The Rod and Greg Show: Trump May Do Better With Bills; Climate Crisis Con Game; How Tesla Activists Fool the Public

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
I hope everybody had a great, great weekend. We've got
a great show plan today. We're all talking about Donald
Trump and the tariffs. Of course, we're all talk about
the climate change hopes a little bit later on, we're
going to get into this the attack on the Tesla's
This justin wasn't random. This was a very well planned,
coordinated attack all around the country. We're going to be

(00:21):
getting into that as well. Greg. It's going to be
interesting to see what what we find out today.

Speaker 2 (00:25):
Yes, you know, such a great show. We got all
those issues we've got, you know, the press conference at
the White House at do Oval Office today that just
has so many sound bites that if you haven't heard
them today, we've we've got some great ones for you
to hear. The perspective of our president and the a'll
Salvadoran president.

Speaker 1 (00:42):
Is in there today.

Speaker 2 (00:44):
There was some good, good points made and we can
We're going to get into those and unpack it all.

Speaker 1 (00:49):
Yeah, And Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer is now explaining why
she didn't want her picture taken at the White House.
She just didn't want her picture taken.

Speaker 2 (00:58):
We don't want to put with Trumps with that flyer,
with that with that folder over your face, that.

Speaker 1 (01:05):
Looked so stupid. And Joshapiro, what a story that is
out of Pennsylvania. Yeah, now the governor of Pennsylvania is
home attacked, set on fire.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
Look, we've said on the show for we've literally said
this for years. We're against all political violence period. We
don't we don't qualify it. We don't say there's some
we like, some we don't. We don't work against political violence.
The left, they're just absolutely crestfalling this today because it's
they were hoping, really they were truly actually hoping this
was a maga or a pro Trump lunatic that was
doing this. Turns out that this person's just arranged and

(01:36):
pretty much hates everyone of.

Speaker 3 (01:38):
All political stripes.

Speaker 2 (01:39):
But uh but yeah, so sad and I thought the
Governor's point, jos Shapiro. Look, I he was when I
was worried was going to run for president. He he
came out and condemned political violence of all shape sizes, party,
political affiliation, you name it. He was not taking any
making any exceptions today, and he shouldn't. His kids were
in that in that house, his family was in there.
He's he's very upset and he should be.

Speaker 1 (02:01):
And he should be he comes across. So we've got
a lot to get to today. As always, we invite
you to be part of the program. Eight eight eight
five seven oh eight zero one zero triple eight five
seven o eight zero one zero Oh. Don't forget Our
Freedom Fund one thousand dollars cash giveaway is underway. If
you missed the keyword at the top of the hour,

(02:21):
we'll have another one for you at the top of
the five o'clock hour. When you hear it, just go
to Canorus dot com enter that keyword. You can win
a thousand bucks. Hey, I take a thousand more.

Speaker 3 (02:30):
The same worder, they could be different.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
No, different words every hour. Yes, have same word. That'd
be easy.

Speaker 2 (02:35):
No, you got to pay attention. You got another word.
I got to write it down somewhere.

Speaker 1 (02:39):
You got to write it down.

Speaker 2 (02:40):
I'll write it on my hand so I don't lose it.
But I don't know, I might lose it.

Speaker 1 (02:43):
Ten different keywords every day, so you got to figure
it out. Yeah, you gotta figure it out. All right,
let's talk about you were in a beautiful San Diego
over the weekend.

Speaker 3 (02:52):
Yes, I had a bit of report from there.

Speaker 1 (02:54):
Had a bit of a shaky start this morning from
what I understand.

Speaker 2 (02:58):
Yes, hats off actually to the US Geological as a
study or whatever they call it a survey, we had
a you know how the amber alert comes out on
your phone's it kind of squeals, your phone turns into
a like an alarm on you. We'll imagine a plane
where everyone hasn't really turned our phones to where you're
taxing on the runway coming back to sol Lake, and

(03:20):
no one's really turned into airplane mode yet, and all
the phones in Unison begin this siren like this, and
I look down and it says there's an earthquake. And
I've looked at my screenshot it's within sixty seconds, within
sixty seconds of the time they said it started, so
it's pretty quick reaction time. And the first thing that
hit my mind is not am I going to be safe?
It's are they going to ground this plane?

Speaker 4 (03:42):
You know what?

Speaker 3 (03:42):
We got to get off this ground. We got to
get off the Earth.

Speaker 2 (03:45):
I am in the one place where I don't have
to be on the on planet Earth where it's shaking.
I can get out of here if we can get
this plane up in the air, and so then I'm sorry,
and the captain comes on and he says, apparently we've
got an earthquake here in San Diego, but we have
to inspect the runway to make sure that it's up
and damaged before we before we take off. And I thought, okay,
I like that idea. I'm actually all in on go

(04:07):
ahead drive it. Make sure that the runway hasn't been cracked.
There's not a crater, there's not a gap in there
to fall into or something. So but this pilot boy,
he was he he knew, well, there's aftershocks and things
like that, so he just wanted to get off the
I could just tell by the urgency in his voice
that he was looking for the go ahead light. And
I'm telling you, within five minutes of that earthquake happening,

(04:28):
we were in the air and to the cat, I'll
tell you what they they he just said, I think
we're better off up in the sky than on this ground.
We are getting out of here. As soon as they
tell me that runway is not has a hole in
it somewhere or crack, we're out.

Speaker 5 (04:41):
And you.

Speaker 1 (04:44):
Feel I did not, You didn't feel, friend of yours?

Speaker 3 (04:47):
Yes, I had a friend.

Speaker 2 (04:48):
We were leaving different flights around the same exact time,
and he he said, it felt like a strong wind
was shaking the plane. He didn't know it was an earthquake,
didn't feel he wouldn't know an earthquake felt, but he
didn't think it was an earthquake. But then when the pilot,
when the pilot came on there and said that's what
it was on the intercom, it made sense to him.
No one on our I don't know, if we're just
talking too much something.

Speaker 3 (05:07):
I don't know. Nobody noticed it that I knew that
I could see.

Speaker 1 (05:09):
About a five point two I think, is what the
what was it registered from?

Speaker 6 (05:13):
What?

Speaker 2 (05:13):
When you see it up in the fives, that's when
you start. And then there were some people saying it
was up in the six point something range. But when
you see five, and you certainly if you see six
and you know something major has happened. But but no,
we but I was just got fortunate that we weren't
grounded for the rest of the day. I want to
get to this show. I had no time to mess around.
I had to get here so I could be on

(05:35):
the riding on the show.

Speaker 1 (05:36):
And you got here and you're safe. And I haven't
heard of much damage, if at all.

Speaker 2 (05:40):
Done, And so no, it'll be interesting some of the
older buildings. There has to be some, I would think.

Speaker 3 (05:45):
But what was it.

Speaker 2 (05:46):
Do you remember what the Richter scale was on our
twenty twenty earthquake? Do we know what that was about?
A five point six? Because five point nine buildings, the
older buildings in Salt Lake did that didn't have the
reinforce struck.

Speaker 1 (06:00):
Well Magnet really remember they think it was kind of
based out in the Magnet area. And I remember that
morning clear as a bell. I mean, I'm sitting in
the office working on the show and all of a
sudden things start shaking. Okay, And this was only a
couple of days after COVID.

Speaker 3 (06:14):
I know it was.

Speaker 2 (06:15):
I really felt like at the end of the days
and you know we're gonna get COVID and then, yeah,
it was.

Speaker 3 (06:20):
It was bizarre times.

Speaker 1 (06:21):
Stuff, all right. Uh, If you were driving the streets
of East Salt Lake late yesterday or up in the
Park City area and noticed, gosh, it is awful quiet here,
it wasn't because everyone was observing the Sunday Sabbath. They
were probably all gathered at the Huntsman Center to hear
from Bernie and AOC.

Speaker 2 (06:41):
Yeah, I think you can put every Democrat, every lefty in.

Speaker 3 (06:46):
The in the center. It's good. It's could to keep
them in one place too. You can keep your eye
on them.

Speaker 1 (06:51):
Yeah, that's good idea. Well, they were all there gathering yesterday.
Bernie was in uh, southern California Saturday night going to Coachilla,
the big concert down there. I'm telling all those people,
you know, uh, you know, we're being controlled by very
rich people. But it costs those people anywhere from eleven
hundred to eleven hundred dollars to four hundred dollars just

(07:13):
get a ticket there, So it must be things are
going okay for those concert goers.

Speaker 2 (07:18):
Perfect k, guys, people that are riching afford all that
from a guy who's ripping on the rich, who's a
million multimillionaire himself, who's never had a job, go figure.
So they're made for each other, now, Bernie Bros.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
Bernie and AOCS thinks all about oligarchy and the fact
that Donald Trump is an oligarch, right, yes, Elon, yeah,
or Elon, I will take that. I want to take
you back. Bernie has been saying this since nineteen ninety three.
So apparently Bill Clinton, George hw Barack Obama, Donald Trump

(07:51):
have all been oligarchs.

Speaker 3 (07:53):
In Bernie's world game. I don't think he's amend that now.

Speaker 1 (07:55):
This is what he said since nineteen ninety three.

Speaker 7 (07:57):
This great country of ours is moving there very rapidly
in the direction of oligaky. The United States of America
today is increasingly becoming an oligoky.

Speaker 6 (08:09):
More and more moving toward in oligarchy.

Speaker 1 (08:13):
We are moving in the direction of oligarchy.

Speaker 7 (08:16):
We will move even more rapidly in the direction of
an oligarchy. This great country is evolving into an oligarchic society.

Speaker 4 (08:28):
It is called oligaky, and.

Speaker 7 (08:31):
That is the system we are rapidly moving toward. This
is a budget that moves our country rapidly into the
direction of oligaky. A handful of billionaires are moving this
entire planet toward an oligarchic society.

Speaker 6 (08:49):
We start off with the bad news, which is pretty bad,
and that is that under Donald Trump, this country is
hurtling rapidly toward oligonky.

Speaker 2 (09:00):
It sounds like he's breaking news when he says it now,
but it does sounds like a broken record.

Speaker 1 (09:04):
He has been saying this since nineteen ninety three. Yeah,
that the country is moving toward an aligarchy. I thought
it was oligarchy, but you know, I'm no expert in
that area. But there's an O there instead of an A.

Speaker 2 (09:14):
You know, I love the Roden Greg show. I learned
something every day and new engaging every day. I had
no idea. I thought, I thought, I knew you showed
me that he had said this in ninety three. I
didn't know he said it fifteen hundred times since nineteen
ninety three till now.

Speaker 1 (09:26):
He's been saying yes. And I guess twenty thousand people
who went to the Huntsman Center last night, I believed
him must be new to them.

Speaker 2 (09:32):
And I hate to break it down if anyone feels
like they're on a high because in Red State, Utah
they had such a great reception. Those were the same
ones that showed up in twenty sixteen for Bernie.

Speaker 8 (09:40):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (09:40):
And by the way, I've seen because I you know,
I used to serve in the legislature in twenty sixteen,
a lot of the Democrats that are in the legislative side,
I think getting beat up by the Bernie Bros. By the
people that really love AOC and Bernie Sanders, and so
you're not even democrat enough in Utah to be, you know,
a bona fide democrat in the Bernie world or the aos.

(10:00):
So that's going to cost some real chaos if that
gets if that gets an momentum in our state, which
would I'm all for.

Speaker 1 (10:06):
All Right, we're gonna be talking more about tariffs coming
up on the Monday after in afternoon edition of the
Rod and Gregg Show. Great to be with you this
afternoon if you want to be a part of it.
Eighty eight five seven oh eight zero one zero.

Speaker 3 (10:17):
I'm citizen in Hughes and I'm roderar Kent.

Speaker 1 (10:19):
Great to be with you on this Monday. I hope
he had a great weekend everybody. Well. The tariffs continue
to be the talk of the country. The President making
some changes again he'm saying no, not really, we aren't
doing this. But there are a lot of people out there,
some people out there, I don't want to say, a
lot of people who said, what if they have been
better for him to go through Congress to try and
get some of these done, I'm not sure they would
have acted. They're kind of slow, and they don't like

(10:41):
to do things very quickly in Washington. But let's talk
about this. Our next guest is Mike McKenna. Mike is
a contributing editor at The Washington Times, talking about that
he may have done better if he had flooded Congress
with bills instead of executive orders. Mike, how are you
welcome to the Rod and Gregg Show.

Speaker 9 (10:58):
Hey, good to be back, guy.

Speaker 1 (11:00):
Mike. Let's talk about this and your thoughts on these
tariffs and what the president did and didn't do.

Speaker 9 (11:06):
Yeah, I mean, it's not just limited as terroriffts. I
think the President would have been better served if he
had put a lot of this stuff, a lot of
the executive orders. Definitely the tariffs in front of Congress.
I think everyone had more chance to chew on them,
and the stuff that did get done would be more
durable because what's been going on now is going to
be washed away by the next stroke of the pen
by the next Democratic president, right which we're.

Speaker 3 (11:28):
Going to have one.

Speaker 1 (11:29):
We're going to have one, you know.

Speaker 2 (11:30):
And I get your point because I think that the
victories are fleeting in terms of how long they'll last.

Speaker 3 (11:36):
I get that.

Speaker 2 (11:37):
The issue I have or The question I have rather is, Michael,
there is no muscle memory with Congress. They I don't
know that they even understand the separate and equal powers
of a legislative branch. They certainly don't on budgets. So
isn't it a bit of a risk to say we're
going to send the Congress and they're going to all
of a sudden become lawmakers and do their job. I'd
love it. I'm having been a former state lawmaker. I

(11:59):
think that that's an important part of our constitution. But
I don't have any confidence in this Congress, do you?

Speaker 9 (12:06):
No, I tend to agree with you. I have some
confidence in this Congress. I tend to agree with you
that you know, the infection of the social media influencers
over lawmakers has not been good. And yeah, a lot
of muscle memory has been lost.

Speaker 10 (12:20):
But you know that.

Speaker 9 (12:24):
If you want muscle memory, you have to use the muscles, right,
So if you're not going to start it now, when
are you going to start it?

Speaker 1 (12:31):
That's a good point, Mike. Mike has he has he
moved too quickly? And are there too many eos in
your opinion?

Speaker 9 (12:44):
Yeah, it's probably not that there's too many it's that
the breadth of them is such that it's difficult to
focus on the two or three things that you really
want to accomplish, right, And that's the tricky thing with
every administration. They come in with two to three or
four things too they want to accomplish, and then they
get they wind up in charge of the whole world,
so they wind up doing forty seven things partially instead

(13:07):
of four things thoroughly. And I think that's the that's
the real risk here, right.

Speaker 2 (13:11):
So I'm watching this and I think that as we've
seen this new administration come in and you have Doge's
effort of trying to bring more transparency to government, I'm
actually shocked at how how much Biden was able or
his administration was able to accomplish. That I think is
a negative. When you look at the number of illegal
entrants into the country two hundred thousand and twenty one,
then four hundred thousand and a million, then two million,

(13:33):
it seems like in an MNGOS and how they were
able to grow. It looks like they got a lot
lot accomplished going the wrong direction. So my thought is
is it can't we hope can't with all that work
and all that that that President Trump and his administrations
bring delight or or trying to work on, even through
executive orders. Congress is more than welcome to take those
doge budget items and run budgets and they actually react

(13:57):
to or not even rack. Just you use that as
a template or as a foundational place to start from,
to put that into the budgets and put that into
into law. You can have both, can't you. I want both,
That's what I'm trying to say. I want both.

Speaker 3 (14:10):
I want him to do it, but I want Congress
too as well. Can we do it that way?

Speaker 6 (14:14):
Yeah?

Speaker 9 (14:15):
And that in fact, that's what I wrote in my column,
that that along with the executive orders, he we should
have put proposed legislation to Congress. Right, there's no there's
no reason why you can't chase both, you know. But
at this point we're starting to get a little late
in the day for that kind of thing.

Speaker 1 (14:31):
So yeah, yeah, would he have better been better a
little bit? Would it have been better for him, Mike,
to go, like you point out in your article, focus
on the two key issues, which was the economy and immigration,
instead of trying to tackle everything all at once, which
I think he is trying to do.

Speaker 9 (14:50):
Yeah, yeah, there's no there's no doubt, you know. You
just you need to pick three or four things. And
and by the way, I mean, I'm sure the President
would say he's picked tariffs, right, that's an important thing
for him. I'm not saying that that's not a good answer.
But then you really need to focus on it. And
if you're serious about it, you need to bring along people,
which means you can't change your mind every day about

(15:10):
what you want to do. You need to bring members
of Congress along with you on the ride, because that's
the only way it's durable. That's the only way you
would really achieve the two or three things you wanted
to achieve.

Speaker 4 (15:20):
Right.

Speaker 2 (15:21):
So I'm not a fatalist. I don't want to rip
on Congress too much or cut too deep. So I
just want to hold out some hope. But didn't doesn't
the President have a very succinct message to Congress, maybe
even a built where he wants the tax cuts that
he put in seventeen in place or help. You know,
Congress did it, but he led the charge for those
tax breaks. They say they're not going to stay permanent.

(15:44):
I mean, that's not even a tax cut at this point,
that's just keeping our tax rate the same. You've got that,
You've got the President talking about tax on tips, you
have some policies. I think that he's pushing by way
of legislation, but I don't see the Senate working.

Speaker 3 (15:57):
Maybe this week's going to be the big week.

Speaker 2 (15:59):
But it we talk about, you know, them dithering away
or potentially is there is there a movement or lack
of movement on taxes kind of a bell weather that
they might not be read again. I want the muscles flexed.
But are we seeing enough even by the legislation that
Trump's proposing on taxes from Congress, are they moving on it?

Speaker 5 (16:18):
Well?

Speaker 9 (16:19):
I think I think everyone would feel a lot better
if there was a little bit more substance. You know,
right right now, we have outlines, we have thoughts, we
have ideas. You know, theoretically, in the next couple of weeks,
we're going to sit down and start right now specific language.
And that's good, and that's good, and it probably means
something good is going to happen ultimately, but it's not
going to probably not going to be in May or June.

(16:41):
Right It's probably going to look.

Speaker 3 (16:42):
More like July or September, which is okay.

Speaker 9 (16:45):
You know that's usually when people do do tax or form,
they do it in the in the third quarter of
a of the first year of a presidency. But you know,
you you'd be you'd be less than thorough in your
thinking if you didn't the possibility that that something could
go wrong at you know, anywhere along the process.

Speaker 1 (17:04):
Mike is always great chatting with you. Thank you. Enjoy
the rest of the.

Speaker 3 (17:07):
Day, you two guys, Thank you, Thanks so much.

Speaker 1 (17:10):
All right, Mike McKenna, columnist at the Washington Times, talking
about the president's strategy when it comes to executive orders
and dealing with Congress. All right, more coming up on
the Roden greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio
one O five nine. Okay, and rs, are the forecasters
really saying we could get some snow this weekend? Thanks
for this week you know, I thought I saw that

(17:31):
over the weekend, some of the weather folks talking about
maybe snow.

Speaker 3 (17:35):
I hope not.

Speaker 1 (17:36):
Yeah, I'm I mean, we've got a beautiful day today.
For the last time I.

Speaker 2 (17:40):
Looked Friday, they say that, Well, no, the loaves are
in the third Well sorry.

Speaker 3 (17:45):
Loves thirty eight.

Speaker 1 (17:46):
So we get a little bit of snow.

Speaker 3 (17:49):
In the mountains.

Speaker 2 (17:50):
I guess, can we just like have a normal spring.
I don't need it to be seventy tomorrow. If it's
going to be fifty one on Friday. Can we just
find a happiness medium here?

Speaker 1 (18:01):
Geez, spring in Utah.

Speaker 3 (18:03):
Right, it's going to be like this until it's ninety.

Speaker 2 (18:05):
We're just gonna go to ninety one day and we
never even get a good spring.

Speaker 1 (18:09):
That's what people fear, you know, we won't get into
the eighties, and then it'll be ninety. That'll be one hundred,
yes right away? All right, Well, speaking of climate I
saw an article the other day, Greg, and the argument
basically was, or the the article of what it was
all about, that the climate change freakos out there have

(18:29):
not changed their tune in twenty or thirty years. Nothing
has really changed with the climate in the past twenty
or thirty years.

Speaker 2 (18:36):
Not surprising has their story changed. I mean, wasn't it nowhere,
wasn't there going to be a big glacier? Wasn't it
good We're going to freeze over?

Speaker 1 (18:43):
Anything about that? Well, let's talk about the climate con game.
Joining us on our news maker line, right, now is
that is McCarter, that is a contributor at American Greatness.
Always ready to have that. He is back on the
show that is How are you welcome to the Rod
and Greg Show?

Speaker 4 (18:57):
Oh, thanks for having me back. Always good to be
with you.

Speaker 1 (19:00):
It doesn't seem like the change from the climate crazy
is out there has changed that much, has it?

Speaker 4 (19:07):
No, it's it's had variations on the same riff you've
gone from. There was a period of it's going to
be hot, and then it's going to be cold, and
then somehow it was going to be cold, which only
shows that it was really going to be hot. Yeah,
And in the in the end, they've just gone with basically,
instead of global warming, instead of a new isation, you

(19:28):
just call it climate change so they could fit everything
under the rubric and advance their political agenda, which is
really what this seems to be about. And then my
latest article I basically tongue and cheeked it. But to
a certain extent, what we're seeing out of con men
are the same types of things you're seeing out of
the climate cult. And it's basically the premise is that

(19:49):
something horrible is going to happen unless you pay me
money to make you go away. You're going are all
going to die? Has a very attractive offer, I suppose.

Speaker 2 (19:57):
And it's it's bulletproof. The way you described it, use
the example of a con. It was written in a
book and it was a Chicago I guess a superintendent
of the Chicago Police Department talked about his aunt being
taken for fifteen thousand dollars, and they played upon her
fears and her superstitions, having I guess, been been from
Italy and they needed to take anyway. I think maybe

(20:18):
you could frame it, but I thought there was such
a absolute parallel to the well are we boiled up
today as that world ended? No, I guess it's working.
I mean that's really what they're doing, kind of like
this con. If you could help show our just describe
for our listeners the parallels. I think that the example
you use is really enlightening.

Speaker 4 (20:38):
Well, it happened as I read it. I found the
book at a Chicago used book place, and it was tremendous,
and as I was reading, and it just tracked because
in the past I'd used to think about they were
using the analogy of essentially the fear of nuclear arm
again and In the past, the left used to talk

(20:58):
about how the fear of nuclear arm ageddon would make
people do horrible things and drive them to engage and
support political policies that weren't very good. It was all
premised on fear, so an extent they had switched this
And when reading this book, it's called What Cops Know.
It's about different police officers relating their experiences on the job.

(21:19):
This instance, had someone's relative had been taken for fifteen
thousand dollars, they were told that there was a curse
placed on the house, that horrible things are going to
happen unless they forked over fifteen thousand dollars or more
to make the curse go away. And when you think
about all the horrible climate armageddon alarmism that you're hearing,

(21:40):
that's really the premise is they're scaring people with the
fear that the world is going to end. Unless you
cough over your liberty and prosperity to some outside government
or centralizing organization, then we're all going to die. Which
is ironic because in the end, even if the climate
does change, Now, does this prevent any realistic debate on
the art on the consequences if there are any of

(22:02):
global warming. But it also does is it locks you
in to the fear mode and makes it very, very
difficult for people to engage in reasonable, responsible discussion about this.

Speaker 2 (22:14):
So when the I'm sorry Rod So, when the investigator,
the police officer confronted the con artist and said, you
charge these you charge this woman fifteen thousand dollars five
thousand for each grandchild to take the curse off? Why'd
you do it? And he said, well, how are the kids?
And he said they're fine? Are they alive? Yes, Well
I took the curse off. I was like, okay, yeah,

(22:38):
therein lies the entire climate argument.

Speaker 4 (22:41):
To me.

Speaker 2 (22:41):
You just keep paying the billions and I guess we
get to live another day.

Speaker 4 (22:46):
Well, we were told at various times that it was
actually late to do anything about it, and yet they
turn around they tell you, well maybe not maybe by
twenty twenty five, Well maybe by twenty thirty, Well maybe
by twenty fifty. And the worst part of it is
with the governmental aspect of it. Politically, you have a
whole lot of people, especially in places like Michigan which

(23:06):
we have term limits, they will pass all this legislation
to destroy your living and prosperity by twenty fifty, that
you have to do certain things by twenty thirty or
twenty fifty, and they'll all be out of office before
the consequences of their horrible policies come frond of bitter fruition.

Speaker 1 (23:20):
Yeah, well, the people it's a go ahead, that.

Speaker 4 (23:24):
Is, but it's they're getting a free pass on it,
and the public is kind of like, this is the
fear drives the public, and well, at least somebody's trying
to do something about something, and it's like, well, you
don't even know if it's going to happen, and then
you can't hold these people accountable for the things they're
going to do to you and your kids.

Speaker 1 (23:39):
Yeah, Tottie. Is it fair to say though that it
may be a con game as far as the climate
is concerned. But I think in a way that's been
a very effective con game, hasn't it, Because many people
in this country believe the world will burn up or
freeze someday.

Speaker 4 (23:56):
Yeah, Robert frost, fire or ice, and if it's climate change,
it can be both at the same time.

Speaker 1 (24:01):
That's true.

Speaker 4 (24:03):
You know, something's it's been very effective, and they've been
scaring people a lot but if you look at the polls,
eventually the climate change. Outside the handful of cultists that
are fervent believers, most people place us very far down
on their list of what they believe the government should
be dealing with. And more importantly, to a certain extent,
at least at least there's hope about this. It's because

(24:26):
the public senses that when people try to scare them
that they're really trying to hide something from them, that
they're using the fear as a way to avoid honest,
reasonable debate about something. And if something that is this important,
you would want to have an honest debate and have
consensus rather than compulsion to finding a policy that would work.
And that's not what we're getting out of the people

(24:48):
supporting them.

Speaker 1 (24:49):
That is, as always, we enjoy having you on the
show and enjoyed your article. Thanks for a few minutes
of your time today. Thanks for having me guys joining
us on our newsmaker line. That's that is mcartter talking
from the American Greatness dot com website if you want
to read his article. But he talks about the climate
crisis and the con game that has been played Greg
and nothing really has changed, you know, either we're heating

(25:11):
up or cooling down. And they've been talking about that
for how many years now? Yeah, yeah, it's nothing.

Speaker 3 (25:16):
It's a brilliant article.

Speaker 2 (25:17):
And I really appreciate his commentary today because I mean,
he says the simplest to con. The best con is
the simplest con. And I'm telling you to say that
the whole world's ending unless you get you know, unless
you give up your freedoms and do what we tell you,
or it all ends. It seems to be compelling to
a lot of people. They act out of fear.

Speaker 1 (25:35):
It is all right. Mare coming up on the Rod
and Greg Show and Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine,
can arrest? Have you kept up with this story about
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

Speaker 2 (25:44):
So I have her silly story, but I hadn't seen
the actual photo of her putting the yeah, put a
face until today in the studio, and it's it's comic.
It's actually pretty pathetic.

Speaker 8 (25:56):
You know.

Speaker 1 (25:56):
She was at the White House on Friday in the
Oval Office with the President. Was there to talk to
the President about working with the president get to get
some things done for her state, right, Yes, But when
a photo op came around. She didn't want her picture
taken now it, you know, and she's not the first.
There have been several governors who had Democratic governors, blue
state governors who have reached out to President's trum trying

(26:19):
to get a working relationship going with them. But you know,
she took so much heat from the Democrats for being
in the oval office to begin with, and now she's
being mocked by those of us on the right saying,
you're hiding your face. Why did you do that? Now,
she went before what is called the Detroit Economic Council
today and explained why she decided to cover her face.

Speaker 11 (26:41):
You asked me what was going through your mind at
that moment, and it was, I don't want my picture taken,
That's all it was. I kind of wish I hadn't
put my folder up in front of my face. But whatever,
you know, I was there. I mean, I just wrote
a book about learning to laugh at yourself, so I'm
pretty good at it. And we all meet, you know,
we all have our moments.

Speaker 1 (27:00):
But yeah, she had a moment, all right, And let
me tell you what. You know, what, why are they
so afraid to have their picture taken with Donald Trump.

Speaker 2 (27:07):
I mean serious, it's it's because it's a it's a
platform of hate, and there's nothing that there's nothing that
speaks more hypocritical if you're if your if your platform
is we just hate him, and we think he's inherently
a bad person to be in the company of and
working with, same room, in the same room with someone
that you're trying to say, is the devil incarnate, and
so if you're there with them, then you're you're one

(27:28):
of the devil's you know, minions. So that's what they
don't want to do, and that's why it's so inconsistent
for them. But we know from this election and from
all their their their hyperbole, that that what they said
he was and what he is has never even remotely
been close.

Speaker 1 (27:42):
Yeah, well, but don't they I mean they almost have
to work with the president, don't they to get the
federal money, the federal dollars projects going for their states.
But they're afraid to be seen with them. It makes
absolutely no sense.

Speaker 2 (27:53):
One would think, you know when again, when I was
on the clock as a public servant, we went back
with the governor myself, I was Speaker of the House
and Senate President. We went back to meet with the
Health and Human Services over Medicaid, Obamacare, Obamacare expansion, because
we weren't going to do it. We had to work
with the Obama administration to get to get what they
call them now.

Speaker 3 (28:13):
I've been out so long.

Speaker 2 (28:14):
Waivers yah to get waivers of our traditional medicaid because
we weren't going to do Obamacare expansion. So you got
to work with those administrations, Democrat or Republican alike as
a public servant, because you're on the clock and you
got to get some things done. So she I wasn't
hiding under any desks, I wasn't putting any folders in
front of my face, but nobody cared. I wasn't the
governor center was taking any pictures.

Speaker 3 (28:33):
I guess so.

Speaker 1 (28:34):
Stephen A. Smith, the well known sports government sportscaster, was
on Jonathan Carl ABC this Week yesterday and he talked
about what she didn't, why she did it.

Speaker 12 (28:42):
But the real issue is is that whatever it takes
to get business done is what we need to be
focused on. Whatever her business is with that particular issue
or her particular state. I understand that the biggest picture
here is that Elizabeth Warren was just on with you. You're
going to have a multitude of Democratic representatives on with you.

Speaker 1 (29:00):
They talk and they talk and they talk. Well, what
can they do?

Speaker 12 (29:02):
They positioned themselves to do absolutely nothing. I didn't hear
anything about terrorists from the Democrats before the election. Trump
had been preaching about this for the longest time. The
men the way people decry his strategy, He's been bloviating
about that. They said nothing about it, and instead they
talked about everything from walk culture, to cancer culture, to
abortion rights and all of this other stuff. So, but

(29:22):
that wasn't going to win the election. And that's what
we have to look at. What is it What is
it going to take to get the job done. That's
why somebody who's a sports analyst for crying out loud
is in the dagone polls. It's not somebody big up
in me. It's an indictment against a Democratic Party.

Speaker 1 (29:39):
There is not one Democrat out there that I've heard
so far, Greg, and you you may disagree with me
on this, who has come out and said what is
it going to do for the Democratic Party to get
things done? It's anti Trump, anti Trump, anti Trump. That's
all they live on. And that's where they're making their mistakes.

Speaker 2 (29:56):
And it's in it, and it's a it's an abandonment
of any common sense whatsoever, because the president really is
coming from a place of common sense. It's and he's
really he really is working very hard and everyone's not
going to agree with him all the time, but he
is working hard from the perspective of I want the
everyday American to have their fair shake, to have a
fair go with this, and he has seen the system,

(30:17):
he has seen how this has changed over time on
so many different levels that a president can actually have
a positive influence. That's where he's coming from. And if
your position is I'm against him with what who he
represents and what he's working on, then you're against the
American people, that's what you are. And they don't they
don't know how to see the whether they say the
trees from the forest or through the trees, Yeah, from
the trees. I just think that they are just so

(30:39):
rudderless as a party in a a and a you
know movement.

Speaker 1 (30:43):
Gavin Newsom has met with him, Phil Murphy from New
Jersey has met with him. Kathy Hlkel from New York
has met with him. They have to work with the president.
Yet they're so afraid to be seen working with the president.
I mean, it's not doing their states any good.

Speaker 2 (30:56):
And you know, they have some guys like Bill Maher,
they have some Democrats that are showing how it can
be done and you don't have to give up who
you are to do it, and there's some like common ground.
I thought Bill Maher's comments were, you know, he's a comedian,
so he's making fun of Trump and I he said,
the guy, the monster I've been I thought I saw
all these years, isn't the guy he really is? Yeah,
you know he a lot of what Bill Martin talked

(31:17):
about in terms of Trump's you know, he doesn't have
he doesn't have all these barriers between him and everyone else.
And he's very inquisitive and he asked a lot of questions,
and he really wants to hear your opinion on things.
That's what I've experienced, that's what my wife, Queen Bee
has experienced. That's that is Donald Trump. He gets meet
him and share that perspective. It humanizes them even if
politically you're not going to agree. We can start to

(31:38):
at least have some common sense conversations. But I don't
think there's enough courage with Democrats to do that.

Speaker 1 (31:43):
I think the most telling thing that Mars said over
the weekend he kind of talked about his meeting with Trump,
that he could not have sat down with Barack Obama
or Joe Biden and do this. That's okay, he couldn't
have done it, but he could with Trump because you
pointed out, very gracious and he will look and Selena
Zito has said this as well. We've had Selena on
the show. He will look you in the eye and
he will listen to you. And Mar said, I couldn't

(32:05):
have done that with Obama and Biden. It would have
been completely different, and it's all pageantry and it wasn't.
And you're right. He went after Trump. He said, I
disagree with you. Trump said, okay, we disagree. Let's move on. Interesting,
all right, when we come back, what do we do
about student visas? And people will want to come here

(32:27):
as guests and go after this country. We'll talk about
it coming up. Okay, have you ever you you occasionally
will have a get together at your home, Yes, a
party at your home, probably more so when you were
running for governor. Yeah, a lot of gathering over now, Yeah,
you would you would invite guests? Yes, did you ever

(32:49):
feel compelled to kick a guest out?

Speaker 3 (32:52):
No?

Speaker 2 (32:52):
But when I was younger, and you know, in my
you know, in my Pittsburgh space, there's been some people
kick out of out of get togethers for really yeah,
for bad behavior.

Speaker 10 (33:04):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (33:04):
Yeah. So my question would be in light of what's
going on in this country today. If we have students
here on a student visa, yes, and they're doing things
that really didn't work with the United States, okay, like
Machmood Khalil, you know, calling for you know, the the
attacks on Jewish students. Do we as a country have

(33:25):
a right to kick them out and say you're you,
you've overstayed, You're welcome, see you later.

Speaker 3 (33:30):
Yes, I would say we would.

Speaker 2 (33:31):
I I have sought and received a visa from other
countries going back when I was a missionary or my
in my early twenties to go to Papua New Guinea
additional a different country than the when I was there.
You need an additional visa to get and you start
applying for that when you arrived in Australia.

Speaker 13 (33:49):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (33:49):
Later in life traveling, sometimes you need a visa to
be in certain countries for extended period of time. But
when you go through that process and then when you
go to customers become they asked you some quot Uessians.
It's not a free for all that you can whatever
you said you were there for the visa, of what purpose?
You could be lying, you could be misrepresenting you. You
have to be pretty honest and truthful. And if you

(34:10):
didn't write, if you didn't put on there I'm seeking
this visa, so that can cause domestic unrest in your country.
I don't know that that it could be faulted of
the country for noticing that wasn't on the visa application
and we let you have this visa.

Speaker 1 (34:24):
Yeah, well, Mark mood Khalil. Over the weekend a court
ruled guess what, he can be deported and their demonstrations
out there today. Go figure. Now he was involved in
protests during the university to cut tides with Israel. Also
FASD accusations of supporting terrorist activities. So I think the
country has a right to say, well, you aren't welcome

(34:45):
here anymore.

Speaker 4 (34:46):
You want to.

Speaker 1 (34:47):
Promote this type of activity, You're out of here.

Speaker 2 (34:50):
It seems like the visa application is one where you're
requesting to come. It doesn't sound like you have any
rights to demand your presence or you can just dictate
the terms of which you will arrive and what you'll do.
I think you're coming as a guest of this country
when you're pursuing a visa.

Speaker 3 (35:04):
So that sounds pretty consistent.

Speaker 1 (35:05):
Well, in say Wash, wasn't their story last week that
some students up at the University of Utah, about thirteen
to fifty of them. I think we're told bye bye,
see you later. Yeah, you know, and across the country
you're starting to see that. My question is, and I
would like to see I think the US is totally
justified in doing this.

Speaker 5 (35:24):
Yep.

Speaker 1 (35:24):
Orkle Rubio has said so on many occasions.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
Well, everybody's got to spoil everything, like nobody can ever
just like just chill, Okay. The reason why we have
to be very sensitive to this issue now is because
we have we have college campuses nationally where Jewish students
feel unread threatened. They are threatened. It's not even that
they feel it, it's that they are being threatened. You
have demonstrations across this country that aren't even on campuses.

Speaker 3 (35:50):
It has gotten out of hand.

Speaker 2 (35:51):
It's not just random here or there that we don't
hear about the country a threehundred and fifty million. It
is a coordinate effort. It is all over the place.
It's all media wants to talk about, and it's leading
communities and populations and students feeling and not just feeling,
but left unsafe. So yeah, now we have to stare
at this a little. We have to squint our eyes
at it because you know, it's a dangerous situation out there.

Speaker 1 (36:14):
Well. Piers Morgan was on Bill Marshall over the weekend,
got into a discussion with I think it was a
reporter from the Washington Post, but he made a very
good point and painted a very interestsing picture about people
who were here on visas.

Speaker 14 (36:26):
What if I was a young student at Columbia, They're
on a green card, British, come in, happy to be here.
Do all my paperwork? Get to Columbia and I start
leading a group which is a bunch of white supremacists,
and we start terrorizing black students in the way that
they were terrorizing Jewish students. Why not in that circumstance
would we all be as comfortable with this? Or is

(36:47):
it the reality which was exposed by the mobs at Columbia,
which is that for some reason Jews get treated differently
to anybody else.

Speaker 1 (36:56):
When it comes to this kind of thing.

Speaker 14 (36:58):
Because if that had been honestly white supremacist trading black
students like that, they would be out the country and.

Speaker 1 (37:04):
Oh, heat spot on, if that would be a white surprise,
he'd be out of this country and in a flash.

Speaker 2 (37:09):
Yeah, it's selective outrage, it's selective logic. It's it it
and it doesn't it doesn't. It's actually, yeah, it's it.
I would even take it a step further. Imagine yourself
being a guest in another country. Let's say you're going
to Britain or to England, Okay, great Britain, and you say, okay,
I'm coming as a student, or I'm coming and I
want to work here. I'm gonna I like a work visa,
whatever it is. If you go to Britain and you

(37:31):
start raising kine, okay, and your job ends up being
I'm trying to undermine the population and the people and
the government of this country. Uh that you're that you've
been granted the visa. I don't see it beyond the
realm of possibility that they might say, yeah, you know
that visa we gave you. I just don't think it's
working out. I think you can have to do. We're
going to send you out if you're if you went
there and that's what you were doing, well, let me

(37:52):
think it would be you'd be honoring the terms of
your visa application.

Speaker 1 (37:55):
Let me take a different approach on this, which I
imagine you will disagree with on them. But does the
student who's here in the United States as a guest
have the same rights as we do when it comes
to free speech? And can't they say whatever they want
to say?

Speaker 2 (38:09):
You know I would, I'd tell you this is why
an argument, but it's it's not. I'd say that if
it were just a student in a in a singular
situation where they're expressing an opinion, great, But this is
But this is again why we have to stare at
this because it's coordinated, because it's it's organized, because it's
larger than a student speaking their mind or exercising freedom

(38:34):
of speech. This is a coordinate effort to terrorize, domestically,
terrorize large swaths of our population, which can't can't go unaddressed.
That's that is the difference and that's why I said
we have to ruin everything. We always have this pendulum
that swings. I do think that this situation if remote,
if it's a student, if it's someone, it wouldn't be

(38:54):
as big of a deal. But it's the it's the
it's the sophistication of it all, it's the organization of
it all. It's the pervasiveness of it all that goes
well beyond someone's freedom of speech. And now you're starting
to be you're a domestic terrorist.

Speaker 1 (39:05):
Well remember Khalil also read the takeover of a building
there at Columbia. Yes, it was behind that.

Speaker 2 (39:11):
Remember those janitors, but they got they were trapped in there,
not able to leave. Yah, it's yeah, it's just beyond
the pale. And I think I think they crossed the
line beyond freedom of speech long ago.

Speaker 1 (39:25):
Well, I think if you're a guest, you can be
told to leave any time.

Speaker 2 (39:29):
Yeah, that is true. I think if if, if, if
the government that that granted you the visa feels that
you have not represented your purpose or your time here, uh,
for forgetting the visa and being granted the visa, if
you were to betray that or to not disclose what
you're there to do, and they feel like you've misrepresented
yourself for what the what you're there doing is not
what the visa was granted for.

Speaker 3 (39:50):
You're a guest. You can be asked to leave.

Speaker 1 (39:52):
And that's exactly what Marco Ruby has said. If he
would have put down on his application, yes, I am
going to lead efforts to take over a building at
Columbia to condemn Israel Jewish students and block them from
going to campus, making them feel unsafe on this college campus.
If he had put that down on his visa application,
would we have led him into the country.

Speaker 2 (40:13):
Not a chance, and no one would let us into
their country. Put that on our If we had a
visa applications in any country in this world, they would
say no, thank you to that exact same you know,
purpose that you would go to do and behave in that.
In their country, they'd be like, yeah, we don't give
visas for that. That's actually not a category for us.
We have students, we have work visas. We don't have
domestic terrorist visas here. Funny funny as it may be. Yeah, yeah,

(40:34):
no thanks, no thanks, no thanks.

Speaker 1 (40:36):
All right, let's see what our listeners think tonight on
this eight eight eight five seven o eight zero one
zero eight eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero.
If you're a guest in this country, does this country
have a right to kick you out of here? If
in fact you're doing things that are not what you
should be doing. Is student you want you come to
learn to enjoy the American experience. Great, you're here to

(40:57):
take over college buildings and isolate a certain group of people. Wrong,
you should be out of here one eight eight eight
five seven eight zero one zero, Or on your cell phone,
dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod your calls
and commings coming up on the Monday afternoon edition of
The Rodding Gregg Show. Now here's happy with the news

(41:18):
up there?

Speaker 10 (41:19):
Thanks Rodding greg Such warrants related to a Utah woman
accused of murdering her national god husband made public, and
police launching an online interactive map tracking crime in Salt
Lake City. The latest coming up at the bottom of
the hour.

Speaker 1 (41:35):
From the Big O' Tires Traffic Operations Center.

Speaker 15 (41:43):
You can expect a major delay if you're heading westbound
on twenty first South Freeway. There is a new crash
at seventy second West. It's in the right shoulder that
has slow speeds back to Mountain View Corridor. Looking on
too I fifteen, there's a fender bender northbound at eighth
North in the left shoulder, as well as a crash
northbound I fifteen at sixteenth North blocking to left lanes.

Speaker 1 (42:06):
This report is sponsored by the Music Saved Me Podcast.

Speaker 10 (42:10):
I'm Lyn Hoffman and Lucky me I get to host
the Music Save Me podcast, the podcast that explores the
healing and transformative power of music.

Speaker 1 (42:18):
Over the weekend, it was determined that Mood Khalil, a
later in protesting against immigration and customs enforcement at Columbia University,
may be sent back to his own country. Will the
US government, led by Donald Trump and Secretary of State
Marco Rubio follow through on this? I hope they do
if you want my opinion, but we want your opinion

(42:40):
on this. Do we have a right to kick out
guests who aren't necessarily behind the United States of America
or doing things like taking over buildings and threatening students?
An important important to note should they be allowed.

Speaker 3 (42:52):
First stated events hes are not organical. They are not.

Speaker 2 (42:54):
They're not grassroots or coordinated, sophisticated funded as well, so
that put that into the equation. And then let's go
to our great listeners and our great callers. Let's go
to John in Salt Lake. John, Welcome to the Riding
Greg Show.

Speaker 13 (43:07):
Hey Roight, Hey Greg, how you guys doing.

Speaker 1 (43:09):
We're doing well, Joe. Thanks. Hey.

Speaker 13 (43:13):
I just want to tell you, you know, if you had
had a visitor at your house and he starts acting
up and starts becoming dangerous, and what have you disliked
these visitors in our country, You're going to get them
out of there, and you have every right to do that.

Speaker 16 (43:27):
Well, America is our home. This is our house for everybody.
And you know the way I see it, You don't.
You don't follow the rules, you don't know how you should.
We have every right to get you out of here.

Speaker 3 (43:40):
You're here.

Speaker 1 (43:40):
I'm with you on that one, John, I'm with you, right.
You invite like I like I said at the start
of this hour, Greg, you invite people over to your
home for a get together and they start wonder to
them and start acting up and breaking things and taking
over the house. You get rid of them, would you?

Speaker 4 (43:56):
Really?

Speaker 3 (43:56):
Would you?

Speaker 2 (43:57):
But just I mean, who of us would you ever
think that we could go and apply for a visa
and go to another country and cause this kind of havoc,
organized funded havoc to undermine and to threaten other other
you know, popular people communities.

Speaker 3 (44:11):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (44:11):
And and it'd be all fine, it'd be it'd be
it would be protected.

Speaker 3 (44:15):
Are you kidding me?

Speaker 2 (44:16):
I don't think any of us would think that that
would be something we could reasonably do by being a
by having a visa in someone else's country.

Speaker 1 (44:23):
Let's go back to the phones in Layton. We're talking
with Clint to night here on the rod In Greg Show. Hi, Clint,
how are you.

Speaker 17 (44:30):
Pretty good?

Speaker 13 (44:31):
Are you?

Speaker 17 (44:31):
Guys?

Speaker 1 (44:31):
We're doing well? Thank you.

Speaker 17 (44:35):
So. My honest opinion on this is being a homeowner too. Hey,
if you're gonna if you're going to come into my
house and act like a complete spurst rate clown, I'm
gonna give you the steel the steel toe boot right
out the door. And I think that's exactly what should
happen to this guy.

Speaker 2 (44:57):
Yeah, I agree, and I and I it's I mean,
is there any to Rodge's question? And I think he's
being rhetorical, but is there any Is there any freedom
of speech rights that they get to enjoy to basically
say what they're saying or act the way they're acting.

Speaker 3 (45:12):
Do you think, Clint, I don't.

Speaker 17 (45:16):
Think anything gives them the right to act the way
they're acting. We even as American citizens, there's there's boundaries
that we have that we can't you know, stuff that
sure we could probably do it, but we're going to
have repercussions out of the deal.

Speaker 3 (45:33):
That's true.

Speaker 1 (45:33):
Absolutely, that's true.

Speaker 3 (45:36):
Yes, thank you for the call.

Speaker 2 (45:37):
Here's here's I think that the comparison, if they were
white supremacists harassing you know, the black community, we would
there would be no patience for this, there'd be no
defense for this, there would be what they call hate crimes.
I mean, I've I was sat in a less state
legislative body for many many years where I thought thought
crimes and do thinks that clock crimes are are are
hard to enforce because what's in the mind of someone.

(46:00):
But people told me, and they were pretty convincing, that
some acts have a ripple effect that impact people other
than just the individual who may be receiving. So if
you burned a cross in someone's yard, that yard, it's
not just trespassing. It's not that you just kill the
grass on that yard with that cross. That was on fire.
It's that people that are black would actually feel threatened

(46:21):
or feel a potential threat if they saw that kind
of act happening in their neighborhood. Okay, so they're saying
that the reason why there are hate crimes is there's
a ripple effect to some of those some of those
things that are being done. It's not just a pure trespassing,
you know, crime crime. Well, if the Left is going
to make that argument, and they've made that for a
long long time, and I think there's some merit to it.

(46:43):
You can't cast a blind eye to what's going on
on these campuses, what's going on in these cities, in
these streets, and it's happening across this country all over
the place, from California all the way to Theaset coasts
and everything in between.

Speaker 3 (46:55):
They've been doing it everywhere.

Speaker 1 (46:57):
Here's the state as well. I think it was thirteen
or eighteen the number of students up with the you
who were told, eh, maybe not with these visas. I mean,
we have a right to do this as the country now.
Marco Rubio, who I think has done a great job
so far as Secretary of State on a number of issues,
noted that allowing Khalil to remain in the US would
jeopardize US policy to fight anti Semitism around the world

(47:20):
and in the United States. A few weeks ago, he
was unfaced the nation and was grilled about Khalil and
what should be done. Let's to his explanation.

Speaker 18 (47:28):
Is there any evidence of a link to terrorism or
is it just his your point of view? Yeah, they
take over I mean do not. I mean you should
watch the news. These guys take over entire buildings, well
shut down.

Speaker 19 (47:42):
I'm asking about this justification for the revocation of his visa.

Speaker 1 (47:46):
Was there any evident so was.

Speaker 18 (47:48):
The negotiator on negotiating on behalf of people that took
over a campus, that vandalize buildings, negotiating over what that's
a crime in and of itself that they're involved in,
being the negotiator of the spokesperson this, that, and the other.
We don't we don't need these people in our country.
That we never should have allowed him in the first place.
If he had told us, I'm going over there, and
I'm going over there to become the spokesperson and one
of the leaders of a movement that's going to turn

(48:10):
one of your allegedly elite colleges upside down. People can't
even go to school, library buildings being vandalized. We never
would have let.

Speaker 1 (48:17):
Him in, Yeah, Marco Ruby, any spot on.

Speaker 2 (48:20):
Yeah, by the way, the Jewish students aren't allowed to
speak up on this.

Speaker 3 (48:23):
They're not allowed to. They're not allowed to those campuses.

Speaker 2 (48:25):
Do not let them speak up or protest back real
counter protests now.

Speaker 3 (48:30):
And I'll tell you why.

Speaker 2 (48:31):
I would love for this media that's questioning the Secretary
of State Marco Rubio there to give care this much
about the citizens that live in this country, lived in
those border counties where people were coming over, dangerous people
coming over the border illegally every single day in the millions.
It turned out towards the end, they don't. They never cared,
They never had this kind of concern. They get this
one guy that they want to say, do you know,

(48:53):
did he commit any specific crime?

Speaker 3 (48:55):
And he has.

Speaker 2 (48:55):
Actually the answer to that journalist is yes he has.
He was negotiat on behalf of and part of the
group that took over that building that on Columbia's kick
them out, kick them out. So I just don't understand
their moral outrage. You can hear it in your voice.
They never have that for any They haven't. They feel
no protection, no defense, no concern about the American people

(49:16):
at all.

Speaker 1 (49:17):
You know, these media all right by? Are your calls
coming up? Are we doing the right thing and kicking
some of these students out of the country who were
here on guest visas eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero or on your cell phone dial pound
two fifty. And all you do is have to say, hey, Rod,
we keep you up to date and give you, you know,
abby reports on the stories. We tell you the story
behind the story. That's what we do.

Speaker 3 (49:37):
Each packet we dissected.

Speaker 1 (49:41):
I got a little testy today inside the Oval office.
The President and a few members of his cabinet and
the president of El Salvador decided to send a few
of their barbs towards CNN. Is that fair to say? Yes, yeah, yeah,
well they shot a few dark.

Speaker 2 (50:00):
I think it's just just I think honest observation is
how I would frame it. I think they I think
the President just had it with CNN. And I mean
there's just so many great he does it like he
opens it up the questions and the first one out
the gates, the CNN reporter, He's like, we're not going
to ce an effort.

Speaker 1 (50:15):
You're just not gonna go there.

Speaker 2 (50:16):
First, they're so wrong, so wrong, and so he doesn't
want to go there. And then so anyway, there's just
there's I think there's some good back and forth or
good moments. And and by the way, hats off to
Stephen Miller really explaining the Supreme Court's decision and saying
this was not a loss for us. So you know,
they're saying that those countries can't judge, can't tell the

(50:36):
country what to do.

Speaker 3 (50:37):
Yeah, bringing someone back now.

Speaker 1 (50:38):
The president of El Salvador has developed a pretty good
worky relationship with the President of the United States. He's
opened up his prison, which does not look like a
great place to stay.

Speaker 2 (50:49):
It's like a great place for bad guys, for bad
guy I think that's a I would not pick a
better place.

Speaker 1 (50:54):
It's like, you know, he was med for you fact
about this effort. A judge rolled over the weekend that
the Inmstration has to go with get this guy who
is a member of MS thirteen. But the media is defending,
you know, always just to have Maryland father who likes
to barbecue.

Speaker 3 (51:09):
Yeah, just a Maryland Maryland man.

Speaker 1 (51:12):
Yeah, Marri Maryland man.

Speaker 3 (51:13):
That sounds like he's an American man, You say, Maryland.

Speaker 1 (51:15):
Maryland man. Well, the president of Old Salvador was asked
about if he, in fact or his country is going
to send him back.

Speaker 20 (51:23):
Are not suggested that I smuggle a terrorists in toda
United States?

Speaker 17 (51:26):
Right?

Speaker 6 (51:28):
How can I smuggle How can I return him.

Speaker 20 (51:30):
To the United States? Like I smuggle him into the
United States? Of course, I'm not going to do it.
It's like, I mean, the question was were busterous? How
can I smuggle the terrorists to the United States. I
don't have the power to return him to the United States.

Speaker 1 (51:45):
How can I smuggle a terrorists back into the United States?

Speaker 2 (51:48):
He's from our country. I'm the president's country. Why would
I send him out there? I'm not doing it. Yeah,
that's it's a good answer. And it's just like the
media to think, well, we had a judge tell you, uh,
the sovereign president of a different country what to do.

Speaker 3 (52:00):
Why aren't you listening to our judges?

Speaker 2 (52:01):
Yeah, I mean, the media just can't even believe he's
saying this because a district judge in the United States
told him what to do.

Speaker 3 (52:08):
He's supposed to just do that.

Speaker 2 (52:10):
I maybe they just don't get that he's the president
of that country, and you know, he doesn't that those
judges jurisdiction doesn't reach into his country and him, and
he's not doing that, especially when the administration is not
asking to see that done.

Speaker 1 (52:23):
Now, I'll want to go back to the question about CNN,
because the President basically said, look at you're a low
rated network. And if he said something along the lines
you hate America. I think that's what the President said,
Am I am I paraphrasing that right, something along those lines.

Speaker 3 (52:38):
Well, yeah, he's yeah, he was.

Speaker 2 (52:40):
The exchange was about thetive percent of the border, as
President Trump says, it's actually ninety nine percent. He says, well,
why doesn't the media report that? He says, that's a
good question. I don't think that they like this country,
is why they're not reporting.

Speaker 1 (52:54):
He said, Well, Dana Bash, one of the anchors at CNN,
decided to issue a disclaimer this CNN actually likes America.

Speaker 19 (53:01):
Differently focus on a lot of some misinformation as well.
But we want to digest all of this right now
with our terrific panel here and our reporters Jeff Zeleni,
I want to start with you. You are at the White House.
Before I get to you, I just want to say,
for the record, since we heard President Trump say in

(53:23):
the Oval Office that CNN hates our country, CNN does
not hate our country. That should go without saying. I've
been here for thirty two years, and I see a
rhetorical device in him trying to say such a thing.

Speaker 1 (53:41):
You know, they're in trouble, Greg when and I love
this when they say, oh, we don't hate the country.
We really do like the country. We don't hate them.
You know they're in trouble.

Speaker 9 (53:50):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (53:50):
And again, to be very specific, Trump said, as of
this morning, it was ninety nine point one percent, to
be exact. And I'll Salvador in prison say, why are
those numbers not in the media said, CNN over here
doesn't want to put them out. I think they hate
our country. Actually, well, I can tell you that even
in the twenty sixteen National Republican National Convention, my cousin
Matt was with me on the floor of that of

(54:11):
that and back then there was this uprising of Utah
delegates to the convention that that were supportive of Ted
Cruz instead of yes, and so Dana Bash is on
the floor and she's looking for these these Utah delegates
that would just rip Trump and she's just so excited
to meet him. And so she goes up to thinking
that my cousin Matt was part of the Utah delegation,
said him, said tell us about Trump and why you're

(54:33):
so angry with him, And my cousin Matt said, oh,
we love Trump.

Speaker 3 (54:36):
I love I love Trump. I love that man.

Speaker 2 (54:39):
He's going to be a great president. And you could
see her face fall. She had the camera going when
she was as the question, thinking he was going to
give a negativity.

Speaker 1 (54:48):
Reporters go out on stories, they're looking for specific sound
bites and they will ask and ask again and again
until they get the sound bite that they want.

Speaker 2 (54:56):
And that is exactly what she She was looking for,
that vitriol about Trump. And when he MICUs did not
answer back the way she expected, you saw her face
fall and you saw the light on the camera turn
off and it was off to the other thing. So
when she says, I've been there thirty two years, You've
been playing this game for a long time.

Speaker 1 (55:12):
Yeah. Yeah, So CNN today a dust up in the
White House again. They have to understand, Greg, Donald Trump
is not going to back down and criticize it, So
they've just got to learn to deal with it. I
don't you know, we talked last week about trust in
the media. I'm not sure if he can be turned
around ever again. We say that back, Katie, you say never,

(55:33):
never say never, right, But what is it going to
take Greg for them to turn the American people back
into trusting him. I don't know if they can.

Speaker 2 (55:41):
I don't think when you ask people they'll they'll tell
you they'll never do it again. But I still think
that this media has a grasp on the conventional wisdom
of this country. It's only the media that has said
that Trump going to reset our trade relationships with partners
around the world. Only they're the ones that screamed the
loudest in those that are true the elite. And yet
you get people that start clutching pearls or getting worried

(56:02):
about it because the media has said it so bad.
If you pull it, it's like fifty nine percent or
hire saying that they think there should be reciprocal trade
agreements with these countries. But the media can can turn that,
and I think people might not realize it, but I
do think that they still have some sway that's undeserved.

Speaker 1 (56:20):
You got your taxes done, don't worry about it.

Speaker 2 (56:23):
Why you gotta be all from a business steat of
a Gromance business rod.

Speaker 1 (56:29):
Mine are done and they've been paid, and I hated it.

Speaker 3 (56:33):
No comment. I'm staying out of this conversation. I don't
like taxes, but you know so.

Speaker 1 (56:38):
Are you an avoid.

Speaker 2 (56:40):
No, I got an account, I got I keep my
papers straight. Don't worry. Why you gotta be asking me?

Speaker 4 (56:49):
All right?

Speaker 1 (56:50):
You know, there's no doubt the goal of what Donald
Trump is trying to do when it comes to tariffs
is bring back the manufacturing to the United States of America. Yes,
that's the goal. I saw that this article today. Back
in the fifties, thirty five percent of private sector jobs
in the US were manufacturing jobs. Today it has fallen
to nine point four percent.

Speaker 5 (57:13):
Wow.

Speaker 1 (57:14):
Yeah, and you can see why the President is trying
to bring some jobs back to America, manufacturing jobs.

Speaker 2 (57:20):
I've lived long enough to remember the people like Ross
pro who warned that we would hire a giant sucking
sound though of our productive, manufacturing, good paying jobs that
household heads of households and families depended on leaving this
country if we were to adopt NAFTA, the North American
Free Trade Act, And that's exactly what's happened, is just

(57:43):
as he ross Pro had described it. That's what's happened.
And so I've said on some social media posts. Ross
Pro is right, and I was wrong because back then
I was for the Clinton NAFTA agreement. I thought that fair.
I thought free trade meant fair. I thought we would
actually see trade going both ways. But it's the case
at all.

Speaker 1 (58:00):
Yeah. Well, the question is, Greg, I think the debate
is ken Donald Trump achieved the goal of trying to
bring manufacturing back to the United States of America.

Speaker 2 (58:08):
Well, if you ask that Janet Yellen, who was the
Treasury secretary, y Yeah, it's a terrible comment. I thought
it might have been from a long time ago, but
she's saying this today. This is actually today on CNBC
when we play it.

Speaker 21 (58:20):
Yeah, perhaps it's to bring back American manufacturing, but I
really think that's a that's a pipe dream and not
something that is likely to be accomplished. And we could
even raise questions about whether or not in a broad
based way that's a desirable goal.

Speaker 2 (58:42):
We could ask if it's a desire in a broad
based way, if it's even a desirable goal, what would
you have us be? A former Secretary to the Treasury,
Janet Yellen, you want us to just be a service economy?
You want us to I don't even understand it. There's
a lower in that. That one I'll post And there
is a picture of her when she was the Secretary
of Biden Treasury Secretary. She's in she's in Africa, and

(59:05):
she's standing in front of this grass hut talking about
climate change. If this isn't the arrogance of that whole
administration and how we got in this mess in the
first place, Our Treasury secretary is going on a climate
change tour uh in Africa, and and and then telling
us now with this whole pipe dream of manufacturing. Oh,
by the way, they just announced what's the computer company

(59:27):
that's going to announced Navida is going to do all
of their supercomputers here in the United States. And we're
seeing over seven trillion dollars of committed manufacturing coming back
in onshoing in the United States. So I really don't
know what former Secretary Yellan is talking about. That it's
a pipe dream. We're seeing it roll out in front
of our eyes.

Speaker 1 (59:45):
You know, Greg, I've always wondered if the American people
are willing to pay a little bit more for a product, uh,
you know, a television, a sewing machine, a car. Are
the American people willing to pay a little bit more
knowing that it is made in America? Do you think
they are?

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
I think they would, but I don't think they have
to because I don't see how how a Tesla one
percent manufactured in the United States is out of is
not competitive with other electric vehicles or vehicles in the
in the in the world or country.

Speaker 3 (01:00:18):
I I don't. I don't.

Speaker 2 (01:00:19):
I reject the notion that offshoring, that labor uh has
made everything. I mean, you might get cheap socks. Don't
get me wrong. I think textiles, I think socks. I
think certain things come pretty pretty inexpensive. But when you
talk about the manufacturing machines, yeah, I think that we
can compete. I think that these I think you're seeing
those companies that do manufacture in the United States, they

(01:00:40):
are not sitting at a competitive disadvantage. And I think
it's been pointed out that a lot of the intellectual
property of engineering and even all of that that's involved
in the creation of products. They migrate to where that
that labor is being So you don't you don't get
to keep all the brain power in the United States
and offshore just raw labor by itself. You see those
engineering firms pop up. You see that that intellectual property

(01:01:03):
all of a sudden start to swarm around or or
form around where it's being where the labor's being done.
So we're losing all of that, We're not just losing
the labor by itself. So I think that the competitiveness
can absolutely stay in the United States. If we see
manufacturing in the United States.

Speaker 1 (01:01:17):
Well, you mentioned the word competitive. I mean, look what
Ford has done. Ford saw this up front and now
they're doing a program. I'm not sure how long it
is going to last, but if you buy a Ford,
you will get the same deal on that forward that
their employees get. Yes, so there's there's an American company saying, Okay,
we're into some heavy competition. Now we need to change

(01:01:39):
our tunes. See what we can do to sell more
cars and trucks. I think the F point fifty is
still the top selling truck in America today, but we'll
sell it to you for what we sell to our employees.
So I don't know what that means some kind of
obvious I would think some significant savings. But here you
have an American company, Greg stepping up, seeing the challenge,
meeting the challenge, and there going to try and succeed with.

Speaker 2 (01:02:01):
And it plays an their advantage to make in America
because you're going to avoid those tariffs or even those
non tariff economic barriers that other countries are putting in
front of us. You're going to always have that advantage
when we start to address some of those unfair competitive
advantages that Ford has been having to deal with.

Speaker 3 (01:02:17):
So I think it's all all up from here.

Speaker 1 (01:02:19):
See what happens. All right, we'll talk more about the
terroriffs coming up our number three of the Robin Greg Show.
Say with us, do you spend your evening with with us?
Rod and Greg right? Were your companions?

Speaker 2 (01:02:37):
Well, we like it. Like you said, in the last hour,
we unpacked all this news. You got it, this news
happening in real time. Are seldom as a show go
as our morning call goes, as we see the news
unfold during the day. But I think that that this
tariff discussion we had at the end of this hour
is really important because I think that the media and
others are trying to draw some conclusions that or even

(01:03:00):
comparisons they have just been so fundamentally inaccurate. I mean,
I'm tired of, like now you have the CCP of
China it's embassy in DC, trying to quote Ronald Reagan
about tariffs. I mean, when China, communist China is quoting
Ronald Reagan, can we stop using Ronald Reagan's name for everything?
By the way, he put one hundred percent tariff on
the Japanese on their TVs and stuff coming in back

(01:03:22):
in eighty six or seven, so he saw that at
times it can be a tool for fair trade. But
I'm it's just one of these overused tactics to try
and quote Reagan when you're a moderate or a liberal
or a lefty or a communist in China's case, and
try to make a point.

Speaker 1 (01:03:40):
Different time as well. I think in that No. One percent,
Before we talk more about the tariffs, what did you
think of Rory's win yesterday? I liked it.

Speaker 2 (01:03:47):
I was actually hoping Bryson would win, but then once
he was once Bryson was kind of dropped out. You
wanted this guy to win, but boy did he make
it hard.

Speaker 3 (01:03:54):
I mean he did not.

Speaker 2 (01:03:56):
All he had to do was two put an easy
eighteen toll and he's sitting one hundred twenty five years out,
goes into the sand, misses the parpot, has to go
into a playoff, and then same hole birdies it.

Speaker 3 (01:04:08):
Yeah, from the same place.

Speaker 1 (01:04:09):
Makes a great second shot. Yes, that second shot was fantastic.

Speaker 2 (01:04:13):
Yeah, he needed that on the eighteen just and then
he hit a two putt that he'd been fine. But
but yeah, he This has been the He hasn't won
a major for since twenty fourteen, so this is just
all anyone's.

Speaker 3 (01:04:22):
Ever talked about.

Speaker 1 (01:04:23):
So he's won all the majors.

Speaker 3 (01:04:25):
Now he has a career Grand Slam, as they say.

Speaker 1 (01:04:27):
By the way Tiger called them today.

Speaker 3 (01:04:29):
Did he Yeah, he's the last. There's only six done it.

Speaker 1 (01:04:33):
Career Grand Slam. Yeah, I think so.

Speaker 2 (01:04:36):
I didn't know Gary Player had done it. I knew that,
Jack Nicholas. I knew it was Tiger Woods, Jack Nicholas.
I don't think so. But Gary Player did, which I
didn't know. But then you get to Ben Hogan and
then anyway, there's some Yeah, there's some old folks in
there too, somewhere, people that you watch me.

Speaker 3 (01:04:53):
No, yeah, I'm just kidding.

Speaker 1 (01:04:54):
Well, you know what got me. You're saying about golf?
What Palmer? Palmer? Yeah, mine, Tiger. Actually you want to
be you know, you wanted to be part of Army's army,
his army years and years ago. Kind of fun. By
the way, he takes home four point two million dollars.

Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
Yeah, oh, Rory does Rory. Yeah, that's a that's not
that's not a bad payday for women the masters?

Speaker 3 (01:05:16):
Is it?

Speaker 1 (01:05:16):
Four point two million? You know what I was found
I thought was funny today. The I think was the
Post New York Post had a body language expert analyzed
the embrace between Rory and his wife and kind.

Speaker 3 (01:05:32):
Of little trouble in paradise.

Speaker 2 (01:05:36):
I don't know, but there's some I don't know, there's
some TMZ stories you know, out there about the about
Rory and the tour and his wife and but he
talked about having his kids around, having his daughter around,
you know, between rounds. Yeah, so he said that was
it was a help. He's not had that before.

Speaker 1 (01:05:54):
So yeah, that's true. All right, let's get back to
the terrorists, the more important stuff, right. They are designed,
of course, to encourage more jobs to come back to
the United States, to encourage companies to build the products here. Now,
a lot of people have been carrying, you know, characterizing
this to the Smooth Holly Act years ago. Some say

(01:06:16):
that triggered the depression at that time.

Speaker 2 (01:06:18):
It is, and so they're saying, look, if you had
Smooth Holly and they had terrorists back then, you know,
in early nineteen hundreds, well then it's absolutely parallel to
what we're looking at in twenty twenty five.

Speaker 1 (01:06:27):
That's true.

Speaker 3 (01:06:29):
Maybe not.

Speaker 6 (01:06:29):
No.

Speaker 1 (01:06:30):
Van Mobley is a professor of the Department of History
at Concordia University there in Wisconsin, joining us on our
Newsmaker line right now to talk about this. He wrote
about this, Van, you talked about comparing Trump's tariffs to
smooth Smooth Holly Act is dishonest. Why do you say
it's dishonest.

Speaker 5 (01:06:48):
I think it's dishonest because the situations are fundamentally different.
At the time of the Smooth Holly tariffs, the United
States was the world's greatest creditor. Today, where the world's
greatest day better, so the situation is completely reversed. And
really the reason why the Smoot Holly was a mistake
at that point in time was because by doing that

(01:07:09):
we raised tarefalls. No one could sell us goods, and
then they couldn't pay us back the money they owed us.
In this case, though, however, we have if we throw
up a few taff walls, that helps us produce more,
consume more of what we produce, sell more abroad, and
I think that it helps the global financial situation. So truly,
President Trump's plan is not only good for America, but

(01:07:31):
good for the whole world.

Speaker 2 (01:07:32):
I appreciate so much the historical perspective of smoot Holly
because I have, as Rod mentioned too, I've heard this
as the example of what caused a great depression and
everything else. Your right to point out the historical difference
relevant differences. Do you think that resetting our global trade
partnerships with all countries around the world, and how we
do that, and you're seeing that play out in real time,

(01:07:55):
do you think we can reverse the damage that's been
done even since NAFTA. I mean, if you look at
at what the jobs we've lost just from Bill Clinton
signing NAFTA until today, we've lost millions of jobs, ninety
thousand factories or plants.

Speaker 3 (01:08:09):
Can we with this realignment?

Speaker 2 (01:08:11):
Do you think that there there's a chance to get
back to what we used to be as a country
of manufacturers and making things.

Speaker 8 (01:08:18):
I think that there is.

Speaker 5 (01:08:19):
And I'll tell you something else that's really necessary to
be the country that we want to be. You know, innovation.
For example, people say we want to be innovative, and
we can. We'll just innovate here and they can manufacture
things abroad. That's not really the way it works. Innovation
happens on the factory. For if you if you lose
all your manufacturing capabilities, not only is it unsafe for

(01:08:42):
you in the short term in the time of war
or emergency, but also you oftentimes lose your innovative capacities.
And so I think it's just go ahead.

Speaker 1 (01:08:53):
No, I interrupted, go ahead, complete your thought if you would.

Speaker 5 (01:08:57):
No, no, And that that really is what Trump is
designed to do. And also, you know, there's a school
of economists that really we've forgotten about. They're called the
American School. Henry Carey was one of the big ones.
He was an economist. He was one of Abraham Lincoln's
big advisors. He argued with the pre trade school of
David Ricardo. And one of the things you pointed out

(01:09:18):
is if you have a situation like they had in
nineteent century, like Trump is going back to now we are,
you get a much more vibrant communities of producers and
consumers living close together, and they tend to be more innovative.
And they are and they were at that time. And
I'm just really excited about it. Trump is so so
he's such a good president. He's on the right track.

(01:09:39):
We have to support him. And I think that we will.

Speaker 1 (01:09:43):
Then for people who don't have the historical perspective on
smooth hauling and what it did, exactly what was it
trying to do, and what in fact did it cause
For people who may not have a real understanding of it.

Speaker 5 (01:09:55):
Well, what it was trying to do is what they
were doing is they were doing what they had always
done in the nineteenth century when they ran into troubles,
and that is they had raised the tariff, and they
had forgotten that, in fact, in the changing circumstances in
the twentieth century after World War One, that they had
that they were more interconnected with the globe than they imagined.

(01:10:16):
The other thing, too, is I think the tariff, the
smooth hard tariff, is really small potatoes. Back then, what
was really the problem was that the Federal Reserve followed
They tightened when they should have loosened their monetary policy.
The Federal Reserve oftentimes fights the last war, and they're
in danger of being that now, although I've seen some

(01:10:38):
signs that they're they're catching up to where they need
to be. The Federal Reserve was slow to raise interest
rates after COVID, and that led to help fuel the inflation,
and now tariffs are actually deflationary historically speaking, they need
to follow an expansionary policy and they needed so they
need to get themselves turned around, and if they don't,

(01:11:00):
that's where you really have some serious problems. They have
powerful tools as well as the president, and they need
to use them appropriately.

Speaker 2 (01:11:08):
You're the second person first with JD. Vance who said
that it's almost like an ecosystem you're manufacturing in your
labor that you see the engineers, you see the innovation
on the spot, and so we see we migrate away
from even the intellectual property when we try to offshore
our labor that way. Some are saying looking forward that
America and it's not maybe across the board, but you
better pay attention to AI, which means you better have

(01:11:29):
a very good way to produce energy. You've got to
have access to rare minerals and processing them. They talk
about healthcare, pharmaceuticals, I'd add food chain, our food chain,
we should be self reliant on that food. Are there
sectors of our economy that you think we're particularly vulnerable
today that we really have to turn around and be
more self relying country because this global supply chain is

(01:11:49):
a lot more frail than people want to admit. Is
there any sectors in the of our economy that you're
staring at and thinking, we really got to get it
right and get it right soon.

Speaker 5 (01:11:59):
Well, the President Trump and Jady Vance, who I like
a lot as well. You know, I was down there
when Jady Vance when they had the vice presidential tryout,
so I met him down in mar Lago way back
in the days so long ago. They've they've outlined, they've
outlined where we need to be, you know, some of
the basic productive capacities, steel, shipbuilding, we need to be there.

(01:12:22):
We need to be there with pharmaceuticals and really we
need to you know, I like elon in space, so
you can begin to look at some of these things
which will add you know, protective capacity. But you know
that is right too. It's like the main street things.
I don't want to cut anybody out. You know, all
the sectors are valuable. If we have a more self
sufficient economy across the board that those tend to be

(01:12:45):
the most innovative and vibrant economy.

Speaker 1 (01:12:48):
Yeah, a self sufficient economy.

Speaker 2 (01:12:50):
Be nice, and let this administration do their work. They've
got all these times lined up with these countries. Everyone's
saying they said it was too chaotic at first, and
then now he's making deals. They're saying, he just ke's
flipped back, you know, going back and forth. It's chaotic.
They can't anything this president does. The media wants to
criticize whatever that may be. Any version of what he does,
they criticize, and just give him the space. Lets us

(01:13:12):
give him the space to get this stuff done with
these countries over the next less than ninety days.

Speaker 10 (01:13:16):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:13:17):
I don't know why they don't understand where Donald Trump
came from. He came from the world of business. He's
that transactional persons. You do this for me, I'll do
this for you. And that's what he's looking he's look
of the deal, yeah, the art of the deal. Yeah,
he's looking for transactions that will benefit the United States
of America. And of course things are going to change,

(01:13:37):
you know. I hear well, he's put tariff now on
electronics things like phones and things. It's just part of
the back and forth negotiations. And the media, of course
doesn't have the patience or the understanding to be able
to digest this and say, like you just pointed out, Greg,
it doesn't happen in three days or five days or
two weeks. Give it a little bit of time.

Speaker 2 (01:13:58):
Absolutely, and I'll tell you this can't go back forty
years on anyone that's been our president, and on my
lifetime at least, And hear him say verbatim what he's
saying today. So when he talks about in the early eighties,
eighty one, eighty two, on whether it's Phil Donahu, Oprah Winfrey,
you name it, we're getting we're getting the wrong end
of the deal and the short end of the stick
with our trade partners. He's it's gotten worse since that time.

(01:14:21):
But forty years ago he was tracking this, so it's
not a surprise. The man is absolutely consistent with his
worldview on this.

Speaker 1 (01:14:27):
You know, there are two consistent people in the world
right now, Bernie Sanders, who's been talking about yeah since
nineteen ninety three, and Donald Trump, who's been talking about
Taro since as long as I can remember, way back
to the early eighties with Oprah.

Speaker 2 (01:14:40):
And the problem with Bernie is a pale. Your oligarky
is on your side of the line, not ours.

Speaker 1 (01:14:45):
Hey burn, Yeah, more coming up on the Roden greg
Show in Utah's talk radio one oh five nine knrs.

Speaker 2 (01:14:52):
I've got suggestions, but after that it's house money. You
can do what you want, but put those two on
your presets and will never be a part, will always
be together.

Speaker 1 (01:15:00):
Yeah, well, you can take it for It's kind of
like having your car radio in your hand. It is
kind of a nice thing.

Speaker 2 (01:15:06):
Well, I well, I was in San Diego when I
woke up this morning. I was listening to canter As.
That's right.

Speaker 1 (01:15:11):
Yeah, then you got shaken.

Speaker 2 (01:15:13):
Yeah, well, I was on the plane. Thank goodness, that
pilot got us going. Boy, I'm so proud of that pilot.
He was like, you know what, we are better off
this ground than on this ground. We are getting out
of here, they say. He said, they're going to check
that runway out. If there's no cracks or holds, we
are out.

Speaker 4 (01:15:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:15:27):
And we got out of there.

Speaker 1 (01:15:28):
Yeah. In a couple of weeks, Greg, May seventh, as
a matter of fact, the Utah Pride Flag Law goes
into effect.

Speaker 22 (01:15:36):
Good, well, you said, Utah right, it's a flag law, period.
It's all flag law. Yes, black lives matter, magnet flags,
all of all. Right, but people are still trying to
figure out exactly what it means and what will and
will not be allowed in a classroom.

Speaker 3 (01:15:52):
Hmmm, Well, I don't think it's that hard actually read
the bill.

Speaker 1 (01:15:55):
I mean, that's does a poster is that allowed in.

Speaker 3 (01:15:59):
A I mean yeah, I guess.

Speaker 2 (01:16:02):
I mean if you if you have if you know
what that flag look, with the different flags that are
politically motivated, that we just want to depoliticize out of
our classrooms, not have our our platforms making any messages.
If you've got a poster that is portraying the same
images that a flag would, then then let's quit being
silly and adults.

Speaker 1 (01:16:20):
That's what it is they're gonna unless it is specifically
outlined in the bill. And I think in some cases
that's where questions are being raised if it's not specifically said,
you can't have this, you can't have that there. You know,
the lgbt community they're going to push this as far
as they can well.

Speaker 2 (01:16:37):
And the thing is, they'd never tolerateed on either side.
They wouldn't allow for make America Great Again signs instead
of flags, they would never let that. They there's no
equal opportunity here. It's it's their agenda is all that
they want to see represented in these classrooms. If you
try to do it the other way, they would have
a big problem with that.

Speaker 1 (01:16:54):
I hope and I wish, as a matter of fact,
Greg that there is a gut seek conservative MAGA supporter
teacher out there who will put up a MEGA poster
there in.

Speaker 3 (01:17:07):
There if they're clowning around in that school.

Speaker 1 (01:17:09):
If the LGBTQ community is going to get away with
this and push things, then I hope there are teachers
out there who will push other agendas, you know, including
the Mega.

Speaker 2 (01:17:19):
You know what the serendipity of that would be this
the found jewel would be that that teacher that does
that would be the most popular teacher in the school.
I mean all the Yeah, the teacher that puts that
MAGA sign up there, the kids are going to love them.
I mean, the parents are going to want to go
to teacher conference and thank them him or her. I
tell you what, it'd be the best day of that

(01:17:39):
teacher's life if they did it.

Speaker 1 (01:17:40):
I hope a teacher does that well.

Speaker 3 (01:17:42):
I do too well.

Speaker 2 (01:17:44):
Again, if they if they mess around and try to
it's called like what hostile compliance or something where they
just try to find logical extremes for different measures. You know,
they do that against Trump on when they say we're
getting rid of DEI you saw some people within government
take that to such an offensive extra dream where they
took descriptions of what Utah was taken off of the

(01:18:06):
website of Arlington Cemetery. That was an example of hostile
compliance where they tried they go to it to a
logical extreme to try and demonize the policy they don't like,
and so they try to they exaggerate it. And I
think if someone were to take this flag law, which
is supposed to again depoliticize our classrooms and not have

(01:18:27):
political messages right or left, just or any and they
want to just mess around and make it cardboard science
in set of flags. I think that I think people
will see through and they won't appreciate it.

Speaker 9 (01:18:40):
I know.

Speaker 2 (01:18:41):
I think parents would be very, very disappointed if that's
the posture that schools or teachers.

Speaker 1 (01:18:46):
Tell another you taught story to follow. Tomorrow, greg is
tomorrow is deadline day for the referendum on the union
busting bill. Union busting bill. Yes, yeah, the referendum. How
many signatures do you need? One hundred and forty thousand
is something like that. And it's interesting because it is
on the ballance. It's not just a bulk amount. This
is why we are laws better in Colorado. You could

(01:19:08):
just go into downtown Denver get all your signatures and
you don't have to get Yes, you have to get
a certain So there's twenty nine counties and I think
out of twenty seven, you have to get a certain
percentage of represents. Yeah, it's a percentage of the even
number the presidential election year, which is what usually is
our traditionally highest voter turnout. You got to have a
percentage from that county of that high vote that presidential

(01:19:30):
year turnout, and so that gives you you have to
have a wide swath of twenty seven out of twenty
nine counties. I think that makes it a lot more
fair in terms of collection and actually the will of
the people. Colorado gets some crazy ones because they can
just go into the downtown. Think about which is Think
about Salt Lake City. If you had to get if
you could get all your signatures for a statewide anything
out of Salt Lake City, think about how uh, you

(01:19:52):
know distortered? That would be all They would have to
go to Boulder. I mean right, look how General Boulder
is at the University of Colorado home and they give
signatures like that.

Speaker 3 (01:20:01):
Yeah, it's at a Colorado Buffalo game. Is it just
to watch? You go to see the Buffs? Say, can
get every one there.

Speaker 1 (01:20:07):
And do that. But referendum tomorrow deadline I believe is
tomorrow for that.

Speaker 2 (01:20:11):
Yeah, well that'll be interesting. I'll see, we'll see what happens. Well,
we'll see if.

Speaker 3 (01:20:15):
It gets it. It's it's supposed to be a high bar.

Speaker 1 (01:20:17):
So this goes back to the fear that legislative leaders
have had. We pass a bill, there can be a
reference or referendum to change that bill.

Speaker 3 (01:20:25):
Yeah, that's where they had from this court ruling.

Speaker 2 (01:20:28):
Well, no, the Supreme Court ruling is even worse than that,
because it's saying that if it reforms government, you can't.
Actually it's it's statutes that you can't amend like you
can any statute. Yeah, otherwise, and that's the part that's
really not not good. You shouldn't have superseding laws that
they you aren't subject to amendments, because all all laws are.

Speaker 1 (01:20:47):
Not good, not good. All right, more coming up, it
is the Rotting Gregg Joe on this Monday and Utah
Talk Radio one oh five nine k n RS. All right,
let's talk about the Tesla takedown. The protests seem to
have slowed down, But wasn't there an incident in was
it New Mexico? Greg, you were saying that they arrested
a guy.

Speaker 2 (01:21:04):
Yeah, so they did arrest so there was well, I
think it made all the news in Albuquerque, New Mexico,
where a Tesla dealership was. They just firebombed the whole thing.
Guy guy was arrested. Finally, they Department of Justice announced
an arrest in that case. And of course the guy's
a well he's a self identified queer. I guess I

(01:21:24):
can say because he said it, so I guess I
can say. I don't know if it's the word I
can say without being rude. But that's what he calls.
That's what he says. And he has some pronouns and stuff,
and and he's and so he's an electrical electrical engineer,
but he's also obviously an activist. And he's been arrested
for the for the firebombing of the Albuquerque, Mexico Tesla dealership.

Speaker 1 (01:21:46):
The question is did you do this all by his
little loansome? Now a lot of people are referring to
these attacks on Tesla as Tesla takedowns, and the media
wants to convince you that these are just random acts
of protest against Tesla. But our next guest has done
some work on this and is taking a look at
how the Tesla takedown and that whole thing the public

(01:22:10):
has been fooled on this. Joining us on our Newsmaker
line to talk about it is David Reboi. David is
U with the City Journal. He's been taking a look
into this. David, how are you, and welcome to the
Rod and Greg Show. Thanks for joining us. David it's
great to be with you.

Speaker 4 (01:22:25):
Thanks for having me.

Speaker 1 (01:22:26):
Tell us about what you found. You did some digging
into this, David, what did you find?

Speaker 23 (01:22:31):
So we did some digging and it's it's more. It's
both more and less than.

Speaker 1 (01:22:39):
What we would think.

Speaker 23 (01:22:41):
So I think the most important thing to know about
what's going on here is that there doesn't need to
be one guy in a room somewhere and you know,
a boardroom, you know, gee George Soros type figure pressing
a button and causing things to happen. I think that
that's a kind of conspiracy minded way of seeing this.

(01:23:04):
The way we need to see it is like an ecosystem,
So you have a lot of different things popping off
at the same time, not necessarily in literal coordination, but
with the general idea that people are going to do
things like this. So, for example, you can have like

(01:23:26):
we saw we saw in the Rolling Stone magazine. There
was a guy, a filmmaker named Winter, Alex Winter, who said,
you know, he kicked off this idea. He said, hey, guys,
let's all protest elon musk at Tesla facilities and dealerships
all over the place. So the next thing, you know,
we have you know, hundreds of organized grassroots protests taking

(01:23:52):
advantage of an eCos of a left wing organizing ecosystem
that kind of comes from union activism and a long
tradition of left wing activism. These guys know, really know
how to get people into the streets or to protests
all over the country. So while you have that going,

(01:24:13):
that's like the smiley face camera ready side, and those
guys know that, you know, they've they've sort of activated
the you know, they put up the bat single signal. Hey,
you know, we're gonna go after Elon Musk and Tesla
and the guys on the far left will do terrorism.

Speaker 1 (01:24:34):
You know, they'll do property damage.

Speaker 24 (01:24:36):
They'll they'll blow up a charging station where they'll they'll
you know, key cars and things like that and what
all this does.

Speaker 23 (01:24:49):
All this kind of works together, even though it's not
exactly coordinated, it's all part of the same movement to
target Tesla.

Speaker 8 (01:24:57):
And this this all.

Speaker 23 (01:25:00):
Works together because they have a principle called diversity of tactics,
which is, hey, you know, these guys can go and
they can set fire to stuff, and we can go
and we can protest and and it's all good. It's
all part of the same deal, and in order for
it to work, they have to adhere to a principle

(01:25:22):
called the non denunciation, which is they're they're not gonna,
you know, the peaceful guys are not going to denounce
the violent guys. They'll say we're not violent, but they're
not going to have anything negative to say about people
who actually do the violence.

Speaker 8 (01:25:38):
And that's how it worked here.

Speaker 23 (01:25:40):
And Chris Rufo and I wrote the piece in the
City Journal in order to kind of get more folks
to understand that this is kind of how it plays out,
and it's not random and it's not necessarily directed. It's
a different thing that that is the way the left
is really op rated for the last one hundred years,

(01:26:01):
and it's something that I think we need to learn
more about.

Speaker 2 (01:26:05):
You know, it's such an interesting article. You mentioned the
Disruption Project, and at first I thought it was a
typo because I've heard of the Indivisible, this organization called Indivisible,
and they have been putting signs together that that have
made their way into protests for TESLA across the country.
They have talking points that they've been generating for people,
and I thought maybe that's what the Disruption Project was,

(01:26:27):
but that's an entirely different group. It reminds me, like
you said, they might not all get into a smoke field,
you know, wood paneled room together and talk about what
they're going to do next, But it would be kind
of like me going to a you know, as growing
up in Pittsburgh and being a Steelers fan, going to
a place to watch the Steelers with a bunch of
Steelers fans. We all speak the same language, we know
the same players. You know, we're all cheering for the

(01:26:47):
same team. We can get we can get coordinated pretty
quick when the game starts. You know, it looks like
that's that is so it seems it seems very organized,
but you have these well funded organizations that really kind
of take these different parts. Where does it go from here?
I think that the biggest I think what the value
of your story is that you're really showing this is

(01:27:08):
not organic, this is not grassroots, it's not just people.
Because they're playing on the they want to make the
public afraid. They wanted to think that there's something so
extreme going on, that people are acting in such extreme
ways that it's Elon Musk that has to stop so
that the violence will stop. And that the disruption will stop.
How can we overcome that? Or do you think we
will overcome that, or will the or will these organizations

(01:27:28):
carry the day?

Speaker 4 (01:27:30):
Right?

Speaker 25 (01:27:31):
Well, I think it's this particular dynamic that I'm describing
as the same one that you know Islamist terrorists have
been using.

Speaker 23 (01:27:44):
It's not new. These guys didn't invent it yesterday. Yeah,
this is usually how it works when you have when
you have let's say, a spectrum of radicalization or a
you know, a large movement it where you have a
spectrum of folks who are in different places in the

(01:28:05):
in the radicalization spectrum. I think that you know, at
the end of the day, we need this is this
is a job for law enforcement, so you know that
means that means making as many connections as possible, but
that also means having an awareness of how this ecosystem works.

(01:28:28):
For example, you have these protests that popped up, and
these protests popped up everywhere, and how that you know
the software that they used to make sure that people
knew about the protests is I don't know, somewhere from
eight hundred to four thousand dollars a month.

Speaker 1 (01:28:48):
Wow, somebody's paying that, right, yeah, yeah, yeah, David, let
me yah, yeah, yeah, yeah, go ahead, sendish your thoughts there, David.

Speaker 5 (01:28:56):
Yes.

Speaker 23 (01:28:57):
So, so they're also communicating via tech message and the
text message short code. That costs thousands of dollars a
month too, depending on how many texts they're sending out
and receiving. So there is there's definitely, you know, there's
definitely a lot of money behind this, and and uh,

(01:29:18):
you know, it would be it would be great to
find out where that money is coming from.

Speaker 1 (01:29:23):
You tell my senses though, how this is all set up?
To me, it says this is not going away anytime soon.
I mean, sounds like this has been around for a
long time. The protest may be against something different, but
the structure itself, David, doesn't sound like it's going anywhere
anytime soon? Am I am I writing reading that?

Speaker 5 (01:29:44):
Yeah?

Speaker 25 (01:29:44):
I think I think that's right.

Speaker 8 (01:29:46):
I think the let's say, the the keeaseful side of
the let's say, the organizing side and the non violent
side of this structure is something that you know, frankly,
the right should be stuff being and should be doing.

Speaker 23 (01:30:02):
We should have been doing it for one hundred years.

Speaker 1 (01:30:06):
I mean, I know.

Speaker 23 (01:30:07):
Because I've been in this business talking about it for
at least fifteen of those hundred years, and there's just
no desire to do it on.

Speaker 8 (01:30:14):
The part of of you know.

Speaker 23 (01:30:16):
Donors and institutions on the right.

Speaker 1 (01:30:18):
People would rather fund.

Speaker 23 (01:30:21):
You know, uh, Facebook ads and you know and and
and make you know and and and put money into
podcasts and things like that than to than to even
consider the idea of you know, hey, let's figure out
how to how we can get one hundred people tomorrow
at location X anywhere in the country because the left.

Speaker 1 (01:30:44):
Can do it. Yeah, we can't do it.

Speaker 23 (01:30:47):
And I think it's a you know, I think it's
it's it's you know, it's a massive leg up that
they have that they've always had. And this comes from
the unions. The unions have have. Yeah, and the engine
behind all this are the large unions from s CiU
to a fl CIO, I mean everything. All the organizers

(01:31:08):
that we're talking about who are running these operations and
you know far left operations, they used to work for
a fl CIO or s CiU you know, five years ago.
That's it's an it's the it's the most common career
paths on the left is to come out of a
union organizing shop and to go into like proto antifah.

Speaker 1 (01:31:29):
Wow. Interesting. Interesting.

Speaker 23 (01:31:31):
So this is this is something that they have and
they do very well, and it's something that we it's
just not even.

Speaker 1 (01:31:38):
On our radar, David. Fascinating story. Thanks for a few
minutes of your time. Thank you, David, My pleasure. All right,
Jordan on our newsmaker line, David Roboi. He is with
a city journal talking about how the Tesla takedown activists
pull the public. Very interesting to learn of this.

Speaker 2 (01:31:55):
Yeah, and he brings up such a good point. I'm
I know we go to a break that Republicans just
aren't good at protesting.

Speaker 3 (01:32:01):
Okay, I've tried it. Actually, I've tried to protest.

Speaker 2 (01:32:03):
Ben McAdams office when they when you voted to impeach
the Trump and I we didn't have rhymes. They have
rhyming slogans. They counter protested us, and they beat us.
We just didn't. We weren't dressed appropriately for the weather.
We were just you know, during our lunch breaks. It
was terrible. It was about it was. It didn't work
out very well.

Speaker 1 (01:32:19):
I remember that it didn't you remember more coming.

Speaker 2 (01:32:24):
I want to make a clarification I a great listener
was listening in, and I was talking about the signatures
that we need to get, that need to be collected
to qualify something for the ballot, and and I was
I always I was describing twenty nine counties and a
certain percentage of it. It's the twenty ninth Senate districts,
not the twenty nine counties, So forget. But in some

(01:32:45):
point it's it's that's that is a big difference.

Speaker 1 (01:32:47):
So yes it is. Are you ready for the nuttiest
story of the day. I was like to save these
till last.

Speaker 3 (01:32:52):
Okay, I'm ready.

Speaker 1 (01:32:53):
This happened in the UK.

Speaker 3 (01:32:55):
Well, there you go.

Speaker 2 (01:32:56):
That's the muddiest thing I've ever heard, right there, right away.
A mother over there was arrested and jailed for seven
hours okay, after she confiscated iPads from her own children
because she wanted them to concentrate on their homework.

Speaker 3 (01:33:17):
What was the charge for this parent? I mean, what
did she do wrong?

Speaker 1 (01:33:20):
Here's the story, latest insane story about overreach in the UK,
where stabbings are just an everyday occurrence anymore. Vanessa Brown,
a history teacher, was arrested and held for seven and
a half hours by Surrey police for stealing two iPads
they were at her mother's house, who was also questioned

(01:33:40):
she had taken them away from her two daughters so
they would concentrate on their homework.

Speaker 2 (01:33:48):
I only I don't even know how to respond to that.
I don't know how a parent can take anything from
their child of who there you know they have custody of,
and it's considered a thought.

Speaker 1 (01:33:57):
Well, apparently the argument is that the devices belonged to
her daughters and mis Brown had merely confiscated them to
encourage them to focus on their homework. Brown said, I
find it quite traumatic even talking about this now. At
no point did they think to themselves, oh, this is
a little bit of an overreaction for a moment confiscating

(01:34:19):
temporarily her iPads and popping over to her mom's to
have coffee. So she took the iPads away from her daughters,
took them over to her mother's and her daughter. I
don't know how police found out about it, but apparently
they did and charged her and she spent seven and
a half hours in jail.

Speaker 3 (01:34:40):
I have no words for that one.

Speaker 1 (01:34:43):
We'll see you tomorrow, Yeah, we'll see you tomorrow, all right,
head off shoulders back. May God bless you and your
family that great country of ours. We talked to you
tomorrow at four