May 6, 2024 • 30 mins
Jon Coupal comes on the show to talk about the Taxpayer Protection Act being heard by the CA Supreme Court. Boeing is sending a rocket with astronauts in it up into space. People are getting very nervous Trump is going to win the election in November. A woman wants to have another kid so she can breastfeed her husband.
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 Cobel podcast on the iHeartRadio
app Coming up in an hour. Jackie Lacy, Jackie Lacy
was the La County DA for eight years. She was
running for a third term against Gascon in twenty twenty,
which is a bad year to run, and Gascone beat
Jackie Lacy. And now we've dealt with all kinds of
(00:23):
tragedy ever since. Nathan Hoffman is taking on Gascone this
time around. As you know, Jackie Lacy is endorsing Nathan
Hoffman and she's going to be on with us to
talk about it, coming up after three o'clock right now,
though this story has been percolating in the background, really important.
(00:43):
You do live in the highest tax state in the nation. Really,
you do at the highest income tax rate in the nation,
highest sales tax, highest gas tax, and goes on and
on and on. Even with all that money, the government
is still over seventy billion dollars in debt. They've blown
tens of billions of dollars on an unemployment fund that
(01:06):
was completely overwhelmed with fraud. You got the high speed
rail debacle that's blown billions of dollars, and the list
just goes on and on. So the whole state government
is a complete mess, a complete fiasco, and people want
to turn off the tax bigot. And there is a
possible initiative on the ballot for November that would strip
(01:30):
the legislature and the governor of the ability to increase taxes.
Taxes would only increase if the voter's approved of it. Now,
obviously Newsom and the legislature want to stop this thing
from reaching the ballot because they know what's going to happen.
So they have petitioned the Supreme Court to hear this
(01:52):
case in advance, and the Supreme Court said yes.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
So let's talk to John Coopaul.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
From the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association to explain this further.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
John, how are you.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
I'm well, John, how are you?
Speaker 1 (02:06):
I I'm good.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
Well.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Now, it seems like this initiative who would be quite sweeping.
Is it as all encompassing as it seems? This really
would stop them from raising any taxes, any fees unless
the public approved.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Yeah, Actually, it's far less reaching than Prop thirteen itself.
Remember Prop thirteen was a very very significant reduction in taxes.
It cut the property tax by more than half. The
Taxpayer Protection Act is more about accountability and allowing the
taxpayers to have a voice in how much they are taxed.
One of the things that it does, and this thing
(02:43):
pulls well above eighty percent, is that the requirement in Prop.
Thirteen that a state tax receive a two thirds vote
of each house of the legislature is still in effect. However,
a state wide tax would then have to go to
the voters for a approval. And what was the most
unpopular tax that actually came out of the California legislature.
(03:06):
That was a gas tax. Now, the two thirds vote
for years and years was not that big of a
problem for taxpayers because we had enough fiscal conservatives in
the legislature. But John, as you know, the legislature is
now a super duper, super liberal legislative institution, and so
(03:27):
they are able to jam tax increases with a two
thirds vote down our throats. And what this says is that, folks,
you can get you can get the legislature to pass it,
but it has to go to the voters for ratification.
And the voters would never have approved the gas tax
had they had a chance to have a voice in this.
(03:47):
It does some other things like simple things like John,
you've seen these ballot labels that are very very deceptives.
It says if there is a tax or fee increase,
it has to say tax or fee increase. It also
says that if there is a revenue enhancement a tax
feed charger assessment on the ballot, it has to specify
(04:08):
how much money they intend to raise, the duration, and
the rate. I mean, this is all common sense stuff
and their argument. And by the way, this is a
duly qualified initiative. One point four million signatures were gathered,
very broad coalition of business, taxpayers, ad groups, property rights.
(04:29):
This is basically us versus them. And you would have
thought that, you know, what we are proposing is the
end of Western civilization. You're right. They hate it because
what it does is it provides accountability and transparency to
the whole process by which they extract money from our pocketbooks.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
Gavenustam is claiming it's unconstitutional. What's the argument there?
Speaker 3 (04:55):
There are a very weak one, a very weak one.
The argument is the people can propose an amendment to
the state constitution like we did with Proposition thirteen. However,
there is a rule that says you can't. You cannot
propose a revision. A revision is some wholesale rewriting of
(05:16):
the entire constitution. There have only been two instances where
that's ever happened, and one of them was kind of
a complete rewrite by this nutjob guy who just kind
of created a state law that was to his bidding.
This is not that. And as I said, many many proposals,
(05:38):
many initiatives, have well survived assault based on the revision argument,
and we think that what will happen here we are
well within the bounds of a permissible amendment. And I
keep on going back to Prop thirteen. Prop thirteen survived
a legal assault based on the revision argument. And the
(05:58):
Taxpayer Protection Act is not nearly so impactful in terms
of substance of tax relief. It basically deals with process
and getting taxpayer engagement in the process of raising local taxes,
state taxes, fees, charges, and assessment. One more provision. I
(06:20):
think you'd like We hear all the time how the
administrative state, both at the federal level and the state level,
have really usurped a lot of legislative power. One of
the provisions that we put in the Taxpayer Protection Act
is the provision that said the administrative agencies cannot raise
a tax or fee without getting the approval of some
(06:43):
elected body. So no longer could the State of California say, well, look,
we delegated to the State Water Resources Control Board the
power to impose a fee. They have to get that approval. Now,
if they give specific approval to an agency, they can
do that. But this kind of a morphous whatever you
(07:05):
want can no longer be done. Really good provisions in
the Taxpayer Protection Act, And I honestly, as a matter
of politics, I think the fact that the governor and
the legislature have sued to take it off the ballot
is embarrassing for them. These are the same people who
claim to want to protect democracy, and they're kind to
prevent voters voters from voting on the Taxpayer.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Protection You know, they're liars and hypocrites.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
They don't want they don't want their money supply cut off.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
That's all it is. That's all that matters to them.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
What about the makeup of the California Supreme Court, you
think it's favorable to this kind of interpretation. I don't
trust judges and courts anymore any more than politicians these days.
So it seems like everything is up for grabs and
there aren't principles anymore.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
What do you think about that?
Speaker 3 (07:53):
Yeah, there is no doubt that you know, we no
longer have any Supreme Court appoint from Reagan, Major Pete Wilson,
even Schwarzeneger. I think Schwarzeneger may have appointed one. So
they are decidedly left of center. However, I do believe
(08:13):
that this case is so clear on our side that
they just don't want to tread down that road. And
in fairness, I have argued a conservative position before very
liberal justices and sometimes they are actually fair. So you know,
talk to me next week, or talk to me after
the decision comes down. But for now, our entire coalition
(08:35):
is giving them the benefit of the doubt. You know.
We don't want their thumb and the scale. We just
want them to apply the law that's well established in
the state of California since eighteen seventy nine, when we
had the original Constitution and when the initiative process was
given to us during the progressive error under Hiram Johnson.
If they apply all the case law that's in front
(08:57):
of them, we win this easily. Am I a little nervous.
You know everything is political now, John, so you know
there's part of me that is a little bit nervous.
But for right now, we're going to give them the
benefit of the doubt to come up with the right decision,
the fair decision, and one that's based on the law.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
John, thanks for coming on. When's the hearing?
Speaker 3 (09:17):
Hearing is Wednesday morning, and if you go to the
California Supreme Court website you can actually watch it. So
I will be there in the courtroom. We have our
director of legal affairs sitting at the council table and
our principal lawyer arguing the case is a guy who
I trust very very much, so I'll be sitting right
behind him during that hearing.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
All right, John, good luck, we'll talk with you again.
Speaker 3 (09:39):
So thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
All right, take care of And that's John Coupaul Howard
Jarffs Taxpayers Association. And this is about getting on the
balant in November, an initiative where the legislature and the
governor will no longer have the final say on increasing
state taxes. It would have to get voter approval. Yeah,
the tax issue itself have to go on the ballot,
(10:01):
and Newsome is suing to block that even though there's
a million, four hundred thousand signatures to get this initiative
voted on. We will continue. We got Jackie Lacy on.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
After three o'clock, you're listening to John Cobelt on demand
from KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
I don't want to be ghoulish, but at seven point
thirty four this evening Pacific time, there is a rocket
being launched and it has astronauts aboard at Cape Canaveral
in Florida, and it's headed for the space station, the
International Space Station, And you ought to say a prayer
(10:42):
for the crew because this rocket was made by Boeing.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
This is Poeings.
Speaker 5 (10:50):
Don't put it out there, John, just don't.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
You know. So far it's been a difficult man actoring
experience making this rocket because Boeing was awarded a four
billion dollar contract ten years ago to build and operate
a space ship to go to the International Space Station.
(11:14):
Now SpaceX, which is based in El Segundo, got two
and a half billion to do the same, and since
twenty twenty they've had eight trips to the space station,
eight crews and Boeing has had only two unmanned flights.
Boeing has had nothing but problems. It was supposed to
(11:36):
launch with a crew last summer, but they had a
problem with the parachute system and they found this is
hard to believe that they used flammable tape in the
spacecraft and a mile of flammable tape had to be removed,
they had to unwind.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
Why would they why.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
That?
Speaker 2 (12:00):
You could ask that a thousand times about Boweing. Why
They've had years and years worth of delays, a billion
and a half dollars in cost overruns, and they say
Boeing's reputation is really on the line here.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
I think those astronauts should think twice.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
I would imagine their wives said, wait a second, who
made this?
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Bowing? Can't you get a job of SpaceX? What do you.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
No?
Speaker 1 (12:34):
Way?
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Yeah, I'm shocked. I didn't know Boeing made spacecraft.
Speaker 5 (12:39):
Now here's something, John.
Speaker 6 (12:41):
Maybe the reason there's been so many problems on the planes,
they've been concentrating on this.
Speaker 5 (12:47):
So this is going to be extra safe.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
I'm hoping they're best guys are on this rocket. The
capsule is designed to be reused ten times, same like SpaceX.
Speaker 5 (13:01):
Does it have a door plug?
Speaker 1 (13:02):
It's good. I thought I thought the mile of tape
was really really bad.
Speaker 5 (13:12):
Is ridiculous?
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Isn't that basic? Who bought this? Who bought this tape?
I told you this is flammable. So it's Barry Wilmore
is one astronaut and Sunita Williams sounds like a woman.
And they're gonna spend eight days testing the capsule. Uh,
and then return to Earth May fifteenth, and uh, the
(13:34):
SpaceX capit capsules splashes down on water. But oh, this
is what's something new here. Starliner will deploy giant air
bags and touchdown on land. It's a system the Russian
space program has used. And if this flight is a success,
(13:55):
Boeing would be cleared to fly Starliner on regular flights
and it would take astronauts. It would stay docked for
six months, and this would be a second aircraft that
they could use to reach the space station. It's shaped
like a Hershey's kiss and can carry up to seven
astronauts without cargo, or fewer astronauts with some cargo. So
(14:22):
you talked with Park Nappy, the manager of Boeing's program, said,
I've never felt readier on any mission. Than I've ever
participated in. We are where we're supposed to be at
this point. Well, if this is a success, could they
put him in charge of the planes?
Speaker 1 (14:36):
Right?
Speaker 2 (14:36):
Put him in charge of that that MAX that MAX
seven experiment.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
So I didn't know Boeing did this.
Speaker 5 (14:45):
That's cary.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Can you imagine all the stories for the last three months.
Every time those astronauts wake up in the morning, they
got another Boeing plane do an emergency landings? All right,
So seven thirty four tonight, see if they be good
thoughts y'all?
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Yeah, all right.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
We've got Jackie Lacy coming up after three o'clock, and
we're also going to talk about the two Australians and
one American killed in Mexico for their tires. These were
a group of surfers. They've been found dead in a well.
Speaker 4 (15:24):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
We're gonna have Jackie Lacy on coming up after three o'clock.
Jackie Lacy was the La County District Attorney from twenty
twelve to twenty twenty, remember when life was normal, and
then Gascoon Beater in twenty twenty, which was a ridiculous,
stupid year filled with a lot of bad ideas, bad policy,
(15:51):
bad voting, and now she's supporting Nathan Hackman to beat
to beat Gascone. In November, we'll talk to Jackie Lacy
coming up after three o'clock. Trump has a plan to
deport twenty million illegal aliens. This was he gave an
(16:14):
interview to Time magazine, which has got everybody flapping their
wings because he was very blunt on what he's going
to do. And the polling is not looking good for Biden.
Not that polling matters at this point, but everybody on
that side is getting really nervous and talking about leaving
(16:35):
the country again, talking about, you know, going getting out
of a going to going to Portugal. I read there
were some Washington bureaucrat types looking at Portugal, looking at Spain.
They think Trump is going to be much better organized.
He knows what the job is about this time. He's
gonna He's got a million grudges that he's got to settle,
(16:59):
and one of a is he's gonna deport the illegal aliens.
No more nonsense. The plan is to take local law enforcement,
the National Guard in the military. Based on what Dwight
Eisenhower did in nineteen fifty four. Eisenhower shipped out a
million immigrants back then. Now we're talking about twenty million.
(17:22):
You're gonna have to get cooperation though from Congress. They're
gonna have to want to spend the money. And of
course if the Democrats own a piece of Congress, that
probably won't happen.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
But they're going to need.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
Officers, detention beds, transportation contracts. There's more flights heading out
of the country, more bus removals. Some countries will not
take illegal immigrants back home, Venezuela for example, and Trump
has an answer for that, Well, good, We'll cut off
aid and there's going to be no more visas for
(17:58):
legal visitors, and that should set them straight. There's always
a weapon in case. I always hate if think, well,
they don't want to accept the migrants back, you know
they want to find cut them off, bribery works, offer
more money. According to one former official, Tom Homan, who
(18:25):
worked as the acting Director of ICE under Trump, we
would prioritize criminals and national security threats, the ones most
dangerous for the country, but no one is off the table.
If you're in this country illegally, then we'll remove you,
and he said he would strongly consider taking a job
with the Trump team. And if Congress wants to finance this,
(18:49):
they'll just hire and they'll get the logistics down and
they'll get the supplies down. They're going to need Health
and Human Services, the State Department, the Immigration Services, and
uh it'll be an all encompassing attack and they're gonna
they'll work around the sanctuary cities. Gavin Newsom, we'll find
(19:11):
just how impotent he is when he's not president. Now
in Mexico, this is a terrible story. Guys like to
go to Baja California and surf. Well, three of them,
two Australians, two Australian brothers and one American went missing
last weekend and now they've been found dead in a
(19:34):
particularly awful way. They were on a surfing trip and uh,
criminals wanted to steal their pickup truck. They wanted the
tires and the three of them. And it's two brothers,
Jake and Callum Robinson from Australia and Jack Carter Rode
from the US.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
So the theory is is.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
That the killers saw the pickup truck and the tents
and one of the tires and when when the criminals
accosted these three, the surfers resisted and so they were
They were murdered and then taken to a site that's
extremely hard to get to and their bodies were dumped
(20:18):
in a well and really almost impossible to find this site.
They must have had like an inside tip. One suspect
was identified by his first name, Jesus Gerardo. His alias
is al Qikis, which is a slang word for casadeas.
(20:39):
People actually called him by the name Casadea.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
This is the killer.
Speaker 5 (20:47):
He has a soft touch.
Speaker 2 (20:49):
Uh yeah, it was nearly impossible to find the location.
It took two hours. They had to lower a winch
into the bottom of the well and and and pull
the bodies out. And a lot of people say, maybe
you shouldn't because Baja California. Everybody says, well, it's really
(21:10):
safe there and it's really quiet, except it's fairly deserted
and the criminals have the run of the place.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
And one guy wrote online.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
There's an internet for him about this kind of travel
and says the reality is the dangers of traveling too
and from and camping in remote areas in Mexico are
outweighing the benefits. The mother of the missing Australians a
week ago is her name is Debora Robinson. She posted
on Facebook page looking for help to find her son's.
Speaker 3 (21:45):
Jack.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Carter wrote the American there's really no detail exactly where
he's from and what his background is. But you know,
there's always people I'm talking to. They're always telling me,
you know, I ain't going to Mexico it's really safe, Like, no,
it's not safecunds on where you go in Mexico.
Speaker 6 (22:06):
Any of people vacation in Mexico. John, I went to Cabo,
I've gone to cancuon I'm okay.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
They are not going to kidnap you, And why.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
No, I.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
Think they would choose otherwise. There's got to be somebody quieter,
somebody more peaceful. You're not going to put her in
the back of the truck.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Well, there you go, and you just need to be
more like me, and you're fine.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
I don't think you'd make it a mile before one
of the guys says, well, can we just stumper now?
Speaker 3 (22:42):
All right?
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Take somebody else? Should we do that story about that
you showed me?
Speaker 6 (22:50):
Yes, It's unbelievable, shocking, disgusting.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Shocking, disgusting. This is the kind of news judgment, Deborah.
Speaker 6 (22:58):
Yes, when we come back, that's why you'll see what
kind of story she gets excited about.
Speaker 5 (23:03):
Only for your show.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
John, Thank you. That's I can see where you kind
of esteem you hold are showing.
Speaker 4 (23:11):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
He'll be yawning, I'm tired. You're gonna do your story here.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
You should be excited and very exciting. All right, coming
up after three o'clock, Jackie Lacy. Maybe she'll keep you awake.
Speaker 5 (23:29):
She probably will.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Jackie Lacey, former La County DA eight years. Weren't any
problems those eight years? Right, it's Steve Cooley for twelve,
Jackie Lacy for eight. We had twenty years of good
district attorneys. And then Gascon beats Jackie Lacy four years
ago and all hell breaks loose. She's endorsing Nathan Hockman
(23:50):
in the coming election. We'll talk to Jackie about that,
all right.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Now this you ever sent me this urgent text?
Speaker 5 (23:58):
I thought it was something you'd enjoy.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
You know about once a day you have a story
idea that you propose, and here's the headline. I'm a
mom who breastfed my husband. Now we want a fourth
child so he can do it again. This is a
for real story because I thought it was clickbait. But
they have names and photos. Rachel Bailey and her husband Alexander.
(24:24):
They're thirty thirty one years old, and they have been
grieving ever since their youngest son stopped breastfeeding and Rachel
stopped producing bread breast milk. Yeah, and apparently Alexander was
still hungry, so they agreed to have a fourth kid
(24:44):
so that Alexander could It's not.
Speaker 6 (24:47):
Because he was hungry, it's because that's how they bond.
It was a bonding experience. So she wants to have
another child so that she could breastfeed her husband again.
I'm saying, you can't figure out another way to bond.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
You know, there are a lot of ways to bond
physically with a woman. I yeah, I'm sure you know.
I don't think you need the milk spurting out to
I don't.
Speaker 5 (25:14):
Look, I have two children.
Speaker 6 (25:16):
I breastfed my kids and it was a great bonding experience.
Speaker 5 (25:21):
With my kids.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Nobody else ever lined up like a feeding no.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
One day, she goes, I was breastfeeding both my son
and my husband, and one day myself the same time.
That's right, Dad would stand in line. Hurry, I'm kid right.
One day my son was no longer interested in my
breast milk at all. I continued feeding Alexander the dad
for about two weeks, but my body seemed to know
(25:50):
that my son didn't need the milk, and it, you know,
she dried up, just a dust coming out.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
What's what's really what's really.
Speaker 2 (25:58):
Disgusting, though, is they and I I cannot believe they
published this. But it's the New York Post and there
are no standards anywhere anymore. They have a photo of
Alexander with his face between Rachel's breasts. Yeah, as if
he's getting a feeding.
Speaker 5 (26:13):
John flipped out.
Speaker 2 (26:14):
I mean, it is the most there's most disgusting. I
thought the story is bad enough, and I'm scrolling through
it's like, oh my god.
Speaker 5 (26:23):
No, So he had John Cobel written all over it.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
And he's got his head buried in his inner Yeah.
Speaker 5 (26:32):
I mean, look, people have different ways of bonding. That
that's up to you.
Speaker 6 (26:36):
I just thought this was very unusual, and I thought
you'd get a kick out of it.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
Well, it completely grossed me out.
Speaker 5 (26:43):
I know it grossed me out too.
Speaker 6 (26:46):
Look how many times do you send me things just
to gross me out?
Speaker 2 (26:50):
So to say, they apparently they have found an alternative
because taking on a fourth kid would be a lot.
Speaker 5 (26:59):
So just for that reason, it's just so stupid, right.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
Because she's gonna dry up again and then you'll have
the same problem. You can't have an infant number of
kids just.
Speaker 5 (27:11):
To keep breastfeeding her husband.
Speaker 1 (27:14):
Yeah, breastfeeding.
Speaker 5 (27:17):
So what's the new way? I didn't see that.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
Well, the couple now wakes up at five in the
morning every day to meditate and have time together.
Speaker 5 (27:25):
Well that okay, that that makes sense to me.
Speaker 1 (27:28):
That's that's yeah, that's a way to bond. Yes, uh
we we uh.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
She She said that when when she told people that
the husband was breastfeeding, she started getting odd requests. Yeah,
I bet now this is out on out on the internet.
Uh huh, Yeah, you're gonna get there are weirdos who yes, no,
(27:55):
what do you mean?
Speaker 3 (27:56):
You know?
Speaker 6 (27:56):
I get comments from people on my pictures and mine
are pretty Nobody wanted to feed though, no, God, no ah.
And if anybody thinks they're funny and they're going to
send me something like that. It's going to be deleted
and blocked right away.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
She's so we get up in the morning at five,
before the craziness of the day and enjoying the calmness
of the early morning. We chat and meditate and breathe.
And I still have people asking me every day they
can buy my breast milk. I have people asking me
if they can meet up with me so I can
breastfeed them too.
Speaker 5 (28:32):
Come on, I did not dive really deep into that story.
I didn't see that.
Speaker 1 (28:38):
But that's there are guys.
Speaker 6 (28:40):
I know there's so many different fetishes, but I don't
understand that one.
Speaker 5 (28:45):
And it's not even your own wife.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
There's people requesting them to make videos of ourselves breastfeeding.
Speaker 5 (28:53):
Oh my god.
Speaker 2 (28:53):
And she goes, we never consider it. I'm sure the
money would have been nice. And she says the breastfeeding
was never a sexual thing for her and her husband.
They did it just a bond.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
Yeah, And then they put it online.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
And so they got all these all these trolls and
these hate comments of who's got time to comment on this?
Speaker 5 (29:15):
Well, the same people that comment on some of my
things that I post.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
What are you posting if you're getting all this attention right.
Speaker 5 (29:24):
It doesn't matter.
Speaker 6 (29:25):
It can be something benign and some people will will
find a way.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
To say something. You're getting about something, not just me,
lots of people.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
You're getting fetishish stuff.
Speaker 5 (29:36):
I've, I've, I've.
Speaker 6 (29:39):
Some people sent me some requests that again I delete
and block.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
You don't want to go into those requests.
Speaker 5 (29:49):
All right, I'm a newswoman.
Speaker 6 (29:52):
I have my standards. That story was for you. I
didn't put that in my newscast.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
I don't get any requests, so I just want all right,
we come back.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
Jackie Lacy and she was our district attorney in La
County for eight years and then she lost a guest
going in twenty twenty.
Speaker 1 (30:10):
You know how that went.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
And she is now endorsing Nathan Hakman and she's going
to be on the show with us next and Deborah
Mark live in the KFI twenty for our 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 Cobel podcast on the iHeartRadio
app Coming up in an hour. Jackie Lacy, Jackie Lacy
was the La County DA for eight years. She was
running for a third term against Gascon in twenty twenty,
which is a bad year to run, and Gascone beat
Jackie Lacy. And now we've dealt with all kinds of
(00:23):
tragedy ever since. Nathan Hoffman is taking on Gascone this
time around. As you know, Jackie Lacy is endorsing Nathan
Hoffman and she's going to be on with us to
talk about it, coming up after three o'clock right now,
though this story has been percolating in the background, really important.
(00:43):
You do live in the highest tax state in the nation. Really,
you do at the highest income tax rate in the nation,
highest sales tax, highest gas tax, and goes on and
on and on. Even with all that money, the government
is still over seventy billion dollars in debt. They've blown
tens of billions of dollars on an unemployment fund that
(01:06):
was completely overwhelmed with fraud. You got the high speed
rail debacle that's blown billions of dollars, and the list
just goes on and on. So the whole state government
is a complete mess, a complete fiasco, and people want
to turn off the tax bigot. And there is a
possible initiative on the ballot for November that would strip
(01:30):
the legislature and the governor of the ability to increase taxes.
Taxes would only increase if the voter's approved of it. Now,
obviously Newsom and the legislature want to stop this thing
from reaching the ballot because they know what's going to happen.
So they have petitioned the Supreme Court to hear this
(01:52):
case in advance, and the Supreme Court said yes.
Speaker 1 (01:56):
So let's talk to John Coopaul.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
From the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association to explain this further.
Speaker 1 (02:02):
John, how are you.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
I'm well, John, how are you?
Speaker 1 (02:06):
I I'm good.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
Well.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Now, it seems like this initiative who would be quite sweeping.
Is it as all encompassing as it seems? This really
would stop them from raising any taxes, any fees unless
the public approved.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Yeah, Actually, it's far less reaching than Prop thirteen itself.
Remember Prop thirteen was a very very significant reduction in taxes.
It cut the property tax by more than half. The
Taxpayer Protection Act is more about accountability and allowing the
taxpayers to have a voice in how much they are taxed.
One of the things that it does, and this thing
(02:43):
pulls well above eighty percent, is that the requirement in Prop.
Thirteen that a state tax receive a two thirds vote
of each house of the legislature is still in effect. However,
a state wide tax would then have to go to
the voters for a approval. And what was the most
unpopular tax that actually came out of the California legislature.
(03:06):
That was a gas tax. Now, the two thirds vote
for years and years was not that big of a
problem for taxpayers because we had enough fiscal conservatives in
the legislature. But John, as you know, the legislature is
now a super duper, super liberal legislative institution, and so
(03:27):
they are able to jam tax increases with a two
thirds vote down our throats. And what this says is that, folks,
you can get you can get the legislature to pass it,
but it has to go to the voters for ratification.
And the voters would never have approved the gas tax
had they had a chance to have a voice in this.
(03:47):
It does some other things like simple things like John,
you've seen these ballot labels that are very very deceptives.
It says if there is a tax or fee increase,
it has to say tax or fee increase. It also
says that if there is a revenue enhancement a tax
feed charger assessment on the ballot, it has to specify
(04:08):
how much money they intend to raise, the duration, and
the rate. I mean, this is all common sense stuff
and their argument. And by the way, this is a
duly qualified initiative. One point four million signatures were gathered,
very broad coalition of business, taxpayers, ad groups, property rights.
(04:29):
This is basically us versus them. And you would have
thought that, you know, what we are proposing is the
end of Western civilization. You're right. They hate it because
what it does is it provides accountability and transparency to
the whole process by which they extract money from our pocketbooks.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
Gavenustam is claiming it's unconstitutional. What's the argument there?
Speaker 3 (04:55):
There are a very weak one, a very weak one.
The argument is the people can propose an amendment to
the state constitution like we did with Proposition thirteen. However,
there is a rule that says you can't. You cannot
propose a revision. A revision is some wholesale rewriting of
(05:16):
the entire constitution. There have only been two instances where
that's ever happened, and one of them was kind of
a complete rewrite by this nutjob guy who just kind
of created a state law that was to his bidding.
This is not that. And as I said, many many proposals,
(05:38):
many initiatives, have well survived assault based on the revision argument,
and we think that what will happen here we are
well within the bounds of a permissible amendment. And I
keep on going back to Prop thirteen. Prop thirteen survived
a legal assault based on the revision argument. And the
(05:58):
Taxpayer Protection Act is not nearly so impactful in terms
of substance of tax relief. It basically deals with process
and getting taxpayer engagement in the process of raising local taxes,
state taxes, fees, charges, and assessment. One more provision. I
(06:20):
think you'd like We hear all the time how the
administrative state, both at the federal level and the state level,
have really usurped a lot of legislative power. One of
the provisions that we put in the Taxpayer Protection Act
is the provision that said the administrative agencies cannot raise
a tax or fee without getting the approval of some
(06:43):
elected body. So no longer could the State of California say, well, look,
we delegated to the State Water Resources Control Board the
power to impose a fee. They have to get that approval. Now,
if they give specific approval to an agency, they can
do that. But this kind of a morphous whatever you
(07:05):
want can no longer be done. Really good provisions in
the Taxpayer Protection Act, And I honestly, as a matter
of politics, I think the fact that the governor and
the legislature have sued to take it off the ballot
is embarrassing for them. These are the same people who
claim to want to protect democracy, and they're kind to
prevent voters voters from voting on the Taxpayer.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Protection You know, they're liars and hypocrites.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
They don't want they don't want their money supply cut off.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
That's all it is. That's all that matters to them.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
What about the makeup of the California Supreme Court, you
think it's favorable to this kind of interpretation. I don't
trust judges and courts anymore any more than politicians these days.
So it seems like everything is up for grabs and
there aren't principles anymore.
Speaker 1 (07:51):
What do you think about that?
Speaker 3 (07:53):
Yeah, there is no doubt that you know, we no
longer have any Supreme Court appoint from Reagan, Major Pete Wilson,
even Schwarzeneger. I think Schwarzeneger may have appointed one. So
they are decidedly left of center. However, I do believe
(08:13):
that this case is so clear on our side that
they just don't want to tread down that road. And
in fairness, I have argued a conservative position before very
liberal justices and sometimes they are actually fair. So you know,
talk to me next week, or talk to me after
the decision comes down. But for now, our entire coalition
(08:35):
is giving them the benefit of the doubt. You know.
We don't want their thumb and the scale. We just
want them to apply the law that's well established in
the state of California since eighteen seventy nine, when we
had the original Constitution and when the initiative process was
given to us during the progressive error under Hiram Johnson.
If they apply all the case law that's in front
(08:57):
of them, we win this easily. Am I a little nervous.
You know everything is political now, John, so you know
there's part of me that is a little bit nervous.
But for right now, we're going to give them the
benefit of the doubt to come up with the right decision,
the fair decision, and one that's based on the law.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
John, thanks for coming on. When's the hearing?
Speaker 3 (09:17):
Hearing is Wednesday morning, and if you go to the
California Supreme Court website you can actually watch it. So
I will be there in the courtroom. We have our
director of legal affairs sitting at the council table and
our principal lawyer arguing the case is a guy who
I trust very very much, so I'll be sitting right
behind him during that hearing.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
All right, John, good luck, we'll talk with you again.
Speaker 3 (09:39):
So thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (09:40):
All right, take care of And that's John Coupaul Howard
Jarffs Taxpayers Association. And this is about getting on the
balant in November, an initiative where the legislature and the
governor will no longer have the final say on increasing
state taxes. It would have to get voter approval. Yeah,
the tax issue itself have to go on the ballot,
(10:01):
and Newsome is suing to block that even though there's
a million, four hundred thousand signatures to get this initiative
voted on. We will continue. We got Jackie Lacy on.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
After three o'clock, you're listening to John Cobelt on demand
from KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
I don't want to be ghoulish, but at seven point
thirty four this evening Pacific time, there is a rocket
being launched and it has astronauts aboard at Cape Canaveral
in Florida, and it's headed for the space station, the
International Space Station, And you ought to say a prayer
(10:42):
for the crew because this rocket was made by Boeing.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
This is Poeings.
Speaker 5 (10:50):
Don't put it out there, John, just don't.
Speaker 2 (10:54):
You know. So far it's been a difficult man actoring
experience making this rocket because Boeing was awarded a four
billion dollar contract ten years ago to build and operate
a space ship to go to the International Space Station.
(11:14):
Now SpaceX, which is based in El Segundo, got two
and a half billion to do the same, and since
twenty twenty they've had eight trips to the space station,
eight crews and Boeing has had only two unmanned flights.
Boeing has had nothing but problems. It was supposed to
(11:36):
launch with a crew last summer, but they had a
problem with the parachute system and they found this is
hard to believe that they used flammable tape in the
spacecraft and a mile of flammable tape had to be removed,
they had to unwind.
Speaker 5 (11:56):
Why would they why.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
That?
Speaker 2 (12:00):
You could ask that a thousand times about Boweing. Why
They've had years and years worth of delays, a billion
and a half dollars in cost overruns, and they say
Boeing's reputation is really on the line here.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
I think those astronauts should think twice.
Speaker 1 (12:22):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
I would imagine their wives said, wait a second, who
made this?
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Bowing? Can't you get a job of SpaceX? What do you.
Speaker 3 (12:33):
No?
Speaker 1 (12:34):
Way?
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Yeah, I'm shocked. I didn't know Boeing made spacecraft.
Speaker 5 (12:39):
Now here's something, John.
Speaker 6 (12:41):
Maybe the reason there's been so many problems on the planes,
they've been concentrating on this.
Speaker 5 (12:47):
So this is going to be extra safe.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
I'm hoping they're best guys are on this rocket. The
capsule is designed to be reused ten times, same like SpaceX.
Speaker 5 (13:01):
Does it have a door plug?
Speaker 1 (13:02):
It's good. I thought I thought the mile of tape
was really really bad.
Speaker 5 (13:12):
Is ridiculous?
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Isn't that basic? Who bought this? Who bought this tape?
I told you this is flammable. So it's Barry Wilmore
is one astronaut and Sunita Williams sounds like a woman.
And they're gonna spend eight days testing the capsule. Uh,
and then return to Earth May fifteenth, and uh, the
(13:34):
SpaceX capit capsules splashes down on water. But oh, this
is what's something new here. Starliner will deploy giant air
bags and touchdown on land. It's a system the Russian
space program has used. And if this flight is a success,
(13:55):
Boeing would be cleared to fly Starliner on regular flights
and it would take astronauts. It would stay docked for
six months, and this would be a second aircraft that
they could use to reach the space station. It's shaped
like a Hershey's kiss and can carry up to seven
astronauts without cargo, or fewer astronauts with some cargo. So
(14:22):
you talked with Park Nappy, the manager of Boeing's program, said,
I've never felt readier on any mission. Than I've ever
participated in. We are where we're supposed to be at
this point. Well, if this is a success, could they
put him in charge of the planes?
Speaker 1 (14:36):
Right?
Speaker 2 (14:36):
Put him in charge of that that MAX that MAX
seven experiment.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
So I didn't know Boeing did this.
Speaker 5 (14:45):
That's cary.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Can you imagine all the stories for the last three months.
Every time those astronauts wake up in the morning, they
got another Boeing plane do an emergency landings? All right,
So seven thirty four tonight, see if they be good
thoughts y'all?
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Yeah, all right.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
We've got Jackie Lacy coming up after three o'clock, and
we're also going to talk about the two Australians and
one American killed in Mexico for their tires. These were
a group of surfers. They've been found dead in a well.
Speaker 4 (15:24):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
We're gonna have Jackie Lacy on coming up after three o'clock.
Jackie Lacy was the La County District Attorney from twenty
twelve to twenty twenty, remember when life was normal, and
then Gascoon Beater in twenty twenty, which was a ridiculous,
stupid year filled with a lot of bad ideas, bad policy,
(15:51):
bad voting, and now she's supporting Nathan Hackman to beat
to beat Gascone. In November, we'll talk to Jackie Lacy
coming up after three o'clock. Trump has a plan to
deport twenty million illegal aliens. This was he gave an
(16:14):
interview to Time magazine, which has got everybody flapping their
wings because he was very blunt on what he's going
to do. And the polling is not looking good for Biden.
Not that polling matters at this point, but everybody on
that side is getting really nervous and talking about leaving
(16:35):
the country again, talking about, you know, going getting out
of a going to going to Portugal. I read there
were some Washington bureaucrat types looking at Portugal, looking at Spain.
They think Trump is going to be much better organized.
He knows what the job is about this time. He's
gonna He's got a million grudges that he's got to settle,
(16:59):
and one of a is he's gonna deport the illegal aliens.
No more nonsense. The plan is to take local law enforcement,
the National Guard in the military. Based on what Dwight
Eisenhower did in nineteen fifty four. Eisenhower shipped out a
million immigrants back then. Now we're talking about twenty million.
(17:22):
You're gonna have to get cooperation though from Congress. They're
gonna have to want to spend the money. And of
course if the Democrats own a piece of Congress, that
probably won't happen.
Speaker 1 (17:34):
But they're going to need.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
Officers, detention beds, transportation contracts. There's more flights heading out
of the country, more bus removals. Some countries will not
take illegal immigrants back home, Venezuela for example, and Trump
has an answer for that, Well, good, We'll cut off
aid and there's going to be no more visas for
(17:58):
legal visitors, and that should set them straight. There's always
a weapon in case. I always hate if think, well,
they don't want to accept the migrants back, you know
they want to find cut them off, bribery works, offer
more money. According to one former official, Tom Homan, who
(18:25):
worked as the acting Director of ICE under Trump, we
would prioritize criminals and national security threats, the ones most
dangerous for the country, but no one is off the table.
If you're in this country illegally, then we'll remove you,
and he said he would strongly consider taking a job
with the Trump team. And if Congress wants to finance this,
(18:49):
they'll just hire and they'll get the logistics down and
they'll get the supplies down. They're going to need Health
and Human Services, the State Department, the Immigration Services, and
uh it'll be an all encompassing attack and they're gonna
they'll work around the sanctuary cities. Gavin Newsom, we'll find
(19:11):
just how impotent he is when he's not president. Now
in Mexico, this is a terrible story. Guys like to
go to Baja California and surf. Well, three of them,
two Australians, two Australian brothers and one American went missing
last weekend and now they've been found dead in a
(19:34):
particularly awful way. They were on a surfing trip and uh,
criminals wanted to steal their pickup truck. They wanted the
tires and the three of them. And it's two brothers,
Jake and Callum Robinson from Australia and Jack Carter Rode
from the US.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
So the theory is is.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
That the killers saw the pickup truck and the tents
and one of the tires and when when the criminals
accosted these three, the surfers resisted and so they were
They were murdered and then taken to a site that's
extremely hard to get to and their bodies were dumped
(20:18):
in a well and really almost impossible to find this site.
They must have had like an inside tip. One suspect
was identified by his first name, Jesus Gerardo. His alias
is al Qikis, which is a slang word for casadeas.
(20:39):
People actually called him by the name Casadea.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
This is the killer.
Speaker 5 (20:47):
He has a soft touch.
Speaker 2 (20:49):
Uh yeah, it was nearly impossible to find the location.
It took two hours. They had to lower a winch
into the bottom of the well and and and pull
the bodies out. And a lot of people say, maybe
you shouldn't because Baja California. Everybody says, well, it's really
(21:10):
safe there and it's really quiet, except it's fairly deserted
and the criminals have the run of the place.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
And one guy wrote online.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
There's an internet for him about this kind of travel
and says the reality is the dangers of traveling too
and from and camping in remote areas in Mexico are
outweighing the benefits. The mother of the missing Australians a
week ago is her name is Debora Robinson. She posted
on Facebook page looking for help to find her son's.
Speaker 3 (21:45):
Jack.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
Carter wrote the American there's really no detail exactly where
he's from and what his background is. But you know,
there's always people I'm talking to. They're always telling me,
you know, I ain't going to Mexico it's really safe, Like, no,
it's not safecunds on where you go in Mexico.
Speaker 6 (22:06):
Any of people vacation in Mexico. John, I went to Cabo,
I've gone to cancuon I'm okay.
Speaker 2 (22:13):
They are not going to kidnap you, And why.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
No, I.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
Think they would choose otherwise. There's got to be somebody quieter,
somebody more peaceful. You're not going to put her in
the back of the truck.
Speaker 5 (22:34):
Well, there you go, and you just need to be
more like me, and you're fine.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
I don't think you'd make it a mile before one
of the guys says, well, can we just stumper now?
Speaker 3 (22:42):
All right?
Speaker 1 (22:46):
Take somebody else? Should we do that story about that
you showed me?
Speaker 6 (22:50):
Yes, It's unbelievable, shocking, disgusting.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
Shocking, disgusting. This is the kind of news judgment, Deborah.
Speaker 6 (22:58):
Yes, when we come back, that's why you'll see what
kind of story she gets excited about.
Speaker 5 (23:03):
Only for your show.
Speaker 1 (23:04):
John, Thank you. That's I can see where you kind
of esteem you hold are showing.
Speaker 4 (23:11):
You're listening to John Cobels on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 1 (23:16):
He'll be yawning, I'm tired. You're gonna do your story here.
Speaker 2 (23:22):
You should be excited and very exciting. All right, coming
up after three o'clock, Jackie Lacy. Maybe she'll keep you awake.
Speaker 5 (23:29):
She probably will.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Jackie Lacey, former La County DA eight years. Weren't any
problems those eight years? Right, it's Steve Cooley for twelve,
Jackie Lacy for eight. We had twenty years of good
district attorneys. And then Gascon beats Jackie Lacy four years
ago and all hell breaks loose. She's endorsing Nathan Hockman
(23:50):
in the coming election. We'll talk to Jackie about that,
all right.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Now this you ever sent me this urgent text?
Speaker 5 (23:58):
I thought it was something you'd enjoy.
Speaker 2 (24:01):
You know about once a day you have a story
idea that you propose, and here's the headline. I'm a
mom who breastfed my husband. Now we want a fourth
child so he can do it again. This is a
for real story because I thought it was clickbait. But
they have names and photos. Rachel Bailey and her husband Alexander.
(24:24):
They're thirty thirty one years old, and they have been
grieving ever since their youngest son stopped breastfeeding and Rachel
stopped producing bread breast milk. Yeah, and apparently Alexander was
still hungry, so they agreed to have a fourth kid
(24:44):
so that Alexander could It's not.
Speaker 6 (24:47):
Because he was hungry, it's because that's how they bond.
It was a bonding experience. So she wants to have
another child so that she could breastfeed her husband again.
I'm saying, you can't figure out another way to bond.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
You know, there are a lot of ways to bond
physically with a woman. I yeah, I'm sure you know.
I don't think you need the milk spurting out to
I don't.
Speaker 5 (25:14):
Look, I have two children.
Speaker 6 (25:16):
I breastfed my kids and it was a great bonding experience.
Speaker 5 (25:21):
With my kids.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Nobody else ever lined up like a feeding no.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
One day, she goes, I was breastfeeding both my son
and my husband, and one day myself the same time.
That's right, Dad would stand in line. Hurry, I'm kid right.
One day my son was no longer interested in my
breast milk at all. I continued feeding Alexander the dad
for about two weeks, but my body seemed to know
(25:50):
that my son didn't need the milk, and it, you know,
she dried up, just a dust coming out.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
What's what's really what's really.
Speaker 2 (25:58):
Disgusting, though, is they and I I cannot believe they
published this. But it's the New York Post and there
are no standards anywhere anymore. They have a photo of
Alexander with his face between Rachel's breasts. Yeah, as if
he's getting a feeding.
Speaker 5 (26:13):
John flipped out.
Speaker 2 (26:14):
I mean, it is the most there's most disgusting. I
thought the story is bad enough, and I'm scrolling through
it's like, oh my god.
Speaker 5 (26:23):
No, So he had John Cobel written all over it.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
And he's got his head buried in his inner Yeah.
Speaker 5 (26:32):
I mean, look, people have different ways of bonding. That
that's up to you.
Speaker 6 (26:36):
I just thought this was very unusual, and I thought
you'd get a kick out of it.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
Well, it completely grossed me out.
Speaker 5 (26:43):
I know it grossed me out too.
Speaker 6 (26:46):
Look how many times do you send me things just
to gross me out?
Speaker 2 (26:50):
So to say, they apparently they have found an alternative
because taking on a fourth kid would be a lot.
Speaker 5 (26:59):
So just for that reason, it's just so stupid, right.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
Because she's gonna dry up again and then you'll have
the same problem. You can't have an infant number of
kids just.
Speaker 5 (27:11):
To keep breastfeeding her husband.
Speaker 1 (27:14):
Yeah, breastfeeding.
Speaker 5 (27:17):
So what's the new way? I didn't see that.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
Well, the couple now wakes up at five in the
morning every day to meditate and have time together.
Speaker 5 (27:25):
Well that okay, that that makes sense to me.
Speaker 1 (27:28):
That's that's yeah, that's a way to bond. Yes, uh
we we uh.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
She She said that when when she told people that
the husband was breastfeeding, she started getting odd requests. Yeah,
I bet now this is out on out on the internet.
Uh huh, Yeah, you're gonna get there are weirdos who yes, no,
(27:55):
what do you mean?
Speaker 3 (27:56):
You know?
Speaker 6 (27:56):
I get comments from people on my pictures and mine
are pretty Nobody wanted to feed though, no, God, no ah.
And if anybody thinks they're funny and they're going to
send me something like that. It's going to be deleted
and blocked right away.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
She's so we get up in the morning at five,
before the craziness of the day and enjoying the calmness
of the early morning. We chat and meditate and breathe.
And I still have people asking me every day they
can buy my breast milk. I have people asking me
if they can meet up with me so I can
breastfeed them too.
Speaker 5 (28:32):
Come on, I did not dive really deep into that story.
I didn't see that.
Speaker 1 (28:38):
But that's there are guys.
Speaker 6 (28:40):
I know there's so many different fetishes, but I don't
understand that one.
Speaker 5 (28:45):
And it's not even your own wife.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
There's people requesting them to make videos of ourselves breastfeeding.
Speaker 5 (28:53):
Oh my god.
Speaker 2 (28:53):
And she goes, we never consider it. I'm sure the
money would have been nice. And she says the breastfeeding
was never a sexual thing for her and her husband.
They did it just a bond.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
Yeah, And then they put it online.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
And so they got all these all these trolls and
these hate comments of who's got time to comment on this?
Speaker 5 (29:15):
Well, the same people that comment on some of my
things that I post.
Speaker 1 (29:21):
What are you posting if you're getting all this attention right.
Speaker 5 (29:24):
It doesn't matter.
Speaker 6 (29:25):
It can be something benign and some people will will
find a way.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
To say something. You're getting about something, not just me,
lots of people.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
You're getting fetishish stuff.
Speaker 5 (29:36):
I've, I've, I've.
Speaker 6 (29:39):
Some people sent me some requests that again I delete
and block.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
You don't want to go into those requests.
Speaker 5 (29:49):
All right, I'm a newswoman.
Speaker 6 (29:52):
I have my standards. That story was for you. I
didn't put that in my newscast.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
I don't get any requests, so I just want all right,
we come back.
Speaker 2 (30:03):
Jackie Lacy and she was our district attorney in La
County for eight years and then she lost a guest
going in twenty twenty.
Speaker 1 (30:10):
You know how that went.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
And she is now endorsing Nathan Hakman and she's going
to be on the show with us next and Deborah
Mark live in the KFI twenty for our 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.