Speaker 1: Stay right here for our final news roundup and information Overload.
Speaker 2: All right, News Roundup, Information Overload hour. Here's our toll
Speaker 2: free telephone number if you want to be a part
Speaker 2: of the program. It is eight hundred and ninety four
Speaker 2: one Shawn if you would like to join us. We
Speaker 2: have a lot of developments as it relates to the declassification.
Speaker 2: If you remember the career senior intelligence officials, they did
Speaker 2: a determination, an audit if you will, of the twenty
Speaker 2: sixteen election, and we read what their findings were. They
Speaker 2: didn't find any evidence of Trump Russia collusion at all whatsoever.
Speaker 2: And that was the case up until early December of
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen, and then all of a sudden, according to
Speaker 2: the declassified documents, well then Barack Obama did not like
Speaker 2: what they had to say and ordered another intelligent intelligence
Speaker 2: community assessment that got taken over by the likes of
Speaker 2: Brennan and Clapper and others, and it came up with
Speaker 2: a conclusion that completely contradicted what senior intelligence officials had concluded.
Speaker 2: As John Solomon says, it was polluted or corrupted, and
Speaker 2: it was turned on its head. According to Tulci Gabbards
Speaker 2: at the direct Orders of Barack Obama himself. There's a
Speaker 2: lot of speculation about who might be held accountable to
Speaker 2: all of this, but it goes even further with this.
Speaker 2: The person responsible for the Second Intelligence Assessment ended up
Speaker 2: being somebody that John Solomon now has done a deep
Speaker 2: dive into, and I have ausinews dot com headline he's
Speaker 2: the founder, editor in chief and chief investigative reporter about
Speaker 2: how social media posts unmasked an anti Trump sentiment of
Speaker 2: the CIA officer that helped draft the Second Intelligence Community
Speaker 2: Assessment report that they wanted the one that set in
Speaker 2: motion a phony narrative about Donald Trump and Russia that
Speaker 2: even career and senior Intel officials had said, this is
Speaker 2: absolutely ridiculously wrong, and they didn't care because they wanted
Speaker 2: their report to basically sabotage an incoming president. John Solomon
Speaker 2: joins US Now, am I assessing that right?
Speaker 3: Yeah, listen, this is an important story, and I want
Speaker 3: to remind everybody back in the Reagan years forty years ago,
Speaker 3: the Reagan administration used to always say people are policy.
Speaker 3: The people you pick and put into these positions end
Speaker 3: up crafting and driving the policies. In the conclusion that
Speaker 3: government makes and I think we now know something about
Speaker 3: a woman named Susan Miller. She was the CIA counter
Speaker 3: intelligence chief as Russia collusion was playing out in twenty
Speaker 3: sixteen seventeen eighteen, and she has been on media the
Speaker 3: last few days now that she retired, saying, I helped
Speaker 3: lead the team that drafted this ICA, this Intelligence Community Assessment,
Speaker 3: the one that brought the way.
Speaker 2: The ICA is the second ICA. They had the first
Speaker 2: version of it, which got rejected for political reasons.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and by the way, they had briefed it the
Speaker 3: Congress array, so Congress was told no, Vladimir Putin didn't
Speaker 3: have a preferred candick, No, he didn't try to help
Speaker 3: Donald Trump. And then they do a one hundred and
Speaker 3: eighty degree flip in December of twenty sixteen as Barack
Speaker 3: Obama's leading a leaving office, and then they released a
Speaker 3: different conclusion. Well, this woman has said in numerous legacy
Speaker 3: media interviews that she was the woman that led the
Speaker 3: team that helped draft this Intelligence Community Assessment. What do
Speaker 3: we know about this woman other than what role she
Speaker 3: played in the CI And the answer is, since she
Speaker 3: retired in the last year, she's been very active in
Speaker 3: social media. We know this because of the great work
Speaker 3: of my colleague here at justin News, Jerry Dunleavy, one
Speaker 3: of the great investigative reporters. He went through all her
Speaker 3: social media, particularly well LinkedIn, where she's a pro poster.
Speaker 3: That's a social media for business colleagues, and lots of
Speaker 3: us who are professionals use it well. In her time there,
Speaker 3: she's referred to Donald Trump as a dictator. She's referred
Speaker 3: to MAGA supporters as Nazis. She suggested that the Steele dossier,
Speaker 3: which John Dura's report Flatley said, didn't have any truthful
Speaker 3: information or accurate information, and that it still might be true.
Speaker 3: This is a woman that clearly, at least now has
Speaker 3: anti Trump sentiments of a massive level, very prolific in
Speaker 3: how she writes. There's a point where she's talking on
Speaker 3: social media, people sharing stories and they say, look Trump,
Speaker 3: there are parallels to Trump and Hitler, and she says,
Speaker 3: it's not lost on me the comparison. These are really
Speaker 3: remarkable statements that she's making. That Jerry dug up. We've
Speaker 3: also gone through some of her interviews and looked at
Speaker 3: some of the things that she said. But when you
Speaker 3: look at this woman, she clearly, at least today, is
Speaker 3: very anti Trump. And this is the sort of woman
Speaker 3: that was helping John Brennan drive that second conclusion by
Speaker 3: her own description, by what she says, this is what
Speaker 3: she did.
Speaker 2: Okay, let's go through some of this, because this is
Speaker 2: pretty amazing to me. All Right. So she's writing, you know,
Speaker 2: exhaustively on linked LinkedIn and recently retired CIA counterintelligence officer,
Speaker 2: and she's doing these media interviews and apparently handpicked, allegedly
Speaker 2: hand picked by former CIA director John Brennan himself. After
Speaker 2: they didn't like the career senior analyst assessment, they decide
Speaker 2: to make another assessment. She gets chosen for this, and
Speaker 2: she has repeatedly been out there suggesting Trump may be
Speaker 2: a Russian asset or a Kremlin asset, claiming that Christopher
Speaker 2: Steele's anti Trump dossier, which we know has been totally
Speaker 2: completely debunked. It was debunked, correct me if I'm wrong
Speaker 2: as early as twenty sixteen in December, and it was
Speaker 2: even debunked before that. People were warned not to use
Speaker 2: it because they knew it was bought and paid for
Speaker 2: by Hillary Clinton. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right. Yeah, they had concerned House. So here's
Speaker 3: another reason beyond just who paid for it. When they
Speaker 3: looked at it from an intelligence product standpoint, it didn't
Speaker 3: rise to the level of trust, meaningful or meritorious intelligence.
Speaker 3: It actually using it in the ICA. The way they
Speaker 3: did violate it the very intelligence roles that Obama's team
Speaker 3: had put in place to govern these analysis. So they
Speaker 3: break their own rules by putting it into the report.
Speaker 3: They knew it wasn't corroborated, and then it had multiple
Speaker 3: things in it that were disprovable, falsely wrong, like Michael
Speaker 3: Cohen didn't go to Prague, remember that famous line home.
Speaker 3: We know that didn't happen. So that's why it wasn't
Speaker 3: supposed to be put in the report, and then they
Speaker 3: shoehorned it in there anyways.
Speaker 2: All right, So let's look at some of the things.
Speaker 2: For example, she also was sending mixed messages that the
Speaker 2: is the ICA team had found no collusion, So you know,
Speaker 2: how do you have it both ways when writing their
Speaker 2: assessment and in late twenty sixteen and even claimed that
Speaker 2: there's no collusion finding was made clear in the ICA.
Speaker 2: But he's singing a very different tune. And let's go
Speaker 2: to the heart of this, which is why was this
Speaker 2: ever questioned in the first place when you had seen
Speaker 2: your career intelligence officials coming to a very different conclusion.
Speaker 2: Why did Barack Obama direct a second assessment to take
Speaker 2: place in the first place. There's no real reason. And
Speaker 2: what role did Brennan, Clapper and call Me play in
Speaker 2: all of this?
Speaker 3: Well, one thing we know for certain. One thing we
Speaker 3: know for certain is that John Brennan wrote an email
Speaker 3: to his team saying I want the DASS in after
Speaker 3: the team said we don't believe it. Belongeria will bring
Speaker 3: shame on the Intelligence Committee. It's not the sort of
Speaker 3: product that we should be basing analytical results, and in
Speaker 3: John Brennan writes an email saying I want it in. Now.
Speaker 3: That's important for some reason, because his story has always
Speaker 3: been the FBI wanted it, and we do know the
Speaker 3: FBI wanted it in. But when he over rules his
Speaker 3: own people, we know that he took that action. Right,
Speaker 3: there's an email John Radcliffe's report makes clear. And now
Speaker 3: we know from last week's release, which is the House
Speaker 3: Intelligence Committee's review of this matter, back when Devin Noons
Speaker 3: were still in charge of it, that several people had
Speaker 3: concerns about the way this analysis was done. It didn't
Speaker 3: follow the rules, It shouldn't have used the Steele dow
Speaker 3: Say had given all the things they knew about it,
Speaker 3: and John Brennan lets that go on. Barack Obama lets
Speaker 3: that go on. Why because he releases that report in
Speaker 3: the aftermath he makes it public in January to dirty
Speaker 3: up Donald Trump as Donald Trump's about to take the
Speaker 3: oath of office for the first time. So and all
Speaker 3: of this, all of this activity in December of January,
Speaker 3: which we've been focusing on in the last couple of weeks,
Speaker 3: has to be looked at in light of what Barack
Speaker 3: Obama knew in July twenty sixteen, because in July twenty
Speaker 3: sixteen there's an intelligence intercept. I think we're going to
Speaker 3: learn a lot more about this in the next couple
Speaker 3: of days where they knew classification. But in July twenty sixteen,
Speaker 3: John Brennan goes over and personally briefs the President and
Speaker 3: tells him there's intelligence Hillary Clinton has authorized a dirty
Speaker 3: trick where she's going to try to make it look
Speaker 3: like Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin are colluding to win
Speaker 3: the election. He knows that Barack Obama knows that. John
Speaker 3: Brennan knows that before the FBI opens up their investigation
Speaker 3: called Crossfire Hurricane. In other words, they know what they
Speaker 3: open up on is the likely fruits of a Hillary
Speaker 3: Clinton political dirty trick, not a real intelligence threat, a
Speaker 3: security matter, a political dirt trick, and they bite on
Speaker 3: it and they legitimize it by going to the fis
Speaker 3: a court, getting a special counsel interviewing everybody, making Mike
Speaker 3: Flynn go through hell. Knowing that Barack Obama knew that
Speaker 3: at the beginning, at the top of the food chain,
Speaker 3: and he doesn't stop. It tells you that Barack Obama
Speaker 3: has some things he really needs to answer to you,
Speaker 3: to the American public.
Speaker 2: All right, quick break will come right back more with
Speaker 2: with John Solomon, founder editor in chief and also chief
Speaker 2: investigative reporter justinews dot com on the other side. Then
Speaker 2: we'll get to your calls eight hundred and nine for
Speaker 2: one Sean if you want to be a part of
Speaker 2: the program as we continue, we continue, John Solomon, as
Speaker 2: for US new developments as it relates to the declassified
Speaker 2: documents involving Russia, Russia, Russia and what a real hoax
Speaker 2: it was, far worse than we ever knew. John Solomon,
Speaker 2: editor in chief, founder of justinews dot com, also the
Speaker 2: chief investigative reporter. Let's go to when did they know
Speaker 2: the dossier was political in nature? When was the first warning?
Speaker 2: The one that I remember was Bruce Or, oddly enough,
Speaker 2: considering Nelly Or was working on the dossier, but Bruce
Speaker 2: Or warned that it was political in nature and shouldn't
Speaker 2: be used. Now, that's just prior to it becoming the
Speaker 2: bulk of information for what became four five applications, three
Speaker 2: of which James Colemy signed. Comy and the FBI director.
Speaker 2: Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe had pushed in December of
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen to include Steele's debunk dossier in the twenty
Speaker 2: sixteen ICA. But didn't they know by December? Didn't they
Speaker 2: get rid of Christopher Steele by December of twenty sixteen?
Speaker 2: And didn't they take them off the payroll for a
Speaker 2: period of time? Wasn't he discredited by that time? Wasn't
Speaker 2: the dossier discredited by December of twenty sixteen?
Speaker 3: It has? And let me give you these precise time
Speaker 3: frame in August of twenty sixteen is when Bruce Org
Speaker 3: gives the first tip off that hey, this is probably
Speaker 3: coming from politics. Now, there are other places where they're
Speaker 3: learning that, but that was an important one because it
Speaker 3: was a senior Justice Department official in November first excuse
Speaker 3: me in the fall of twenty sixteen, based on information
Speaker 3: that was he classified in twenty twenty by the first
Speaker 3: Trump administration, the CIA warned the FBI that Christopher Steele's
Speaker 3: network of sources that he was allegedly basing this information
Speaker 3: was infiltrated, potentially by Russian intelligence and that they needed
Speaker 3: revalidate it. Don't rely on them. They didn't revalidate him.
Speaker 3: They kept them going. On November first, the FBI terminated
Speaker 3: Christopher still the source because he had gone to the
Speaker 3: news media and leaked information from the dossier in the
Speaker 3: existence of what the FBI was doing. So by December,
Speaker 3: all that baggage, all of those red warnings are there.
Speaker 3: But there's one other thing that has happened. The FBI's
Speaker 3: counterintelligence team has built a spreadsheet. You and I broke
Speaker 3: this on your show many years ago. The spreadsheet went
Speaker 3: line by line everything that Christopher Steele was a curt
Speaker 3: and came from his sources and they were ninety percent
Speaker 3: of it they determined either wasn't corroborated or had been debunked.
Speaker 3: It was either uncorroboratable or debunked. That makes it a
Speaker 3: very bad intelligence product, the sort of thing not supposed
Speaker 3: to use to create an ICA for the President of
Speaker 3: the United.
Speaker 2: Well, but senior Intel officials that did the original ICA,
Speaker 2: we're screaming the same thing that this goes against all standards,
Speaker 2: and rat clufs review of everything and post mortem on
Speaker 2: this said the same thing. Last question, and it's about
Speaker 2: two different subjects. Devin Newnez and the Intel board chairman
Speaker 2: want security clearance is revoked over this and other abuses.
Speaker 2: And what do you make of former FBI agents Struck
Speaker 2: deleting all of his posts on social media yesterday?
Speaker 3: Maybe he just decided to take a break from social media.
Speaker 3: He's not going to keep it from the Justice Department.
Speaker 3: You can take him down, but obviously Twitter archives them,
Speaker 3: they're there for everybody to see. So I don't think
Speaker 3: it's a grand conspiracy with Pete Struck done. Maybe he
Speaker 3: just decided, after all that's been exposed about him, he
Speaker 3: doesn't want to stay in the town hall anymore and
Speaker 3: keep talking about it because we now have the facts
Speaker 3: to judge his behavior much differently than we did a
Speaker 3: few years ago. But no one's going to get rid
Speaker 3: of those posts there in time machine. Twitter is going
Speaker 3: to keep them. I think he's just gone silent on
Speaker 3: social media, probably because the heat's turning up on him,
Speaker 3: like so many of the players. Now, people are beginning
Speaker 3: to realize he trusted these FBI agents, but they may
Speaker 3: have misled us. And I think that he's praising for
Speaker 3: a moment. I think this next revelation that comes out,
Speaker 3: the timing of Petees truck topping off is because there's
Speaker 3: going to be the classified annex of the Durham Report
Speaker 3: being released. I asked President Trump in an interview ten
Speaker 3: days ago, would you because if it he said yes,
Speaker 3: he immediately went and started the process that's going to happen.
Speaker 3: What that annex is going to show is that it
Speaker 3: wasn't just Barack Obama and John Brennan that knew that
Speaker 3: Hillary Clinton was pulling a dirty trick, That the FBI
Speaker 3: themselves knew that Hillary Clinton was doing this dirty trick,
Speaker 3: and they continued to proceed down the line of crossfire.
Speaker 3: Hurricane the fice of Warrens, all the things that we
Speaker 3: now know about. I think that moment's going to be
Speaker 3: a very difficult moment for people who worked in the
Speaker 3: Komi mckabe FBI, because it's going to show they were
Speaker 3: legitimizing something they need to just simply be a dirty trick.
Speaker 2: I want to see if this grand conspiracy has followed
Speaker 2: through on I don't want to overpromise an underdeliver, but
Speaker 2: it has all the markings of the biggest political scandal,
Speaker 2: far bigger than Watergate in the last one hundred years.
Speaker 2: Let's see where it goes. We've been disappointed before. John
Speaker 2: solomonsinews dot com. We appreciate your time and your hard
Speaker 2: work as always, and thank you for sharing it with
Speaker 2: us as always. Also, you know how I know I'm
Speaker 2: getting old, Linda gray hair all right? Wise, Wisenheimer, are
Speaker 2: you it's five thirty? It's allow Now, you're a wise
Speaker 2: Laura Wise It that's a wise ask comment. You're right,
Speaker 2: that's a wise ask, cimate.
Speaker 4: Indeed it is. I mean there are other things that
Speaker 4: are indicative of old age, you know, asking a lot
Speaker 4: of questions. What did I tell you earlier? I can't
Speaker 4: remember Why did I walk in this room? What did
Speaker 4: I come here? For all of those boys?
Speaker 2: I haven't gotten to that point in my life yet,
Speaker 2: but if I do, I'll let you know. What's that said?
Speaker 4: God bless you, so I'll tell you.
Speaker 2: I know I'm getting hold when I read the hard
Speaker 2: copy of the New York Post every day, which I do,
Speaker 2: and I kind of that's the one thing I take
Speaker 2: my time with. I've raced through.
Speaker 4: Where do you get it from?
Speaker 2: It's all over the place down here? Is there really
Speaker 2: seven eleven? You get at CBS, you can get it
Speaker 2: at public, so you can get anywhere.
Speaker 4: It really is New York with sand Okay, it's.
Speaker 2: New York with Sandon and better weather than the crap
Speaker 2: weather you've been having in the Northeast all spring in
Speaker 2: summer long, it's been horrible. So you know, you get
Speaker 2: old when when I go to page six, which is
Speaker 2: like the gossip page, and it's always interesting, and when
Speaker 2: I start seeing somebody over and over and over again,
Speaker 2: and I have no earthly idea who the person is.
Speaker 2: And apparently this young woman, Sydney Sweeney, is very very popular.
Speaker 2: Do you know about this girl?
Speaker 4: I know about her because of the news I have
Speaker 4: never seen her before.
Speaker 2: No, Okay, she's all over page six almost on a
Speaker 2: daily basis, or they have a picture of her in
Speaker 2: the like every day. She's like the IT person of
Speaker 2: the hour, right, correct and anyway, So she starts this
Speaker 2: ad campaign and now there's a backlash to it, and
Speaker 2: the ad campaign includes her wearing American Eagle gene products
Speaker 2: modeling with a dog and a white Mustang. Okay, the
Speaker 2: ads declared that Sweeney has great genes ge n ees.
Speaker 2: Now I interpreted that to me, Oh, she's an attractive
Speaker 2: young lady. Okay, That's how I interpreted it. The word
Speaker 2: genes spell ge nes is replaced with genes, which is
Speaker 2: what they're selling. Now, these people on social media have
Speaker 2: lost their mind and they're trying to tie the ad
Speaker 2: to Nazism and racism? Did you mean to include a
Speaker 2: bunch of Nazi dog whistles in this?
Speaker 3: Now?
Speaker 2: I think I'm pretty hip to anti semitism. I mean,
Speaker 2: there are people out there that are claiming and it's
Speaker 2: gone more viral than I ever thought it wouldn't. We
Speaker 2: talked about it a little bit yesterday. I talked about
Speaker 2: it with Patrick bet David on his podcast. That are
Speaker 2: trying to rewrite history as though Winston Churchill was not
Speaker 2: one of the most heroic and brave, you know people
Speaker 2: in his time and battling back the forces of evil
Speaker 2: with blood, oil and sweat. And what do we what
Speaker 2: do I am Victory one of one of one of
Speaker 2: the great leaders of our time. During the bombing of
Speaker 2: Britain's guys walking among the people and he's standing up.
Speaker 2: He understood Hitler was evil and and thank god, you know,
Speaker 2: he was able to lead the way and Europe was
Speaker 2: saved and victory in Europe occurred. And and somehow they're arguing, well,
Speaker 2: he didn't save Western civilization, no, but he he saved
Speaker 2: it for his time. And I'll go back to my
Speaker 2: interview with Levin earlier, and it's like, well, Reagan said
Speaker 2: it best. You know, we're but one generation away from freedom.
Speaker 2: Every generation has their their moral obligation to preserve the
Speaker 2: cause of liberty and freedom, and it lands on their shoulders.
Speaker 2: You can't blame somebody from the forties that defeated Nazism
Speaker 2: and fascism, and we defeated imperial Japan and expect that
Speaker 2: they're responsible for every generation thereafter. And I know this
Speaker 2: is a debate that apparently some people are buying into
Speaker 2: this revisionism and I'm having a hard time understanding how
Speaker 2: they are claiming to be conservative and believing that. But
Speaker 2: I do believe in freedom of speech. But I digress.
Speaker 2: And anyway, apparently MSDNC had an opinion piece arguing the
Speaker 2: ad shows a cultural shift to whiteness, as well as
Speaker 2: ABC's Good Morning America platforming the criticism with a report
Speaker 2: on critics comparing the ad to Nazi propaganda and with
Speaker 2: racial undertones. Whiteness is ugly. This is the ideology of
Speaker 2: the left. Political consultant and Ryan James Dusky, writing on
Speaker 2: x in response to the MSDNZ opinion post, I mean,
Speaker 2: this thing has gone super heavy viral here, and I'm
Speaker 2: just I don't know this young girl. I don't know
Speaker 2: much about it. I guess she's a movie star. I
Speaker 2: have no idea.
Speaker 4: She's laying a lot of TV shows and stuff, all.
Speaker 2: Right, so she's very popular. She's a pretty young woman. Fine,
Speaker 2: that's why she's in the paper. Okay, she's doing a
Speaker 2: gene ad and it's like, oh, okay, she's a pretty girl,
Speaker 2: so we'll spell Jens ge Nes. How does that have
Speaker 2: anything to do with Nazis. Tell me what I might
Speaker 2: be missing here. I could be missing something.
Speaker 4: You're just missing a liberal gene. We went from a
Speaker 4: very long period of time where the ugliest and most
Speaker 4: out of shape people were supposed to be the people
Speaker 4: that we looked at and said, whoever you are, it's beautiful,
Speaker 4: instead of addressing the real issues of maybe that nose
Speaker 4: ring is not for you, maybe you shouldn't dye your
Speaker 4: hair eighteen colors, Maybe you should work out because you
Speaker 4: might get diabetes and it's hard on your knees and
Speaker 4: your joints, in your heart. We weren't allowed to talk
Speaker 4: about these things. So they put a pretty girl in
Speaker 4: jeans because guess what that sells jeans, and they did it.
Speaker 2: Guess what. They did the same thing years ago with
Speaker 2: Brooks Shields, and it was a huge controversy. You know
Speaker 2: what comes between me and Mike Calvin's nothing right.
Speaker 4: But she was fourteen years old, so it was gross.
Speaker 4: I mean, I wouldn't like my fourteen year old ugh
Speaker 4: to do that, but you know, they have been.
Speaker 2: I actually met her once. In fairness to her, she
Speaker 2: was very lovely. She's a very nice, lovely, lovely woman.
Speaker 4: It doesn't mean that she wasn't you know, manhandled and
Speaker 4: manipulated as a childhood start fourteen.
Speaker 2: That's a parent, parental decision. I'm not going to get
Speaker 2: into a personal life, right. So leftists are melting down
Speaker 2: after American Eagle dropped this ad with Sydney Sweeney over
Speaker 2: the blue jeans. Then the ad shows Sweety flaunting the
Speaker 2: jeans in a provocative fashion. Okay, aka, I guess Brooks,
Speaker 2: Shields and Calvin's and it shows you know are doing
Speaker 2: that with a voiceover of the actress talking about her genes.
Speaker 2: And then he took the ad to employ wordplay in
Speaker 2: order to imply that people with good genes was spelled
Speaker 2: with a G are better than others. I mean, come on,
Speaker 2: stress from the real anti semitism we hear every day.
Speaker 4: Let me tell you what it is. It's an opportunity
Speaker 4: to take a very popular story and make it woke
Speaker 4: as a joke, in an effort to make people who
Speaker 4: are looking at it and say, oh my gosh. For
Speaker 4: a moment, I let go of my woke as a
Speaker 4: joke isms and just read an article and thought, oh,
Speaker 4: she looks good, the jeans look good or whatever, or
Speaker 4: for guys to look at that girl and go, oh,
Speaker 4: she looks pretty. Now we have to go back to
Speaker 4: our woke as a joke is and say that everything
Speaker 4: that is pretty, you know, it really isn't. The things
Speaker 4: that they're saying are normal. The things that they're saying
Speaker 4: are pretty. The things that they're saying are supposed to
Speaker 4: be the every day. Now, it's all a bunch of
Speaker 4: woke bs. And for once, they actually had an ad
Speaker 4: that had a double Enton had a smart ad writer.
Speaker 4: The copy was good and we kept it moving. They
Speaker 4: just want to make it ugly because it actually isn't.
Speaker 2: Okay. Now, some people think she's very attractive. I think
Speaker 2: she's moderately attractive as my home at the end of
Speaker 2: the day, you know, but Jean's. But apparently everybody thinks
Speaker 2: she's super attractive, and then that that is the reason
Speaker 2: why I this is my interpretation they're talking about Jean's meaning.
Speaker 4: So she looks she has a certain feature of her
Speaker 4: body which I will not go into here, But anybody
Speaker 4: who looks at the picture can see there's a part
Speaker 4: of her body that theycentuate more than others.
Speaker 2: So I don't I'm looking at I have no idea
Speaker 2: what he's talking.
Speaker 4: Obviously, your second sign of aging is your inability to see.
Speaker 4: So we'll work on that.
Speaker 2: But at the end of it, now I can't. I
Speaker 2: have to text me the answer be an informed host.
Speaker 4: But the point of the matter is, well, I'm only.
Speaker 2: Looking at a printed version here. It's not like it's
Speaker 2: a big picture.
Speaker 4: It's pretty big. It's pretty big print online, it's all.
Speaker 4: It's all big.
Speaker 2: At the end of the day, I think I figured,
Speaker 2: good job.
Speaker 4: The point of the matter is is that they're mad.
Speaker 2: It's very, very wrong of you to be talking about
Speaker 2: people's body thoughts like that.
Speaker 4: I wasn't talking about any particular body part.
Speaker 2: I just feature, you know, there's one way to put it.
Speaker 4: Sure, we're features, you know what.
Speaker 2: Can everyone just take a deep breath and calm the
Speaker 2: hell down? This girl for Adam, I don't, But she's
Speaker 2: not a Nazi. I don't see anything Nazi related to
Speaker 2: this much. Just like Calvin Klein and Brooke Shields back
Speaker 2: in the day. That's what I see.
Speaker 4: The left is completely backwards. This girl is not a Nazi,
Speaker 4: just like the shooter last night was not white. Everybody
Speaker 4: on the left, like you think, we're looking at the picture.
Speaker 4: Oh my guys, some things are just facts.
Speaker 2: Sorry that it doesn't watching them and not me.
Speaker 4: I always watch the enemy That's what I do. I
Speaker 4: watch all the channels I can't stand, so I know
Speaker 4: exactly what they're saying, so I can WHOA.
Speaker 2: That means I'm not on the enemy list anymore. I
Speaker 2: just stop watching me.
Speaker 4: Look at that.
Speaker 2: I mean in here for me. You know, if you
Speaker 2: want to call people names, I'm going to tell you something.
Speaker 2: One of the worst things you can call people as
Speaker 2: a racist. One of the worst things you can say
Speaker 2: is they're misogynists and sexist. You can say there are Nazi, homophobes,
Speaker 2: even the FOBE. I mean, it's like Chuck Schumer his
Speaker 2: latest comments, Oh Americans don't want people of color to vote,
Speaker 2: among other things. This is what he said.
Speaker 1: Listen, It's been clear when we fight for democracy, when
Speaker 1: we protect democracy, we got to fight fire with fire.
Speaker 1: We're not going to stand idly by, as Maya said,
Speaker 1: We're not going to let.
Speaker 2: Them revert to Jim Crow.
Speaker 1: And if you don't think they want to revert to
Speaker 1: Jim Crow, just look what they did in the Save Act,
Speaker 1: which went back to the Jim Crow for the whole
Speaker 1: nation by so making it hard. They said, you need
Speaker 1: ID and they made it so hard to show ID
Speaker 1: that probably half the people in America couldn't vote. We
Speaker 1: wouldn't let it pass Democrats they needed our vote.
Speaker 2: They went to court.
Speaker 1: Many of us Durban, myself and others will lead plaintiffs,
Speaker 1: and we beat them in court. But it shows why
Speaker 1: we need legislation because these guys are undoing everything in
Speaker 1: every way they can. They don't want poor people to vote,
Speaker 1: they don't want people of color to vote, they don't
Speaker 1: want Democrats to vote. They don't believe in democracy we do.
Speaker 2: They don't want poor people to vote, they don't want
Speaker 2: of color to vote, they don't want Democrats to vote.
Speaker 2: I mean, they just make this up. You're racist, sexist, homophobic, misogynists, xenophobic, islamophobic.
Speaker 2: You want dirty air and water and grandma and grandpa
Speaker 2: to be thrown over a cliff by a republic. It's
Speaker 2: the same crew.
Speaker 4: Here's what's so funny. I always you know you and
Speaker 4: I've talked about this for years, and it's so true.
Speaker 4: You never have to wonder what the left is doing
Speaker 4: because they pretend and they projected on the other side
Speaker 4: you want to know what a Nazi is, just look
Speaker 4: at Antifa, Look at the people calling for the complete
Speaker 4: and total elimination of the Jewish people.
Speaker 2: About the anti Semitism in the squad.
Speaker 4: About these are the Nazis.
Speaker 2: That's not okay. Well, and let me add one other
Speaker 2: point here. Chuck Schumer has to go harder and harder
Speaker 2: and more radical left. Let me tell you what Chuck
Speaker 2: Schumer's greatest fear right now is is that he's gonna
Speaker 2: get primaried by AOC. And if he gets primaried by AOC,
Speaker 2: she wins by double digits, if not by twenty points
Speaker 2: or more. He knows she would crush him. Knows it.
Speaker 2: And Chuck Schumer, that's why he can't stand up to
Speaker 2: Mom Donnie. He's never going to stand up to the squad.
Speaker 2: Neither can Hakim Jeffries. And they are they are just
Speaker 2: leaders in name only. They are impotent, they are weak,
Speaker 2: they are gutless, they are cowardly, and they have no
Speaker 2: business even being in the house or sent it either
Speaker 2: one of them, and they lie with abandonment. You know, look,
Speaker 2: if if anybody has stood up against this Nazi talk
Speaker 2: and naziism and antiseme stood against anti Semitism. It's been me,
Speaker 2: it's been this show. We have been consistent. We find
Speaker 2: anti semitism from anybody, virulent anti semitism, halls of Congress, worldwide,
Speaker 2: it's growing college campuses. We've been chronicling it. And for
Speaker 2: those people you know that we played yesterday this podcast
Speaker 2: which was repulsive in the comments that were being made
Speaker 2: about about Jewish people and during the Holocaust and Hitler.
Speaker 2: It was I can't even believe the level of depravity
Speaker 2: and the ignorance of these people on this podcast. I
Speaker 2: don't even know who they are. I mean, it's it's scary,
Speaker 2: the lack of knowledge about Israel, its history, its homeland,
Speaker 2: how it's been attacked again and again and again, and
Speaker 2: that they get accused of atrocities. Meanwhile, they lost nearly
Speaker 2: forty thousand people in a single day on October seven.
Speaker 2: Nobody ever brings that part up. Eight hundred and nine
Speaker 2: point one, Shawn is our number if you want to
Speaker 2: be a part of the program.