October 14, 2025 • 39 mins
In today’s show, we are going to discuss the claims that really amount to something that they are not!
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-hoho-show--2639419/support.
Thank You for Listening,
For All Things "The HohO Show"
Email, Website & Other Links
hoho@thehohoshow.com
WSPRadio.com
TheHohOShow.com
The HohO Show / Rumble
WSPChronicles
StinkPikle.com / Merch Store
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-hoho-show--2639419/support.
Thank You for Listening,
For All Things "The HohO Show"
Email, Website & Other Links
hoho@thehohoshow.com
WSPRadio.com
TheHohOShow.com
The HohO Show / Rumble
WSPChronicles
StinkPikle.com / Merch Store
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
Yes, welcome to the show, grated the number one most
listened to podcast on Fluida. So join us now as
we discuss news, politics, current events made so much more,
but through the airwaves and strapped in as we.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Do because the three broadcasting live from weapon I saw
production studio be Welcome to the Ho Host Show and
as always I'm your host, Ho Ho. So hey, y'all's done.
(00:43):
I hope you're doing good. I really do. I got
just a few things, well three three things, yeah, three
things that I'm wanting to talk about in today's show.
A little preemptive show, not preemptive show, and I'll kind
of the spur of the moment show actually But anyway,
like I said, I got a few things that I'm
wanting to talk about, a few stories that I'm wanting
(01:03):
to throw in here. And the title of the show
is unconstitutional, and I gotta be honest with you, I'm
a little well baffled, but yet I'm not surprised about
the articles that I'm throwing in here. And of which case,
(01:24):
after the show, I will be putting this into a well,
onto the blog, onto the website. This way, you can
just head on over to the HO Hot show dat
com and click on that news feed tab and then
you'll see the articles that I have thrown in here.
So let's go ahead and get into it, because it
(01:45):
I kind of find it infuriating whenever the left throws
out this unconstitutional and throws out things like undemocratic or
a threat to democracy. Whenever in a lit dnesty, what
you are seeing happen is anything. But it's not unconstitutional,
(02:08):
It isn't a threat to democracy. But these are the
things that the left throws out there because for the
most part, you've got way too many people that just
believe what they're saying on face value without questioning it.
And that's the part to me, this kind of infuriating,
especially whenever I'm talking about the you know, the threat
(02:30):
to democracy type of a thing, especially whenever you're talking
about Trump in his second term. So let's go ahead
and get into it. This first article that I'm wanting
to touch base on is out of common dreams, never
actually heard of them. But whatever doesn't matter. Headline, as
(02:51):
Deadline nears outlets, have no plans to sign flatly unconstitutional
Pentagon press policy. Now, look, here's why I'm kind of
confused about this. It continues with the you know a
subtitle the policy unveiled last month with bar reporters from
(03:14):
seeking or reporting information that isn't explicitly authorized by the
Trump administration. This article was written today, and really what
this amounts to is kind of simple. They're they're ticked
off because Pete Hegseeth told the the news people, you know,
(03:42):
the journalists, that you're no longer going to get unfettered
access to the Pentagon. You have to sign in, you've
got to get a visitor badge, and you will be escorted.
That's it. And basically every one of them are already
taked off about this, and they're claiming that, oh, this
is unfair, this is unconstitutionally yata YadA, blah blah. But
(04:05):
it's like, you know, okay, look, so you want unfettered
access to the Pentagon, to be able to go wherever
you want to talk to whomever you want to and
get whatever information that you can. Okay. And I had
heard Matt Locke talking about this, host of Voice of
(04:27):
the working Man podcast, and one of the things he
threw in there was wait a second, you know, you know,
like taxpayer dollars is the thing that's funding Pentagon, and
of which case that should just automatically give them access
because it's taxpayer funded, And of which case it's like,
wait a second, where was that frame of mind on
(04:50):
January sixth? Don't the people have the right to have
unfettered access then to the Capitol Building? But I'm actually
going to take this a little bit different of a
of approach on this because it infuriates me because how
is this unconstitutional? And this is exactly what happens when
(05:17):
you go into a building, all right, whenever you go
into a business, when you go into something, you know,
you're not just going to get unfettered access. You know.
Let let's say you go into well, these buildings that
you know these journalists work out of, you know, like
(05:40):
their head office or whatever. Do you think that they're
just going to let you roam around, have full access
without any type of an escort, without any type of
a security badge, without any type of security to keep
track of what where you are and what you're doing. No,
(06:01):
obviously not. You know, I work for a company, and
you know I deliver I deliver things to you know,
various places, So I'm at a lot of different locations
throughout the course of the year. We have a lot
of customers, you know, like around the one hundred customer range,
(06:22):
and I've gone to quite a few of these different facilities.
And even though I am a known commodity, you know,
a lot like these journalists are at the Pentagon, I
still don't have unfettered access. I have access to get in,
do what I need to do, and then leave. I
(06:46):
just can't wander the property. I can't go inside and
do whatever. I can't do that. Why Because I don't
work there. I don't have access. They're security measures in place,
and I can't violate that. I can't even have my
cell phone out at all because they don't want me
(07:09):
to take recordings, pictures, anything. It's security. It's the way
things happen. You know, when you go into a place
of business, you're not allowed unfettered access. I mean, if
this person were to come to your home, you don't
know who they are, you don't know them from Adam whatever.
(07:30):
I mean, are you really going to give them unfettered
access to go wherever they want to within your home? No,
of course not. It's asinine to even believe that. And
what's also asinine is whenever these security protocols are put
into place for these so called journalists who are I mean,
let's be honest, anything. But they're treating it as though
(07:57):
it's unconstitutional, like they deserve, like they should, like they
are supposed to just have unfettered access to be able
to do whatever the hell they want to. It's not unconstitutional,
it's not. Just because they say it is doesn't actually
(08:17):
make it so. It's not unconstitutional to put security protocols
in place. And I mean, I'm really kind of curious.
I mean, are you really going to throw a fit
because you're going to be treated as an outsider as
you should be and expected to follow security protocols. I mean, really,
(08:40):
what are they going to do? I mean what are
they going to do? Are they going to cry? And
you know, Sue Pete Hegseth and people at the Pentagon
because they're not given full access. It's like, look, you
can sign in, get a security badge, get an escort,
(09:01):
get access that way. If you don't want to do that,
then no access. They're not. You know, it's not like
it's a violation of the First Amendment right the freedom
of press. No, you have the right to be able
to print whatever dumbass shit you want to But just
because you claim that it's unconstitutional doesn't mean that it's unconstitutional.
(09:23):
You still have the ability to print whatever it is
going to print. But one of the things we seem
to have forgotten as a society as a nation is FAFO.
You know, it's consequences to your action. I mean, yeah,
you may have the right to say whatever it is
(09:43):
you want to say. I mean, you go up on
my porch, you can say whatever it is you want
to say. But that's not to say that there's not
going to be potential consequences for saying it. I mean, really,
what are they going to do? Are they really going
to suit? How far do they think that's actually going
(10:06):
to get? Is it going to backfire tremendously? I think
it is. I think it really is. I mean it's
just I think it's absolutely stupid how they're playing victim
whenever most every Republican knows and every conservative knows that
what these places end up putting in the print is
(10:28):
not truth. It's not factual. You know. They they spend
the tail however they want to to try to make
their side look better, to try to, you know, put
forth an agenda, put forth a narrative that they support.
I mean, that's what they do. That's always what they've done,
(10:51):
you know. And if you didn't have so many of
these so called journalists doing just that, would Pete Hegseth,
would Donald Trump? Would any of these people in Trump's administration?
Would they have a problem or an issue with these journalists?
Know they wouldn't. But here's the thing, though, too. Every
one of them is being held to the same standard.
(11:13):
Democrats aren't used to that. Democrats are used to getting
prefer preferential treatment, preferred treatment. They're used to being catered
to and being able to do whatever it is that
they're one because they're used to controlling the narrative. They're
(11:38):
used to people having to bend to their will. And
that's not what President Trump's all about. That's not what
Pete hegg Saith is all about. They're losing power and
they are trying everything that they can in order to
(11:59):
keep said, let's go ahead and move on, because this
next one I found absolutely hilarious. I really did. This
one comes from Mediaite headline inherently corrupting Obama condemns Trump
sending National Guard to Chicago says Potus has damaged democracy.
(12:23):
Oh no, Trump's damaged democracy. Okay, look, let me let
me touch base on a couple of things here. One,
it's Obama saying this. Right. No, Look, I'm not saying that,
you know, Obama's not a US citizen. I'm not saying that,
(12:44):
you know, Obama stole the election, not saying that, you know,
I believe as though he did win, farre and square
got no qualms with that. You know, he did. He
was the man of the hour. But for Obama to
(13:04):
say that somebody is doing something that is anti democracy
is laughable. It really is. I mean, I'm just throwing
that out there. It is absolutely laughable because, I mean,
we all know a lot of the things that came
(13:27):
out of Obama's White House, Obama's administration. We all know this.
We all know that he is the one who, you know,
really got the ball rolling on weaponizing government against your enemies.
He is the person who was behind not going after
(13:51):
Hillary Clinton for her email scandal. I mean, yes, it
was Bill Clinton too, but it was Obama. Let me
illustrate that point real quick. Because every single person that
Hillary Clinton sent or received classified information to or from
(14:12):
they are guilty of the same thing Hillary Clinton was
guilty of, and that is mishandling classified information. And every
single person in the Obama White House, in the Obama administration,
they are all guilty, including Obama himself. So do you
really think that Obama wanted this to really get out?
(14:32):
Do you really think that he wanted an actual investigation,
especially after the fact that Hillary Clinton was like, look,
if I go down, I'm taking all yaws with me.
It ain't going to be just me. And she was
serious about that. I have no doubt in my mind.
She had the receipts, she had the evidence, she had
(14:52):
the proof, she knew, she knew where the bodies were buried.
She wasn't going to take it lying down. A lot
of the things on the attacks against President current President
Trump was that to be hessed and orders, and because
(15:16):
nothing happened without his say so, without his okay, without
his nod, Obama was behind every last bit of it.
But let me get to this democracy thing. Okay, well, no, no, no,
let me back up a little bit. Trump sending the
National Guard to Chicago now, because this kind of ties
(15:40):
hand in hand with the damage to democracy thing, right, Okay,
because one of the things that Obama is he's neglecting.
He's neglecting to realize, he's neglecting to understand, he is
flat ignoring the truth of the matter is that Trump
(16:01):
won every swing state. Trump won the popular vote. Now,
first and foremost, the obvious. We are not a democracy.
We are a constitutional republic, not a democracy, a constitutional republic.
(16:29):
But if these democrats want to continue to throw around
the word democracy like it actually means something, well, let's
talk about democracy then, because what is democracy It's rule
of the majority. So if the majority of the people
(16:50):
voted for President Trump, President Trump won the popular vote,
because you can't throw in there, as Obama has done
in the past, it's like, I, you know, I'm doing
this for the people that didn't vote, too, because I
automatically assumed that every single person that didn't vote in
America would have voted for me, right, I mean, that's
kind of what he arrogantly said. No, the people that
(17:16):
voted are the ones who wanted to make their voices heard,
and the majority of the people in the United States
of America voted for President Trump. What is that If
it isn't democracy and a fundamental thing the President Trump
ran on was law and order, holding people accountable. And
(17:38):
what you have in Chicago is out of control crime.
That's what you have. One of the things the President
Trump won on, as in one of the things that
got him elected is he was not a soft on
(18:00):
crime president. I'm going to hold these people accountable because
the victims are worth something. We're not going to cater
to these out of control cities that don't want to
do anything about crime that victimize the criminals. We're not
about that. That's what the majority of the people one
(18:23):
of the things that they elected President Trump on. So
how is this one anti democracy? How is this unconstitutional?
Because this is exactly what the president is supposed to
be doing because when these governors failed to act, well, okay,
when the mayors failed to control the population, and they're
(18:46):
saying control the criminals, and it's up to the governor.
If the governor fails, and it's up to the president.
It's about law and order, it's about enforcing the crime.
And you know, this same very same argument as in
dealing with ice. This is something an argument that Obama
had with Arizona and I think he even had it
(19:10):
with Texas because you know, Obama was failing to enforce,
and I know this also happened under Biden, but the
president was failing to enforce, and they said, oh no,
oh wait not yeah. So so the president was failing
to enforce. Governor stepped in and said, okay, if you're
(19:31):
not going to act, then we are, which again was
their right to do so constitutionally protected. It was. It's
actually in the constitution. You can do it, read it,
check it for yourself. But you know, he got a
lot of pushback saying, oh, no, immigration is strictly a
you know, immigration enforcement is strictly a president executive order.
(19:57):
It's a federal matter, not a state matter. You have
no say. And in Illinois and the worst city in
Illinois being Chicago, hands down, and other cities as well,
(20:19):
if these governors are not going to act and do
their job and make sure that they enforce federal immigration laws,
because that's what these are, then the president has every
right in the constitutional authority to go in there, especially
whenever you know, Obama is one of them that specifically
(20:40):
said this is a federal matter, not a state matter,
and we have the right to enforce federal law. You don't,
So here we have somebody the very president. They shot
down the governors for trying to enforce federal law, saying that, oh, no,
you can't enforce the federal law if the state governor
(21:02):
doesn't want you to do so. No, no, no, no, shut
your mouth. You can't have it both ways, just because
that now you have a president in office that is
that wants to enforce federal law. No, you can't just
change your mind on what is right for what is
right now. You can't do that. And to say that
(21:24):
it's a damage to democracy will want no shit, Sherlock.
We are in a constitutional republic. But that's ignoring the
fact that the majority of Americans voted for President Trump
and one of the things he ran on was cleaning
up these cities, getting rid of these illegal aliens, holding
criminals accountable whenever they commit crimes. It's exactly what we
(21:50):
voted for. For all those memes out there that are asking,
is this what you've voted for? Yes, it is. You're
damn right, it is. This is exact exactly what I've
voted for. I mean, I truly do find it laughable
because of all people, I mean, it wouldn't be bad
(22:12):
or at least as bad if it came out of
Bill Clinton. But no, it was Obama, one of the
people who went out and attacked governors for trying to
enforce immigration laws, saying that no, stay in your lane.
This is a federal matter, not a state matter. And
now he's going to go out and bad mouth Trump
(22:33):
for doing exactly what he directed, making this not a
state matter, but by making this a federal matter. Are
you picking up what I'm throwing down here? Are you
understanding the double speak that we here come out of
(22:56):
the Democrats? All this think in time? I hope you are.
I hope you get it, because this type of stuff
is absolutely infuriating. It is ridiculous, you know, and and
is I almost have to applaud Obama, right, I got
to give them kudos. I mean, the goal on this
(23:18):
person to say what he did, knowing what it is
he did and how he was whenever he was president.
I mean that that takes some guts, right. And one
of the things that the Democrats thrive on, especially the
political class, and you know the you know, the the
journalists and you know, the talking heads of the Democrat Party.
(23:40):
You know, they really thrive on the fact that most
people just aren't going to remember what happened previously. I
know I've talked about this before on on other shows,
but the whole you know, uh, forget today, it's the
(24:01):
you know, the memory of tomorrow. Forget today. Doesn't matter
in the past, right, I mean, that's how they operate.
It doesn't matter what they did in the past. They
can just change whatever they want to, point fingers at
whoever they want to, and the media is going to
(24:22):
have their back, and they're going to act like, oh, no,
Obama didn't do that. Obama didn't say that. No, no, no,
of course he didn't. Why would he because he has
always believed that governors should have a final say in
how laws are enforced. Except you and I we know different.
(24:48):
We remember what happened during Obama's presidency. Of course, we
remembered what happens. We remember what happened ring at Biden's presidency.
We're not stupid. You're not going to gas like us.
You're not going to stay you know, sit there and
tell me. Don't believe my lying eyes. I know better.
(25:14):
I'm awake, not woke. Right. Moving on last topic of today,
now this one, Oh that was the wrong one. So
this headlines out of Fox News, Chip Roy and other
(25:34):
Republicans push bill to block and deport Sharia law adherent aliens,
calling them an existential threat. Europe should be a wake
up call to America showing what the spread of Sharia
law looks like the erosion of the West. Roy warned, now, look,
(25:58):
I am one of them people that I am all
about freedom of religion. Absolutely, okay, I very much am.
And for the most part, most religions are very docile
whenever it comes to how they interact with people of
other religions. Okay, very tolerant, you know, regardless of whether
(26:23):
they accept But still one of them things are going
to put their big boy pants on and they're going
to be tolerant. You know, they're not going to go
after you publicly. They're not going to you know, you're
not at risk of being harmed, being hurt, being attacked
just because you believe something different. I have my big
boy pants on. If I don't like what you have
(26:43):
to say, I'll shut the door. If you come to
my house trying to promote something that I disagree with,
I'll turn around, I'll walk away. If I'm into public space,
I'm not going to threaten your life. I'm not going
to beat you up, not going to do that. That's
not what adults do. That's what children throwing a temper
tantrum does. Right, I'm an adult, and most religions out
(27:07):
there are like that when it comes to dealing with
people of different faiths. So I'm all about the First Amendment.
You have the right to worship as you see fit,
as your faith dictates that you do. However, and this
is a fundamental belief, a fundamental principle of the Constitution,
(27:34):
because your freedom ends where mine begins. You have the
freedom of speech, you don't have the freedom to force
it down my throat. You don't have the freedom and
the right to enforce your beliefs on me. You don't
(27:54):
have that. That's not in the Constitution. And yes, I've
said it before, I'll say it again. The Constitution grants
you the freedom of it does not grant you the
freedom from So if you're going to live here, then
you're just going to have to get used to other
people worshiping as they see fit. And as long as
(28:15):
that doesn't violate your own freedom, then you just have
to put up with it. Sorry, not really, but there's
a difference between most every other religions out there and
(28:37):
Muslims who want to practice sharia law because Sharia law
is not compatible with the Constitution. And before I really
get into some of this and here, because I have
a list of some of the things in sharia law
(29:00):
that I want to bring up. And as I go
through this list, I know that there's going to be
those of you out there that are like, hey, you know,
there's stuff like that in the Bible too. You know
there's stuff like that in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. You know,
one of my uh, one of my favorite pair of
(29:23):
verses in the Bible is absolutely hilarious. And what's even
funnier is whenever I was in junior high actually this
was during the summer between my junior and senior high
school years, and I had seen a group of people
(29:43):
act out this very verse on stage, and I thought
it was absolutely freaking hilarious. So let me go ahead
and recite to you the verse. If two men are fighting,
and the wife of one of them rescues her husband
from his assailant and reaches out and seizes him by
his private parts, you shall cut off her hand, show
(30:07):
her no pity. Yes, that's in Deuteronomy. I'm a child.
I acknowledge that. I'm okay with it. But you see,
there is a fundamental difference between the Old Testament Bible,
(30:29):
the Holy Bible versus the Old Testament and the Koran.
There's a difference between the New Testament of the Holy
Bible and the New Testament of the Koran. See, the
New Testament says that, no, you don't do that. This
(30:52):
is how it was then, but as of two thousand
years ago, that is not how things are done today.
But in the Qoran it's backwards. Yeah, there were some
violent things in the Old Testament. There were some things
(31:13):
that I would very much agree with you that, you know,
maybe we shouldn't do that type of stuff today, And
I perfectly agree with you. But that was the Old
Testament of the Holy Bible. Now we live under a
new Commandment, the New Testament. That's Christianity. But in the Quran,
(31:34):
it started off all kinds of peaceful and then it
turns violent. So let's get into the Sharia law. This
is why Sharia law is not compatible with the Constitution.
Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands. Yeah, Criticizing
(32:00):
or denying any part of the Koran is punishable by death.
Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is
punishable by death. Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death.
A Muslim who becomes a non Muslim is punishable by death.
(32:21):
A non Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam
is punishable by death. A non Muslim man who marries
a Muslim woman is punishable by death. Homosexuality is punishable
by death, but sodomizing boys is fine. Girls clinorists should
be cut. Girls can be sodomized until and vaginally raped
(32:46):
after eight years of age. A woman or girl who
has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist.
Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape
of A female woman or a girl who alleges rape
without producing four male witnesses is guilty of adultery. A
(33:07):
woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death.
A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed
by marrying his victim. Muslim men have sexual rights to
any woman or girl not wearing a hinge ab A
woman can have one husband, who can have up to
(33:27):
four wives. A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
A man can utilatterally divorce his wife. A wife needs
her husband's consent to divorce. A divorced wife loses custody
of all children over six years of age or when
(33:49):
they exceed it. A woman's testimony in court allowed in
property cases, carries half the weight of a man's. A
female or I'm sorry, a female heir inherits half of
what a male heir inherits. A woman cannot speak alone
to a man who is not her husband or a relative.
(34:09):
Meat to eat must come from animals that have been
sacrificed to a law. Muslims should engage in whatever this
is and lie to non Muslims to advance Islam. Now
you tell me is Sharia law compatible with the constitution.
(34:34):
Take the murdering stuff out of there, you know, because well,
I mean, they do have honor killings. You know, that's
something that is very prominent in Muslim Sharia law countries.
It is the only time Muslims are docile in a
(35:04):
country is whenever they are not in control, but once
their population reaches a point that they gain control. Then
they start pushing this type of thing. I mean, you
have places in Michigan and others that are Sharia law zones.
(35:38):
So especially whenever we're talking about because I don't want
you to ignore the headline from Fox News, Republicans push
bill to block and deport Sharia law adherent aliens, as in,
these people are not US citizens, they have I have
(36:00):
no constitutional right to be here. They don't belong here,
and here they want to enact and practice Sharia law
that goes counter to the Constitution. As if they should
just automatically be allowed to do this. I say, no,
(36:24):
they're not. You know, we're not necessarily talking or well, okay,
not necessarily, we are not talking about citizens who are Muslim.
But I just read to you a list of things
that is in Sharia law. In every single one of
(36:48):
these things contradicts the Constitution, the rights and freedom that
everybody has, regardless of your plumbing, everybody has the same
rights and freedom, equal protection under the law, equal justice
under the law. Does this sound like equal justice? Does
(37:12):
this sound like equal representation? Does it sound like equal
rights under the law? No, absolutely not, it doesn't. Now
you tell me, is Sharia law compatible with the Constitution
(37:32):
in the United States of America. I mean, if you
have to have a sharia law zone anywhere, then that
means that you're forfeiting your constitutional rights in America. No,
thank you, absolutely no, thank you. I don't. I'll just
(37:58):
be honest with you. I don't want sharia law here.
It has no place in America. It just doesn't. Anyway,
that's all I got for y'all today. That is it.
I will go ahead and post this magazine over there
on the ho Host Show dot com. And so if
(38:19):
you want to check out the articles that I'll be
using in the show, then go ahead and head on
over to there and check that out. Anyway, do me
a great favorite. Head on over to Stinkpickle dot com
that is s T I N K P I k
l E dot com. Pick yourself up some merch dot
is the best way to support the channel. Anyway, y'alls,
have yourself a great one and I will see you
(38:40):
in the next one.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
This has been the ho Host Show. For more information,
you can head to the hoo Hostshow dot com. And
for the merchandise store, you can head on over to
Stinkpickle dot com that is s T i n k
P I k l E dot com.
Speaker 2 (38:56):
Until next time
Speaker 1 (39:00):
The assists
Yes, welcome to the show, grated the number one most
listened to podcast on Fluida. So join us now as
we discuss news, politics, current events made so much more,
but through the airwaves and strapped in as we.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
Do because the three broadcasting live from weapon I saw
production studio be Welcome to the Ho Host Show and
as always I'm your host, Ho Ho. So hey, y'all's done.
(00:43):
I hope you're doing good. I really do. I got
just a few things, well three three things, yeah, three
things that I'm wanting to talk about in today's show.
A little preemptive show, not preemptive show, and I'll kind
of the spur of the moment show actually But anyway,
like I said, I got a few things that I'm
wanting to talk about, a few stories that I'm wanting
(01:03):
to throw in here. And the title of the show
is unconstitutional, and I gotta be honest with you, I'm
a little well baffled, but yet I'm not surprised about
the articles that I'm throwing in here. And of which case,
(01:24):
after the show, I will be putting this into a well,
onto the blog, onto the website. This way, you can
just head on over to the HO Hot show dat
com and click on that news feed tab and then
you'll see the articles that I have thrown in here.
So let's go ahead and get into it, because it
(01:45):
I kind of find it infuriating whenever the left throws
out this unconstitutional and throws out things like undemocratic or
a threat to democracy. Whenever in a lit dnesty, what
you are seeing happen is anything. But it's not unconstitutional,
(02:08):
It isn't a threat to democracy. But these are the
things that the left throws out there because for the
most part, you've got way too many people that just
believe what they're saying on face value without questioning it.
And that's the part to me, this kind of infuriating,
especially whenever I'm talking about the you know, the threat
(02:30):
to democracy type of a thing, especially whenever you're talking
about Trump in his second term. So let's go ahead
and get into it. This first article that I'm wanting
to touch base on is out of common dreams, never
actually heard of them. But whatever doesn't matter. Headline, as
(02:51):
Deadline nears outlets, have no plans to sign flatly unconstitutional
Pentagon press policy. Now, look, here's why I'm kind of
confused about this. It continues with the you know a
subtitle the policy unveiled last month with bar reporters from
(03:14):
seeking or reporting information that isn't explicitly authorized by the
Trump administration. This article was written today, and really what
this amounts to is kind of simple. They're they're ticked
off because Pete Hegseeth told the the news people, you know,
(03:42):
the journalists, that you're no longer going to get unfettered
access to the Pentagon. You have to sign in, you've
got to get a visitor badge, and you will be escorted.
That's it. And basically every one of them are already
taked off about this, and they're claiming that, oh, this
is unfair, this is unconstitutionally yata YadA, blah blah. But
(04:05):
it's like, you know, okay, look, so you want unfettered
access to the Pentagon, to be able to go wherever
you want to talk to whomever you want to and
get whatever information that you can. Okay. And I had
heard Matt Locke talking about this, host of Voice of
(04:27):
the working Man podcast, and one of the things he
threw in there was wait a second, you know, you know,
like taxpayer dollars is the thing that's funding Pentagon, and
of which case that should just automatically give them access
because it's taxpayer funded, And of which case it's like,
wait a second, where was that frame of mind on
(04:50):
January sixth? Don't the people have the right to have
unfettered access then to the Capitol Building? But I'm actually
going to take this a little bit different of a
of approach on this because it infuriates me because how
is this unconstitutional? And this is exactly what happens when
(05:17):
you go into a building, all right, whenever you go
into a business, when you go into something, you know,
you're not just going to get unfettered access. You know.
Let let's say you go into well, these buildings that
you know these journalists work out of, you know, like
(05:40):
their head office or whatever. Do you think that they're
just going to let you roam around, have full access
without any type of an escort, without any type of
a security badge, without any type of security to keep
track of what where you are and what you're doing. No,
(06:01):
obviously not. You know, I work for a company, and
you know I deliver I deliver things to you know,
various places, So I'm at a lot of different locations
throughout the course of the year. We have a lot
of customers, you know, like around the one hundred customer range,
(06:22):
and I've gone to quite a few of these different facilities.
And even though I am a known commodity, you know,
a lot like these journalists are at the Pentagon, I
still don't have unfettered access. I have access to get in,
do what I need to do, and then leave. I
(06:46):
just can't wander the property. I can't go inside and
do whatever. I can't do that. Why Because I don't
work there. I don't have access. They're security measures in place,
and I can't violate that. I can't even have my
cell phone out at all because they don't want me
(07:09):
to take recordings, pictures, anything. It's security. It's the way
things happen. You know, when you go into a place
of business, you're not allowed unfettered access. I mean, if
this person were to come to your home, you don't
know who they are, you don't know them from Adam whatever.
(07:30):
I mean, are you really going to give them unfettered
access to go wherever they want to within your home? No,
of course not. It's asinine to even believe that. And
what's also asinine is whenever these security protocols are put
into place for these so called journalists who are I mean,
let's be honest, anything. But they're treating it as though
(07:57):
it's unconstitutional, like they deserve, like they should, like they
are supposed to just have unfettered access to be able
to do whatever the hell they want to. It's not unconstitutional,
it's not. Just because they say it is doesn't actually
(08:17):
make it so. It's not unconstitutional to put security protocols
in place. And I mean, I'm really kind of curious.
I mean, are you really going to throw a fit
because you're going to be treated as an outsider as
you should be and expected to follow security protocols. I mean, really,
(08:40):
what are they going to do? I mean what are
they going to do? Are they going to cry? And
you know, Sue Pete Hegseth and people at the Pentagon
because they're not given full access. It's like, look, you
can sign in, get a security badge, get an escort,
(09:01):
get access that way. If you don't want to do that,
then no access. They're not. You know, it's not like
it's a violation of the First Amendment right the freedom
of press. No, you have the right to be able
to print whatever dumbass shit you want to But just
because you claim that it's unconstitutional doesn't mean that it's unconstitutional.
(09:23):
You still have the ability to print whatever it is
going to print. But one of the things we seem
to have forgotten as a society as a nation is FAFO.
You know, it's consequences to your action. I mean, yeah,
you may have the right to say whatever it is
(09:43):
you want to say. I mean, you go up on
my porch, you can say whatever it is you want
to say. But that's not to say that there's not
going to be potential consequences for saying it. I mean, really,
what are they going to do? Are they really going
to suit? How far do they think that's actually going
(10:06):
to get? Is it going to backfire tremendously? I think
it is. I think it really is. I mean it's
just I think it's absolutely stupid how they're playing victim
whenever most every Republican knows and every conservative knows that
what these places end up putting in the print is
(10:28):
not truth. It's not factual. You know. They they spend
the tail however they want to to try to make
their side look better, to try to, you know, put
forth an agenda, put forth a narrative that they support.
I mean, that's what they do. That's always what they've done,
(10:51):
you know. And if you didn't have so many of
these so called journalists doing just that, would Pete Hegseth,
would Donald Trump? Would any of these people in Trump's administration?
Would they have a problem or an issue with these journalists?
Know they wouldn't. But here's the thing, though, too. Every
one of them is being held to the same standard.
(11:13):
Democrats aren't used to that. Democrats are used to getting
prefer preferential treatment, preferred treatment. They're used to being catered
to and being able to do whatever it is that
they're one because they're used to controlling the narrative. They're
(11:38):
used to people having to bend to their will. And
that's not what President Trump's all about. That's not what
Pete hegg Saith is all about. They're losing power and
they are trying everything that they can in order to
(11:59):
keep said, let's go ahead and move on, because this
next one I found absolutely hilarious. I really did. This
one comes from Mediaite headline inherently corrupting Obama condemns Trump
sending National Guard to Chicago says Potus has damaged democracy.
(12:23):
Oh no, Trump's damaged democracy. Okay, look, let me let
me touch base on a couple of things here. One,
it's Obama saying this. Right. No, Look, I'm not saying that,
you know, Obama's not a US citizen. I'm not saying that,
(12:44):
you know, Obama stole the election, not saying that, you know,
I believe as though he did win, farre and square
got no qualms with that. You know, he did. He
was the man of the hour. But for Obama to
(13:04):
say that somebody is doing something that is anti democracy
is laughable. It really is. I mean, I'm just throwing
that out there. It is absolutely laughable because, I mean,
we all know a lot of the things that came
(13:27):
out of Obama's White House, Obama's administration. We all know this.
We all know that he is the one who, you know,
really got the ball rolling on weaponizing government against your enemies.
He is the person who was behind not going after
(13:51):
Hillary Clinton for her email scandal. I mean, yes, it
was Bill Clinton too, but it was Obama. Let me
illustrate that point real quick. Because every single person that
Hillary Clinton sent or received classified information to or from
(14:12):
they are guilty of the same thing Hillary Clinton was
guilty of, and that is mishandling classified information. And every
single person in the Obama White House, in the Obama administration,
they are all guilty, including Obama himself. So do you
really think that Obama wanted this to really get out?
(14:32):
Do you really think that he wanted an actual investigation,
especially after the fact that Hillary Clinton was like, look,
if I go down, I'm taking all yaws with me.
It ain't going to be just me. And she was
serious about that. I have no doubt in my mind.
She had the receipts, she had the evidence, she had
(14:52):
the proof, she knew, she knew where the bodies were buried.
She wasn't going to take it lying down. A lot
of the things on the attacks against President current President
Trump was that to be hessed and orders, and because
(15:16):
nothing happened without his say so, without his okay, without
his nod, Obama was behind every last bit of it.
But let me get to this democracy thing. Okay, well, no, no, no,
let me back up a little bit. Trump sending the
National Guard to Chicago now, because this kind of ties
(15:40):
hand in hand with the damage to democracy thing, right, Okay,
because one of the things that Obama is he's neglecting.
He's neglecting to realize, he's neglecting to understand, he is
flat ignoring the truth of the matter is that Trump
(16:01):
won every swing state. Trump won the popular vote. Now,
first and foremost, the obvious. We are not a democracy.
We are a constitutional republic, not a democracy, a constitutional republic.
(16:29):
But if these democrats want to continue to throw around
the word democracy like it actually means something, well, let's
talk about democracy then, because what is democracy It's rule
of the majority. So if the majority of the people
(16:50):
voted for President Trump, President Trump won the popular vote,
because you can't throw in there, as Obama has done
in the past, it's like, I, you know, I'm doing
this for the people that didn't vote, too, because I
automatically assumed that every single person that didn't vote in
America would have voted for me, right, I mean, that's
kind of what he arrogantly said. No, the people that
(17:16):
voted are the ones who wanted to make their voices heard,
and the majority of the people in the United States
of America voted for President Trump. What is that If
it isn't democracy and a fundamental thing the President Trump
ran on was law and order, holding people accountable. And
(17:38):
what you have in Chicago is out of control crime.
That's what you have. One of the things the President
Trump won on, as in one of the things that
got him elected is he was not a soft on
(18:00):
crime president. I'm going to hold these people accountable because
the victims are worth something. We're not going to cater
to these out of control cities that don't want to
do anything about crime that victimize the criminals. We're not
about that. That's what the majority of the people one
(18:23):
of the things that they elected President Trump on. So
how is this one anti democracy? How is this unconstitutional?
Because this is exactly what the president is supposed to
be doing because when these governors failed to act, well, okay,
when the mayors failed to control the population, and they're
(18:46):
saying control the criminals, and it's up to the governor.
If the governor fails, and it's up to the president.
It's about law and order, it's about enforcing the crime.
And you know, this same very same argument as in
dealing with ice. This is something an argument that Obama
had with Arizona and I think he even had it
(19:10):
with Texas because you know, Obama was failing to enforce,
and I know this also happened under Biden, but the
president was failing to enforce, and they said, oh no,
oh wait not yeah. So so the president was failing
to enforce. Governor stepped in and said, okay, if you're
(19:31):
not going to act, then we are, which again was
their right to do so constitutionally protected. It was. It's
actually in the constitution. You can do it, read it,
check it for yourself. But you know, he got a
lot of pushback saying, oh, no, immigration is strictly a
you know, immigration enforcement is strictly a president executive order.
(19:57):
It's a federal matter, not a state matter. You have
no say. And in Illinois and the worst city in
Illinois being Chicago, hands down, and other cities as well,
(20:19):
if these governors are not going to act and do
their job and make sure that they enforce federal immigration laws,
because that's what these are, then the president has every
right in the constitutional authority to go in there, especially
whenever you know, Obama is one of them that specifically
(20:40):
said this is a federal matter, not a state matter,
and we have the right to enforce federal law. You don't,
So here we have somebody the very president. They shot
down the governors for trying to enforce federal law, saying that, oh, no,
you can't enforce the federal law if the state governor
(21:02):
doesn't want you to do so. No, no, no, no, shut
your mouth. You can't have it both ways, just because
that now you have a president in office that is
that wants to enforce federal law. No, you can't just
change your mind on what is right for what is
right now. You can't do that. And to say that
(21:24):
it's a damage to democracy will want no shit, Sherlock.
We are in a constitutional republic. But that's ignoring the
fact that the majority of Americans voted for President Trump
and one of the things he ran on was cleaning
up these cities, getting rid of these illegal aliens, holding
criminals accountable whenever they commit crimes. It's exactly what we
(21:50):
voted for. For all those memes out there that are asking,
is this what you've voted for? Yes, it is. You're
damn right, it is. This is exact exactly what I've
voted for. I mean, I truly do find it laughable
because of all people, I mean, it wouldn't be bad
(22:12):
or at least as bad if it came out of
Bill Clinton. But no, it was Obama, one of the
people who went out and attacked governors for trying to
enforce immigration laws, saying that no, stay in your lane.
This is a federal matter, not a state matter. And
now he's going to go out and bad mouth Trump
(22:33):
for doing exactly what he directed, making this not a
state matter, but by making this a federal matter. Are
you picking up what I'm throwing down here? Are you
understanding the double speak that we here come out of
(22:56):
the Democrats? All this think in time? I hope you are.
I hope you get it, because this type of stuff
is absolutely infuriating. It is ridiculous, you know, and and
is I almost have to applaud Obama, right, I got
to give them kudos. I mean, the goal on this
(23:18):
person to say what he did, knowing what it is
he did and how he was whenever he was president.
I mean that that takes some guts, right. And one
of the things that the Democrats thrive on, especially the
political class, and you know the you know, the the
journalists and you know, the talking heads of the Democrat Party.
(23:40):
You know, they really thrive on the fact that most
people just aren't going to remember what happened previously. I
know I've talked about this before on on other shows,
but the whole you know, uh, forget today, it's the
(24:01):
you know, the memory of tomorrow. Forget today. Doesn't matter
in the past, right, I mean, that's how they operate.
It doesn't matter what they did in the past. They
can just change whatever they want to, point fingers at
whoever they want to, and the media is going to
(24:22):
have their back, and they're going to act like, oh, no,
Obama didn't do that. Obama didn't say that. No, no, no,
of course he didn't. Why would he because he has
always believed that governors should have a final say in
how laws are enforced. Except you and I we know different.
(24:48):
We remember what happened during Obama's presidency. Of course, we
remembered what happens. We remember what happened ring at Biden's presidency.
We're not stupid. You're not going to gas like us.
You're not going to stay you know, sit there and
tell me. Don't believe my lying eyes. I know better.
(25:14):
I'm awake, not woke. Right. Moving on last topic of today,
now this one, Oh that was the wrong one. So
this headlines out of Fox News, Chip Roy and other
(25:34):
Republicans push bill to block and deport Sharia law adherent aliens,
calling them an existential threat. Europe should be a wake
up call to America showing what the spread of Sharia
law looks like the erosion of the West. Roy warned, now, look,
(25:58):
I am one of them people that I am all
about freedom of religion. Absolutely, okay, I very much am.
And for the most part, most religions are very docile
whenever it comes to how they interact with people of
other religions. Okay, very tolerant, you know, regardless of whether
(26:23):
they accept But still one of them things are going
to put their big boy pants on and they're going
to be tolerant. You know, they're not going to go
after you publicly. They're not going to you know, you're
not at risk of being harmed, being hurt, being attacked
just because you believe something different. I have my big
boy pants on. If I don't like what you have
(26:43):
to say, I'll shut the door. If you come to
my house trying to promote something that I disagree with,
I'll turn around, I'll walk away. If I'm into public space,
I'm not going to threaten your life. I'm not going
to beat you up, not going to do that. That's
not what adults do. That's what children throwing a temper
tantrum does. Right, I'm an adult, and most religions out
(27:07):
there are like that when it comes to dealing with
people of different faiths. So I'm all about the First Amendment.
You have the right to worship as you see fit,
as your faith dictates that you do. However, and this
is a fundamental belief, a fundamental principle of the Constitution,
(27:34):
because your freedom ends where mine begins. You have the
freedom of speech, you don't have the freedom to force
it down my throat. You don't have the freedom and
the right to enforce your beliefs on me. You don't
(27:54):
have that. That's not in the Constitution. And yes, I've
said it before, I'll say it again. The Constitution grants
you the freedom of it does not grant you the
freedom from So if you're going to live here, then
you're just going to have to get used to other
people worshiping as they see fit. And as long as
(28:15):
that doesn't violate your own freedom, then you just have
to put up with it. Sorry, not really, but there's
a difference between most every other religions out there and
(28:37):
Muslims who want to practice sharia law because Sharia law
is not compatible with the Constitution. And before I really
get into some of this and here, because I have
a list of some of the things in sharia law
(29:00):
that I want to bring up. And as I go
through this list, I know that there's going to be
those of you out there that are like, hey, you know,
there's stuff like that in the Bible too. You know
there's stuff like that in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. You know,
one of my uh, one of my favorite pair of
(29:23):
verses in the Bible is absolutely hilarious. And what's even
funnier is whenever I was in junior high actually this
was during the summer between my junior and senior high
school years, and I had seen a group of people
(29:43):
act out this very verse on stage, and I thought
it was absolutely freaking hilarious. So let me go ahead
and recite to you the verse. If two men are fighting,
and the wife of one of them rescues her husband
from his assailant and reaches out and seizes him by
his private parts, you shall cut off her hand, show
(30:07):
her no pity. Yes, that's in Deuteronomy. I'm a child.
I acknowledge that. I'm okay with it. But you see,
there is a fundamental difference between the Old Testament Bible,
(30:29):
the Holy Bible versus the Old Testament and the Koran.
There's a difference between the New Testament of the Holy
Bible and the New Testament of the Koran. See, the
New Testament says that, no, you don't do that. This
(30:52):
is how it was then, but as of two thousand
years ago, that is not how things are done today.
But in the Qoran it's backwards. Yeah, there were some
violent things in the Old Testament. There were some things
(31:13):
that I would very much agree with you that, you know,
maybe we shouldn't do that type of stuff today, And
I perfectly agree with you. But that was the Old
Testament of the Holy Bible. Now we live under a
new Commandment, the New Testament. That's Christianity. But in the Quran,
(31:34):
it started off all kinds of peaceful and then it
turns violent. So let's get into the Sharia law. This
is why Sharia law is not compatible with the Constitution.
Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands. Yeah, Criticizing
(32:00):
or denying any part of the Koran is punishable by death.
Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is
punishable by death. Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death.
A Muslim who becomes a non Muslim is punishable by death.
(32:21):
A non Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam
is punishable by death. A non Muslim man who marries
a Muslim woman is punishable by death. Homosexuality is punishable
by death, but sodomizing boys is fine. Girls clinorists should
be cut. Girls can be sodomized until and vaginally raped
(32:46):
after eight years of age. A woman or girl who
has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist.
Testimonies of four male witnesses are required to prove rape
of A female woman or a girl who alleges rape
without producing four male witnesses is guilty of adultery. A
(33:07):
woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death.
A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed
by marrying his victim. Muslim men have sexual rights to
any woman or girl not wearing a hinge ab A
woman can have one husband, who can have up to
(33:27):
four wives. A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
A man can utilatterally divorce his wife. A wife needs
her husband's consent to divorce. A divorced wife loses custody
of all children over six years of age or when
(33:49):
they exceed it. A woman's testimony in court allowed in
property cases, carries half the weight of a man's. A
female or I'm sorry, a female heir inherits half of
what a male heir inherits. A woman cannot speak alone
to a man who is not her husband or a relative.
(34:09):
Meat to eat must come from animals that have been
sacrificed to a law. Muslims should engage in whatever this
is and lie to non Muslims to advance Islam. Now
you tell me is Sharia law compatible with the constitution.
(34:34):
Take the murdering stuff out of there, you know, because well,
I mean, they do have honor killings. You know, that's
something that is very prominent in Muslim Sharia law countries.
It is the only time Muslims are docile in a
(35:04):
country is whenever they are not in control, but once
their population reaches a point that they gain control. Then
they start pushing this type of thing. I mean, you
have places in Michigan and others that are Sharia law zones.
(35:38):
So especially whenever we're talking about because I don't want
you to ignore the headline from Fox News, Republicans push
bill to block and deport Sharia law adherent aliens, as in,
these people are not US citizens, they have I have
(36:00):
no constitutional right to be here. They don't belong here,
and here they want to enact and practice Sharia law
that goes counter to the Constitution. As if they should
just automatically be allowed to do this. I say, no,
(36:24):
they're not. You know, we're not necessarily talking or well, okay,
not necessarily, we are not talking about citizens who are Muslim.
But I just read to you a list of things
that is in Sharia law. In every single one of
(36:48):
these things contradicts the Constitution, the rights and freedom that
everybody has, regardless of your plumbing, everybody has the same
rights and freedom, equal protection under the law, equal justice
under the law. Does this sound like equal justice? Does
(37:12):
this sound like equal representation? Does it sound like equal
rights under the law? No, absolutely not, it doesn't. Now
you tell me, is Sharia law compatible with the Constitution
(37:32):
in the United States of America. I mean, if you
have to have a sharia law zone anywhere, then that
means that you're forfeiting your constitutional rights in America. No,
thank you, absolutely no, thank you. I don't. I'll just
(37:58):
be honest with you. I don't want sharia law here.
It has no place in America. It just doesn't. Anyway,
that's all I got for y'all today. That is it.
I will go ahead and post this magazine over there
on the ho Host Show dot com. And so if
(38:19):
you want to check out the articles that I'll be
using in the show, then go ahead and head on
over to there and check that out. Anyway, do me
a great favorite. Head on over to Stinkpickle dot com
that is s T I N K P I k
l E dot com. Pick yourself up some merch dot
is the best way to support the channel. Anyway, y'alls,
have yourself a great one and I will see you
(38:40):
in the next one.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
This has been the ho Host Show. For more information,
you can head to the hoo Hostshow dot com. And
for the merchandise store, you can head on over to
Stinkpickle dot com that is s T i n k
P I k l E dot com.
Speaker 2 (38:56):
Until next time
Speaker 1 (39:00):
The assists
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
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.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.