Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Jonathan and Kelly Show.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Jonathan Rush, every president for the past two decades, Democrat
and Republican alike, has declared war on drugs, and each
of them has lost that war and.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
Lost it miserably. Kelly Nash, Let's go after.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
The drug lords where they live. There must be no
safe haven for these narco terrorists.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
Jonathan and Kelly Show.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
I just heard a Democrat the other day talking about
how that narco terrorist is not even a word. That's
just a play on words. They took two words and
crammed them together so they could lead you to believe
that drug dealers were like isis That's not even a word.
And I'm sitting there going I'm pretty sure I've heard
the term narco terrorist. Maybe I'm misremembering. So I looked
(00:45):
it up and the only reference I can find, the
earliest reference I can find was nineteen eighty five.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
That is good now.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
That was nineteen eighty nine from Joe Biden, and he
went on to tell you we got the power, we
got the military, we got the money. All we need
is the wheel to go after them where they are.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
So Donald Trump, following the playbook of one Joe Joseph
Arbiden exactly. Well, the Democrats hate Joe Biden now, so
I guess that's another reason that they're upset. So did
Obama do this?
Speaker 3 (01:15):
You know he's right because we did have the war
in drugs first, starting with Ronald Reagan?
Speaker 1 (01:19):
Correct?
Speaker 5 (01:20):
Was he the first one?
Speaker 1 (01:21):
I believe? So?
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Okay, but he said Republicans and Democrats of light have
failed miserably. Now, if you notice, Joe Biden years later
when he took the Oval Office, never started or picked
up the war on drugs.
Speaker 4 (01:33):
No, he was busy solving cancer. Remember he had that
handled and.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
He didn't want to get in a scuffle with his
own son.
Speaker 4 (01:41):
No, if I was gonna win the war on drugs,
i'd make Hunter very upset.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
That'd be great if you'd have made him the drugs
are Oh.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
That's what they call him on the street already, sir.
Speaker 5 (01:54):
Is that really cocaine? Why don't you sniff it and
find out?
Speaker 1 (01:58):
That's great?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Oh, oh, big day today because we're going to get
the admiral now to come in. And they got questions
for the admiral about the double tap, and we're gonna
are we gonna get the video with the audio today
because MSNBC has been promising that, the administration said they
were going to release it. They're frothing in the mouth
over there. They get the audio with the video, they
want to hear Pete headgsays say the words kill them both,
(02:21):
those two guys right there, kill them. Okay, all right,
well whatever, and one things for sure, we all agree,
and we've seen it in videos, we've heard about it.
We all agree, if you're a serviceman or woman, you
do not carry out in the illegal order. Everybody agrees
with that. Okay, there's no debate there. But the great
(02:43):
debate apparently is and I've seen former generals and former admirals,
current admirals I guess as well, arguing on each side
whether this was illegal to take out the boat with
the second strike. Is anybody well, we've heard Democrats argue
(03:05):
that the first strike, even Ram Paulicy and the first
strike is illegal. So certainly war criminal charges are coming.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
Well you know there.
Speaker 4 (03:15):
I mean, there's so many different angles that people are
trying to take on it. One would be it's not
a war. There isn't a war, so it's just a murder.
But then if it's a war crime, then you have
to admit that we're at war. Then if you admit
that we're in a war, why didn't Congress declare the war?
Speaker 3 (03:36):
And if I said yesterday, Congress hasn't declared the wars,
it's World War two, that's correct. So they certainly if
they skipped them over a couple, they're not going to
come out for this one.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Well, because the president, according to UH was it the
second article, that he has the ability to have limited
air strikes uh, and then he can escalate it to
bombings on the ground or like as Obama was doing
drone strikes those types of things. You have like ninety
(04:07):
days to do that. Then if you take like a
day off or something, you can then escalate it again
for like another one hundred and twenty or something like that.
So they just keep so like the whole Vietnam War
was not ever a war. It was a police action.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
That's right.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
And it went from like nineteen sixty two to like
nineteen seventy five, so.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
We recorded would take a day off.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
Thirteen years of no war. I guess they were all
the peace presidents, starting with Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
The way they would like to be remembered.
Speaker 4 (04:43):
Yes, I'm the President of Peace. You have a guy
here now who actually wants peace for no other reason
other than peace, and he's made out to be the
biggest warmonger of all time.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
And well, you know, the coverage are going to be
interesting because this morning on MSBC, I laughed out loud
when I've forgotten the reporter was, but they were talking
to Ali Battally and her last line was, as they
show that they are in support of their Secretary of Defense,
or as they refer to him, the Secretary of war,
we can't even agree even with the new letterhead on
(05:17):
the letters and on the building, we can't even agree
what his title is.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
So we're damn sure not going to agree what his
actions were.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
Well, yeah, that's true to the Hakeem Jeffreys yesterday kept
saying the so called secretary of Defense, and I was like,
I know you're trying to take a shot at him,
but it would be the so called secretary of war.
But it's but you're not even taking the right shot.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
No, this is why if you were in the military,
they'd never have you to take the second shot.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
You wouldn't have hit him the first one. Hello. All right, anyway,
we got all.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
That unfolding today as we get ready for the Admiral
to be Now, is this going to be open It's
going to be closed.
Speaker 4 (05:57):
Door hearings today, I'm assuming. I'm assuming so everybody's talking
about the pipe bomb right now.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Yeah, otherwise that have a clock tick down or a
countdown for the actual coverages today of the Admirable speaking.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
So it's going to be a closed door session. You're right.
Speaker 3 (06:13):
We do have now the file that I guess it's
sto the FBI. Maybe they just forgot where they had
it because they held most of that information for five
years in a folder.
Speaker 4 (06:26):
Yeah, it's interesting that they're not giving the Trump administration,
specifically Dan Bongino more credit because Dan Bongeno. Look, when
Dan Bongina was a podcaster, he did say some kind
of outrageous things, and that was in order to get attention.
But some of those things that he said were actually
turning out to be true. And the fact that he
(06:47):
kind of sensationalized what was going on with the pipe
bomb investigation and implying that he knew things that he.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Didn't know.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
Doesn't diminish the fact that his point was they should
know enough information just based off the video they should
be able to figure out who this is and now
that he and what's his face? Cash butteller in charge.
They've gone and they've looked at the information that the
FBI collected in twenty twenty one, in twenty twenty two,
(07:19):
and it has been sitting there untouched. They have not
added anything to it. There's been no further investigation other
than they helped the people go over it again with
fresh eye.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
So to speak.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
And today they made an arrest. Now, this is not
a woman. That's what I thought it was gonna because
there had been speculation that there was some sort of
way of tracing the gate to a woman who would
have had that rare pair of Nike what they call
like fast turf show turf shoes or something, who used
to play professional soccer in Ohio. It turns out it
was a guy that they arrested in Virginia. No information
(07:55):
at this early hour, which just after ten am, So
maybe we'll get a name later on.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
We'll find out made official charges.
Speaker 4 (08:03):
He's just arrested. He's not being held for questioning. He
is arrested. Yes, so he's arrested. Yeah, so I'm not
sure what the charges will be. I mean, I'm sure
there's plenty.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
Yeah, And we'll have to wait for that laundry list
all right now.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
Otherwise, it's been interesting.
Speaker 3 (08:21):
In the past couple of days without getting into it,
because it's kind of a repeat of the information that
we recognize, but the Democrats refuse to with Bessett on
television in the past couple of days having interviews with
these people who insist on telling him how wrong he is.
Speaker 5 (08:36):
I wouldn't get into that mess.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
I would not sit down to talk to Bessett about that.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
In the state of South Carolina, apparently we can line
your watches back one hundred years. Henry mcmassa, Yeah, is
going to be the Massa once again because according to
a lot of the pushback that we're hearing after his
announcement yesterday with an executive order directing state agencies and
state universities to stop using race based quotas in awarding
(09:06):
future state contracts, meaning businesses that the state hires for
any particular thing, from roads to construction to whatever. So
we have now ended that practice because before we had
a program that was put in place specifically to make
sure that we gave minority owned and that would include
(09:26):
female owned as well as minority as an African American female,
an African American owned, any minority owned, Hispanic whatever business
is an opportunity to get a foothold, just a foothole
in the good old boy system to give them an
opportunity to be able to be contracted by the state
of South Carolina.
Speaker 4 (09:46):
Well and Diane Sumter led the South Carolina Minority Business
Development Agency for the last few years, and she said
we never did get the foothold. She said that they
were very hopeful back in the mid eighties when this
law was passed and South Carolina, but she said, quote,
alls we've ever had is hope, never caught on. This
(10:08):
now takes away the hope, It takes away the dream.
The money has never followed. So I don't know what
Diane is talking about in the sense that they're seven
hundred and fifty minority owned businesses in South Carolina that
are currently doing business with the state. Seventy percent of
them belong to African American men and women. The other
thirty percent are basically white women. So I don't know
(10:32):
seven hundred and fifty businesses.
Speaker 5 (10:33):
I don't know what group of them would have got
this job.
Speaker 4 (10:39):
I'll say more likely because of the fact that they're
minority owned. Obviously they're going out of their way to
try to find minority owned businesses to try to do
business with, but they weren't going to overpay per se.
I don't think that they would have tolerated inferior work
too much. But it's hard to say.
Speaker 3 (10:57):
Well, anyway, what, Yes, the Treasury Department, and maybe they
will in the future give you a percentage of what
money's actually went to minority owned business is and what
that percentage represented.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
In raw dollars, but we don't have all that those articles.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
Yeah, and again I would think of the seven hundred
and fifty minority owned businesses, I'm going to go vast majority,
if not every single one of them, would have gotten
the state contract on their own. They don't need this
BS law, you would think. And that's kind of what
Henry McMaster was saying yesterday, is that, for one, you're
(11:33):
putting us at risk of losing federal funding because the
Trump administration has already told us they're not going to
fund states that have these racial quotas set up. It
actually is a violation of federal law.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
To do it.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
They can't trump federal law, no matter how many times
California and Illinois tells you that they can.
Speaker 4 (11:56):
Yeah, And here we are in the year twenty twenty five.
And it's funny, like if you go back and you
watch like a film or something in the bank in
the year nineteen sixty two or whatever it is. But
in the I am quickly approaching sixty years old, and
I have been a pretty astute student of at least
(12:19):
the groups that I've lived with. I've lived in Connecticut,
and I've lived in New York, and I've lived in
South Carolina. Those are the three states that I've basically
lived in. And I can tell you honestly, and I
think a lot of people would agree with this statement
that race relations were better in the eighties, nineties, and
(12:41):
early two thousands than they are.
Speaker 5 (12:43):
Well, maybe not today.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Today.
Speaker 4 (12:44):
I feel like they're getting better, actually, but we did
a lot of damage. I hate to say it, particularly
with Barack Obama's administration totally. That administration really tried to
drive a wedge. And that's really the first administration that
completely played up the identity politics. Clinton played it a
(13:06):
little bit but he never played it to the extent
that the Obama administration did.
Speaker 3 (13:09):
Now, no matter how many times a Senator or a
house member of the State of South Carolina General Assembly
tells you that this is a racist move, the quote
is that we didn't comply with the constitution. It's viewed
by the Trump administration, is viewed by me and lawyers here,
and he is a former state attorney general now of
the governor. If we didn't abide, then now people will
be losing federal money. Now, Todd Rutherford, Democrat Richland says
(13:31):
he does not believe the federal funding would have really
not really, that's just a guideline.
Speaker 4 (13:40):
Well, I mean, you know, look to Todd Rutherford, I
always try to give people benefit of the doubt. So,
for example, right now we're in a a legal battle
after what's her face yesterday announced that SNAP funding is
now in jeopardy for twenty one states, the Democrat run
states that did not comply with the Trump administration's quest
for information on who's receiving this SNAP benefits. They got
(14:04):
it from twenty nine states. Those twenty nine states revealed
massive fraud. They're assuming that the twenty one that didn't
comply going to be at least as bad, if not.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
Worse, probably worse.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
So she said, we've made a decision that we're not
going to send out SNAP funding to the states that
don't comply. Well, Unfortunately for her, the law says you
can never deny SNAP funding to a state and it's
their decision how to administrate it forever. So unless Congress
wants to write a new law, which I'm not against,
(14:37):
you can't defund a state like Oregon. Who tells you
to go pound sand when you say it seems like
you have massive fraud in your state, Well, it may
or may not, but you're nothing you can do about
it when it comes to SNAP. So to Todd Rutherford's point,
I don't know if we would have lost federal funding.
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But I'll
also point out to Todd Ruththerford, why would you want
(14:58):
to have race quote.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
He said, we need to understand that a rising tide
lifts all boats. Yes, we do that because we take
care of the least of the We take care of
those that participated in the building of this state, not
just enjoying its well without giving back to those who
actually had to build it, who built it? Todd, He
(15:23):
doesn't come out specifically and say that.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
Or any of these people who built the state, in
Todd's opinion, currently with us. Are they currently in the room.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Or any of the people that actually worked on the
last renovation of the State House still with us.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
I mean, because when they say things like that that
African Americans built whatever America, or they built the state,
I can push back as an Irish American and tell
you you can go look at a lot of stuff
that the Irish built in this state, and they were
doing it at slave wages. They may not have been
(15:59):
actually shack but they were doing it for like literally
pennies an hour, and many of them died. And you know,
it is what it is many people. It's not a race,
it's not a people group. It's a bunch of individuals
who did things to make this state what it is
and make this country what it is. And it didn't
(16:21):
just happen in the seventeen hundreds and eighteen hundreds or
nineteen hundreds. It's happening right now and right now, thank god.
Most people don't look at a business through the prism
of who owns it. They look at it through the
prism of what can it do for me?
Speaker 3 (16:36):
Right now, there were some comments, and you know we
mentioned earlier that started in the eighties. You know, it
just seems like this is the last leverage stronghold of
the old Hugh Leatherman regime. Maybe because Harvey Peeler doesn't
(16:57):
actually contract anything that the state whatever buy other than milk.
Speaker 4 (17:01):
I'll point out Hugh Leatherman, lifelong Democrat till you couldn't
win elections as a Democrat. So again, somebody who when
you used to talk about race, somebody who sees thing
through that prism, always a Democrat.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
So when the dB as it referred to here of
disadvantaged businesses were given the opportunity, he immediately went out
and hired a female to be the president. Now, on paper,
he owned less than five percent of Lawrence Concrete, so
he made sure that it was set up properly.
Speaker 5 (17:32):
So how did he hire her?
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Oh well, I'm going to assume that he had somebody
to do that. JT.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
At Lawhorn, president and then a then president and CEO
of Columbia Urban League, said such skewed percentages for rather
the rule than an exception of the system. In South
Carolina and nationally where BDD contracts go predominantly to non
minority female businesses rather than the racial minority businesses they
were set up to aid. There's nothing more unique. There's
(18:00):
nothing unique about the Florence concrete. This is from an
article printed back in I think it's eighty nine. I'll
look at the look at the date in a minute.
But if you want to level the playing field for minorities,
it takes looking beyond the designation of businesses of the
businesses themselves. And he goes, honestly, I can't criticize the
company for working within the system. Well, you know, when
(18:21):
you're when you're the one developing the system, it's pretty
easy to create a company that works within that system.
Speaker 1 (18:28):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (18:28):
And you know it's interesting is he makes the subtle
shot that it was designed to help. Did he say
people they didn't use the phrase people of color in
the eighties. Did he say he said something about African
Americans or did they use the color black back then?
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Maybe it was African Americans.
Speaker 5 (18:47):
I didn't think we were using that yet n eighties.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
But here we go predominantly non minority female businesses instead
of the rather than racial minority racial minorities.
Speaker 4 (18:59):
So that was the is used racial minorities, which I mean,
I'm not a quote unquote feminist other than I love
women and I think that they have unique skill sets
that make the earth a very you know, we couldn't.
Speaker 5 (19:13):
Live without women.
Speaker 4 (19:14):
Obviously you couldn't give birth, but also just their insights
and instincts and intellect make society a far better place
than it would be if it was completely male dominated.
But women would have been I would have felt like
the last group to get access to the workplace. Minorities
(19:35):
would have been given access to the workplace before women.
Really women were given any kind of access during World
War Two would have been their first shot to get
into the workforce, but for most women it didn't happen
until the seventies. And so you know you're talking about
African American males or Latino males, they would have been
(19:56):
working in the eighteen hundreds.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
Now, the article printed by the Posting Courier, just a
little inside here. The number of certified contractors who qualify
for the program as small, totally, just seven hundred and
fifty businesses as of August fifth, according to state data.
The Lion's share of those businesses, about seventy percent belonged
to black men and women and the rest primarily owned
(20:18):
by white women. So there was a there, there were
a lot of businesses who were minority owned. But then
again you get down to one of the last paragraphs,
if not the last one. The biggest question are the
big question mark, how marks? How impactful these laws are
regarding minority owned businesses have been. According to Frank Knapp,
(20:39):
CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce,
I'm sure they were.
Speaker 1 (20:43):
They probably had an impact.
Speaker 3 (20:45):
We don't know. We don't know how impactful they've been.
You would have thought of anybody who would it would
have been him.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (20:52):
I mean, the idea that the racial quotas to get
businesses that are run by minority state contracts seems to
have had little impact. According to the people in that field,
minorities who have businesses that are available for state contracts,
they don't feel like they've gotten much of a leg
(21:13):
up at all. I'm wondering, you know, to me, when
I think about racial quotas, I always feel like you're
doing more harm than good in this era. I'm not
saying kind of like when I'm saying unions do more
harm than good today. I'm not saying there wasn't a
(21:34):
time when a racial quota may have been of assistance
to try to get America to open its eyes and see,
you know, women can do just as many great things
as men, or that people of different colors can be
just as you know, make just great contributions. Unions certainly
had a place before we had all the labor laws,
(21:57):
and they did you know when they ever, you know
who is it was?
Speaker 3 (21:59):
It?
Speaker 5 (21:59):
Kama, You better thank.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
A union member.
Speaker 5 (22:02):
I mean, you like your weekend, you better thank a
union member.
Speaker 4 (22:05):
Yes, the unions certainly helped create the weekends and those
these types of things.
Speaker 3 (22:09):
Oh, childhood, you better thank a union member. Okay, yeah,
because they put an end to child labor.
Speaker 1 (22:15):
Yeah yeah, I mean get it. There.
Speaker 4 (22:17):
There was definitely a time and a place for for
these things. But we're long past it, and now they're
doing more harm than good.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Who is the.
Speaker 4 (22:27):
Black economist who's like one hundred years old now? And
why am I drawing a blank? I've read like five
of his books and I'm getting I'm a little tired today,
so my memories are going.
Speaker 5 (22:36):
But I think we all know who I'm talking about.
Speaker 4 (22:38):
If you don't look up black economist, conservative from North Carolina,
and he will. He has a number of books, but
he often talked about how you're doing more harm than good.
He was talking specifically in the scholastic field, in the
sense that you would take a black student who didn't
have the grades of a white student and put him
(22:59):
into law school and say, and the understanding was because
blacks didn't have an opportunity to become lawyers because they
came from disadvantaged childhoods, which meant they were going to
have disadvantaged education opportunities even if they went to the
same school as the white child, because they didn't have
a father at home, or they didn't have this, that
(23:19):
and the other thing. And so now we got to
give them a chance, and we're going to do it
by taking people who have lower scores, scholastic scores and
put him into the law school.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
He said.
Speaker 4 (23:29):
Invariably, a couple of things happened. One, you got a
much higher dropout rate. They're frustrated, they're miserable, they're not
mentally capable of learning the law or an engineering degree
or whatever it was that they got there artificially but two,
for those that were ready for it, they probably didn't
(23:49):
need that hand up or handout or whatever you want
to call it. And now they're disadvantaged in the sense
that everybody's looking at him side eyed. Everybody said, well,
the only reason here is because of that. Let competition
be competition.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
That's all it is.
Speaker 5 (24:07):
Soul.
Speaker 4 (24:07):
Yes, So, ow El Thomas Sole, great great African American economist,
has a wonderful disposition about him, and I highly encourage
you to read all of his books. He's got like
a dozen or more out there. But again, I the
state doing business with minority owned businesses as a policy
(24:30):
just seems so antiquated and so actually harmful to the
minority owned businesses.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
And the fact that we.
Speaker 4 (24:39):
Only got what is it five percent? Is that what
they said something like that five percent of the businesses.
It's seven hundred and fifty of them fifty that I'm
I'm wondering if now that they're going to take the
shackles off of this, I wouldn't be surprised if it
goes up to ten or fifteen percent. I just feel
like there's going to have a better shot with fair competition, all.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
Right, So then more information be rolling out of that
by the way, Hines, Oh, I wish he was still
up there, Representative Hins. Representative Hines said, the strike on
the boat, I guess he stepped out of the admiral's
office to get the first shot on ms NOW. Okay,
the strike on the boat is the most troubling thing
he has seen during his time in public office. Is
(25:24):
that's the most troubling thing he's ever seen. This is
an admiral, Well, the admiral who's speaking today, and he's
been in in what high no, Hines, Representative hinspresentative, Yeah,
he stepped out of the He stepped out of the
hearing to get the first shot, the video shot on
ms NOW so he can make sure he gets the
gets the recycle for the rest of the news. You know,
(25:45):
I'm wondering where where's Representative Hines from?
Speaker 1 (25:48):
Do they say?
Speaker 4 (25:50):
I'm wondering if he's anywhere near Minnesota. I wonder if
the George Floyd protesters would say, that's more disturbing exact
how you saw it happened to George Floyd.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
He wanted to step out.
Speaker 3 (25:58):
You overstated your case and you'll only get it pushback
from that, say his name exactly
Welcome to the Jonathan and Kelly Show.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Jonathan Rush, every president for the past two decades, Democrat
and Republican alike, has declared war on drugs, and each
of them has lost that war and.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
Lost it miserably. Kelly Nash, Let's go after.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
The drug lords where they live. There must be no
safe haven for these narco terrorists.
Speaker 1 (00:23):
Jonathan and Kelly Show.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
I just heard a Democrat the other day talking about
how that narco terrorist is not even a word. That's
just a play on words. They took two words and
crammed them together so they could lead you to believe
that drug dealers were like isis That's not even a word.
And I'm sitting there going I'm pretty sure I've heard
the term narco terrorist. Maybe I'm misremembering. So I looked
(00:45):
it up and the only reference I can find, the
earliest reference I can find was nineteen eighty five.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
That is good now.
Speaker 3 (00:51):
That was nineteen eighty nine from Joe Biden, and he
went on to tell you we got the power, we
got the military, we got the money. All we need
is the wheel to go after them where they are.
Speaker 4 (01:02):
So Donald Trump, following the playbook of one Joe Joseph
Arbiden exactly. Well, the Democrats hate Joe Biden now, so
I guess that's another reason that they're upset. So did
Obama do this?
Speaker 3 (01:15):
You know he's right because we did have the war
in drugs first, starting with Ronald Reagan?
Speaker 1 (01:19):
Correct?
Speaker 5 (01:20):
Was he the first one?
Speaker 1 (01:21):
I believe? So?
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Okay, but he said Republicans and Democrats of light have
failed miserably. Now, if you notice, Joe Biden years later
when he took the Oval Office, never started or picked
up the war on drugs.
Speaker 4 (01:33):
No, he was busy solving cancer. Remember he had that
handled and.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
He didn't want to get in a scuffle with his
own son.
Speaker 4 (01:41):
No, if I was gonna win the war on drugs,
i'd make Hunter very upset.
Speaker 3 (01:47):
That'd be great if you'd have made him the drugs
are Oh.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
That's what they call him on the street already, sir.
Speaker 5 (01:54):
Is that really cocaine? Why don't you sniff it and
find out?
Speaker 1 (01:58):
That's great?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Oh, oh, big day today because we're going to get
the admiral now to come in. And they got questions
for the admiral about the double tap, and we're gonna
are we gonna get the video with the audio today
because MSNBC has been promising that, the administration said they
were going to release it. They're frothing in the mouth
over there. They get the audio with the video, they
want to hear Pete headgsays say the words kill them both,
(02:21):
those two guys right there, kill them. Okay, all right,
well whatever, and one things for sure, we all agree,
and we've seen it in videos, we've heard about it.
We all agree, if you're a serviceman or woman, you
do not carry out in the illegal order. Everybody agrees
with that. Okay, there's no debate there. But the great
(02:43):
debate apparently is and I've seen former generals and former admirals,
current admirals I guess as well, arguing on each side
whether this was illegal to take out the boat with
the second strike. Is anybody well, we've heard Democrats argue
(03:05):
that the first strike, even Ram Paulicy and the first
strike is illegal. So certainly war criminal charges are coming.
Speaker 1 (03:13):
Well you know there.
Speaker 4 (03:15):
I mean, there's so many different angles that people are
trying to take on it. One would be it's not
a war. There isn't a war, so it's just a murder.
But then if it's a war crime, then you have
to admit that we're at war. Then if you admit
that we're in a war, why didn't Congress declare the war?
Speaker 3 (03:36):
And if I said yesterday, Congress hasn't declared the wars,
it's World War two, that's correct. So they certainly if
they skipped them over a couple, they're not going to
come out for this one.
Speaker 4 (03:46):
Well, because the president, according to UH was it the
second article, that he has the ability to have limited
air strikes uh, and then he can escalate it to
bombings on the ground or like as Obama was doing
drone strikes those types of things. You have like ninety
(04:07):
days to do that. Then if you take like a
day off or something, you can then escalate it again
for like another one hundred and twenty or something like that.
So they just keep so like the whole Vietnam War
was not ever a war. It was a police action.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
That's right.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
And it went from like nineteen sixty two to like
nineteen seventy five, so.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
We recorded would take a day off.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
Thirteen years of no war. I guess they were all
the peace presidents, starting with Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
The way they would like to be remembered.
Speaker 4 (04:43):
Yes, I'm the President of Peace. You have a guy
here now who actually wants peace for no other reason
other than peace, and he's made out to be the
biggest warmonger of all time.
Speaker 3 (04:54):
And well, you know, the coverage are going to be
interesting because this morning on MSBC, I laughed out loud
when I've forgotten the reporter was, but they were talking
to Ali Battally and her last line was, as they
show that they are in support of their Secretary of Defense,
or as they refer to him, the Secretary of war,
we can't even agree even with the new letterhead on
(05:17):
the letters and on the building, we can't even agree
what his title is.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
So we're damn sure not going to agree what his
actions were.
Speaker 4 (05:24):
Well, yeah, that's true to the Hakeem Jeffreys yesterday kept
saying the so called secretary of Defense, and I was like,
I know you're trying to take a shot at him,
but it would be the so called secretary of war.
But it's but you're not even taking the right shot.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
No, this is why if you were in the military,
they'd never have you to take the second shot.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
You wouldn't have hit him the first one. Hello. All right, anyway,
we got all.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
That unfolding today as we get ready for the Admiral
to be Now, is this going to be open It's
going to be closed.
Speaker 4 (05:57):
Door hearings today, I'm assuming. I'm assuming so everybody's talking
about the pipe bomb right now.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Yeah, otherwise that have a clock tick down or a
countdown for the actual coverages today of the Admirable speaking.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
So it's going to be a closed door session. You're right.
Speaker 3 (06:13):
We do have now the file that I guess it's
sto the FBI. Maybe they just forgot where they had
it because they held most of that information for five
years in a folder.
Speaker 4 (06:26):
Yeah, it's interesting that they're not giving the Trump administration,
specifically Dan Bongino more credit because Dan Bongeno. Look, when
Dan Bongina was a podcaster, he did say some kind
of outrageous things, and that was in order to get attention.
But some of those things that he said were actually
turning out to be true. And the fact that he
(06:47):
kind of sensationalized what was going on with the pipe
bomb investigation and implying that he knew things that he.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Didn't know.
Speaker 4 (06:56):
Doesn't diminish the fact that his point was they should
know enough information just based off the video they should
be able to figure out who this is and now
that he and what's his face? Cash butteller in charge.
They've gone and they've looked at the information that the
FBI collected in twenty twenty one, in twenty twenty two,
(07:19):
and it has been sitting there untouched. They have not
added anything to it. There's been no further investigation other
than they helped the people go over it again with
fresh eye.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
So to speak.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
And today they made an arrest. Now, this is not
a woman. That's what I thought it was gonna because
there had been speculation that there was some sort of
way of tracing the gate to a woman who would
have had that rare pair of Nike what they call
like fast turf show turf shoes or something, who used
to play professional soccer in Ohio. It turns out it
was a guy that they arrested in Virginia. No information
(07:55):
at this early hour, which just after ten am, So
maybe we'll get a name later on.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
We'll find out made official charges.
Speaker 4 (08:03):
He's just arrested. He's not being held for questioning. He
is arrested. Yes, so he's arrested. Yeah, so I'm not
sure what the charges will be. I mean, I'm sure
there's plenty.
Speaker 3 (08:14):
Yeah, And we'll have to wait for that laundry list
all right now.
Speaker 1 (08:19):
Otherwise, it's been interesting.
Speaker 3 (08:21):
In the past couple of days without getting into it,
because it's kind of a repeat of the information that
we recognize, but the Democrats refuse to with Bessett on
television in the past couple of days having interviews with
these people who insist on telling him how wrong he is.
Speaker 5 (08:36):
I wouldn't get into that mess.
Speaker 1 (08:37):
I would not sit down to talk to Bessett about that.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
In the state of South Carolina, apparently we can line
your watches back one hundred years. Henry mcmassa, Yeah, is
going to be the Massa once again because according to
a lot of the pushback that we're hearing after his
announcement yesterday with an executive order directing state agencies and
state universities to stop using race based quotas in awarding
(09:06):
future state contracts, meaning businesses that the state hires for
any particular thing, from roads to construction to whatever. So
we have now ended that practice because before we had
a program that was put in place specifically to make
sure that we gave minority owned and that would include
(09:26):
female owned as well as minority as an African American female,
an African American owned, any minority owned, Hispanic whatever business
is an opportunity to get a foothold, just a foothole
in the good old boy system to give them an
opportunity to be able to be contracted by the state
of South Carolina.
Speaker 4 (09:46):
Well and Diane Sumter led the South Carolina Minority Business
Development Agency for the last few years, and she said
we never did get the foothold. She said that they
were very hopeful back in the mid eighties when this
law was passed and South Carolina, but she said, quote,
alls we've ever had is hope, never caught on. This
(10:08):
now takes away the hope, It takes away the dream.
The money has never followed. So I don't know what
Diane is talking about in the sense that they're seven
hundred and fifty minority owned businesses in South Carolina that
are currently doing business with the state. Seventy percent of
them belong to African American men and women. The other
thirty percent are basically white women. So I don't know
(10:32):
seven hundred and fifty businesses.
Speaker 5 (10:33):
I don't know what group of them would have got
this job.
Speaker 4 (10:39):
I'll say more likely because of the fact that they're
minority owned. Obviously they're going out of their way to
try to find minority owned businesses to try to do
business with, but they weren't going to overpay per se.
I don't think that they would have tolerated inferior work
too much. But it's hard to say.
Speaker 3 (10:57):
Well, anyway, what, Yes, the Treasury Department, and maybe they
will in the future give you a percentage of what
money's actually went to minority owned business is and what
that percentage represented.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
In raw dollars, but we don't have all that those articles.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
Yeah, and again I would think of the seven hundred
and fifty minority owned businesses, I'm going to go vast majority,
if not every single one of them, would have gotten
the state contract on their own. They don't need this
BS law, you would think. And that's kind of what
Henry McMaster was saying yesterday, is that, for one, you're
(11:33):
putting us at risk of losing federal funding because the
Trump administration has already told us they're not going to
fund states that have these racial quotas set up. It
actually is a violation of federal law.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
To do it.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
They can't trump federal law, no matter how many times
California and Illinois tells you that they can.
Speaker 4 (11:56):
Yeah, And here we are in the year twenty twenty five.
And it's funny, like if you go back and you
watch like a film or something in the bank in
the year nineteen sixty two or whatever it is. But
in the I am quickly approaching sixty years old, and
I have been a pretty astute student of at least
(12:19):
the groups that I've lived with. I've lived in Connecticut,
and I've lived in New York, and I've lived in
South Carolina. Those are the three states that I've basically
lived in. And I can tell you honestly, and I
think a lot of people would agree with this statement
that race relations were better in the eighties, nineties, and
(12:41):
early two thousands than they are.
Speaker 5 (12:43):
Well, maybe not today.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Today.
Speaker 4 (12:44):
I feel like they're getting better, actually, but we did
a lot of damage. I hate to say it, particularly
with Barack Obama's administration totally. That administration really tried to
drive a wedge. And that's really the first administration that
completely played up the identity politics. Clinton played it a
(13:06):
little bit but he never played it to the extent
that the Obama administration did.
Speaker 3 (13:09):
Now, no matter how many times a Senator or a
house member of the State of South Carolina General Assembly
tells you that this is a racist move, the quote
is that we didn't comply with the constitution. It's viewed
by the Trump administration, is viewed by me and lawyers here,
and he is a former state attorney general now of
the governor. If we didn't abide, then now people will
be losing federal money. Now, Todd Rutherford, Democrat Richland says
(13:31):
he does not believe the federal funding would have really
not really, that's just a guideline.
Speaker 4 (13:40):
Well, I mean, you know, look to Todd Rutherford, I
always try to give people benefit of the doubt. So,
for example, right now we're in a a legal battle
after what's her face yesterday announced that SNAP funding is
now in jeopardy for twenty one states, the Democrat run
states that did not comply with the Trump administration's quest
for information on who's receiving this SNAP benefits. They got
(14:04):
it from twenty nine states. Those twenty nine states revealed
massive fraud. They're assuming that the twenty one that didn't
comply going to be at least as bad, if not.
Speaker 1 (14:13):
Worse, probably worse.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
So she said, we've made a decision that we're not
going to send out SNAP funding to the states that
don't comply. Well, Unfortunately for her, the law says you
can never deny SNAP funding to a state and it's
their decision how to administrate it forever. So unless Congress
wants to write a new law, which I'm not against,
(14:37):
you can't defund a state like Oregon. Who tells you
to go pound sand when you say it seems like
you have massive fraud in your state, Well, it may
or may not, but you're nothing you can do about
it when it comes to SNAP. So to Todd Rutherford's point,
I don't know if we would have lost federal funding.
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. But I'll
also point out to Todd Ruththerford, why would you want
(14:58):
to have race quote.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
He said, we need to understand that a rising tide
lifts all boats. Yes, we do that because we take
care of the least of the We take care of
those that participated in the building of this state, not
just enjoying its well without giving back to those who
actually had to build it, who built it? Todd, He
(15:23):
doesn't come out specifically and say that.
Speaker 4 (15:25):
Or any of these people who built the state, in
Todd's opinion, currently with us. Are they currently in the room.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
Or any of the people that actually worked on the
last renovation of the State House still with us.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
I mean, because when they say things like that that
African Americans built whatever America, or they built the state,
I can push back as an Irish American and tell
you you can go look at a lot of stuff
that the Irish built in this state, and they were
doing it at slave wages. They may not have been
(15:59):
actually shack but they were doing it for like literally
pennies an hour, and many of them died. And you know,
it is what it is many people. It's not a race,
it's not a people group. It's a bunch of individuals
who did things to make this state what it is
and make this country what it is. And it didn't
(16:21):
just happen in the seventeen hundreds and eighteen hundreds or
nineteen hundreds. It's happening right now and right now, thank god.
Most people don't look at a business through the prism
of who owns it. They look at it through the
prism of what can it do for me?
Speaker 3 (16:36):
Right now, there were some comments, and you know we
mentioned earlier that started in the eighties. You know, it
just seems like this is the last leverage stronghold of
the old Hugh Leatherman regime. Maybe because Harvey Peeler doesn't
(16:57):
actually contract anything that the state whatever buy other than milk.
Speaker 4 (17:01):
I'll point out Hugh Leatherman, lifelong Democrat till you couldn't
win elections as a Democrat. So again, somebody who when
you used to talk about race, somebody who sees thing
through that prism, always a Democrat.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
So when the dB as it referred to here of
disadvantaged businesses were given the opportunity, he immediately went out
and hired a female to be the president. Now, on paper,
he owned less than five percent of Lawrence Concrete, so
he made sure that it was set up properly.
Speaker 5 (17:32):
So how did he hire her?
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Oh well, I'm going to assume that he had somebody
to do that. JT.
Speaker 3 (17:39):
At Lawhorn, president and then a then president and CEO
of Columbia Urban League, said such skewed percentages for rather
the rule than an exception of the system. In South
Carolina and nationally where BDD contracts go predominantly to non
minority female businesses rather than the racial minority businesses they
were set up to aid. There's nothing more unique. There's
(18:00):
nothing unique about the Florence concrete. This is from an
article printed back in I think it's eighty nine. I'll
look at the look at the date in a minute.
But if you want to level the playing field for minorities,
it takes looking beyond the designation of businesses of the
businesses themselves. And he goes, honestly, I can't criticize the
company for working within the system. Well, you know, when
(18:21):
you're when you're the one developing the system, it's pretty
easy to create a company that works within that system.
Speaker 1 (18:28):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (18:28):
And you know it's interesting is he makes the subtle
shot that it was designed to help. Did he say
people they didn't use the phrase people of color in
the eighties. Did he say he said something about African
Americans or did they use the color black back then?
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Maybe it was African Americans.
Speaker 5 (18:47):
I didn't think we were using that yet n eighties.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
But here we go predominantly non minority female businesses instead
of the rather than racial minority racial minorities.
Speaker 4 (18:59):
So that was the is used racial minorities, which I mean,
I'm not a quote unquote feminist other than I love
women and I think that they have unique skill sets
that make the earth a very you know, we couldn't.
Speaker 5 (19:13):
Live without women.
Speaker 4 (19:14):
Obviously you couldn't give birth, but also just their insights
and instincts and intellect make society a far better place
than it would be if it was completely male dominated.
But women would have been I would have felt like
the last group to get access to the workplace. Minorities
(19:35):
would have been given access to the workplace before women.
Really women were given any kind of access during World
War Two would have been their first shot to get
into the workforce, but for most women it didn't happen
until the seventies. And so you know you're talking about
African American males or Latino males, they would have been
(19:56):
working in the eighteen hundreds.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
Now, the article printed by the Posting Courier, just a
little inside here. The number of certified contractors who qualify
for the program as small, totally, just seven hundred and
fifty businesses as of August fifth, according to state data.
The Lion's share of those businesses, about seventy percent belonged
to black men and women and the rest primarily owned
(20:18):
by white women. So there was a there, there were
a lot of businesses who were minority owned. But then
again you get down to one of the last paragraphs,
if not the last one. The biggest question are the
big question mark, how marks? How impactful these laws are
regarding minority owned businesses have been. According to Frank Knapp,
(20:39):
CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce,
I'm sure they were.
Speaker 1 (20:43):
They probably had an impact.
Speaker 3 (20:45):
We don't know. We don't know how impactful they've been.
You would have thought of anybody who would it would
have been him.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (20:52):
I mean, the idea that the racial quotas to get
businesses that are run by minority state contracts seems to
have had little impact. According to the people in that field,
minorities who have businesses that are available for state contracts,
they don't feel like they've gotten much of a leg
(21:13):
up at all. I'm wondering, you know, to me, when
I think about racial quotas, I always feel like you're
doing more harm than good in this era. I'm not
saying kind of like when I'm saying unions do more
harm than good today. I'm not saying there wasn't a
(21:34):
time when a racial quota may have been of assistance
to try to get America to open its eyes and see,
you know, women can do just as many great things
as men, or that people of different colors can be
just as you know, make just great contributions. Unions certainly
had a place before we had all the labor laws,
(21:57):
and they did you know when they ever, you know
who is it was?
Speaker 3 (21:59):
It?
Speaker 5 (21:59):
Kama, You better thank.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
A union member.
Speaker 5 (22:02):
I mean, you like your weekend, you better thank a
union member.
Speaker 4 (22:05):
Yes, the unions certainly helped create the weekends and those
these types of things.
Speaker 3 (22:09):
Oh, childhood, you better thank a union member. Okay, yeah,
because they put an end to child labor.
Speaker 1 (22:15):
Yeah yeah, I mean get it. There.
Speaker 4 (22:17):
There was definitely a time and a place for for
these things. But we're long past it, and now they're
doing more harm than good.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Who is the.
Speaker 4 (22:27):
Black economist who's like one hundred years old now? And
why am I drawing a blank? I've read like five
of his books and I'm getting I'm a little tired today,
so my memories are going.
Speaker 5 (22:36):
But I think we all know who I'm talking about.
Speaker 4 (22:38):
If you don't look up black economist, conservative from North Carolina,
and he will. He has a number of books, but
he often talked about how you're doing more harm than good.
He was talking specifically in the scholastic field, in the
sense that you would take a black student who didn't
have the grades of a white student and put him
(22:59):
into law school and say, and the understanding was because
blacks didn't have an opportunity to become lawyers because they
came from disadvantaged childhoods, which meant they were going to
have disadvantaged education opportunities even if they went to the
same school as the white child, because they didn't have
a father at home, or they didn't have this, that
(23:19):
and the other thing. And so now we got to
give them a chance, and we're going to do it
by taking people who have lower scores, scholastic scores and
put him into the law school.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
He said.
Speaker 4 (23:29):
Invariably, a couple of things happened. One, you got a
much higher dropout rate. They're frustrated, they're miserable, they're not
mentally capable of learning the law or an engineering degree
or whatever it was that they got there artificially but two,
for those that were ready for it, they probably didn't
(23:49):
need that hand up or handout or whatever you want
to call it. And now they're disadvantaged in the sense
that everybody's looking at him side eyed. Everybody said, well,
the only reason here is because of that. Let competition
be competition.
Speaker 1 (24:05):
That's all it is.
Speaker 5 (24:07):
Soul.
Speaker 4 (24:07):
Yes, So, ow El Thomas Sole, great great African American economist,
has a wonderful disposition about him, and I highly encourage
you to read all of his books. He's got like
a dozen or more out there. But again, I the
state doing business with minority owned businesses as a policy
(24:30):
just seems so antiquated and so actually harmful to the
minority owned businesses.
Speaker 1 (24:37):
And the fact that we.
Speaker 4 (24:39):
Only got what is it five percent? Is that what
they said something like that five percent of the businesses.
It's seven hundred and fifty of them fifty that I'm
I'm wondering if now that they're going to take the
shackles off of this, I wouldn't be surprised if it
goes up to ten or fifteen percent. I just feel
like there's going to have a better shot with fair competition, all.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
Right, So then more information be rolling out of that
by the way, Hines, Oh, I wish he was still
up there, Representative Hins. Representative Hines said, the strike on
the boat, I guess he stepped out of the admiral's
office to get the first shot on ms NOW. Okay,
the strike on the boat is the most troubling thing
he has seen during his time in public office. Is
(25:24):
that's the most troubling thing he's ever seen. This is
an admiral, Well, the admiral who's speaking today, and he's
been in in what high no, Hines, Representative hinspresentative, Yeah,
he stepped out of the He stepped out of the
hearing to get the first shot, the video shot on
ms NOW so he can make sure he gets the
gets the recycle for the rest of the news. You know,
(25:45):
I'm wondering where where's Representative Hines from?
Speaker 1 (25:48):
Do they say?
Speaker 4 (25:50):
I'm wondering if he's anywhere near Minnesota. I wonder if
the George Floyd protesters would say, that's more disturbing exact
how you saw it happened to George Floyd.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
He wanted to step out.
Speaker 3 (25:58):
You overstated your case and you'll only get it pushback
from that, say his name exactly
Popular Podcasts
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.