Big Bills, Fake Backstories & Billionaire Bling — Welcome to America 2025

Trump's comprehensive legislation package is advancing through Congress with a focus on tax cuts, border security funding, and military readiness, while including controversial Medicaid cuts as legislators make difficult trade-offs to achieve progress.

• The "One Big Beautiful Bill" represents the first major legislative advancement in nearly four years
• Chuck Schumer removed the bill's name in what many consider a petty political move
• The Supreme Court ruled that lower court judges can no longer issue nationwide injunctions against federal policies
• Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered a rare public rebuke to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in her majority opinion
• A $14.6 billion healthcare fraud operation was uncovered spanning multiple countries with 324 defendants including 96 medical professionals
• Two Idaho firefighters were killed in a premeditated ambush while responding to a brush fire
• Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez faces criticism after evidence emerged she grew up in wealthy Westchester County rather than the Bronx as she claims
• Jeff Bezos's $50 million three-day wedding celebration highlighted the contradiction of climate-conscious celebrities arriving on private jets
• The University of Pennsylvania has complied with presidential mandates on transgender athletes in sports, stripping Lia Thomas of titles and reinstating Riley Gaines's proper rankings

Support the show

DON'T WAIT FOR THE NEXT EMERGENCY, PLUS, SAVE 15%: https://www.twc.health/elsa
#ifounditonamazon https://a.co/ekT4dNO
TRY AUDIBLE PLUS: https://amzn.to/3vb6Rw3
Elsa's Books: https://www.amazon.com/~/e/B01E1VFRFQ
Design Like A Pro: https://canva.7eqqol.net/xg6Nv...

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
it's the Elsa Kirk show, with Clay Novak serving up
trending news and conservativeviews brought to you by the Elsa
Kirk collection and refugemedical and now it's time for
the show.

Speaker 3 (00:13):
So well, happy, happy Wednesday for us, thursday for
everybody that's going to bewatching.
Look at that, I hit it rightoff the top there right at the

(00:34):
beginning yes.
And that means like threepeople just said well, I'm not
going to watch it if it's notlive.
We love you anyway, it's okay,it's okay 4.30 on Wednesday on
the East Coast folks.

Speaker 1 (00:47):
That's when we're recording and it's been a rapid
fire week and we're going totalk about a lot.
There's even stuff we set ourtopics yesterday and there's
been plenty of stuff that'shappened between yesterday and
today.
So we're trying to stay on topof things, folks, but we'll talk
about all of it right afterthis.

Speaker 2 (01:05):
From border bills and broken budgets to judges
finally being put in check.
We're exposing billion dollarscams, honoring fallen heroes,
calling out fake Bronx fairytales and, yes, crashing Bezos's
billionaire love fest.
Truth, grit and just the rightamount of snark.
Let's get on with the show.

Speaker 3 (01:23):
So we've got we've got big topics, this, of course,
one big beautiful bill, andwe've got to get it done.
One big beautiful bill,although it's technically
unnamed right now, thanks toChucky right.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
That's right.
Yeah, chuck Schumer's partinggift to the one big beautiful
bill.
As it departed, the Senate wasto take that name off of it,
which I thought was incrediblypetty but also very apropos for
for Chuck Schumer.
So, yeah, one big beautifulbill is a very, very big deal
and, yeah, yeah, covers a lot.

(01:57):
I mean, the name says it all.
That was the intent, but youknow, with that it takes a
process and when you make an allencompassing bill like this,
there's concessions to be made,and that's exactly what happened
.

Speaker 3 (02:11):
Yeah, and there's.
You know there's a lot of bigfeelings about it on both sides.
Everybody's got big feelingsabout it and you know, I mean I
understand why.
So so here you know.
The plain English version of itis the bill cuts taxes for
families and small businessesGreat news, obviously,
especially if you're the kind ofperson that likes keeping more
of what you earn in your pockets.

(02:32):
Right, let's see what elsethrows big bucks at border
security and military readinessKind of big deals.
If you're asking me, that'sAmerica first.
I love that.
But it also slashes funding forMedicaid, which is the one that
people are making the biggestfuss about.
And I have to be honest, I hadto kind of do a little bit
deeper dive in this because youknow, of course, you good, it's

(02:54):
fine, it's great, it's it'staking it away from people who
shouldn't be getting it anyhow,like illegals, blah, blah, blah,
that stuff.
Other people are saying youknow, of course you got
elizabeth warren, you knowpocahontas, you know crying that

(03:16):
you're, you know you're harmingmillions of people, um, so I, I
did kind of I shouldn't say Idove deep, but I dove into it a
little bit more.
And you know, I have to behonest, it kind of sounds to me
like it's it's people thatpeople aren't going to be
eligible for.
Are able bodied people, likepeople who are eligible to work,

(03:37):
are able to work.
So you're kind of likelessening the burden, lessening
and I think the bigger deal hereis lessening the dependence on
the government, right, becausethat, I mean that seems to be,
in my opinion, one of ourbiggest issues as a nation.
The left in particular pushesthis dependence on government,

(03:57):
you know, for basicallyeverything, and the right says
you don't want big government inall of your business, let's get
out of your pockets, out ofyour personal lives, out of all
of this.
Step back, let the statesdetermine.
You know the majority of things, and this is one of those
things that you know.
I mean, based on myunderstanding, it kind of makes
sense.
What do you think?

Speaker 1 (04:19):
Yeah, so you know this bill administratively.
You know it started obviouslyadministratively in the Senate
by whatever I think it was onevote moved to that for you know
really the negotiation and thenthe round robin voting that
happened over the last week orso and then now it's been kicked
back to the Senate for approvalor I'm sorry I have that

(04:41):
backwards.
So House first very narrow voteover to the Senate for the
negotiation and you know thevice president ended up being
the tie breaking vote becauseyou know the Democrats all ran
party line.
There was three Republicansthat moved and voted with the
Democrats and then vicepresident was a tie breaker.
And now it's been kicked backto the House for the final vote

(05:02):
before it goes to PresidentTrump and the goal is to have it
to him by the 4th of July.
So you know it's beenadministratively.
It's been an interestingproposition because this is such
a widespread bill.
You know a lot of a lot of himand Han.
You know Chuck Schumer had thewhole 940 pages read out loud or
whatever.
It was his proposal.

(05:23):
There's a lot of give and takeand certain people won and
certain interests won andcertain interests lost.
I don't think there's a singlecongressperson on either side of
the aisle that will say it's anawesome bill, but this is
getting things done which wehaven't done in so long.
Literally nothing has moved infour years.

(05:46):
Whether you like it or not,things are, are happening and
there are things that both sidesof the aisle, or I should say,
you know, there's things thatthe Democrats like and things
they don't like, and things thatRepublicans like and things
they don't like, and you know,but it's moving, which this is
progress, and I understand, youknow you're, you dove into

(06:10):
Medicare more than I did, but I,I I got the same gist.
Uh, you probably have moredetail than I do.
Um, but that's perspective,it's always it's.
That is the.
The biggest difference in thetwo parties is how they choose
to spend the nation's money.
Um, you know, conservativesgenerally, it's for security, uh
, and those, you know those,those lines of money.
And then you know, on the, onthe Democrat side, it's social
programs and social support andand those sorts of things, and

(06:32):
it's two very, very differentmindsets in how to spend that
money.
So, again, moving forward, butwe're talking.
This is a what is it?
$4.4 trillion.
Have I got that number right?

Speaker 3 (06:44):
I think so.
I think so.
I don't even know if I have thenumber in my notes here.
Yeah, I don't see the exactnumber, but I think you're, I
think you're right.

Speaker 1 (06:52):
Yeah, yeah, I'm still looking.
I know that.
You know some of theconcessions that were made.
Like you said, medicare, youknow was, was a a a negotiating
point on both sides.
Um, I, I know that there's somefood program delays, like cost
increase in social food programs, that were a negotiating point.
I know that where SecondAmendment stuff is concerned,

(07:13):
there was some negotiation there.
There was a big push to haveshort barreled rifles and
shotguns not registered and notpay a tax stamp $200.
The same thing with suppressors, and the negotiation point was
well, you don't have to pay the$200 extra fee to the federal
government but you do still haveto register them.

(07:33):
So you know both sides.
You know there's a lot of giveand take.
The parliamentarian stuck hernose in the middle of this
multiple times.
You know the Senate had to workaround her.
It was just.
I learned a lot about this, theround robin voting and and
those sorts of things.
This was very different, Ithink, than most of us have ever
experienced because of the sizeand scope of this bill.

Speaker 3 (07:57):
Yeah, it's huge and we all I mean everybody had to
have known and I'm talking aboutinsiders and outsiders,
observers of the whole process.
Everybody has to know that thewhole thing is not going to pass
.
They're not going to agree onevery single detail.
They can't agree on smallthings, let alone big things.
This is a constant battle,particularly because it's Trump

(08:19):
and they don't want to give himany wins if they could help it.
And, of course, obviously, theAmerican people are the ones who
always get lost in the shuffleof all of this contest that they
have.
I was going to say somethingvulgar and I'll just let
everybody's imaginations run.
You know the funny part to me,going back to Schumer for a
second there, remember whenObama's big bill was going to be

(08:42):
passed?
And what's her name?
The Crypt Keeper Pelosi.

Speaker 2 (08:48):
I can see her.

Speaker 3 (08:49):
No, pelosi.
Oh, they both could.
They both could be.
Yeah, it was a great guess,though actually no Pelosi,
remember.
She said well, we have to passit if you want to see what's in
it.
But this time around theymanaged right, you know.
And this one, they had to readall, would you say, 900 pages of
it before they could take astep forward.
And you know, and I don't know,maybe that's like one of the

(09:11):
many of the significantdifferences between the two
parties.
Why didn't the GOP do that, youknow?
Why didn't?
Why didn't the Republicans dothat with that bill?
Why didn't they force it?
I guess if they didn't have themajority, they maybe didn't
have the say to do it.
Is that?
Does that ring true?

Speaker 1 (09:27):
Probably yeah.
So part of that part of the,you know, the give and take in
this was because of the Bird Act.
You know, the stipulationsassociated with that would be a
60 percent vote, which they knewthey wouldn't get.
So they basically negotiatedout portions of the bill to
allow it to go to a simplemajority of 51, which in this

(09:50):
case, included the vicepresident.
So I think they wanted to, Ithink they just wanted to get it
through and I think they hadtheir hard line points that they
wanted, you know, and as longas those hard lines weren't
violated, then they were happyto move it through.
And I think, like any goodnegotiator, they had all of the

(10:11):
things lined up that they werewilling to give up.
And so they negotiated throughand kept it at the hey, let's
just get it through with 51.
But I think if they hard linedit in the same way that Pelosi
had done those years ago, itwould have turned into uh, you
need 60%, and they just weren'tgoing to have it.
So, um, you know, myunderstanding is like Alaska was
the big winner in all of this.

(10:32):
Um, you know, because we had alot of senators who were really
what we want them to do, whichwas acting on the behalf of
their constituency.
Um, yeah, and she, you know, um, the Senator from from Alaska,
negotiated quite a few things tobenefit her state and a lot of
it had to do with oil drillingand leases and those kinds of
things.

(10:52):
And so you know good for her.
You know that's what we all,that's what we elect these
people to do is to, you know,work on our behalf or the behalf
of their constituents.
And you know, in this case, shedid what her constituency, what
was best for her constituency,and good honor.
You know that's what we allwant them to do.
But this is progress Again.
We've went four years withoutreally getting anything done and

(11:13):
now we're actually a bill ismoving to change some things.
So I think it's a bonus, nomatter what, even if there's
things that I don't agree with,or, you know, whatever party you
belong to, if you don't agreewith the fact that we're making
any progress whatsoever, I thinkis huge.

Speaker 3 (11:28):
Yeah, I agree.
And a question for you.
I don't know if you know theanswer to this.
So the things that were takenout, removed from it, does that
mean that they are?
It can't possibly mean thatthose are completely dead.
I would imagine they're goingto try and work those in, likely
somewhere else at another time,and another bill and another
something right.

Speaker 1 (11:52):
I mean, all is not lost.
Yeah, they will try and workthem as.
Yeah, they'll either beindividual bills or they'll be,
you know, pork and some otherkind of a bill, you know, but
they, they it.
Just because they've beenpulled out of this doesn't mean
that they're dead forever andthey'll.
You know, if they're superimportant, then they'll
reintroduce them later inanother form or fashion.
I can promise you that all ofthis stuff, as they prep to go

(12:13):
into these things by party,whether it's by the whip or
whoever it is they look throughthere and they say these are
hard lines, these are secondtier, we want to keep as many of
these as possible, but we can,you know, negotiate, and then
these are like we'll throw theseaway in a heartbeat, you know
what I mean.
And then they probably got, asyou know, reintroduced later.

(12:33):
Let's bring this back anothertime.
That kind of thing must hasbeen like the biggest opposition
to this bill.
Even after him and PresidentTrump had their little fight, it
seems like he is still goingafter this thing in the way that
you know.
He's now talking about buildinga third party, an America party
, because this bill as a wholeis such a disappointment.

Speaker 3 (12:55):
Yeah, yeah, I think it is such a embarrassingly
petty and childish move on hispart and you know, I don't have
anything against Elon currentlyexcept for, you know this, this
kind of absurd behavior thathe's got going on right now.
Yeah, he has to know thatthat's nothing but detrimental,
you know.
So who knows what he's going todo?

(13:15):
He's, he's kind of a loosecannon, right.
I mean, he just does whateverit is he wants to do and he can
change on a whim.
And you know, we'll just haveto see what happens.
But I think it's, you know, andI think most people, I think
that's kind of the consensus ofa lot of people that that is a
terrible idea.
You're not going to take votesaway from the Democrats, you're
going to take votes away fromRepublicans, and you know we've
had third parties.
You know you're Ross Perot andall of that stuff, and all it

(13:39):
does is damage the process andany viable candidate that we
might actually have.
So you know, but there's alsoenough people that love the idea
.
I think it's a brilliant idea,and those are people that just
like to throw the wrench in thesystem, I think Right.

Speaker 1 (13:53):
Yeah, you know, whether it's Ross Perot or even
RFK Jr, it does you know,habitually take away uh from you
know the I hate to say theconservative side, but that you
know, rfk backing Trump in theelection is really what carried
the day.
In my opinion, that securityelection and Ross Perot running
until the end againstessentially to the end against

(14:16):
president Bush, one is what losthim.
Reelection against presidentClinton.
So, yeah, the conservative siderarely benefits from that, but
I, you know, I'm all for it.
I think you know whether it'sthe Tea Party, whether it's
independent, I don't.
I think we need more options,you know, across the board.
I think it's better for thenation.

(14:37):
But you, before I brought upElon, you were going to ask
another question before I rudelyinterrupted you.

Speaker 3 (14:42):
Oh, it wasn't rude at all.
You know what, if I couldremember what it was, it's like
a total bummer.
I remember what the questionwas.
It's all good, you're justgetting me to remember something
from like five minutes ago.
Stop being crazy, clay.
That's a silly notion.

Speaker 1 (14:55):
My bad, my bad.

Speaker 3 (14:57):
Listen.
You asked me the lyrics to asong that I listened to when I
was 12 years old.
I've got you, but don't ask meanything from you know five
minutes ago, or this morning, oryesterday or last week.
It's terrible.
It's actually kind offrightening.
Did anybody else?

Speaker 1 (15:12):
get a picture of Elsa in a jean jacket listening to
White Snake.
That's what I just pictured inmy head.

Speaker 3 (15:19):
Yeah, I, you know I had a very we're segueing guys,
just roll with it.
I had such a super eclecticmusical taste.
You know, my mother, when I wasa kid, listened to a mixture of
like Motown and then she hadher what I call depressing music
.
It was like Carole King and youknow all oh, and Helen Reddy,
oh, my gosh, all of these thingsthat like just always made me

(15:41):
feel like super depressed and Iwas too young to even understand
why.
Now, when I hear him back, I'mlike because they were
depressing songs, they were solike sad and mopey.
Um, and my brother was listeningto things like in excess and
like his, everybody was eclectic.
It was like rolling stones inexcess.
You know super 80 stuff.
So I listened to everything,including white snake.

(16:03):
Never had, um, I had a jeanjacket but I never had a white
denim jacket.
So, yeah, never liked thatweird, weird thing to point out,
just saying I don't know.
But yeah, yeah, I definitelyhad the big hair, huge hair.
I'll have to, I'll have toscrape up a picture for you guys
and show it.

Speaker 1 (16:18):
Believe it or not.
Um, I was a scruffy haired uhsoccer player in high school, so
it was a lot of cuffed jeansand you know the rolled in
cuffed jeans indoor soccer shoes, T-shirts, dirty baseball hat
which clearly hasn't changed andand scruffy hair.
That was, that was me.

Speaker 3 (16:38):
Like as in long scruffy hair.
I need to see a picture of likeShaggy.

Speaker 1 (16:42):
It was Shaggy yeah it was Shaggy.
I'll dig up and send you apicture as well.

Speaker 3 (16:48):
Yeah, all right, if he sends it in time.
These pictures are going to be,we're going to be up like right
in the middle of us, or maybeI'll just put it right over,
right over us, and I'll I'll doa little cutouts for the mouths,
and the mouths can be.
I'm not that talented, I can'tdo that.

(17:11):
All right, all right, sorry,guys.
Back to business.
Back to business.
So yeah, as far as the one bigbeautiful bill, do you think
it's going to be through by thefourth?
I mean, I guess it's possible,but not likely, right?
Or yeah, it is, yeah.

Speaker 1 (17:16):
OK, I think it will.
I think it's going to get votedthrough.
I think it's going to make it.
I think it's going to go to thepresident Um, and you know him.
He'll sign it at midnight onthe third Um, if that's what
he's got to do, and be done withit.
But I do, I think it'll be forthe weekend.

Speaker 3 (17:31):
Nice, cool, I love it .
Let's get going Like, whateverthe case is, just let's go tired
of hearing about it and let'sjust do it, move on from it and
and go from there, and I thinkthere's a greater plan going on.
You know what do they say?
Somebody has it's been saidmany times about Trump that you
know he plays chess whileeverybody else is playing
checkers, right, so he's got aplan.
I'm not worried about it.

(17:51):
Speaking about wins for Trump,this is a big win for him.
Finally, with this, I mean Ishouldn't say finally.
I mean this has only been a fewfew months, six months, I don't
know um, so yeah, so supremecourt finally is doing something
that makes actual sense.
They told lower court judges tostay in their lane.

(18:12):
It's about time they stay intheir lane.
Um, let's see, they can nolonger issue nationwide blocks
against federal policies.
Uh, one judge, as in basicallyone judge in California, can't
shut down a Trump order meantfor the whole country.
Anymore is done, guys.
You can't do it, so suck onthat.

Speaker 1 (18:31):
And and yet in the days since, there have been a
number of judges who havecontinued to do exactly the same
thing.
So I don't know where and howthe the uh, you know how this is
uh employed, how it's enforced.
Um, who's enforced?
Who's holding who accountable?
Are they going to keep puttingthese injunctions in place only
to have them fought again?

(18:54):
I understand the ruling and Ilove the ruling and I love Amy
Comey Bryant and how she putthis, but what I don't get is
what's the enforcement on this?
So if you've got a, if you'vegot a lower level judge, we'll
go with your example ofCalifornia that says you know,
this Trump policy is illegal,null and void, national

(19:16):
injunction.
Does everybody else in thecountry just look at that judge
and give him the finger and justdo what they were doing?
Does somebody at a higher levelcourt, like the Supreme court,
you know, call down to them andsay, hey, you can't do it and if
you do it again, we're going tohold you in contempt and you
know, we're going to send you tojail or whatever it is Like.
I don't understand theenforcement of this.
I do love the ruling, though.

Speaker 3 (19:35):
Love it and I and I would be willing to bet it's
going to be a combination andsay you silly fool, nobody's
listening to you, shut up.
But and if they keep it up,yeah, I would imagine you know
they'll be held in contempt.
I mean, I would think that'slike the most logical thing to
happen right, so I don't know.

Speaker 1 (19:54):
Yeah, Procedurally that seems.

Speaker 3 (19:57):
Yeah, let's see.
Win for checks and balances.
It keeps power in the hands ofyour vote.
Yeah, I mean, I love it.
And, of course, the left isclaiming that this is going to
allow dangerous policies to gounchecked, which is awfully
silly because there's still aprocess.
I mean, there's still process,like it's not.

(20:17):
You know this.
This obsession with a Trumpdictatorship is literally the
silliest, stupidest thing thatthey could possibly run with,
and they've run with so manystupid, illogical, impractical
things that this is just.
It's just.
It becomes comical after all,as frustrating and annoying as
it is, it's just like this youknow this one gnat that keeps

(20:38):
flying around your face and youkeep swiping at it and it keeps
coming back.
You know I mean, that's whatthey're doing right now, but but
you know it just stops judicialdictatorship.
So he's not trying to be adictator, he's just doing his
job, what he's allowed to do inhis role executive decisions
that the judicial, these courts,have no saying, so it's just

(20:59):
restoring that simple fact.
They're so crazy.

Speaker 1 (21:02):
Yeah, and that's.
That's exactly what Amy ComeyBryant wrote in her opinion,
right?
So she wrote for the majorityopinion and I am not a legal
scholar, folks, I don't followthe written word of every legal
opinion written by the SupremeCourt.
However, I don't ever recallanyone on the Supreme Court

(21:28):
another justice outing one oftheir fellow justices in a
written decision, which isexactly what happened.
So Amy Comey Bryant essentiallysaid what you just said, except
way smarter.
Oh yeah, she outed I alwaysscrew it up Kajani Brown Jackson

(21:49):
.

Speaker 3 (21:49):
What's her?

Speaker 1 (21:49):
name.
Yeah, you know, amy ConeyBryant said, said you know this
other justice, you know SupremeCourt Justice Kajani Brown would
much rather have a judiciarydictatorship than a, you know,
executive dictatorship, which iswhat she's trying to say is

(22:09):
appropriate.
In other words, you know itgives the president the power
that his office is supposed tohave, even though you know the
left-leaning justices would allprefer to have the judiciary
have all the power to stop thepresident, in which case they
have their own dictatorial edictthat they're following.
And she said that's not howthis nation works, that's not

(22:33):
how our checks and balances work, that's not the powers of the
judiciary do not arbitrarilytrump the powers of the
president at an individual judgelevel below the Supreme Court.
It doesn't work that way.
But she outed her by name,which I don't ever recall
happening.
It may have happened before andI didn't know, but she outed it
was a slap down of epicproportions they must have, like

(22:55):
the most eloquent, intelligentbattles behind closed doors.

Speaker 3 (23:02):
Right, because that was written so well that I
listen.
I'm humble enough to tell you Ihad to read it like four times
to understand what she wassaying.
I'm like wait what?
And then again wait what.
And then, as as it was sinkingin, I was like, oh she, that
would be what we call a smackdown in our layman's terms, you

(23:26):
know, in our everyday, everydaypeople terms.
Yeah, that was, that was prettywild.
So I can, I can take a prettygood guess that they aren't
getting along very well.

Speaker 1 (23:40):
I can't imagine the lunchroom at the Supreme Court
is a friendly place to be rightnow.
There's probably a lot ofpassing and using the microwave
and not talking to each otherkind of stuff going on.
I'm sure it's not like that.
I'm sure they all have theirown kind of support life around
them that they don't have toworry about that, but they do

(24:01):
have to sit with each other.
I mean, there is a professionalrelationship which I'm sure
right now is is, like you said,very ice cold.
So interesting.

Speaker 3 (24:09):
Yeah, strained would be the understatement right.
Oh my goodness, yep, yeah, thatwas pretty sure there were
seven other justices.
Yes, no doubt, no doubt.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (24:21):
I wonder if they, like I do wonder about the like
behind the scenes stuff, like,did she, like you know, call up
one of the other ones, like,okay, listen, what do you think
of this?
I'm going to say?
What do you think if I say this, gossiping, and oh but boy,

(24:48):
it'd be so funny to to be behindthose closed doors and hear all
of that stuff.
It would probably go over myhead anyhow.
So it's all good.
Oh, what else?
Oh, my goodness, it is, Ilisten, government wise.
It has been, um, it's been onlike Donkey Kong, as they say
how about this?
Did you even know?
I mean, I don't know.
Did anybody publicly know thatthis was going on?
Like, was this investigationspoken about before the big

(25:10):
bombshell was dropped?
I didn't think so.
Okay.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
I'm like I know I don't pay attention to a lot of
things.

Speaker 3 (25:16):
But I'm like, I feel like I would have.
I feel like I would have heardthat that was coming down the
pipe Right.
Oh my goodness, Hang on, I'mgetting my, I'm getting my notes
here.

Speaker 1 (25:28):
Yeah, it was very quiet in an investigation, with
the FBI and others participating, and so this is multinational.
This isn't just inside theUnited States.
They broke up in a number ofdifferent vertical methods of
fraud $14.6 billion healthinsurance fraud, again across a

(25:51):
number of different continents,a number of different districts
within the United States, andthen a bunch of different
methods or what was beingfraudulently done.
I mean, you've got everything.
There's what do they say?
324 defendants, including 96various doctors and medical
professionals.
You've got Russia, easternEurope, the Middle East, the Far

(26:14):
East all involved.
You know crime syndicateswithin each of those.
You've got identity theft.
You've got Medicare fraud.
You've got wound fraud.
You've got prescription meds,specifically opioids, which was
fraud with the intent to sell.
That was a drug ring.
The FBI is already seizingmillions of dollars in assets to

(26:38):
recover real money that wasstolen from the American people.
Listen, folks, medicare was inthe one big beautiful bill.
Elsa talked about it and shetalked about how people are not
happy about cutting Medicarecosts and benefits and some
other things as part of the bill.
Medicare has been ripped off.
Most of this money that isbeing recovered or has been

(26:59):
identified is Medicare money,almost all of it.
So you can be upset aboutholding people accountable
within Medicare for theirbenefits, but when you don't
hold them accountable for theirbenefits, this is what you get.
You get an easily defraudedsystem and people take advantage
.
Why?
Because people suck globally,and that's what's going on here.

Speaker 3 (27:22):
Yeah, yeah.
You give people an opportunityto abuse the system.
They're going to abuse thesystem.
It is that simple.
It's unfortunate.
We like to think the best ofeveryone and in a perfect world
we could.
This is not that perfect world.
We don't live in that, and youknow this is part of what we
voted for.
We want major reform of thesesystems, these organizations,

(27:44):
these departments.
We want massive overhaul andaccountability, and that is
exactly what we're getting.
So you know, to answer the themonths old question of is this
what you voted for?
Yeah, it is, yes, it is.
This makes me right Me and somany people happy to see.
You know, because I mean reallyand you hit it you said you

(28:04):
know the American people are theones that are getting defrauded
here, getting money taken outof their pockets.
Their hard earned money isbeing taken out of your pockets,
our pockets.
I mean we're talking aboutpeople working overtime and
struggling and just and doingall like that's the kicker right
there, doing all of the rightthings, and these SOBs are out

(28:26):
there just taking and taking andtaking and profiting, you know,
off of your struggles.
So you should be very gladabout this.
You should be glad of all themovement that's happening right
now to get things the way thatthey should be, and it's going
to be a long process.
This isn't going to beovernight.
This is this is incredible,government wise.
This is warp speed compared towhat we're used to, you know.

(28:49):
So, no, no complaints on mypart.

Speaker 1 (28:52):
Yeah, this is not in.
Keep this in perspective, folks.
This is not workman's compfraud.
This isn't the guy down thestreet who says he's got a bad
back, but he's outside mowinghis lawn and he's drawing a
workman's comp check.
This is not a doctor who is,you know, erroneously or being
lazy about their prescriptions.
This is not petty stuff.
These are massive crimesyndicate.

(29:16):
This is stolen identity right.
Just think in these terms.
This is somebody on anothercontinent stealing 100,000
identities, different identitiesof American citizens, using
those identities to put inmedical claim, insurance claims
right that can pay out fromMedicare to them.

(29:39):
This is a bank account.
This is high crime in the senseof, you know, stealing from the
government by identity fraud orinsurance fraud, you know.
And then, on the edge of it,you've also got and I think
these were the Russians, theRussian crime syndicate doing
this who were using this as away to sell drugs, opioids right

(29:59):
, prescription medication.
They had doctors, americandoctors, on the hook, american
healthcare professionals thatwere prescribing erroneously or
or outright stealing and selling, you know, prescription med and
selling prescription meds onbehalf of them.
So this is big stuff.
This isn't small potatoes.
It's $14.6 billion and this isa big deal and attaboy to the

(30:20):
FBI and all the other lawenforcement agencies that played
a part in this.
Folks, this is white-collarcrime that we want and need the
FBI to be looking into.
You know, it's nice to bust thedrug dealer on the corner to
get it out of your neighborhood,but this, this is a huge, huge
thing.

Speaker 3 (30:39):
Yeah, that's always one of the big complaints, right
, Like, oh, white collar crime.
They always get away with allthat stuff.
You know well not anymore.
They should be shaking in theirin their patent leather shoes
right now and, like you said, Imean it's crazy, so fake.
Like you said, fake patientnames, fake claims, real
government checks being sent out, Some, just like an example,

(31:00):
some build Medicare forcatheters that were never
delivered.
Others submitted here's a crazyone Others submitted claims for
diabetic monitors for deadpeople, Come on.
And it's because.
Why do they do it?
Because they can, Becausethere's been no checks and
balances for any of this.
It's just been running rampant.
People are, because they'remaking money off it and the

(31:24):
people who are probably up untilthis point, who should have
been monitoring this andstopping it.
We're probably profiting aswell.
You know, here's a littlesomething for you.
Just keep your mouth shut,Don't worry about it.
It's gross, but I'm glad to see.
That's hopefully the beginningof the end for all that stuff
you know.

Speaker 1 (31:40):
Yeah, and just a message for all those folks in
the healthcare community Listen,we are.
We are for those of you thatare working your asses off and
most of you are and you'reworking on the up and up.
We're not lumping you in withthese people.
That's not what we're talkingabout.
We're not vilifying the entirehealthcare industry.
However, if you're in thehealthcare industry and a lot of

(32:01):
folks are that are looking atthe one big, beautiful bill and
they're complaining because nowthey're saying, oh well, x
amount of people aren't going tohave healthcare and X amount of
people aren't going to havehealthcare and X amount of
people aren't going to haveaccess to this and X amount of
people aren't going to haveaccess to that, well, you have
an obligation, especially if youwork within the industry, to
clean up the industry.
Right?

(32:23):
You know there are people withinthe industry who may not be
guilty of all of the things thatthe FBI just uncovered, but you
probably have some visibility.
There are folks out there whohave visibility and have
knowledge, who have decided toturn their head and not say
anything.
So you know, unfortunately nowyou've got national level law
enforcement involved and drasticmeasures have to be taken.
So I don't.
I don't like associating onewith the other.
You know I would prefer thatMedicare had had all the funding

(32:46):
that it absolutely needs, butat the same time $14.6 billion
being stolen and now beingrecovered is a big deal and
hopefully that kind of levelsthe playing field a little bit.
But we'll see what happens.

Speaker 3 (33:00):
Yeah, and correct me if I'm wrong, but common sense
tells me that we are literallythe ones paying for that, paying
for this in our premiums.
I mean, this is the probablythe biggest part, besides our,
you know, propensity for obesityand poor lifestyle and all
those things Besides that.
This is probably the biggestreason for why we spend so much

(33:22):
in healthcare is because we'recovering for the fraud of other
people who are sitting back andenjoying the fruits of our labor
, you know, off of our brokenbacks, you know, sometimes
pretty literally.
So, yeah, this is, this is amuch bigger win, or the start of
a much bigger win that weshould all be, you know, big
time applauding right.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
Yeah for sure, and and and again it's.
It's about tightening things up, you know it's.
It's nice when your physiciansays you know this is the
treatment you need and you knowwe'll get it for you, but really
you could also do this and thisand this and this, and maybe
you don't need it and maybe youdo, but we can try it and I'm
going to prescribe it and thosekinds of things.

(34:04):
And that kind of free handedattitude is exactly why you have
people exploiting the system isbecause they know that inside
of the system nobody wants tolook into it.
Because there is that.
You know, a lot of doctors havethat mentality and I appreciate
the fact that they're trying totake care of their patients, but

(34:27):
you open the door to thingslike this at the same time.
It's a very, it's a razor'sedge, you know kind of thing.
It's.
It's like the cop that is niceto the neighborhood kids, right,
and then you know they're niceto them and they're nice to them
and they let them go.
And then three years later thatkid, you know, has gone the
opposite.
Instead of taking thatgraciousness from that police
officer and said, hey, I couldhave been a great direction with

(34:49):
my life.
They go the other way and theysay, hey, sucker cop, and three
years later drugs on the cornerright.
So it's a razor's edge, and Idon't necessarily blame the
doctors, but the system itselfis flawed and that's why
opportunities like this exist.

Speaker 3 (35:02):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
How are we doing?
We're doing okay.
We got to move on.
We got still several moretopics here.
Uh, this one is, um, aheartbreaker and, um, if you're
someone like me, it fills youwith righteous rage.
Um, on behalf of of these,these people, uh, absolutely

(35:23):
awful.
Two firefighters wereintentionally ambushed and
killed in idaho while respondingto a brush fire.
A A third was wounded.
Investigators believed that thesuspect lured them in and
opened fire.
It was a premeditated attack onpublic servants.
This is awful.
Their names were, and I've gottheir pictures here because I
want to make sure we give themsome respect here.

(35:45):
Their names were Frank Harwoodand John Morrison, and they died
doing what they were called todo, which is serve and protect
their community.
And now, of course, theirfamilies are planning funerals
instead of homecomings, and itis absolutely horrendous.
I don't know the status of thethird victim at the moment.

(36:08):
I just know that you knowrecovering, recovering third
victim at the moment.

Speaker 1 (36:12):
I just know that, um, do you know?
Recovering?
Recovering, um, yeah, so youknow those were listen, folks,
those were not two um averageJoe firefighters, those were two
battalion chiefs.
Right, that's leadership.
Uh, in, in, uh, two firedepartments that you know.
We watch wildfires out Westevery year.
Um, and folks like that are soimportant to you, know those

(36:32):
areas on so many levels.
Um, and this young man, wesRowley Rowley, um, like you said
, it's an ambush.
Um, he, he purposely set thefire is what they're saying
right now.
Um, there is speculation thathe spoke to these three um
firemen and then, and then youknow, backed away and opened
fire on them after there wassomething about his car.

(36:53):
I don't know if maybe theycaught him in the act in a in a
way, but they basically saidsomething about hey, your car's
not supposed to be parked there.
And there was an interaction.
And then he shot him, killedtwo, wounded a third, and then,
you know, there's been a lot of.
He did commit suicide, cowards,way, way out.
As a matter of fact, hecontinued to fire on the

(37:14):
firefighters for a while.
It delayed, obviously, treatingthe brush fire that he started,
which made things even worseand then the police found him
dead.
He killed himself.
But this is a troubled young manand there have been some
falsehoods out there already,which is sickening.
Um, you know he has.
His parents were, um arborists.

(37:36):
They've worked in the woods.
He's been in the woods hisentire life.
He wanted to be a firefighter.
Um, you know he has had somesort of falling out, uh, with
his mother and, uh, you know sheseparated herself from him.
There was speculation that shehad filed a restraining order
against him.
That has been debunked.
That is not true.
Rumors about him beingtransgender I think those have

(37:59):
also been debunked.
But there was obviouslysomething very mentally wrong
with this young man and he wasprone and known to violent
outbursts.
His friends from high schoolwhich he's only been out of high
school for a year his friendssaid you had to take him in
small doses.
He was a very aggressive person.
He could switch on and off andhe was just a lot to deal with.

(38:22):
So it sounds like he wasmentally unstable in probably
more ways than one and this ishow he decided to act, which is
horrible.

Speaker 3 (38:29):
Yeah, and I know people are always very quick to,
you know, blame the parents,and there are plenty of times
where that is not incorrect todo.
But you don't know until youknow, and you know the the
mental health system, mentalhealth care facilities, all of
those things, that whole systemis yet another broken system.
So, and I do know people,families who have mentally

(38:54):
unstable children, who areviolently unstable, and to get
the help that they need is it is.
You would be horrified if youdon't know what what they go
through.
You would be so disheartenedand heartbroken and angry,
really, that they can't get thehelp that they need and then
things like this happen.
So this certainly could verywell be a case like that, Cause

(39:16):
you know, like you, Clay, I'm sotired of people just running
with falsehoods and just makingthings up and um.
Slight segue for a second, notunlike the whole.
Did you hear about the littlegirl that fell off of the Disney
cruise ship and the fatherjumped in Incredible story.
But almost immediately peoplewere saying on the internet,

(39:39):
people were saying, oh well, youknow what happened.
He put the girl on the railingand that's why she fell off.
That's been debunked, that didnot happen.
So you know, just, I just wisheverybody would just shut up
until you know what happened.
But back to this one.
You know, I just, you havecertain people like the only
thing that they'll say about usand we talked about this last

(40:00):
week the stories that we shouldbe as a society, we should be
talking about and that getignored by the mainstream media.
This falls under that categoryalso.
You know, the only thing thatthey have to say about this is
what we need.
What do they always say?
We need stricter gun laws, guncontrol legislation, blah, blah,
blah.
And the fact is you cannotlegislate away evil, mental

(40:23):
illness.
It doesn't work.
A mentally stable, sane personwould not do these things.
You know a legal gun owner.
More often than not.
I mean, we can.
You know, we can find thosestatistics pretty easily.
I'm sure um are not doing thesethings.
These are, you know, whetheryou want to look at them as evil
or mentally ill or combinationof both, however you want to

(40:45):
look at it.
These are people that operateoutside of societal norms.
They are not going to followthe rules.
It's, it's literally thatsimple.
So you know, please spare methe whole gun control
conversation.
I'm so over that one too, youknow.

Speaker 1 (41:01):
Yeah, this is um, um, this is a breakdown in in
mental health.
Um, you know the harder parttoo, and you talked about those,
those families that have, youknow, children with challenges.
As soon as somebody hits 18, itbecomes even more difficult for
the family because now theyhave no legal, you know,
oversight or even really inputinto what happens with that

(41:22):
individual once they become anadult, or even really input into
what happens with thatindividual once they become an
adult.
So in this kid's case, wesRowley, or Rowley, he was 20
years old, you know at thatpoint his parents, and
supposedly he spoke to hisgrandfather about once a week.
The young man was living in hiscar, he was, you know, very kind
of in an unstable situation andthen he kind of went off the

(41:44):
net a couple of weeks ago andhadn't talked to his grandfather
.
But as a family member you cansay all you want, but once
they're adults, unless they'rebreaking the law, there's not a
lot you can do.
So it becomes even morechallenging and I think that
this one is a failure along theway, probably of the mental

(42:06):
health and criminal justicesystem, along the way to get
this young man help or identifyhim as a potential violent actor
and at least get him into somesort of an institution or
protective custody of some kind.
But we could second guess allof this.
Like you said, we only knowwhat we've been told so far, I
think hopefully this won't gointo the back page of the

(42:26):
newspaper and we won't ever hearabout it again, but most likely
that's what's going to happen,unfortunately and we'll never
really know, especially sincethis young man decided to kill
himself there's no follow-up tothis right, no right right,
other than the potential tocharge a parent for some sort of
neglectful, you know,purchasing of a gun for a minor,
but the kid's 20 years old,like there's.

(42:46):
There's really not much more.
I think we're going to get outof this one, which is a shame,
but that's kind of where thingsare at right now.

Speaker 3 (42:53):
Yeah, yeah, and it's just, you know, it's just that
reminder.
I think that you know first ofall what, what is out there in
the world right now Not that,like, like anybody needs that
reminder, right, but you know itkind of is.
It's just a societal breakdown,mental illness, all of these
things.
These are such ongoing,long-term problems that we face
and deal with and you know, theimplications and the causes of

(43:15):
all of that are so big and sointertwined and it's one of
those things that you know.
Solution wise, if there is everone, it's going to take a
really, really long time.
So I'm guessing at the veryleast.
I feel like the least we can dois get the story straight, or
not even speculate on them untilyou get it.

(43:36):
Or you can speculate on them.
Everybody does that, that'swhat you do.
But don't pass things off asfact until you know what the
facts actually are and offersome grace and compassion to the
families until you know.
You know if they're dirtbags,you know who contributed this.
Well then your feelings changea little bit on that.
But again, we don't know untilwe know.

(43:58):
All right, listen, we hit allof the heavy stuff right at the
get-go.
I think everything else we haveon here is kind of a little bit
fun.
You guys want to have some fun?
Yeah, what?

Speaker 1 (44:10):
do you think, clay, we were talking before the show
started about you know we.
We were trying to figure out wewant to do something at the end
to to we.
We occasionally hit a, I'll say, human interest story.
That's probably being a littlegracious, but, um, something
more in the you know tabloidpeople magazine make you laugh
or smile.
We hit some of these storiesoccasionally and I think that we

(44:32):
both agree that we need to do alittle bit more of this,
especially at the end of theshow when we hit so many heavy
topics like this.

Speaker 3 (44:51):
So we're going to hit a few of those, those newsstand
, you know, as you're standingthere in the grocery line and
you're looking at all of thosemagazines that sit there, uh,
some of those kinds of storieswhich maybe aren't so heavy.
So what do we got first bezos.
Bezos, okay, um, wait, we gottado so.
We're gonna like we'll do agentle, uh, a gentle transition,
because we gotta talk aboutthis silly girl.
We gotta start with her.
So we're like easing out of thepolitical lane into the, uh,
people magazine, which she'sprobably on people magazine too.
I'm sure she's's a littlecelebrity in her own mind.
So I listen.
So I crack myself up every daybecause this is what I do.

(45:11):
So I did, I did two things here.
I'm going to show you the firstone.
So listen, if you know, youknow what this is a reference to
, and if you don't know, let'ssee, I'm trying to think how
much of this other clip that Iput in here.
Well, if you don't know, I'lltell you, everybody remembers
J-Lo, right?
I mean, she's still around, butJenny from the block, you know,

(45:33):
she's the Bronx girl, yeah.
So I had to do this.
This is very similar to herlittle outfit that, you know I'm
used myself to no end with thatand I did a skit an AOC skit
the other day yesterday I thinkit was yesterday about this.

(45:54):
It's a longer skit.
I cut most of it out and I'lljust show you the end here.
So here it is.
I wrote in that post, but I wantyou to say it like you're from
the Bronx, I am a Bronx girl andyou should know that we eat
Queens boys for breakfast noteven close, not even close.
Bronx, bronx, bronx, bronx,bronx, bronx, bronx, bronx.

(46:15):
I'm gonna stop you there.
I'll tell you what I got.
Just the thing for you tolisten to.
This is going to tell you howto talk and act like a real
bronx girl.
Okay, oh, all right, all right.
Where's that play button?
Where is it?
It is when I was 16 in the.

Speaker 2 (46:25):
Bronx, running up and down the block.
A crazy little girl.
Be wild and no limits, alldreams.

Speaker 3 (46:34):
Don't be fooled by the rocks that I got.
I'm still, I'm still AOC fromthe block.
That was like that was so good.
Right, yeah, I think it wasreally good.
So, yeah, listen guys, I knowyou don't have to jump in the
comments, so you don't quitehave the voice yet it's close.
But I know that I don't, I knowand I don't really think it's
going to happen, so we're justgoing to.

(46:54):
You know, extreme parody here.
Just, you know, imagine it inyour mind.
But I was told, I was told thatI got the crazy eyes down
pretty well, so, down prettywell.
So I'm, I'm, I'm good with that.
The deer in headlight, wildeyes.
So yay, I got that right.
Um, so yeah, so if anybody issitting here going I don't even

(47:15):
know what's going on what areyou talking about?
Elsa?
I will tell you.
So, uh, a yearbook photo andmultiple witnesses confirmed
that.
Uh, aoc grew up in a wealthyWestchester County, in wealthy
Westchester County, not thecrime ridden Bronx persona she
built her career on.
So she's been telling everybodythat she's from the Bronx she's
representing, and she's anotherone.

(47:35):
This is their favorite thing todo.
She changes her accent towhatever group she's talking to,
so sometimes she puts on heryou know her Latina voice and
she puts the heavy Latina accent, you know, or ghetto Latina is
what she tries to do.
And then when she's talking towhite people, she talks very

(47:55):
nasally.
Well, she talks nasally anyhow.
So she does all of thetrademark things that they do,
but she's been telling everybodythat she's a Bronx girl.
That quote that she said isexactly what she did say
Something about us Bronx girlseat Queens boys for breakfast.
She's referring to presidentTrump.
She's, that's who she wasdirecting that at.
So you know.
So somebody, of course, dug upthe, the high school pitcher, or

(48:19):
, yeah, high school pitcher,maybe elementary high school
pitcher, and she's like what isit like York town or something
like that.

Speaker 1 (48:25):
This is another politician, conservative
politician who went to highschool with her and, you know,
when she said that about thepresident, he's like, ok, I've
had enough.
And so he said he watched her,he saw it pop up, he reached
behind him, he grabbed hisyearbook, he snapped a photo of
it and he posted it on socialmedia.
Snapped a photo of it and heposted it on social media and it

(48:48):
is of her in science, uh, inhigh school, yorktown, new York.
Uh, very, you know, kind ofcomfortable live.
You know, upbringing suburbanneighborhood.
Um, she was in the science club, uh, you know, in high school,
and everybody they didn't callher Alexandria or Lexi, or
everybody called her Sandy.
So, yeah, like, or Lexi oreverybody called her Sandy so
yeah, like you know, Danny Zukois Sandy.

(49:09):
Um, so she, uh, she was known asSandy and a very well off, you
know suburban neighborhood, andshe's not a Bronx girl Like she.
They left, she moved out of theneighborhood when she was five,
five years old, Right, yeah.
And and didn't go back thereuntil after college.
So she's she's not a Bronx girl, folks.

Speaker 3 (49:27):
She's not a tough girl from the streets, she's a
suburban girl and is notanything that she has claimed
that she is, Go figure Rightright and you know, and let's
not get it twisted, you know,because there's going to be like
oh, you're making such a bigdeal of nothing.
So she did.
She did live in the Bronx for aperiod of time.
You're just nitpicking herbecause you don't like her.
No, this is about authenticity.

(49:49):
This is about honesty.
This is about accountabilitycalling people out for lying to
the American people.
If you're lying about who youare, you're going to lie about
anything and everything.
You have lost all credibilityright out the gate if that is
what you're doing.
Credibility right out the gateif that is what you're doing,
and that's more of what it is.

(50:09):
You don't get to just cosplay awhole life, a whole existence,
to just fit in with every groupthat you're talking to and
change your little cosplaycostume for each one and expect
that you're not going to getcalled out for it.
You should be called out for it.
It's garbage, it's a grossthing to be doing.
You're lying, you're deceivingand it's not cute, and called
out for it.
It's garbage, it's a grossthing to be doing.
You're lying, you're deceivingand it's not cute and it's not

(50:31):
funny.
We're making fun, but thereality of it is is really not
funny at all, which is why wehave to make jokes about it,
because otherwise we would getso angry.
It's.

Speaker 1 (50:41):
Kamala.
It's Kamala, part two.
It's the exact same thingMisrepresenting who they are.
You know it's it's Barack Obama.

Speaker 3 (50:48):
Same thing Misrepresenting who they are
Hillary Clinton.
Same thing with the hot sauce.

Speaker 1 (50:53):
Yeah, he was exactly hot sauce in her purse.
But Obama Barry, the whole timehe was growing up.
You know, and that's what theydo.
They play to, you know, theyplay to the crowd, they play to
the masses.
And now the question is isanybody going to hold her
accountable other than makingfun of her to her face now,
which they are definitely goingto do?
And God, I hope that peoplecatch it and they put it on the

(51:14):
Internet, because that's thestuff I want to see.
Same.
Speaking of manufactured, let'stake a look at the three-day $50
million celebration, thethree-day $50 million
celebration.
And I say manufactured folks,because when you look at the
crowd, well, first of all youlook at his wife.
That is like plastic.
Yes, you know, that isdefinitely manufactured.

(51:37):
But you look at the crowd,who's there?
And this is billionaire's row.
We all know that these peopledo not hang out together.
This is all of thesefriendships are manufactured.
This is not like he is notcalling Oprah on the weekends.
They're not hanging out and youknow doing the thing.
He doesn't hang out withDiCaprio, um, you know Tom Brady

(52:00):
was there.
I know he doesn't hang out withBrady, um, there's a big view
about him and uh, who's theyoung girl?
There was some 24 year old.
Yeah, there's a big reviewabout him.
And who's the young girl?
There was some 24 year old, ohSweeney.
Sidney Sweeney.
Yeah, there was a bunch of guyswho were upset about that.
They're like, listen, becausethere was rumors of Tom Brady
hitting on Sidney Sweeney or thetwo of them, you know, having a
little chat up.
It's like you don't get to belike that good looking and be

(52:20):
the best quarterback of all timeand be in that kind of great
physical shape in your in yourforties and get Sidney Sweeney
Like you can't.
That's not cool.

Speaker 3 (52:27):
You can't have it all .
You cannot have everything.

Speaker 1 (52:29):
Yeah, but the wedding the wedding party itself was,
was totally manufactured.
Um and it and it was, and itwas.

Speaker 3 (52:36):
uh, it's embarrassing , truthfully, it was a you know
it was an embarrassing grossdisplay of you know obscene
wealth, and which, by the way,more power to you.
I don't really care.
I mean, I genuinely don't care.
You figured out a way to becomea billionaire.
Congratulations.
That is what this country isall about the opportunities and

(52:57):
the abilities for a guy whostarted his business out of his
garage to become amulti-billionaire.
More power to you, so there'snothing about that.
Yeah, exactly Right, I mean itis so.
Not about that, and I know itis for other people.
I know a lot of people are,like you know, so angry about
the you know, grotesque displayof wasteful spending when the

(53:19):
money can go to other things andyou know better things and all
of that.
All of that is absolutely true.
However, it is his money to dowith what he wishes and that's
his business.
I kind of look at it more likeat the guests, really, that the
people, all of them flying in ontheir private jets.
Those are all the same peoplethat are lecturing us about

(53:42):
saving the environment and ourcarbon footprint and all of
these things and being morecareful and caring about the
planet.
You're terrible people.
I'm trying to.
It's one of those times whereI'd like to swear I'm not doing
it.
But just how about?
How about do this?
Shut up, go ahead, enjoy yourobscene wealth, fly around on

(54:03):
your jet planes, but don't youdare, dare tell me about my
carbon footprint or what Ishould do to protect the climate
.
How about?
Don't lecture me on one singlething ever after this nonsense.
So stupid, right, clay?
All right.

Speaker 1 (54:23):
Well, who's our next celebrity?

Speaker 3 (54:25):
Oh, let's see, oh, so , so, so gross, so gross, and
that's why I'm I mean, I don'teven have a picture to put up,
cause I cannot even look at thatman's face Um, so did he?
Um, you know, he basically gotaway with everything.
I think he, I think it was fivecharges.
I think he got hit on two ofthem, which would be mildest,
most minor ones, all of the bigstuff not guilty.

(54:48):
You know, we could speculateall day.

Speaker 1 (54:52):
He walked away from the racketeering stuff and the
trafficking stuff, you know, andthose are the big ones that
we're going to put him awayforever.
There's been an interestingcelebrity reaction to this Rosie
O'Donnell, who I really don'tcare about, you know.
She said well, you know, ofcourse nobody believed the women
, which may or may not have beentrue.
Honestly, folks, I didn'tfollow up on this because it was
really really disgusting, butvery interesting that 50 Cent

(55:14):
was like did he beat the feds?
That's a bad dude.
There's people that know thetruth and they know that he got
over on this, which is prettydisgusting, but an absolute
failure of the justice system.
Hopefully, on this, which ispretty disgusting, but an
absolute failure of the justicesystem, hopefully he spends a
little bit of time in jail.
But I have a feeling this isone of those things where nature

(55:35):
is going to take its course andsomebody is going to write this
along the way in some way,shape or form.
I'm not prognosticating, butyou know he does dabble in the
world of, you know, biggieSmalls and Tupac and those folks
who are both dead, by the way,yes, and of you know, biggie
Smalls and Tupac and those folkswho are both dead, by the way
yes, and so this one might getsettled in a outside of a
courtroom.
We'll have to see how thatworks.

Speaker 3 (55:51):
Yeah, yeah, I you know.
It's funny that you said that,because I was thinking the same
thing when that verdict came out.
I was like okay you got awaywith this right now.
Well, they're a little streetjustice probably coming your way
, sir.
So I hope you got yourbodyguards ready, because you're
going to need them, becausesomebody's going to get at them,
I'm sure.
Oh, yeah, yeah, you know, let's, let's be real here.
There was nonstop talk and, Ithink, some verification of like

(56:15):
copious amounts of videos andproof and evidence against
people that were at theseparties.
So much so, like I think theyshowed pictures of like I don't
know if it was a cabinet or Idon't know what it was, but it
was just.
You know top to bottom videos,you know cassettes and whatever.
This is what he had on all ofthese people.

(56:38):
And if we, if anybody, thinksthat those are the only copies
that he had of stuff he had toomuch on too many people who have
too much power and influence,and you know this was, this was
set to happen, probably rightfrom the get-go, that nothing
really was going to come of thisbecause too many people, it's
again.
It's another Epstein, it'sanother Epstein.
We're never going to getclosure on these things.

Speaker 1 (56:58):
So there is a rumored and I have not proven this.
Please somebody tell me if it'strue or not that the attorney,
the prosecuting attorney forthis is the same prosecuting
attorney for Dwayne Maxwell.
It is James Comey.
She is his daughter, I believe,former director of the FBI, his
daughter, and so she failed inboth prosecutions.

(57:18):
And oh, by the way, we stillhave not seen a list of the
people that they trafficked inany way, shape or form.
So, yeah, it's, there's toomany famous names involved with
this and that's why.
So anything else?
Who else Is there one more?

Speaker 3 (57:33):
Oh, we'll squeeze in our last one here, UPenn.
This is actually a great one toend on because it's a victory.
We love a little good victory.
Yes, this was a great victory.
Go ahead, Clay.

Speaker 1 (57:42):
Yeah.
So UPenn finally caved to themandate by the president about
transgenders in sports and, ifyou remember, upenn was is the
center of this because of RileyGaines and Leah Thomas, and so
they have since said we will nolonger have transgender athletes
competing in the women'scategories and and have stripped

(58:05):
all of the winnings and titlesand everything else from Leah.
And so Riley Gaines and thewomen who also got screwed over
in this whole thing have beengiven their rightful titles and
accolades and everything else.
And of course, you've gotpeople out there like Keith
Olverman, who's never doneanything but run his mouth in
his entire life, is know, istaking pot shots at her.

(58:29):
You know, oh yeah, you know.
Congratulations on now beingtied for fourth instead of tied
for fifth.
Yes, nationally, keithOlbermann, you stopped playing
sports in high school becauseyou had a concussion and but now
all you do is run your mouth.
So, good for good for, you know, riley Gaines and all of those
other ladies who who've gottennow the accolades they deserve.

(58:51):
Um, should have been betterdone at the time, but UPenn has
said, yep, we're done.
No more transgender athletes,we would prefer.
Our athletic funding is beingwithheld and, uh, you know the
purse.
The power of the purse folks,that's where it's at.
So the power of the purse folks, that's where it's at.

Speaker 3 (59:05):
Power of the purse?
Yeah, absolutely, and Trump hasknown that all along and I feel
like you know, if you picturethat house of cards and the
foundation, and I feel like Penn, you, penn was like that card,
that one card right at thebottom that just got pulled out,
and I really feel like this isthe start.
You know the true start.
We know that there's been caseswhere things have been reversed

(59:26):
and turned around already, butthis is probably one of the
biggest ones because this iswhere it started it all,
particularly for Riley Gaines,and you know what she's done
with this has been absolutelyincredible for women and girls
in sports.
She has done so much for themand it's just amazing.
I hope she continues to getlike all the recognition for
that.
This actually reminds me I knowthat was supposed to be our

(59:48):
last one, but it just as we'retalking, I'm like, oh, this is
so funny, so I had shared.
I don't know if you saw it, butyou know how JK Rowling, just
you know, gets battered by youknow, or attack, I should say
battered, because she battersthem pretty well.
You know the trans communitiesor trans supporters.
They're always coming after herand especially like big name
people like Pedro Pascal.
You know who you know is such agirly man, just shut up, but

(01:00:10):
the funniest one for me.
I have to share this veryquickly.
I had shared over.
I had put together the exchangethat she had with boy George
and I don't know if you saw thatwhen she had a little exchange
with boy George, boy Georgethought he would enter the chat,
say a little one-liner and justprance away and call it a win.
Well, she unleashed on himepically, just ground him into

(01:00:36):
the dirt verbally, and I hadshared that with my own little
comment about it.
I also put with it music.
I put Boy George's old song, doyou Really Want to Hurry?
So it was like the whole thingNever really thought anything.
I put it out there, gave myopinion on it, moved on in life.
Um days later I happened to seethe notifications on my phone
and I see the name boy George.

(01:00:57):
You know like at boy George,his his handle, basically on
Instagram, and I'm like, oh geez, what is this?
Uh, you know a fake account.
You know that's pretty funny.
So I look at it and it's averified and I'm like it's not
really him.
So I go off and I look it up, Ifind out that it really is Boy
George commenting on my post.
It's so I'm embarrassed for him.

(01:01:19):
It was a very silly, stupidcomment.
Nothing, it wasn't even bad.
Like it wasn't bad, I put it upon the screen and everything
too.
Um.
So yeah, misspelling, um, itwas just right, and I gave him a
very nice response back and youknow that's been the end of it,
but it just cracked me up.
It's, it's right up there.
I've had, I've had a couple offunny ones.
I had Mark Cuban comment on, onone of my Kamala Harris

(01:01:40):
impressions.
Uh, Alec Baldwin, who I haven'tbeen very nice to, followed me.
Had to be by accident, I don'tknow if he still is.
Yeah, it's very weird.
It's very weird, butentertaining and amusing, so
whatever.
But yeah, that was my fun littlesegue there that I had to share
.
My 80s girl heart kind of hurta little bit because that was.

(01:02:01):
You know, we talked about thisbefore.
My eclectic music, love andculture club I'm sorry, guys,
was was one of my favorites fora hot minute.
So yeah, anyhow, well, this wasfun, this was a fun way to end
the show right, just talkingabout these kind of fluffy,
silly things or happy things youcan is not a fluffy thing, it's
.
It's a happy, happy conclusionto a not happy situation.

(01:02:24):
So but that was fun.
I like that.
What do you guys think?
Do you think we should endevery show with something light
and fun and just maybe like aculture commentary stuff, like,
like Clay said, you know alittle people magazine here for
you, right, I like it, clay, doyou like it?

Speaker 1 (01:02:41):
Yeah, I think it's good.
I think we cover a lot of cover.
You know so many heavy thingsin the world.
I think we have often tried togo out the door on a good note.
It doesn't always work out thatway, but I think if we kind of
put our minds to it, we canfocus and go out with a fun one
or a funny one one way or theother, and I think it's a good
way to tie things up.

Speaker 3 (01:03:00):
Yeah, yes, absolutely All right.
You let us know in the commentsif you agree.
Hopefully you agree, we mightdo it anyway.
Even if you don't agree, it'sour show, we can do whatever you
want.
Sorry, I'm just kidding, I'mjust being bratty.
We love you guys.
As always, we appreciate youhanging out with us, join us in
the comments section and let'stalk about all these topics.
Give your opinions, you know.
If you disagree, agree whatever, have close them out with your

(01:03:22):
exciting news reminder, please.
Okay, so you?

Speaker 1 (01:03:25):
guys will be watching .
You'll be watching this onThursday night, the 3rd of July,
and, uh, happy to announce there-release of uh keep moving,
keep shooting, second edition.
New cover um will be coming outtomorrow, on the 4th.
Uh, it'll be available onAmazon hardcover, softcover.
I am working on the audio book.
Uh, it's also out.
It will be out ebook as well,but I am working on the audio.
There's been a ton of peoplethat have asked for that, but

(01:03:46):
I'm working with a new publisherand if you haven't read it,
read it now, because the sequelis coming out next month.
And for those of you, like youknow, longtime fans, which I
love, you all, um, I know you'vebeen asking for this, pestering
and, in some cases, threateningme about second, I'm happy to
announce that's coming as well.
But yes, tomorrow, the fourthof the 4th of July, keep Moving,
keep Shooting is available onAmazon.

(01:04:07):
If you like action fiction JackRyan, Jack Reacher, jason
Bourne this is right up youralley.
And until then, enjoy your 4thof July and, as always for me,
keep moving, keep shooting.

Speaker 2 (01:04:19):
Happy 4th of July, everyone Prepare for the
re-release of Clay'selectrifying novel Keep Moving,
keep Shooting.
This is book one in hisgripping Terry Davis series.
Experience an edge of your seatthriller that will leave you
breathless.
Get your copy of this highlyanticipated re-release.
It drops July 4th, don't missit.
She's the voice behind theviral comedy, bold commentary

(01:04:41):
and truth-packed interviews thatcut through the chaos.
Author, brand creator, proudconservative Christian.
This is Elsa Quote.
Welcome to the show that alwaysbrings bold faith, real truth
and no apologies.