December 13, 2024 • 28 mins
Rep. Zach Nunn of Iowa, is a United States Air Force Colonel Nunn who was an airborne operations officer overseeing drone strikes and counterintelligence against Chinese UAVs. He’s certain the NJ ones are Chinese made.
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):
All right, thanks Scott Shan in an hour two Sean
Hennity Show, eight hundred and nine to four one Seawn
our number if you want to be a part of
the program. Well, I keep talking about the Daniel Penny
case because I think it's so relevant, this case that
never should have been brought. It was a malicious prosecution
on the part of Alvin Bragg.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
By far.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
The best coverage was my friend, my colleague, judge Janine
Piro of the hit show The Five. She'll join us
in a second, and she got the first interview with
Daniel Penny, the only interview to date, and it was.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Very, very powerful.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Let me play portions of this where he slams the
policies that failed New Yorkers. Remember, you know this guy,
Jordan Neely had what forty two run ins with the
police prior to this. He never should have been on
that subway train. Don't forget the testimony from eyewitness after
eyewitness talked about how they feared for their lives. One
(01:03):
African American woman testifying in the trials saying thank you
to Daniel Penny, smiling at him from the witness stand.
And of course, then the antics that I believe, you know,
were just just so corrupt by the DA's office. This
guy should not be a DA in any city or
(01:25):
any town or any municipality anyway. Here's Penny slamming the
policies that failed New Yorkers, then talking about how Jordan
Neely was threatening to kill people, and describing the subway
when Jordan Neely got on it. Let me play a
substantial part of this interview so you understand the context
(01:47):
of what Daniel Penny had to deal with that day.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
These public officials wouldn't do something so self serving.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Does it serve them to hurt you just political gain.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
I mean, these are their policies that are and I
don't mean to get political. I don't really want to
make any enemies really, although I guess I have already,
But I mean these these are their policies that I've
clearly not worked, that the people, the general population are
(02:24):
not in support of. Yet their egos are too big
just to admit admit that they're wrong, just very aggressively.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
Kind of like ran on and stumbled on.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
That's you know, as New Yorkers, you kind of come
to accept that is unfortunately a normal occurrence.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
And what was he saying, what was he doing?
Speaker 4 (02:49):
What drew your attention to him?
Speaker 2 (02:53):
Well, you know I noticed him at first.
Speaker 3 (02:55):
When he came on, you know, and the doors closed,
and as soon as the doors closed, he was carrying
a jacket and he whipped the jacket down and it
landed on the feet I was standing, and it landed
on the feet of the passenger sitting down next to me,
and the zipper made.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
A very audible noise. It was very loud, very aggressive, and.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
At that point the train car went completely silent. It
was it almost felt as like it felt like a vacuum,
and there's like this hollow feeling. And that's when I
first kind of gave him my full attention.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
Okay, so the train becomes silent, What if anything does
he say?
Speaker 3 (03:43):
You know, he first comes on and he starts demanding things.
He's demanded three different things. You know, he's certain types
of food, certain types of drinks, and you know, things
that like some type of fast food, and that he
was he was willing to go to jail forever if
he didn't get these things.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
And then it kind of escalated.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
You were saying, you repeated, I was going to go
to jail for life, I'm willing to hurt people, I'm
willing to kill people.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
I'm going to kill people.
Speaker 3 (04:14):
And is this keep in mind, this is all within
fifteen seconds of him getting on the train, and it
was this escalation of violence and threatening behavior that it
was just.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
It was pretty.
Speaker 4 (04:29):
Serious when he said he was willing to kill people.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Did you believe him? Yeah, totally.
Speaker 3 (04:34):
It was unlike you know, because there's outbursts on the
train all the time.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Unfortunately in New York City, there's.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
There's always people coming on and saying kind of talking crazy,
and this was unlike anything that I've ever experienced, and
it was it was very serious. It was I completely
believed what he was saying.
Speaker 4 (04:59):
It was what was the reaction by the fellow subway riders.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
Well, when, like I said, when there was that silence,
when there was that vacuum, I mean everybody was had
Like he got everybody's attention.
Speaker 4 (05:14):
How close was he to the people as he was
telling them or saying I'm going to kill someone?
Speaker 3 (05:20):
He started off in the middle of the of the train,
by the pole, and then he would in that in
that escalation, he would he started to get in people's
faces within a foot of people.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
What was there. There was a woman with a baby in.
Speaker 3 (05:33):
A carriage, children, kids going to school, coming back from school.
It was just like it was. It was what you'd
expect on a normal New York City subway train or
subway car. He was yeah, the mother was was holding
her child, and the school kids were protecting themselves or
(05:55):
holding each other, and just people were stuck their chairs
and they felt pinned. And I felt pinned, I felt nervous,
I felt scared.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
All right joining us now, she had this exclusive interview.
Friend of the program, also co host of the hit
show of the five Friend of Mine, judged Janine Piros
with us, Judge, I will tell you all throughout the trial,
and I did comment to you about this privately and
publicly on the air on Fox News. You had superb coverage,
(06:28):
and it was in the middle of a presidential election,
which made your life that much harder. But you really
cared about this, and with your background as a DA
and a prosecutor, you are the perfect person to be
in that courtroom.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
As often as you are.
Speaker 4 (06:42):
Well, thank you for your gratitude and your compliments. I
really appreciate it. Look, I've been Alvin Bragg I've been
the elected DA and I've been the judge in that
courtroom as well as an elected county judge. So I mean,
that's kind of my wheelhouse. It's New York. But it
was clear to me from the get go that this
was a case that never should have been brought, as
(07:03):
you've been saying for many, many months now, because Alvin
Bragg is a leftist, progressive prosecutor funded by George Sorrows.
This was a case that was brought because of color,
and the prosecutor's office tried to make this a case
about race and racism, but it was totally rejected by
(07:24):
the jury and by everyone on that subway train. And
you know you said it right. There was an African
American lady who smiled from the witness stand. And Danny
Penny was so eloquent in that interview when he talked
about the fact that the gratitude and the thanks from
the people on that subway car would overcome, as he
(07:46):
said it a million days of court appearances, all the
name calling and all the hate. He said, he only
has to think back to the people who thanked him.
This guy, Danny Penny is he is an American hero.
And when you've got these people like Alvin Bragg and
you mentioned malicious prosecution, I think they should go for that.
(08:08):
But there's another piece to it, Sewan, and that isn't
the medical examiner lied on the oath. The medical examiner
said one thing in the grand jury and one thing
at the trial regarding the pressure at the neck. She
said she couldn't tell if there was persistent consistent pressure
in the grand jury testimony. And at the trial, of
course she's pro prosecution. Oh yeah, there's consistent persistent pressure.
(08:33):
That's number one, same medical examiner. Number two, the chief
medical examiner gets involved after the autopsy's done and decides
it's a homicide. They don't wait for toxicology, histology, anthropology.
Why is that relevant? Because this guy had enough K
two in his system to make him that aggressive, incredibly
(08:55):
strong first in nation.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
A lot of people don't know what K two is,
but it's a very poltent, powerful drug that literally makes
people crazy.
Speaker 4 (09:06):
It makes me crazy, and this guy's already crazy. He
was in the middle of a psychotic break, remember, Sean.
He was on a list of fifty the most dangerous
mentally ill homeless people in a city of eight million people.
He's identified as one of the fifty. He was arrested
forty two times, arrested within a seven year period. He
(09:26):
had an open warrant for decking in a sixty four
or sixty eight year old woman and breaking your orbital bumps.
That day he had arrassed another woman on the subway
car on the subway platform. So let's not kit each other.
You not only had a DA who was political, but
you had a medical examiner who actually came out Sean
(09:47):
and said, I don't care if there's enough fetanyl to
kill an elephant. This is a strangulation. Now, Sewna tried
strangulation cases. There was no FATIGUEI I think there were
two little dots in They showed the eyelid. And these
lawyers are great Teniff and Razor, Steve rasor Tom Kaniff.
There's no PANDIKII. There was no damage to the hyoid bone.
(10:10):
The high bone is the Adams apple, none of that stuff.
And they didn't even wait for the test. And he
was he had sickle cell disease. He was sickling as
he died. So you've got a psychotic break. You've got
him on K two an incredibly a strong drug. It's
cannabinoid synthetic. People are crazy on it. They're very strong,
(10:32):
and even Penny said in the interview with me, he said, look,
he was above me and he picked me up as
I wrapped myself around him. We were on the floor
and he was strong enough to pick me up with him.
And then you had the stress from the fight. So
all of a sudden, they want to make this a
George Floyd situation. No, and the jury of blacks, Hispanics,
(10:54):
Asians and white, just like the people on that subway car,
just like New York City said no, you're not going
to sell us this nonsense. And that's why Donald Trump won.
People want the truth, they want law and order. They
want to be able to go on a subway car
and know that there's a hero like Danny Penny who
is willing to give it up and go to prison.
(11:15):
I said, were you ready to go? He said yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
I was humble.
Speaker 4 (11:20):
Kind. This guy wants no attention none. And when they
came in to take pictures of him at my interview,
they took one. He said no more.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
All right, quick break, we'll come right back. More with
Judge Janine Piro more of her exclusive interview with Daniel
Penny on the other side. Then we'll get to your
phone calls. Eight hundred nine four one, Shawn our number
if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, but continue now with my friend, my colleague
of the hit show The Five. Judge Janine Piro is
(11:51):
with us. We'll get to your calls coming up. Eight
hundred and nine to four one, Sean. You know, I'm
listening to everything you're saying here. They tried to make
this case about Ray, and then the closing arguments, the
prosecutor again brought up the racial issue, but they didn't
charge him with a hate crime, which they would have
had they had any evidence that this was a racial
(12:13):
case or a hate crime. They didn't want the toxicology
report at all. It wasn't even ordered in the beginning.
They just came to the conclusion they wanted to without
doing their due diligence in the case. And what really
offended me as well is after the jury deadlocked on
(12:34):
the manslaughter charge, then Alvin Bragg comes in and he
dismisses that charge, which, according to New York state law,
correct me if I'm wrong, No, the jury would need
to come to a unanimous verdict. Otherwise the entire case,
including the lesser charges, would be thrown out in New
(12:54):
York State unless they came to a full verdict on that.
And they did it on purpose against the law which
is designed to prevent a compromised verdict that being defined
as oh okay, well, they're thrown out the other charge,
and I guess that means they only think he's guilty
of the lesser charge. And the odds go up significantly
(13:16):
when they do that, But the law is designed to
prevent that.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
Right, right, You're absolutely right there, Sean. Look, I think
that this was the turning point for the jury, and
I'll tell you why. They go to the judge they say, Judge,
we can't agree on manslaughter in the second degree, for
which you face up to fifteen years in prison, and
the judge gives them an Allen charge, which I would
(13:41):
give all the time, and basically say go back and
try to share your views again. Judge gives them another
Allen charge when they come back. And then they come
back and they say, no, we can't, we can't agree.
Instead of dismissing everything that the prosecutor says, Judge, we
wanted Smith just the manslaughter and keep the rest of it,
(14:03):
and the judge went along with it. Now, I've been
doing this for almost four decades, I have never seen
that done. And what they were trying to do is
coerce the jury. And this is when I think Sean,
the normal jury might have come back and said, yeah,
maybe we can still, you know, hang on the krim
neg like we had criminally negligent homicide, like on the
(14:25):
manslaughter in the second degree. They came back in an
hour and they said, not guilty, David.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
But you know what's amazing about that, And Jonathan Turley
pointed this out is the person that was most surprised
by this verdict was likely Alvin Bragg because they probably thought, oh,
we got him on the lesser charge. At least that's
a partial victory for them. But I've just again, I
do have to compliment you. You did a phenomenal job. I'm
(14:52):
very grateful for your coverage and grateful you shared that
interview both here and on Fox News, and we appreciate
all you. Judge Bureau, You're the best.
Speaker 4 (15:02):
Thank you, love you, good bye.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Love you back.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Well, I guess you just can't trust your own eyes.
You can't trust your own ears. You can't trust the
videos that we've all seen and the pictures that we've
all seen. At least if you listen to John Kirby
in the Biden administration, you know, the first sighting of
this drone was on November the eighteenth. This was over
(15:27):
New Jersey, now also over New York and parts of Pennsylvania.
But the administration now says that it's probably not happening
at all. Here's John Kirby, National Security Advisor, basically saying, nah,
none of this is true.
Speaker 5 (15:43):
Listen, using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal authorities,
we have not been able to and neither of state
or local law enforcement authorities corroborate any of the reported
visual sightings.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Really, none of it's true. No evidence of drone sightings
in New Jersey, and there is no safety threat at all,
no foreign nexus. And anyway, I mean pressed about this,
you know, they just continue to stick to the story.
Now the more the longer this goes on, and the
(16:21):
lack of urgency they are showing tells me and I
was more con it was either two choices to me.
Either they just don't know anything, which would be the
scarier scenario for me, because considering our capabilities as the
United States of America and the biggest military power on
the face of the earth. You know, I'd like to
(16:42):
believe and I'd like to think that we'd be able
to figure this out in less than twenty four hours.
If you have drones forty nine sightings this past Sunday,
the size of a bus, with the sound of a Harley,
and so many people, you know, giving testimony and I
witness testimony that they've seen it. Anyway, here is the
(17:03):
police dispatch audio where caller is stating a drone fell
out of the sky near power lines and ten more
drones showed up.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Listen to this.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Count crazy, What was the exact call?
Speaker 4 (17:17):
This crash or crash partical?
Speaker 3 (17:21):
Drones fell out of the sky by the power lines
behind their house, and then ten more showed up.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
All right here to help well unpack what's going on.
Here is Representative Zachnna of Iowa. He is a US
Air Force colonel. He was an airborne operations officer overseeing
drone strikes and counterintelligence against the Chinese. And they're drones
(17:46):
and he's certain that these drones in New Jersey because
eighty percent of drones in this country are made in China.
He believes they came from China anyway, And we have
Jeff and Andrew, who the congressman from New Jersey, thinks
they came from Iran. But the bottom line is the
government's not telling us anything anyway. Congressman None are great
(18:07):
to have you on the program. Thank you for your
military service, and we appreciate your time. What do you
when you hear about a drone the size of a
school bus or bigger or the size of a dining
room table and it sounds like a Harley Davidson do
you believe in any way, shape, batter, or form that
we don't know where these drones originated from, who's operating
(18:30):
these drones, and what these drones might be capable of
regarding either surveillance or maybe even having a military payload
on them.
Speaker 6 (18:39):
Sean, you've highlighted just a spectrum of threat vector coming
in here. We know a couple of things right now. One,
the overwhelming majority of drones come from DJTU. It's a
Chinese made production facility in China, still has software tied
to China. We also know that the indigenous capability of
some of our greatest adversaries, that of a raw which
(19:00):
you highlighted, and just earlier this year sent hundreds of
attack drones over Israel over other countries, were able to
be intercepted, but had only one intent. The destruction of
folks across Israel are real. We also recognized the United
States lags behind in our drone technology and oftentimes even
US manufactured drones still have foreign software operations systems. Now
(19:23):
here's also what we know. We know we've got New
Jersey State Police who were in a helicopter flying above
a drone and when they approached it, it was a
large airborne vehicle that then turned off its lights and
attempted to go as much as a drone can help,
but they had to disengage because they were afraid that
there could be a mid air mishap. We know for
a fact that we have an entire Coastguard cutter that
(19:46):
was surrounded by a dozen plus drones and followed throughout
to see off the coast of Jersey, and that when
they came in and made their report that it was
substantiated by Homeland Security. We also know for a fact
that Homeland Security felt so concerned about this that they
briefed members of Congress and members of the government there
in New Jersey, both law enforcement and elected officials. And
(20:08):
as of today, we also know that the White House
says there's nothing to see here, in the same way
there was nothing to see about Joe Biden's cognitive decline,
in the same way there was nothing to see that Afghanistan,
a place where I serve for decades, would fall apart overnight,
And there was nothing to see when we left Americans
behind in Afghanistan or when Israel was attacked. We're now
(20:29):
supposed to take the word of John Kirby that there
is nothing to see over the skies of New Jersey.
And clearly, whether you ask law enforcement, whether you ask government,
where you ask kids on the Jersey Shore, they've all
seen it with their own eyes. This is now a
difficult challenge that we're forced to yet again believe that
the White House knows better than what the American people
(20:50):
have seen with their own eyes, and that they have
dissuaded us from understanding what is happening. When you're absolutely right,
this is something we should have been able to track down,
be transparent about and get the info out for safety reasons.
And this is flying over your house or your community
to the people in New Jersey and the people of
America in a matter of hours, not days, and now
going on months.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
Okay, So let me ask you, a drone this big,
the size of a bus, what would its capability be?
And more and more as time goes on and they
show a lack of urgency, Why do I suspect they
know exactly what these drones are doing, where they came from,
they know everything about them, and maybe even they're the
(21:32):
ones that are testing them. Is that a possibility?
Speaker 6 (21:34):
So, as an intelligence officer and a member of Congress,
let me be very clear about what we know, and
I'll speak to that verset. What we know is a
drone of that size, and it's been reported that some
of these may have been the size of and a
sub maybe even up to the size of a bus.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
I don't know what.
Speaker 6 (21:53):
Is flying over New Jersey right now because our federal
agency is responsible for this. The FAA and Homeland Security
have not been transparent with us. But any platform that size,
whether it's hovering, whether it's a fixed wing, which would
mean like our version of a predator drone would be
able to carry a payload, as we've seen just in
US operations over the Middle East, a hell fire type
(22:15):
of weapon if that were to be included. But we've
also seen what are non traditional actors like the Iranians,
like the Chechens have done with drones. They've attached explosive
ordinance and been able to use these as suicide style drones.
They can go in target a vector very quickly and
fly into a cause and impact. This is also at
(22:36):
a minimum a flight hazard. You're supposed to have an
FAA license to be able to pilot a non hobbyist drone,
which is what the Homeland Security Department has told us.
These are not hobbyist drones before they told us they
didn't exist, and so a danger to flight operations in
the area, whether you're a helicopter or a smaller light
(22:56):
aircraft also is directly impeded. I think the secondary, more
likely scenario for drones in this situation would be for surveillance,
both visual as well as electronic. And then certainly one
of the things that I think is in the realm
of the possible here as a professional assessment, would be
a mass testing of drones, and we haven't informed other
(23:17):
sectors of the government. And that's equally concerning that we
have testing going on over US territory that has not
included potentially other key partners in the area for safety
of flights, safety of civilians, and just safety of operations
in open air space. Any type of testing that should
be done with the drones should be over a closed
(23:38):
range where we have complete awareness of what else is
happening in that airspace, and ideally in a situation where
we're not putting the US civilians at risk in the type.
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Of an operation.
Speaker 1 (23:51):
All right, click, Frank, We'll come back more with Congressman
Zach Nunn of Iowa as we talk about the administration
just slat out denying that these drones even exist in
spite of all the eyewitness testimony we've heard and spottings
that we've heard about, and the videos and the pictures
we've all seen. Pretty unbelievable. I think we're just flat
(24:13):
out being lied to. Anyway, more with the Congressman on
the other side than we'll get to your calls and
much more coming up eight hundred and nine to four one, Shawn,
as we continue.
Speaker 4 (24:26):
The final hour of the Sean Hannity Show was up next.
Speaker 6 (24:29):
Hang on for Sean's Conservative solutions.
Speaker 1 (24:38):
All right, we continue now talking about the mystery drone
issue over the state of New Jersey with Congressman Zach
Nunn of Iowa. Is there any chance that there are drones?
Then they're doing testing, but they just don't want to
tell those for national security reasons.
Speaker 6 (24:57):
If that is their cover story, then that is a
horrible cover story. We have entire areas of operation again
as a career Air Force officer out at Knellus in
places in the desert where we can test these types
of operations. Even if we needed something on a coastal
environment to do this, there is still a clear delineation
to close air space in coordination with the civilian authorities
(25:18):
like the FAA. So if they failed to do that,
if they've now been caught out in the public doing testing,
and I will put an asterik on here, that's an if.
If that's the situation, then this is a failure of
policy and administration that continues to be non transparent and
potentially has put civilian and first respond your lives at
(25:40):
risk by flying exercise or testing elements over an open
population that should never happen to begin with, not without
close coordination in any case. If this is commercial, if
this is foreign, and if this is something I think
that is cleared to everybody, it's not truly understood, not
even by folks in the White House, then we have
an obligation to get to the ground truth on this
(26:02):
and determine definitively. Look, this is not hypothetical. This is
something that we can assess today. Whether there are actual
drones operating over US airspace over so.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Well, Congressman, I know people that as a hobby they
have these little baby drones and they fly them for
fun and sometimes in some areas, you know what, you
get in trouble for flying them, and the authorities are
able to find out where they originated from almost immediately.
So you know, you're never going to convince me that
(26:32):
they can't figure out where these originated from, who's operating them,
and what their capabilities are, And that just means they're
flat out lying to us, or if they're that utterly incompetent,
then I cannot believe. I am. I am stunned at
the lack of our capabilities, But you know we do
(26:55):
have I Rdian assassination squads in the country. We also
know that we have known terrorists in the country, and
murderers and rapists and other violent criminals and gang members
and cartel members. So I guess that nothing with this
administration surprises me. But if we don't have the ability
to identify where these things came from, that is chilling,
and they're telling us they don't exist really pisses me off.
Speaker 6 (27:17):
John, You're absolutely right. This is the worst of both
worlds because we're dealing with a Biden administration that is
both incompetent and consistent only in the fact that they lie.
So when dealing with this, the reality is, here's what
we know. Again, we have hundreds of noviduals who came
to this country illegally on terrorists watch lists, not to
mention the tens of millions who came here under false pretense.
(27:41):
The second aspect is the technology alone we recognize is
most likely foreign built related, because that's the reality of
the drone industry. Particularly beyond what these hobby small drones
are that my neighbor kids are flying over, or that
you know, you might see a football game, these are
the type of Syrian professional drones that would be operated
(28:02):
in a commercial or military capacity for things like surveying, assessment,
recon all the way up to a military operation capability,
some of which could be operated half the world away
based on modern day technology for their operations. Holding these
folks leable should be operation number one for the White House,
and instead they've said these things don't even exist, which
(28:25):
is again.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
You last question is yes or no. Do you believe
they're flat out lying to the American.
Speaker 6 (28:32):
People based on the information we have right now?
Speaker 4 (28:34):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Wow, anyway, Congressman none of Iowa. We do appreciate you,
Thank you so much for being with us. Eight hundred
ninety four one Seawn our number if you want to
be a part of the program.
All right, thanks Scott Shan in an hour two Sean
Hennity Show, eight hundred and nine to four one Seawn
our number if you want to be a part of
the program. Well, I keep talking about the Daniel Penny
case because I think it's so relevant, this case that
never should have been brought. It was a malicious prosecution
on the part of Alvin Bragg.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
By far.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
The best coverage was my friend, my colleague, judge Janine
Piro of the hit show The Five. She'll join us
in a second, and she got the first interview with
Daniel Penny, the only interview to date, and it was.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Very, very powerful.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
Let me play portions of this where he slams the
policies that failed New Yorkers. Remember, you know this guy,
Jordan Neely had what forty two run ins with the
police prior to this. He never should have been on
that subway train. Don't forget the testimony from eyewitness after
eyewitness talked about how they feared for their lives. One
(01:03):
African American woman testifying in the trials saying thank you
to Daniel Penny, smiling at him from the witness stand.
And of course, then the antics that I believe, you know,
were just just so corrupt by the DA's office. This
guy should not be a DA in any city or
(01:25):
any town or any municipality anyway. Here's Penny slamming the
policies that failed New Yorkers, then talking about how Jordan
Neely was threatening to kill people, and describing the subway
when Jordan Neely got on it. Let me play a
substantial part of this interview so you understand the context
(01:47):
of what Daniel Penny had to deal with that day.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
These public officials wouldn't do something so self serving.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Does it serve them to hurt you just political gain.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
I mean, these are their policies that are and I
don't mean to get political. I don't really want to
make any enemies really, although I guess I have already,
But I mean these these are their policies that I've
clearly not worked, that the people, the general population are
(02:24):
not in support of. Yet their egos are too big
just to admit admit that they're wrong, just very aggressively.
Speaker 2 (02:32):
Kind of like ran on and stumbled on.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
That's you know, as New Yorkers, you kind of come
to accept that is unfortunately a normal occurrence.
Speaker 2 (02:46):
And what was he saying, what was he doing?
Speaker 4 (02:49):
What drew your attention to him?
Speaker 2 (02:53):
Well, you know I noticed him at first.
Speaker 3 (02:55):
When he came on, you know, and the doors closed,
and as soon as the doors closed, he was carrying
a jacket and he whipped the jacket down and it
landed on the feet I was standing, and it landed
on the feet of the passenger sitting down next to me,
and the zipper made.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
A very audible noise. It was very loud, very aggressive, and.
Speaker 3 (03:21):
At that point the train car went completely silent. It
was it almost felt as like it felt like a vacuum,
and there's like this hollow feeling. And that's when I
first kind of gave him my full attention.
Speaker 4 (03:38):
Okay, so the train becomes silent, What if anything does
he say?
Speaker 3 (03:43):
You know, he first comes on and he starts demanding things.
He's demanded three different things. You know, he's certain types
of food, certain types of drinks, and you know, things
that like some type of fast food, and that he
was he was willing to go to jail forever if
he didn't get these things.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
And then it kind of escalated.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
You were saying, you repeated, I was going to go
to jail for life, I'm willing to hurt people, I'm
willing to kill people.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
I'm going to kill people.
Speaker 3 (04:14):
And is this keep in mind, this is all within
fifteen seconds of him getting on the train, and it
was this escalation of violence and threatening behavior that it
was just.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
It was pretty.
Speaker 4 (04:29):
Serious when he said he was willing to kill people.
Speaker 2 (04:32):
Did you believe him? Yeah, totally.
Speaker 3 (04:34):
It was unlike you know, because there's outbursts on the
train all the time.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Unfortunately in New York City, there's.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
There's always people coming on and saying kind of talking crazy,
and this was unlike anything that I've ever experienced, and
it was it was very serious. It was I completely
believed what he was saying.
Speaker 4 (04:59):
It was what was the reaction by the fellow subway riders.
Speaker 3 (05:04):
Well, when, like I said, when there was that silence,
when there was that vacuum, I mean everybody was had
Like he got everybody's attention.
Speaker 4 (05:14):
How close was he to the people as he was
telling them or saying I'm going to kill someone?
Speaker 3 (05:20):
He started off in the middle of the of the train,
by the pole, and then he would in that in
that escalation, he would he started to get in people's
faces within a foot of people.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
What was there. There was a woman with a baby in.
Speaker 3 (05:33):
A carriage, children, kids going to school, coming back from school.
It was just like it was. It was what you'd
expect on a normal New York City subway train or
subway car. He was yeah, the mother was was holding
her child, and the school kids were protecting themselves or
(05:55):
holding each other, and just people were stuck their chairs
and they felt pinned. And I felt pinned, I felt nervous,
I felt scared.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
All right joining us now, she had this exclusive interview.
Friend of the program, also co host of the hit
show of the five Friend of Mine, judged Janine Piros
with us, Judge, I will tell you all throughout the trial,
and I did comment to you about this privately and
publicly on the air on Fox News. You had superb coverage,
(06:28):
and it was in the middle of a presidential election,
which made your life that much harder. But you really
cared about this, and with your background as a DA
and a prosecutor, you are the perfect person to be
in that courtroom.
Speaker 2 (06:40):
As often as you are.
Speaker 4 (06:42):
Well, thank you for your gratitude and your compliments. I
really appreciate it. Look, I've been Alvin Bragg I've been
the elected DA and I've been the judge in that
courtroom as well as an elected county judge. So I mean,
that's kind of my wheelhouse. It's New York. But it
was clear to me from the get go that this
was a case that never should have been brought, as
(07:03):
you've been saying for many, many months now, because Alvin
Bragg is a leftist, progressive prosecutor funded by George Sorrows.
This was a case that was brought because of color,
and the prosecutor's office tried to make this a case
about race and racism, but it was totally rejected by
(07:24):
the jury and by everyone on that subway train. And
you know you said it right. There was an African
American lady who smiled from the witness stand. And Danny
Penny was so eloquent in that interview when he talked
about the fact that the gratitude and the thanks from
the people on that subway car would overcome, as he
(07:46):
said it a million days of court appearances, all the
name calling and all the hate. He said, he only
has to think back to the people who thanked him.
This guy, Danny Penny is he is an American hero.
And when you've got these people like Alvin Bragg and
you mentioned malicious prosecution, I think they should go for that.
(08:08):
But there's another piece to it, Sewan, and that isn't
the medical examiner lied on the oath. The medical examiner
said one thing in the grand jury and one thing
at the trial regarding the pressure at the neck. She
said she couldn't tell if there was persistent consistent pressure
in the grand jury testimony. And at the trial, of
course she's pro prosecution. Oh yeah, there's consistent persistent pressure.
(08:33):
That's number one, same medical examiner. Number two, the chief
medical examiner gets involved after the autopsy's done and decides
it's a homicide. They don't wait for toxicology, histology, anthropology.
Why is that relevant? Because this guy had enough K
two in his system to make him that aggressive, incredibly
(08:55):
strong first in nation.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
A lot of people don't know what K two is,
but it's a very poltent, powerful drug that literally makes
people crazy.
Speaker 4 (09:06):
It makes me crazy, and this guy's already crazy. He
was in the middle of a psychotic break, remember, Sean.
He was on a list of fifty the most dangerous
mentally ill homeless people in a city of eight million people.
He's identified as one of the fifty. He was arrested
forty two times, arrested within a seven year period. He
(09:26):
had an open warrant for decking in a sixty four
or sixty eight year old woman and breaking your orbital bumps.
That day he had arrassed another woman on the subway
car on the subway platform. So let's not kit each other.
You not only had a DA who was political, but
you had a medical examiner who actually came out Sean
(09:47):
and said, I don't care if there's enough fetanyl to
kill an elephant. This is a strangulation. Now, Sewna tried
strangulation cases. There was no FATIGUEI I think there were
two little dots in They showed the eyelid. And these
lawyers are great Teniff and Razor, Steve rasor Tom Kaniff.
There's no PANDIKII. There was no damage to the hyoid bone.
(10:10):
The high bone is the Adams apple, none of that stuff.
And they didn't even wait for the test. And he
was he had sickle cell disease. He was sickling as
he died. So you've got a psychotic break. You've got
him on K two an incredibly a strong drug. It's
cannabinoid synthetic. People are crazy on it. They're very strong,
(10:32):
and even Penny said in the interview with me, he said, look,
he was above me and he picked me up as
I wrapped myself around him. We were on the floor
and he was strong enough to pick me up with him.
And then you had the stress from the fight. So
all of a sudden, they want to make this a
George Floyd situation. No, and the jury of blacks, Hispanics,
(10:54):
Asians and white, just like the people on that subway car,
just like New York City said no, you're not going
to sell us this nonsense. And that's why Donald Trump won.
People want the truth, they want law and order. They
want to be able to go on a subway car
and know that there's a hero like Danny Penny who
is willing to give it up and go to prison.
(11:15):
I said, were you ready to go? He said yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
I was humble.
Speaker 4 (11:20):
Kind. This guy wants no attention none. And when they
came in to take pictures of him at my interview,
they took one. He said no more.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
All right, quick break, we'll come right back. More with
Judge Janine Piro more of her exclusive interview with Daniel
Penny on the other side. Then we'll get to your
phone calls. Eight hundred nine four one, Shawn our number
if you want to be a part of the program.
All right, but continue now with my friend, my colleague
of the hit show The Five. Judge Janine Piro is
(11:51):
with us. We'll get to your calls coming up. Eight
hundred and nine to four one, Sean. You know, I'm
listening to everything you're saying here. They tried to make
this case about Ray, and then the closing arguments, the
prosecutor again brought up the racial issue, but they didn't
charge him with a hate crime, which they would have
had they had any evidence that this was a racial
(12:13):
case or a hate crime. They didn't want the toxicology
report at all. It wasn't even ordered in the beginning.
They just came to the conclusion they wanted to without
doing their due diligence in the case. And what really
offended me as well is after the jury deadlocked on
(12:34):
the manslaughter charge, then Alvin Bragg comes in and he
dismisses that charge, which, according to New York state law,
correct me if I'm wrong, No, the jury would need
to come to a unanimous verdict. Otherwise the entire case,
including the lesser charges, would be thrown out in New
(12:54):
York State unless they came to a full verdict on that.
And they did it on purpose against the law which
is designed to prevent a compromised verdict that being defined
as oh okay, well, they're thrown out the other charge,
and I guess that means they only think he's guilty
of the lesser charge. And the odds go up significantly
(13:16):
when they do that, But the law is designed to
prevent that.
Speaker 4 (13:21):
Right, right, You're absolutely right there, Sean. Look, I think
that this was the turning point for the jury, and
I'll tell you why. They go to the judge they say, Judge,
we can't agree on manslaughter in the second degree, for
which you face up to fifteen years in prison, and
the judge gives them an Allen charge, which I would
(13:41):
give all the time, and basically say go back and
try to share your views again. Judge gives them another
Allen charge when they come back. And then they come
back and they say, no, we can't, we can't agree.
Instead of dismissing everything that the prosecutor says, Judge, we
wanted Smith just the manslaughter and keep the rest of it,
(14:03):
and the judge went along with it. Now, I've been
doing this for almost four decades, I have never seen
that done. And what they were trying to do is
coerce the jury. And this is when I think Sean,
the normal jury might have come back and said, yeah,
maybe we can still, you know, hang on the krim
neg like we had criminally negligent homicide, like on the
(14:25):
manslaughter in the second degree. They came back in an
hour and they said, not guilty, David.
Speaker 1 (14:31):
But you know what's amazing about that, And Jonathan Turley
pointed this out is the person that was most surprised
by this verdict was likely Alvin Bragg because they probably thought, oh,
we got him on the lesser charge. At least that's
a partial victory for them. But I've just again, I
do have to compliment you. You did a phenomenal job. I'm
(14:52):
very grateful for your coverage and grateful you shared that
interview both here and on Fox News, and we appreciate
all you. Judge Bureau, You're the best.
Speaker 4 (15:02):
Thank you, love you, good bye.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Love you back.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Well, I guess you just can't trust your own eyes.
You can't trust your own ears. You can't trust the
videos that we've all seen and the pictures that we've
all seen. At least if you listen to John Kirby
in the Biden administration, you know, the first sighting of
this drone was on November the eighteenth. This was over
(15:27):
New Jersey, now also over New York and parts of Pennsylvania.
But the administration now says that it's probably not happening
at all. Here's John Kirby, National Security Advisor, basically saying, nah,
none of this is true.
Speaker 5 (15:43):
Listen, using very sophisticated electronic detection technologies provided by federal authorities,
we have not been able to and neither of state
or local law enforcement authorities corroborate any of the reported
visual sightings.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Really, none of it's true. No evidence of drone sightings
in New Jersey, and there is no safety threat at all,
no foreign nexus. And anyway, I mean pressed about this,
you know, they just continue to stick to the story.
Now the more the longer this goes on, and the
(16:21):
lack of urgency they are showing tells me and I
was more con it was either two choices to me.
Either they just don't know anything, which would be the
scarier scenario for me, because considering our capabilities as the
United States of America and the biggest military power on
the face of the earth. You know, I'd like to
(16:42):
believe and I'd like to think that we'd be able
to figure this out in less than twenty four hours.
If you have drones forty nine sightings this past Sunday,
the size of a bus, with the sound of a Harley,
and so many people, you know, giving testimony and I
witness testimony that they've seen it. Anyway, here is the
(17:03):
police dispatch audio where caller is stating a drone fell
out of the sky near power lines and ten more
drones showed up.
Speaker 2 (17:13):
Listen to this.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Count crazy, What was the exact call?
Speaker 4 (17:17):
This crash or crash partical?
Speaker 3 (17:21):
Drones fell out of the sky by the power lines
behind their house, and then ten more showed up.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
All right here to help well unpack what's going on.
Here is Representative Zachnna of Iowa. He is a US
Air Force colonel. He was an airborne operations officer overseeing
drone strikes and counterintelligence against the Chinese. And they're drones
(17:46):
and he's certain that these drones in New Jersey because
eighty percent of drones in this country are made in China.
He believes they came from China anyway, And we have
Jeff and Andrew, who the congressman from New Jersey, thinks
they came from Iran. But the bottom line is the
government's not telling us anything anyway. Congressman None are great
(18:07):
to have you on the program. Thank you for your
military service, and we appreciate your time. What do you
when you hear about a drone the size of a
school bus or bigger or the size of a dining
room table and it sounds like a Harley Davidson do
you believe in any way, shape, batter, or form that
we don't know where these drones originated from, who's operating
(18:30):
these drones, and what these drones might be capable of
regarding either surveillance or maybe even having a military payload
on them.
Speaker 6 (18:39):
Sean, you've highlighted just a spectrum of threat vector coming
in here. We know a couple of things right now. One,
the overwhelming majority of drones come from DJTU. It's a
Chinese made production facility in China, still has software tied
to China. We also know that the indigenous capability of
some of our greatest adversaries, that of a raw which
(19:00):
you highlighted, and just earlier this year sent hundreds of
attack drones over Israel over other countries, were able to
be intercepted, but had only one intent. The destruction of
folks across Israel are real. We also recognized the United
States lags behind in our drone technology and oftentimes even
US manufactured drones still have foreign software operations systems. Now
(19:23):
here's also what we know. We know we've got New
Jersey State Police who were in a helicopter flying above
a drone and when they approached it, it was a
large airborne vehicle that then turned off its lights and
attempted to go as much as a drone can help,
but they had to disengage because they were afraid that
there could be a mid air mishap. We know for
a fact that we have an entire Coastguard cutter that
(19:46):
was surrounded by a dozen plus drones and followed throughout
to see off the coast of Jersey, and that when
they came in and made their report that it was
substantiated by Homeland Security. We also know for a fact
that Homeland Security felt so concerned about this that they
briefed members of Congress and members of the government there
in New Jersey, both law enforcement and elected officials. And
(20:08):
as of today, we also know that the White House
says there's nothing to see here, in the same way
there was nothing to see about Joe Biden's cognitive decline,
in the same way there was nothing to see that Afghanistan,
a place where I serve for decades, would fall apart overnight,
And there was nothing to see when we left Americans
behind in Afghanistan or when Israel was attacked. We're now
(20:29):
supposed to take the word of John Kirby that there
is nothing to see over the skies of New Jersey.
And clearly, whether you ask law enforcement, whether you ask government,
where you ask kids on the Jersey Shore, they've all
seen it with their own eyes. This is now a
difficult challenge that we're forced to yet again believe that
the White House knows better than what the American people
(20:50):
have seen with their own eyes, and that they have
dissuaded us from understanding what is happening. When you're absolutely right,
this is something we should have been able to track down,
be transparent about and get the info out for safety reasons.
And this is flying over your house or your community
to the people in New Jersey and the people of
America in a matter of hours, not days, and now
going on months.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
Okay, So let me ask you, a drone this big,
the size of a bus, what would its capability be?
And more and more as time goes on and they
show a lack of urgency, Why do I suspect they
know exactly what these drones are doing, where they came from,
they know everything about them, and maybe even they're the
(21:32):
ones that are testing them. Is that a possibility?
Speaker 6 (21:34):
So, as an intelligence officer and a member of Congress,
let me be very clear about what we know, and
I'll speak to that verset. What we know is a
drone of that size, and it's been reported that some
of these may have been the size of and a
sub maybe even up to the size of a bus.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
I don't know what.
Speaker 6 (21:53):
Is flying over New Jersey right now because our federal
agency is responsible for this. The FAA and Homeland Security
have not been transparent with us. But any platform that size,
whether it's hovering, whether it's a fixed wing, which would
mean like our version of a predator drone would be
able to carry a payload, as we've seen just in
US operations over the Middle East, a hell fire type
(22:15):
of weapon if that were to be included. But we've
also seen what are non traditional actors like the Iranians,
like the Chechens have done with drones. They've attached explosive
ordinance and been able to use these as suicide style drones.
They can go in target a vector very quickly and
fly into a cause and impact. This is also at
(22:36):
a minimum a flight hazard. You're supposed to have an
FAA license to be able to pilot a non hobbyist drone,
which is what the Homeland Security Department has told us.
These are not hobbyist drones before they told us they
didn't exist, and so a danger to flight operations in
the area, whether you're a helicopter or a smaller light
(22:56):
aircraft also is directly impeded. I think the secondary, more
likely scenario for drones in this situation would be for surveillance,
both visual as well as electronic. And then certainly one
of the things that I think is in the realm
of the possible here as a professional assessment, would be
a mass testing of drones, and we haven't informed other
(23:17):
sectors of the government. And that's equally concerning that we
have testing going on over US territory that has not
included potentially other key partners in the area for safety
of flights, safety of civilians, and just safety of operations
in open air space. Any type of testing that should
be done with the drones should be over a closed
(23:38):
range where we have complete awareness of what else is
happening in that airspace, and ideally in a situation where
we're not putting the US civilians at risk in the type.
Speaker 4 (23:50):
Of an operation.
Speaker 1 (23:51):
All right, click, Frank, We'll come back more with Congressman
Zach Nunn of Iowa as we talk about the administration
just slat out denying that these drones even exist in
spite of all the eyewitness testimony we've heard and spottings
that we've heard about, and the videos and the pictures
we've all seen. Pretty unbelievable. I think we're just flat
(24:13):
out being lied to. Anyway, more with the Congressman on
the other side than we'll get to your calls and
much more coming up eight hundred and nine to four one, Shawn,
as we continue.
Speaker 4 (24:26):
The final hour of the Sean Hannity Show was up next.
Speaker 6 (24:29):
Hang on for Sean's Conservative solutions.
Speaker 1 (24:38):
All right, we continue now talking about the mystery drone
issue over the state of New Jersey with Congressman Zach
Nunn of Iowa. Is there any chance that there are drones?
Then they're doing testing, but they just don't want to
tell those for national security reasons.
Speaker 6 (24:57):
If that is their cover story, then that is a
horrible cover story. We have entire areas of operation again
as a career Air Force officer out at Knellus in
places in the desert where we can test these types
of operations. Even if we needed something on a coastal
environment to do this, there is still a clear delineation
to close air space in coordination with the civilian authorities
(25:18):
like the FAA. So if they failed to do that,
if they've now been caught out in the public doing testing,
and I will put an asterik on here, that's an if.
If that's the situation, then this is a failure of
policy and administration that continues to be non transparent and
potentially has put civilian and first respond your lives at
(25:40):
risk by flying exercise or testing elements over an open
population that should never happen to begin with, not without
close coordination in any case. If this is commercial, if
this is foreign, and if this is something I think
that is cleared to everybody, it's not truly understood, not
even by folks in the White House, then we have
an obligation to get to the ground truth on this
(26:02):
and determine definitively. Look, this is not hypothetical. This is
something that we can assess today. Whether there are actual
drones operating over US airspace over so.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Well, Congressman, I know people that as a hobby they
have these little baby drones and they fly them for
fun and sometimes in some areas, you know what, you
get in trouble for flying them, and the authorities are
able to find out where they originated from almost immediately.
So you know, you're never going to convince me that
(26:32):
they can't figure out where these originated from, who's operating them,
and what their capabilities are, And that just means they're
flat out lying to us, or if they're that utterly incompetent,
then I cannot believe. I am. I am stunned at
the lack of our capabilities, But you know we do
(26:55):
have I Rdian assassination squads in the country. We also
know that we have known terrorists in the country, and
murderers and rapists and other violent criminals and gang members
and cartel members. So I guess that nothing with this
administration surprises me. But if we don't have the ability
to identify where these things came from, that is chilling,
and they're telling us they don't exist really pisses me off.
Speaker 6 (27:17):
John, You're absolutely right. This is the worst of both
worlds because we're dealing with a Biden administration that is
both incompetent and consistent only in the fact that they lie.
So when dealing with this, the reality is, here's what
we know. Again, we have hundreds of noviduals who came
to this country illegally on terrorists watch lists, not to
mention the tens of millions who came here under false pretense.
(27:41):
The second aspect is the technology alone we recognize is
most likely foreign built related, because that's the reality of
the drone industry. Particularly beyond what these hobby small drones
are that my neighbor kids are flying over, or that
you know, you might see a football game, these are
the type of Syrian professional drones that would be operated
(28:02):
in a commercial or military capacity for things like surveying, assessment,
recon all the way up to a military operation capability,
some of which could be operated half the world away
based on modern day technology for their operations. Holding these
folks leable should be operation number one for the White House,
and instead they've said these things don't even exist, which
(28:25):
is again.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
You last question is yes or no. Do you believe
they're flat out lying to the American.
Speaker 6 (28:32):
People based on the information we have right now?
Speaker 4 (28:34):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Wow, anyway, Congressman none of Iowa. We do appreciate you,
Thank you so much for being with us. Eight hundred
ninety four one Seawn our number if you want to
be a part of the program.
The Sean Hannity Show News
Host
Sean Hannity
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.