February 10, 2026 • 37 mins
This podcast edition of Kenny Webster's Pursuit of Happiness features journalists Holly Hansen and Riley Lewis. ( @KennethRWebster )
Listen
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Jick ganon Government Sucks. The Soue of Happiness Radio is deluxe.
Liberty and freedom will make you smile. The Suit of
Happiness us.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
On your radio to al just As cheese Burg just
saying a liberty rise at all.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
Right, So there's a coffee shop in Orange County, California
that reportedly had women giving up lamp dances. That probably
explains why men were coming in for a grande but
leaving with a VENTI. Hi, everybody, I'm Kenny Webster. Thanks
so much for turning on your radio this afternoon. You know,
we actually have a guest from South California on the
radio show today. My buddy Riley Lewis is stopping by
(00:44):
to talk about the Save Act, Save America Act. Some
people refer to it as the Voter Integrity Act, and
why it needs to pass. It passed the House once,
can it do it again? And uh, will it make
it to Donald Trump's desk. We'll talk about that also
stopping by Holly Hansen from the Texan Dot News. We're
going to get to all of that and a lot more.
Can I start off discussing something we did on the
(01:05):
show yesterday. There's a conversation we were having about Gene Wu,
the Houston Democrat, who's somehow managed to become the human
embodiment of everything that is wrong with identity politics. This
guy's not just a state representative. He's the minority leader
of the Texas House Democrats, which means he's got a
megaphone the size of the astrodome, and he's using it
(01:27):
to broadcast the kind of rhetoric that makes you wonder
if he's auditioning to be the villain in a bad
reboot for the Manchurian candidate. Back in twenty twenty four,
he was on a podcast called Define American, which sounds
like a support group for people confused about borders, and
he drops this little gem.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Let me play a SoundBite of what he said here.
Speaker 5 (01:48):
I always tell people the day the Latino, African, American,
Asian and other communities realize that they are that they
share the same oppressor, is the day we start winning
because we are the majority in this country. Now are
we have the ability to take over this country and
to do what is needed for everyone and to make
(02:10):
things fair. But the thumb is our communities are divided.
Speaker 6 (02:13):
They're completely divided.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
Okay, so it sounds like he's talking about white people.
Some people have argued, no, no, he's just talking about
Trump or whatever. At any rate, it's a game of
risk where you roll the dice and you try to
flip Texas purple by race baiting people. Again, this is
the guy leading the House Democrats, and in this earlier
(02:37):
in the same conversation, he casually throws out that the
anti immigrant stuff is being driven by pure white nationalism.
Nobody's anti immigrant, we're anti illegal immigrant. It's this belief
that the people on the left have that America just
belongs to white people and God handed it to white
people with a divine deed. No one really thinks that.
(02:59):
If they do, there's not a lot of those people.
It's certainly not the mainstream Republican belief. So there's someone,
you know, listen to this rhetoric and they think it's
white genocide. Supporters say, oh, now, we're just talking about Republicans.
When you say a pressor in the context of racial
groups uniting to take over, the first thing that comes
to mind is, uh, well, white people. It's like saying,
(03:21):
you know, we're going to storm the beast deal, but
only to redistribute the croissants.
Speaker 4 (03:26):
Fairly, nobody's buying that. It's very divisive race baiting.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
It's dressed up as empowerment, and it's coming from a
guy who's supposed to represent all Texans or at least
substantial portion of Southeast Texas. It's not just one representative
for one racial group.
Speaker 4 (03:42):
So that none of this is new.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
You know, back in the COVID days, Jeene reportedly posted
something along the lines of being good with Republicans dying
from the virus. Now he deleted that not very classy,
real statesmanlike material.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Imagine if a Republicans said that about Democrats, the outrage
would melt servers.
Speaker 4 (04:01):
On the internet.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
But when Jean WU does it, it's crickets from his side,
because apparently wishing ill on half the country is fine
if you're on the right team or in this case,
the left team.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
And then there's the redistricting walkouts.
Speaker 3 (04:14):
The guy bolted from the Capitol like it was on fire,
and Republicans hit back with questions about what his intent was,
why he was being so low and ugly. Wo's the
one fanning the flames by framing every policy disagreement as
systemic racism or white supremacy. People in Texas were trying
to get more fair elections. We were trying to redraw
(04:37):
the district line so that they better represented the people
of our state. Jean Wu said, that's racism. Texas is
supposed to be the lone star state. We're supposed to
be independent and tough and freedom loving. It's not supposed
to be a balconized mess where politicians pit groups against
each other like it's a reality show Survivor Demographics edition.
(04:59):
Wu's out here acting like America as a zero sum pie,
and the only way his slice gets bigger is by
shrinking everyone else's. Here's the news slash for those on
the left who support this guy. Texas thrives when we
build together, not when we divide into tribes and declare
war on the oppressor.
Speaker 4 (05:15):
Du jour Gene Wu is not just bad on policy,
he's bad on vibes.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
He's the political equivalent of that one neighbor who blasts
music at three am and then complains about noise ordinances.
He divides us, He inflames tensions, and then plays victim
when the backlash hits. Texas deserves better than a leader
who talks like he's organizing a takeover instead of, you know, governing.
(05:43):
So next time someone asks why Texas politics often feel
like a dumpster fire, point to gen Wu. He's not
just fanning the flames. He's handing out marshmallows and singing
KUMBAII around the bonfire of unity.
Speaker 4 (05:55):
Except it's not unity. It's tribalism with a side of sanctimony.
Hopefully people in Texas realize this. They're waking up to it.
We don't need imported division.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
We need leaders who love this state more than they
love scoring points off racial resentment. Gen Wu is exhibit
A for why we need term limits and common sense
and maybe a Mirr or two in the capitol.
Speaker 4 (06:18):
I'm Kenny Webster. We got a lot coming up on
the show.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
Riley lewis joining us right after this to talk about
election integrity, which I think Gen Wuo would describe as racist.
Speaker 7 (06:27):
America the land of taxation that was founded to avoid taxation,
Kenny Webster's pursuit of happiness.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
All right, kids, Eddie Bauer is closing out its stores
in North America. If this makes you sad, it's because
you're probably mistaken him for LLL being. It's a totally
different guy, they're not the same people. Hi, everybody, welcome
back from break as a lot of you know, there's
been a lot of discussion lately about election integrity, and
(06:58):
for good reason. Did you know it took twenty years
for us to get real ID into place?
Speaker 4 (07:04):
Isn't that kind of embarrassing?
Speaker 3 (07:05):
After nine to eleven, there was some discussion over whether
or not we needed an ID system, a national ID system,
and how he could actually potentially be used to benefit
elections as well as national security, and most people probably agreed, Yeah,
that's not a bad idea, let's do that, And twenty
(07:28):
years later we finally got it implemented. Right cause back
in the day, I think it was Jimmy Carter was
one of the people who made these suggestions that now
there's more we could do to beef up election integrity,
and Democrats agreed with that right up until they realized
that Republicans wanted those things, and then suddenly full on TDS.
It's a tale as old as time. A good friend
(07:49):
of mine has been covering this actively on his show
on one American news network. Riley Lewis, the host of
the Real Story with Riley Lewis, airs weekdays, on and
if you've not watched it before, it's a fantastic show.
It focuses on protecting America, exposing media lies, fighting censorship,
empowering their viewers with unfiltered truth. I'm a big advocate
(08:12):
for it. I think Riley is as well. I invited
Riley onto the show this afternoon. Riley, I always wonder
if California is a lost cause. And then I realize,
you guys at won America News Network work there and
live there. You guys are in South California, And I
will admit that that's very refreshing to me.
Speaker 4 (08:30):
It makes me feel better.
Speaker 8 (08:32):
But it makes me feel better too.
Speaker 6 (08:34):
I have to tell you. Look, California, it's not a
lost cause. It's run by communists, people who are extremely
corrupt and incompetent. It's hard to imagine that people can
be so incompetent and corrupt. Actually, and it goes all
the way to the top of Sacramento. It's Gavin Newsom,
it's his administration. Do not make him president under any circumstance. Ever, however,
(08:56):
it's not a lost cause. We just don't have much
opposition here. But there's a few of us, including this
great network and we are in the trenches every single
day fighting tooth and nail with everything we have to
make the Golden State golden again. So that's that's the
mission we're.
Speaker 4 (09:11):
On, all right.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
So I think what a lot of people seem to
misunderstand about the Save Act, to Save America Act, as
it's often called, is that its heart, this.
Speaker 4 (09:18):
Is really about voter ID laws.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
And I can remember not that long ago, this was
something everybody agreed on.
Speaker 4 (09:25):
What do you think changed, Well, to.
Speaker 6 (09:28):
Your point, Democrats realized that Republicans wanted it, and they
realized that when Republicans are on the ballot and good
conservatives are on the ballot and you have, you know,
real restrictions in place, then Republicans were in elections and
that's not what Democrats want to happen. So, you know,
it was a pretty subtle shift because they used to
support a lot of these common sense measures, and a
(09:49):
lot of Democrat voters still do, by the way. Interestingly,
even was it was it Harry Enton on CNN just
last week showing that more than seventy percent of Democrat
voters registered dens support federal photo ID before you vote.
So it's it's something that people want. It's something most
Americans want ninety five percent plus some Republican voters want it.
Speaker 8 (10:10):
But I think Democrats at some point.
Speaker 6 (10:12):
Realize that that is not a winning formula for them.
I think a lot of them frankly, and this is
just my opinion, but I believe a lot of Democrats
are banking on fraud, cheating and duplicate ballots just to
win elections.
Speaker 8 (10:23):
And so it's an untenable position for them to take.
Speaker 6 (10:27):
And that's really sad.
Speaker 3 (10:27):
By the way, Okay, you have covered that on your show.
Has that been an issue in California? I mean, you're
you live in the state that I think a lot
of people think of as like, Oh, it's the isn't it.
In your state? It's legal to have these ballot drop
off boxes. It's legal to go out and pick up
a ballot for somebody. Ballot harvesting, they call it. Do
you see that?
Speaker 4 (10:47):
You know? Do you feel like that's been problematic in California?
Speaker 6 (10:52):
Absolutely, my friend, during twenty twenty especially, let me break
down the process as a lifelong and native California so
months before and this really a lot changed during twenty twenty,
but months before election day from the general. You receive
a ballot in the mail. You don't even ask for it, really,
They just send it to your house preemptively, and then you.
Speaker 8 (11:14):
Fill it out on your kitchen table.
Speaker 6 (11:16):
They have no idea of verifying who's actually filling it
out right, or if any of the information is true.
There's no oversight whatsoever. But you fill it out on
your kitchen table with mom and dad, whatever. Then you
take it to your local post office or library, community center,
what have you, and you drop it in a dropbox.
There is little to no oversight, if any.
Speaker 8 (11:36):
Sometimes you have someone.
Speaker 6 (11:37):
Sitting down with a chair just to make sure that
people aren't tampering with the dropbox itself. But there's no oversight,
no questioning, no real security. You can't show an ID.
Even if you want to show an ID to somebody,
they'll say, put it the way, we don't need to
see that that we don't care about that information. So
no passport, no ID, no bank statements, no proof of
(11:58):
residency or citizenship at all, no proof to confirm that
you are who you say you are. And people routinely
show up with multiple ballots in hand, presumably for themselves,
their family, their friends, whatever, and maybe it's innocent, maybe
it's not. But the point is there's zero oversight and
there's zero mechanism to prevent any kind of cheating. So
it's just a glaring, gaping hole and that should be
(12:20):
an issue for everybody. But it's super widespread here in California,
even in southern California. It's a big problem, and I
just I take so much issue with it. So, yeah,
we cover a lot on the show.
Speaker 3 (12:31):
Yeah, I had heard recently that in Michigan they actually
have voter ID laws in Michigan that are slightly stricter
than this, and if you don't have your idea with you,
you can still vote, but they put your what I
forget what it's called. They take your ballot and they
put it aside, and it only counts if it's a
close race and then they have to go verify it.
(12:51):
So in Michigan, where Gretchen Whitmer's totally against this, they
actually technically do have a system in place that requires
voter ID, but she's been out being one of the
biggest critics of this. I mean, interestingly enough, in Michigan,
there are less things you can use as a voter
ID than you would be able to use on a
national level under the Save Act. I guess I'm asking
(13:11):
you the a question here, But then that seem a
little hypocritical.
Speaker 6 (13:16):
Completely. It does, and it raises a good concern. Getting
the Save Act, the Save America Act, the Save Act,
plus the Make to Act, whatever you want to call it.
This is critical legislation. There's nothing more important to me. However,
we have to make sure if it should be passed
into law, God willing, that we actually enforce it. And
that is a whole different issue. And I don't know
(13:37):
exactly how you go about that, but that's the next
big question, is making sure that these things are actually
in place and then enforced, all right, And those are
two very different fights.
Speaker 4 (13:47):
Yeah, I mean it seems really simple to me.
Speaker 3 (13:49):
Now there are people that are against this, the NAACP,
the ACLU. They argue this is a form of voter suppression.
They compare it to Jim Crow. I know, that's like
an anecdotal thing. I can't find any actual evidence that
black people don't have driver's licenses or IDs. And if
someone didn't have an idea, how would they even function
in society? I mean, voting is the least to their concern.
Speaker 4 (14:11):
Right.
Speaker 6 (14:13):
Oh, absolutely, And by the way, this is something you
need for every basic function in your society.
Speaker 8 (14:17):
You can't get a job without an.
Speaker 6 (14:19):
ID, you can't buy alcohol or get on a plane
without ID. And almost every country on the earth in
the Greece, Romania, Hungry, Iceland, Ireland, every country on the planet,
almost everyone is requiring what we're asking. So this is
not groundbreaking stuff. It shouldn't even be artisan or controversial,
(14:40):
but it is for political reasons, and that's really sad.
But to your point, you basically can't do anything without
an ID, and there are states in this country where
if you're here, even illegally, you can still get an ID,
including the state of California, which is a massive problem
that needs to be fixed.
Speaker 3 (14:55):
All right, bottom line me, it's already passed the House once.
If this passes again and it passes the Senate, how
do you think this is going to change the public
confidence in elections?
Speaker 4 (15:05):
But I mean, obviously conservatives all like it.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Do you think this does anything to restore the confidence
of liberals who also question election results routinely once every
two to four years.
Speaker 6 (15:16):
Possibly it's easier to say that now than before the
midterm elections actually happen.
Speaker 8 (15:20):
However, Again, look, more than seventy percent of.
Speaker 6 (15:23):
Registered Democrats, according to Newpool data, support this measure. This
is very common sense. I'm not worried about Democrat voters
so much. I'm worried about people like Elizabeth Warrem. So
we'll see.
Speaker 8 (15:34):
But yeah, I actually think this.
Speaker 6 (15:35):
Could move the needle and restore some of our trust
in our institutions and our government, and hopefully that will
make us a little less divided.
Speaker 3 (15:42):
Riley, I am a big fan of your TV show,
and you're still doing radio out there, aren't you?
Speaker 6 (15:48):
Not so much anymore? So I really appreciate the chance
to be on your show because I miss it.
Speaker 3 (15:53):
Yeah, dude, you got your start in radio and now
you're doing TV full time.
Speaker 4 (15:58):
Dude, that's awesome though. Good for you.
Speaker 3 (16:00):
And anytime you ever want to come back and do
some good old fashioned radio, we've still got it here
in Texas. In California, apparently, I've heard that Gavin Newsom,
in his effort to censor speech out there, is actually
going to go around and send all the radio hosts
to goolags.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
Is that true?
Speaker 6 (16:18):
I would not be surprised, but I cannot confirm.
Speaker 8 (16:22):
Newsome Newsolini. I would not put it past them.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
You guys in South California and Orange County, you guys
are very reasonable. In San Diego, it's kind of a
purple city. You guys seem reasonable there. From time to
time we hear talk of that part of the state
branching off, and like, that's never going to happen, right,
I mean, is that a serious thing? Making South California
or East California its own state.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
Do people still advocate for that?
Speaker 6 (16:47):
No, not really, but I do get it because places
places like LA and San Francisco, where you run into
real issues, those are communist wastelants. At this point.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
The rest of.
Speaker 6 (16:56):
California, You've got farmers, gun owners, truckers, cowboys. It's California
is a pretty dynamic state. It's just that San Francisco
and LA are effectively dead weight to hold us back
from being a great state. However, we have some very
interesting candidates running for governor right now, and I do
think that we may see some real change in November.
(17:17):
I'm hoping and praying for it.
Speaker 3 (17:18):
Really, does Gavin Newsom have a chance in the running
for president? Do you think do people in California like
him as much as they claim. I mean, it seems
like now he's trying to fashion him himself as something
of a moderate.
Speaker 4 (17:28):
It seems to be upsetting his base.
Speaker 6 (17:32):
Yeah, I mean, he's a Look, he's very slimy. He's
very sleazy. He's a true politician. He's a chameleon. You know.
He one minute, he's sitting down with Charlie Kirk talking
about men and women's sports, saying, Oh, it's it's so
unfair what they're doing, this.
Speaker 8 (17:44):
Is truly insane.
Speaker 6 (17:45):
In the next minute, he just totally flips off because
he just wants power. He doesn't really have any principle.
But he's not as popular really in California. The only
reason he survived multiple recall efforts is because people just
don't want to vote Republican and or San Francisco. But
I think with twenty twenty eight and beyond, he does
have a chance. He is sleazy and slimy. He can debate,
(18:08):
he can twist the facts and lie. He's very good
at lying, and he's very good at convincing people that
he's got a liar, even though he is, and that's
just objectively true. It's not even a debate, so it's
scary because he's really done a number on California. He's
across the board, look to issue, homelessness, crime, toss of living.
It's outrageous under Gavin Newsom's regime. But I would not
(18:30):
count him out at all. I certainly think he would
stand a better chance than someone like Kamala Harris. Again,
so he is a very real threat on the national level.
And don't ask me why necessarily, but I do see
that and it worries me. The whole whole direction about
party worries me. It's not a liberal party anymore. It's
a communistic party. And Gavin Newsom is getting of the communists.
Speaker 4 (18:51):
Yeah, am endo that it's concerning.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
He is the host of the Real Story with Riley
Lewis on What American News Network ex Changes are You
probably seen him hip and through the cable channels before.
Why not give him a follow at Riley Lewis seven
point sixty on AX. Riley, thanks so much for your
time this afternoon, my man, Thank you.
Speaker 6 (19:09):
Brother.
Speaker 7 (19:12):
Kenny has always thought the best things in life are
free free plus tags of course, Kenny Webster's pursuit of happiness.
Speaker 3 (19:23):
All right, we got breaking news new pictures have been
released of a potential gu three kidnapping suspect destroying the
doorbell camera at Nancy's home. There is a grainy surveillance
image of a masked individual in dark clothing tampering with
the doorbell camera and apparently authorities claim this is a
(19:44):
potential kidnapper from the home in Tucson, Arizona. Nancy, the
mother of NBC's Today's Show co host Savannah Guthrie, vanished
early February fourth. Investigators found her blood on the porch
and noted the camera was disconnected at almost two in
the morning. FBI director Cash Pattel released these images to
aid the manhunt amid speculation that the act was a
(20:07):
test run by the kidnapper. No arrests have been reported yet,
and boy, I got to tell you, with every passing day,
it kind of adds.
Speaker 4 (20:16):
More and more to my growing theory about this whole thing.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
Look, I find it odd how many people on the
news seem to get interviewed now as like potential experts,
much like this guy's the potential kidnapping suspect. One of
those people is Dan Bongino. Dan Bongino is on TV
last night the same guy who told you not to
be suspicious about Epstein's so called suicide nothing to see here,
(20:43):
even though it kind of built a career out of that,
is now an expert on finding missing elderly women. He
has three different theories, and he keeps repeating over and
over again. He has no idea what he's talking about.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
So what's going on right now?
Speaker 9 (20:54):
I see three possibilities, Sean, and I'm not going to
wait them. I'm just these are three possibilities if you
apply Ockham's razor I see could apply. The first would be,
obviously it's a kidnapping, that was an intended kidnapping for
a ransom payment. That would be the first possibility. Again,
I'm not waiting any of them. The second possibility would
be this was just a crime that went awry. Someone
(21:17):
was at the house, maybe it was a burglary, something
went bad, and that you've got some bad actors committing
another crime unrelated. Ratherwand's requesting a ransom for something you
didn't do, just to take advantage of a situation like this.
The third possibility, again, this is a very and this
is where I think you have to kind of think
outside of the boxes, especially given some of the messaging
(21:40):
that we've seen lately is the possibility that there may
have been some kind of maybe a medical emergency or something,
and maybe this was not a kidnapping.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
Okay, So I well, it sounds like Dan Bongino doesn't
know what he's talking about there. I think that's pretty obvious.
They're just filling up time on Fox News. I'm probably
better than them, so I'm going to do the same
thing right now.
Speaker 4 (22:02):
I actually agree.
Speaker 3 (22:03):
I think there's something to the theory that somebody was
there to either kidnap or rob her, and in the
process of doing so, this elderly woman died and they
weren't expecting that they wanted to get some money or
steal from her or you know, get the ransom or whatever.
She's dead now, you know, theoretically in this theory, and
they didn't know what to do. Isn't that sort of
(22:24):
like what happens in what's that movie Fargo? So this
is a very popular idea that it was not supposed
to go down like this. Now authorities classified as an abduction,
forced entry, signs blood on the porch. Motive appears financial,
possibly exploiting the family's wealth, and Savannah's high profile status.
Some experts have pointed out it's atypical for a classic
(22:44):
ransom case involving an elderly victim. There's no quick proof
of life updates, disorganized communication, They missed the deadline without
any escalation. The family publicly agreed to pay and pleaded
for her safe return in these videos. Still nothing's happened
since then they're retired. FBI agenes suggesting this could have
been a personal grievance against the family rather than random
(23:08):
or purely celebrity targeted. That and that's true. Very often
is the case. I mean, we don't know if that's true,
but very often is the case. When somebody is murdered
or even kidnapped, the person the suspect is somebody that
knew them personally. Some of that speculation includes someone with
prior access, maybe a former household help, a yard work
or a neighbor, a not too distant relative who knew
(23:30):
her routine or vulnerabilities, mobility issues, living somewhat remotely completely alone.
This is an older woman with a lot of money,
all by herself out in the middle of the desert,
and a lot of people have speculated that it could
have been hired help. They're not that far from the border.
Is it possible that she offended somebody. We don't know
(23:51):
what their personal life is like. And then there's some
people and this is a less common but you know,
TDS inspired that this was retaliation linked to Savannah's journalism.
There are people that think because she covered Trump negatively
or talked about the Epstein files or whatever it may be,
that somehow that's the reason that.
Speaker 4 (24:11):
Her mom got kidnapped.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
There are global security experts pointing out that ideology can't
be ruled out given her profile, though no evidence and
notes support this. There's nothing, no actual evidence of that
at all. Overall, the expert consensus leans towards financial motives,
possibly somebody with inside knowledge. It seems unlikely that someone
(24:35):
didn't have inside knowledge. Who even thinks about this woman?
Speaker 4 (24:38):
Now?
Speaker 3 (24:38):
It has been pointing out before that she's been on
her daughter's show. She'd been interviewed before by her daughter,
and that's true, but it wasn't frequently. It wasn't like
they didn't like show you that she was home alone
all the time. So this released surveillance image of a
masked figure tampering with the camera aims to generate leads,
(24:59):
but no not any breakthrough reporting. Yet the case still
remains active with heavy scrutiny due to the celebrity connection.
One of the editors over at Breitbart has pointed out
how Guthrie looked understandably pale, exhausted after the unimaginable What
is it at this point? Eight days of horror? Just
(25:20):
absolute complete nightmare. Please say that last week, in the
pre dawn hours of Sunday morning, she was forcibly abducted
just hours after being dropped off blood. We've been told
that Nancy is frail and she requires a certain medication
to remain healthy. Medicine was left behind. Her Apple watch
(25:41):
was connected to her pacemaker that disconnected, and in the
days since, the Guthrie family did receive ransom notes requesting
millions of dollars, but no proof Nancy was alive and
no way to send the money. Nancy has three children,
Savannah and then brother and a sister. They've released a
number of video saying they agree to pay the ransom.
(26:03):
In the latest video, which was released hours before the
reported deadline, Savannah thanks everyone for prayers. She says she
believes her mom is still out there. I don't think
her mom's still alive. But of course if this was
my mom, I'd want to hope she was still You
can't blame her for that. I'd feel the same way.
Savannah goes on to praise law enforcement for working tirelessly
(26:25):
around the clock trying to bring her home to find her,
and the FBI is now offering a fifty thousand dollars
reward for information leading to an arrest and conviction in
the case. The video came with a note it said,
please bring her home. We need you, She needs you,
all of you. It's a very sad story and I
don't think it's going to have a happy ending. I
(26:46):
hope I'm wrong. Times like this, I think we need
some prayer warriors. And just saying that out loud seems
to upset people, because there's people out there who know
that their family member who disappeared or possibly was kidnapped
won't get the same amount of media attention that Savannah's
mother's getting. The world is not a fair place, I suppose.
In response to that, Savannah might say, you know, kidnapping
(27:07):
my mom wasn't fair.
Speaker 4 (27:08):
She's right.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Pursuit of that penis radio coming now just the This
is Kenny Webster's Pursuit of Happiness on KPRC nine fifty Houston.
Oh this is interesting. I mean I think it's interesting.
Maybe you do too. According to an article in Psychology Today,
humans have forgotten how to be bored. You know what
(27:31):
the remedy is for that? Watch the Bad Bunny super
Bowl halftime show. I gotta think problem solved. Right, there
was not interesting to me at all. You know what
isn't boring to me? Reading articles from Holly S. Hanson
my next guest, Yeah, that's right. As a matter of fact,
I find that she often covers stories at the Texan
News that other journalists won't cover, like this. A Houston
(27:54):
lawsuit has been filed against the Department of Homeland Secretary Chrisino.
Now I know what you're thinking, what is this about
killing dogs? Turns out no, doesn't have anything to do
with that. It's about Ice. Well, the lawsuits against Ice
and Christinome over agents demanding proof of citizenship.
Speaker 4 (28:11):
That's an odd thing to file a lawsuit over.
Speaker 3 (28:14):
I mean, these people's job is to go out and
make sure you're supposed to be in the country legally.
Speaker 4 (28:19):
Isn't that kind of their job. Holly S.
Speaker 6 (28:21):
Hanson, Well, it seems so.
Speaker 10 (28:25):
But what they're saying, though, is that if you are
demanding proof of citizenship before arresting someone, it's basically racial profiling.
And what they're saying is that you've had some of
the officials in ICE or Border Patrol saying that they
take people into custody based partly on how they look,
(28:46):
and so they're saying it's the racial profiling. They want
to put a stop to it. And so we had
this press conference last Friday, so it's kind of a
slow news day, but you had this press conference with
the chair of the Harris County Democratic Party, quite a
slew of Democratic elected officials and party officials there to
(29:09):
talk about this lawsuit. And the problem for them though,
is that it looks very similar to a lawsuit that
was filed in California last year, and they've already had
a federal judge just the Supreme Court grant a stay
of an injunction that was issued in that case. So
(29:30):
you know, legally it seems problematic, but it seems like
an opportunity for them to try to go after Ice
and the DHS secretary. What's interesting in this first of
all in this press conferences. You had all these local officials.
Speaker 11 (29:47):
You had newly elected Congressman Christian Menifee there, and you
had eleven term incumbent Congressman Al Green there and because
of redistrict saying the two will be running against.
Speaker 10 (30:02):
Each other in the primary election here in just a
few weeks. So that was a bit of an interesting dynamic.
One thing they did not talk about was whether or
not Harris County is fully cooperating with ICE in identifying
people with ICE detainers. We also had a story last
week talking about a suspect who was arrested on weapons
(30:27):
charges at the end of December. He had fired a
or allegedly fired a gun in a public place and was.
Speaker 11 (30:35):
Illegally carrying that weapon, and he was just given a
general order bond and released into the community. But now
he's been rearrested and has been charged in murder. And
the question we were trying to get an answer to
is why wasn't there an ICE detainer placed against him
(30:56):
when he was arrested on misdemeanor charges. Apparently no ICE
attainer was filed.
Speaker 10 (31:03):
Until he was charged with murder. So I think that
when we look at the pulling numbers and what the
American people want. While a lot of people are uncomfortable
with just arresting people who are otherwise while abiding citizens,
there's a bipartisan support for identifying anybody in the criminal
(31:24):
justice system who is here illegally and would like to
see authorities do something about those.
Speaker 6 (31:31):
But we're not.
Speaker 10 (31:32):
Really sure what Harris County's doing at this point.
Speaker 3 (31:34):
All right, correct me if I'm wrong here, But the
filing accuses agents of racial profiling partly based on statements
from the Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bavino about taking people
into the into custody. Quote based partly on how they look.
That's what they're saying. But Gregory Bavino is not in
Harris County. He's not in Houston conducting these arrests. It
(31:54):
feels like that legal argument's a little thin.
Speaker 11 (31:58):
It does feel that way.
Speaker 10 (32:00):
And you know, we just haven't seen the kind of
conflict in Harris County in Houston that we obviously see
in Minneapolis and then in some other parts of the country.
And what's interesting of these plaintiffs in this lawsuit, which
I believe there's more than thirty. I believe I counted
thirty two plaintiffs listed here. They don't appear to be
(32:23):
claiming that any of them was wrongfully detained or were
asked to show any kind of proof of citizenship. So
you know, the chances are of this lawsuit doesn't have
a lot of leeway, probably is not going to last
very long, but you never know, it just depends on
(32:44):
what judge gets the case and how far it goes.
But you know, we're seeing these kinds of legal battles
all over the country as people are grappling with you know,
what ICE's role is in the community and powers that
they have to arrest individuals. But again, and you know,
in Harris County, we've just we just someon't seeing the
(33:06):
kind of outcry except in a few cases in the
city of Houston, where there has been some activists has
been who have been very upset about whether or not
they think the Houston police are cooperating with ICE, to
which the Houston polices are pointing out they're just following
the law and checking for warrants when they arrest someone.
(33:31):
We're not so sure about Harris County. We do know
that what someone's booked into the jail on felony charges.
They do appear to be identified if they have an
ICE warrant, but you know, not everyone perhaps.
Speaker 3 (33:44):
Okay, so Jean Wou is involved in this. He was
at the press conference, and let's see statements at the
press conference from Jean and Harris County Democratic Party Chair
Mike Doyle. From this as a constitutional issue, he says,
it affects all Americans, not just immigrants. I don't feel
like this affects me that much, Holly, do you think
this framing is going to broaden support for the lawsuit.
(34:07):
I mean, most people are going to hear that out
loud and think, well, nobody's walking. This is Houston, Texas.
There's so many Hispanic people on the streets of this
city that aren't being accosted by ice. How does anyone
believe that?
Speaker 4 (34:20):
Yeah?
Speaker 11 (34:21):
Well, I think the point that Jean Wu was trying
to make, and we'll talk a little bit more about
him in just a moment, is that, you know, if
the government can violate the law, which he says it's
a violation of the Constitution to demand papers proof of
citizenship from people out in public or face being arrested.
(34:42):
He's saying, if the government can do that, this is
then they can also seize your guns, which is an
interesting appeal to the folks who are very defensive of
the Second Amendments right to bear arms. Jean Wu state
representative also been a lot in the news because of
(35:03):
a video that's now surfaced where he said that non
whites share the same oppressor.
Speaker 8 (35:12):
As a lot of.
Speaker 10 (35:13):
Minority communities, and he said, we are the majority. Now,
we can take over this country. And of course that
has prompted some.
Speaker 12 (35:23):
Outrage by quite a few people in the state of Texas,
including one of our candidates for Attorney General, who is
called for Wu to be de naturalized.
Speaker 10 (35:35):
But it's been quite a I don't know what you
call it, an uh.
Speaker 6 (35:40):
Twitter war.
Speaker 10 (35:41):
I guess we're not supposed to call it twitter anymore.
Speaker 3 (35:43):
I just ak, I know, I think you're you're dead naming.
It isn't that what that's called dead naming? That's that's transphobia.
Speaker 10 (35:52):
That it might be a hate crime too, So all right,
so that's.
Speaker 3 (35:56):
That's Aaron Wrights that's calling for the denaturalization, which is
an I think, you know, to your point, I don't
think that there's a legal argument to be made there,
but it doesn't offend me when he says stuff like that,
because June was just all over the news making some
comment about how, you know, pocs need to take down
white people. And anyway, before we get off topic here,
there's something I mean, we've probably already straight away from
(36:18):
the topic for a minute.
Speaker 4 (36:19):
I want to ask you a question.
Speaker 3 (36:20):
I want to ask you a question totally unrelated to
any of this, because, as you know, on the afternoon show,
I mostly cover state and local politics.
Speaker 4 (36:28):
You know that.
Speaker 3 (36:28):
It's the reason why you've been a regular guest on
this show for years. People want to subscribe to the
TEXANDT News.
Speaker 4 (36:34):
What's the website for that?
Speaker 10 (36:36):
All the TEXANDT News come on over. We've got all
kinds of great content and some wonderful writers there, and
a lot of staff who are covering events all over Texas.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
So it's not just a clever name, The TEXANDT News.
Follow Holly Hanson on x It's not called Twitter. That's
dead naming.
Speaker 4 (36:54):
To the rest of you, I love you all. We'll
be back Brighten early tomorrow morning for more of what
you bought a radio for.
Speaker 13 (37:04):
You are listening to the Pursuit of Happiness Radio. Tell
the government to kiss your ass when you listen to
the show.
Jick ganon Government Sucks. The Soue of Happiness Radio is deluxe.
Liberty and freedom will make you smile. The Suit of
Happiness us.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
On your radio to al just As cheese Burg just
saying a liberty rise at all.
Speaker 3 (00:21):
Right, So there's a coffee shop in Orange County, California
that reportedly had women giving up lamp dances. That probably
explains why men were coming in for a grande but
leaving with a VENTI. Hi, everybody, I'm Kenny Webster. Thanks
so much for turning on your radio this afternoon. You know,
we actually have a guest from South California on the
radio show today. My buddy Riley Lewis is stopping by
(00:44):
to talk about the Save Act, Save America Act. Some
people refer to it as the Voter Integrity Act, and
why it needs to pass. It passed the House once,
can it do it again? And uh, will it make
it to Donald Trump's desk. We'll talk about that also
stopping by Holly Hansen from the Texan Dot News. We're
going to get to all of that and a lot more.
Can I start off discussing something we did on the
(01:05):
show yesterday. There's a conversation we were having about Gene Wu,
the Houston Democrat, who's somehow managed to become the human
embodiment of everything that is wrong with identity politics. This
guy's not just a state representative. He's the minority leader
of the Texas House Democrats, which means he's got a
megaphone the size of the astrodome, and he's using it
(01:27):
to broadcast the kind of rhetoric that makes you wonder
if he's auditioning to be the villain in a bad
reboot for the Manchurian candidate. Back in twenty twenty four,
he was on a podcast called Define American, which sounds
like a support group for people confused about borders, and
he drops this little gem.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Let me play a SoundBite of what he said here.
Speaker 5 (01:48):
I always tell people the day the Latino, African, American,
Asian and other communities realize that they are that they
share the same oppressor, is the day we start winning
because we are the majority in this country. Now are
we have the ability to take over this country and
to do what is needed for everyone and to make
(02:10):
things fair. But the thumb is our communities are divided.
Speaker 6 (02:13):
They're completely divided.
Speaker 3 (02:15):
Okay, so it sounds like he's talking about white people.
Some people have argued, no, no, he's just talking about
Trump or whatever. At any rate, it's a game of
risk where you roll the dice and you try to
flip Texas purple by race baiting people. Again, this is
the guy leading the House Democrats, and in this earlier
(02:37):
in the same conversation, he casually throws out that the
anti immigrant stuff is being driven by pure white nationalism.
Nobody's anti immigrant, we're anti illegal immigrant. It's this belief
that the people on the left have that America just
belongs to white people and God handed it to white
people with a divine deed. No one really thinks that.
(02:59):
If they do, there's not a lot of those people.
It's certainly not the mainstream Republican belief. So there's someone,
you know, listen to this rhetoric and they think it's
white genocide. Supporters say, oh, now, we're just talking about Republicans.
When you say a pressor in the context of racial
groups uniting to take over, the first thing that comes
to mind is, uh, well, white people. It's like saying,
(03:21):
you know, we're going to storm the beast deal, but
only to redistribute the croissants.
Speaker 4 (03:26):
Fairly, nobody's buying that. It's very divisive race baiting.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
It's dressed up as empowerment, and it's coming from a
guy who's supposed to represent all Texans or at least
substantial portion of Southeast Texas. It's not just one representative
for one racial group.
Speaker 4 (03:42):
So that none of this is new.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
You know, back in the COVID days, Jeene reportedly posted
something along the lines of being good with Republicans dying
from the virus. Now he deleted that not very classy,
real statesmanlike material.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
Huh.
Speaker 3 (03:56):
Imagine if a Republicans said that about Democrats, the outrage
would melt servers.
Speaker 4 (04:01):
On the internet.
Speaker 3 (04:03):
But when Jean WU does it, it's crickets from his side,
because apparently wishing ill on half the country is fine
if you're on the right team or in this case,
the left team.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
And then there's the redistricting walkouts.
Speaker 3 (04:14):
The guy bolted from the Capitol like it was on fire,
and Republicans hit back with questions about what his intent was,
why he was being so low and ugly. Wo's the
one fanning the flames by framing every policy disagreement as
systemic racism or white supremacy. People in Texas were trying
to get more fair elections. We were trying to redraw
(04:37):
the district line so that they better represented the people
of our state. Jean Wu said, that's racism. Texas is
supposed to be the lone star state. We're supposed to
be independent and tough and freedom loving. It's not supposed
to be a balconized mess where politicians pit groups against
each other like it's a reality show Survivor Demographics edition.
(04:59):
Wu's out here acting like America as a zero sum pie,
and the only way his slice gets bigger is by
shrinking everyone else's. Here's the news slash for those on
the left who support this guy. Texas thrives when we
build together, not when we divide into tribes and declare
war on the oppressor.
Speaker 4 (05:15):
Du jour Gene Wu is not just bad on policy,
he's bad on vibes.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
He's the political equivalent of that one neighbor who blasts
music at three am and then complains about noise ordinances.
He divides us, He inflames tensions, and then plays victim
when the backlash hits. Texas deserves better than a leader
who talks like he's organizing a takeover instead of, you know, governing.
(05:43):
So next time someone asks why Texas politics often feel
like a dumpster fire, point to gen Wu. He's not
just fanning the flames. He's handing out marshmallows and singing
KUMBAII around the bonfire of unity.
Speaker 4 (05:55):
Except it's not unity. It's tribalism with a side of sanctimony.
Hopefully people in Texas realize this. They're waking up to it.
We don't need imported division.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
We need leaders who love this state more than they
love scoring points off racial resentment. Gen Wu is exhibit
A for why we need term limits and common sense
and maybe a Mirr or two in the capitol.
Speaker 4 (06:18):
I'm Kenny Webster. We got a lot coming up on
the show.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
Riley lewis joining us right after this to talk about
election integrity, which I think Gen Wuo would describe as racist.
Speaker 7 (06:27):
America the land of taxation that was founded to avoid taxation,
Kenny Webster's pursuit of happiness.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
All right, kids, Eddie Bauer is closing out its stores
in North America. If this makes you sad, it's because
you're probably mistaken him for LLL being. It's a totally
different guy, they're not the same people. Hi, everybody, welcome
back from break as a lot of you know, there's
been a lot of discussion lately about election integrity, and
(06:58):
for good reason. Did you know it took twenty years
for us to get real ID into place?
Speaker 4 (07:04):
Isn't that kind of embarrassing?
Speaker 3 (07:05):
After nine to eleven, there was some discussion over whether
or not we needed an ID system, a national ID system,
and how he could actually potentially be used to benefit
elections as well as national security, and most people probably agreed, Yeah,
that's not a bad idea, let's do that, And twenty
(07:28):
years later we finally got it implemented. Right cause back
in the day, I think it was Jimmy Carter was
one of the people who made these suggestions that now
there's more we could do to beef up election integrity,
and Democrats agreed with that right up until they realized
that Republicans wanted those things, and then suddenly full on TDS.
It's a tale as old as time. A good friend
(07:49):
of mine has been covering this actively on his show
on one American news network. Riley Lewis, the host of
the Real Story with Riley Lewis, airs weekdays, on and
if you've not watched it before, it's a fantastic show.
It focuses on protecting America, exposing media lies, fighting censorship,
empowering their viewers with unfiltered truth. I'm a big advocate
(08:12):
for it. I think Riley is as well. I invited
Riley onto the show this afternoon. Riley, I always wonder
if California is a lost cause. And then I realize,
you guys at won America News Network work there and
live there. You guys are in South California, And I
will admit that that's very refreshing to me.
Speaker 4 (08:30):
It makes me feel better.
Speaker 8 (08:32):
But it makes me feel better too.
Speaker 6 (08:34):
I have to tell you. Look, California, it's not a
lost cause. It's run by communists, people who are extremely
corrupt and incompetent. It's hard to imagine that people can
be so incompetent and corrupt. Actually, and it goes all
the way to the top of Sacramento. It's Gavin Newsom,
it's his administration. Do not make him president under any circumstance. Ever, however,
(08:56):
it's not a lost cause. We just don't have much
opposition here. But there's a few of us, including this
great network and we are in the trenches every single
day fighting tooth and nail with everything we have to
make the Golden State golden again. So that's that's the
mission we're.
Speaker 4 (09:11):
On, all right.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
So I think what a lot of people seem to
misunderstand about the Save Act, to Save America Act, as
it's often called, is that its heart, this.
Speaker 4 (09:18):
Is really about voter ID laws.
Speaker 3 (09:21):
And I can remember not that long ago, this was
something everybody agreed on.
Speaker 4 (09:25):
What do you think changed, Well, to.
Speaker 6 (09:28):
Your point, Democrats realized that Republicans wanted it, and they
realized that when Republicans are on the ballot and good
conservatives are on the ballot and you have, you know,
real restrictions in place, then Republicans were in elections and
that's not what Democrats want to happen. So, you know,
it was a pretty subtle shift because they used to
support a lot of these common sense measures, and a
(09:49):
lot of Democrat voters still do, by the way. Interestingly,
even was it was it Harry Enton on CNN just
last week showing that more than seventy percent of Democrat
voters registered dens support federal photo ID before you vote.
So it's it's something that people want. It's something most
Americans want ninety five percent plus some Republican voters want it.
Speaker 8 (10:10):
But I think Democrats at some point.
Speaker 6 (10:12):
Realize that that is not a winning formula for them.
I think a lot of them frankly, and this is
just my opinion, but I believe a lot of Democrats
are banking on fraud, cheating and duplicate ballots just to
win elections.
Speaker 8 (10:23):
And so it's an untenable position for them to take.
Speaker 6 (10:27):
And that's really sad.
Speaker 3 (10:27):
By the way, Okay, you have covered that on your show.
Has that been an issue in California? I mean, you're
you live in the state that I think a lot
of people think of as like, Oh, it's the isn't it.
In your state? It's legal to have these ballot drop
off boxes. It's legal to go out and pick up
a ballot for somebody. Ballot harvesting, they call it. Do
you see that?
Speaker 4 (10:47):
You know? Do you feel like that's been problematic in California?
Speaker 6 (10:52):
Absolutely, my friend, during twenty twenty especially, let me break
down the process as a lifelong and native California so
months before and this really a lot changed during twenty twenty,
but months before election day from the general. You receive
a ballot in the mail. You don't even ask for it, really,
They just send it to your house preemptively, and then you.
Speaker 8 (11:14):
Fill it out on your kitchen table.
Speaker 6 (11:16):
They have no idea of verifying who's actually filling it
out right, or if any of the information is true.
There's no oversight whatsoever. But you fill it out on
your kitchen table with mom and dad, whatever. Then you
take it to your local post office or library, community center,
what have you, and you drop it in a dropbox.
There is little to no oversight, if any.
Speaker 8 (11:36):
Sometimes you have someone.
Speaker 6 (11:37):
Sitting down with a chair just to make sure that
people aren't tampering with the dropbox itself. But there's no oversight,
no questioning, no real security. You can't show an ID.
Even if you want to show an ID to somebody,
they'll say, put it the way, we don't need to
see that that we don't care about that information. So
no passport, no ID, no bank statements, no proof of
(11:58):
residency or citizenship at all, no proof to confirm that
you are who you say you are. And people routinely
show up with multiple ballots in hand, presumably for themselves,
their family, their friends, whatever, and maybe it's innocent, maybe
it's not. But the point is there's zero oversight and
there's zero mechanism to prevent any kind of cheating. So
it's just a glaring, gaping hole and that should be
(12:20):
an issue for everybody. But it's super widespread here in California,
even in southern California. It's a big problem, and I
just I take so much issue with it. So, yeah,
we cover a lot on the show.
Speaker 3 (12:31):
Yeah, I had heard recently that in Michigan they actually
have voter ID laws in Michigan that are slightly stricter
than this, and if you don't have your idea with you,
you can still vote, but they put your what I
forget what it's called. They take your ballot and they
put it aside, and it only counts if it's a
close race and then they have to go verify it.
(12:51):
So in Michigan, where Gretchen Whitmer's totally against this, they
actually technically do have a system in place that requires
voter ID, but she's been out being one of the
biggest critics of this. I mean, interestingly enough, in Michigan,
there are less things you can use as a voter
ID than you would be able to use on a
national level under the Save Act. I guess I'm asking
(13:11):
you the a question here, But then that seem a
little hypocritical.
Speaker 6 (13:16):
Completely. It does, and it raises a good concern. Getting
the Save Act, the Save America Act, the Save Act,
plus the Make to Act, whatever you want to call it.
This is critical legislation. There's nothing more important to me. However,
we have to make sure if it should be passed
into law, God willing, that we actually enforce it. And
that is a whole different issue. And I don't know
(13:37):
exactly how you go about that, but that's the next
big question, is making sure that these things are actually
in place and then enforced, all right, And those are
two very different fights.
Speaker 4 (13:47):
Yeah, I mean it seems really simple to me.
Speaker 3 (13:49):
Now there are people that are against this, the NAACP,
the ACLU. They argue this is a form of voter suppression.
They compare it to Jim Crow. I know, that's like
an anecdotal thing. I can't find any actual evidence that
black people don't have driver's licenses or IDs. And if
someone didn't have an idea, how would they even function
in society? I mean, voting is the least to their concern.
Speaker 4 (14:11):
Right.
Speaker 6 (14:13):
Oh, absolutely, And by the way, this is something you
need for every basic function in your society.
Speaker 8 (14:17):
You can't get a job without an.
Speaker 6 (14:19):
ID, you can't buy alcohol or get on a plane
without ID. And almost every country on the earth in
the Greece, Romania, Hungry, Iceland, Ireland, every country on the planet,
almost everyone is requiring what we're asking. So this is
not groundbreaking stuff. It shouldn't even be artisan or controversial,
(14:40):
but it is for political reasons, and that's really sad.
But to your point, you basically can't do anything without
an ID, and there are states in this country where
if you're here, even illegally, you can still get an ID,
including the state of California, which is a massive problem
that needs to be fixed.
Speaker 3 (14:55):
All right, bottom line me, it's already passed the House once.
If this passes again and it passes the Senate, how
do you think this is going to change the public
confidence in elections?
Speaker 4 (15:05):
But I mean, obviously conservatives all like it.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Do you think this does anything to restore the confidence
of liberals who also question election results routinely once every
two to four years.
Speaker 6 (15:16):
Possibly it's easier to say that now than before the
midterm elections actually happen.
Speaker 8 (15:20):
However, Again, look, more than seventy percent of.
Speaker 6 (15:23):
Registered Democrats, according to Newpool data, support this measure. This
is very common sense. I'm not worried about Democrat voters
so much. I'm worried about people like Elizabeth Warrem. So
we'll see.
Speaker 8 (15:34):
But yeah, I actually think this.
Speaker 6 (15:35):
Could move the needle and restore some of our trust
in our institutions and our government, and hopefully that will
make us a little less divided.
Speaker 3 (15:42):
Riley, I am a big fan of your TV show,
and you're still doing radio out there, aren't you?
Speaker 6 (15:48):
Not so much anymore? So I really appreciate the chance
to be on your show because I miss it.
Speaker 3 (15:53):
Yeah, dude, you got your start in radio and now
you're doing TV full time.
Speaker 4 (15:58):
Dude, that's awesome though. Good for you.
Speaker 3 (16:00):
And anytime you ever want to come back and do
some good old fashioned radio, we've still got it here
in Texas. In California, apparently, I've heard that Gavin Newsom,
in his effort to censor speech out there, is actually
going to go around and send all the radio hosts
to goolags.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
Is that true?
Speaker 6 (16:18):
I would not be surprised, but I cannot confirm.
Speaker 8 (16:22):
Newsome Newsolini. I would not put it past them.
Speaker 3 (16:24):
You guys in South California and Orange County, you guys
are very reasonable. In San Diego, it's kind of a
purple city. You guys seem reasonable there. From time to
time we hear talk of that part of the state
branching off, and like, that's never going to happen, right,
I mean, is that a serious thing? Making South California
or East California its own state.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
Do people still advocate for that?
Speaker 6 (16:47):
No, not really, but I do get it because places
places like LA and San Francisco, where you run into
real issues, those are communist wastelants. At this point.
Speaker 4 (16:55):
The rest of.
Speaker 6 (16:56):
California, You've got farmers, gun owners, truckers, cowboys. It's California
is a pretty dynamic state. It's just that San Francisco
and LA are effectively dead weight to hold us back
from being a great state. However, we have some very
interesting candidates running for governor right now, and I do
think that we may see some real change in November.
(17:17):
I'm hoping and praying for it.
Speaker 3 (17:18):
Really, does Gavin Newsom have a chance in the running
for president? Do you think do people in California like
him as much as they claim. I mean, it seems
like now he's trying to fashion him himself as something
of a moderate.
Speaker 4 (17:28):
It seems to be upsetting his base.
Speaker 6 (17:32):
Yeah, I mean, he's a Look, he's very slimy. He's
very sleazy. He's a true politician. He's a chameleon. You know.
He one minute, he's sitting down with Charlie Kirk talking
about men and women's sports, saying, Oh, it's it's so
unfair what they're doing, this.
Speaker 8 (17:44):
Is truly insane.
Speaker 6 (17:45):
In the next minute, he just totally flips off because
he just wants power. He doesn't really have any principle.
But he's not as popular really in California. The only
reason he survived multiple recall efforts is because people just
don't want to vote Republican and or San Francisco. But
I think with twenty twenty eight and beyond, he does
have a chance. He is sleazy and slimy. He can debate,
(18:08):
he can twist the facts and lie. He's very good
at lying, and he's very good at convincing people that
he's got a liar, even though he is, and that's
just objectively true. It's not even a debate, so it's
scary because he's really done a number on California. He's
across the board, look to issue, homelessness, crime, toss of living.
It's outrageous under Gavin Newsom's regime. But I would not
(18:30):
count him out at all. I certainly think he would
stand a better chance than someone like Kamala Harris. Again,
so he is a very real threat on the national level.
And don't ask me why necessarily, but I do see
that and it worries me. The whole whole direction about
party worries me. It's not a liberal party anymore. It's
a communistic party. And Gavin Newsom is getting of the communists.
Speaker 4 (18:51):
Yeah, am endo that it's concerning.
Speaker 3 (18:53):
He is the host of the Real Story with Riley
Lewis on What American News Network ex Changes are You
probably seen him hip and through the cable channels before.
Why not give him a follow at Riley Lewis seven
point sixty on AX. Riley, thanks so much for your
time this afternoon, my man, Thank you.
Speaker 6 (19:09):
Brother.
Speaker 7 (19:12):
Kenny has always thought the best things in life are
free free plus tags of course, Kenny Webster's pursuit of happiness.
Speaker 3 (19:23):
All right, we got breaking news new pictures have been
released of a potential gu three kidnapping suspect destroying the
doorbell camera at Nancy's home. There is a grainy surveillance
image of a masked individual in dark clothing tampering with
the doorbell camera and apparently authorities claim this is a
(19:44):
potential kidnapper from the home in Tucson, Arizona. Nancy, the
mother of NBC's Today's Show co host Savannah Guthrie, vanished
early February fourth. Investigators found her blood on the porch
and noted the camera was disconnected at almost two in
the morning. FBI director Cash Pattel released these images to
aid the manhunt amid speculation that the act was a
(20:07):
test run by the kidnapper. No arrests have been reported yet,
and boy, I got to tell you, with every passing day,
it kind of adds.
Speaker 4 (20:16):
More and more to my growing theory about this whole thing.
Speaker 3 (20:19):
Look, I find it odd how many people on the
news seem to get interviewed now as like potential experts,
much like this guy's the potential kidnapping suspect. One of
those people is Dan Bongino. Dan Bongino is on TV
last night the same guy who told you not to
be suspicious about Epstein's so called suicide nothing to see here,
(20:43):
even though it kind of built a career out of that,
is now an expert on finding missing elderly women. He
has three different theories, and he keeps repeating over and
over again. He has no idea what he's talking about.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
So what's going on right now?
Speaker 9 (20:54):
I see three possibilities, Sean, and I'm not going to
wait them. I'm just these are three possibilities if you
apply Ockham's razor I see could apply. The first would be,
obviously it's a kidnapping, that was an intended kidnapping for
a ransom payment. That would be the first possibility. Again,
I'm not waiting any of them. The second possibility would
be this was just a crime that went awry. Someone
(21:17):
was at the house, maybe it was a burglary, something
went bad, and that you've got some bad actors committing
another crime unrelated. Ratherwand's requesting a ransom for something you
didn't do, just to take advantage of a situation like this.
The third possibility, again, this is a very and this
is where I think you have to kind of think
outside of the boxes, especially given some of the messaging
(21:40):
that we've seen lately is the possibility that there may
have been some kind of maybe a medical emergency or something,
and maybe this was not a kidnapping.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
Okay, So I well, it sounds like Dan Bongino doesn't
know what he's talking about there. I think that's pretty obvious.
They're just filling up time on Fox News. I'm probably
better than them, so I'm going to do the same
thing right now.
Speaker 4 (22:02):
I actually agree.
Speaker 3 (22:03):
I think there's something to the theory that somebody was
there to either kidnap or rob her, and in the
process of doing so, this elderly woman died and they
weren't expecting that they wanted to get some money or
steal from her or you know, get the ransom or whatever.
She's dead now, you know, theoretically in this theory, and
they didn't know what to do. Isn't that sort of
(22:24):
like what happens in what's that movie Fargo? So this
is a very popular idea that it was not supposed
to go down like this. Now authorities classified as an abduction,
forced entry, signs blood on the porch. Motive appears financial,
possibly exploiting the family's wealth, and Savannah's high profile status.
Some experts have pointed out it's atypical for a classic
(22:44):
ransom case involving an elderly victim. There's no quick proof
of life updates, disorganized communication, They missed the deadline without
any escalation. The family publicly agreed to pay and pleaded
for her safe return in these videos. Still nothing's happened
since then they're retired. FBI agenes suggesting this could have
been a personal grievance against the family rather than random
(23:08):
or purely celebrity targeted. That and that's true. Very often
is the case. I mean, we don't know if that's true,
but very often is the case. When somebody is murdered
or even kidnapped, the person the suspect is somebody that
knew them personally. Some of that speculation includes someone with
prior access, maybe a former household help, a yard work
or a neighbor, a not too distant relative who knew
(23:30):
her routine or vulnerabilities, mobility issues, living somewhat remotely completely alone.
This is an older woman with a lot of money,
all by herself out in the middle of the desert,
and a lot of people have speculated that it could
have been hired help. They're not that far from the border.
Is it possible that she offended somebody. We don't know
(23:51):
what their personal life is like. And then there's some
people and this is a less common but you know,
TDS inspired that this was retaliation linked to Savannah's journalism.
There are people that think because she covered Trump negatively
or talked about the Epstein files or whatever it may be,
that somehow that's the reason that.
Speaker 4 (24:11):
Her mom got kidnapped.
Speaker 3 (24:14):
There are global security experts pointing out that ideology can't
be ruled out given her profile, though no evidence and
notes support this. There's nothing, no actual evidence of that
at all. Overall, the expert consensus leans towards financial motives,
possibly somebody with inside knowledge. It seems unlikely that someone
(24:35):
didn't have inside knowledge. Who even thinks about this woman?
Speaker 4 (24:38):
Now?
Speaker 3 (24:38):
It has been pointing out before that she's been on
her daughter's show. She'd been interviewed before by her daughter,
and that's true, but it wasn't frequently. It wasn't like
they didn't like show you that she was home alone
all the time. So this released surveillance image of a
masked figure tampering with the camera aims to generate leads,
(24:59):
but no not any breakthrough reporting. Yet the case still
remains active with heavy scrutiny due to the celebrity connection.
One of the editors over at Breitbart has pointed out
how Guthrie looked understandably pale, exhausted after the unimaginable What
is it at this point? Eight days of horror? Just
(25:20):
absolute complete nightmare. Please say that last week, in the
pre dawn hours of Sunday morning, she was forcibly abducted
just hours after being dropped off blood. We've been told
that Nancy is frail and she requires a certain medication
to remain healthy. Medicine was left behind. Her Apple watch
(25:41):
was connected to her pacemaker that disconnected, and in the
days since, the Guthrie family did receive ransom notes requesting
millions of dollars, but no proof Nancy was alive and
no way to send the money. Nancy has three children,
Savannah and then brother and a sister. They've released a
number of video saying they agree to pay the ransom.
(26:03):
In the latest video, which was released hours before the
reported deadline, Savannah thanks everyone for prayers. She says she
believes her mom is still out there. I don't think
her mom's still alive. But of course if this was
my mom, I'd want to hope she was still You
can't blame her for that. I'd feel the same way.
Savannah goes on to praise law enforcement for working tirelessly
(26:25):
around the clock trying to bring her home to find her,
and the FBI is now offering a fifty thousand dollars
reward for information leading to an arrest and conviction in
the case. The video came with a note it said,
please bring her home. We need you, She needs you,
all of you. It's a very sad story and I
don't think it's going to have a happy ending. I
(26:46):
hope I'm wrong. Times like this, I think we need
some prayer warriors. And just saying that out loud seems
to upset people, because there's people out there who know
that their family member who disappeared or possibly was kidnapped
won't get the same amount of media attention that Savannah's
mother's getting. The world is not a fair place, I suppose.
In response to that, Savannah might say, you know, kidnapping
(27:07):
my mom wasn't fair.
Speaker 4 (27:08):
She's right.
Speaker 3 (27:09):
Pursuit of that penis radio coming now just the This
is Kenny Webster's Pursuit of Happiness on KPRC nine fifty Houston.
Oh this is interesting. I mean I think it's interesting.
Maybe you do too. According to an article in Psychology Today,
humans have forgotten how to be bored. You know what
(27:31):
the remedy is for that? Watch the Bad Bunny super
Bowl halftime show. I gotta think problem solved. Right, there
was not interesting to me at all. You know what
isn't boring to me? Reading articles from Holly S. Hanson
my next guest, Yeah, that's right. As a matter of fact,
I find that she often covers stories at the Texan
News that other journalists won't cover, like this. A Houston
(27:54):
lawsuit has been filed against the Department of Homeland Secretary Chrisino.
Now I know what you're thinking, what is this about
killing dogs? Turns out no, doesn't have anything to do
with that. It's about Ice. Well, the lawsuits against Ice
and Christinome over agents demanding proof of citizenship.
Speaker 4 (28:11):
That's an odd thing to file a lawsuit over.
Speaker 3 (28:14):
I mean, these people's job is to go out and
make sure you're supposed to be in the country legally.
Speaker 4 (28:19):
Isn't that kind of their job. Holly S.
Speaker 6 (28:21):
Hanson, Well, it seems so.
Speaker 10 (28:25):
But what they're saying, though, is that if you are
demanding proof of citizenship before arresting someone, it's basically racial profiling.
And what they're saying is that you've had some of
the officials in ICE or Border Patrol saying that they
take people into custody based partly on how they look,
(28:46):
and so they're saying it's the racial profiling. They want
to put a stop to it. And so we had
this press conference last Friday, so it's kind of a
slow news day, but you had this press conference with
the chair of the Harris County Democratic Party, quite a
slew of Democratic elected officials and party officials there to
(29:09):
talk about this lawsuit. And the problem for them though,
is that it looks very similar to a lawsuit that
was filed in California last year, and they've already had
a federal judge just the Supreme Court grant a stay
of an injunction that was issued in that case. So
(29:30):
you know, legally it seems problematic, but it seems like
an opportunity for them to try to go after Ice
and the DHS secretary. What's interesting in this first of
all in this press conferences. You had all these local officials.
Speaker 11 (29:47):
You had newly elected Congressman Christian Menifee there, and you
had eleven term incumbent Congressman Al Green there and because
of redistrict saying the two will be running against.
Speaker 10 (30:02):
Each other in the primary election here in just a
few weeks. So that was a bit of an interesting dynamic.
One thing they did not talk about was whether or
not Harris County is fully cooperating with ICE in identifying
people with ICE detainers. We also had a story last
week talking about a suspect who was arrested on weapons
(30:27):
charges at the end of December. He had fired a
or allegedly fired a gun in a public place and was.
Speaker 11 (30:35):
Illegally carrying that weapon, and he was just given a
general order bond and released into the community. But now
he's been rearrested and has been charged in murder. And
the question we were trying to get an answer to
is why wasn't there an ICE detainer placed against him
(30:56):
when he was arrested on misdemeanor charges. Apparently no ICE
attainer was filed.
Speaker 10 (31:03):
Until he was charged with murder. So I think that
when we look at the pulling numbers and what the
American people want. While a lot of people are uncomfortable
with just arresting people who are otherwise while abiding citizens,
there's a bipartisan support for identifying anybody in the criminal
(31:24):
justice system who is here illegally and would like to
see authorities do something about those.
Speaker 6 (31:31):
But we're not.
Speaker 10 (31:32):
Really sure what Harris County's doing at this point.
Speaker 3 (31:34):
All right, correct me if I'm wrong here, But the
filing accuses agents of racial profiling partly based on statements
from the Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bavino about taking people
into the into custody. Quote based partly on how they look.
That's what they're saying. But Gregory Bavino is not in
Harris County. He's not in Houston conducting these arrests. It
(31:54):
feels like that legal argument's a little thin.
Speaker 11 (31:58):
It does feel that way.
Speaker 10 (32:00):
And you know, we just haven't seen the kind of
conflict in Harris County in Houston that we obviously see
in Minneapolis and then in some other parts of the country.
And what's interesting of these plaintiffs in this lawsuit, which
I believe there's more than thirty. I believe I counted
thirty two plaintiffs listed here. They don't appear to be
(32:23):
claiming that any of them was wrongfully detained or were
asked to show any kind of proof of citizenship. So
you know, the chances are of this lawsuit doesn't have
a lot of leeway, probably is not going to last
very long, but you never know, it just depends on
(32:44):
what judge gets the case and how far it goes.
But you know, we're seeing these kinds of legal battles
all over the country as people are grappling with you know,
what ICE's role is in the community and powers that
they have to arrest individuals. But again, and you know,
in Harris County, we've just we just someon't seeing the
(33:06):
kind of outcry except in a few cases in the
city of Houston, where there has been some activists has
been who have been very upset about whether or not
they think the Houston police are cooperating with ICE, to
which the Houston polices are pointing out they're just following
the law and checking for warrants when they arrest someone.
(33:31):
We're not so sure about Harris County. We do know
that what someone's booked into the jail on felony charges.
They do appear to be identified if they have an
ICE warrant, but you know, not everyone perhaps.
Speaker 3 (33:44):
Okay, so Jean Wou is involved in this. He was
at the press conference, and let's see statements at the
press conference from Jean and Harris County Democratic Party Chair
Mike Doyle. From this as a constitutional issue, he says,
it affects all Americans, not just immigrants. I don't feel
like this affects me that much, Holly, do you think
this framing is going to broaden support for the lawsuit.
(34:07):
I mean, most people are going to hear that out
loud and think, well, nobody's walking. This is Houston, Texas.
There's so many Hispanic people on the streets of this
city that aren't being accosted by ice. How does anyone
believe that?
Speaker 4 (34:20):
Yeah?
Speaker 11 (34:21):
Well, I think the point that Jean Wu was trying
to make, and we'll talk a little bit more about
him in just a moment, is that, you know, if
the government can violate the law, which he says it's
a violation of the Constitution to demand papers proof of
citizenship from people out in public or face being arrested.
(34:42):
He's saying, if the government can do that, this is
then they can also seize your guns, which is an
interesting appeal to the folks who are very defensive of
the Second Amendments right to bear arms. Jean Wu state
representative also been a lot in the news because of
(35:03):
a video that's now surfaced where he said that non
whites share the same oppressor.
Speaker 8 (35:12):
As a lot of.
Speaker 10 (35:13):
Minority communities, and he said, we are the majority. Now,
we can take over this country. And of course that
has prompted some.
Speaker 12 (35:23):
Outrage by quite a few people in the state of Texas,
including one of our candidates for Attorney General, who is
called for Wu to be de naturalized.
Speaker 10 (35:35):
But it's been quite a I don't know what you
call it, an uh.
Speaker 6 (35:40):
Twitter war.
Speaker 10 (35:41):
I guess we're not supposed to call it twitter anymore.
Speaker 3 (35:43):
I just ak, I know, I think you're you're dead naming.
It isn't that what that's called dead naming? That's that's transphobia.
Speaker 10 (35:52):
That it might be a hate crime too, So all right,
so that's.
Speaker 3 (35:56):
That's Aaron Wrights that's calling for the denaturalization, which is
an I think, you know, to your point, I don't
think that there's a legal argument to be made there,
but it doesn't offend me when he says stuff like that,
because June was just all over the news making some
comment about how, you know, pocs need to take down
white people. And anyway, before we get off topic here,
there's something I mean, we've probably already straight away from
(36:18):
the topic for a minute.
Speaker 4 (36:19):
I want to ask you a question.
Speaker 3 (36:20):
I want to ask you a question totally unrelated to
any of this, because, as you know, on the afternoon show,
I mostly cover state and local politics.
Speaker 4 (36:28):
You know that.
Speaker 3 (36:28):
It's the reason why you've been a regular guest on
this show for years. People want to subscribe to the
TEXANDT News.
Speaker 4 (36:34):
What's the website for that?
Speaker 10 (36:36):
All the TEXANDT News come on over. We've got all
kinds of great content and some wonderful writers there, and
a lot of staff who are covering events all over Texas.
Speaker 3 (36:47):
So it's not just a clever name, The TEXANDT News.
Follow Holly Hanson on x It's not called Twitter. That's
dead naming.
Speaker 4 (36:54):
To the rest of you, I love you all. We'll
be back Brighten early tomorrow morning for more of what
you bought a radio for.
Speaker 13 (37:04):
You are listening to the Pursuit of Happiness Radio. Tell
the government to kiss your ass when you listen to
the show.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
Betrayal Season 5
Saskia Inwood woke up one morning, knowing her life would never be the same. The night before, she learned the unimaginable – that the husband she knew in the light of day was a different person after dark. This season unpacks Saskia’s discovery of her husband’s secret life and her fight to bring him to justice. Along the way, we expose a crime that is just coming to light. This is also a story about the myth of the “perfect victim:” who gets believed, who gets doubted, and why. We follow Saskia as she works to reclaim her body, her voice, and her life. If you would like to reach out to the Betrayal Team, email us at betrayalpod@gmail.com. Follow us on Instagram @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.