loaded up before his answer of no. Well, if you're
asking this, we're not asking that. You're asking that, and
then you're answering that this guy is as slick and
shady and dirty as they come. And this is where
I am hopeful that President Trump has learned his lesson.
(19:13):
He appointed Christopher Ray to replace James Comy, and all
he turned out to be was James Comy two point zero.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
He is awful.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
He is terrible, and I think he needs to be
investigated once Cash Pttel takes over as FBI director.
Speaker 2 (19:27):
Time out.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
Jimmy Sangenberger joins me next on Ryan Schuling Live. I
am a back on Ryan Schuling Live. Jesse Thomas Carl
cachera helping put this show together and keep it together.
I'm trying to keep it together. After that opened, Christopher Ray,
what a weazon five seven seven three nine. We'll get
(19:49):
to your text on him and other topics like the
unknown drones or manned aircrafts off the coast of the
United States, New Jersey, New York.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
What are they?
Speaker 3 (19:59):
We don't know by their legal low John Kirby said, so,
so let's take his word for it.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
It's fine. His latest in.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
The Gazette, entitled Democrat Darling Jodey just another radical leftist
Jimmy Sangenberger looking out for you and me. He's got
all ease in his last name, that's significan and he
joins us here live Jimmy, Welcome.
Speaker 7 (20:20):
Good afternoon, brother, Thanks for having me back.
Speaker 3 (20:22):
Now take us through your latest article here, and what
is the kind of pull away kind of target bullet
points we should know?
Speaker 7 (20:33):
Yeah, remember that Tim Hernandez guy, that Elizabeth EPs Gal
who were just voted out of their primaries and then
different Democrats replaced them in the legislature because they got
nominations instead. Well, those two were extraordinarily antisemitic, just outright
(20:54):
je hating bigotry that we saw, including on the floor
of the State House. The list goes on. Well, in
the state legislature there are others who are clearly anti
Semitic as well, and that includes a state representative by
the name of Iman Joday or Juda. I forget how
they actually pronounce it. But one thing that's important to
(21:18):
keep in mind is that when you have antisemitism in
the legislature, that's a bad thing no matter which level,
whether it's the House or the Senate. But when one
of those anti semites wants to be elevated to the
State Senate in one of these openings in a vacancy,
because remember we have three State Senate vacancies that have
(21:41):
opened up with three members who have said, you know what,
I'm getting out for one reason or another, one of
them being Janet Buckner, you kinda should consider this and
whether Iman Joday in this case should be elevated to
the State Senate because she has announced her intention to
pursue Buckner's Yeah, what.
Speaker 3 (22:01):
I'm reading here and you can find out more at
the Gazette and You can look up Jimmy's article there
about the aforementioned representative I Mon Joday is a lot
of the same tropes in thethology that we have seen
from the anti Semitic left, and it is rather robust
and it doesn't exactly hide itself anymore. For instance, you
go back to ilhan Omar with their tweet on then
(22:24):
Twitter about it's all about the Benjamins. You know, this
insinuation that Jews control the banking systems internationally, part of
a mafia, that Jews control Hollywood, et cetera. And these
things are proclaimed and they're exaggerated and of course a
lot of times completely distorted from any sense of reality.
(22:44):
And this whole notion of occupation and apartheid, the Palestinians
are fighting off occupiers and that there is some kind
of genocide going on that Israel is committing against the
residents of Gosen, against the Palestinians. This furthers that kind
of heated rhetoric that we've seen, Jimmy, and it appears
that this representative Joday is feeding right into it.
Speaker 7 (23:07):
Yeah, she's she's a Palestine American herself and has clear
beyond sympathies holds in solidarity and just consistently he is
not really unequivocally at any point condemned Hamas. She'll sort
of quibble with it, and you know, like she did
very early on a little bit, but hasn't done a
(23:27):
condemnation and instead has gone and publicly on her social
media and so forth talked about the supposed genocide and
apartheid and occupation by Israel in Gaza and will consistently
criticize Israel while refusing to name or condemn Hamask and
(23:48):
even just throwing little bones about the at the hostages
and how they have been taken, but not even specifying
that Hamas took the hostages. But the thing that sets
representative Imanjo Day apart from Tim Fernandez and Elizabeth EPs
is style she comes across if you read what she
(24:09):
puts out as more sort of intellectual or more considerate
of the issues than doing some barbed outbursts. And that
should be more concerning because I think that can lure
people in to buying into this anti Semitic drivel that
we're seeing more and more, as you pointed out on the.
Speaker 3 (24:29):
Left, Jimmy Sangenberger joining us and again here's article entitled
Democrat Darling Joday just another radical leftist and we're talking
about I think at least in part, Jimmy, maybe not
a majority part, maybe not even a significant minority part
percentage wise, But why the Democrats fared so poorly in
our national elections just this past November fifth, not just
(24:51):
at the presidential level. They gained a couple of House seats.
We can talk about that another time with the ongoing
vote counts in California, but they lost several Senate seats,
including a handful of moderate senators and maybe with the
notable exception of John Fetterman out of Pennsylvania, we haven't
seen anybody from the left really calling out this divisive, abusive, heated,
(25:12):
dangerous rhetoric against Jews, anti Semitic drivell. We've seen the
protests on college campuses. I don't think that did the
Democrats any favors in the last re election. But while
we see Epps, Hernandez removed, that's kind of one step forward.
Now we're taking at least one step back with somebody
like Joday that is just continuing this drivel.
Speaker 7 (25:33):
Yeah, and elevated potentially to the state Senate. Looks like
there's one other candidate as of now that had just
announced I think possibly the same day as my column
went out. But we can see if you look at
a lot of these things, like Tim Hernandez was appointed
to the State House in a vacancy, when when you
(25:55):
look at some of the assemblies that happen at the
county level, a guy by the aim of Hashim Coates
managed to get on the ballot for county commissioner in
a Rapahoe County, but he lost in a bid for
county commissioner in that general so you can see, or
the primary election itself once he got into the ballot
from the primary or assembly, so you can see that
(26:18):
a lot of times, when the activists and the deft
have control in these processes, you will get the most
extreme people into these positions.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
I think it stands to reason that the Democratic Party
certainly needs more John Fetterman's Rocanna's moderate reasonable voices, even
if they're Liberal, to stand up to this lunatic fringe
element of their party that is simply dragging them down.
And by no means am I trying to root for
Democrats to win elections, but I do want them to
have a sane party opposition to the Republicans that is
(26:50):
instrumental to the survival and the health of our republic.
And yet it doesn't seem like a lot of moderate Democrats,
especially maybe Jimmy right here in Colorado, are willing to
stand up to that lunatic fringe.
Speaker 7 (27:03):
Well, we saw a little bit in the primaries when
the voters had the opportunity, But when the party brass
and the activists are in the position to make the
decision prime and time again, they will not push back
against this fringe. They will embrace the fringe.
Speaker 3 (27:20):
Finally, Jimmy, I want to give you a chance to
talk about a column that is coming up for you
for about Jenna Griswold.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
What's going on with that?
Speaker 7 (27:29):
Yeah, tomorrow in the Denver Gazette. My next piece will
be entitled Gaping Holes in the Griswold Investigation. And this
really goes to earlier in the week. It was a Monday,
I think when you had this report, this so called
third party investigation that was commissioned by Griswold herself to
(27:49):
look into the passwords breach and there's a lot that
is an address. They don't talk about the leadership failures
in her administration that have been going on for a
long time and helped lead to this breach or other
systemic issues. Jenna Griswold was not interviewed for this, nor
was her Deputy Secretary of State, Christopher Beale. And there
(28:12):
are a lot of issues with this report, as well
as the fact that the Legislative Audit Committee refused to investigate,
as Griswold is poised to announce very soon that she
will be running for governor. So you can't make this
stuff up, and I break it all down tomorrow in
the Denver Gazette.
Speaker 3 (28:31):
Look for the latest there the Denver Gazette, both online
and in old school hard payper form. You can also
follow him on x at Saying Center. That's se n
G Center ce n Ter Jimmy Sangenberger. He'll be filling
in for me one week from today in the following Friday,
and who knows. I think throughout the holidays as I
take a little bit of a sabbatical going home to
(28:53):
Michigan for the holidays.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I'll be back on Monday, January sixth.
Speaker 3 (28:57):
But in the meantime, Jimmy, I appreciate you holding on
the fort here and appreciate your time today.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
Thanks brother.
Speaker 7 (29:03):
Merry Christmas, Happy New Yet there it is.
Speaker 3 (29:05):
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, Happy Hanukkah, Kwanza. Anything you're celebrating,
celebrate all of it. It's that time of year, embrace it.
We'll take this time out. We'll come back wrapping up
our number one. Ryan Shuling Live continues after this coming
back to Since Frank Zappa Game, I've always enjoyed his
testimony on Capitol Hill. Very smart guy about censorship and
(29:29):
pushing back against Tipper Gore and those explicit lyrics labels.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
And he didn't ultimately.
Speaker 3 (29:36):
Become successful in that endeavor, but I supported his aim
and any fight against censorship, no matter whether it's from
the left or the right, is a worthwhile one. We
don't censor Jesse Thomas on this show. And that's why
he's behind the glass right now taking your text five
seven seven, three nine as we close out our number
one here, guess.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
Who's trending on X right now.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
It's going to be shocking to you, Ray Epps, we're
talking about earlier this hour.
Speaker 2 (30:01):
I wonder why.
Speaker 3 (30:03):
I wonder why he's trending on the X in your
texts right now, Ryan, you forgot Festivus in Boxing Day
as holidays, Alexi. You're right. I love Boxing Day. Isn't
that a Canadian thing? Or is that a British thing?
Is that American thing? But it's fun. Yeah, and Festivus
for the rest of us. You got to have the
poll and you got to have the airing of grievances.
(30:24):
And I plan to do that with my family this Festivus,
which is coming up right before Christmas Eve. Ryan, Trump
is a target of those drones practicing for a missile strike,
Bob and Narveda. You know, Bob, I'm going to sit
here and say, oh, you're not so it can't be
that it's a conspiracy there, like we don't know, and
I don't like being in the dark on stuff like this,
(30:45):
but I'm not going to rule anything out. Trump is
a target. You're exactly right. The fact that these are
near one of his golf courses, like we saw with
the attempted assassination at West Palm Beach in Florida. Of
course he had an attempt on his life in Butler,
pet Sylvania. Security cannot be too tight around the forty
seventh president.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
To b.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
Ryan, they also never said it. The other twenty three
entered the capitol or restricted space. They didn't say they did.
They didn't say they didn't. They only acknowledge that three did.
You're exactly right, But there were FBI agents, assets, sources, informants,
whatever you wanted to find them, ass as Christopher Ray
(31:27):
tries to wrap it around his definition they were there.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
Were they agitators? Were they provocateurs?
Speaker 3 (31:34):
Were they orchestrating at No, maybe not all those nouns
or verbs or adjectives. But were they part and parcel
involved in it at all? And if they were, why
weren't they charged? And if they were not charged, why
were others charged? Those are the questions. And I see
a very similar post from Julie Kelly, and I know
that Kelly Cauchera is helping me trying to reach out
(31:55):
to her. She's been out with Dan Bongino before. We've
talked to Susan Crabtree on this program. We will again,
and I'd love to have Julie on this show to
talk to him more about what happened on January sixth
and what the truth is behind it. There were twenty
six informants there, said this Texter, only three were authorized.
So you're telling me twenty three showed up out of
(32:16):
the goodness of their hearts.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Why were they there? Why weren't we told about them?
Speaker 3 (32:21):
Why wasn't Christopher Ray open, honest, transparent about any of this?
Speaker 2 (32:25):
Those are valid questions.
Speaker 3 (32:27):
This texter says the drones are illegal, but Biden has
pardoned them before they could be investigated. Very nice, good
touch there, and speaking about Biden pardons, it's an interesting list.
I'm being told that there are convicted pedophiles on this list.
There's also several Chinese nationals on this list. How about
Yan jun Zou Southern District of Ohio sentenced to two
(32:51):
hundred and forty months in prison for conspiracy to commit
economic espionage, conspiracy to commit trade secret theft attempt an
economic espionage by theft or fraud, attempted theft of trade
secrets by taking or deception. That person was pardoned. Interesting.
Why Joe Biden when we are fighting in information and
(33:13):
technology war, a trade war against China. I think we're
old explanations for each of these. We won't get them though.
That's what the blanket pardons for presidents do, and that
may need to be revisited. I might agree with a
Democratic senator on that point. Ji Shao Kun Northern District
of Illinois ninety six months imprisonment, conspiracy to defraud the
(33:37):
United States, impersonating agents of foreign governments, statements or entries.
Generally uh pardoned, offered clemency by the President of the
United States Joe Biden.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
This is the worst one.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
Shan ln Jin ninety seven months imprisonment, five years supervised released,
thirty point five thousand dollars thirty thousand, five hundred dollars
rest to possession of child pornography. Why what good does
that do? I mean politically, I can see when you
go back to Donald Trump's pardons. Kwame Kilpatrick, the disgracefulmer
(34:13):
mayor of Detroit, he was pardoned, okay, whatever. Blago Lagoyevitch,
the former governor of Illinois pardoned.
Speaker 2 (34:20):
You know, was he entrapped or roped into something? I
don't know.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
These demand an explanation, though, and again it'll be an
explanation that we never get, though we deserve.
Speaker 2 (34:29):
We'll take a time out much more to get to
our number two.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Including John Caldera talking about a tobacco flavor band
Using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal authorities.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
We have not been able to.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
And neither have state or local law enforcement of authorities,
corroborate any of the reported visual sightings. To the contrary,
upon review of available imagery, it appears that many of
the reported sightings are actually manned aircraft that are being
operated lawfully. The United States Coast Guard is providing support
to the State of New Jersey and has confirmed that
(00:29):
there is no evidence of any foreign based involvement from
coastal vessels. And importantly, there are no reported or confirmed
drone sightings in any restricted airspace.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
John Kirby from just a little bit earlier today here
on Ryan Schuling Live, you can text at five seven
seven thirty nine alongside Kelly COUCERA. Jesse Thomas in the
control room right now. And I trust him a whole
hell of a lot more than I do John Kirby
or anybody in the Biden administration. The problem is, I
just don't I don't believe you, John Kirby. I don't
(01:03):
believe anything they're telling us. And I'm not coming at
this as somebody traditionally through the years who's been a
conspiracy theorist like Gary Busey in Black Sheep. You know
somebody that's prepping. I'm not a prepper for the end
of the world armageddon. Maybe I should be. I don't know.
I don't have a bunker, established, soundproof, et cetera. I
(01:25):
don't have years stocked up of goods and wares and
staples and rations.
Speaker 2 (01:32):
I'm not that guy. Not to a certain degree.
Speaker 3 (01:35):
I think Michael Brown might be at the undisclosed location
down in Taos. Well, I'm not supposed to say that.
He says it all the time New Mexico, you know
where he is. But when John Kirby says this today,
he's assuring the media, assuring Americans that these are actually
manned aircraft and they're operating lawfully in airspace over New Jersey.
They're not foreign based drones. There's nothing to see here,
(01:56):
there's nothing to worry about that. Why did it take
so long then for there to be this statement issued
by anybody from the Biden administration. I mean, just yesterday
there was a press conference and they were denying that
they were foreign based drones from an Iranian mother ship,
as had been alleged by New Jersey Representative JEFFA and
(02:17):
Drew in Congress, but they were leaving the void open
for interpretation and extrapolation and invention of any kind of
conspiracy theories that might fit into that space. Now, John
Kirby goes, we'll hold the phone a minute here. You know,
if it was something serious, we would take it seriously.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (02:36):
We certainly take seriously the threat that can be posed
by unmanned aircraft systems, which is why law enforcement and
other agencies continue to support New Jersey and investigate the reports,
even though they have uncovered no malicious activity or intent
at this particular stage. While there's no known malicious activity occurring,
the reported sightings there do, however, highlight a gap in authorities.
(03:00):
So we urge Congress to pass important legislation that will
extend and expand existing counter drone authorities so that we
are better prepared to identify and mitigate any potential threats
to airports or other critical infrastructure, and so that state
and local authorities are provided all the tools that they
need to respond to such threats as well.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
And so he passes the buck and passes this off on.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
Congress needs to pass relevant legislation to help regulate these things.
I'm not buying, are you? Five seven seven three nine, Kelly?
I want to bring you into the conversation. You heard
what Representative Jeff Andrew had to say yesterday that very
well placed, highly respected sources had told him that these
drones and now they're saying they're not drones were part
(03:43):
of an Iranian mothership spy apparatus that was denied by
the State Department and by the DoD And now Kirby
comes out with this noise.
Speaker 2 (03:51):
My question, perhaps you have others.
Speaker 3 (03:53):
If they are manned aircraft operating lawfully in the airspace
above New Jersey and Staten Island right off the coasts there,
what are they? Who are they? I'm not an aviation expert,
maybe jesse As, maybe you are. Maybe somebody in our
audience is. But shouldn't there be flight logs or something
like that to tell us, Okay, this is who was
(04:14):
flying these planes, this is the airspace they were in
at what times? There would have to be some record
of this, right?
Speaker 4 (04:20):
Well, of course the FAA would have every plane in
the sky right now and they should be able to
track those things, right, So why hasn't the FAA come
out and say listen, there completely, we have a flight
plan for this, they're manned, we have records of this.
Nothing okay, And why is Kirby issuing a statement right
(04:41):
now and not the FAA coming out and saying this
is what it is. Everybody calmed down, and Dragon actually
made a very decent point this morning and saying listen,
if these were professional, like if this was Google earth
mapping something or that, Google would have said it's this
(05:02):
is us and would have taken credit for it. But
nobody has done that. It's just this whole cloaked mystery
at this point. And no, I agree with you. I
don't buy Kirby's story either.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
I just watched Diehard too, so I know how this
all goes down, right the airport, at the airspace. Great
points that you made, Kelly, there would be some kind
of flight manifests, because if there is air traffic at all,
legal or otherwise commercial or private, it is it has
to be logged by the FAA, because that's how you
(05:35):
avoid plane crash exactly.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
And also, how come there are no helicopters investigating them
or flying alongside of them, or doing some sort of
surveillance on them. If there's no threat to them, why
aren't we investigating it further? And I don't buy this
whole other speculation that, oh, it's just a bunch of
hobbyists that are out there, you know a country, yeah,
(06:00):
dinking with some stuff and they built some stuff in
their backyard and now they're just testing it out.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I don't buy it. I don't either.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
I'm not just gonna take for granted or at face
value what we're being told. And it's not me trying
to start any conspiracy that they have lost our trust.
And this is part of the number one priority and
aim and goal of the incoming Trump administration Kelly to me,
is they need to rebuild faith and trust with the
(06:29):
American people in our government institutions, agencies, bureaucracies to the
degree that that's possible because so much damage has been
done over these last four years. These agencies have been politicized,
they've been weaponized, they are partisan in many ways.
Speaker 4 (06:45):
Very good point. And you know, just so we have
the whole story here, let's look at what the DoD
was concentrating on. They were putting mothers and tracking them,
the FBI and the CIA, and you know, they were
looking at them for going to school board meetings. We
were making sure that at the DoD we had men
(07:08):
who could fly planes in women's white suits. That was
really important. And so yes, I agree with you. There
has to be somebody like a Pete Hegseth that is
going to put his foot down and say no more
of this crap.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
I don't know how he went back to this. Represent
Jeff Van Drew is not a kook, He's not a nut.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
He's a former Democrat recently converted of the last several
years to Republican. He represents people in the state of
New Jersey. He has a vested interest in this. The
New Jersey city councils and the General Assembly, legislatureor whatnot.
Even Governor Phil Murphy. I don't think that he can
be satisfied with the answers we're getting, or more importantly
not getting with regard to these unidentified flying objects and
(07:50):
being literal here, not saying UFO, start the X files music.
You know, que the Martians no, but we don't know.
We don't know, and they've only filled in the blanks
to a certain degree. And we went from Jeff Van
Drew telling us yesterday you know this is from an
Iranian mothership. We got to start shooting these things down
out of the sky. To John Kirby assuring us nothing
(08:11):
to see here. It's like Leslie Nielsen with everything exploding
behind him. Everything's fine, you know, go back to your
every day lives. You have nothing to worry about.
Speaker 2 (08:18):
That's the thing. Though. I don't believe you, and I
don't trust you.
Speaker 4 (08:21):
Well, riddle me this. Why did it have to fly
over Trump's golf course?
Speaker 3 (08:28):
That when you factor in total picture here right in context,
the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania, the assassination attempt in
West Palm Beach at Trump's other golf course there, and
now we've got whatever flying over this airspace and we're
not being giving a full detailed explanation as to the who, what, where, why,
(08:49):
and how these things are happening. Why were they a
mystery for so long? How long was that seventy two hours?
Not mate needymore a full week? And then finally Kirby
comes out with this, plays it Nope, And another reason
why I'm not buying it.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
Kind of the theme of the show today.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Is there was a Inspector General report released today about
potential FBI involvement, agents or assets or informants. However you
wanted to find that because you really need to unwind it.
When it comes to outgoing disgraced FBI Director Christopher Ray,
he mince his words, he parses words, He chooses his
(09:27):
words carefully, as you'll hear in just a moment. And
he was adamant when he framed it a certain way
that the FBI had no involvement and the provocation of
the storming of the Capitol on January sixth, twenty twenty one.
Will come to find out there were FBI assets in
that crowd that day, to what level they had involvement
(09:49):
in storming the capitol. It wasn't zero. It wasn't zero.
Here's David Spunk from Fox News.
Speaker 5 (09:56):
The report reveals that there were a total of twenty
six fidential human sources in the crowd that day.
Speaker 3 (10:03):
Twenty saved funt to his life and the Justice Department.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
He has got the news for us, David Sandra.
Speaker 5 (10:07):
Three of those were authorized and tasked by the FBI
to be there on January.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
Sixth, twenty twenty one.
Speaker 5 (10:13):
We're coming up on four years since that day of
the Capital ride. This ig report specifically focuses on the
FBI's handling of confidential human sources, or as we know him,
FBI informants. For years, the outgoing FBI Director Chris Ray
has been pressed on reports of undercover agents. According to
this new report, there were no undercover FBI agents. However,
(10:35):
there were three confidential human sources tasked by the bureau
to be in the crowd on January sixth to specifically
watch what the report states is concerns over domestic terrorism.
Out of those three, Sandra and John, one entered the capital,
two others entered a restricted area. The report says the
FBI did not encourage or authorize any sources to go
into the building or a restricted area.
Speaker 3 (10:57):
It doesn't matter. Those three were on the radar of
the FBI. Who knew their whereabouts and who they were?
For all we know they were on the payroll in
some way as a paid informant. There was some kind
of deal, and Christopher Ray refused to reveal that truth,
that detail. Why why was that being withheld? He can't
hide behind this Kakamamy notion that it's an ongoing investigation.
Speaker 2 (11:20):
We can't now shut up if you're a leader.
Speaker 3 (11:22):
If you're the director of the FBI and you knew
there was some kind of malefeasance that day, you owed
it to the American people for whom you work to
have a specific, detailed explanation. These three elements went rogue,
and this is what we know about it. This is
what we can tell you. Maybe you withhold their names.
Maybe it's Ray Apps. We don't know that yet. That
has not been revealed. But the fact that we have
(11:43):
to find out not only after the fact. The point
of the matter is it's almost four years later. People
are being held in custody now for several years kind
of in this purgatory state. Some committed violent crimes, many
did not, Some are being charged, others may be don't know.
(12:03):
Smunt continues with his report here on those three FBI
human sources. Now again, trying to pin Ray down on
this is like trying to nail jello to a wall. Okay,
they're not hired uniformed FBI agents.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
That doesn't mean they.
Speaker 3 (12:19):
Weren't informants, sources assets of the FBI, and that matters
just as much it should.
Speaker 5 (12:26):
In addition to the three confidential human sources, the FBI
told there were twenty three that were there on their own. Now,
they had worked with the FBI in the past on
other cases, but not specifically on the January sixth rally.
Some of them entered a restricted area as well. And
what stands out in this report, John and Sandra, none
(12:46):
of the confidential human sources that enter the US capital
or a restricted area were prosecuted by the DCUs Attorney's Office.
Remember this is an office that is still arresting nearly
four years later and prosecuting people.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
Why not want this case now?
Speaker 5 (13:01):
In a response to the Inspector General, the DCUs Attorney's
Office says the following. The DCUs Attorney's Office generally has
not charged those individuals whose only crime on January sixth,
twenty twenty one was to enter the restricted grounds surrounding
the Capitol, which has resulted in the office declining to
charge hundreds of individuals. And we have treated the confidential
(13:23):
human sources is consistent with this approach.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
And now by it, I don't buy it. They say,
generally they're playing word games. Generally we don't. That leaves daylight.
That leaves an opening for them to say, yeah, there
are some being held in custody being charged who simply
entered the Capitol that day that happened. They can't deny that,
So they parse through that with that word generally. And
(13:47):
if you're charging everyday Americans who were there of their
own volition to support Donald Trump and they ended up
in the Capitol and the police were escorting them through
the capital. That includes the shaman, you know with the
weird hat, the buffalo hat in the face paint. Did
you watch the video of this that was released to
Tucker Carlson, Completely harmless, walking through, very casually, very calmly.
(14:11):
There are Capital Police uniformed offices there. They're going not
untouch anything. Come on, guys, you know, settled down a
little bit. There was nothing nefarious going on with regard
to a lot of these people that were in the
Capitol who ended up later being charged, including that shaman.
Then why weren't these three confidential human sources of the
FBI charged? The FBI claims that they went rogue. FBI
(14:35):
had nothing to do with the initiation the provocation of
those three assets. They are assets of the FBI going
into restricted space or into the Capitol building. If others
were being charged for that what's good for the goose
has to be good for the gander. Otherwise, in my opinion,
everybody needs to be pardoned from that day that did
(14:56):
not commit a violent crime where there is direct evidence
of harm being on to an individual even property. At
this point, if you're going to let these three off
the hook, if the testimony of Repps is buried and
not featured in prime time like that whole circus of
the January sixth Non Select Committee Unselect Committee was, and
(15:18):
you're protecting Rey Epps, Adam Kinzinger, Liz Cheney, Benny Thompson,
Nancy Pelosi. Just remember back then, every Trump protester, rallygoer
on that day has been pilloried and vilified by everybody
in that committee except for Reyps. Why is he special?
(15:40):
Why was he singled out for special protection and said no, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (15:45):
He testified in a skiff, it was off camera. He's fine.
Speaker 3 (15:49):
I know he's on video saying we need to go
into the Capitol building more than once, at least twice,
maybe three or more times. We have people chanting at him,
fed fed fed. He was a provocateur that day? Was
he an asset of the FBI that day? This report
from the IG raises more questions than it does provide answers.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
Here's spun in the conclusion of his report.
Speaker 5 (16:10):
Outgoing FBI Director Christopher Ray, who announced that he would
be stepping down in the next few weeks yesterday, has
been pressed on the FBI's role on January sixth. Here's
just one clip from last year.
Speaker 6 (16:21):
If you are asking whether the violence at the Capitol
on January sixth was part of some operation orchestrated by
FBI sources and or agents, the answer is emphatically say no,
saying not violence orchestrated by FBI sources or.
Speaker 5 (16:38):
Agents, confidential human sources tasked by the FBI, or not
undercover agents. These are people that belonged to groups like,
for instance, the Proud Boys the Oathkeepers, and then became
paid FBI informants at certain points in time while still
being members of their groups. And of course John and
Sandra others are not putter of any group and just
decided to show up to the Capitol for whatever reason
(16:58):
and still work with the FBI on the side and
provide information. And we're of course waiting for more information
from Capitol Hill to see if the White House has
anything the Department of Justice, the FBI as this report
just breaking now with the Inspector General.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
So think of it in these terms.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
I don't go back to the Ray comment just a moment,
but these are just like mafia rats for the Proud Boys,
the three percenters or whatever that have turned tail and
become informants for the FBI. Maybe they were threatened with
other kinds of prosecution. They cut a deal, They're in
some kind of protection program by the FBI.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
But Christopher Ray sliny.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
Weasel that he is listen to this caveat that he
tries to set. This is a rhetorical technique where you
re ask the question the way you wanted to be asked,
and then you answer it.
Speaker 6 (17:51):
If you are asking whether the violence at the Capitol
on January sixth was part of some operation orchestrated by
FBI sources and or agents, the answer is emphatically no, no,
say not violence orchestrated by FBI sources or agents.
Speaker 3 (18:07):
The keyword there, orchestrated. We're not saying it had to
be orchestrated, Christopher Ray. Were they part of it? Were
they party to it? Did they encourage it? Did they
participate in it. They didn't have to orchestrate it or
plant he is doing. It's a red herring that he's
(18:28):
sending out there. He's answering this kind of hypothetical that
he sat, not the actual question. Go back and watch
that testimony. You'll see him slither. He's a snake, and
I'm glad he's gone. There's no way he could stick around.
Speaker 6 (18:43):
If you are asking, well, violence at the Capitol on
January sixth was part of some operation, no orchestration by
FBI sources and or agents.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
The answer is emphatically, think about that parenthetical he just
loaded up before his answer of no. Well, if you're
asking this, we're not asking that. You're asking that, and
then you're answering that this guy is as slick and
shady and dirty as they come. And this is where
I am hopeful that President Trump has learned his lesson.
(19:13):
He appointed Christopher Ray to replace James Comy, and all
he turned out to be was James Comy two point zero.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
He is awful.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
He is terrible, and I think he needs to be
investigated once Cash Pttel takes over as FBI director.
Speaker 2 (19:27):
Time out.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
Jimmy Sangenberger joins me next on Ryan Schuling Live. I
am a back on Ryan Schuling Live. Jesse Thomas Carl
cachera helping put this show together and keep it together.
I'm trying to keep it together. After that opened, Christopher Ray,
what a weazon five seven seven three nine. We'll get
(19:49):
to your text on him and other topics like the
unknown drones or manned aircrafts off the coast of the
United States, New Jersey, New York.
Speaker 2 (19:58):
What are they?
Speaker 3 (19:59):
We don't know by their legal low John Kirby said, so,
so let's take his word for it.
Speaker 2 (20:03):
It's fine. His latest in.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
The Gazette, entitled Democrat Darling Jodey just another radical leftist
Jimmy Sangenberger looking out for you and me. He's got
all ease in his last name, that's significan and he
joins us here live Jimmy, Welcome.
Speaker 7 (20:20):
Good afternoon, brother, Thanks for having me back.
Speaker 3 (20:22):
Now take us through your latest article here, and what
is the kind of pull away kind of target bullet
points we should know?
Speaker 7 (20:33):
Yeah, remember that Tim Hernandez guy, that Elizabeth EPs Gal
who were just voted out of their primaries and then
different Democrats replaced them in the legislature because they got
nominations instead. Well, those two were extraordinarily antisemitic, just outright
(20:54):
je hating bigotry that we saw, including on the floor
of the State House. The list goes on. Well, in
the state legislature there are others who are clearly anti
Semitic as well, and that includes a state representative by
the name of Iman Joday or Juda. I forget how
they actually pronounce it. But one thing that's important to
(21:18):
keep in mind is that when you have antisemitism in
the legislature, that's a bad thing no matter which level,
whether it's the House or the Senate. But when one
of those anti semites wants to be elevated to the
State Senate in one of these openings in a vacancy,
because remember we have three State Senate vacancies that have
(21:41):
opened up with three members who have said, you know what,
I'm getting out for one reason or another, one of
them being Janet Buckner, you kinda should consider this and
whether Iman Joday in this case should be elevated to
the State Senate because she has announced her intention to
pursue Buckner's Yeah, what.
Speaker 3 (22:01):
I'm reading here and you can find out more at
the Gazette and You can look up Jimmy's article there
about the aforementioned representative I Mon Joday is a lot
of the same tropes in thethology that we have seen
from the anti Semitic left, and it is rather robust
and it doesn't exactly hide itself anymore. For instance, you
go back to ilhan Omar with their tweet on then
(22:24):
Twitter about it's all about the Benjamins. You know, this
insinuation that Jews control the banking systems internationally, part of
a mafia, that Jews control Hollywood, et cetera. And these
things are proclaimed and they're exaggerated and of course a
lot of times completely distorted from any sense of reality.
(22:44):
And this whole notion of occupation and apartheid, the Palestinians
are fighting off occupiers and that there is some kind
of genocide going on that Israel is committing against the
residents of Gosen, against the Palestinians. This furthers that kind
of heated rhetoric that we've seen, Jimmy, and it appears
that this representative Joday is feeding right into it.
Speaker 7 (23:07):
Yeah, she's she's a Palestine American herself and has clear
beyond sympathies holds in solidarity and just consistently he is
not really unequivocally at any point condemned Hamas. She'll sort
of quibble with it, and you know, like she did
very early on a little bit, but hasn't done a
(23:27):
condemnation and instead has gone and publicly on her social
media and so forth talked about the supposed genocide and
apartheid and occupation by Israel in Gaza and will consistently
criticize Israel while refusing to name or condemn Hamask and
(23:48):
even just throwing little bones about the at the hostages
and how they have been taken, but not even specifying
that Hamas took the hostages. But the thing that sets
representative Imanjo Day apart from Tim Fernandez and Elizabeth EPs
is style she comes across if you read what she
(24:09):
puts out as more sort of intellectual or more considerate
of the issues than doing some barbed outbursts. And that
should be more concerning because I think that can lure
people in to buying into this anti Semitic drivel that
we're seeing more and more, as you pointed out on the.
Speaker 3 (24:29):
Left, Jimmy Sangenberger joining us and again here's article entitled
Democrat Darling Joday just another radical leftist and we're talking
about I think at least in part, Jimmy, maybe not
a majority part, maybe not even a significant minority part
percentage wise, But why the Democrats fared so poorly in
our national elections just this past November fifth, not just
(24:51):
at the presidential level. They gained a couple of House seats.
We can talk about that another time with the ongoing
vote counts in California, but they lost several Senate seats,
including a handful of moderate senators and maybe with the
notable exception of John Fetterman out of Pennsylvania, we haven't
seen anybody from the left really calling out this divisive, abusive, heated,
(25:12):
dangerous rhetoric against Jews, anti Semitic drivell. We've seen the
protests on college campuses. I don't think that did the
Democrats any favors in the last re election. But while
we see Epps, Hernandez removed, that's kind of one step forward.
Now we're taking at least one step back with somebody
like Joday that is just continuing this drivel.
Speaker 7 (25:33):
Yeah, and elevated potentially to the state Senate. Looks like
there's one other candidate as of now that had just
announced I think possibly the same day as my column
went out. But we can see if you look at
a lot of these things, like Tim Hernandez was appointed
to the State House in a vacancy, when when you
(25:55):
look at some of the assemblies that happen at the
county level, a guy by the aim of Hashim Coates
managed to get on the ballot for county commissioner in
a Rapahoe County, but he lost in a bid for
county commissioner in that general so you can see, or
the primary election itself once he got into the ballot
from the primary or assembly, so you can see that
(26:18):
a lot of times, when the activists and the deft
have control in these processes, you will get the most
extreme people into these positions.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
I think it stands to reason that the Democratic Party
certainly needs more John Fetterman's Rocanna's moderate reasonable voices, even
if they're Liberal, to stand up to this lunatic fringe
element of their party that is simply dragging them down.
And by no means am I trying to root for
Democrats to win elections, but I do want them to
have a sane party opposition to the Republicans that is
(26:50):
instrumental to the survival and the health of our republic.
And yet it doesn't seem like a lot of moderate Democrats,
especially maybe Jimmy right here in Colorado, are willing to
stand up to that lunatic fringe.
Speaker 7 (27:03):
Well, we saw a little bit in the primaries when
the voters had the opportunity, But when the party brass
and the activists are in the position to make the
decision prime and time again, they will not push back
against this fringe. They will embrace the fringe.
Speaker 3 (27:20):
Finally, Jimmy, I want to give you a chance to
talk about a column that is coming up for you
for about Jenna Griswold.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
What's going on with that?
Speaker 7 (27:29):
Yeah, tomorrow in the Denver Gazette. My next piece will
be entitled Gaping Holes in the Griswold Investigation. And this
really goes to earlier in the week. It was a Monday,
I think when you had this report, this so called
third party investigation that was commissioned by Griswold herself to
(27:49):
look into the passwords breach and there's a lot that
is an address. They don't talk about the leadership failures
in her administration that have been going on for a
long time and helped lead to this breach or other
systemic issues. Jenna Griswold was not interviewed for this, nor
was her Deputy Secretary of State, Christopher Beale. And there
(28:12):
are a lot of issues with this report, as well
as the fact that the Legislative Audit Committee refused to investigate,
as Griswold is poised to announce very soon that she
will be running for governor. So you can't make this
stuff up, and I break it all down tomorrow in
the Denver Gazette.
Speaker 3 (28:31):
Look for the latest there the Denver Gazette, both online
and in old school hard payper form. You can also
follow him on x at Saying Center. That's se n
G Center ce n Ter Jimmy Sangenberger. He'll be filling
in for me one week from today in the following Friday,
and who knows. I think throughout the holidays as I
take a little bit of a sabbatical going home to
(28:53):
Michigan for the holidays.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I'll be back on Monday, January sixth.
Speaker 3 (28:57):
But in the meantime, Jimmy, I appreciate you holding on
the fort here and appreciate your time today.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
Thanks brother.
Speaker 7 (29:03):
Merry Christmas, Happy New Yet there it is.
Speaker 3 (29:05):
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, Happy Hanukkah, Kwanza. Anything you're celebrating,
celebrate all of it. It's that time of year, embrace it.
We'll take this time out. We'll come back wrapping up
our number one. Ryan Shuling Live continues after this coming
back to Since Frank Zappa Game, I've always enjoyed his
testimony on Capitol Hill. Very smart guy about censorship and
(29:29):
pushing back against Tipper Gore and those explicit lyrics labels.
Speaker 2 (29:34):
And he didn't ultimately.
Speaker 3 (29:36):
Become successful in that endeavor, but I supported his aim
and any fight against censorship, no matter whether it's from
the left or the right, is a worthwhile one. We
don't censor Jesse Thomas on this show. And that's why
he's behind the glass right now taking your text five
seven seven, three nine as we close out our number
one here, guess.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
Who's trending on X right now.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
It's going to be shocking to you, Ray Epps, we're
talking about earlier this hour.
Speaker 2 (30:01):
I wonder why.
Speaker 3 (30:03):
I wonder why he's trending on the X in your
texts right now, Ryan, you forgot Festivus in Boxing Day
as holidays, Alexi. You're right. I love Boxing Day. Isn't
that a Canadian thing? Or is that a British thing?
Is that American thing? But it's fun. Yeah, and Festivus
for the rest of us. You got to have the
poll and you got to have the airing of grievances.
(30:24):
And I plan to do that with my family this Festivus,
which is coming up right before Christmas Eve. Ryan, Trump
is a target of those drones practicing for a missile strike,
Bob and Narveda. You know, Bob, I'm going to sit
here and say, oh, you're not so it can't be
that it's a conspiracy there, like we don't know, and
I don't like being in the dark on stuff like this,
(30:45):
but I'm not going to rule anything out. Trump is
a target. You're exactly right. The fact that these are
near one of his golf courses, like we saw with
the attempted assassination at West Palm Beach in Florida. Of
course he had an attempt on his life in Butler,
pet Sylvania. Security cannot be too tight around the forty
seventh president.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
To b.
Speaker 3 (31:06):
Ryan, they also never said it. The other twenty three
entered the capitol or restricted space. They didn't say they did.
They didn't say they didn't. They only acknowledge that three did.
You're exactly right, But there were FBI agents, assets, sources, informants,
whatever you wanted to find them, ass as Christopher Ray
(31:27):
tries to wrap it around his definition they were there.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
Were they agitators? Were they provocateurs?
Speaker 3 (31:34):
Were they orchestrating at No, maybe not all those nouns
or verbs or adjectives. But were they part and parcel
involved in it at all? And if they were, why
weren't they charged? And if they were not charged, why
were others charged? Those are the questions. And I see
a very similar post from Julie Kelly, and I know
that Kelly Cauchera is helping me trying to reach out
(31:55):
to her. She's been out with Dan Bongino before. We've
talked to Susan Crabtree on this program. We will again,
and I'd love to have Julie on this show to
talk to him more about what happened on January sixth
and what the truth is behind it. There were twenty
six informants there, said this Texter, only three were authorized.
So you're telling me twenty three showed up out of
(32:16):
the goodness of their hearts.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Why were they there? Why weren't we told about them?
Speaker 3 (32:21):
Why wasn't Christopher Ray open, honest, transparent about any of this?
Speaker 2 (32:25):
Those are valid questions.
Speaker 3 (32:27):
This texter says the drones are illegal, but Biden has
pardoned them before they could be investigated. Very nice, good
touch there, and speaking about Biden pardons, it's an interesting list.
I'm being told that there are convicted pedophiles on this list.
There's also several Chinese nationals on this list. How about
Yan jun Zou Southern District of Ohio sentenced to two
(32:51):
hundred and forty months in prison for conspiracy to commit
economic espionage, conspiracy to commit trade secret theft attempt an
economic espionage by theft or fraud, attempted theft of trade
secrets by taking or deception. That person was pardoned. Interesting.
Why Joe Biden when we are fighting in information and
(33:13):
technology war, a trade war against China. I think we're
old explanations for each of these. We won't get them though.
That's what the blanket pardons for presidents do, and that
may need to be revisited. I might agree with a
Democratic senator on that point. Ji Shao Kun Northern District
of Illinois ninety six months imprisonment, conspiracy to defraud the
(33:37):
United States, impersonating agents of foreign governments, statements or entries.
Generally uh pardoned, offered clemency by the President of the
United States Joe Biden.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
This is the worst one.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
Shan ln Jin ninety seven months imprisonment, five years supervised released,
thirty point five thousand dollars thirty thousand, five hundred dollars
rest to possession of child pornography. Why what good does
that do? I mean politically, I can see when you
go back to Donald Trump's pardons. Kwame Kilpatrick, the disgracefulmer
(34:13):
mayor of Detroit, he was pardoned, okay, whatever. Blago Lagoyevitch,
the former governor of Illinois pardoned.
Speaker 2 (34:20):
You know, was he entrapped or roped into something? I
don't know.
Speaker 3 (34:24):
These demand an explanation, though, and again it'll be an
explanation that we never get, though we deserve.
Speaker 2 (34:29):
We'll take a time out much more to get to
our number two.
Speaker 3 (34:31):
Including John Caldera talking about a tobacco flavor band
Popular Podcasts
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.
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.