Indecision, Inflation, Ilhan Omar

Monday, Rich reacts to the indecision regarding Trump's 28-point Ukraine-Russia peace deal that keeps stalling with the Europeans. Then, Treasury Secretary Scot Bessent pushes back on inflation while challenging the filibuster. Meanwhile, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and MN Attorney General Keith Ellison complain about the Trump Administration cracking down on fraud in Minnesota. Later, the ultra-wealthy are 'cleansing' their blood plasma to fight aging. Plus, New York Attorney General Letitia James and former FBI Director James Comey had their respective criminal cases dropped on a technicality regarding US Attorney General Pam Bondi's appointment of Lindsey Halligan as acting US Attorney for Northern Virginia. 

Subscribe to "This is America with Rich Valdés" and follow @RichValdes on social media.

RichValdes.com

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:05):
This is America with Rich Valdez powered by politicweek dot com.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
And Rich Valdes is with us.

Speaker 3 (00:11):
Former Christian Administration.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Official you worked for, Chris Christie.

Speaker 3 (00:13):
Have been follow us each on a lot of public
service stuff.

Speaker 4 (00:15):
Rich Valdez calumnist now with the Washington Times.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
This is America, Richiev.

Speaker 3 (00:20):
You're on the air with A Nation.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
America with your host, Rich Valdez.

Speaker 3 (00:26):
What's up, America.

Speaker 4 (00:27):
I am Rich Valdes Valdez with an S at Rich
Valdest on all of the social media. Welcome to the
Monday night edition of the program.

Speaker 3 (00:35):
Happy to be with you.

Speaker 4 (00:36):
Check us out at Rich Valdest dot com. Of course,
that is Valdest with an S and man. There's so
many things in the news tonight. It reminds me of
an old political joke where there's a robber, right the
guys about to do a stick up and he holds
up a guy.

Speaker 3 (00:51):
He's got him at gunpoint.

Speaker 4 (00:52):
He's like, you know, put him up, and he's robbing
a really well dressed guy, pointing his gun and he's
yelling and he said, give me all your money, and
the man replies, don't you know who I am? I'm
a US congressman, and then the Robberts says, oh, in
that case, give me all of my money. And that's
exactly how it is, because ultimately in Congress we get
into all sorts of things. So Ed Trompito is meeting

(01:13):
a backlash over this. He says, we've got extra money
from tariffs and he wants to give a dividend check
back to the American people. Members of some members of
Congress are saying, not so fast. We've got a deficit
to take care of. We're going to get into that.
Plus pardons, pardons and forgiveness right, not only for the
turkey today Monday, the President forgave the White House turkey

(01:37):
for Thanksgiving and two other things that were forgiven in
court today, I should say dismissed.

Speaker 3 (01:46):
James call me and Letitia James.

Speaker 4 (01:49):
Both of their cases were thrown out of court today
in a dismissal, with a federal judge siding with the
arguments that were made by the defense, saying that Lindsay
Halligan did not have the standing to serve as the
United States attorney for that district. So as they do

(02:09):
their appeal and whatnot, I'll keep you posted on that
and I'll get into that in the moment as well.
I also want to talk about what's happening internationally, because
there was really quite a lot happening today internationally, Lots
on the Russia front, lots with Ukraine, with the European Union.
As you know, on Friday, there was a big controversy
over that with respect to the deal coming out and

(02:32):
then people saying, oh, the deal is too favorable to Russia,
and the Ukrainians agreeing that this was not a deal
that they wanted to get involved with. So they're having
that rewritten and I'm guessing that once President Putin sees it,
he's gonna say thanks, but no thanks. This is how
this is going to go back and forth. My hope
is that we'll get some exciting news on that, and

(02:55):
there was a couple of promising reports the White House
signaling a development.

Speaker 3 (03:00):
I hope some promise. We'll see how that goes.

Speaker 4 (03:02):
But I want you to hear this report because it
has to do with how we get leverage on Russia,
and it's from Fox News. It's about these battlegroups that
are forming in the Caribbean to isolate Venezuela. Now, the
big deal here is that Venezuela is dabbling with China,
dabbling with Russia, dabbling with Iran. So if we can
isolate Venezuela so that they're no longer with these communist

(03:27):
partners globally, it puts the United States in a better position.

Speaker 3 (03:31):
Listen to this.

Speaker 5 (03:33):
Should President Trump order strikes against the Maduro regime, there's
plenty of firepower in the Caribbean to do it, with
about thirty percent of all deployed American warships, including the
aircraft carrier Gerald R four now on station. There are
over two hundred Tomaul cruise missiles in theater aboard destroyers
and US marines aboard the USSE with Reshima and other
amphibs in the ready group now. Head of Thanksgiving, the

(03:55):
US military's top officer, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, General Raisin Kane, arrived in Puerto Rico yesterday
to meet the forces were part of Operation Southern Spear.
So with General Kine in the region, we'll have to
see if Secretary Hegseth follows suit ahead of Thanksgiving.

Speaker 3 (04:10):
And one thing.

Speaker 5 (04:11):
Officials have said is some of this build up in
the Creeman goes beyond the Maduro regime. It's about getting Russia,
China and Iran out of the Western hemisphere.

Speaker 3 (04:20):
Guys should present, So what will happen. There's a lot
of speculation going on.

Speaker 4 (04:26):
The New York Post reporting today there was some leaked
information and this is, you know, this developing story from
late last night that the peace deal calls for Ukraine
to keep its forces, but it leaves a NATO door
open in contrast to Trump's proposal. This is what the
Europeans are leaking, saying that they want to suggest. This

(04:47):
European proposal is meant to rival President Trump's twenty eight
point peace plan, and this is being reported by the
New York Post, and they're saying, keep your military forces
and let's keep the option to put you into NATO
on the table for the future. I think this is
obviously the deal breaker. It's literally why many say that
we're in this war to begin with. I don't know

(05:08):
how much of that I believe, but I know that
Putin has alluded to that being a deal breaker. Now,
this was discussed last night Sunday during a meeting between
the Europeans and the Ukrainians looking to put a counterproposal together.
Hoping to reach a deal, so Ursula, vander Lyon and

(05:31):
the rest of the gang are trying to hammer out
a deal here.

Speaker 3 (05:35):
Now.

Speaker 4 (05:35):
Part of what the deal includes the US plan, which
called on Ukraine to shrink its forces from about nine
hundred thousand soldiers to about six hundred thousand soldiers. European
version has no restriction can be placed on the Ukrainian army,
and obviously it's not much of a peace plan if
you leave, I think all the troops in place, right,

(05:56):
I think you got both sides seemingly unwilling to do it,
and again makes sense, right, I think everybody's making money
with this war over there, including the United States. But
it seems that the United States is looking for peace
way more than the other guys are.

Speaker 3 (06:12):
Right.

Speaker 4 (06:12):
It seems like Vladimir Putin's like, I'm vettiguti. If he dies,
he dies, right, if you know the reference, you know
the reference, and and Zelensky is you know, he's kind
of moved into this role as I was once an
actor and a comedian, but now I am a wartime president,
and he'll be one. He wants to remain this wartime
president with his sweatshirt, with his little Ukrainian logo on it.

(06:34):
So look, and I'm not trying to ridicule him or
minimize him. I'm just calling it the way I see it.
So what happens, what's next? Where do we go from here? Well,
I think that Secretary of Rubio has been out there
trying to make a deal happen and indicating that they
feel like the Russians might accept the deal. The issue

(06:55):
here is that it's the Ukrainians that look like they're
not going to accept the deal. Now, Rubio was defending
the twenty eight point piece planned because he had something to.

Speaker 3 (07:05):
Do with it.

Speaker 4 (07:07):
He says that the talks with the Ukrainians have probably
been the most productive that they've been during the entire process,
So that's encouraging. And Zelensky has also said that a
proper peace plan must take Ukraine's priorities into account and

(07:29):
avoid rewarding Russia with launching its invasion in the first
place and starting this whole war.

Speaker 3 (07:36):
So we'll see how that ends up playing out.

Speaker 6 (07:40):
But this.

Speaker 3 (07:42):
Is a precarious situation for show.

Speaker 4 (07:46):
Now, speaking of military action, there is a lot a
lot going on. The fallout over these military people continues, Right,
what do I mean by the military people. Well, I'm
talking about these videos that came out last week Democrats
who were calling on members of the military to disobey

(08:06):
illegal orders. And of course, not a single illegal order
has been conveyed. And I think this is part of
the issue. I explained in the previous show, this manipulation.
Not only is it unfair, but it's uncalled for. And
today Senator Elisa Slotkin, well, she admitted as much that

(08:30):
this whole thing was a hoax. She was more than
happy to tell the truth when she was in her
natural habitat CNN.

Speaker 3 (08:38):
Listen to this.

Speaker 6 (08:39):
Well, let's talk right now.

Speaker 3 (08:40):
Do you believe President Trump has issued any illegal orders?

Speaker 7 (08:45):
To my knowledge, I am not aware of things that
are illegal, but certainly there are some legal gymnastics that
are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything related
to Venezuela.

Speaker 4 (08:56):
Oh, isn't that something? Well, then guess what. It seems
like this whole thing was a fake. It was a phony,
and it was a fraud and they knew that to
begin with. Well, now the Pentagon is threatening to court
martial the Democrat senator over his comment to refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 3 (09:16):
In that video.

Speaker 4 (09:18):
The Department of War announced earlier today on Monday that
it's opened a formal review into allegations of misconduct against
Democrat Senator Mark Kelly from Arizona over the video he
made calling on service members to refuse illegal orders. Now,
the Pentagon said it may even call Kelly, a retired
Navy captain, back into active duty to face a court

(09:40):
martial proceeding or some other administrative action under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice. Now, I don't know how fair
that is if he's not in the military anymore. But hey,
he shouldn't have opened his mouth. I guess you know.
This is the slippery slope that we play here. I
think that they're trying to make make a case here

(10:00):
for you know, you're out of line, you're out of bounds,
don't do it again.

Speaker 3 (10:05):
I don't believe that they have this ability.

Speaker 4 (10:07):
And lord knows, if if I was in the military
and was out of the military and then made a
comment that was critical of the president, I would I
would hate to think that they could recall me to
the military to.

Speaker 3 (10:21):
Court martial right for saying that Joe L.

Speaker 4 (10:24):
Babo so Biden, whether Barack Hussein Obama or any other
President I've never agreed with, you know, was the subject
of my scrutiny. Now, I understand that this is widely
viewed as it's a seditious action.

Speaker 3 (10:41):
I do.

Speaker 4 (10:41):
I get that, But I also understand that these guys
are no longer in the military, So there's a there's
a burden of proof here. The punishable by death is
the seditious conspiracy. Seditious language is is not last I checked, right.
So this is a distinction with a difference. And this

(11:03):
is not a defense of the Democrats. These guys are
a bunch of clowns that are playing a game that
is incredibly irrosive to the body politic, to the country,
to the fabric of our nation. However, these guys are
experts at walking up to the line and without crossing it.
And so you got to pick and choose your fights carefully.

(11:25):
And now here's a quote from an article in Fox
News about this matter. It says this matter will be
handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality.
The Department said that any further comments would be limited
to protect the integrity of these proceedings. The statement also
underscored that military retirees remain subject to ThEC MJ the

(11:48):
Uniform Code of Military Justice, and reminded service members that
orders are presumed to be lawful and must be obeyed.
The Department cited federal staff excuse me, including eighteen USC.
Section twenty three hundred and eighty seven, which prohibits attempts

(12:10):
to undermine the loyalty, morale, or discipline of US forces.
The Department of War reminds all individuals that military retirees
remains subject to the UCMJ for applicable offenses. The statement read,
a service member's personal philosophy does not justify or excuse
the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.

Speaker 3 (12:29):
Oh oh, I stand corrected.

Speaker 4 (12:32):
Even though Kelly left active service years ago, the Pentagon could,
if it determines his actions violate the code, bring him
before a military court. Such recalls are rare and typically
reserved for serious criminal conduct such as espionage, sexual assault,
or fraud. Still precedent exists in the United States versus

(12:54):
Dinger in twenty eighteen and the United States versus Larabee
in twenty twenty. Appellate courts reaffirm that retirees receiving pay
remain under the ucmj's jurisdiction and can be tried for offenses.

Speaker 3 (13:09):
Committed after retirement. So I guess that's the question.

Speaker 4 (13:13):
If Senator Mr Kelly is receiving a pension from the
United States Military, can he be recalled into active duty
service just to be disciplined. I would say that's arguable, right,
That's very different than Hey, I was in the military
thirty years ago. I've been retired for twenty of those years,
or twenty five of them, and I'm saying what I

(13:35):
want to say because I'm a citizen of the United
States and a sitting member of Congress United States senator
at that.

Speaker 3 (13:44):
Something tells me not much will happen.

Speaker 4 (13:46):
But they wanted to take a stand to you know,
to be on the record saying hey, watch it, or
as my mother would say, not that, giddo. So this
investigation and review could potentially conclude that Kelly's comments constitute
a conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline
or a violation of a United States Code which prohibits

(14:09):
encouraging disloyalty or insubordination amongst the armed forces. If so,
he could face recall to active duty for a formal
court martial. Punishments under those statutes can include forfeiture of pay, confinement,
or dismissal from service which he's already gone from, though
such outcomes are extraordinarily rare for political figures. So yeah, again,

(14:31):
I don't think anything's going to happen here, but let
everybody else who's getting any ideas be warned. If you're
getting a pension, you could lose your pension. I would say.
That goes without saying. You know, if I'm getting money
from any organization, I would expect that I have to
do things in the best interest of that relationship. Just
makes sense, right, If you got a sponsor, you know

(14:53):
you're not going to turn around and say this sponsor enough,
you don't like the sponsors, say you don't like the sponsor,
get rid of the sponsor, don't take their money, but
don't take their money, and then go say bad things
about them.

Speaker 3 (15:01):
Right, it makes sense to me.

Speaker 4 (15:04):
So we'll see what happens, and if there's gonna be
any formal disciplinary reaction, I don't think there will be.
That's my prediction here. I could be wrong, you know,
it might be unpopular opinion. I don't know, but you
let me know. Anyway, there's more to come. I want
to talk about the economy, Secretary best and talking about inflation.
We also have, oh my gosh, the back and forth

(15:24):
between President Trump ilhan Omar and all of the crazy
stuff happening in Dearborn, Michigan, and in Minnesota and all
across the country.

Speaker 3 (15:35):
There are some wild stuff going on. Don't go anywhere.
I'm Rich Valdez.

Speaker 2 (15:40):
This is America. This is America. He's got the best
head of hair and podcasting. This is America with Rich Valdez.

Speaker 3 (15:54):
All right, I mean he goes, Welcome back, Rich Valdez.

Speaker 4 (15:56):
Keeping your company this evening at Rich Valdez on all
of the social richveld does dot com. Make sure you
keep it locked there for updates on everything that's going on.
And I want to talk about the economy a little
bit because Secretary Beston was making his rounds this weekend
saying this, saying that going here, going there, fighting off
the deep state, fighting off the left, within the media,

(16:17):
doing all sorts of things that he's pretty good at doing.

Speaker 6 (16:19):
Right.

Speaker 4 (16:20):
He's pretty snide when he needs to be, and I
think that's a pretty good skill to have when you're
the Treasury Secretary. So I want to go to a clip.
He did an interview with Kristen Welker this weekend from
NBC News. I think that's Meet the Press, and this
is a good one. She hits him on the economy,

(16:41):
on inflation, on all sorts of stuff, and he collaps
right back.

Speaker 3 (16:45):
Check this one out.

Speaker 8 (16:46):
And yet some prices are going up. Of course, we
have seen prices increasing on staples like coffee, bananas, bacon.
Inflation has gone up. It's it's three percent now, up
from two percent in April when the tariffs were imposed.

Speaker 6 (17:03):
No, no, no, no, they weren't. So inflation has it gone up.
And Kristen, the one thing that we're not going to
do is do what the Biden administration did and tell
the American people they don't know how they feel. They
are traumatized and over the Biden inflation. We have slowed
inflation and we are working very hard to bring it down.

(17:26):
Christ And I can tell you that the Council and
Economic Advisors has a study. You know, the best way
to bring your inflation right down. Move from a blue
state to a red state. Blue state inflation is half
a percent higher. And that is because they don't deregulate,
they keep prices up. Energy is higher.

Speaker 4 (17:47):
Scott Besson, like he says, always armed with the truth, right,
He says, I have facts, they have opinions. That's what
he told breitbarton interviewed you did with Alex Marlow, and
I think he's right. I think the fact is that
Vesont really is on top of his game.

Speaker 3 (18:04):
He knows what's going on.

Speaker 4 (18:05):
And of course this has been a tough year for
him for anybody, right that they've been cleaning up a lot,
a lot, a lot of issues from the Biden administration,
from a very crooked Bureau of Labor Statistics reporting agency
for jobs numbers to everything else. Right, you see these

(18:28):
inflation numbers that people keep looking at, and again they're
somewhat manageable now. But my question is when they were
at their highest under Biden. I feel like I could make,
if you give me enough time, a valuable case to
say whatever that number was, it was likely double right,
because I think many of us at certain points during

(18:48):
the Biden administration, I can tell you for me, at least,
I felt like I hit one hundred percent increases on
certain things at some points, many things, So it was very,
very contentious in that time, and I think there's a
lot of that, a lot of catching up to do, right,

(19:09):
So it's kind of a.

Speaker 3 (19:12):
Bad situation to be in. You know.

Speaker 4 (19:14):
It's not one where they can come and say, voila
wave the magic wand like.

Speaker 3 (19:17):
Obama said, well, what's he going to do?

Speaker 4 (19:19):
Wave a magic wand let me be clear, No, he
has to do what he has to do in order
to roll back red tape, in order to you know,
eliminate some of this restrictive policies so that people can
actually start making money and be willing to invest. No
small feet right, not to mention President Trump running all

(19:40):
around the world, globe trotting, Hey, Mohammed Ben soundman, Hey,
how's it going, Hey, how are you? And every time
he says hello to somebody, they're like, hey, here's a
trillion dollar investment from our biggest company.

Speaker 3 (19:51):
Hey, here's another trillion for you.

Speaker 4 (19:52):
So you know, I've got no beef with President Trump,
el trumpitos and all this. Magnus the forty fifth president
of these United States and not mention the forty seventh too.

Speaker 3 (20:02):
I think he's doing his thing.

Speaker 4 (20:04):
But something that Besson said really stuck with me and
He said policy is personal because it's personnel that's carrying
it through, right, it's people. And when he saw what
President Trump was doing early on, he said one of
his biggest single trading game days was the twenty sixteen victory.

(20:32):
He also said that Trump was going to become president twice,
so he knew.

Speaker 3 (20:36):
He kind of predicted it.

Speaker 4 (20:38):
Saying that he thought it would be a good idea
to match up President Trump's policies with his own. So
he said, he went to him and he's been advising
him for close to three years now. So isn't that interesting, Right,
You get a smart guy like Scott Bessont that you know,

(20:58):
steps into the folder in the campaign and is ready
to go anyway. I wanted to get into another thing
on the economy here because there's some polling out and
this polling suggests that people are not too thrilled, at
least the people that they interviewed too thrilled about what's
going on with.

Speaker 3 (21:20):
The economy.

Speaker 4 (21:22):
And Besson says, look, we can have a lot better
outcomes if we had a more functional, cooperative congress right
the Senate and in the House and started pushing back
on the filibuster.

Speaker 3 (21:36):
Listen to this.

Speaker 8 (21:37):
Do you believe that you have enough votes, that the
president has enough votes to get rid of the filibuster?

Speaker 6 (21:43):
We will see come January thirties, because that's the point
of my editorial is to put the Senate on notice
that the Democrats keept the government shut down. And Ezra
Klein in the New York Times took the mask off.
He said, this wasn't about healthcare. This was about stopping totalitarianism.

(22:03):
The Democrats haven't been able to stop President Trump in
the courts, they haven't been able to stop him in
the media, so they had to harm the American people
one point five percent hit to GDP eleven billion dollar
permanent hit.

Speaker 3 (22:16):
They don't care.

Speaker 6 (22:17):
So I believe that Senate Democrats, if if Senate Democrats
close the government again, that Senate Republicans should immediately abrogate
the philibuster. Should you should ask Senator Culbatar whether she
will adhere to the filibuster and whether she will close

(22:37):
the government.

Speaker 3 (22:38):
She just or know, though, do.

Speaker 8 (22:39):
You acknowledge at this point you don't have the votes
right now to do that?

Speaker 6 (22:42):
We will see can have them on January third, when
we see this bad democratic.

Speaker 4 (22:46):
Behavior, bad Democrat behavior, again throwing the Senate under the
bus and listen, he's right. I think you can't do
this shutdown stuff right, And sadly, ed Trompito, don all
this magnus is paying the price for some of it, right,
because a majority of Americans that were surveyed in a
CBS News poll that was released late last night Sunday night.

(23:11):
The poll showed that just thirty six percent of the
United States adults approof of Trump's approach to the economy,
while sixty four percent disapproved. Moreover, it's according to the
report and the Daily Caller, seventy seven percent of respondents
said the president is not devoting enough time to handling
inflation in the economy, eighteen percent he was spending an

(23:31):
adequate amount of time, and only five percent said he
was spending too much time on the economy. So I
take these things with a grain of salt. But I
think there's sometimes a trend, right, whether the actual numbers
are accurate or not, the trend is something you can
you can look at, and I would agree, right, we're
coming off this shutdown. We're open back for I don't
know a week or two. The longest shutdown in our

(23:53):
history not Trump's fault, definitely Schumer's fault. Definitely the democrat's fault.
But I think ultimately there's some political fall out there.
There is some collateral damage of these types of exercises.
It's just the reality of politics. And Trump's going to
take it on the chin a little bit until he
can say, hey, look, this is what we're doing for you,

(24:14):
and I understand that. And you know what'll turn that
tide around putting some money in people's pockets. Instead of
seeing a ninety thousand dollars bitcoin, maybe one hundred thousand
dollars bitcoin instead of a two dollars XRP, maybe we'll
see three or four or five or ten or one
hundred dollar XRP.

Speaker 3 (24:32):
You know, the more the merrier.

Speaker 4 (24:34):
And it's that upward trend that gets people excited. When
people start seeing their crypto portfolios take a hit, When
people start seeing anything take a hit, they tend to
get skittish and say, you know, and I'd rather not
spend money right now.

Speaker 3 (24:45):
Yeah, let me hold off, let me hold off. Anyway.

Speaker 4 (24:48):
So you've got investment pushing back on the filibuster, and
then you've got the poll saying that it's at Trumpito's
fault and President Trump saying when he met with the
when when the Saudis were in town, he said, let's
see if I can find this quote. Yeah, I'll do

(25:10):
it in my best Trump voice. We're gonna be doing
a dividend to the people, low and middle income, moderate
income people of at least two thousand.

Speaker 3 (25:24):
That's Ed Trumpezo.

Speaker 4 (25:25):
And that's what he said at the US Saudi Arabia
Investment Forum on Wednesday. These two thousand dollars checks are
a proposal that's coming right now because the publicly held
debt is what is turning some people off, at least
in Congress, people saying, look, we've got a one point
eight trillion dollar deficit from the previous fiscal year and

(25:47):
we have to pay debt service on that. Right, So
this is a huge deal and people are rightfully upset.
I'm upset that we have this, and it's not, you know,
the fault of of a bad decision or anything like that.
This is the fault of a number of things, some

(26:07):
of the fallout from Biden and some of what happened
with the big beautiful bill. Right this was a big
spending bill, and you're gonna have deficits increase when you
have spending bills. I get that. I don't like that,
but I get it. So I understand the pushback when
people are saying, no, no, no, we're not going to give
that money away. We're gonna use that to pay down
the debt. Right, so think about it. You know, you

(26:30):
get your tax return, you're running your household family and
your the mom. The wife, she says, hey, honey, we
got our two thousand dollars tax return.

Speaker 3 (26:44):
Let's go to Hawaii.

Speaker 4 (26:47):
And the husband's saying, well, hold on a second, we've
got we've got three thousand on the home depot card
that we need to pay down from when we put
the pool in last summer and we built that deck
around it.

Speaker 3 (26:58):
Uh oh, so this is you know where it is.

Speaker 4 (27:02):
I think everybody makes a valid point, right, Mom the
wife is saying, look, we work hard all year, we
don't do anything. We only have the kids for two
months in the summer when they're not in school. So
and so's coming back from college. This is our chance
to do some family time. And then I understand the
dad who's like, look, you know you worry all day
about the kids, and I worry all day about paying

(27:23):
the bills, and right now we got money to pay bills.
I'm paying bills. I'm not adding to my bills. I'm
paying my bills. So I get that, and not to
make too much of a rudimentary analogy of it, but
that's really what's happening here. So Scott Bessen, the Treasury Secretary,
says that the tariff dividend checks will require an Act
of Congress in order to be distributed to the people,

(27:45):
kind of like the COVID stimulus checks. Trump wants a
two thousand dollars check to go to every American in
that tax bracket that he said, lower to moderate income.
I don't know what those numbers, but I would imagine
it's probably between you know, people that are making ten

(28:07):
thousand dollars a year and people that are making you know,
one hundred and ten thousand dollars a year. That's that
type of range. And listen, who wouldn't want a treasury dividend.
You know, that's not tax dollars. It's being funded by
people that want to buy foreign goods. That's simple, right,

(28:32):
So whether it's being paid by the importer or the exporter,
it's the person that wants the foreign goods in the country,
that's paying extra to get those goods, and that goes
into a treasury account called the tariff Fund. And Trump
is treating that as a sovereign wealth fund where we
get this money, and he's saying, hey, let's be sovereign.
Let's give it back to the people, because that's who

(28:52):
it belongs to. I get it makes sense to me.

Speaker 3 (28:56):
Let me know.

Speaker 4 (28:57):
Hit me up on any of the social media drop
a comments where if you see one of my posts
and let me know, or just tag me. Should we
be doing this? Should we get the two thousand dollars?
Do you want to get a two thousand dollars check
from your cut of the Trump tariffs or do you
want to see that go towards paying down the national debt?

(29:17):
At Richvaldesk with an s at Richfaldesk. By the way,
the eight hundred number will be up and going soon enough.
I believe the new number is going to be eight
seven to seven valid desks number one eight seven seven
valved desk one. It's not operational now, so you don't
have to dial it, but you can go right ahead
and lock it into your phone, so that when it's

(29:39):
time to start doing open phone in America and taking calls,
we can go ahead and do that at that number.

Speaker 3 (29:44):
So stick with me, folks. I appreciate it. We're coming
right back. I'm Richvaldez.

Speaker 2 (29:49):
This is America. This is America.

Speaker 3 (30:13):
President final, say you up, mister President. Welcome to the program.

Speaker 9 (30:16):
Sir, well, thank you, Rich, and thank you for everything.

Speaker 2 (30:19):
I know you very well and I have.

Speaker 9 (30:21):
I listened, but I have a lot of people that
listen and.

Speaker 3 (30:24):
They love your show, and I appreciate.

Speaker 10 (30:25):
It very much.

Speaker 4 (30:27):
All right, and he goes, welcome back, Rich Valdez. Valdez
with ans at Rich valdest on all of the social media.
And I want to bring your attention to some comments
that President Trump made about a month ago regarding immigration,
about protecting the borders of your country, saying that Prime
Minister Keir Starmer you he puts him on notice, saying, look,

(30:48):
you need to do this or you will not have
a country.

Speaker 3 (30:51):
Check this out people.

Speaker 9 (30:52):
Coming in from parts of the world. Uh you better
do you know this interview is good for one thing.
You bet to do something about immigration because it's more
important than inflation.

Speaker 3 (31:03):
You know, inflation. You can solve.

Speaker 10 (31:05):
But when you.

Speaker 9 (31:08):
Have people coming into your country and they're bad people,
the wrong people.

Speaker 10 (31:12):
It doesn't work. And it's not working.

Speaker 9 (31:15):
If you don't get them out, you're not going to
have a country left.

Speaker 3 (31:18):
Well, that's a fact. Listen, you will lose everything.

Speaker 4 (31:20):
This is why you have to vet and control immigration
into your country. Well, this is the debate that's currently
raging right all over the place. We've got a lot
of people upset about a lot of things, and there's
been a lot of questions about should we impose the
same standard that we impose on the President of the

(31:40):
United States for every elected office in the country. Now,
I'm going to say whatever has to be done to
get to that standard. I think that's a good thing
because it makes sense. Right, It makes sense to say
you need to be a United States citizen that's born
in this country in order to service president. And I

(32:02):
think that's a good policy because it's this country. You
we're seeing what happens in some other places, right, You're
seeing people bringing different cultures, different customs. Does that mean
that we should not melt together in the melting pot? No,
because it's not new. Right, we all grew at least
I did. I grew up with these things. I grew

(32:22):
up with people of many many different faiths, many backgrounds,
many cultures, and you can celebrate the differences in bite
sized portions. I should say, right right, you go, you
learn something. I grew up with a kid across the
hall from the building I lived in when I was
when I first moved to New Jersey, and he listened

(32:45):
to his family.

Speaker 3 (32:46):
Beautiful family, by the way.

Speaker 4 (32:48):
He was born in Nigeria. His father was born in
what was then India but is today Pakistan. His mother
was born in Vietnam. They're all Indian. They spent time
in the UK, they spent time in Florida, and then

(33:10):
they spent time in New Jersey. And I think now
they're in Indiana. Wonderful people. It's how I learned to
perfect my I have good. I would say my Indian
impression is very good, pretty solid. I can I can
hang with many people with my Indian. It's very good
because I learned from very original source. And I don't
do that to make fun. I do that because it
was a I enjoyed the culture I did. I learned

(33:33):
a lot. But I say this, they they understood America.
Uh and and they appreciated America. And they also appreciated
their their faith and their upbringing, and and and I
appreciated mine. And I don't necessarily need to exist in
a place where I say, well hold on, you do

(33:53):
that differently than me.

Speaker 3 (33:54):
I don't think I like you. I'm not.

Speaker 4 (33:55):
I'm not that kind of guy. The issue becomes when
you try to impose your will on others. It doesn't
matter what you do per se, right in your house,
you go buy a house, rent an apartment, do what
you want. But it's when you try to change and
bend you impose your will on others.

Speaker 3 (34:16):
This is the issue.

Speaker 4 (34:18):
So I think we're seeing that in many places. You're
seeing in a deerborn Michigan, you're seeing all sorts of
things coming out of Somalia ending up in Minnesota. Now,
what's interesting about Minnesota?

Speaker 3 (34:33):
Right?

Speaker 4 (34:33):
And again, about a month ago, maybe two months ago,
we saw the Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services
holding a press conference, and I think I have a
clip of that so that you can hear a little
bit about what's going on.

Speaker 3 (34:49):
I'll check this out.

Speaker 7 (34:51):
From our fraud Detection and National Security director working in
teams have conducted over one thousand site visits across the
Minneapolis Saint Paul air as part of this operation. What
they found should shock all of America. Focusing on a
list of over one thousand target cases involving more than
nine hundred individuals, our officers encountered blankedant marriage fraud visa

(35:16):
over states, people claiming to work with businesses that can't
be found, forged documents, abuse of the H one B
visa system, abuse of the F one visus, and many
other discrepancies. Over the course of the operation, our officers
found indication of fraud, non compliance, or public safety and

(35:36):
national security concerns in nearly a little less than fifty
percent of the cases interviewed. We found troubling patterns with
the Uniting for Ukraine program that should have raised serious
concerns under other administrations, such as an individual filing to
sponsor more than one hundred aliens an organization sponsoring hundreds.

(35:57):
We are continuing to investigate these cases.

Speaker 4 (36:00):
So that again was a couple of months ago. Right,
you heard that blatant marriage fraud visa overstays all sorts
of things. Right, Then there's there's other reports right back
in the early two thousands, many Somali businesses were raided
and shut down by the FEDS for using those as
fronts to funnel money to Osama bin Laden's Alcata network.

(36:23):
That actually happened back then. So this has been a
hotbed of you know, of terrorism sympathies, if you will.
Doesn't mean that these people are all terror sympathizers, but
amongst them there are some.

Speaker 3 (36:39):
I think that's a fair statement. So how do we
prevent some of that?

Speaker 4 (36:45):
You can make a law saying that you may not
be able to elect someone like ill hant Omar, But
that's not necessarily going to stop fraudulent people from doing
fraudulent things. But it's a start insomuch as making sure
that you don't legitimize this movement of people that are
in your country using the system to destroy the system.

(37:07):
And when I say these people, I don't mean Muslims overall.
You know, I've interviewed Rudy Jasser many times. He is
a Muslim, and he is I take a fine human being.
I grew up with some kids that were Palestinian fine
human beings. So my issue is not necessarily against Muslims
or because you know, I don't consider them the infidel, right,

(37:29):
I don't they You know, some radicals might consider me that,
but it's not my position to do that. My position
is to pray. You pray for people that don't share
your faith. If you get a chance to share it,
hopefully you do it. Well, it's not one of your
bad days where you're making a rash decision, driving really fast,
you know, saying things you shouldn't say, that type of thing.
But the attorney general in Minnesota, he's flipping out. You

(37:52):
got ill han Omar, she's flipping out to listen to this.

Speaker 11 (37:55):
Well, we also know is that there is not a
sin evidence that the President or his coonies have put
forth that there are any single resource from taxpayers in
Minnesota that has gone to aid and obey terrorism. That

(38:17):
language is dangerous. That language puts the lives of Somali's
not only in Minnesota, but across the country in danger.
And if the President believed that, and he had evidence,
he would take people to court. So we are sick

(38:38):
and tired of the President waking up one day and
deciding to put forth falsehoods and demonize whole communities, while
the ignorant people that support him then take the lives

(38:58):
that he's spreading and use it as a fact. We've
seen it doing the campaign where he said Asians were
eating cats and dogs.

Speaker 12 (39:09):
We've seen.

Speaker 11 (39:11):
His vice president repeat those lies. We've seen the media
run it as a headline as if it was a fact.
That is shameful. That is shameful, that is ignorant. It
makes us look like a stupid nation that does not
believe in truth but traffics and lies. It makes the

(39:35):
world mock us. And we are better than that. We
are better than that as Americans.

Speaker 3 (39:42):
It makes the world mock us.

Speaker 4 (39:44):
This is the woman who said some people do something right,
some people did something That's what she said referring to
the nine to eleven attacks. So she's talking about she's
going off the rails about a report that came out
over the summer and again just last week regarding Somalians

(40:09):
in Minnesota swindling millions of dollars in state Medicaid aid
autism care programs and sent the cash back into their
homeland and to terrorist groups, according to investigators. Wryitbart News
reported back in July that nearly one hundred autism clinics
in Minnesota were being investigated for fraudulently excuse me, billing

(40:33):
medicaid for treatment of children supposedly diagnosed with autism, most
of it in connection with the rampantly corrupt Somali community
around Minneapolis. This is again from the Breitbart report, but
the fraud is more widespread, with far more money involved
than was previously reported, all of which has been presided

(40:53):
over by former Democrat Party Vice presidential candidate Tim Walls, right,
remember him, Tim up on Tim, Tim and Tim. The
money that was paid out by Minnesota's scandal plagued welfare
schemes is monumental. According to Breitbart, these states failed Medicaid
Housing Stabilization Services program, for instance, was kicked off with

(41:16):
let's see, twenty one million dollars in payouts its first year.
Every subsequent year ballooned to forty two million, then seventy
four million, then one hundred and four million. Wow, and
nobody says, no, you're spending too much.

Speaker 3 (41:32):
Right.

Speaker 4 (41:33):
That's why President Trump was talking about healthcare reform, and
we'll get to that in the next segment. That's important,
But this is what ilhan Omar is upset about now.
Prosecutors are now saying that there are other people that
were committing this fraud like a woman Somalian woman named
Asha Farhan Hassan. She's been charged with defrauding the state's

(41:56):
early Intensive developmental and behavioral intervention program of fourteen million
dollars with fake diagnoses of autism and children of Somali immigrants. Wow,
that's crazy. Then you got prosecutors now saying that Ms.
Hassan and her cohorts approach Somali families and promised them
kickbacks between three hundred and fifteen hundred bucks a month

(42:18):
per kid if they enrolled in the state's autism treatment program.
So again, you look at something like this and you say, what,
how is this possible? How is this even a thing?
You try to extend the olive branch to someone who's
trying to flee the country they're in. They don't like

(42:39):
it there. They come here. They're free to practice their
faith and do as they wish. And they come here
and they get public assistance, and then this money. It
balloons and balloons and triples and quadruples, and then we
find out it's fraud. You got this doctor that's working
with them saying, hey, look, just bring your kid every
month to the clinic and I'll give you back a
little something, And who knows how many of them even

(43:00):
understood that. I'm sure there's a bunch of them that did,
but I'm sure there's a bunch of them that likely
didn't that. Just you know, they're here going well, I
love this country. You come here, the doctor's so nice,
that doctor pays you to stay home. God bless America.
That American dream really is something else now. Keith Allison,
he is the Attorney General of the State of Minnesota.

(43:23):
He also waited on this. Listen to this.

Speaker 12 (43:26):
Weaponizing negative stereotypes and racism against our neighbors is morally wrong.
It has no place in our state, no place in
our law, and no place in public discourse around protecting
people from the most dangerous conditions on the planet. People
from all walks of life and all across the world
are proud to call our state home, and Minnesota is

(43:48):
better for it. We reject this catallous cruelty and embrace
our Somali neighbors with compassion and the care that we
all deserve.

Speaker 4 (44:00):
Don't do it to the tune of one hundred million
dollars in kickbacks. All right, mister Attorney in General Again,
that's Keith Ellison, the Attorney General of Minnesota. Anyway, folks,
I just wanted to leave that in your lap. We'll
talk about that a little bit more. I want to
continue on this vein with President Trump weighing in on
his plans for health care. He's doubling down saying America's

(44:20):
need to spend their own money, and I think that's
a pretty good plan. Keep it locked right here. I'm
Rich Valdes.

Speaker 2 (44:26):
This is America, this is America.

Speaker 1 (44:30):
He's brown, he's bald, and he's breaking it down. Oh
he's so has some what's his day, Rich Valdez?

Speaker 2 (44:41):
All right?

Speaker 4 (44:42):
I mean he goes, welcome back, Rich Valdez, keeping your company,
Richiev here with you and check this out. I want
to talk about healthcare in this segment because the President
weighed in on healthcare. He had a few things that
he was talking about that over the last few days.
It make a lot of sense and and that opens
the door to some additional conversation on on just a

(45:04):
whole lot of crazy that's going on in the world
of healthcare. And hopefully have time for all of it.
But let's see here. Where is this one?

Speaker 1 (45:13):
Here?

Speaker 3 (45:13):
It is?

Speaker 4 (45:14):
This is al Trumpet, though weighing in Healthcare Price Cuts Act.

Speaker 3 (45:19):
This is a good one. Check this out.

Speaker 10 (45:21):
Going to go down what the exact opposite with the
biggest increase of any of healthcare in any country. It's
a disaster. And I'm calling today for insurance companies not
to be paid but for the money, this massive amount
of money, to be paid directly to the people of
our country, so that they can buy their own healthcare,

(45:41):
which will be far better and far less expensive than
the disaster known as Obamacare. And I've had I think
great support, I've even had Democrat support. So we want
the money that would be going to the insurance company,
which is hundreds of billions of dollars. You know, their
stock prices have gone up by one thousand percent in

(46:01):
many cases a thousand percent over a short period of
time because our country stupidly pays them so much money
with this Obamacare scandal. So I want the money to
go directly to you, the people, and you go out
and you'll buy your own health insurance, and you'll negotiate
different plans and you'll get much better insurance, and you

(46:22):
will be an entrepreneur for yourself. So I'm always willing
to work with anyone, including the other party. We'll work
on something having to do with healthcare. We can do
a lot better, We can do great. So with all
of that, I just want to tell you the country
has never been in better shape.

Speaker 4 (46:40):
That of course El Trumpito making that announcement from the
Oval office. And this is a good thing, I believe, right,
I believe it's a good thing that we.

Speaker 3 (46:51):
We're going down this road. Now. If you have this money, right,
you gotta get a lot of money. You're gonna pay
a lot of money.

Speaker 4 (46:58):
Maybe you want to get health insurance, or maybe you
just want to take yourself to the shop.

Speaker 3 (47:03):
Well, what do you mean to the shop rich? Well,
I'll tell you what I mean.

Speaker 4 (47:06):
I mean, maybe you just want to go and get
your self checked out. Maybe you want to go in
and say, hey, I want to get my blood cleansed. Yep,
that's actually a thing some rich people are doing. They
call them longevity seekers, and they're spending thousands of dollars
on blood cleansing to remove toxins from their bodies.

Speaker 3 (47:31):
And this is an interesting story of a guy named
John J. Vanes.

Speaker 4 (47:36):
His dad died of a massive heart attack at the
age of sixty six, so he started doing literally everything
he could to keep his ticker ticking. This is in
the New York Post. The uh the guy in question,
he's a colleague. He's a radio host out in Phoenix.
He shed about one hundred and sixty pounds. He transformed

(47:58):
himself from morbidly obese too impressively sleek with is twelve
percent body fat. Wow, kudos to you, my brother, And
he embarked on an international biohacking journey. According to the Post,
sources say that he found stem cells in Mexico. He
even got canned hydrogen water imported from Australia. It takes

(48:22):
a lot of wealth for mister Vaness's good health. He
estimated that he drops about one hundred grand a year
on everything from twenty five thousand dollars natural killer cells
to three thousand dollars unlimited red light therapy sessions. I'm
sure I said that wrong. Therapy sessions. Thank you, And
that's crazy, but that's what it is. And you know,

(48:45):
as he was doing the interview, he told the Post,
oh my gosh, that's sick.

Speaker 3 (48:48):
I never talleeted it up together.

Speaker 4 (48:50):
It's nice to have money, brother, but listen, I think
it's a good thing to engage in alternative therapies.

Speaker 3 (48:57):
Me personally, I like to go to the chiropractor. And
I don't mean like, oh I got a kink in
my leg, in my neck, let me go to the chiropractor.

Speaker 4 (49:07):
I mean like I like to go, like every week,
sometimes twice, just keep everything in line, keep everything.

Speaker 3 (49:15):
Cracked up, jacked up. I like it like that. I've
been doing it for years. I swear by it.

Speaker 4 (49:20):
If I go once a week, there's at least two
or three days in the week where I'm just like,
oh man, I'm behind. I think twice a week is
is good. I'd say three times a week is optimal.
I know it sounds like overkill, but I used to
have an insurance years ago that allowed for that. And man,
let me tell you, I was at the top of

(49:40):
my game when I went three times a week. It
was just in and out two minutes. I don't know
how your chiropractor does it, but my guy is a purist.
He doesn't use any machines. There's no massage, there's no
hot and cold. You do that all on your own.
You just walk in there. He you know, does the
quick exam to see you know if all the lumbars
and cervical spine, parts of your neck or in the

(50:03):
right spot if they're not crack, he does the adjustment,
gets you straight, and you're out and literally ninety seconds,
two minutes, three minutes is a long visit. And I
think that stuff is optimal. It really is, So I
swear by it. These people swearing by blood cleansing. Now,

(50:24):
whatever they call it, I mean, blood cleansing has always
been a thing, right, Dialysis has always been around, and.

Speaker 3 (50:33):
This is the latest.

Speaker 4 (50:34):
Right, he's doing blood cleansing seventy five dollars a pop.
They call it plasma faresis. It involves removing the plasma
that may contain harmful substances like auto antibodies or toxins,
and replacing them with healthy fluid. Never heard of this process,

(50:55):
but it sounds interesting. I don't know if I'm ready
to do it, but I'm ready to learn more. Plasma
plasma pheresis is a form of apharesis. I'm probably saying
that wrong, but I'm gonna stick with that, which has
long been used to treat autommune disorders, certain cancers, blood
disorders like sickle cell anemia, transplant rejection, even high cholesterol.

(51:18):
But the anti aging benefits for healthy people are unproven.
Now that hasn't stopped boldface names like Orlando Bloom or
Brian Johnson, who are both a little older than me
forty eight years old, from sending their blood into the
spin cycle. But a funny article, but you get the point.
And this reminds me of an article like that I

(51:38):
don't know three four years ago where rich people were
having transfusions of the plasma of young people and they
were saying they felt younger, more spry if they were
to get this transfusion of young blood. And it was
a big piece. It was called young Blood in the
in Newsweek Newsweek magazine. Very interesting and I did a

(52:01):
whole podcast on it. You could probably check it in
the podcast listenings if for this is America. But just
interesting what people that have a bunch of money can do.
President Trump taking part in the annual tradition of punishing
or pardoning the turkey as a Thanksgiving tradition at the
White House, he decided to forgive two turkeys, offering them pardons,

(52:23):
one named Gobble and the other one named Waddle. That
wasn't the case for everybody that was seeking punishment or
facing punishment. I should say in the swamp earlier I
mentioned Letitia James and James Comy were both. I'm not
going to say I quit it because they never got adjudicated,
but their cases were dropped today. So I'm going to

(52:43):
get into that straight ahead, as well as talking a
little bit about what happened in the White House with
the Turkey.

Speaker 3 (52:49):
Don't go anywhere.

Speaker 2 (52:50):
This is America. This is America.

Speaker 1 (52:56):
He's making podcasting great again. This is America with Rich Valdez.

Speaker 4 (53:03):
All right, I mean he goes welcome back Rich Valdez,
at Rich Valdez. On all of the social media. I
remind you so that you'll engage with me there and
follow me. Give me a follow, It doesn't matter which
one I'm on, I think every single one.

Speaker 3 (53:14):
Just put my name in there.

Speaker 4 (53:15):
And of course I want to get your feedback and
your five.

Speaker 3 (53:19):
Star ratings and whatever you want to share. I'm looking
to hear it.

Speaker 4 (53:23):
But I want to talk about this Letitia James, James
Coomy stuff, because this, I feel like is sadly you
know what many of us feared right when we talked
about this, and I had Doug Burns on a couple
of weeks back, maybe a month or two ago, when
this whole thing started to hit the fan, and he said, look,

(53:44):
he made the prediction that one of these was probably
going to go through and the other one was not,
and so far he's half right, and he caveated it,
saying that this could end up happening because there was
so many different things going on.

Speaker 3 (53:59):
And the good news is they were dismissed.

Speaker 4 (54:03):
Without prejudice, so that you can bring the case again
if I got that right, and I'm pretty sure they
will right because there was a lot of information out
there about how how blatant this was right and good
for them. People are like, oh, Trump's abusing his authority,
And I say, now you know what, they abused Trump.

(54:24):
They abuse their authority to go after Trump, trying to
make it look like he did something that they've actually done. Right,
because you got to remember that there was no issue here.

Speaker 3 (54:39):
Trump didn't.

Speaker 4 (54:40):
Nobody complained against Trump except Letitia James. That's the issue here.
It's not like he defrauded anyone. The people that he
borrowed the money from got their money.

Speaker 11 (54:48):
Now.

Speaker 4 (54:48):
I guess she could make the same defense, right. She
could say, well, look, the people I borrow the money
for that mortgage. They got their money too. The problem is,
I bet you if you ask those people and say,
excuse me, bank, if this is true, did you lose
money on the deal, and would you do the deal
with her again, I bet you they'd say no.

Speaker 3 (55:06):
They'd say no, no, no.

Speaker 4 (55:07):
If it's true, then she should have paid a higher
rate because she's not owner occupied, you know, it was
an investment. Or they might say no, if this is true,
we wouldn't have written the loan because we don't like
the right loans on investments. We like to only do
owner occupied right, that's a possibility. Conversely, with Trump, they
asked the bank, would you do business with them again?

(55:29):
They said absolutely. They said do you have any problem?
They said, no, no problem. He paid every last penny.
The bank went out of their way to testify for
Trump to say what how you know they felt that
this was unfair in so many ways. They didn't say
it was unfair. They just said, hey, look, the guy's solid.
So I think there's a big difference there. But I
want to get into this. Let me see if I

(55:50):
have this audio that I wanted to share with you
on this one do we have the audio? All right,
so we don't have the audio, No problem, So let
me give you the scoop here again.

Speaker 3 (56:00):
This is the next article up in the post.

Speaker 4 (56:03):
Very interesting here judge dismissed his case against ex FBI
director James Comy and against New York Attorney General uh
Tiss James.

Speaker 3 (56:14):
Who's the judge?

Speaker 4 (56:14):
Well, the federal judge dismissed the Virginia criminal cases against
former FBI Director James Comy and New York Attorney General
Letitia James on Monday, finding that the interim the United
States Attorney Lindsay Halligan, was improperly appointed to her position
and had no lawful authority to secure the indictments of
either of President Trump's longtime adversaries.

Speaker 3 (56:36):
They like to throw that in. It doesn't matter who
they were. They weren't.

Speaker 4 (56:39):
They weren't being prosecuted because they were adversaries. They were
being prosecuted because they were suspected of breaking the law.
But anyway, some people can't help themselves. Then it says
the humiliating defeat for the administration. I wouldn't say it's
a humiliating defeat. I mean it's they brought a case
with one charge against comy. How do you how could
you be humiliated if you only brought a case with

(57:00):
one charge. It was either going to get around grand
jury to return the indictment or it wasn't. In this case,
it did and then the judge intervened, so I wouldn't
be humiliated. They did what they had to do. Lindsay
Halligan did her job. They're just saying she wasn't allowed
to do her job. That's a different story.

Speaker 3 (57:23):
Now.

Speaker 4 (57:23):
David Shoon, who was a one time attorney for Jeffrey Epstein,
he weighed in on this on the Fox News Channel
with Laura Ingram, checked this out.

Speaker 11 (57:32):
Some of the procedural stuff here is in question.

Speaker 6 (57:36):
But you say this was avoidable.

Speaker 13 (57:39):
How so it was avoidable because quite frankly, the Justice
Department should have just put somebody in the room with
Lindsay Halligan, would have taken away all of the arguments
for dismissal. Quite frankly, based on all the decisions around
the country. I still don't think the decision is right,
but it was avoidable in that sense. I give Lindsay
Halligan great credit, and she showed great courage here. She
looked at the fact and the evidence, she saw that

(58:01):
there was a wrong committed and she got an indictment.
She was put in this position and she should have
had more support than she was given. But it's not
a major setback for the Trump administration or anything like that.
It was obviously it was going to happen. But I
think they're wrong in the arguments for a couple of reasons.
There's some pretty esteemed scholars Steve Calabrizi Paul Cassell, who

(58:22):
have explained why the courts just have it wrong with this.
Professor Calabriezy says this section of the law of five
point forty six is unconstitutional. It invades the executive power,
and he cites a couple of recent cases to talk
about the exclusive of executive power and here to a
point a representative of the executive branch. Cassell says, it's constitutional,

(58:43):
but that the president has the right to appoint successive
interim US attorneys, or in this case, she could act
as acting US attorney. We see in the case in
California with Bill alas Sale that he continued to go
on as first assistant. So I give great credit to
miss Halligan. But the other point I would make here
is this these are public figures. First of all, the
hypocrisy of the argument, now given the position these folks

(59:06):
took with Jack Smith, but in any of it putting
that aside, these are public figures. Why not deal with
these cases on the merits they're going to have to
sooner or later because they will be re indicted. And
if you read the Miss James indictment carefully, and of
course everyone's entitled the presumption of innocence, if you read
it carefully, they have her coming and going if they
can prove the allegations in the indictment. First, she claimed

(59:29):
a secondary home, which means she has to have certain
personal use days fourteen days a year. But in her
tax schedule, according to the indictment, at least she said
zero personal days in the home. I would ask questions
like did she have an insurance policy, what did she
put on her application?

Speaker 3 (59:43):
Did she make a claim?

Speaker 13 (59:44):
What was her capacity there? I think that case is
going to be a slam dunk.

Speaker 4 (59:48):
Quite frankly, again, David shown he says that this was avoidable,
but it was the right thing for Halligan to do,
and that it could be a slim done case.

Speaker 3 (01:00:00):
So we'll see how this ends.

Speaker 4 (01:00:02):
Up playing out for this case if they bring it again,
if they don't, I don't know, but I do know
that the media is having a field day with it.
Should they be having one? I don't think so. I
think this is again one of those things that it
would have been nicer to go the other way. But
I think at the end of the day they'll probably
they'll do well. As far as the Coomi, I don't know.

(01:00:24):
That was a more difficult case, I believe, and I
think they just wanted to give them a little bit
of a black eye because most prosecutors don't like to
take cases that they don't know they can win. Anyway,
There's a bunch of stuff I want to get into
on these kids that get together. They have these car meetups,
They run donuts in the streets, er, you know, burner

(01:00:47):
and rubber all over the place. They got into a
fight with somebody. They beat these people, then they lit
their car on fire. That happened in Vickiy Palladino's district.
Maybe she'll join me to talk about that. And there's
also this wild undercover audio of Campbell's soup Campbell's soup
employee freaking out saying, look this isn't real meat.

Speaker 3 (01:01:10):
This meat's made on a three D printer. It's fake meat.

Speaker 4 (01:01:14):
I want to get into that and so much more,
and we'll do that on the next one. You know
what I always say, as Stalla broxima, take care, good night,
and God bless you America. And remember you gotta stand
for something, because if you stand for nothing, you'll fall
for anything. As Stalla Brosima, I'm rich Valdez and this
is America.

Speaker 2 (01:01:34):
This is America.