Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Judge Juan Merchant holding Donald Trump in contempt yet again
for violating his gag order. And now the New York
County judge is now giving a major warning to the President,
telling him that after he has violated his gag order
again during the trial, the next time, well, I'm going
(00:22):
to put you in jail. Yeah, jail time for any
further infractions. Take a listen to this from Fox News
where Annie McCarthy said putting Donald Trump in jail would
be the worst decision ever for the Democratic Party.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Abana Seawan now indicating that he's going to find Donald
Trump in contempt for the tenth time. He's recognizing fairly
quickly that when you slap one thousand dollars fines on
a billionaire, you're not necessarily going to get him to
change his ways or his comments or what he says
in public or otherwise. But he said, this is the
judge now that he would consider jail up there for
(00:59):
further violations to that extent prosecutors have urged him to
do so.
Speaker 3 (01:04):
Will that likely happen?
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Let's go to Andy McCarthy on that former assistant US attorney.
Fox News contributed that would be a big lead but
what do you think, Andy.
Speaker 4 (01:13):
Well, I think it'd be politically disastrous for Democrats to
have Donald Trump be put in jail over this. I
think it would just cause more scrutiny for this case,
which is very politicized.
Speaker 5 (01:26):
I don't see how that helps them politically.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
So I think the judges backing himself into a bad
corner by continuing to draw a line in the sand
that I think he really doesn't want to.
Speaker 5 (01:41):
Cross with these struts of incarceration.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
You're the legal legal I'm not, as they've often told you.
I've watched a lot of law shows, so.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
I think I qualify.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
But the one thing that struck me, couldn't the judge
make this easier on himself and everybody else if he
just said the standards i'm applying to you, Donald Trump,
I will apply now to Michael Cohen.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
Well, there's less law for the proposition that you can
you can stifle a witness than a party. But you're
quite right that you know there's there's what the law
exactly says, and that there's what the judge could do
if the judge really wants, If the judge made it
clear to prosecutors that he wants their witness to stop
talking about Trump.
Speaker 5 (02:24):
They're talking about the case, they would that would happen quickly.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
He's not doing that on the rationalization that Trump is
the only one who's on trial.
Speaker 5 (02:35):
But the thing is, Neil, If what he's saying.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
Is that he's trying to shield the proceedings from, you know,
heightened publicity and other potential things that could undermine the proceedings,
it really doesn't matter which participant in the trial is
doing the talking, whether it's Trump or somebody else, that
still generates what the what the judge says he's trying
to shield the jury and the rest of the pro
(03:00):
says from So I think it's a disingenuous argument. My
own view of it, for what it's worth, is that
he doesn't the judge doesn't want Trump talking about the
fact that the judge's daughter is a political operative for
the Democrats who gets a lot of money working for
people who define themselves by.
Speaker 5 (03:19):
How much they loath Trump.
Speaker 4 (03:20):
I think that's problematic for the judge and he doesn't
want Trump talking about it. So he's pretextually saying that
Trump is threatening witnesses, which Trump isn't doing, so that
he has an excuse to tamp down that line of
argument by Trump.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
You listen to what he had to say there, and
I think the point that is the takeaway is if
you're a judge, are you really going to lock up
the front runner for the presidency of the United States
of America over the most egregious court case we have
seen in modern political history?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Number one? And number two?
Speaker 1 (03:59):
Are you going to do it to the guy who's
a former president just on that alone? And then the
front runner, which is clear election interference? That's the question
everyone should be asking. Want to talk to you, though,
real quick about something else, and that's inflation. Inflation is skyrocketing.
(04:19):
It is well above the Fed's target rate. Consumer prices
of skyrocketed year over year over year, and if you
look at what it costs to live now compared to
what it costs just four years ago, you know you
need an extra twenty two thousand dollars on average per
family just to keep up with where you were four
years ago. Now, what does that mean for your retirement?
(04:40):
It means you need more money now to retire than
ever before. And that is where gold and silver come in.
Gold and silver have historically been good hedges against inflation.
That's why we're seeing gold right now continuing to hit
record highs. It's a great way to protect your hard
earned retirement dollars. Now, there are a lot gold comies
out there. Many of them will tell you to put
(05:02):
all your money in gold and silver. That is not diversification,
and they'll never tell you to do that at Freedom
Goold USA. The other thing is there's a lot of
companies that charge insane commission, so when you go to
buy gold, you're already upside down significantly. When you actually
get that gold, well, guess what, Freedom Goold USA. They
(05:23):
charge twenty five to thirty percent less than most major
gold and silver firms. So take control of your financial
future now. Visit Freedomgoldusa dot com slash ben. It's freedom
GOOLDUSA dot com slash ben save twenty five to thirty
percent less than most major gold and silver firms. That
(05:43):
means twenty five to thirty percent more gold or silver
in your account. One eight hundred sixty five five eight
eight four to three is their number. One eight hundred
sixty five five eight eight four three. Call them, tell
them Ben Ferguson sent you, and ask them about getting
free silver in your account today freedom GOOLDUSA dot com
(06:04):
slash ben all right. Back to what Anny McCarthy was
saying there, it'd be politically disastrous for Dems if the
judge ordered Trump to be in jail. I do believe
that Donald Trump is showing just how egregious this is.
And look, they were finding Trump one thousand dollars for
a single violation. He previously fined Trump for nine violations.
(06:26):
That's nine grand Trump then had another quote violation the
judge's the judge's mind right for a tenth contempt defense
occurred before the last order.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
And not afterwards.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
Trump did not push the boundaries after the first gag
order ruling. Just so you know, quote, this court will
have to consider a jail sanction, is what the judge
said the court and quote, at the end of the day,
I have a job to do. Part of that job
is protect the dignity of the justice system. The violation
is a direct attack on the rule of law, and
I cannot allow that to continue, he added. According to
(07:01):
the court reporters, now, the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg
alleged Trump committed four violations, including comments about Michael Cohen,
a guy that is a convicted If I'm not mistaken,
it's a felon, right convicted felon, and he can say
and go on TV and on his podcast and say
whatever he wants to say. Also, David Pecker, the former
publisher of the National Inquirer, these are things that they're
(07:26):
able to talk and Trump's not. And the prosecutors allege
a speech directed towards witnesses was a violation of the
original gag order quote. I think it's a political hoax,
Trump told reporters before entering the courtroom today.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
It's election interference.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
This is a ridiculous situation, not fair, not fair, but
we will fight.
Speaker 3 (07:47):
I just want to be very clear.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
I think if they put Donald Trump in jail, it
will be the biggest backfire in modern political history.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
I really, really, really do believe that.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
Now the gag order is to prevent Trump from making
public comments about witnesses participating in the trial. The problem is,
the main witness is a guy who's his former lawyer
and a guy who's out there making a living off
of trashing Donald Trump. Should he be able to respond, Yes,
There's also another reason why Donald Trump should be able
to speak and not be silenced by the court. He's
(08:20):
running for president of the United States of America, and
part of running for office is having the ability to
defend yourself when people are coming after you. It is
incredibly unfair and clearly it is election interference to tell
a former president and the front runner for the presidency
yet again, that they can't respond to people that are
(08:43):
attacking him, and it will alter and change the election
in a major way.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
That's just the reality here.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
I want to play for you real quick what Donald
Trump said before he walked into the courthouse. And the
reason why is because there's two two points here. One
yay talks about the fact that this judge has found
him in contempt for the tenth time. It's ten thousand
dollars total and fines a thousand freach charge, and now
(09:12):
the judge saying, hey, I'm gonna put you in jail,
and I want you to listen to Trump and how
he responds that first off. But the second thing I
want you to notice is how quickly he pivots and
goes back to the issues. For example, the Columbia University
just canceled their commencement, and he says that shouldn't have
happened like this is unfair to the students, all because
the radical extremists on the left. And there's a focus
(09:33):
part here that I love about Trump, Like, yes, he's
being clearly there's election interference going on, like that is
so clear, but he's still staying focused on the issues
for the American people at the very same time. Take
a listen to Trump as he's walking into the court.
Speaker 6 (09:53):
The first question, as you know, they've taken away my
constitutional right, so I'm not allowed to answer to that question.
This has never happened in this country before. It's a
ridiculous thing. It's a ridiculous case.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
I did nothing.
Speaker 3 (10:06):
Wrong, absolutely nothing wrong.
Speaker 6 (10:08):
I take a look at great Jared this morning he
went on, take a look at Andrew McCarthy or Jonathan
Journally or Barca who. It's like they say there's an
ocase here, and yet the judges gagged me and I'm
not allowed to talk about.
Speaker 5 (10:23):
I guess his total conflict.
Speaker 7 (10:27):
The judge is totally confidict It could be conflicted, and
you want to take a look at it, and I'm
not supposed to be talking about it, but I am
allowed to say that the judges a conflict that like
nobody's ever happy.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
For you ought to take a look at it.
Speaker 7 (10:42):
He's taken away my constitutional right to speak.
Speaker 3 (10:46):
I was in Miami this weekend and reporters are.
Speaker 7 (10:49):
Asking me questions the same questions like you're asking me,
and I have to say I have a gaggle or
I can't speak about it.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
Never happened before or ever.
Speaker 5 (10:57):
Number one. Number two, it's a fake trial. They have
no case.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
And it's been absolutely proven now that.
Speaker 5 (11:04):
No case whatsoever.
Speaker 7 (11:06):
This is Alvin Bragg doing it for political reasons for Biden.
Speaker 5 (11:10):
This is a bike trial. He's a crooked president.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
Now, it just came out Columbia just canceled their commensal axioms.
Columbia just canceled their commensal. That shouldn't happen. And it
also came out that the.
Speaker 7 (11:26):
Protesters, many of the protesters are backed by Biden's donors.
Speaker 8 (11:33):
Okay, are you listening Israel? I Hope you're listening Israel,
Hope you're getting smart. But they're back by Biden donors.
That's where the money's coming from. And I'm not surprised
at all.
Speaker 9 (11:43):
There's many other articles, many of them having to do
with the gag order, the unconstitutionality having to do with
the gag order, and it is unconstitutional and it shouldn't
be allowed. And I wish people could proved a little bit.
Speaker 7 (11:57):
Quicker the knowelling courts, because the whole world is watching you,
so they see what's happening.
Speaker 6 (12:03):
More importantly, frankly, they have no case. They have absolutely
no case. It's a political.
Speaker 7 (12:09):
Hopes and selection interference anything they can do, and even
the witnesses they want to bring up, they have nothing
to do with the case. This is a ridiculous situation,
not fair, not fair.
Speaker 3 (12:22):
But we will fight, thank you, but we will fight.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
You can hear the President going back to that and saying, look,
we still have business here that we got to deal with.
We still have a country in essence to save, and
so I'm going to tell you what's going on, but
I'm also going to move on now. All of this
is happening, by the way, right now, while there's something
else that the Democrats are going to have to deal with,
this reality. The judge and brag and everyone involved in
(12:48):
this case. They say there's nothing political here, right, They're lying,
And I think most Americans have figured that out, Like
they're lying, that's number one. But if you're gonna hold
the line that this is real and something that was
supposed to happen and it was something that we needed
to happen. If that's the line, then don't you have
(13:10):
to put Trump in jail if he violates it yet again,
which I have no doubt he's going to, and then
you got to stick by that. But then there's Democrats
that are going to say, wow, no, no, no, just find
him again, right, just just just find him again. Don't
put him in jail because that will be the biggest
backfire we've ever seen. So if you don't put Trump
(13:33):
in jail at this point, then it doesn't that speak
to just how political this whole entire witch hunt actually is.
That you are willing to arrest him, you're willing to
try to ruin his life, You're you're willing to go
to trial over charges that Alvin Bragg said he would
bring if he gets elected and is raising money off
(13:54):
of that. The federal government wouldn't even take the case
because they said that there was no evidence in a
crime committed here. And then you do this the way
that they did it in court basically the second go
round so it's not federal charges, and they say, oh.
Speaker 3 (14:09):
This isn't political.
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Okay, if it's not political, then you got to put
Trump in jail. And if you don't put him in jail,
and you keep finding him a thousand dollars over and
over and over and over again, then you are admitting
by not putting him in jail, that this is in
fact political because you're you're afraid that if you put
him in jail, that it's going to affect the outcome
of the election. Like if you want to see and
(14:31):
they know this, this judge knows this. Alvin Bragg has
to know this if you actually locked up. Can you
imagine seeing a former president of the United States of
America and you want to talk about election interference putting
him in jail?
Speaker 3 (14:46):
Donald Trump in jail.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
There's been word that's been coming out that Donald Trump
or the Secret Service are now planning for actual contingencies
how they would keep a former president safe while in prison.
Like while in prison and what does that look like?
You can't put him with the rest of the prison population.
You're gonna have to completely isolate him from everybody else
(15:09):
because your job is to keep the president safe. So
what does it look like if you do this, and
if you do it, the President the Secret Service are
going to have to be involved in every step of this.
It's not like you just say I'm putting you in
jail and then you walk out the baylists grab you
and they take you back behind the court.
Speaker 3 (15:28):
It didn't work that way.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
But if you want to see American patriots get angry,
put Donald Trump in jail. And if you don't do it,
and he does quote cross the line again and then
you purposely don't put him in jail after you make
this threat, then it goes back again to proving the
point this is all political from the very beginning. They're
what they're wanting to do, and what they're trying to
(15:51):
do is put Donald Trump in a court room so
that Donald Trump can't go out in campaign. Okay, Like
that's the whole ball game here, and they know it,
and Trump knows it. And by the way, Donald Trump
is also called for the arrest of Jack Smith, the
special prosecutor, after prosecutors admit to misleading a judge on
(16:12):
evidence that they tampered with There were several revelations last
week that the special counsel Jack Smith's team had mishandled
evidence in the trial of former President Trump over his
allegedly criminal mismanagement of classified documents. Trump then went on
social media to demand the case against him be dropped
and that Smith himself be prosecuted instead, saying, quote, it
(16:35):
has always been clear that the document's case is nothing
but an election interference scam concocted by crooked Joe Biden
and deranged Jack Smith and their hacks and thugs.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
That's what he said.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
On Friday, he said, now derange Jack Smith has had
to admit in a filing in front of Judge Cannon
to what I've been saying happened since the illegal raid
on my home at Marlago, that he and his team
committed blatant evidence tampering by mishandling the very boxes they
used as a pretext to bring this fake case. These
(17:10):
deeply illegal actions by the politicized prosecutors mandate that this
whole witch hunt be dropped immediately. He added in the
box's hoaxes MAGA twenty twenty four.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
He then put at the end of that.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Post on true Social Hours later, Trump returned a true
Social account to demand that Smith be quote arrested, saying
arrest arrange Jack Smith, he is a criminal based on
the fact that there was evidence tampering going on as
a pretext to getting in.
Speaker 3 (17:42):
And having a raid at Marlago again.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
I hope they put Trump in jail. I mean that
because I think the world will. I think the United
States America will stand up and say this is out
of control radicalism by the extreme left. This is a weapon,
is a the politicalization of the Justice Department, and people
will say that is a step too far. And by
the way, that's exactly why I think this judge won't
(18:08):
do it. He can threaten it all he once, but
this is why I think he won't actually do it.
I want to pivot to what's going on in Israel
as well, real quick, because it's really important that you know,
and there is a pr stunt that is unfolding before
our very eyes. Hamas has agreed they claim to a
(18:31):
ceasefire proposal from Egypt and Katar. Now we have heard
nothing official from the Israeli government. Is what the media
initially says about this, claiming that now if Israel doesn't
agree to the terms that were put together from Egypt
and Qatar, that they're somehow now the aggressor, and this
is a pr stunt. I want you to listen to
(18:52):
how the Cut News cover this instantly. They took the
bait from Hamas, they took the bait for the terrorists,
and they ran with it on National TV.
Speaker 10 (19:00):
That's a proposal that has now been on the table
for more than a week, a proposal that the US
has been urging Hamas to take. Now, our understanding of
the most recent iteration of this proposal is that Hamas
would agree to the release of thirty three hostages from
(19:21):
the so called humanitarian category, so that is women, it
is children, it is the elderly, it is people with
serious medical conditions, and in return, Israel would agree to
a forty day ceasefire and the release of potentially thousands
of Palestinian prisoners. Now we should stress us at this point,
(19:41):
all we have is this statement from the political wing
of Hamas. We do not have the detail of what
exactly it is that they have agreed to. And there
has been pretty frenetic diplomacy over the weekends involving CIA
director Bill Burns, who has been chrisp crossing the Middle East,
starting in Egypt, flying to Katar coming here to Israel,
(20:04):
so it is possible that the framework of that deal
has changed over the weekends. It is also worth saying
that these deals are often structured in terms of first
and agreement on a broad framework and then hammering out
of the details. And as we know, Chris, the devil
is often in the detail.
Speaker 5 (20:24):
But there is positive indication.
Speaker 10 (20:28):
For the first time since that last ceasefire deal, which
lasted only a week collapsed on December one last year,
this is the first time that we have heard from
Hamas that they are prepared to accept a ceasefire proposal.
Now we have heard nothing officially from the Israeli government.
(20:48):
Israel is certainly aware of this statement from Hamas, they
are studying it, but we have not heard yet from
Prime Minister net Yahu or from Israeli official. But this
is a potentially potentially positive sign after these many, many
months of bloodshed in Gaza, and these many many painful
(21:11):
months of the hostages staying in Amas captivity.
Speaker 3 (21:15):
All right, so let's be queer what the media is
doing there.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
They're telling you that this is a deal that Israel
should take, while admitting they have no idea what's in
the deal. Did you notice that, like, oh, well, this
is a big deal, and we've got terrorists that are
agreeing to a new deal after they're the ones that
broke the ceasefire agreement last time, and this is like,
(21:39):
we're very excited about this, and this is something that
they need to do. What's in the deal, we don't know,
but they should agree to it. Israel shouldn't agree to anything,
especially they don't know what's in the damn deal. Tom Cotton,
by the way, coming out after amasays has agreed to
a ceasefire deal that makes no mention to the hostages,
because about thirty minutes after that MSNBC report, it came
(22:01):
out that there was no mention of releasing hostages in
this deal. I want you to hear what Tom Cotton
said while on Fox.
Speaker 11 (22:08):
All right, let's go.
Speaker 12 (22:09):
Ahead now and bring in Senator Tom cottony serves on
the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sir, just hearing this news
that Hamas says they have agreed to the terms of
the ceasefire without specifying what those terms are. Mighty hard
for the Israelis to agree to a ceasefire when Hamas
has not even been truthful or forthcoming about how many
(22:32):
hostages remaining captivity, and how many of them are even
alive at this point.
Speaker 11 (22:39):
Well, Jillian, we'll have to see exactly what Israel says
they received from Hamas. But this sounds suspiciously like an
info operation trying to win a pr war, because Hamas
knows it can't win a military war against Israel, nor
can you negotiate with them in good faith. As you said,
we don't even know how many of the hostages remain alive.
We hope most of them do, but I think we
(22:59):
have to accepit up the reality that many or even most,
might already be dead. Hamas won't even provide proof of
life photos or videos. It would not be hard for
Hamas to put today's newspaper in front of these hostages
and have them speak a few words into the camera,
but then that would reveal their ace cards, how many
hostages they still have alive. And Hamas is not going
to do that, and they're especially not going to do
(23:20):
that as long as Joe Biden continues to pressure Israel
to give Hamas what it wants more than all, which
is its continued existence. Israel is dedicated to Hamas's destruction.
There are four Hamas battalions left in Rafa. Every time
Joe Biden says or his senior aide say, we don't
want Israel to take down these battalions in Rafa. We
(23:40):
demand that they reopen these gates the supplies can get in.
Apparently now withholding ammunition from Israel, all it does is
make Comas less likely to agree to any kind of
hostage release because they think they're going to get from
Joe Biden's pressure what Israel is otherwise only getting when
they apply military pressure to Hamas.
Speaker 13 (24:00):
At least, according to one report, I saw Israel or
Yaho in that call did agree to reover the carb
Shalom crossing for humanitarian assistants.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Reuters is reporting on this.
Speaker 13 (24:10):
Here's what it's said about Israel's rejection of the Hamas deal.
Israeli official says Hamas announcement appears to be a ruse
to cast Israel is the side refusing a deal. And
there's a tremendous amount of pressure on Biden too from
the left.
Speaker 5 (24:24):
Listen to what.
Speaker 13 (24:24):
Bernie Sanders posted on x He said one million people
have fled to Ratha for months. The US has warned
against an attack. Yah who ignored the warnings. Now an
assault is imminent, it will kill countless civilians. President Biden
must back his words with action and all offensive military
aid to Israel.
Speaker 3 (24:43):
Why wouldn't Hamas see an opportunity.
Speaker 11 (24:45):
Here, Well, John, that's exactly right again. As long as
Joe Biden the Democratic Party keeps putting pressure on Israel,
it makes him loss that much less likely to actually
agree to release any of these hostages. The only reason
they restarted arted negotiations a few weeks ago is because
the invasion of Ratha appeared imminent. The only time Hamas
(25:06):
has been willing to release hostages and when they is
when they are feeling intense military pressure. And every time
Joe Biden and the Democrats say that Israel should not
proceed with this war, they demand a cease fire, and
Hamas is simply emboldened. Look at what Hamas is saying
about these disgusting cesspools of anti Semitic hate on our campuses,
little gazes all around the country.
Speaker 5 (25:26):
They're celebrating them.
Speaker 11 (25:27):
Because they know that puts more pressure on Joe Biden
and the Democrats to demand that Israel capitulate as opposed
to what they should be doing. If these people want
gozens to stop suffering, they should demand that Hamas release
all the hostages and unconditionally surrender.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Do not fall for the propaganda. That is the reason
why I played that for you, so that you understand,
do not fall for this. They are trying to act
like they want a deal and there's there's no mention
of the hostages in the deal. Why would there be
(26:05):
no mention in the deal of hostages because they're not
going to give those up. That's their quote leverage, right,
They're all in for the leverage.
Speaker 3 (26:13):
It's just pure leverage.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
And they're like, all right, we'll announce that we want
to do a deal. We will, we'll announce it. We'll
say we're going to do a deal. So what's in
the deal. We're not talking about that. No, no, no, no,
we're not going to talk about what's in the deal.
We're just going to tell you we've agreed to a deal.
What about hostages? Is that going to be a part
of the deal.
Speaker 5 (26:36):
No?
Speaker 3 (26:37):
And why are they saying this? So this is all.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
Because the Israelis said, Hey, we're going to go into
Rafla if you guys don't give us the hostages back,
and agree to a real deal. We're going in because
as you notice there, they even admit it. Yeah, that's
where they're keeping them, and that's where they are, these
battalions of Hamas fighters. So we're going to go to
the next phase of this war. And the media is
helping them eld this by saying, well, you know, they
(27:02):
agreed to a deal with with with Cutter and Jordan
to put it together, right, so it must be a
good deal.
Speaker 3 (27:08):
What's the deal? We don't know, right, We have no idea,
we have no clut all. And while all that's happening,
you have a president that's also.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Talking about flying thousands of Palestinian quote refugees into the US,
which is another massive problem here. So they're not listening
to the terrorism threat, they're not listening to the Israelis.
They're not standing out for the Israelis at all. And
(27:37):
the White House, we were told, was even thinking about
meeting with the protesters of these college campuses, which now
the White House is denying because they got busted in
the news.
Speaker 3 (27:47):
Listen to this, you can agreed.
Speaker 13 (27:50):
Parson Rocanna said that the president should and will be
out visiting these campus among the protests.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
I mean the protest. Is there any plan for him
to get out there and talk to students right now?
Speaker 1 (28:04):
I love that in Congress and roconsin you guys are
gonna the President's going to be out there visiting these protesters,
and the why is like no, no, no, no, We're
not doing that.
Speaker 3 (28:12):
Next and move on quickly, move on, No follow ups.
Let's go, no follow ups.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
Gotta move on, Gotta move on quickly, gotta move hurry, next, next,
next question. The president is in a clear situation where
he is trying to keep the extreme of his party
intact so they'll vote for him, because if they don't
show up, he screwed, and that means you're siding with
(28:36):
the terrorist sympathizers. He also has a problem when it
comes to funding. As we exposed on yesterday's show, the
President's money is coming from the same exact people that
are funding the anarchists, the anti Semites, the Nazis on
these college campuses that want to kill all the Jews,
and they want to take out Israel from the river
(28:57):
to the sea. The people that are chanting death to
America are being funded by the same millionaire and billionaires
that are writing checks to Joe Biden, So Joe Biden's
got to agree with them right now because he needs
their money for reelection.
Speaker 3 (29:11):
Never forget who this man is.
Speaker 1 (29:14):
Make sure you share this podcast please with your family
and friends, so everybody you know get to hear what
we're exposing here every day.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
And I'll see you back here tomorrow
Judge Juan Merchant holding Donald Trump in contempt yet again
for violating his gag order. And now the New York
County judge is now giving a major warning to the President,
telling him that after he has violated his gag order
again during the trial, the next time, well, I'm going
(00:22):
to put you in jail. Yeah, jail time for any
further infractions. Take a listen to this from Fox News
where Annie McCarthy said putting Donald Trump in jail would
be the worst decision ever for the Democratic Party.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Abana Seawan now indicating that he's going to find Donald
Trump in contempt for the tenth time. He's recognizing fairly
quickly that when you slap one thousand dollars fines on
a billionaire, you're not necessarily going to get him to
change his ways or his comments or what he says
in public or otherwise. But he said, this is the
judge now that he would consider jail up there for
(00:59):
further violations to that extent prosecutors have urged him to
do so.
Speaker 3 (01:04):
Will that likely happen?
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Let's go to Andy McCarthy on that former assistant US attorney.
Fox News contributed that would be a big lead but
what do you think, Andy.
Speaker 4 (01:13):
Well, I think it'd be politically disastrous for Democrats to
have Donald Trump be put in jail over this. I
think it would just cause more scrutiny for this case,
which is very politicized.
Speaker 5 (01:26):
I don't see how that helps them politically.
Speaker 4 (01:31):
So I think the judges backing himself into a bad
corner by continuing to draw a line in the sand
that I think he really doesn't want to.
Speaker 5 (01:41):
Cross with these struts of incarceration.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
You're the legal legal I'm not, as they've often told you.
I've watched a lot of law shows, so.
Speaker 3 (01:50):
I think I qualify.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
But the one thing that struck me, couldn't the judge
make this easier on himself and everybody else if he
just said the standards i'm applying to you, Donald Trump,
I will apply now to Michael Cohen.
Speaker 4 (02:04):
Well, there's less law for the proposition that you can
you can stifle a witness than a party. But you're
quite right that you know there's there's what the law
exactly says, and that there's what the judge could do
if the judge really wants, If the judge made it
clear to prosecutors that he wants their witness to stop
talking about Trump.
Speaker 5 (02:24):
They're talking about the case, they would that would happen quickly.
Speaker 4 (02:29):
He's not doing that on the rationalization that Trump is
the only one who's on trial.
Speaker 5 (02:35):
But the thing is, Neil, If what he's saying.
Speaker 4 (02:38):
Is that he's trying to shield the proceedings from, you know,
heightened publicity and other potential things that could undermine the proceedings,
it really doesn't matter which participant in the trial is
doing the talking, whether it's Trump or somebody else, that
still generates what the what the judge says he's trying
to shield the jury and the rest of the pro
(03:00):
says from So I think it's a disingenuous argument. My
own view of it, for what it's worth, is that
he doesn't the judge doesn't want Trump talking about the
fact that the judge's daughter is a political operative for
the Democrats who gets a lot of money working for
people who define themselves by.
Speaker 5 (03:19):
How much they loath Trump.
Speaker 4 (03:20):
I think that's problematic for the judge and he doesn't
want Trump talking about it. So he's pretextually saying that
Trump is threatening witnesses, which Trump isn't doing, so that
he has an excuse to tamp down that line of
argument by Trump.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
You listen to what he had to say there, and
I think the point that is the takeaway is if
you're a judge, are you really going to lock up
the front runner for the presidency of the United States
of America over the most egregious court case we have
seen in modern political history?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Number one? And number two?
Speaker 1 (03:59):
Are you going to do it to the guy who's
a former president just on that alone? And then the
front runner, which is clear election interference? That's the question
everyone should be asking. Want to talk to you, though,
real quick about something else, and that's inflation. Inflation is skyrocketing.
(04:19):
It is well above the Fed's target rate. Consumer prices
of skyrocketed year over year over year, and if you
look at what it costs to live now compared to
what it costs just four years ago, you know you
need an extra twenty two thousand dollars on average per
family just to keep up with where you were four
years ago. Now, what does that mean for your retirement?
(04:40):
It means you need more money now to retire than
ever before. And that is where gold and silver come in.
Gold and silver have historically been good hedges against inflation.
That's why we're seeing gold right now continuing to hit
record highs. It's a great way to protect your hard
earned retirement dollars. Now, there are a lot gold comies
out there. Many of them will tell you to put
(05:02):
all your money in gold and silver. That is not diversification,
and they'll never tell you to do that at Freedom
Goold USA. The other thing is there's a lot of
companies that charge insane commission, so when you go to
buy gold, you're already upside down significantly. When you actually
get that gold, well, guess what, Freedom Goold USA. They
(05:23):
charge twenty five to thirty percent less than most major
gold and silver firms. So take control of your financial
future now. Visit Freedomgoldusa dot com slash ben. It's freedom
GOOLDUSA dot com slash ben save twenty five to thirty
percent less than most major gold and silver firms. That
(05:43):
means twenty five to thirty percent more gold or silver
in your account. One eight hundred sixty five five eight
eight four to three is their number. One eight hundred
sixty five five eight eight four three. Call them, tell
them Ben Ferguson sent you, and ask them about getting
free silver in your account today freedom GOOLDUSA dot com
(06:04):
slash ben all right. Back to what Anny McCarthy was
saying there, it'd be politically disastrous for Dems if the
judge ordered Trump to be in jail. I do believe
that Donald Trump is showing just how egregious this is.
And look, they were finding Trump one thousand dollars for
a single violation. He previously fined Trump for nine violations.
(06:26):
That's nine grand Trump then had another quote violation the
judge's the judge's mind right for a tenth contempt defense
occurred before the last order.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
And not afterwards.
Speaker 1 (06:39):
Trump did not push the boundaries after the first gag
order ruling. Just so you know, quote, this court will
have to consider a jail sanction, is what the judge
said the court and quote, at the end of the day,
I have a job to do. Part of that job
is protect the dignity of the justice system. The violation
is a direct attack on the rule of law, and
I cannot allow that to continue, he added. According to
(07:01):
the court reporters, now, the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg
alleged Trump committed four violations, including comments about Michael Cohen,
a guy that is a convicted If I'm not mistaken,
it's a felon, right convicted felon, and he can say
and go on TV and on his podcast and say
whatever he wants to say. Also, David Pecker, the former
publisher of the National Inquirer, these are things that they're
(07:26):
able to talk and Trump's not. And the prosecutors allege
a speech directed towards witnesses was a violation of the
original gag order quote. I think it's a political hoax,
Trump told reporters before entering the courtroom today.
Speaker 3 (07:41):
It's election interference.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
This is a ridiculous situation, not fair, not fair, but
we will fight.
Speaker 3 (07:47):
I just want to be very clear.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
I think if they put Donald Trump in jail, it
will be the biggest backfire in modern political history.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
I really, really, really do believe that.
Speaker 1 (07:58):
Now the gag order is to prevent Trump from making
public comments about witnesses participating in the trial. The problem is,
the main witness is a guy who's his former lawyer
and a guy who's out there making a living off
of trashing Donald Trump. Should he be able to respond, Yes,
There's also another reason why Donald Trump should be able
to speak and not be silenced by the court. He's
(08:20):
running for president of the United States of America, and
part of running for office is having the ability to
defend yourself when people are coming after you. It is
incredibly unfair and clearly it is election interference to tell
a former president and the front runner for the presidency
yet again, that they can't respond to people that are
(08:43):
attacking him, and it will alter and change the election
in a major way.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
That's just the reality here.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
I want to play for you real quick what Donald
Trump said before he walked into the courthouse. And the
reason why is because there's two two points here. One
yay talks about the fact that this judge has found
him in contempt for the tenth time. It's ten thousand
dollars total and fines a thousand freach charge, and now
(09:12):
the judge saying, hey, I'm gonna put you in jail,
and I want you to listen to Trump and how
he responds that first off. But the second thing I
want you to notice is how quickly he pivots and
goes back to the issues. For example, the Columbia University
just canceled their commencement, and he says that shouldn't have
happened like this is unfair to the students, all because
the radical extremists on the left. And there's a focus
(09:33):
part here that I love about Trump, Like, yes, he's
being clearly there's election interference going on, like that is
so clear, but he's still staying focused on the issues
for the American people at the very same time. Take
a listen to Trump as he's walking into the court.
Speaker 6 (09:53):
The first question, as you know, they've taken away my
constitutional right, so I'm not allowed to answer to that question.
This has never happened in this country before. It's a
ridiculous thing. It's a ridiculous case.
Speaker 5 (10:05):
I did nothing.
Speaker 3 (10:06):
Wrong, absolutely nothing wrong.
Speaker 6 (10:08):
I take a look at great Jared this morning he
went on, take a look at Andrew McCarthy or Jonathan
Journally or Barca who. It's like they say there's an
ocase here, and yet the judges gagged me and I'm
not allowed to talk about.
Speaker 5 (10:23):
I guess his total conflict.
Speaker 7 (10:27):
The judge is totally confidict It could be conflicted, and
you want to take a look at it, and I'm
not supposed to be talking about it, but I am
allowed to say that the judges a conflict that like
nobody's ever happy.
Speaker 3 (10:40):
For you ought to take a look at it.
Speaker 7 (10:42):
He's taken away my constitutional right to speak.
Speaker 3 (10:46):
I was in Miami this weekend and reporters are.
Speaker 7 (10:49):
Asking me questions the same questions like you're asking me,
and I have to say I have a gaggle or
I can't speak about it.
Speaker 3 (10:55):
Never happened before or ever.
Speaker 5 (10:57):
Number one. Number two, it's a fake trial. They have
no case.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
And it's been absolutely proven now that.
Speaker 5 (11:04):
No case whatsoever.
Speaker 7 (11:06):
This is Alvin Bragg doing it for political reasons for Biden.
Speaker 5 (11:10):
This is a bike trial. He's a crooked president.
Speaker 6 (11:14):
Now, it just came out Columbia just canceled their commensal axioms.
Columbia just canceled their commensal. That shouldn't happen. And it
also came out that the.
Speaker 7 (11:26):
Protesters, many of the protesters are backed by Biden's donors.
Speaker 8 (11:33):
Okay, are you listening Israel? I Hope you're listening Israel,
Hope you're getting smart. But they're back by Biden donors.
That's where the money's coming from. And I'm not surprised
at all.
Speaker 9 (11:43):
There's many other articles, many of them having to do
with the gag order, the unconstitutionality having to do with
the gag order, and it is unconstitutional and it shouldn't
be allowed. And I wish people could proved a little bit.
Speaker 7 (11:57):
Quicker the knowelling courts, because the whole world is watching you,
so they see what's happening.
Speaker 6 (12:03):
More importantly, frankly, they have no case. They have absolutely
no case. It's a political.
Speaker 7 (12:09):
Hopes and selection interference anything they can do, and even
the witnesses they want to bring up, they have nothing
to do with the case. This is a ridiculous situation,
not fair, not fair.
Speaker 3 (12:22):
But we will fight, thank you, but we will fight.
Speaker 1 (12:25):
You can hear the President going back to that and saying, look,
we still have business here that we got to deal with.
We still have a country in essence to save, and
so I'm going to tell you what's going on, but
I'm also going to move on now. All of this
is happening, by the way, right now, while there's something
else that the Democrats are going to have to deal with,
this reality. The judge and brag and everyone involved in
(12:48):
this case. They say there's nothing political here, right, They're lying,
And I think most Americans have figured that out, Like
they're lying, that's number one. But if you're gonna hold
the line that this is real and something that was
supposed to happen and it was something that we needed
to happen. If that's the line, then don't you have
(13:10):
to put Trump in jail if he violates it yet again,
which I have no doubt he's going to, and then
you got to stick by that. But then there's Democrats
that are going to say, wow, no, no, no, just find
him again, right, just just just find him again. Don't
put him in jail because that will be the biggest
backfire we've ever seen. So if you don't put Trump
(13:33):
in jail at this point, then it doesn't that speak
to just how political this whole entire witch hunt actually is.
That you are willing to arrest him, you're willing to
try to ruin his life, You're you're willing to go
to trial over charges that Alvin Bragg said he would
bring if he gets elected and is raising money off
(13:54):
of that. The federal government wouldn't even take the case
because they said that there was no evidence in a
crime committed here. And then you do this the way
that they did it in court basically the second go
round so it's not federal charges, and they say, oh.
Speaker 3 (14:09):
This isn't political.
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Okay, if it's not political, then you got to put
Trump in jail. And if you don't put him in jail,
and you keep finding him a thousand dollars over and
over and over and over again, then you are admitting
by not putting him in jail, that this is in
fact political because you're you're afraid that if you put
him in jail, that it's going to affect the outcome
of the election. Like if you want to see and
(14:31):
they know this, this judge knows this. Alvin Bragg has
to know this if you actually locked up. Can you
imagine seeing a former president of the United States of
America and you want to talk about election interference putting
him in jail?
Speaker 3 (14:46):
Donald Trump in jail.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
There's been word that's been coming out that Donald Trump
or the Secret Service are now planning for actual contingencies
how they would keep a former president safe while in prison.
Like while in prison and what does that look like?
You can't put him with the rest of the prison population.
You're gonna have to completely isolate him from everybody else
(15:09):
because your job is to keep the president safe. So
what does it look like if you do this, and
if you do it, the President the Secret Service are
going to have to be involved in every step of this.
It's not like you just say I'm putting you in
jail and then you walk out the baylists grab you
and they take you back behind the court.
Speaker 3 (15:28):
It didn't work that way.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
But if you want to see American patriots get angry,
put Donald Trump in jail. And if you don't do it,
and he does quote cross the line again and then
you purposely don't put him in jail after you make
this threat, then it goes back again to proving the
point this is all political from the very beginning. They're
what they're wanting to do, and what they're trying to
(15:51):
do is put Donald Trump in a court room so
that Donald Trump can't go out in campaign. Okay, Like
that's the whole ball game here, and they know it,
and Trump knows it. And by the way, Donald Trump
is also called for the arrest of Jack Smith, the
special prosecutor, after prosecutors admit to misleading a judge on
(16:12):
evidence that they tampered with There were several revelations last
week that the special counsel Jack Smith's team had mishandled
evidence in the trial of former President Trump over his
allegedly criminal mismanagement of classified documents. Trump then went on
social media to demand the case against him be dropped
and that Smith himself be prosecuted instead, saying, quote, it
(16:35):
has always been clear that the document's case is nothing
but an election interference scam concocted by crooked Joe Biden
and deranged Jack Smith and their hacks and thugs.
Speaker 3 (16:47):
That's what he said.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
On Friday, he said, now derange Jack Smith has had
to admit in a filing in front of Judge Cannon
to what I've been saying happened since the illegal raid
on my home at Marlago, that he and his team
committed blatant evidence tampering by mishandling the very boxes they
used as a pretext to bring this fake case. These
(17:10):
deeply illegal actions by the politicized prosecutors mandate that this
whole witch hunt be dropped immediately. He added in the
box's hoaxes MAGA twenty twenty four.
Speaker 3 (17:22):
He then put at the end of that.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
Post on true Social Hours later, Trump returned a true
Social account to demand that Smith be quote arrested, saying
arrest arrange Jack Smith, he is a criminal based on
the fact that there was evidence tampering going on as
a pretext to getting in.
Speaker 3 (17:42):
And having a raid at Marlago again.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
I hope they put Trump in jail. I mean that
because I think the world will. I think the United
States America will stand up and say this is out
of control radicalism by the extreme left. This is a weapon,
is a the politicalization of the Justice Department, and people
will say that is a step too far. And by
the way, that's exactly why I think this judge won't
(18:08):
do it. He can threaten it all he once, but
this is why I think he won't actually do it.
I want to pivot to what's going on in Israel
as well, real quick, because it's really important that you know,
and there is a pr stunt that is unfolding before
our very eyes. Hamas has agreed they claim to a
(18:31):
ceasefire proposal from Egypt and Katar. Now we have heard
nothing official from the Israeli government. Is what the media
initially says about this, claiming that now if Israel doesn't
agree to the terms that were put together from Egypt
and Qatar, that they're somehow now the aggressor, and this
is a pr stunt. I want you to listen to
(18:52):
how the Cut News cover this instantly. They took the
bait from Hamas, they took the bait for the terrorists,
and they ran with it on National TV.
Speaker 10 (19:00):
That's a proposal that has now been on the table
for more than a week, a proposal that the US
has been urging Hamas to take. Now, our understanding of
the most recent iteration of this proposal is that Hamas
would agree to the release of thirty three hostages from
(19:21):
the so called humanitarian category, so that is women, it
is children, it is the elderly, it is people with
serious medical conditions, and in return, Israel would agree to
a forty day ceasefire and the release of potentially thousands
of Palestinian prisoners. Now we should stress us at this point,
(19:41):
all we have is this statement from the political wing
of Hamas. We do not have the detail of what
exactly it is that they have agreed to. And there
has been pretty frenetic diplomacy over the weekends involving CIA
director Bill Burns, who has been chrisp crossing the Middle East,
starting in Egypt, flying to Katar coming here to Israel,
(20:04):
so it is possible that the framework of that deal
has changed over the weekends. It is also worth saying
that these deals are often structured in terms of first
and agreement on a broad framework and then hammering out
of the details. And as we know, Chris, the devil
is often in the detail.
Speaker 5 (20:24):
But there is positive indication.
Speaker 10 (20:28):
For the first time since that last ceasefire deal, which
lasted only a week collapsed on December one last year,
this is the first time that we have heard from
Hamas that they are prepared to accept a ceasefire proposal.
Now we have heard nothing officially from the Israeli government.
(20:48):
Israel is certainly aware of this statement from Hamas, they
are studying it, but we have not heard yet from
Prime Minister net Yahu or from Israeli official. But this
is a potentially potentially positive sign after these many, many
months of bloodshed in Gaza, and these many many painful
(21:11):
months of the hostages staying in Amas captivity.
Speaker 3 (21:15):
All right, so let's be queer what the media is
doing there.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
They're telling you that this is a deal that Israel
should take, while admitting they have no idea what's in
the deal. Did you notice that, like, oh, well, this
is a big deal, and we've got terrorists that are
agreeing to a new deal after they're the ones that
broke the ceasefire agreement last time, and this is like,
(21:39):
we're very excited about this, and this is something that
they need to do. What's in the deal, we don't know,
but they should agree to it. Israel shouldn't agree to anything,
especially they don't know what's in the damn deal. Tom Cotton,
by the way, coming out after amasays has agreed to
a ceasefire deal that makes no mention to the hostages,
because about thirty minutes after that MSNBC report, it came
(22:01):
out that there was no mention of releasing hostages in
this deal. I want you to hear what Tom Cotton
said while on Fox.
Speaker 11 (22:08):
All right, let's go.
Speaker 12 (22:09):
Ahead now and bring in Senator Tom cottony serves on
the Senate Armed Services Committee. Sir, just hearing this news
that Hamas says they have agreed to the terms of
the ceasefire without specifying what those terms are. Mighty hard
for the Israelis to agree to a ceasefire when Hamas
has not even been truthful or forthcoming about how many
(22:32):
hostages remaining captivity, and how many of them are even
alive at this point.
Speaker 11 (22:39):
Well, Jillian, we'll have to see exactly what Israel says
they received from Hamas. But this sounds suspiciously like an
info operation trying to win a pr war, because Hamas
knows it can't win a military war against Israel, nor
can you negotiate with them in good faith. As you said,
we don't even know how many of the hostages remain alive.
We hope most of them do, but I think we
(22:59):
have to accepit up the reality that many or even most,
might already be dead. Hamas won't even provide proof of
life photos or videos. It would not be hard for
Hamas to put today's newspaper in front of these hostages
and have them speak a few words into the camera,
but then that would reveal their ace cards, how many
hostages they still have alive. And Hamas is not going
to do that, and they're especially not going to do
(23:20):
that as long as Joe Biden continues to pressure Israel
to give Hamas what it wants more than all, which
is its continued existence. Israel is dedicated to Hamas's destruction.
There are four Hamas battalions left in Rafa. Every time
Joe Biden says or his senior aide say, we don't
want Israel to take down these battalions in Rafa. We
(23:40):
demand that they reopen these gates the supplies can get in.
Apparently now withholding ammunition from Israel, all it does is
make Comas less likely to agree to any kind of
hostage release because they think they're going to get from
Joe Biden's pressure what Israel is otherwise only getting when
they apply military pressure to Hamas.
Speaker 13 (24:00):
At least, according to one report, I saw Israel or
Yaho in that call did agree to reover the carb
Shalom crossing for humanitarian assistants.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
Reuters is reporting on this.
Speaker 13 (24:10):
Here's what it's said about Israel's rejection of the Hamas deal.
Israeli official says Hamas announcement appears to be a ruse
to cast Israel is the side refusing a deal. And
there's a tremendous amount of pressure on Biden too from
the left.
Speaker 5 (24:24):
Listen to what.
Speaker 13 (24:24):
Bernie Sanders posted on x He said one million people
have fled to Ratha for months. The US has warned
against an attack. Yah who ignored the warnings. Now an
assault is imminent, it will kill countless civilians. President Biden
must back his words with action and all offensive military
aid to Israel.
Speaker 3 (24:43):
Why wouldn't Hamas see an opportunity.
Speaker 11 (24:45):
Here, Well, John, that's exactly right again. As long as
Joe Biden the Democratic Party keeps putting pressure on Israel,
it makes him loss that much less likely to actually
agree to release any of these hostages. The only reason
they restarted arted negotiations a few weeks ago is because
the invasion of Ratha appeared imminent. The only time Hamas
(25:06):
has been willing to release hostages and when they is
when they are feeling intense military pressure. And every time
Joe Biden and the Democrats say that Israel should not
proceed with this war, they demand a cease fire, and
Hamas is simply emboldened. Look at what Hamas is saying
about these disgusting cesspools of anti Semitic hate on our campuses,
little gazes all around the country.
Speaker 5 (25:26):
They're celebrating them.
Speaker 11 (25:27):
Because they know that puts more pressure on Joe Biden
and the Democrats to demand that Israel capitulate as opposed
to what they should be doing. If these people want
gozens to stop suffering, they should demand that Hamas release
all the hostages and unconditionally surrender.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
Do not fall for the propaganda. That is the reason
why I played that for you, so that you understand,
do not fall for this. They are trying to act
like they want a deal and there's there's no mention
of the hostages in the deal. Why would there be
(26:05):
no mention in the deal of hostages because they're not
going to give those up. That's their quote leverage, right,
They're all in for the leverage.
Speaker 3 (26:13):
It's just pure leverage.
Speaker 1 (26:16):
And they're like, all right, we'll announce that we want
to do a deal. We will, we'll announce it. We'll
say we're going to do a deal. So what's in
the deal. We're not talking about that. No, no, no, no,
we're not going to talk about what's in the deal.
We're just going to tell you we've agreed to a deal.
What about hostages? Is that going to be a part
of the deal.
Speaker 5 (26:36):
No?
Speaker 3 (26:37):
And why are they saying this? So this is all.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
Because the Israelis said, Hey, we're going to go into
Rafla if you guys don't give us the hostages back,
and agree to a real deal. We're going in because
as you notice there, they even admit it. Yeah, that's
where they're keeping them, and that's where they are, these
battalions of Hamas fighters. So we're going to go to
the next phase of this war. And the media is
helping them eld this by saying, well, you know, they
(27:02):
agreed to a deal with with with Cutter and Jordan
to put it together, right, so it must be a
good deal.
Speaker 3 (27:08):
What's the deal? We don't know, right, We have no idea,
we have no clut all. And while all that's happening,
you have a president that's also.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Talking about flying thousands of Palestinian quote refugees into the US,
which is another massive problem here. So they're not listening
to the terrorism threat, they're not listening to the Israelis.
They're not standing out for the Israelis at all. And
(27:37):
the White House, we were told, was even thinking about
meeting with the protesters of these college campuses, which now
the White House is denying because they got busted in
the news.
Speaker 3 (27:47):
Listen to this, you can agreed.
Speaker 13 (27:50):
Parson Rocanna said that the president should and will be
out visiting these campus among the protests.
Speaker 3 (27:57):
I mean the protest. Is there any plan for him
to get out there and talk to students right now?
Speaker 1 (28:04):
I love that in Congress and roconsin you guys are
gonna the President's going to be out there visiting these protesters,
and the why is like no, no, no, no, We're
not doing that.
Speaker 3 (28:12):
Next and move on quickly, move on, No follow ups.
Let's go, no follow ups.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
Gotta move on, Gotta move on quickly, gotta move hurry, next, next,
next question. The president is in a clear situation where
he is trying to keep the extreme of his party
intact so they'll vote for him, because if they don't
show up, he screwed, and that means you're siding with
(28:36):
the terrorist sympathizers. He also has a problem when it
comes to funding. As we exposed on yesterday's show, the
President's money is coming from the same exact people that
are funding the anarchists, the anti Semites, the Nazis on
these college campuses that want to kill all the Jews,
and they want to take out Israel from the river
(28:57):
to the sea. The people that are chanting death to
America are being funded by the same millionaire and billionaires
that are writing checks to Joe Biden, So Joe Biden's
got to agree with them right now because he needs
their money for reelection.
Speaker 3 (29:11):
Never forget who this man is.
Speaker 1 (29:14):
Make sure you share this podcast please with your family
and friends, so everybody you know get to hear what
we're exposing here every day.
Speaker 3 (29:20):
And I'll see you back here tomorrow
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!