Senator Rand Paul Challenging Fauci on COVID and Congressman Andy Harris Calls for the Firing of Johns Hopkins' Chief Diversity Officer
01:04:06 Share

The 2022 political field was intense, so don't get left behind in 2024. If you're running for political office, the first thing on your to-do list needs to be securing your name on the web with a yourname.votewebdomain from godaddy.com. Get yours now.

Welcome to Breaking Battlegrounds. I'm your host, Chuck Warren, with Kylie Kipper. Today, we are honored to have with us Senator Rand Paul. He really needs no introduction. If you don't know him, you live under a rock. Senator, welcome to our show. Glad to be with you guys. Thanks for having me. Thank you. So, you have run a successful medical practice. You've been in the Senate for a while. If you had an employee go to a meeting for you or represent you and say over 100 times he did not recall what happened in the meeting or the decisions they made, how would you handle that as an employer? Sure.

I'd say out on your ass, baby. You're gone. I'd say this is somebody that's not competent. But really, this is a person, you know, we're talking about Fauci, who claimed to have such overwhelming intelligence and omniscience.

that he wanted to mandate our every move. He was willing to tell us to wear one mask, two masks, three masks, wear goggles, wear earmuffs, get vaccinated 10 times. But when you ask him about the details of why, he's like, well, I don't recall. So it's insulting. And it's, you know, it's a lie. He does recall. And, yeah.

I mean, look at the questions they ask him in Missouri versus Biden, the case about free speech and their interference with free speech. He's like, oh, well, Dr. Xi, you know, the bat scientist who was working on these viruses, oh, I'm not good with Asian names.

So my gosh, old guy who claims to be smart enough and omniscient enough to tell us all what to do in every aspect of our lives. Like, I'm not good with Asian names. I mean, give me a break. He's just a dishonest person from top to bottom. Were your colleagues on the Democrat side of the aisle surprised about there's just no scientific basis for the six foot rule, which he pushed and just shut everything down?

They don't care. I mean, all along when they were squawking, follow the science, follow the science, I'd look at them and say, well, I am following the science. That's why I'm not wearing a mask because I just had COVID and I've got immunity. And like, oh, you don't know that. You don't know if you'll have immunity. Right.

And I look them back in the eye and I say, I know you're 25 and you have free masks on. But do you realize that people who had the Spanish flu in 1918 and are still alive, some of them have been tested and they still have antibodies to the Spanish flu after 100 years? And it's like, oh, they don't care about the science, you know, obey the science.

But in the end, there was no signs for the six feet of separation. Fauci now admits it. He used to say that you're a crackpot if you thought that the virus came from a lab in Wuhan. Now he says, oh, you know, I've always been open to that possibility. Yeah, that's right. After he commissioned a journal article that basically said that you're a nut if you believe it came from the lab. So.

Now, these people are so dishonest that they've gotten away with it because the Democrats give them a free pass. The Democrats still think he's a saint and he ought to be on Mount Olympus. You know, the Democrats, they don't care about the logic or seeing this through or what the science was. They love government so much and Fauci to them represents government. And so they're unwilling to really analyze whether he was good or bad.

So he's also testified that he approved all foreign domestic NIAID grants without reviewing the proposals. How is that possible? I mean, is he just greenlight any spending proposal put across his desk? Well, the thing is, is he's owning up to the responsibility that, yes, he approved them, but I think it looks quite bad and is quite bad that he approved them without reading them. But there are thousands of proposals. No one could probably read them all.

But the thing is, is how many of the proposals potentially had gain of function where you create a brand new virus that doesn't exist in nature that could be more contagious or more lethal because it's manipulated in the lab and these are gains of function? How many of those are there?

probably a couple dozen, maybe 100, maybe 200. We don't know because, of course, they won't tell us, and I've been trying to get this information. But he could possibly have looked at the more dangerous stuff. But when asked specifically about Wuhan, he still to this day says it wasn't gain-of-function. And the reason he says it wasn't gain-of-function, he says, well, they didn't know it would gain-of-function. So sure, it did gain-of-function, but because they didn't know or predict it would gain-of-function, then it's not gain-of-function research.

We've been asking for three years for information on this. NIH still stonewalls us. HHS stonewalls us. Will not give us the deliberations of why this research was approved in Wuhan without going through the proper channels and the appropriate safety committee. Why do you think he...

And those who praise him hold so tight to what they were trying to do. Was this a function, if you listen to our friends who are a little more paranoid of the government than others, that this is simply just to control the American populace? Or did they really believe it? Or did it just come to the point that they were so far in, they were unwilling to admit they made mistakes?

All of the above. I think in the beginning, if you will go back to 2010, when some of the more dangerous gain-of-function research began with the avian flu, and they mutated the avian flu to make it easier to spread to mammals.

Half of the scientific community or more was alarmed and said, oh, my goodness, we shouldn't publish this because it's a roadmap to terrorists and to rogue nations to create dangerous viruses out of viruses that are not very contagious now. And Anthony Fauci at that time in 2012 was asked, and he said,

You know, gain of function research is worth the risk that even if a scientist were bitten or a scientist were infected and a pandemic occurred, the risk of that versus the knowledge gained, the knowledge is worth the risk. And I think that was before, you know, we had 20 million people die from a virus that in all likelihood came from a lab.

And so are they able to sort of accept some culpability here and move on and try to restrict it? No, they just simply say they never said that. So Anthony Fauci will tell you he's never been an advocate of gain-of-function and that it wasn't gain-of-function research. But see, all that's a lie because we objectively know that there was gain-of-function research going on there. And when you get his private emails, the only time you get a glimpse into the honest part of his personality –

from February of 2020, there's a Slack email to a bunch of people on this email chain. And he describes their first conversations and he says, "Yes, we all agree the virus looks genetically manipulated. And we're also very, very suspicious and worried because we know that lab does gain-of-function research." He described the research,

It's the research he funded. So in a private email, he acknowledged they did gain a function, and he described the research, listed it specifically, and that's what he had been funding. But publicly, he still says he didn't fund it, and it wasn't gain of function. So basically, he's fundamentally a dishonest person. But you have to realize why. He has a conflict of interest. His conflict of interest is history and –

Part of history, at least, will record that he has culpability for 20 million people dying. Does that mean he wanted them to die? No, he didn't want them to die. It was a terrible and tragic accident. It was a terrible bit of judgment that he thought his knowledge was worth the risk, and in the end, it didn't turn out to be worth the risk.

We're with Senator Rand Paul from the great state of Kentucky. So basically, just what we were discussing. So here's my question. So we've had successive presidential administrations on both sides of the aisle have done everything they can to insulate the executive branch and their agencies from oversight. What do we need to do to allow Congress to start doing true oversight of these branch, the executive branch and agencies again?

Unfortunately, or however you want to look at it, Congress doesn't have the ability to make the executive branch do anything. Even under the Constitution, when we give powers to Congress, if the executive branch takes those powers and there's a dispute, the only way to resolve it would be through the court or through the Supreme Court. But when these questions of separation of power and what powers were delegated to one branch versus another get to the court, the court routinely punts and says, "Oh, these are political questions. You all decide it at the next election."

So really the only practical way of getting the information that I want on the cover-up of COVID, which I really truly think was a cover-up by Anthony Fauci and many, many others, is when we all get that information is with a new president.

That new president would have to be someone who's a disruptor. So people who are part of the system, part of the military-industrial complex like Nikki Haley, I think there's not a chance in hell that I'd get the information. If there's a disruptor – and I think Donald Trump is a disruptor. He frankly is like a bull in a china shop, sometimes for bad, sometimes for good –

But the good part is he's not willing to take somebody like Anthony Fauci and the establishment and just say, oh, I'm not going to give him the information. So I fully believe if we have a disruptor in the White House again, the first thing I will ask for – and this is where I may be different than some – I don't want a job. I don't want any money. I don't want any prestige.

What I want is for the next president to appoint somebody to be head of health and human services that will give me all the records I asked for. None of them are classified. I want to see every last bit of deliberation over who made the decision that the research in Wuhan would be funded and that it would be funded without the

the scrutiny of the safety committee. It was a safety committee set up in 2017. It was supposed to be reviewing all this research. Why did the research never go to that committee? And if there were internal deliberations that said it was safe to do this research,

Give them to me. Exactly. You know, I represent a whole state. You know, I represent a lot of people around the United States. We just want to know the truth because we want to make sure this doesn't happen again. We want to make sure dangerous research like this is really being properly vetted before we allow dangerous research. And the example I give may sound absurd, but this is the kind of stuff that we worry that they could be doing. Ebola.

You've seen what it does. You bleed out of every orifice and you die a horrific death over a week or two. Right now, you can only catch it through bodily fluids. In a village in Africa where everybody's very close contact, it spreads because people are very close to each other, but it doesn't spread through the air.

Can you imagine if a lab said, well, you know, we want to see what would happen if Ebola spreads through the air. You know, we're doing this so we could counteract it because China's trying to do this. So we need to do it in order to see if we can counteract it. Well, it's a death wish. You create something like that who spread that spreads through the air that deadly. And what you have is a pandemic that might kill 50 percent of the population.

Now we're talking about end times type of scenario where everybody's at war with everybody to try to get scraps of food. There's no potable water and people are fighting day to day in the streets and breaking into people's houses wanting food. And society and civilization descends into chaos when 50 percent of the public does. This is what happened to Europe in the 14th century is chaos occurred when a third of Europe died. So we really shouldn't be taking viruses seriously.

that are that deadly and saying, hey, I wonder if we put this S-protein on the virus. Hey, guys, hey, look at this, guys. It's 10 times more dangerous. Wow, we discovered we create a virus that's 10 times or 1,000 times more dangerous. They are doing that kind of research in the United States as we speak because there's no oversight. There's Anthony Fauci, and he's been there for 40 years. Even though he's gone, he's left behind him a plethora of cronies that he handpicked because they believe in this stuff.

And so we've got a real problem until we get legislation that actually says we are going to scrutinize this stuff and we're going to make damn certain that all of the scientists who look at this, including skeptical scientists, are OK with the research before it happens. Fantastic. Senator, we have one minute left here. I just want to quickly go over to the amendment you proposed last week.

where we would freeze aid to any Palestinian government until hostages, Bahamas, are released, and the Palestinian Authority renounces terrorism, and it got defeated. Were you shocked it got defeated? You know, I was pleased that we got more votes than I've gotten in the past. I've been fighting this battle for probably 10 years that we shouldn't fund terrorists, and we shouldn't fund horrible people that don't believe –

people tell we need for day to meet with her not that that week we convince the ones are not that bad to be better i was like no you don't so you know about run palestinian authority they're thought to not be as bad as a mosque people can believe the holocaust exists he doesn't he hates jews he doesn't believe israel should exist and doesn't say a word about the massacre that happened on october seventh so now i i think they shouldn't get any money i would agree to my opinion makes them better no money to the palestinians period

Senator Rand Paul, thank you so much for joining us today. We appreciate your work, and we hope to have you on sometime again in the future. Have a fantastic week and weekend. Thanks, guys. Bye-bye. This is Breaking Battlegrounds. You can find us at BreakingBattlegrounds.vote. We'll be right back with Representative Andy Harris.

At Overstock, we know home is a pretty important place, and that's why we believe everyone deserves a home that makes them happy. Whether you're furnishing a new house or apartment or simply looking to update and refresh a few rooms, Overstock has everyday free shipping and amazing deals on the beautiful, high-quality furniture and decor you need to transform any home into the home of your dreams. Overstock, making dream homes come true.

Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds. We're with us on this segment, Congressman Andy Harris. He is from Maryland's 1st Congressional District. He is the son of immigrants who fled Eastern Europe. He was a medical officer in the Naval Reserve and a physician at John Hopkins Hospital. Congressman Harris, welcome back to the show.

It's good to be back. Which salutation did you prefer, Dr. Harris or Congressman Harris, in your life? I usually go by Dr. Harris. Fantastic. Well, that's what I'm going to do with you then, Dr. Harris. Okay, so let's talk about some fun at your old employer, John Hopkins. So you had Dr. Sherita Golden issue an apology for labeling white people, Christians, males, heterosexuals, middle class, and English-speaking people among those privileged.

Can you tell our audience a little bit about this train wreck going on at Johns Hopkins and what needs to be done to clean it up? Yeah, I was very surprised. You know, I mean, we're supposed to be, in the best sense of the word, completely colorblind when we take care of patients. So here a leader at the Johns Hopkins Medicine, which is the medical school and the hospital, coming out and listing groups that, you know, might be discriminated against. Honestly, that's my main concern.

You know, when you say, for instance, that a religious group is privileged, what's the next step? That you take away some of their rights, you take away some of the things from them because you say they're privileged. It's just a great concern in a health care setting. But that's what they want to do. I mean, literally, when we think about it, it seems like that's what they want to do. Isn't Dr. Golden the same person who's implemented a lot of the DEI policy over there, including...

the big scandal last spring about what the definition of a lesbian is and it's basically a non-man attracted to a non-man isn't that what she pushed as well

Yeah, there were a lot of strange things going on at Hopkins. They published a glossary of 50 different pronouns that you could use, your personal pronouns. It's funny because I can only think of three or four. They thought of 50. Again, it divides people. It discriminates based on, again, as you said, in this case, whether you were a middle or owning class. I don't even know what an owning class is, but they were privileged also.

How do you change what's going on at John Hopkins? Is it what's happening, for example, at Harvard and Wharton, University of Pennsylvania, where just donors come in and say, we're not helping fund this anymore. We're done. Is that what has to happen?

Yeah, I think it's donors and I think the staff has to push back. I mean, again, we've seen this now getting the pushback occurring in the business world where DEI is all and ESG are not are not as sought after in the business world and companies are backing away from it.

I hope that we back away from this, again, this diversity, this DEI dogma in health care as well. And look, you know, again, I understand it. You know, the doctor retracted what she said. But look, given that Claudine Gray was fired over it, I'm not surprised that she retracted it. But some things, you know, can't be unseen. And this is what these are one of those things. Well, it's not her first first mistake of this nature. OK, so you're in Homeland Security. You visited the border recently.

What are Democrats not understanding about the crisis at the border? We're here in Arizona. We can explain to you what it is. What are they not understanding or do they just not care? Well, look, I think they understand perfectly, especially those Democrat mayors of cities that are being overrun by illegal immigrants and having to provide care and use some of their assets to take care of them. So the Democrats...

understand what's going on the border. The question is whether they really want to do something about it. And they're torn in this because again, the big city mayors, they're torn because it's bankrupting their cities. But on the other hand, the Democrats still believe that these 10 million people who came into the country under Biden administration are eventually going to be voters that vote predominantly for Democrats. So, you know, they're torn right now, but I think that the American people are not torn. The

clearly see the border as being wide open, as being out of control. And I think they link the fentanyl crisis, again, the crisis in some of our inner cities, to the open border. And in the end, look, I hope they give in and they agree to strict border control. The H.R. 2 is what we talk about, the bill that we passed earlier in the House. I hope they agree to metrics to lower the number of people coming into the

country dramatically, lower them to the Trump levels. But I'm not sure they're going to do that. So I think that maybe it's possible that nothing happens on the border until the presidential election. So right now we have a budget battle in D.C. and Republicans are saying there's no aid for Ukraine until we get a border deal done.

What are Republicans asking for and what are Democrats squawking about that they don't want to give us? Because they certainly want to give as much as possible Ukraine. So what is holding them back from saying, OK, you can have these various tactics on the border?

Well, again, you know, the negotiation over in the Senate, which was conducted with Democrats, you know, allowed for 5,000 people a day crossing our border illegally and accepted into asylum status in the country. And that doesn't even take into account individuals who come over on what's called parole.

which is allowing people to come into this country. It used to be on a case-by-case basis. Now it's whole groups of people. If you're from Venezuela, you're allowed to come in under parole system. If you're from Nicaragua, you're allowed to come in under the parole system. This is not the way the system was designed to work. So what we insist is that you stop the asylum cases. You basically shut down the border for all intents and purposes. Unless you're here on a legal immigration program, you're not going to cross into the United States.

What else? What else? Besides that, that's a fantastic point. What else are Republicans asking for that they're squawking about?

Well, that's really it. I mean, the bottom line is we have to shut down the border. We have to allow only people here who are illegal, because what that does, it frees up our border patrol agents to do things like intercept the fentanyl that's crossing our border, to intercept the human traffickers that are trafficking children across our border into the sex slave trade. Again, our border patrol agents, God love them, but what they are right now is they're glorified social workers who just

Fill out paperwork so that you can process people into the interior of the country. You're on the Homeland Security. So it was announced today in The Wall Street Journal that the U.S. secretly alerted Iran ahead of an Islamic State terrorist attack, which surprised me. If Trump had did that with Russia, which he did for a St. Petersburg terrorist attack,

Democrats are saying, see, he's in cahoots with Putin, but I guess it's a policy of the United States. My question for you being a homeland security, do we ever have people alerting us from other countries about possible terrorist attacks in our country?

Well, look, I don't know. I don't sit on the Intelligence Committee. I suspect that the Intelligence Committee members might have access to that information. But, look, that's a grave concern. I mean, you know, the bottom line is why would we help an enemy? I don't get it. You know, the leadership of Iran, they're very unpopular in their own country, but, you know, they're promoting, you know, death to America. You know, we ought to just leave them alone in terms of, look, if they want to deal with terrorists who want to attack them, that's their business. We shouldn't be aiding and abetting.

Yeah, it seems to be a policy that you see a lot in various relationships in life that if I'm just nice to them, maybe they'll start being nice back to me. Is there any situation where you see Iran ever being nice back to us?

No, I think that's the typical naive ideas that Democrats have about foreign policy, that somehow there's no good and evil in the world, that everybody can be negotiated with, that you can apply diplomacy to everyone. You're seeing it right now in Israel where the Democrats are insisting that Hamas somehow can be trusted in a ceasefire, that Hamas can be trusted not to reignite a war. Look, this is why the Biden administration has so utterly failed in foreign policy, and I think they'll be held to task in the November election.

Oh, I agree. We're with Congressman Andy Harris. He's from Maryland's second, excuse me, Maryland's first congressional district, former medical officer, Naval Reserve. Before we break here, where can people find you on social media, Congressman?

You know, then go to harris.house.gov, harris.house.gov, and that gets you into my official website. Fantastic. We're with Dr. Andy Harris from Maryland, and this is Breaking Battlegrounds. You can find us at breakingbattlegrounds.vote, and we'll be right back. Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds. I'm your host, Chuck Warren, with Kylie Kipper with me here in studio. We are honored with this on the segment to have with us Dr. Andy Harris. He serves in Congress in Maryland's 1st Congressional District. But before we get started, folks...

Are you concerned about your retirement? Well, I highly recommend that you go and visit YRefi. That's right, YRefi, and find out how you can get up to a 10% plus interest rate over a five-year loan. This is annualized and will help you through retirement as you try to save. So visit YRefi. You can call them at 888-YREFY24. That's right, 888-YREFY24. And tell them Chuck and Sam sent you. All right, Dr. Harris. Hi.

What are the things that keep you up at night being a congressman? What are the two or three things that you are most concerned about America and our future?

I think the threat from China is probably the most worrisome. Look, they don't believe we should exist as a democracy. They're tremendously powerful. They're economically powerful. We've helped that to some extent with our policies toward China. And militarily, they're just, again, they are getting to the point where they will surpass the U.S. military. The other thing that's

very, very important is that we don't lose sight of the debt and deficit problem we have. Because in the end, if we fail economically, we will fail in all the other fields, military and, again, the ability to influence democracy in the world. And we are at the tipping point. Our debt is getting to the point where it is out of control and it's spiraling and no one in Washington really seems to care.

How do we ever pay back $34 trillion in national debt?

You can't. I mean, the bottom line is there's no way you can do it. The only way you potentially could do it is inflate your way out of it. I mean, real hyperinflation, you know, pre-World War II Germany hyperinflation. But that would be terrible for the rest of the economy. So realistically, you really can't ever pay it back. So the question is, can we stabilize it? Can we get to a mortgage payment that we can afford? Because we can't afford the mortgage payment we have now, which is about a trillion dollars a year.

That's what we've got to do. We've got to realize that this is a long-term problem, but we need short and medium-term solutions to get us on the right path. Is there an appetite among Republicans to really have a serious conversation about entitlement reform? I mean, one way that we go and start getting ourselves on a better fiscal path is obviously realizing what lies ahead of us regarding entitlements. What do you think...

people's and Congress understanding is of this problem? The trouble is they're politically unwilling to deal with it. You know, anybody who takes math, who understands mathematics, understands the problem. I mean, you multiply a $34 trillion debt by the current average interest rate on U.S. Treasuries, and then you come up with the fact that we're going to spend over a trillion dollars in interest. That's bigger than our Medicare budget, Social Security budget, and

and bigger than our defense budget. It's just not doable anymore. But again, the politics of it are, this takes leadership at the top. So until we, honestly, until we get a president who's willing to say, and remember George Bush in his second term tried to do it and was immediately beaten back in trying to reform social security. Had we done it back then, we probably would be in much better shape right now. Well, it's not only that, I think he was trying to deal with immigration again back then as well. Am I wrong on that?

That's right. Again, in the second term, some presidents have some leeway because they're not going to run for reelection. And I hope that Mr. Trump deals with the deals with the deficit and the debt problem in his second term. When you go about with your constituent meetings in Maryland, what is what is the most consistent question asked of you?

I would say the most consistent question is, you know, what is wrong with Washington? You know, why can't we solve the problems? Why do we have inflation that's as high as it is? Why are we, you know, why are our streets not as safe as they were? You know, what are we doing about all that?

And again, you know, we're whistling past the graveyard in Washington. We don't deal with a lot of these issues because, again, politics gets tied up in some of them. And again, the, you know, the inflation and the economy is a huge issue. Unemployment, you know, is rising even in Maryland. It's rising. And I think that's going to weigh heavily on this November's election.

Oh, I do, too. I do, too. 100%. Your crystal ball. Does Donald Trump beat President Biden come November 2024?

Well, he certainly would today. There's no question about it. I think he will in November because I think the world will be even a more dangerous place. I think crime will continue to rise. I think the economy will continue to stagnate. And I think inflation will still be here. None of those bode well for a sitting president. No, they don't bode well at all. If you had one if you had one tax cut you could implement just unanimously, what would it be?

It would be probably unlimited charitable deductions. We have to get to the point where charities provide a lot of the charity care, not the government, because the government is now, we're too dependent on the government for taking care of all society's ills and woes. That's fantastic. Well, Dr. Andy Harris, thank you so much for joining us. Folks, you can find Dr. Andy Harris at Maryland's 1st Congressional District on various social media platforms. Doctor, we appreciate you joining us today.

Thank you. This is Breaking Battlegrounds. BreakingBattlegrounds.vote. We'll be right back.

At Overstock, we know home is a pretty important place, and that's why we believe everyone deserves a home that makes them happy. Whether you're furnishing a new house or apartment or simply looking to update and refresh a few rooms, Overstock has everyday free shipping and amazing deals on the beautiful, high-quality furniture and decor you need to transform any home into the home of your dreams. Overstock, making dream homes come true.

Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds with your host Chuck Moran. I'm Sam Stone. Our next guest up today is going to be Rich Lowry, Editor-in-Chief of National Review.

And before we do that, folks, you've heard me say this. You've heard me say this over and over, and you still haven't gone to the website. You are killing yourself. You need to go to investwirefi.com and learn how you can earn up to 10.25% rate of return. That's a fixed rate of return. Joe Biden can mess up this stock market as much as he wants, and you're going to keep earning a great rate and great interest on your money. You have total flexibility. You can get your principal back at any time. There are no fees. There are no penalties. It's a great way to earn money.

It is an unbelievable opportunity. If you haven't gone there and checked it out, you need to do that. Invest the letter Y, then refy.com or give them a call at 888-Y-REFI-24. We are today with Rich Lowry, the editor for National Review. Rich, thanks for joining us. Of course. Thanks for having me. So I want to start quickly with a brief story here. So as you know, the LA Times the other day laid off 115 journalists.

And there seems to be just gnashing of teeth in the journalism industry. And NBC News lit off an article, Journalists of Color Hit Hard in Seismic L.A. Times Layoffs.

I mean, just the 150 drills. It's seismic LA Times layoffs. There was no one else in their newsroom to be hit. Yeah, if you read through the article, too, it's, you know, I mean, what are major daily newspapers just not getting because they're losing so much money? And I know the industry's changed a lot, but I think the one frustration for Sam and I, I would just love a paper that splits down the middle columnists on the left and right. Just give me both perspectives. And that just seems to be difficult for them to do. Yeah. Yeah.

So I chuckled, not because I don't want anyone to be laid off. Right. Even an outlet I really don't like, the LA Times. But the New York Times, there's an old joke that kind of – forget exactly how it goes, but there's a nuclear strike and three media outlets cover it, and the spin of the New York Times is –

minorities and women hit hardest. Right, right. Of course, this is what they say about the LA Times. I don't know. Maybe it's true, but it's a tough time in journalism. It's the best and worst time in journalism. You have a lot of amazing sources of information that are at your fingertips more quickly than ever before and a lot of new outlets. At the same time, the...

Older legacy outlets are struggling, especially newspapers. And I like newspapers. I grew up when you had to get your information pretty much either through three newscasts, which wasn't great, and a newspaper. And I remember my dad would – when we lived in Washington, D.C. area, when the Washington Post would come and get wet because it rained overnight. And it was delivered. He had to put it in the oven and sort of dry it out a little bit to read it because otherwise you just –

You wouldn't know what's going on. You wouldn't know the baseball scores if nothing else. Even some of those you wouldn't, you'd never learn because there'd be a late score and it might not appear in the next day's newspapers. Anyways, I'm a big newspaper guy, but you, you have to, um, you have to do, I hate to say it because we're just mocking it. What the New York times has done. Uh, they've,

created a lot of reasons for people to subscribe beyond just reading the news. And even though I don't like the New York Times, they do do a lot of great work, but puzzles and food. The athletic. Yeah, exactly. And the other key thing I was going to say is sports, right? So if you're the Boston Globe and you're in a sports city and you do good coverage, that drives subscriptions. But

You're at the L.A. Times. You're not doing any of this. You know, it's a real it's a real hard. I love everything about The New York Times except its coverage of politics and news. Yeah. And it's still there you go. But even on international articles, you can still go to the middle of the article and get some real good facts. So just as a closing comment on this little topic, Soon-Shiong, who's the owner of it, says they're losing 40 million a year. He's invested one billion in the paper since 2018.

So anyway, Sam, you had a question. Yeah. Rich recently came out. Joe Biden has announced that they're not going to approve any more liquid natural gas terminals or transfer ports, transfer points to deliver liquid natural gas to the rest of the world. How how does this make any sense at all?

When gas has been the single, if your goal is decarbonization and reducing carbon in the atmosphere, gas has been the single biggest driver of decarbonization in the world. How does this make sense? Zero. Zero sense, obviously. It's a deep ideological commitment of theirs where they just think any,

version of fossil fuels is kind of inherently evil, even if it's a better, from their perspective, form of fossil fuels that if we use more of and ship more around the world, it'll be better, supposedly, for the climate. It's still fossil fuels, so it's kind of a category of

So it's crazy. I mean, this country is so blessed in so many ways, but foremost among which perhaps is, I wouldn't say foremost, you know, we're blessed in our founding. But our geographic position is just incredible, right? Separated by two oceans with friendly countries to the north and the south. You know, maybe annoying countries, especially to the north. With two huge navigable river basins in the middle of it, I mean. Yeah.

Yeah, yeah. And then the natural resources, just unbelievable. And it just no other time in human history would have would anyone have thought we're not going to exploit our natural resources. Right. Exactly. Well, the other funny thing about that is, is we're Biden is so committed and I'm not opposed to it funding Ukraine. Right. But yet. Yeah.

and supporting Europe and NATO. Yet he's willing to close these downs that provide them with more energy that they don't, then don't have to get from Russia or anywhere else. Yeah, right. Yeah, exactly. So it makes no sense that at any level and climate change, I assume that, uh, well, I know, you know, the other side is exaggerating it. Uh,

I know that the science is being distorted. I don't know enough to know this particular way it's being distorted, but it's just like the pandemic. There'll be a study saying, oh, there's a 30% chance that if you do just right, your mask will help you if it's an N95 and you're changing it during the day. And that gets filtered into...

News reports, masks will save you. And then that's cable chatter. You must wear masks. And that's a policy. We're going to mandate you wear masks. So it just gets distorted all the way up. And I know that's happening with climate change. But my approach is, you know, it really might be a serious problem. So we need the most dynamic, innovative economy possible to, if it comes to that, innovate our way out of it. And eventually we'll find an alternative fossil fuel.

fuels, right? Correct. The way we found alternatives to everything else throughout human history, but forcing it now, making, you know, not exploiting these resources, making it more expensive at the margins for everyone in America makes zero sense. And this will be

a vulnerability of Biden in the campaign, just all the energy policies, the push to electric cars that people don't want to buy, all that. Not a foremost, not a highest valiance issue, but important.

Right. With Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review. If you're not a subscriber to National Review, what are you waiting for? Subscribe. It's important. So taking that, I feel like Joe Biden, you know, so we have in the Republican Party, the MAGA crowd is really leading it right now. On the left, I think Joe Biden is led by the Act Blue donors. I really think that's what's pushing him. OK, so that all being said.

What happens if Nikki Haley stays in the Republican presidential contest and goes to the convention with 30 to 40 percent of the vote? What does that mean? Well, I kind of doubt she's going to do that because I'll be very uncomfortable. I don't think it's been great. She probably hasn't been very comfortable last couple of days since since New Hampshire. And it's not going to get any better. It's going to get worse. But she would do that. And this is, you know, legitimate role in politics if she wants to be the protest candidate.

I'm the non-MAGA candidate. I'm holding up the banner for this because I think it's right. And I think November is going to be a disaster. And just wait. You're going to turn around and say, Nikki, you were right. And then, you know, I got a leg up in 2028. I think that scenario is kind of unlikely to play out at multiple levels. But that'd be that'd be a legitimate, a legitimate role. You know, the rest of the party will hate her for it.

which is one reason I think she won't do it. I also don't think, you know, there are leaders of factions within parties like Bernie Sanders where his supporters are just, they're fundamentally bonded to him because he's the symbol of this and he's suffused by his socialism and the direction he wants to take the party. And I don't see that with Nikki. You know, it's more, we've seen in the polling, people aren't voting for her because they're attached to Nikki, it's because they're opposed to Trump. And

You know, she's still getting she's still got 43, 42 percent in New Hampshire. I would've been shocked if you told me she'd do that three months ago. She's overreformed. Good for her. I just think it's unlikely she's going to want to want to do the the convention scenario. We're talking with Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review. Rich, does it make sense for her to stay in just to see how the legal cases against Trump play out, even if she essentially mothballs her campaign?

I don't. Just, you know, the distanced people were thinking this initially. Maybe something's going to happen to Trump, you know, so maybe it's an act of God or maybe it's these legal cases. So let's just stay in. But, you know, losing everywhere just it's it's it's discredits you and it's no fun and just it's.

staying in even though you're losing places on the off chance that that trump will get convicted and the republicans will change their attitude to him one i'm not sure he's going to get convicted at least not on a timeline that would make sense in terms of the republican nomination and two even if he did i don't think that's going to change republicans

Attitude to him it looks as though by the way, you know the January 6th case Which is the most serious one and the one that that was because of that kind of first in the queue looks like it it could get delayed not just weeks, but maybe months because the Supreme Court is considering this case as

that some january 6 defendants are bringing about how we're interpreting the obstruction statute which is a big part of the case against trump so if judge tutkin is going to play it legit at all which maybe there's some doubt about that i think she really has to wait and see what the supreme court says about this important question of law so then she's into july

And is she really going to do this like July, August, September, or maybe into October in the election year? Maybe she would. Maybe they're that committed. But I think that's hard. But at the very least, Alvin Bragg is leapfrogging Jack Smith. So now that's scheduled later on in March. The case is a joke. I think it may collapse as a matter of law. But if he gets convicted on that, is that going to make Republicans say, OK, he's not our guy? Not that one. No, not that one. I think that one's a total failure.

total joke. I agree. Only the January 6th case has real potential risks or merit. Yeah, and if Bragg does that to Trump, then there's a lot of people in New York and Manhattan that need to start talking to their accountants and attorneys. Okay, let's dust here. So this week, it was announced that the U.S. secretly alerted Iran ahead of the Islamic terrorist attack they had, which killed 84 people and wounded a lot more, right? So the Biden administration did. This says it's policy.

I think the funny thing about this is when Trump did this for Putin in 2017, and by the way, I am no Russian fan. All hell broke loose in the media. Look, he's an ally of Putin. He's helping him. I mean, he did the same thing. Are we ever going to see them play level with how they report the news? I mean, it's just such a drastic reaction how we did to Iran, which is clearly our enemy.

Yeah, Russia is, too. But no one would really consider him an enemy, then just interference versus Iran literally wants to kill us. And as a policy, as a common sense policy, alerting other nations, you know, there's a terrorist attack. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think that makes sense at all, either. But what are your thoughts on that?

Are they going to play it straight? No, I mean, they never will. And it's so weird. You know, this this affects the Ukraine debate. I'm a Ukraine hawk. But, you know, all of a sudden, the left and Democrats who have been soft on Russia pretty much since 1917, since the revolution, are all of a sudden these these adamant, fierce Russia hawks. And it's entirely because

The whole collusion hoax, and I do think that's the correct term, and they're so invested in it and hate that Trump says favorable things about Putin, which I don't think he should say. And then so you got this weird – six months ago or whatever it was, you had the progressive caucus saying –

issuing this letter saying, we think we should talk to Russia about a diplomatic solution, like the way that progressives always do. And they had to withdraw the letter because there was this political correctness and kind of near McCarthyism in the Democratic Party. So it's just weird. And I don't think it's going to get less weird. And this is just a general, my axiom, guys, for this year. Everything's going to get weirder. Everything's going to get worse. Everything's going to get more intense. Well, Sam and I were talking before you came on, and I just said,

I really have no idea what the hell is going to happen the next four months. Yeah. I mean, there's nothing that's going to happen that we're going to say, huh, that surprises me. It's just so weird right now. Yep.

Yeah. So and I think the prosecutions are deeply wrong. I think classified documents. OK, certainly the instruction on the classified documents. We'd all be going to jail right now. So fine. Prosecute him on that. But that's classified documents. They're complex. Those cases take a long time. Probably not going to do it in election year, which I don't think you should be doing. So fine. But should leave this one to the voters. Rich, I'm sorry. We have to wrap up here. How do folks follow you and your work and stay in touch with everything you're doing?

Well, thanks for asking. It's overwhelmingly at National Review, nationalreview.com.

We have a meter paywall, I warn you. So we're hoping not to suffer the fate of the L.A. Times. So we hope if you go and you like it, you'll sign up. But you can find me at Twitter, Rich Lowry at Twitter. And we're writing about this stuff hour by hour and have some of the best political and legal commentators in the business, I believe. I agree, too. 100%. Absolutely 100%. Subscribe, people. Subscribe. Yes.

And also, make sure you subscribe to the Breaking Battlegrounds podcast. You can find us at BreakingBattlegrounds.vote or wherever you get your favorite podcasts. We will be back on the air next week. But hey, if you're not on that podcast, you're missing every week. There's a great additional segment. You're missing it. Tune in. Download. We'll see you next week.

The 2022 political field was intense, so don't get left behind in 2024. If you're running for political office, the first thing on your to-do list needs to be securing your name on the web with a yourname.votewebdomain from godaddy.com. Get yours now. All right. Welcome to the podcast segment of Breaking Battlegrounds. I'm your host, Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone.

I got to admit, Chuck, the one interview, you know, you and I occasionally cover for each other. We miss some segments here and there. I have to admit, I was really disappointed to miss Rand Paul because he's my Fauci spirit. He and I are highly simpatico on Dr. Fuck Up. Yeah. He was, I mean, he was just a great interview. Would love to have him on again. I mean, you just...

He just was ready to go. I mean, I think I don't think there's a bigger expert on COVID than Rand Paul.

I think it helps that he has a medical background. 100%. And I think that's what gives him authority. I think that's what gives him the confidence to speak authoritatively about this, right? Because he knows, he understands science. And, you know, look, he's worked up about it. And, you know, I heard him, he wasn't during our interview, but he had an interview and he said if he was a doctor when it first broke and he had an 80-year-old father, which he does, he would have told his father to get the vaccine. Yeah. And if you're a...

16-year-old kid, he said, I would not have told you you got the vaccine because he was following the science. That was the data. By the way, it's the same data Ron DeSantis followed in Florida. And it's one of the things, you know, going back to the interview we just had with Rich Lowry of National Review when he's talking about the climate change thing. One of the things that I've had to learn over the last few years is how to read scientific reports.

Because the data in these reports consistently does not match what you're told about it. So like every year the IPCC, the International Panel on Climate Change, puts out its annual climate change report. This is the everybody panic document, right? Right. It comes with a political summary front sheet. This is what every journalist works off of.

When I dug into it and I realized that front sheet is based entirely on the worst case scenario, which if you read the numbers, they admit is less than a point zero zero zero one percent chance of coming to fruition. Correct. So their own document says this is this is false. This is not happening. And yet on the front page, that's what they put is, you know, they're selling that as the future.

And the politicians and the media all respond to that. And they don't read the darn thing for themselves or dig into the numbers. No, they do not. They do not. Well, Kylie, the world translates down to local communities and there's lots of crime. There's lots of murders. There's lots of chaos going on. So what's happening on Kylie's corner today? People are losing their minds. They are losing their minds. Okay, so I'm actually wondering...

If I'm just becoming more aware of it? No, I think so. Well, first of all, I think there's always been these very weird underculture, right? But I think social media accentuates it more. You just hear about it more now. And so it carries on. So for example, so for example, there's a DJ in Memphis I was reading this morning. I sent you the article who was found beheaded in his house, decapitated, right?

Well, there were six new things doing on my... You know, as I'm scrolling down, there's six different outlets on it, right? Before, it had just been something in the paper and C7, like, oh, man, that's weird. And that's the last you'd hear of it the day. Now, it's just like... I'm sure that story's going to be around for the next weeks, my scrolls. Well, one of the things...

For instance, people think kids are being kidnapped and grabbed off the street, thrown in the back of a white van all the time now, right? Parents are terrified to let their kids out of the house by themselves. And government will actually arrest the parents if they do let them out of the house by themselves in many places. The reality is that child kidnappings are way down.

from where they were 20, 30, 50 years ago. And social media and Amber Alerts have helped on that. So it's a mixed bag. But I do think a lot of people are losing their ever-living mind. Oh, yeah. Well, I mean, I learned after watching American Nightmare that I'm 30 and I could still be kidnapped. You think once you get over the little hump that you're not going to be less of a target? I love how you think age...

Oh, yeah. It's going to be your safety blanket. I remember as a kid, I reached that limit. I'm like, I'm 16. I'm probably lower on the target now. Well, you're tall too, though. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I like to think they look and they're like, oh, there's probably another one down the road that's probably a little shorter. It's like alligators. When I was in Florida doing a river tour and I said, what happens when you see an alligator? He goes, well, if it's four feet or below-

We don't do anything with it because they're only going to attack people that they're bigger than. Right? So that's sort of the idea for kidnappers. You're a six-foot woman. Right? They're going to have to be a pretty strong guy. We're not putting this out there. Yeah, we're not putting this out there. And I work out a lot. And she works out a lot. Just amazing strength right now. And I box. Yeah, yeah. No, yeah. We don't. All right. Don't video you boxing. That's not good for anybody. That's not going to help. Help.

All right. Anyways, last week, Sam wanted an update on a Boston police officer who was found dead out front of a party of another Boston police officer's home. And his fiance at the time, Karen Reed, is being she says she's being framed for his killing by because she backed up into him when she was late because she dropped him off at said party. Correct. She was backing up and the cops are saying she hit him when backed up left.

However, there has been no updates since because her trial is set to go to date or

she's set to go to trial on March 12th of this year. Okay. So during Kylie's Corner in March and moving forward, we will give you the updates, the necessary updates that we find. That's all we can ask. Yeah. I was hoping there was a little more, but I get it. So was I. I mean, you know, that one was one of the better mysteries we've had. Well, the problem is there's too much crazy right now, so they have to focus on other things. So speaking of mysteries, I'm going to continue on this Jordan case from Kansas City. It

was actually on Fox News this morning. So another thing where social media will not leave it alone. Are these the frozen people? Yeah. So this case is the one where three men were found dead in the backyard of a Kansas City home. I have not used his last name, but everyone is now using his last name. But I'm just going to keep calling him Jordan so I don't get sued. Okay. Okay. Yeah, we don't have a budget for lawsuits. Yeah, no, no. But he has since...

Got himself a criminal defense attorney, and he has made some statements on behalf of Jordan. So I'm going to read them to you guys because they seem a little suspicious in my own opinion. So his first statement says, you know what, Kylie, I've got to stop you real quick. Here's the good news. If you're ever pulled for jury duty.

All you have to do is submit a clip of all of this and you are not going to be on that. Yeah, I know. I know, but I would love to. She's like Gloria from Modern Family where she kept her. They're guilty. All right. But anyways. OK, so Jordan originally had said, oh, I don't know what happened to my friends. They probably just froze to death. And this was his first statement right when cops showed up to his home and searched his home and then found the friends in the backyard. Yeah.

His attorney has since come out and said, is saying this now. Jordan has absolutely nothing to do with their deaths. He does not know the timing or the manner of their deaths, nor does he know when they exited the house. He had no knowledge that they remained in the backyard and that they needed medical attention. Had he had known, he would have called for help. The last time he saw them was when they left his house and he went to bed. But in the first sentence, or the second sentence, he says...

He doesn't know when they exited the house. So there's already an issue there. Contradiction. Yes. So then it was going around that several people said that they were calling him, messaging him on Facebook, text messaging him and showing up at his door. And he ignored all of it. Which, by the way, is a good advice here from an attorney friend. Never lie to your own attorney. Yeah, exactly. Never, ever.

No matter what you did and how bad it was. Because they're your friends. Right. They're your one friend. They're your only friend. They're your only objective friend on this whole thing. So about all everyone reaching out, trying to get in contact with him, his attorney had said prior to being contacted by the police, he had not received one phone call or one text message from friends or family of the deceased. Two people came to his house. However, he did not hear them as he sleeps with earbuds and a loud fan.

One of those people, the wife of the deceased, tried to reach him on Facebook Messenger, but unfortunately he did not see that message until after police contacted him. Two friends left their cars at the house, to which Jordan said he did not notice them, but it's also not unusual for friends to leave their cars overnight. So that was that statement regarding that. So the next day, Jordan's attorney came out and then says that there was actually a fifth friend there that night.

And he said at one point in the night, he's changing the story now, Jordan just went to bed because he got tired, leaving the four guys in the house. This fifth guy has now come out and said, I got there at 7 p.m. and I left at midnight. When I left the house, everyone was fine watching Jeopardy on the couch. Jordan, oh yeah. Oh yeah, and then he said, Jordan said he did not receive any calls and texts. However, people started contacting me on Monday afternoon. And so that's when I started calling and messaging Jordan

So he's saying, I did contact him. Right. So he should have received those. The next day, Jordan's attorney comes back out and says that he misspoke and that he walked the four men to the door, said their goodbyes. They all left, all four guys. And then Jordan went to sleep on the couch. Okay. Boy, we are all over the place. And it also still gets weird. So do you think he killed them?

Or do you think they just had a drunken night and he doesn't remember anything and they literally went in the backyard? Yeah, but why wouldn't you just say that? Like, we were all drinking. We passed out. I don't know. I mean, the whole thing's weird. And then the non-follow-up. I don't know. This whole thing smells. It smells really weird because then his attorney also said that he left the house sporadically Monday and Tuesday and that's how he didn't notice the cars. And then he backtracks and says, what I meant by he left the house sporadically, he actually left his bedside

bedroom sporadically from going in and out of sleeping. So this whole like he keeps saying that he's been sleeping for two days like Monday and Tuesday. So like I don't know like drugs have to be involved. If drugs are involved. 100% Without a doubt. How do you sleep that long? However this morning on Fox News they were posting photos of the inside of the house. Yeah. And the entire back windows they're all back windows. So you can see out into your backyard and

So there's absolutely no way, even if he's walking around his house sporadically after going in it, that you didn't see anything weird. This is just odd. So I think maybe he's like panicked. Like he, I don't know, maybe he was just on drugs for two days and like, I don't know. I mean, look, there is a possibility with high level drug use that you're just incoherent.

But it seems far-fetched. And three? But that's the thing. It's three. Three, yeah. Three grown men. Three grown men, and there's no... In their late 30s. And based on looking at the house, there doesn't seem to be any physical altercations or anything, right? Yeah, no. So the cops are sticking to this is 100% in all caps not being investigated as a homicide investigation. I mean, I can see people being...

There was a wedding recently, I understood, on New Year's Eve, that people got so drunk that a lot of people would not remember. Maybe. I'm not sure. I can't attest to that. I'm not sure. Interesting. Well, yeah, keep us up. I do notice that story is on a lot of news outlets. Yes. Because it's so odd. Yes. But two weeks ago, it wasn't when we were talking about it. No, no. Because we're trendsetters. We're trendsetters. We're trendsetters. We didn't ask Kylie to prep for this, but do we know anything about this Illinois kid who killed like...

eight family members or whatever in three states. And he killed himself. He went to Texas and killed himself. Oh, gosh, no. Yeah, no. Okay. Yeah, we're going to need some details on that one. But there's some finale to that, though. He escaped to Texas and killed himself. Yeah. But anyway, still a horrible story. There's a finale. I know. Well, no, there's conclusion to it. There's no dragging this out. I just want to know, like, I mean...

He literally drove from city to city different places to kill families. Yeah, who are the people? This week was like there's too many things going on. There was a beauty queen who killed her boyfriend's kid because she was jealous of him. And then there was some homeowners in Grand Junction, Colorado, who found a head. They bought a new home, and they were cleaning it out, and they found a frozen, decapitated head in their freezer. It happens. It happens. Yeah.

Yeah, they just said they bought this home. They posted on Facebook and said anyone, they just left the house with everything in it. So you can come and take anything you want. And so people were coming and they're like, we're going to take the fridge. And they're like, all right, take the fridge. And there was a dead, a decapitated head in there. In Grand Junction, too, of all places, right? No kidding. Yeah.

Okay. But my other story for today has to do with the Harbaugh brothers. Harbaugh. Harbaugh. Ravens coach, University of Michigan coach. University of Michigan coach is going to Chargers. Yes. Yeah. Yep. And their dad. So the number 34, this is for my betting friends as well. The number 34 is a really good number for this family. Gambling addicts, tune in. Yeah. So...

Their dad was the head coach of Western Kentucky University. And when he won the FCS National Championship, they won by 34 points. 34 to 14. When Jim won with Michigan, they won against the University of Washington 34 to 13. Wow. When John won the Super Bowl against his own brother, he won 34 to 31. Wow.

John and Jim, the two sons, both became fathers at 34 years old. Both got their first head coaching job at 34 years old. So now they're saying if the Ravens go to the Super Bowl, might be a little lucky to bet on the number 34. I think it's worth a couple bucks at least. Yeah. And the little Chargers thing. So in 2013, sorry, 2006,

That's who's going. Yep. He met his wife in the parking lot of a P.F. Chang's. The Chargers in 07 tweeted. That's actually an interesting, like, how does that happen? But in 2007, the Chargers tweeted, so hungry, need to find my wife and head to P.F. Chang's. And now he is the head coach of the Chargers.

And that is Kylie's Corner today. That is spookiness. Well, I have two interesting things to add to Kylie's Corner. First of all, for you folks who love capitalism, the Democratic Socialists of America have been hit by layoffs. They're not getting donations. And we find out one of the people who was let go was their DSA contractor, the National Harassment Grievance Officer, who was making...

$360,000 a year. Oh, my goodness. I've got to find one of those jobs. But what's funny is just a few months ago, one DSA leader who is the secretary of Brown University and Rhode Island School of Design youth chapter articulated that many comrades felt reject budgets, reject organizational austerity politics, their comrade wrote.

Because when it comes to budget, some criticisms lean into self-destructive austerity and reproduce narratives of fiscal restraint that sounds suspiciously like neoliberalism. And in other news, in Iran. Wait, hang on. On this one. Do you think, and this is turning this serious a little bit.

Do you think – I suspect that a lot of their funding was coming from very rich people whose kids were tied to this. Yeah, Goldman Sachs kids. Right. So then all this stuff breaks with Israel and DSA is right out front supporting Hamas. I agree with you 100 percent. And why not? They could just give the Democratic Party now. They need to give the Democratic Socialists of America. Yeah. No, no. I agree with you. I think this is –

Look, what's happening with the second and third generation trust fund kids, like literal trust fund kids. This is not somebody who's left like five million bucks or a house or something. Kids are left hundreds of millions of dollars.

I think they are one of the biggest take them and teachers unions. Those are two of the biggest impediments to what's going on in the world in the chaos. They just set in their Ivy Towers. They don't get outside New York or their special islands. This is ridiculous. And I think I think some some I think some senior members of the household said, yeah, we're done with this. You know what? I would you know, I've always argued against the state taxes.

I'm not sure there shouldn't be a point where you get a certain amount and then everything over that. I've totally changed on it. Yeah. I mean, and all because of this. I have since the George Floyd stuff and what I watched the second, third generation absolutely moronic brats have put in. And they're useless people. They never have accomplished anything. The only thing I would just put off limits is anything that's farm related.

I would put a farm-related if you've got physical business. Yeah, yeah. That's providing actually working. But the rest of it, I agree. I have flipped on this issue. I used to be the biggest person. There should be no estate tax. I am totally against it now. I was 100% with you, and I'm coming to the same conclusion as –

Unless there's jobs at stake, if this is just a market fund of $500 million, you should get $5 million and the rest is taken. One more little tidbit. So as we know, the BBC is not pro-Israel. They're anti-Israel, and they get called out all the time for journalistic mistakes they make. Well, there's a story out of England that BBC reported, so you know this is how bad it is regarding Hamas.

And this just tells you how bad it is.

In the footage, General Gassimi also falsely accused the Holocaust was a lie and a fake and described the war that the British students could join to bring an end to the life of the oppressors and occupiers, Zionists and Jews across the world. He added, God willing, myself and you good students in Europe will be written in the beautiful list of the soldiers of the resistance from tonight. And then furthermore, remember Robert Maile who got fired, the U.S. envoy? We wrote about it in Substack. He's there. Yeah.

who had a security clearance revoked and was placed on leave from the State Department and defended Hezbollah, is now teaching about Israel and Palestine at Yale. More about the cultural rot of our Ivy League schools. Oh my goodness. Now teaching Israel and Palestine at Yale. He loses his security clearance for being a terrorist friend. Yeah. Right? He's a terrorist friend. Terrorist supporter. But that's okay. You get a chair at Yale.

This stuff – I mean let's put – people took a lot of laps, victory laps over Claudine Gay's thing. Well, she didn't lose a dime and she just got demoted back to being a professor. 900,000 bucks a year. I'm sorry. These schools are doing everything they can to avoid any kind of accountability for the complete lack of academic rigor, the ideological taint. Yeah.

You could just get rid of the entire Ivy League today and this country would be better tomorrow. 100%.

Well, folks, if you're listening to us here in Phoenix, we are at 9 a.m. now. That's a big time change. And we will be adding here next week two new stations in Utah. Yep. And we will announce that next week. Growing, growing, growing. Growing, growing, growing. So, folks, on behalf of Kylie's Corner, Kylie Kipper, my co-host Sam Stone. Best corner to be in. Thank you for visiting us. You can always look and find our interviews on BreakingBattlegrounds.vote or wherever you get your podcasts, Spotify, Apple, etc. Have a fantastic weekend, and we'll see you next week.