August 4, 2024 • 43 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
There is a really sad reality in this country right now,
and that is if you are a hard working American
man and you say something online that's supposed to be funny,
it can cost you your job if people find it
politically incorrect.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Right.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
There's instant accountability for anything that isn't perfect in the
private sector in this country, especially if you are a conservative.
But what is the accountability like if you're a government employee,
for example, maybe you're in charge of the secret Service
detail that's screwed up to the point where you have
(00:36):
a president of the United States of America or the
former president Donald Trump and the leader to become the
president of United States of America, you know, get shot.
How many people lose their jobs when there's a building
that is in plain sight from where the president a
perfect shot for where the president's standing on a stage,
for example, and no one's on that rooftop. What happens then?
(01:00):
Is there any accountability? The answer is very clearly no.
How do we know this because the acting director testified
before Congress and was asked like, who's been fired?
Speaker 2 (01:12):
How many people have been fired? Has anyone been fired? Right?
Speaker 1 (01:16):
Well, we don't have anyone that's been fired. And you
may say, well, hold on, I'm going to fact check you, Ben,
that's not true. The FBI director is gone.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
That's true.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
She resigned. She was not fired by the President of
the United States of America. Remember Joe Biden fires no one.
In fact, I'm not sure there's anything you can do
in this administration to get you fired. But what was
even more shocking when the new acting director went before
the Senate. I want you to hear what he said
on one basic issue, which is the most mind blowing
(01:47):
twenty nine seconds of this entire hearing.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
No information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever
passed to our personnel.
Speaker 4 (01:57):
How is that even possible?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Do you want to come to that Senator again? I
believe that information and this is probably something my colleague
can can expound on information that was in law enforcement
local law enforcement channels but did not cross over and
make it to Secret Service awareness.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Mike Lee sener. Mike Lee, you hear they're asking that
simple question. How is that even possible? Because the acting
Secret Service Director, Ronald Road Junior his quote again, no
information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever Okay,
I'm want to make sure you understand that word he
says was ever passed to our personnel. The personnel is
(02:40):
he's saying our personnel the secret Service, sener Mike Lee,
How is that even possible? Not only that, but the
FBI deputy director, and this was also someone at the hearing,
was asked another question, and I want you to hear
what the FBI director had to say.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
That director had to say. Listen to this.
Speaker 5 (03:02):
We don't have definitive evidence yet as to how he
got the rifle up there. Based on everything that's been
collected thus far, photos, video, eyewitness accounts, we do believe
he likely had.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
It in the backpack, broken down in the backpack.
Speaker 5 (03:18):
We're still assessing that. Our laboratory has taken it, looked
at the rifle itself and measured that against the backpack itself,
and if placed in this backpack, it would extend outside.
It would have been visible. We don't have anyone who
has observed him, who observed him with the backpack with
a rifle, barrel or other part of it sticking out
(03:39):
of the backpack, but the rifle would not have fit
fully into this backpack to be concealed in whole. We
have video that was recently found of the shooter walking
in a distance from his car just before six pm,
about five point fifty six. I believe in and based
(04:00):
on everything we have, we assess that he returned to
his vehicle at that time, got the backpack, and then
proceeded back to the area and to the AGR building,
and then he's observed, of course on the roof just
you know, minutes later, holding the backpack in front of him.
In fact, there's dash cam footage from a police vehicle
(04:22):
that shows him briefly traversing the roof with the backpack
in front of him, and then it's just minutes after
that that he's actually seen by the officer who I
described with the rifle on the roof. It's possible that
he broke the rifle down that we don't have conclusive
evidence of that, and took it out of the bag
on the roof in those moments before and reassembled there.
(04:45):
That's one of the theories we're looking at and working
on right now.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
We have a answer here. The FBI deputy director admits
that while the FBI quote has no definitive evidence of
how exactly the Trump shooter managed to get an AR
fifteen on the roof. He admits this shooter most likely
had in his backpack, so we can't even figure that
out right now. Now, I'm not blaming the FBI deputy
(05:09):
director for that answer. What I am saying is this
was such a colossal, just you know what up that
the question goes back to what I said at the
very beginning. How is it possible that a hard working
American man in this country can put an off color
joke out on the Internet that somebody's offended by. We
(05:30):
can find that person and make sure they get fired
from their job for that.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
But you have this big of a.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Screw up, and you have an acting Secret Service director
who says, yeah, we had no information regarding a weapon
on the roof that was ever passed to the Secret Service.
They weren't talking to local law enforcement. Yeah, we didn't
have any buy in the roof there Yet are bad? Hey,
we lost this guy out there that we didn't even
know existed because no one told us about it, because
we weren't contacting or in contact with the people on
(05:59):
the ground that we're seeing this guy.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And we don't even know how we got a gun
on a roof.
Speaker 1 (06:03):
How is it that with this many questions, basic questions
they can't answer. Has no one been fired? No one
has been fired for any of this. There is a
double standard. Do you understand just how big the double
standard is?
Speaker 2 (06:20):
Now?
Speaker 1 (06:21):
Senator Cruz and I set down to do our podcast,
and I want you to hear what he had to
say about the Secret Services, just horrific leadership and lack
of answers that they are giving about the assassination attempt
on Donald Trump. Senator, so set the stage for us
real quick. I want to play. Obviously you're back and
(06:43):
forth with the acting director as you got to ask
a lot of questions, and it didn't go well for him.
It's made a lot of headlines, but set the stage
of how important this hearing was and why it was
taking place.
Speaker 6 (06:56):
So this was yesterday morning. It was a joint hearing
of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Committee on
Homeland Security, and we had the acting director of the
Secret Service, the former director has finally resigned given the
catastrophic failures we saw, and the deputy director of the FBI.
And so it was hearing that went all morning and
(07:17):
I got to say, there was enormous concerned enormous skepticism.
We saw it from both Republicans and Democrats who were
asking about the disastrous failures of the Secret Service. And listen,
the acting director, he is somewhat better than.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
The old director.
Speaker 6 (07:36):
The old director was brazen, she was defiant. Her view
was we owe nothing, we owe no accountability, We will
not answer any question. We did everything right. To his credit,
the acting director began his testimony by saying, we screwed up.
We screwed up really badly. And the fact that there
was not an agent on the roof where the shooter
(07:58):
was was utterly indefensible. That's a step in the right direction.
That being said, he's stonewaald and he's stonewalled in a
way that was infuriating. And look, rather than meet describe
it to you, just give a listen. Here's my questioning
of the acting director of the Secret Service yesterday morning.
Thank you, miss chairman, mister Row, thank you for being here.
(08:21):
I agree with what you said at the outset that
the individual Secret Service agents demonstrated remarkable personal courage putting
their bodies in between the line of sight of the
shooter and the president. That being said, the bravery of
the line agents is quite different from the decisions of
Secret Service leadership. Secret Service leadership committed catastrophic security failures, indeed,
(08:44):
the worst security failures for the Secret Service since nineteen
eighty one, since the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan.
It is incumbent upon this committee to determine why those
security failures happened. Just after the shooting, Secret Service put
(09:05):
out an official statement from your spokesperson that says, there's
an untrue assertion that a member of the former president's
team requested additional security resources that those were rebuffed.
Speaker 4 (09:14):
This is absolutely false. In fact, we.
Speaker 6 (09:17):
Added protective resources and technology and capabilities as part of
the increased campaign travel tempo.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
Was this tweet accurate with respect to Butler, Pennsylvania. It
is accurate, sir.
Speaker 6 (09:30):
It is accurate that the Trump team had not asked
for additional security and had not been rebuffed.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
If you're talking about Butler, Pennsylvania, all assets requested were approved.
If you're talking about the media reporting of assets requested,
there were times when assets were unavailable and not able
to be filled, and those gaps were staffed with state
and local law enforcement tactical assets.
Speaker 6 (10:00):
I'm reading from the Washington Post July twentieth, twenty twenty
four secret Services denied requests for more security at Trump events.
Speaker 4 (10:06):
The opening paragraph.
Speaker 6 (10:08):
Top officials of the US Secret Service repeatedly denied requests
for additional resources and personnel sought by Donald Trump's security
detail in the two years leading up to his attempted assassination,
according to four people familiar with the requests, is that
right that repeatedly the Trump detail asked for more resources
and repeatedly Secret Service leadership turned that down.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
That is not accurate. Senator assets are requested. There's a
process that has made How many.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
Requests did the Trump team or the Trump.
Speaker 4 (10:39):
Detail ask for?
Speaker 3 (10:40):
I can get you that number in a Q.
Speaker 4 (10:42):
You don't know now, so I.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
Can speak to the ones that reported in the Washington
Post and we can go through them if you like.
Speaker 4 (10:48):
But you don't know how many requests there were.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
In general, how many requests since twenty twenty one that
the former Trump detail has made a request for asking.
Speaker 4 (10:56):
You've had two weeks.
Speaker 6 (10:57):
You had a spokesperson put something out that is fall
on its face. By the way, did you approve this
statement when it went out?
Speaker 3 (11:04):
I don't know if I did or didn't say has.
Speaker 6 (11:06):
This spokesperson is he still employed to he still have
still employed center, so he lied on behalf of the
Secret Service.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
He still has a job.
Speaker 6 (11:12):
Did your predecessor, the former director, does she approve the statement?
Speaker 3 (11:16):
Senator? Our comms team they send out statements, they do
deconflict them, and they put them out.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
Did she approve this statement?
Speaker 3 (11:26):
I don't know if she did or did not.
Speaker 4 (11:27):
And you don't know if you did either.
Speaker 3 (11:29):
I don't recall approving it, Senator.
Speaker 6 (11:32):
Will you commit to provide this committee in writing every
written request for additional resources from the Trump campaign or
the Trump Detail and every response from Secret Service?
Speaker 3 (11:44):
Senator, I will commit to providing responses and getting you
the information that you're seeking.
Speaker 6 (11:52):
Me ask you something, and who makes the decision to
deny those requests?
Speaker 4 (11:56):
Did you make that decision?
Speaker 3 (11:58):
Which requests are you talking about the any of the post?
Speaker 4 (12:01):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (12:02):
The processor is that a detail will make a request
for either staffing technical assets. That is handled between the
field office and the detail. It goes up to a
logistics office between Okay.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
So there's a bureaucracy. Is there a decision maker?
Speaker 6 (12:19):
It's not a bureaucracy, Senator, that's a person that's a
decision maker, is there one.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
Senator, It's a conversation. It's not just an absolute yet.
So let me tell you what I believe.
Speaker 6 (12:29):
I believe that the Secret Service leadership made a political
decision to deny these requests, and I think the Biden
administration has been suffused with partisan politics. Did the same
person who denied the request for additional security to President
Trump also repeatedly deny the request for security to Robert F.
Kennedy Junior, whose father was murdered by an assassin and
(12:52):
whose uncle was murdered by an assassin? Did the same
person make that decision?
Speaker 3 (12:56):
Senator? What I will tell you is that Secret Service
agents are not political.
Speaker 6 (13:00):
Okay, you're not answering. You know what leadership you're in
by the president. Leadership appointed by the president is political.
Speaker 4 (13:07):
I have a simple question, yes or no?
Speaker 6 (13:10):
Did the same person deny the Trump requests that also
denied the RFK request.
Speaker 4 (13:16):
That's a yes or no.
Speaker 3 (13:16):
Question, Senator. That is not a yes or no question.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
One.
Speaker 3 (13:21):
There is a process for a candidate nominee to receive protection.
Speaker 4 (13:24):
Is there a by Cameron?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
Does the bike stop body artisan process that they say
by cameral bipartisan process.
Speaker 4 (13:32):
What camera candidate not a congress you have a cameral.
Speaker 3 (13:36):
Mister Kennedy submitted a request that was referred over to
the Sea Pack.
Speaker 6 (13:40):
Okay, you're refusing to answer the question. Let me ask
because because the failures on that day were catastrophic. By
the way, is it true that on the day of
the of the Butler events that Secret Service transferred agent
from President Trump to the.
Speaker 3 (13:52):
First Lady H No, sir, that's not true.
Speaker 4 (13:56):
That's been widely reported.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
It's not true. There was one airport agent that actually
went on the MANPI request for the Trump detail. They
handled the arrival at the airport.
Speaker 6 (14:04):
What is what was the relative size of the Trump
detail compared to the detail that is assigned to the
president of the First Lady?
Speaker 3 (14:13):
Senator? The former president travels with a full shift just
like the president.
Speaker 6 (14:17):
What's the red so the exact same size? Is that
your testimony that the President Trump had the same size
detail that President Biden has.
Speaker 3 (14:24):
On the day of Inbuler the agent surrounding him. It
is the same number of agents surrounding the president today.
There is a difference between the sitting president who also
not only.
Speaker 6 (14:34):
And you're using President in a way that is not clear.
Is it your testimony that in Butler, Pennsylvania, Donald Trump
had the same number of agents protecting him that Joe
Biden has at a comparable event.
Speaker 3 (14:47):
I'm telling you the shift, the closet protection shift surrounded. Yes,
or you asked me, Senator, I'm trying to answer it.
Speaker 4 (14:53):
You are not answering it. Is it the same number
of agents or not?
Speaker 3 (14:57):
Senator, there is a difference between the sitting president of
the United States and what's the difference the.
Speaker 4 (15:02):
Difference two x three x five?
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Actional command authority to launch a nuclear strike?
Speaker 6 (15:07):
I'm not over assets. How many more with the president?
That's our former president. You're refusing the number of secret services.
Stop interrupting him, Stop interrupting me, go ahead, order. Refusing
to answer clear and direct questions. I am asking the
relative difference in the number of agents between those assigned
(15:28):
to Donald Trump and those assigned to Joe Biden. I'm
not asking why you assign more to Joe Biden. I'm
asking is the difference?
Speaker 4 (15:34):
Is it two x? Is it three X? Is it
five X? Is it ten X? Senator?
Speaker 3 (15:39):
I will get you that number so you can see
it with your own eyes.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
Senator number one, let's start the end. He says, he
will get you those numbers. This is not a hard question.
You asked about the difference in the details, and yet
he clearly didn't want to answer that question. Is that
because we're going to be so shocked by what that answer?
Speaker 4 (16:00):
There is so listening.
Speaker 6 (16:02):
He engaged in a very deliberate effort at deception. He said,
the close protective detail is identical. Now understand a secret
service detail that is protecting someone. You have the close
protective detail, which are the agents that actually surround the
protect tea. You also have typically a perimeter that is
(16:27):
often at three levels, the close protection, a second perimeter
level that's often where you see magnetometers, that's often where
you see people examined, and then you have the furthest
out perimeter. What he did not want to answer is
how many agents we're protecting Donald Trump? How many agents
(16:48):
typically protect Joe Biden? And by the way, how many
agents protect the first Lady Jill Biden. Now I can
tell you following up this cross examination, we have what
are called QFRS Questions.
Speaker 5 (17:00):
For the record.
Speaker 6 (17:01):
So I am submitting written questions. I am asking the
acting Director of the Secret Service. Number one? How many
agents were assigned to Donald Trump? Number two? How many
are typically assigned to Joe Biden?
Speaker 2 (17:14):
Number three?
Speaker 6 (17:14):
How many are typically assigned the First Lady. Now, to
be clear, and this is where listen, there's some strategy
in terms of how you approach across examination like this
in public hearing. I did not ask him this in
a public hearing why because he would refuse to answer.
He what he would say is, I'm not going to
disclose to you how many agents are assigned to Donald
(17:35):
Trump because that would endanger the security of the protective detail.
And that's a reasonable response. It's why I didn't ask
the question. Because there's there's something that is known as
law enforcement confidential. So when I ask him a question
for the record, listen, I have TSSCI clearance. I have
the top level of security clearance there exists in the government.
(17:59):
I want to know the exact number how many friggin
agents were assigned to Trump, how many were a signed
to the First Lady, how many were assigned to the President.
I'm not going to reveal those numbers, so when I
get them, I'm assuming he will tell me. If he
tells me, their law enforcement confidential. I'm not going to
repeat them on this podcast, but what I am going
(18:19):
to repeat is what I asked him that he refused
to answer. What is the relative difference? I understand, Joe Biden,
the sitting president's detail is larger than Trump's, but by
what margin? Is it double? Is it triple? Is it
five X?
Speaker 4 (18:37):
Is it ten x?
Speaker 6 (18:39):
He did not want to answer that question. The American
people are entitled to know that question.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Let's also go back to some other questions that were
asked of him, and I think these are important. One
of them came from one of your good friends and colleagues,
Mike Lee.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
A very simple question. Take a listen.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
No information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever
passed to our personnel. How is that even possible? Do
you want to comment to that Senator again? I believe
that information and this is probably something my colleague can
expound on, information that was in law enforcement local law
(19:20):
enforcement channels but did not cross over and make it
to secret service awareness.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
I mean, that might be one of the worst answers
I've ever heard center and the fact that he's confirming
what we were terrified of, which is no information regarding
a weapon on the roof, where the shooter on the
roof was ever passed to our personnel. Now, when he
refers to our personnel, he's clearly referring to those in
the Secret Service or the Secret Service Sniper team. And
(19:48):
Mike Lee's response is spot on right. How is that
even possible?
Speaker 6 (19:53):
Yeah, Look, this was, as I said, a catastrophic security
failure by the leadership of the Secret Service. They are
not taking responsibility for that failure. Now, I got to
tell you the way this hearing was set up, we
had five minute rounds. It is difficult to walk through
the details of what you need to get through in
five minutes. I ended up taking about seven, which meant
(20:16):
I went about two minutes.
Speaker 4 (20:17):
Over and that's always leary.
Speaker 6 (20:19):
But let me tell you some of the other questions
that I had that I was prepared to ask, But
because the acting director of the Secret Service was filibustering
to some extent, he was interrupting me to some extent,
he was belligerent to a significant extent, I didn't get
to them. But there are a whole series of questions
that need to be answers. And by the way, I'm
asking every one of these questions in writing. So in
(20:43):
a follow up to hearing, you ask written questions number one.
The shooter when he came into the rally site in Butler, Pennsylvania,
he was stopped by Secret Service at the metal detectors.
He had a rangefinder with him. That was at three pm.
Why did Secret Service not detain him? Why did they
(21:06):
not question him about the ragefinder? Now, the acting director
of the Secret Service, he said, well, it was a
recreational rangefinder. It was like a golf rangefinder that you
used to look the distance of the pin. Now you're
right now, you're with your son at the World Championship.
You probably have a golf rangefinder.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
Yes, you know what.
Speaker 6 (21:27):
You know what in Butler, Pennsylvania, they weren't playing golf.
They weren't trying to figure out where the pin was.
There is no benign or innocious explanation for why someone
shows up at a political rally with a rangefinder. So
that's question number one. Why didn't you detain him? Why
didn't you question him? Why didn't you say why the
(21:48):
hell do you have this rangefinder?
Speaker 4 (21:49):
They didn't.
Speaker 6 (21:50):
After that, two and a half hours later, at about
five point thirty, the shooter was seen. And by the way,
let me be making a side. You will notice on
this podcast, I will never ever ever say the name
of the shooter. I think people that commit heinous acts
like this are evil bastards who deserve to be forgotten
by history. So I will never I'll call him the shooter,
(22:13):
but I will not repeat his name. But the shooter
at about five point thirty was observed using the rangefinder
to measure the distance from where he was to the
podium where Donald Trump was. The next obvious question, why
did was the shooter not detain?
Speaker 4 (22:34):
Then question?
Speaker 6 (22:35):
Then he was observed by law enforcement scoping out the distance.
That is obvious and highly suspicious activity. Third question, why
were there not more agents? We had repeated requests over
and over and over again from the Trump team. We
need more agents, We need more agents. Why were they
not more agents in the outer perimeter? Why there were
they not more agents? On another question, why was there
(22:59):
not a Secret Service agent on that rooftop? It is
obvious it was about one hundred and forty yards away
from the president. That is a clean line of sight
for a sniper. That is not a difficult shot. Why
was there not a Secret Service agent? On that roof
to ensure that nobody else was there. He did not
answer that question either.
Speaker 2 (23:19):
Why let me ask you this question.
Speaker 1 (23:21):
Let me ask you this question on that because there's
a lot of people that ask me this, and I
want you to.
Speaker 2 (23:26):
Answer your perspective.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
If they didn't have a team, right, There's been arguments
when maybe they didn't have a team to cover that roof,
and so it was lack of resources.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
Assign the dam agents.
Speaker 6 (23:38):
There are four thousand Secret Service agents assign the agent.
So one of the fundamental problems is the Secret Service.
I believe I haven't had this confirmed, but here's what
I believe was happening. They were treating Donald Trump as
a former president. Now, listen, former presidents have Secret Service
protection for life. So jim Carter right now, who is
(24:02):
almost one hundred years old, Jimmy Carter has a Secret
Service detail now, to be honest, that's right, that's good.
But the threats against Jimmy Carter at this point in
his life are very low. There are just not a
lot of acting Trump. There are not a lot of
active murderers seeking to kill Jimmy Carter at the very
(24:24):
end of his natural life. We know by the way
the nation of Iran has hired assassins to murder Trump.
So you don't just have crazy ass lunatics who want
to shoot him. You literally have a nation state with
billions of dollars to fund assassins to murder him. And
what I believe the Secret Service here's what I think happened.
(24:46):
The Biden administration is political in every decision it makes.
I think they didn't want to up Trump's security detail
because if they did so, they would have to acknowledge
his legitimacy. Listen, Trump is not just a former president
who's retired and is off like painting paintings and building
(25:08):
houses for habitat for humanity. He is the Republican nominee
to b president. Right now, he is I think likely
the next president of the United States. And the Biden administration,
I believe this was all politics. The leadership of the
Secret Service did not want to up his detail because
it would be according credibility and seriousness to his campaign.
(25:31):
It is I believe, the identical reason they refused repeatedly
to give a Secret Service detailed Robert F. Kennedy Junior,
Now listen, you and I on this podcast months ago
called them out and said it is outrageous.
Speaker 4 (25:46):
Robert F.
Speaker 6 (25:47):
Kennedy Junior, his father RFK Senior was murdered when he
was running for president of the United States. His uncle
JFK was ordered as the sitting president of the United States.
RFK Junior has had multiple death threats. He has had
(26:07):
multiple attempts on his life, and I believe the reason
that the Biden administration didn't give him a Secret Service
protection is they hate the fact that another Democrat is
running against what was then Joe Biden now Kamala Harris,
and if they gave Secret Services protection to him, it
would be acknowledging he was legitimate. That is, if that
is the basis. It is a purely political decision. It
(26:31):
is indefensible and we need to get answers on it.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
Senator, I want to ask you another couple quick questions
about this, because there's so much that came out in
this hearing. One of them you mentioned a moment ago
was about Iran, and I want to play this because
I do think it just shows how shocking how unprepared
the Secret Service was, not just at this event, but
(26:56):
maybe at many other events that were supposed to be
protecting Donald Trump.
Speaker 7 (27:00):
What is the nature of the Iran threat? The threat
to former President Trump? That has been mentioned, but we
know that.
Speaker 5 (27:10):
Let me be clear here, the terrorist regime of Iran
have been targeting people our country for many, many years now.
We've talked about that here before. I want to be
clear about that. From the FBI stampoint we have, we
know publicly they've put they've targeted former President Trump, they've
(27:30):
called for his assassination.
Speaker 1 (27:33):
I mean that they know this, and they say they've
been doing this for years, and yet you let this
building just sit unattended. And I go back to the
question I asked you earlier, because it's a question many
have asked, if let's just say hypothetical center, they didn't
have the manpower hypothetical for the Secret Service, and I
have the manpower, yet it Why wouldn't they have used
those that were on the ground there locally, the squat
(27:56):
teams that were there locally to cover that roof.
Speaker 6 (27:59):
Well and to some ex so the Secret Service was
trying to pass the blame to local law enforcement. They
were saying, well, local law enforcement screwed up, and so
they said at one point that there were local swat
teams that were supposed to be monitoring that roof, and
there's been testimony that there was a local swat team
there and then they disappeared. Now they won't tell us
who it was. They won't tell us who made the
(28:20):
decision to leave that post. There has been media reports
that there was someone assigned to be on that roof
but it was too hot, so they left. We need
to know the answer to that that that is. They're
they're they're not. But what's what the Secret Service is
trying to do is pass the buck to local law enforcement.
Say local law enforcement screwed up. But I'll tell you
a couple other questions that I was going to ask
(28:40):
and that I that I am asking and writing. So
we know and we've seen the videos. In fact, we
played this on this podcast at the time. There were
multiple spectators who were outside the perimeter who saw the
shooter on the roof. They saw the shooter on the
roof with a gun with a rifle, and they began
screaming and yelling and saying there's a man on the roof,
(29:02):
a man on the roof of the gun. They began
doing that one minute and fifty seven seconds before the
shooting began. That's a lot of time they told local
law enforcement it was a sign in that outer perimeter
there's a man on the roof with a gun. Now,
one of the enormous problems is there was apparently zero
(29:26):
coordination and communication between local law enforcement and secret serpents.
So a natural question a minute in fifty seven seconds
before the shooting began, spectators observe a man on the
roof of a gun.
Speaker 4 (29:40):
Why did the local police officers who.
Speaker 6 (29:43):
Were there not immediately radio Secret Service and say there's
a shooter. Pull President Trump down. That's what you do
in that circumstance, is you pull him down. If you
have the protect tee and you know that there's a
potential sniper and it's a dangerous situation, you go up,
you pull him down, say miss President, you need to
(30:03):
come down for a second, and you just pull them
out of the harm's way and then you go and
deal with the law enforcement threat. Why did they not
do that for a minute and fifty seven second And
what appears to be the answer, but the acting director
would not answer it is there was no interoperability. There
was no communication between local law enforcement and the Secret Service. Now,
and it gets even worse, a local police officer climbed
(30:27):
up on the shoulders of another local police officer climbed
up to the roof. So when the peoplers are yelling, hey,
there's a guy with a gun, he climbed up to
see it. He climbs up to the roof. He pulls
his head up, and the shooter turns and points his
rifle at the officer's head. Now, the officer ducks because
he doesn't want to get shot in the head. And
(30:49):
the testimony was he fell about eight feet to the ground.
That happened twenty four seconds before the first shot was
Now in any ordinary insane situation, the officer as he
sees the rifle, as he sees the man on the roof,
so he knows. You're a police officer that knows there's
(31:10):
a shooter with a rifle on the roof. While the
president is talking, here's what should happen. The officer as
he's ducking down, he pulls out his radio and he says, gun, gun, gun, shooter.
Speaker 4 (31:25):
Shooter, shooter.
Speaker 6 (31:26):
And if the Secret Service here is that, they have
twenty four seconds for the detail to run up to
grab the president to pull him down under the podium.
And by the way, they also have two counter snipers.
If they get over the radio gun gun gun shooter,
shooter shooter, you've got twenty four seconds for the counter
snipers to see the sniper, see the shooter, and take
(31:47):
him out. If that happens, President Trump is not shot,
Fire Chief Corey Comparatory is not murdered. The two other
people who are severely injured or not injured, And what
appears to be the case, although the acting director of
the Secret Service would not confirm this, is there was
(32:09):
no radio interoperability. In other words, what the local police
officer saw, he could not communicate with Secret Service, and
that is utterly unacceptable and what is infuriating. There was
nothing in the hearing yesterday that suggested they've changed what
they've done. So if they're relying on local law enforcement
(32:31):
for important security and yet they have no way to
communicate with local law enforcement about what they're seeing, it
is fundamentally ineffective. And the most important question is what
are they doing to prevent this from happening again? And
there was zero answer to that question in the hearing yesterday.
Speaker 1 (32:54):
Final question on this and somebody sent this to me
earlier today and I'm just going to read it the
way it was sent to me. Quote, it's sad that
we live in the country. Now, we're a hard working,
regular guy who goes to work from seven in the
morning till nine o'clock at night or eight o'clock put
in fifty sixty hour week, will quote face more professional
(33:17):
consequences for sharing an offensive joke online than the unelected
bureaucrats task with protecting our president will face for almost
getting the leading candidate killed. Now, according to the acting
Secret Service director, he admitted to you guys yesterday that
no agent assigned to the Trump July thirteenth rally has
(33:39):
been fired. And in fact there's only the secret the
head of the Secret Service that was forced to resign
after a horrible display on Capitol Hill. But it doesn't
seem like there's been any other accountability. And that's sad,
isn't it.
Speaker 6 (33:53):
It's infuriating. So, as best I can tell, in almost
four years of Joe Biden Kamala Harris being the White House,
not a single person has been fired from any job whatsoever.
You have the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. It was an absolute debacle.
It was embarrassing, it undermined the US military. It led
(34:13):
to the deaths of thirteen servicemen and women. Nobody was fired.
There was no accountability.
Speaker 4 (34:19):
You have here the first.
Speaker 6 (34:22):
Shooting of a presidential candidate, a former president since nineteen
eighty one.
Speaker 4 (34:29):
Since Ronald Reagan. Nobody was fired.
Speaker 6 (34:32):
In any sane world, the director of the Secret Service
would have resigned that day. In any sane world, the
president would have fired the director of the Secret Service.
But there's no accountability. Now you now have the acting director.
And one question you asked me at the beginning of
this pot should the acting director be fired? And I'm
going to say, I don't know. I think the proof
(34:53):
is in the pudding. So on one level, the acting director,
whom I don't know personally, but he's been a long
time career Secret Service agent and officer. His answers demonstrated
massively more candor than the old director. The old director
(35:14):
was handpicked by Joe Biden and Joe Biden I believe
the old director was there. She used to be on
Joe Biden's Secret Service detail when he was vice president.
I think they handpicked her because they wanted the Secret
Service to cover up Joe Biden's massive mental decline, and
so they put her in that place as a political
(35:35):
decision to protect his political vulnerabilities. That's what I believe.
But she was and we talked about this in a
prior podcast. When she did on all Senators briefings, she
stonewalled she would not answer any questions. She said they
did everything perfectly except for the fact that the president
was shot. And by the way, to be clear, had
(35:55):
the bullet been a half inch to the left, Donald
Trump would be dead today. She described this as a
success for the Secret Service. It's not a success. It
is I think God's providence. I believe God turned Trump's head.
But we came within a half inch of the history
(36:17):
of the world being changed that day. So compared to
the former director, the acting director is at least admitting
they screwed it up, they did something wrong. He has
some modicum of candor. Here's my answer in terms of
whether he should be fired. How does he answer the
questions for the record that I and other senators ask him.
(36:40):
I believe the Secret Service needs radical transparency. Among the
questions I'm asking also is how many threats are directed
right now in the last year against Donald Trump, how
many threats are directed against Joe Biden? How many threat
threats are directed against the First Lady? And had to
be clear all three need to be protected. I'm not
saying that Joe Biden should not be protected, but one
(37:02):
of the public press reports is on the day of
the Butler rally, they pulled members of Trump's security detail
and put them on the First Lady's detail. Now I
don't know this, but Secret Service does. But I'm going
to venture a guess that the number of threats against
Trump versus against the First Lady, it is at least
(37:26):
one hundred x, and it wouldn't surprise me if it
is a thousand x that I think Donald Trump is
the most threatened person on the face of the planet.
And if it is the case, it is all the
more indefensible that the Secret Service political leadership would not
provide sufficient agents to keep him safe. And I'm asking
(37:47):
them how many threats against Trump? How many threats against
Joe Biden? How many threats against Joe Biden? Will see
if they answer that, you know, based on the testimony,
I'm skeptical that they will.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
Center.
Speaker 1 (37:58):
Finally, I want to move to some of this breaking
news and it is an important moment that's happening in
the Middle East right now. Israel is doing everything they
can to protect their people, and they're also having success
and taking out terrorists and terrorist leaders that have been
orchestrating many of these attacks on Israel, including taking out
(38:21):
someone in Iran in Tehran.
Speaker 6 (38:25):
Well, that's exactly right, and they're two huge stories in
terms of the war in Israel, the war against Amas
and against Hesbela. One story that broke late this afternoon
and evening is a story that says IDF kills HESBELA
commander behind brutal attack on children's soccer field. And this
(38:48):
is a Fox News story that's being reported everywhere. Fud Shuker,
whose death is unconfirmed by Hesbela, was wanted by US
government connection to the nineteen ninety in nineteen eighty three
Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, and IDF forces on Tuesday
announced the death of Fuad Shukar, the HESBELA commander who
(39:10):
was behind the drone strike that killed twelve children and
teens over the weekend. So over the weekend we saw
hesbel A fire rocket in northern Israel. It hit a
soccer field and twelve Israeli children were murdered. Continuing back
from the Fox News story, Shukar, who was also known
as haj Mohsen, joined Hesbel in nineteen eighty five. He
(39:33):
was also sought by the US government over his connection
to the nineteen eighty three suicide bombing of the Marine
Corps barracks in Beirut that killed two hundred and forty
one US service members. Shuker served as a senior advisor
to Hesbeli leader Hassan Nasrala at the time of his
death in an IDF strike on Tuesday in southern Bea route.
(39:57):
The IDF confirmed the news in a press release announced
seeing that it's fighter jets eliminated hesbela terrorist organization's most
senior military commanders, Shooker in Lebanon's capital city, now understand
this is a murderer responsible for murdering two hundred and
(40:17):
forty one US service members. This is a reason to celebrate. Listen,
the enemies of Israel are the enemies of America, the
enemies of Jews. Those who want to kill Jews want
to kill Christians, Hamas and Hesbela. They hate Israel, but
they hate America too, and This is an example where
(40:39):
Israel fighting the war, fighting the war against Hamas and
Hesbel at the same time is defeating someone who has
murdered hundreds of Americans. That is an enormous victory for
this country. And then let me say secondly, so you
and I are recording this podcast, it is eleven forty PM.
At eleven forty PM, this news has just broken.
Speaker 4 (41:01):
So listen.
Speaker 6 (41:01):
Any time you're dealing with matters of life and death
and war in peace, the news can move. So what
we're recording right now, it may be different by six
am tomorrow, but at eleven forty pm, let me read
the AP story. Iran says Hamas leader Ismail Haniya was
(41:23):
assassinated in Tehran, And let me just read the AP story.
Hamas leader Ismail Haniya was assassinated in Tehran. Iran's peramilitary
Revolutionary guards said early Wednesday. No one immediately claimed responsibility
for the assassination, but suspicion immediately fell on Israel No duh,
(41:43):
which is vowed to kill Haniya and other leaders of
Hamas over the group's October seventh attack on Israel that
killed one two hundred people and saw some two hundred
and fifty others taken hostage. Haniya was in Tehran to
attend Iran President Masud Pezeshkians swearing in on Tuesday. Iran
(42:07):
gave no details on how Haniya was killed, and the
guards said the attack was under investigation. Analysts on Iranian
state television immediately began blaming Israel for the attack. Israel
did not immediately comment, but it often doesn't when it
comes to assassinations carried out by their Massad intelligence agency.
To come up within twenty four hours with number one
(42:30):
killing the top military commander of Hesbelah responsible for murdering
twelve Israeli children in northern Israel with a rocket attack
and also responsible for two hundred and forty one American
servicemen and women being killed in Beirut in nineteen eighty three.
That's a big damn deal. And then this taking out
(42:52):
the top leadership of AMAS. It's a big, big victory
for Israel and a big, big victory for America.
Speaker 2 (43:00):
Can you share this podcast with your family and your friends.
Speaker 1 (43:02):
Please share it on social media wherever you are and
I'll see it back here tomorrow
There is a really sad reality in this country right now,
and that is if you are a hard working American
man and you say something online that's supposed to be funny,
it can cost you your job if people find it
politically incorrect.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Right.
Speaker 1 (00:16):
There's instant accountability for anything that isn't perfect in the
private sector in this country, especially if you are a conservative.
But what is the accountability like if you're a government employee,
for example, maybe you're in charge of the secret Service
detail that's screwed up to the point where you have
(00:36):
a president of the United States of America or the
former president Donald Trump and the leader to become the
president of United States of America, you know, get shot.
How many people lose their jobs when there's a building
that is in plain sight from where the president a
perfect shot for where the president's standing on a stage,
for example, and no one's on that rooftop. What happens then?
(01:00):
Is there any accountability? The answer is very clearly no.
How do we know this because the acting director testified
before Congress and was asked like, who's been fired?
Speaker 2 (01:12):
How many people have been fired? Has anyone been fired? Right?
Speaker 1 (01:16):
Well, we don't have anyone that's been fired. And you
may say, well, hold on, I'm going to fact check you, Ben,
that's not true. The FBI director is gone.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
That's true.
Speaker 1 (01:24):
She resigned. She was not fired by the President of
the United States of America. Remember Joe Biden fires no one.
In fact, I'm not sure there's anything you can do
in this administration to get you fired. But what was
even more shocking when the new acting director went before
the Senate. I want you to hear what he said
on one basic issue, which is the most mind blowing
(01:47):
twenty nine seconds of this entire hearing.
Speaker 3 (01:51):
No information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever
passed to our personnel.
Speaker 4 (01:57):
How is that even possible?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Do you want to come to that Senator again? I
believe that information and this is probably something my colleague
can can expound on information that was in law enforcement
local law enforcement channels but did not cross over and
make it to Secret Service awareness.
Speaker 1 (02:17):
Mike Lee sener. Mike Lee, you hear they're asking that
simple question. How is that even possible? Because the acting
Secret Service Director, Ronald Road Junior his quote again, no
information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever Okay,
I'm want to make sure you understand that word he
says was ever passed to our personnel. The personnel is
(02:40):
he's saying our personnel the secret Service, sener Mike Lee,
How is that even possible? Not only that, but the
FBI deputy director, and this was also someone at the hearing,
was asked another question, and I want you to hear
what the FBI director had to say.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
That director had to say. Listen to this.
Speaker 5 (03:02):
We don't have definitive evidence yet as to how he
got the rifle up there. Based on everything that's been
collected thus far, photos, video, eyewitness accounts, we do believe
he likely had.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
It in the backpack, broken down in the backpack.
Speaker 5 (03:18):
We're still assessing that. Our laboratory has taken it, looked
at the rifle itself and measured that against the backpack itself,
and if placed in this backpack, it would extend outside.
It would have been visible. We don't have anyone who
has observed him, who observed him with the backpack with
a rifle, barrel or other part of it sticking out
(03:39):
of the backpack, but the rifle would not have fit
fully into this backpack to be concealed in whole. We
have video that was recently found of the shooter walking
in a distance from his car just before six pm,
about five point fifty six. I believe in and based
(04:00):
on everything we have, we assess that he returned to
his vehicle at that time, got the backpack, and then
proceeded back to the area and to the AGR building,
and then he's observed, of course on the roof just
you know, minutes later, holding the backpack in front of him.
In fact, there's dash cam footage from a police vehicle
(04:22):
that shows him briefly traversing the roof with the backpack
in front of him, and then it's just minutes after
that that he's actually seen by the officer who I
described with the rifle on the roof. It's possible that
he broke the rifle down that we don't have conclusive
evidence of that, and took it out of the bag
on the roof in those moments before and reassembled there.
(04:45):
That's one of the theories we're looking at and working
on right now.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
We have a answer here. The FBI deputy director admits
that while the FBI quote has no definitive evidence of
how exactly the Trump shooter managed to get an AR
fifteen on the roof. He admits this shooter most likely
had in his backpack, so we can't even figure that
out right now. Now, I'm not blaming the FBI deputy
(05:09):
director for that answer. What I am saying is this
was such a colossal, just you know what up that
the question goes back to what I said at the
very beginning. How is it possible that a hard working
American man in this country can put an off color
joke out on the Internet that somebody's offended by. We
(05:30):
can find that person and make sure they get fired
from their job for that.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
But you have this big of a.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Screw up, and you have an acting Secret Service director
who says, yeah, we had no information regarding a weapon
on the roof that was ever passed to the Secret Service.
They weren't talking to local law enforcement. Yeah, we didn't
have any buy in the roof there Yet are bad? Hey,
we lost this guy out there that we didn't even
know existed because no one told us about it, because
we weren't contacting or in contact with the people on
(05:59):
the ground that we're seeing this guy.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And we don't even know how we got a gun
on a roof.
Speaker 1 (06:03):
How is it that with this many questions, basic questions
they can't answer. Has no one been fired? No one
has been fired for any of this. There is a
double standard. Do you understand just how big the double
standard is?
Speaker 2 (06:20):
Now?
Speaker 1 (06:21):
Senator Cruz and I set down to do our podcast,
and I want you to hear what he had to
say about the Secret Services, just horrific leadership and lack
of answers that they are giving about the assassination attempt
on Donald Trump. Senator, so set the stage for us
real quick. I want to play. Obviously you're back and
(06:43):
forth with the acting director as you got to ask
a lot of questions, and it didn't go well for him.
It's made a lot of headlines, but set the stage
of how important this hearing was and why it was
taking place.
Speaker 6 (06:56):
So this was yesterday morning. It was a joint hearing
of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Committee on
Homeland Security, and we had the acting director of the
Secret Service, the former director has finally resigned given the
catastrophic failures we saw, and the deputy director of the FBI.
And so it was hearing that went all morning and
(07:17):
I got to say, there was enormous concerned enormous skepticism.
We saw it from both Republicans and Democrats who were
asking about the disastrous failures of the Secret Service. And listen,
the acting director, he is somewhat better than.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
The old director.
Speaker 6 (07:36):
The old director was brazen, she was defiant. Her view
was we owe nothing, we owe no accountability, We will
not answer any question. We did everything right. To his credit,
the acting director began his testimony by saying, we screwed up.
We screwed up really badly. And the fact that there
was not an agent on the roof where the shooter
(07:58):
was was utterly indefensible. That's a step in the right direction.
That being said, he's stonewaald and he's stonewalled in a
way that was infuriating. And look, rather than meet describe
it to you, just give a listen. Here's my questioning
of the acting director of the Secret Service yesterday morning.
Thank you, miss chairman, mister Row, thank you for being here.
(08:21):
I agree with what you said at the outset that
the individual Secret Service agents demonstrated remarkable personal courage putting
their bodies in between the line of sight of the
shooter and the president. That being said, the bravery of
the line agents is quite different from the decisions of
Secret Service leadership. Secret Service leadership committed catastrophic security failures, indeed,
(08:44):
the worst security failures for the Secret Service since nineteen
eighty one, since the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan.
It is incumbent upon this committee to determine why those
security failures happened. Just after the shooting, Secret Service put
(09:05):
out an official statement from your spokesperson that says, there's
an untrue assertion that a member of the former president's
team requested additional security resources that those were rebuffed.
Speaker 4 (09:14):
This is absolutely false. In fact, we.
Speaker 6 (09:17):
Added protective resources and technology and capabilities as part of
the increased campaign travel tempo.
Speaker 3 (09:23):
Was this tweet accurate with respect to Butler, Pennsylvania. It
is accurate, sir.
Speaker 6 (09:30):
It is accurate that the Trump team had not asked
for additional security and had not been rebuffed.
Speaker 3 (09:38):
If you're talking about Butler, Pennsylvania, all assets requested were approved.
If you're talking about the media reporting of assets requested,
there were times when assets were unavailable and not able
to be filled, and those gaps were staffed with state
and local law enforcement tactical assets.
Speaker 6 (10:00):
I'm reading from the Washington Post July twentieth, twenty twenty
four secret Services denied requests for more security at Trump events.
Speaker 4 (10:06):
The opening paragraph.
Speaker 6 (10:08):
Top officials of the US Secret Service repeatedly denied requests
for additional resources and personnel sought by Donald Trump's security
detail in the two years leading up to his attempted assassination,
according to four people familiar with the requests, is that
right that repeatedly the Trump detail asked for more resources
and repeatedly Secret Service leadership turned that down.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
That is not accurate. Senator assets are requested. There's a
process that has made How many.
Speaker 6 (10:36):
Requests did the Trump team or the Trump.
Speaker 4 (10:39):
Detail ask for?
Speaker 3 (10:40):
I can get you that number in a Q.
Speaker 4 (10:42):
You don't know now, so I.
Speaker 3 (10:43):
Can speak to the ones that reported in the Washington
Post and we can go through them if you like.
Speaker 4 (10:48):
But you don't know how many requests there were.
Speaker 3 (10:51):
In general, how many requests since twenty twenty one that
the former Trump detail has made a request for asking.
Speaker 4 (10:56):
You've had two weeks.
Speaker 6 (10:57):
You had a spokesperson put something out that is fall
on its face. By the way, did you approve this
statement when it went out?
Speaker 3 (11:04):
I don't know if I did or didn't say has.
Speaker 6 (11:06):
This spokesperson is he still employed to he still have
still employed center, so he lied on behalf of the
Secret Service.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
He still has a job.
Speaker 6 (11:12):
Did your predecessor, the former director, does she approve the statement?
Speaker 3 (11:16):
Senator? Our comms team they send out statements, they do
deconflict them, and they put them out.
Speaker 4 (11:24):
Did she approve this statement?
Speaker 3 (11:26):
I don't know if she did or did not.
Speaker 4 (11:27):
And you don't know if you did either.
Speaker 3 (11:29):
I don't recall approving it, Senator.
Speaker 6 (11:32):
Will you commit to provide this committee in writing every
written request for additional resources from the Trump campaign or
the Trump Detail and every response from Secret Service?
Speaker 3 (11:44):
Senator, I will commit to providing responses and getting you
the information that you're seeking.
Speaker 6 (11:52):
Me ask you something, and who makes the decision to
deny those requests?
Speaker 4 (11:56):
Did you make that decision?
Speaker 3 (11:58):
Which requests are you talking about the any of the post?
Speaker 4 (12:01):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (12:02):
The processor is that a detail will make a request
for either staffing technical assets. That is handled between the
field office and the detail. It goes up to a
logistics office between Okay.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
So there's a bureaucracy. Is there a decision maker?
Speaker 6 (12:19):
It's not a bureaucracy, Senator, that's a person that's a
decision maker, is there one.
Speaker 3 (12:24):
Senator, It's a conversation. It's not just an absolute yet.
So let me tell you what I believe.
Speaker 6 (12:29):
I believe that the Secret Service leadership made a political
decision to deny these requests, and I think the Biden
administration has been suffused with partisan politics. Did the same
person who denied the request for additional security to President
Trump also repeatedly deny the request for security to Robert F.
Kennedy Junior, whose father was murdered by an assassin and
(12:52):
whose uncle was murdered by an assassin? Did the same
person make that decision?
Speaker 3 (12:56):
Senator? What I will tell you is that Secret Service
agents are not political.
Speaker 6 (13:00):
Okay, you're not answering. You know what leadership you're in
by the president. Leadership appointed by the president is political.
Speaker 4 (13:07):
I have a simple question, yes or no?
Speaker 6 (13:10):
Did the same person deny the Trump requests that also
denied the RFK request.
Speaker 4 (13:16):
That's a yes or no.
Speaker 3 (13:16):
Question, Senator. That is not a yes or no question.
Speaker 4 (13:20):
One.
Speaker 3 (13:21):
There is a process for a candidate nominee to receive protection.
Speaker 4 (13:24):
Is there a by Cameron?
Speaker 3 (13:26):
Does the bike stop body artisan process that they say
by cameral bipartisan process.
Speaker 4 (13:32):
What camera candidate not a congress you have a cameral.
Speaker 3 (13:36):
Mister Kennedy submitted a request that was referred over to
the Sea Pack.
Speaker 6 (13:40):
Okay, you're refusing to answer the question. Let me ask
because because the failures on that day were catastrophic. By
the way, is it true that on the day of
the of the Butler events that Secret Service transferred agent
from President Trump to the.
Speaker 3 (13:52):
First Lady H No, sir, that's not true.
Speaker 4 (13:56):
That's been widely reported.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
It's not true. There was one airport agent that actually
went on the MANPI request for the Trump detail. They
handled the arrival at the airport.
Speaker 6 (14:04):
What is what was the relative size of the Trump
detail compared to the detail that is assigned to the
president of the First Lady?
Speaker 3 (14:13):
Senator? The former president travels with a full shift just
like the president.
Speaker 6 (14:17):
What's the red so the exact same size? Is that
your testimony that the President Trump had the same size
detail that President Biden has.
Speaker 3 (14:24):
On the day of Inbuler the agent surrounding him. It
is the same number of agents surrounding the president today.
There is a difference between the sitting president who also
not only.
Speaker 6 (14:34):
And you're using President in a way that is not clear.
Is it your testimony that in Butler, Pennsylvania, Donald Trump
had the same number of agents protecting him that Joe
Biden has at a comparable event.
Speaker 3 (14:47):
I'm telling you the shift, the closet protection shift surrounded. Yes,
or you asked me, Senator, I'm trying to answer it.
Speaker 4 (14:53):
You are not answering it. Is it the same number
of agents or not?
Speaker 3 (14:57):
Senator, there is a difference between the sitting president of
the United States and what's the difference the.
Speaker 4 (15:02):
Difference two x three x five?
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Actional command authority to launch a nuclear strike?
Speaker 6 (15:07):
I'm not over assets. How many more with the president?
That's our former president. You're refusing the number of secret services.
Stop interrupting him, Stop interrupting me, go ahead, order. Refusing
to answer clear and direct questions. I am asking the
relative difference in the number of agents between those assigned
(15:28):
to Donald Trump and those assigned to Joe Biden. I'm
not asking why you assign more to Joe Biden. I'm
asking is the difference?
Speaker 4 (15:34):
Is it two x? Is it three X? Is it
five X? Is it ten X? Senator?
Speaker 3 (15:39):
I will get you that number so you can see
it with your own eyes.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
Senator number one, let's start the end. He says, he
will get you those numbers. This is not a hard question.
You asked about the difference in the details, and yet
he clearly didn't want to answer that question. Is that
because we're going to be so shocked by what that answer?
Speaker 4 (16:00):
There is so listening.
Speaker 6 (16:02):
He engaged in a very deliberate effort at deception. He said,
the close protective detail is identical. Now understand a secret
service detail that is protecting someone. You have the close
protective detail, which are the agents that actually surround the
protect tea. You also have typically a perimeter that is
(16:27):
often at three levels, the close protection, a second perimeter
level that's often where you see magnetometers, that's often where
you see people examined, and then you have the furthest
out perimeter. What he did not want to answer is
how many agents we're protecting Donald Trump? How many agents
(16:48):
typically protect Joe Biden? And by the way, how many
agents protect the first Lady Jill Biden. Now I can
tell you following up this cross examination, we have what
are called QFRS Questions.
Speaker 5 (17:00):
For the record.
Speaker 6 (17:01):
So I am submitting written questions. I am asking the
acting Director of the Secret Service. Number one? How many
agents were assigned to Donald Trump? Number two? How many
are typically assigned to Joe Biden?
Speaker 2 (17:14):
Number three?
Speaker 6 (17:14):
How many are typically assigned the First Lady. Now, to
be clear, and this is where listen, there's some strategy
in terms of how you approach across examination like this
in public hearing. I did not ask him this in
a public hearing why because he would refuse to answer.
He what he would say is, I'm not going to
disclose to you how many agents are assigned to Donald
(17:35):
Trump because that would endanger the security of the protective detail.
And that's a reasonable response. It's why I didn't ask
the question. Because there's there's something that is known as
law enforcement confidential. So when I ask him a question
for the record, listen, I have TSSCI clearance. I have
the top level of security clearance there exists in the government.
(17:59):
I want to know the exact number how many friggin
agents were assigned to Trump, how many were a signed
to the First Lady, how many were assigned to the President.
I'm not going to reveal those numbers, so when I
get them, I'm assuming he will tell me. If he
tells me, their law enforcement confidential. I'm not going to
repeat them on this podcast, but what I am going
(18:19):
to repeat is what I asked him that he refused
to answer. What is the relative difference? I understand, Joe Biden,
the sitting president's detail is larger than Trump's, but by
what margin? Is it double? Is it triple? Is it
five X?
Speaker 4 (18:37):
Is it ten x?
Speaker 6 (18:39):
He did not want to answer that question. The American
people are entitled to know that question.
Speaker 1 (18:45):
Let's also go back to some other questions that were
asked of him, and I think these are important. One
of them came from one of your good friends and colleagues,
Mike Lee.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
A very simple question. Take a listen.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
No information regarding a weapon on the roof was ever
passed to our personnel. How is that even possible? Do
you want to comment to that Senator again? I believe
that information and this is probably something my colleague can
expound on, information that was in law enforcement local law
(19:20):
enforcement channels but did not cross over and make it
to secret service awareness.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
I mean, that might be one of the worst answers
I've ever heard center and the fact that he's confirming
what we were terrified of, which is no information regarding
a weapon on the roof, where the shooter on the
roof was ever passed to our personnel. Now, when he
refers to our personnel, he's clearly referring to those in
the Secret Service or the Secret Service Sniper team. And
(19:48):
Mike Lee's response is spot on right. How is that
even possible?
Speaker 6 (19:53):
Yeah, Look, this was, as I said, a catastrophic security
failure by the leadership of the Secret Service. They are
not taking responsibility for that failure. Now, I got to
tell you the way this hearing was set up, we
had five minute rounds. It is difficult to walk through
the details of what you need to get through in
five minutes. I ended up taking about seven, which meant
(20:16):
I went about two minutes.
Speaker 4 (20:17):
Over and that's always leary.
Speaker 6 (20:19):
But let me tell you some of the other questions
that I had that I was prepared to ask, But
because the acting director of the Secret Service was filibustering
to some extent, he was interrupting me to some extent,
he was belligerent to a significant extent, I didn't get
to them. But there are a whole series of questions
that need to be answers. And by the way, I'm
asking every one of these questions in writing. So in
(20:43):
a follow up to hearing, you ask written questions number one.
The shooter when he came into the rally site in Butler, Pennsylvania,
he was stopped by Secret Service at the metal detectors.
He had a rangefinder with him. That was at three pm.
Why did Secret Service not detain him? Why did they
(21:06):
not question him about the ragefinder? Now, the acting director
of the Secret Service, he said, well, it was a
recreational rangefinder. It was like a golf rangefinder that you
used to look the distance of the pin. Now you're
right now, you're with your son at the World Championship.
You probably have a golf rangefinder.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
Yes, you know what.
Speaker 6 (21:27):
You know what in Butler, Pennsylvania, they weren't playing golf.
They weren't trying to figure out where the pin was.
There is no benign or innocious explanation for why someone
shows up at a political rally with a rangefinder. So
that's question number one. Why didn't you detain him? Why
didn't you question him? Why didn't you say why the
(21:48):
hell do you have this rangefinder?
Speaker 4 (21:49):
They didn't.
Speaker 6 (21:50):
After that, two and a half hours later, at about
five point thirty, the shooter was seen. And by the way,
let me be making a side. You will notice on
this podcast, I will never ever ever say the name
of the shooter. I think people that commit heinous acts
like this are evil bastards who deserve to be forgotten
by history. So I will never I'll call him the shooter,
(22:13):
but I will not repeat his name. But the shooter
at about five point thirty was observed using the rangefinder
to measure the distance from where he was to the
podium where Donald Trump was. The next obvious question, why
did was the shooter not detain?
Speaker 4 (22:34):
Then question?
Speaker 6 (22:35):
Then he was observed by law enforcement scoping out the distance.
That is obvious and highly suspicious activity. Third question, why
were there not more agents? We had repeated requests over
and over and over again from the Trump team. We
need more agents, We need more agents. Why were they
not more agents in the outer perimeter? Why there were
they not more agents? On another question, why was there
(22:59):
not a Secret Service agent on that rooftop? It is
obvious it was about one hundred and forty yards away
from the president. That is a clean line of sight
for a sniper. That is not a difficult shot. Why
was there not a Secret Service agent? On that roof
to ensure that nobody else was there. He did not
answer that question either.
Speaker 2 (23:19):
Why let me ask you this question.
Speaker 1 (23:21):
Let me ask you this question on that because there's
a lot of people that ask me this, and I
want you to.
Speaker 2 (23:26):
Answer your perspective.
Speaker 1 (23:29):
If they didn't have a team, right, There's been arguments
when maybe they didn't have a team to cover that roof,
and so it was lack of resources.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
Assign the dam agents.
Speaker 6 (23:38):
There are four thousand Secret Service agents assign the agent.
So one of the fundamental problems is the Secret Service.
I believe I haven't had this confirmed, but here's what
I believe was happening. They were treating Donald Trump as
a former president. Now, listen, former presidents have Secret Service
protection for life. So jim Carter right now, who is
(24:02):
almost one hundred years old, Jimmy Carter has a Secret
Service detail now, to be honest, that's right, that's good.
But the threats against Jimmy Carter at this point in
his life are very low. There are just not a
lot of acting Trump. There are not a lot of
active murderers seeking to kill Jimmy Carter at the very
(24:24):
end of his natural life. We know by the way
the nation of Iran has hired assassins to murder Trump.
So you don't just have crazy ass lunatics who want
to shoot him. You literally have a nation state with
billions of dollars to fund assassins to murder him. And
what I believe the Secret Service here's what I think happened.
(24:46):
The Biden administration is political in every decision it makes.
I think they didn't want to up Trump's security detail
because if they did so, they would have to acknowledge
his legitimacy. Listen, Trump is not just a former president
who's retired and is off like painting paintings and building
(25:08):
houses for habitat for humanity. He is the Republican nominee
to b president. Right now, he is I think likely
the next president of the United States. And the Biden administration,
I believe this was all politics. The leadership of the
Secret Service did not want to up his detail because
it would be according credibility and seriousness to his campaign.
(25:31):
It is I believe, the identical reason they refused repeatedly
to give a Secret Service detailed Robert F. Kennedy Junior,
Now listen, you and I on this podcast months ago
called them out and said it is outrageous.
Speaker 4 (25:46):
Robert F.
Speaker 6 (25:47):
Kennedy Junior, his father RFK Senior was murdered when he
was running for president of the United States. His uncle
JFK was ordered as the sitting president of the United States.
RFK Junior has had multiple death threats. He has had
(26:07):
multiple attempts on his life, and I believe the reason
that the Biden administration didn't give him a Secret Service
protection is they hate the fact that another Democrat is
running against what was then Joe Biden now Kamala Harris,
and if they gave Secret Services protection to him, it
would be acknowledging he was legitimate. That is, if that
is the basis. It is a purely political decision. It
(26:31):
is indefensible and we need to get answers on it.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
Senator, I want to ask you another couple quick questions
about this, because there's so much that came out in
this hearing. One of them you mentioned a moment ago
was about Iran, and I want to play this because
I do think it just shows how shocking how unprepared
the Secret Service was, not just at this event, but
(26:56):
maybe at many other events that were supposed to be
protecting Donald Trump.
Speaker 7 (27:00):
What is the nature of the Iran threat? The threat
to former President Trump? That has been mentioned, but we
know that.
Speaker 5 (27:10):
Let me be clear here, the terrorist regime of Iran
have been targeting people our country for many, many years now.
We've talked about that here before. I want to be
clear about that. From the FBI stampoint we have, we
know publicly they've put they've targeted former President Trump, they've
(27:30):
called for his assassination.
Speaker 1 (27:33):
I mean that they know this, and they say they've
been doing this for years, and yet you let this
building just sit unattended. And I go back to the
question I asked you earlier, because it's a question many
have asked, if let's just say hypothetical center, they didn't
have the manpower hypothetical for the Secret Service, and I
have the manpower, yet it Why wouldn't they have used
those that were on the ground there locally, the squat
(27:56):
teams that were there locally to cover that roof.
Speaker 6 (27:59):
Well and to some ex so the Secret Service was
trying to pass the blame to local law enforcement. They
were saying, well, local law enforcement screwed up, and so
they said at one point that there were local swat
teams that were supposed to be monitoring that roof, and
there's been testimony that there was a local swat team
there and then they disappeared. Now they won't tell us
who it was. They won't tell us who made the
(28:20):
decision to leave that post. There has been media reports
that there was someone assigned to be on that roof
but it was too hot, so they left. We need
to know the answer to that that that is. They're
they're they're not. But what's what the Secret Service is
trying to do is pass the buck to local law enforcement.
Say local law enforcement screwed up. But I'll tell you
a couple other questions that I was going to ask
(28:40):
and that I that I am asking and writing. So
we know and we've seen the videos. In fact, we
played this on this podcast at the time. There were
multiple spectators who were outside the perimeter who saw the
shooter on the roof. They saw the shooter on the
roof with a gun with a rifle, and they began
screaming and yelling and saying there's a man on the roof,
(29:02):
a man on the roof of the gun. They began
doing that one minute and fifty seven seconds before the
shooting began. That's a lot of time they told local
law enforcement it was a sign in that outer perimeter
there's a man on the roof with a gun. Now,
one of the enormous problems is there was apparently zero
(29:26):
coordination and communication between local law enforcement and secret serpents.
So a natural question a minute in fifty seven seconds
before the shooting began, spectators observe a man on the
roof of a gun.
Speaker 4 (29:40):
Why did the local police officers who.
Speaker 6 (29:43):
Were there not immediately radio Secret Service and say there's
a shooter. Pull President Trump down. That's what you do
in that circumstance, is you pull him down. If you
have the protect tee and you know that there's a
potential sniper and it's a dangerous situation, you go up,
you pull him down, say miss President, you need to
(30:03):
come down for a second, and you just pull them
out of the harm's way and then you go and
deal with the law enforcement threat. Why did they not
do that for a minute and fifty seven second And
what appears to be the answer, but the acting director
would not answer it is there was no interoperability. There
was no communication between local law enforcement and the Secret Service. Now,
and it gets even worse, a local police officer climbed
(30:27):
up on the shoulders of another local police officer climbed
up to the roof. So when the peoplers are yelling, hey,
there's a guy with a gun, he climbed up to
see it. He climbs up to the roof. He pulls
his head up, and the shooter turns and points his
rifle at the officer's head. Now, the officer ducks because
he doesn't want to get shot in the head. And
(30:49):
the testimony was he fell about eight feet to the ground.
That happened twenty four seconds before the first shot was
Now in any ordinary insane situation, the officer as he
sees the rifle, as he sees the man on the roof,
so he knows. You're a police officer that knows there's
(31:10):
a shooter with a rifle on the roof. While the
president is talking, here's what should happen. The officer as
he's ducking down, he pulls out his radio and he says, gun, gun, gun, shooter.
Speaker 4 (31:25):
Shooter, shooter.
Speaker 6 (31:26):
And if the Secret Service here is that, they have
twenty four seconds for the detail to run up to
grab the president to pull him down under the podium.
And by the way, they also have two counter snipers.
If they get over the radio gun gun gun shooter,
shooter shooter, you've got twenty four seconds for the counter
snipers to see the sniper, see the shooter, and take
(31:47):
him out. If that happens, President Trump is not shot,
Fire Chief Corey Comparatory is not murdered. The two other
people who are severely injured or not injured, And what
appears to be the case, although the acting director of
the Secret Service would not confirm this, is there was
(32:09):
no radio interoperability. In other words, what the local police
officer saw, he could not communicate with Secret Service, and
that is utterly unacceptable and what is infuriating. There was
nothing in the hearing yesterday that suggested they've changed what
they've done. So if they're relying on local law enforcement
(32:31):
for important security and yet they have no way to
communicate with local law enforcement about what they're seeing, it
is fundamentally ineffective. And the most important question is what
are they doing to prevent this from happening again? And
there was zero answer to that question in the hearing yesterday.
Speaker 1 (32:54):
Final question on this and somebody sent this to me
earlier today and I'm just going to read it the
way it was sent to me. Quote, it's sad that
we live in the country. Now, we're a hard working,
regular guy who goes to work from seven in the
morning till nine o'clock at night or eight o'clock put
in fifty sixty hour week, will quote face more professional
(33:17):
consequences for sharing an offensive joke online than the unelected
bureaucrats task with protecting our president will face for almost
getting the leading candidate killed. Now, according to the acting
Secret Service director, he admitted to you guys yesterday that
no agent assigned to the Trump July thirteenth rally has
(33:39):
been fired. And in fact there's only the secret the
head of the Secret Service that was forced to resign
after a horrible display on Capitol Hill. But it doesn't
seem like there's been any other accountability. And that's sad,
isn't it.
Speaker 6 (33:53):
It's infuriating. So, as best I can tell, in almost
four years of Joe Biden Kamala Harris being the White House,
not a single person has been fired from any job whatsoever.
You have the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal. It was an absolute debacle.
It was embarrassing, it undermined the US military. It led
(34:13):
to the deaths of thirteen servicemen and women. Nobody was fired.
There was no accountability.
Speaker 4 (34:19):
You have here the first.
Speaker 6 (34:22):
Shooting of a presidential candidate, a former president since nineteen
eighty one.
Speaker 4 (34:29):
Since Ronald Reagan. Nobody was fired.
Speaker 6 (34:32):
In any sane world, the director of the Secret Service
would have resigned that day. In any sane world, the
president would have fired the director of the Secret Service.
But there's no accountability. Now you now have the acting director.
And one question you asked me at the beginning of
this pot should the acting director be fired? And I'm
going to say, I don't know. I think the proof
(34:53):
is in the pudding. So on one level, the acting director,
whom I don't know personally, but he's been a long
time career Secret Service agent and officer. His answers demonstrated
massively more candor than the old director. The old director
(35:14):
was handpicked by Joe Biden and Joe Biden I believe
the old director was there. She used to be on
Joe Biden's Secret Service detail when he was vice president.
I think they handpicked her because they wanted the Secret
Service to cover up Joe Biden's massive mental decline, and
so they put her in that place as a political
(35:35):
decision to protect his political vulnerabilities. That's what I believe.
But she was and we talked about this in a
prior podcast. When she did on all Senators briefings, she
stonewalled she would not answer any questions. She said they
did everything perfectly except for the fact that the president
was shot. And by the way, to be clear, had
(35:55):
the bullet been a half inch to the left, Donald
Trump would be dead today. She described this as a
success for the Secret Service. It's not a success. It
is I think God's providence. I believe God turned Trump's head.
But we came within a half inch of the history
(36:17):
of the world being changed that day. So compared to
the former director, the acting director is at least admitting
they screwed it up, they did something wrong. He has
some modicum of candor. Here's my answer in terms of
whether he should be fired. How does he answer the
questions for the record that I and other senators ask him.
(36:40):
I believe the Secret Service needs radical transparency. Among the
questions I'm asking also is how many threats are directed
right now in the last year against Donald Trump, how
many threats are directed against Joe Biden? How many threat
threats are directed against the First Lady? And had to
be clear all three need to be protected. I'm not
saying that Joe Biden should not be protected, but one
(37:02):
of the public press reports is on the day of
the Butler rally, they pulled members of Trump's security detail
and put them on the First Lady's detail. Now I
don't know this, but Secret Service does. But I'm going
to venture a guess that the number of threats against
Trump versus against the First Lady, it is at least
(37:26):
one hundred x, and it wouldn't surprise me if it
is a thousand x that I think Donald Trump is
the most threatened person on the face of the planet.
And if it is the case, it is all the
more indefensible that the Secret Service political leadership would not
provide sufficient agents to keep him safe. And I'm asking
(37:47):
them how many threats against Trump? How many threats against
Joe Biden? How many threats against Joe Biden? Will see
if they answer that, you know, based on the testimony,
I'm skeptical that they will.
Speaker 2 (37:58):
Center.
Speaker 1 (37:58):
Finally, I want to move to some of this breaking
news and it is an important moment that's happening in
the Middle East right now. Israel is doing everything they
can to protect their people, and they're also having success
and taking out terrorists and terrorist leaders that have been
orchestrating many of these attacks on Israel, including taking out
(38:21):
someone in Iran in Tehran.
Speaker 6 (38:25):
Well, that's exactly right, and they're two huge stories in
terms of the war in Israel, the war against Amas
and against Hesbela. One story that broke late this afternoon
and evening is a story that says IDF kills HESBELA
commander behind brutal attack on children's soccer field. And this
(38:48):
is a Fox News story that's being reported everywhere. Fud Shuker,
whose death is unconfirmed by Hesbela, was wanted by US
government connection to the nineteen ninety in nineteen eighty three
Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, and IDF forces on Tuesday
announced the death of Fuad Shukar, the HESBELA commander who
(39:10):
was behind the drone strike that killed twelve children and
teens over the weekend. So over the weekend we saw
hesbel A fire rocket in northern Israel. It hit a
soccer field and twelve Israeli children were murdered. Continuing back
from the Fox News story, Shukar, who was also known
as haj Mohsen, joined Hesbel in nineteen eighty five. He
(39:33):
was also sought by the US government over his connection
to the nineteen eighty three suicide bombing of the Marine
Corps barracks in Beirut that killed two hundred and forty
one US service members. Shuker served as a senior advisor
to Hesbeli leader Hassan Nasrala at the time of his
death in an IDF strike on Tuesday in southern Bea route.
(39:57):
The IDF confirmed the news in a press release announced
seeing that it's fighter jets eliminated hesbela terrorist organization's most
senior military commanders, Shooker in Lebanon's capital city, now understand
this is a murderer responsible for murdering two hundred and
(40:17):
forty one US service members. This is a reason to celebrate. Listen,
the enemies of Israel are the enemies of America, the
enemies of Jews. Those who want to kill Jews want
to kill Christians, Hamas and Hesbela. They hate Israel, but
they hate America too, and This is an example where
(40:39):
Israel fighting the war, fighting the war against Hamas and
Hesbel at the same time is defeating someone who has
murdered hundreds of Americans. That is an enormous victory for
this country. And then let me say secondly, so you
and I are recording this podcast, it is eleven forty PM.
At eleven forty PM, this news has just broken.
Speaker 4 (41:01):
So listen.
Speaker 6 (41:01):
Any time you're dealing with matters of life and death
and war in peace, the news can move. So what
we're recording right now, it may be different by six
am tomorrow, but at eleven forty pm, let me read
the AP story. Iran says Hamas leader Ismail Haniya was
(41:23):
assassinated in Tehran, And let me just read the AP story.
Hamas leader Ismail Haniya was assassinated in Tehran. Iran's peramilitary
Revolutionary guards said early Wednesday. No one immediately claimed responsibility
for the assassination, but suspicion immediately fell on Israel No duh,
(41:43):
which is vowed to kill Haniya and other leaders of
Hamas over the group's October seventh attack on Israel that
killed one two hundred people and saw some two hundred
and fifty others taken hostage. Haniya was in Tehran to
attend Iran President Masud Pezeshkians swearing in on Tuesday. Iran
(42:07):
gave no details on how Haniya was killed, and the
guards said the attack was under investigation. Analysts on Iranian
state television immediately began blaming Israel for the attack. Israel
did not immediately comment, but it often doesn't when it
comes to assassinations carried out by their Massad intelligence agency.
To come up within twenty four hours with number one
(42:30):
killing the top military commander of Hesbelah responsible for murdering
twelve Israeli children in northern Israel with a rocket attack
and also responsible for two hundred and forty one American
servicemen and women being killed in Beirut in nineteen eighty three.
That's a big damn deal. And then this taking out
(42:52):
the top leadership of AMAS. It's a big, big victory
for Israel and a big, big victory for America.
Speaker 2 (43:00):
Can you share this podcast with your family and your friends.
Speaker 1 (43:02):
Please share it on social media wherever you are and
I'll see it 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!