May 6, 2024 • 31 mins
Former LA County DA Jackie Lacey comes on the show to talk about endorsing Nathan Hochman to be the next LA County DA. The White House Correspondent for NPR says that Democrats are feeling nostalgia for the economy during the Trump presidency. More on the minimum wage raise for fast food workers in California.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can't. I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
We're on from one until four. After four o'clock, you
miss something happens, well we have a makeup. We have
a makeup class after four o'clock gets posted on the
iheartab John Cobelt's show on demand. You got complaints about
(00:22):
the world, plenty plenty to complain about eight seven seven
Mois steady six eight seven seven Mois staighty six. We
had seemed like most of the calls last Friday were
about the protests and the rioting going on, and there
was not one single supporter of the students or the agitators,
not one one eight seven seven Mois staighty six. So
you can use the talkback feature on the iHeart Radio app. Well,
(00:46):
you know the story. Jackie Lacy was the La County
DA for eight years and she was really good and
then George Gascone in that ridiculous, stupid year twenty twenty
beat her. And she was running for a third term
and Gascone just unleashed all kinds of hell on people
in La County. And I think things are coming crashing
(01:08):
down on him now Nathan Hackman is running a strong
campaign against him, and today Hawkman received the endorsement of
Jackie Lazy, and uh, I think it's a really powerful endorsement.
And we're gonna have Jackie on now. Jackie Lazy, welcome.
How are you.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Well. It's good to hear your voice. I'm doing fine.
How you doing? Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Yeah, it's really good to have you on because you've
been very quiet the last few years while Gascon has
been dismantling the justice system, and I often wondered what
you thought about what was going on.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
So now I've got you.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
What have you been what's been going through your mind
the last four years watching him do his thing?
Speaker 3 (01:51):
You know when I left off is, of course I lost,
and I took that as a message from the majority
of the voters, and so I deliberately said, you know,
I'm done with politics. Them out. I'm gonna keep my
mouth shut. This is what you want, this is what
you get, and enjoy my private life. But you know,
unfortunately I suffered tragedy, lost my husband to pancreatic cancer,
(02:15):
and my mother also was diagnosed with cancer. And you know,
I've just been sitting there and and and I I
see some of the stuff that's happening in the DA's office,
and I know it's wrong. I know that. You know,
some of the justifications are are you know, their misstatements
(02:35):
they reflect a lack of knowledge about the criminal justice
system or a lack of will to protect us. And so, uh,
you know, I waited. I mean, there were a lot
of people in the primary that I thought would make
good das, including Nathan Hackman, and so when he came in,
when he came through as one of the top two,
(02:56):
and I saw how poorly Gascon did, I said, you know,
now's the time speak up, speak up and say something,
because I did that job. You know, I did that
job for eight years and I can tell when miss
you know, malfeasance and just incompetence is happening. So to
(03:16):
the degree the voters still care or listen to me,
I'm going to speak my mind.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
What do you think happened in twenty twenty, Because it
never occurred to me that year that you would lose,
just because I thought you had done such a good
job and you had such a good profile here in
Los Angeles. I never remember anybody complaining about you, and well,
(03:43):
I mean, well, all right up to the point of
the campaign, and then you had the Black Lives Matter
protesters outside your house, and there was criticism that you
hadn't prosecuted cops and this and that. But for the
first seven years.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
You really, you really were.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
We're doing the work head down, and you know, nothing
out of the ordinary, I guess, is what I'm saying.
I mean, every DA gets some criticism along the way,
it's part of the job. But I just didn't think
that yours was a particularly controversial or scandalous turned Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:16):
Yeah, you know, look, I almost lent. I mean, I
just felt like I lost by a lot, but I lost.
I think twenty twenty it was a convergence of things.
That was the George Floyd murder. I think it was
BLM showing up on our doorstep and my husband confronting
them with the gun. They use that politically. I do
(04:40):
think that the I think it was twelve million dollars
from two independent groups campaigning for a gascon chose to
paint me, as you know, someone who was not effective
on police shootings. They saw a window of opportunity, wanted
(05:00):
George in and that's that's what happened.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Seems like they created some kind of hysteria. I mean
much of twenty twenty was about hysteria in a lot
of ways, with the with the lockdown and the protests.
I mean, it was an emotionless surge.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
It took over. Yeah, many people.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
Yeah, it was. You know, remember COVID had happened, and
people were quarantined, they were not working, they were home.
They the murder of George Floyd was was shocking as
it should be, and many people just you know, just
(05:42):
just sort of wanted change without realizing the change they
were getting. I mean, they didn't know about his record
in San Francisco, that people in San Francisco had had
had complaints about him, and so he comes down here
off and like I said, with that kind of money
(06:04):
coming into the race, you can pretty much destroy anybody's reputation.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
Was there things you wish you had done differently in
the campaign?
Speaker 3 (06:16):
No, I felt like I thought as hard as I could.
You know, of course I go back overto my mind
and think, were they different things? But I think it
was just the circumstances. I think, you know, with fate
in some sense, in some sense. While I'm sad about
what happened to our safety in La County. It was
(06:37):
a blessing in disguise because I got to spend what
I didn't know would be a year with my husband
before he was diagnosed with pancretic cancer. So I'm grateful
that I had that year at home with him because
I would have been working, and quite frankly, when he
got diagnosed, I would have had to resign from the office.
(06:57):
But no, I mean, in campaigns it's you know, it's
like that Star Wars scene where Luke Skywalker is blindfolded
with a saber sword and trying to fight you know,
this this thing that is larger than he is, and
trying to rely on his instinct. It was difficult, but
(07:17):
I did my best. I tried to explain to people
what electing this particular person was going to do to
their safety and said it out loud many, many times,
and people, just the majority of people felt that, you know,
that maybe I was crying wolf and that you know,
(07:38):
they want to change.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Has anybody come up to you since then, after seeing
what that kind of havoc that guess going is rought
on La County and said, Jackie, you were right, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Yeah, yeah, actually more than more than you would imagine.
I even had a protester come back to me, a
guy was part of the protests. If I I'll come
back to being apologized and say I just didn't know.
I didn't realize what was going on. Yeah, now it's out.
I really serious, it was out. I'm out hanging my
(08:12):
Christmas light, mind my own business with my handyman. And
guy with purple hair, you know, comes over a young guy.
Young man says, you know, are you Jackie Leasy? And
of course just like, well, who wants to know? And yeah,
but no, I do get that. I get that from
my neighbors. I get in Granada Hills. You know, we're
(08:34):
we're seeing a rise in crime here. We're all scared
about what's happening. And you know, occasionally get that from
people and that and that's why when I look, when
I when I endorse Nathan Hakman, I said, look, if
you vote for me, vote for Nathan Hawkman. Or if
you in hindsight now realize you should have voted for me,
(08:54):
vote for Nathan Hawkman. You know he's not a tough
on crime guy. He is is compassion and he's fair.
But it's up to the prosecutor to discourage criminal activity.
And if you have someone who's sort of weak at that,
of course the criminals are going to be in bold course.
Of course they're going to say, wait a minute, met
(09:15):
I can get away with all this. Then of course
they're going to go out and commit crime.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
So can you hang on for another segment?
Speaker 2 (09:22):
Sure, I've talked more specifically about what you really like
about Nathan Hackman and what the worst mistakes you think
Gascone has made are the worst parts of his policy.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
Oh, we got Jackie Lacey.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
She was a great DA for La County for eight
years from twenty twelve to twenty twenty, lost to Gascone
in that year, and now Hawkman is taking young Gascone
and Jackie Lacy went public today with her endorsement.
Speaker 4 (09:48):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
We continue with Jackie Lacey, former La County DA for
eight years from twenty twelve to twenty twenty. She's watched
through Gascone that year and now she's back in the
public eye endorsing Nathan Hackman today against Gascone in November.
So what do you what do you like about Nathan
(10:14):
Hockpin because you were you go ahead, go ahead, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
I want people to know that this is just not
some politician. I've known him personally for over a decade,
have been with his family at events, I've talked to
him in depth, so I know I know the guy.
What I like about Nathan is, first of all, I
like the fact, among anythings that you know, he's tried
(10:42):
over a hundred cases the current administration that you know,
I mean gascon had never been to court, never tried
a case. And I think when you're making decisions about
some of the high profile cases and trying not to
make mistakes, it's important for you to know how the
facts are going to play out in the you know,
(11:03):
in the courtroom. I also like John that he was
president of the City of Los Angeles Ethics Commission. I mean,
not a day, not a week goes why were you
probably aren't reporting on someone violating ethics, someone ceiling, someone lying,
someone doing something they shouldn't be doing. And I like
the fact that he knows those laws well, he's going
(11:25):
to follow them. And also like the fact that while
he understands that with certain criminal behavior, you've got to
meet it head on and be stern about it. But
he also understands that criminal justice reform has to be executed,
but it has to be done in a very thoughtful
and meaningful manner.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
People don't know what that means, that that phrase criminal
justice reform. You had Gascon's version of it, which has
been a disaster, and so people get leery when they
hear the phrase. It's like, well, what does that mean?
You're going to let everybody out, They're going to run amock?
What would be I mean, what do you think Nathan
Hoffman is talking about or what are you personally talking
(12:06):
about when you use that phrase?
Speaker 3 (12:09):
You know, what I'm talking about is addressing people who
have a mental health concern. You're actually you're right on
the money when people say they don't know what criminal
justice reform is. But the truth of the matter is
is in the LA Office, we've been doing criminal justice
reform for years or twenty thirty years, in the sense
of drug courts where instead of sending someone to dail,
(12:32):
you say, look, go to these classes and we'll dismiss
the case after that, you know, sort of leveraging them
into support or looking at things like those who are
wrongfully convicted, should we give them an avenue to have
their case reviewed. In short, it's about improving or changing,
(12:53):
if you will, changing the criminal justice system. But when
it's not done right change, the change could be disasters.
It can harm us, and that's what you're seeing now.
But if it's done well, you see success stories without
people getting hurt by folks who just aren't ready to
be out in our society for one reason or another.
(13:15):
And so really, I think that's the best way to
look at it. It's changing it, and it's supposed to
be changing it for the better, not the worst, if
it's done right.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
What are a couple of things that Gascon did that
really either scared you, makes you just shake your head,
made you angry? Were what were some of his policies
that you just couldn't believe.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
I was stunned on the first day when he ordered
UH prosecutors to no longer attend any parole hearings. I
thought that was wrong. His rationale was, it wasn't our job.
And so you have now victims or victims families who
have to go into prison and faith being the same
(14:00):
room with the person who either killed their killed their
loved ones or who violated them and argue against the
lies that prisoners sometimes put forth about what happened in
their crime and their rehabilitation. There is no one else
other than if they hire use their own money to
(14:21):
hire a private lawyer that will be in there with them.
I thought that was the worst. I also thought, you know,
wholesale getting away doing away with gun enhancements in La County,
doing away with gang enhancements in La County, you know,
doing away with hate crime enhancements. I mean, he finally
walked that back, but it's only with the hate crime.
(14:44):
Somebody had to threat to protest against him and then
he walked that back. I think that was egregious. But
I also think there's stuff that you wouldn't know about
unless you really follow the Board of Supervisors hearing the
millions that this person has cost us and taxpayer money
(15:05):
that could have been used on things like the homeless crisis.
This administration is burning through money left and right because
of costly mistakes. Well. An example is they filed the
case on someone that had to do with voter fraud
some company, and that company that person owned the company,
(15:26):
sued them and the board ended up giving them five
million dollars to set You know, there's such thing as
prosecutorally immunity, so that means they must have screwed that case.
That's so bad that the board ran scared and gave
them five million dollars. The other thing is employees who
have sued civil servants that he has, you know that
(15:46):
he has crapt over because they dared to speak the
truth to the king, so to speak. And that you know,
that's that's taxpayer money. I mean, you know, only a
couple of them now have been litigated, and he's lost them.
He lost one and he settled one, and then he
lost the other one to one point five eight dollars.
There's about a dozen more left on top of that.
(16:08):
With this recent charging of Diana Turan, one of his
top people in the office, I'm gonna be surprised if
those officers end up suing the office for failure to
stop or catch or manage this woman who broke the
law using their names. So, you know, uh, there's a
(16:31):
myriad of reasons. Maybe money is your issue, maybe you know,
maybe you feel safe. I'm not sure, but you talk
to people in Granada Hills. We're not feeling safe. We're
feeling like, look, things are are are dangerous now, more
dangerous than there were four years ago. We don't have
to go back to any tough on crime policies. But
(16:51):
you know what, the cost of crime, you know, it's
the cost of crime is too great. Right now, Jackie
is out.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
It's really good talking with you. Thanks for coming on.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
Jo I hope we can talk again sometime. All right.
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Jackie Lacey who was the DA for eight years here
in La County and she's endorsing Nathan Hakman against Gascone
in November.
Speaker 4 (17:16):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI Am
six forty.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
We're on until four Conway on here after four. If
you missed the show today, we just finished a half
an hour Jackie Lacey, who is La County DA for
eight years and she's endorsing Nathan Hakman in the race
against Gascone in November. So if you missed that, you
want to hear it. She was very forthcoming, very honest
(17:42):
in her answers about what happened with her in that
election of twenty twenty and the tragedies she's gone through since,
and what she thinks of gascone, which she thinks of
Nathan Hakman. So you definitely ought to hear that on
the podcast on the iHeart app, moistline is eighty seven
seven Moist eighty six seven Moyst eighty six. You usually
talkback feature on the iHeartRadio app every once in a while.
(18:07):
It's really amusing. I don't think people understand just how
sheltered a lot of Washington journalists are from the public.
It's why they constantly get blindsided by, you know, Trump's support,
no matter even though we're dealing with Trump now next
month will be nine full years and still inside Washington
(18:30):
journalists are repeatedly stunned by his support and the reasons
for the support. I mean, at this point after nine years,
and since your job is to as a journalist to
if you're covering politics, you're covering why people vote the
way they vote. By now you should at least intellectually
(18:52):
understand what's going on, even if you don't agree with
it personally, you should understand why it's happening. And the
latest example of somebody utterly clueless, of course, it's NPR
and you've heard all about I mean, you've got people
inside NPR now revolting against the left wing indoctrination. And
(19:16):
what has happened is because you have virtually all the
NPR employees all left wing, all progressive, woke, they don't
have a clue as to what's going on in the
rest of the in the rest of the world. And
they've lost millions and millions of listeners, and they've lost
a lot of advertising money, corporate money, simply because they
(19:40):
are no longer giving out a product that a lot
of people can relate to. And here's why. This is
an NPR reporter named Osma Khaleide. She's their White House correspondent. Okay,
so this is not some low level intern here. This
is NPR's White House correspondent. She was invited on This Week,
(20:02):
which is their political show on Sunday mornings on ABC.
And she's baffled why so many people in America, including Democrats,
have nostalgia for Trump's economy.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
Listen to this clip.
Speaker 5 (20:17):
What I've already heard in so many of my interviews
with people is a lack lesser sense of enthusiasm, whether
it's black voters, whether it's you'd call them sort of
like disaffected Republicans, there's a whole bunch of things that
went right for Biden.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
I would argue in.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
Twenty twenty it was unity in opposition to Donald Trump.
To make this a referendum. Sure, is what the Biden
campaign wants, but it's really challenging because many voters are
looking at this election as a referendum on Trump. You know,
I was just up in Pennsylvania NonStop. I heard about
the economy, and people don't real right, yeah, yeah, I'm Biden.
I'm sorry, referendum on Biden. And so people don't feel
great about the economy. Now, this nostalgia for the Trump
(20:52):
years is something that I would say about the the
economy nostalgia I heard from Democrats even, which was really
shocking to me. Lay Democrats remember how good they thought
they're four one k was they would say in the
next breath, you know, they're not going to vote for
Trump for a variety of reasons.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
But that's what Joe Biden is up again.
Speaker 2 (21:08):
She shocked the Democrats want to protect the money they have.
She's really see people, our people, and we've all got
the same issues in life. And when inflation jacks up
the cost of everything by twenty to thirty percent. That
pisses you off because it wasn't necessary. It was ignited
(21:30):
by massive overspending. They dump trillions of dollars into the economy,
and that is a sure fireway to create inflation that
gets out of control. Many countries have done it. It's
a short term fix to try to keep people happy.
You dump more money into the economy and people feel
(21:53):
like they're getting richer for a brief period of time.
But when you have more money chasing the same goods,
it drives up the price.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
It always happens.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
I looked into huge inflation problems in the past in
various countries, and it was always the same. The government
started printing money, the government started borrowing money, they started
spending money, printing, borrowing, spending through the economy completely out
of whack and ignites inflation and it becomes a cycle.
It's hard to stop because the more the prices go up,
the more people want raises, the more raises they get,
(22:26):
that's more money they have to drive prices up, and
it goes around and around and around, and it doesn't stop.
And that's what we've got. And it's not whether the
inflation's up three and a half percent this month, it's
that cumulatively, since Biden took over, it's up between twenty
and thirty percent. That's a twenty to thirty percent pay cut,
a twenty to thirty percent tax, however you want to
(22:48):
frame it, and that hits you have to pay the
same price for eggs, no matter who you voted for
in twenty twenty, no matter what party you're registered with.
Of course Democrats are upset and have Trump nostalgia for
the economy. Of course they do, because they don't want
(23:09):
to pay an extra two dollars for eggs. Nobody does.
It's not their politics, it's not who they vote for,
it's they don't like the price of eggs. Like you know,
the price of gasoline here well over five dollars. A
lot of that's on Newsome and the Democratic legislature, but
we don't. We don't hold anybody responsible here in California
(23:31):
somehow strangely, weirdly, But in the rest of the country
where more rational people live, yeah, they hold the guy
responsible and they don't care if it's a Republican or
a Democrat because that doesn't factor in how they're going
to pay their bills. And that is a huge issue,
(23:53):
and it's not getting better. Inflation keeps going up, and
you keep getting reporters going on, I don't really understand.
I'm really shocked. I mean, there's no yeah, because ultimately,
you can tune out somebody's bombastic personality and you should.
You can tune out their tweets, you can tune out
all the nonsense. When you go to the store, you've
(24:13):
got to pay a hard number, and that hard number
is a lot higher than it used to be, and
it's it's, uh, it's gonna get worse. Oh, And that
reminds me this, this whole uh, this whole campaign to
raise the uh, the wages of fast food workers in California,
(24:33):
it is backfired big time. It's not only brought all
of us huge price increases if we go to these restaurants,
it has now cost the employees literally thousands of jobs.
And I'm going to explain that to you in the
next segment as well.
Speaker 4 (24:47):
Coming up, you're listening to John Cobelt on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (24:54):
When you artificially raise the wages, especially in something like
the fast food industry, because those jobs aren't worth much,
because the people doing those jobs do not bring much
value to the job. There's no specific skills, there's no
education needed. They're easily replaced not only by people now
(25:16):
but by machinery. But when you artificially raise the wages,
then the prices are going to be raised, and that's
going to fuel inflation, and that's going to upset people.
And Gavin Newsom, because he's stupid, mandates this new minimum
wage for fast food exempts his buddy who runs Panera, and.
Speaker 1 (25:39):
You end up with.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Unhappy people or now upset over how much money they're
paying for a cheeseburger or French fries or a taco
or whatever it is. Because you can't artificially raise wages
on jobs that don't have much inherent value. So the
(26:02):
side effect in the short term is prices have to
go up. The side effect the medium term is the owner,
the owners of these fast food franchises are going to
come up with new ways to get the job done
without using people. And a professor by the name of
Lee Ohanian has done some research looking at California minimum
(26:27):
wage laws for fast food businesses to see how it's
working out, and he's written a piece for the Independent
Institute and he has found that nine five hundred jobs
in California have already been wiped out. Can you imagine
if it was sold this way to the workers. We're
(26:49):
going to force your employer to pay you twenty bucks.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
An hour. Oh wow, that's wonderful.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Yay, twenty bucks to shake the fry basket.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
Yay.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Uh yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Then a week later you find out you're out. They're
not paying you twenty bucks. Nobody's gonna do that. Job's
not worth that, he wrote. More fast food job losses
are coming as the new minimum wage effect. New minimum
wage took effect losses at Pizza Hut and Round Table
Piece Pizza. Thirteen hundred delivery drivers alone got fired at
(27:29):
Pizza Hut and Round Table Pizza thirteen hundred. Elpoil, Loco
and Jack in the Box announced that they're going to
speed up the use of robotics. They've got robots that
make sasa, robots that cook fried foods. Now, you're gonna
end up with thousands of guys out of work, and
who's gonna go to them and say, oh, jeez, you
(27:51):
know we were wrong about that. Sorry, because those robots
are in for good. Those robots aren't coming when you
get fired from your job.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
You're not You're not. That job is gone for good.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
So it was an extremely stupid wall and it feels
and failed inflation. But stupid people running the state conways here.
Speaker 6 (28:12):
Hey know, eventually this is going to be taken over
by robots too, the producers, the writers, the hosts. I'll
kill the robots. I don't know if you'll be around.
John might be a couple of decades. Mondo's coming in
or on the phone. I don't know, but he he
won another Blue ribbon first place in the Guacamalle contest
(28:34):
at the La County Fair. That's four wow, that's incread
I don't think anyone's ever done that in the history.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
Of the world. I can't. You know, you must be right.
I don't think I am.
Speaker 6 (28:46):
Fritz Coleman's coming on Blask him if he knew it
was going to be windy at the Beach Life Festival.
Speaker 1 (28:52):
They shut that down over the weekend. I don't know
if you heard that. No I didn't.
Speaker 6 (28:56):
Yeah, I got really windy at the Beach Life Festival,
and I feel bad that it was later in the
day on Sunday, but still they did it. So nobody
got killed, you know, how much money did you make
on the Kentucky Derby. Okay, let me tell you what
happened last year. The horse that run was named Madge
m Age, which is my grandmother's name, m Agi. She
(29:17):
pronounced it, she spelled it m Agi, but it's Maggie Madge.
It's the same name. So this year I missed mistic Dan,
which is my grandfather's name.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Oh.
Speaker 6 (29:28):
The two closest people in my life my two grandparents.
So I missed my grandmother last year, my grandfather this year.
But I got a tip on a horse next year.
And it's called bet your grandparents, U fing idiot.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
Put a couple bucks on them. That's a good idea.
Speaker 6 (29:49):
It paid thirty eight dollars, John, if you have twenty
to win on it, you would have won three hundred
and eighty dollars.
Speaker 1 (29:53):
That's a good payoffs. It was huge, right, unbelievable. You
missed it. I missed it.
Speaker 6 (29:58):
I missed it, But I but you know what if
I would have bet it.
Speaker 1 (30:00):
God is sending you some hints. He's sending me messages.
Speaker 6 (30:05):
I made the same talk with my daughter at in
and out last night around ten o'clock at night, went
to get in and out and I was looking at
Los Alamados while we're in line, and she said, Dad,
are you winning at the track today?
Speaker 1 (30:16):
I said, no, I'm not winning today.
Speaker 6 (30:18):
And she said, do you think that's a sign that
maybe you should stop gambling?
Speaker 1 (30:27):
It didn't work out. You just keep missing all the signs.
Speaker 6 (30:32):
I know, I know, but look, they say that the
only thing worse than not having money on the winning
horse is not gambling at all. Guys in a single,
single room apartment in silmay sling under an overpass. It
that's right, okay, but that's why we get up in
(30:54):
the morning to, you know, to look at the racing.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
F Well, I mean you're still working, so you know
you keep funding. I have to work. You don't have to.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
I do. I can't. I got I gotta watch. What
I say is I haven't been on a horse in
thirty five in I know.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
I know.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
You gotta take a chance in life. Show take a.
Speaker 2 (31:11):
Chance, Conway, Crush you with you live in the KFI
twenty four hour Newsroom. Hey, you've been listening to the
John Cobalt Show podcast. You can always hear the show
live on KFI Am six forty from one to four pm.
Every Monday through Friday, and of course anytime on demand
on the iHeartRadio app.
Can't. I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio app.
We're on from one until four. After four o'clock, you
miss something happens, well we have a makeup. We have
a makeup class after four o'clock gets posted on the
iheartab John Cobelt's show on demand. You got complaints about
(00:22):
the world, plenty plenty to complain about eight seven seven
Mois steady six eight seven seven Mois staighty six. We
had seemed like most of the calls last Friday were
about the protests and the rioting going on, and there
was not one single supporter of the students or the agitators,
not one one eight seven seven Mois staighty six. So
you can use the talkback feature on the iHeart Radio app. Well,
(00:46):
you know the story. Jackie Lacy was the La County
DA for eight years and she was really good and
then George Gascone in that ridiculous, stupid year twenty twenty
beat her. And she was running for a third term
and Gascone just unleashed all kinds of hell on people
in La County. And I think things are coming crashing
(01:08):
down on him now Nathan Hackman is running a strong
campaign against him, and today Hawkman received the endorsement of
Jackie Lazy, and uh, I think it's a really powerful endorsement.
And we're gonna have Jackie on now. Jackie Lazy, welcome.
How are you.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
Well. It's good to hear your voice. I'm doing fine.
How you doing? Thanks for having me.
Speaker 2 (01:30):
Yeah, it's really good to have you on because you've
been very quiet the last few years while Gascon has
been dismantling the justice system, and I often wondered what
you thought about what was going on.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
So now I've got you.
Speaker 2 (01:45):
What have you been what's been going through your mind
the last four years watching him do his thing?
Speaker 3 (01:51):
You know when I left off is, of course I lost,
and I took that as a message from the majority
of the voters, and so I deliberately said, you know,
I'm done with politics. Them out. I'm gonna keep my
mouth shut. This is what you want, this is what
you get, and enjoy my private life. But you know,
unfortunately I suffered tragedy, lost my husband to pancreatic cancer,
(02:15):
and my mother also was diagnosed with cancer. And you know,
I've just been sitting there and and and I I
see some of the stuff that's happening in the DA's office,
and I know it's wrong. I know that. You know,
some of the justifications are are you know, their misstatements
(02:35):
they reflect a lack of knowledge about the criminal justice
system or a lack of will to protect us. And so, uh,
you know, I waited. I mean, there were a lot
of people in the primary that I thought would make
good das, including Nathan Hackman, and so when he came in,
when he came through as one of the top two,
(02:56):
and I saw how poorly Gascon did, I said, you know,
now's the time speak up, speak up and say something,
because I did that job. You know, I did that
job for eight years and I can tell when miss
you know, malfeasance and just incompetence is happening. So to
(03:16):
the degree the voters still care or listen to me,
I'm going to speak my mind.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
What do you think happened in twenty twenty, Because it
never occurred to me that year that you would lose,
just because I thought you had done such a good
job and you had such a good profile here in
Los Angeles. I never remember anybody complaining about you, and well,
(03:43):
I mean, well, all right up to the point of
the campaign, and then you had the Black Lives Matter
protesters outside your house, and there was criticism that you
hadn't prosecuted cops and this and that. But for the
first seven years.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
You really, you really were.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
We're doing the work head down, and you know, nothing
out of the ordinary, I guess, is what I'm saying.
I mean, every DA gets some criticism along the way,
it's part of the job. But I just didn't think
that yours was a particularly controversial or scandalous turned Yeah.
Speaker 3 (04:16):
Yeah, you know, look, I almost lent. I mean, I
just felt like I lost by a lot, but I lost.
I think twenty twenty it was a convergence of things.
That was the George Floyd murder. I think it was
BLM showing up on our doorstep and my husband confronting
them with the gun. They use that politically. I do
(04:40):
think that the I think it was twelve million dollars
from two independent groups campaigning for a gascon chose to
paint me, as you know, someone who was not effective
on police shootings. They saw a window of opportunity, wanted
(05:00):
George in and that's that's what happened.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Seems like they created some kind of hysteria. I mean
much of twenty twenty was about hysteria in a lot
of ways, with the with the lockdown and the protests.
I mean, it was an emotionless surge.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
It took over. Yeah, many people.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
Yeah, it was. You know, remember COVID had happened, and
people were quarantined, they were not working, they were home.
They the murder of George Floyd was was shocking as
it should be, and many people just you know, just
(05:42):
just sort of wanted change without realizing the change they
were getting. I mean, they didn't know about his record
in San Francisco, that people in San Francisco had had
had complaints about him, and so he comes down here
off and like I said, with that kind of money
(06:04):
coming into the race, you can pretty much destroy anybody's reputation.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
Was there things you wish you had done differently in
the campaign?
Speaker 3 (06:16):
No, I felt like I thought as hard as I could.
You know, of course I go back overto my mind
and think, were they different things? But I think it
was just the circumstances. I think, you know, with fate
in some sense, in some sense. While I'm sad about
what happened to our safety in La County. It was
(06:37):
a blessing in disguise because I got to spend what
I didn't know would be a year with my husband
before he was diagnosed with pancretic cancer. So I'm grateful
that I had that year at home with him because
I would have been working, and quite frankly, when he
got diagnosed, I would have had to resign from the office.
(06:57):
But no, I mean, in campaigns it's you know, it's
like that Star Wars scene where Luke Skywalker is blindfolded
with a saber sword and trying to fight you know,
this this thing that is larger than he is, and
trying to rely on his instinct. It was difficult, but
(07:17):
I did my best. I tried to explain to people
what electing this particular person was going to do to
their safety and said it out loud many, many times,
and people, just the majority of people felt that, you know,
that maybe I was crying wolf and that you know,
(07:38):
they want to change.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Has anybody come up to you since then, after seeing
what that kind of havoc that guess going is rought
on La County and said, Jackie, you were right, I'm sorry.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Yeah, yeah, actually more than more than you would imagine.
I even had a protester come back to me, a
guy was part of the protests. If I I'll come
back to being apologized and say I just didn't know.
I didn't realize what was going on. Yeah, now it's out.
I really serious, it was out. I'm out hanging my
(08:12):
Christmas light, mind my own business with my handyman. And
guy with purple hair, you know, comes over a young guy.
Young man says, you know, are you Jackie Leasy? And
of course just like, well, who wants to know? And yeah,
but no, I do get that. I get that from
my neighbors. I get in Granada Hills. You know, we're
(08:34):
we're seeing a rise in crime here. We're all scared
about what's happening. And you know, occasionally get that from
people and that and that's why when I look, when
I when I endorse Nathan Hakman, I said, look, if
you vote for me, vote for Nathan Hawkman. Or if
you in hindsight now realize you should have voted for me,
(08:54):
vote for Nathan Hawkman. You know he's not a tough
on crime guy. He is is compassion and he's fair.
But it's up to the prosecutor to discourage criminal activity.
And if you have someone who's sort of weak at that,
of course the criminals are going to be in bold course.
Of course they're going to say, wait a minute, met
(09:15):
I can get away with all this. Then of course
they're going to go out and commit crime.
Speaker 1 (09:19):
So can you hang on for another segment?
Speaker 2 (09:22):
Sure, I've talked more specifically about what you really like
about Nathan Hackman and what the worst mistakes you think
Gascone has made are the worst parts of his policy.
Speaker 1 (09:32):
Oh, we got Jackie Lacey.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
She was a great DA for La County for eight
years from twenty twelve to twenty twenty, lost to Gascone
in that year, and now Hawkman is taking young Gascone
and Jackie Lacy went public today with her endorsement.
Speaker 4 (09:48):
You're listening to John Cobelt on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
We continue with Jackie Lacey, former La County DA for
eight years from twenty twelve to twenty twenty. She's watched
through Gascone that year and now she's back in the
public eye endorsing Nathan Hackman today against Gascone in November.
So what do you what do you like about Nathan
(10:14):
Hockpin because you were you go ahead, go ahead, Yeah.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
I want people to know that this is just not
some politician. I've known him personally for over a decade,
have been with his family at events, I've talked to
him in depth, so I know I know the guy.
What I like about Nathan is, first of all, I
like the fact, among anythings that you know, he's tried
(10:42):
over a hundred cases the current administration that you know,
I mean gascon had never been to court, never tried
a case. And I think when you're making decisions about
some of the high profile cases and trying not to
make mistakes, it's important for you to know how the
facts are going to play out in the you know,
(11:03):
in the courtroom. I also like John that he was
president of the City of Los Angeles Ethics Commission. I mean,
not a day, not a week goes why were you
probably aren't reporting on someone violating ethics, someone ceiling, someone lying,
someone doing something they shouldn't be doing. And I like
the fact that he knows those laws well, he's going
(11:25):
to follow them. And also like the fact that while
he understands that with certain criminal behavior, you've got to
meet it head on and be stern about it. But
he also understands that criminal justice reform has to be executed,
but it has to be done in a very thoughtful
and meaningful manner.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
People don't know what that means, that that phrase criminal
justice reform. You had Gascon's version of it, which has
been a disaster, and so people get leery when they
hear the phrase. It's like, well, what does that mean?
You're going to let everybody out, They're going to run amock?
What would be I mean, what do you think Nathan
Hoffman is talking about or what are you personally talking
(12:06):
about when you use that phrase?
Speaker 3 (12:09):
You know, what I'm talking about is addressing people who
have a mental health concern. You're actually you're right on
the money when people say they don't know what criminal
justice reform is. But the truth of the matter is
is in the LA Office, we've been doing criminal justice
reform for years or twenty thirty years, in the sense
of drug courts where instead of sending someone to dail,
(12:32):
you say, look, go to these classes and we'll dismiss
the case after that, you know, sort of leveraging them
into support or looking at things like those who are
wrongfully convicted, should we give them an avenue to have
their case reviewed. In short, it's about improving or changing,
(12:53):
if you will, changing the criminal justice system. But when
it's not done right change, the change could be disasters.
It can harm us, and that's what you're seeing now.
But if it's done well, you see success stories without
people getting hurt by folks who just aren't ready to
be out in our society for one reason or another.
(13:15):
And so really, I think that's the best way to
look at it. It's changing it, and it's supposed to
be changing it for the better, not the worst, if
it's done right.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
What are a couple of things that Gascon did that
really either scared you, makes you just shake your head,
made you angry? Were what were some of his policies
that you just couldn't believe.
Speaker 3 (13:38):
I was stunned on the first day when he ordered
UH prosecutors to no longer attend any parole hearings. I
thought that was wrong. His rationale was, it wasn't our job.
And so you have now victims or victims families who
have to go into prison and faith being the same
(14:00):
room with the person who either killed their killed their
loved ones or who violated them and argue against the
lies that prisoners sometimes put forth about what happened in
their crime and their rehabilitation. There is no one else
other than if they hire use their own money to
(14:21):
hire a private lawyer that will be in there with them.
I thought that was the worst. I also thought, you know,
wholesale getting away doing away with gun enhancements in La County,
doing away with gang enhancements in La County, you know,
doing away with hate crime enhancements. I mean, he finally
walked that back, but it's only with the hate crime.
(14:44):
Somebody had to threat to protest against him and then
he walked that back. I think that was egregious. But
I also think there's stuff that you wouldn't know about
unless you really follow the Board of Supervisors hearing the
millions that this person has cost us and taxpayer money
(15:05):
that could have been used on things like the homeless crisis.
This administration is burning through money left and right because
of costly mistakes. Well. An example is they filed the
case on someone that had to do with voter fraud
some company, and that company that person owned the company,
(15:26):
sued them and the board ended up giving them five
million dollars to set You know, there's such thing as
prosecutorally immunity, so that means they must have screwed that case.
That's so bad that the board ran scared and gave
them five million dollars. The other thing is employees who
have sued civil servants that he has, you know that
(15:46):
he has crapt over because they dared to speak the
truth to the king, so to speak. And that you know,
that's that's taxpayer money. I mean, you know, only a
couple of them now have been litigated, and he's lost them.
He lost one and he settled one, and then he
lost the other one to one point five eight dollars.
There's about a dozen more left on top of that.
(16:08):
With this recent charging of Diana Turan, one of his
top people in the office, I'm gonna be surprised if
those officers end up suing the office for failure to
stop or catch or manage this woman who broke the
law using their names. So, you know, uh, there's a
(16:31):
myriad of reasons. Maybe money is your issue, maybe you know,
maybe you feel safe. I'm not sure, but you talk
to people in Granada Hills. We're not feeling safe. We're
feeling like, look, things are are are dangerous now, more
dangerous than there were four years ago. We don't have
to go back to any tough on crime policies. But
(16:51):
you know what, the cost of crime, you know, it's
the cost of crime is too great. Right now, Jackie
is out.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
It's really good talking with you. Thanks for coming on.
Speaker 3 (17:04):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
Jo I hope we can talk again sometime. All right.
Speaker 2 (17:06):
Jackie Lacey who was the DA for eight years here
in La County and she's endorsing Nathan Hakman against Gascone
in November.
Speaker 4 (17:16):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI Am
six forty.
Speaker 2 (17:22):
We're on until four Conway on here after four. If
you missed the show today, we just finished a half
an hour Jackie Lacey, who is La County DA for
eight years and she's endorsing Nathan Hakman in the race
against Gascone in November. So if you missed that, you
want to hear it. She was very forthcoming, very honest
(17:42):
in her answers about what happened with her in that
election of twenty twenty and the tragedies she's gone through since,
and what she thinks of gascone, which she thinks of
Nathan Hakman. So you definitely ought to hear that on
the podcast on the iHeart app, moistline is eighty seven
seven Moist eighty six seven Moyst eighty six. You usually
talkback feature on the iHeartRadio app every once in a while.
(18:07):
It's really amusing. I don't think people understand just how
sheltered a lot of Washington journalists are from the public.
It's why they constantly get blindsided by, you know, Trump's support,
no matter even though we're dealing with Trump now next
month will be nine full years and still inside Washington
(18:30):
journalists are repeatedly stunned by his support and the reasons
for the support. I mean, at this point after nine years,
and since your job is to as a journalist to
if you're covering politics, you're covering why people vote the
way they vote. By now you should at least intellectually
(18:52):
understand what's going on, even if you don't agree with
it personally, you should understand why it's happening. And the
latest example of somebody utterly clueless, of course, it's NPR
and you've heard all about I mean, you've got people
inside NPR now revolting against the left wing indoctrination. And
(19:16):
what has happened is because you have virtually all the
NPR employees all left wing, all progressive, woke, they don't
have a clue as to what's going on in the
rest of the in the rest of the world. And
they've lost millions and millions of listeners, and they've lost
a lot of advertising money, corporate money, simply because they
(19:40):
are no longer giving out a product that a lot
of people can relate to. And here's why. This is
an NPR reporter named Osma Khaleide. She's their White House correspondent. Okay,
so this is not some low level intern here. This
is NPR's White House correspondent. She was invited on This Week,
(20:02):
which is their political show on Sunday mornings on ABC.
And she's baffled why so many people in America, including Democrats,
have nostalgia for Trump's economy.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
Listen to this clip.
Speaker 5 (20:17):
What I've already heard in so many of my interviews
with people is a lack lesser sense of enthusiasm, whether
it's black voters, whether it's you'd call them sort of
like disaffected Republicans, there's a whole bunch of things that
went right for Biden.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
I would argue in.
Speaker 5 (20:29):
Twenty twenty it was unity in opposition to Donald Trump.
To make this a referendum. Sure, is what the Biden
campaign wants, but it's really challenging because many voters are
looking at this election as a referendum on Trump. You know,
I was just up in Pennsylvania NonStop. I heard about
the economy, and people don't real right, yeah, yeah, I'm Biden.
I'm sorry, referendum on Biden. And so people don't feel
great about the economy. Now, this nostalgia for the Trump
(20:52):
years is something that I would say about the the
economy nostalgia I heard from Democrats even, which was really
shocking to me. Lay Democrats remember how good they thought
they're four one k was they would say in the
next breath, you know, they're not going to vote for
Trump for a variety of reasons.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
But that's what Joe Biden is up again.
Speaker 2 (21:08):
She shocked the Democrats want to protect the money they have.
She's really see people, our people, and we've all got
the same issues in life. And when inflation jacks up
the cost of everything by twenty to thirty percent. That
pisses you off because it wasn't necessary. It was ignited
(21:30):
by massive overspending. They dump trillions of dollars into the economy,
and that is a sure fireway to create inflation that
gets out of control. Many countries have done it. It's
a short term fix to try to keep people happy.
You dump more money into the economy and people feel
(21:53):
like they're getting richer for a brief period of time.
But when you have more money chasing the same goods,
it drives up the price.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
It always happens.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
I looked into huge inflation problems in the past in
various countries, and it was always the same. The government
started printing money, the government started borrowing money, they started
spending money, printing, borrowing, spending through the economy completely out
of whack and ignites inflation and it becomes a cycle.
It's hard to stop because the more the prices go up,
the more people want raises, the more raises they get,
(22:26):
that's more money they have to drive prices up, and
it goes around and around and around, and it doesn't stop.
And that's what we've got. And it's not whether the
inflation's up three and a half percent this month, it's
that cumulatively, since Biden took over, it's up between twenty
and thirty percent. That's a twenty to thirty percent pay cut,
a twenty to thirty percent tax, however you want to
(22:48):
frame it, and that hits you have to pay the
same price for eggs, no matter who you voted for
in twenty twenty, no matter what party you're registered with.
Of course Democrats are upset and have Trump nostalgia for
the economy. Of course they do, because they don't want
(23:09):
to pay an extra two dollars for eggs. Nobody does.
It's not their politics, it's not who they vote for,
it's they don't like the price of eggs. Like you know,
the price of gasoline here well over five dollars. A
lot of that's on Newsome and the Democratic legislature, but
we don't. We don't hold anybody responsible here in California
(23:31):
somehow strangely, weirdly, But in the rest of the country
where more rational people live, yeah, they hold the guy
responsible and they don't care if it's a Republican or
a Democrat because that doesn't factor in how they're going
to pay their bills. And that is a huge issue,
(23:53):
and it's not getting better. Inflation keeps going up, and
you keep getting reporters going on, I don't really understand.
I'm really shocked. I mean, there's no yeah, because ultimately,
you can tune out somebody's bombastic personality and you should.
You can tune out their tweets, you can tune out
all the nonsense. When you go to the store, you've
(24:13):
got to pay a hard number, and that hard number
is a lot higher than it used to be, and
it's it's, uh, it's gonna get worse. Oh, And that
reminds me this, this whole uh, this whole campaign to
raise the uh, the wages of fast food workers in California,
(24:33):
it is backfired big time. It's not only brought all
of us huge price increases if we go to these restaurants,
it has now cost the employees literally thousands of jobs.
And I'm going to explain that to you in the
next segment as well.
Speaker 4 (24:47):
Coming up, you're listening to John Cobelt on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (24:54):
When you artificially raise the wages, especially in something like
the fast food industry, because those jobs aren't worth much,
because the people doing those jobs do not bring much
value to the job. There's no specific skills, there's no
education needed. They're easily replaced not only by people now
(25:16):
but by machinery. But when you artificially raise the wages,
then the prices are going to be raised, and that's
going to fuel inflation, and that's going to upset people.
And Gavin Newsom, because he's stupid, mandates this new minimum
wage for fast food exempts his buddy who runs Panera, and.
Speaker 1 (25:39):
You end up with.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Unhappy people or now upset over how much money they're
paying for a cheeseburger or French fries or a taco
or whatever it is. Because you can't artificially raise wages
on jobs that don't have much inherent value. So the
(26:02):
side effect in the short term is prices have to
go up. The side effect the medium term is the owner,
the owners of these fast food franchises are going to
come up with new ways to get the job done
without using people. And a professor by the name of
Lee Ohanian has done some research looking at California minimum
(26:27):
wage laws for fast food businesses to see how it's
working out, and he's written a piece for the Independent
Institute and he has found that nine five hundred jobs
in California have already been wiped out. Can you imagine
if it was sold this way to the workers. We're
(26:49):
going to force your employer to pay you twenty bucks.
Speaker 1 (26:55):
An hour. Oh wow, that's wonderful.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Yay, twenty bucks to shake the fry basket.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
Yay.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Uh yeah.
Speaker 2 (27:05):
Then a week later you find out you're out. They're
not paying you twenty bucks. Nobody's gonna do that. Job's
not worth that, he wrote. More fast food job losses
are coming as the new minimum wage effect. New minimum
wage took effect losses at Pizza Hut and Round Table
Piece Pizza. Thirteen hundred delivery drivers alone got fired at
(27:29):
Pizza Hut and Round Table Pizza thirteen hundred. Elpoil, Loco
and Jack in the Box announced that they're going to
speed up the use of robotics. They've got robots that
make sasa, robots that cook fried foods. Now, you're gonna
end up with thousands of guys out of work, and
who's gonna go to them and say, oh, jeez, you
(27:51):
know we were wrong about that. Sorry, because those robots
are in for good. Those robots aren't coming when you
get fired from your job.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
You're not You're not. That job is gone for good.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
So it was an extremely stupid wall and it feels
and failed inflation. But stupid people running the state conways here.
Speaker 6 (28:12):
Hey know, eventually this is going to be taken over
by robots too, the producers, the writers, the hosts. I'll
kill the robots. I don't know if you'll be around.
John might be a couple of decades. Mondo's coming in
or on the phone. I don't know, but he he
won another Blue ribbon first place in the Guacamalle contest
(28:34):
at the La County Fair. That's four wow, that's incread
I don't think anyone's ever done that in the history.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
Of the world. I can't. You know, you must be right.
I don't think I am.
Speaker 6 (28:46):
Fritz Coleman's coming on Blask him if he knew it
was going to be windy at the Beach Life Festival.
Speaker 1 (28:52):
They shut that down over the weekend. I don't know
if you heard that. No I didn't.
Speaker 6 (28:56):
Yeah, I got really windy at the Beach Life Festival,
and I feel bad that it was later in the
day on Sunday, but still they did it. So nobody
got killed, you know, how much money did you make
on the Kentucky Derby. Okay, let me tell you what
happened last year. The horse that run was named Madge
m Age, which is my grandmother's name, m Agi. She
(29:17):
pronounced it, she spelled it m Agi, but it's Maggie Madge.
It's the same name. So this year I missed mistic Dan,
which is my grandfather's name.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Oh.
Speaker 6 (29:28):
The two closest people in my life my two grandparents.
So I missed my grandmother last year, my grandfather this year.
But I got a tip on a horse next year.
And it's called bet your grandparents, U fing idiot.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
Put a couple bucks on them. That's a good idea.
Speaker 6 (29:49):
It paid thirty eight dollars, John, if you have twenty
to win on it, you would have won three hundred
and eighty dollars.
Speaker 1 (29:53):
That's a good payoffs. It was huge, right, unbelievable. You
missed it. I missed it.
Speaker 6 (29:58):
I missed it, But I but you know what if
I would have bet it.
Speaker 1 (30:00):
God is sending you some hints. He's sending me messages.
Speaker 6 (30:05):
I made the same talk with my daughter at in
and out last night around ten o'clock at night, went
to get in and out and I was looking at
Los Alamados while we're in line, and she said, Dad,
are you winning at the track today?
Speaker 1 (30:16):
I said, no, I'm not winning today.
Speaker 6 (30:18):
And she said, do you think that's a sign that
maybe you should stop gambling?
Speaker 1 (30:27):
It didn't work out. You just keep missing all the signs.
Speaker 6 (30:32):
I know, I know, but look, they say that the
only thing worse than not having money on the winning
horse is not gambling at all. Guys in a single,
single room apartment in silmay sling under an overpass. It
that's right, okay, but that's why we get up in
(30:54):
the morning to, you know, to look at the racing.
Speaker 2 (30:56):
F Well, I mean you're still working, so you know
you keep funding. I have to work. You don't have to.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
I do. I can't. I got I gotta watch. What
I say is I haven't been on a horse in
thirty five in I know.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
I know.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
You gotta take a chance in life. Show take a.
Speaker 2 (31:11):
Chance, Conway, Crush you with you live in the KFI
twenty four hour Newsroom. Hey, you've been listening to the
John Cobalt Show podcast. You can always hear the show
live on KFI Am six forty from one to four pm.
Every Monday through Friday, and of course anytime on demand
on the iHeartRadio app.
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
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.