April 29, 2025 • 27 mins
Today on the Jimmy Barrett Show:
- Bill Belicheck's relationship
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Well, what we need is more common sense.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Common breaking down the world's nonsense about how American common sense.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
Will see us through with the common sense of Houston.
I'm just pro common sense for Houston. From Houston dot com.
This is the Jimmy Barrett Show, brought to you by
viewind dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Now here's Jimmy Barrett.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
All right, I thought we would start the show today
talking about what do they call the May December romances?
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Right?
Speaker 4 (00:40):
Older usually older guy, younger woman. Very rarely the other
way around for some reason. I think we know the reason.
But but you have to be willing to admit it.
Guys like younger women. Women generally like their men more mature. Right,
that's an over generalization. I get that, Okay, I mean
(01:00):
a shovendiest, but I think it's more true more often
than not. So Bill Belichick, who, by the way, the
farmer New England Patriots coach current coach of North Carolina.
He is seventy three years old. He has a girlfriend,
Jordan is her name. She is twenty four years old,
(01:25):
so she is easily in the right age range. I mean,
you bea at the upper end, but she's technically she's
young enough to be his granddaughter. And I think that's
when things start to get creepy. It's bad enough for
guys when you're dating somebody who's young enough to be
your daughter. It is even more creepy when you're dating
(01:46):
somebody who is potentially young enough to be your granddaughter.
Now I don't know what they have in common. Well, yes,
I think I do know. Probably what they have in common.
His money is what they have in common. I'm guessing
you know your twenty four year old woman. I mean
she's not. She's not a super bottle or anything. In fact,
(02:09):
I was a little surprised. I mean she's not. You know,
she's not. She hasn't fit a stereotypical thing of you know,
some young buxom, you know, hottie that that Bill Belichick
has managed to latch onto. I don't know who latched
on to who, to be honest with you, I don't
know if he latched on to her she latched on
to him. I'm making an assumption that the only thing
(02:31):
they really have in common is his money, because what
else would a seventy four or a seventy three year
old and a twenty four year old have in common?
You wouldn't think much of anything when you get right
down to it. And to make things even more interesting,
and I'm not quite sure why he agreed to do it.
Bill Belichick evidently agreed to sit down for an interview
(02:52):
with CBS's Sixty Minutes where they were going to talk,
and he knew they were going to talk about his
relationship ship with this young girl. I guess, okay, young
woman technically speaking, but you know again, twenty four years old.
And she proceeded, by the way to pretty much dictate
(03:14):
what could or could not be asked during the interview.
I mean, she may be, you know, she may be
a quarter of his age, but she's clearly in charge
of that relationship, at least as a related to the interview.
And the question evidently that she didn't want Bill to
answer was how did they meet? Which I thought was
kind of interesting. Of all the questions you could be asked,
(03:37):
why would you not want to share how they met? Now?
Rumor has it they met on a plane. I don't
know if that's true or not, in which case, why
would you care if that information was shared? I mean,
the only reasons to really care about sharing that is if,
like I don't know. They met at a strip club
(03:57):
and she was the stripper and he was the customer.
Then I want to just yeah, that would be embarrassing.
I would get that there's something that she's hiding, and
I'm not quite sure what it is. Anyway, Obviously a
lot of people, I'm not the first nor the last,
I'm sure to comment on this whole thing. But I'll
get to my rules about older men and younger women
in a second. But first, I wanted to play this
(04:19):
for you, and that is a little portion of the
sixty minute CBS interview. Maybe it was, I don't know
if it was sixty minutes. It was CBS that he
was doing the interview with, so you can hear a
little bit of it for yourself. And then, of course
Greg Guttfeld has a field day with this whole thing.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
The other change.
Speaker 5 (04:36):
From Belichick is twenty four year old Jordan Hudson, his
creative muse. As he writes in his book, Jordan was
a constant presence during our interview.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
You have Jordan thread over there.
Speaker 6 (04:52):
Everybody in the world seems to be following this relationship.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
How do you deal with that?
Speaker 7 (04:56):
I've never been too worried about what everybody else thinks,
just to try to do what I feel like is
deser me and what's right?
Speaker 2 (05:02):
How did you guys meet? Not talking about those No.
Speaker 5 (05:07):
It's a topic neither one of them is comfortable commenting on.
Speaker 8 (05:11):
H I get it, it's not sexy admitting that they
met when she was at his front door selling boxes
of thin mints. They also delved into the couple of
social media presence.
Speaker 6 (05:26):
There's some great pictures of you and Jordan where you're
a fisherman and she's a mermaid. It's charming, it's a
different side of you. What's the reaction been like, what's
it been like to have these different sort of photos.
There's another one where you're doing I know, you're not
into meditation or yoga or pilates. You're balancing Jordan on
(05:46):
your feet and she's doing kind of the Titanic post.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (05:51):
So I'm on some of those social media platforms, but
I honestly don't follow them.
Speaker 8 (06:02):
I'll bet she has to show him out to use
his own phone. It's so nice to have the grandkids
around so overnight.
Speaker 9 (06:08):
Belichick, who went from a coach that won six Super
Bowls to a Joe Biden impersonator seemed confused when those
Instagram photos were brought up. My gut tells me those
weren't his ideas.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
The one thing's for certain.
Speaker 8 (06:21):
He may be the head coach, but she's in charge
of that interview.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Who knows. Maybe Jordan is his muse or at.
Speaker 8 (06:27):
The very least his life insurance beneficiary.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
Yeah, like I said, what do they have in common?
Speaker 2 (06:34):
His money?
Speaker 4 (06:35):
And by the way, if you caught the interview, did
you see what he's wearing. He's wearing like a old
Navy sweatshirt. I knows father lunch coach for Navy, but
that sweatsher looked like something his father might have worn.
It had a hole in it. I mean, who sits
down for an interview with a major television network wearing
a raty old sweatshirt. But then again, you know, that's
kind of classic Bill Belichick. So I'm pretty sure wherever
(06:58):
they did meet, he didn't presser with the way he
was dressed. I don't know what it was she was
impressed with, other the fact that it is Bill Belichick.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
Here. Here's the bottom line, though, you know, because because
I you know, a seventy three year old man and
a twenty four year old woman. That's that. That's into creepy.
I think I don't mind older men younger women. You
know they are consenting adults. You know that's up to them.
But at the end of the day, my divarce attorney,
(07:31):
he had a rule. This was his advice as I
was going back into the dating pool, which is, if
you're going to date a younger woman, remember the rule
half your age plus seven half your age plus seven.
So at the time I was forty and so half
my age plus seven would have been twenty seven. No,
(07:53):
don't date a woman younger than twenty seven. And the
other part of his rule was that that it worked
regardless of how old you are. So if you're like
a really old guy and you want to date a
younger woman, you know, if you're eighty, half your age
plus seven is forty seven. You see how that works.
(08:15):
Right now, I did the math for Belichick, seventy three,
half your age plus seven and be thirty six and
a half will round it down because we'll just round
it down to thirty six. So he should not be
dating anybody younger at the age of thirty six, or
then you get into super creepy. All right, quick little
break back with more in a moment, Jimmy Part Show.
(08:35):
Here a name of the nine fifty KPRC. All Right,
today marks the one hundred day of the Trump administration's
(08:58):
second term. This is day one hundred today. He will
be in Michigan tonight in Macomb County, Michigan. That is
a suburb about his appearances, would be a twelve mile road.
The Uh, this is what I remember for my days there.
The the the demarcation line is eight mile road. If
you have ever listened to M and M, you might
(09:20):
you know, you might be familiar with that term eight
mile road.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
That's that's where the city of Southfield begins and the
city of Detroit ends. So he's only talking, you're only
talking about Macomb County. You're talking about four miles north
of Detroit. Is where he's going to be. And the
reason why he's going to be there, I think there's
a couple of reasons. We had Wesley Hunt on our
show earlier today on k t R H and and
(09:43):
I think he stutely pointed out the two reasons to
go there. Number one is the President was announcing yesterday
some backing off of car tariffs. So I'm sure he
wants to spread that word in in the Motor City
because obviously that's where they make a lot of cars,
and that that area is impacted probably more than anywhere else.
Number one, and number two, that is where you know,
(10:04):
middle class American auto workers. That's where they live, and
many of them voted for Trump and carried the state
for him. So I'm sure he wants to go back
there and explain exactly what it is he's doing, especially
as it relates to the tariffs, so that they worry
a little bit less on how all this stuff is
going to end up working out. He also might bring
(10:25):
this up again. He yesterday speaking of tariffs, he talked
about how much money we made in tariff so far.
Do you know, in the month of April, and April's
not over yet, in the month of April, fifteen point
nine billion dollars in tariff income. That's really amazing. I
(10:47):
think about that. Maybe he's not wrong when he says
that he could eliminate the income tax, or at least
significantly lower the income tax with all the tariff income
that we're going to be making. So here's Trump. I
think he's probably maybe was getting ready to go to Michigan.
Here's Trump talking about terriffs replacing tax revenue, and then
(11:08):
some reaction to that from shark tanks or formerly shark tanks,
Kevin O'Leary.
Speaker 10 (11:14):
We're going to make a lot of money and we're
going to cut taxes for the people of this country.
It will take a little while bee before we do that,
but we're going to be cutting taxes, and as possible,
we'll do a complete tax cut, because I think the
tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax. Now,
we have a lot of depth that's been left to us,
you know, unfortunately over many years. We'll take care of
(11:36):
that with the tariffs.
Speaker 11 (11:37):
You know, coming desperate for your thoughts on the idea
that had been floating around in some Republican circles about
raising the top tax bracket for some of the highest
highest earners.
Speaker 12 (11:46):
That is dead on arrival fifty times over because it
goes against the American Dream. That is the brand that
the President is hired to protect above all of his
other mandates, to protect the American Dream. We've talked about
it countless times. That is not the American dream. Taxing
the rich and making them and punishing the there for
being successful is not the American dream. They pay the
(12:08):
majority of the taxes already, they pay billions in taxes,
and so we don't This is never going to be
in this country where let's focus on successful people and
really screw them back into the ground. That is not
the American dream. What is going to work? Think I
think it'll come in this tax package. On the other
side of that is this no tax on tips and
(12:30):
over time, cool idea for.
Speaker 2 (12:32):
People that work really, really hard.
Speaker 12 (12:34):
And I really endorse that, and I hope that happens,
and I think it will.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
This tax package.
Speaker 12 (12:38):
Has to go through, and if they just keep the
existing tax code as it stands.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
That's good enough.
Speaker 12 (12:43):
That's good enough, and that's hard enough to get through.
And then let's focus on growth to get out of debt.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Because even the.
Speaker 12 (12:49):
Democrats are saying, guys, we got to stop bringing budgets
where we go another two trillion into debt every time
we bring a budget.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
Why can't we.
Speaker 12 (12:57):
Just get to a place where we're balancing a budget
for the first time in years.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
Yeah, well, you'd have to. When you have to go
back to the Clinton years. I mean, there's a lot
of things to not like about Bill Clinton, but he
was good for the economy and he was he was
good as far as getting the budget under control. Of course,
knew gingrich and had a lot to do with that
as well. But that was back when Democrats and Republicans
(13:23):
could do, at least to a certain extent, cooperate with
each other. And when you know, getting rid of wasteful
spending was not a dirty word or a dirty thing
to do. So there you go, by the way, I
had another guy in the morning show today, Matt Locke.
He's a Republican strategist. He is also a podcaster, you know,
and I asked him about you know, Trump's big, beautiful
(13:43):
budget and about you know, making these tax cuts permanent,
and he doesn't think either one gets done. He thinks
that the Republican controlled Congress is still more anti Trump
than than Trump's supporting and that they'll just they'll just
they don't want to, you know, they don't want to
(14:04):
lower their potential income level. They want all that extra
money to work with so that they can enrich themselves,
and that at the end of the day, they're not
going to get it done.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
We'll see. We'll see now.
Speaker 4 (14:16):
As far as the trade war itself, Team and Shine
those are a couple of China companies, although Team Wu
has their has their corporate headquarters in Boston, but everything
that they bring in, everything that you can order from them,
comes from China, and they have increased their prices about
(14:37):
one hundred and forty five percent because of the tariffs.
So you know that coat that used to be was
like forty thirty thirty six dollars is now like eighty
eight dollars kind of thing. That the prices have gone
way up. Still by the way, quite frankly, you know,
relatively inexpensive anything. So I don't think it'll absolutely, you know,
(14:58):
kill their business, but it will certainly impact what kinds
of things people buy from them, although this might not
last all that long. Gordon Chang, who's we've had on
our program before. Gordon Shang is a China expert. He
thinks that the Chinese are already capitulating. They're already they're
already backing off. They're just not telling you what it
(15:19):
is that they're doing. Here's Gordon Chang.
Speaker 13 (15:21):
The important thing here is that China, without any announcements,
is not collecting tariffs on important goods, so for instance,
some semiconductors, aviation products, industrial chemicals, medical devices, some medicines.
And also they're going to expand that list because there
are lists circulating in China of one hundred and thirty
(15:42):
one items that China may not impose tariffs, So this
is going to expand. It means that China is made
an important concession, but it's not saying it's making a concession,
which is a fascinating insight into the Chinese political system
right now, which has become both in transigent and inflexible.
Speaker 14 (16:02):
What is the impact of a one hundred and forty
five percent tariff on Chinese goods coming into the US cordon.
Speaker 13 (16:08):
It's not growing at the five point four percent pace
that they reported for Q one. It's probably contracting, as
we can see from the price data from both February
and March, which signals that China's in a deflationary spiral.
We are seeing underlying indicators that point to contraction, including
tax receipts that were down three point five percent for
(16:28):
the quarter. That's inconsistent with robust growth. And if China
is not contracting now, somehow it will be contracting very soon.
So when you talk about one hundred and forty five
one hundred and forty five percent general tariff on Chinese goods,
this really means that many's factories aren't going to be
selling anything to the US, which explains why some factories
(16:51):
have already closed and other factories are cutting down their shifts.
Speaker 15 (16:55):
AI.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
Here's one more riem, by the way, from Trump's first
one hundred day, and it may be the one that
he's the most glaringly successful. He's done a tremendous amount
of things in the first one hundred days, almost all
of which have been successful, but none more successful than
shutting down the illegal immigration. I think in the last
(17:19):
month there's been like nine people arrested at the border. Nine.
Back during the Biden administration, their worst one day ever
was over forty eight hundred, so it's down to virtually nothing.
Here is from the Center for Immigration Studies. Here is
Todd Bensman.
Speaker 16 (17:37):
Sure, the Biden administration left a wreck, a train wreck
of the deportation and detention machine. It's in pieces all
over the country. They dismantled the machine. So the Congress
is now in a position to fund its reconstruction. The
(18:00):
machine has to be rebuilt from the bottom up. They
shut down all of the detention centers for women and children,
for families. They canceled all the private contracts with private jails,
and they eliminated deals between local jails and ICE, et cetera.
(18:20):
So that there's nowhere to put people. That has to
be expanded. We need to see more personnel staffing the
deportation effort, ICE border patrol. We need the wall to
be finished. And so this is going to be Congress.
They're looking at about one hundred and seventy billion dollars
(18:41):
maybe to really just throw at all of these reconstruction issues.
And I think that's what we're going to be seeing
next for the real phase of deportations, the real thing
that's coming.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
I want to stay on that because.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
The word cut anyway, Yeah, I mean that that's kind
of where we've gone from protecting the border now to
concentrating on these deportations by ICE, which of course he's
driving the progressive crowd crazy thanks in part to what
you can see how it's the reacting with that judge
of Milwaukee, Wisconsin and what she did. Anyway, we've got
(19:21):
quick lope break. We're back with Vorne Moment Jimmy Parrett Show.
You're on a nine fifty KPRC. All right, Bob, we
(19:49):
kind of wrap up the show today. We've talked about
China on the show today, but let's let's relate it
to not only China, Russia. Who else would be in
this Iran and North Korea? Four different countries are covered
in Texas SB. Seventeen. It's a bill that, among other things,
(20:09):
would require you, if you're from those countries China, North Korea, Iran,
and Russia, that you would have to be a United
States citizen in order to be able to buy property.
Come here and write if you want, but to buy property,
you'd have to be a US citizen if you're from
(20:30):
any one of those four countries, which are all you know,
enemies of the United States when you get right down
to it, of one varying degree or another. Those are
the four that are covered. Let's face, we've had a
lot of property here in Texas bought up by by
you know, Chinese nationals, you know, some of it near
military bases. Do doubt my mind what they want that
property for. It is for spying purposes. We need to
(20:53):
stop this. There's not a lot of countries in the world,
by the way, where you, as a United States citizen,
can go and just buy property to live in. You know,
in some countries you cannot buy property if you're not
a citizen of that country, period, regardless of where you're from.
So I don't find anything that unique or unusual about this,
(21:15):
and to me, it only makes common sense. Anyway, here
is the report from Fox twenty six here in Houston.
Speaker 17 (21:22):
Let's be absolutely clear, this bill is racist.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
This bill is anti Asian.
Speaker 11 (21:30):
Thursday, the Texas House Committee of Homeland Security advanced Center
Bill seventeen and it is now headed to the House
floor for a vote.
Speaker 14 (21:37):
This law s to be seventeen undermines the American dream.
It undermines the very moral fabric of what we should
stand for as Americans. Harris County is one of the
largest economic hubs, not only in Texas but in the
United States. So to have a law it would take
(22:01):
our neighbor's rights away. It would have a law where
the Attorney general could essentially unilaterally take the property is
unconstitutional because it undermines due process.
Speaker 11 (22:14):
If signed into law, Senate Bill seventeen would restrict people
from buying land and property purchases who are originally from China, Russia, Iran,
and North Korea.
Speaker 15 (22:25):
Moreover, this bill is threatened to protections granted by both
US Constitution and the Texas Constitution. It's also discouraging foreign
investment and talent.
Speaker 11 (22:39):
In a tweet on x, State Representative Cole Hefner from
District five, who introduced the bill, says, in part quote,
this legislation is about standing up to hostile foreign actors
and keeping Texas secure. It strengthens our ability to protect
critical infrastructure, private property, and our communities from foreign threats
that have no place here. Local leaders and activists say
(23:02):
this bill is not about national security, but dividing our nation.
Speaker 17 (23:06):
SB seventeen will strip away the rights of thousands of
Texas residents, people who are here legally simply because of
their country of origin.
Speaker 2 (23:16):
It'll expose them to racial.
Speaker 17 (23:17):
Profiling, housing discrimination, and even the terrible possibility of having
their property seized.
Speaker 4 (23:27):
Okay, first of all, nobody's talking about seizing anybody's property
who currently owns. Nobody's talking about that at all. That's
not what SB seventeen calls for. But you could see
the tactic here right, it's racist. It's racist. It's racist
to prevent people from China, Chinese citizens, Chinese nationals from
(23:49):
buying property next to US military basis. That's we're reacting
out of racism, not of any real security concern. So
I thought, okay, well, let's if that's the way the
left wants to play it, let me run it past you.
We did a little question of the day this morning
on kt URH. You know, do you think we should
(24:10):
ban non citizens from China, in Russia and Iran in
North Korea from buying property here in Texas? And we
all seem to be walking pretty much in lockstep on
this one.
Speaker 18 (24:22):
I cannot think of another country on the planet that
allows non citizens to own property, especially property that is
deemed a sensitive farmland near military bases, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
It just doesn't happen. Why do we allow it?
Speaker 19 (24:39):
Hey, good morning, Jimmy is Jared from Pearland. So I
sure would like to see one of us try and
go to China or Russia or much last North Korea
and an attempt to buy some land, especially near sensitive
military bases. It doesn't make any sense. So I don't
think it should be legal for them. To do it either.
(25:01):
It's nothing racist about it. It's just common sense for
our national security.
Speaker 20 (25:06):
Jimmy John from Katie Area, Hey, regarding people from commonest
countries playing land in Texas, push the bill through.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
Push the bill through.
Speaker 20 (25:19):
Why the lefties are concerned because they think it's going
to hurt something? Hey, hey, how are we going to
appease our enemies and hope them want bomb or kill us?
Speaker 3 (25:30):
That's my thought?
Speaker 4 (25:31):
Bye bye, Okay, yeah, I think we're all pretty much
on the same page. Well, here's one more let me
let me grab one more.
Speaker 1 (25:38):
Morning Jimmy Rick from the East Side. I know you
have a vacation home somewhere down around Galveston. I wonder
what would happen if you'd tried to go over to
China and get a vacation home. You know, what's good
for the goose is good for the gander.
Speaker 4 (25:52):
Push it through, amen, Well push it. And for the record,
I have no interest in the vacation home in China.
I wouldn't even think about. You know, I had no interest. Honestly,
I have no interest in a trip to communist China,
let alone a vacation home in communist China. And by
(26:13):
the way I would. I would have no problem not
selling the vacation home near Galveston Freeport, to be exact,
to not selling it to somebody from China, a Chinese national,
or somebody again from Russia. Who's who's down to a
United States citizen, I have no problem not There's plenty
of other people to buy the home, I hope somewhere
(26:35):
down the road. Okay, well, we'll see what happens with
that bill. I'm you know, you know, I don't have
a lot of faith right now in the state legislature
because of all the craziness going on in the Texas House.
But I guess we'll see if this gets anywhere. Listen,
y'all have a great day. Thank you for listening. I
do appreciate it. I'll see you tomorrow morning, bright nearly
at five am over on news Radio seven forty KTRH.
(26:56):
We are back here at four on AM nine fifty
KPRC
Speaker 1 (27:05):
Defender Tidy and the band they defend
Well, what we need is more common sense.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
Common breaking down the world's nonsense about how American common sense.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
Will see us through with the common sense of Houston.
I'm just pro common sense for Houston. From Houston dot com.
This is the Jimmy Barrett Show, brought to you by
viewind dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:29):
Now here's Jimmy Barrett.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
All right, I thought we would start the show today
talking about what do they call the May December romances?
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Right?
Speaker 4 (00:40):
Older usually older guy, younger woman. Very rarely the other
way around for some reason. I think we know the reason.
But but you have to be willing to admit it.
Guys like younger women. Women generally like their men more mature. Right,
that's an over generalization. I get that, Okay, I mean
(01:00):
a shovendiest, but I think it's more true more often
than not. So Bill Belichick, who, by the way, the
farmer New England Patriots coach current coach of North Carolina.
He is seventy three years old. He has a girlfriend,
Jordan is her name. She is twenty four years old,
(01:25):
so she is easily in the right age range. I mean,
you bea at the upper end, but she's technically she's
young enough to be his granddaughter. And I think that's
when things start to get creepy. It's bad enough for
guys when you're dating somebody who's young enough to be
your daughter. It is even more creepy when you're dating
(01:46):
somebody who is potentially young enough to be your granddaughter.
Now I don't know what they have in common. Well, yes,
I think I do know. Probably what they have in common.
His money is what they have in common. I'm guessing
you know your twenty four year old woman. I mean
she's not. She's not a super bottle or anything. In fact,
(02:09):
I was a little surprised. I mean she's not. You know,
she's not. She hasn't fit a stereotypical thing of you know,
some young buxom, you know, hottie that that Bill Belichick
has managed to latch onto. I don't know who latched
on to who, to be honest with you, I don't
know if he latched on to her she latched on
to him. I'm making an assumption that the only thing
(02:31):
they really have in common is his money, because what
else would a seventy four or a seventy three year
old and a twenty four year old have in common?
You wouldn't think much of anything when you get right
down to it. And to make things even more interesting,
and I'm not quite sure why he agreed to do it.
Bill Belichick evidently agreed to sit down for an interview
(02:52):
with CBS's Sixty Minutes where they were going to talk,
and he knew they were going to talk about his
relationship ship with this young girl. I guess, okay, young
woman technically speaking, but you know again, twenty four years old.
And she proceeded, by the way to pretty much dictate
(03:14):
what could or could not be asked during the interview.
I mean, she may be, you know, she may be
a quarter of his age, but she's clearly in charge
of that relationship, at least as a related to the interview.
And the question evidently that she didn't want Bill to
answer was how did they meet? Which I thought was
kind of interesting. Of all the questions you could be asked,
(03:37):
why would you not want to share how they met? Now?
Rumor has it they met on a plane. I don't
know if that's true or not, in which case, why
would you care if that information was shared? I mean,
the only reasons to really care about sharing that is if,
like I don't know. They met at a strip club
(03:57):
and she was the stripper and he was the customer.
Then I want to just yeah, that would be embarrassing.
I would get that there's something that she's hiding, and
I'm not quite sure what it is. Anyway, Obviously a
lot of people, I'm not the first nor the last,
I'm sure to comment on this whole thing. But I'll
get to my rules about older men and younger women
in a second. But first, I wanted to play this
(04:19):
for you, and that is a little portion of the
sixty minute CBS interview. Maybe it was, I don't know
if it was sixty minutes. It was CBS that he
was doing the interview with, so you can hear a
little bit of it for yourself. And then, of course
Greg Guttfeld has a field day with this whole thing.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
The other change.
Speaker 5 (04:36):
From Belichick is twenty four year old Jordan Hudson, his
creative muse. As he writes in his book, Jordan was
a constant presence during our interview.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
You have Jordan thread over there.
Speaker 6 (04:52):
Everybody in the world seems to be following this relationship.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
How do you deal with that?
Speaker 7 (04:56):
I've never been too worried about what everybody else thinks,
just to try to do what I feel like is
deser me and what's right?
Speaker 2 (05:02):
How did you guys meet? Not talking about those No.
Speaker 5 (05:07):
It's a topic neither one of them is comfortable commenting on.
Speaker 8 (05:11):
H I get it, it's not sexy admitting that they
met when she was at his front door selling boxes
of thin mints. They also delved into the couple of
social media presence.
Speaker 6 (05:26):
There's some great pictures of you and Jordan where you're
a fisherman and she's a mermaid. It's charming, it's a
different side of you. What's the reaction been like, what's
it been like to have these different sort of photos.
There's another one where you're doing I know, you're not
into meditation or yoga or pilates. You're balancing Jordan on
(05:46):
your feet and she's doing kind of the Titanic post.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (05:51):
So I'm on some of those social media platforms, but
I honestly don't follow them.
Speaker 8 (06:02):
I'll bet she has to show him out to use
his own phone. It's so nice to have the grandkids
around so overnight.
Speaker 9 (06:08):
Belichick, who went from a coach that won six Super
Bowls to a Joe Biden impersonator seemed confused when those
Instagram photos were brought up. My gut tells me those
weren't his ideas.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
The one thing's for certain.
Speaker 8 (06:21):
He may be the head coach, but she's in charge
of that interview.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Who knows. Maybe Jordan is his muse or at.
Speaker 8 (06:27):
The very least his life insurance beneficiary.
Speaker 4 (06:30):
Yeah, like I said, what do they have in common?
Speaker 2 (06:34):
His money?
Speaker 4 (06:35):
And by the way, if you caught the interview, did
you see what he's wearing. He's wearing like a old
Navy sweatshirt. I knows father lunch coach for Navy, but
that sweatsher looked like something his father might have worn.
It had a hole in it. I mean, who sits
down for an interview with a major television network wearing
a raty old sweatshirt. But then again, you know, that's
kind of classic Bill Belichick. So I'm pretty sure wherever
(06:58):
they did meet, he didn't presser with the way he
was dressed. I don't know what it was she was
impressed with, other the fact that it is Bill Belichick.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
I don't know.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
Here. Here's the bottom line, though, you know, because because
I you know, a seventy three year old man and
a twenty four year old woman. That's that. That's into creepy.
I think I don't mind older men younger women. You
know they are consenting adults. You know that's up to them.
But at the end of the day, my divarce attorney,
(07:31):
he had a rule. This was his advice as I
was going back into the dating pool, which is, if
you're going to date a younger woman, remember the rule
half your age plus seven half your age plus seven.
So at the time I was forty and so half
my age plus seven would have been twenty seven. No,
(07:53):
don't date a woman younger than twenty seven. And the
other part of his rule was that that it worked
regardless of how old you are. So if you're like
a really old guy and you want to date a
younger woman, you know, if you're eighty, half your age
plus seven is forty seven. You see how that works.
(08:15):
Right now, I did the math for Belichick, seventy three,
half your age plus seven and be thirty six and
a half will round it down because we'll just round
it down to thirty six. So he should not be
dating anybody younger at the age of thirty six, or
then you get into super creepy. All right, quick little
break back with more in a moment, Jimmy Part Show.
(08:35):
Here a name of the nine fifty KPRC. All Right,
today marks the one hundred day of the Trump administration's
(08:58):
second term. This is day one hundred today. He will
be in Michigan tonight in Macomb County, Michigan. That is
a suburb about his appearances, would be a twelve mile road.
The Uh, this is what I remember for my days there.
The the the demarcation line is eight mile road. If
you have ever listened to M and M, you might
(09:20):
you know, you might be familiar with that term eight
mile road.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (09:22):
That's that's where the city of Southfield begins and the
city of Detroit ends. So he's only talking, you're only
talking about Macomb County. You're talking about four miles north
of Detroit. Is where he's going to be. And the
reason why he's going to be there, I think there's
a couple of reasons. We had Wesley Hunt on our
show earlier today on k t R H and and
(09:43):
I think he stutely pointed out the two reasons to
go there. Number one is the President was announcing yesterday
some backing off of car tariffs. So I'm sure he
wants to spread that word in in the Motor City
because obviously that's where they make a lot of cars,
and that that area is impacted probably more than anywhere else.
Number one, and number two, that is where you know,
(10:04):
middle class American auto workers. That's where they live, and
many of them voted for Trump and carried the state
for him. So I'm sure he wants to go back
there and explain exactly what it is he's doing, especially
as it relates to the tariffs, so that they worry
a little bit less on how all this stuff is
going to end up working out. He also might bring
(10:25):
this up again. He yesterday speaking of tariffs, he talked
about how much money we made in tariff so far.
Do you know, in the month of April, and April's
not over yet, in the month of April, fifteen point
nine billion dollars in tariff income. That's really amazing. I
(10:47):
think about that. Maybe he's not wrong when he says
that he could eliminate the income tax, or at least
significantly lower the income tax with all the tariff income
that we're going to be making. So here's Trump. I
think he's probably maybe was getting ready to go to Michigan.
Here's Trump talking about terriffs replacing tax revenue, and then
(11:08):
some reaction to that from shark tanks or formerly shark tanks,
Kevin O'Leary.
Speaker 10 (11:14):
We're going to make a lot of money and we're
going to cut taxes for the people of this country.
It will take a little while bee before we do that,
but we're going to be cutting taxes, and as possible,
we'll do a complete tax cut, because I think the
tariffs will be enough to cut all of the income tax. Now,
we have a lot of depth that's been left to us,
you know, unfortunately over many years. We'll take care of
(11:36):
that with the tariffs.
Speaker 11 (11:37):
You know, coming desperate for your thoughts on the idea
that had been floating around in some Republican circles about
raising the top tax bracket for some of the highest
highest earners.
Speaker 12 (11:46):
That is dead on arrival fifty times over because it
goes against the American Dream. That is the brand that
the President is hired to protect above all of his
other mandates, to protect the American Dream. We've talked about
it countless times. That is not the American dream. Taxing
the rich and making them and punishing the there for
being successful is not the American dream. They pay the
(12:08):
majority of the taxes already, they pay billions in taxes,
and so we don't This is never going to be
in this country where let's focus on successful people and
really screw them back into the ground. That is not
the American dream. What is going to work? Think I
think it'll come in this tax package. On the other
side of that is this no tax on tips and
(12:30):
over time, cool idea for.
Speaker 2 (12:32):
People that work really, really hard.
Speaker 12 (12:34):
And I really endorse that, and I hope that happens,
and I think it will.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
This tax package.
Speaker 12 (12:38):
Has to go through, and if they just keep the
existing tax code as it stands.
Speaker 2 (12:42):
That's good enough.
Speaker 12 (12:43):
That's good enough, and that's hard enough to get through.
And then let's focus on growth to get out of debt.
Speaker 2 (12:48):
Because even the.
Speaker 12 (12:49):
Democrats are saying, guys, we got to stop bringing budgets
where we go another two trillion into debt every time
we bring a budget.
Speaker 2 (12:56):
Why can't we.
Speaker 12 (12:57):
Just get to a place where we're balancing a budget
for the first time in years.
Speaker 4 (13:01):
Yeah, well, you'd have to. When you have to go
back to the Clinton years. I mean, there's a lot
of things to not like about Bill Clinton, but he
was good for the economy and he was he was
good as far as getting the budget under control. Of course,
knew gingrich and had a lot to do with that
as well. But that was back when Democrats and Republicans
(13:23):
could do, at least to a certain extent, cooperate with
each other. And when you know, getting rid of wasteful
spending was not a dirty word or a dirty thing
to do. So there you go, by the way, I
had another guy in the morning show today, Matt Locke.
He's a Republican strategist. He is also a podcaster, you know,
and I asked him about you know, Trump's big, beautiful
(13:43):
budget and about you know, making these tax cuts permanent,
and he doesn't think either one gets done. He thinks
that the Republican controlled Congress is still more anti Trump
than than Trump's supporting and that they'll just they'll just
they don't want to, you know, they don't want to
(14:04):
lower their potential income level. They want all that extra
money to work with so that they can enrich themselves,
and that at the end of the day, they're not
going to get it done.
Speaker 2 (14:14):
We'll see. We'll see now.
Speaker 4 (14:16):
As far as the trade war itself, Team and Shine
those are a couple of China companies, although Team Wu
has their has their corporate headquarters in Boston, but everything
that they bring in, everything that you can order from them,
comes from China, and they have increased their prices about
(14:37):
one hundred and forty five percent because of the tariffs.
So you know that coat that used to be was
like forty thirty thirty six dollars is now like eighty
eight dollars kind of thing. That the prices have gone
way up. Still by the way, quite frankly, you know,
relatively inexpensive anything. So I don't think it'll absolutely, you know,
(14:58):
kill their business, but it will certainly impact what kinds
of things people buy from them, although this might not
last all that long. Gordon Chang, who's we've had on
our program before. Gordon Shang is a China expert. He
thinks that the Chinese are already capitulating. They're already they're
already backing off. They're just not telling you what it
(15:19):
is that they're doing. Here's Gordon Chang.
Speaker 13 (15:21):
The important thing here is that China, without any announcements,
is not collecting tariffs on important goods, so for instance,
some semiconductors, aviation products, industrial chemicals, medical devices, some medicines.
And also they're going to expand that list because there
are lists circulating in China of one hundred and thirty
(15:42):
one items that China may not impose tariffs, So this
is going to expand. It means that China is made
an important concession, but it's not saying it's making a concession,
which is a fascinating insight into the Chinese political system
right now, which has become both in transigent and inflexible.
Speaker 14 (16:02):
What is the impact of a one hundred and forty
five percent tariff on Chinese goods coming into the US cordon.
Speaker 13 (16:08):
It's not growing at the five point four percent pace
that they reported for Q one. It's probably contracting, as
we can see from the price data from both February
and March, which signals that China's in a deflationary spiral.
We are seeing underlying indicators that point to contraction, including
tax receipts that were down three point five percent for
(16:28):
the quarter. That's inconsistent with robust growth. And if China
is not contracting now, somehow it will be contracting very soon.
So when you talk about one hundred and forty five
one hundred and forty five percent general tariff on Chinese goods,
this really means that many's factories aren't going to be
selling anything to the US, which explains why some factories
(16:51):
have already closed and other factories are cutting down their shifts.
Speaker 15 (16:55):
AI.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
Here's one more riem, by the way, from Trump's first
one hundred day, and it may be the one that
he's the most glaringly successful. He's done a tremendous amount
of things in the first one hundred days, almost all
of which have been successful, but none more successful than
shutting down the illegal immigration. I think in the last
(17:19):
month there's been like nine people arrested at the border. Nine.
Back during the Biden administration, their worst one day ever
was over forty eight hundred, so it's down to virtually nothing.
Here is from the Center for Immigration Studies. Here is
Todd Bensman.
Speaker 16 (17:37):
Sure, the Biden administration left a wreck, a train wreck
of the deportation and detention machine. It's in pieces all
over the country. They dismantled the machine. So the Congress
is now in a position to fund its reconstruction. The
(18:00):
machine has to be rebuilt from the bottom up. They
shut down all of the detention centers for women and children,
for families. They canceled all the private contracts with private jails,
and they eliminated deals between local jails and ICE, et cetera.
(18:20):
So that there's nowhere to put people. That has to
be expanded. We need to see more personnel staffing the
deportation effort, ICE border patrol. We need the wall to
be finished. And so this is going to be Congress.
They're looking at about one hundred and seventy billion dollars
(18:41):
maybe to really just throw at all of these reconstruction issues.
And I think that's what we're going to be seeing
next for the real phase of deportations, the real thing
that's coming.
Speaker 2 (18:56):
I want to stay on that because.
Speaker 4 (19:00):
The word cut anyway, Yeah, I mean that that's kind
of where we've gone from protecting the border now to
concentrating on these deportations by ICE, which of course he's
driving the progressive crowd crazy thanks in part to what
you can see how it's the reacting with that judge
of Milwaukee, Wisconsin and what she did. Anyway, we've got
(19:21):
quick lope break. We're back with Vorne Moment Jimmy Parrett Show.
You're on a nine fifty KPRC. All right, Bob, we
(19:49):
kind of wrap up the show today. We've talked about
China on the show today, but let's let's relate it
to not only China, Russia. Who else would be in
this Iran and North Korea? Four different countries are covered
in Texas SB. Seventeen. It's a bill that, among other things,
(20:09):
would require you, if you're from those countries China, North Korea, Iran,
and Russia, that you would have to be a United
States citizen in order to be able to buy property.
Come here and write if you want, but to buy property,
you'd have to be a US citizen if you're from
(20:30):
any one of those four countries, which are all you know,
enemies of the United States when you get right down
to it, of one varying degree or another. Those are
the four that are covered. Let's face, we've had a
lot of property here in Texas bought up by by
you know, Chinese nationals, you know, some of it near
military bases. Do doubt my mind what they want that
property for. It is for spying purposes. We need to
(20:53):
stop this. There's not a lot of countries in the world,
by the way, where you, as a United States citizen,
can go and just buy property to live in. You know,
in some countries you cannot buy property if you're not
a citizen of that country, period, regardless of where you're from.
So I don't find anything that unique or unusual about this,
(21:15):
and to me, it only makes common sense. Anyway, here
is the report from Fox twenty six here in Houston.
Speaker 17 (21:22):
Let's be absolutely clear, this bill is racist.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
This bill is anti Asian.
Speaker 11 (21:30):
Thursday, the Texas House Committee of Homeland Security advanced Center
Bill seventeen and it is now headed to the House
floor for a vote.
Speaker 14 (21:37):
This law s to be seventeen undermines the American dream.
It undermines the very moral fabric of what we should
stand for as Americans. Harris County is one of the
largest economic hubs, not only in Texas but in the
United States. So to have a law it would take
(22:01):
our neighbor's rights away. It would have a law where
the Attorney general could essentially unilaterally take the property is
unconstitutional because it undermines due process.
Speaker 11 (22:14):
If signed into law, Senate Bill seventeen would restrict people
from buying land and property purchases who are originally from China, Russia, Iran,
and North Korea.
Speaker 15 (22:25):
Moreover, this bill is threatened to protections granted by both
US Constitution and the Texas Constitution. It's also discouraging foreign
investment and talent.
Speaker 11 (22:39):
In a tweet on x, State Representative Cole Hefner from
District five, who introduced the bill, says, in part quote,
this legislation is about standing up to hostile foreign actors
and keeping Texas secure. It strengthens our ability to protect
critical infrastructure, private property, and our communities from foreign threats
that have no place here. Local leaders and activists say
(23:02):
this bill is not about national security, but dividing our nation.
Speaker 17 (23:06):
SB seventeen will strip away the rights of thousands of
Texas residents, people who are here legally simply because of
their country of origin.
Speaker 2 (23:16):
It'll expose them to racial.
Speaker 17 (23:17):
Profiling, housing discrimination, and even the terrible possibility of having
their property seized.
Speaker 4 (23:27):
Okay, first of all, nobody's talking about seizing anybody's property
who currently owns. Nobody's talking about that at all. That's
not what SB seventeen calls for. But you could see
the tactic here right, it's racist. It's racist. It's racist
to prevent people from China, Chinese citizens, Chinese nationals from
(23:49):
buying property next to US military basis. That's we're reacting
out of racism, not of any real security concern. So
I thought, okay, well, let's if that's the way the
left wants to play it, let me run it past you.
We did a little question of the day this morning
on kt URH. You know, do you think we should
(24:10):
ban non citizens from China, in Russia and Iran in
North Korea from buying property here in Texas? And we
all seem to be walking pretty much in lockstep on
this one.
Speaker 18 (24:22):
I cannot think of another country on the planet that
allows non citizens to own property, especially property that is
deemed a sensitive farmland near military bases, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (24:36):
It just doesn't happen. Why do we allow it?
Speaker 19 (24:39):
Hey, good morning, Jimmy is Jared from Pearland. So I
sure would like to see one of us try and
go to China or Russia or much last North Korea
and an attempt to buy some land, especially near sensitive
military bases. It doesn't make any sense. So I don't
think it should be legal for them. To do it either.
(25:01):
It's nothing racist about it. It's just common sense for
our national security.
Speaker 20 (25:06):
Jimmy John from Katie Area, Hey, regarding people from commonest
countries playing land in Texas, push the bill through.
Speaker 1 (25:18):
Push the bill through.
Speaker 20 (25:19):
Why the lefties are concerned because they think it's going
to hurt something? Hey, hey, how are we going to
appease our enemies and hope them want bomb or kill us?
Speaker 3 (25:30):
That's my thought?
Speaker 4 (25:31):
Bye bye, Okay, yeah, I think we're all pretty much
on the same page. Well, here's one more let me
let me grab one more.
Speaker 1 (25:38):
Morning Jimmy Rick from the East Side. I know you
have a vacation home somewhere down around Galveston. I wonder
what would happen if you'd tried to go over to
China and get a vacation home. You know, what's good
for the goose is good for the gander.
Speaker 4 (25:52):
Push it through, amen, Well push it. And for the record,
I have no interest in the vacation home in China.
I wouldn't even think about. You know, I had no interest. Honestly,
I have no interest in a trip to communist China,
let alone a vacation home in communist China. And by
(26:13):
the way I would. I would have no problem not
selling the vacation home near Galveston Freeport, to be exact,
to not selling it to somebody from China, a Chinese national,
or somebody again from Russia. Who's who's down to a
United States citizen, I have no problem not There's plenty
of other people to buy the home, I hope somewhere
(26:35):
down the road. Okay, well, we'll see what happens with
that bill. I'm you know, you know, I don't have
a lot of faith right now in the state legislature
because of all the craziness going on in the Texas House.
But I guess we'll see if this gets anywhere. Listen,
y'all have a great day. Thank you for listening. I
do appreciate it. I'll see you tomorrow morning, bright nearly
at five am over on news Radio seven forty KTRH.
(26:56):
We are back here at four on AM nine fifty
KPRC
Speaker 1 (27:05):
Defender Tidy and the band they defend
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!