917: Trump Pledges Support For Ukraine In Major U-Turn

Also, potential regime change war with Venezuela, Trump's ICE chief takes a bribe, Jimmy Kimmel (sort of) returns, Kamala throws everyone under the bus in her book tour, and analyzing the rhetoric of the Kirk memorial.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/newsflash--2206348/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:11):
Ladies and gentlemen, Welcome to today's show. We are absolutely
packed today and I cannot wait to get into it
all with you. On the show today, we are taking
some big new changes for Donald Trump's position on Ukraine.
He has one hundred of verse course what impact would
have on the peace process. We will break that down

(00:33):
for you. Also taken look at Trump's plans for regime
change war in Venezuela as they continue to unfold. Also
Tom Hoeman, who is Trump's borders are stop at the
FBI taking fifty k in bribes direct government contracts, but
the Trump dooj shut down the investigation, claiming it was

(00:55):
a deep state conspiracy. Also, Jimmy Kimmel returning to Web tonight,
but his return blocked by big business and they're cowing
to the government. Kamala Harris is on a book tour
where she is blaming pretty much everyone, button herself for
her recent political misfortune. Will break down the revelations from

(01:18):
her book one hundred and seven Days. Also, we are
taking a look at the coverage of the Kirk memorial.
Charlie Kirk at a big memorial over the weekend. We're
taking look at Steven Miller's crazy speech that echoed some people.
Let's just say you don't want to echo throughout history
that is for short and contrasting it with the grace

(01:41):
of Erica Kirk. It's gonna be a great one. We
have all YouTube videos currently being uploaded as we speaks.
Gonna be a big show today, a lot of great stuff.
So go check it out on YouTube if you want
that visual version Spencer Walsh YouTube channel. But with that
being said, let's get into the show and then get

(02:02):
in some big news that came out as we were
recording the show. Here just coming in today. Donald Trump
is essentially completely reversed his position on Ukraine and now
says that they can win back not just their nineteen
ninety one borders where they had crimea, but maybe even
go further. Here's a look at that really crazy statement.

(02:23):
He says, after getting to know and fully understand the
Ukraine Russia military and economic situation, and after seeing the
economic trouble it's causing in Russia, I think Ukraine was
the support of the European Union is in a position
to fight and win all of Ukraine back in its
original form with time, patients and the financial support of
Europe and a particular NATO the original borders from where

(02:44):
this war started is very much an option. Why not
Russia has been fighting animlessly for three and a half years,
a war that should have been a real military power
less that should have taken a real military power less
than a week to win. This is not distinguishing Russia.
In fact, it's very much making them look like a
paper tiger. When the people living in Moscow and all
the great cities, districts, in towns all throughout Russia find

(03:08):
out what's really going on with this war. The fact
that it's been almost impossible for them to get cassoline,
which is kind of funny considering that is one of
the very few things actually definitely is easy for them
to get. Considering that they actually do live in a
very highly oil producing state, when a natural gas producing
state that they've been selling natural gases and means of
keeping their economy afloat throughout the war, it's kind of

(03:30):
interesting things to put in there, the long lines being
formed and all other things that are taking place in
their war economy, where most of their money is being
spent on finding Ukraine, which has great spirit, and it's
only getting better. Again, He's saying this despite reports they're
putting sixty year olds right now, because so many Ukrainian
men are fleeing, Ukraine would be able to take back

(03:51):
to their country in its original form, and who knows,
maybe even go further than that. Putin and Russia are
in big economic trouble, and this is the time for
Ukraine to act. In any event, I wish both countries, well,
we'll continue to supply weapons to NATO, for NATO to
do what they want with them. Good luck to all.
It says, there we go. I'm done with this situation.
It almost it almost seems like Trump is saying there

(04:14):
and here you can see this map here as is
now backing Trump is Ukraine's ninety ninety one borders. After
people is saying he'd recognized Crimea as Russian and Crimea
obviously is that little peninsula there that Ukraine was Ukrainian
up until twenty fourteen when Russia took it, as we
all remember. So here he is talking with Emmanuel Macron

(04:34):
in this really remarkable situation where he essentially backs up
the statement, and it seems like what happened was Zolensky.
If we go to some of these remarks, Zelinsky saying,
I'm very grateful to Trump. I cannot share the details
right now, but Trump is just very important information regarding
the situation at the front. And what seems like happened
here is that Trump was told by Zolensky a series

(04:55):
of information that we're essentially going to go against everything
that we've previously been told about this war. And I
think the things that Trump told Zelensky, and it remains
to be seen, maybe they are true, but they definitely
haven't been true up until this point, is that with
European help, given the military economic situation that Russia is

(05:16):
in right now, with only European help, maybe indirectly supported
europe indirectly supportive by the US, Ukraine can win the war.
And I feel like that sort of a thing. And also,
you know, maybe giving some kind of dishonest or maybe
maybe they're not true, I don't know, but very negative
pictures of where Russia is at at this moment has

(05:38):
led to this really one hundred and eighty degree conversion
on the part of Donald Trump, because you know, now
he's saying that Ukraine is going to get security guarantees
after the war ends. You know, here is Zelensky confirming
that in what is a really remarkable clip here, Yeah,
security guarantees.

Speaker 2 (05:56):
So all all of us we understand that President Trump.

Speaker 1 (06:00):
That he's ready to give Ukraine to security guarantees after
this war will finish. So, you know, that was something
that would never have been previously expected, given even like
a week or two ago, given Trump's previous position on Ukraine.
But I think, you know, if that stuff is true
and Ukraine could continue to push back and against Russia

(06:22):
with European help kind of indefinitely, it still creates a
situation where we're at forever war. The morality, you know, again,
this all is barring some massively you know, kind of
black swan event that know what, ever's all coming about
the state of Russia and the fact that you know,
if it unexpectedly gets a lot easier for Ukraine to
win the war, then all bets are off. But if

(06:44):
Zolenski has kind of on false premises, convinced Trump that
Ukraine plus Europe equals held off Russia, you know, they're
equal to Russia here in military battle. You know, it
seems like Zolski pulled off a great campaign of deception.
Donald Trump here, because even if that does happen, they
are at the best case scenario going to be fighting

(07:06):
Russia to a stalemate, and that will mean continue chaos
in the region, many Ukrainians, many Russians, dying by the
thousands every single week, and it continued drain one on European,
on American military resources for a situation that really has
no end in sight. And I think, you know, Trump

(07:28):
is to a certain extent right to realize. I think
this is also a part of his announcement today that
Putin did play him and he's not really interested in peace,
and he thinks that, you know, it's essentially like when
someone you kind of lose respect for, you push them
a little bit, you see they can't really resist you,
and then you push them a little bit more. You know,
We've come to that point where Putin is realizing that
about the West, and he feels like given the West

(07:51):
support for Ukraine, the level of support for Ukraine, he
can keep fighting until he can at least get a
puppet government in Ukraine. And that's what he's going to
continue to try to do unless it becomes so politically
costly or militarily costly for him that he can no
longer do it, so that is what he is trying
to do. And Trump has essentially realized that that is
what his aim is. I think that's also you know,

(08:13):
a part of his calculations here today. But unless there's
a really kind of concerted campaign of the United States
effort to punish Russia for their lack of commitment to this,
and by the way, a long sustained slow effort in
a stalemate, that's not gonna work. Russia is fine and
can continue in a stalemate much longer likely than the

(08:33):
West can. But if you don't have that kind of
push by the by the US, nothing's gonna change in
Russia's calculation. If they are saying we can handle a stalemate.
If the US kind of hands off responsibility on this
to Europe, that's even better. Or maybe they tacitly support,
that's even better, and we will continue to degrade Ukraine,

(08:57):
will continue to kill all their young men with no
end in sight. Because you know, first, you know, it
was the best case scenario when Trump was negotiating with US,
But now he's kind of taken a hands off approach
and just said he's gonna passively support Europe. We can
handle that as well, would actually force Putin to change.
The calculation is clear aims stated by the US that

(09:20):
Russia could agreed to, and a military campaign that is
concerted and punishing enough that Russia takes enough losses that
it actually gets brought to the table, because nothing that
the West has offered Russia right now has given it
any reason to come to the table, and nothing in
the calculations that Trump did is going to change that.

(09:40):
So bottom line is, unless there is some really crazy,
remarkable turn of events here, it seems like we are
no closer to a final conclusion and some peace for
the people of that region than we ever were one
week ago, two months ago, or even two years ago.
And it seems like the suffering in Ukraine is set

(10:02):
to continue. It certainly seems like we are headed for
a regime changed war that's right under the pro peace
Trump administration. With Venezuela, this is a really crazy situation here.
Headline in the New York Times says US military build
up and Caribbean signals broader campaign against Venezuela. So the
Trump officials say the mission aims to shru up the

(10:25):
drug trade, but military officials and analysts say the real
goal might be to drive Venezuela's president from power. That
is where we are headed, ladies and gentlemen, three boats.
The Trump administration officials have asserted we're smuggling drugs in
the Garbbean Sea, by the way, with no evidence. They
didn't pull them over, they didn't wrest them, theydn't do
anything like that. Were blown up in another quote unquote

(10:48):
counter in narcotics, counter terrorism mission. But this comes, by
the way, as the US military is really sending a
lot of its assets right now to the Caribbean. We
are not going to have a cartel operating or masquerading
as a government operating in our own hemisphere. Since Secretary
of State Marco Rubio, in a very kind of modern

(11:10):
road doctrine, we own the entire western hemisphere. Everyone in
Latin America is to bow down for us type of
way that it really is going to have some drastic
consequences for these civilians of Venezuela, but also for the
American people, Like it's important. I don't want to sound
so callous as to completely forget the argument of the
and the humanity of the people of the region, but

(11:32):
to be selfish for a moment like this is not
going to go well for the average American here in
any way, shape or form. And you're saying, you know, here,
this is a fugitive of American justice. Material is It's
just it's honestly ridiculous, because it's just like, isn't this
the whole thing the Trump Instration was supposed to be against,
Like this whole you know, our justice supplies everywhere. We're

(11:52):
gonna bring the hammer to you no matter what because
we don't like how you govern. Well, there's a lot
of people that think across this country that America is
a terrorist state that is supporting Jenna Side and Gazo
or is trying to destroy Russia, you know, or coming
after people in China. Like there is a million things
that the people in the world could say towards America

(12:13):
to justify a regime change operation in America, you know,
but that is not something that is accepted anywhere in
the world. It's not accept or seen as normal anywhere
in the world any other time than when American government
America does it. It's only okay when America steps in
and says, I don't like how you're governing. You're you're
not doing it in a way that I like. So

(12:34):
we're gonna make up some completely unproven allegations, and we
are gonna determine how you're governed, and at the cost
by the way of many, many lives of Venezuelans, inventing
many lives of Americans being forced to carry that out.
And we talked about how, you know, it is kind
of BS, the whole situation regarding the uh, you know,
the drug trafficking allegations. But what definitely is not BS

(12:58):
is the fact that Marco Rubio is a current Secretary
of State, was a formerly Florida senator, where he is
a huge you know, BIL essentially built his political career
fighting against people like Castro people like Hugo Shavaz and Venezuela,
the predecessor of Maduiro, and of course Majoria himself. He
used an ideological commitment to getting these people out of
power because they have gone against the people who have

(13:22):
been very good to him throughout his political career. And
also there's oil, there's a bunch of other natural resources
in Venezuela that let's just say America would prefer it
if we get someone who's on the same page as
us caapies, you know, like it is a mafia style
threatening of this situation here, and Maduro seems to also

(13:43):
kind of know what's happening here. This is what the
headline in Reuter's was, Moduro offers to engage in direct
talks with Trump Envoy Rick Grennell. The summer here from
Reuters says Moduro offers direct talks with the envoy. In
a letter to Trump, Murdera denies Venezuela has a major
role in drug trafficking in as the US military build
up in the Caribbean is raising tensions. So this in

(14:08):
a letter he says that, oh, a President, I hope
together that we can defeat the falsehoods that absolute our relationship,
which must be historic and peaceful, these and other issues
will always be open for direct and frame conversation with
your Special Envoy Brick Gronell to overcome media noise in
fake news. So he's essentially saying, I don't want to
go through with this, like I'm willing to talk. I'm
willing to help you on some matters. And there was

(14:30):
a situation where earlier in the very beginning of the
second Trump administration where Grenell actually got some American prisoners
to be released in exchange for allowing Chevron to go
in and drew Venezuelan oil. Like that is the template
that Maderia is looking to build in the future. But this,
you know, it remains honestly, those remains to be seen
how committed Trump is to this whole whole project. But

(14:52):
I think, you know, he seems to be just as
committed as he needs to be for now, as we
will take a look at here in this clip just
came out hours ago from the UN General Assembly. But
he there is a real faction in this administration that's saying,
screw all that schoo all working with Maduro, Let's take
him out. We can take him out now. We want

(15:13):
to do it for so long. You know, they tried
to do it back in twenty twenty with disastrous results,
but you know they are really trying to do it
again here and this is this is what Trump had
to say, and it really seems like an audiological mission
but also in a mission to really expand and solidify
and consolidate the power of the American Empire. Here is
what Trump had to say about it at the UNNGA.

Speaker 3 (15:35):
Isn't we've recently begun using the supreme power of the
United States military to destroy Venezuela or terrorists and trafficking
networks led by Nicholas Maduro. To every terrorist thug smuggling
poisonous drugs into the United States of America, please be
one that we will blow you out of existence. That's

(15:58):
what we're doing. We have no choice.

Speaker 1 (16:00):
We will blow you out of existence. That is a
message there. And I'm sorry, Nikki, doesn't seem like you're
gonna get a good negotiating partner anytime soon for this.
This was another one, perhaps even more blatant on truth
social We want Venezuela to immediately accept all of the
prisoners and the people from mental institutions, which includes the
worst in the world insane asylums that Venezuelan leadership has

(16:23):
forced into the United States of America, thousands of people
who have been badly hurt and even killed by these monsters.
Get them the hell out of our country right now,
or the price you pay will be incalculable. And whatever
the excuse here, it is, whatever the fig leafits, whether
you know trafficking drugs is a little evident for you
know they're certainly not letting people out of insane asylums
and just marching dropping them off at the US border.

(16:44):
You know, it is an excuse for the US to
assert their power more fully over their own hemisphere as
they try and kind of disconnect from the parts of
the world they are really trying to solidify. They're trying
to build up their kind of sphere of influence late
eighteen hundred style all over the Western hemisphere here, and

(17:06):
they're willing to do whatever sort of military power is
required to get that job done. So here's more details
about this. The heavy military presence in the Caribbean, including
F thirty five fighters in Puerto Rico, suggest the United
States plans to do more than just blow up small vessels,
and it was said, but the scope of the operation
remains unclear. The four thy five hundred member force currently

(17:29):
aboard eight warships is too small to invade Venezuela or
any country harboring traffickers, and it's not operating in the
main body of water to carry out major drug intradictions
that would be in the eastern Pacific Ocean, regional experts say.
But the Clandeston deployment of elite special Operations Forces suggests
that strikes or commander raids inside Venezuela may be in

(17:53):
the works. Experts No, so that is a real pretty
important thing, Like they could be kidnapping this guy, They
could try and go in and you know, do false
flag operations like the Venezuelan government is accusing them of doing.
They say. They said on September seventeenth, they arrested five
people in what their Interior minister called a false flag

(18:14):
operation aimed at framing the Venezuelan government for drug trafficking
and justifying foreign aggression. That's according to drop site news
reporting of a Venezuelan press conference you can see down here.
But you know, it really does seem like something is
being planned here, Something big is beling planned, and it

(18:34):
depending on what it is. You know, it's obviously going
to have adverse consequences for the people of Venezuela, and
you know, I think that makes it wrong on a
moral level, but it also really politically in terms of
dealing with, for example, the migrant crisis that Trump is
so freaked out about, you know, dealing with the ending

(18:55):
of foreign wars and the America first that is really
so central to Trump campaign, you know, all that stuff
on a political level, and also on a logistical level.
How the how the hell are you going to go
through a really massive country like Venezuela with people who
seem to be very armed. You know, it seemed to

(19:15):
be also relatively united behind Nicholas Maturo, especially when compared
to some US puppet taking control. You know, it's going
to be very logistically a challenge for the US military
to get their desired outcome, to get a real regime
change here. If they go in and about it, it's
gonna come at a pretty high cost, a cost that
we really haven't seen at least since the Iraq War,

(19:36):
maybe back even further to Vietnam, depending on how far
they choose to go here. But these kind of aerial
or kind of reconnaissance operations that are going on here
are presenting a really very slippery slope on a logistic level,
political level, and a moral level. It's just like we
at the base part of it, at the root of

(19:57):
this issue should be that Venezuela and if they want
to be governed by somebody through the United States doesn't
like that is their choice, and the United States has
to learn and that supposedly was what the conversation was about.
To respect that the United States, if we see someone
we don't like, we don't have the right to blow
up their country, cause suffering for their civilians and destroy

(20:19):
the entire region. That is something that we supposedly move past.
And it really is horrifying and incredibly scary and depressing
to see us heading right down that same road of
interventionism and suffering and death and regime change right here
in our own hemisphere in Venezuela. Definitely a story we're
watching closely on Newslash. You know, if this story doesn't

(20:40):
encapsulate what life is like in the Trump administration, I
don't know what does we have? This guy who's carrying
out incredibly cool policies, it's clear basic blithering idiot. He
is also just so happens to be incredibly blatantly corrupt
to the point where it's honestly offensive. It's like, we
see what you're doing, like we know what the game is,

(21:01):
and we're just amazing is that you can get away
with it, because those are the times that we live in.
I mean, this was the headline here In the article
from NBC News, Tom Holman was investigated for accepting fifty
thousand dollars from undercover FBI agents. Trump's DOJ shut it down.
So here's a headline and an undercover operation. Last year,
the FBI recorded Tom Holman, now the White House borders

(21:24):
are accepting fifty thousand dollars in cash, indicating he could
help the agents who are posing as business executives win
government contracts in a second Trump administration. So he was
essentially helping to get these guys who we thought were
contractors the inside track for government deals, and he was
paid fifty thousand dollars to do it. Only difference was,
of course, these were FBI agents trying to exactly do

(21:48):
their jobs and root out coverment corruption. This is exactly
what these guys are supposed to be doing, and they
were shut down by the Trump administration, who is completely
interested in protecting their own and essentially framing it as
this conflict as you'll see here, against the deep state.
They're just saying, Oh, Americans are so pissed off at

(22:08):
the deep state. That's why we should be able to
shut any investigations down into blatant corruption by our guys.
You know, they should be able to do whatever they
want because they're the ones who are actually fighting against
deep state. It's just beyond parody. The FBI and Justice
Department planned a way to see whether Homan would deliver
on his alledged promise once he became the nation's stop

(22:29):
immigration official, but the case in definitely stalled soon after
Donald Trump became president again in January, according to six
sources familiar with the matter. In recent weeks, Trump appointees
officially closed the investigation after FBI Director Cash Ptell requested
a status update on the case to what the people said.
It's unclear what reasons they had to close the department down,
but a Justice Department official in the Trump administration called

(22:52):
a Trump appointee called the case a quote deep state
probe in early twenty twenty five, and know further investigative
steps were taken, The sources state. So you know, if
you just want to rip off the just embezzle and
steal and cheat and do whatever you want, just say
it's a deep state probe. But the like Tom Holman,
you can get away with it. You know, if you
want to provide inside access to government contracts to help

(23:13):
your friends for kickbacks, totally totally good. That is what
is permissible in the trumpmistration. And I think this story
should be absolutely blasted all over the place. I mean,
the Democrats, they should absolutely get on this. This is
just textbook corruption, using the government to shut down an
investigation of your own guy, clearly taking bribes to direct

(23:33):
griment contracts, clear as day here. And you know, Democrats
are they have a great opportunity to make some hay
out of this, and they absolutely should. This would be
front page news if it were Republican. And but really,
if I were the FBI and I was sick of taking,
you know, taking a bunch of shit all day from
cash Mattel, I would leak this. If I were a
top FBI guy who had in my hands on this,
I'd just go leak this to, you know, the Wall

(23:55):
Street Journal or something. I would say, hey, why don't
you guys put this video out there and make them
defend this blatant example of bribery what they're calling, you know,
a deep state conspiracy that we're trying to push on
them when they are just completely using the government for
corrupt purposes. I know that this seems pretty reasonable if
you're you're an FBI guy who's just been taking a
bunch of crap all day from cash Mattel, and you're

(24:16):
talking about you know, this is what happens, like good
cops be cops, like screwing up the Charlie Kirk murdered investigation.
And it also would do something interesting for the right
wing and kind of make them defend this situation because
right now they're just saying, oh, it's a deep state plot,
you know, just like becaus they said in this article,
you know Meggan Kelly saw going on. Is she somehow
tied it back to Charlie Kirk's assassination, saying, you know,

(24:38):
everyone's trying to attack us. You know, they murdered our
leaders like Charlie Kirk, they investigate our leaders like Donald
Trump and try to imprison them. Will never take your
word for it again. And it's just like if this
video is really out there and they say I believe
in this uh this article that they have him on
video accepting this bribees. Yeah, hidden cameras recording the scene

(24:59):
and eating spot in Texas. Homann accepted fifty thousand dollars
in bills, straight up cash, according to internal summary of
the case and sources. So if that stuff is there.
Why not just let them put it out and let
It'd be interesting to see how they respond to. Let
these people on this on the right wing who claim
that everything that doesn't come from an explicitly right wing

(25:20):
source is not just fake news, it's not just untrue,
but explicit violent attack against them. Let them come out
and defend open corruption. Open accepting a bribe like that
would be a very interesting new frontier here for the
right wing to go in and defend. And they certainly
probably could do it given their As you can see,

(25:43):
I'm a little bit conflicted there in that own statem,
but I really think that that, you know, you would
see people coming out and say, you know, it's good
that he's doing this. This is how you fight against
the deep state or the FBI. They they're the Department
of Homeland Security. They're going to try and stop him.
He needs these this broad money to to fight for
safe borders or whatever the hell. I don't know what

(26:04):
they would come up with, but they would come up
with something to defend this open corruption. And if I
were the FBI, I'd say let this video out to
the Wall Street Journal tomorrow and see what the hell
Cash Hotel has to say about it after he's you know,
he's calling it a deep state plot, or whoever in
the Trump Justice Department is calling it a deep stave plot.
Let it loose. And this here is the him on

(26:26):
Fox News responding to the allegations. And here you can
really see that this guy not only is he very
cruel carrying the school policy against immigrants, he's very corrupt,
but he's also not very eloquent or a very smart speakers.

Speaker 4 (26:41):
Take a look, I will give you a chance to
address this article that came out over the weekend and
it was on our always reliable MSNBC, and they said
that you took fifty thousand dollars in cash in a
bag from an undercover FBI agent to help them.

Speaker 1 (27:00):
By the way, that's the best part. A little kind
of colors to the angle. It apparently it was a
kava bag, so you know, I think it was from
like Mission BBQ or something. But apparently Tom Homan's a
big cava.

Speaker 4 (27:11):
Guy practicing Trump's second term. The DOJ said they concluded
there was no criminal wrongdoing, but nevertheless that story, way
imagine you want to respond to that.

Speaker 5 (27:25):
Slortly.

Speaker 6 (27:25):
Look, I did nothing criminal. I did nothing illegal. And
this hit piece after hit piece after hit piece, and
I'm glad the FBI and dj came out and said
and then you know it said that nothing illegal happened
and nothing you know, no criminal activity. You're talking about, guys,
spent thirty four years in force in the law. I mean,
I left the very successful business that I ran to

(27:45):
come back and work for a government again. I'm back
on a government paycheck. Not only did I sacrifice my
howny home, my family sacrifices. I make sacrifices every day.
I got more death threats than anybody I got me.
But guess what, my kids don't my life though. I mean,
I haven't lived with my wife in months because I
don't want her to be here right now with all
the threats. So, after all the sacerririces, after serving my

(28:08):
nation all this year, they want to come on and
dirting me up. And it's not going end. There's a
hip piece on me every two weeks. But keep coming
because you know what, Tom Holman isn't going anywhere. Tom
Holman isn't shutting up. And Tom Holman's gonna keep your
doing anything he's doing because working with President Trump's the
greatest sign in my life. We're making this country safer
again every day. We're gonna keep doing it.

Speaker 1 (28:26):
You know. I'm sure Tom Holman's wife, Missus Holman, is
devastated not to have a top class ace husband like
that around the house. But he's out there making America safe,
making his pockets fatter by taking bribes from FBI agents
posing as government contractors and having the government cover it up.

(28:47):
There's another day in the life of the bleatant corruption
of the Trump administration. Folks, what a world we are
living in. So I know everyone is so so excited
about jimm Kimble. He's thinking his big return to the
he's got a big victory against government censorship. That's all
well and good. But the thing is, while Disney may

(29:07):
have allowed him to restart his show on ABC, the
way Americans I don't know about millions of Americans. I
was gonna say millions, but the way Americans would watch
Jimmy Kimmel's show is on one of their local ABC
news stations and in over seventy markets across the country.
Their ABC stations. They're not owned by ABC. They're pretty

(29:28):
much never owned directly by ABC. They're owned by other
major media conglomerates, including Nextdar Media in Saint Clair Broadcasting,
and those two companies have confirmed today that they are
going to say, you know, Disney, you may be letting
Jimmy Kimmel back on the air, but we are going
to preempt Jimmy Kimmel's broadcast when it comes over nationally,

(29:51):
and we're gonna put something else in place of that
in our locally owned stations. So this is the headline
here from NBC News. Nexttar's sc affiliates will keep Jimmy
Kimmel off air for now. Next Star is the second
station owner, and they own, you know, a bunch of
ABC stations all across the country to keep the show
off the air even as Disney brings the show back nashally.

(30:11):
And that's a key key point because if you look
at these two broadcasters there are explicitly when Brendan Carr,
the FCC regulator, went on the air and said we
can do this the easy way or the hard way,
he specifically shouted out local broadcast owners, these owners that
own all these local broadcast stations, these big conglomerates, to

(30:33):
say that we're going to have to look at you
guys and maybe taking away your broadcast licenses if you
don't do something about this guy, Jimmy Kimmel, And they
have business interests in front of the government. They want
to stay on the government's good side. So you know
the pressure is still there just because Disney gives them
the okay, and so doesn't matter. You've got the federal
government breathing down your neck. It's going to be a

(30:54):
whole different side of the story. So the First Amendment
threat here is still very much in place. Let's read
a little bit further here on the statement, they say,
we made a decision last week to predempt to Jamie
Kimmel Love This is Next Star Media Group on Tuesday,
and you know that decision was made when Brendan Carr
went on the podcast specifically calling out the affiliate owners

(31:17):
these EBC stations that are owned by other companies to
say that you need to do something about this. That
they say they admit that's when they made a decision
last week. Nextar's announcement adds to Saint Clair's, another major
local TV operator, which said Monday it would not air
Kimbell's show, just moments after Disney announced that they would

(31:37):
let kim you know, restart producing his show back on
the air, but you Next Star in Saint Clair. They
both are saying they're not gonna take it, so they
got about seventy ABC affiliates, meaning Kimmel's return will not
be available over broadcast to tens of millions in the US.
Those decisions come after a week of tumult for Disney
and ABC. The Maga gang is desperately trying to characterize

(31:58):
this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk is anything other than
one of them. Again, he did not say there that
he is a Maga guy. I guess you could say
he implied it, but he did not come out explicitly
and say it definitely not something worth canceling somebody from
their entire show under government pressure, but the Federal Communications
Chair Rendkar obviously threatens to take action, as we know,

(32:20):
but by Monday, Kimmel was announced as returning to the air.
The situation is complicated by major business moves from both
Sinclair and Next Star. This is really the paragraph I
wanted to get to here. Sinclair is currently exploring merger
options for his broadcast business, which would also require FCC clearance.
CNBC reported but Next Star is also seeking FCC approval

(32:46):
for a six point two billion dollar merger with fellow
station owner Tegna. So both companies, Sinclair and next Star,
they are trying to merge. They're trying to consolidate their
ownership over local news. And there's actually an FCC regulation
that says no one company can own over a certain
amount of local news stations and sources over a certain
amount of different markets. And Brendan Carr has to be

(33:08):
able to go in and change that. So they have
to stay on this guy's good side if they want
to expand their money and their profit and their power
over our local news consumption. And he said, you know,
he made it pretty clear we can do this the
easy way or the hard way. And I think them
being you know, capitalist owners that want to make profit,
they're going to do it the easy way. You know,

(33:30):
it seems pretty clear. And that really shows you that
this is you know, just because Disney is one of
the companies that has so many resources and they relent,
that does not mean that this free speech fight is over.
Like this is a really incredible precedent as we have
seen you know, TikTok now taking control Mark Zuckerberg essentially
showing up everywhere under Donald Trump. He owns Instagram, he

(33:52):
owns Facebook. Those are huge sources of information for a
bunch of Americans. You also have CBS coming under the
control of Larry Ellison, who's big Trump donor, and Trump
ally they're now trying to get CNN under that wing
as well. You know this is it is a real
effort to consolidate power over some media stations and essentially

(34:13):
threaten all the rest of them, to really maintain a
complete control of information by the government, by the Trump admustration.
That is what they are clearly clearly going for here.
And this Jimmy Kimmel move, it's it's not just against
Jimmy Kimmel. It is a message to broader descent against
Donald Trump in this country. And if you're talking about

(34:33):
Saint Clair this if you remember back in the day,
this is the twenty eighteen the dead Spin produced this
as a blog. This is their their kind of messaging.
This is all the same Claire stations around the country
being forced to read essentially the same propaganda about how
they supposedly stand against misleading information.

Speaker 2 (34:51):
Take a look San Antonio's Jessica Hedley and I'm Ryan Wolfe.

Speaker 7 (34:55):
Our latest prosibility is Treasure Valley Communities, the Old Pass Lust,
Cruci Communities, Eastern Iowa Communities, Michigan communities. We are extremely
proud of the quality balanced journalism that City's four News produces.

Speaker 1 (35:08):
But we are.

Speaker 8 (35:13):
Playing in our country, plaguing our country.

Speaker 9 (35:16):
The sharing of biased and false news has become all
too common on social media. More alarming, some media outlets
publish these same fake stories without checking facts first.

Speaker 7 (35:26):
The sharing of biased.

Speaker 10 (35:28):
And false news has become all too common, only without
checking first, unfortunately their own.

Speaker 11 (35:46):
Exactly.

Speaker 1 (35:49):
Yeah, I think you get the idea. That is all.
All those voices are different news anchors from Sinclair stations
around the country, essentially saying we don't care we we
are seeing as biased news. We are fighting for the
truth no matter what, even when other people are trying
to go against it. So really is completely dystopian stuff.
That this is one of the companies that is now

(36:10):
going completely in line with the Trump and the station's
push for complete control of the narrative in the news media,
and that they own so many news stations all across
the country. You should look it up which station Sinclair
owns it. It may be one in your market, and
we can really stay here that in this effort I
think by Donald Trump to come in and censor and

(36:32):
control the narrative and seize power over the First Amendment
and just free expression of free journalism being done in
this country. I think, you know, it's it's become really
clear that the corporate consolidation of news media, especially local
news media, is going to be a huge aid to
him in that because they're always looking to expand they

(36:52):
need come and approval to do so. And as long
as he controls the government, he has proven he is
more than willing to extract political acceps sessions out of
these groups in order to do so. Just one kind
of funny note moment here for you. This is the
view who took a brave stance here against Jimmy Kimmel's

(37:13):
suspension by talking about it after he was only after
he was already unsuspended, and trying to make themselves look
cool while doing so.

Speaker 5 (37:22):
Billy think we weren't gonna talk about Jimmy Kimmel, I
mean watched the show over the last twenty nine seasons,
so you know, no one silences us. And to all
my friends in Italy who reached out.

Speaker 1 (37:39):
No one silences us, at least until our bosses give
us approval. Weighing on something.

Speaker 5 (37:45):
You have to know it's okay. We're still here, we're
still broadcasting. And when the news broke last week about
Jimmy Kimmel's suspension, we took a breath to see if
Jimmy was going to say anything about oh, the same
thing with Stephen Colbert. Then our show was on tape
on Friday. But we are live here today and we're

(38:10):
getting into it now.

Speaker 1 (38:14):
Okay, So yeah, there's another brave stands by the view
and it just shows that, you know, it's all understood.
Its varies in degrees of how understandable it is depending on,
you know, how much power. Whoopee Goldberg doesn't have as
much power as you know, the owner of Disney to
put the hammer down on this, or Saint Clair to
really stand up with the Trump administration. But it really

(38:35):
does show you when it comes down to it, when
push comes to shove, there are very few people, even
in a such a cut and dry case. It was
such a famous, kind of uncontroversial, well known person like
Jimmy Kimmel to stand up for a clear example of
government overreach in free speech, an attempt to shut down
any sort of descent against the administration. And I also

(38:57):
think it's important to note how concerning it is that
we have not just the government try and do it,
but the government working really, really well and effectively with
these corporations to silence any sort of descent against the government.
When you have that government in that corporate cooperation so
that both sides profit, that is when you really have

(39:17):
dark times, I think for the first Amendment. Indeed, so
Kama Harris is on a book tour where she's throwing
absolutely anyone and everyone under the bus, but she went
on to talk to Rachel Maddow about what was arguably
the most important part of her political life, which was
the period where she took over from Joe Biden, and

(39:38):
really why that change didn't happen soon or the answer is,
I'll just say, kind of vintage Kamala.

Speaker 7 (39:45):
Here.

Speaker 1 (39:45):
Let's take a look the part of.

Speaker 7 (39:47):
Your book that has people most upset thus far, which
is some of your writing about the decision around the
president abandoning his reelection campaign, the timing there, and how
it's handled. You say in part page forty six. It's
Joe and Jill's decision. We all said that like a mantra,

(40:07):
as if we'd all been hypnotized. Was it grace or
was it recklessness? In retrospect, I think it was recklessness.
The stakes were simply too high. This wasn't a choice
that should have been left to an individual's ego, an
individual's ambition. It should have been more than a personal decision.
Whose decision should that have been? How should that decision

(40:28):
have been made?

Speaker 2 (40:30):
So when I write this, it's because I realize that
I have and had a certain responsibility that I should
have followed through on, which is and so when I
talk about the recklessness, as much as anything, I'm talking
about myself. There was so much, as we know, at stake,

(40:56):
and as I write, you know where my head was
at at the time is that it would be completely
it would come off as being completely self serving.

Speaker 7 (41:06):
If you said to President Biden you did not think
you should run again, yeah, or even that he should.

Speaker 2 (41:11):
Question whether it's a good idea.

Speaker 1 (41:13):
Who cares how it comes off.

Speaker 2 (41:14):
But I think that you know, one of the reasons
I wrote this book, Rachel, is there are actually a
number of reasons. One is one that it is unprecedented.
Right to your point of what you said in your opening,
we had a president of the United States running for

(41:35):
re election three and a half months from the election,
decides not to run, the sitting vice president enters the
race against a former president of the United States, has
been running for ten years, with one hundred and seven
days to go, and it ended up being the closest
presidential election in the twenty first century.

Speaker 7 (41:54):
You don't know about that cuts should vote to allow
the government.

Speaker 1 (41:57):
To Yeah, then they get them by the shutdown. So
there's really a lot going on there. And I don't
think it really makes Kamala Harris look pretty good because
she kind of gets that was like, yeah, it was
obviously it was recklessness, but it was an unprecedented time
and I was worried about how it would come off.
It's like, that is why you're a bad politician. I'm sorry, Like,
that is why you're a bad politician. She talks earlier
in the book about how much really the Biden team

(42:21):
did undermine her, and will go to some of those
excerpts from that book, and it was reported at the
time as well. But it's just like you would assume
that these people would do the right thing. They would
be the ones who would say, Joe, you need to
step down. You need to do this, like after you've
seen up close and personal how they operate and how
much they are kind of this kind of loyalty brigade
to Joe Biden, Like they clearly picked her as somebody

(42:44):
who could be the fall woman for when Joe Biden declines.
It's like, obviously you don't want to you know, Joe
may not be perfect, but you don't want to deal
with Kamala.

Speaker 7 (42:51):
You know.

Speaker 1 (42:52):
That was the rhetoric that they put up when it
came to the media questioning about you know, should Joe
really this, does he have this in him? Is it
time to handle off to Kama? Is it time to
have some sort of open primer. It's like these people
thought you were political, no talent, Like they didn't think
you had any sort of juice, And honestly, you kind

(43:12):
of proved them right because it's just like you fed
into exactly what they wanted you to do. And it
was literally Kamala Harris to your own political detriment for
you to come out and defend Biden to the hilt
even after that debate where she really did not give
an inch in terms of defending Biden. And it's just
like these people, they had it out for you from

(43:33):
the beginning. Why not lead to the media, why not
come out? Why not use your power in the administration
as somebody who may not be the best politician, may
not have the biggest base of support, but still in
that administration did have power in order to say go
to the media, in order to say we need some
change here. We can't have this happening. Joe Biden can't
be running. The stakes are too big. And if you

(43:54):
really thought that at some point in time, she should
have taken action. But instead, just like in so many
other different political instances, she was too afraid of her
own shadow. She was too afraid to draw any sort
of confrontation really with anyone. And there's a billion examples.
I could think of this back when she essentially got
bullied by the Bernie Sanders camp during the twenty twenty
primary to change tact on criminal justice. Like, she is

(44:16):
not a very confident person in terms of what she
actually believes. She has no core telling her what to do.
So when it comes to that, when it comes to
you know, she wanted to pick Pete boodha Jedge, but
she was scared of how it would play when it
comes to you know, she wanted to tell Biden to
get out, but she was scared of how it played
within the Bid administration. You got to be tougher than that.
You got to say, this may draw me some heat,

(44:37):
but I'm gonna keep going. I because I know it's
important also with the country, but really from my political career,
you know, I she just does not even have the
fundamental capability to act in her own self interest because
she's too afraid it's gonna be uncomfortable. And I feel
like that is really what that clip shows and also
is really why she is screwed for the political future.

(44:58):
And I mean, look at this here, this, this is
her talking about how the Biden campaign underminded her. She
says worse. I often learned the president's staff was adding
fuel to negative narratives that sprang up around me. One
narrative that took a stubborn hold was that I had
a chaotic office and unusually high staff turnover during my
first year. When the stories were unfair and accurate, the
president's inner circle seemed fine with it. Indeed, it seemed

(45:20):
as if they decided I should be knocked down a
little more.

Speaker 7 (45:23):
So.

Speaker 1 (45:24):
These are the people that you were dealing with here,
like they're not your friends, and to think that they're
going to attack, it's like, yes, they've been attacking since
day one. Why don't you attack back and say, I'm
gonna tell the truth of the American people about President
Biden's condition here, and we'll see how you like it.
We'll see how you know's see what you make of it,
instead of, you know, leaking all these stories about me,
but instead she was like, no, I'm worried about what

(45:45):
they're gonna say to me in the media. I can't
do it. I can't. It's like, that's not gonna get
you any respect. I'm sorry. Here's another one. Harris says
Pulling was showing she was getting more popular and only
made the situation worse with Biden's team. It was a
complete had her as the fall woman to essentially say
that she's gonna be so unpopular it'll make Biden look good.

(46:06):
You know, that's why they put her on the ticket.
So you know, it was a really conservative strategy that
she did nothing to counteract here and only played into
And this is another great example. She thinks someone should
have told Biden to run, but not her. It's like,
where's the leadership, where's the moral vision, where's the clarity
of you know, your principles here it's just completely non existent.

(46:30):
But of course, you know she's gonna come out and
snipe in this book and be like, oh, you know
you they should have told Biden not to run. It
was a reckless decision, you know. And they go to
be the quote that Rachel Maddow just read, you know,
so she this is the exact type of shirking responsibility here.
You know, someone should have told Biden a run, but
shouldn't have been me. It should have been someone else's responsibility.

(46:52):
People hate that, and it really surprised me for someone
who clearly stage manages everything, that she would go out
with this kind of really awful line.

Speaker 5 (47:00):
Here.

Speaker 1 (47:01):
Here's another one. Biden asked her if she wanted to
run days before he dropped out. He floated the situation,
if for any reason I had to drop it out,
I would support you, but only if that's what you want.
It's occurred to me, I haven't asked you he had
clearly rehearsed the speech. It wasn't spontaneous thought, and Harris recalls,
I'm fully behind you, Joe, but if he decided not
to run, I'm ready and I would give it mine
all because Trump has to be beaten. You know, it

(47:23):
didn't seem like they were really coordinating this or even
thought this was gonna happen till the very last little bit,
and she blames Biden's staff for his debate meltdown. Harris
pushes back on the idea there was some big conspiracy
to hide Biden's age problems. In the first book Expert excerpt,
she says that it's on his on his worst day,
he was still functioning better than Trump, and she blames

(47:44):
White Have staffers for tiring him out before the first debate.
I mean he had a week to prepare in camp
David before that debate. It's like you are not meeting
the moment here either. Like, no, not even a Democrat
is going to take this line that, oh, there is
no big conspiracy even though his worst day, he's still
functions better than Donald Trump. Like that is just stuff
that people have just completely cast out long ago, long

(48:07):
after Trump already sensed up this selection, and she is
still retreading these own lines. It's like it almost feels
like she doesn't even want to have any sort of
political future. This is kind of crazy here though. On Biden,
Harris reveals that, moments before her debate with Trump and
irritated Biden, called her of accusing her of criticizing him
to powerbrokers in Philadelphia. Why is he asking that, Harris rights,

(48:31):
According to Politico, my head had to be right. I
had to be completely in the game, he said. I
couldn't understand why he would call me right now, just
before the debate and make it all about himself. She
also had a weird phone call with Trump. Harris reached
out to Trump after a man was arrested in charge
of trying to assassinate him at Moral Lago. Though Trump
publicly blamed the incident on Harris's campaign rhetoric, privately, he

(48:52):
was oddly flattering. You've done a great job, you really have,
Trump told her, My only problem is it makes it
very hard for me to be angry at you. It's like,
what am I gonna do say bad things right now? Well,
then don't, she replied, I'm going to tone it down.
Trump said, I will, I will, You're going to see uh.
Trump then said that his daughter Ivanka was a big
fan and said to say hello to Doug for him.

(49:12):
So it was just like, I guess she thought that, Oh,
it's gonna be easy now Trump's not an attack anymore.
I mean, that must have been the moment where he
was like, Okay, I'm gonna win this thing, Like let's
let's just take a little let's be a little conciliatory
here to Kamala Harris didn't want to respond to Trump's
for racial attacks, apparently with a speech she rejected the idea.

(49:33):
According to NBC News, I was so pissed. I didn't
hold back Racolls Harris, who was a board Air Force
two talking to Foalon by phone, Are you eving kidding me?
She says. He told talent today he wants to prove
my race. What's next He'll say, I'm not a woman
and I need to show my vagina. So I mean
she she should have and that that goes back to
the whole thing about weird comments, like they were completely
afraid of their own chat. Throughout that campaign too, there

(49:56):
were people telling, oh saying there that the Republicans are weird.
That's too next people aren't gonna like that. And then
they they're like, oh, we won't say that it's our bad,
you know, we'll hold back.

Speaker 6 (50:05):
You know.

Speaker 1 (50:06):
It's just complete political weakness up and down. And it's
not even as you can see here in the sideline Plantygo,
it's not even landing with Democrats, it's not even landing
with your own party. You know, this is really a
maybe someone who thinks to getting back in the game.
But it seems pretty clear here when it comes to
Kamala and her vision and her sense of what she
actually believes in and her ability to fight for it,

(50:28):
there really is nothing there when it comes to Kamala.
So over the weekend, Charlie Kirk had a truly massive
memorial in Arizona. And there are a lot of different speakers,
but most of them, except for one normable exception that
will play you at the end of this segment, most
of them took the opportunity to make clear their intentions
going forward, and those intentions being limit all involvement of

(50:53):
anybody left of center in American political society as much
as humanly possible. And I really feel like there was
no better example of this kind of rhetoric than the
Deputy White House Chief of Staff, a real sicko, Stephen Miller.
This is how he addressed the crowd was supposedly a

(51:14):
memorial that for his friend, take a look.

Speaker 12 (51:16):
The storm whispers to the warrior.

Speaker 8 (51:21):
That you cannot withstand my strength, and the warrior whispers back,
I am the storm.

Speaker 12 (51:30):
Erica is the storm. We are the storm, and our.

Speaker 8 (51:38):
Enemies cannot comprehend our strength, our determination, our resolve, our passion,
our lineage, and our legacy hails backed to Athens to Rome,
to Philadelphia to Monticello. Our ancestors built the cities, They

(51:59):
p de the art and architecture, they built the industry.
Erica stands on the shoulders of thousands of years of warriors,
of women who raised up families, raised up city, raised
up industry, raised up civilization, who pulled us out of

(52:19):
the caves and the darkness into the light. The light
will defeat the dark. We will prevail over the forces
of wickedness and evil. They cannot imagine what they have awakened.
They cannot conceive of the army that they have arisen

(52:39):
in all of us.

Speaker 12 (52:42):
Because we stand for what is good, what is virtuous,
what is noble?

Speaker 8 (52:47):
And to those trying to incite violence against us, those
trying to foment hatred against.

Speaker 12 (52:53):
Us, what do you have? You have nothing? You are nothing.
You are wicked, you are jealousy, you are envy, you
are hatred. You are nothing.

Speaker 8 (53:05):
You can build nothing, you can produce nothing, you can
create nothing. We are the ones who build, We are
the ones who create. We are the ones who lift
up humanity. You thought you could kill Charlie Kirk. You
have made him a mortal. You have immortalized Charlie Kirk,

(53:29):
and now millions will carry on his legacy.

Speaker 1 (53:34):
Yeah. So there you have quite a speech there from
Steven Miller, and I feel like I just want to
point out, kind of on the face of it that
in I'll show you some of the responses from some
of the other speeches coming up, he did not get
a very big response even in that room, because I
think he just comes off as such a uniquely unappealing,

(53:58):
unhuman person that it even resonates these people that are
love Charlie Kirk and are really quite hungry for some
form of vengeance and some form of retribution. I think
the thing about, you know, the people in our audience
clearly being repelled by his delivery and his presentation as
a person does not mean that they do not support
this message. And you know, there was some The biggest

(54:19):
applause came if you remember that if you listen to
that clip, was when he was calling out the enemy,
when he was saying that these people are liars, they're
hate filled, they are envious, they're disgusting, and we are
the ones that build, We're the ones that create value
to society. And that on a rhetoric there, you know,
it reminded him. Shout out to Crystal Balinnis. She made

(54:42):
a great comparison to net Yahu and his Hebrew version
speeches where he portrays the Israelis as you know, pure light,
pure good. You know, they they believe in all the
right values, they're fighting for all the right things. They're
just purely good people. And their opponent, Samoas, are pure
evil that only want death and destruction, and they must

(55:03):
You can't just come to a deal with them, you
can't defeat them on the field of battle. You have
to completely wipe them out. And that's the language that
nen Yahoo is using to justify what he's doing. In
Gaza to his own population. And I feel like the
fact that we're seeing, you know, Miller use that is very,
very disturbing. But also I think another pretty darn disturbing
comparison when it comes to specifically the dynamics of we

(55:26):
are the light, they are the darkness, and this kind
of mindset of revenge is people have been drawing comparison
to this speech here from the famous Nazi propaganda's Joseph
Globbels in nineteen thirty two talking about this in the
wake of a murdered Nazi Party official that they use
as a murder and brought it all up. I don't
you know, I'm not trying to make a direct comparison

(55:47):
to what Charlie Kirk was doing. And you know what
the future is for you know, I'm not saying we're
heading down some nineteen thirty two style Hitlar path here.
But it really is insane these comparisons talking about you guys.
You were promised you, you who bear witness, the builders,
the will bearers of our idea in our worldview, you
who carry forward the German nation. You were betrayed by

(56:10):
these people who promised to you freedom and beauty and dignity,
but they sly, they slam or, they pour scorn on us.
Their political days are number. This kind of a framework,
this kind of a strategy to whip people up and
unify them behind what you want to do is a
strategy that has been used before, both in the very
recent past, as in months, months, and days ago, but

(56:32):
in also the slightly longer past of decades ago, and
going back to really presaging some of the worst atrossees
in history because of this stoking for vengeance, for stoking relily,
for this final confrontation of absolute good, of absolute purity
against the complete evil that Stephen Miller is trying to portray. Here.
Talk about some more crazy rhetoric here. This is Jack Posobec,

(56:56):
and here's what he had to say on this memorial,
trying to whip people up further into this revenge based
frenzy against their enemies ends.

Speaker 12 (57:06):
Are you ready to continue the mission? Are you ready
to fight back?

Speaker 13 (57:14):
And are you ready to put on the full armor
of God and face the evil in high places and
the spiritual warfare before us.

Speaker 12 (57:24):
That put on the full armor of God?

Speaker 1 (57:27):
Do it now? Now is the time, this.

Speaker 12 (57:32):
Is the place, This is the turning point for Charlie.
God blessed to all of you.

Speaker 8 (57:52):
God blessed to everyone, to Charlie's family, to all the families,
and Charlie.

Speaker 12 (58:02):
Till we made again.

Speaker 3 (58:03):
Brother.

Speaker 1 (58:07):
Yeah, so kind of a weird way of you know,
this kind of a quiet memorial of turning down the temperature.
You know, it's kind of a weird way of going
about it. I really do think maybe it's just me.
You know, it's not something it seems like you're John
Snow and you're trying to get a bunch of people
to go off to battle like that. That is the
kind of tone that we hear from Jack Pisobec and
Steven Miller and all these political appointees who are totally

(58:30):
not you know, memorializing their friend. They're trying to whip
people up into a frenzy for revenge here, regardless of
what the consequences it might have on American citizens and
their constitucial rights and just really the general stability of
the country. But I do want to say here huge
credit to Erica Kirk and her really remarkable speech that

(58:51):
was completely against all of this poison that Steven Miller
and Jack Pisobec and others were trying to force down
the country's throats at this royal.

Speaker 13 (59:01):
My husband, Charlie, he wanted to save.

Speaker 11 (59:10):
Young men.

Speaker 13 (59:12):
Just like the one who took his life, that young man,

(59:36):
that young man on the cross.

Speaker 11 (59:39):
Our Savior said, Father, forgive them for they not know
what they do.

Speaker 13 (59:52):
That man, that young man, I forgive him.

Speaker 1 (01:00:06):
So really really incredible stuff there from Erica Kirk, who
in a time where she could have just been, you know,
exactly like just completely rage, pissed off, angry at the world,
and would have made total total sense she you know,
and it's a great example of you know, religion can
motivate people to do awful things, but it can motivate
people to really push the limits of humanity to even

(01:00:28):
greater heights. And that's an example of that happening right there.
And she's saying, I know, you know, I'm without my husband,
my kids are without their father. But I am choosing
to extend forgiveness because that is what Jesus Christ, our Savior,
would have wanted. And you know, you cannot give her
anything the credit, and you really just have to hope.
And it's it's almost shocking really to see that someone

(01:00:51):
actually comes up and does the right thing in a
way where all the incentives would have been aligned for
them to do something different to come does the right
I think this is a tough thing as well. You know,
it really is super super refreshing and incredible to see,
and let's hope the country goes into direction that's more
like Erica kirk speech than Jack Jack Pasobis and Steven

(01:01:16):
Miller's there. Thank you so much for listening to today's show.
Of course, all of our videos are up now on
YouTube on the Spencer wallsh YouTube channel. We'll be back
later this week. It's his flash