The Rod and Greg Show: Trump Admin Facing Fallout from Epstein Files

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Remember uh, I think it was earlier this week. It
may have been last week about these uh these new
centers that are opening up around the country claw machine centers.

Speaker 2 (00:09):
Yeah, you see, this is another one of these. Like
I think you're pulling down your your news from mad magazine.
I don't know that this is.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
Well, there are claw machines very popular. A little boy
in Ohio got stuck in one. He tried to call
through and crawl through the pride of his arm. I
mean he was about two thirds of the way in
that thing. It got stuck. Little boy in Ohio.

Speaker 2 (00:32):
That's sad.

Speaker 1 (00:33):
You know, he's fine. They had they had called the
first responders come and pull them out. But you wouldn't
do that, would you.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
No, you got you would stuck my arm. I've stuck
my arm in plenty of those little machines, like you know,
the ones have the little twisters that are supposed to
put the money in the girl corkscrew goes towards the
glass and pushes out your your treat.

Speaker 1 (00:51):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
Well you ever had all those fall ands get stuck
like it just doesn't come all the way down. It's
happening to me. And when you pushed the thing and
open it's supposed to blocking from I've tried very hard.
I've shaken those things worked. I treat out, but you
didn't get stuck. I didn't get stuck. But I got
yelled at for banging on the machine. But it was
ripping me off. I don't blame you, all right, that

(01:13):
was like last month.

Speaker 1 (01:13):
Here's what we'll be talking about today. We want to
talk about Donald Trump's tariff man. He has some concern
about that. We'll also talk about condemning the Texas Hill Gouals. Now,
the President was down in Texas today along with the
First Lady, very touched by what he saw there and
the damage and talking to some of those families and
the stories they are shared. We'll talk about that a

(01:34):
little bit later on. A new report on the White
House payroll y is the smallest has been in twenty
years or so. I guess.

Speaker 2 (01:43):
For example, mister President, I think that's I think that's excellent.

Speaker 1 (01:46):
Now disturbing story that both you and I have talked
about Greg and apparently there you know, we have chatted
about the President's cabinet, yes, and how strong we feel
that his appointees have been, and how strong a cabinet
he had right now, but there are stories out there
today that it may not at all be happy in
Happyville because of this. Apparently there was a blow up

(02:10):
this week between Pam Bondy, the Attorney General, and the
deputy FBI Director, Dan Bongino. He was very upset about
the release of the Epstein files. He feels apparently that
Pambomani Pam Bondy over promised and under delivered and didn't
release all the details. And apparently they had quite the

(02:31):
blow up in the White House. According to reports today,
he has not shown up for the last couple of days.
You know, he stayed at home, apparently ticked off. And
now there also reports that Cash Patel, who is the
FBI director, may join him in telling the President either
she goes or we go. We don't. There are bigger

(02:51):
things to worry about than this, and we don't need this.

Speaker 2 (02:55):
Well, you know you haven't heard if you listen to
our program, we don't dive in head first on this
whole Epstein issue. And by the way, for me, I
don't know about you rub it. For me, it's by design.
It's it's a lot of tabloids that I by the way,
I don't. I don't condone pedophilia. I don't condone anything
that happened on Epstein's Island. I think all of it
stinks to high heaven. I think all of it's wrong,
and I think justice ought to be served. Okay, that's

(03:17):
that's the premise where everything else comes from. That said,
I mean, we just got done with a P. Diddy trial, Okay,
Now if you want, if if when the government was
finished with its case, you'd think the only people that
went to that P. Diddy part of those parties were
the bodyguards and backup singers, because I didn't see a
single big name of anybody, and there happens to be

(03:39):
I'm sure big names that attended those parties and behaved
in ways that were either reprehensible or illegal, or illegal
or both both. And I'm pretty sure that the names
I've heard, the you know, the the Leonardo DiCaprio's and
all those other types probably paid a king's ransom to
prevent themselves. There should be like a blockbuster size video

(04:01):
library of all the stuff that at P. Ditty's places
that had been happening over the years, but we saw
none of it. Why does that not receive the same
collective recoil and outrage and firing of cabinet members that
the Epstein uh, you know, the Epstein case has. I
just think we have to look, we have a president
and an administration that's doing things that we've never seen

(04:22):
done before. And if we become collectively as a society
so mad about the the the you know, just this
just the filth okay and the Epstein stuff, crip it.
If it becomes clickbait, and if it becomes if it
you know, if it bleeds at least, if that, if
that grabs the American attention in the public will so
much that all the other things that are happening, closing

(04:44):
the border, dealing with Iran tariff's trade deals.

Speaker 1 (04:48):
Uh, immigrate Ice, the attacks on Ice.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
The attacks on Ice, if that ends up becoming the
focus of the American people's attention, then what the swamp
will learn from that is we don't have to do
anything hard or generation. We just have to do things
that are salacious. We have to go after the most
salacious stories. That's what everybody wants to see. If if
this country loses some of these fine members of the

(05:11):
cabinet over this topic, by itself, after all, there should
be a well of goodwill and trust from all the
good things that are going on. I mean, we just
got Comyan and Brennan being investigated right now. I again,
I don't dismiss any of that, but we've got to
be able to put it and it's into some sort
of perspective. And I promise you, if everything in this
country and it's fate rests on that scumbag Ebstein and

(05:36):
whatever he does, and that is yes, and he's a dirtball,
and you know what if that, but that is all
we care about, and every cabinet member can see the
door if they don't feed our client list that we
want to see and we just want to see those
people put in jail. If if that's all we care,
then I think we're we're our own worst enemy.

Speaker 1 (05:54):
Well that point, here's the issue, I think, Greg, they
talked so much about this during the campaign. Yes, I really,
you know you'd hear this to me. I'm with you, Greg,
I don't care. I mean, yeah, these guys, these guys
are pigs, you know. Epstein for sure is the biggest
of pigs out there, you know. But I think they
they backed themselves in the corner. And there are some

(06:16):
out there supporters of Donald Trump who are looking for
the bombshells, but they're really looking forwards. Did Bill Clinton
have sex with a thirteen year old girl? That's what
they That's what they're like. And other powerful people, I mean,
Jeffrey Epstein. How this guy got to where he is?
Who knows? He set these things up? He invited some
powerful people apparently to get involved. He may have pictures,

(06:39):
he may have video, and I think he blackmailed them
and they decided to give him money, saying it was
an investment. He is no investor.

Speaker 2 (06:47):
Let's be honest this guy, because he didn't he did
not know. He's not an investor. So but I'm with you.

Speaker 1 (06:55):
There is so much good that's going on right now
and things moving in the right direction. And slow things
down because of something like this. Figure it out, folks
and move on. Did she over promise an underdeliver? Probably so?
But can we move on?

Speaker 2 (07:09):
And look Castell if you look at it. Before he
was ahead of the FBI, he was highly skeptical of
He believed there was evidence out there that that would
put people in jail. So was Dan Bongino, and both
of them after looking at everything, you're saying that that's
not the case. But my deal is, look, I try.
I mean, Dan Bongino, is that guy the reason why

(07:31):
he's gonna I think as I've listened to him and
tracked him on his podcast and over the years and
gotten to listen to him and know him, the guy
does have a compass and he does have a rudder
in the water in terms of his moral principles. And
you're not going to compromise that guy. You're not going
to get him to say things he doesn't believe. And
so if we can't if we can't take what's going

(07:51):
on right now in America that we've not seen a
president or administration have the guts to change in terms
of the status quo, that's sending us off a cliff.
If we can't put some weight into that, it just
tells the people that are spending that political capital it
was a waste of time because all you have to
do is talk about p Diddy or Epstein and that's
where everybody wants to look, and that's all anyone wants
to talk about. And I want all of them in jail.

(08:12):
But again, it's select. It's like the Democrats, it's selective
outrage in logic for me to have a p Didty
trial that should have as much incriminating evidence about his
conduct and the people that he ran with, stars, a listers, musicians,
you name it, politicians. There should be as much information
about that that degenerate as there is about Epstein. And

(08:33):
we don't have anything on the p Didty side, And
nobody's clamoring like they are for Epstein. And I'm just saying,
come on, it's not it's not Inquire magazine. It's not
it's not you know, it's not you know, tabloid stuff.
I don't want any of that to happen. I want
everyone to be face face justice. But you can't throw
away this administration over it.

Speaker 1 (08:53):
The ultimate decider is going to be Donald Trump. And
Donald Trump in a news conference cabinet meeting just what
was it on Wednesday? Question came up to Pam Bondy
about all of this and the president and interrupted and said,
wait a minute here, why are we talking about Jeffrey Epstein.
I mean, he raised that question. You know, there are
bigger fish to fry right now. Why are we even

(09:14):
talking about this? And by the way, Donald Trump really
likes Pam Bondy. My guess is she's not going anywhere.

Speaker 2 (09:19):
Well, I'll tell you that I don't know the president
like I'm sure our cabinet members do, but I will
tell you the ultimatums to that man, I don't think work.
So if you've said, if you have publicly said you
got to get rid of this person or I quit,
I think he made your decision. I just think by personality,
he's not going to be told what to do.

Speaker 1 (09:37):
Don't let the door hit you. All right, We've got
a lot to get too. Great to be with you
on this Friday afternoon. It is the Rod and Greg
Show on Talk radio one oh five nine. Can arrest
Donald Trump? You know there is Donald Trump and the
whole tariff thing? Wasn't there a report today that the
government surplus for the first time in years is better.
You saw that somewhere. It was called up. You're looking

(09:57):
for it right now. But the surplus, you know, in June,
we haven't had a surplus, yes, for a long long time.
It was in June. The figure was pretty amazing, right
it was.

Speaker 2 (10:07):
So, so let's see where I have it. I have
it right here. So Secretary Bessett announced that there was
a twenty seven billion dollar June surplus from tariff revenue.
Well surge, wow, yes, wow, So you know I've heard
the number a round three hundred billion, but there's there
is the tariffs that are at least being levied right

(10:27):
now are creating a surplus, which I haven't heard that word.
Of course, the federal government.

Speaker 1 (10:32):
Time long time, Well what about the tariffs. Joining us
on our Newsmaker line right now to talk about this
is Ewan Howarth. Ewan is an author. He's also a
political commentator. He wrote about the tariffs Concerned about the tariffs, Ian,
Thanks for joining us this afternoon on our Newsmaker line.
What are your overall impressions of the tariffs and what
Donald Trump has done so far?

Speaker 3 (10:51):
My feelings on tariffs have been I've tried to be
one of these people who isn't, you know, too much
of a fearmonger or a cheerleader, and he decided I've
tried to look at it, you know, down the middle,
in living in the real world, which is I think
what most conservatives try and do on a daily basis.
My view on tariffs is that if it's targeted, I
actually don't have as much of a problem. So for example,

(11:11):
when these were first being sold to the American people
that started administration, it was a bit of an onslaught
of different excuses. Right, other countries are going to pay
for it. It's a threat, we don't actually mean it.
It's going to help us threaten other countries into agreeing
to deals. And kind of the point I've gotten to
right now is this a bit of a frustrating yo

(11:32):
yo effect where every few months at this point, Don
Trump is kind of spraying the world with tariffs of
twenty five, thirty forty percent and there's no real stability.
And the point I'm trying to make is that economically,
stability is the most important thing out there. We can
have a debate over whether or not tariffs are good.
I think they're actually bad. But it's fair to have

(11:53):
a debate over tariffs, and it's fair to impose tariffs
in certain specific structured ways. But if you actually want
to look at growth and how the economy grows, and
how businesses grow and develop, and how we create jobs,
the answer is not government. The answer is usually private investment.
And if you want investment to increase or at least continue.

(12:14):
Then people need to be able to plan their business
structure months ahead, years ahead. And if we're living in
a situation where a country can just have a tariff
thrown upon it, whether their allies or not, whether their
trade partners are not really with no rhyme or reason,
then people are not going to be investing. And that's
where my growth, my growth concerns come in, because if
companies are not investing, or if companies are thinking, well,

(12:36):
I'm a little worried about Trump and has tariffs, i
might just hold off an investment for three years until
the next president comes in, and then I'll try my
like then that has not just short term effects, but
it has medium and long term effects that people I
don't think are taken seriously enough. So that's really the
root of my concern when it comes to growth.

Speaker 2 (12:55):
So, and I have a question, and I don't know
the this isn't rhetorical. I really don't know the answer
I was. I had thought that there was an agreement
with say the UK. I thought that Japan came and
there was some kind of announcement of an agreement, even India,
But I'm not so sure. I don't know if any
of those have actually been signed, sealed, delivered. What is
the status since this has begun. Do we have some

(13:16):
new trade agreements with any of any countries that would
be different than what he had what the President had
originally announced.

Speaker 3 (13:24):
Not substantively. I think the problem with politics is that
you usually have to scrape off the top layer of
like pr and marketing to actually get to the core
of what's happening. And that's not to say there haven't
been some positive moves, like there's been discussions with the
UK to maybe tone back certain tags in certain industries,
but there's been no major trade deals, actual agreements, because

(13:45):
those take time. Those take months, if not years. They
usually span administrations, and so quite often you'll see the
administration looking for a win, looking for a headline. This
isn't a hit against the trud administration. Every single administration does.
Their role is to promote their ideology and their viewpoints.
But the idea that we have trade agreements even on

(14:07):
the table, I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that.
For example, the British trade agreement was really just in
a few industries either freezing or slight reduction in certain tariffs.
But it's not a trade deal. You cannot just unilaterally
declare a trade deal. The UK Parliament has to go
through that, the Prime Minister can't approve that, and it's
the same in the United States too. Trump Trump can't

(14:28):
unilaterally declare a trade deal. And so I think a
lot of this people are looking for short term wins
and kind of ignoring the long term. Is proof that
tariffs are so called working. For example, you've got a
lot of people talking about a budget surplus today, which
in many ways is like celebrating a free dinner when
someone else is paying the bill. It's like, yes, yes, yes,

(14:48):
there's a surplus when you're tariffying goods, but who is
paying for those tariffs? You know, nothing is free in
this world, and so quite often you've got to scrape off,
as I said, that top layer of pr to really
get to the heart of what's going Is.

Speaker 1 (15:00):
It the uncertainty that bothers you as well in and
the fact that you have this one day and now
something new is coming into this. Is it the uncertainty
that you're concerned about as well when it comes to tariffs.

Speaker 3 (15:12):
Yeah, I mean I'm anti tariff generally, but if the
administration wants to impose tariffs on, for example, China, Like,
let's talk about one country. I think there are greatest
adversary on the planet. I think we need to decouple
from them economically.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
I think it was a.

Speaker 3 (15:26):
Monumental generation on the state to tie ourselves to them economically,
and so I think we need to decouple ourselves from
them through tariffs and other means. I'm in favor of that,
but that's a specific policy that you're putting out a
long term plan so that other countries to think, Okay,
my import flow is through China, I'm going to decouple
from China. I'm going to go work with India, Vietnam,

(15:47):
all these other countries. But the problem is when there
is no structure and there is no real policy position
beyond the fact that Trump loves tariffs, and he's obviously
allowed to love tariff he's a persident of the United States.
But again, it makes it impossible for this and is
to plan five minutes ahead. That's what worries me. I
think if you're going to have a policy or you're
pushing tariffs, we can have a debate on that. But

(16:08):
it feels like often we're just rolling the dice and
just seeing which countries we should pick and how much
we should tariff them, and then we put a ninety
day delay on. Everyone celebrates the stock market recovering. No
one's talking about the almost certain inside of trading that's
going on. If you actually look into the people who
are buying buying into the market at quite lucky times,
and then it's just this yo yo effect where nothing's

(16:30):
actually happening except people are profiting from uncertainty, Whereas you know,
average Americans who actually depend on certainty in the market
are usually losing out.

Speaker 1 (16:38):
But I couldn't that be part of Trump's negotiating tactics
right now, to kind of lead things up there, keep
them guessing a little bit.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
Sure, I mean that's always a possibility. I think that
works quite well in foreign policy, where you've got to
keep your enemies guessing. But the problem is, it's like
it's a game of too much guesswork is bad for
your books. And I think we've got to be picking
again if it was more of a specific thing that
we were trying to deal with China. But every time
we throw out tariffs, Trump's announced in these delays, and honestly,

(17:08):
it makes me very uncomfortable when any executive has the
power to estentially allow people to carve out special interests.
So you've got some massive corporations who are essentially buying
special treatment. You know, we have these announcements of certain
industries not being affected by tariffs and other industries are affected.
That's fundamentally unfair. That's not a free market system. And

(17:30):
so I think again the uncertainty, the unfairness. I think
there are ways to do tariffs properly, even though I
disagree with them fundamentally, but I feel that's not what's
happening now. I think it's a little haphazard, a little
all over the place, and again makes it impossible for
American businesses to plan ahead.

Speaker 1 (17:46):
And how worth Talking about the Trump tear off mania,
he claims it could be anti growth. More coming up
on the Rod and Greg Show here on Utah's Talk
Radio one All five nine can ars. We went off
on this Monday about every time there is a tragedy
in America today. Greg, you know, they it's politicized in
a matter of seconds from the left, From the left, yes,

(18:08):
and if the right does it, shame on the right.
But I don't hear from the right, hardly at all.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
Oh, the left will shut down the first first time
you talk about the person's motivations, if there's been a
shooting or anything else. If they're left of center, you
can't say one word about their political persuasion. If it's
someone right of center, they lead with that within five
minutes of whatever is happening.

Speaker 1 (18:27):
And you know what bothers me about it is first
of all talking about what happened, then the loss of life,
the impact it has on communities and families and friends.
You know, we can't even get to that point. I mean,
they were already blaming Trump, and I think they'd only
accounted for about twenty one people being dead, and that
numbers now climbed to well over one hundred. It just
drives as none. We aren't the only ones joining us

(18:49):
on our newsmaker line right now is Scott McKay, publisher
of The Hay Ride, contributing editor at American Spectator. He says,
the Hill Country ghouls are out. Scott, how are you
welcome to the show. What are your thoughts on reaction
to what happened last weekend?

Speaker 4 (19:02):
Well, I've been disgusted by this in a different context,
which is that every time some deranged lunatic decides to
shoot up a school or a shopping mall or whatever else,
you know, you get the gun grabbing gules.

Speaker 2 (19:19):
Yea.

Speaker 4 (19:20):
And this has now progressed to what I'm calling the
river gules. Who are people that? I mean? You know,
this is like the gun grabbing gules on steroids times ten. Somehow.
It's you know, Trump and Doge budget cuts that caused
a flash flood in a place known as flash Flood Alley,

(19:43):
where a river rose twenty six feet in forty five minutes,
and people you know would have been warned and wouldn't
have been victims of this thing, but for the you
know government's budget cut, uh failed response when the river
rose at four o'clock in the morning on the fourth

(20:05):
of July. I mean, there's there's zero logical nexus between
Donald Trump and a natural disaster which is foreseeable but
not predictable. So let me ask you.

Speaker 2 (20:21):
Yeah, go ahead, so let me ask you this. Okay,
Because I got friends, you know, with Trump arrangement syndrome,
I kind of run in some questionable crowds sometimes and
they say to me, Hughes, you know you're mad about this.
You think that. But I heard you during the North
Carolina hurricanes, complained that the FEMA hadn't showed up in
weeks for people in need. I complained that the tanks
to put out the fires in LA were empty, they

(20:43):
weren't ready. I've said that the airline crashes, we've got,
you know, DEI vacancies for air traffic controller. So I
have looked at some of the causes of some of
these disasters, and have looked at at the administration in
the past. Am I inconsistent in being offended here? Or
is there a difference between what we saw happen in
Texas and what I just described.

Speaker 4 (21:06):
Well, I think that there's definitely a valid comparison to
be made between the what has happened in the Hill
Country and Hurricane Helene in western North Carolina because the
topography is similar. Right when you're in an area which
is hilly or mountainous, and you know the people are

(21:27):
in valleys, essentially, you know like that's where the water
is going to drain to, and there's usually a minor
river or creek that will run through the valley, and
you know that's a flash flood situation. I don't think
anybody ever said that the Biden administration was guilty of

(21:48):
Hurricane Helene dropping all that water on western North Carolina
and the flood's happening. Correct, The problem was that FEMA
didn't get there to help these people out for weeks, Okay,
like that was the problem. They were screaming about what
had happened in the whole country by Saturday, right like
the government couldn't have gotten there any faster than it did.

(22:10):
Time will tell whether the overall reaction, whether from FEMA
or whoever else, is sufficient to deal with what has
happened in Central Texas. We'll see, but it's premature to
blame Trump for that response. Where the wildfires in California
were concerned, Like, we've been talking about proper forest management

(22:35):
for decades in the context of southern California, and when
you have woods near populated areas that are not properly
managed and become tinderboxes, then what is foreseeable also becomes predictable,
which is you will have a wildfire eventually, and that

(22:55):
wildfire will get out of control, like very quickly when
you're not managing the forest and when you don't have
a ready made water supply to take out a wildfire
because of bad water management on top, then you know
what you have is foreseeable, predictable, and the scope of
it becomes predictable. And that makes that totally different than

(23:19):
what you're talking about with respect to the Hill country.
But this is the other thing, is it is evidence
of a moral sickness to look at an act of
God and immediately find a political you know, price that

(23:39):
you can force somebody else to pay, or or to
seek political accountability for natural disasters. And what I will
say is while you will see criticism by people on
the right of policies that go wrong, typically speaking, that
is not the way we operate. And I'm not saying

(24:01):
there's nobody on the right who politicizes this stuff. That's
not what I'm trying to say. On the whole you
will not get like you will not get the George
Stephanopolis's and Dana Bashes immediately taking the TV to try
to politicize this stuff on the right. You just don't.
And the reason is most of the people on the

(24:21):
right are trying to get to heaven and they know
that that's not how.

Speaker 5 (24:25):
You do it.

Speaker 4 (24:26):
But when you come from a philosophy and a mindset
which has it that you know your goal is, you're
going to use government to create a heaven on earth.
All of a sudden, these things are politicizable, and that's
what you see so often on the left. And you know,
you really see it with the gun grabbing ghules, Yes,

(24:47):
and now you're seeing it with the river gouls.

Speaker 1 (24:49):
Yeah. And you know, Scott, and you point this out
in your article, you've been in that part of the country.
I've been in that part of the country. I know
what the Guadalupe River is like. It's not some wide
river like the Mississi. At times, it's just a creek, right,
I mean, that's about it, and that's why people enjoy that.

Speaker 2 (25:06):
It's not navigable.

Speaker 1 (25:07):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (25:07):
Yeah, well, I mean there's a few places along the
Guadalupe that you can, you know, get in a boat
and right around. But for the most part, you know,
it's you know, if you're in Arizona or you know,
someplace even drier than that, you'd look at this thing
and you'd say, well, it's almost a waddie rather than
a river. It doesn't I'll tell you this, The Guadalupe

(25:28):
doesn't even hardly show up if you get into Google
Maps and you pull up the satellite view, you can't
you can barely even see that there is a Guadalupe River.
I mean it's that it's that kind. It's a very
narrow basin, okay. And when you get two fronts colliding
over central Texas and stalling out and dropping I don't

(25:50):
know what what the final number was, ten twelve inches
of rain, you know which it's It'll happen every thirty
years or so. Like, you know, that little bitty river
is gonna swell up huge. And that's why the vast
majority of the structures along that river are well back

(26:12):
from the river bank. But that doesn't stop people from
bringing r v's and you know things down to the river.

Speaker 6 (26:18):
And when it.

Speaker 4 (26:19):
Happens on the fourth of July weekend, but you know,
in the hill country, like that's a cool thing to
go do, is to go camping by the river. I mean,
you can't blame people for doing it. It's just this
thing happened that it was a horrible, horrible, you know
event with terrible timing on top. And but the fact
that people can't just see this and say, okay, nature

(26:42):
is more powerful than man, and nature will let us
know this from time to time to devastating effect and
leave it at that without trying to politicize it, like
that's a character problem for the people that do it.

Speaker 1 (26:55):
Scott, do you make a very good point, Scott McKay.
He's a publisher The hay Ride, also contributing editor at
the American Spectator, and he's right, why not just blame
mother nature and say we can't control mother nature, even
though they are climatologists who feel we can and the weather.
Just say, you know this, this is a tragedy and
move on. But they can't.

Speaker 2 (27:13):
Great they went ready fire, aim, and they went to
attack something they thought they could and it's it's it's
become so beyond the pale that you would attack this
that he looks silly.

Speaker 1 (27:23):
Yeah, yeah, all right. More coming up on the Rod
and Greg Show on this Friday afternoon on Talk Radio
one oh five nine. Canna Rice, you know, we want
to talk a little bit more about this blow up
apparently that has taken place in the White House. Dan
Bongino apparently telling people he's done. If Pam Bondi doesn't go,
he's gone. Cash Pattel maybe joining him. The President doesn't

(27:44):
need this right now, and I think I know where
the presidents stand because of that. Come in, he made
it the cabinet meeting last week, and who's asking about
Jeffrey Epstein?

Speaker 2 (27:51):
Who cares? Yeah, And I see why people care. I
get it. And I knew when we took this on
at the first segment, I was going to get blown back.
And I've got some you know, I've gotten my share
some input on those that disagree with my take on this,
and I would love to have this discussion in the
next hour and talk about it, because I'm going to
tell you that the big thing I don't like this.
I like to be consistent. I like things to be
a two way street. I think that the focus on

(28:14):
Epstein and it's disgusting and he's a degenerate and everybody
involves should go to jail. But to say that this
is the only time where we're going to blow up
this administration and it's cabinet members without regard to what's happened.
So you know, in this country over it when this
happens sadly too often, Come on, we can't have selective
outrage on this.

Speaker 1 (28:31):
Yeah, Yeah, And it's you know, like the President said,
he you know he has because a reporter asked Pam
Bondi at that cabinet median on Wednesday, you know what's
going on here? And the president cutter off stepped right
in and said, why are we talking about this guy? Yeah,
we've got a lot, We've got a lot of much
bigger issues on this and what the country is going
through right now than this, than this case, you know,

(28:53):
And yeah, I'm with you, Greg, I mean, this guy's
a pig. The people who were involved with him are
all pigs.

Speaker 2 (29:00):
And probably worse. They probably criminals, antable.

Speaker 1 (29:03):
Maybe that's what people. We've got some comments already coming
in on that, and we'll get your thoughts. Stay with
us and great show.

Speaker 2 (29:14):
And the show talking about this Ebstein stuff. And I
haven't really delved into it myself. I think that powerful
people get away with too much. It's it's not new.
I don't like it. It disgusts me. I wish it
were different. I think there's a lot of guilty people
running around here that need to face justice. I find
the obsession of the Epstein files. And Pam Bondi, by

(29:37):
the way, did over promise and under delivered, so she's
made some of the well. I think that Bongino before
he was in as an assistant director of the FBI,
and then Cash Bettel before he was a director of
the FBI, both independently, if each other had said there's
stuff here, we know, there's stuff we have to go after,
and then when they get in the position they don't
have it that that frustrates people. And I get all that,

(29:59):
But to take this administration and everything that's happening on
this I don't know one hundred front battle that this
administration is taking on and narrow it all down to
this Epstein Island and this client list, it's to me,
it is disproportionate, and not in a good way. I
think it's I just think that we are we're going
to burn down and there's going to be cabinet members

(30:20):
leaving over an issue that is bad, But there's we
have got to put some inventory on how much this
administration is accomplishing. And it takes certain people to be
able to do what they're doing. I mean, his first
term didn't look anything like this because he didn't have
as strong of cabinet members to get some of this
stuff done.

Speaker 1 (30:37):
Yeah, and you know, you think about this, Okay, Are
you guilty if you fly on Epstein's jet?

Speaker 2 (30:42):
No, you're not.

Speaker 1 (30:43):
No, you're not. Now, doesn't matter who you're with, If
you've done nothing on that jet, you're not guilty of
any crime. Okay, And that's what people see. You flow
on that Yet we want to see your name.

Speaker 2 (30:54):
Well, Donald Trump's on that list. He's I think seven
or seventeen times. There's some multiple times R Junior has
flown on that jet. Alan Derschwitz flown on that jet.
I mean there's a ton of people that have that
have flown new knew him, have pictures with this Epstein guy,
so that the list of associates is really broad. But

(31:15):
does that mean they're pedophiles? Does that mean that they
they rape children? No, it does not. You better have
evidence of those things before you destroy people by association.
But again, it's it's one issue of so many of
such great magnitude right now. And I am just I'm
just so happy to see the status quo, which is

(31:36):
really a land of cronyism being attacked by this administration,
sticking up for the everyday people. And we cannot if
the Democrats are celebrating what you're doing. You're on the
wrong side. And the Democrats love that we want to
talk about Epstein. They love that we want to make
the whole to find the entire administration down to this
list that nobody can find. That that is, it's never

(31:58):
been a better day for the boy.

Speaker 1 (32:01):
If they need it, they haven't had a good day
in a while. But it still comes down to this
greg And you know, I think supporters of Donald Trump
have seen how he's been treated for the last eight years,
four years in the presidency and then the two years
by even when he was outside the White House. Yep.
You know, people were going after Donald Trump, and I

(32:22):
think now that he's in power, those supporters are saying
it's time to get back at some of these people.
Would you agree or disages? Okay, you've got the investigation finally,
an investigation in Nacomi and Brennan. Okay, that's underway. I
just think they want some answers, and this is one
of those answers that some people on the campaign trail said,

(32:43):
we will get to the bottom of this. And I
think there are people like Bongino and Patel and many
others out there who are saying, now you're telling us
there's nothing there after you told us there's something there
and we're gonna find out what it is. That's where
their frustration is and what I say to all that,
but I agree, don't let this be a distraction of
the other good things that are going on. This is a.

Speaker 2 (33:04):
Distraction because everything you said, I agree with all of it.
You should be dealt with and people should be brought
to justice. I do not believe that that Epstein, that island,
and the crimes committed wherever they have maybe ever threatened
the existence of this country, or that they participate they
were part of a coup to try and take out

(33:25):
a president like they tried to take out President Trump.
I think the people that were responsible for an attempted
coup against the president trying to remove him from office
first and then try to throw him in jail and
get him to keep him off a ballot. In between
the scariness of that in terms of our liberties and
our freedoms, and take COVID into for example, and what

(33:46):
they did to us and our constitutionally protected rights. I
want those things addressed. I want safeguards. I want to
make sure and America does seventy seven million people that
voted for Trump want to make sure those things never
happen again. That's that's the ball. That's that's the ball
we need to be hitting, not I mean, this is
this is an issue, but I'm afraid it's been disproportionate

(34:07):
how much attention or severity it's given versus all the
things that this president they've done to attack him and
try to get him out of office.

Speaker 1 (34:15):
All Right, we want to know from you eight eight
eight five seven oh eight zero one zero on your
cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey rod
or on our talkback line, what you think about this?
Are you disappointed in the President for not pushing for this?
Are you disappointed in Pan Bombi Bondi? Do you support
Dan Bongino and Cash Bettel and their threats to leave
the White House and lead the administration if Bondi doesn't go,

(34:37):
I mean, you know she over promised and underdlivered. That's
what a lot of people feel. What do you say
eight eight eight five seven oh eight zero one zero
on your cell phone dial pound two to fifty and
say hey rod less less to a few of our
talkback commenters already, I.

Speaker 7 (34:53):
Think the same thing is a waste of time to
talk about I don't think we should give us some
metaphile of the time or day or even care about
him anymore. He's gone and we already knew the last
administration was going to destroy files or list or whatever,
who knows what they had and before Trump's administration got
in there. And I just think we need to move

(35:14):
on more important things to talk about and have say
it's just the waste of people's breath.

Speaker 8 (35:21):
Oh.

Speaker 1 (35:21):
I think a lot of Americans feel that way. You
and I have gone, Okay, let's move on, let's do
some things here. Greg. But he made a point how
many of these files were destroyed before Donald Trump even
showed up for a second time.

Speaker 2 (35:32):
Well, if Dan Bongino says he didn't have him, then
he doesn't have That's what I'm going to tell you.
I don't think that man has any reason to lie.
He's got he has set his podcast, he had a
great little thing going in terms of his podcast, his
thought leader, his influencer side. He's given that up to
work fourteen hour a day by himself. His wife is
in Florida. There's nothing, there's no upside to doing He
feels like his service And I don't think that guy

(35:54):
is doing it for the wrong reason. So I think
if he's saying, I believe what Dan Bongino says, and
I think that if they don't have it, they don't
have it. All.

Speaker 1 (36:01):
Right, here's another caller on our talkback line.

Speaker 9 (36:04):
You can't look at the Epstein files the same way
you did the Diddy case. We've been told for years
and years how bad the Epstein files were, and all
the big names involved, and nobody is being held account
accountable for except for maxwells us in prison and Epstein's dead.
What about all the other people involved? Those kids deserve justice,

(36:30):
and swipping it under the rug does not give those.

Speaker 1 (36:34):
See that's about the way. We didn't cut them out all.
You don't have that on the talkback line. But he
makes a good point. How about the kids the victims
of these pedophiles, if in fact that all took place.

Speaker 2 (36:46):
But that's but look the same accusations, same things were happening.
There's so much video. So the p Diddy connection there
for me is there should have been volumes and volumes involved.
You want a client list better than client lists? How
about the videos? There there was tons of it, we
were told, but that's gone. It was never part of
the trial. I think those were purchased. I think you

(37:07):
have people that were on those videos that didn't want
to be on those videos. And that's the problem with
powerful people that protect themselves or shield themselves from justice.
It's wrong. It shouldn't happen. And I and but I
just I think if you just make everything about Epstein,
you're missing a lot of examples where this is going on.
And again, what about the one the three hundred thousand
kids that came across were traffick quorder. You got at

(37:30):
least eight of them that were found yesterday in California plotform,
you know, I mean, this is this is as tragic
these little kids are in this country somewhere right now.
We got to go find.

Speaker 1 (37:39):
Yeah, yeah, all right. I got a lot of calls
coming in on this. We'll take a break and then
get to your calls. Eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero cell phone dial pound two fifteen. Say hey,
Rod or on our talkback line at Kanaris dot com.
Your calls you're coming. It's coming up. On the Rod
and Greg Show, Dan Bongino and maybe Cash Betail, the
director and deputy director the I may just leave because

(38:02):
of air. They're upset with Pam Bondy, the Attorney General,
her handling of the Epstein files. And there are some
people who say they're very disappointed of Pam Bondy's performance.
Also maybe a bad reflection on Donald Trump. Are there
are more important things to consider than this cash?

Speaker 2 (38:19):
We're telling von Jenior leaving because they believe that what
they've heard from the AG's offices is they didn't give
them the right information. It's all there were there, and
they're and they're not lying, and they'd sooner leave than
be accused as liars. So okay, let's go to our
listeners and and hear from you. Let's go to Will,
who's on I fifteen right now. Will, thank you for holding.

(38:39):
Welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 5 (38:42):
Hey, guys, thanks for taking my call. Myself and our
neighbors are talking about this the other night. Some of
them were burning their Maggie gear. I'm not as far
and I tend to agree with you, guys. Let's not
single out this single issue. Trump still has a lot
of good things to do in his administration. I don't
think you Epstein killed himself. I do think it was

(39:02):
a Masaud operation because of Gislayden Maxwell's father. But I
do find the timing a little bit weird with Benjamin
Ett and Yahoo coming to uh the White House the
next day and asking to hit I ran again. It
just did. It did make me frustrated and raise some questions.
Thanks for taking my call.

Speaker 1 (39:19):
I was going to ask, well, what his neighbors are
saying as well? And you know, because someone were built
burning their mega gear.

Speaker 2 (39:25):
Well, that's one of the talk back Live guys. He's
it's Ebstein or bust. He's gonna, he's gonna, he's he's out.
He's got to vote for Democrats. If you don't come
in that list. Okay, let's go to How and Salem.
How Welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 10 (39:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 11 (39:39):
I just wanted to comment on the fact that I
went to a rally today for that doctor Moore and
we talked to a lot of people about his Epstein issue,
and just like the last caller, a lot of people
are uh burning their mega gear if you want to
call it that, because they're frustrated, especially victims who feel

(40:01):
like they finally had somebody who is going to fight
for them and now they feel the trade in the way.
President Trump answered that uh, that reporter.

Speaker 4 (40:10):
The other day.

Speaker 11 (40:11):
H Uh he just kind of and and uh basically said,
this is a this is no longer an issue and
we're moving on. It is an issue. Something happened, somebody's
not being transparent and it needs to be handled.

Speaker 1 (40:27):
How do you what are you saying? Hell, it needs
to be handled. There needs to be accountability here and
with what Pam Bondi said the other day, accountability may
go out the window.

Speaker 6 (40:39):
Exactly.

Speaker 11 (40:39):
There needs to be accountability. There needs to be transparency
to rebuild the trust. The trust in the UH in
the government has been just destroyed. And how else are
you going to build it unless you come clean?

Speaker 2 (40:54):
All right?

Speaker 1 (40:55):
All right, now there's one opinion, yea, I understand to take.

Speaker 2 (40:58):
I don't think it's a broader issue of about accountability
and the crimes against these kids and people that have
to be held accountable. Let's go to Alan in Salt
Lake City. Allen, thank you for holding. Welcome to the
Rod and Greg Show. What do you think about all this?

Speaker 12 (41:11):
What's going on?

Speaker 13 (41:12):
Guys, I'm a first time caller on the radio, so.

Speaker 4 (41:14):
Bear with me.

Speaker 1 (41:15):
Hey, go ahead, Alan.

Speaker 13 (41:19):
Hey, listen, guys, guys think like especially most of the
people that I talked to. I think the main issue
people are upset about the Epstein thing is because we
worry about our children. We want our children protected. You know,
eight hundred thousand children a year in America alone come

(41:40):
up mixing and it seems like nobody is doing anything
about it. So I think that's where these big issues
come from, is because Epstein is one person, but there's
other people tied that we want to know and we
just want our children protected.

Speaker 1 (41:59):
I agree, all right, good job on being a first
time caller. Good comment, because I think I think a lot.
You know, people are concerned. You've expressed this, Greg concerned
about the children.

Speaker 2 (42:07):
So we got we have eight or nine that were
picked up. They were on a company that were brought
accounts that border that they don't get paid marijuana. Is
these traffickers of children get paid for those kids to work.
Every single day, we're finding it in real time happening.
It needs to This has to be dealt with. We've
got at least one hundred thousand missing children out there
that happened during the Biden administration. You have these crimes happening,

(42:29):
and this is my deal. I don't think cash Pattel
is FBI director is a liar. I don't think John
Dan Bongino is a liar. If they don't have it,
what the rub is that Bondi's saying it's their fault,
not mine. I got to tell you. If there's something
someone's hiding, sure, but what has anyone stopped to consider
that the list, this client list, everyone's asking for cash.

(42:50):
Pttel doesn't have it, Bongino doesn't have it, and the
AG doesn't have it. It's it's not there? Or is
that is? Is it? Does it have to be that
they're that they're covering it up?

Speaker 1 (42:59):
Let me ask you this. Do you think Pam Bondi
is lying?

Speaker 2 (43:02):
Yeah? I know you know what I think she did.
I think she foolishly let out with these binders and
let everyone believe that there was all this this treasure
trove of information that was finally going to be released.
I think she did this ignorantly. I don't think she
had reviewed what it was that she was handing out
to people in terms of the files that she received.
She gave to people, and it didn't it didn't contain
what people expected to find, and therein lies the problem.

(43:25):
I think that she way way over promised or described
what she had, and when it's not there, you're looking
around going are you kidding me? But let's not. Let's
not say that everything that this administration is dealing with
right now it's ebstein or bust. I think it's way
over simplified, and I would just like to say a
broader contempt and demand for justice over children that are

(43:47):
being you know, crimes committed against and the people that
do it need to be in jail. But it's a
lot more than this guy. There's a lot more of
this happening, and I want the same line in the sand.

Speaker 1 (43:59):
Eight eight eight seven eight zero one zero eight eight
eight five seven eight zero one zero on your cell
phone dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod or
you can come in on our talk back line. Let's
listen to one of those comm editors.

Speaker 2 (44:10):
I had to say, you guys are still belittling it.

Speaker 9 (44:13):
Though the kids need justice, this topic cannot get swept
under the rug continuously, especially under this administration, because if
the files do not get released and people don't go
to prison, a lot of us are going to change
our vote the next election, including me.

Speaker 2 (44:34):
There the Democratic Party, Yeah, vote for the Democrats. The
kids weren't safer under their watch. I'll tell you right now.
I don't think Cash Betel and Damaging Bonding are lying,
and they don't. They say that it doesn't it's not there.
What we were told about that minute missing in the
in the in the video is that when that tape loops,
every single time, there is a one minute every single time.

(44:55):
It's just the way it works. So and they were
supposed to show in a transparent way that the way
that recording works is that every twenty four hours there
is a minute on the reset that is not recorded.
And so that isn't an aberration. That is the way that.

Speaker 1 (45:09):
The system works. Well, don't believe that.

Speaker 2 (45:12):
Yeah, So that's meant to explain things that seem out
of out of line.

Speaker 1 (45:17):
Well, people don't believe that.

Speaker 2 (45:18):
Yeah. Well again, if you think Cash Bettel and Dan
Bonino are lyne, I guess you can, but I don't.
I don't think they are.

Speaker 1 (45:26):
All right, mar of your calls and comments coming up.
It is the Rod and Greg Show here on Utah's
Talk Radio one O five nine k NRS.

Speaker 2 (45:33):
Okay, let's go back to our listeners. We got some
talk back comments, comments to share with you, and also
go back to our callers. Let's let's listen. Let's let's
speak with Nikki in Taylorsville, who has patiently been on hold.
Thank you for calling.

Speaker 12 (45:48):
I just wanted to talk about a couple of things
about the Epstein files. Genarily, I personally want them only
to be found as a matter of justice. I don't
care who's on the list, but I don't think that
that's a common thing. I think that most weak people

(46:11):
want to see who's on the list for sensatial reasons,
and the two people who deserved to get justice the
most and that whole thing have received it. I don't
know what more you want out of it. Yes, for
men should be punished. Whether that list still exists or not,

(46:31):
we may never know. And that has to be okay,
because if you're going to make promises and under deliver,
this would be one I would pick. This is okay,
people are paying for it, Sorry for the victims, and
thank god he didn't underdeliver on Israel or oil.

Speaker 2 (46:55):
Or you know what I mean.

Speaker 1 (46:56):
Yes, go ahead.

Speaker 12 (47:00):
And the other thing about it is I watched Dan.
I'm big fan of Dan. I was sad when he
took the job, so I understood. And I had never
seen him look so sick as when they had made
him lie that Jeffrey Epstein and killed himself that there

(47:20):
was no evidence otherwise you could tell he was lying.
He looked like he was going to vomit. I don't
know Cash that well, but Dan was sick about it.
And if he doesn't leave, that will surprise me more
than if they find the Epstein files.

Speaker 1 (47:38):
All right, Nikki, thank you very much. Yeah, interesting and
side back to the phones we go. Let's hear from
Ken and Harriman tonight here on the Rotting Greg Show. Ken,
how are you, thanks so much for joining us tonight.

Speaker 8 (47:49):
Oh, I'm good, great, Rod. I'm with Greg. I think
that it's important that we don't throw the baby out
with bathwater, you know, with the Epstein files stuff that
it's been out there for a long time. I think
the president has to do better than what he did
the other day, and they need to take it serious

(48:12):
and possibly made some answers to that. However, we've got
to remember that we're working in a two party system
and this president has done more in the six months
that he's been in office. When you and you also
need to include his first term. But he's done more

(48:33):
to get things straightened out than any president in my
lifetime I've lived. I'm seventy years old, and I'll tell
you what, it's amazing what he's got done. You know,
when people are talking about they don't want anything to
do with the Trump administration, an I wonder, you know,

(48:54):
let's not lose sight of this. This is a two
party system and the other part he's completely crazy hacking
ice officers and everything else. You know, let's keep our
feet on the ground and keep uh you know, thinking logically.
I mean, when you've got ice agents that are being

(49:15):
shot at by crazy people and stuff like that. I mean,
we've got some really big things on there. And Bongino
and and and uh and uh yeah cash mattel If
if those guys don't get to the bottom, but nobody's
getting get into the bottom, I just hope they really

(49:36):
don't resign. That would be tragic.

Speaker 1 (49:39):
Yeah, I can I I you know, we don't need
turmoil in the cabinet, right And he's only been an
office six months.

Speaker 2 (49:45):
And look, I mean, I mean, if you you talk
about people that are excusing the abuse of children, I
mean you found nine of them in a farm yesterday
that they're handlers, that that they are not related to,
are getting paid for these children to work there, and
Evan knows what else they're being paid what they're doing
with those kids, I mean, and the Democrats are mad
about it. Democrats today are infuriated. They think that's the

(50:07):
bad thing. Let's go to Diana in Alpine. Diana, welcome
to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 12 (50:13):
Thank you.

Speaker 14 (50:15):
I think everyone would like to see somebody be held
accountable for, you know, what has happened and get to
the bottom of this. And I really do trust Bongino
and Patel. But at the same time, I feel like
maybe the reason it's not being released is because there

(50:36):
are too many world leaders or just really big names,
and I mean you've heard some of them thrown around
in the past. That would just be some you know,
really serious retaliation if the list gets released, and I'm
thinking maybe that could have something to do with it.

Speaker 1 (50:57):
That's interesting think about the world. You're absolutely right, all right,
Let's go to our talkback line to what they're saying
tonight on the Rodding Greg Show. Here's one of our commenters.

Speaker 15 (51:07):
Greg, you got us all wrong just because Maga is
willing to leave because the files are not being released
does not mean that we're going to vote Democrat.

Speaker 2 (51:18):
We're not stupid.

Speaker 9 (51:21):
We want the facts. And plus Elon created the American Party,
so we got that to look forward to.

Speaker 1 (51:30):
Well, I don't think the American Party is going anywhere
in my opinion.

Speaker 2 (51:33):
Well, and even if they don't, I mean, you got
to you gotta get votes to win. If you're not
going to vote for the Republican, then Democrats are thanking
you for the effort they love for you to not
vote for for Donald Trump. Well he's not. It's gonna
be your election again.

Speaker 1 (51:46):
Yeah, it won't be around next time. All right, more
coming up and more your calls and comments right here
on the Rodding Greg Show and Utah's Talk Radio one
o five nine k NRS in the six o'clock Cawray.
You won't believe what Donald Trump has done with the
White House pay role. It's getting smaller, believe it or not.
He's walking his talk Kisney. That's coming up at six
oh five right here on Talk Radio one five nine.

Speaker 2 (52:08):
Can I all right, let's go to our callers, our
listeners who have called in. Let's go to Frank in
Salt Lake City Rank, thank you for holding. Welcome to
the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 16 (52:17):
Hello, say rodin Greg. I got a question for you,
is Mary. Guys, if your wife way over reacts to
a situation all out of proportion.

Speaker 6 (52:30):
What do you do?

Speaker 2 (52:31):
Run agree with her?

Speaker 16 (52:35):
Eskay. I'll guarantee if you try to justify yourself and
show why this isn't a big deal, you're going to
lose every time.

Speaker 2 (52:44):
That's a good action.

Speaker 16 (52:45):
I've been married fifty years and I know that when
that happens, I'm just seeing the tip of the iceberg.
There's something way down beneath it's causing this overreaction, and
I think that's what's happening here. Everybody but he's focusing
on the Jeffrey Epstein thing, and I think it's the
wrong focus because the base has been frustrated for thirty

(53:09):
years of seeing Democrats get away with literally murder and
no justice. And one of the big reasons that Trump
was elected was to start holding people accountable. It's been
six months and with everything out there, there hasn't been
a single even court case or charge, and I think

(53:30):
this is just this is the latest case where if
there's any place where there should be overwhelming of it.
And he kept records, he kept videos, he logged everything,
and now they can't find a thing. And I think
it's just the feeling at the base is if they
can't prosecute this and bring it to a head, there's

(53:55):
no hope of any of the others. And I think
this is just a reaction of the base just frustrated
to no end that it looks like there's going to
be no justice. Frank, even now after Trump was elected.

Speaker 1 (54:12):
You were making a very good point, Frank, But I
want to ask you, Frank, I don't know if you
saw the comment from the president the other day of
the cabinet meeting where he kind of interrupted and said,
why are we still talking about that? Did that disappoint
you a little bit that he was almost brushing this off.

Speaker 16 (54:28):
He is doing what I talked about. You know, if
your wife is overreacting, you try to justify yourself here
and dismiss it because it's another big deal. He is
about to get blindsided because he is not seeing the
bigger picture. He's focusing on the little offense, but he's
not looking at the iceberg behind it. And I don't

(54:51):
think the bases given him that much grace and you know,
much longer to get the picture and if he blows
it off, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (55:04):
Look, that's the best I've heard it framed thus far,
because I would say that the brider line isn't an
Ebstein or bust moment. It's a we are protecting these
children and we are holding the adult criminals and degenerates accountable. Period.
And that's whether it's the border, these unaccompanied minors, whether
it's these rich and famous. But it needs to be
a broader sentiment. And I think that that what Frank

(55:26):
pointed out is true, that the Epstein files is a
example of Yeah, it's an example of the broader concern
that's out.

Speaker 1 (55:33):
There, the concern that frame. For so long, what thirty years,
we have seen Democrats get away with almost murder, yes
in some cases. And Donald Trump presented the American people,
We're going to clean this up. Yes, and this may
be the tip of the iceberg. And that's why I
think there are some supporters out there the president are saying,
come on, mister President, you promised us to get this done.

(55:54):
You know, like like Jason Chafit said the other day,
he was surprised. What has taken us so long to
launch an investigation into Komi and Brennan. We're six months
into this, yep, why has it taken so long? And
I think that's the frustration people are feeling.

Speaker 2 (56:07):
I would agree. I think that was I think that's
that for me was good to hear because I think
it isn't just this one incident that everybody's I think
it's it's that is the example of all the broader ones.
I would just like it articulated as these broad issues.
And look, the president is he's not letting boys play
girls sports. He is fighting for these young people, but

(56:28):
he needs to broaden that out. Yeah, I think it does.

Speaker 1 (56:30):
All right, another full hours coming your way on this
Friday on talk Radio one oh five nine kN rs
more coming up to stay with us. Well, I got
back our number three. You've got a busy hour coming
your way. We're going to be talking about, you know,
Donald Trump walks the talk and we'll explain what that's
all about. We'll talk about the push to have the
administration do more about the trans agenda in this country.

(56:54):
We also have our list back Friday segments. But boy,
I love this story. Greg as story out today indicate
that the White House payroll under Donald Trump has shrunk
twenty nine percent year to year.

Speaker 2 (57:07):
I love it. I love it. It shows that, you know,
when you're looking at pair back government, which we haven't
seen anyone really have the appetite to do. You not
only have a president they can do it, but it
leads by example. Yeah, which imagine that?

Speaker 1 (57:18):
Yeah, wow, imagine that right. Well, joining us on our
Newsmaker line to talk more about that as John Hart.
John is the CEO of Open the Books. They've been
looking at the White House budget. John, thanks for joining
us tonight. What have you found out and what is
the president doing when it comes to the White House payroll?

Speaker 10 (57:33):
Well, it's great to be an again.

Speaker 5 (57:35):
There's some good news to report.

Speaker 10 (57:36):
There's often not a lot of good news to report
out of Washington, but the Trump White House has actually
reduced payroll twenty nine percent year over year. So this
this is a really good example of someone in a
position of authority leading by example. And you know, it
seems like the nature of government is that it always expands,
it always gets bigger, and there's lots that we need

(57:57):
to tackle in Washington, but this is one example, or
the president's leading by example. His own White House payroll
has gone down, you know, twenty nine percent. So the
Trump administration spent forty four million paying four hundred four
employees in twenty twenty five, and that's the least costly
payroll since two thousand and nine when you adjusted for inflation.

(58:17):
So that's that's a good, really good, uh trajectory that
they're on, and so I think, you know, we need
to give them credit. That's we want to see more
of that throughout the entire federal budget.

Speaker 2 (58:29):
So I do. I think that leading by example is
what leadership is. And so this this is a well
received for me report that he is shrunk the payroll
twenty nine percent year overy year. I think you might
have mentioned it in your stats. But did he just
pay his full time employees less by way of salary
or does he have less full time employees in the
White House that was calculated for this for this amount

(58:51):
to be less?

Speaker 10 (58:53):
Well he has he has I think I think few employees,
but there were about thirty five staffers that made at
least one hundred and ninety five thousand dollars. But there
so there was a there's a concentration of a few that.

Speaker 1 (59:06):
Make quite a bit.

Speaker 10 (59:07):
Some of them make more, but again the aggregate number
is less, so there's there's fewer staffers. And I think
it's just a it's an example of I think someone
learning from experience and learning how to how to really
manage the resource as well. And again there's a long
way to go in terms of the federal budget. This
is just one one area. But I think when he's
been so aggressive with Doge, you know, it's it's really

(59:30):
important to lead by example to really win I think
credibility with taxpayers, and and this is I think what
they're what they're trying to do. And in one note
is you know, we've encouraged that the Vice president doesn't
have to disclose this information. It's not part of the law,
but we think they should go ahead and proactively do that.

Speaker 2 (59:49):
We don't think they have anything to hide.

Speaker 10 (59:50):
I just think it's it's useful for them to to
to be forthright with what they're spending as well, and
I suspect that it would be in line with what
the White House is doing.

Speaker 1 (01:00:00):
Take us back to Biden and even take us back
to Obama, how much did they spend? Did they ever
try and reduce.

Speaker 10 (01:00:08):
No, I think it's well, in twenty twenty four, the
Biden White House spent sixty two point two million, So
that's quite a bit more than the forty four million
that that Trump just spent. And they had they had
four hundred I'm sorry, five hundred and sixty five people
that year. That was the most since Richard Dixon was president.
And so Obama never spent less than fifty one million

(01:00:30):
on payroll during his eight years in office. So what
Trump has done, you know, has spent less than what
Obama spent. And again it's you know, and when you
adjust it for inflation, you know, it's an even more
it's an even more important number.

Speaker 2 (01:00:43):
So this isn't getting I mean, thank goodness you're you're
reporting this, because I don't think this gets the credit
or the commentary it deserves. What what would Trump say
or has he said about why his payrolls less? As
he said, I just expect more from those that I employ.
I mean, is it return on investment? I mean, how
does he frame it if he's had a chance. I

(01:01:03):
don't know that he has.

Speaker 10 (01:01:05):
Yeah, you know, I haven't seen them publicly publicly com
I you know, I've noticed. I've sent a notice to
OMB said hey, we're going to put this out, and
they were they were happy to see it. You know,
it's something I think he ought to take credit for.
I think it's I think it's something that is important
for him to note that that look in my own
if you want to if you want to manage what
another agency does, you want to lead by example again

(01:01:25):
and manage the the payroll that you're in charge of.
So I hope they do bring attention to it, because
I think it shows what's possible. And you know, and
this is something I learned when I worked in the
Senate for Tom Cobra and one of.

Speaker 2 (01:01:37):
The legendary fiscal conservatives.

Speaker 10 (01:01:39):
Oh yes, you know, when we when we force GEO
to do an an audit of all the duplication in
the federal federal budget. They said that that by getting
rid of extra positions, you will improve the quality of services.
And so oftentimes what the left will says, well, you're
going to slash and burn, you're going to hurt people,
and really, if you have smart, responsible downside, you improve

(01:02:01):
the quality of services and you lower inflation in the process. Now,
this is now moving from fifty one million to forty
four million isn't going to lower inflation so much. But
when you extrapolate that leadership by example, and you're dealing
with with billions and trillions, that it does make a
big difference. And so I hope this is something that

(01:02:21):
I appreciate you you all looking at it, but it's
something that taxpayers deserve to know about.

Speaker 1 (01:02:25):
John. What about his business experience? How much does it
play into this? I mean it's got to play a
major role into this. I mean he's run businesses, he
knows what it takes. How much of a role does
that play? Do you feel, well?

Speaker 10 (01:02:36):
I think it plays a lot into it. I think,
you know, and again it's not there's no coincidence that Coburg,
who I just mentioned, he also ran He was a
successful business person before he got into politics. You know,
I think when ordinary people can relate to this, whether
you run a business or run a even if you
have a family, a household, you're effectively running an operation
where you have to you have to learn to live

(01:02:57):
within your means, and often you try to do more less.
I mean, that's the constant challenge is how do you
whether again, whether you're running a business or just running
your family business and your daily life is you want
to provide the best care, the best environment for your kids,
the best environment for your employees. And this shows that
we want people in politics who are in touch with reality.

Speaker 1 (01:03:20):
Who lived in the real world.

Speaker 10 (01:03:22):
And because what happens in Washington is people get up there,
they just feel like they're entitled to spend, you know,
to to spend more and more, and you know, and
he did. He has four hundred and four employees and
that's again, that's less than what Biden had. You know,
Biden had five hundred and sixty five. So so he's
doing a lot more with less. And whether you love

(01:03:44):
what everything the administration is doing or not, you can't
argue that they're not being very productive and very aggressive
with what they've done in the first few months of
his administration.

Speaker 2 (01:03:53):
The final question for me, I think that Doge has
received so much criticism, particularly from people within the Beltway
who are used to the swamp, and they think it's
just inhumane or wrong to cut any job. They have
tried to argue since Doge and since this administration has
been cutting Hey, you're getting rid of the very people
that you need to get you out of the crisis

(01:04:13):
we're in. You're getting all that you're losing all that expertise.
How are you supposed to get government more efficient if
you lose all that institutional knowledge or memory. This seems
to answer that question quite quite clearly.

Speaker 8 (01:04:24):
So I.

Speaker 2 (01:04:26):
Is that right? I mean, is this like an example
of why DOGE and why cutting these these agencies makes sense?

Speaker 8 (01:04:34):
Sure?

Speaker 10 (01:04:34):
Yeah, well absolutely can. But I think how you do
it really does have a huge impact. Because you know
what what politicians, anyone in Washington wants to do is
they want to moth. They want to mow the flower
bed instead of pulling the weeds. Okay, so if you
if you if you've got a land or farm, a garden,
anything you have, you know you have to get on
your hands and knees and do the hard work of

(01:04:55):
figuring out what is the weed amidst the rose bushes
and you want to pull that u out? And what
what happens too often in Washington is they just want
to do across the board cuts and so so DOGE
did some of that really well and some of it
not as well in different agencies. But it proves the
point that when you when you give the attention to it,
you absolutely can pull the weeds and leave the good

(01:05:16):
things intact and so and look, even when Elon was
in that position, he was admitting, he said, look, we're
going to make some mistakes. We're gonna we're going to
have to backfill some of these areas. And they've and
they've gone ahead and done that, even as he's moved
on to other things. But it absolutely proves the point
what you've seen with the White House is you really
can you can downsize and get better performance at the

(01:05:40):
same time. Again, and that's that's not news to anyone
who runs a business or is in the real world.

Speaker 1 (01:05:46):
John Hart, CEO of opened the books talking about what
the president has done to reduce the payroll in the
White House. I mean, it's pretty interesting. He's reduced staff,
but some of the staff got more money.

Speaker 2 (01:05:56):
Yeah, and so I love that the FTEs his government
likes to full time employees. They've they got skinnier. They
may required people to do more, maybe scope of work increased,
but at the end of the day, much less less
than even the Obama administration, which impressive.

Speaker 1 (01:06:12):
Yeah, all right, more coming up on the Thank Rod
and Greg Friday edition of the Rotting Greg Show on
Talk radio one oh five nine can arrest. All right, Well,
there is a new report out there urging the Trump
administration to do more to stop the dangerous trends agenda.
I think I think the tide is turning here, Greg,
as America's attitudes towards trans agendas and they want to stop.

(01:06:34):
They think something is wrong here.

Speaker 2 (01:06:35):
Well, we have a momentum, clearly, and with that momentum,
we need to make sure we're sweeping the corners and
making sure those that are finding workarounds, which you know
everyone likes to do, especially if they're making money on it.
You got to find those corners sweep them out.

Speaker 1 (01:06:48):
Well. The report was to put together by the American
Principles Project, and as president, Terry Schilling is joining us
on our any hour Newsmaker line right now. Terry, you're
asking for more, What more steps or what other steps
would you like to see this administration do?

Speaker 4 (01:07:02):
Well?

Speaker 17 (01:07:02):
The interesting Well, first of all, thanks so much for
having me, Ron and Greg. The thing is, the administration
is actually already taking several steps that we are recommending.
It's like we're reading from the same playbook. We need
to subpoena these gender clinics, get them to testify about
how they came to these conclusions that children need irreversible

(01:07:24):
and harmful sex change procedures. They need to be on
under oath and before the American people answering these questions.
That's step one, and then from there we need to
extrapolate and figure out where they broke the law, which
we know that they're breaking the law. There was a
very interesting workshop on quote unquote gender affirming care as
a Federal Trade Commission just yesterday where it was uncovered

(01:07:49):
that these medical providers and hospitals are actually using erroneous
coding in order to prescribe puberty blockers, cross sex hormones
to children, in order to use these drugs off labels.
So there's a lot of corruption here. There's a lot
of fraud going on, but it starts with the regulatory

(01:08:09):
agencies and the Department of Justice subpeeing these people and
these hospitals and clinics and getting answers from them. We
need to get them under oath and expose the deceit.

Speaker 2 (01:08:20):
So how did you find out about the fraudulent coding?
Because I'm surprised A four and a half billion dollars.
You mentioned gender industry, How were you able to find
out that there were workarounds going on? As you've seen
the Trump administration really focused on I felt like they
were focused on this issue.

Speaker 17 (01:08:37):
Well, there was a at the Federal Trade Commission's workshop
on gender firming care, a so called Jenner firming care,
that is yesterday. There was a whole panel of whistleblowers,
and the whistleblowers were everyone from doctor aton Heim from
Dallas children who identified that Dallas Children's was performing these

(01:08:57):
even after they said they weren't and it was illegal
in the state of Texas to do. But they were
social workers. There were nurses who had made a name
for themselves and got on the scene by blowing the
whistle and exposing the fact that their bosses were instructing
them to use false coding through you know, the medical code.

(01:09:19):
They all have medical codes for the insurance companies, so
they know what they're covering. Insurance companies actually don't cover
a lot of these gender transition procedures, especially for minors,
so they were using them falsely. They were saying that
some children were suffering from precocious puberty at twelve years old.
Precocious puberty is for you know, six year olds, an
eight year old or seven year olds. People that are
going through it too young. Twelves are perfectly fine and

(01:09:41):
healthy age to go with through puberty. So we found
out primarily through whistleblowers, and that requires because they went
through the proper process, we need to do an investigation now,
and that's what the FTC and the DOJ are doing
at this moment.

Speaker 1 (01:09:53):
Terry, what I think is frightening, and you mentioned it
in your reported, Well, this transgender and an industry is booming.
I mean, there is a lot of money out there
with this terry.

Speaker 17 (01:10:03):
Well, believe it or not, Rod and Greg, this this
industry is booming. You're right, but they wanted to go
a lot bigger. So there was an inn. It's right now,
it's four and a half billion dollars annually. But only
a small portion of the so called one point three
million estimated Americans that identify as transgender, only a small
portion of them have actually transitioned or had you know,

(01:10:25):
hormone treatments or surgeries. Their goal is to get all
one point three million to transition. And to give you
some just quick numbers, we did a whole report on
this and found out that it costs around six hundred
and fifty thousand for a woman to attempt to transition
to male, and it costs around four hundred and eighty
thousand for a male to attempt a transition to female.

(01:10:47):
So you take those numbers times one point three million,
and that's a lot of money. They expect it to
grow to over two hundred billion dollars a year, and
to put that number into perspective, that's larger than the
entire American film industry. There's a lot of money they
want to grow. And these are the numbers that they
put in for put in front of investors to get
them to invest in these hospitals, in these clinics, and

(01:11:09):
these pharmaceutical companies. It's a really nefarious industry.

Speaker 2 (01:11:12):
So it's it taps into my greatest worry, and that
is I've always felt that the climate agenda, much of
it is a profit driven endeavor, not really we need
to be better stewards of the plant of planet Earth.
You look at and you look at the Pride Month
that we just went through in June, so many corporate
sponsors were pulling out, which signaled to me that they
didn't see the return on investment. They didn't see it
as a profitable, necessarily a profitable endeavor. Do you think

(01:11:36):
that this gender transition for minors is there. Is it
more fueled by the philosophy that your gender is fluid,
by those social engineers that want to make that the case,
or is this just about making profit? Is this a
money chase?

Speaker 17 (01:11:50):
Well, I think it's both. I think it's a I
think there are a lot of ideologues who are behind this,
and I think there's a lot of money that are
fueling those idea logues. But the difference is if you
look at Europe right where primarily there's socialized medicine, there's
no profits or at least profits on paper and their medicine.
But Europe is backing away from these gender procedures, especially

(01:12:14):
for miners, and they're actually just looking at the outcomes
and the results for these kids and they're seeing that
there's actually no benefits. There's only detriment to these children
after they receive these treatments. So they're cutting it because
there's no profits to push it and they're seeing it's
doing harm. In America, it's a little bit messier because
of the profit angle, but there's still these ideologues. And

(01:12:34):
I know this is hard to understand, Ryan greg, but
these ideologues believe that you and me being men is
actually harmful to society. It's harmful to us as individuals.
It's harmful. They prefer a world of androgyny. I know
that sounds crazy, but that's what they want. And so
they think that the existence of men, the existence of

(01:12:54):
women is a bad thing, and ideally there is no
such thing as gender. Everyone's fluid, everyone's in androgynists, everyone
has purple hair. That's essentially the worldview that these people
are pushing.

Speaker 1 (01:13:05):
Terry Shilling, he's with the American Principles Project talking about
a new report urging the administration to do more to
stop the dangerous transagenda in this country.

Speaker 2 (01:13:14):
My feel is if they know, they will. I mean,
you just don't know what you don't know. It's shocking
that they've found workarounds like this, and there's a miscoding
certain pessima. It's wrong, and so I think if you
know it, you can go after it. And I think
that this work is an important step to make sure
we get to it.

Speaker 1 (01:13:30):
Our listen back Friday segments coming up next to it
is the Friday edition of The Rotten Gregg Show right
here on Utah's Talk Radio one all five nine knrs.
Well our listen back Friday segments. We do this at
this time every Friday, in which we look back at
the newsmakers who've been on the show and replace some
of those segments or those interviews that you may have missed.
Of course, one of the big stories is week Greg
was the announcement that there is going to be an

(01:13:52):
investigation into James Combing and into John Brennan about the
Russian hopes about time.

Speaker 2 (01:13:58):
Huh it is. It's taking up a lot of new
a lot of commentary. Our next guest, she brings up
a very good point that you don't see in the investigation.
You don't see the name come up, but former President
Barack Obama seems to be highly involved and was knowledgeable
while he was president in those final weeks in putting
this together to go after then President elect Trumpe. And

(01:14:18):
so that's some information that we should be talking about. YEA.

Speaker 1 (01:14:21):
Her name is Margo Cleveland. She is a senior legal
correspondent at The Federalist. We talked to her earlier this week.
About this situation. We asked her about Barack Obama, where
is his name when it comes to John Brennan and
James Comy.

Speaker 18 (01:14:33):
Oh. Absolutely, And it was fascinating how it was peppered
throughout the report. And yet the first big takeaway everybody
was looking at was Brennan and Clapper and Coney, But
you have to look at what the report said, and
they said, you got to look at the background. How
did this start? That Obama brought these people into the

(01:14:56):
office and he tasked them with doing this report, this assessment,
and he also gave the timing for the assessment. And
that's what's key. That doing an assessment by itself would
not be suspicious, but Obama gave them the timing that
it would be done before Trump was in office. And

(01:15:20):
these types of assessments are not something that can be
done in thirty days. And that was in the report
that Ratcliffe released. Had said how the people they talked
to talked about how abnormal this timeframe was, how rush
they were, how little time people had to review it.

(01:15:40):
And then you also have that Obama was talking with
Brennan about the process for this report, and Brennan basically
kept this within the FBI, the CIA. He kicked out
the other parts of the Intel community that normally were

(01:16:02):
responsible for doing this assessment. And why because he had
talked to Obama and how they figured out they're going
forward with it. Obama knew who he could trust to
do his bidding, and that's who he went to.

Speaker 13 (01:16:17):
Margot.

Speaker 2 (01:16:18):
I want to ask you a question, but I've been
following you your coverage of the Judiciary and some of
the rulings that are coming out. You're doing such a
phenomenal job. I hope we have time at the end
of this to discuss some of that. But let me play.
And I hate doing this but Devil's advocate, and I
hate doing that for President Obama because I'm with you
on this actually, But could he argue that the reason

(01:16:38):
he had to hasten the pace and get this analysis
done in such a short amount of time was because
if Trump took office, he could then bury it and
there wouldn't be an honest assessment of maybe some information
he became privy to that he wanted really to have
looked at without someone getting rid of it. If they
didn't like the answer, they.

Speaker 18 (01:16:57):
Got sure that he would come up with some rationale
for it. But if you look at who was supposed
to be doing this report, it was intelligence community professionals,
it was not political appointees, and yet Obama kept it

(01:17:19):
away from them. So even if you're going to say
we wanted to finish it before Trump was in, why
then did Brennan and Clapper marginalize the folks who normally
do these investigations. So even if I give you one, okay,
you want to get the timing done fast, that still
doesn't answer why they cut out the organization that normally

(01:17:45):
did these assessments, and why you had Brennan, Clapper, and
Komi doing a hands on review as opposed to the
professionals who normally do.

Speaker 2 (01:17:56):
And to your point, didn't some of the professionals there
that were not political appointments find that process so unsettling
they didn't want to be They actually we even withdrew
from it because it was not appropriate what was going on.

Speaker 18 (01:18:08):
Absolutely that was in the report too, that they that
it was so heavy handed and so politically based, and
that they were not used to this type of I
guess overlords involved that they didn't want to be involved
in it. So again that shows that even if Obama
had a legitimate concern over the timeframe that there was

(01:18:32):
no reason for all of the other issues that arose.

Speaker 1 (01:18:37):
It sounds like Barack Obama knew what he was doing.
I mean, this wasn't a shot in the dark. I
mean this was all part of a plan. Is that
what it sounds like to you, Margo?

Speaker 18 (01:18:46):
Oh, it absolutely sounds like that. It was Obama saying
that I'm going to mess up Trump's administration. And you
even had Rackliff, the CIA director, who's seen this evidence
and has seen more than this. One of the stories
that I broke at the same time that I was
writing about Obama is I have a source who has

(01:19:07):
seen the hipsy Staff report. And HIPSIE is the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Intelligence I think, and they
did their own report on this and that's still classified.
And my source who's familiar with it said that is
much more corrupt than what was in this report. So

(01:19:32):
Ratcliffe has seen both reports. And Ratcliffe went out afterwards
and he did an interview with Miranda Jervine and he
said that this was Obama, Brennan, Clapper, and Camy basically
saying We're going to screw Trump. So you don't have
to even read into the details. We don't have to,
you know, hypothesize. We have someone who has seen this

(01:19:55):
all saying that's exactly what took place.

Speaker 1 (01:19:58):
Real quick. I just want to go back to the
story of the day today, and that's the investigation into
Brennan and Comy. You're surprised by that at all, because
I know a lot of people have been saying someone's
got to be held accountable for what's going on here.
Is this a step in that direction, do you think, Marco?

Speaker 18 (01:20:15):
Yes and no. So first I am not surprised. I've
been actually running down this and I'm trying to get
back to a few sources yet tonight to get more
details on this. But it doesn't surprise me. There was
a reason that Radcliffe did not release the House Staff
report that talked about some of these issues, so I

(01:20:36):
wasn't surprised by it. Whether or not we are ever
going to have any accountability, the criminal case I see
being very challenging. So beyond the statue of limitations, I
think we probably could get around that with a conspiracy
charge because this has been ongoing for some time, But

(01:20:56):
you're going to end up in DC. No Surrey, it's
going to convict folks in desecents. And what I was
saying today, I was again talking with an editor saying, look,
I think my next article is going to be we
are the accountability that we are not going to get
the accountability of these individuals being criminally prosecuted and convicted.

(01:21:20):
But they should be thrown out of polite society. They
should never be on a television show again as a guest.
Anybody who interviews them should be treated as a prior
as well. They should be the equivalent of Nixon because

(01:21:41):
what they did is much worse, and Nixon did not
have to go to jail for there to be accountability.
And it's really going to come down to Americans to
hold them accountable because it was much worse than anything
that happened in Watergate.

Speaker 1 (01:21:58):
As part of our list, Mac Friday segment our conversation
with Margot Cleveland from the Federalist Land it out. I
have the same questions, where's Barack Obama and all of this?

Speaker 2 (01:22:06):
Yes, you know, he says, in the room, in the
room where it's happening, maybe even directing it. Keep your
eye on Margot Cleveland, watch her on AXT She always
stays on top of all these issues. And also the
judiciary really well that's how I keep the score.

Speaker 1 (01:22:18):
She does a great job. All right, more coming up
on the Rod and Greg Show and Talk Radio one
oh five nine Canterrests and a reminder of our great
shows weekend shows. What we have. We have the travel
show Larry Gelwicks. Yes, he does a pretty good job. Yes,
and they flies all over the world. And then we'll
do gun Radio Utah with Clark Composion.

Speaker 2 (01:22:38):
Yeah, it's a powerpack line as pretty usual.

Speaker 1 (01:22:40):
Good good weeknd All right, Now, we just spoke with
Margot Cleveland about the word that James Comy and John
Brennan we're going to be investigating. What it was In
the thick of all of this was former Utah Congressman
Jason Chafits, now a contributor to Fox News. We had
a chance to talk with Jason earlier this week about it.
We asked him about this investigation into Komy and Brand.

Speaker 6 (01:23:00):
Well, finally we've look, we've known about their the perception
that they have deceived and lied to Congress and the
world quite frankly for a long time, and so for
the Department of Justice too. Now saying, hey, they're starting
to do a more serious formal inquiry. Is you know,

(01:23:22):
I don't know where it's going to lead, but you
just have to roll the tape. I mean, and look,
there are others within the justice the departments that have
highlighted these these people as you know, overstepping their bounds
when they've made such comments. So I hope they take
it seriously. I'm you know, color me a little bit pessimistic.

(01:23:42):
How many times have I seen an inspector General or
Congress recommend somebody for prosecution within the Department of Justice
and it just doesn't happen. And I even though I
think it should. But you know, I'm glad it's happening.
Am I optimistic? That comes to the conclusion it said, eah,

(01:24:03):
you know that was going to.

Speaker 2 (01:24:04):
Be My question? Is I feel like Charlie Brown kicking
trying to kick the football and Lucy keeps pulling it
away because yeah, we're seeing there's an inquiry their target
of a criminal investigation. But I just think these guys
have gotten away with it for so long. I just
I am pessimistic as well. Is there a particular charge
of whether it's perjury in front of Congress if it's
a conspiracy. I think Brennan was speaking about this issue

(01:24:27):
probably inaccurately up until twenty twenty three. So some argue
there's a five year statute limitation there that could take
them to twenty eight, So there's still time there is
there any of these charges or any of these at
least allegations that you're hearing about that you give the
most credit that if something were to happen, this is
where justice would be served.

Speaker 6 (01:24:47):
I think when you go and you affix your signature
to a FISA warrant to surveil somebody in this in
this case the Trumpet, you know, campaign, then you've taking
it to a whole other level. And I think, if
if the courts were ever going to stand up for themselves,
if Congress is ever going to stand up for themselves,

(01:25:08):
if justice was ever going to prevail, you just can't
lie to a federal judge. At least that's the world
you and I live, And we all know if Rod
did that, he'd be behind bars in a heartbeat, right.

Speaker 10 (01:25:20):
But.

Speaker 6 (01:25:22):
You know, it just doesn't happen. Like two weeks ago
that the Inspectors General had recommended an FBI agent overseas
was using his office and resources to engage in prostitution
that he was he was, and that's a very serious.
It was just an allegation. But the Department of Justice,

(01:25:43):
like I've seen dozens of times, came back and said, no,
we're not going to prosecute. Now, this is very serious.
But if you're signing a PFISA warrant and you're telling
the judge that you have cause to go so far
as to surveil somebody seeker, I think that's a whole
other level too. And I think you can demonstrate that

(01:26:05):
they should have known or they did know, that what
they were attesting to was false.

Speaker 1 (01:26:12):
Jesson, I've got to think there's some penalties here when
it comes to Lyne to Congress as well. I saw
some video earlier today that's the hearing several years ago.
Trey GOUDI, I mean just basically asked John Brennan, have
you seen evidence of any connection between the Trump administration
and of Ladimir and Putin? And Brennan just says, yes,
I have seen evidence of this, and I stand by

(01:26:33):
what we're investigating. I mean, that's a bald face lie. Jason.

Speaker 6 (01:26:38):
Yeah, Look, it happened to be paid for by the
Hillary Clinton campaign ten million dollars and so much so
that the intelligence community knew it was false. They had discredited.
All they had to do is ask, you know, when
you ask the simple question, it was very quickly evident

(01:26:59):
that this is not the case. They were doing these
things for political purpose, going affect an election. So you
would think, again, the standard would be even higher, particularly
given their positions, their roles, and their responsibility, and you know,
that's what we entrusted him to do. What's interesting in

(01:27:21):
this case is I don't understand why Clapper has suddenly
fallen off the TV screens here, because it was basically Brennan,
Clapper and Comy like it was some you know, bad
personal injury. You know the law firm of Brennan, Clapper
and Kobey. You know, you've been injured, call this number.

(01:27:43):
You know it's a billboard out on IBO fifteen. You
would think that that's but somehow he's not involved in that.
I can't figure out for the life of me.

Speaker 2 (01:27:51):
Why, because I think he's a confidential informant, that's what
I think. You know, I don't know I hear the
name that I hear, I wish. No, here's the name.
I don't hear, but I hear us time talking about
a lot, and that's President Obama. There's a lot out
there that says that he was far more aware of
and helping plan an intelligence report that would come out

(01:28:11):
and would be completed before Trump took office. This is
after he won. Where is his role? Is his role
ever going to be highlighted or is there going to
be anything that's done about President Obama? I don't believe
you'll see him, you know, thrown in the clink. But
how much of this is going to splash on the
former president?

Speaker 6 (01:28:31):
Well, you know it happened under his watch. You know,
they're pretty clever about not having their names associated with it.
I don't know whether he was involved, not involved. I
hope with this inquiry signals is that we're going to
take a deep, deep look at this. Since are there
communications that were going from the White House to a
CI director? My guess is the answer to that is

(01:28:54):
probably no. And that's exceptionally hard to prove. What I
think is easy to demonstrate is how the Clinton administration,
through a guy named Mark Elias, who was the fixer
for a whole lot of things in the world. Could
he potentially have been involved and engaged. I mean, there

(01:29:15):
was a flow of this ten million dollars and you
can't just as a campaign expense chalk it up to
legal fees if it wasn't a legitimate campaign expenditure. Was
it a campaign expenditure? And what was their expectation with
this flow of money? And so you know that a
lot of that money went overseas Emdelli Again still needs

(01:29:38):
to be sorted out and proven beyond a reasonable doubt,
but that's the allegation. That's why the investigation's happening.

Speaker 1 (01:29:44):
Jason Shape, it's former Utah congressman talking about the investigation
in Dacomya and Brennan. I'm not sure how far this
is going to go, but I hope it ends up
somewhere this investigation because he expressed concern. You've expressed concern
as well.

Speaker 2 (01:29:57):
I think so much of this we talk about, I
don't see justice ever arriving. I feel like, you know,
Charlie Brown, as I said in that as we discussed this,
trying to kick the football and it always gets pulled away. Well, see,
I'm just gonna I'm gonna temper my expectations. It's not
a question that there's been illegality, it's just whether anyone
will pay for that.

Speaker 1 (01:30:16):
Ill that said, well, that does it for us. We'll
see you tomorrow morning on the golf course.

Speaker 2 (01:30:20):
Yeah, and don't be late.

Speaker 1 (01:30:22):
It long and straight, Yeah, coming from you, that doesn't
for us. Tonight, head up, shoulders back. May God bless
you and your family this great country. Have a safe weekend.
We'll talk to you on Monday.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Trump Admin Facing Fallout from Epstein Files

Episode Transcript

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

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

All Episodes