July 9, 2025 • 31 mins
Texas flood rescue teams continue to search for scores of missing people as death toll climbs / 3 dead after floods in Ruidoso, New Mexico, Sweep Away Homes. Epstein files: Annoyance at Bondi’s handling of case grows inside and outside the White House.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Kf I Am six point forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to Later with Mo Kelly on demand on
the iHeartRadio app. If you listen to me during Later
with Mo Kelly, my normal show from seven to ten
pm here on KFI. But I appreciate the opportunity to
talk about some different things with you. There's a lot
that we need to discuss. We collectively, there are a
(00:26):
lot of issues that impact us directly and indirectly, and
hopefully I can give you just a little bit of
a different take on this. Let me first say good
morning to Heather Brooker. It's nice to be able to
work with you.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Heather. It's not often we get to work together.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
I know this is such a tree for me.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
Let's have some fun and also inform some people on
the way and on the ones and twos. Elmer, what's
happening to my friend? It's been a while since I've
worked with you as well.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
How's it going.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
It's gone real well, So let's get to it. Two
of the biggest stories right now in the United States
have to do with floods. We know about the Texas flood,
which is still in the rescue effort portion. You might
have heard some audio, that we may not be in
that rescue portion much longer and may move to recovery.
(01:12):
That's the unfortunate reality where after a certain point, if
you're not finding signs of life, optimism may fade. But
the latest numbers that at least one hundred and nineteen
people are confirmed dead and more than one hundred and
sixty people remain unaccounted for, and this is according to
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, and we know is in reference
(01:35):
to the Camp Mystic tragedy the Girls Summer Camp. At
least twenty seven campers and councilors die. I want to
put a pin in that and just think about those
individuals and think about their families and think about what
they may be going through at this moment.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
I want to come right back to that. But we
also now have.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
To deal with the New Mexico floods, in which three
people were killed in southern New Maya, Mexico, after heavy
rains fell. A middle aged man and two children aged
seven and four died after being swept away by flood waters.
In addition, dozens of people trapped in their homes were
caught in fast moving flood waters were rescued by emergency crews.
(02:18):
Not all bad news, some good news, and I want
you to put a pin in this. Governor Michelle Grisham
asked the federal government to send response teams and resources
to help with repairs, and that's against the backdrop of
a larger discussion of what FEMA's role is not only
in these disasters, but as an agency going forward. You'll
(02:42):
probably be familiar with what the President has said about
FEMA and how he plans to eradicate the agency in
the next calendar year. But I'll get to that in
the next segment. I wanted to talk about Texas and
New Mexico and the idea of tragedy and this ongoing
(03:04):
discussion as far as what we should or shouldn't be
talking about. If you exist in the online space like
I do, you see the discussions some people are talking about, Hey,
we should only be offering thoughts and prayers for the victims.
It doesn't matter what happened, it doesn't matter why it happened,
it doesn't matter who's to blame. It should be about
(03:26):
praying for the victims and their families. That's generally one
sentiment out there, and others will say, well, no, no, no, No,
this happened for a reason. This happened to someone's negligence.
This happened to someone's budget cutting. And that's another form
of conversation out there, and seemingly they're competing. Now I'm
(03:50):
going to tell you about what someone told me. His
name is Carl McNair, and you may not recognize the name,
but Carl McNair is a longtime friend of mine, known
him for more than twenty years. Carl is the older
brother of Ronald McNair, who pairished on January of nineteen
eighty six aboard the Challenger. And Carl and I have
(04:14):
discussed that period of grieving and how he's dealt with
the loss of his brother in a number of ways,
and I'm going to share some of the things that
he told me. He told me that there is room
for simultaneous conversations because as he was mourning his brother,
(04:35):
he was mourning, he was questioning what and why it happened,
and also he wanted answers as to determining who was
responsible for the events leading up to it. In short,
he was saying, though, talking to me, you can have
all these conversations at the same time. And we were
talking maybe two weeks ago, because I'm helping him with
(04:56):
the planning and preparation for events commemorating the fortieth anniversary.
Imagine that forty years since Challenger exploded, but commemorating the
forty years since Challenger and that disaster and all the
memories and the emotions which come up in relation to it.
But he was saying to me that there's room for
(05:17):
these simultaneous conversations about what happened, making room for mourning,
finding out why, assessing blame simultaneously, not one at the
expense of the other. And here's something that he told
me that made it all made sense today. What's different
today as opposed to nineteen eighty six is people, by
(05:40):
and large start start with a conclusion formed by an
already established worldview, and then people work backwards from there
to assess blame. In other words, you want to blame
X or y person, be at the California fires, be
(06:01):
at the Texas floods, be it the hurricane here or there,
or the tornadoes. You start with a conclusion, and then
you make sure that conclusion conforms to your worldview, and
then you work yourself backwards to find the right person
to blame to fit that worldview, you're not trying to
(06:22):
find out what and why happened. You're trying to find
a way to blame the right small r person for
the circumstances involved. If it's the fires, blame local officials
and the state governor. If it's the floods, blame the
president and his cuts to federal agencies, including FEMA. That
(06:45):
was what Carl McNair was telling me about how we
as a country have shifted in how we look at tragedy.
This is someone who lost his brother on Challenger. This
is someone who had to grieve publicly for the whole
world to see. This is someone who had to watch
the investigations and in his words, why I can't say
(07:06):
his words because there's certain things that he told me
in confidence. Let me just say he told me and
on this station back in January, that he never found
out everything which happened with Challenger. The family's never found out.
So oftentimes you're trying to grieve, you're trying to remain
focused and understand, and you want those who are responsible
(07:30):
to be held accountable.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
And he told me, mother.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
There's always room for these conversations simultaneously The problem is
our intentions are not pure, our desires are corrupted by
our own political biases. So if you get on social media,
I know we got to go to break But if
you get on social media and you say that this
is not the time to assess blame, I will just
(07:55):
tell you what someone told me and said, no, that's
not true. If you can get to the heart of
the matter, get to the heart of the matter. If
you say that, well, we should only focus on the
families who are grieving and offer thoughts in prayers, I'm
sure Carl would say no, No, you could do both.
You can offer thoughts in prayers to the family, but
(08:16):
also be an instrument to help find out what happened
and why it happened, and then correctly assess blame, not whimsically,
not politically, but correctly and accurately. But that's just what
Carl McNair told me. And he had to grieve in
front of the world for years and documentaries and public
(08:37):
discussions and conspiracy theories while he buried his brother and
had to find out how to move forward. It's Gary
and Shannon show mo Kelly, and for Gary and Shannon,
we'll have more on this in just a moment k
if I AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
We're live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 4 (08:54):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
And as we continue our conversation about the floods and
the appropriate response not only in how we talk about it,
but how we pursue making people hold, how we make
sure that people are safe in these recovery and other
efforts which are being applied right now, there is an
(09:22):
emerging discussion, i should say, a continuing discussion about FEMA's role,
about whether FEMA should even exist. And this is how
I just happen to look at it. I look at
FEMA and I love analogies or metaphors. FEMA to me
is like car insurance. You have it around, you don't
(09:43):
use it. By and large, you and other people pay
into it. You don't want to use it, but in
the event that you have to use it, you're glad
that it's there. And states are like the deductibles states
and that limited responsibility will pay the first portion, and
(10:05):
then FEMA, the federal response, will pick up the rest
of it. And there is a debate largely generated by
our President. People weren't talking about eradicating FEMA prior to
President Donald Trump making it a central issue. My question
is can states And this is really not even theoretical
(10:27):
or rhetorical question.
Speaker 1 (10:29):
There's an answer which needs to be given.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Canned states actually handle all these natural disasters and also
mayn made disasters on their own.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
If you want or expect Alabama or Missouri to be
responsible for the lion's share of emergency services when we
have tornadoes, I think we're putting ourselves in a very
dangerous position. And you could talk about California and its fires,
and you can say, well, California should have done this,
or California should have done that. There are things that
(11:03):
aren't California's responsibility. There were a lot of areas which
caught on fire which were not state property.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
It was federal land.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Are you saying that the federal government is not going
to be responsible for federal land in an emergency.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
A lot of these conversations require nuance.
Speaker 2 (11:23):
But just in case you don't remember what the President
had to say, let me just very quickly.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
Just reassess what you're saying.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
I think that he was saying that FEMA needed to
be gone inside of a year and that all this
should be on the shoulders of governors. But here is
the longer clip, so you have some context. How soon
do you want to see team eliminated and what's your
message to the governments about how much florid expense it's
going to fall as state the.
Speaker 5 (11:51):
I'm going to do so much to states. We're going
to give out less money. We're going to give it
out directly. It'll be from the President's office. We'll have
somebody here, could be security, but we're going to give
it out through a method where it's given out. As
an example, I just gave out seventy one million dollars
to a certain state. They were looking to do about
one hundred and twenty. They were very happy with the
(12:13):
seventy one million. We did a little cutting and they
were very happy with it.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
So we're going to do as much North Carolina.
Speaker 5 (12:21):
We think after this, Christie I say, after the hurricane season,
we'll yes our Sally set.
Speaker 6 (12:25):
Up a FEMA council over the next couple of months
will be working on reforms and what FEMA will look
like in the future as a different agency as under
the Department of Homeland Security to the President's vision, and
it will empower governors to go out and respond to
emergency situations. And that what the president does best is
to make sure that the taxpayers are only fulfilling the
(12:49):
need to which is appropriate, and that people are responsible
to respond to their own people closest to home.
Speaker 5 (12:54):
So it's a certain state, as an example, gets hit
by a hurricane, or to nick, that's what you know,
governors should be able to handle it, and frankly, if
they can handle it the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't
be governor.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
I wholeheartedly disagree. I whole heartedly disagree. You're saying that
if a hurricane hits a state or multiple states, the
governor is supposed to be able to handle it. How
does one presume that you can handle a natural disaster?
Speaker 6 (13:24):
Not?
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Natural disasters don't come in one size. Natural disasters don't
only impact one particular state. Natural disasters oftentimes overwhelm the
services and resources of a given state. Let me give
you just an example. I think all of us can
relatively remember just if you're old enough. It's hard to believe.
(13:46):
I have to ask this question, you know, are you
old enough to remember? Nine to eleven. We're at that
point where there are a lot of people who are
probably listening who don't have an active memory of nine
to eleven.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
But let's just say hypothetically, you're old like me.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
And you remember where you were on nine to eleven,
You remember what happened to the state of New York.
Are you saying, are you suggesting that a governor of
a state like New York, if they were overwhelmed in
a situation like that nine to eleven, that you would
deem the governor incompetent or shouldn't be governor.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
I'm just going off with the President said if.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
They were overwhelmed and did not have the requisite resources
available to deal with it. Now, I know what's politically
expedient to say, well, Governor Gavin Newsom, he shouldn't be
governor if he couldn't handle the fires. But a lot
of the fires, if we look over the totality of
less maybe five to ten years have been on federal lands,
(14:45):
you're gonna blame the governor for the federal lands.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
I understand there were mistakes made somewhere along the way, and.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
That goes back to our conversation last segment about being
able to mourn, being able to assess and blame at
the same time. There's room for all of those conversations.
But if you back yourself into a corner and say,
if a state cannot handle a natural disaster, then you
(15:12):
need to blame the governor. That's a very dangerous precedent.
Given that we have earthquakes every year, given that we
have tornadoes every year, given that we have hurricanes every
single year, given that we have floods, come to think
of it, every single year. Are you saying that Governor
Greg Abbot is less of a governor because twenty seven children.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
That we know of have perished in the floodwaters.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Are you saying that if this tragedy is beyond the
resources of the governor of Texas, the Governor Abbot possibly
should be held accountable because of only just the resources
not being available. That's why you have the insurance policy.
To go back to that analogy, and that's why you
have the deductible. You have the states doing what they
(15:59):
can and where they can how they can, right where
they are, and then you have the federal government, hopefully
theoretically come in and do what states can't do for
themselves and Frankly.
Speaker 5 (16:10):
If they can handle it the aftermath, then maybe they
shouldn't be governed.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
I don't know if those dots connect, because an act
of God obviously usually possibly it's beyond the control of
man as in humankind, and sometimes beyond our collective resources
in a given state, and not all resources are created equal.
(16:36):
California more resources, Louisiana fewer resources, What happens in Arkansas,
what happens into a smaller and a smaller state. That's
the whole idea of federalism, where you have the totality
of the states, the federal government helping out those states
which may be in need and have fewer resources. California
(16:57):
the fourth largest economy in the world. It's not the
same thing in California as it might be in Oklahoma
or Iowa. Just something to think about. It's Gary and Shannon.
I'm o Kelly in for Gary and Shannon kfi AM
six forty. We are live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app
but we have to talk about the Jeffrey Epstein files,
which now do not exist, and there are no John's
(17:19):
and there's no one to prosecute, and there's no list
to share anywhere.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
We got to talk about that next.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Before I talk about Trump and Epstein, I'm going to
back into it by asking some questions of some folks
in the studio. Elma, who is the most famous person
that you've met and taken a photo with?
Speaker 1 (17:48):
Wow?
Speaker 2 (17:51):
I've met some famous people, but I've never taken a
photo with any.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Okay, who have you met them? Just met? Ah?
Speaker 2 (18:02):
You need me to come back to you. Ye, Okay,
I have the same question to you.
Speaker 3 (18:08):
This is difficult for me, but for a different reason
because I have met so many pashtag bragging humble brag.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
No, that's okay, it is appropriate for this one.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
I would say Steve Carell is pretty high up there
on the list the rock right, I would say, my gosh,
any major like movie star in the last like ten
years or so.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Okay, Yeah, no, that's a great starting point, and I'm
not gonna humble brag, but it's it's to highlight a point.
I've met dozens of stars and Academy Award winners over
the years. If I went through my photo album and
found all the pictures I could find the Mariah Carey.
I could find a Janet Jackson, I could find a Beyonce,
(18:51):
a Denzel Washington, Halle Berry, Jamie Fox, the Rock. And
they are pictures of me with all of them. And
there are pictures of me. Would President Obama, President Clinton,
President George W.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
Bush. I have some great stories to tell.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
But if you were to put those in a collage
and say, Aha, what's the common thread? If I, unfortunately
were to be indicted for something, they would mean nothing.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Here's what I'm getting to.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
In the first segment, I talked about how people usually
want to assess blame according to their political worldview. One
way in which people do this is they use pictures.
In the discussion of Jeffrey Epstein bringing it all together,
people will show a picture of Epstein with this person,
(19:46):
show a picture of Donald Trump and that person, and
or Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump. Well, they'll show Harvey
Weinstein and Oprah Winfrey. You know what I mean, what
I mean and where I'm going with this. The pictures
don't mean anything. We just want to assess blame. And
I'm quite sure you could find me in pictures with
all those people, and I would have no idea about
(20:10):
their sexual history, their predilections, and vice versa. We don't
know these people, and we don't know what goes on
in their bedroom. And there has been a haste, a rush,
an obsession with Jeffrey Epstein and trying to ascribe blame
to anyone seen with him or quote unquote link to him.
(20:35):
I have no idea who the Johns are my phraseology.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
I don't know who was on this supposed Epstein list.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
We've seen flight logs, okay, I've been on flights with
Janet Jackson, for example.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
That doesn't mean I.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
Know anything about her personal sex life. Sometimes we want
to connect which are not there. Jeffrey Epstein is dead.
There have been plenty of conspiracy theories surrounding him. There
have been theories that there is an exclusive client list.
(21:15):
I believe yes, there are obviously people who were involved
in criminal behavior with Jeffrey Epstein, if only because Gilaine Maxwell.
Speaker 1 (21:23):
Is that how she pronounces her name, gi Laine.
Speaker 2 (21:26):
Gilaine Maxwell is in prison, presumably for the rest of
her life, and Jeffrey Epstein would have been in prison
for the rest of his life had he not killed himself.
Regardless of people's conspiracy theories. But the question is did
we get here of.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Our own accord or were we told.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
That there was more to Jeffrey Epstein than there actually was?
Speaker 1 (21:52):
In other words, were.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
These just people of power or is it something more
that people want to hide to protect the people of power?
And here's something else. I know it might sound a
little bit convoluted, but I'm going somewhere with this. Powerful
people know powerful people. That should not be a surprise.
The question is whether powerful people were literally in bed
(22:17):
with the powerful people in trying to protect the powerful people.
But we came to this administration, not to say this administration,
because the Trump administration, the now Trump administration, told us
that if and when Donald Trump was elected, he was
going to release all the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
He placed that bar up there. Our level of expectation was.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
That upon election that we would learn about Jeffrey Epstein,
we would learn about JFK, we would learn about MLK.
Speaker 1 (22:49):
That is what we were told.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
So we collectively as a country had a level of
expectation that the government was holding something back, and if
you don't deliver that, then it's going to feed the
idea that there is some sort of conspiracy or there
is some sort of cover up.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I don't mind answering.
Speaker 5 (23:06):
I mean, I can't believe you're asking a question on
at Epstein at a time like this, where when having
some of the greatest success and also tragedy with what
happened in Texas, it just seems like a desecration.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
Well, you can't have it both ways. You can't have
it both ways.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
You can't tell us in one moment that if when
I'm elected, we're going to find out what actually happened,
you were going to release all the Epstein files. You
can't have the same Attorney General Pambondi tell us on
one hand, I have all the je Epstein files right
here on my desk and hold up a binder, and
then three weeks later you're saying, Department of Justice tell
(23:46):
us that there are no Epstein files.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
To a reasonable.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Person, that makes no damn sense. It's got to be
one or the other. Gelay Maxwell is in jail, in prison.
Jeffrey Epstein was likely to go to prison. I know, Elm,
I gotta go to break, but this is important. Got
to get this off my chest. Those people are gonna
spend the rest of their lives in prison for something
(24:11):
that happened, that was done by someone at an island,
and also in Florida, and also in New York. And yes,
the public doesn't necessarily have a right to know.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
We can file a Freedom of Information Act.
Speaker 2 (24:26):
We didn't have a right to know, but damn it,
we were told that we were going to know. You
told us that there was a list. You told us
that you were gonna release all the information and on
the files. You told us that we're gonna find out
all the names, whether it actually included Bill Clinton, whether
it actually included stars and other celebrities.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
You told us that.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
So it's reasonable to be upset at this point as
to why, all of a sudden none of that exists.
It'd be one thing if you didn't honor your promise,
but this is a one hundred hundred and eighty degree turn.
You went from We're gonna tell you everything to there's
no to tell.
Speaker 4 (25:00):
You're listening to later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
You can hit me on social media. Some people already
have at mister mo Kelly. Some people have found me
on Instagram and they're expressing themselves in you know the
ways that they think they know. How now, I have
not been disrespectful to you, So why would you be
disrespectful to me?
Speaker 1 (25:25):
I just don't get it. I don't get it anyhow.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
This comes from Jeremy Leeb at Jeremy Leeb on Instagram.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
He says, you suck bro. I'm not your bro.
Speaker 2 (25:38):
Stop being so biased bias about politics.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
We get it.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
You love Joe Biden, but you're spilling a bunch of misinformation.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
It's sad.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Jeremy Lee, First, thank you for your note, but uh,
I have yet to talk about politics.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
I talked about the floods.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
I talked about how the president wanted to close FEMA,
which is accurate.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
I talked about how.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
People want to rush to blame according to their worldview.
Speaker 1 (26:09):
But I.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
Have yet to even express any type of like of
Joe Biden, much less love. And the word is biased,
b I a s ed. Stop being so biased. If
you're gonna insult me, at least use the correct conjugation
of the of the word. Okay, it's biased, not biased.
It just helps the power of your insult if you
(26:34):
at least get that portion correct. But you know, thank
you very much for your note, let's talk about Jeffrey Epstein.
And I was making the point just because you see
a picture of someone, and I use the example of
Donald Trump in the fitth of Donald Trump Jeremy Leeb,
just because you see a picture of someone, it does
(26:54):
not indict or implicate someone. Think about all the pictures
you of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, and I have
to remind people pictures don't mean anything.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Powerful people know powerful people.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
You go to an award show, all the famous people
take pictures with all the famous people. That's what they do.
But talking about why Jeffrey Epstein is an issue right now,
I make the point the level of expectation was set
by only Donald Trump in his administration. Pam Bondy was
(27:31):
the only person talking about we're going to release the
Jeffrey Epstein files. I wish you were someone else, but
she was the only one.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
You call that misinformation, it's just a fact.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
She was holding up the binder talking about I have
all the Jeffrey Epstein files right here on my desk.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
That's setting level of expectations.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
And if you happen to be of the opinion that
that's unaccept that now people are saying in the same administration,
Pambondi and also President Trump has said, basically in so
many words, to move on, that we're not going to
talk about this anymore.
Speaker 1 (28:13):
I was like, dude, bro, you're all were the only
ones talking about it.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
You told us that this was going to be released,
you said you had the files, and now you're saying
there are no files. That's just a statement of fact.
Is what you said before, and that's what you're saying now.
It's just a statement of fact that is on the
public record. Me personally, I don't care one way or
(28:42):
the other. I just believe, because you have powerful people
who will always protect powerful people, that we will never
know the full truth.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
I said this in the first statement.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I was talking about my friend Carl McNair and the
whole Challenger disaster.
Speaker 1 (28:57):
He told me just last month.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Forty years later, he still doesn't believe he'll ever find
out the truth regarding the Challenger disaster. Forty years later.
Powerful people protect powerful people. I don't know who's on
this Jeffrey Epstein client list. I do believe, as a
rational person and a reasonable person that Geley Maxwell would
(29:23):
not be in prison right now unless there were a
client list, because she was the facilitator, she was the
go between, she was the madam if you will. Somebody
was doing something with someone which was illegal, which led
to Gelay Maxwell being put in prison.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
So there is a list.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
I'm quite sure Geley Maxwell had a list of her
frequent clients, people that required her to preserve their anonymity,
preserve their privacy. It wasn't like someone could just open
a yellow with they had back in the day, or
the White Pages, or just somehow just call for one
(30:04):
and say, hey, can I come on over to Jeffrey
Epstein's and hang out for a while.
Speaker 1 (30:08):
No, it wasn't like that.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
It clearly was a small society of people who knew
and knew how to contact her and knew what to
do to do whatever criminal thing that they were trying
to do. That's known to the federal government because it
had to be part of the evidence.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
A reasonable person knows that.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
I'm just trying to tell you, Jeremy Leeb and anyone else.
The expectations were set by Pam Bondi. The expectations were
set by a campaigning Donald Trump, who said, I would
release the Epstein files. I would release the MLK files.
I will release the JFK files. I didn't say that
(30:55):
he did. And when you set the expectations that high
and you not only deliver on them and you go
in the other direction, that that is a problem that
you yourself have created. I personally never expected to see
any of this, and I'm not in any way disappointed
because low expectations, no disappointments. It's Gary and Shannon mo Kelly.
(31:21):
And for Gary and Shannon KFIM six forty we live
everywhere the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
You've been listening so later with mo Kelly.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
You can always hear us live on kf I AM
six forty seven pm to ten pm every Monday through Friday,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
Kf I Am six point forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to Later with Mo Kelly on demand on
the iHeartRadio app. If you listen to me during Later
with Mo Kelly, my normal show from seven to ten
pm here on KFI. But I appreciate the opportunity to
talk about some different things with you. There's a lot
that we need to discuss. We collectively, there are a
(00:26):
lot of issues that impact us directly and indirectly, and
hopefully I can give you just a little bit of
a different take on this. Let me first say good
morning to Heather Brooker. It's nice to be able to
work with you.
Speaker 1 (00:37):
Heather. It's not often we get to work together.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
I know this is such a tree for me.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
Let's have some fun and also inform some people on
the way and on the ones and twos. Elmer, what's
happening to my friend? It's been a while since I've
worked with you as well.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
How's it going.
Speaker 2 (00:50):
It's gone real well, So let's get to it. Two
of the biggest stories right now in the United States
have to do with floods. We know about the Texas flood,
which is still in the rescue effort portion. You might
have heard some audio, that we may not be in
that rescue portion much longer and may move to recovery.
(01:12):
That's the unfortunate reality where after a certain point, if
you're not finding signs of life, optimism may fade. But
the latest numbers that at least one hundred and nineteen
people are confirmed dead and more than one hundred and
sixty people remain unaccounted for, and this is according to
Texas Governor Greg Abbott, and we know is in reference
(01:35):
to the Camp Mystic tragedy the Girls Summer Camp. At
least twenty seven campers and councilors die. I want to
put a pin in that and just think about those
individuals and think about their families and think about what
they may be going through at this moment.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
I want to come right back to that. But we
also now have.
Speaker 2 (01:55):
To deal with the New Mexico floods, in which three
people were killed in southern New Maya, Mexico, after heavy
rains fell. A middle aged man and two children aged
seven and four died after being swept away by flood waters.
In addition, dozens of people trapped in their homes were
caught in fast moving flood waters were rescued by emergency crews.
(02:18):
Not all bad news, some good news, and I want
you to put a pin in this. Governor Michelle Grisham
asked the federal government to send response teams and resources
to help with repairs, and that's against the backdrop of
a larger discussion of what FEMA's role is not only
in these disasters, but as an agency going forward. You'll
(02:42):
probably be familiar with what the President has said about
FEMA and how he plans to eradicate the agency in
the next calendar year. But I'll get to that in
the next segment. I wanted to talk about Texas and
New Mexico and the idea of tragedy and this ongoing
(03:04):
discussion as far as what we should or shouldn't be
talking about. If you exist in the online space like
I do, you see the discussions some people are talking about, Hey,
we should only be offering thoughts and prayers for the victims.
It doesn't matter what happened, it doesn't matter why it happened,
it doesn't matter who's to blame. It should be about
(03:26):
praying for the victims and their families. That's generally one
sentiment out there, and others will say, well, no, no, no, No,
this happened for a reason. This happened to someone's negligence.
This happened to someone's budget cutting. And that's another form
of conversation out there, and seemingly they're competing. Now I'm
(03:50):
going to tell you about what someone told me. His
name is Carl McNair, and you may not recognize the name,
but Carl McNair is a longtime friend of mine, known
him for more than twenty years. Carl is the older
brother of Ronald McNair, who pairished on January of nineteen
eighty six aboard the Challenger. And Carl and I have
(04:14):
discussed that period of grieving and how he's dealt with
the loss of his brother in a number of ways,
and I'm going to share some of the things that
he told me. He told me that there is room
for simultaneous conversations because as he was mourning his brother,
(04:35):
he was mourning, he was questioning what and why it happened,
and also he wanted answers as to determining who was
responsible for the events leading up to it. In short,
he was saying, though, talking to me, you can have
all these conversations at the same time. And we were
talking maybe two weeks ago, because I'm helping him with
(04:56):
the planning and preparation for events commemorating the fortieth anniversary.
Imagine that forty years since Challenger exploded, but commemorating the
forty years since Challenger and that disaster and all the
memories and the emotions which come up in relation to it.
But he was saying to me that there's room for
(05:17):
these simultaneous conversations about what happened, making room for mourning,
finding out why, assessing blame simultaneously, not one at the
expense of the other. And here's something that he told
me that made it all made sense today. What's different
today as opposed to nineteen eighty six is people, by
(05:40):
and large start start with a conclusion formed by an
already established worldview, and then people work backwards from there
to assess blame. In other words, you want to blame
X or y person, be at the California fires, be
(06:01):
at the Texas floods, be it the hurricane here or there,
or the tornadoes. You start with a conclusion, and then
you make sure that conclusion conforms to your worldview, and
then you work yourself backwards to find the right person
to blame to fit that worldview, you're not trying to
(06:22):
find out what and why happened. You're trying to find
a way to blame the right small r person for
the circumstances involved. If it's the fires, blame local officials
and the state governor. If it's the floods, blame the
president and his cuts to federal agencies, including FEMA. That
(06:45):
was what Carl McNair was telling me about how we
as a country have shifted in how we look at tragedy.
This is someone who lost his brother on Challenger. This
is someone who had to grieve publicly for the whole
world to see. This is someone who had to watch
the investigations and in his words, why I can't say
(07:06):
his words because there's certain things that he told me
in confidence. Let me just say he told me and
on this station back in January, that he never found
out everything which happened with Challenger. The family's never found out.
So oftentimes you're trying to grieve, you're trying to remain
focused and understand, and you want those who are responsible
(07:30):
to be held accountable.
Speaker 1 (07:32):
And he told me, mother.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
There's always room for these conversations simultaneously The problem is
our intentions are not pure, our desires are corrupted by
our own political biases. So if you get on social media,
I know we got to go to break But if
you get on social media and you say that this
is not the time to assess blame, I will just
(07:55):
tell you what someone told me and said, no, that's
not true. If you can get to the heart of
the matter, get to the heart of the matter. If
you say that, well, we should only focus on the
families who are grieving and offer thoughts in prayers, I'm
sure Carl would say no, No, you could do both.
You can offer thoughts in prayers to the family, but
(08:16):
also be an instrument to help find out what happened
and why it happened, and then correctly assess blame, not whimsically,
not politically, but correctly and accurately. But that's just what
Carl McNair told me. And he had to grieve in
front of the world for years and documentaries and public
(08:37):
discussions and conspiracy theories while he buried his brother and
had to find out how to move forward. It's Gary
and Shannon show mo Kelly, and for Gary and Shannon,
we'll have more on this in just a moment k
if I AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
We're live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 4 (08:54):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
And as we continue our conversation about the floods and
the appropriate response not only in how we talk about it,
but how we pursue making people hold, how we make
sure that people are safe in these recovery and other
efforts which are being applied right now, there is an
(09:22):
emerging discussion, i should say, a continuing discussion about FEMA's role,
about whether FEMA should even exist. And this is how
I just happen to look at it. I look at
FEMA and I love analogies or metaphors. FEMA to me
is like car insurance. You have it around, you don't
(09:43):
use it. By and large, you and other people pay
into it. You don't want to use it, but in
the event that you have to use it, you're glad
that it's there. And states are like the deductibles states
and that limited responsibility will pay the first portion, and
(10:05):
then FEMA, the federal response, will pick up the rest
of it. And there is a debate largely generated by
our President. People weren't talking about eradicating FEMA prior to
President Donald Trump making it a central issue. My question
is can states And this is really not even theoretical
(10:27):
or rhetorical question.
Speaker 1 (10:29):
There's an answer which needs to be given.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Canned states actually handle all these natural disasters and also
mayn made disasters on their own.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
I don't think so.
Speaker 2 (10:40):
If you want or expect Alabama or Missouri to be
responsible for the lion's share of emergency services when we
have tornadoes, I think we're putting ourselves in a very
dangerous position. And you could talk about California and its fires,
and you can say, well, California should have done this,
or California should have done that. There are things that
(11:03):
aren't California's responsibility. There were a lot of areas which
caught on fire which were not state property.
Speaker 1 (11:10):
It was federal land.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
Are you saying that the federal government is not going
to be responsible for federal land in an emergency.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
A lot of these conversations require nuance.
Speaker 2 (11:23):
But just in case you don't remember what the President
had to say, let me just very quickly.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
Just reassess what you're saying.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
I think that he was saying that FEMA needed to
be gone inside of a year and that all this
should be on the shoulders of governors. But here is
the longer clip, so you have some context. How soon
do you want to see team eliminated and what's your
message to the governments about how much florid expense it's
going to fall as state the.
Speaker 5 (11:51):
I'm going to do so much to states. We're going
to give out less money. We're going to give it
out directly. It'll be from the President's office. We'll have
somebody here, could be security, but we're going to give
it out through a method where it's given out. As
an example, I just gave out seventy one million dollars
to a certain state. They were looking to do about
one hundred and twenty. They were very happy with the
(12:13):
seventy one million. We did a little cutting and they
were very happy with it.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
So we're going to do as much North Carolina.
Speaker 5 (12:21):
We think after this, Christie I say, after the hurricane season,
we'll yes our Sally set.
Speaker 6 (12:25):
Up a FEMA council over the next couple of months
will be working on reforms and what FEMA will look
like in the future as a different agency as under
the Department of Homeland Security to the President's vision, and
it will empower governors to go out and respond to
emergency situations. And that what the president does best is
to make sure that the taxpayers are only fulfilling the
(12:49):
need to which is appropriate, and that people are responsible
to respond to their own people closest to home.
Speaker 5 (12:54):
So it's a certain state, as an example, gets hit
by a hurricane, or to nick, that's what you know,
governors should be able to handle it, and frankly, if
they can handle it the aftermath, then maybe they shouldn't
be governor.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
I wholeheartedly disagree. I whole heartedly disagree. You're saying that
if a hurricane hits a state or multiple states, the
governor is supposed to be able to handle it. How
does one presume that you can handle a natural disaster?
Speaker 6 (13:24):
Not?
Speaker 2 (13:24):
Natural disasters don't come in one size. Natural disasters don't
only impact one particular state. Natural disasters oftentimes overwhelm the
services and resources of a given state. Let me give
you just an example. I think all of us can
relatively remember just if you're old enough. It's hard to believe.
(13:46):
I have to ask this question, you know, are you
old enough to remember? Nine to eleven. We're at that
point where there are a lot of people who are
probably listening who don't have an active memory of nine
to eleven.
Speaker 1 (13:56):
But let's just say hypothetically, you're old like me.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
And you remember where you were on nine to eleven,
You remember what happened to the state of New York.
Are you saying, are you suggesting that a governor of
a state like New York, if they were overwhelmed in
a situation like that nine to eleven, that you would
deem the governor incompetent or shouldn't be governor.
Speaker 1 (14:21):
I'm just going off with the President said if.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
They were overwhelmed and did not have the requisite resources
available to deal with it. Now, I know what's politically
expedient to say, well, Governor Gavin Newsom, he shouldn't be
governor if he couldn't handle the fires. But a lot
of the fires, if we look over the totality of
less maybe five to ten years have been on federal lands,
(14:45):
you're gonna blame the governor for the federal lands.
Speaker 1 (14:49):
I understand there were mistakes made somewhere along the way, and.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
That goes back to our conversation last segment about being
able to mourn, being able to assess and blame at
the same time. There's room for all of those conversations.
But if you back yourself into a corner and say,
if a state cannot handle a natural disaster, then you
(15:12):
need to blame the governor. That's a very dangerous precedent.
Given that we have earthquakes every year, given that we
have tornadoes every year, given that we have hurricanes every
single year, given that we have floods, come to think
of it, every single year. Are you saying that Governor
Greg Abbot is less of a governor because twenty seven children.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
That we know of have perished in the floodwaters.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Are you saying that if this tragedy is beyond the
resources of the governor of Texas, the Governor Abbot possibly
should be held accountable because of only just the resources
not being available. That's why you have the insurance policy.
To go back to that analogy, and that's why you
have the deductible. You have the states doing what they
(15:59):
can and where they can how they can, right where
they are, and then you have the federal government, hopefully
theoretically come in and do what states can't do for
themselves and Frankly.
Speaker 5 (16:10):
If they can handle it the aftermath, then maybe they
shouldn't be governed.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
I don't know if those dots connect, because an act
of God obviously usually possibly it's beyond the control of
man as in humankind, and sometimes beyond our collective resources
in a given state, and not all resources are created equal.
(16:36):
California more resources, Louisiana fewer resources, What happens in Arkansas,
what happens into a smaller and a smaller state. That's
the whole idea of federalism, where you have the totality
of the states, the federal government helping out those states
which may be in need and have fewer resources. California
(16:57):
the fourth largest economy in the world. It's not the
same thing in California as it might be in Oklahoma
or Iowa. Just something to think about. It's Gary and Shannon.
I'm o Kelly in for Gary and Shannon kfi AM
six forty. We are live everywhere in the iHeartRadio app
but we have to talk about the Jeffrey Epstein files,
which now do not exist, and there are no John's
(17:19):
and there's no one to prosecute, and there's no list
to share anywhere.
Speaker 1 (17:24):
We got to talk about that next.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
You're listening to Later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Before I talk about Trump and Epstein, I'm going to
back into it by asking some questions of some folks
in the studio. Elma, who is the most famous person
that you've met and taken a photo with?
Speaker 1 (17:48):
Wow?
Speaker 2 (17:51):
I've met some famous people, but I've never taken a
photo with any.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Okay, who have you met them? Just met? Ah?
Speaker 2 (18:02):
You need me to come back to you. Ye, Okay,
I have the same question to you.
Speaker 3 (18:08):
This is difficult for me, but for a different reason
because I have met so many pashtag bragging humble brag.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
No, that's okay, it is appropriate for this one.
Speaker 3 (18:16):
I would say Steve Carell is pretty high up there
on the list the rock right, I would say, my gosh,
any major like movie star in the last like ten
years or so.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Okay, Yeah, no, that's a great starting point, and I'm
not gonna humble brag, but it's it's to highlight a point.
I've met dozens of stars and Academy Award winners over
the years. If I went through my photo album and
found all the pictures I could find the Mariah Carey.
I could find a Janet Jackson, I could find a Beyonce,
(18:51):
a Denzel Washington, Halle Berry, Jamie Fox, the Rock. And
they are pictures of me with all of them. And
there are pictures of me. Would President Obama, President Clinton,
President George W.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
Bush. I have some great stories to tell.
Speaker 2 (19:10):
But if you were to put those in a collage
and say, Aha, what's the common thread? If I, unfortunately
were to be indicted for something, they would mean nothing.
Speaker 1 (19:23):
Here's what I'm getting to.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
In the first segment, I talked about how people usually
want to assess blame according to their political worldview. One
way in which people do this is they use pictures.
In the discussion of Jeffrey Epstein bringing it all together,
people will show a picture of Epstein with this person,
(19:46):
show a picture of Donald Trump and that person, and
or Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump. Well, they'll show Harvey
Weinstein and Oprah Winfrey. You know what I mean, what
I mean and where I'm going with this. The pictures
don't mean anything. We just want to assess blame. And
I'm quite sure you could find me in pictures with
all those people, and I would have no idea about
(20:10):
their sexual history, their predilections, and vice versa. We don't
know these people, and we don't know what goes on
in their bedroom. And there has been a haste, a rush,
an obsession with Jeffrey Epstein and trying to ascribe blame
to anyone seen with him or quote unquote link to him.
(20:35):
I have no idea who the Johns are my phraseology.
Speaker 1 (20:40):
I don't know who was on this supposed Epstein list.
Speaker 2 (20:45):
We've seen flight logs, okay, I've been on flights with
Janet Jackson, for example.
Speaker 1 (20:52):
That doesn't mean I.
Speaker 2 (20:54):
Know anything about her personal sex life. Sometimes we want
to connect which are not there. Jeffrey Epstein is dead.
There have been plenty of conspiracy theories surrounding him. There
have been theories that there is an exclusive client list.
(21:15):
I believe yes, there are obviously people who were involved
in criminal behavior with Jeffrey Epstein, if only because Gilaine Maxwell.
Speaker 1 (21:23):
Is that how she pronounces her name, gi Laine.
Speaker 2 (21:26):
Gilaine Maxwell is in prison, presumably for the rest of
her life, and Jeffrey Epstein would have been in prison
for the rest of his life had he not killed himself.
Regardless of people's conspiracy theories. But the question is did
we get here of.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Our own accord or were we told.
Speaker 2 (21:47):
That there was more to Jeffrey Epstein than there actually was?
Speaker 1 (21:52):
In other words, were.
Speaker 2 (21:53):
These just people of power or is it something more
that people want to hide to protect the people of power?
And here's something else. I know it might sound a
little bit convoluted, but I'm going somewhere with this. Powerful
people know powerful people. That should not be a surprise.
The question is whether powerful people were literally in bed
(22:17):
with the powerful people in trying to protect the powerful people.
But we came to this administration, not to say this administration,
because the Trump administration, the now Trump administration, told us
that if and when Donald Trump was elected, he was
going to release all the Jeffrey Epstein files.
Speaker 1 (22:34):
He placed that bar up there. Our level of expectation was.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
That upon election that we would learn about Jeffrey Epstein,
we would learn about JFK, we would learn about MLK.
Speaker 1 (22:49):
That is what we were told.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
So we collectively as a country had a level of
expectation that the government was holding something back, and if
you don't deliver that, then it's going to feed the
idea that there is some sort of conspiracy or there
is some sort of cover up.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I don't mind answering.
Speaker 5 (23:06):
I mean, I can't believe you're asking a question on
at Epstein at a time like this, where when having
some of the greatest success and also tragedy with what
happened in Texas, it just seems like a desecration.
Speaker 1 (23:20):
Well, you can't have it both ways. You can't have
it both ways.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
You can't tell us in one moment that if when
I'm elected, we're going to find out what actually happened,
you were going to release all the Epstein files. You
can't have the same Attorney General Pambondi tell us on
one hand, I have all the je Epstein files right
here on my desk and hold up a binder, and
then three weeks later you're saying, Department of Justice tell
(23:46):
us that there are no Epstein files.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
To a reasonable.
Speaker 2 (23:50):
Person, that makes no damn sense. It's got to be
one or the other. Gelay Maxwell is in jail, in prison.
Jeffrey Epstein was likely to go to prison. I know, Elm,
I gotta go to break, but this is important. Got
to get this off my chest. Those people are gonna
spend the rest of their lives in prison for something
(24:11):
that happened, that was done by someone at an island,
and also in Florida, and also in New York. And yes,
the public doesn't necessarily have a right to know.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
We can file a Freedom of Information Act.
Speaker 2 (24:26):
We didn't have a right to know, but damn it,
we were told that we were going to know. You
told us that there was a list. You told us
that you were gonna release all the information and on
the files. You told us that we're gonna find out
all the names, whether it actually included Bill Clinton, whether
it actually included stars and other celebrities.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
You told us that.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
So it's reasonable to be upset at this point as
to why, all of a sudden none of that exists.
It'd be one thing if you didn't honor your promise,
but this is a one hundred hundred and eighty degree turn.
You went from We're gonna tell you everything to there's
no to tell.
Speaker 4 (25:00):
You're listening to later with Moe Kelly on Demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
You can hit me on social media. Some people already
have at mister mo Kelly. Some people have found me
on Instagram and they're expressing themselves in you know the
ways that they think they know. How now, I have
not been disrespectful to you, So why would you be
disrespectful to me?
Speaker 1 (25:25):
I just don't get it. I don't get it anyhow.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
This comes from Jeremy Leeb at Jeremy Leeb on Instagram.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
He says, you suck bro. I'm not your bro.
Speaker 2 (25:38):
Stop being so biased bias about politics.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
We get it.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
You love Joe Biden, but you're spilling a bunch of misinformation.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
It's sad.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Jeremy Lee, First, thank you for your note, but uh,
I have yet to talk about politics.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
I talked about the floods.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
I talked about how the president wanted to close FEMA,
which is accurate.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
I talked about how.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
People want to rush to blame according to their worldview.
Speaker 1 (26:09):
But I.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
Have yet to even express any type of like of
Joe Biden, much less love. And the word is biased,
b I a s ed. Stop being so biased. If
you're gonna insult me, at least use the correct conjugation
of the of the word. Okay, it's biased, not biased.
It just helps the power of your insult if you
(26:34):
at least get that portion correct. But you know, thank
you very much for your note, let's talk about Jeffrey Epstein.
And I was making the point just because you see
a picture of someone, and I use the example of
Donald Trump in the fitth of Donald Trump Jeremy Leeb,
just because you see a picture of someone, it does
(26:54):
not indict or implicate someone. Think about all the pictures
you of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, and I have
to remind people pictures don't mean anything.
Speaker 1 (27:07):
Powerful people know powerful people.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
You go to an award show, all the famous people
take pictures with all the famous people. That's what they do.
But talking about why Jeffrey Epstein is an issue right now,
I make the point the level of expectation was set
by only Donald Trump in his administration. Pam Bondy was
(27:31):
the only person talking about we're going to release the
Jeffrey Epstein files. I wish you were someone else, but
she was the only one.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
You call that misinformation, it's just a fact.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
She was holding up the binder talking about I have
all the Jeffrey Epstein files right here on my desk.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
That's setting level of expectations.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
And if you happen to be of the opinion that
that's unaccept that now people are saying in the same administration,
Pambondi and also President Trump has said, basically in so
many words, to move on, that we're not going to
talk about this anymore.
Speaker 1 (28:13):
I was like, dude, bro, you're all were the only
ones talking about it.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
You told us that this was going to be released,
you said you had the files, and now you're saying
there are no files. That's just a statement of fact.
Is what you said before, and that's what you're saying now.
It's just a statement of fact that is on the
public record. Me personally, I don't care one way or
(28:42):
the other. I just believe, because you have powerful people
who will always protect powerful people, that we will never
know the full truth.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
I said this in the first statement.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
I was talking about my friend Carl McNair and the
whole Challenger disaster.
Speaker 1 (28:57):
He told me just last month.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Forty years later, he still doesn't believe he'll ever find
out the truth regarding the Challenger disaster. Forty years later.
Powerful people protect powerful people. I don't know who's on
this Jeffrey Epstein client list. I do believe, as a
rational person and a reasonable person that Geley Maxwell would
(29:23):
not be in prison right now unless there were a
client list, because she was the facilitator, she was the
go between, she was the madam if you will. Somebody
was doing something with someone which was illegal, which led
to Gelay Maxwell being put in prison.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
So there is a list.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
I'm quite sure Geley Maxwell had a list of her
frequent clients, people that required her to preserve their anonymity,
preserve their privacy. It wasn't like someone could just open
a yellow with they had back in the day, or
the White Pages, or just somehow just call for one
(30:04):
and say, hey, can I come on over to Jeffrey
Epstein's and hang out for a while.
Speaker 1 (30:08):
No, it wasn't like that.
Speaker 2 (30:11):
It clearly was a small society of people who knew
and knew how to contact her and knew what to
do to do whatever criminal thing that they were trying
to do. That's known to the federal government because it
had to be part of the evidence.
Speaker 1 (30:29):
A reasonable person knows that.
Speaker 2 (30:32):
I'm just trying to tell you, Jeremy Leeb and anyone else.
The expectations were set by Pam Bondi. The expectations were
set by a campaigning Donald Trump, who said, I would
release the Epstein files. I would release the MLK files.
I will release the JFK files. I didn't say that
(30:55):
he did. And when you set the expectations that high
and you not only deliver on them and you go
in the other direction, that that is a problem that
you yourself have created. I personally never expected to see
any of this, and I'm not in any way disappointed
because low expectations, no disappointments. It's Gary and Shannon mo Kelly.
(31:21):
And for Gary and Shannon KFIM six forty we live
everywhere the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
You've been listening so later with mo Kelly.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
You can always hear us live on kf I AM
six forty seven pm to ten pm every Monday through Friday,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
Later, with Mo'Kelly News
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.