August 5, 2025 • 45 mins
A handful of Democrats are facing arrest as a result of various different stories. From those involved in the Russia Hoax to Texas Democrats, there's a lot to cover here. But first, Jesse Kelly dives into the culture war, Sydney Sweeney and just how crazy things got the last time Democrats were in power. Special guests include Hans Mahncke, Wade Miller and William A. Jacobson.
I'm Right with Jesse Kelly on The First TV | 8-4-25
Pure Talk: Go to https://www.puretalk.com/JESSETV to make the switch
The Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club: Go to https://FarmFresh246.com & get your first $39 bottle free with no obligation or commitment
Choq: Visit https://choq.com/jessetv for a 17.76% discount on your CHOQ subscription for life
Follow The Jesse Kelly Show on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheJesseKellyShow
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 (00:02):
We're gonna take a walk down memory lane. We're gonna
talk about redistricting. We're gonna make fun of Elizabeth Warren.
That's always a good time. We're gonna honor the fallen.
What a night tonight, and I'm right, okay, time for
(00:23):
our least favorite thing on this show. I know, I
know it's hard, I know it's heavy, but you know
it's something that matters to us. I know it matters
to you. Honoring the fallen, the fallen who die in training,
who die in service to this country, not charging a
machine gun nest in time of war, but serving this
(00:44):
country and giving their lives for it. It is a
dangerous thing to serve in the United States military, and
it has to be. And the USS George Washington was
off the coast of Australia and uh Airman Jose Antonio
Rivera Lynch the fourth went over the side and we
(01:04):
lost them to the deep. So say a prayer for him,
Say a prayer for his family. You can't imagine the
agony they're going through right now. But that young man
served his country honorably and gave his life for his
country the same way anybody did in a war. Anywhere,
and we honor his sacrifice. Now we are gonna get
(01:28):
to this redistricting talk, because that can be really politically
wonky and it can really go over a lot of
people's heads, myself included. So we're gonna dig into that.
We will. We'll talk a bit more about the Russia
Hoak stuff keeps getting worse for the communists. But I
wanted to walk down memory lane really quickly. And this
(01:48):
may be a little painful. Maybe it'll make you sad,
maybe it'll make you angry, but none of that, None
of That's why I'm doing this. We're gonna walk down
how insane our culture. God, because we went through a
period of time when Communists achieved ultimate cultural power in
this country in every way, from the presidency to corporations
(02:11):
to everything. They achieved ultimate political power, and then they
proceeded to make everybody miserable, to make everybody hate each other,
to destroy as much as they could destroy. And so
when we were under assault like that, when the Communists
were battering down the gates like that of our culture,
that was a time of revelation for many people. Hopefully
(02:33):
it was the time of revelation for you, even revelation
about yourself. What I mean by that is when the
evil forces have controlled everything and they're attacking everything, you
will find out who's a coward and who's courageous. You
will find out who will stand and who will falter.
You really find out who the evil people, the evil
entities are. And look, I'm not going to talk about
(02:56):
the freaking Sydney Sweeney stuff, which is so overblown and
done by now. It's brutal, it's been going on for
a week. But let's do Okay, we'll play this very
briefly here. Why did this make the left so angry
that there's video out today of them screaming at her.
(03:17):
I'm not here to tell you to buy American Eagle Chance,
and I definitely won't say that they're the most comfortable chance.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
I've ever worn, or that they make your butt look amazing.
I'm gonna need to do that.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
But if you said that you want to buy the jeans,
I'm not gonna stop you. But as we're clear, this
is not me telling you to buy American Egle Chance.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Sidny Sweeney has very keen You.
Speaker 4 (03:45):
See what I did there?
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Right? Okay? The jeans at and this is this is
the thing. This is gonna be generatingal what I'm about
to say. I am not ancient. I'm certainly getting older.
Couldn't sleep last night. I hurt my neck anyway, in
(04:07):
im sleeping, I hurt my neck. But I'm forty four.
That ad you just saw, if you're young enough, you
don't realize that was every fashion ad ever for my
entire life. And it didn't you know what. I take
that back. It wasn't every fashion ad. It was every ad.
(04:27):
That's just kind of how they did it. Because people,
all human beings, men, women, everybody, we like to look
at beauty, beautiful nature, beautiful mountains, beautiful rivers, beautiful people
with human beings like to take in beauty. So it
doesn't matter whether you're selling jeans or gatorade, or you're
down at the local Mazda dealership. You find a handsome
(04:50):
man a pretty woman, and you dress him up and
you say, hey, look at this pretty girl. She wants
you to come buy a Mazda. Don't you want to
buy a Mazda? And that was just advertising, and it
has always been this way all of human history. That's
what you do. You find somebody who looks good and
you use their appearance to make your product or service
whatever that is more appealing, and that's just human nature. Honestly,
(05:14):
the ad we just played is just the most benign
thing in the world. What is it?
Speaker 5 (05:20):
So?
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Why would they react like this?
Speaker 6 (05:22):
Should we be surprised that a company whose name is
literally American Eagle is making fascist propaganda like this? Probably not,
but it's still really shocking. Like a blonde haired, blue eyed,
white woman is talking about her good genes like that
is not the propaganda.
Speaker 7 (05:43):
I really wasn't going to weigh in on this, but
here we go. It is so difficult to grow up
as a person of color, specifically a woman, and view
yourself as beautiful in any sense of the word. Growing
up in this country. I remember growing up in a
predominantly white community, wishing myself out of this body, out
of this culture, take my name if it meant that
(06:03):
I could wake up blonde haired and blue eyed, never
having to explain who I am or worry.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
About being accepted.
Speaker 7 (06:10):
That is why this American Eagle ad with Sidney Sweeney
is especially off putting.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
What we had articles from MSNBC Good Morning America was
talking about it. ESPN. One writer said he was mortified
by the ad. Okay, but what happened, well, this is
this is where we're going to rewind. See what happened
was ugly people took over our culture. Ugly on the inside.
(06:38):
Most of them were ugly on the outside too, but
ugly on the inside. Communists, communists, they hate beauty of
any kind. It doesn't have to be physical beauty on
a man or a woman, or of any kind. If
something is wonderful, beautiful, if something is good, the Communists
views that as a threat because the Communist is demonic.
(07:02):
So anything that is good. There could be a mountain.
If it's a beautiful mountain, tear it down. If it's
a beautiful woman, run her out of television. No, grab
some fat heffer and stuffer in some jeans and then
tell everybody it's beautiful. It could be a beautiful institution,
the boy scouts, Hey, can we make this gaear? It
could be whatever, a beautiful, a wonderful company, a good company,
(07:23):
whatever it is. If the Communist sees beauty, success, greatness,
the Communist endeavors to tear it down. Now normally those
deranged ugly freaks are held on the street corner and
made fun of the way they should be. But for
a period of time in this country, they took over everything.
Our buddy Banci at Red State pointed something out a
(07:46):
tweet from the NHL, the National Hockey League, a tweet
from the NHL which says, by the way, they've not
deleted it, trans women are women, trans men are men,
non binary ident t is real. This is why we're
gonna take this little walker or we're taking this little
walk down memory lane. How insane would that be? If
(08:10):
any human being, anyone of any age, a race, and whatever,
any human being uttered those words a man can turn
into a woman or a woman can turn into a man.
That's an insane It's not just inaccurate, it's insanity. If
one person said that, you would say, wow, you're crazy.
We had major sports leagues, multi billion dollar corporations publicly
(08:37):
declaring something that's completely insane. The evil people, the communists,
tore apart this country as fast as they possibly could.
Remember George Floyd, I'm never going to stop bringing this up.
George Floyd died of an overdose. Derek Chauvin. Derek Chauvin
got lynched by the United States of America. He did
(09:00):
We had sports teams like the New York Mets celebrating
he's his conviction. He's still wrongfully convicted and still sitting
in prison, I might point out, celebrating the whole thing.
That is the kind of country we had. And I
want to reinforce the point I made in the opening.
We had that not just because the Communists are evil demons,
(09:22):
but because so many people in entities in this country
are gutless cowards when faced with Communists insanity. I just
got your beanuts off, you'll be a woman, they said, Oh, okay,
just don't hurt me anymore. Insanity. And we need to
remember this. You really really need to remember this. Democrats, communists,
(09:43):
they have not come out and changed their ways. They
have not apologized for what they've done. They have not
backtracked one iota. And the reason they haven't backtracked one
iota is they don't regret a single thing. What you
need to remember from that is if they ever get
powered again, God forbid, they will do the same or worse.
Do I need to remind you this human being was
(10:05):
made an admiral.
Speaker 4 (10:07):
Hello, I'm Admiral Rachel Levine. Climate change is having a
disproportionate effect on the physical and mental health of black communities.
Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to live
in areas and housing that increase their susceptibility to climate
related health issues, and sixty five percent of Black Americans
report feeling anxious about climate changes impact. Through our Office
(10:31):
of Climate Change and Health Equity and the Office of
Environmental Justice, we're working with providers and community leaders to
identify innovative approaches that in power communities to address to
health consequences linked to climate change.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
An admiral on top of all that, it's not just
that the communists took over every institution, pushed insanity every
where they could. Anytime they thought they might meet resistance,
they met it with threats and with force, including something
(11:09):
I have never seen before. I have never seen this before,
the President of the United States of America routinely threatening
the American people.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represented extremism that threatens
the very foundations.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
Of our republic.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
You've been patient, but our patience is wearing thin, and
your refusal has cost all of us. And by the way,
if they want to think to take on government, if
we get out of line which they're talking on again about. Well,
guess what they need at fifteen's they don't need.
Speaker 7 (11:43):
Is right?
Speaker 1 (11:47):
What a statement? Don't make me send my fighter jets
after you. This is a reminder not just that these
people were evil and destructive. You know that our institutions
failed us, bent the knee as fast as they could
bend the knee, and failed us like gutless cowards. When
(12:11):
these communists were tearing apart this country, there weren't many people.
There weren't hardly any institutions that stood strong and tall
during that time. And they're going to come back to power.
You know that they're going to come back, and they're
going to do it again. Let's hope we're made of
(12:31):
stronger stuff the next time. All that may have made
you uncomfortable, but I am right. Hans Monkey is going
to join me in a moment and discuss many many
things I want to discuss pure talk with you. First.
I'm getting old, and as I get older, I get
angrier and angrier that I can't understand any customer service
(12:53):
people on the phone because they're all foreigners. They don't
speak English that well, they don't understand English that well,
and I know it's bad, but I'm so tired of
you having to repeat myself ten times into the phone. No,
that's not what I said. Hire Americans. I love that
Puretalk hires Americans. It's not just that they provide the
same great sales service as all the big guys because
(13:15):
they're on the same network. It's not just that you
pay less when you have to get a hold of
somebody at pure Talk, and you will at some point
in time. It's a pleasant American who speaks English. Because
they hire Americans right here at home. That means something
to me. Go to puretalk dot com, slash jessetv and
(13:37):
switch to the company that hires Americans. Okay, the Russia
Gate stuff, we constantly are getting more and more documents.
Really these cash Betel's announcing a new trove every single day.
(14:00):
We have more we've released, we have more we're going
to release. And this, honestly, it seems like he's putting
his eggs in this basket. Seem to be a lot
of very powerful people publicly publicly bragging about this, which
tells me, are they confident someone's going down? Someone better
go down? After all this bragging, joining me now Hans Monkey,
(14:21):
author of the wonderful book Swift Boating America. Hans is
someone going to burn for all this stuff because there's
a lot of public bragging right now, there is, and
it worries me.
Speaker 8 (14:35):
You know, I don't like it when they leak that
there's an investigation. I'd much rather have it that I
wake up and there was a five am raid somewhere,
you know, John Brennan's house was rated or whatever, and
that we have not seen that said, I agree with you.
They do seem to be very confident, and hopefully these
leaks are the result of confidence rather than of trying
(14:58):
to you know, kick the cand on the road. So
that's kind of what I'm hoping here. I think Brennan
is probably the most likely to get charged. Just if
you look at all the stuff that came out over
the past few weeks. He seems to be the one
that did the sort. He wasn't as careful as the others,
you know, he made some real errors along the way
documented and I think they can actually go after him.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
Okay, so rewind for me, Hans, act like I haven't
been paying attention what's been released. Tulsey's releasing stuff Ratcliff's
releasing stuff. Cash Bettel has been releasing stuff. What do
the docs actually say?
Speaker 8 (15:35):
Okay, so let's zoom out here. The overall picture, thirty
thousand foot view is that there was this scheme, and
it was both the Clinton campaign as well as the
Obama administration that decided that Trump was only elected because
of Putin's help. That's the sort of thing they decided
was going to be the lynchpin of all of Russia
(15:57):
Gate after Trump was actually elected in November.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Of twenty six.
Speaker 8 (16:00):
So what's been released is from the CIA, is from
the House Intelligence Committee, and it's also from various documents
drafted within sort of the FBI, within the NSA and
so on, and all of those show that at the
time when they came up with this narrative that Putin
elected Trump, you know, the whole thing we've been hearing
(16:22):
for all these years, the actual intelligence said that that
was fake, that there was no evidence for that, so
they made it up. And when I talked about Brennan earlier,
he is the one who has his fingerprints most on this,
and there are some documents that show that he directly
manipulated the intelligence to show that. So the actual intelligence
said Putin he probably had no preference. If he had
(16:45):
any preference at all, it was Hillary they turned out
on its head and then came out with this public
narrative that Putin elected Trump and then they ran with
it for, you know, the.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Past eight years.
Speaker 8 (16:55):
So that's sort of the core of it. And in
terms of accountability, they were all involved, They're all pushing this,
but I think Brennan is the one who he was
just the most careless.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
In how they did it. Okay, what's the Durham Annex.
I keep hearing this term Durham ANX, Durham ANX. What
is it? What is it? Show? What is this thing?
Speaker 8 (17:16):
The Durham Annex is a secret part of the Durham Report,
which we didn't get to see until last week. And
what it says is that US intelligence picked up Russian
intelligence and the Russians had intercepted or hacked, whatever word
you want to use, some emails involving people at the
Soros Foundation, involving people at the DNC and various others,
(17:41):
and from these emails, the Russians learned that Clinton had
this plan to smear Trump with Russia collusion. In other words,
the whole thing was a Clinton dirty trick. So the
Russians knew that, and then the US intercepted the fact
that the Russians knew that, so they all knew that
they knew. The only people who didn't know were the
American public. So all of that is in that Durham annex.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Okay, Hans, let's talk about Hillary here for a moment,
because look, lying and smearing your political opponent may be unethical.
You may believe it's wrong, but it's also not illegal.
Did Hillary Clinton do anything illegal? With all this? Can
she go down for anything?
Speaker 8 (18:21):
I don't think she can. There's too many layers of
deniability built in. So in fact, she hired a law
firm called Perkins Koi. Perkins Koi hired contractors called Fusion
GPS or the dirt bongers. Huge GPS, hired a guy
called Christopher Steele to make up this fraudulent dossier, and
Steele hired another guy called Dan Schenko to sort of
(18:42):
insert the stories into the dossier. So each of these
people and each of these groups can say, well, it
wasn't my fault, it was the guy below me. And
when you go back to Clinton, well that's like five
or six levels below her. So I don't think she's
gonna be held accountable in any meaningful way. That doesn't
mean that what she in terms of her dirty tricks
campaign wasn't illegal. I mean, there's one very obvious illegality
(19:05):
in what they did, and what is what they did
is they pushed all this false information, this false intelligence,
this made up stuff into law enforcement. They pushed it
into the CIA, they pushed it into the FBI. The
Clinton campaign lawyer guy called Michael Sussman. He walked into
the FBI with this fake intelligence. He said, look here,
look at this. Well, if you give fake stuff to
(19:26):
the government knowing it's fake, obviously that's a crime. Now,
unfortunately all those things are you know, eight nine years ago,
so we're probably not going to have accountability for the
people involved sort of on the ground, her, you know,
her little helpers. But certainly, you know, coming back to
your question, I don't think with all this deniability, it's
ever gonna you know, reach her, which, by the way,
it's the same way that the mafia operates, isn't it.
(19:47):
That's why it's so hard to get the mafia boss,
because they can always say, well, it was the underling,
and the underlink says it was the next UNDERLINGK And
then you know, you work your way down the chain.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Well, I agree, but we do get them afia bosses.
We used RICO to get them. Can we use RICO here?
I'm not a lawyer, but this seems like an ongoing
criminal enterprise to me. I understand RICO is famously hard
to prove, but it sure looks like it on its face.
Speaker 8 (20:17):
Unfortunately, we live in this two tier justice system. You're
absolutely right, but look at what happened. For instance, you
asked earlier about the Durham annex, so they found out.
The US Intelligence services found out that the Russians knew
about this Clinton plot. Now there were particular emails that
the Russians had hacked. Now, Durham wanted to show that
these emails are real. So what he did is he
went to court in Washington, d C. To try and
(20:39):
get a subpoena to get these emails from whatever server company,
Google or whoever. And the judge said, no, you can't
have that, So he never got to see the emails.
And of course the judge, as we found out now,
is was Beryl Howell, who was involved with the J
six and all these kinds of things. So when you
have to jump through that extra hurdle in order to
(21:00):
get to RICO or just even get some documents, and
you have these judges being an obstruction, it's just going
to be very difficult to get that moving.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
Hans, thank you, my brother. As always, I appreciate it.
Thanks for having all Right, what's going on with all
this redistricting talk and things like that. Let's talk to
Wade Miller in a moment. Also, what's John Thunne doing?
Why don't we have these appointments? Wade Miller will join
us in a moment. Before he does, I wish you
to get some fresh olive oil. I know that sounds weird,
(21:36):
but man, your olive oil sucks. And I've only had
garbage olive oil my whole life. I didn't know that
the bottles of olive oil you buy in the grocery
store were kind of bland and flavorless. Do you know
why they're planning flavorless? Some of those bottles have been
on the shelves for years. Did you know that? No
one knows? But I never knew. Try one bottle fresh
(22:00):
from a farm and you'll be floored at how much
better your food tastes. Don't expect you to believe me.
Get a free bottle. They'll send you a thirty nine
dollars bottle free. You pay like a buck to cover
the ship. Farm Fresh two four six dot com. Get
one bottle. You don't like it, don't order anymore. You
will farm Fresh two four six dot com. We'll be back. Okay.
(22:33):
Why is Donald Trump telling the Senate Minority Leader Chuck
Schumer to and I quote, go to hell? Uh, there's
a lot more to it than that, but those are
some strong words from the President of the United States
of America. What is Schumer doing and how does Schumer
have the power to do whatever it is he's doing.
I don't know. Let's talk to Wade about it. Joining
me now, my friend Wade Miller, Senior advisor at the
(22:56):
Center for Renewing America. Okay, Wade, what has Trump so
h and bothered? What's Schumer up to? Well?
Speaker 5 (23:02):
Does he really need an excuse to tell Schumer to
go to hell?
Speaker 1 (23:05):
But yeah, the truth.
Speaker 5 (23:08):
Of the matter is so Schumer knows he has some
leverage on these noms and he was trying to negotiate
a big spending increase in exchange for approving these nominees.
The Trump administration wisely saw that as just a total
non starter, mainly because the Senate doesn't need Democrats on this.
They have the full leverage to get this done. They
(23:29):
can just show up and do their jobs. They can
eat up the clock and get these nominees done. But
more importantly, Johnthune can just formally recess the Senate and
then Donald Trump can recess appoint all of these people.
They don't need Democrats for any of it. The problem
is that Senate Republicans are getting in the way. And
as a reminder, pro forma sessions, which is where the
(23:51):
Senate shows up, gabbles in and then gabbles out to
prevent a formal recess, was always supposed to be a
power of one side to prevent the Republican or sorry,
the president of another party from doing this type of stuff.
It was never supposed to be used against your own president.
So John Thune is basically intentionally depriving the ability of
(24:14):
President Trump to use the recess appointment power while making
it appear like he's trying to get a deal done
to get the nominees done. It's just total DCS swamp nonsense.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
Okay, So Wade, I know you're intimately familiar with the
players here, but most people aren't. John Thune, why what's
his deal? What's behind all this?
Speaker 5 (24:37):
Well, a little bit of it is he's having to
deal with his own caucus. And you know, we've got
a solid ten or so of these that it's questionable
whether or not they're really Republicans in reality, or if
they just kind of campaign that way because that's their
path to winning an election. But you know, recess appointments
are the historical norm. The only president in recent time
(24:58):
that really hasn't had an expanse use of these is
Donald Trump, and we control all aspects of government. If
you go back to Reagan, if you go back to Bush,
if you go back to the second Bush, if you
go back to Obama Clinton, they all had recess appointments,
some of them dozens, if not hundreds of them. So
there's really no excuse not to just formally recess the
Senate and get these things done. Instead, what they're going
(25:21):
to do is they're going to do these pro forma sessions,
eat up August, come back, work on you know, appropriations.
But it's just a gimmick process. It's not real. And
then we're going to get to a cr later in
the summer, so they're just eating up the clock instead
of actually getting these things out of the way so
we can actually have real fights on real things when
they get back.
Speaker 1 (25:41):
So it sounds like the Senate is doing what the
Senate normally does and it just goes beyond these appointments.
They're trying to slow roll change as much as humanly possible,
so nothing changes. Do I have that right? Yeah?
Speaker 5 (25:56):
And my guess is behind the scenes, they're probably trying
to convince the Trump and iministration that this is like
they're trying to help them. The reality is they're not.
My guess is that Trump senses that, and he's getting
increasingly frustrated, not just with Chuck schumerber but probably with
Senate leadership. And as of just a technical reminder, Speaker
Johnson can do this too. If Speaker Johnson calls back
(26:18):
the House and then formally votes on a recess and
then the Senate disagrees with that, then that gives the
president unilateral authority to declare a recess, and then President
Trump himself can recess a point and get all of
these done. So even Speaker Johnson could get this done
for us, but I doubt he comes back to town
and John Thune isn't going to do it without an
(26:40):
enormous amount of pressure. And again, they are using a
process now that was always intended to slow down the
ability of an opposition president. They're now using it against
our own president. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
Okay, So not to weigh too deep into the weeds here,
but I kind of need to the appointments. What are they?
How important are they? What aren't we getting that we
should have by now?
Speaker 5 (27:05):
Well, there's about thirteen hundred or so positions that can be,
you know, formally nominated. It's kind of ridiculous. It really
shouldn't be more than a few dozen that needs to
be reformed. I don't know why we're you know, have
to have Senate approval on a fifth person down in
an agency. It just doesn't make any sense. But there's
a lot of some of them are judges, some of
(27:27):
them are US attorneys, a lot of them are political
appointees to the administration. But you know, I have some
good friends, like you know, Joe Edloe just got through
to DHS. He's awesome, he's a great guy. Why does
the Senate need to vote on Joe Edlin? You know,
I understand a cabinet secretary, but why does Senate Republicans
want to have a deliberate of conversation about every single
(27:49):
one of the nominees and their own president's administration. Just
get them done, just you know, get them through the door.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
We don't need to have this long.
Speaker 5 (27:56):
You can always do a recess appointment and then come
back and still do a formal hearing and then formally
confirm them. But then you're not on a clock. You
don't have to worry about this. But it's just a backlog.
And by the way, they make it difficult to the
n degree on all of these people five layers down,
while at the same time they voice vote all these
(28:18):
woke admirals and generals without even a second of conversation
and give them their promotions. So it's just they've got
their priorities backwards. They need to be focusing more on
woke generals and admirals and less on politically vetted appointees
for the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Yeah, what's the status on all these generals and admirals?
I haven't forgotten about all these poisonous little demons that
have infected our military. Has Pete hag Seth getting them out?
Speaker 5 (28:45):
Yes, so they are starting the process. You know, it's
never going to be as fast as I would always love,
but they are moving forward. They've been very responsive when
we've highlighted some people that have been promoted that are bad,
Like they just got rid of someone who has given
a ten year professor positioned Jen Easterly, who was the
head of all of the CIS censorship industrial complex nonsense.
(29:07):
She was given a tenured position at West Point within
hours of US highlighting that the DoD had already acted,
and they revoked that and pulled it back. They fired
a number of generals. I think that they've reassigned some generals. So, yes,
they're being very responsive, and there is some consideration, you
know versus like I have a political desire on something
(29:28):
to occur. But at the same time, they have thirty
years of training, and you have to weigh removing them
from a leadership position and replacing that thirty years of
knowledge versus their woken weaponize So they can't do them
all at once. They need to slowly. Long story short, Yes,
they're making forward progress. I'd like to see more, but
they're definitely being very responsive and helpful.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
All right, let's talk about redistricting, because the average normal
person doesn't understand this process, doesn't understand what's happening Texas.
Why are Democrats flying to Illinois, Why is the governor
threatening give me the one oh one on this way?
What's happening?
Speaker 5 (30:08):
So there's a lot of reasons to do it. First, remember,
even the Census Bureau admitted that they undercounted Texas by
more than five hundred thousand people. And then if you
factor in the you know, they're counting illegal aliens for
purposes of political districts, which should not be done just
across the board in the entire country. That should not
(30:28):
be done because you're basically saying that if a district
has forty percent illegals, then the actual citizens who can
vote in that district have more proportional power than citizens
in a district with five percent of legals. So there's
a lot of reasons to do it. Texas came up
with a good map that compared to a lot of
Democrats states, is still you know, not nearly as favorable
to ours. As some of these states are to their
(30:50):
own to Democrats. So they come up with a map
that does plus five in theory plus five Republican districts.
And they got the map out of committee, and then
the tech Texas Speaker of the House, when he had
everyone in a quorum, decided to break for the weekend
and give them four days to go strategize with the
hikeem Jeffries. And now they've left the state, so they're
(31:11):
denying quorum, which means that no legislative business can take place.
These Democrats openly admitted it. They've left the state. They've
driven out of the state, they've flown out of the state.
A lot of them have gone to Illinois, which, by
the way, their map is way more Jerry manner than anyone.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Could accuse Texas of doing.
Speaker 5 (31:26):
I think Texas's map is legitimate on a from a
lot of perspectives. But they're denying quorum. Now, this is
important to understand. The governor of Texas can basically vacate
their seats. He can say that they have abandoned their position,
and under Texas constitution and various precedents, he can just
deem these as vacant. Now He did put out a
press release this morning saying he was going to begin
(31:48):
in that process, but he was going to do it
through a path that goes through the courts instead of
just doing it unilaterally, which is kind of just Abbot
being abbot, which is he says what people wants to hear,
but if you read in between the lines, it's like
bare minimum. That's kind of what he's doing again, is
the bare minimum. Also, the Texas Speaker of the House,
Dustin Burroughs, who allowed all this to happen, He basically
(32:09):
laid it out on a platter for these Democrats to
do what they're doing. In many ways, he's complicit. He
has the ability, through the Sergeant in Arms to issue
arrest warrants. Now they can't effectuate those outside of the
state of Texas because they don't have jurisdiction. But there's
a lot of other things they could be doing. They
could be stripping the funding for all these Democrat offices,
including their staff. They could be charging them all of
(32:30):
the costs of the sergeant in arms encouraged in order
to go try to find them. They could start a
lot of different things. They could strip them of their chairmanships,
and committee responsibilities. There's a lot of things that could
start to happen today. I think we'll need to see.
But my guess is that Dustin Burrows more so and
probably Greg Abbott will do the bare minimum. I hope
(32:52):
I'm wrong, and I hoping I'm especially wrong when it
comes to Greg Abbot.
Speaker 1 (32:55):
I'd love to see some real leadership on.
Speaker 5 (32:57):
This side of him. But that's basically where we're at.
They've got to get these Democrats back into the U
on the Texas floor, lock the door shut if they
need to, and force them to remain while this business
is conducted.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
Wait, thank you, brother, I appreciate you. All right, Supreme
Court matters. There's all kinds of stuff happening, all kinds
of stuff still coming, and we need to talk to
Bill Jacobson about it so we can sound super smart
in front of all of our friends. And we will
do that in just a moment. Now, something else will
help you sound super smart. If your mind is working right,
(33:35):
as your testosterone levels drop, there's a fog that descends
on your mind. Did you know that? Did you know
you need testosterone for your mind more than anything else.
You need it for logical thinking, for clear thinking. You're
foggyer not because you're older, You're foggy because your tea
levels are down. Do you want great energy, great focus,
(33:58):
you want to have your mind and feel like it's supercharged.
Try some natural herbal supplements from Chalk. You don't have
to use drugs. Stop sticking needles in your arm, natural
herbal supplements. Taking a male Vitality stack from Chalk is
one of the greatest decisions of my life. And I'm
not exaggerating, one of the greatest decisions I've ever made.
(34:20):
I'll never stop. Just I feel so good all the time.
Chalk dot Com, slash Jesse TV. We'll be back.
Speaker 4 (34:38):
Now.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
As long as we're talking about redistracting and the Supreme
Court apparently is going to get involved, let's talk about
the legalities of all this. What might the Supreme Court say?
In fact, there's a lot we need to ask Bill
Jacobson about joining me now. Of course William A. Jacobson,
founder of Legal Insurrection, and of course Cornell University law
professor redistricting Bill. Is the Supreme Court get involved, then
(35:02):
why are they going to get involved that.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
They are, Well, they're getting involved, They're already involved. In Louisiana.
There's a case that is up for argument. I don't
know if they've set a date, but it's before the
Supreme Court as to whether there was unlawful racial gerrymandering
in Louisiana. But it's even bigger than that. The question
before the court is whether the Voting Rights Act of
(35:26):
nineteen sixty five, as interpreted by the Supreme Court is
unconstitutional if to the extent it requires that race be
taken into effect when drawing congressional districts. And that's huge
because what has happened in multiple states in the South
is that Democrats have secured extra seats, not sure we
(35:49):
have a precise calculation how many, but at least several
extra congressional seats because the states have been required to
have a certain number of majority black can rational districts.
And the question is is that constitutional. Can the Voting
Rights Act essentially do away with the constitutional protection of
equal protection? And that's the issue that the Court has
(36:13):
just requested extra briefing on. It's unusual, it's not unheard of,
but the Court on its own said, hey, we want
more briefing on this specific issue. And so that's what's
before the Court, and it will be enormous if the
Court rules that the Constitution prevails, not the Voting Rights Act,
and that the courts cannot insist that various states create
(36:36):
majority black districts. In fact, Clarence Thomas, who of course
is you know, an absolute you know, you know star
on the Court, wrote a separate opinion on this issue
of taking up extra briefing, and he said, hey, why
don't we just decide it?
Speaker 2 (36:54):
Now?
Speaker 3 (36:54):
What are we stalling for? So it's pretty obvious which
way he's going to go, and there must be a majority.
Were the significant number of justices who were at least
interested in such a ruling, and it would be an
absolute earthquake for the Democrats.
Speaker 1 (37:10):
Okay, So honestly, I can see people sitting up in
their chair. I can see them right through the camera
right now. Bill's saying, wait, we have racial districting in
the country for a lot of people. Because this is
so deep down in the weeds, they just don't ever
get all the way down there. They didn't even realize
this was a thing. But states really sit down and
try to carve out a special congressional district for black people,
(37:33):
don't they.
Speaker 3 (37:34):
Well, yes, and Historically, the reason was is that in
certain states they gerrymanneder districts to deprive Blacks of having
any real voting power, and so there was a pushback
against that. But the argument now is we're beyond that.
This is not nineteen sixty five anymore. It's you know,
twenty twenty five, and that statistically and the analysis show
(37:57):
that that sort of you know, racial detriment, that sort
of essentially boxing black voters out of existence, isn't a
thing anymore. And so therefore, why are we still doing this?
And that's really the issue that the Court's going to
have to decide. And it's I think significant that in
the briefing before the court, what decision are they talking about? Well,
(38:20):
they're talking about the affirmative action decision. And now that
we've had that ruling in twenty twenty three from the
Supreme Court, why aren't we applying the same principles to
congressional districts. And so this would be the fallout from
the affirmative action ruling in twenty twenty three. And if
this happens, when I say, it will be an earthquake
(38:42):
for Democrats. It could cost them. I've seen estimates of
five to ten seats around the country. If this, if
race neutrality becomes the measure for congressional districting, and you
will see hows not abortion ruling level of hows not.
You know, violence in the streets. But given the current
(39:02):
political posture, there will be screams if the Supreme Court,
consistent with the Affirmative Action ruling, says you cannot take
race into account when drawing congressional districts.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
Okay, I believe we live in a place where that's
a thing. All right, let's move on to other things. Bill.
I thought we solve this problem of these lower court
judges stopping the President of the United States over exceeding
their authority, wildly over exceeding their authority. I thought, all
this got shot down. Yet every single day I wake up,
I roll over, I pull up my phone, and there's
(39:37):
a new wacky judge doing something. Why is this still happening?
Speaker 3 (39:42):
Well, as I predicted on your show previously, we can
roll the tape that what the Supreme Court did was
great in theory, was significant when they ruled out these
universal injunctions. They've been doing decent things in terms of
issuing stays of lower court injunctions. But it's still happening
because because you have district court judges who disagree with
(40:04):
the Trump administration. You read their opinions and they're like
political manifestos, and it's essentially an insurrection against the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court has refused to be very clear
with the lower courts what the lower courts need to
do when they issue a stay, which means put on
hold one of these crazy injunctions from a district court,
for the most part, the Supreme Court doesn't explain why.
(40:27):
And so then what you have is you have another
judge comer long similar case, and the judge says, well,
we never actually got a reasoning from the Supreme Court.
We don't know why they put that other injunction on
a hold, So there's nothing for me to follow. I'm
not bound by anything. John Roberts, I've said it before,
needs to use his bully pulprit against the district court judges,
(40:49):
much like he has used it against Trump and Trump supporters. Okay,
when they've criticized the Court, but in many district courts,
not all, but in many of them, there is an
insurrection against Supreme Court authority. They are refusing to follow
Supreme Court rulings. And the excuse they're using is, well,
we don't have clear guidance from the Supreme Court. Well,
(41:11):
the Supreme Court needs to start giving them more clear
guidance and needs to set out the ground rules, because
what's happening now is running out an attempt by some
judges to run out the clock. You can't read their opinions,
you know, and not come to the conclusion that they
just don't like the Trump policies and they just don't
like Trump, and therefore they're going to rule a certain way. Again,
(41:33):
not all of the judges, but enough of them to
really muck up the system.
Speaker 1 (41:39):
What's happening in Rhode Island. Are white teachers being targeted?
What's happening here?
Speaker 3 (41:44):
Yeah, So Legal Insurrection and our Equal Protection Project for
almost three years has been challenging an outrageous program in
the Providence Public School District, which is the largest school
district in the state by far. It's a disaster in
terms of student education. It was so bad the state
had to take it over. So the kids are proficiency
(42:06):
at grade level is some place around ten percent of
the students, but the district is obsessed with Yes, it's horrible, horrid,
beyond horrible. I've seen for math. I think it's below
ten percent at grade level. And so the district though,
all they care about is DEI, All they care about
is racial stuff. And they created a program along with
(42:27):
the group called the Rhode Island Foundation, the largest charity
in the state, a billion and a half dollar charity,
to hire more teachers into the system because nobody wants
to work there, and the charity would pay off up
to twenty five thousand dollars of their student loans for
new teachers, with a big catch, only if you're non white,
and they literally named the program the Educator of Color
(42:51):
Loan Forgiveness Program. We challenged it. The Department of Justice
has now opened an investigation. The EEOC Employment Opportunity Commission
just came out with the final determination that this was
likely a violation of the law. But in Rhode Island,
they don't care. Rhode Island's a heavily democratic state, but
(43:12):
worse than that, it's become heavily progressive. It's a far
left wing. It's not like the old Democratic Party in
Rhode Island, which was very blue collar, working class. Now
it's the elites and they are pushing these things and
they don't care. We have complained loudly. We've gotten a
lot of media coverage. The Attorney General asilent, the political
leadership is silent. Fortunately, it looks like the Trump Department
(43:36):
of Justice and it looks like the Trump EEOC are
going to go after the school district. But the question
I'm asking is why aren't they going after this Rhode
Island Foundation. Rhode Island Foundation helped create the program, administer
the program, and fund the program. So I've been calling
for a year now, over a year now for the
Department of Justice to go after the Rhode Island Foundation.
(43:58):
And that's what's going on. This is emblem man of
the problem at the local and state level, even though
we have all these great Supreme Court rulings, even though
we have all these great civil rights laws that progressive
Democrats do not care and at the state level, they
will not be held accountable.
Speaker 1 (44:18):
Stay on on, Bill, appreciate you as always. All right,
let's light in the move next. All right, it is
time to lighten the mood. And Elizabeth Warrene, I'll play
(44:40):
you the video. In a moment she fell on the
Senate floor, and believe it or not, I'm not playing
this to make fun of her, because actually don't think
it's funny when old people fall. It's always bothered me.
I'm playing this because I feel like this is happening
to me born more and I don't know why. I'll
lean on something that's not very solid and I'll just fall.
I'll try to sit down. I did this last night
(45:01):
in my chair. I tried to sit down and I
kind of missed the chair, so I sat on the
arm of it and almost fell off it. I don't
know what's happening. Maybe it's just getting older, but I
feel you, Liz.
Speaker 3 (45:12):
Senator's about gonna get permanent.
Speaker 6 (45:14):
Well with Block Rochester, Drvin Heinrich, Brono King, I seeable
We're gonna take a walk down memory lane. We're gonna
talk about redistricting. We're gonna make fun of Elizabeth Warren.
That's always a good time. We're gonna honor the fallen.
What a night tonight, and I'm right, okay, time for
(00:23):
our least favorite thing on this show. I know, I
know it's hard, I know it's heavy, but you know
it's something that matters to us. I know it matters
to you. Honoring the fallen, the fallen who die in training,
who die in service to this country, not charging a
machine gun nest in time of war, but serving this
(00:44):
country and giving their lives for it. It is a
dangerous thing to serve in the United States military, and
it has to be. And the USS George Washington was
off the coast of Australia and uh Airman Jose Antonio
Rivera Lynch the fourth went over the side and we
(01:04):
lost them to the deep. So say a prayer for him,
Say a prayer for his family. You can't imagine the
agony they're going through right now. But that young man
served his country honorably and gave his life for his
country the same way anybody did in a war. Anywhere,
and we honor his sacrifice. Now we are gonna get
(01:28):
to this redistricting talk, because that can be really politically
wonky and it can really go over a lot of
people's heads, myself included. So we're gonna dig into that.
We will. We'll talk a bit more about the Russia
Hoak stuff keeps getting worse for the communists. But I
wanted to walk down memory lane really quickly. And this
(01:48):
may be a little painful. Maybe it'll make you sad,
maybe it'll make you angry, but none of that, None
of That's why I'm doing this. We're gonna walk down
how insane our culture. God, because we went through a
period of time when Communists achieved ultimate cultural power in
this country in every way, from the presidency to corporations
(02:11):
to everything. They achieved ultimate political power, and then they
proceeded to make everybody miserable, to make everybody hate each other,
to destroy as much as they could destroy. And so
when we were under assault like that, when the Communists
were battering down the gates like that of our culture,
that was a time of revelation for many people. Hopefully
(02:33):
it was the time of revelation for you, even revelation
about yourself. What I mean by that is when the
evil forces have controlled everything and they're attacking everything, you
will find out who's a coward and who's courageous. You
will find out who will stand and who will falter.
You really find out who the evil people, the evil
entities are. And look, I'm not going to talk about
(02:56):
the freaking Sydney Sweeney stuff, which is so overblown and
done by now. It's brutal, it's been going on for
a week. But let's do Okay, we'll play this very
briefly here. Why did this make the left so angry
that there's video out today of them screaming at her.
(03:17):
I'm not here to tell you to buy American Eagle Chance,
and I definitely won't say that they're the most comfortable chance.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
I've ever worn, or that they make your butt look amazing.
I'm gonna need to do that.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
But if you said that you want to buy the jeans,
I'm not gonna stop you. But as we're clear, this
is not me telling you to buy American Egle Chance.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Sidny Sweeney has very keen You.
Speaker 4 (03:45):
See what I did there?
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Right? Okay? The jeans at and this is this is
the thing. This is gonna be generatingal what I'm about
to say. I am not ancient. I'm certainly getting older.
Couldn't sleep last night. I hurt my neck anyway, in
(04:07):
im sleeping, I hurt my neck. But I'm forty four.
That ad you just saw, if you're young enough, you
don't realize that was every fashion ad ever for my
entire life. And it didn't you know what. I take
that back. It wasn't every fashion ad. It was every ad.
(04:27):
That's just kind of how they did it. Because people,
all human beings, men, women, everybody, we like to look
at beauty, beautiful nature, beautiful mountains, beautiful rivers, beautiful people
with human beings like to take in beauty. So it
doesn't matter whether you're selling jeans or gatorade, or you're
down at the local Mazda dealership. You find a handsome
(04:50):
man a pretty woman, and you dress him up and
you say, hey, look at this pretty girl. She wants
you to come buy a Mazda. Don't you want to
buy a Mazda? And that was just advertising, and it
has always been this way all of human history. That's
what you do. You find somebody who looks good and
you use their appearance to make your product or service
whatever that is more appealing, and that's just human nature. Honestly,
(05:14):
the ad we just played is just the most benign
thing in the world. What is it?
Speaker 5 (05:20):
So?
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Why would they react like this?
Speaker 6 (05:22):
Should we be surprised that a company whose name is
literally American Eagle is making fascist propaganda like this? Probably not,
but it's still really shocking. Like a blonde haired, blue eyed,
white woman is talking about her good genes like that
is not the propaganda.
Speaker 7 (05:43):
I really wasn't going to weigh in on this, but
here we go. It is so difficult to grow up
as a person of color, specifically a woman, and view
yourself as beautiful in any sense of the word. Growing
up in this country. I remember growing up in a
predominantly white community, wishing myself out of this body, out
of this culture, take my name if it meant that
(06:03):
I could wake up blonde haired and blue eyed, never
having to explain who I am or worry.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
About being accepted.
Speaker 7 (06:10):
That is why this American Eagle ad with Sidney Sweeney
is especially off putting.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
What we had articles from MSNBC Good Morning America was
talking about it. ESPN. One writer said he was mortified
by the ad. Okay, but what happened, well, this is
this is where we're going to rewind. See what happened
was ugly people took over our culture. Ugly on the inside.
(06:38):
Most of them were ugly on the outside too, but
ugly on the inside. Communists, communists, they hate beauty of
any kind. It doesn't have to be physical beauty on
a man or a woman, or of any kind. If
something is wonderful, beautiful, if something is good, the Communists
views that as a threat because the Communist is demonic.
(07:02):
So anything that is good. There could be a mountain.
If it's a beautiful mountain, tear it down. If it's
a beautiful woman, run her out of television. No, grab
some fat heffer and stuffer in some jeans and then
tell everybody it's beautiful. It could be a beautiful institution,
the boy scouts, Hey, can we make this gaear? It
could be whatever, a beautiful, a wonderful company, a good company,
(07:23):
whatever it is. If the Communist sees beauty, success, greatness,
the Communist endeavors to tear it down. Now normally those
deranged ugly freaks are held on the street corner and
made fun of the way they should be. But for
a period of time in this country, they took over everything.
Our buddy Banci at Red State pointed something out a
(07:46):
tweet from the NHL, the National Hockey League, a tweet
from the NHL which says, by the way, they've not
deleted it, trans women are women, trans men are men,
non binary ident t is real. This is why we're
gonna take this little walker or we're taking this little
walk down memory lane. How insane would that be? If
(08:10):
any human being, anyone of any age, a race, and whatever,
any human being uttered those words a man can turn
into a woman or a woman can turn into a man.
That's an insane It's not just inaccurate, it's insanity. If
one person said that, you would say, wow, you're crazy.
We had major sports leagues, multi billion dollar corporations publicly
(08:37):
declaring something that's completely insane. The evil people, the communists,
tore apart this country as fast as they possibly could.
Remember George Floyd, I'm never going to stop bringing this up.
George Floyd died of an overdose. Derek Chauvin. Derek Chauvin
got lynched by the United States of America. He did
(09:00):
We had sports teams like the New York Mets celebrating
he's his conviction. He's still wrongfully convicted and still sitting
in prison, I might point out, celebrating the whole thing.
That is the kind of country we had. And I
want to reinforce the point I made in the opening.
We had that not just because the Communists are evil demons,
(09:22):
but because so many people in entities in this country
are gutless cowards when faced with Communists insanity. I just
got your beanuts off, you'll be a woman, they said, Oh, okay,
just don't hurt me anymore. Insanity. And we need to
remember this. You really really need to remember this. Democrats, communists,
(09:43):
they have not come out and changed their ways. They
have not apologized for what they've done. They have not
backtracked one iota. And the reason they haven't backtracked one
iota is they don't regret a single thing. What you
need to remember from that is if they ever get
powered again, God forbid, they will do the same or worse.
Do I need to remind you this human being was
(10:05):
made an admiral.
Speaker 4 (10:07):
Hello, I'm Admiral Rachel Levine. Climate change is having a
disproportionate effect on the physical and mental health of black communities.
Black Americans are more likely than White Americans to live
in areas and housing that increase their susceptibility to climate
related health issues, and sixty five percent of Black Americans
report feeling anxious about climate changes impact. Through our Office
(10:31):
of Climate Change and Health Equity and the Office of
Environmental Justice, we're working with providers and community leaders to
identify innovative approaches that in power communities to address to
health consequences linked to climate change.
Speaker 1 (10:48):
An admiral on top of all that, it's not just
that the communists took over every institution, pushed insanity every
where they could. Anytime they thought they might meet resistance,
they met it with threats and with force, including something
(11:09):
I have never seen before. I have never seen this before,
the President of the United States of America routinely threatening
the American people.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represented extremism that threatens
the very foundations.
Speaker 3 (11:26):
Of our republic.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
You've been patient, but our patience is wearing thin, and
your refusal has cost all of us. And by the way,
if they want to think to take on government, if
we get out of line which they're talking on again about. Well,
guess what they need at fifteen's they don't need.
Speaker 7 (11:43):
Is right?
Speaker 1 (11:47):
What a statement? Don't make me send my fighter jets
after you. This is a reminder not just that these
people were evil and destructive. You know that our institutions
failed us, bent the knee as fast as they could
bend the knee, and failed us like gutless cowards. When
(12:11):
these communists were tearing apart this country, there weren't many people.
There weren't hardly any institutions that stood strong and tall
during that time. And they're going to come back to power.
You know that they're going to come back, and they're
going to do it again. Let's hope we're made of
(12:31):
stronger stuff the next time. All that may have made
you uncomfortable, but I am right. Hans Monkey is going
to join me in a moment and discuss many many
things I want to discuss pure talk with you. First.
I'm getting old, and as I get older, I get
angrier and angrier that I can't understand any customer service
(12:53):
people on the phone because they're all foreigners. They don't
speak English that well, they don't understand English that well,
and I know it's bad, but I'm so tired of
you having to repeat myself ten times into the phone. No,
that's not what I said. Hire Americans. I love that
Puretalk hires Americans. It's not just that they provide the
same great sales service as all the big guys because
(13:15):
they're on the same network. It's not just that you
pay less when you have to get a hold of
somebody at pure Talk, and you will at some point
in time. It's a pleasant American who speaks English. Because
they hire Americans right here at home. That means something
to me. Go to puretalk dot com, slash jessetv and
(13:37):
switch to the company that hires Americans. Okay, the Russia
Gate stuff, we constantly are getting more and more documents.
Really these cash Betel's announcing a new trove every single day.
(14:00):
We have more we've released, we have more we're going
to release. And this, honestly, it seems like he's putting
his eggs in this basket. Seem to be a lot
of very powerful people publicly publicly bragging about this, which
tells me, are they confident someone's going down? Someone better
go down? After all this bragging, joining me now Hans Monkey,
(14:21):
author of the wonderful book Swift Boating America. Hans is
someone going to burn for all this stuff because there's
a lot of public bragging right now, there is, and
it worries me.
Speaker 8 (14:35):
You know, I don't like it when they leak that
there's an investigation. I'd much rather have it that I
wake up and there was a five am raid somewhere,
you know, John Brennan's house was rated or whatever, and
that we have not seen that said, I agree with you.
They do seem to be very confident, and hopefully these
leaks are the result of confidence rather than of trying
(14:58):
to you know, kick the cand on the road. So
that's kind of what I'm hoping here. I think Brennan
is probably the most likely to get charged. Just if
you look at all the stuff that came out over
the past few weeks. He seems to be the one
that did the sort. He wasn't as careful as the others,
you know, he made some real errors along the way
documented and I think they can actually go after him.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
Okay, so rewind for me, Hans, act like I haven't
been paying attention what's been released. Tulsey's releasing stuff Ratcliff's
releasing stuff. Cash Bettel has been releasing stuff. What do
the docs actually say?
Speaker 8 (15:35):
Okay, so let's zoom out here. The overall picture, thirty
thousand foot view is that there was this scheme, and
it was both the Clinton campaign as well as the
Obama administration that decided that Trump was only elected because
of Putin's help. That's the sort of thing they decided
was going to be the lynchpin of all of Russia
(15:57):
Gate after Trump was actually elected in November.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
Of twenty six.
Speaker 8 (16:00):
So what's been released is from the CIA, is from
the House Intelligence Committee, and it's also from various documents
drafted within sort of the FBI, within the NSA and
so on, and all of those show that at the
time when they came up with this narrative that Putin
elected Trump, you know, the whole thing we've been hearing
(16:22):
for all these years, the actual intelligence said that that
was fake, that there was no evidence for that, so
they made it up. And when I talked about Brennan earlier,
he is the one who has his fingerprints most on this,
and there are some documents that show that he directly
manipulated the intelligence to show that. So the actual intelligence
said Putin he probably had no preference. If he had
(16:45):
any preference at all, it was Hillary they turned out
on its head and then came out with this public
narrative that Putin elected Trump and then they ran with
it for, you know, the.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Past eight years.
Speaker 8 (16:55):
So that's sort of the core of it. And in
terms of accountability, they were all involved, They're all pushing this,
but I think Brennan is the one who he was
just the most careless.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
In how they did it. Okay, what's the Durham Annex.
I keep hearing this term Durham ANX, Durham ANX. What
is it? What is it? Show? What is this thing?
Speaker 8 (17:16):
The Durham Annex is a secret part of the Durham Report,
which we didn't get to see until last week. And
what it says is that US intelligence picked up Russian
intelligence and the Russians had intercepted or hacked, whatever word
you want to use, some emails involving people at the
Soros Foundation, involving people at the DNC and various others,
(17:41):
and from these emails, the Russians learned that Clinton had
this plan to smear Trump with Russia collusion. In other words,
the whole thing was a Clinton dirty trick. So the
Russians knew that, and then the US intercepted the fact
that the Russians knew that, so they all knew that
they knew. The only people who didn't know were the
American public. So all of that is in that Durham annex.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
Okay, Hans, let's talk about Hillary here for a moment,
because look, lying and smearing your political opponent may be unethical.
You may believe it's wrong, but it's also not illegal.
Did Hillary Clinton do anything illegal? With all this? Can
she go down for anything?
Speaker 8 (18:21):
I don't think she can. There's too many layers of
deniability built in. So in fact, she hired a law
firm called Perkins Koi. Perkins Koi hired contractors called Fusion
GPS or the dirt bongers. Huge GPS, hired a guy
called Christopher Steele to make up this fraudulent dossier, and
Steele hired another guy called Dan Schenko to sort of
(18:42):
insert the stories into the dossier. So each of these
people and each of these groups can say, well, it
wasn't my fault, it was the guy below me. And
when you go back to Clinton, well that's like five
or six levels below her. So I don't think she's
gonna be held accountable in any meaningful way. That doesn't
mean that what she in terms of her dirty tricks
campaign wasn't illegal. I mean, there's one very obvious illegality
(19:05):
in what they did, and what is what they did
is they pushed all this false information, this false intelligence,
this made up stuff into law enforcement. They pushed it
into the CIA, they pushed it into the FBI. The
Clinton campaign lawyer guy called Michael Sussman. He walked into
the FBI with this fake intelligence. He said, look here,
look at this. Well, if you give fake stuff to
(19:26):
the government knowing it's fake, obviously that's a crime. Now,
unfortunately all those things are you know, eight nine years ago,
so we're probably not going to have accountability for the
people involved sort of on the ground, her, you know,
her little helpers. But certainly, you know, coming back to
your question, I don't think with all this deniability, it's
ever gonna you know, reach her, which, by the way,
it's the same way that the mafia operates, isn't it.
(19:47):
That's why it's so hard to get the mafia boss,
because they can always say, well, it was the underling,
and the underlink says it was the next UNDERLINGK And
then you know, you work your way down the chain.
Speaker 1 (19:58):
Well, I agree, but we do get them afia bosses.
We used RICO to get them. Can we use RICO here?
I'm not a lawyer, but this seems like an ongoing
criminal enterprise to me. I understand RICO is famously hard
to prove, but it sure looks like it on its face.
Speaker 8 (20:17):
Unfortunately, we live in this two tier justice system. You're
absolutely right, but look at what happened. For instance, you
asked earlier about the Durham annex, so they found out.
The US Intelligence services found out that the Russians knew
about this Clinton plot. Now there were particular emails that
the Russians had hacked. Now, Durham wanted to show that
these emails are real. So what he did is he
went to court in Washington, d C. To try and
(20:39):
get a subpoena to get these emails from whatever server company,
Google or whoever. And the judge said, no, you can't
have that, So he never got to see the emails.
And of course the judge, as we found out now,
is was Beryl Howell, who was involved with the J
six and all these kinds of things. So when you
have to jump through that extra hurdle in order to
(21:00):
get to RICO or just even get some documents, and
you have these judges being an obstruction, it's just going
to be very difficult to get that moving.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
Hans, thank you, my brother. As always, I appreciate it.
Thanks for having all Right, what's going on with all
this redistricting talk and things like that. Let's talk to
Wade Miller in a moment. Also, what's John Thunne doing?
Why don't we have these appointments? Wade Miller will join
us in a moment. Before he does, I wish you
to get some fresh olive oil. I know that sounds weird,
(21:36):
but man, your olive oil sucks. And I've only had
garbage olive oil my whole life. I didn't know that
the bottles of olive oil you buy in the grocery
store were kind of bland and flavorless. Do you know
why they're planning flavorless? Some of those bottles have been
on the shelves for years. Did you know that? No
one knows? But I never knew. Try one bottle fresh
(22:00):
from a farm and you'll be floored at how much
better your food tastes. Don't expect you to believe me.
Get a free bottle. They'll send you a thirty nine
dollars bottle free. You pay like a buck to cover
the ship. Farm Fresh two four six dot com. Get
one bottle. You don't like it, don't order anymore. You
will farm Fresh two four six dot com. We'll be back. Okay.
(22:33):
Why is Donald Trump telling the Senate Minority Leader Chuck
Schumer to and I quote, go to hell? Uh, there's
a lot more to it than that, but those are
some strong words from the President of the United States
of America. What is Schumer doing and how does Schumer
have the power to do whatever it is he's doing.
I don't know. Let's talk to Wade about it. Joining
me now, my friend Wade Miller, Senior advisor at the
(22:56):
Center for Renewing America. Okay, Wade, what has Trump so
h and bothered? What's Schumer up to? Well?
Speaker 5 (23:02):
Does he really need an excuse to tell Schumer to
go to hell?
Speaker 1 (23:05):
But yeah, the truth.
Speaker 5 (23:08):
Of the matter is so Schumer knows he has some
leverage on these noms and he was trying to negotiate
a big spending increase in exchange for approving these nominees.
The Trump administration wisely saw that as just a total
non starter, mainly because the Senate doesn't need Democrats on this.
They have the full leverage to get this done. They
(23:29):
can just show up and do their jobs. They can
eat up the clock and get these nominees done. But
more importantly, Johnthune can just formally recess the Senate and
then Donald Trump can recess appoint all of these people.
They don't need Democrats for any of it. The problem
is that Senate Republicans are getting in the way. And
as a reminder, pro forma sessions, which is where the
(23:51):
Senate shows up, gabbles in and then gabbles out to
prevent a formal recess, was always supposed to be a
power of one side to prevent the Republican or sorry,
the president of another party from doing this type of stuff.
It was never supposed to be used against your own president.
So John Thune is basically intentionally depriving the ability of
(24:14):
President Trump to use the recess appointment power while making
it appear like he's trying to get a deal done
to get the nominees done. It's just total DCS swamp nonsense.
Speaker 1 (24:25):
Okay, So Wade, I know you're intimately familiar with the
players here, but most people aren't. John Thune, why what's
his deal? What's behind all this?
Speaker 5 (24:37):
Well, a little bit of it is he's having to
deal with his own caucus. And you know, we've got
a solid ten or so of these that it's questionable
whether or not they're really Republicans in reality, or if
they just kind of campaign that way because that's their
path to winning an election. But you know, recess appointments
are the historical norm. The only president in recent time
(24:58):
that really hasn't had an expanse use of these is
Donald Trump, and we control all aspects of government. If
you go back to Reagan, if you go back to Bush,
if you go back to the second Bush, if you
go back to Obama Clinton, they all had recess appointments,
some of them dozens, if not hundreds of them. So
there's really no excuse not to just formally recess the
Senate and get these things done. Instead, what they're going
(25:21):
to do is they're going to do these pro forma sessions,
eat up August, come back, work on you know, appropriations.
But it's just a gimmick process. It's not real. And
then we're going to get to a cr later in
the summer, so they're just eating up the clock instead
of actually getting these things out of the way so
we can actually have real fights on real things when
they get back.
Speaker 1 (25:41):
So it sounds like the Senate is doing what the
Senate normally does and it just goes beyond these appointments.
They're trying to slow roll change as much as humanly possible,
so nothing changes. Do I have that right? Yeah?
Speaker 5 (25:56):
And my guess is behind the scenes, they're probably trying
to convince the Trump and iministration that this is like
they're trying to help them. The reality is they're not.
My guess is that Trump senses that, and he's getting
increasingly frustrated, not just with Chuck schumerber but probably with
Senate leadership. And as of just a technical reminder, Speaker
Johnson can do this too. If Speaker Johnson calls back
(26:18):
the House and then formally votes on a recess and
then the Senate disagrees with that, then that gives the
president unilateral authority to declare a recess, and then President
Trump himself can recess a point and get all of
these done. So even Speaker Johnson could get this done
for us, but I doubt he comes back to town
and John Thune isn't going to do it without an
(26:40):
enormous amount of pressure. And again, they are using a
process now that was always intended to slow down the
ability of an opposition president. They're now using it against
our own president. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
Okay, So not to weigh too deep into the weeds here,
but I kind of need to the appointments. What are they?
How important are they? What aren't we getting that we
should have by now?
Speaker 5 (27:05):
Well, there's about thirteen hundred or so positions that can be,
you know, formally nominated. It's kind of ridiculous. It really
shouldn't be more than a few dozen that needs to
be reformed. I don't know why we're you know, have
to have Senate approval on a fifth person down in
an agency. It just doesn't make any sense. But there's
a lot of some of them are judges, some of
(27:27):
them are US attorneys, a lot of them are political
appointees to the administration. But you know, I have some
good friends, like you know, Joe Edloe just got through
to DHS. He's awesome, he's a great guy. Why does
the Senate need to vote on Joe Edlin? You know,
I understand a cabinet secretary, but why does Senate Republicans
want to have a deliberate of conversation about every single
(27:49):
one of the nominees and their own president's administration. Just
get them done, just you know, get them through the door.
Speaker 1 (27:55):
We don't need to have this long.
Speaker 5 (27:56):
You can always do a recess appointment and then come
back and still do a formal hearing and then formally
confirm them. But then you're not on a clock. You
don't have to worry about this. But it's just a backlog.
And by the way, they make it difficult to the
n degree on all of these people five layers down,
while at the same time they voice vote all these
(28:18):
woke admirals and generals without even a second of conversation
and give them their promotions. So it's just they've got
their priorities backwards. They need to be focusing more on
woke generals and admirals and less on politically vetted appointees
for the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
Yeah, what's the status on all these generals and admirals?
I haven't forgotten about all these poisonous little demons that
have infected our military. Has Pete hag Seth getting them out?
Speaker 5 (28:45):
Yes, so they are starting the process. You know, it's
never going to be as fast as I would always love,
but they are moving forward. They've been very responsive when
we've highlighted some people that have been promoted that are bad,
Like they just got rid of someone who has given
a ten year professor positioned Jen Easterly, who was the
head of all of the CIS censorship industrial complex nonsense.
(29:07):
She was given a tenured position at West Point within
hours of US highlighting that the DoD had already acted,
and they revoked that and pulled it back. They fired
a number of generals. I think that they've reassigned some generals. So, yes,
they're being very responsive, and there is some consideration, you
know versus like I have a political desire on something
(29:28):
to occur. But at the same time, they have thirty
years of training, and you have to weigh removing them
from a leadership position and replacing that thirty years of
knowledge versus their woken weaponize So they can't do them
all at once. They need to slowly. Long story short, Yes,
they're making forward progress. I'd like to see more, but
they're definitely being very responsive and helpful.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
All right, let's talk about redistricting, because the average normal
person doesn't understand this process, doesn't understand what's happening Texas.
Why are Democrats flying to Illinois, Why is the governor
threatening give me the one oh one on this way?
What's happening?
Speaker 5 (30:08):
So there's a lot of reasons to do it. First, remember,
even the Census Bureau admitted that they undercounted Texas by
more than five hundred thousand people. And then if you
factor in the you know, they're counting illegal aliens for
purposes of political districts, which should not be done just
across the board in the entire country. That should not
(30:28):
be done because you're basically saying that if a district
has forty percent illegals, then the actual citizens who can
vote in that district have more proportional power than citizens
in a district with five percent of legals. So there's
a lot of reasons to do it. Texas came up
with a good map that compared to a lot of
Democrats states, is still you know, not nearly as favorable
to ours. As some of these states are to their
(30:50):
own to Democrats. So they come up with a map
that does plus five in theory plus five Republican districts.
And they got the map out of committee, and then
the tech Texas Speaker of the House, when he had
everyone in a quorum, decided to break for the weekend
and give them four days to go strategize with the
hikeem Jeffries. And now they've left the state, so they're
(31:11):
denying quorum, which means that no legislative business can take place.
These Democrats openly admitted it. They've left the state. They've
driven out of the state, they've flown out of the state.
A lot of them have gone to Illinois, which, by
the way, their map is way more Jerry manner than anyone.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Could accuse Texas of doing.
Speaker 5 (31:26):
I think Texas's map is legitimate on a from a
lot of perspectives. But they're denying quorum. Now, this is
important to understand. The governor of Texas can basically vacate
their seats. He can say that they have abandoned their position,
and under Texas constitution and various precedents, he can just
deem these as vacant. Now He did put out a
press release this morning saying he was going to begin
(31:48):
in that process, but he was going to do it
through a path that goes through the courts instead of
just doing it unilaterally, which is kind of just Abbot
being abbot, which is he says what people wants to hear,
but if you read in between the lines, it's like
bare minimum. That's kind of what he's doing again, is
the bare minimum. Also, the Texas Speaker of the House,
Dustin Burroughs, who allowed all this to happen, He basically
(32:09):
laid it out on a platter for these Democrats to
do what they're doing. In many ways, he's complicit. He
has the ability, through the Sergeant in Arms to issue
arrest warrants. Now they can't effectuate those outside of the
state of Texas because they don't have jurisdiction. But there's
a lot of other things they could be doing. They
could be stripping the funding for all these Democrat offices,
including their staff. They could be charging them all of
(32:30):
the costs of the sergeant in arms encouraged in order
to go try to find them. They could start a
lot of different things. They could strip them of their chairmanships,
and committee responsibilities. There's a lot of things that could
start to happen today. I think we'll need to see.
But my guess is that Dustin Burrows more so and
probably Greg Abbott will do the bare minimum. I hope
(32:52):
I'm wrong, and I hoping I'm especially wrong when it
comes to Greg Abbot.
Speaker 1 (32:55):
I'd love to see some real leadership on.
Speaker 5 (32:57):
This side of him. But that's basically where we're at.
They've got to get these Democrats back into the U
on the Texas floor, lock the door shut if they
need to, and force them to remain while this business
is conducted.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
Wait, thank you, brother, I appreciate you. All right, Supreme
Court matters. There's all kinds of stuff happening, all kinds
of stuff still coming, and we need to talk to
Bill Jacobson about it so we can sound super smart
in front of all of our friends. And we will
do that in just a moment. Now, something else will
help you sound super smart. If your mind is working right,
(33:35):
as your testosterone levels drop, there's a fog that descends
on your mind. Did you know that? Did you know
you need testosterone for your mind more than anything else.
You need it for logical thinking, for clear thinking. You're
foggyer not because you're older, You're foggy because your tea
levels are down. Do you want great energy, great focus,
(33:58):
you want to have your mind and feel like it's supercharged.
Try some natural herbal supplements from Chalk. You don't have
to use drugs. Stop sticking needles in your arm, natural
herbal supplements. Taking a male Vitality stack from Chalk is
one of the greatest decisions of my life. And I'm
not exaggerating, one of the greatest decisions I've ever made.
(34:20):
I'll never stop. Just I feel so good all the time.
Chalk dot Com, slash Jesse TV. We'll be back.
Speaker 4 (34:38):
Now.
Speaker 1 (34:38):
As long as we're talking about redistracting and the Supreme
Court apparently is going to get involved, let's talk about
the legalities of all this. What might the Supreme Court say?
In fact, there's a lot we need to ask Bill
Jacobson about joining me now. Of course William A. Jacobson,
founder of Legal Insurrection, and of course Cornell University law
professor redistricting Bill. Is the Supreme Court get involved, then
(35:02):
why are they going to get involved that.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
They are, Well, they're getting involved, They're already involved. In Louisiana.
There's a case that is up for argument. I don't
know if they've set a date, but it's before the
Supreme Court as to whether there was unlawful racial gerrymandering
in Louisiana. But it's even bigger than that. The question
before the court is whether the Voting Rights Act of
(35:26):
nineteen sixty five, as interpreted by the Supreme Court is
unconstitutional if to the extent it requires that race be
taken into effect when drawing congressional districts. And that's huge
because what has happened in multiple states in the South
is that Democrats have secured extra seats, not sure we
(35:49):
have a precise calculation how many, but at least several
extra congressional seats because the states have been required to
have a certain number of majority black can rational districts.
And the question is is that constitutional. Can the Voting
Rights Act essentially do away with the constitutional protection of
equal protection? And that's the issue that the Court has
(36:13):
just requested extra briefing on. It's unusual, it's not unheard of,
but the Court on its own said, hey, we want
more briefing on this specific issue. And so that's what's
before the Court, and it will be enormous if the
Court rules that the Constitution prevails, not the Voting Rights Act,
and that the courts cannot insist that various states create
(36:36):
majority black districts. In fact, Clarence Thomas, who of course
is you know, an absolute you know, you know star
on the Court, wrote a separate opinion on this issue
of taking up extra briefing, and he said, hey, why
don't we just decide it?
Speaker 2 (36:54):
Now?
Speaker 3 (36:54):
What are we stalling for? So it's pretty obvious which
way he's going to go, and there must be a majority.
Were the significant number of justices who were at least
interested in such a ruling, and it would be an
absolute earthquake for the Democrats.
Speaker 1 (37:10):
Okay, So honestly, I can see people sitting up in
their chair. I can see them right through the camera
right now. Bill's saying, wait, we have racial districting in
the country for a lot of people. Because this is
so deep down in the weeds, they just don't ever
get all the way down there. They didn't even realize
this was a thing. But states really sit down and
try to carve out a special congressional district for black people,
(37:33):
don't they.
Speaker 3 (37:34):
Well, yes, and Historically, the reason was is that in
certain states they gerrymanneder districts to deprive Blacks of having
any real voting power, and so there was a pushback
against that. But the argument now is we're beyond that.
This is not nineteen sixty five anymore. It's you know,
twenty twenty five, and that statistically and the analysis show
(37:57):
that that sort of you know, racial detriment, that sort
of essentially boxing black voters out of existence, isn't a
thing anymore. And so therefore, why are we still doing this?
And that's really the issue that the Court's going to
have to decide. And it's I think significant that in
the briefing before the court, what decision are they talking about? Well,
(38:20):
they're talking about the affirmative action decision. And now that
we've had that ruling in twenty twenty three from the
Supreme Court, why aren't we applying the same principles to
congressional districts. And so this would be the fallout from
the affirmative action ruling in twenty twenty three. And if
this happens, when I say, it will be an earthquake
(38:42):
for Democrats. It could cost them. I've seen estimates of
five to ten seats around the country. If this, if
race neutrality becomes the measure for congressional districting, and you
will see hows not abortion ruling level of hows not.
You know, violence in the streets. But given the current
(39:02):
political posture, there will be screams if the Supreme Court,
consistent with the Affirmative Action ruling, says you cannot take
race into account when drawing congressional districts.
Speaker 1 (39:17):
Okay, I believe we live in a place where that's
a thing. All right, let's move on to other things. Bill.
I thought we solve this problem of these lower court
judges stopping the President of the United States over exceeding
their authority, wildly over exceeding their authority. I thought, all
this got shot down. Yet every single day I wake up,
I roll over, I pull up my phone, and there's
(39:37):
a new wacky judge doing something. Why is this still happening?
Speaker 3 (39:42):
Well, as I predicted on your show previously, we can
roll the tape that what the Supreme Court did was
great in theory, was significant when they ruled out these
universal injunctions. They've been doing decent things in terms of
issuing stays of lower court injunctions. But it's still happening
because because you have district court judges who disagree with
(40:04):
the Trump administration. You read their opinions and they're like
political manifestos, and it's essentially an insurrection against the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court has refused to be very clear
with the lower courts what the lower courts need to
do when they issue a stay, which means put on
hold one of these crazy injunctions from a district court,
for the most part, the Supreme Court doesn't explain why.
(40:27):
And so then what you have is you have another
judge comer long similar case, and the judge says, well,
we never actually got a reasoning from the Supreme Court.
We don't know why they put that other injunction on
a hold, So there's nothing for me to follow. I'm
not bound by anything. John Roberts, I've said it before,
needs to use his bully pulprit against the district court judges,
(40:49):
much like he has used it against Trump and Trump supporters. Okay,
when they've criticized the Court, but in many district courts,
not all, but in many of them, there is an
insurrection against Supreme Court authority. They are refusing to follow
Supreme Court rulings. And the excuse they're using is, well,
we don't have clear guidance from the Supreme Court. Well,
(41:11):
the Supreme Court needs to start giving them more clear
guidance and needs to set out the ground rules, because
what's happening now is running out an attempt by some
judges to run out the clock. You can't read their opinions,
you know, and not come to the conclusion that they
just don't like the Trump policies and they just don't
like Trump, and therefore they're going to rule a certain way. Again,
(41:33):
not all of the judges, but enough of them to
really muck up the system.
Speaker 1 (41:39):
What's happening in Rhode Island. Are white teachers being targeted?
What's happening here?
Speaker 3 (41:44):
Yeah, So Legal Insurrection and our Equal Protection Project for
almost three years has been challenging an outrageous program in
the Providence Public School District, which is the largest school
district in the state by far. It's a disaster in
terms of student education. It was so bad the state
had to take it over. So the kids are proficiency
(42:06):
at grade level is some place around ten percent of
the students, but the district is obsessed with Yes, it's horrible, horrid,
beyond horrible. I've seen for math. I think it's below
ten percent at grade level. And so the district though,
all they care about is DEI, All they care about
is racial stuff. And they created a program along with
(42:27):
the group called the Rhode Island Foundation, the largest charity
in the state, a billion and a half dollar charity,
to hire more teachers into the system because nobody wants
to work there, and the charity would pay off up
to twenty five thousand dollars of their student loans for
new teachers, with a big catch, only if you're non white,
and they literally named the program the Educator of Color
(42:51):
Loan Forgiveness Program. We challenged it. The Department of Justice
has now opened an investigation. The EEOC Employment Opportunity Commission
just came out with the final determination that this was
likely a violation of the law. But in Rhode Island,
they don't care. Rhode Island's a heavily democratic state, but
(43:12):
worse than that, it's become heavily progressive. It's a far
left wing. It's not like the old Democratic Party in
Rhode Island, which was very blue collar, working class. Now
it's the elites and they are pushing these things and
they don't care. We have complained loudly. We've gotten a
lot of media coverage. The Attorney General asilent, the political
leadership is silent. Fortunately, it looks like the Trump Department
(43:36):
of Justice and it looks like the Trump EEOC are
going to go after the school district. But the question
I'm asking is why aren't they going after this Rhode
Island Foundation. Rhode Island Foundation helped create the program, administer
the program, and fund the program. So I've been calling
for a year now, over a year now for the
Department of Justice to go after the Rhode Island Foundation.
(43:58):
And that's what's going on. This is emblem man of
the problem at the local and state level, even though
we have all these great Supreme Court rulings, even though
we have all these great civil rights laws that progressive
Democrats do not care and at the state level, they
will not be held accountable.
Speaker 1 (44:18):
Stay on on, Bill, appreciate you as always. All right,
let's light in the move next. All right, it is
time to lighten the mood. And Elizabeth Warrene, I'll play
(44:40):
you the video. In a moment she fell on the
Senate floor, and believe it or not, I'm not playing
this to make fun of her, because actually don't think
it's funny when old people fall. It's always bothered me.
I'm playing this because I feel like this is happening
to me born more and I don't know why. I'll
lean on something that's not very solid and I'll just fall.
I'll try to sit down. I did this last night
(45:01):
in my chair. I tried to sit down and I
kind of missed the chair, so I sat on the
arm of it and almost fell off it. I don't
know what's happening. Maybe it's just getting older, but I
feel you, Liz.
Speaker 3 (45:12):
Senator's about gonna get permanent.
Speaker 6 (45:14):
Well with Block Rochester, Drvin Heinrich, Brono King, I seeable
Host
Jesse Kelly
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.