07 16 25 Holy (crap) City!

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Jonathan and Kelly Show.

Speaker 2 (00:05):
When you start to talk about whether or not Sesame Street,
this is so that there is not this warped thought
process about the Western world or about the United States,
Kelly Nash, we're talking about making sure that we don't
end up allowing people to be radicalized against us.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
The Jonathan and Kelly Show, Fate of America. Hanks in
the balance of the producers of Sesame Street count We're
counting on you count because if it weren't for Sesame
Street being broadcast worldwide in a particular couple of was
it us AID expenditures having to do with Sesame Street
as well?

Speaker 3 (00:41):
I don't know that us AID was partnering with them.
But to your bigger point, yes, NPR's shows are shown
around the world. I don't if we're going to just
say that that's what the purpose of them is, stop
showing them in America and uh and then just let's
just call it propaganda. This is the propaganda wing of

(01:03):
the United States. But it's not having a lot of
success because it's being shown in Iran. As the Iranians
have they warmed up to us.

Speaker 1 (01:12):
Yet you know what beats it out in the afternoon
every day at four when the Iranian kids get home
from their what used to be the pile of rubble
that used to be their school. What's that that cartoon
where they kill all the Jewish children. That's the show.
I can't I don't know the name of it, but
that's the show that beats out Sesame Street.

Speaker 3 (01:32):
I think it's called kill HEIMI Yeah, they love it.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
Kill himI. Great show. And she was reading that, Jasmine
Crockett was reading that. That was her well thought position
in that argument.

Speaker 3 (01:45):
So they're gonna defund it, right, I mean, for the
most part. We're having another vote on that today, I hope.
So yesterday we had vance cast the tie breaking vote
nine point four billion dollar recision package, which totally, well,
I shouldn't say totally to funds PBS and NPR. If
you ever listened to any of those shows, or watch

(02:08):
the shows, or listen to the radio, you'll hear them
saying this hour brought to you by and then some
family organization that loves that type of thing, and again,
that's that's awesome. It's like Christian radio. Most of the
Christian radio stations do not receive any government funding, but
they do receive funding from, whether it's a you know,

(02:29):
wealthier Christians or even just families who want to send
in You know, I pledge ten dollars a month for
a Christian radio station to provide wholesome family entertainment that
uplifts you know the name of the Lord.

Speaker 1 (02:41):
Okay, that's great.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
You're more of an NPR PBS kind of person, you
want to We like to promote shows that have a
more liberal lean and interpretation of the Constitution or whatever.
That's that's fine, Or you just like Ken Burns baseball documentaries, whatever, right.
I mean, that's all fine and good, but don't make
the US taxpayers pay for it.

Speaker 1 (03:04):
Speaking of taking votes, Ralph Norman was the only Republican
I think in his subcommittee devote against releasing Epstein files.
Now we've had more. Was it a tweet that Donald
Trump sent out today. Well, he doesn't do trying to
rate his point. He only does truth Social, So I
guess in essence, I've recently started on truth Social, by

(03:27):
the way, very frustrating. I do not like truth Social.
I think that as it came out, and I'm not
a big fan of it.

Speaker 3 (03:33):
There is I guess I went to AI, and I said,
I don't understand the algorithm of this social media platform,
and they link you to these stories where I guess
the people at truth brag that there is no algorithm.
There's no way for people to find you or you

(03:54):
to find other people unless you know specifically who you're
looking for. And then if you're tweet slash truth is
not something that they're already following, there's no way for
them to discover you. So I don't understand truth social
But anyway, that's the only thing, the only platform that
he uses. Now there is a bunch of accounts on
X that will copy and paste his words. So that's

(04:18):
how I saw it this morning on X. Was but yeah,
he Donald Trump is very adamant about a couple of
things regarding the Epstein case. One is, as far as
he can tell, there's no real credible evidence that was
put together by the intelligence agencies. And he constantly brings
back the fact that I saw my files and they

(04:40):
were filled with bs from these same people, Right, so
why would I believe? Yeah, why would I believe what
they were saying about Epstein. The other thing is he
believes Pam Bondi's doing a great job. He's not moving
from Pambondi. But you know, part of that, I think
has to do with the fact that when you look you,
Jonathan Rush, I think correct identified an issue back in

(05:02):
the first administration, and you called it. I want to say,
sometime in like February of twenty seventeen, Jonathan Rush said
Jeff Sessions is going to be a problem, and then
sometime I think in March or April or May, somewhere
in that window, you said, Jeff Sessions is going to
go down in history. Is the biggest mistake Donald Trump

(05:23):
made in this administration, worst hire, and Jeff Sessions was
a problem. I don't know if he met the bar
as the biggest mistake, because I think the COVID handling
and putting Fauci in charge is going.

Speaker 1 (05:33):
To think the worst higher.

Speaker 3 (05:35):
But he went through nine attorney generals in four years, yes, nine,
So Pian Bondi at this point was I believe, the
longest reigning attorney general in Trump history. And I think
that Trump is saying to himself, I'd like to see
if we can go all four years with one. There

(05:57):
would be a nice refreshing change. If we could have
consistency in that office, So I think he's going to
just keep fighting for her.

Speaker 1 (06:06):
Again.

Speaker 3 (06:06):
The Epstein files, to his bigger point of this is
not effect the future of America is absolutely correct, but
he's absolutely dead wrong, and that Americans don't care about
it because they feel as if I was listening to
some guy this morning, I had to go out and
get some blood work, some guy in one of our
sister stations basically saying there is no justice to be

(06:26):
had here. So what are you worried about? Epstein's dead?

Speaker 1 (06:31):
Here's my point. If you believe and you're frustrated that
there's no information to finally hang people on a hook
that you believe are part of the elite ruling class
who gets away with everything, why would you possibly believe
that that information, if it were there, I don't know

(06:56):
if it's there or not, that that information would still
be available. That's already been handled, that's already been cleaned up.
There is no information available anywhere. All that was sucked
out of any governmental agency that ever had a thought
about investigating Jeffrey Epstein or anybody associated with Epstein. So
continue believing that there is a ruling class that gets

(07:18):
away with everything, and I got it. We can. There
are millions of different examples to prove that to be
the case. But just know they get away with everything
because there's nothing in the file. It's gone, it's sanitized.
Take your win where you can get it. You know
where you get your win. Policy policy policy, Drive it

(07:39):
through Congress NonStop like a truck without breaks. Keep it going,
keep focused, keep it going. Run over every Democrat you
can with your policy and leave them unconscious in the
middle of the road.

Speaker 3 (07:55):
Well, and this is where I have to part with
Trump on Pambondi. Pambondy totally screwed this thing up. She
at minimum all right, let's just go from her perspective.
I'm Pambondy. I am the new attorney General. I just
got the gig. I've been in the position now for

(08:16):
three weeks. For three weeks you've been tweeting about talking
about I can't wait to release the Epstein files. At
some point during that three week period, you actually took
a peak, You had an idea what's in there. Then
sometime in February you say we are releasing the Epstein files.

(08:39):
And she has this big media circus where she invites
and I am embarrassed to admit I don't know who
the biggest social media influencers are in the conservative world,
the maga world, but they were all called. Apparently you
and I are not them because we were not called.
But there's like thirty of them there, and the thirty
biggest influencers in the MAGA world are presented with these

(09:01):
white binders and they march out holding them over their heads.
The most transparent administration in history has released the Epstein files,
and that was at like eleven in the morning, and
by noon the x and social media was filled with
accounts of those people saying, there's nothing in here that

(09:21):
we didn't already have access to, right, So why would
you do that? Pambondy. This is what I'm talking about.
You've created a scenario where we think there's a credible
idea that there's some client list, and now you're saying
there never was a client list and we're not going
to talk about it anymore, which really lends credence to

(09:42):
the Jonathan Rosse theory that the rich and powerful did it,
they got away with it, and then they sanitized it done.

Speaker 1 (09:50):
Now what you're going to fire, Pam Bondy? Now it
looks like you're part of the cover up. I don't know.

Speaker 3 (09:59):
I would I would fire Pambondi because she shouldn't have
done what she's done. This bill, you got everybody's I
don't want to say got your hopes up, because that's
not the right word for it. But we wanted just
MAGA at its heart is about justice and if you've
got some creeps out there who are molesting children, and
whether they're in a blackmail scheme or not with Jeffrey Epstein,

(10:20):
they should be held accountable for it. But apparently we
don't have any files that show that.

Speaker 1 (10:29):
Well, I just I'm excited to know that we might
be moving past this. I don't have any reason I
believe that we are because I'm watching MSNBC and sing
it in and they keep telling me this is this
is a mountain too big to scale. Nobody could have
her get the MAGA crowd over the Epstein hump.

Speaker 3 (10:50):
Well there's I mean, is there a segment of MAGA
that's not gonna move on?

Speaker 1 (10:54):
Sure?

Speaker 3 (10:54):
I mean, look, you know, you know what I like
about this, Jonathan, because I do love to point out
the positive is. For far too long, democrats in the
media have been able to or have attempted to label
MAGA as a unified UNI party. Everybody thinks the same,

(11:14):
we all fall in.

Speaker 1 (11:15):
Line monolithic morons.

Speaker 3 (11:18):
But that is not who MAGA is. MAGA is made
up of all kinds of individuals from all kinds of backgrounds,
who all think independently about every issue that's presented to them.
And there is a lot of room for disagreement. Now
you may look at Donald Trump's pushback and go, there's
no room. Donald Trump's not going to allow it. Donald

(11:39):
Trump's doing what he should do, which is fighting for
his position. It's kind of like when we say America first,
we're not saying everybody else suck it. We're saying, you
put yourselves first. Australia, you put yourself first. Vietnam worry
about Vietnam, We'll worry about America and if our paths can,
you know, comingle even better. But we're not gonna put

(12:01):
Vietnam first. We're gonna put America first. And if Donald
Trump puts Donald Trump first, and he's the leader of
the United States, so in other words, he's putting the
the by his estimation, the interests of the United States first,
then that's the right thing for him to do, and
is there room for us to push back on that
and go, you're you're screwing it up. You're not doing

(12:21):
what we want you to do. Of course, but his
bigger point still remains, it does not move the needle
when it comes to the stock market and housing prices,
and will the Fed lower interest rates? And what kind
of jobs are we getting? And what kind of border
security are we gonna have. Are we gonna lose ICE agents?
Are we gonna start if we gotten to the point
we're gonna start killing ICE agents with the Democrats. I mean,

(12:44):
there's so many real, legit, serious problems that need to
be cleaned up. And Jeffrey Epstein has been dead for
what six years now, and all of his victims, they
would all they've already testified in court, right, so they've
all had there. You know, when people said there's.

Speaker 1 (13:01):
Name, Max was already told you now, we didn't want
to believe her.

Speaker 3 (13:05):
We wanted a hater, Yeah, she said, we didn't. We
never kept a client list, and we weren't trying to
blackmail people, was her point.

Speaker 1 (13:12):
But we heard about people who said I was in
the you know whatever property where they had the cameras
in the bedrooms and the cameras in the bathrooms and
all that stuff I got. I got it.

Speaker 3 (13:22):
That might be true, and it might be because Jeffrey
Epstein was a very sick perf and he just liked
I mean, if you believe Pam BONDI, they got like
ten thousand hours of videotapes of child porn.

Speaker 1 (13:37):
Yes.

Speaker 3 (13:38):
Now, when she said that, a lot of people's minds
went to, well, who were all these children and who
were all the purveyors who put it.

Speaker 1 (13:45):
All out there.

Speaker 3 (13:47):
I think there's another possibility that it was all filmed
on Epstein's purv island, that he didn't need to go
on the Internet and buy it from other people. He
had it produced basically house because he would bring in
a PERV. And when we say child porn, of course
we're talking about anybody under the age of eighteen. So

(14:08):
there's probably I would assume. I again, I know nothing
about Jeffrey Epstein's child porn fetishes. I don't even want
to imagine, but I'm imagining most of them are going
to be in that sixteen to eighteen year old range.
They like the young girls.

Speaker 1 (14:21):
Based on the ones that we knew that he had.
They had sent other young girls out to recruit other
young girls. That was about the age frame.

Speaker 3 (14:32):
But it's not like in California where you've got an
eight year old and a nine year old unaccompanied miners
who are working basically as slaves at a marijuana farm
and their quote unquote supervisor is a convicted pedophile now
and he likes to bang seven eight nine year olds.
That's what he went to jail for. So that that

(14:53):
should be getting the Democrats attention, and that should be
getting Maga's attention as well. Everybody should be talking about here.

Speaker 1 (14:59):
The Democrat say, the Republicans only want this argument because
they think they're going to be able to go back
to Pizzagate. They're gonna pin everything on the Clintons and
every big Whig Democrat that's still alive, and they want
to see these people mark frog march to prison. But
they don't care as so see the Democrats about the
real victims, the innocent, underaged as we now know women

(15:22):
or girls and boys who were trafficked. They don't care
about them. And then the next segment on MSNBC or
you know, seven year olds running through a burning marijuana
field in California, where they plainly don't care about the
farm workers. And if you're gonna traffic farm workers, you're

(15:45):
gonna traffic the more profitable sex slaves. So the Democrats
themselves end up being a microcosmo of their own argument.

Speaker 3 (15:56):
Well, and again, I don't think that the nine year
olds out there in the California farm fields that they
were actually being trafficked as sex slaves. It's just ironic
that you're that there are legal aliens who are unaccompanied
minors who happened to be working under the direct supervision
of a convicted pedophile.

Speaker 1 (16:13):
Yeah, they come from the same pipeline.

Speaker 3 (16:15):
I think that this is I think that they were
not producing any money for anybody other than the marijuana farmer,
who is like, I just need labor. I can pay
a dollar an hour or two.

Speaker 1 (16:23):
He called out the eight nine year old boys and
sent them to his friend, the marijuana farmer.

Speaker 3 (16:27):
And then yeah, and then you got, you know, for
you boss man out here watching the fields for me,
make sure that the field slaves are in line. As
an added bonus, I'll throw you in a couple eight
year olds. And so that's that's the deep, deep perversion
of the Democrat Party that they don't want to address
these issues.

Speaker 1 (16:45):
And we know the same things going on even in
urban America when you look at factories or the like
or I've forgotten where it was or what the what
the plant was, but it was in Chicago, but it
was a meat process plan. So you had twelve year
olds in the middle of the night mopping up the
floors from these meat processing centers, and they in fact were,

(17:09):
as Kelly mentioned, they were trafficked as slaves basically through
Joe Biden's open border.

Speaker 3 (17:17):
Yeah, if you claim, like you know, the Democrats use
that phrase that no person is illegal, and they're big
fans of that, and I'm sure that there's a lot
of people in that base that would say that that
is in their heart of hearts, that everybody is legal
wherever they're standing. Okay, you're an idiot, but I get

(17:38):
your heart, I understand your heart. But how do you
square that with what we see the results of this are,
which is worldwide sex slavery has exploded, specifically because of
the United States under Joe Biden opened our borders in
order to bring insex slaves, and then once they got

(18:01):
them into the slavery, ring of sexual slavery, not just slavery.
We have those people too, But we've got sex slaves
in the United States that are under the age of fourteen,
and then once they get them all coached up on
how to be a good sex slave, then we export that.

(18:22):
That could be one of the number one exports of
the United States. We're not really big on exporting things,
but apparently we got a crew here in the US
that they can create wonderfully underaged sex slaves and send
them to other perverted parts of the world where that
brings in big money.

Speaker 1 (18:41):
It's a sort of a fear. So let's move past
all that for a minute. As if, well and as
if MSNBC would ever believe it, you could move past it.
You can't. You can't move past it. We're hung up
on Epstein. We can't do anything. E sip talk about Epstein.
Now the magabase is gonna turn all down Trump. Now
did they did they seek some some kind of strange

(19:04):
correlation between the MSA NBC viewa and what used to
be a Trump supporter? Is that what it is? Now
We're going to martial left forces and end up voting
for a socialist how we're going to bridge all this
togethers Well.

Speaker 3 (19:16):
Again, we were doing, I think we were joking about
yesterday on the podcast, the idea that there's a third
party and that Elon Musk think about what Elon Musk
really wants, right, Elon Musk wants somebody who is very
fiscally responsible. He's upset with the Trump Maga movement because
he thought that when Trump got the House, got the

(19:38):
Senate and the White House, that he would put forth
a bill that would have at minimum, no increase to
the debt. At minimum, just spend what you got this year.
I'm not even saying cut the debt. I'm saying, don't
add to the debt. And part of the bill that
Donald Trump put out, the Big Beautiful Bill, is a

(19:59):
not only an increase debt. He wants a debt ceiling
limit raised five trillion dollars. And Elon Musk says that
this is immoral, and that's his number one issue is
the debt. He believes that the federal debt is going
to sink the country. So, okay, are there a bunch
of maga people who would vote for a candidate who

(20:23):
because I don't know where Elon stands necessarily on abortion
and things of that nature. I know he's very against
the transgendered movement, as his former son now daughter has
pointed out, so he doesn't think that there's any place
for that in schools. He's basically looking for a libertarian,

(20:43):
that's what that and libertarians are going to line up
more often with MAGA because we're all about liberty. We
want people to have freedom. I mean, I am not
in the business of patrolling your bedroom activities. However, Comma,
I also don't want your bedroom activities flaunted in my face.

(21:05):
And I also don't want your whatever your secret perversions
are to then be tried to be normalized. Don't put
it onto the mainstream media and say what is it?

Speaker 1 (21:16):
What do they call it?

Speaker 3 (21:17):
Again? When you're attracted to younger people, they have a
word for it, like mapped.

Speaker 1 (21:23):
MAP minor attraction adult.

Speaker 3 (21:26):
A person person, Yeah, minor attracted person. Well I'm MAP,
I'm MAP, and we're supposed to just sit there and go, oh,
that's fine. Always a MAP, okay, makes sense. He prefers brunettes,
she prefers bald guys, he prefers children.

Speaker 4 (21:42):
It's not normal, it's perverted. It's it's if you believe
the Bible, it's the sort of sin they would wipe
out an entire village over by God's orders, kill all
of them, everyone, even the ones that aren't doing it,
the ones that just allowed it to happen. The Lord says,

(22:02):
it's such an abomination that they all must die. And
we're up here the Democrat Party, acting like, not only
is that not true, but this is the way it
should be. And it was not just Sodom and Gomorro's correlation.
It was you would be better off tying a millstone
around your neck and throwing yourself into the ocean than

(22:25):
to hurt one of these.

Speaker 3 (22:27):
I mean, you got Tim Walls at the was it
the Democrat National Convention going or at least in one
of his speeches, we understand, how does it? I can't
even do the Wall's imitation anymore. But it's just like
we got to mind our own business. Yes, mind our
own business. That's that's the American way of mind your
own business. So if he wants to bang an eight

(22:47):
year old boy, that's his business. And if the eight
year old's into it, great, and if he's not, well,
he's only eight. So we don't get a vote. Hey today,
in a rash thought, I did have a flashback to
a motion picture as we were reading, first reading the
headline and then reading the actual report and the preceding
court case. Now we're not far from Charleston, South Carolina,

(23:10):
as it was portrayed in the motion picture of The
Patriot The Swamp Fox. Something Benjamin in the movie not
actually called the Swamp Fox made the statement, when arguing
against the Revolutionary War, why would I trade one tyrant
three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away?

(23:33):
And now we're reading that. In Charleston, there's a condo
building that has been condemned under emergency orders. You have
to leave, is what the residents were told. Don't even
pack your pictures, your personal belongings, don't even stop to
wipe your butt, Get up off the toilet and get
out of here before this building falls and kills you.

(23:56):
Are these the tallest buildings in Charleston, I know, I know,
the two buildings that we're talking about. They're nineteen stories tall.
So I've if you've been to Charleston, if you've gone
over the bridge into Charleston, you've seen them. If you're
coming in from Mount Pleasant. They're on the left hand
side there. I mean they've been there for years, I guess, right,
they've built them like the eighties or the nineties or
something like that. Right, But the structurally deficient, like you said,

(24:21):
they were told they had twenty four hours to get
out of their homes, never to return. Now, what about
the fact that I paid for this house, doesn't matter.
You're not getting your money back.

Speaker 1 (24:32):
You got to get out of here.

Speaker 3 (24:33):
Why would the insurance pay The.

Speaker 1 (24:34):
City inspectors already deemed it structurally deficient, so it included it.

Speaker 3 (24:41):
And maybe that is the case, by the way, maybe
those nineteen story buildings, the way they described them, they
have weakened concrete and not enough steal inside of them
or whatever to support themselves. The fear, according to some
of the people who were working on this, was that
one floor would collapse on top of another and eventually

(25:03):
and that would lead to the entire building basically falling
in on itself. And then it would then, unlike the
twin towers, I guess, this would then fall into a
multi story garage thing that's underneath them, So it would
all be self contained, so much so that they believe
it's still absolutely safe for businesses that are like just

(25:27):
literally seventy feet from them to stay open. However, another comma,
if you own a town home that was around these
areas around those have been condemned as well. Now, why
is it that if my town home is three hundred
feet from the building, I have to evacuate it and

(25:48):
I'm not allowed even to go back in and get
my furniture. But the business that's seventy feet from it
can still operate. How is that still safe? And the
City of Charleston is getting a, you know, a pretty
significant lawsuit brought up against it because the rumors have
been for years. This is not like a new rumor

(26:08):
about the City of Charleston. The rumor has been four
years that Charleston wants that property back because it's right
on the water, it's prime real estate. We made a
bad deal in the eighties with these developers. Now we're
going to get it back. And the only thing we
got to do to get them back is screw all
these people out of their homes.

Speaker 1 (26:27):
Yeah, condemn it. The lawsuit followed them behalf of the
town home owners contends that nearby buildings included the International
African American Museum, which is closer to the tower. I'm
sorry you've already read that part. There was another paragraph
in here on one of the read but nonetheless is.

Speaker 3 (26:42):
It the one where it starts there and lies the issue.
By not following the city's own ordinances, the city's created
a maze that has left plaintiffs to trudge through blindfolded.
While simultaneously arguing that the plaintiffs have not followed the
right path. The city then flipped the burden of proof
into something that could never be met by plaintiffs. The
city has no legal authority to issue the order that

(27:03):
it did in the manner that it did, but it
now seeks to force the plaintiffs to prove that their
homes are safe, while the city can present no evidence
that the town homes as they currently are are unsafe.
And yet we're just gonna be taking your home now. Yes,
so there you have it, unless you said you said
this morning, and you also have an HOA feed do yes.

Speaker 1 (27:25):
Your mortgage company is still going to send you that
amount due and you'll have an HOA fee notice coming
again at the end of the month. But wait a minute,
I can't get in my home. Yeah that that doesn't matter.
You sign You signed for the mortgage, and you signed
the agreement for the homeowners association. Well I don't live

(27:45):
in the home, but you are the homeowner.

Speaker 3 (27:48):
Yeah, they got you. Whenever a government entity starts doing this,
whether whether it's this this is a new one to me,
where there's just condemning buildings and saying that the people
can't live there anymore. That's a new one on me.
But you know, the eminent domain thing that kind of
became there's a movie about it from Connecticut because we
had a town in Connecticut that claimed that one home

(28:12):
was in the way of the town making millions in
tax revenues. And they were trying to seize this woman's
home and I think it's called like the Little Blue House,
and they tried to offer her what they said was
fair market value. And her husband was dying at the time,
and so when you watch the documentary, it's like, Okay,
he's got like leukemia and months to live and he's
living in the house that his father built. And they

(28:34):
came over and they said, sorry to hear that rough break,
how about one hundred grand to move? He's not moving anywhere. Okay,
how about one hundred and fifty. What if we doubled it.
What if we said, it's worth two hundred thousand dollars
for you to take your dying husband and leave the
home that his family built. And then she's like, you
couldn't give me a million dollars And they said, better

(28:56):
than that, how about we give you nothing. We're just
taking it. And they took the home. They bulldozed her house,
and they built them mall. Hey, now she's got a lawsuit,
but she's never really got any satisfaction out of it.
The city just screwed her out of it, right, And
that's what and that's what. That's why we should be
afraid of the government eminent domain.

Speaker 1 (29:17):
There should be a follow up if we could put
the WHO back together, which we can't. We don't have
all of them to make a sequel to Eminence Front.

Speaker 3 (29:27):
Is it Eminence Front?

Speaker 1 (29:29):
It's a put on. They're here to serve you. It's
a put on. It's a put on.