The Rod and Greg Show: Supreme Court Says South Carolina Can Defund Planned Parenthood

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
We had a cornercopia of news and quotes just flying
around everywhere.

Speaker 2 (00:04):
And you know why he does that because he didn't sleep.
No s that's the narrative for the day. Yes, what
have we been talking about all day?

Speaker 3 (00:12):
Or what?

Speaker 4 (00:12):
You know?

Speaker 2 (00:13):
You know the great lineup that we have with Glenn
and Clay and Buck and Sean and nowas what are
we talking about? What they said at eight o'clock this morning?

Speaker 1 (00:20):
I know sometimes they lead us astray because we take
that eight am and then we go there and then
all of a sudden, five more things will happen before
we start to show it.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
For well, we've got a great show lined up for
you today. We always appreciate you being with us. Eighty
eight eight five seven eight zero one zero. If you
want to join in on the conversation, you can do
it on our talkback line as well. Here's what we
will be talking about today. We are going to dig
in to this attack. The White House says we've had
enough on this. We're not putting up with a shoddy

(00:48):
reporting that's going on right now. We want to find out.
They have lunched a major effort to find out where
the leak came from. Of the initial intelligence assessment of
the damage out there. They want to find that out,
so we'll talk about that a little bit later. On
Supreme Court, they have got a long list of rulings
to wish you tomorrow, but they issued a key one
today when it comes to medicaid and planned parenthood and abortions.

(01:10):
We'll get into that as well, and we'll talk about
some of the takeaways from the US bombing of Iran.
But so Greg, we have got a lot to talk about.
But I wanted to start off the show today here.
I am in Tehran, a good old Iranian that I am. Yes, yes,
Iran bomb bomb Iran. It is you know you're you're

(01:32):
in Tehran right now. You're just waking up and you
feel so much better today because you're Supreme Leader has
come out of his rat hole and basically said, don't worry.
We have I'm declaring a fabulous victory in the twelve
day war over Jerusalem and Israel, and we have slapped

(01:53):
the face of the American people. That's what he's telling
Iranians this morning.

Speaker 1 (01:58):
And if you don't believe him in Iran, he provides
CNN reports, yes, that that make his case for him
because he's got American CNN telling uh, the Iranians that
the that the mission failed.

Speaker 2 (02:12):
Yeah, the Iyahtola Ali Coolhamini said this, the Azamik Republic
was victorious and in retaliation delivered a handslap to American's face.
That's what he said today. So I feel you know,
I'm in Toronto and go man, I'm worried about what's
going to happen to our country. I don't have for
you anymore.

Speaker 1 (02:28):
No, they won.

Speaker 2 (02:29):
They won.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
Back when Baghdad, Bob would lie about, you know, the
status of the war. You know, he get on there,
we'd all just laugh and laugh and even CNN back
then would kind of laugh that Bagdad Bob says, it's
complete annihilation. We're winning everywhere. As the American troops were
just rolling in and the Allies were rolling in. Now
CNN actually supports the Iahtola. They're they're with them. They're

(02:53):
out there to say, you know, to to the world,
to Iran. But the rest of the world. No, no, no,
Trump failed. Whatever he did, he failed, none of it's real. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
See those pictures you're seen on TV. Don't believe them.

Speaker 1 (03:03):
Yeah, it's getting a little hard for seeing.

Speaker 2 (03:05):
Don't believe him. Well, there was a briefing today. John
Kennedy has waited on the proving. We'll get his thorough
analysis of this gets into the deep gress. He's very technically,
it's very very good. But we thought we'd bring you
up to speed. First of all, on an audio montage
of CNN, and they're reporting on the damage assessment that
the United States inflicted on Iran's nuclear facility. Here's a

(03:27):
breakdown of what they did.

Speaker 1 (03:29):
And before I do this is what they're calling this
now is we were just asking questions. I want you
to listen to these this montage and tell me if
you hear questions in the reporting of CNN.

Speaker 5 (03:38):
Not have as much damage or as much impact as
the President has been saying. CNN was first to report
on a preliminary intelligence assessment produced by the Defense Intelligence
Agency that found that US air strikes may have set
Aron's nuclear program back by just a few months and
did not destroy its core components.

Speaker 6 (03:58):
It indicates that President Trump's comments about the destruction of
these nuclear facilities and the obliteration of Aron's nuclear ambitions
appear to have been vastly overstated. Much of the core
components of Iran's nuclear program remain intact. Even though there
was significant damage that was done to some of the
above ground structures at these nuclear facilities, much of the

(04:20):
underground structures were not touched. THEDIA found that it is
likely that the iraniance could reconstitute within.

Speaker 7 (04:29):
A matter of months.

Speaker 8 (04:30):
One source says that the strike set Iran back quote
maybe a few months' tops to others.

Speaker 1 (04:37):
US.

Speaker 8 (04:37):
The country stockpile of enriched uranium was also not destroyed.
Another says the centrifugas are largely intact, and I've spoken
with seven people briefed on it.

Speaker 9 (04:47):
Israel and the US have failed to target significant elements
of Iran's nuclear materials and production infrastructure. Rising Lion and
Midnight Hammer are tactically brilliant, but may turn out to
be strategic failures.

Speaker 1 (05:03):
So that doesn't sound question. There was a question there
in any of what we just shared with you folks.
That was them announcing that this report and they so
misrepresented this low confidence preliminary report. They said it was actual, factual,
it was factual, and it had failed. It is a
big failure.

Speaker 2 (05:23):
Well apparently not. After all this shoddy reporting, people are
now getting briefed on exactly what happened, and finally they
have found out that guess what everything worked?

Speaker 1 (05:36):
And imagine that.

Speaker 2 (05:36):
An analyst, his name is Nicholas Funda Carrol went on
CNN today and described what he saw during this briefing.
Listen to what he said his analysis of the attack.

Speaker 10 (05:48):
What we now know from that brief first time you
know it is that as it was designed as these.

Speaker 11 (05:53):
Mass awardings, penetrators with significant computer software engineering went directly
down to those three NI later shafts specifically as designed,
and until you actually do it, you never know if
it's going to work. It worked. It seems to have
worked flawlessly. That is very important information.

Speaker 10 (06:09):
So as I come out of this briefing, I now
know BDA level two, as I mentioned level.

Speaker 11 (06:15):
One first twenty four hours, you're looking at imagery level two.
Did the ordinance work? Did everything go as we had wanted?
The answer now was yes.

Speaker 10 (06:23):
With the objective theme, Aron can never auar weapon and
it's enrichment program has to be completely destroyed. I think
from what I've seen the twenty thousand centrifuges you had
about seventeen thousand in the tons about three thousand and
four too they are all completely destroyed. I am very
confident those centrifuges are gone. So if you add it
up from what we're seeing, massive catastrophic setback for Iron's program.

(06:47):
So I didn't know that. I couldn't have confirmed that
twenty four hours ago. I now know those three ventilators
they went down there and it worked. That's new and
that means probably FOURIDOH is rendered in operable for the
foreseeable future, probably forever.

Speaker 2 (07:04):
So let's see CNN busted for a line as they
defend their fake news reporting. They took up busted by
one of their own analysts who said it worked. They
have a you know, some of these facilities may never
come back. How does CNN respond to this? Now?

Speaker 1 (07:18):
The look on their faces, these talking heads at CNN
as they were listening to him, they were just crestfallen.
They were so sad. They just and and again they're
now saying, well, we were just asking questions. There were
we played the montage. There was not a single question
in there, and they overplayed and overstated the preliminary low
confidence as it was tagged. It was tagged low confidence

(07:41):
because it was preliminary. They never said it was low confidence.
They didn't say it was preliminary. They they were announcing
the failure of that mission that they did. And they're
now they're walking that back, trying to say something different.
But we heard it. And I don't know how CNN
brings someone on. They just completely contradict everything they've been reporting.

Speaker 2 (08:00):
Guy just did and they just did it. Yeah, this
guy just this. I mean, they could have handled this
so differently, Greg, But you're right, they are so Trump
derangement syndrome is so deep in their minds and their makeup.
They could have said, you know, this is a very
preliminary report. These are the but they end say that. No,
they just went on and said here's what he is saying.

(08:22):
It is so deep in them. And we'll have a
sound bite here in a little bit with Pete haig
Seth explaining that it is so ingrained in their being,
in their fiber that they cannot give Donald Trump credit
for anything, none, whatsoever.

Speaker 1 (08:37):
They can't. And I again, I think that the way
that that that's a stolen and leaked intelligence report, and
what that intelligence report fails to ever be reported on
is that it was preliminary and that it was rand
It was called literally, I'm not saying it was low

(08:58):
confidence or that they stamped it says this is a
low confidence preliminary assessment. Nothing in the reporting of CNN
or The New York Times said this is a preliminary,
you know, status, low confidence report, which you would at
least be able to say there's at least some idea,
there's some lack of confirmation because but but they don't.

(09:19):
They don't know that confidently. But there's questions out there.
But no, they if you listen to that montage, they
were reporting definitively a a an intelligent and a military
intelligence uh briefing that said it did not work. They
didn't get They left no room for anything but failure.

Speaker 2 (09:38):
Well, let us turn to our our favorite lawmaker. He's
from Louisiana. We're talking about Republican Senator John Kennedy.

Speaker 1 (09:46):
Now, this is very technical. This gets into the deep grass.
He's a lot of you know, a lot of jargon
that you might not understand because it's very very technical.
Let's hearr he is.

Speaker 2 (09:55):
Here's what I had to say after he came out
of the briefing today.

Speaker 12 (09:58):
Here's what I Here's what I took from the briefing.
Or at least as much as I can tell you
casey and technical terms, we knocked them living crap out
of our free targets.

Speaker 2 (10:16):
Is not the living crap out of the target a
technical term.

Speaker 1 (10:19):
And for John Kennedy, for Senator Kennedy, I would say, yes,
I think that is. I think it's I think it's
very technical. I think it looks nothing sounds nothing like
what the regime media was reporting. You know, we asked
this question out loud when we saw the success. How
would the leftists in their regime media frame this as
a failure. Well, we now know they lie. They say

(10:42):
that they he failed without you know, without regard to
the proof and the truth of it all. They're just
going to say he failed.

Speaker 2 (10:47):
Yeah, all right, We've got a lot to get too.
More coming up. It is great to be with you
on this nice Thursday afternoon. It is the Rotten Grag
Show on Utah's Talk Radio one O five nine k
n RS, and she's praising Donald today. So it was
a brilliant move on his part because Iran has destabilized
that region of the world and really all over the world, countries,

(11:09):
all over the world for what forty six years and
the United States has sent a message and said enough's enough,
We're done.

Speaker 1 (11:17):
Just what an incredible couple of days. I mean, you
have a President Trump visiting NATO and he has been
he's in conflict with NATO because he didn't think people
were living up to their obligations of how much they
were contributing into defense, all of those things. He gets there,
he gets to Brussels and they're just I mean, he's
got the Secretary of NATO calling him daddy, and he's

(11:38):
just running the place. Everyone wants to be on the
same side with him. And then you've got what I
would say traditional critics of this president on the Republican side,
like a Condoleeza Rice, like others from the Bush administration
that are praising him and acknowledging because you can't do
otherwise of the grand success of the campaign that he

(11:59):
authorized in successfully executed this.

Speaker 2 (12:01):
So Bill Crystal and John Bolden, so that was the
right move.

Speaker 1 (12:04):
And I'm telling you they just can't. You can't be
corrupt enough or a big enough liar to try and
paint what Trump is accomplished globally as a failure. You can't.
They have to come clean and call call it for
what it is.

Speaker 2 (12:17):
And this administration is not afraid of confrontation and not
afraid to call out the media. I mean Pete Haig
Saith that news conference he held this morning along with
a general kine which they talked about the success of
this program, took him in it and he I'm going
to play this audio sound bite, but before you hear him,
he pauses for a second and he's kind of thinking,

(12:38):
do I want to go there? And he decides to
go there and listen to what he said about the
media and it's coverage of this attack.

Speaker 4 (12:44):
Because you, and I mean specifically you, the press, specifically
you the press corps, because you cheer against Trump so hard,
it's like in your DNA and in your blood. Cheer
against Trump because you want him not to be success.

Speaker 7 (13:00):
Was so bad. You have to cheer against the efficacy
of these strikes.

Speaker 4 (13:05):
You have to hope maybe they weren't effective, Maybe the
way the Trump administration's represented him isn't true.

Speaker 7 (13:11):
So let's take half truths.

Speaker 13 (13:14):
Spun information, leaked information, and then spin it, spin it
in every way we can to try to cause doubt
and manipulate the mind, the public mind over whether or
not are brave pilots were successful.

Speaker 2 (13:30):
Well, I mean he just ripped. He just ripped.

Speaker 1 (13:34):
He did and appropriately. So now, as a recovering public servant,
I can't tell you how many press conferences I've been
in where I've been asked to answer hypothetical questions that
aren't real. Never do I've been. I've been. I've been
the questions and the and the antagonism by the by
journalists and by the media. And I'm trying to frame
it in a respectful way. But what you're hearing from

(13:56):
the Secretary of Defense and Pete Hegseth is just absolutely
calling them out, not not soft shooing it at all.
My question for you, Rod is you've been in you know,
you've been in broadcast journalism. I don't know, one hundred years,
I think you know. I just think no, I just
think it was by at least one hundred years. But
in your time as a veteran and all the different stations, TV, radio,

(14:18):
you name it, all the different stations you've worked in,
have you known a moment like this where the when
journalists are treating people unfair or how they're treating the
person they're interviewing, getting pushedback like they do with Trump
or in This Morning the Secretary of Defense.

Speaker 2 (14:33):
You know, I don't recall the time. I mean, if
you're in journalism, you realize right away that nobody likes you. Yes,
you were a lawmaker. I mean, how many journalists did
you cozy up to?

Speaker 1 (14:45):
Yeah? I didn't, I know, you know, and the general.

Speaker 2 (14:48):
Public has this kind of dislike of journalists to begin with.

Speaker 1 (14:51):
I always love the TV show where the journalist is
the bad guy.

Speaker 2 (14:54):
This is a really good show. But I have never
seen where they confront it. There may have been occasions
over the years that you see something where they come
out and are willing to confront you face to face.
I think it turned the corner when Donald Trump got
into the race years ago and Donald Trump was not
afraid to call out the media and a lot of
the media is going right, I'm here, how many years

(15:15):
did Rush Limbaugh call out the media?

Speaker 1 (15:17):
That's right?

Speaker 2 (15:18):
I mean Rush called him for years calling out the
media in the hippocras see and the drive by media.
And then Donald Trump I think he upped the andy
a little bit with yeah, with fake news, and now
I think you have an administration Pam Bondi, Cash, Betel,
Pete hag Seth, Marco Rubio, all these people who serve
on on his cabinet, and they are not afraid to

(15:40):
call out the media. So for the media nowadays, it
is a different world, folks, and you'd better be ready
to get in if you don't have a tough skin,
I mean liquid. He did to Caitlin what's her name
on CNN there today? Oh you're with CNN. Oh you're
gonna hate me anyway, So go ahead and ask your question.

Speaker 1 (15:55):
It's it is so great because one of the things
that you figure out having to deal with the media
is they have the thinnest skin in the world. They
have such a they just rip rip, and then they
have the thinnest skin in the world. So when Trump
as a candidate and then as president is first term
and it's continued forward, he would call them out and
they were just so angry. This is part of the
Trump drangement syndrome. How dare you question them? How dare

(16:17):
you attack the New York Times and question their viability
and their business viability or their credibility. And I do
think that that there has been an important I think
it's really important that they call out manipulative so called
journalism to the degree that they're trying to get away
with it. I think it is about time we see it.

Speaker 2 (16:35):
It is a change world, that's for sure. All Right,
A lot more to come on this Thursday afternoon edition
of the Roden Grag Show on Talk Radio one five
to nine knrs. All right, let's talk more about the
coverage of the attack launched by the US against their
running in nuclear sites over the weekend. CNN breaking news
the other day, A preliminary report shows nothing's been done.

(16:58):
They have been set back at all. Well, come to
find out, we're learning more and more and guess what
we did some serious, if not long lasting damage to Iran.
And joining us on our newsmaker line to talk more
about this is Glenn Beaton. Glenn is a columnist with
the Asthmen beat Glenn, always great to have you on
the show. All Right, what are they doing? Why are
they trying so hard? In your opinion, Glenn, did discredit

(17:19):
this attack that will launch by the US over the weekend.

Speaker 14 (17:22):
Well, I think they're trying to discredit Trump. They're willing
to discredit the Israelis as well. And if that means
discrediting America. It's worth it to them if it means
that they get to discredit Trump. You know, they're Trump derangement.
Their hatred just swamps everything else, including professionalism, objectivity, and

(17:46):
you know, their duty to report the news.

Speaker 1 (17:48):
So I saw a clip on social media from CNN
where they have one of their analysts, he's a former
Middle East North Africa coordinator with the National Security Council,
saying that what he saw in the briefing that was
provided with the video of the Precition precision strikes, it
has left him no doubt that the that these strikes
were successful, they did as they were supposed to, and

(18:10):
that the forum facility may never be able to be
brought back online again. And the faces of the CNN
are you know news heads that were listening to this,
they just looked, uh, forlorn, They looked so disappointed by
the news that he was pronounced pronouncing so definitively on
their network.

Speaker 15 (18:27):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (18:28):
I guess my question is, you know, why does why
is there going to be an apology? Is there going
to be a from Jake Tapper, who you know has
spent a lot of time in writing a big book
about how he got it wrong before. Are they going
to say that they they were premature in a low
confidence you know early uh you know, intelligence report that
was stolen. Are they going to do anything about the

(18:48):
information they have now?

Speaker 14 (18:51):
No, of course not. You know, they still haven't fessed
up about Russian collusion and uh hunter Biden's laptop, and
for that matter, they I've been fessed up about Joe
Biden's anility. They just move on hope that people forget
and look for the next opportunity to bash the Republicans
or at least bashed Trump. You know, I saw the

(19:13):
early satellite imagery too, which is probably what this guy
is referring to of the photo installation. And what I
saw is you had to look kind of close. You
could see that the ground was discolored. But if you
look close and saw the magnifying images, you could see
where the bunker Busters entered the Earth. And I thought,

(19:34):
that's exactly what you want to see. What you're seeing
are three small holes. If I'd seen a huge crater, oh,
all bets are off, because that would have meant that
the bunker Buster exploded on the surface, which is not
where you wanted to explode. But when I saw these
three small holes, I thought beautiful. It exploded real deep.

(19:55):
I was surprised that. You know, I have a background
aerospace engineering before I into the dark side, became a
lawyer who worked for Boeing. But you know, this isn't
really rocket science. You know, people knew what these bunker
busters were supposed to do. They were not supposed to
explode on the surface, and the satellite imagery that we

(20:17):
saw showed that they didn't.

Speaker 2 (20:20):
Glenn, I want to ask you because in your story
you cite a report from the Institute for Science and
International Security ICES, which I love the name. But what
did that report indicate about the damage that has been done?

Speaker 14 (20:35):
Well, you ought to click into the report itself. The
Wall Street Journal reported on the report, but their report
is behind their paywall, so you may not have access
to that. But if you click into the International Security
what's it called.

Speaker 2 (20:51):
Again, internet Institute for Science and International Security.

Speaker 14 (20:56):
Thank you, Institute for Science and International Security. If you
click into that, you'll find their report, which is publicly available.
It goes into excruciating depth about this. These people had
inside information from talking to the Atomic inspectors with the
UN They know everything from the ground up and the
ground down, and they just went through it and said

(21:20):
their ultimate conclusion was it was effectively demolished.

Speaker 1 (21:26):
So, if anyone was paying attention, CNN prior to the
bombing was saying that we don't know that they have
any nuclear capability at all. We don't know that that's true.
And then after the bombing took place, they said, oh,
it's only about a week or two away from being
fully operational again. So they just jumped from one narrative
extremely to another. Right now, I believe that Iran's leader

(21:48):
Ayatola is using CNN stories to push out his version
of facts to his people in Iran that they won
this war. Does that shame this news organization? Is anyone
going to watch CNN? Does this harm them? Or are
they or have they been irrelevant all along?

Speaker 14 (22:06):
Well, there's a constituency out there for CNN, there's the
kool aid drinkers, and they just lap this stuff up.
The CNN is still going to get marginal ratings. They're
not going to get ratings like Fox News or its competitors,
but they're still going to be in existence. I don't
think they're going to go out of business. It's interesting

(22:26):
you put the point that you made that they hold
these contradictory notions in their heads simultaneously, one that there
never was a nuclear program, and two they can have
it back online within a.

Speaker 1 (22:39):
Month or two.

Speaker 14 (22:43):
Which is it. It reminds me of the contradictory ideas
they hold about Donald Trump. They say, on the one hand,
the guy is diabolically clever, and on the other hand, well,
he's dumb as a box of hammers. Well, you know, it's.

Speaker 2 (22:58):
Got to be one of the other, that's for sure.
How do you think, Glenn, the American people are viewing
this debate over the extent of the damage and what
CNN and the legacy media and are reporting. To me,
a lot of Americans are looking at that saying to themselves,
are you guys for the United States or for Iran?
On what side are you in this argument? I mean,
do you think the American people are looking at it

(23:19):
that way?

Speaker 13 (23:21):
Well?

Speaker 2 (23:21):
I hope.

Speaker 16 (23:21):
So.

Speaker 14 (23:22):
You know, a lot of people aren't paying very close
attention though, and then there's another large group of people
who are paying attention, but their minds are already made up.
They're going to believe what CNN says because that's what
they want to believe, because that reinforces their preexisting narrative
that Trump is some combination of diabiolically clever and to

(23:44):
them as a box of hammers. So but I don't
think this helps CNN on balance. I think on balance
people are paying enough attention to this because it is
a major story to see that the story that And
led with has been contradicted soundly by at least half

(24:04):
a dozen stories since.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
On any our newsmaker line. Glenn beat and Glenn thanks
for joining us. He's a columnist with the Aspen Beat.
More coming up on the Rod and Greg Show right
here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine k
n RS. It's funny what kind of you know, crazy
things happen and the crazes that people go through. Right,
did you were you ever successful at operating one of
those claw machines?

Speaker 1 (24:28):
No, you know that pulls a little thing out.

Speaker 2 (24:30):
You pull the thing out? Were you ever successful at
doing that?

Speaker 1 (24:32):
I've tried, Yeah, I've tried.

Speaker 2 (24:34):
Near the well, apparently they are now the rage all
over the country. This story today in Acxio says there's
even one here. But apparently there are there are now
entertainment areas where there are nothing but claw machines, and
people go in and try and get something out of
there where there's.

Speaker 1 (24:50):
Little claws don't even they don't have they have no strength.
You put it right around the stuffed animal thing and
you've got the claw around it, and when it picks up,
it just falls through.

Speaker 2 (25:00):
Called a claw machine craze, and it's taking I mean,
they mentioned Houston, they mentioned Dallas, they mentioned Salt Lake City.
I'm not sure where it is in Salt Lake City,
but that's now the craze for families they go in.

Speaker 1 (25:11):
And that's a sucker's bet there. I'm telling you, I've
tried it.

Speaker 2 (25:15):
I have even tried.

Speaker 1 (25:16):
I have failed mentor play. Yes, I've seen it all
sticking up in the air. I think, oh I can
get that.

Speaker 2 (25:22):
No right, all right, Marre coming up our number two
of the Rod at Greg Show to stay with us. Well,
the debate in the country goes on about the effectiveness
of the Iranian or the US attacks of the Iranian
nuclear missile site nuclear sites over the weekend, CNN continuing
to say, trying to downplay this as much as they
possibly can.

Speaker 1 (25:42):
Greg, it's it's frustrating. I mean, after the initial assessment
of the morning's press conference to show and really show
that it's not even debatable how successful the mission is.
Hours later, we're seeing now that CNN is not giving
it up.

Speaker 17 (25:58):
Man.

Speaker 1 (25:58):
They still trying to find some wrinkle, something shared, some
detail that would that they can run with it would
say that the United States was not successful. And your
tell in this moment is if Iran uses CNN so
called news to make their case that they won the
twelve Day War, then then they're not telling the truth

(26:19):
and that because that's not true. They did not win it.
And there's no reasonable person who understands any of the
facts of what's happened they could ever say that Iran
prevailed over Israel over the United States.

Speaker 2 (26:31):
Well, Barack Obama used America's military might seven times, okay,
over the time. Do you recall it under any of
those tacks of the attacks that took place where the
news media, the legacy media in this country, we're raising
questions about the effectiveness of those attacks like they are
now about what Donald Trump and the US did Saturday

(26:54):
night in Iran. I don't remember thorough analysis of all
of this, And well, did it really happen, did it
not happen? I mean, it's just kind of nuts.

Speaker 1 (27:05):
I'm telling you. I saw a report that President Trump
was thinking about litigating against the New York Times and CNN.
I'll tell you why that's not an eye roll, and
that why I like that. I don't think that these
media outlets are accountable enough. And I think if they
had some level of accountability where their sources more than
one two sources something and not seven people that see

(27:26):
the same leaked you know, you know, carefully script omitted,
you know, the intelligence report. But if you put out
something that can be verifiably shown to be false, there
should be some If there was a financial liability to
doing that. Maybe that because fairness, they're not interested in that.
But maybe if they were to lose money and they
were found, you know, liable, then they would be more

(27:48):
like more careful.

Speaker 2 (27:50):
Yeah. Yeah, Well, let's go back to if you weren't
listening to the first hour, I want to play back
Pete Haigseth because he went on a terror today. Secretary
of Defense, very upset of the media, and they're reporting
the CNN reporting in particular, and then the New York
Times picked it up as well. This preliminary report, a
low confidence report that America missed the mark. We listen

(28:11):
to what Pete Haigsas said about that and the media
during that news conference this morning.

Speaker 4 (28:15):
Because you, and I mean specifically you, the press, specifically
you the press corps, because you cheer against Trump so hard.
It's like in your DNA and in your blood to
cheer against Trump, because you want him not.

Speaker 7 (28:31):
To be successful so bad.

Speaker 4 (28:33):
You have to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes.
You have to hope maybe they weren't effective. Maybe the
way the Trump administration is represented him isn't true.

Speaker 13 (28:43):
So let's take half truths, spun information, leaked information, and
then spin it, spin it in every way we can
to try to cause doubt and manipulate the mind, the
public mind over whether or not our brave pilot we're successful.

Speaker 2 (29:01):
Do you get a sense of frustration on his part? Now?
I want to play another audio SoundBite, because he even
called out a Fox News reporter for her coverage of this.

Speaker 15 (29:12):
It's about highly and rich uranium. Do you have certainty
that all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Four
Dome Mountain or some of it? Because there were satellite
photos that showed more than a dozen trucks there two
days in advance. Are you certain none of that highly
enriched uranium was moved.

Speaker 18 (29:30):
Of course, we're watching every single aspect, But Jennifer, you've
been about the worst, the one who misrepresents the most intentionally.
I know what the President says.

Speaker 15 (29:41):
I'm familiar about the ventilations chefs on Saturday night, and
in fact, I was the first to describe the B
two bombers, the refueling, the entire mission with great accuracy.

Speaker 7 (29:53):
So I take issue with that.

Speaker 19 (29:55):
I appreciate you acknowledging that this was the first operator
the most successful mission based on operational security that this
department has done since you've been here, and I appreciate that. Absolutely,
we're looking at all aspects of intelligence and making sure
we have a sense of what was where.

Speaker 16 (30:10):
Now.

Speaker 2 (30:10):
Who he was calling out was Jennifer Griffin with Fox News.
He's been at the Pentagon for a long long time.
My personal opinion, I think she's done a pretty durn
good job in covering and I'm not sure why haig
Zeth called her out.

Speaker 1 (30:22):
I was surprised that he went after her, because that's
not she isn't one of the big no, I think,
culprits of the of the lies and the attacks. But
the quicker answer than him saying that would have been
we saw the trucks. We've looked, and they were trying
to pour concrete to try and block those ventilation, those
conduits so that a bunker buster could not penetrate us

(30:43):
as deeply into the base. That's what those trucks were for.
They were not to remove any of what you're in
nuclear material.

Speaker 2 (30:52):
Now CNN is reporting that their expert, so to speak,
has told them, well that nuclear material could be put
on the back of a truck and move just like that. Yeah,
the President has argued, you'd know it's heavy. You've got
to do it very very quietly, very safely, I should say.
And those trucks were there to seal up the tunnels,
not to move the nuclear material.

Speaker 1 (31:13):
And they're trying to they're trying to draw strange conclusions
from a center Cotton saying that the the eradication of
the enriched uranium was not part of the missile to
destroy it all. And they're saying that, whoa, why is
it not everyone everyone's become a you know, enriched uranium expert. Okay,
the goal is to take that entire facility and the

(31:35):
enrichment of uranium and destroy it all so that it
cannot be done and there cannot be a nuclear bomb.
What the status is of the uranium of down twenty
stories down below the ground, I don't know. I but
what what what we're saying, what they're saying this morning,
and great I thought specificity was those facilities are unusable.

(31:57):
They're not coming back online. They have been destroyed. Period.
You can't build another nuclear you can't build any nuclear
bomb with it. So again, where CNN shouldn't even get
five seconds of our attention is up until the bombing,
they were still maintaining they didn't even have an enrichment
program going on, and they weren't even nuclear capable. And

(32:18):
now they're saying, well now it can you just get
kicked up really quick. It could take a matter of months.
They have flipped, you know, in their in their premise
so badly. This intellectual yoga that they go through, it's
it's a mockery.

Speaker 2 (32:30):
Yeah, you were asking me earlier if you've ever seen
a time where the administration or a government official is
willing to take on the media. And I haven't seen
anything like this before. No, I've been doing this a
long time. And for Hegseth to come out and the president,
I wonder what the media. I wonder what our listeners
think about this. Do they agree that the administration has
every right to call out the media if they're shotting

(32:52):
and reporting? And you mentioned a very key point used
to be if you're going with a breaking story, you
have two sources. Yes, the management, the people who control
the flow of news on your radio or TV station,
they will not let you go with a story if
you have only one source. You've got to have two
different sources. That's been the standard rule. That rule, for

(33:14):
some reason has gone out the window. I mean, if
you have one anonymous source, go with it. Oh, exactly right.
And by the way, I've never been like that before.

Speaker 1 (33:23):
Fifty one intelligence officers or former intelligence officers signing a
letter that the hunter by laptop is Russian disinformation is
not fifty one sources. Okay. A source is independent verification
of something that you've become privy to that you can
cross check with another source, not two people saying the

(33:45):
same thing that you provide them. Although that looks about right,
that looks like that could be real. That's not two
sources as I understand it. I'm not in the media,
but I thought it was. You have to have two different,
verified sources of the same are making the same argument
before you run with it and tell the public that
there could be any merit to it.

Speaker 2 (34:02):
Well, let's go. Let's hear from our listeners as they
work their way home tonight. Is the administration, the Defense Department,
those involved in this operation justified in calling out from
the media for what they considered to be shoddy weak reporting.
Eight eight eight five seven oh eight zero one zero
triple eight five seven oh eight zero one zero on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey

(34:23):
Rod or on our talkback line. Just downloaded our new
iHeartRadio app haydarrest dot com and you'll see the little
red microphone in the upper right hand corner. Click on
that and you'll have thirty seconds to make your coming.
We want to hear from you tonight. Eight eight eight
five seven oh eight zero one zero decimated. Does your
family has changed? It's gotten older?

Speaker 1 (34:42):
Man. It was my favorite holiday bar none. I used
to go that Provo Freedom Festival parade. Loved it, loved it,
go to lunch at Lost Hermanos down Provo. Then we'd
walk around the Freedom Festival. Then we'd go home and
watch Rocky four, you know, and then we'd have a
we'd have a I shouldn't probably say stadium Roman candle
fight maybe. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (35:03):
Do you ever go to the stadium a fire?

Speaker 1 (35:05):
Yeah, I've been actually did that when I was younger.
But with the Yeah, when I lived down there, you know,
you could see it for you to go with your
family and then but I know you mean.

Speaker 2 (35:16):
You denied them an opportunity to see an unbelievable fireworkshop.

Speaker 1 (35:20):
Because maybe you don't know, but we would have the
Culdal Sack of Fire, sir.

Speaker 2 (35:24):
Okay, and this we had one of those.

Speaker 1 (35:27):
We would do this. I would put serious, serious investment
in the Cauldal Sack of Fire with neighbors, and this
thing was.

Speaker 2 (35:35):
And these were all legal fireworks.

Speaker 1 (35:37):
I will you can in my heart and soul it
is all Americana, That's what I'll say. You know, I
find Wyoming to be a state of the United States
of America. And if they you know, it's good enough
for Wyoming, it's good enough for me.

Speaker 2 (35:51):
So I've got at the door right now, I would
like to talk.

Speaker 1 (35:55):
To you aboutatuas No, all these things. This was like
it was like one after the other because in all
of it, it was just such a glorious day. And
I'd wake up early and I'd play my playlist from
fourth of July, Born in the USA. I play all
my favorite songs, even spring Bruce Springfield's ruined Born in
the USA. I'm so mad at him, But I play
Lee Greenwood. I play all the great songs play you know,

(36:18):
uh James James Brown and.

Speaker 2 (36:20):
Living in America.

Speaker 1 (36:22):
Yeah, I just it was a great. So now I
have to have new traditions because they've all been ostroy.

Speaker 2 (36:27):
We'll find them for you, all right, Pete. Haigseth and
the President really went after the media today and this
was some people are calling and I think it is
shoddy reporting on the effectiveness of the attacks on Iran's
nuclear sites over the weekend. Yes, very very upset. So
we're asking you tonight, you know, do you think the
administration is justified in calling out the media. I mean,

(36:49):
even Haigseth today, I disagree with him on this. He
called out Jennifer Griffith with the with Fox News she
covers the Pentagon, saying her reporting has been shoddy. But
let's minute some of their reporting. You know, they are
so anxious to be the first and anything they can
do to get Trump, even if it's only single source
and an anonymous source. That's very preliminary, low confidence report,

(37:15):
but they run with it, and they know if they do,
other media will pick up and it becomes the narrative
of the day.

Speaker 1 (37:21):
It was. It was just flat out misrepresented. It was
a low confidence, very early preliminary assessment. And all that
was was a scenario visited. It wasn't the it wasn't
the heart and soul and theme thesis of the report.
It was exploring different scenarios of what could have just happened,
and this was one of the scenarios. They ran that

(37:42):
report as if this was the conclusion of their intelligence,
that it did not strike the facility and that it
could be up and running very quickly. That was not that.
It doesn't The report doesn't say it. It is a
low confidence early assessment on different scenarios, and they only
shared one scenari and failed to tell the public that
that was a low confidence preliminary.

Speaker 2 (38:04):
Report eight eight eight five seven oh eight, deral one dero.
Let's go to our talk back line. See what one
of our listeners has to say about this.

Speaker 20 (38:12):
I'm glad they're calling out the news. It's about time
because whenever I watch it, I want to see what's
really going on. I want the real news.

Speaker 2 (38:19):
I don't want.

Speaker 20 (38:20):
Any fake, made up stories because it's just it's ridiculous.
I like to know the truth about what's going on.
And when I watch news now, I watch Fox. That's
all I watch is Fox News. Those other ones are
just comedy. It's it's ridiculous how much they just bs
all the time. So yeah, I'm glad they're calling them out.
Needs to start happening.

Speaker 2 (38:41):
I wonder how many of our listeners feel that way,
call them out.

Speaker 1 (38:45):
I think if there's an accountability, even financially for them,
it'll never be out ethics and journalism. But if it
is a financial impact, if they do it cavalierly, if
they do it without being thorough or disclosing all the
information and really misleading the public to pursue whatever you know,
worldview they have, if they are accountable that they'll stop

(39:06):
doing that. And when I say accountable, I mean financial
They won't do.

Speaker 2 (39:09):
It, Bob's and Ogden did want to weigh in on this, Bob,
how are you welcome to the Roder Gregg Show.

Speaker 21 (39:16):
Hey, then discussing today and I didn't hear you mentioned
this though. So here's the one thing that could legitimately
mess up this strike. So those mops massive ordnance penetrators.
They're twenty seven thousand pounds of steel and a five
thousand pound warhead, which is a big warhead. But the
Iranians and others, they're starting to use super strong cement.

(39:38):
Like you go to home people, you can find five
six thousand psi hardened cement, even nine thousand. So if
you've got some nine thousand psi cement and that meets
the bomb, it can mess up its impact. Right, So
there is a chance we might need to do something more. Yeah,
it's a cat and mouse thing, right.

Speaker 1 (39:57):
And Bob, you're right, I just let you know it. Well,
I'll tell you this. What they did say is that
the trucks and the vehicles they saw was not removing anything,
but was doing what Bob described. They were pouring concrete
into those area, into those conduits to try and those
those events, to try and stop a bomb. And now, Bob,
you know, he sounds pretty like he knows what he's saying.
That might have a way to stop it. The one

(40:20):
thing everyone's saying, or at least it's it's It's one
thing to set them back and destroy them. It's another
to have a president willing to say, Okay, did you
you still have them? We'll send some more. Okay, because
they will send some more as soon as they if
they want to ramp it up again, they got more coming.
Because he's not going to change his approach.

Speaker 2 (40:37):
That's true, that's true. All right, More of your phone
calls coming up. Eight eight eight five seven eight zero
one zero on your cell phone dial Pound two fifteen.
Say hey, Rod, we're on our talk back line. You
can leave a message there as well. Just download the
iHeartRadio app and make sure you load Upcanarrest dot com.
All right, more coming up on the Rod and Greg shild.

Speaker 1 (40:54):
Hey, get on that talkback live, get on a tack talk.
We have a great we have some great talkbacks that
have come up.

Speaker 2 (41:00):
I am not.

Speaker 1 (41:02):
There's one that's just phenomenal. Play that listeners smart. Okay,
let's go to our callers, our listeners who are on
the line. Let's go to Charlie and Orum. Charlie, thank
you for holding holding. Welcome to the Rod and Greg show.

Speaker 22 (41:17):
Sure.

Speaker 16 (41:17):
Absolutely, guys, Hey listen, I am with you. I was
very surprised that Jennifer griff have got the sort of
the backhand of the of the administration today. But I think,
you know, I mean, if you think about it, going
after Caitlyn Collins, CNN, MSNBC, all these ridiculous uh uh network,

(41:39):
I think it has become commonplace, right, So I think bye.
By bringing Jennifer Griffiths and Fox into the into the discussion,
I think was to try and place some emphasis on
the fact that, hey, listen, we want everybody to play
by the rules. We want everybody to be you know,
to to be responsible and report properly. I'm just thinking

(42:01):
that with that, that's the only thing that makes sense
to me as to why she got called out, because
she has been, you know, traditionally really an excellent reporter.

Speaker 2 (42:11):
Yeah you know what, Trulie, I agree with you, because
she did get called out today and I saw those
initial reports that she was talking about during the news
conference today when she was reporting over the weekend as
to what was going on. I thought she was spot on,
she was very accurate. I you know, I but you
may be right. Maybe he's just trying to show that everybody,
we're going to treat you fairly.

Speaker 1 (42:31):
Yeah, I think I think like that if they try
to make it, if CNN and the regime media, MSNBC,
all of them say well, he only picks on certain
certain networks, then you can't say that if he's if
he's spreading around. But I would hope there's something that
Pete haig Seth is the Secretary of Defense, spots that
he thinks what she's doing is unfair.

Speaker 2 (42:50):
Yeah, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (42:51):
So let's go to Pascal and American Fork. Welcome to
the Rod and Greg Show. Hell are you.

Speaker 17 (43:07):
Hey right here?

Speaker 1 (43:07):
How you doing good? Welcome to the show?

Speaker 3 (43:12):
Hey, hey you hey.

Speaker 21 (43:13):
I'm just curious, how come there's not any talk about
an environmental issue? I mean, isn't Isn't that a many
chernobyl over there now?

Speaker 1 (43:21):
So you know, it's a good question the way it
was described. And look, we're all becoming, you know, experts
on this, you know, just by what we're trying to
glean from the from So I'm not I don't have
any place of real authority on this, although I did
watch the documentary on Chernobyl and it was terrifying. But
I think that what the bunker buster is supposed to
do is really contain it. So it's supposed to almost

(43:42):
in case it in toomb the whole thing into its
rubble and keep it from escaping and getting out, because
that's what Chernobyl did when that when that with the
fuel got loose, it was just going down to the
Earth's core if it wasn't interrupted, and they had to
dig down by hand and lay concrete to you know,
below it to capture it as it was going down.

Speaker 2 (44:03):
And the mere fact that this was two hundred to
two hundred and fifty feet underground already and if they're
storing that it blows up, they think the rock and
everything will contain it. So that's why there hasn't been
any talk about that.

Speaker 1 (44:15):
And one of the things so that's going up. One
of the things about Chernobyls they had a major water
table below and if it did that, it would get
into the was the blacks heat or something, and it
was anyway had the potential of getting into the water table,
and this you would have to imagine the way they've
blown it up. Is not going to do that that
that had to be contemplated.

Speaker 2 (44:34):
All right, Let's go to our talk back line here
from one of our listeners about what we're talking about
the administration and it's efforts to go after the media
for its coverage of the attacks on the Iron nuclear
facilities last week.

Speaker 17 (44:45):
Hey, guys, when Trump first came down the Golden Escalator,
I was absolutely so excited because there was finally going
to be somebody that knew how to fight.

Speaker 2 (44:54):
And you know, Trump rose.

Speaker 17 (44:55):
Had a knight fight with the best of them, and
as far as you know, all all the surrogates coming,
you know, like going at the media like crazy, and
especially also congressional hearings. Man, I gotta tell you, I
love that more than a fat kid loves cake.

Speaker 2 (45:10):
I just love it.

Speaker 1 (45:12):
Like a fat kid loves cake. Yeah, I'm with him.

Speaker 2 (45:17):
By the way, did Pascal call us Yahoo's he did?

Speaker 1 (45:21):
I took it as a termined endearment, Yeah, I did.
Could be he got another talk back I thought was brilliant.

Speaker 2 (45:26):
I'm not going to play you know what that's all about?
All right, more coming up, it is The Rodden Gray Show.
Right here on Utah's talk radio one oh five nine
k n rs. Have you seen this video that the
Pentagon released today showing how it basically showcased how the
thirty thousand pound heavy duty bunker buster bomb actually works.

(45:47):
It's pretty scary.

Speaker 1 (45:49):
Wow, let's go. I actually I think I saw actual
video of it going into the ground, not a lot
like a model of it. But I thought I saw
it entering into the ground.

Speaker 2 (45:57):
I thought it was just agree.

Speaker 1 (45:58):
No, No, there's there's two I think there's two things?

Speaker 2 (46:00):
Are there two things out there?

Speaker 1 (46:01):
Yeah? Wow, I mean this is radio, so that's not
going to get us far this whole video. You know that.

Speaker 2 (46:07):
Well, you know, if we were, if we were brilliant
radio professionals, we could adequately describe it. But see, we
aren't that at that level yet.

Speaker 1 (46:15):
Color commentary is a little high.

Speaker 2 (46:17):
We aren't. We're nowhere. We're nowhere near that level as
of yet. We had a good laugh with this yesterday,
the the NATO leaders calling Donald Trump daddy.

Speaker 1 (46:28):
Yes, it's beautiful. We called him daddy. Yes, President Trump
is your daddy. It is true.

Speaker 2 (46:34):
Well, the White House they're having fun now and they
put out this video using ushers Hey, Daddy, Daddy's home
song and put some video with this. We can't show
it on the radio because we don't do pictures on
the radio, but.

Speaker 1 (46:48):
It is absolutely hilarious. And then there's there's lyrics about
Shorty and they show Zelensky shaking his hand when they're
talking about Shorty. It is so yes. The the social
media team of the White House, they're dropping bombs of
their own, they really are. They're capturing the hearts and
minds of people online because it was a riot. It
shows all the people in NATO just so happy to

(47:10):
see the president just gumbing it up in the pictures
and everything.

Speaker 2 (47:15):
I think Baron Trump is doing that a whole new world.
I think he told his dad go get some social
media experts men and own the social media. And he does.

Speaker 1 (47:26):
Yep, he does.

Speaker 2 (47:29):
They're having fun and that's what the American people.

Speaker 1 (47:32):
Like to see.

Speaker 2 (47:32):
I'm a little bit of fun.

Speaker 1 (47:34):
Speaking of fun, I thought that our great General Raisin
Kane was having a little fun at the expense of
my favorite all time movie and sequel, Pop Gun and Mavericks.

Speaker 2 (47:46):
Well, during the news conference today, he was talking about
the pilots and where they trained, and he got a
little dig in at the same time.

Speaker 1 (47:52):
Okay, let's have a listen.

Speaker 2 (47:54):
Here.

Speaker 23 (47:54):
The crews ranked from captain to colonel, and most were
graduates of the Air Force Weapons School, headquartered at Nellis
Air Force Base in Nevada. I will state for the
record that there is no beach, volleyball or football at
the Air Force Weapon School.

Speaker 1 (48:13):
Do I say its a little jealousy from General Raising King?

Speaker 2 (48:16):
That's a pretty good dig.

Speaker 1 (48:17):
Well, you know, that's a you know, I think there's
a shot across the bow of Maverick, you know, Pete
Maverick Mitchell and the US Navy. But I would I
think here's more jealousy there. Maybe they want a little
more beach volleyball and football while they're training.

Speaker 2 (48:31):
Is now, that's the one right outside of Vegas you
see going into Vegas.

Speaker 1 (48:35):
I don't know, I don't have no idea.

Speaker 2 (48:37):
You've been to Vegas, Yeah, I don't remember it. Yes, ye, yes,
it is big military base.

Speaker 1 (48:43):
Now, I guess there's no beach to have any volley
But that then that confirms it. He's just jealous. He's
just they're just jealous they don't have any beach volleyball
or football. Because we know are are we know that
those guys in the Navy then they're on the San
Diego side of the world.

Speaker 2 (48:58):
Yeah, they got a little THEA and they played volleyball.

Speaker 1 (49:01):
With their off that's right. Yeah, no, don't don't rip.
You know, top Gun and Maverick. That saved that saved us.
We won the Cold War with top Gun and we're
saving the world with Maverick.

Speaker 2 (49:10):
With these strikes that took place over the weekend. Were
you thinking about Maverick and Tumy. Yes, I was in
the latest movie where they well they had and.

Speaker 1 (49:17):
Again I kept thinking how much harder their mission was
than the mission we had because they took out all
their surface to air missiles. They had complete superiority of
the skies and Matt and Maverick they did not have
the superiority they had. They had to go to great
lengths to stay away from them. So you know.

Speaker 2 (49:32):
They I mean, they had to hit a specific target.

Speaker 1 (49:35):
But that target was, yes, it was.

Speaker 2 (49:37):
And you know they dropped that that those bunker buster
bombs and.

Speaker 1 (49:40):
You saw it. How I had to go down that event.
It had to actually the precision of that had to
be perfect. One in the movie Maverick one of them misses.

Speaker 2 (49:48):
Oh that's true, and you're I mean, I'm telling you
you watch it.

Speaker 1 (49:53):
I'm just gonna say, if you watch a movie thirty times,
you can.

Speaker 2 (49:55):
Remember if you remember those things. All right, Supreme Court
an important ruling today, and they have got a long
list of rulings that they will relate tomorrow. We'll talk
about it coming up on the Rodd and Greg show.
To stay with us, and asked me to go.

Speaker 1 (50:10):
You won't go, and I go, And you don't like
the course I go to. You like to dumb courses? Yeah, right,
courses are horrible. Oh they're good.

Speaker 2 (50:18):
They're good.

Speaker 1 (50:18):
Rod like folks. He likes to He likes to golf
on the face of a mountain. So if you actually
did hit the Fairwaight just rolls off. I don't even
know why he punishes himself that way. It's just a
it's a crazy picked crazy courses.

Speaker 2 (50:29):
The two courses I play, Davidson Valley View are two
of the best public courses out there.

Speaker 1 (50:36):
I like Glendale. Yeah, it's Salt Lake City. It's a
good course, salt Lake City. That's all I said. All Right,
Supreme Court tomorrow, Final day. I counted seven major rulings
that are expected to be announced tomorrow. Really, it all
seemed like we've.

Speaker 2 (50:53):
Been getting ready to the last minute. They always do.

Speaker 1 (50:56):
Let me ask you have you seen it, because remember
what year was it where you saw him starting to
put the fencing up around the court.

Speaker 2 (51:02):
Like, oh, we have the abortion ruling.

Speaker 1 (51:04):
That was one. But I swear even last year they
were putting some fencing up, like for rulings that they
thought people are going to lose their minds. But if
we don't see the barricades going up, they either think
times have changed or are mean people are getting used
to their rulings. I don't know, but yeah, that would
be a tell if you saw the barricades going up.

Speaker 2 (51:22):
There was a big decision today. The Court ruled today
in favor of South Carolina in its efforts to defund
Planned parenthood, concluding that individual medicaid patients cannot sue to
enforce their right to pick a medical provider and joining
us on our newsmaker line to get more reaction to that.
As Matt Staver, he is the founder chairman of Liberty
Council they were involved in this case. Matt, thank you

(51:43):
very much for joining us on our any our newsmaker
line tonight tell us about the ruling and why it's
so significant.

Speaker 22 (51:49):
Well, it's a great decision at sixty three, and it
ruled that there is no private cause of action by
Planned Parenthood or anyone or any entity when there's a
general spending clause unless it's specifically stated in the statute
that someone has a private cause of action. This is
a big decision because it's not only in this particular

(52:12):
case essentially Planned Parenthood, other Medicaid recipients who say, well
they're not included in the qualified medical provider list, they
have no right to sue, so they are out of court.
And so in this particular case, I'll explain the implications
of it. But Planned Parenthood was removed as a qualified

(52:33):
provider from Medicaid funds in South Carolina by an executive
order from Governormentmaster in twenty eighteen. And they removed Planned
Parenthood from the qualified provider in part because of our
clients videos Sandra Merritt obtained that shocked the world that
showed Planned Parenthood was involved in this underground if you will,

(52:56):
this human trafficking of baby body parts by taking be
body parts and then providing them to third parties and
then they sell them to research institutions. And so because
of that, they said, enough is enough. We're going to
do We're not going to fund Planned Parenthood and no
more medical provider qualified list. So if you are a

(53:17):
Medicaid recipient, you can go to the list of the
state that list different qualified medical providers. In this case
Planned Parent who is removed. So Planned Parenthood and a
Medicaid recipient filed suit and said we want to be
added back in because this should be added as a
qualified provider and therefore there should be an option that

(53:39):
people could select to use Medicaid funds. And that was
the litigation. The Supreme Court said, no Planned Parent has
no basis to filesuit. So this case not only is
good in here because it allows South Carolina and many
other states to defund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers
remove them from their referred or qualified medical provider list

(54:02):
for Medicaid fund purposes, to just simply remove them. And
those entities, whether it's Planned Parenthood or some other abortion
entity or some abortion doctor, do not have a right
to sue. And what we had before this is for
general spending statutes where there's some spending. It's a federal

(54:23):
spending provision. The question was, does an individual who might
be a recipient of that spending have a right to
actually file suit regarding the spending. And there were some
courts that said yes. The Supreme Court had routinely begun
to say no, not unless the statute specifically says you

(54:44):
have a right to sue. And so this case was
front and center, and the Supreme Court essentially ruled if
the statute regarding spending, whether it's on medicaid or whatever
it might be, does not specifically and unambiguously say that
private individuals have a cause of action that they can bring,
then there is no cause of action. There's no standing,

(55:07):
there's no litigation, nothing, You can't infer this. And therefore
Planned Parenthood has no standing, no right to bring the suit.
The defunding the Planned Parenthood in South Carolina stands, and
therefore it also stands in many other states that are
doing the same thing.

Speaker 1 (55:22):
So they Planned Parenthood every time they get and looks
at them and looks at them with scrutiny, especially that
video that you describe where it shows them selling the
parts horrifically the way they were, what their response typically
to the public is, oh, so you don't want us
to do cancer screenings. Oh, you don't want us to
do the non abortion related procedures. But this ruling says
that no, they can't be they can't be reimbursed if

(55:44):
they're not on the list to do the non abortion
services procedures, including cancer screens. But my question to you,
Matt is did they ever really do that? Honestly, honestly,
did they really ever do it?

Speaker 22 (55:56):
Not really, And in fact, if you go to their
annual report, they make their money from abortion. They do
have this fictitious thing, oh, well we help other women.
Well know, if somebody comes in for an abortion, they
might give them some test, but they're actually there for
an abortion, so that they can say, oh, we gave
them a breast cancer test when they're there for an abortion,

(56:17):
and they know that they're there for an abortion. They
clearly say in their annual report where their money comes from.
It comes from abortion. And so if you are funding
Planned Parenthood at all with federal dollars, what you are
doing is you are paying the infrastructure, the salaries, you're
paying the brick and mortar, you're paying the whole process.

(56:39):
So that they can operate a system that makes money
off of abortions, and they come up with fictitious numbers.
On the other side, Oh yeah, well we did this
particular pregnancy test. Well, they do a pregnancy test when
somebody's you know, eight months pregnant, so that they can
say they did a pregnancy test. That's not there for

(57:00):
women's health. They're there and they make their money they
always have, not by any of these other matters, but
by abortion. And if you're going to do abortion, that's
the problem. That's the issue. If you're going to do abortion,
you get no money, period Stop doing abortions. And then
if you want to do pregnancy test or breast screening,

(57:20):
you can do that, but don't do abortions directly or indirectly.
And if you do, no funding at all, period into story.

Speaker 2 (57:26):
Yeah, and Matt, doesn't this go back to the basic
question of all of this that the American people who
are opposed to abortion do not want their tax money
going to help women have an abortion. Doesn't it address
that issue in that debate that's been going on in
this country forever.

Speaker 22 (57:42):
Yeah, it does. The majority of people, no matter where
you are on the issue of the abortion. This issue, say,
no federal or state tax dollars should go My tax
dollars should not fund abortion, shouldn't fund it directly, shouldn't
fund it indirectly. My tax dollar should not be paying
the rent, the mortgage, or the salaries of anyone in

(58:05):
Planned Parenthood or any other entity that's actually engaging in abortions.
That's the majority of people. That's what South Carolina said.
There's unethical practices that they're dealing with. This is abortion, obviously,
it's one of their main funding mechanisms. No funding anymore.
Planned Parent had said, well, no, we're going to force you.

(58:25):
We're going to file suit, and that's the decision today.
No Planned Parenthood, you're not. This is the end for
Planned Parent. This is going to be a big hit
against Planned Parent in South Carolina, but it's not just
that state. It's other states as well. If it had
gone the other way, some of these other states that
are also defunding Planned Parenthood would have to reverse their situation.
Thank god, this decision was.

Speaker 1 (58:46):
The right one.

Speaker 2 (58:47):
Matt Stever, he is a founder and chairman of the
Liberty Council, and I would think Greg that Utah is
like South Carolina and has a large something on the
books like this where you cannot use Medicaid funding to
fund an abortion with plan parented. Yeah, I would think
the state has something like this already.

Speaker 1 (59:04):
Yeah, I think that, especially after the the the the
Dodd decision. I think your decisions like that made so
I do think it's going to have a positive impact.
It would have been either way. There was no middle
ground for us. They would have had a positive impact
or a negative if they'd have ruled the other way.
I think you would have seen. I don't think we're

(59:24):
currently funding, but we would be compelled to if that's
that a decision gone the other way. So that's a
big one. That's a real big one.

Speaker 2 (59:31):
More coming up. It is the Rodin Greg Show right
here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine k
n R S. You are, without a doubt, the biggest
chicken in the world.

Speaker 1 (59:40):
No, it's not that. It's just you're having a conversation.
You want to make it into a radio show. It's like, well,
these are personal conversations.

Speaker 2 (59:45):
But this is a great, great show.

Speaker 1 (59:47):
It's not you. It's always at my expense.

Speaker 2 (59:49):
We're going to do it tomorrow.

Speaker 24 (59:52):
See this, Wait, you asked you share these stories with
me and you you live a very you live a
very unusual life, by the way, and.

Speaker 2 (01:00:02):
You share their story and then I'm supposed to shut.

Speaker 1 (01:00:05):
Up, yes, because you know what, it just naturally flows,
you know, the one that brought up, you know, some
weird topics that we start talking about, and it just
leads me to to something. Christy Queen Bee always says
to me, why do you say that to him? Because
because I didn't think he's a nark. I think he
turned around and make it a you know, part of
the show. Well wait, you need to.

Speaker 2 (01:00:23):
Be folks, you need to listen to more because we're
on a debate. This is going to have to come
up because the moment, the moment that you shared with
me just tears me up. And I have we all
have those moments, you know what some guys do.

Speaker 1 (01:00:39):
This is a this is a show on political current events,
this is life, This is on life, this is that
was a I share peking on you.

Speaker 2 (01:00:48):
I think there are other people out there who have
the same moment, are similar moments that they may want
to share.

Speaker 1 (01:00:54):
But when I asked him if you have a similar moment,
he can't think about that.

Speaker 2 (01:00:57):
I can think of one that doesn't count. There are
some out there. I've just got a you know, I
don't I don't record him and write them in my journal.

Speaker 1 (01:01:05):
I don't, I don't write. I just just came to
mind when we're talking about something else.

Speaker 2 (01:01:10):
Man, all right, this may come up tomorrow.

Speaker 1 (01:01:14):
You know, this is you know, this is where your
media instincts come out. There is no off the record
with you. You just say you're an open book.

Speaker 2 (01:01:22):
Yeah, and if you can't be an open book, then
to be in the business my opinion. All right, now,
we haven't done a lot with this, but I think
we need to kind of stay on top. Is it
amazing how the Democrats are freaking out over the election
of that guy in New York.

Speaker 1 (01:01:40):
They're going, whoa, Well, yeah, they're upset, but some are
like kissing up to them.

Speaker 2 (01:01:45):
Yeah, a few of them are. But I mean Steve
Moore in his uh Committee to Unleashed prospers on his
email today and he mentioned this, He said, we rarely
quote from the New York Times editorial, but this seething
on the sad state of affairs in America's largest metropolis.
In the wake of Tuesday's Democratic primary, victory is a

(01:02:07):
must read. Here's what they said, Greg, This is the
New York Times. This the editorial page right writing this today,
mister mam Danny, Ma'mdannie is running on an agenda uniquely
unsuited for the city's challenges. He favors rent freezes that
could restrict housing supply make it harder for younger New

(01:02:28):
Yorkers and new arrivals to afford housing. Most worrisome, he
shows little concern about the disorder of the past decade,
even though costs have fallen hardest on the city's working class.
Many longtime New Yorkers have had a sinking feeling at
some point in the past decade. They have worried that
their city was heading back to the battle days of

(01:02:49):
the seventies and eighties, and they go on to bring
this up. Subway trips have a chaotic, even menacing quality.
Nearly half of bus riders board without paying their fares.
The number of felony assaults have jumped more than forty
percent in the past decade. The city's fourth graders, after
significantly outperforming the appears in other large cities during the

(01:03:10):
early two thousands, have fallen back in math and reading
housing has become even less affordable, and homelessness has risen.
In the most basic measure of the city's appeal, the
population remains well below its pre COVID pink.

Speaker 1 (01:03:25):
And you know what I say to the New York Times,
you raised.

Speaker 2 (01:03:27):
A very good point as we were talking about this
earlier today.

Speaker 1 (01:03:30):
Welcome to the world you created.

Speaker 2 (01:03:32):
Bingo, bingo, bingo.

Speaker 1 (01:03:34):
Every single item that they bring up in this editorial
is a position that they have. Oh, crime's gone up
because you wanted to catch and release criminals. Housing got
more expensive because you wanted more subsidized housing. I can't
find a single more people don't pay the fares because
you like to catch and release. I can't find a

(01:03:55):
single issue that they're complaining about. And public safety, defund
the police, everything, this, everything they're complaining about. They sound
like Republicans in this editorial. It's it's it's every it's
every position that's that paper's ever taken. And this guy
is just the logical extreme of everything they've pushed. All
all that this candidate that they oppose is doing is

(01:04:18):
basically running with the New York Times worldview.

Speaker 2 (01:04:22):
What they have been arguing for. Yes, I mean you
go the down list list of almost everything that they
that they that they point out, Greg And you're right,
the New York Times has been out there promoting it.

Speaker 1 (01:04:33):
Well, when when has the New York Times ever been
for public safety and advocating for it. Now, you're a racist,
You're a racist law enforcement if you go after crime.
They I again, we could go down the entire list.
And it is the world that the New York Times envisioned.
It's the one they advocated for. This guy's just the
embodiment of it. And then to have the nerve to

(01:04:54):
then criticize them on all of your papers, editorial boards
and andjournalists positions. It's it's it's a joke to me.

Speaker 2 (01:05:03):
Some of that some I'm watching some of the video
and the monitor right now on Fox News about this
man Donnie. The guy's a goofball.

Speaker 1 (01:05:10):
He is well, he's been a rapper. He has different accents.

Speaker 2 (01:05:13):
You know that he's got a Sudan. He goes runs
in the ocean for a swim with a suit shirt
and tie. Sudan.

Speaker 1 (01:05:18):
You know he's been an American citizen for seven years,
seven years, seven years. No, he has fate, he has
different accents, he has he's Indian. He's uh, he's from
Uganda as well, but he has different accents. He's been
a rapper, He's put on so many different hats. He's
a total phony. This guy weird, but but his positions.
He wants government runs grocery stores. He wants rent control.

(01:05:40):
Rent control absolutely crushes people that have to move and
have to move. The rich people that can rent something
in the Swank area benefit.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
He wants social workers instead of police.

Speaker 1 (01:05:51):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:05:51):
Yeah, this year they had the highest homicide rate in
New York City in years. Well, all right, more coming up,
more coming up on the Rod and Greg Show, on
Utah's Talk, righty oh one oh five nine k n rs.

Speaker 1 (01:06:03):
The jet leg thing is still you're handling it well,
way better than that.

Speaker 2 (01:06:08):
I'm doing better, but it's still Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:06:10):
Yeah, Well I go home.

Speaker 2 (01:06:12):
I want to go to bed at seven o'clock.

Speaker 1 (01:06:14):
Well, no, honestly, I find it harder coming back than
going out.

Speaker 2 (01:06:18):
I see. I think when you're chasing the sun the
way we did Monday, it was once easier.

Speaker 1 (01:06:24):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:06:24):
Can you sleep on a plane.

Speaker 1 (01:06:27):
Uh, to some degree if I have one of those
pillow things around my neck. Yeah, but you know what
happens now my leg I can't for those long international
flights if my legs are my ankles swell up too much.

Speaker 2 (01:06:39):
You look like an elephant.

Speaker 1 (01:06:41):
I got cankles, Yeah, and ankles. There's no that doesn't paper.
It's just the same, you know, circumference.

Speaker 2 (01:06:50):
Yeah, yeah, terrible, It's terrible like that all my life. Uh,
let's talk about more about the Iran and the nuclear
attacks or the attack on the nuclear sites, so I
should say. Our next guest says she has developed three
takeaways from what happened over the weekend. Her name is Ella,
Helen and Ralei. She is a writer, a speaker, senior

(01:07:10):
contributor at the Federal lest She's joining us on our
any our newspaker line right now. Helen, thanks for joining
us tonight. Of the takeaways that you listed, which one
do you think is number one?

Speaker 3 (01:07:20):
Well, the number one takeaway is that the days before
the US bombed run the Chinese Chinese president Shi Jinping
continue he's repeating his same rhetoric that he's been repeating
since the twenty twenty that the East is rising, the West,
especially the United States, is on an inevitable path of declining,

(01:07:42):
and he tried to use this. Basically, she tried to
use this rhetoric to convince other nations to join China's
camp as part of China's effort to use a China
centric ward order to replace the US latter ward order.
And this bombing US bombing over you run just the

(01:08:03):
complexity of the operation as well as the demonstration of
our superme you know, military strengths basically defeated. That kind
of rhetoric, make that kind of rhetoric is a wish
for thinking. I don't think she's very happy right now.

Speaker 1 (01:08:20):
You know, you're exactly right, But I have to say that,
you know, up until the time Trump was elected, he
might have been she might have been right that we
might not have had strong leadership. Maybe you could speak
to our listeners about why who's president and what kind
of leadership it takes to do something like this to
show that we're the loan superpower. Why? Why is that

(01:08:41):
an important thing to understand with what happened over the weekend?

Speaker 3 (01:08:46):
Absolutely, Actually that's my Your question really led to my
second takeaway, which is the leadership matters.

Speaker 16 (01:08:53):
Right.

Speaker 3 (01:08:54):
I mentioned in my in my articles that since the
mid nineties, for US President Bill Clinton, George W. Bush
and Barack Obama and Joe Bidens, they all told, uh,
told the world that the they you know, Iran cannot
have nuclear weapons. And they all tried in various forms efforts,
but they all failed, and the Iran continue to make

(01:09:16):
great progress towards pursuing of the nuclear weapon development. And
as you know, when it comes to international you know,
geopolitical uh reality, the complexity, there is only one rule.
You don't have forever allies, you don't have a forever friends,
you only have forever interests. So many smaller countries, they

(01:09:36):
will align themselves with whoever's the most powerful. And for
more than seventy years since the end of World War Two,
because the United States has been the most powerful country
and we are the ones who are up old the
liberal world order promote you know, freedom, liberty and the
prosperity and the you know, which ensured the rest of

(01:09:58):
the world has enjoyed the modern SECE in decades of
peace and prosperity. By China has a different plan, Communist
China has a different plan. So that's why it is
very important United States demonstrates it to prove not just
military power but also demonstrate its will to confront you know,

(01:10:19):
it's willingness to confront evil forces that present that its
threat to not only the United States, but also to
the rest the world's you know, security as well as prosperity.
That's why the meaning of the weekend bombing has go
far beyond just to stop or slow down you run
nuclear weapon development. It will it's basically re established US's

(01:10:44):
global leadership and in still confidence among our allies as
well as in still fears among our folks.

Speaker 2 (01:10:52):
Heln why do you think the presidents that you listed, Clinton, Bush, Obama,
and Biden we're reluctant to use military strength to stop Iran?
Why were they so reluctant to do so? But Trump
steps up and says We're going to use it. Did
we not have the technology back then? Why were they
so reluctant?

Speaker 3 (01:11:11):
Well, I think they're reluctant because this whole foreign policy
establishments believe that when you're facing evil, uh you know,
usually tried diplomas, that you should try not to escalate
the situation. And they're reluctant to get into a World
War three situation, as we knew, you know, since last weekend,

(01:11:31):
even before Trump Trump is at your bomb Iran. We
heard all these warnings and the screaming about the World
War three is coming, right, So it's a lot of
driven with this fear. And also I think, especially in
terms of Black of Alabama, I think he also has
you know, he's ideologically complicit and I think he actually,

(01:11:51):
you know, he's if the Chinese president was right about
the US decline that's probably started from the uh you know,
under the block Obama's leadership, because he's once to begin
the self imposed decline. He's the one talk about, you know,
there's no American dream, there's other dreams as well, and
he's the one started to you know, give money back

(01:12:13):
to Iran, basically enable the mulahs in Iran had the
money to not only continue nuclear weapon development, but also
you know, sponsor their proxies throughout the Middle East to
create a terrorism you know, hurt other people in the
country as well. So so, yes, leadership definitely matters, and
I think Trump is very different. I credit his days

(01:12:35):
of the real estate developer in probably the toughest market,
which is New York, New York City. And yeah, I
think Trump, Trump's never afraid to confronting people and so
he recognized for some adversaries that you know, the only
they can only be persuaded by demonstrated force. And you know,

(01:12:57):
and he's not going to lead us into World three
because I think based on many of his talks, he's
not interested in getting United States involved in, you know,
in a prolonged war of nation building other countries. But
he what he is about is he's never hesitated going
to use all the powers and you know, assets under

(01:13:19):
he's under his management to deter any threat he perceived
that it will threaten the United States. You know, he
he's waiting to have a confrontation and no other president
we need to do that.

Speaker 1 (01:13:33):
I think you're exactly right that this is a unique president.
And I think what I've heard him say before is,
you know, chaos doesn't make for prosperity. Economies don't do
well under chaos. None of this works. We will protect
American interests and and and we've seen that play out.
But when he went to the Middle East, I think
his message to those Arab states was we should be

(01:13:54):
we should be doing fabulously to get partnering together, making money,
and our economy should be growing together. He's renegotiating trade
relationships all around the world. It really does make China
and Russia and North Korea almost like outliers when you
see everyone coming to this kind of mindset of, yeah,
let's work together, let's see our people and the economies grow.

(01:14:14):
Looking at the Middle East and looking at what's happened here,
do you think that more of this world will come
to maybe the Trump doctrine of let's work together. Let's
we recognize we're different countries, but let's see our economies grow,
let's have good trade agreements. Do you think there's a
shift happening.

Speaker 21 (01:14:31):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (01:14:31):
Absolutely, absolutely. I think one of his strengths, you know,
which the establishment hates, you know, more than anything, is
he's not ideological. You're right, He's a businessman by nature.
He wants to do good deals. He wants to, you know,
make money himself, help for America to make money, and
in the process help other people make the money as well.

(01:14:52):
He just want to see everybody who makes money. And
so he's not ideological. He doesn't give those rhetoric about
you know, building democracy in the free them, and the
establishment absolutely hates that. So when he was in the
Middle East to try to you know, negotiate the traded
deals as well as the economic development. The establishment create him,
criticizing him for cow twing, you know, to the Mulas.

(01:15:15):
But he's bombing of the Rum showed that, Hey, he's
all about making good deals. But if he you know,
if he gives you sixty days to make a good
deal and then you is noam on him. He's you know,
he has other means, you know, to make you come
back to the table to negotiate the deal. So I
think I think it really is the lessons for China
and Russia and even North Korea is you know, when

(01:15:37):
Trump invites you to make a deal, come to the table,
make a deal with him, because the alternative is going
to be a lot worse.

Speaker 2 (01:15:44):
Helen Rawley with the Federalist, joining us on our newsmaker
line talking about the three takeaways from the US bombing
of Iran. More coming up on the Rod and Greg
Show and you Tass Talk Radio. One oh five nine
k nrs. Our Freedom Fund one thousand dollars cash giveaway
is back and starting tomorrow morning at about nine oh

(01:16:07):
five and throughout five oh five, every hour at five
past the hour, you'll have a chance to win one
thousand dollars.

Speaker 1 (01:16:13):
Yeah, you start that with I got a great idea
for you.

Speaker 2 (01:16:15):
Well not accept that I'm not eligible, No, you aren't. Yeah,
And all you do is have to listen to the
winning keyword. Go to canterest dot com enter that word
and you could win one thousand dollars. And we do.
We give you chances from nine o'clock in the morning
through five o'clock in the afternoon.

Speaker 1 (01:16:30):
That's excellent?

Speaker 2 (01:16:30):
Are we Aren't we nice?

Speaker 1 (01:16:32):
Very It's like it's like we just you know, pulled
out the wallet. Yeah, we did a side.

Speaker 2 (01:16:37):
Well it's coming out of your I didn't want to
tell you that, but it is coming out of your paycheck. Hey,
next year, two hundred and fifty years old, I know
America will be and guess what's going to happen. Fireworks
are going to return to Mount Rushmore.

Speaker 1 (01:16:50):
Excellent?

Speaker 2 (01:16:50):
Isn't that great idea? South Dakota Governor Larry Rodent and
Secretary of Interior Doug Bergham announced plans for a Mount
Rushmore fireworks celebration to commemorate America's two hundred and fiftieth
birthday on the fourth of July twenty twenty sixth that
that would be fun to go to.

Speaker 1 (01:17:08):
Yeah, I mean, I'm happy, but I kind of thought
they were starting it.

Speaker 2 (01:17:10):
Now I wish they well, I don't know why they're
waiting exactly, Like maybe they want to create the excitement.
They won't create the excitement, but I kind of liked
that idea.

Speaker 1 (01:17:19):
Yeah, no, I'm excited for it. I was trying to
explain to my kids about how young the state is
an erg state, how young this country are only two
hundred and fifty years. You think that's three generations? Really?

Speaker 2 (01:17:29):
Yeah, go to Europe you o see some old countries. Yes,
all right, that does it for us. Tonight, head out,
shoulders back. May God bless you and your family and
this great country. Have hours. We'll talk to you tomorrow

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

Cold Case Files: Miami

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Supreme Court Says South Carolina Can Defund Planned Parenthood

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

Cold Case Files: Miami

All Episodes