Power Hour | 17 July

This week on Power Hour, Trump calls Epstein Files a Democrat “hoax,” Whoopi attacks Obama over Democrat criticism, chaos in Spain after migrant gang attacks, Trump’s wild request to Zelensky, and Harry travels solo to Angola without Meghan.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
This Zie's Power Hour with Gabriello Power.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
Hello and welcome to Power Hour. I'm Gabriella Power. Thank
you for joining us. Coming up, Calls grow for Gallain
Maxwell to testify before Congress, as the world demands answers
over the Epstein files, Socialists around Ma'm Danny heads to DC,
the Obamas address divorce rumors, and chaos erupts in Spain

(00:28):
as migrant gangs clashed with locals. Joining us now is
Gabrielle Kichia, former Trump White House staffer. Gabrielle Thank you
so much for joining us. Let's start with the Jeffrey

(00:50):
Epstein files. There have been major developments in the past
few days. Gallain Maxwell's family broke their silence to insist
that she's innocent. As we know, Glen's having twenty years
in prison for sex trafficking offenses linked to Jeffrey Epstein,
and the family insists that Gallaine is innocent and did
not receive a fair trial. But it's interesting because this,
of course comes at a time where there is a

(01:11):
huge amount of interest in the case. After Attorney General
Pam Bondi botched the handling of this publicly putting out
a memo shutting down theories of a client list which
no one really buys, and there are calls for Gallaine
Maxwell to testify to Congress about Epstein. Tim Burchett formally
called on oversight Shair James Comer to allow Gallaine Maxwell

(01:32):
to testify and speak of Mike Johnson says that he
supports Gallaine Maxwell testifying.

Speaker 3 (01:38):
I'm for transparency. We're intellectually consistent in this look. Reagan
used to tell us we should trust the American people.

Speaker 1 (01:44):
I believe in that.

Speaker 3 (01:44):
Prince well, I know President Trump does as well, and
I trust him. I mean, he put together a team
of his choosing and they're doing a great job. It's
a very delicate subject, but we should we should put
everything out there and let.

Speaker 1 (01:55):
The people decide it.

Speaker 3 (01:56):
I mean, the White House and the White House team
are private to facts that I don't know well, I mean,
this isn't my lane. Haven't been involved in that. But
I agree with the sentiment that we need to we
need to put it out there. And and you know,
Pam BONDI I don't know when she originally made the statement.
I think she was talking about documents as I understood it,
that they were on her desk. I don't know that
she was specific about a list or whatever, but she

(02:18):
needs to come forward and explain that to everybody. I
like Pam, I mean, I think she's done a good job.
We need the dj focusing on the major priorities. So
let's get this thing resolved so that they can deal
with violent crime and public safety and election integrity and
going after ActBlue and the things that the president is
most concerned about as we are.

Speaker 2 (02:36):
Gabrielle, what are your thoughts on this? Would you support
Glenn Maxwell test to find to congos if.

Speaker 4 (02:41):
That means that more information is coming out. I mean,
I do agree with you, Gabrielle, in the sense that, yeah,
this this rollout was absolutely botch if you just look
at even what has happened in recent time. We were
shown a binder that said Phase one, that and of
itself implies that there are more than one phases. We
haven't seen that, of course. You know, whether you want

(03:02):
to say that this is the deep state, that this
was a hoax, you know, I know the administration kind
of was trying to catalog it as something as to
the Russia hoax and a few other things that, of
course we know were botched and it's just simply not true.
But all in all, when those elements, say the Hunter
Biden laptop or the Russia hoax came out, the information

(03:23):
came out, it supported the notion that these things were
clear issues, and that was something that the base and
then even people that were on the left kind of
coming on over into the base of the Republican Party,
were able to join in on. And I would say
the Epstein files a list whatever you want to call it,
the details surrounding the Epstein and whoever is involved. That

(03:45):
was something that was expressed during the campaign trail, it
was something talked about after the first term, and all
in all, I think most of the base is just
looking for similar to the Hunter Biden laptop. I mean,
Marco Pulla put out a full book of all the
details that they could get their hands on when it
came to the Hunter Biding laptop, or say even in

(04:07):
the Russia hoax, all the sound bites coming from the
DOJ themselves, Comy having no issue with saying that he
acted in bad faith in his job at the DOJ.
There is so much information for those two issues. So
if you want to say that this is lumped in
which the administration has said, you know this is kind
of on the same level, then all right, let's have

(04:27):
that info. By no means do I think Maxwell is
innocent or that Epstein is innocent. However, more information improving
that point, I say, why the heck not.

Speaker 2 (04:39):
Yeah, I completely agree with you and Donald Trump. Keepe's
getting asked about this, and the more Hay shots it down,
the more people are going to ask.

Speaker 5 (04:46):
Questions and demand answers.

Speaker 2 (04:47):
He posted on truth Social today, calling it a scam
and a horx. He said, my past supporters have brought
into this bass hook Line and Sinka. But Donald Trump
has spoken again about this because it keeps getting asked
by reporters.

Speaker 5 (05:00):
He's trying to shut it down.

Speaker 2 (05:01):
But he did say that he believes all credible files
should be released.

Speaker 6 (05:06):
But I don't understand why the Jeffrey Epstein case would
be of interest to anybody. It's pretty boring stuff. It's sorted,
but it's boring, and I don't understand why it keeps going.
I think really only pretty bad people, including.

Speaker 1 (05:22):
Fagdus, want to keep something like like that going.

Speaker 6 (05:25):
But credible information let them give it. Anything that's credible.
I would say let them have it.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
It seems as though he's losing control of this story
because he's comparing the Epstein list to other deep state hoaxes.
But as you pointed out, we got plenty of evidence
and information to get to the bottom of this and
get to the bottom of the truth. For that to
be revealed, people on both sides, as you say, want answers.
It's what the American people have been promised, and this

(05:52):
administration has really failed to deliver up.

Speaker 5 (05:55):
It's interesting.

Speaker 2 (05:55):
Attorney General hit back at reporters when she was asked
about the tensions between herself and Dan Bongino.

Speaker 5 (06:02):
This is her response.

Speaker 1 (06:04):
Is there a disruption of this leadership of POJ and
the FBI frout your relationship with Dan Bongino that is
affecting the operations.

Speaker 7 (06:13):
No, I'm not going to talk about personnel matters.

Speaker 8 (06:15):
No.

Speaker 7 (06:15):
I was with Director of PTEL all morning, and we
are committed to keeping America safe, making America safe, working
with our incredible partners at DEA, FBI, atf US Marshals
to do everything we can to make America safe. And
that's what we're focused on. And today we're focused on

(06:35):
protecting our kids and I would ask all of you
when you leave, go look at that wall outside right
outside this room, of all the fentanyl deaths, all the
faces of fentanyl that you, guys, you have done an
amazing job putting up.

Speaker 2 (06:50):
She didn't say Dan Bongino's name there. She just referred
to cash Pateel. What are you hearing of what's going
on behind closed doors? Is everyone still fighting?

Speaker 9 (06:59):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (07:00):
I mean, at the end of the day, what appears
to be one of the bigger issues when it comes
to the interconnections of DC. Is that different than any
other administration we've seen before. We're seeing a lot of
loyalists be in these positions in the government, and it's
no secret that a lot of these individuals are also

(07:21):
close friends, even with the individuals that have say large
X accounts that also are you know, talking heads or
journalists or commentators on television. So another piece of this
puzzle is that it appears that the administration is still
operating and confiding in the ways that these individuals would

(07:42):
have before they got into office, and they're quickly learning
that anything that they really say could very easily be
put on display online, whether for good nature or for
bad nature. So I don't think it doesn't appear to
me that this Dan bond Gino Pam Bondi hardline between
the two of them right now, this contention is playing

(08:03):
made up. There's a lot of credible individuals that are
very close to both separately and together actually, that have
reported on the same thing. So I think it's just
a learning lesson for them all, truly that what you
say media in a sense, media matters, right, what you
do say to your pals, whether it's the people on

(08:23):
TV or the people that have large accounts on social media,
your words are going to be heard, whether you were
intending for them to be or not. And so for
something like this, especially when again, this is something an
issue that both the base and individuals that maybe necessarily
didn't even jump on the mega train from the get

(08:45):
want answers to absolutely this is where kind of culture
and politics collide. So there's no hiding in this sense,
and she's got a lot of work to do to
kind of you know, make right or wrong bond Gino.
At the same time too, I think that's where the
frustrations come from, because his show highlighted a lot prior
to him joining in into the government role. He's in

(09:06):
was a huge highlight about Epstein, and so again Trump
himself too, really having to come face to face with
something that's the very one of the very few times
where the administration kind of makes a hiccup that just
simply can't be ignored. They do a lot, of course correcting,
and they did it a lot in the first term,
but this is just one of those things you just

(09:27):
can't let it go. This transcends beyond politics and more
of a bigger question of you know, does the government
kind of think we're stupid and we're just going to
be okay with a memo being dropped on the fourth
of July weekend. I mean that even of itself, whether
you want to say that there was nothing in this
and you know, we can go through semantics, talk about

(09:47):
Epstein's history, talk about what the deal was with that,
whether it's justifiable or not that video being doctored or
having the minutes.

Speaker 5 (09:56):
Being worked about that video.

Speaker 2 (09:58):
Why it is reporting that the Jeffrey epstream prison video
that was recently released by the DOJA had almost three
minutes cut out, not one minute that was originally reported.
So this was the only functioning camera near Jeffrey Epstein's
prison cell the night before he died, and the video
was released last week as part of the Trump administration's

(10:19):
commitment to fully investigate Epstein's death. But this just raised
more questions about how the footage was edited.

Speaker 5 (10:27):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (10:27):
Absolutely, just looking at the footage that they put out
and you know, even comparing it to say the image,
the one sole image that was put out of the
Epstein cell back when he allegedly committed suicide, the footage
doesn't appear to reflect that photo that came out years prior.
So one is factual, one is not or neither true

(10:49):
or you know what's going on there. I think that
just adds an extra element of more questions that just
need to be answered. And there is this little bit
of fear rate of if the government gives you more
answers and does there become an uproar and the public
handle the truth? But at some point we are almost
so desensitized from the truth. We spent how many years

(11:12):
in our country accepting what our higher individuals, our government
officials have told us. And that was the whole point
in the birth of the MAGA movement. Yes, Trump, where's
the maga hat? Quite literally? And you know physically and
you know figuratively, But there is an America after Trump,
and so I think we almost got comfortable in not

(11:34):
asking questions and just having more trust in these people
of power. So to answer that question, and maybe you know,
water down a little bit more, is that it's sure
a good thing. Maybe they tried to attempt to give
us some footage, but it isn't impure real. We have
a liability and a right to ask that question. We
didn't forfeit it just because we voted for President Trump
and trust him and his administration do a good job.

(11:56):
They also need to trust us to keep them honest.
It's two ways here, and that's a really important element
that we just can't let up on, no matter what
information is then being given on to us. And again,
you know, the justification from Pam Bindy of why that
those minutes would be not there, it didn't seem to

(12:17):
add up. And again she should be able to answer
that question once more, Garriella. So you know, you focusing
on it, I think is the right answer here.

Speaker 2 (12:24):
We all are yeah, absolutely, Look, we can be Trump
supporters and still demand answers. Let's turn to what is
another huge scandal Biden's autopen. The White House is investigating
former President Joe Biden's use of the autopen and tens
of thousands of documents are being reviewed. This story is
just wild. The autopen was used to sign pardons, including

(12:45):
preemptive pardons for members of Joe Biden's family also doctor
Anthony Fauci. The only one that happened to be signed
by hand appears to be for Hunter Biden, which he
said he would not do, and in his final weeks
in office, Biden grad did clemency and pond and moule
than at fifteen hundred people in what the White House
described at the time as the largest single day act.

Speaker 5 (13:09):
Where is this investigation going to go?

Speaker 4 (13:12):
Oh, well, it shouldn't stop. I can tell you that much.
I actually when I worked at the White House, I
had several roles, but one of my final official roles
over at the White House was one of which had
autopen privileges. So I know the process very well, and
I can tell you that there are individuals. There are
two offices that are completely apolitical that stay between each administration.

(13:35):
One is the Executive Clerk's office. They're the ones that
handle from start to finish every single thing the president signs.
And then the other element, the other office is the
actual Office of Records Management that manned physically mans the autopen.
Both of those offices are still intact. They have they
maintained and are responsible for all the historical elements of

(13:57):
the presidential executive power. They know who is utilizing the
autopen because once the whole process is delegated in writing
and so it would begin that process by the staff secretary,
And when the staff secretary starts an email thread, it

(14:17):
has the Executive Clerk's office following the whole entire process,
with the Office of General Counsel being the White House
lawyers and any other entities that need to be involved
utilizing Joe Biden in this case, Joe Biden's signature. The
very last action item in that email chain is now.
It begins with the staff secretary and it ends with
the staff secretary. The staff secretary is saying ready for

(14:39):
ap AP mean meeting autopen. The Executive clerk takes the document,
produces it, prints it off on their own computer with
nice White House bond paper, and walks all the way
up to the highest floor, the fifth floor over at
the Eisenhower executive building and hands it on over present,
doesn't leave, hands it on over to records management where
they turn on the autopen. And the clerk also signed

(15:04):
their name on paper, so it's being cataloged as well
in writing and in email. Who is touching the autopen,
who is part of this process? And I mentioned that
and just kind of a watered down version of exactly
how that works is because the last that we heard
right was from GOP Oversight calling in near A Tanden

(15:25):
the second of three staff secretaries. And the staff secretary
position in general is a very un sexy term, but
it actually is one of the most important, most confidential
roles at the White House. People don't really recognize that.
It's revered as the nucleus of the administration, and so
near A Tanden being in that position, and then the

(15:46):
third person being Stephanie Feldman, who took over for her
near A Tandin was brought in by GOP oversight recently
and said point blank period under oath, perjuring herself saying
I don't know who authorized me to authorize on Biden's
behalf the auto pen. Then all of a sudden, this
New York Times article comes out and Joe Biden says,

(16:07):
it was me. It was me, and it was my
chief of staff. And so now that we're starting to
hear this what overall cover up which appears to be
in patterned with politics in Washington, DC. But now you
have all three of these people, Biden himself him saying
his chief of staff was also involved in these pardons,

(16:28):
that being Jeff Zionce. And then again, as I mentioned,
the staff secretary is all very guilty in this. And
I point that out because you say, what's left of this?
Well for the autopen in the Constitution Section two, Articles two,
Section two, it says that pardons and clemencies are non delegible.

(16:48):
So that means that that can't that power is not
being transferred to Eddie individual for Joe Biden to say,
and in this New York Times article he thinks he's
doing a good thing, covering his basis saying I proved
these things, but he also said that he was delegating
Jeff Zience, the chief of staff, to then put that
pressure on to the staff secretaries and then by default

(17:10):
those two offices that I say, maintain that process of
actually executing the autopen. So this is a huge mess.
Not to mention, as I said earlier, that this is
this is all catalog in writing. That's the standard operating
procedure for autopen always. No one is ever utilizing that
thing unless they have clearance. So what's the right direction here?

(17:31):
The right direction is for GOP oversight if they're serious,
and it appears that they are to continue working with
National Archives, because between National Archives and the actual servers
at the White House under White House Communications Agency, all
that information is right there because you still have people
that were in prior administrations to include the Biden administration,

(17:51):
in those two offices I mentioned still there at the
White House that could tell you everything. And if they
don't tell you everything, it's all in the email. And
if it's not in the meal, that in and of
itself is guilt by old mission because it needs to
be cataloged when the utopen is utilized in place of
a sitting present exercising a physical signature. So that's what

(18:13):
I have to say about that. I know it's a lot,
but I did work closely with this.

Speaker 2 (18:17):
No, we appreciate it. It just shows it's absolutely unbelievable.
I do want to talk to you about Hunter Biden
because he has spoken out weighing in rather on why
the Democrats lost the election, and he says it's because
of the democrats disloyalty to his father. He went on
Jamie Harrison's podcast and said, we lost the last election

(18:38):
because we did not remain loyal to the leader of
the party. And he went on to say that we
had the advantage of an incredibly successful administration and the
Democratic Party literally melted down. Wow, that is what Hunter
Biden had to say. So nothing to do with the
cover up of Biden's decline, the open borders, the gas
lighting from the Democrats, or even the scandal about Hunter

(19:00):
himself and the Hunt of biden laptop and the evidence
of influence pedaling. I mean, Gabrielle, what do you make
of what Hunt of Biden's had to say.

Speaker 4 (19:09):
I'm trying very hard not to laugh because it's not
a funny matter, but it kind of is in the
sense of even just based off the things that you
listened out, it's like, can you be more tone deaf?
But there is a silver lining here. I never thought
that I'd be like, thank you, Hunter Biden, But Hunter
Biden saying all that just proved not that we needed
any more proof of what exactly happened with the Democrats

(19:30):
in the last election, where they stole the votes of
their own delegates and their own constituents and just installed
Kamala Harris. But he just said exactly what we all
were thinking. The Democrats turned on Joe Biden and kicked
him out so he couldn't run for president again. Yeah,
I think it's crazy. He thought that Joe Biden would
do great, continuing on yet again, that's insane. But what's

(19:53):
more insane is that he has no issue in the
name of defending his father saying, yes, the deep state
is real here and they kicked out my dad. Boy,
I wish they did it, because he would have done
a great job. All of that is I can't even
wrap my head around it. I truly cannot.

Speaker 2 (20:09):
Finally, Gabrielle, We've got to get to one more topic
before I let you go. The Obamas have addressed divorce rumors.
They address speculation around their marriage and Michelle Obama's podcast,
Let's take a look at this.

Speaker 1 (20:20):
Wait, you guys like each other?

Speaker 10 (20:22):
Oh?

Speaker 4 (20:23):
Yeah, really?

Speaker 5 (20:25):
The rumor meal is my husband, y'all. Now, don't start.

Speaker 11 (20:34):
I can't it's so nice to have you both in
the same room, I know.

Speaker 12 (20:42):
Because when we aren't, folks think we're divorced.

Speaker 2 (20:45):
It's interesting they've barely been seen together in months, and
there of course joking saying, you know, I was touch
and go for a moment, but there's often a lot
of truths in some jokes.

Speaker 4 (20:58):
Oh yeah, Gabriela, I mean, they're just trying to gaslight us.

Speaker 10 (21:01):
It does.

Speaker 4 (21:02):
This is outside of politics. They're just trying to gaslight
their public perception. And honestly not that I gosh, you're
gonna make me say a bunch of things I never
thought I would say, like thank you undro Biding for
being honest, or oh boy, I feel bad for Obama,
but I mean for his relationship.

Speaker 1 (21:17):
My gosh.

Speaker 4 (21:17):
This actually reminds me so much of Will Smith and
Jada Smith and kind of just the you know, the
lack of wanting to protect a marriage or you know,
maybe even just that you say, the perception. They admitted
that the perception of their marriage isn't positive, and as
a joint, cohesive couple, you would imagine that they would

(21:37):
take it a heck of a lot more serious, especially
representing the country for such a long time and being
that quote unquote pillar of hope, you know, putting it
in their words, and this looks quite hopeless unfortunately. And
I don't you know, champion broken marriages by any means,
but they're just kind of it's just silly. It's like
a Megan Markle type of situation, or like I said,

(21:58):
the Will Smith couple paradox. I don't like to be
a part of it. And this is this is not
fooling anybody, surely not following me.

Speaker 2 (22:07):
So Gatrial Kochia, thank you so much for your time.
So great to speak to you here in Power Hour.

Speaker 4 (22:13):
Thank you appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (22:20):
It's time for medium meltdowns, and this time it's former
President Barack Obama, leaving leftist media hosts in a spin.
Barack Obama delivered a blunt message to Democrats last week.

Speaker 5 (22:32):
Telling them to tough enough.

Speaker 12 (22:34):
He told donors this over the weekend. Quote I think
it's going to require a little bit less naval gazing
and a little less whining and being in fetal positions,
Obama set Grinda Excerpts of his remarks exclusively obtained by CNN,
And it's going to require Democrats to just toughen up.

Speaker 2 (22:54):
Sounded like that was pretty painful for the scene and
reporter to get through that. So Barack Obama lectures the Democrats,
telling them to tough enough. Hear the meltdown from the
views that whoopee gold bug.

Speaker 13 (23:05):
Democrats laying back, this has been about y'all. This has
been about y'all because their messaging was always the same.
Democrats have been angry at what this man tried to
do the last time. They've been angry this time.

Speaker 1 (23:23):
So I with much due.

Speaker 13 (23:25):
Respect to you both, I believe you are pointing the
finger at the wrong person when you say democrats.

Speaker 12 (23:32):
Are you delineating between voters and elected officials?

Speaker 2 (23:35):
Yes, I am whoopee taking his message a little personally.

Speaker 12 (23:40):
I agree voters are very impassioned voters.

Speaker 13 (23:43):
And when you say Democrats, he's talking to us saying
our messaging is bad, and I'm saying, no, our messaging
has not been bad because people have been out.

Speaker 5 (23:54):
She's not happy.

Speaker 2 (23:55):
But this reminds me of when Obama lectured men, accusing
them of being said for not wanting to vote for
Kamala Harris.

Speaker 8 (24:03):
They're coming up with all kinds of reasons and excuses.
I've got a problem with that because part of.

Speaker 14 (24:14):
It makes me think I'm speaking to men directly. Part
of it makes me think that, well, you just aren't
feeling the idea of having a woman as president, and
you're coming up with other alternatives and other reasons for them.

Speaker 1 (24:31):
That's not exciting, That's not it. This shouldn't even be
a question.

Speaker 2 (24:39):
For some reason, this just keeps backfiring for Barack Obama.
But the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon has run with
Obama's lecture, doing a skit on the quality list of
Democrats that could potentially step up.

Speaker 11 (24:52):
And besides, look, I'm not sure America is ready for
a president named Gavin Gabvin gabbling?

Speaker 9 (24:59):
Then, and who do you think is tough enough to
save the Democrat?

Speaker 11 (25:02):
Well, at this point you got to go with you
got to go with the popular vote. So right now
the front runners are Hudder from Love Island.

Speaker 1 (25:14):
Or a Labo bu Dog. That's enough, President Obama.

Speaker 2 (25:19):
Everybody joining us now from New Jersey is broadcast and
commentated Carmine Saba Cammin, thank you so much for joining us.
Barack Obama has lectured the Democrats and it didn't work.
What did you make of will be goldbugs tantrum?

Speaker 9 (25:39):
What was it?

Speaker 1 (25:40):
Tantrum, wasn't it. I'm not surprised by this. I was
surprised to see her take sides against President Obama for
one of the first times since I followed President Obama.
He was actually spot on what he's saying, which is,
you can't have a party, you can't have victory and
elections if your only argument is, hey, we're not Trump,
we're angry at Trump, and let's go protest and riot

(26:03):
and do all these things. And then what Beg Goldberg's
argument to that was, well, you know, we're doing our job.
We're out there protesting, and don't you know, how dare you?
This is y'all's fault. This is y'all's fault, meaning him
and Mark Cuban, And I don't see how it's their fault.
I think they followed Obama's advice. They might have had
a chance, and you know, it was an absolute meltdown

(26:24):
on the air. But you know, listen, you could fit
with what Begldberg knows about politics in a thimble and
have a room. This is a woman who put me
Jill Biden should be the surgeon general because she's a
great doctor. She's a doctor of education, you know, so
she doesn't know much of anything, but she knows how
to be loud and she nailed that. And you know what, listen,

(26:45):
let the Democrats eat their own I think it's lovely.

Speaker 2 (26:47):
And businessman and TV personality Mark Cuban went on Pod
Saves America. He had this message for the Democrats.

Speaker 15 (26:54):
It's just Trump sucks. That's the underlying, you know, thought
of everything the Democrats do. Trump socks. Trump says, you know,
the sky is blue, Trump socks.

Speaker 9 (27:06):
You can't.

Speaker 15 (27:07):
That's not the way to win. It's just not because
it's not about Trump. It's about the people of the
United States of America and what's good for them and
how do you get them to a place where they're
in a better position and it's less stressful for them, a.

Speaker 5 (27:21):
Bit of common sense.

Speaker 2 (27:22):
Instead of being so obsessed with Donald Trump, they could
actually come up with positive policies to help America get
They're pouring their energy into fighting ice keeping men in
women's sports. But speaking of Democrats, let's talk about Gavin Newsom,
California's governor. He's on a media blitz at the moment,
and he had a disastrous appearance on The Sewan Ryan Show,

(27:42):
he was unable to answer when he was asked if
he believed that eight years old was just too young
to transition.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
What about for your values?

Speaker 9 (27:51):
I mean, is eight years old too young?

Speaker 16 (27:54):
Yeah?

Speaker 10 (27:54):
I mean, look now that I have a nine year old,
it just became nine. Come on, man, I get it.
So those are legit. You know, it's interesting just the
issue of age.

Speaker 1 (28:09):
I haven't.

Speaker 10 (28:11):
I'm as I and there's someone that's been so focused
on equality broadly LGBT rights, particularly gay marriage. The trans
issue for me is also novel. It's over the last
few years. I'm trying to understand as much as anyone else,
the whole pronoun thing. Trying to understand all of that.

Speaker 1 (28:34):
Well, you know that was like the hell, I mean,
all that stuff.

Speaker 5 (28:37):
I get it comin. It's so awkward to watch.

Speaker 1 (28:42):
I think you're in a bad situation going into twenty
twenty eight if you want to be the Democrat nominee
for president and you can't say unequivocally eight year olds
should not have gender transition. You know, Gabrielle, When I
was eight, I watched one hundred and one Dalmatians. My
niece and I went to the movie. We watched one
hundred and one Dalmatians. We came home. We were convinced

(29:04):
we were Dalmatians. And you know, my mom didn't get
us tails and fur coach. So I think, you know,
at eight years old, you're convinced of a lot of things.
And I think this it's psychotic. It's actually psychotic. And listen,
I pray he stays on this road. Please, Democrats, please
stay on Mandami, stay on this Gavin Newsom, stay on

(29:26):
these eighty twenty issues that nobody agrees that you want.
We'll keep the White House forever. They've apparently learned nothing,
nothing at all, and I'm all for it.

Speaker 2 (29:37):
Let's talk about ma'm Dannie. He's the front runner for
New York City mayor. Socialists around Ma'm Danny, and he's
made it clear he's not a fan of capitalism. He's
refused to recognize Israel's right to exist. He's come under
fire for his campaign policy document that calls for shifting
the city's tax burden onto richer and whiter neighborhoods. And
now in Minneapolis rather the Democrats are running Omar Fatta

(30:00):
for mayor, and he wants rent freezers. He wants to
defund the police, and he wants to of course Trump
prove the city, but he also wants to bridge the
gap between Minneapolis and Somalia.

Speaker 5 (30:11):
Take a look at this. We should meet for him.

Speaker 7 (30:14):
I pray for him and prayer for him.

Speaker 17 (30:17):
I understand that our some other communities are all connected
to each other here in Minnesota and back home, and
ask for your support. There's always been a link between
our community here as well as back home, and I'm
running to bridge that gap and unite all of us
and represent all of us, because when we succeed here,

(30:38):
we succeed everywhere. And I'm hoping to do that.

Speaker 5 (30:41):
Just like Abdrazak and Charlah.

Speaker 2 (30:43):
Looking at ma'm Danny and Omar Fata, they are radical,
far left, you know, ma'am. Danny has been in DC
today meeting with Democratic lawmakers to talk about the lessons
from his surprise win out.

Speaker 5 (30:54):
There with AOC.

Speaker 2 (30:56):
But this is really putting the spotlight on the future
direction of the Demo Party, don't you think.

Speaker 1 (31:02):
Oh boy, yes, and I love it.

Speaker 6 (31:05):
I love it.

Speaker 1 (31:06):
I think this is fantastic. I've said it before, I'll
say it again. Democrats are doing our work for us.
No matter what mistakes the Republicans make, and we've made
some mistakes since January twentieth, don't get me wrong, But man,
let's have this. Let's finally, once and for all, have
this out in twenty twenty eight. In twenty twenty eight,

(31:27):
communism first capitalism because calling these people democrats, socialists are socialists,
it's actually it actually undermines, it lessens, it softens what
they actually are. What they actually are is communists. When
you're talking about seizing private property in the form of
rental units, you know, apartment buildings, when you're talking about

(31:49):
government run grocery stores, you are talking about communism. But
it's baby steps communism. Communism always comes to you in
baby steps. The first up is class warfare. Well, the
Democrats have protected that if you're a successful person, you're evil.
If you're a poor person, then you're righteous. And so

(32:09):
they've and they've they've convinced people who are struggling, the
middle class and whatever, that people who have are the
reason they don't have. And once you can convince them
of that, then communism starts to look more attractive. However,
I think these ideas are so radical. I believe firmly
in my heart, America will reject them. That doesn't mean

(32:31):
that places like Minneapolis won't accept them, places like New
York City won't accept them. I think, and this is
going to shock people. As much as I don't want
Mandomi to win, I believe that him winning in New
York City would be the best thing that could happen
for capitalism because it's the biggest, most popular city in

(32:54):
the world. It is the beacon of capitalism in the globe.
You got War, you got Fifth Avenue, you got you know,
all the places, so much commerce goes on there. If
you can show the failure of capitalism in New York City,
you might be able to drive a stake through the
heart of this movement. Because if you don't, this has

(33:15):
taken over the Democrat Party. There's going to be a time,
believe it or not. I tell my Republican friends this
all the time. There's going to be a time where
you guys sit there and say, oh, man, I wish
we had Nancy Pelosi back. That's how bad these people are.

Speaker 2 (33:29):
Well, there you go that says something, doesn't it. I
want to talk to you about what's happening in Spain.
Because the streets of Spain have turned into chaos. Locals
are clashing with migrant gang members. Let's just take a
look at what's unfolded.

Speaker 6 (34:20):
Now.

Speaker 5 (34:20):
This all kicked off after.

Speaker 2 (34:22):
An elderly man was randomly and brutally beaten up by
three members of an African gang on Saturday, and this
sparked outrage in the community. Now we're seeing violent clashes
play out between migrant gangs and locals. Some of the
vision is confronting, including vision of protesters wearing masks and
shooting fireworks in the streets. Multiple people have been arrested

(34:56):
after many nights of violence. Now, can I get your
reaction into what's been unfolding here?

Speaker 1 (35:03):
Sadly, not surprised. The sixty eight year old man gets
attacked by a gang of migrants and the police are
cracking down. They're cracking down, but they're cracking down on
the people who are tired, who are fed up with
their country being invaded. I feel for Europe, and I
have a lot of fear for Europe because I believe
Europe has laid down. They have laid down without a fight.

(35:28):
I've never seen in the history I've studied history, I've
never heard of a continent being taken over by inviting
the invaders in. Could you imagine they invited the huns
in back in the ancient times that just come in, guys,
come in to tell it. It's okay, what's happening here?
You can't and then, you know, look politically correct or not,

(35:51):
you cannot take people from the third world stick them
in the first world countries and say okay, go ahead.
There's no assimilation, there's nothing, and you have these random
acts of violence, and then the police cracked down on
the people who are fed up. Look, I'm pro immigration.
I'm an American, My family are immigrants. I believe in

(36:12):
immigration legally and through assimilation. And that's not what's happening here.
What we have is just a flood of people who
are fundamentally changing what it means to be European. European.
Unlike the United States, the United States is built on multiculturalism.
Europe wasn't built that way. Europe had people who are

(36:35):
specifically homogeneous to these regions. They have the same culture,
they have the same you know things that they do,
the same religious beliefs, and you just shoved millions of
people in and not only did you shove them in
without any assimilation, but you're giving them preferential treatment. It's
not just Spain, it's all across Europe. What's happening in Spain,

(37:00):
it's just an example of what's been happening in Europe.
The fact that they're arresting people on what they want
to call the far rate and I like to call
the common sense, but they call it the far rate
because that sounds dangerous. They're arresting those people who finally saying, look,
we're that up. We're not racists, we're not haters, but
we want safety in our own country. It's absolutely absurd.

(37:25):
It's absurd what's happening there.

Speaker 2 (37:27):
Well, a legal migration to Spain has increased by eighty
two percent in the last three years.

Speaker 5 (37:32):
And it's interesting to note how this is playing out
in the media.

Speaker 2 (37:35):
It's not getting all that much attention and the articles
that I have been saying, look at the New York
Times and it's police arrest far right leader after anti
immigration riots in Spanish in the Spanish town. I mean,
what's your assessment of the media's role in this.

Speaker 1 (37:52):
Media The media is the biggest purveyors of I can't
say that word on TV, but nonsense. In the whole
Western hemisphere and in the world, the media likes to
cultivate the narrative. If you control the narrative, you control
the message. And if you control the message, you control
the people. So you say far right, these anti immigrant

(38:12):
protesters have been arrested, and then they're far right, and
they're again far right. You know that harkens back to
World War two and Germany and things like that, and
that gets people scared. That's not what these people are.
These are people that want to protect their country. They
want to protect Spain has a beautiful and rich history.
It is a beautiful country. It is. My nephew is

(38:34):
just in Italy and he's telling me. He's like, it's
nothing like I mean, you've been going there for decades.
He's like, it's you could see the change. It's not
the Italy we know. And it's the same thing happening
in Spain. And it's such a culture shock, and it's
happening so fast that it's it's just dangerous. And the
media plays the biggest role in this, because the media

(38:56):
wants you to feel guilty for being somebody who wants
the protect your country. And so when the New York
Times puts out an article like that, that's not just
about Spain. Believe me, it's also about America. It's also
about saying it's the bad guys who don't want these immigrants.
And by the way, they always say immigrants, they never
say illegal immigrants. They mix them. The immigrants and illegal

(39:17):
immigrants to them are the same thing. But to us
on the right, it's not the same thing. We welcome
legal immigrants and no. So the media is playing a
horrible role in this. But I will say they're playing
the role that they've been playing for years. This is
what the media does. So to that end, they're being
very successful because they're doing what it.

Speaker 7 (39:37):
Is they do.

Speaker 2 (39:39):
Broadcaster and commentator Calming Saber, thank you so much for
joining us on Power Hour. Really great to get your thoughts,
appreciate it. Joining us now is Adam Crichton, chief economist
at the IPA. Adam, great to see you again. Let's
start with what's happening here in Australia. And it hasn't
been a good week for the Labour government after Treasure

(40:00):
accidentally released a sacred document revealing it's advice to the
government that called for taxes to be raised and spending
to be cut. You have some advice for the treasurer,
and it includes looking to this guy, Argentina's president, Javier Malay.

Speaker 18 (40:16):
Ga ra vis Ira, nil A, Rombero, Leo ave Minortracorimola,
Rea el Morello, Standra, Matin, Sewin and Pimpoo Sewin and

(40:45):
Gimpolis Severin and Diempo Felice.

Speaker 2 (40:48):
It's interesting, Adam, you've written about how he's managed to
revive the country's economy by doing the opposite of what
some of the world's top economists were advising.

Speaker 5 (40:57):
Talk to us about why we should be looking to
malay Yeah.

Speaker 19 (41:00):
Look, certainly, it's been an incredible success. He was elected
roughly two years ago, and as you said, all these
eminent economists said it was going to be a disaster
to cut regulations, to cut spending, et cetera, et cetera,
and it's turned out.

Speaker 9 (41:11):
To be quite the contrary.

Speaker 19 (41:12):
The inflation rate in you know, in this country, which
had had rates of inflation of hundreds of percent basically
for years, is now down at about forty percent over
the last twelve months. But over the last just two
months it slowed to one percent a month, which is
really just an extraordinary achievement of this government because it
really is the biggest the biggest economic cancer really is
extremely high rates of inflation.

Speaker 9 (41:33):
And he's killed those.

Speaker 19 (41:34):
But at the same time you've got the economy growing
seven point six percent i think over the year in
the most recent quarter, which is extremely fast and of course,
unlike Australia that's not built on people coming from overseas,
that's actually genuine growth. He's had a budget surplus and
you know, one of the really interesting anecdotes, he's really
slashed a lot of regulation and in the capital city

(41:56):
Woners areas, he slashed all of the rent control buildings
and of course everyone said, oh no, you know, rents
are going to skyrocket, this is going to be terrible
for the poor.

Speaker 9 (42:03):
But actually what happened the supply of rental housing.

Speaker 19 (42:06):
Actually tripled because a lot of people brought their houses
onto the market and so rents actually felt so just
an extraordinary outcome really all around. It's a great achievement
and you don't see it kind of written up much
in the press, and that's why I decided to do
my column on it.

Speaker 2 (42:21):
No, well, we enjoyed it absolutely, it's fascinating what's happening there.
So what can we actually expect to come out of
this roundtable in August?

Speaker 5 (42:29):
Do you think that'd be looking to Malaia. I doubt
that they will.

Speaker 10 (42:33):
No.

Speaker 19 (42:33):
No, Look, I mean was that was partly a tongue
in cheek recommendation, because let's be frank, this is a
government that's addicted to spending and regulation and I don't
think it has the future prosperity of this nashing of
this nation very high on its priority list, and so
I'm expecting more tax proposals and very little on the
spending side in terms of restraint.

Speaker 9 (42:52):
You know, we've had the fastest growth in spending since
the Whitlam news at the federal level. That's quite extraordinary.

Speaker 19 (42:57):
And even with bracket creep, and even with this new
superinnuation tax, that's still not enough extra money. They're going
to have to find more or the budget deficit will
just keep growing. It's it's really a pretty shameful exercise.
And also the other point is, you know, you're a
second term government, surely you have some agenda of your
own and you don't need to have a round table
to ask people. So you know, I just think that's

(43:19):
someone embarrassing. You know, they really don't know what they're doing.
And I suspect that that leak you mentioned, I mean,
maybe it wasn't an accident and they just wanted to get,
you know, further discussion of taxing preeces out there in
the media because that that leak document did say that
raising taxes was one of the options.

Speaker 9 (43:38):
And I do worry that will be the only option.
So let's see what happens. Let's hope, but I'm rather pessimistic.

Speaker 2 (43:44):
Yeah, that's interesting. Maybe it wasn't an accident. To kind
of soften the blow, Let's look to the US. Donald
Trump reportedly drafted a letter to fire Federal Reserve chaired
your own Pal. According to The New York Times, the
US President discussed whether or not to dismiss him with
White House lawmakers. We know that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent

(44:04):
had confirmed moves to replace Federal Reserved hedgerown power that
they were underway. He told Bloomberg. There's a formal process
that's already starting. This is what Donald Trump had to
say about it today.

Speaker 6 (44:15):
He's doing allows you job. But no, I'm not talking
about that we get. Fortunately, we get to make a
change in the next what eight months or so, and
we'll pick somebody that's good, and we'll pick somebody. I
just want a fair job. We want to see lower
interest rates, so our country deserves it. We're not planning
and doing anything.

Speaker 1 (44:33):
We're very concerned.

Speaker 6 (44:35):
He's doing a little renovation for two point five billion
of the FED building renovation and they have a close
to nine hundred million.

Speaker 5 (44:45):
Dollar cost over on Adam.

Speaker 2 (44:47):
This of course comes mid frustration with the central banks
reluctance to cut interest rates. As we heard there, Donald
Trump was slamming the Fed's two point five billion dollar
renovation plans, and Trump did say that it's highly unlike
clear that he would dismiss Powell unless he has to
leave for fraud. Adam, what do you make of this?
The news have certainly raddled the markets.

Speaker 9 (45:08):
Well, I don't know why Trump keeps talking about power.

Speaker 19 (45:11):
I mean, his term expires next year anyway, as you suggested,
so just wait until that happens, and then appoints someone else.
But he's he's really I mean, he's really loaths the
man for the last eight years, but he appointed him.
Not confusing, I mean, he was Trump's choice in his
first term. He wants lower rates, but frankly, I don't
think lower rates are necessarily a wise move.

Speaker 9 (45:31):
And you know the same can be said for Australia.
I mean, inflation is actually not that low.

Speaker 19 (45:35):
It's in the high two's that's still historically fairly high.
And it's an uncertain world. We don't know what the
tariffs are going to do. And also if you have
super low rates, you just get large amounts of borrowing
and speculation and stupid investments, and it's not necessarily a
good thing. And of course asset prices go up even further,
the price of houses go up even further when rates
come down. So I'm not sure that Pale's doing a

(45:57):
bad job. But as for the renovation, I saw some
data recently that it suggests it's actually more expensive. The
FED renovation about three point eight billion Australian dollars than
it cost to build a palace of Versaie. Wow, it's
the most expensive government renovation in the history of the world, apparently,
and I don't know whether the FED actually deserves that,

(46:17):
but it's going ahead.

Speaker 2 (46:18):
It's going Yeah, it's pretty extraordinary. Let's turn to the
conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and Donald Trump's position. The
Financial Times has been reporting that Trump privately encouraged President
Vladimir Zelensky to strike deeper into Russia. Citing anonymous sources,
They claim that Trump asked if Ukraine could conduct more

(46:38):
attacks if the US provided longer range weapons, but Trump
has denied this.

Speaker 15 (46:44):
Should Zolensky target Moscow or deeper into Russia?

Speaker 1 (46:48):
He shouldn't target Moscow.

Speaker 9 (46:49):
Are you on new Plane's side?

Speaker 13 (46:51):
Now?

Speaker 9 (46:52):
I know I'm on nobody's side.

Speaker 6 (46:53):
I'm gonna know, well, I want to you know what
the side I'm on humanity side.

Speaker 1 (46:57):
I want to stop the killing of thousands of a week.
I want to stop the killing.

Speaker 9 (47:03):
Now.

Speaker 2 (47:03):
We know that Trump has said that he's very unhappy
with Putin and that if Russia's president failed to agree
to a deal to end the war within fifty days,
the US would impose a one hundred percent tariff on
Russian goods and Russian Russia's trade partners. We know that
plenty of Trump allies have been critical about the president's

(47:24):
decision to sell weapons to NATO to be used by Ukraine,
But there's, of course plenty of relief that the US
is sending more weapons to help Ukraine.

Speaker 5 (47:33):
In its fight. You know, what do you make of
where things are at at the moment, Adam.

Speaker 2 (47:36):
I know we've spoken about this before, and Donald Trump
has attempted to make a deal with Putin and it
appears that it has not worked.

Speaker 19 (47:45):
Yes, Look, he certainly didn't end the war in one day,
like honest, But Trump seems to change his view on
the whole thing every week or two, so I kind
of take this lasting with a grain of salt. I
think personally he's very torn on the issue, and I
think he's very heavily influenced on who he's just spoken to.
You know, he's obviously got the kind NEEO cons in
Washington want to want to expand the war, accelerate the war.

Speaker 9 (48:06):
Send war weapons.

Speaker 19 (48:07):
But then he's got the MAGA movement, which doesn't really
care much for the war at all and basically wants
the US to withdraw. So he's got these these these
two birds on his shoulder, if you like. You know,
what's what's interesting is about the threatned tariffs. A lot
of media have reported them as putting one hundred percent
tariff on Russian goods, but actually it's not on Russian goods.
The US basically has no trade with Russia. What's really

(48:29):
interesting about this threat is this tariff would go on
all the other countries that buy Russian goods, so China,
so India, so Brazil. And I do wonder whether the
US would follow through with that tariff. That is an
extraordinary threat to basically say to a sovereign nation, if
you buy from this other country, then we're going to
basically put one hundred percent tariff on you. I mean,

(48:49):
that's kind of wild stuff. I don't know if that's
happened actually in world history, at least not to that extent.
So I do wonder whether they'd follow through. And of
course Russia has just shrugged it off. The fifty days
is interesting, So fifty days quite a long time, so
I don't kind of in a military sense, So I
don't know why he settled on fifty days.

Speaker 9 (49:06):
But look, let's just wait and see. I had no
doubt that we'll be talking about this again.

Speaker 5 (49:10):
Yes, absolutely.

Speaker 2 (49:12):
A top aide to former First Lady Jill Biden has
pleaded the Fifth Amendment, opting not to answer any questions
regarding a former president Joe Biden's health and cognitive state
during his term in the White House.

Speaker 5 (49:24):
Anthony Bernall, who.

Speaker 2 (49:25):
Was Jill Biden's chief of staff, was asked if President
Biden was fit to exercise the duty of president. He
was asked, did President Biden ever instruct you to lie
about his health? And he did not want to answer,
and Adam, This comes just days after the former president's doctor,
Kevin O'Connor, also pleaded the Fifth Amendment, deciding not to

(49:46):
answer questions about Biden's health or cognitive abilities while in
the White House.

Speaker 9 (49:51):
Are you surprised, Well, no, Look.

Speaker 19 (49:54):
It seems like it was even worse, I think than
many of us suspected when Biden was president. I mean,
you've got these fairly senior p who don't want to
say anything at all. Now it's possible that they're just
treating the process with contempt, but it's I think more
likely that they just don't want to have to lie,
so they just choose not to say anything, which is
they're right in the US, of course, but you know,
the autopen issue is just extraordinary. There was, of course,

(50:16):
a Biden interview recently with The New York Times, and
he hardly helped the situation by basically saying, yeah, I
just gave an oral okay to some list that other
people compiled. You know, that's one of the most extraordinary
powers of the US president to pardon people, and he
wasn't really paying full attention to it. And you know,
it raises questions of, you know, to what level was
he engaged with what was going on in the US government.

(50:38):
And as one recent constitutional scholar at Georgetown said, this
is one of the greatest constitutional scandals in the history
of the US. You had a mentally unfit president in
all likelihood who was not really running the administrations. Some
other people who are entirely unelected were and we still
don't really know who they are.

Speaker 9 (50:54):
So so it's you know, it's an extraordinary chapter.

Speaker 19 (50:58):
You know, just a reminder to Trump turn seventy nine recently,
and it's still very sharp.

Speaker 9 (51:03):
It sends for all his eccentricities.

Speaker 19 (51:05):
But so it's not so much age, it's the mental
state of the person. A lot of people say Biden
was too old. Well, you know, he's not that much
older than Trump. I think it's more about your mental state.
And yeah, so that's just that's.

Speaker 2 (51:18):
That's a good point because you look at Donald Trump.
You look at his energy, look at how sharp he is.
He's across the detail. There's no question who is running
the country. Completely different story when you look at Joe
Biden and that autopen scandal, as you say, it is
just absolutely wild. It raises so many questions, the fact
that the autopen was used to pardon fauci members of

(51:39):
the Biden family. You know, the White House is now
investigating this, but it's unbelievable.

Speaker 5 (51:44):
Adam Crichton, thank you so much for your time. Great
to talk to you.

Speaker 9 (51:48):
Likewise, thanks for having me.

Speaker 2 (51:53):
Prince Harry has embarked in a surprise visit to Angola
to continue his late mother, Princess Diana's efforts to eliminate
land mines. Riley Sullivan is a lifestyle reporter here at
skynies dot com dot au. He's always across the latest
celebrity headlines. Riley, great to see you, Great to be back.
Let's talk about Prince Harry's visit. He's just returned from
the African nation of Angola to continue his mother's work

(52:15):
eliminating land mines.

Speaker 16 (52:17):
What was on the itinerary during the trip, right, Well,
this was quite a surprise visit from Harry. As you said,
he visited Angola earlier this week. He met with the
President of Angola and it was in relation to landmines.
Of course, that was really one of the main legacies
I think of his mother, Princess Diana. She massively increased
the profile of that issue when she went to Angola

(52:39):
in nineteen ninety seven. And it's quite a haunting thing,
you know, because she did all this amazing work for landmines,
raising awareness of this issue, but she never really lived
to see what she achieved because when she went to Angola,
that was in January ninety seven. She Acchley died several
months later. So I think for Harry this is a
very important cause. It is probably a direct line really

(53:00):
to his mother's legacy, and he's always sort of kept
up this link to Angola. He last went there in
twenty nineteen, as we can see in some footage, recreated
those iconic scenes of Diana walking through the minefield, and
this is really a cause that has sort of maintained
a place in his duty since leaving the royal family.

(53:23):
I think it was a really wonderful visit and really
a sign that you know, when he's there when he's
really focusing on the issues and really important philanthropic causes,
he is still effective.

Speaker 2 (53:34):
We can't help but notice though Meghan Markle did not
join Harry for the visit to Angola, do we know
why she didn't.

Speaker 5 (53:40):
Want to join?

Speaker 16 (53:41):
Yeah, there was an insider that said that Meghan chose
not to go because of personal safety concerns. This is
the same sort of reason that has been given in
the past for why she refuses to return to the UK.
But I've never really believed that, you know, I think
that there have been, you know, examples of Meghan going
to Colombia, going to Nigeria, so you know, certainly she
doesn't she's not afraid to travel outside of California, but

(54:05):
it seems kind of like a selective thing where maybe
when it's not something that she's interested in or maybe
doesn't align with what she's what she's doing, you know,
she's she probably you know, kind of pulls the security card.
But I mean it is a contrast. You know, I'm
not saying that Meghan doesn't have any interest in philanthropy,
but I do think that she probably you know, I mean,

(54:26):
she has every right not to be as interested. She
I think is prioritizing other things. She's trying to build
a business. She's selling wines and jams, and I think that,
you know, for Harry, he's a little bit more focused
on the philanthropy.

Speaker 5 (54:38):
Yes, I think Meghan's focused on Instagram.

Speaker 2 (54:40):
But the Sussexes are reportedly getting closer to a possible
truth with the royal family. After Harry and Meghan's team,
we're seen meeting with one of the King's aids. What's
the latest possible on a possible rather reconciliation. Could we
see Prince William even being involved?

Speaker 16 (54:57):
Yeah, you know, we saw those photos over the weekend
supposedly of the Sussex team meeting with the King's team,
and there was all this speculation this week that you know,
this is a real concrete sign of a possible summit
or a meeting, and I think that that could be
on the cards. But I think that there's a really
important distinction here. I think any kind of reconciliation between
Charles and Harry, I don't think that's really a reconciliation

(55:20):
with the monarchy. I think it's just a father and
son thing. I don't think William would be involved I
think William has well and truly put Harry in the freezer,
and he's moved on. You know, he's focusing on plans
for his reign and I don't think I don't really
see any real movement there. But I could see Harry
definitely reconciling with King Charles, because you know, at the
end of the day, the monarch has cancer. The King

(55:42):
is you know, hopefully in good health and will remain
in good health for years to come. But of course
that would be a consideration. You know, anyone who's had
a kind of rift with a family member, you know,
you want to bury that hatchet in their lifetime. I
think it would be a tragedy if Harry was never
able to reconcile with the King in his lifetime. But
I think it's more a personal thing. I don't think

(56:02):
that this would be a sign of them, you know,
coming back to royal duties or a bigger reconciliation. I
think it would just be father and someone sitting down.

Speaker 2 (56:10):
Okay, I want to talk to you about a moment
that occurred at Wimbledon. Matthew McConaughey is being praised after
making a kind gesture to Princess Catherine and Prince William
over the way you can.

Speaker 5 (56:21):
Let's just take a look that went down.

Speaker 16 (56:34):
Well, I mean, what a southern gentleman who doesn't love
Matthew McConaughey. I think, you know what a class act.
You can see he's sitting there in the Royal box
and some of the other set of celebrities and guests.
They don't stand for the Prince and Princess of Wales,
but trust Matthew McConaughey classy or keeping it classy and
very respectful, and I just I love that. And he

(56:54):
is kind of a funny, interesting kind of celebrity because
he's almost like a royal kind of thing. He's so
universal if you think about it. He's not political. Matthew
McConaughey has never got into politics, much like the royal family,
and I think that that's why he does have this
sort of aura about him.

Speaker 1 (57:08):
But what's not to like?

Speaker 2 (57:10):
Yeah, no, it was brilliant moved by Matthew McConaughey, as
you say, class act. Indeed, to some other news that's
happening around the world, a large fire has destroyed the
main stage at this Moorland festival in Belgium, just days
before the festival was set to kick off. I mean
some of the vision is unbelievable. Warts is latest on
the fire and will the festival go ahead?

Speaker 1 (57:29):
Right?

Speaker 16 (57:30):
Well, this is quite a shock, you know, as you said,
it's just days out from the festival kicking off on
Friday and the main stage has been destroyed by a fire.
Antiwerp police have begun in a preliminary investigation to the
cause of the fire. Reportedly there is no signs of
foul play. I think it was honestly an accident, but certainly,
you know, quite a chaos. You know, there's tens of

(57:52):
thousands of people kind of descending on the site.

Speaker 9 (57:55):
People camp.

Speaker 16 (57:56):
It's a sort of two weekends of festivities and this
would be an apt, absolute disaster for the organizers. You know,
they've got David Getter and all of these sort of
a list DJs and dance artists coming in, so I
think they're going to rally. From all reports it's still
going to go ahead, but yeah, definitely wouldn't like to
be there this weekend.

Speaker 2 (58:15):
No, I can't believe the vision from that festival. Hopefully
everyone is safe and that is the good news. That
if they can still attend to some entertainment.

Speaker 5 (58:24):
News.

Speaker 2 (58:25):
Donald Trump Junior is reportedly getting serious with his new love,
Betina Anderson. There are reports potentially wedding bells could be
in the future. What inside can you tell us?

Speaker 16 (58:35):
Yeah, it's quite interesting because, of course DJT was or
should I say DTJ was in a long term relationship
with Kimberly Guilfoyle of course x Fox News host. She
is now going to be the ambassador degree, so they
remain friends. She's sort of moved on with her life,
she's going to be abroad, and he's met this new

(58:56):
person at Bettina. Reportably, she is from a prominent family
in Palm Beach, which makes sense of course mar Lago
being in Palm Beach and being in that kind of scene.
She's a philanthropist, a model, a bit of a sort
of socialite in Florida. And I think that they're a
great partnership. You know, I think she's quite low key.
She seems to be pretty happy to sort of come

(59:17):
into his world, and you know, being in that vortex
of the Trumps and mar A Lago would be pretty intoxicating.
I wouldn't be surprised, actually if he got married again.
I think that it all seems quite friendly. We saw
her actually attend think it was the Republican National Convention
last year before it came out.

Speaker 9 (59:36):
That they were dating.

Speaker 16 (59:37):
He was there, she was there, and his ex wife,
Vanessa was there, so I think it's all quite friendly.
But yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if wedding bells were
in the future.

Speaker 5 (59:44):
Riley Sullivan, thank you so much for joining us. Great
to speak with you.

Speaker 9 (59:47):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (59:51):
And that is power our Thank you for your company.
We'll see you next week. Make sure you subscribe to
Sky in Australia on YouTube.

Speaker 6 (01:00:00):
Yes