January 15, 2025 • 45 mins
Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth sat before Republican and Democrat Senators for his confirmation hearing. Jesse Kelly gives his thoughts on the hearing and goes through some of the best moments. He then gets reaction from Congressman Chip Roy, who is working on border security legislation as we speak. This comes as the DOJ launched yet another desperate effort to smear President-Elect Donald Trump. Josh Hammer has the latest on this. Plus, an on-the-ground update on the California wildfires from Joel Pollak and Jennifer Galardi.
I'm Right with Jesse Kelly on The First TV | 1-14-25
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):
The Pete hagg Seth confirmation hearing is spicy and wonderful.
We'll talk about everything that happened there, the Biden doj
making some late corrupt moves. Surprise, surprise, Josh Hammer joins us.
All that and more coming up on them, right, All right,
(00:26):
let's talk about the Pete hagg Seth confirmation hearing from
earlier today.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
It was quite a spectacle.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
But before we launch into that, all the Pete's opening stuff.
Tim Kaines an idiot guillebrand.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
But we have a lot.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
We're gonna bring it here in just a moment. Let's
just talk about why I'm so supportive of somebody like
Pete hagg Seth getting into an important position of power,
because he is different, most definitely different. In fact, he
really talked about being a change agent today.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
Now it is true and has been acknowledged that I
don't have a similar biography to defense secretaries of the
last thirty years.
Speaker 4 (01:08):
But as President Trump.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
Also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon
with supposedly the right credentials, whether they are retired generals, academics,
or defense contractor executives. And where has it gotten us
he believes, and I humbly agree that it's time to
give someone with dust on his boots the helm. A
(01:31):
change agent, someone with no vested interest in certain companies
or specific programs or approved narratives. My only special interest
is the warfighter. I've led troops in combat, I've been
on patrol for days. I've pulled a trigger down range,
heard bullets whiz by, flexcuffed insurgents, called in close air support,
(01:53):
led metavacs, dodged IEDs, pulled out dead bodies, and knelt
before a battlefield cross.
Speaker 4 (02:02):
This is not academic for me.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
This is my life, good right, but a change agent.
So why am I so supportive? I want to explain
it in this way because it's not just the hag
seth appointment that I approve of. I approve of a
lot of the people coming their confirmation hearing is people
who I really have problems with, a lot of people
(02:26):
I disagree with. So I'll make a sports analogy. Because
everyone's talking football right now. I guess I think it's
the NFL playoffs. I don't watch that anymore. I know
the College football National Championship is a week from now,
so football is on everybody's mind.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
So picture it this way.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
You have a football team, we'll make it, who's one
of the historically great ones, Ohio State, historically great, and
they're winning ten, eleven, twelve games every year, always flirting
with a national title. And then someone suggests, you know what,
let's get rid of all these coaches. There's some high
(03:03):
school team in Wisconsin running this really quirky offense. Let's
completely rip out the Ohio State coaching staff and replace
it with this quirky little high school team. You would
have a problem with that. I would have a problem
with that.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
We all would. But wait a minute, what why are
we changing what's working.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
So that's one scenario. The other scenario is this, let's
focus on a really horrible school, Michigan. We'll make this
about Michigan. Michigan is hot, stinky garbage. They've been garbage forever,
just a horrible, horrible school full of horrible people and
a horrible football program.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Michigan hasn't won a game in forty years. Now.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
If you say I want to rip out that coaching
staff and go grab some quirky high school coaching staff,
well yeah, let's try it. Let's try something different. Maybe
the high school coaching staff will come in and fall
flat on their face. Maybe they'll come in and turn
things around. But one thing we absolutely positively cannot do
(04:08):
under any circumstances is continue with the current failed coaching
staff here in the United States of America, our military.
This will be about other people who are going to
get confirmed, Lord Willing, but we'll beg this about haig
set today. Our military fought ag war, global war on Terror,
two wars, two theaters for twenty years, twenty years of failure,
(04:34):
twenty years without the mission being clear, twenty years of
embarrassing policies being handed down. I remember being Iraq, and
I remember given orders that came from up on high
somewhere that we were.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
No longer allowed to fly our American flags from our amtraks.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
Twenty years of embarrassing failure from generals and admirals. And
these really, really, really the important people, the troops being
treated poorly, VA system in complete disarray, failed systems after
failed systems, trying to win hearts.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
And minds, of course, and in the end, I racks.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
A disaster in Afghanistan is still even worse than not
one general or admiral has voluntarily resigned in disgrace. Whatever
we have now, it's not working. In fact, the war
games we play with Russia, we've war gamed it.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
We lose all of them. We are simply not ready.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
So Pete Hegseth my personal approval of him aside, he's
someone I know. But setting that aside, Pete Hegseth is
a change agent, and I genuinely don't know whether he's
going to get everything right or maybe he'll fail. I
have a hard time leaving people fail. But what we
cannot have under any circumstance is the status quo, and surprise, surprise,
(06:03):
that's exactly what Elizabeth Warren wants.
Speaker 5 (06:06):
In other words, you're quite sure that every general who
serves should not go directly into the defense industry for
ten years. You're not willing to make that same pledge.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
I'm not a general, Senator, you'll be the one.
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Let us just be clear in charge of the generals.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
Something you should understand about these senators, as producer mad
who came up with us, and he's so right. These
senators they have staffers who write most of their questions.
You think Elizabeth Warren really sat down and dug into
Pete Hegseth or her background. Well, if you're a Democrat senator,
you're really stuck these days because you have to hire
(06:54):
democrats out of college to come intern for you. Well,
the democrats you're getting out of college today are extra
stupid and extra coming, so they don't know anything, so
they'll write questions for you. You ask those questions on
national television and then with a quick little comeback from
Pete Hegseth, you look like an idiot, Brandon. That's Elizabeth
(07:14):
Warren's specialty. But Elizabeth Warren, I doubt she's a believer
in God. She should, however, get down on her knees
tonight and thank him profusely, because she's far from being
the dumbist senator in the United States Senate. That award
goes to now, and I think it'll go to her forever.
One Mazie Herono of Hawaii, Hawaii, my word, seriously, will.
Speaker 6 (07:37):
You resign as Secretary of Defense if you drink on
the job, which is a twenty four to seventh position.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
I've made this commitment on behalf of.
Speaker 6 (07:47):
Will you resign as Secretary of Defense?
Speaker 3 (07:49):
I've made these commitment on behalf of the men and
women I'm service. I'm not because he's the most important deployment.
Speaker 6 (07:55):
Hearing an answer to my question, so I'm going to
move on. Would you carry out an order to shoe
protest surery in the legs?
Speaker 3 (08:01):
I saw service agents to get injured by riders trying
to jump over the fence, set church on fire and destroyer.
Speaker 6 (08:09):
That sounds to me that you will comply with such
an order you will shoot protesters in the leg moved on.
President has attacked our allies in recent weeks, refusing to
rule out using military force to take over Greenland and
the Panama Canal, and they're threatening to take to make
Canada the fifty first state. Would you carry out an
(08:32):
order from President Trump to seize Greenland, a territory of
our NATO ally Denmark, by force? Or how would you
comply with an order to take over the Panama Canal?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Senator.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
I will emphasize that President Trump received seventy seven million
votes to be the lawful commander.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
We're not talking about the election.
Speaker 6 (08:52):
My question is would you use our military to take
over Greenland or are an ally of Denmark?
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Senator.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
One of the things that President Trump is so good
at is never strategically tipping his hand. And so I
would never in this public forum give one way or
another direct orders the president in any context.
Speaker 6 (09:15):
That sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out
such an order to basically invade Greenland. You will not
enable our service members to seek reproductive care.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
I don't believe the federal government not.
Speaker 6 (09:29):
Hearing answers to my question.
Speaker 2 (09:31):
Chairman, she's so dumb.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
But she's a United States Senator and she's so dumb,
and honestly, I'm not even sure if she I'm not
even sure if that was the most embarrassing part of
the day for Democrats.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Kirsten Gillibrand, is something else.
Speaker 7 (09:54):
You will have to change how you see women to
do this job well. And I don't know if you
are capable of that. You've denigrated active duty service members.
We have hundreds, hundreds of women who are currently in
the infantry, lethal members of our military serving in the infantry,
but you degrade them. You say we need moms, but
(10:16):
not in the military, especially in combat units. So please
explain these types of statements because they're brutal, and they're mean,
and they disrespect men and women who are willing to
die for this country. You cannot denigrate women in general,
and your statements do that we don't want women in
the military, especially in combat. What a terrible statement. So
(10:38):
women you have denigrated, you have also denigraded members of
the LGBTQ community. To denigrate LGBTQ service members is a mistake.
If you are a sharpshooter, you're as lethal regardless of
what your gender identity is, regardless of who you love.
The statements you said about people who have views differently
than you that were the enemy, are you saying the
(10:59):
fifty percent of the DoD if they hold liberal views
or leftist views or our Democrats, are not welcome in
the military.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Are you saying that, Senator I volunteered to deploy to
Afghanistan under Democrat President Barack Obama. I also volunteered to
guard the inauguration of Joe Biden, but was denied the
opportunity to serve because I was identified as an extremist
by my own unit for a Christian tattoo.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
Embarrassing, but I didn't want to end on that note.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
You see, We've been interviewing senator after senator, and I've
been talking to them privately and I don't know if
you've noticed, if you've been watching I'm right regularly, which of.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
Course you have.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
The senators all seem to be saying that all of
Trump's nominees are going to go through, every one of them, to.
Speaker 2 (11:48):
A man, they're going to go through. They're going to
go through. They're all going to get approved.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
In fact, even the weenies the sissies publicly they're running
to the news saying, no, I think they're all going
to go through.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
In fact, I saw.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Senator Joni Ertz today kind of changing her tune from
earlier singing Pete heegsas praises, I.
Speaker 8 (12:08):
Ask unanimous consent to enter into the record. A letter
submitted by mister Mark Lucas, who is a fellow Iowan
and Iowa Army National Guard member. Mister Lucas and I
served together in the Iowa Army National Guard. He succeeded
Pete Hegseth as executive director of Concerned Veterans for America,
(12:30):
and in his letter, mister Lucas says that mister Hegseth
quote laid a strong foundation that postured CVA for long
term success end quote, and that mister Hegseth quote continued
to be an invaluable asset to both me as a
leader and the organization end quote. So I would ask
for unanimous consent to enter this Washington Times article and
(12:54):
the letter from mister Mark Lucas into the record.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
Wow. Wow, she's being super helpful.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
All these super sissy senators are even on board. Now, Oh,
they're all going to get confirmed. So what changed? What happened?
Speaker 2 (13:13):
You happened. Give yourself a lot of credit.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
You were the reason the GOP Senate is probably just
going to stamp in approval on all these Trump nominees.
You see Jonie Ernst and the losers like her, they
decided they were going to try to pull a fast
one and do the Deep States bidding and try to
handicap these nominees. And they started running their mouths publicly,
well I'm not really sure if we can support and well,
(13:37):
I don't really know. I am a senator, I'm very important.
And they had venom poured on them from you from
the public. The public said you better confirm these people
or were coming for your Senate seats, And what do
you know, a couple weeks of that venom and they're
all on the team. Now let this be a lesson
(13:59):
to you, me, all of us. Bully your local gopre
into doing what's right, as he never is going to
have the guts to do it on his own.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
All that may have made you uncomfortable, but I am right.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
The great Congressman Chip Royd joins us in a moment
before we do that. You don't have to bully pure
Talk into doing what's right. They've been doing it for
a very long time. Puretalk their CEO did two tours
in Vietnam. Oh he wasn't stpland papers mac v SOG.
(14:33):
We're talking behind enemy lines stuff. That's the guy who
runs pure Talk. Why is it you never see planned
parenthood donations from Pure Talk? Black Lives Matter? Why don't
you see any of this DEI stuff? In fact, they
even hire Americans. Who does that? A company's staff with patriots,
that's who does that.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
That's why I love them. And they're on the same
vibe G networks.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
So you don't sacrifice service, you'll save money and it's
quick easy pure talk dot com slash jessetv.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Now is the time to switch. We'll be back.
Speaker 9 (15:15):
That are you aware of these emails being sent to officers.
Speaker 3 (15:20):
Senator, you mentioned the word accountability, which is something we
have not had for the last four years.
Speaker 10 (15:26):
Are you aware of these messages being sent to officers.
Speaker 4 (15:31):
Certainly, I'm not aware of that. It's not one of
my efforts.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
But there's been no accountability for the disaster of the
withdrawal in Afghanistan. And that's precisely why we're here today,
is that leadership has been unwilling to take accountability, and
it's the time to restore that to our most senior ranks.
Speaker 9 (15:47):
You've written publicly that diipology distraction and have military personnel
walking on edgshails.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
Yeah sounds good twenty me. Now, great congressman from the
state of Texas, Chip Roy Okay, Chip. Look to me
like Pete did pretty well today. I'm assuming he's gravy.
The question is the other nominees, But I don't know.
You tell me you're inside the belly of the beast.
Speaker 10 (16:13):
Well, I had to enjoy yesterday the Washington Post put
out a list of you know, who they support and
don't support, and they had four they didn't support, my
good friend Russ Boat being one and Pete Hegsett being one, which.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
Tells me those four are the ones to really go
fight for. Right. If the post is opposing.
Speaker 10 (16:28):
Him, then we know those four are great, So it
doesn't mean some of the others aren't good too. But look,
Pete did a great job today from what I saw.
I was able to watch maybe thirty to forty five
minutes into hearing while I was doing other things on
the House side. But he pushed back hard on, you know,
the narrative that the Democrats are putting forward against him,
pushed back on all of the you know, slander that's
(16:48):
been levied at him, and I think he did a
great job of that. But importantly, he made very clear
that you know, he is the the you know, he
will be the soldier's secretary, right, he will be the
guy that'll be fighting for the guys that have actually
been out there taking bullets, that have been on the
front lines fighting for this country, not the brass, not
the fat cats in Washington, not the k Street lobbyists,
who are the ones that have been driving our defense
(17:09):
policy for too long. Which, by the way, I hope
he sends that message to Congress because my colleagues have
their head up their rear right now and they're about
to try to go do a deal with Democrats to
pass that monster appropriations package rather than cutting spending and
limiting the size and scope of government, which is no
way to start things under the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Okay, you have to tell us all about that. What's
happening right now?
Speaker 10 (17:32):
Well, right now the House Freedom Caucus, which gets maligned
by my swamp creature Republican colleagues, we went and presented
the administration and our colleagues in the House of the
Senate what we believe was a reasonable approach to increase
the debt sealing something like four trillion dollars over two
years in exchange for guaranteeing that our border gets funded
and secured, defense gets funded and secured two hundred billion
(17:53):
dollars for modernization, not DEI and woke garbage, and then
importantly that we start cutting Biden's garbage right eb mandates,
cut the student loan fiasco and pay for those things
we wanted upfront cuts and in exchange for that, secure
the border, defense and a debt ceiling increase for the president.
But our swamp preacher colleagues are rejecting that, and instead
(18:14):
what they're talking about now is the monster, big reconciliation package,
which won't have the cuts in place that need to
be put in place unless we fight for them.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
And importantly, they're.
Speaker 10 (18:25):
Now talking about taking the debt ceiling probably four years
and ten trillion dollars, attaching that to the appropriations package,
plus stop plus funding for California and put that all
in one great, big package, because that's the way swamp
creatures think. I hope the President's team comes in and
rejects that. It tells them it's a bad idea. We
need to change the way this town works, and that's
(18:46):
not the way to do it.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Good grief, these people. None of these people care about
the debt at all to do that. None of them
is going to keep going until the dollar just strat
straight up collapses.
Speaker 10 (18:59):
Yeah, and they literally have an excuse for everything. And
their biggest excuse right now is that ship away and
the Freedom Caucus will never vote for a debt sealing increase. Well,
you know what, we put a proposal on the table.
We did say we would vote to raise the debt ceiling,
but only responsibly if we get cuts and the things
that we need for this country. They want to continue
like business as usual. I'm not going to stand for it,
and I'm not going to be leveraged by the way.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
I'm not going to.
Speaker 10 (19:21):
Let them put the border security on a monster big
bill that doesn't cut spending and has kse Street giveaways
and the tax policy rather than doing what we need
to do for the hardworking American and right now, you
know what that is, getting rid of the inflation that's
taxing the hardworking American family, getting rid of the health
tax on the American people by having these big insurance
companies screwing them. And so I'm going to stand up
(19:42):
for the little guy in this country rather than what's
going on in Washington.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
Good things. Something's never changed.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
When is all this stuff coming ship?
Speaker 10 (19:51):
Well, we put border proposal, we think we ought to
do a two bill approach, and look, by the way,
I understand why the President says he might want a
one bill approach and try to get it all done together.
I'd be happy to do that if my swamp preacher
friends weren't more for tax giveaways that won't go to deficit,
reduce deficits, and won't cut spending. But what I'm trying
to do is get early wins so we can show
unity and deliver for the president, get the dead ceiling,
(20:14):
get the border, get the defense, and so forth. But
right now, the swamp preachers want to try to drive
this train through in the next few weeks. I think
that will harm the President's agenda. I think that will
harm our unity. So I'm going to keep trying to,
you know, convince these guys to do the right thing.
There are a lot of us who want to do
the right thing, and we'll keep working to do it.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Well. At least Joe Biden's all over it. He's sending
the Secret Service down to the border. Here.
Speaker 11 (20:38):
He was, Look, let's catch something in mind about the border.
When I became president, the numbers came way down in
I'm in the world number two. We had a circumstance
where I pushed very hard from BI partnersan agreement to.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
Put more on the border, more.
Speaker 11 (20:56):
More, more secret services.
Speaker 4 (20:58):
And guess what if he's on a phone saying, don't
do it, don't do it? Make me look bad?
Speaker 1 (21:05):
Oh, Chip, this nightmares. It's less than a week left. Chip,
I don't know if I can take it. I might
have to go to a cabin in the woods for
a week. I can't do this anymore. It's so embarrassing.
Speaker 10 (21:15):
Well, first of all, the first part of it was
just a you know, bald faced lie. I mean, and
Bill Malusian pointed out yesterday and he does a great
reporting for Fox on the border, but.
Speaker 2 (21:24):
It's just straight up a lie.
Speaker 6 (21:25):
I mean.
Speaker 10 (21:25):
The numbers is obviously skyrockets of your listeners and viewers
know that, but that last stuff just shows you, you know,
sharp as attacked Joe Biden. Democrats knew what was going on,
you know last July when I was initially calling for
him to have to step aside and the twenty fifth
Amendment to be in both because I thought you should
have to happen and Kamala Harri should have to own it.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
It was because of this.
Speaker 10 (21:48):
We've had this guy as the president since last July
and we shouldn't.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
And so you know, look here we are.
Speaker 12 (21:53):
Thank god President Trump won.
Speaker 10 (21:55):
We'll get busy on Monday, we'll swear them in and
we got to get busy working. But Congress needs to
not stand in the way of the actual America First agenda,
and I'm worried that they will. So my job is
to try to highlight that and make clear what we're
trying to actually do to advance the America First Agenda.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
Stay on them, Chip rooting for you, come back sooner,
appreciate it. Freaking Congress as always kind of thing that
can keep you up at night unless you're taking your
dream powder from Beam.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
Doesn't keep me up at night.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Nothing keeps me up at night now, because when I
feel like I'm maybe gonna be too wired, not gonna
be able to sleep, I just have a couple of
hot chocolate.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
It's delicious hot chocolate. It's called dream powder.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
I warm up a little thing of milk, pour some
dream powder in there, and I just sit and sip
on it. Only it has things in it, natural things,
drug free. It has natural things that just relax.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
Me and put me to sleep. I sleep like a baby.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
I sleep through the night, and I wake up ready
to take on the day. Do you want that every night?
And take it every night? Try it up to forty
percent off Shopbeam dot com. Slash Jesse Kelly, we'll be
back late last night. Jack Smith, the former Special Council,
(23:22):
I guess I should say, released his investigative.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Report on Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (23:26):
Now I'm gonna allow Josh to correct me if I'm wrong.
But releasing a report when you've dropped the entire thing
is really just one last attempt at a public smear.
But I want to hear what Josh has to say
about it. He's the one who knows. Joining me now,
my friend host of America on Trial and new father,
Josh Hammer. Josh, why release the report?
Speaker 12 (23:49):
Jesse? Always great to join you, my good friends.
Speaker 9 (23:52):
So this is somewhat unusual insofar as for you know,
by the way, he's not merely former special counsel. He's
former so called special counsel Jacksmith, because he's not actually
a special council in the first place. I mean Jack
Smith is a special council, as when of my friends
put it to me earlier today, the same way that
the so called black Hebrew Israelites are Israelites. I mean,
(24:13):
he is a fake special council, which is why he
was dismissed from the Florida case by Judge Aleen Cannon
Florida back in July. Clarence Thomas in the Trump vversus
United States Scot's opinion back on July one, had the
same conclusion there, so he was illegitimate from the get
go there, But he ultimately faced reality and moved to
its draw both of his cases against Donald Trump in
both Florida, the classified docs case at mar A Lago
(24:35):
as well as the January sixth, twenty twenty election case
in DC. There, and it is similar unusual to have
a prosecutor who has moved to remove his own cases,
who has not actually taken those cases to its logical conclusion.
He has not taken it to a judge. He's not
taken it to a jury. You've not gone a guilt
and acquittal, a mistrial. There's been no result other than
you moving to remove your own case. It is a
(24:56):
little unusual to then have the ability to file a
final report. So I was hoping that that Judge Cannon
and the other judges involved here might have just prevented
this from happening in the first place there, because you
basically forfeited your ability to do so from my perspective,
when you yourself, dude, moved to end these cases and
terminate them there. But to your point, the reason that
(25:17):
he's trying to do this there is because he's trying
to write for the history books. He's trying to preserve
the perceived legitimacy of his year's long legal jihad. He
is trying to convince generations of high schoolers of law
students ten twenty thirty years from now that he was
in the right and that you, the American people, the voter,
were in the wrong. Unfortunately for Jack Smith, for Merrick Garland,
(25:39):
for Joe Biden, frankly, unfortunately for Alvin Bragg, for Fannie Wills,
for all the various tentacles of what I like to
call the Democrat law fair complex. Unfortunately for them, history
is written by the winners. History is not written by
the loser. So Jack Smith is trying to write and
make a play here for the history books, but he's
fundamentally going to come up short.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
I think. But did they lose, Josh, I mean in
the end, yes, Donald Trump won the election, of course,
But Fannie willis You and I both know she's gonna
get re elected or even move up. Alvin Bragg. His
sham trials in New York. They're not going to hurt
Alvin Bragg's career. He's going to run on those and
he's going to be a senator, a governor, or something else.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
They didn't lose in the end, right.
Speaker 9 (26:21):
Well, on an individual level. I mean Fannie Wilson, Fulton County, Georgia.
Speaker 12 (26:24):
You're right.
Speaker 9 (26:25):
I mean that's Atlanta that has a very very blue
jurisdiction these days. Alvin Bragg is in Manhattan that is
probably even further left, or maybe slightly less left, but similar.
But I think they lost Jesse kind of zooming out
insofar as they lost the election. I mean they've lost
what they were purportedly trying to do, which was to
try to derail Donald Trump's primary campaign in the GOP primary,
(26:46):
and more to the point, to make sure that he
would not be elected as the forty seventh President of
the United States. That, above all is what they were
trying to do there, and once upon a time in
the eyes of the mainstream legal commentariat there they viewed
a lot of these cases as open and shut, ironclad cases,
the way that MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times, so forth,
the way that they used to talk about the case
(27:06):
in Washington, d C. In particular, the Marquee case of
the Democrat Law Fair Complex, the January sixth, twenty twenty case.
There they were saying, this was the safest thing imaginable,
or the safest thing at least in decades there, and
it all fell apart. Not only did it all fall apart,
but it had the reverse effect. It had the effect
of boosting Donald Trump in the primary over his primary competitors,
(27:28):
and it had the effect of boosting him in the
general election as well. The American people were not having
it with this law fare. So yes, they have succeeded
to an extent, insofar as they have set an extraordinarily
dangerous precedent. We have crossed not merely the Rubicon, we've
crossed frankly the Atlantic Ocean at this point there when
it comes to trying to turn America into a third
world sub Saharan Africa tinpot dictatorship.
Speaker 12 (27:50):
I'm not sure when we're going to get.
Speaker 9 (27:51):
Back from that abyss anytime sooner or anything there, but
they fundamentally have lost when it comes to their overall
number one mission to derail Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
What about this case against Hunter Biden, David Weiss released
his final report, What are we supposed to make all this?
Speaker 9 (28:07):
Well, David Wise is basically excoriating Joe Biden here for
having the temerity to critics that criticized the Justice Department. Now,
this case was interesting from the get go right. So
David Weiss was the special counsel on Hunter Biden. He
was also the US Attorney for Delaware, which, by the way,
is kind of odd because a sitting active US attorney
(28:28):
is not supposed to actually be a special counsel. The
DJ has protocols that purportally exist to prevent exactly that
from happening. No one seemed to care, which as a lawyer,
I continued to find a little odd there. But David
Wise did pursue the gun case against Hunter Biden in
Delaware through to a conviction. He almost was surely was
going to be able to get a conviction out in
Los Angeles as well, before they ultimately got that plead
deal the week that that trial in Los Angeles in
(28:50):
September was about to get started there and then we all,
you know, look, the whole world saw what Joe Biden did.
I mean, he reversed his you know, approximately five thousand
times that he said he was not going to pardon
his son. He reversed all that. In the blink of
an eye of there he pardons the son. And then
he says that the Justice Department handled this in an
improper and politicized manner.
Speaker 12 (29:09):
I'm sorry, mister presidents.
Speaker 9 (29:11):
When Donald Trump was saying the exact same thing about
former so called special counsel Jack Smith, when Donald Trump
was saying all those exact same things, Joe Biden was saying,
Oh he's sowing the seeds of discording the justice system.
Oh he's trying to destabilize the constitution, and fascist tyrant
Hitler or Nazee whatever, they're so shirley. What's good for
the goose is good for the gander.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
There.
Speaker 9 (29:31):
So that's basically a little bit of what David Weiss
has here in his report. He's basically saying, mister President's,
I mean, look, you have the part of power and fury.
You can do what you want, even if it is
something as venal and corrupt and self dealing and grossly
cynical with the Hunter Biden part, and you theoretically have
that power within your legitimate constitutional authority. But don't do
what you criticize your opponent of doing. In so far
(29:53):
as trying to criticize the Justice Department in this case
is doubly embarrassing because it's actually Joe Biden's own Justice apartment.
If you really cared that much, you could have fired
David White' special counsel and prevented it from game to
this point.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
Josh, how did those two get crossways? Because David Weiss
may have done all that, but David Weiss was obviously
put there to run cover for Hunter, gave him a
sweetheart deal that was going to get through in Delaware
if not for a judge. And now those two were
taking little pop shots like high school girls at each other.
Is it just because Joe Biden called him politicized?
Speaker 9 (30:28):
Well, you're totally right. So just to be clear here,
David Weise, he brought two prosecutions against Hunter Biden. There
was this gun case involving this revolver that Hunter Biden
literally wrote about in his book. I mean, first of all,
what and moron you have to be to literally admit
to a federal crime in an actual book. You actually
had prosecutors reading from Hunter Biden's book at that trial.
Speaker 12 (30:48):
I mean, I mean, I'm serious, Yessing, how stupid do
you have to be?
Speaker 2 (30:51):
Right?
Speaker 9 (30:52):
So, I mean he brought this gun case acaust Hunter
Biden and Delaware, and then he brought this tax case
out in Los Angeles, which was similarly ironclad but before
they reached a plea deal. But he deliberately slow walked
everything else so Farah, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which
Hunter Biden was guilty as a clam of violating on
behalf of Brisbane, Ukraine in particular, arguably also Romania, China,
(31:13):
maybe other countries as well, but definitely Ukraine Fara has
a five year statute of limitations, and David Weiss slow
walked the crap out of his investigation there. It seemed
to many of us like he was trying to slow
walk away that five year statute of limitation so as
to basically try to land the Hunter Biden plane safely,
so to speak.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
There.
Speaker 9 (31:32):
So you're totally right there, but yeah, they're but now
they're at odds there because Joe Biden. If you know,
if I can, if I can psychoanalyze Joe Biden just
for a second here, you know, he has the fragile
ego of a kindergartener. This is someone who is the
oldest president American history, but he has the ego of
someone who who is like one twentieth or thirtieth or
whatever of his age. If you criticize Joe Biden at all,
(31:55):
there he is going to lash out of you. He
has an infamous temper. He cannot stand being criticized. What's there,
that's basically I think where this is coming from. But
you're totally right. David Weis was trying to help Joe Biden,
and I guess he has now found out what happens
when you try to help a man as fickle and
frankly irascible as Joe Biden.
Speaker 2 (32:15):
Irascible. That's a great word.
Speaker 1 (32:16):
I'm gonna figure out what that used, how to use
that word. I'm gonna say it in a sentence later
on today. All right, Josh, Finally I saw the Washington Post,
one of the more despicable papers in the United States
of America. They put out the list of Trump nominees
they approve of and disapprove of, and one of the
ones they approved of concerns me, Josh, because it's the
(32:37):
Washington Post, and because in my mind, there is nothing
more important than the DOJ stopping the government protection racket
it has become. Pam Bondy got a big, fat thumbs
up from the Washington Post. Now everybody I talked too
speaks highly of Pam Bondy. I'm not here to trash
your reputation, but at the Washington Post, like Sir Josh,
I have concerns. Jesse.
Speaker 9 (33:00):
Look, I mean, Pam Bondi would not have been my
number one pick, if I'm being very candid with you.
She is not who I would have personally advised Donald
Trump to pick for attorney general there. But she's perfectly serviceable.
I mean, she's going to do a perfectly fine job there.
You know, she was a two term attorney general of
my state, of the state of Florida, and she was
a leading conservative crusader during her years as a state
(33:20):
attorney general. She was one of the tips of the
spears against Obamacare back when that was a fight she
actually fought pretty courgeously, if memory serves, on the same
sex marriage issue as well, before the Supreme Court took
that off the table in the Obergefel case of twenty fifteen.
There my only objection to Pam Bondi is that I
think she's somewhat of yesterday's news. She was attorney general
of Florida for if memory serves, from twenty eleven to
twenty nineteen. There I would have encouraged to go with
(33:42):
a slightly younger spruce your pick someone who maybe is
a sitting current active attorney general, someone like a Ken
Paxton in Texas or something like that there. But she's
perfectly fine. I have no actual objections to Pam Bondi.
She actually was a registered agent of the Qatari government
tw years ago. I'm told that as well in the past.
It's no longer an in shoe, thank god, because that
actually would have been troublesome. But I'm told it's no
(34:02):
longer an issue there the Washington Post, I'm on, Charlie.
Speaker 12 (34:05):
Sure why they're giving her thumbs up.
Speaker 9 (34:07):
I mean, you know, she probably does not agree with
them on the overhalling majority of issues. Maybe it is
the Kutark connection, frankly, because the Washington Post does take
a lot of Katari money. So maybe that is actually
what's going on there. But I can't really figure out
what else might be going on.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Josh, thank you, my friend. Enjoy your new baby.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Thanks all right, what's like on the ground California wildfires
can't be good, let's find out that's.
Speaker 13 (34:42):
And that's when I saw this, And I really want
to show you this because I hadn't noticed it before,
but I started looking for this hose and it was
extended over my yard. Somebody had taken the garden hose
from the front yard and they had stood there before
(35:02):
I had arrived, and they had tried to extinguish or
maybe they had extinguished the fire that burnt this part
of the fence and the fire that was burning these trees.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Some neighbor who.
Speaker 13 (35:14):
I don't know I still don't know who did it
to this day, had put out the fire at my house.
Speaker 2 (35:21):
Pretty awesome.
Speaker 1 (35:22):
You know. There's plenty of stories of dirtballs and turns,
looting and things like that out there, but there are
plenty of stories of some wonderful people doing wonderful things.
Joining me now at least one of those wonderful people, Jennifer.
We're not really sure about her. Joel Pollock, Senior editor
at large for bright bart News and Jennifer Gallardi, visiting
fellow from the Independent Women's Forum. Joel, that's your house.
(35:44):
I keep hearing wonderful things about wonderful people out there,
and I like to hear it.
Speaker 14 (35:51):
Well. Jesse, the house behind me is not my house.
The house on the cliff is my house. My house
is about four hundred yards that this is a house
on a neighboring street. And the only reason I'm setting
up here is because I know I have good reception here.
It's very hard to get services and reception at the
(36:12):
moment because of the destruction that you can see around me.
But this is my neighborhood and I'd think probably about
eighty percent of the homes have been destroyed.
Speaker 1 (36:24):
God have mercy, Jen, you lived there for a very
long time, twenty years you finally left. How surreal is
it to look at all those videos, all those images
and it's just gone. I mean, I've been in that
area so many times. It's amazing to see it ugly.
It's the most beautiful place I've ever seen.
Speaker 15 (36:44):
It really is.
Speaker 16 (36:44):
And first I want to extend my sympathies to Joel
and everybody who has lost so much, their friends. Miraculously,
my friends condo building is still standing, So there has
been some grace given by God, Thank the Lord, and
very grateful for that. And I know it's still going
to be a long road. But yeah, Jesse, I think
I heard you say on Megan Kelly's podcast, is that
(37:06):
people like to dump all over California.
Speaker 15 (37:09):
I mean, with good reason.
Speaker 16 (37:10):
Our leadership has completely driven the state into the ground.
And you know, I wasn't very political in California because
I didn't.
Speaker 15 (37:17):
Need to be. Right, it was an easy place to
live without a lot of money.
Speaker 16 (37:20):
Not everybody that lives there is a wealthy millionaire, right,
the lifestyle, It's why the homeless are all there. You
didn't need a million dollars. And then COVID really hit
and I was like, what is going on? And I
started to understand kind of before this fire, what bad
policy looks like and the destruction it wrecks on people.
(37:43):
And you know, Gavin Newsom, I'm not so sure that
people are going to wake up. I mean, he did
this during COVID and that wasn't enough. So maybe this
will be it. But you know, I don't know what
it's going to take for these people to realize that
voting has consequences.
Speaker 1 (37:59):
Joe, you're there, obviously. What is the mood on the
ground of the people. I've been in natural disasters plenty
of times myself before. There's always sadness, there's always anger there.
If there is anger, who are they angry at?
Speaker 2 (38:13):
What's the mood of the people.
Speaker 14 (38:17):
Well, right now, I'm one of the only people who
lives in Pacific Palisades.
Speaker 2 (38:23):
Who is actually in Pacific.
Speaker 14 (38:24):
Palisades Because the only people they allow up here right
now are police, fire and journalists, and most of the
journalists are from international or national outlet. It just so
happens that two Breitbart News people live in Pacific Palisades
and one lives over in Brentwood and he had to evacuate.
(38:44):
But if my colleague John Cohn lost his house, it
was about a mile in that direction, and my house
is still standing about a quarter mile behind me. But
on the ground, in terms of people who have been evacuated,
the mood is obviously grief, but also frustration because they
can't come up here yet it's not safe for large
(39:07):
numbers of people. I found a fire in the front
yard of a house near Mind just this morning because
a local resident asked me to take the photograph of
their now ruined house, and they sent me to an
address and I went there and there was a fire
in the front yard. This is still a burning fire,
even though it looked like mostly out. There are hot
spots that are still dangerous. But people are frustrated. They
(39:30):
want to be able to have closure or to get
back into their homes if their homes are still standing.
And there's some anger at Governor Gavin Newsom at Mayor
Karen Bass. She was out of the country when the
wildfires hit. He knew there was an extreme wind event coming,
but he did not get emergency personnel in place. The
fire department did not predeploy because they didn't have the
(39:51):
money to pay overtime. You think how much money would
have been saved had they just put the firefighters out
and paid the overtime. Look how many billions of dollars
have been destroyed for maybe what one million dollars in
overtime for twenty four hours. So there's a lot of anger.
At the same time, there is a lot of hope.
(40:11):
The public school, which is just uphill behind me, it
burnt down, but what survived was the school logo, which
is a seagull in front of a rainbow, and that
rainbow is giving people hope, very much like the biblical
rainbow after the flood. It's the symbol of hope that
the community is embracing and people do want to rebuild.
(40:32):
People are helping each other. It's like the random neighbor
who put out the fire on my fence before I
got there. People in Palisades are like that, and that
spirit continues, but there's a lot of pain and frustration
and anger.
Speaker 1 (40:46):
Yeah, Jen, I know you have a bunch of friends
still there, and I know you've got a bunch of
fruitcake friends still there.
Speaker 2 (40:54):
Where are they at in all this?
Speaker 16 (40:57):
Well, the ones with any common sense, like said, are angry.
They want accountability, they want a change. They hope other
people wake up. But this is the liberal We've talked
about this almost ad nauseum. Now, this mindset that you know,
there were many responses to a piece I wrote in
The Federalist, you know, holding Governor Gavin Newsom accountable everything,
(41:19):
Joel said. Karen Bass was in God doing god knows what.
And they're saying, now is not the time for politicizing.
Now is not the time for pointing fingers and casting blame.
Now is the time for compassion. And you know what,
how is it compassionate to sit there from behind your
computer and your flat in Brooklyn and post like this
(41:39):
is where you can get help to me? That is
like the ultimate narcissism to think someone's going to come
to my social media platform to figure out how to
get help. Nobody was coming, like my friends and the
palisades were not asking me. They have resources, but they
love to preach from above, pointing out all the moral
failures of all those less virtuous than they are, and
(42:00):
do nothing except post nice words on social media.
Speaker 4 (42:03):
You know, they pat.
Speaker 16 (42:03):
Themselves on the back for all their compassion about where
to find help or where to donate. And meanwhile, the
actual victims who lost everything are as upset and angry
as I am. And anger can be beneficial, it prompts change,
and you know, it moves.
Speaker 12 (42:19):
People to act.
Speaker 16 (42:20):
Yet the morally superior it's not helpful in any way,
and they know the right way to respond to the crisis,
and they're going to sympathy shame you until you feel
the way they feel. And you know, one person even
used my religion against me and saying what would Jesus do?
Speaker 15 (42:36):
And I was like, first of all, you're not Christians,
so you.
Speaker 16 (42:38):
Have no idea what Jesus would do, you know, and
maybe you should get out from behind your computer and
go help in the ways that you can.
Speaker 12 (42:46):
But they don't.
Speaker 15 (42:46):
They just make other people try to feel bad.
Speaker 1 (42:51):
Joel Jen wishing you both the very best. Joel reach
out text me if you need anything, My brother Jen
not you.
Speaker 2 (42:57):
All right, you guys, I appreciate you very much.
Speaker 1 (43:01):
Lighten the mood next, all right, it is time to
lighten the mood. And before we do that, if you
want more videos like this, you can go get them.
Speaker 2 (43:18):
They're all over.
Speaker 1 (43:19):
My YouTube page and it's free, and just go subscribe
to the YouTube pageutube dot com, slash at Jesse Kelly
DC or just scan that little thing right there on
your phone and you're good to go. Now, I made
a mistake and I bought nice luggage a while ago.
Speaker 2 (43:38):
Well here I was talking about it.
Speaker 1 (43:41):
There is one thing you should not spend the money
on luggage. We each carried throughout our life. The luggage
we brought into the marriage, which had one big bag
and one kind of small carry on begging. Do you
know what it's like you mix and match. We were
not worried about. Well, finally the wheels were starting to
go a little caddy wampus and things are going bad
(44:02):
on the luggage, and we decided, hey, you get what
you paid for. Let's go out and get a set
of good luggage. That way, it'll last us very first
trip with the good luggage it's it broke, and it
didn't break in just a weird way or in a
normal way. It broke, the latches didn't open. I had
(44:23):
to get a hammer to open up the luggage. So
listen to me. I went home, I went online. I
found a coupon gosh I sound like Chris, and I
spent sixty eight dollars for one of the big bags.
And I got a big bag, and it has lasted
me another three years. It's a complete piece of crap.
Speaker 2 (44:44):
Zip up.
Speaker 1 (44:45):
You wouldn't look at it twice. Don't ever spend money
on luggage, a complete ripoff.
Speaker 2 (44:53):
It's a fact. I just saved you some money. See
them all, U,
The Pete hagg Seth confirmation hearing is spicy and wonderful.
We'll talk about everything that happened there, the Biden doj
making some late corrupt moves. Surprise, surprise, Josh Hammer joins us.
All that and more coming up on them, right, All right,
(00:26):
let's talk about the Pete hagg Seth confirmation hearing from
earlier today.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
It was quite a spectacle.
Speaker 1 (00:32):
But before we launch into that, all the Pete's opening stuff.
Tim Kaines an idiot guillebrand.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
But we have a lot.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
We're gonna bring it here in just a moment. Let's
just talk about why I'm so supportive of somebody like
Pete hagg Seth getting into an important position of power,
because he is different, most definitely different. In fact, he
really talked about being a change agent today.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
Now it is true and has been acknowledged that I
don't have a similar biography to defense secretaries of the
last thirty years.
Speaker 4 (01:08):
But as President Trump.
Speaker 3 (01:09):
Also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon
with supposedly the right credentials, whether they are retired generals, academics,
or defense contractor executives. And where has it gotten us
he believes, and I humbly agree that it's time to
give someone with dust on his boots the helm. A
(01:31):
change agent, someone with no vested interest in certain companies
or specific programs or approved narratives. My only special interest
is the warfighter. I've led troops in combat, I've been
on patrol for days. I've pulled a trigger down range,
heard bullets whiz by, flexcuffed insurgents, called in close air support,
(01:53):
led metavacs, dodged IEDs, pulled out dead bodies, and knelt
before a battlefield cross.
Speaker 4 (02:02):
This is not academic for me.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
This is my life, good right, but a change agent.
So why am I so supportive? I want to explain
it in this way because it's not just the hag
seth appointment that I approve of. I approve of a
lot of the people coming their confirmation hearing is people
who I really have problems with, a lot of people
(02:26):
I disagree with. So I'll make a sports analogy. Because
everyone's talking football right now. I guess I think it's
the NFL playoffs. I don't watch that anymore. I know
the College football National Championship is a week from now,
so football is on everybody's mind.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
So picture it this way.
Speaker 1 (02:42):
You have a football team, we'll make it, who's one
of the historically great ones, Ohio State, historically great, and
they're winning ten, eleven, twelve games every year, always flirting
with a national title. And then someone suggests, you know what,
let's get rid of all these coaches. There's some high
(03:03):
school team in Wisconsin running this really quirky offense. Let's
completely rip out the Ohio State coaching staff and replace
it with this quirky little high school team. You would
have a problem with that. I would have a problem
with that.
Speaker 2 (03:16):
We all would. But wait a minute, what why are
we changing what's working.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
So that's one scenario. The other scenario is this, let's
focus on a really horrible school, Michigan. We'll make this
about Michigan. Michigan is hot, stinky garbage. They've been garbage forever,
just a horrible, horrible school full of horrible people and
a horrible football program.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Michigan hasn't won a game in forty years. Now.
Speaker 1 (03:45):
If you say I want to rip out that coaching
staff and go grab some quirky high school coaching staff,
well yeah, let's try it. Let's try something different. Maybe
the high school coaching staff will come in and fall
flat on their face. Maybe they'll come in and turn
things around. But one thing we absolutely positively cannot do
(04:08):
under any circumstances is continue with the current failed coaching
staff here in the United States of America, our military.
This will be about other people who are going to
get confirmed, Lord Willing, but we'll beg this about haig
set today. Our military fought ag war, global war on Terror,
two wars, two theaters for twenty years, twenty years of failure,
(04:34):
twenty years without the mission being clear, twenty years of
embarrassing policies being handed down. I remember being Iraq, and
I remember given orders that came from up on high
somewhere that we were.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
No longer allowed to fly our American flags from our amtraks.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
Twenty years of embarrassing failure from generals and admirals. And
these really, really, really the important people, the troops being
treated poorly, VA system in complete disarray, failed systems after
failed systems, trying to win hearts.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
And minds, of course, and in the end, I racks.
Speaker 1 (05:12):
A disaster in Afghanistan is still even worse than not
one general or admiral has voluntarily resigned in disgrace. Whatever
we have now, it's not working. In fact, the war
games we play with Russia, we've war gamed it.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
We lose all of them. We are simply not ready.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
So Pete Hegseth my personal approval of him aside, he's
someone I know. But setting that aside, Pete Hegseth is
a change agent, and I genuinely don't know whether he's
going to get everything right or maybe he'll fail. I
have a hard time leaving people fail. But what we
cannot have under any circumstance is the status quo, and surprise, surprise,
(06:03):
that's exactly what Elizabeth Warren wants.
Speaker 5 (06:06):
In other words, you're quite sure that every general who
serves should not go directly into the defense industry for
ten years. You're not willing to make that same pledge.
Speaker 4 (06:20):
I'm not a general, Senator, you'll be the one.
Speaker 5 (06:26):
Let us just be clear in charge of the generals.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
Something you should understand about these senators, as producer mad
who came up with us, and he's so right. These
senators they have staffers who write most of their questions.
You think Elizabeth Warren really sat down and dug into
Pete Hegseth or her background. Well, if you're a Democrat senator,
you're really stuck these days because you have to hire
(06:54):
democrats out of college to come intern for you. Well,
the democrats you're getting out of college today are extra
stupid and extra coming, so they don't know anything, so
they'll write questions for you. You ask those questions on
national television and then with a quick little comeback from
Pete Hegseth, you look like an idiot, Brandon. That's Elizabeth
(07:14):
Warren's specialty. But Elizabeth Warren, I doubt she's a believer
in God. She should, however, get down on her knees
tonight and thank him profusely, because she's far from being
the dumbist senator in the United States Senate. That award
goes to now, and I think it'll go to her forever.
One Mazie Herono of Hawaii, Hawaii, my word, seriously, will.
Speaker 6 (07:37):
You resign as Secretary of Defense if you drink on
the job, which is a twenty four to seventh position.
Speaker 4 (07:45):
I've made this commitment on behalf of.
Speaker 6 (07:47):
Will you resign as Secretary of Defense?
Speaker 3 (07:49):
I've made these commitment on behalf of the men and
women I'm service. I'm not because he's the most important deployment.
Speaker 6 (07:55):
Hearing an answer to my question, so I'm going to
move on. Would you carry out an order to shoe
protest surery in the legs?
Speaker 3 (08:01):
I saw service agents to get injured by riders trying
to jump over the fence, set church on fire and destroyer.
Speaker 6 (08:09):
That sounds to me that you will comply with such
an order you will shoot protesters in the leg moved on.
President has attacked our allies in recent weeks, refusing to
rule out using military force to take over Greenland and
the Panama Canal, and they're threatening to take to make
Canada the fifty first state. Would you carry out an
(08:32):
order from President Trump to seize Greenland, a territory of
our NATO ally Denmark, by force? Or how would you
comply with an order to take over the Panama Canal?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Senator.
Speaker 3 (08:46):
I will emphasize that President Trump received seventy seven million
votes to be the lawful commander.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
We're not talking about the election.
Speaker 6 (08:52):
My question is would you use our military to take
over Greenland or are an ally of Denmark?
Speaker 4 (09:04):
Senator.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
One of the things that President Trump is so good
at is never strategically tipping his hand. And so I
would never in this public forum give one way or
another direct orders the president in any context.
Speaker 6 (09:15):
That sounds to me that you would contemplate carrying out
such an order to basically invade Greenland. You will not
enable our service members to seek reproductive care.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
I don't believe the federal government not.
Speaker 6 (09:29):
Hearing answers to my question.
Speaker 2 (09:31):
Chairman, she's so dumb.
Speaker 1 (09:38):
But she's a United States Senator and she's so dumb,
and honestly, I'm not even sure if she I'm not
even sure if that was the most embarrassing part of
the day for Democrats.
Speaker 2 (09:48):
Kirsten Gillibrand, is something else.
Speaker 7 (09:54):
You will have to change how you see women to
do this job well. And I don't know if you
are capable of that. You've denigrated active duty service members.
We have hundreds, hundreds of women who are currently in
the infantry, lethal members of our military serving in the infantry,
but you degrade them. You say we need moms, but
(10:16):
not in the military, especially in combat units. So please
explain these types of statements because they're brutal, and they're mean,
and they disrespect men and women who are willing to
die for this country. You cannot denigrate women in general,
and your statements do that we don't want women in
the military, especially in combat. What a terrible statement. So
(10:38):
women you have denigrated, you have also denigraded members of
the LGBTQ community. To denigrate LGBTQ service members is a mistake.
If you are a sharpshooter, you're as lethal regardless of
what your gender identity is, regardless of who you love.
The statements you said about people who have views differently
than you that were the enemy, are you saying the
(10:59):
fifty percent of the DoD if they hold liberal views
or leftist views or our Democrats, are not welcome in
the military.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Are you saying that, Senator I volunteered to deploy to
Afghanistan under Democrat President Barack Obama. I also volunteered to
guard the inauguration of Joe Biden, but was denied the
opportunity to serve because I was identified as an extremist
by my own unit for a Christian tattoo.
Speaker 2 (11:26):
Embarrassing, but I didn't want to end on that note.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
You see, We've been interviewing senator after senator, and I've
been talking to them privately and I don't know if
you've noticed, if you've been watching I'm right regularly, which of.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
Course you have.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
The senators all seem to be saying that all of
Trump's nominees are going to go through, every one of them, to.
Speaker 2 (11:48):
A man, they're going to go through. They're going to
go through. They're all going to get approved.
Speaker 1 (11:51):
In fact, even the weenies the sissies publicly they're running
to the news saying, no, I think they're all going
to go through.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
In fact, I saw.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Senator Joni Ertz today kind of changing her tune from
earlier singing Pete heegsas praises, I.
Speaker 8 (12:08):
Ask unanimous consent to enter into the record. A letter
submitted by mister Mark Lucas, who is a fellow Iowan
and Iowa Army National Guard member. Mister Lucas and I
served together in the Iowa Army National Guard. He succeeded
Pete Hegseth as executive director of Concerned Veterans for America,
(12:30):
and in his letter, mister Lucas says that mister Hegseth
quote laid a strong foundation that postured CVA for long
term success end quote, and that mister Hegseth quote continued
to be an invaluable asset to both me as a
leader and the organization end quote. So I would ask
for unanimous consent to enter this Washington Times article and
(12:54):
the letter from mister Mark Lucas into the record.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
Wow. Wow, she's being super helpful.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
All these super sissy senators are even on board. Now, Oh,
they're all going to get confirmed. So what changed? What happened?
Speaker 2 (13:13):
You happened. Give yourself a lot of credit.
Speaker 1 (13:16):
You were the reason the GOP Senate is probably just
going to stamp in approval on all these Trump nominees.
You see Jonie Ernst and the losers like her, they
decided they were going to try to pull a fast
one and do the Deep States bidding and try to
handicap these nominees. And they started running their mouths publicly,
well I'm not really sure if we can support and well,
(13:37):
I don't really know. I am a senator, I'm very important.
And they had venom poured on them from you from
the public. The public said you better confirm these people
or were coming for your Senate seats, And what do
you know, a couple weeks of that venom and they're
all on the team. Now let this be a lesson
(13:59):
to you, me, all of us. Bully your local gopre
into doing what's right, as he never is going to
have the guts to do it on his own.
Speaker 2 (14:09):
All that may have made you uncomfortable, but I am right.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
The great Congressman Chip Royd joins us in a moment
before we do that. You don't have to bully pure
Talk into doing what's right. They've been doing it for
a very long time. Puretalk their CEO did two tours
in Vietnam. Oh he wasn't stpland papers mac v SOG.
(14:33):
We're talking behind enemy lines stuff. That's the guy who
runs pure Talk. Why is it you never see planned
parenthood donations from Pure Talk? Black Lives Matter? Why don't
you see any of this DEI stuff? In fact, they
even hire Americans. Who does that? A company's staff with patriots,
that's who does that.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
That's why I love them. And they're on the same
vibe G networks.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
So you don't sacrifice service, you'll save money and it's
quick easy pure talk dot com slash jessetv.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
Now is the time to switch. We'll be back.
Speaker 9 (15:15):
That are you aware of these emails being sent to officers.
Speaker 3 (15:20):
Senator, you mentioned the word accountability, which is something we
have not had for the last four years.
Speaker 10 (15:26):
Are you aware of these messages being sent to officers.
Speaker 4 (15:31):
Certainly, I'm not aware of that. It's not one of
my efforts.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
But there's been no accountability for the disaster of the
withdrawal in Afghanistan. And that's precisely why we're here today,
is that leadership has been unwilling to take accountability, and
it's the time to restore that to our most senior ranks.
Speaker 9 (15:47):
You've written publicly that diipology distraction and have military personnel
walking on edgshails.
Speaker 1 (15:56):
Yeah sounds good twenty me. Now, great congressman from the
state of Texas, Chip Roy Okay, Chip. Look to me
like Pete did pretty well today. I'm assuming he's gravy.
The question is the other nominees, But I don't know.
You tell me you're inside the belly of the beast.
Speaker 10 (16:13):
Well, I had to enjoy yesterday the Washington Post put
out a list of you know, who they support and
don't support, and they had four they didn't support, my
good friend Russ Boat being one and Pete Hegsett being one, which.
Speaker 2 (16:23):
Tells me those four are the ones to really go
fight for. Right. If the post is opposing.
Speaker 10 (16:28):
Him, then we know those four are great, So it
doesn't mean some of the others aren't good too. But look,
Pete did a great job today from what I saw.
I was able to watch maybe thirty to forty five
minutes into hearing while I was doing other things on
the House side. But he pushed back hard on, you know,
the narrative that the Democrats are putting forward against him,
pushed back on all of the you know, slander that's
(16:48):
been levied at him, and I think he did a
great job of that. But importantly, he made very clear
that you know, he is the the you know, he
will be the soldier's secretary, right, he will be the
guy that'll be fighting for the guys that have actually
been out there taking bullets, that have been on the
front lines fighting for this country, not the brass, not
the fat cats in Washington, not the k Street lobbyists,
who are the ones that have been driving our defense
(17:09):
policy for too long. Which, by the way, I hope
he sends that message to Congress because my colleagues have
their head up their rear right now and they're about
to try to go do a deal with Democrats to
pass that monster appropriations package rather than cutting spending and
limiting the size and scope of government, which is no
way to start things under the Trump administration.
Speaker 1 (17:27):
Okay, you have to tell us all about that. What's
happening right now?
Speaker 10 (17:32):
Well, right now the House Freedom Caucus, which gets maligned
by my swamp creature Republican colleagues, we went and presented
the administration and our colleagues in the House of the
Senate what we believe was a reasonable approach to increase
the debt sealing something like four trillion dollars over two
years in exchange for guaranteeing that our border gets funded
and secured, defense gets funded and secured two hundred billion
(17:53):
dollars for modernization, not DEI and woke garbage, and then
importantly that we start cutting Biden's garbage right eb mandates,
cut the student loan fiasco and pay for those things
we wanted upfront cuts and in exchange for that, secure
the border, defense and a debt ceiling increase for the president.
But our swamp preacher colleagues are rejecting that, and instead
(18:14):
what they're talking about now is the monster, big reconciliation package,
which won't have the cuts in place that need to
be put in place unless we fight for them.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
And importantly, they're.
Speaker 10 (18:25):
Now talking about taking the debt ceiling probably four years
and ten trillion dollars, attaching that to the appropriations package,
plus stop plus funding for California and put that all
in one great, big package, because that's the way swamp
creatures think. I hope the President's team comes in and
rejects that. It tells them it's a bad idea. We
need to change the way this town works, and that's
(18:46):
not the way to do it.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
Good grief, these people. None of these people care about
the debt at all to do that. None of them
is going to keep going until the dollar just strat
straight up collapses.
Speaker 10 (18:59):
Yeah, and they literally have an excuse for everything. And
their biggest excuse right now is that ship away and
the Freedom Caucus will never vote for a debt sealing increase. Well,
you know what, we put a proposal on the table.
We did say we would vote to raise the debt ceiling,
but only responsibly if we get cuts and the things
that we need for this country. They want to continue
like business as usual. I'm not going to stand for it,
and I'm not going to be leveraged by the way.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
I'm not going to.
Speaker 10 (19:21):
Let them put the border security on a monster big
bill that doesn't cut spending and has kse Street giveaways
and the tax policy rather than doing what we need
to do for the hardworking American and right now, you
know what that is, getting rid of the inflation that's
taxing the hardworking American family, getting rid of the health
tax on the American people by having these big insurance
companies screwing them. And so I'm going to stand up
(19:42):
for the little guy in this country rather than what's
going on in Washington.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
Good things. Something's never changed.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
When is all this stuff coming ship?
Speaker 10 (19:51):
Well, we put border proposal, we think we ought to
do a two bill approach, and look, by the way,
I understand why the President says he might want a
one bill approach and try to get it all done together.
I'd be happy to do that if my swamp preacher
friends weren't more for tax giveaways that won't go to deficit,
reduce deficits, and won't cut spending. But what I'm trying
to do is get early wins so we can show
unity and deliver for the president, get the dead ceiling,
(20:14):
get the border, get the defense, and so forth. But
right now, the swamp preachers want to try to drive
this train through in the next few weeks. I think
that will harm the President's agenda. I think that will
harm our unity. So I'm going to keep trying to,
you know, convince these guys to do the right thing.
There are a lot of us who want to do
the right thing, and we'll keep working to do it.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Well. At least Joe Biden's all over it. He's sending
the Secret Service down to the border. Here.
Speaker 11 (20:38):
He was, Look, let's catch something in mind about the border.
When I became president, the numbers came way down in
I'm in the world number two. We had a circumstance
where I pushed very hard from BI partnersan agreement to.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
Put more on the border, more.
Speaker 11 (20:56):
More, more secret services.
Speaker 4 (20:58):
And guess what if he's on a phone saying, don't
do it, don't do it? Make me look bad?
Speaker 1 (21:05):
Oh, Chip, this nightmares. It's less than a week left. Chip,
I don't know if I can take it. I might
have to go to a cabin in the woods for
a week. I can't do this anymore. It's so embarrassing.
Speaker 10 (21:15):
Well, first of all, the first part of it was
just a you know, bald faced lie. I mean, and
Bill Malusian pointed out yesterday and he does a great
reporting for Fox on the border, but.
Speaker 2 (21:24):
It's just straight up a lie.
Speaker 6 (21:25):
I mean.
Speaker 10 (21:25):
The numbers is obviously skyrockets of your listeners and viewers
know that, but that last stuff just shows you, you know,
sharp as attacked Joe Biden. Democrats knew what was going on,
you know last July when I was initially calling for
him to have to step aside and the twenty fifth
Amendment to be in both because I thought you should
have to happen and Kamala Harri should have to own it.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
It was because of this.
Speaker 10 (21:48):
We've had this guy as the president since last July
and we shouldn't.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
And so you know, look here we are.
Speaker 12 (21:53):
Thank god President Trump won.
Speaker 10 (21:55):
We'll get busy on Monday, we'll swear them in and
we got to get busy working. But Congress needs to
not stand in the way of the actual America First agenda,
and I'm worried that they will. So my job is
to try to highlight that and make clear what we're
trying to actually do to advance the America First Agenda.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
Stay on them, Chip rooting for you, come back sooner,
appreciate it. Freaking Congress as always kind of thing that
can keep you up at night unless you're taking your
dream powder from Beam.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
Doesn't keep me up at night.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Nothing keeps me up at night now, because when I
feel like I'm maybe gonna be too wired, not gonna
be able to sleep, I just have a couple of
hot chocolate.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
It's delicious hot chocolate. It's called dream powder.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
I warm up a little thing of milk, pour some
dream powder in there, and I just sit and sip
on it. Only it has things in it, natural things,
drug free. It has natural things that just relax.
Speaker 2 (22:49):
Me and put me to sleep. I sleep like a baby.
Speaker 1 (22:53):
I sleep through the night, and I wake up ready
to take on the day. Do you want that every night?
And take it every night? Try it up to forty
percent off Shopbeam dot com. Slash Jesse Kelly, we'll be
back late last night. Jack Smith, the former Special Council,
(23:22):
I guess I should say, released his investigative.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Report on Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (23:26):
Now I'm gonna allow Josh to correct me if I'm wrong.
But releasing a report when you've dropped the entire thing
is really just one last attempt at a public smear.
But I want to hear what Josh has to say
about it. He's the one who knows. Joining me now,
my friend host of America on Trial and new father,
Josh Hammer. Josh, why release the report?
Speaker 12 (23:49):
Jesse? Always great to join you, my good friends.
Speaker 9 (23:52):
So this is somewhat unusual insofar as for you know,
by the way, he's not merely former special counsel. He's
former so called special counsel Jacksmith, because he's not actually
a special council in the first place. I mean Jack
Smith is a special council, as when of my friends
put it to me earlier today, the same way that
the so called black Hebrew Israelites are Israelites. I mean,
(24:13):
he is a fake special council, which is why he
was dismissed from the Florida case by Judge Aleen Cannon
Florida back in July. Clarence Thomas in the Trump vversus
United States Scot's opinion back on July one, had the
same conclusion there, so he was illegitimate from the get
go there, But he ultimately faced reality and moved to
its draw both of his cases against Donald Trump in
both Florida, the classified docs case at mar A Lago
(24:35):
as well as the January sixth, twenty twenty election case
in DC. There, and it is similar unusual to have
a prosecutor who has moved to remove his own cases,
who has not actually taken those cases to its logical conclusion.
He has not taken it to a judge. He's not
taken it to a jury. You've not gone a guilt
and acquittal, a mistrial. There's been no result other than
you moving to remove your own case. It is a
(24:56):
little unusual to then have the ability to file a
final report. So I was hoping that that Judge Cannon
and the other judges involved here might have just prevented
this from happening in the first place there, because you
basically forfeited your ability to do so from my perspective,
when you yourself, dude, moved to end these cases and
terminate them there. But to your point, the reason that
(25:17):
he's trying to do this there is because he's trying
to write for the history books. He's trying to preserve
the perceived legitimacy of his year's long legal jihad. He
is trying to convince generations of high schoolers of law
students ten twenty thirty years from now that he was
in the right and that you, the American people, the voter,
were in the wrong. Unfortunately for Jack Smith, for Merrick Garland,
(25:39):
for Joe Biden, frankly, unfortunately for Alvin Bragg, for Fannie Wills,
for all the various tentacles of what I like to
call the Democrat law fair complex. Unfortunately for them, history
is written by the winners. History is not written by
the loser. So Jack Smith is trying to write and
make a play here for the history books, but he's
fundamentally going to come up short.
Speaker 1 (25:57):
I think. But did they lose, Josh, I mean in
the end, yes, Donald Trump won the election, of course,
But Fannie willis You and I both know she's gonna
get re elected or even move up. Alvin Bragg. His
sham trials in New York. They're not going to hurt
Alvin Bragg's career. He's going to run on those and
he's going to be a senator, a governor, or something else.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
They didn't lose in the end, right.
Speaker 9 (26:21):
Well, on an individual level. I mean Fannie Wilson, Fulton County, Georgia.
Speaker 12 (26:24):
You're right.
Speaker 9 (26:25):
I mean that's Atlanta that has a very very blue
jurisdiction these days. Alvin Bragg is in Manhattan that is
probably even further left, or maybe slightly less left, but similar.
But I think they lost Jesse kind of zooming out
insofar as they lost the election. I mean they've lost
what they were purportedly trying to do, which was to
try to derail Donald Trump's primary campaign in the GOP primary,
(26:46):
and more to the point, to make sure that he
would not be elected as the forty seventh President of
the United States. That, above all is what they were
trying to do there, and once upon a time in
the eyes of the mainstream legal commentariat there they viewed
a lot of these cases as open and shut, ironclad cases,
the way that MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times, so forth,
the way that they used to talk about the case
(27:06):
in Washington, d C. In particular, the Marquee case of
the Democrat Law Fair Complex, the January sixth, twenty twenty case.
There they were saying, this was the safest thing imaginable,
or the safest thing at least in decades there, and
it all fell apart. Not only did it all fall apart,
but it had the reverse effect. It had the effect
of boosting Donald Trump in the primary over his primary competitors,
(27:28):
and it had the effect of boosting him in the
general election as well. The American people were not having
it with this law fare. So yes, they have succeeded
to an extent, insofar as they have set an extraordinarily
dangerous precedent. We have crossed not merely the Rubicon, we've
crossed frankly the Atlantic Ocean at this point there when
it comes to trying to turn America into a third
world sub Saharan Africa tinpot dictatorship.
Speaker 12 (27:50):
I'm not sure when we're going to get.
Speaker 9 (27:51):
Back from that abyss anytime sooner or anything there, but
they fundamentally have lost when it comes to their overall
number one mission to derail Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (28:00):
What about this case against Hunter Biden, David Weiss released
his final report, What are we supposed to make all this?
Speaker 9 (28:07):
Well, David Wise is basically excoriating Joe Biden here for
having the temerity to critics that criticized the Justice Department. Now,
this case was interesting from the get go right. So
David Weiss was the special counsel on Hunter Biden. He
was also the US Attorney for Delaware, which, by the way,
is kind of odd because a sitting active US attorney
(28:28):
is not supposed to actually be a special counsel. The
DJ has protocols that purportally exist to prevent exactly that
from happening. No one seemed to care, which as a lawyer,
I continued to find a little odd there. But David
Wise did pursue the gun case against Hunter Biden in
Delaware through to a conviction. He almost was surely was
going to be able to get a conviction out in
Los Angeles as well, before they ultimately got that plead
deal the week that that trial in Los Angeles in
(28:50):
September was about to get started there and then we all,
you know, look, the whole world saw what Joe Biden did.
I mean, he reversed his you know, approximately five thousand
times that he said he was not going to pardon
his son. He reversed all that. In the blink of
an eye of there he pardons the son. And then
he says that the Justice Department handled this in an
improper and politicized manner.
Speaker 12 (29:09):
I'm sorry, mister presidents.
Speaker 9 (29:11):
When Donald Trump was saying the exact same thing about
former so called special counsel Jack Smith, when Donald Trump
was saying all those exact same things, Joe Biden was saying,
Oh he's sowing the seeds of discording the justice system.
Oh he's trying to destabilize the constitution, and fascist tyrant
Hitler or Nazee whatever, they're so shirley. What's good for
the goose is good for the gander.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
There.
Speaker 9 (29:31):
So that's basically a little bit of what David Weiss
has here in his report. He's basically saying, mister President's,
I mean, look, you have the part of power and fury.
You can do what you want, even if it is
something as venal and corrupt and self dealing and grossly
cynical with the Hunter Biden part, and you theoretically have
that power within your legitimate constitutional authority. But don't do
what you criticize your opponent of doing. In so far
(29:53):
as trying to criticize the Justice Department in this case
is doubly embarrassing because it's actually Joe Biden's own Justice apartment.
If you really cared that much, you could have fired
David White' special counsel and prevented it from game to
this point.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
Josh, how did those two get crossways? Because David Weiss
may have done all that, but David Weiss was obviously
put there to run cover for Hunter, gave him a
sweetheart deal that was going to get through in Delaware
if not for a judge. And now those two were
taking little pop shots like high school girls at each other.
Is it just because Joe Biden called him politicized?
Speaker 9 (30:28):
Well, you're totally right. So just to be clear here,
David Weise, he brought two prosecutions against Hunter Biden. There
was this gun case involving this revolver that Hunter Biden
literally wrote about in his book. I mean, first of all,
what and moron you have to be to literally admit
to a federal crime in an actual book. You actually
had prosecutors reading from Hunter Biden's book at that trial.
Speaker 12 (30:48):
I mean, I mean, I'm serious, Yessing, how stupid do
you have to be?
Speaker 2 (30:51):
Right?
Speaker 9 (30:52):
So, I mean he brought this gun case acaust Hunter
Biden and Delaware, and then he brought this tax case
out in Los Angeles, which was similarly ironclad but before
they reached a plea deal. But he deliberately slow walked
everything else so Farah, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which
Hunter Biden was guilty as a clam of violating on
behalf of Brisbane, Ukraine in particular, arguably also Romania, China,
(31:13):
maybe other countries as well, but definitely Ukraine Fara has
a five year statute of limitations, and David Weiss slow
walked the crap out of his investigation there. It seemed
to many of us like he was trying to slow
walk away that five year statute of limitation so as
to basically try to land the Hunter Biden plane safely,
so to speak.
Speaker 2 (31:32):
There.
Speaker 9 (31:32):
So you're totally right there, but yeah, they're but now
they're at odds there because Joe Biden. If you know,
if I can, if I can psychoanalyze Joe Biden just
for a second here, you know, he has the fragile
ego of a kindergartener. This is someone who is the
oldest president American history, but he has the ego of
someone who who is like one twentieth or thirtieth or
whatever of his age. If you criticize Joe Biden at all,
(31:55):
there he is going to lash out of you. He
has an infamous temper. He cannot stand being criticized. What's there,
that's basically I think where this is coming from. But
you're totally right. David Weis was trying to help Joe Biden,
and I guess he has now found out what happens
when you try to help a man as fickle and
frankly irascible as Joe Biden.
Speaker 2 (32:15):
Irascible. That's a great word.
Speaker 1 (32:16):
I'm gonna figure out what that used, how to use
that word. I'm gonna say it in a sentence later
on today. All right, Josh, Finally I saw the Washington Post,
one of the more despicable papers in the United States
of America. They put out the list of Trump nominees
they approve of and disapprove of, and one of the
ones they approved of concerns me, Josh, because it's the
(32:37):
Washington Post, and because in my mind, there is nothing
more important than the DOJ stopping the government protection racket
it has become. Pam Bondy got a big, fat thumbs
up from the Washington Post. Now everybody I talked too
speaks highly of Pam Bondy. I'm not here to trash
your reputation, but at the Washington Post, like Sir Josh,
I have concerns. Jesse.
Speaker 9 (33:00):
Look, I mean, Pam Bondi would not have been my
number one pick, if I'm being very candid with you.
She is not who I would have personally advised Donald
Trump to pick for attorney general there. But she's perfectly serviceable.
I mean, she's going to do a perfectly fine job there.
You know, she was a two term attorney general of
my state, of the state of Florida, and she was
a leading conservative crusader during her years as a state
(33:20):
attorney general. She was one of the tips of the
spears against Obamacare back when that was a fight she
actually fought pretty courgeously, if memory serves, on the same
sex marriage issue as well, before the Supreme Court took
that off the table in the Obergefel case of twenty fifteen.
There my only objection to Pam Bondi is that I
think she's somewhat of yesterday's news. She was attorney general
of Florida for if memory serves, from twenty eleven to
twenty nineteen. There I would have encouraged to go with
(33:42):
a slightly younger spruce your pick someone who maybe is
a sitting current active attorney general, someone like a Ken
Paxton in Texas or something like that there. But she's
perfectly fine. I have no actual objections to Pam Bondi.
She actually was a registered agent of the Qatari government
tw years ago. I'm told that as well in the past.
It's no longer an in shoe, thank god, because that
actually would have been troublesome. But I'm told it's no
(34:02):
longer an issue there the Washington Post, I'm on, Charlie.
Speaker 12 (34:05):
Sure why they're giving her thumbs up.
Speaker 9 (34:07):
I mean, you know, she probably does not agree with
them on the overhalling majority of issues. Maybe it is
the Kutark connection, frankly, because the Washington Post does take
a lot of Katari money. So maybe that is actually
what's going on there. But I can't really figure out
what else might be going on.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
Josh, thank you, my friend. Enjoy your new baby.
Speaker 1 (34:25):
Thanks all right, what's like on the ground California wildfires
can't be good, let's find out that's.
Speaker 13 (34:42):
And that's when I saw this, And I really want
to show you this because I hadn't noticed it before,
but I started looking for this hose and it was
extended over my yard. Somebody had taken the garden hose
from the front yard and they had stood there before
(35:02):
I had arrived, and they had tried to extinguish or
maybe they had extinguished the fire that burnt this part
of the fence and the fire that was burning these trees.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Some neighbor who.
Speaker 13 (35:14):
I don't know I still don't know who did it
to this day, had put out the fire at my house.
Speaker 2 (35:21):
Pretty awesome.
Speaker 1 (35:22):
You know. There's plenty of stories of dirtballs and turns,
looting and things like that out there, but there are
plenty of stories of some wonderful people doing wonderful things.
Joining me now at least one of those wonderful people, Jennifer.
We're not really sure about her. Joel Pollock, Senior editor
at large for bright bart News and Jennifer Gallardi, visiting
fellow from the Independent Women's Forum. Joel, that's your house.
(35:44):
I keep hearing wonderful things about wonderful people out there,
and I like to hear it.
Speaker 14 (35:51):
Well. Jesse, the house behind me is not my house.
The house on the cliff is my house. My house
is about four hundred yards that this is a house
on a neighboring street. And the only reason I'm setting
up here is because I know I have good reception here.
It's very hard to get services and reception at the
(36:12):
moment because of the destruction that you can see around me.
But this is my neighborhood and I'd think probably about
eighty percent of the homes have been destroyed.
Speaker 1 (36:24):
God have mercy, Jen, you lived there for a very
long time, twenty years you finally left. How surreal is
it to look at all those videos, all those images
and it's just gone. I mean, I've been in that
area so many times. It's amazing to see it ugly.
It's the most beautiful place I've ever seen.
Speaker 15 (36:44):
It really is.
Speaker 16 (36:44):
And first I want to extend my sympathies to Joel
and everybody who has lost so much, their friends. Miraculously,
my friends condo building is still standing, So there has
been some grace given by God, Thank the Lord, and
very grateful for that. And I know it's still going
to be a long road. But yeah, Jesse, I think
I heard you say on Megan Kelly's podcast, is that
(37:06):
people like to dump all over California.
Speaker 15 (37:09):
I mean, with good reason.
Speaker 16 (37:10):
Our leadership has completely driven the state into the ground.
And you know, I wasn't very political in California because
I didn't.
Speaker 15 (37:17):
Need to be. Right, it was an easy place to
live without a lot of money.
Speaker 16 (37:20):
Not everybody that lives there is a wealthy millionaire, right,
the lifestyle, It's why the homeless are all there. You
didn't need a million dollars. And then COVID really hit
and I was like, what is going on? And I
started to understand kind of before this fire, what bad
policy looks like and the destruction it wrecks on people.
(37:43):
And you know, Gavin Newsom, I'm not so sure that
people are going to wake up. I mean, he did
this during COVID and that wasn't enough. So maybe this
will be it. But you know, I don't know what
it's going to take for these people to realize that
voting has consequences.
Speaker 1 (37:59):
Joe, you're there, obviously. What is the mood on the
ground of the people. I've been in natural disasters plenty
of times myself before. There's always sadness, there's always anger there.
If there is anger, who are they angry at?
Speaker 2 (38:13):
What's the mood of the people.
Speaker 14 (38:17):
Well, right now, I'm one of the only people who
lives in Pacific Palisades.
Speaker 2 (38:23):
Who is actually in Pacific.
Speaker 14 (38:24):
Palisades Because the only people they allow up here right
now are police, fire and journalists, and most of the
journalists are from international or national outlet. It just so
happens that two Breitbart News people live in Pacific Palisades
and one lives over in Brentwood and he had to evacuate.
(38:44):
But if my colleague John Cohn lost his house, it
was about a mile in that direction, and my house
is still standing about a quarter mile behind me. But
on the ground, in terms of people who have been evacuated,
the mood is obviously grief, but also frustration because they
can't come up here yet it's not safe for large
(39:07):
numbers of people. I found a fire in the front
yard of a house near Mind just this morning because
a local resident asked me to take the photograph of
their now ruined house, and they sent me to an
address and I went there and there was a fire
in the front yard. This is still a burning fire,
even though it looked like mostly out. There are hot
spots that are still dangerous. But people are frustrated. They
(39:30):
want to be able to have closure or to get
back into their homes if their homes are still standing.
And there's some anger at Governor Gavin Newsom at Mayor
Karen Bass. She was out of the country when the
wildfires hit. He knew there was an extreme wind event coming,
but he did not get emergency personnel in place. The
fire department did not predeploy because they didn't have the
(39:51):
money to pay overtime. You think how much money would
have been saved had they just put the firefighters out
and paid the overtime. Look how many billions of dollars
have been destroyed for maybe what one million dollars in
overtime for twenty four hours. So there's a lot of anger.
At the same time, there is a lot of hope.
(40:11):
The public school, which is just uphill behind me, it
burnt down, but what survived was the school logo, which
is a seagull in front of a rainbow, and that
rainbow is giving people hope, very much like the biblical
rainbow after the flood. It's the symbol of hope that
the community is embracing and people do want to rebuild.
(40:32):
People are helping each other. It's like the random neighbor
who put out the fire on my fence before I
got there. People in Palisades are like that, and that
spirit continues, but there's a lot of pain and frustration
and anger.
Speaker 1 (40:46):
Yeah, Jen, I know you have a bunch of friends
still there, and I know you've got a bunch of
fruitcake friends still there.
Speaker 2 (40:54):
Where are they at in all this?
Speaker 16 (40:57):
Well, the ones with any common sense, like said, are angry.
They want accountability, they want a change. They hope other
people wake up. But this is the liberal We've talked
about this almost ad nauseum. Now, this mindset that you know,
there were many responses to a piece I wrote in
The Federalist, you know, holding Governor Gavin Newsom accountable everything,
(41:19):
Joel said. Karen Bass was in God doing god knows what.
And they're saying, now is not the time for politicizing.
Now is not the time for pointing fingers and casting blame.
Now is the time for compassion. And you know what,
how is it compassionate to sit there from behind your
computer and your flat in Brooklyn and post like this
(41:39):
is where you can get help to me? That is
like the ultimate narcissism to think someone's going to come
to my social media platform to figure out how to
get help. Nobody was coming, like my friends and the
palisades were not asking me. They have resources, but they
love to preach from above, pointing out all the moral
failures of all those less virtuous than they are, and
(42:00):
do nothing except post nice words on social media.
Speaker 4 (42:03):
You know, they pat.
Speaker 16 (42:03):
Themselves on the back for all their compassion about where
to find help or where to donate. And meanwhile, the
actual victims who lost everything are as upset and angry
as I am. And anger can be beneficial, it prompts change,
and you know, it moves.
Speaker 12 (42:19):
People to act.
Speaker 16 (42:20):
Yet the morally superior it's not helpful in any way,
and they know the right way to respond to the crisis,
and they're going to sympathy shame you until you feel
the way they feel. And you know, one person even
used my religion against me and saying what would Jesus do?
Speaker 15 (42:36):
And I was like, first of all, you're not Christians,
so you.
Speaker 16 (42:38):
Have no idea what Jesus would do, you know, and
maybe you should get out from behind your computer and
go help in the ways that you can.
Speaker 12 (42:46):
But they don't.
Speaker 15 (42:46):
They just make other people try to feel bad.
Speaker 1 (42:51):
Joel Jen wishing you both the very best. Joel reach
out text me if you need anything, My brother Jen
not you.
Speaker 2 (42:57):
All right, you guys, I appreciate you very much.
Speaker 1 (43:01):
Lighten the mood next, all right, it is time to
lighten the mood. And before we do that, if you
want more videos like this, you can go get them.
Speaker 2 (43:18):
They're all over.
Speaker 1 (43:19):
My YouTube page and it's free, and just go subscribe
to the YouTube pageutube dot com, slash at Jesse Kelly
DC or just scan that little thing right there on
your phone and you're good to go. Now, I made
a mistake and I bought nice luggage a while ago.
Speaker 2 (43:38):
Well here I was talking about it.
Speaker 1 (43:41):
There is one thing you should not spend the money
on luggage. We each carried throughout our life. The luggage
we brought into the marriage, which had one big bag
and one kind of small carry on begging. Do you
know what it's like you mix and match. We were
not worried about. Well, finally the wheels were starting to
go a little caddy wampus and things are going bad
(44:02):
on the luggage, and we decided, hey, you get what
you paid for. Let's go out and get a set
of good luggage. That way, it'll last us very first
trip with the good luggage it's it broke, and it
didn't break in just a weird way or in a
normal way. It broke, the latches didn't open. I had
(44:23):
to get a hammer to open up the luggage. So
listen to me. I went home, I went online. I
found a coupon gosh I sound like Chris, and I
spent sixty eight dollars for one of the big bags.
And I got a big bag, and it has lasted
me another three years. It's a complete piece of crap.
Speaker 2 (44:44):
Zip up.
Speaker 1 (44:45):
You wouldn't look at it twice. Don't ever spend money
on luggage, a complete ripoff.
Speaker 2 (44:53):
It's a fact. I just saved you some money. See
them all, U,
Host
Jesse Kelly
Popular Podcasts
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com