There's a reason Ryan refers to Whoopi Goldberg as the 'least bad' of The View's three regular panelists (Joy Behar, Sunny Hostin being the others). Today's episode was an example of why, as the veteran actor urged Ana Navarro not to 'piss in the wind' and rip on Trump before he even takes office, taking a 'wait and see' approach instead.
We were lied to about masks, social distancing, and mRNA vaccines during the COVID pandemic, and Ryan hasn't forgotten. For this reason, it's time to stop putting blind faith in experts and trust Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to follow the actual science and truth when it comes to leading Health and Human Services.
We were lied to about masks, social distancing, and mRNA vaccines during the COVID pandemic, and Ryan hasn't forgotten. For this reason, it's time to stop putting blind faith in experts and trust Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to follow the actual science and truth when it comes to leading Health and Human Services.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I think what we're all saying is we're going to
sit and watait. We're gonna wait and see because we
can't do anything else except I'm.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Not gonna wait and see.
Speaker 3 (00:07):
I mean, this guy is.
Speaker 4 (00:10):
What you're doing.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
There's nothing to be done until you know what you're fighting.
It's it's listen and the wind doesn't help you.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Just what I'm saying is.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
I have no false expectations that at seventy eight.
Speaker 4 (00:25):
He's going to all of a sudden turn another.
Speaker 5 (00:30):
I spent weeks telling people that he was apocalyptic.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
I'm not going to change now.
Speaker 6 (00:35):
It's not treating every single thing.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
I think that's when we lose credibility.
Speaker 4 (00:39):
Well, here's the thing.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
You lose credibility in many different ways. If you don't
know what you're talking about and you accuse him of something,
then then they're going to blow it back. That's why
I saying we need to wait and see exactly what
you want to do.
Speaker 3 (00:54):
That is a prime example of why I firmly believe
will Be Goldberg is the least bad of the three
on the view. If you're gonna compare her to Joy
Behar and Sonny Houston, who she's got to be the
worst because time after time, week after week, when Kelly
and I come up with the Fool of the Week nominee,
(01:14):
Sonny Houston's on the list, she says something that's like
what And she's supposed to be the.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Smart one, She's got the law degree.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
But what Bee I think does have some basis one
foot in the ground of common sense in that square,
and she touches on a very key paradigm now haunting
the left. And make no mistake, Anna Navarro is of
the left, on the left pretending to be a conservative,
like Jennifer Ruben, like Bill Crystal, like George Will.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
No, the grift is over.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
The grift is over for them, Anthony Scaramucci, how are
they going to continue to make money claiming that Donald
Trump is Orange Hitler? And what woo Be touches on there,
I think is very important, which is Anna Navarro claimed, Well,
we got to stick with this narrative of Trump's efect.
She's just authoritarian, he's a dictator. Otherwise we lose credibility. Well,
(02:04):
in a way, she's right, but to what base point?
If you're doing that now before Donald Trump even does
a single thing in office, well then you lose credibility
on that.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Basis as well.
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Kelly Cacherra is back with us, and I know this
is her favorite show. Oh yeah, So Kelly, how do
you respond to Whoopy Goldberg? They're kind of shutting down
Anna Navarro and telling her to stop pissing into the wind.
Speaker 7 (02:30):
Well, I mean, somebody does have to have a little
bit of common sense on that show. And I think
you know, both of us know that, Yes, Honey, Houston
makes it onto the full of week every single week,
every week on and but I think what you're starting
to see from people like Woopy Goldberg is hold on, Okay,
(02:50):
people have spoken we lost, are side lost pretty handily? Okay,
Now we can't go with the same narrative because nothing
has been done yet. His cabinet has some really good
people on it, and it's very diverse, very very diverse,
with smart women hello, thank you, Mark Cuban and some
(03:15):
other people who are just going to be They're going
to shake some things up. And so I like her
stance of let's wait and see.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Well, and I think Whoopy is being at least there's
a modicum of intellectual honesty here where she's going to
oppose probably a lot of what Donald Trump says and does.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
And to me, that's fine. I don't really have a
problem with that.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
But she's right, and let's wait until it actually happens
and then we counter it. And that's the arena of
free speech and ideas, and that's what this is supposed
to be all about. Now we're going to get to
Jim vander High, the Axio CEO, because he went nuts.
These people are losing it. They're losing their minds over
the influence that they have lost with the everyday, modern
(04:01):
average American.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
Now April Ryan again no friend to the right.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
She works for some outlet that I don't think I've
ever heard of, even but she gets called on a
lot in the White House press conferences. That's about to
change with Kareem John Pierre. She does contribute to MSNBC,
And here's Joe Scarborough. And again to Scarborough's credit, he's
at least identifying the problem. Now, the solution might be
(04:27):
a different matter altogether. But the problem is exactly what
we're seeing in the Exitpole results. And even April Ryan
is honest about it.
Speaker 8 (04:35):
Why are Democrats losing working class white voters? Why are
Democrats losing working class Hispanic voters. Why are Democrats even
losing some working class Black voters, especially black men? It overstated,
It was overstated about black men the degree, but there's
no doubt there is a trend that Democrats are losing
(04:56):
a lot of people that have been their base for
a long time.
Speaker 4 (05:00):
Why do you think that is tone deafness? Tone deafness?
Speaker 2 (05:05):
At this point, you have to think about this.
Speaker 9 (05:07):
Politics is personal and it's also pocketbook.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
I think they knew that before the election, but they
didn't want to scare off voters who might vote for Kamala.
But they knew deep down that Kamala didn't have that
connection with such people in flyover America, in working class
russ Belt states that we're going to decide this election
like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania. Abra Ryan continues, and this part
(05:33):
is especially illuminating.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
This is not new.
Speaker 9 (05:36):
Though, for Black America, for Latino America, for those who
are underserved. Think about the nineteen sixties. Think about the
March on Washington with doctor King. Think about if Robert
Kennedy Senior and doctor Martin Luther King would have lived,
they would have dealt with issues of poverty and one
thing that I did ask Robert Kennedy Junior at the
debate in Philadelphia. After the debate, in the spin room,
(05:59):
I said, what if your father and doctor King.
Speaker 10 (06:02):
Had lived, they.
Speaker 9 (06:03):
Would dealing with the issue, Poppy, who is the president
that would deal with that issue more so than the
other And he said Donald Trump, which was surprising to hear.
That is, Democrats are thought to be the ones who
deal with this, and they are imploding now because of this,
because of the tone deafness that so many people have
told them about, and they didn't listen.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
The classic question when you're asked between two candidates and
no candidates perfect, But when you're asked who was running
for president, you got two choices, which one of these
candidates cares more about someone like me? Immediately your answer
is Donald Trump. And what drove this point home like
a stake through the heart were the ads running in
(06:47):
the Upper Midwest, in particular Pennsylvania and Charlote Mine The
God even pointed this out. Kamala Harris is for they them,
Donald Trump is for you. Democrats got off track on
these fringe issues like using taxpayer funds for transgender surgeries
(07:07):
of convicted felons who are inmates in prison. Like I said,
it's like a mad Libs gone psychotic. But it's actually
what she said. And it wasn't just something written in
an article. And they put a photo of The New
York Times up on the screen.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
No, it was Kamala Harris's face.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
It was Kamala Harris's voice saying those very words as
she was pandering to the subject of an interview with
a transwoman. And Kamala is the type of chameleonic politician
who goes into every room and wants to tell someone
what they want to hear, or what she thinks they
(07:47):
want to hear, not what she actually believes or thinks
to this day, other than abortion. I don't know that
I know what Kamala Harris truly thinks or believes. She's
a puppet. She is an absolute charlatan. And she was
exposed for who she was, which when the news broke today.
And Kelly, I want to get your take on this.
(08:08):
She is going to stay active in the game, considering
a run for president in twenty twenty eight, and polls
show right now that among Democrats she's the leading candidate,
or she might run for governor in twenty twenty six. Personally, Kelly,
I think the latter is much more likely, and it's
the only thing in my view that will keep her
in the game. She can't just float now for the
(08:28):
next four years on the speaker circuit and then show
up and be the nominee for the Democrats in twenty eight, can.
Speaker 7 (08:33):
She No, I think the governorship is probably more likely
to happen. California people are extraordinarily stupid, and Sheik is
a former California resident orself, I do, but I will
tell you that with the exception of this year, I
(09:00):
was very pleased to see at least some in roots
happening in California, and you know, turning a lot of
those counties red that were traditionally blue.
Speaker 4 (09:12):
But I think you're right.
Speaker 7 (09:13):
I don't see her going coming back, even though the
polls say what the polls say. I mean, it's very
fresh off the election, and she's going to have a
little bit of a bump. I guess no, But I
just don't see it happening.
Speaker 3 (09:27):
Well, what Donald Trump did, it cannot be forgotten or dismissed.
Was virtually historically unprecedented. Yeah, yea, go go back to
Grover Cleveland. In the eighteen nineties, and that Dan loves
it when I go down memory lane in American history.
But truly, it's the only other time it's been done
where a president has lost, come back and then one
(09:47):
two nonconsecutive terms. But you degrade that even further, and
let me just go over recent history. And by recent history,
I'm just going to go back to nineteen eighty the
first election that I remember. I was six years old.
My parents were very enthusiastic about voting for Ronald Reagan.
They had both voted for Carter, and they were immensely disappointed.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
So there you go. Jimmy Carter. Did he come back
in nineteen eighty four?
Speaker 3 (10:10):
He was a rumor by then he was lost to
the bin dustbin of history. Walter Mondale, what happened after
he lost in eighty four? Did was he going to
come back and run an eighty eight?
Speaker 4 (10:21):
No?
Speaker 3 (10:22):
Michael Ducacus, very cerebral, intelligent candidate governor of Massachusetts, spoke
like seventeen languages, son of immigrants.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
What happened to him after eighty eight? Did he run
again in ninety two?
Speaker 4 (10:34):
No?
Speaker 3 (10:34):
In fact, I believe it was his successor. Paul songis
another governor of Massachusetts who ran and was in the
lead in the early stages of that Democratic primary.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Bill Clinton won two terms al Gore, al Gore almost won.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
Al Gore was like five hundred and thirty eight votes
away from flipping Floord and winning the whole election and
being President of the United States himself.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
Very narrow loss. Where was al Gore in two thousand
and four.
Speaker 3 (11:00):
He was a better candidate, who performed better than Kamala Harris,
and he just went off on his climate change circuit
and made a lot of money in his private jet.
John Carey loses in two thousand and four. Was he
a factor in two thousand and eight. The point of
the matter is she's lost. She had her chance. She'll
never have a better chance. She was vice president of
(11:20):
the United States. She ran as their candidate. She didn't
have to endure a primary, she didn't have to do
any debates with any other Democratic candidates for that role.
And you think somehow she's going to come back in
twenty twenty eight and navigate the field that obliterated her,
that destroyed her in twenty twenty She couldn't even make
it to Iowa. This is laughable on its face, it's
(11:44):
foolish and like Kelly said in the immediate aftermath, oh,
people Democrats who are asked, oh, I know who Kamala
Harris is, Okay, yeah her. Believe me, four years from
now she will be a distant memory, and there will
be others to fill her space, people like Governor Josh
Shapiro of Pennsylvania. I think he'll be one of the
front runners. Gavin Newsom wants into this whole race, and
(12:06):
I think in a very real way, he is glad
that Donald Trump won because it clears the path for Newsom.
However delusional he is about it that he can run
now in twenty twenty eight, and he feels he can
do well. But there'll be handfuls, bushels full of other
Democratic candidates who surpassed Kamala Harrison name recognition and fundraising.
(12:29):
The Democrats are not going to want nominate a loser.
She'd showed no signs that she was able to run
a campaign coherently. Well, she only had one hundred and
seven days. She had one hundred seven days with no
other competition. She was anointed in the role. That sort
of historical anomaly is not happening again. So dismiss any
notion from those on the left. Ol Kama could be
(12:50):
the nominee.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
She won't be.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
I mean for their sake. I mean I hope that
she is, because she'll lose. There's no way she defeats
Rod DeSantis or Jade Vance. But even how we get
our information, the left is coming to terms with this.
There's a lot of coping, and there's a lot of sithing,
but they need to cope more than they seethe. And
here's Jim Vanda hieh Axio CEO, and he's mostly sithing here,
(13:13):
not so much coping.
Speaker 6 (13:15):
I hate this damn debate about oh, we don't need
the media. It is not true. Think about what makes
this I love this country. I'm a beneficiary of this country,
like some from Wisconsin who can come and start two companies,
be up here with an award sitting next to mikey
of a beneficiary of it. But there's something about the country.
(13:35):
There's something about it right, There's something about freedom, capitalism,
the animal spirits of democracy. But at the core of
that is maybe transparency, maybe a free press, maybe the
ability to do your job without worrying to go to jail,
maybe the ability to sit in a war zone and
tell people it's actually happening, so they're not just looking
at distortion. Matters. It matters profoundly. It's why it's not
(13:58):
like we just love getting.
Speaker 4 (13:59):
Up at three four in the morning.
Speaker 6 (14:01):
Doing this every single day, like we do it because
we love it. We do it because it matters. The
work that we do matters.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
It would matter if his description of the mainstream media
still existed. It doesn't even if you go back, let's say,
twenty years ago and compare a CNN cable cast to
what they're doing now. The first thing I noticed over
that time were the chirons changing from newsworthy items that
were objectively told to extremely partisan, subjective headlines that were
(14:34):
bashing one side over the other. And you can guess
which side that was. They took a side. This started
with Obama and eight it got worse, and of course
it mutated when Donald Trump hit the scene. It was
actually viewed as a serious candidate. And I is very
mad at Elon Musk as well. Everything we do is
under fire. Elon Musk is on Twitter every day or
(14:56):
x today.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
I'm saying, like we are the media, you are the media.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
True.
Speaker 6 (15:02):
My message to Elon Musk is both you're.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
Not the media. You having you.
Speaker 6 (15:12):
Having a blue check mark, a Twitter handle in three
hundred words of cleverness doesn't make you a reporter anymore
than me looking at your head and seeing that you
have a brain and telling you have an awesome set
of tools makes.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
Me a damn neurosurgeon.
Speaker 3 (15:26):
Because the reporters were not doing their jobs as journalists
because they took a side and were inherently biased, and
people figured that out. Regular everyday American started searching out
for their own sources of information, doing their own homework,
not trusting immediately what they were fed and what they
were told, because what they were fed and what they
were told, in large part were lies, were distortions. Twitter
(15:49):
x Elon Musk is an outgrowth of that failure of
the mainstream media to do its job, which is journalism,
which is to report and allow audiences to make up
their own minds. They felt the need to encapsulate things
in digestible form that were preordained, opinions that were approved,
and they wanted the audience to just buy them hook
line and sinker. Now listen to who he cites here
(16:13):
as a source for credible journalism.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
This is shocking to me what we do.
Speaker 6 (16:17):
What journalists do, what you did in Mississippi, what Eljazira
does in the Middle East. What you don't proclaim yourself
to be a reporter like this nonsense, like being a reporter.
Speaker 4 (16:31):
Is hard, really hard.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Yeah, if you even tried.
Speaker 4 (16:35):
You have to care, you have to do the hard work.
Speaker 6 (16:39):
You have to skit up every single day and say
I want to get to the closest approximation of the
truth without any fear, without any favoritism. You don't even
do that by popping off on Twitter. You don't do
that by having an opinion. You'd do it by doing.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
The hard work.
Speaker 3 (16:56):
He's so outdated in his philosophy and view of what's
really going on out there. Has he lived in a
bubble over these last eight to ten years. Catherine Maher
gives away the ghost her NPR CEO because she says
the truth it's overrated.
Speaker 5 (17:11):
But one of the most significant differences critical from moving
from polarization to productivity is that the wikipedians who write
these articles aren't actually focused on finding the truth. They're
working for something that's a little bit more attainable, which
is the best of what we can know right now,
and after seven years there, I actually believe that they're
(17:32):
onto something that for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the
truth and seeking to convince others of the truth isn't
necessarily the best place to start. What, in fact, I
think our reverence for the truth might become might have
become a bit of a distraction that is preventing us
from finding consensus and getting important things done.
Speaker 3 (17:55):
If consensus is not the truth, then what you're doing
is not journalism.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
And what she is advocating for.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
What NPR has done, what public television has done, is
they have chosen Donald Trump as a boogeyman against whom
they must fight and take a principled stand. They can't
afford to platform or legitimize him or humanize him. He
was an existential threat to democracy who must be defeated
at any and all costs. And therefore the end justified
the means in lying to the American people because they
(18:23):
couldn't take the risk of Donald Trump winning.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
And what happened. Donald Trump won, and so did we.
Speaker 11 (18:34):
You're a lawyer and an activist. You're not a doctor
or a scientists.
Speaker 10 (18:42):
We live in a democracy. We don't have a priesthood here.
We don't have a high priests who are telling us
we're in charge our own lives and Americans need to
do their own research. And you know, listen, people say
trust the experts. That became a mantra or in COVID.
I've brought over five hundred cases and almost all of
(19:02):
them involved a scientific controversy. My job is to read science,
to learn it, and to be able to read it critically.
Speaker 3 (19:10):
RFK Junior, and of course he'll be taking the mantle
of Health and Human Services as the secretary. They're pending
approval by the Senate. I believe that he will get it.
I believe that he should get it. He's being interviewed
here on News Nation by Elizabeth Vargas. He may recall
that she married Mark Kohane, who wrote the song Walking
in Memphis, and I believe was shot in an attempted
(19:32):
carjacking here in Denver. If I'm not mistaken, you can
fact check me on that one. But I believe that's correct.
But she's trying to tell Elizabeth Vargas is trying to
tell RFK Junior that you know you're a lawyer, you're
an activist. You're not a scientist. Okay, let's play that game.
What did the so called scientists tell us during COVID
(19:52):
and let me check off the lies that we were told.
Six feet distancing. We were told that's what we needed
to do do. That's what you saw on the grocery
store floors and a restaurant six feet. Please maintain six
feet of distancing at all times. You know where that
number came from. Thin air was based on nothing scientific,
(20:13):
no experiments, no control in those experiments, no peer reviewed
conclusions based on set experiments. I'm not a scientist, but
I'm the son of one, and I know the scientific
method that was not applied to masks. That was another example.
We got a mask kids in schools, Gotta wear a
(20:33):
mask cuts down your chances of transmitting the virus.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
That was based on nothing.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
Masks are worn hospitals because of bacterial droplets, to avoid
infections in surgical rooms and to protect the physicians the
nurses themselves from bacterial infections, which are much larger the
droplets bacterial droplets than viral droplets, which are minute, miniscule, microscopic.
(21:02):
The analogy has been used, and it might be a
slight overstatement, but not much. It's like expecting a chain
link fence to stop a mosquito. And now to mention,
you're wearing a mask, where's the air coming from? Where
is it going out the top and the sides in
the bottom of the mask, not through the mask. This
is not a mask that you're using to aspiray respiate.
(21:25):
You're not breathing through the mask in or through the
mask out. There are masks that do that, but not
your typical standard masks that we were wearing during COVID
RFK Junior continues, and he's just spot on on all
of this.
Speaker 10 (21:39):
In every case I've ever brought, there's an expert on
that side and an expert on this side. When I
brought them up, when we brought them on Santo case,
it was three experts from Harvard, Stanford, Egale, And we
had three experts from Harvard, Stanford, Gale, and they were
saying exactly the opposite thing. Oh, you know, saying trust
the experts, to me makes no sense at all. But
(22:02):
trusting the experts is a function of religion and totalitarianism.
It is not a function of democracy and democracy we
question everybody.
Speaker 3 (22:14):
Yes, in a democracy, in a constitutional republic like we have.
You question authority, you question what you've been told, You
put it through the ringer, You treat hypotheses with rigor.
A true scientist will take an idea into the arena,
take it for a test, run, run an experiment, test
(22:36):
the hypothesis, and then form conclusions.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
But he's exactly right.
Speaker 3 (22:40):
We were being asked to go on faith, like religion,
go on faith for doctor Fauci, for Deborah Burks, for
all of these clowns that were telling us what to
do during the early stages of COVID two weeks to
stop the spread, wear a mask socially distanced six feet,
all of it ridiculous, wise fabrications, and the worst of all,
(23:04):
the so called vaccines. The vaccines had not endured full
and total scientific trials with controls in the experiments, with
data collected with a representative sample size, to draw conclusions,
scientific mathematical conclusions. We could not know what we did
not know at that time, and the right approach is
(23:26):
a scientist. As scary as this would have been, there
already was public panic. There wouldn't have been a whole
lot more. But if you're honest with the public, they're
going to respect you more and they're going to listen
to you more, both in the short and long term.
If they told us, look, we have these mRNA shots.
We believe they blunt the effects of the disease, and
(23:46):
for the elderly and the morbidly, or beasts and anyone
else with comorbidities, we strongly recommend that you get them. However,
we do not have enough evidence at this point to
conclude that the mRNA vaccines or the they were Pfizer
or Moderna or Johnson and Johnson. We don't know if
they prevent infection entirely as a prophylactic true vaccine, and
(24:12):
we don't know if it prevents spreading of the disease.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
We don't know that.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
All we do know and all we can assure you
and tell you based on science and fact and truth,
is that we believe that if you have these comorbidities,
any of them, COPD, you're elderly, etc. We strongly recommend
you get these shots because it will blunt the effects
the severe effects of the disease. If they had told
(24:38):
us that, I would be okay with it. That is
not what we were told. We were lied to Rachel
Mattow and others like her advanced the lie and told
us that if you got the shots, you would not
get the disease and you would not spread the.
Speaker 2 (24:52):
Disease to others. False and false. Upon further review, RFK
Junior gets in one lass, seeing right here.
Speaker 11 (25:02):
A lot of questions I want to get to before
we do. I want a director of viewers to our
website to go deeper on the science of vaccines as
well as mister Kennedy's positions on everything from immigration to
foreign policy.
Speaker 4 (25:12):
We have resources available.
Speaker 11 (25:13):
For you online and encourage you to check them out
at Newsnationnow dot com.
Speaker 10 (25:19):
All right, a big issue a children's health defense, and
you can find.
Speaker 4 (25:23):
The other side of this.
Speaker 3 (25:25):
Go to Children's Health Defense dot com and you can
find the other side of the story. What we were
told were lies by so called experts, and RFK Junior's
point is exactly right. You can find a study, you
can find a statistic, you can find evidence to support
any claim that you make. But when you say that
your experts are the right experts, but he can provide
(25:47):
experts from those very same schools who will say the
exact opposite.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's all about the experts you find.
Speaker 3 (25:53):
Doesn't make them any better than the other experts who
might disagree unless they bring to the table science, ti conclusions,
peer reviewed etc. That is why I'm entirely on board
with RFK Junior heading HHS, with doctor Marty McCary heading
up a portion of our health and oversight, whether it's
the CDC or the FDA or anything else. And j Bardicharia,
(26:17):
another doctor out of Stanford. These were the truth tellers
during COVID. These were credible sources in the scientific and
medical communities who were expatriated, who were exiled from those
who would buy into the narrative.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
As doctor Fauci.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
Declared from on high, those are the people I want
in charge of our health now because they're unafraid to
ask the uncomfortable questions that need to be asked. We
tried it their way, We tried it with quote unquote experts,
and they let us down, and they lied to us,
and they were complete unmitigated failures, and they destroyed the
public trust in our public health cess systems.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
And that's the track of this entire thing.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
One last time out, we're back wrapping it up with
your tax five seven, seven, three nine Ryan Schuley Live
on this Monday before Thanksgiving.
Speaker 12 (27:11):
And finally, I'll say this, President Trump has made it
clear we're going to prioritize public safety threats and national
security threats right out of the gate. Could they pose
the most dangerous country?
Speaker 2 (27:20):
What governor or mayor.
Speaker 12 (27:22):
Is doesn't want public safety trusts and national security threats
out of their neighborhoods, out of their communities. That's your
number one responsibility. So you can hate Trump all you want,
but you got to love your community more than you
hate President Trump.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
Aimen Tom Homan, the actual borders are who is going
to be visiting the border soon? According to Bill Malusion
of Fox News, and he asked the simple question there
that even Mike Johnston conceded when Mark Salinger, who I
give credit to for nine News, asked him points like
you know, what kind of people are you willing to deport?
Speaker 2 (27:55):
And he finally gave an answer on that part of it.
Speaker 13 (27:57):
I don't think that's what Denveright's for Americans do in
this context of all.
Speaker 9 (28:01):
What is your line where you say, yes, I support
these deportations and no I don't support these other ones.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Yeah, I think our line is clear.
Speaker 13 (28:09):
We think if you are a violent criminal that is
committing serious crimes like murder or rape and Denver, you
should be prosecuted to the folks end of the law
and you should be deported. We agree, we haven't accord.
That is exactly what Tom Holman is saying. That is
exactly what Ice is planning to do. It just hasn't
been done. And crime is.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
Running rampant in Aurora in the form of Trendy Aragua
taking over apartment complexes. We're getting word that trender Aragua
has a presence not only there but in Denver and
other American cities as well. Those who are affiliated with
that gang must be deported one hundred percent of them,
with zero percent room for error.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
Five seven seventy three nine.
Speaker 3 (28:52):
The text line, if I should have joined throughout Ryan,
you are an idiot with masks shoestring, Please explain how
I'm the idiot with masks, and please describe using scientific evidence,
how your mask works. You know how many posts I saw,
and I think Kelly as well, people that they had
followed all the rules, They've gotten all seventy seven shots,
(29:15):
they wore a mask everywhere and they still got COVID.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
Why did that happen? If masks work.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Also, if masks work, why do I have to wear
a mine for yours to work? If the shots work,
why do I have to get a shot for your
shot to work? When we go around during flu season
and there are people my father included with COPD and.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
He's seventy seven years old and he was a lifelong.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
Smoker, there's a lot of comorbidity stored up in my
own father, And yeah, he should get a flu shot.
Does he need me to get a flu shot for
his flu shot to work? This was never based on science.
That's my primary criticism.
Speaker 2 (29:57):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (29:58):
They drew conclusions that no scientific method or experimentation or
any kind of study could have revealed.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
At the time, they.
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Told us that we needed to believe on faith on
God that these so called vaccines worked. What they should
have done was told us what they knew and what
they didn't know at the time, that they knew it
or didn't know it. It sounds simple, but that's not
what happened. And you know it, we both lived through it.
(30:28):
The mainstream media had decided not to platform Trump, and
thus they don't have a platform anymore. That's a really
good way to sum it up, Texter. And they gave
up any pretense of journalism with the candidacy of Donald Trump,
and that dates way back to twenty sixteen. And they did,
if you notice, it was like pro wrestling. They did
a heel turn on Trump. They were amping him up,
(30:50):
they were platforming him when it was the primary, and
they were really scared. You know who they were really
scared of, Marco Rubio, Little Marco. That's who all the
Apple research which was being compiled for by the Hillary
Clinton campaign. They feared him as a young, kind of
vibrant Cuban American, first generation American from Florida, a state
(31:13):
rich in electoral votes. He was very cerebral, very well spoken.
They feared Marco Rubio a lot. Now in retrospect, it
was Trump all along who they should have feared the most,
but they didn't. And so the media kind of viewed
Trump as a joke. And again I would advise a
lot of you to watch the documentary that's.
Speaker 2 (31:33):
On Netflix about Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (31:35):
And it's not with any agenda, I don't think going in.
I think it's Trump an American dream. Kelly, have you
seen that yet.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
It's a series I have. You did watch that?
Speaker 4 (31:46):
I did?
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Okay, well, really good? What were your thoughts.
Speaker 7 (31:51):
You're going to learn a different side to him, but
you're also going to learn that he is the exact
same person that he was on this campaign trail.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
He's very genuine.
Speaker 3 (32:03):
Yeah, he's kind of what you see is what you get.
You might not like it, but it's the truth and
it's authentically him, and I think that's what I pulled
out of that documentary series.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
And it's an interesting watch.
Speaker 3 (32:11):
There's a lot of critical voices in there, people that
do not like Donald Trump, but a lot of them acknowledge,
you know, what is this magic, this mystery, this special
sauce of Trump? Why does it work? And you get
to that point as well. Roger Stone's in it. So
you've got a lot of different sides represented in the
presentation of that documentary and why he decided to run
for president.
Speaker 2 (32:32):
But yeah, the mainstream media, Mika and.
Speaker 3 (32:34):
Joe, the two that just went to visit him at
mar A Lago, they were funning over him.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
I remember this. I was there. I did not suffer
a brain injury in the interim.
Speaker 3 (32:43):
They loved him until they didn't and they stopped loving
him because they realized this is serious. He's really running
this time, Unlike nineteen eighty eight or nineteen ninety two
or two thousand or twenty twelve. He threatened to run
all of those times, and time it was like, well,
he's not really going to go through with it.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
He backs out.
Speaker 3 (33:03):
And that's what I thought initially when he came down
the escalator wash is he really running?
Speaker 2 (33:08):
I don't know. Well, I guess we'll wait and see.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Had I truly did have a literal wait and see
approach on Donald Trump if he was actually running, And
I think when I knew he was serious, there was
a moment in one of the first debates with Jeb
Bush where Trump just went in on George W. Bush
in the Iraq War, and he drew groans and booze
from the crowd. He goes, that's because these aren't my donors,
these aren't these people aren't here to see me.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
They're paying Jeb Bush.
Speaker 3 (33:34):
And I'm like, Okay, One, this guy's very different, and
two he's serious.
Speaker 2 (33:39):
He's running.
Speaker 3 (33:40):
I still voted for Little Marco in the twenty sixteen primary,
but when it came down to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton,
that choice was easy and it was simple, and I
voted for Donald Trump all three times, sixteen, twenty and
twenty twenty four. It's an interesting character arc. Will continue
to follow it for the remainder of this week. Stay tuned.
The Dan Kaflis Show is next for tuning in today.
(34:00):
You could tune in each and every day right here
on six thirty K how
Speaker 12 (34:07):
M.
I think what we're all saying is we're going to
sit and watait. We're gonna wait and see because we
can't do anything else except I'm.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Not gonna wait and see.
Speaker 3 (00:07):
I mean, this guy is.
Speaker 4 (00:10):
What you're doing.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
There's nothing to be done until you know what you're fighting.
It's it's listen and the wind doesn't help you.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Just what I'm saying is.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
I have no false expectations that at seventy eight.
Speaker 4 (00:25):
He's going to all of a sudden turn another.
Speaker 5 (00:30):
I spent weeks telling people that he was apocalyptic.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
I'm not going to change now.
Speaker 6 (00:35):
It's not treating every single thing.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
I think that's when we lose credibility.
Speaker 4 (00:39):
Well, here's the thing.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
You lose credibility in many different ways. If you don't
know what you're talking about and you accuse him of something,
then then they're going to blow it back. That's why
I saying we need to wait and see exactly what
you want to do.
Speaker 3 (00:54):
That is a prime example of why I firmly believe
will Be Goldberg is the least bad of the three
on the view. If you're gonna compare her to Joy
Behar and Sonny Houston, who she's got to be the
worst because time after time, week after week, when Kelly
and I come up with the Fool of the Week nominee,
(01:14):
Sonny Houston's on the list, she says something that's like
what And she's supposed to be the.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Smart one, She's got the law degree.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
But what Bee I think does have some basis one
foot in the ground of common sense in that square,
and she touches on a very key paradigm now haunting
the left. And make no mistake, Anna Navarro is of
the left, on the left pretending to be a conservative,
like Jennifer Ruben, like Bill Crystal, like George Will.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
No, the grift is over.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
The grift is over for them, Anthony Scaramucci, how are
they going to continue to make money claiming that Donald
Trump is Orange Hitler? And what woo Be touches on there,
I think is very important, which is Anna Navarro claimed, Well,
we got to stick with this narrative of Trump's efect.
She's just authoritarian, he's a dictator. Otherwise we lose credibility. Well,
(02:04):
in a way, she's right, but to what base point?
If you're doing that now before Donald Trump even does
a single thing in office, well then you lose credibility
on that.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Basis as well.
Speaker 3 (02:16):
Kelly Cacherra is back with us, and I know this
is her favorite show. Oh yeah, So Kelly, how do
you respond to Whoopy Goldberg? They're kind of shutting down
Anna Navarro and telling her to stop pissing into the wind.
Speaker 7 (02:30):
Well, I mean, somebody does have to have a little
bit of common sense on that show. And I think
you know, both of us know that, Yes, Honey, Houston
makes it onto the full of week every single week,
every week on and but I think what you're starting
to see from people like Woopy Goldberg is hold on, Okay,
(02:50):
people have spoken we lost, are side lost pretty handily? Okay,
Now we can't go with the same narrative because nothing
has been done yet. His cabinet has some really good
people on it, and it's very diverse, very very diverse,
with smart women hello, thank you, Mark Cuban and some
(03:15):
other people who are just going to be They're going
to shake some things up. And so I like her
stance of let's wait and see.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
Well, and I think Whoopy is being at least there's
a modicum of intellectual honesty here where she's going to
oppose probably a lot of what Donald Trump says and does.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
And to me, that's fine. I don't really have a
problem with that.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
But she's right, and let's wait until it actually happens
and then we counter it. And that's the arena of
free speech and ideas, and that's what this is supposed
to be all about. Now we're going to get to
Jim vander High, the Axio CEO, because he went nuts.
These people are losing it. They're losing their minds over
the influence that they have lost with the everyday, modern
(04:01):
average American.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
Now April Ryan again no friend to the right.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
She works for some outlet that I don't think I've
ever heard of, even but she gets called on a
lot in the White House press conferences. That's about to
change with Kareem John Pierre. She does contribute to MSNBC,
And here's Joe Scarborough. And again to Scarborough's credit, he's
at least identifying the problem. Now, the solution might be
(04:27):
a different matter altogether. But the problem is exactly what
we're seeing in the Exitpole results. And even April Ryan
is honest about it.
Speaker 8 (04:35):
Why are Democrats losing working class white voters? Why are
Democrats losing working class Hispanic voters. Why are Democrats even
losing some working class Black voters, especially black men? It overstated,
It was overstated about black men the degree, but there's
no doubt there is a trend that Democrats are losing
(04:56):
a lot of people that have been their base for
a long time.
Speaker 4 (05:00):
Why do you think that is tone deafness? Tone deafness?
Speaker 2 (05:05):
At this point, you have to think about this.
Speaker 9 (05:07):
Politics is personal and it's also pocketbook.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
I think they knew that before the election, but they
didn't want to scare off voters who might vote for Kamala.
But they knew deep down that Kamala didn't have that
connection with such people in flyover America, in working class
russ Belt states that we're going to decide this election
like Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania. Abra Ryan continues, and this part
(05:33):
is especially illuminating.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
This is not new.
Speaker 9 (05:36):
Though, for Black America, for Latino America, for those who
are underserved. Think about the nineteen sixties. Think about the
March on Washington with doctor King. Think about if Robert
Kennedy Senior and doctor Martin Luther King would have lived,
they would have dealt with issues of poverty and one
thing that I did ask Robert Kennedy Junior at the
debate in Philadelphia. After the debate, in the spin room,
(05:59):
I said, what if your father and doctor King.
Speaker 10 (06:02):
Had lived, they.
Speaker 9 (06:03):
Would dealing with the issue, Poppy, who is the president
that would deal with that issue more so than the
other And he said Donald Trump, which was surprising to hear.
That is, Democrats are thought to be the ones who
deal with this, and they are imploding now because of this,
because of the tone deafness that so many people have
told them about, and they didn't listen.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
The classic question when you're asked between two candidates and
no candidates perfect, But when you're asked who was running
for president, you got two choices, which one of these
candidates cares more about someone like me? Immediately your answer
is Donald Trump. And what drove this point home like
a stake through the heart were the ads running in
(06:47):
the Upper Midwest, in particular Pennsylvania and Charlote Mine The
God even pointed this out. Kamala Harris is for they them,
Donald Trump is for you. Democrats got off track on
these fringe issues like using taxpayer funds for transgender surgeries
(07:07):
of convicted felons who are inmates in prison. Like I said,
it's like a mad Libs gone psychotic. But it's actually
what she said. And it wasn't just something written in
an article. And they put a photo of The New
York Times up on the screen.
Speaker 2 (07:23):
No, it was Kamala Harris's face.
Speaker 3 (07:26):
It was Kamala Harris's voice saying those very words as
she was pandering to the subject of an interview with
a transwoman. And Kamala is the type of chameleonic politician
who goes into every room and wants to tell someone
what they want to hear, or what she thinks they
(07:47):
want to hear, not what she actually believes or thinks
to this day, other than abortion. I don't know that
I know what Kamala Harris truly thinks or believes. She's
a puppet. She is an absolute charlatan. And she was
exposed for who she was, which when the news broke today.
And Kelly, I want to get your take on this.
(08:08):
She is going to stay active in the game, considering
a run for president in twenty twenty eight, and polls
show right now that among Democrats she's the leading candidate,
or she might run for governor in twenty twenty six. Personally, Kelly,
I think the latter is much more likely, and it's
the only thing in my view that will keep her
in the game. She can't just float now for the
(08:28):
next four years on the speaker circuit and then show
up and be the nominee for the Democrats in twenty eight, can.
Speaker 7 (08:33):
She No, I think the governorship is probably more likely
to happen. California people are extraordinarily stupid, and Sheik is
a former California resident orself, I do, but I will
tell you that with the exception of this year, I
(09:00):
was very pleased to see at least some in roots
happening in California, and you know, turning a lot of
those counties red that were traditionally blue.
Speaker 4 (09:12):
But I think you're right.
Speaker 7 (09:13):
I don't see her going coming back, even though the
polls say what the polls say. I mean, it's very
fresh off the election, and she's going to have a
little bit of a bump. I guess no, But I
just don't see it happening.
Speaker 3 (09:27):
Well, what Donald Trump did, it cannot be forgotten or dismissed.
Was virtually historically unprecedented. Yeah, yea, go go back to
Grover Cleveland. In the eighteen nineties, and that Dan loves
it when I go down memory lane in American history.
But truly, it's the only other time it's been done
where a president has lost, come back and then one
(09:47):
two nonconsecutive terms. But you degrade that even further, and
let me just go over recent history. And by recent history,
I'm just going to go back to nineteen eighty the
first election that I remember. I was six years old.
My parents were very enthusiastic about voting for Ronald Reagan.
They had both voted for Carter, and they were immensely disappointed.
Speaker 2 (10:07):
So there you go. Jimmy Carter. Did he come back
in nineteen eighty four?
Speaker 3 (10:10):
He was a rumor by then he was lost to
the bin dustbin of history. Walter Mondale, what happened after
he lost in eighty four? Did was he going to
come back and run an eighty eight?
Speaker 4 (10:21):
No?
Speaker 3 (10:22):
Michael Ducacus, very cerebral, intelligent candidate governor of Massachusetts, spoke
like seventeen languages, son of immigrants.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
What happened to him after eighty eight? Did he run
again in ninety two?
Speaker 4 (10:34):
No?
Speaker 3 (10:34):
In fact, I believe it was his successor. Paul songis
another governor of Massachusetts who ran and was in the
lead in the early stages of that Democratic primary.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Bill Clinton won two terms al Gore, al Gore almost won.
Speaker 3 (10:48):
Al Gore was like five hundred and thirty eight votes
away from flipping Floord and winning the whole election and
being President of the United States himself.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
Very narrow loss. Where was al Gore in two thousand
and four.
Speaker 3 (11:00):
He was a better candidate, who performed better than Kamala Harris,
and he just went off on his climate change circuit
and made a lot of money in his private jet.
John Carey loses in two thousand and four. Was he
a factor in two thousand and eight. The point of
the matter is she's lost. She had her chance. She'll
never have a better chance. She was vice president of
(11:20):
the United States. She ran as their candidate. She didn't
have to endure a primary, she didn't have to do
any debates with any other Democratic candidates for that role.
And you think somehow she's going to come back in
twenty twenty eight and navigate the field that obliterated her,
that destroyed her in twenty twenty She couldn't even make
it to Iowa. This is laughable on its face, it's
(11:44):
foolish and like Kelly said in the immediate aftermath, oh,
people Democrats who are asked, oh, I know who Kamala
Harris is, Okay, yeah her. Believe me, four years from
now she will be a distant memory, and there will
be others to fill her space, people like Governor Josh
Shapiro of Pennsylvania. I think he'll be one of the
front runners. Gavin Newsom wants into this whole race, and
(12:06):
I think in a very real way, he is glad
that Donald Trump won because it clears the path for Newsom.
However delusional he is about it that he can run
now in twenty twenty eight, and he feels he can
do well. But there'll be handfuls, bushels full of other
Democratic candidates who surpassed Kamala Harrison name recognition and fundraising.
(12:29):
The Democrats are not going to want nominate a loser.
She'd showed no signs that she was able to run
a campaign coherently. Well, she only had one hundred and
seven days. She had one hundred seven days with no
other competition. She was anointed in the role. That sort
of historical anomaly is not happening again. So dismiss any
notion from those on the left. Ol Kama could be
(12:50):
the nominee.
Speaker 2 (12:51):
She won't be.
Speaker 3 (12:51):
I mean for their sake. I mean I hope that
she is, because she'll lose. There's no way she defeats
Rod DeSantis or Jade Vance. But even how we get
our information, the left is coming to terms with this.
There's a lot of coping, and there's a lot of sithing,
but they need to cope more than they seethe. And
here's Jim Vanda hieh Axio CEO, and he's mostly sithing here,
(13:13):
not so much coping.
Speaker 6 (13:15):
I hate this damn debate about oh, we don't need
the media. It is not true. Think about what makes
this I love this country. I'm a beneficiary of this country,
like some from Wisconsin who can come and start two companies,
be up here with an award sitting next to mikey
of a beneficiary of it. But there's something about the country.
(13:35):
There's something about it right, There's something about freedom, capitalism,
the animal spirits of democracy. But at the core of
that is maybe transparency, maybe a free press, maybe the
ability to do your job without worrying to go to jail,
maybe the ability to sit in a war zone and
tell people it's actually happening, so they're not just looking
at distortion. Matters. It matters profoundly. It's why it's not
(13:58):
like we just love getting.
Speaker 4 (13:59):
Up at three four in the morning.
Speaker 6 (14:01):
Doing this every single day, like we do it because
we love it. We do it because it matters. The
work that we do matters.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
It would matter if his description of the mainstream media
still existed. It doesn't even if you go back, let's say,
twenty years ago and compare a CNN cable cast to
what they're doing now. The first thing I noticed over
that time were the chirons changing from newsworthy items that
were objectively told to extremely partisan, subjective headlines that were
(14:34):
bashing one side over the other. And you can guess
which side that was. They took a side. This started
with Obama and eight it got worse, and of course
it mutated when Donald Trump hit the scene. It was
actually viewed as a serious candidate. And I is very
mad at Elon Musk as well. Everything we do is
under fire. Elon Musk is on Twitter every day or
(14:56):
x today.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
I'm saying, like we are the media, you are the media.
Speaker 4 (15:01):
True.
Speaker 6 (15:02):
My message to Elon Musk is both you're.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
Not the media. You having you.
Speaker 6 (15:12):
Having a blue check mark, a Twitter handle in three
hundred words of cleverness doesn't make you a reporter anymore
than me looking at your head and seeing that you
have a brain and telling you have an awesome set
of tools makes.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
Me a damn neurosurgeon.
Speaker 3 (15:26):
Because the reporters were not doing their jobs as journalists
because they took a side and were inherently biased, and
people figured that out. Regular everyday American started searching out
for their own sources of information, doing their own homework,
not trusting immediately what they were fed and what they
were told, because what they were fed and what they
were told, in large part were lies, were distortions. Twitter
(15:49):
x Elon Musk is an outgrowth of that failure of
the mainstream media to do its job, which is journalism,
which is to report and allow audiences to make up
their own minds. They felt the need to encapsulate things
in digestible form that were preordained, opinions that were approved,
and they wanted the audience to just buy them hook
line and sinker. Now listen to who he cites here
(16:13):
as a source for credible journalism.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
This is shocking to me what we do.
Speaker 6 (16:17):
What journalists do, what you did in Mississippi, what Eljazira
does in the Middle East. What you don't proclaim yourself
to be a reporter like this nonsense, like being a reporter.
Speaker 4 (16:31):
Is hard, really hard.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
Yeah, if you even tried.
Speaker 4 (16:35):
You have to care, you have to do the hard work.
Speaker 6 (16:39):
You have to skit up every single day and say
I want to get to the closest approximation of the
truth without any fear, without any favoritism. You don't even
do that by popping off on Twitter. You don't do
that by having an opinion. You'd do it by doing.
Speaker 4 (16:54):
The hard work.
Speaker 3 (16:56):
He's so outdated in his philosophy and view of what's
really going on out there. Has he lived in a
bubble over these last eight to ten years. Catherine Maher
gives away the ghost her NPR CEO because she says
the truth it's overrated.
Speaker 5 (17:11):
But one of the most significant differences critical from moving
from polarization to productivity is that the wikipedians who write
these articles aren't actually focused on finding the truth. They're
working for something that's a little bit more attainable, which
is the best of what we can know right now,
and after seven years there, I actually believe that they're
(17:32):
onto something that for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the
truth and seeking to convince others of the truth isn't
necessarily the best place to start. What, in fact, I
think our reverence for the truth might become might have
become a bit of a distraction that is preventing us
from finding consensus and getting important things done.
Speaker 3 (17:55):
If consensus is not the truth, then what you're doing
is not journalism.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
And what she is advocating for.
Speaker 3 (18:01):
What NPR has done, what public television has done, is
they have chosen Donald Trump as a boogeyman against whom
they must fight and take a principled stand. They can't
afford to platform or legitimize him or humanize him. He
was an existential threat to democracy who must be defeated
at any and all costs. And therefore the end justified
the means in lying to the American people because they
(18:23):
couldn't take the risk of Donald Trump winning.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
And what happened. Donald Trump won, and so did we.
Speaker 11 (18:34):
You're a lawyer and an activist. You're not a doctor
or a scientists.
Speaker 10 (18:42):
We live in a democracy. We don't have a priesthood here.
We don't have a high priests who are telling us
we're in charge our own lives and Americans need to
do their own research. And you know, listen, people say
trust the experts. That became a mantra or in COVID.
I've brought over five hundred cases and almost all of
(19:02):
them involved a scientific controversy. My job is to read science,
to learn it, and to be able to read it critically.
Speaker 3 (19:10):
RFK Junior, and of course he'll be taking the mantle
of Health and Human Services as the secretary. They're pending
approval by the Senate. I believe that he will get it.
I believe that he should get it. He's being interviewed
here on News Nation by Elizabeth Vargas. He may recall
that she married Mark Kohane, who wrote the song Walking
in Memphis, and I believe was shot in an attempted
(19:32):
carjacking here in Denver. If I'm not mistaken, you can
fact check me on that one. But I believe that's correct.
But she's trying to tell Elizabeth Vargas is trying to
tell RFK Junior that you know you're a lawyer, you're
an activist. You're not a scientist. Okay, let's play that game.
What did the so called scientists tell us during COVID
(19:52):
and let me check off the lies that we were told.
Six feet distancing. We were told that's what we needed
to do do. That's what you saw on the grocery
store floors and a restaurant six feet. Please maintain six
feet of distancing at all times. You know where that
number came from. Thin air was based on nothing scientific,
(20:13):
no experiments, no control in those experiments, no peer reviewed
conclusions based on set experiments. I'm not a scientist, but
I'm the son of one, and I know the scientific
method that was not applied to masks. That was another example.
We got a mask kids in schools, Gotta wear a
(20:33):
mask cuts down your chances of transmitting the virus.
Speaker 2 (20:37):
That was based on nothing.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
Masks are worn hospitals because of bacterial droplets, to avoid
infections in surgical rooms and to protect the physicians the
nurses themselves from bacterial infections, which are much larger the
droplets bacterial droplets than viral droplets, which are minute, miniscule, microscopic.
(21:02):
The analogy has been used, and it might be a
slight overstatement, but not much. It's like expecting a chain
link fence to stop a mosquito. And now to mention,
you're wearing a mask, where's the air coming from? Where
is it going out the top and the sides in
the bottom of the mask, not through the mask. This
is not a mask that you're using to aspiray respiate.
(21:25):
You're not breathing through the mask in or through the
mask out. There are masks that do that, but not
your typical standard masks that we were wearing during COVID
RFK Junior continues, and he's just spot on on all
of this.
Speaker 10 (21:39):
In every case I've ever brought, there's an expert on
that side and an expert on this side. When I
brought them up, when we brought them on Santo case,
it was three experts from Harvard, Stanford, Egale, And we
had three experts from Harvard, Stanford, Gale, and they were
saying exactly the opposite thing. Oh, you know, saying trust
the experts, to me makes no sense at all. But
(22:02):
trusting the experts is a function of religion and totalitarianism.
It is not a function of democracy and democracy we
question everybody.
Speaker 3 (22:14):
Yes, in a democracy, in a constitutional republic like we have.
You question authority, you question what you've been told, You
put it through the ringer, You treat hypotheses with rigor.
A true scientist will take an idea into the arena,
take it for a test, run, run an experiment, test
(22:36):
the hypothesis, and then form conclusions.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
But he's exactly right.
Speaker 3 (22:40):
We were being asked to go on faith, like religion,
go on faith for doctor Fauci, for Deborah Burks, for
all of these clowns that were telling us what to
do during the early stages of COVID two weeks to
stop the spread, wear a mask socially distanced six feet,
all of it ridiculous, wise fabrications, and the worst of all,
(23:04):
the so called vaccines. The vaccines had not endured full
and total scientific trials with controls in the experiments, with
data collected with a representative sample size, to draw conclusions,
scientific mathematical conclusions. We could not know what we did
not know at that time, and the right approach is
(23:26):
a scientist. As scary as this would have been, there
already was public panic. There wouldn't have been a whole
lot more. But if you're honest with the public, they're
going to respect you more and they're going to listen
to you more, both in the short and long term.
If they told us, look, we have these mRNA shots.
We believe they blunt the effects of the disease, and
(23:46):
for the elderly and the morbidly, or beasts and anyone
else with comorbidities, we strongly recommend that you get them. However,
we do not have enough evidence at this point to
conclude that the mRNA vaccines or the they were Pfizer
or Moderna or Johnson and Johnson. We don't know if
they prevent infection entirely as a prophylactic true vaccine, and
(24:12):
we don't know if it prevents spreading of the disease.
Speaker 2 (24:15):
We don't know that.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
All we do know and all we can assure you
and tell you based on science and fact and truth,
is that we believe that if you have these comorbidities,
any of them, COPD, you're elderly, etc. We strongly recommend
you get these shots because it will blunt the effects
the severe effects of the disease. If they had told
(24:38):
us that, I would be okay with it. That is
not what we were told. We were lied to Rachel
Mattow and others like her advanced the lie and told
us that if you got the shots, you would not
get the disease and you would not spread the.
Speaker 2 (24:52):
Disease to others. False and false. Upon further review, RFK
Junior gets in one lass, seeing right here.
Speaker 11 (25:02):
A lot of questions I want to get to before
we do. I want a director of viewers to our
website to go deeper on the science of vaccines as
well as mister Kennedy's positions on everything from immigration to
foreign policy.
Speaker 4 (25:12):
We have resources available.
Speaker 11 (25:13):
For you online and encourage you to check them out
at Newsnationnow dot com.
Speaker 10 (25:19):
All right, a big issue a children's health defense, and
you can find.
Speaker 4 (25:23):
The other side of this.
Speaker 3 (25:25):
Go to Children's Health Defense dot com and you can
find the other side of the story. What we were
told were lies by so called experts, and RFK Junior's
point is exactly right. You can find a study, you
can find a statistic, you can find evidence to support
any claim that you make. But when you say that
your experts are the right experts, but he can provide
(25:47):
experts from those very same schools who will say the
exact opposite.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
It's all about the experts you find.
Speaker 3 (25:53):
Doesn't make them any better than the other experts who
might disagree unless they bring to the table science, ti conclusions,
peer reviewed etc. That is why I'm entirely on board
with RFK Junior heading HHS, with doctor Marty McCary heading
up a portion of our health and oversight, whether it's
the CDC or the FDA or anything else. And j Bardicharia,
(26:17):
another doctor out of Stanford. These were the truth tellers
during COVID. These were credible sources in the scientific and
medical communities who were expatriated, who were exiled from those
who would buy into the narrative.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
As doctor Fauci.
Speaker 3 (26:36):
Declared from on high, those are the people I want
in charge of our health now because they're unafraid to
ask the uncomfortable questions that need to be asked. We
tried it their way, We tried it with quote unquote experts,
and they let us down, and they lied to us,
and they were complete unmitigated failures, and they destroyed the
public trust in our public health cess systems.
Speaker 2 (26:59):
And that's the track of this entire thing.
Speaker 3 (27:02):
One last time out, we're back wrapping it up with
your tax five seven, seven, three nine Ryan Schuley Live
on this Monday before Thanksgiving.
Speaker 12 (27:11):
And finally, I'll say this, President Trump has made it
clear we're going to prioritize public safety threats and national
security threats right out of the gate. Could they pose
the most dangerous country?
Speaker 2 (27:20):
What governor or mayor.
Speaker 12 (27:22):
Is doesn't want public safety trusts and national security threats
out of their neighborhoods, out of their communities. That's your
number one responsibility. So you can hate Trump all you want,
but you got to love your community more than you
hate President Trump.
Speaker 3 (27:35):
Aimen Tom Homan, the actual borders are who is going
to be visiting the border soon? According to Bill Malusion
of Fox News, and he asked the simple question there
that even Mike Johnston conceded when Mark Salinger, who I
give credit to for nine News, asked him points like
you know, what kind of people are you willing to deport?
Speaker 2 (27:55):
And he finally gave an answer on that part of it.
Speaker 13 (27:57):
I don't think that's what Denveright's for Americans do in
this context of all.
Speaker 9 (28:01):
What is your line where you say, yes, I support
these deportations and no I don't support these other ones.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Yeah, I think our line is clear.
Speaker 13 (28:09):
We think if you are a violent criminal that is
committing serious crimes like murder or rape and Denver, you
should be prosecuted to the folks end of the law
and you should be deported. We agree, we haven't accord.
That is exactly what Tom Holman is saying. That is
exactly what Ice is planning to do. It just hasn't
been done. And crime is.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
Running rampant in Aurora in the form of Trendy Aragua
taking over apartment complexes. We're getting word that trender Aragua
has a presence not only there but in Denver and
other American cities as well. Those who are affiliated with
that gang must be deported one hundred percent of them,
with zero percent room for error.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
Five seven seventy three nine.
Speaker 3 (28:52):
The text line, if I should have joined throughout Ryan,
you are an idiot with masks shoestring, Please explain how
I'm the idiot with masks, and please describe using scientific evidence,
how your mask works. You know how many posts I saw,
and I think Kelly as well, people that they had
followed all the rules, They've gotten all seventy seven shots,
(29:15):
they wore a mask everywhere and they still got COVID.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
Why did that happen? If masks work.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Also, if masks work, why do I have to wear
a mine for yours to work? If the shots work,
why do I have to get a shot for your
shot to work? When we go around during flu season
and there are people my father included with COPD and.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
He's seventy seven years old and he was a lifelong.
Speaker 3 (29:42):
Smoker, there's a lot of comorbidity stored up in my
own father, And yeah, he should get a flu shot.
Does he need me to get a flu shot for
his flu shot to work? This was never based on science.
That's my primary criticism.
Speaker 2 (29:57):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (29:58):
They drew conclusions that no scientific method or experimentation or
any kind of study could have revealed.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
At the time, they.
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Told us that we needed to believe on faith on
God that these so called vaccines worked. What they should
have done was told us what they knew and what
they didn't know at the time, that they knew it
or didn't know it. It sounds simple, but that's not
what happened. And you know it, we both lived through it.
(30:28):
The mainstream media had decided not to platform Trump, and
thus they don't have a platform anymore. That's a really
good way to sum it up, Texter. And they gave
up any pretense of journalism with the candidacy of Donald Trump,
and that dates way back to twenty sixteen. And they did,
if you notice, it was like pro wrestling. They did
a heel turn on Trump. They were amping him up,
(30:50):
they were platforming him when it was the primary, and
they were really scared. You know who they were really
scared of, Marco Rubio, Little Marco. That's who all the
Apple research which was being compiled for by the Hillary
Clinton campaign. They feared him as a young, kind of
vibrant Cuban American, first generation American from Florida, a state
(31:13):
rich in electoral votes. He was very cerebral, very well spoken.
They feared Marco Rubio a lot. Now in retrospect, it
was Trump all along who they should have feared the most,
but they didn't. And so the media kind of viewed
Trump as a joke. And again I would advise a
lot of you to watch the documentary that's.
Speaker 2 (31:33):
On Netflix about Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (31:35):
And it's not with any agenda, I don't think going in.
I think it's Trump an American dream. Kelly, have you
seen that yet.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
It's a series I have. You did watch that?
Speaker 4 (31:46):
I did?
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Okay, well, really good? What were your thoughts.
Speaker 7 (31:51):
You're going to learn a different side to him, but
you're also going to learn that he is the exact
same person that he was on this campaign trail.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
He's very genuine.
Speaker 3 (32:03):
Yeah, he's kind of what you see is what you get.
You might not like it, but it's the truth and
it's authentically him, and I think that's what I pulled
out of that documentary series.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
And it's an interesting watch.
Speaker 3 (32:11):
There's a lot of critical voices in there, people that
do not like Donald Trump, but a lot of them acknowledge,
you know, what is this magic, this mystery, this special
sauce of Trump? Why does it work? And you get
to that point as well. Roger Stone's in it. So
you've got a lot of different sides represented in the
presentation of that documentary and why he decided to run
for president.
Speaker 2 (32:32):
But yeah, the mainstream media, Mika and.
Speaker 3 (32:34):
Joe, the two that just went to visit him at
mar A Lago, they were funning over him.
Speaker 2 (32:40):
I remember this. I was there. I did not suffer
a brain injury in the interim.
Speaker 3 (32:43):
They loved him until they didn't and they stopped loving
him because they realized this is serious. He's really running
this time, Unlike nineteen eighty eight or nineteen ninety two
or two thousand or twenty twelve. He threatened to run
all of those times, and time it was like, well,
he's not really going to go through with it.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
He backs out.
Speaker 3 (33:03):
And that's what I thought initially when he came down
the escalator wash is he really running?
Speaker 2 (33:08):
I don't know. Well, I guess we'll wait and see.
Speaker 3 (33:10):
Had I truly did have a literal wait and see
approach on Donald Trump if he was actually running, And
I think when I knew he was serious, there was
a moment in one of the first debates with Jeb
Bush where Trump just went in on George W. Bush
in the Iraq War, and he drew groans and booze
from the crowd. He goes, that's because these aren't my donors,
these aren't these people aren't here to see me.
Speaker 2 (33:33):
They're paying Jeb Bush.
Speaker 3 (33:34):
And I'm like, Okay, One, this guy's very different, and
two he's serious.
Speaker 2 (33:39):
He's running.
Speaker 3 (33:40):
I still voted for Little Marco in the twenty sixteen primary,
but when it came down to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton,
that choice was easy and it was simple, and I
voted for Donald Trump all three times, sixteen, twenty and
twenty twenty four. It's an interesting character arc. Will continue
to follow it for the remainder of this week. Stay tuned.
The Dan Kaflis Show is next for tuning in today.
(34:00):
You could tune in each and every day right here
on six thirty K how
Speaker 12 (34:07):
M.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.