The Dana Show with Dana Loesch - Thursday February 8 - Full Show

Episode Date: February 8, 2024

The Supreme Court hears Trump’s Colorado ballot access case. Congress doesn’t suggest any plan B to the failed border bill. Hillary Clinton calls Tucker Carlson a puppy dog after he scores an interview with Vladimir Putin. The Senate passes another foreign aid package to send more money to Ukraine. Mutant wolves exposed to the Chernobyl disaster have gained a new superpower. The Hawaii Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of charges for carrying without a permit.Please visit our great sponsors:Black Rifle Coffeehttps://blackriflecoffee.com/danaJoin the Coffee Club today and get 30% off your first month’s subscription.Goldcohttps://danalikesgold.comGet your free Gold Kit from GoldCo today.Hillsdale Collegehttps://danaforhillsdale.comVisit today to hear a Constitution Minute and reserve your free pocket copy of the Constitution.KelTechttps://KelTecWeapons.comSign up for the KelTec Insider and be the first to know the latest KelTec news.Patriot Mobilehttps://patriotmobile.com/danaGet free activation with code Dana.Wise Food Storagehttps://preparewithdana.comSave $50 on your 4-Week Survival Food Kit plus free shipping when you order today!

two powers to run elections. But it would seem that particularly after reconstruction and after the compromise of 1877 and during the period of redeemers, that you would have that kind of conflict. There were a plethora of confederates still around. There were any number of people who would continue to either run for state offices or national offices. So it would seem that that would suggest that they would at least, be a few examples of national candidates being disqualified. If your reading is correct. Well, there were certainly national candidates who were disqualified by Congress refusing

to seat them. I understand that, but that's not this case. I'm talking. Did states disqualify them? That's what we're talking about here. I understand Congress would not seat them. Other than the example I gave no, but again, Your Honor, that's not surprising because there wouldn't have been, states certainly wouldn't have the authority to remove a city. So what's the purpose of the, what was the purpose of Section 3? States were sending people. The concern was that the former Confederate states would continue being bad actors.

And the effort was to prevent them from doing this. And you're saying that, well, this also authorized states to disqualify candidates. So what I'm asking you for, if you are right. What are the examples? Well, Your Honor, the examples are states excluded many candidates for state office, individuals holding state offices. We have a number of published cases of states considering that. I understand the states controlling state elections and state positions. What we are talking about here are national candidates.

I understand you look at phoner or foot, shall be, or McPherson, they all talk about, of course, the conflict after the Civil War. And there were people who felt very strongly about retaliating against the South, the radical Republicans. But they did not think about authorizing the South to disqualify national candidates. And that's the argument you're making. And what I would like to know is do you have any examples of this? Many of those historians have filed briefs in our support in this case, making the point that the idea of the 14th Amendment was that both states and the federal government would ensure rights and that if states failed to do so, the federal government certainly would also step in. But I think the reason why there aren't examples of states doing this is an idiosyncratic one of the fact that elections worked differently back then.

States have a background power under Article 2 and the 10th Amendment to run presidential elections. They didn't use that power to police ballot access until about the 1890s. And by the 1890s, everyone had received amnesty and these issues had become moot. So I don't think the history tells us. So look at Justice Thomas's questions sort of from the 30,000 foot level. I mean, the whole point of the 14th Amendment was to restrict state power, right? States shall not abridge privilege as immunity. They won't deprive people of property without due process.

they won't deny equal protection. On the other hand, it augmented federal power under Section 5. Congress has the power to enforce it. So wouldn't that be the last place that you'd look for authorization for the states, including Confederate states, to enforce implicitly authorized, to enforce the presidential election process? That seems to be a position that is at war with the whole, thrust of the 14th Amendment. So this is, I found this fascinating and it was a little long,

but I wanted to play it for you. And there are several excerpts from this. And I haven't dug deep into it because I want to wait until, because this is from the Supreme Court. This is the hearing. In fact, this exchange happened maybe what, 40, 45 minutes ago. There was another really good one with Justice Gorsuch that took place. And this is about the fight from Trump to appear on the ballot in Colorado. And it is fascinating. You should listen to it if you can. You can, I mean, other people have like, I mean, they have like the archives of it online. You can stream it and listen to it. Let's do it while you make dinner or something. Because it's, it is a very interesting argument. And they're specifically diving into the 14th Amendment. I mean, specifically they're looking at

article 14, section three, which gets into whoever incites sets foot, assist or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States of the laws there. of or gives aider comfort there too, and they had a huge debate about that clause. She'll be fine under this title or imprison, blah, blah, blah. This is about whether or not Trump can be disqualified from the ballot in Colorado because of January 6. And it's insightful because the repercussions from this are far more reaching than just specifically this election.

Welcome to the show. Dana Lash here with you at the top of our very first hour here on Thursday. It doesn't feel like a Thursday. You can listen coast to coast. You can stream the radio program as well. And you can also find us on YouTube. Facebook, all kinds of good stuff there. The discussion ongoing on YouTube and then of course Channel 347, Direct TV. So this, I'm, I kind of feel like the, and again, this is the hearing,

and we were just hearing the audio of it that has been carrying. And the arguments that the state of Colorado is made, because they, they want to, they think that that Trump, they think that Trump shouldn't be on the ballot. And what they're arguing is specifically whether or not it's state authorities. It's not an issue of the courts. It's an issue of a state authority in the state of Colorado, whether or not they have the legal authority to disqualify someone who has met every qualification for president. And there was an interesting discussion. And even it was, Cantony Brown Jackson.

We don't have to play every single bit of it. She, I found her remark very interesting because they were actually, they had a little bit of a back and forth on it. And she was just trying to clarify something. And I don't know, her remarks to me suggested that she kind of sees a bigger picture here. Because remember this. One of the things that the left guaranteed. They get over their skis. The right can't strategize to save their life, but the left gets over their

skis. And they'll take an issue like this. And it doesn't matter how they bend the law, how they pervert the law, whatever they do. It doesn't matter. They'll do whatever is necessary to achieve their objective, even if it means imperilling their own strategy and moves later on down the line. this all the time. In fact, they had a bunch of mistakes that led to Citizens United. Harry Reid suffered for that immensely. This, I think, is one of those things. And I just got the sense that when Kintanji Brown Jackson was questioning the lawyers representing Colorado, it just was very, I mean, you got a quick sound, but if we wanted to play this, do we want to play it? Because I don't want to drag you all into the weeds, but it's fascinating because I honestly feel like she and me,

maybe kind of Sotomayor. Kagan, I felt, was hardcore against. I don't think Kagan gets it. But I sort of felt like some of these progressive justices could see the writing on the wall. Like, wait a second. Whoa, guys, hold up. I felt like they were just sort of taking inventory of what the consequences of this could be. Play a little of this because this was.

Yeah, this was the Kintanji Brown Jackson when she was replying to him. Because I think this exchange, I think, came. I think this was when I heard like a half hour ago. where she kind of just gutted their whole argument. And I don't think she did it on purpose. Listen. From rising again in the context of these sort of local elections as opposed to focusing on the presidency. Well, two points on that, Justice Jackson.

First is that, as I discussed earlier, there isn't the same history of states regulating ballot access at this time. So ballot access rules to restrict presidential candidates wouldn't have, wouldn't have existed. they wouldn't have been raised one way or another. Right, but I'm not making a distinction between ballot access and anything else. Understood. But the more broad point I want to make is that what is very clear from the history is that the framers were concerned about charismatic rebels who might rise through the ranks up to and including the presidency of the United States.

But then why didn't they put the word president in the very enumerated list in Section 3? The thing that really is troubling to me is I totally understand your argument. But they were listing people that were barred, and president is not there. And so I guess that just makes me worry that maybe they weren't focusing on the president. And, for example, the fact that electors of vice president and president are there suggests that really what they thought was, if we're worried about the charismatic person, we're going to bar insurrectionist electors, and therefore that person is never going to rise. This came up in the debates in Congress over Section 3, where Reverty Johnson said,

why haven't you included president and vice president in the language? And Senator Morrill responds, we have. Look at the language, any office under the United States? Yes, but doesn't that at least suggest ambiguity? And this sort of ties into Justice Kavanaugh's point. In other words, we had a person right there at the time saying what I'm saying. The language here doesn't seem to include president. why is that? And so if there's an ambiguity, why would we construe it to, as Justice Kavanaugh pointed out,

against democracy? Well, Reverty Johnson came back and agreed with that reading. Any office is clear. The Constitution says about 20 times. No, I'm not going to that. So let me just say, so your point is that there's no ambiguity. With having a list and not having president in it, with having a history that suggests that they were really focused on local concerns in the South. I'm telling you, it's fascinating to me because she's literally destroying their argument here. Here's the point, and this is what it kind of comes back to, because some of these, you have people that are arguing, I mean, this gets into very much the spirit of the Constitution and originalism, et cetera. but there are there i mean ultimately what colorado's saying is that state authorities can just take somebody off the ballot and there have been a number of arguments from the justice to say well you're disenfranchising a lot of voters in colorado who have made this determination that determination because he's all he's satisfied every other qualification keep in mind he was never charged criminally there's no criminal charge you're talking about removing someone off the ballot based on a state of a state official's discretion their own personal choice you're disenfranchising and i think every single so to

Mayor mentioned this, shockingly, Gorsuch mentioned this, as well as Thomas. And I think even Alito touched on this. And it was, I mean, to me, to have that many justices, particularly some who have always sort of suede in the middle. And then to have Contagri Brown Jackson and even Sotomayor to an extent, you know, come up to that line, to me is incredibly telling because I don't see the Supreme Court determining in favor of Colorado on this for the simple fact that you have an individual who was not charged with a crime. And by the way, this is. doesn't matter if you like Trump or not. This comes down to what the ultimate authority a power a state official has. And they're trying to stretch the argument over state's rights

to include this state official making this, you know, a completely arbitrary determination. And when they were arguing, by the way, when they were arguing states rights as well, they also brought in the Fifth Amendment amendment. And they, they, they, they, I mean, it was a very interesting constitutional scholarly debate. But when you have federalism, when you, when you, when you're going to argue federalism, you're also arguing that you have to observe the process that the structure of federalism as it pertains to states. That doesn't mean, or not a Fifth Amendment, Section 5, by the way, of the 14th, because Congress was the one that has the authority, it rests in them to enforce this particular law, not a state official, and he hasn't done

anything in order to merit such consideration under Section 5. And it's they, I just don't think that the, the attorneys for Colorado, I mean, they're making, they're arguing very well, but the facts simply are not on their side. They're really trying to stretch this. We're going to talk more about this coming up because, again, whenever anyone tries to pervert the Constitution and stretch and bend constitutional law to fit their means, you're going to get something bad out of it down the road. And this actually could affect Democrats more than Republicans later on. Some of the other stuff were going to hit. Now, wait, I was told he couldn't do it. this guys. Joe Biden is considering taking executive action to deter legal immigration across the southern border. NBC just reported that this late last night. What? We got to have a conversation about this because guys, we were told he couldn't do this. Wait, what? I thought this is all Republicans' fault. We'll talk about it. Our partners that help bring you free radio, it's Gold Coe precious metals. This is a great way to navigate. Gold Coe makes it easy. It's a with a great way to navigate through

the oftentimes very confusing precious metals choices that are out there. I mean, to go to somebody you can trust isn't exactly easy, which is why you should turn to Gold Co. Everybody knows wasteful government spending and just printing endless money. That's exactly how we get inflation. It's also why I add a gold and silver as a hedging to inflation with Gold Co. So you can get a free 2024 gold kit.

They make it so easy. And you can also learn how to potentially get $10,000 in bonus silver. Anybody, bonus silver is great. Everybody loves bonus silver. Code has a very unique quality with its education first position and the thoroughness of the information that it provides. So you get this one-of-a-kind gold IRA kit for individual buyers and it explains the economy how gold IRAs work. They just want to make it easy for you to get the benefit of owning like actual physical gold or silver. And precious metals ownership is a huge part of

your overall entirement, very important for saving strategy. And you're going to get unmatched customer service with zero complaint record. and first rate service with Goldco. They're all about transparency and honesty and no pressure. I also ask about their highest buyback guarantee to. Protect your families, financial, and future freedom. Get started today at Dana likesgold.com and get your free gold kit from Goldco and learn how to get $10,000 in bonus silver.

Dana likesgold.com. Does our border have turnstiles and velvet ropes? Some Republicans are touting a bill with a limit of 5,000 migrants per day. That's still 1.8,000. million per year. An amusement park doesn't let more people in when it hits capacity. Check out the Watchdog on Wall Street podcast on Apple, Spotify, wherever you get your podcast. And now, all of the news you would probably miss.

It's time for Dana's Quick Five. So you remember the kid who was accused of being in Blackface at the football game? Remember, it was a little bitty kid and all these people were out there weighing in on it. It was in November. Deadspin was the one that went after him. He was the Kansas City Chiefs fan. and he actually was in the colors. He had half of his face in black, half in red.

Well, anyway, the family's suing deadspin. And I hope that they take them for everything they have, including their birth certificates if they have them. Go get them. Drag them. Drag them. So moths apparently aren't actually drawn to light as previously thought. One of the best, most ridiculous jokes in the world

is the one my friend Norm MacDonald told, where it was the longest joke I've ever heard. And he told it on Conan O'Brien, and it was so ridiculous. But his joke is going to be the hardest hit, as K noted. But apparently they've done this whole study on it that they published in the journal Nature Communications. And they used motion capture cameras and filming with infrared illumination so they wouldn't disrupt their vision. And it showed that they actually were not going totally towards the light. They think that there's something else going on.

Artificial light confuses them, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they're attracted to it. Do we need a study on that? I don't know. An activist climbed that 367 foot Las Vegas Fear just four days before Super Bowl. I don't know if you got, I don't even know how this happens. But it came right after the, right before Super Bowl's guy climbed up. He ended up getting arrested. He's a pro-life activist. Stick with us. We got more in store coming up, including Biden said he's not going to enforce border law. What?

Free radio brought to you by the folks over at Wise Foods and Wise Food Storage. When emergencies strike, the last thing that you want to worry about, about is where your next meal is going to come from. And this is where Wise Food Storage comes in. So they have a Buy One, Get One free discount on their 72 hour food kit. Just visit Wisefoodstorage. And type in Dana and the search bar. And when you do, you're going to get access to all the deals on wise food storage's best selling products. Like that 72 hour food kit, the buy one get one. You get two boxes, 12 pouches of premium survival food, entrees, breakfast, drinks, all kinds of stuff 11,120 total calories in each kit, and everything that they have is made with high quality

U.S. ingredients. Freeze dried, dehydrated, easy to prepare, just add water with a 25-year shelf life. Also, order your heirloom seed vault. There's 4,500 seeds in each kit. They're non-hybrid, non-GMO, open-pollinated heirloom varieties with a 10-year shelf life, and it contains 39 varieties of seeds. Order yours today at wisefoodstorage.com. Type Dana in the search bar to get those exclusive deals like the buy one, get one free on the

72-hour food kit. Visit wisefoodstorage.com. Code Dana, Dana and the search bar. Looking for the drive-through version of the Dana show? Check out the best highlights from every show and Dana's absurd truth podcast posted daily from the Dana Show. This app that this court has held, you're not contesting this or asking us to revisit that decision in Thornton or term limits or whatever you want to call it, that it has to come

from some federal constitutional authority. No, we are not, Your Honor. Okay. And here, we're not talking about the qualifications clause, right? Nobody's talking about whether he's 35 years old or natural born, whatever, right? Not an issue. Okay. We're talking about something under the 14th Amendment and Section 3.

So that's where you have to find your authority, right? We find our authority in Article 2 in states' plenary power to run their elections. Federal election, but this is for a federal office. It has to come from the Constitution, and you're seeking to enforce section 3. We're suggesting that in their broad power to determine them to select presidential electors in any manner they see fit, they can take account of Section 3 and apply Section 3. Could they do it without Section 3? Could they disqualify somebody for, you know, on whatever basis they wanted outside of the Qualifications Clause? That would run into term limits.

Yeah, I would think so, right? So it has to come back to Section 3. And if that's true, how does that work given that Section 3 speaks about holding office, not who may run for office? It was a point Mr. Mitchell was making earlier, and I just wanted to give you a chance to respond to it because it seems to me that you're asking to enforce

in an election context, a provision of the Constitution that speaks to holding office. So it's different than the qualifications clause, which is all about who can run and then serve, yeah? I don't know that it is different. Other qualifications for

office similarly talk about eligibility for the office. There's nothing unconstitutional about a 30-year-old trying to get on the back. Except for this disability can be removed, right, under Section 3. That's what's different about it. So, thoughts on. You know, Gorsuch totally sounds like an exasperated professor. That's what I noticed with us. Welcome back to the program. Dana Lash here with you. It's a joy to be with you this Thursday. So they're arguing over, and we're going to get to this other stuff, but the hearings wrapped. but they've were the scotus was listening to arguments from state of colorado they want to take trump off the ballot why they want to take trump off the ballot they said he incited an insurrection oh my gosh let's go to a 14th amendment we got to go to section all the sections of the 14th amendment but but what scotis is arguing is that well they didn't say it but they're leaning towards it i mean everything that they've said suggests that they really do believe that there's you know limitations obviously you can't disenfranchise a whole state of voters because you have one state official who thinks that

that Trump should be on the ballot. You know, that the guy can have his opinion all day long, like just like I think Green Day sucks and they're not punk and they're not the first people to play in a subway. But, you know, whatever. You know, that doesn't make my opinion law, which is why you should not elect me to a public office because I would do everything in my power to make it so.

Gladriel, with the one ring, that should be terrifying. That being said, they're saying, look, you know, let's look at section three and let's look at the power that Congress has. And the reason why, going back to Contagy Brown Jackson's point, you know, they were trying to argue that, well, there's some vagary here with this and that, you know, and we think that vagary entitles us to be able to argue for inclusion of the President of the United States in consideration for removal of ballot. And Brown Jackson was like, well, you can't interpret this vagary against democracy, which I almost choked to death after I heard that. But she was also saying, look, this is a very enumerated article. And if they

one of the president in there, the founders would have put the president in there, which suggests, you know, which goes without saying that the impeachment process, that's where they have the check and balance on the president of the United States. I don't see the Supreme Court citing with Colorado against Trump on this. I really don't because it's such a specious argument, especially one in which there are no criminal charges present. And that's huge. And secondly, we watched this online. We saw everything. I mean, we were live. When this was happening, we were carrying a video on air. I mean, we saw all of this happening when we were, like I said, we were broadcasting live.

It was, you know, during a weekday afternoon. And, you know, while we were condemning the smaller group of people that wasn't anywhere near the peaceful rally that broke away and was engaging in property, destruction, and violence, we condemned those people. But the idea that it was an insurrection is one of the stupidest things that I've ever heard in my life. because you you it just doesn't make any sense these were people who were just I think that there were some bad actors there and I think there were some dumb gullible people who went along with some of the bad actors which says more about them than anything but it wasn't a movement as a whole and it wasn't a whole bunch of supporters of Trump as a whole either and he also was telling people to be peaceful I don't know what else Democrats wanted him to do I mean these are the same Democrats that had Chuck Schumer literally standing in front of the Supreme Court building raging about you're going to pay for this Kavanaugh and then two weeks later without missing a beat a guy's arrested for trying to assassinate him. So, I mean, we could sit here and go back and forth with this argument all day long, but what it comes down to is that you have what seems like the majority of the Supreme Court that's arguing against bastardizing the Constitution

of the United States to elevate the opinion of a state official in removing a qualified presidential candidate from the ballot because they're butt hurt over J.C. six not having criminal charges go their way with the president. I don't know. That's just what it seems like to me. Speaking of the president and criminal actions, so now I don't know what changed. Can I just read you this? I mean, I just want to read you this NBC headline. The Biden administration is considering executive action to deter illegal immigration at the southern border. Hmm? Oh yes, they say with border security legislation unlikely in Congress, the White House wants to take action. Migrant crossings are expected to soar back to last year's record levels.

So, according to two U.S. officials, NBC says that that's what the president is preparing for, because there hasn't been a border solution. And they say that, now listen to this, the unilateral measures under consideration might upset some progressives in Congress, but, you know, they have to help the Democrat mayors who've asked for more, help from federal government to handle the influx of migrants in their cities, they would be pleased. Democrats are setting themselves up for a win on this, too. But at this point, I don't care because I want the border secured. But it also, if Republicans play this right, if they stop, if Republicans get on the same page and you have half of the Republicans, stop trying to denigrate the other

half that didn't make the primary choice that they wanted to and everybody gets on the same page and they put all the effort into that, this could be a very successful narrative flip for them. If they wanted to be smart about it, which I still haven't seen that demonstrated from a handful. They go, congressional Republicans chose to put partisan politics ahead of national security. Why didn't Biden do this in the first place then? If it was so important that it needed to be done, why didn't he do this in the first place? You know, he could have established an east. EO that sunset and reverted to anything that Congress had passed. I mean, he could do whatever with your EO like that.

You can structure it like that, sure. He could have easily done that. They go, oh, this is plan B. So what is it going to be? They haven't given any suggestions as to what it might be. Because remember when his literal first day, actually, let me pull this up. His executive orders on first day. and this was, I think there were four.

He had the revision of the civil immigration enforcement policies and priorities, so that revoked literally everything, everything that was under the former president. I mean, he's, and he's taken since that time about 300 executive actions on immigration, most of which have been to dilute the strength of law. so they he had the eo on ending what he was calling discriminatory bans on entry to the u.s revision of civil immigration enforcement policies and priorities the deferred action for childhood arrivals he had a this this literally was all day one January 20th the executive order on ensuring lawful and accurate and blah blah blah that was uh uh uh different appointments for

immigration judges uh they had the deferred enforced departure the suspension of new enrollments on this was the remaining Mexico policy on the migrant protection protocols that's the official name of the remaining Mexico policy they also had suspension of entry non immigrants and non immigrants people who the COVID stuff they suspended all so that was the executive order they this was on January 25th so this was what this was still within the first week the next big batch of executive orders that he had on immigration included suspending any kind of coronavirus protections against people who are entering illegally so that they could say that they didn't have to worry about testing them. Meanwhile, you still had to prove a negative test to get on a flight,

you know. I mean, all kinds of stuff. So he had a handful. He had at least, he had five, actually. I was saying four. I was incorrect. He had five executive orders on day one. And within his first week, he had a ton. And then in total, he's had about 300. It's crazy. Nearly 300. So he rolled back all of this stuff on his very first day. His very, very, very first day. and the executive actions that he took, really, as I said, that's when you got rid of the remain in Mexico, and you had essentially the reinstatement of the Flores Agreement, all of this stuff. There were a bunch of interior enforcement priorities that were discarded, the entry bans that were discarded, DACA, which was expanded, family, I mean, all kinds of stuff on this.

the asylum was eroded, the protections against, you know, people, everybody trying to claim asylum and backlogging that. I mean, he undid all of it. So you're telling me, and we made this argument, he had all of these executive orders to do these things. So you know that because he could do these things with an executive order, that he could undo them with an executive order as well. Although I doubt that that's what he's going to be doing with any of his authority. I don't know what it means, but they're getting ready for some kind of op, right? they're getting ready for something to boost Biden and kind of try to play off of what they view as a victory for themselves.

And maybe it works on some independents who haven't been following it as closely, but they're trying to paint Republicans as being the irrational ones who wouldn't take seriously all the concerns that they had as it pertained to the deluge at the border. And so here they try to propose perfectly reasonable legislation and Republicans just rejected it,

except they don't tell everybody that less than a third of it actually went towards the border and everything else is foreign money. But whatever. So now they're going to try to double down and make it look like, well, since Congress couldn't get this done, Biden's going to step up to do it. And they're going to make, oh, get ready. Oh, get ready. It's going to be a big push. And they're going to, I bet he's going to give a speech on it too. How much you want to bet? We'll probably see a speech and he's probably not going to answer any questions, but we'll probably see a speech at some point, you know, like a late afternoon, right before prime time speech that he's, going to be 40 minutes late for and he's going to make a big deal out of it so democrats can say look we're saving the country from this recklessness at the border without telling everyone that it was their policies that directly contributed to all of the influx at the border so they're getting there are republicans

ready to push back on this at all i'm curious they should reintroduce hr too i mean they should when i was we'll just see i'm just saying we got a lot more to hit as we uh roll towards uh days of these United States as well. Our partners out bringing you free radio, Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is the only Christian conservative cell phone service, and they are standing, they stand behind their service and their values as a company. It's reflected in how they do business. And they also want to make sure you can afford your cell phone service. They offer dependable nationwide coverage in all three major networks. You get the best service in your area, but without funding the left. And when you switch, you can get a tailor-made plan for you. I mean,

have your family on it, save money for everybody. Keep your phone in your number or upgrade. The choice is entirely yours. And work with a member of their 100% U.S.-based customer service team. They make switching easy while you support and maintain and create even more U.S.-based jobs. Visit Patriotmobile.com slash Dana or call 972 Patriot and use promo code Dana to get free activation. Make that switch today. That's Patriotmobile.com slash Dana 972 Patriot.

Don't let FOMO get the best of you. Stay in the loop and ahead of the curve by following. Dana on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Like Sands Through the Hourglass, so are the days of the United States. The negotiation didn't have a path to citizenship. It was entirely on their terms in order to get Ukraine funding, right? Well, I mean, Chris, that's been a failed play for 20 years. So you are right that that has been the Democratic strategy for 30 years, maybe. And it has failed to deliver for the people we care about most, the undocumented Americans that are in this country.

This is also not 2013 any longer when we ran that play last. He cares about non-citizens more than citizens? That's Senator Chris Murphy saying that, well, we care, you know, more about, you know, the most about the undocumented American. You mean they're not undocumented Americans. You're not an American until you're a citizen. undocumented means you're here illegally. There's no such thing as un-doct-can I be an undocumented, undocumented Mexican?

Can I go be an undocumented Italian? Do you know in Italy, or when you walk around and any of the European nations that have, what is it, the Shenzhen agreement? I mean, you're technically, you can't just carry a copy of your passport. You have to carry your documents on you. Can't even be a copy. And I know some people in court, they say,

oh, you can carry a copy of it. And it's up to the discretion of, you know, the law enforcement that would pull you over. But in a lot of these countries, if you're traveling abroad, you know, if they demand to see your actual for real documents and you cannot produce them, they can haul your ass off to jail. I mean, we could have been detained in Italy. If we had to provide, like the actual documentation, you can't just provide a copy. Does that, so what, can I just say I'm in an undocumented Italian? No, because guess what?

To jail, yo, you goio. That's what happens. but why is it in the United States that's considered acceptable? That's so stupid. It's not. There's no such thing as undocumented American. Yeah, I'm an undocumented billionaire. Give me my money.

What's good? I'm so tired of this undocumented stuff. We're not doing this. Then you're here illegally. Senator Chris Murphy's a moron. Don't sit there and look at the camera. Look at the American people through the camera and say with a straight face that we care about people who are here illegally more than anyone else. you know who you're also

screwing over the people who come here legally that you claim to care so much about I mean you are literally steamrolling over those people and that's I mean these are people who are going to be Americans and you're steamrolling over them gosh I hope they remember that that's why I have a survey we're going to be talking

about Democrats are still losing a lot of ground with black and Hispanic Americans probably I mean there's a big reason why big reason why I don't know how Republicans aren't looking at this particularly with the Hispanic vote and then the mess at the border because I'm going to tell you something. You think

you're mad about the border. Hell hath no fury. Like a Hispanic American who did their due diligence waited for years, proudly became an American, joined our fabric,

created a business, added, created wealth. And then they see all these other people get fast tracked while they were put through the ringer. I'm going to tell you, you do not know the rage until you talk to these people. They get, and they deservedly get infuriated about it. It is some righteous indignation. And then Democrats are like, why are we hemorrhaging the Hispanic vote? Gee, I wonder. Also, because they're natural conservatives. They're not buying into your trans stuff.

Good night. We got a lot on the way, including about that survey. You don't want to go anywhere. Second hour of the Dana Show. Back in just a moment. As we move, our partners. black rifle coffee company, a veteran-owned, veteran-operated company, and they make the best coffee that is out there. And they do a lot for first responder and veteran causes, too. And unlike some of these other cats out there, they don't act, they don't, you know, just import roasted beans in, white, label them and light everybody and act like they did it themselves. They actually roast their stuff six days a week, right? Five or six days a week out of Tennessee and Utah. And if you don't want to settle for bland, overpriced, overroasted, mediocre coffee,

you can get the high quality black rifle coffee roasted right here in the US of A delivered right to your door with the black rifle coffee club. When you become a member, you get 30% off your first subscription order using code Dana. Choose your blend, your favorite brew, pick your quantity, how often you want to have it delivered right to your doorstep. You pick your delivery schedule, you're done, and you can also find all kinds of stuff. In addition to, you know, the roast that you choose from the AK-47 espresso, the thin blue line medium roast, silence or smooth, whatever your jam is. You can also find grinders, mugs, kettles, everything you need for that perfect brew, all at black rifle coffee.com slash Dana.

So visit today, join the Black Rifle Coffee Club. Get 30% off your first month using code Dana. Save money on high-quality coffee, roasted right here in the U.S. of A. It's black rifle coffee.com slash Dana. The border bill has been dead. It's been as dead as Woodrow Wilson. And now it's sufficient. We just finished voting.

There will be some who will want to continue to talk about this bill. It's their right, but I think they'll just be grooming a corpse. Oh, my gosh. He is so funny. That's Senator John Kennedy out of Louisiana. This is dead as a woodrow Wilson. I like, you know what, you know, he likes to give these little jabs as unstudied an air as possible. But, you know, he's probably got, I.

Is it something that just arises from the moment or does, it's careful planning involved? That's like really one of the only questions I would ever want to ask him, I think. He won't come on the show, though. We can't get him on the show. And I'm like, you don't realize we could be best friends. Like I, like your energy is my energy. Why don't you come on, Senator Kennedy? Why?

Like, we could be best friends and he just won't do it. I don't understand. Welcome back to the show. A very sad little Dana Lash here with you. Top of the second hour on Thursday. I mean, he's got the energy of someone that you, if you get to church early and you want to sit in the back, I'm not saying that any of us do this, but you know what I mean. And like, say you get early for a wedding or something and you're sitting in the back and you want to watch everybody else how they're dressed. He's the guy you want to sit next to because it's going to be like running commentary a la Joan Rivers.

You know it would be like that. You would get some tea. He has that energy. I am all for that. Like when I become an old lady, I want to be just like John Kennedy's personality. I just want to be like that. Oh my gosh, he's just got great energy. I'm not insulting him.

I just wanted him to come on the show. You have a best friend right here and you don't even know it. Anyway, so we've been covering a lot of stuff, including the border, the border spin that they have on it now. Now Joe Biden's like, well, guess what guys? I guess I will use some executive orders. Don't know what I'm going to do yet. Could have done that from the beginning, Slick. Could have done that from the very get-go.

All right. One of the other things that I want to hit on. I hate doing this to you, but I'm going to play this old lady. So Tucker Carlson, and Tucker's a friend of mine. I actually just spoke with him last night, and he's doing some extensive traveling, and I have a feeling that he's got a couple more, a couple of more interesting interviews to come. But he went over, and he's interviewing Vladimir Putin, and he's putting it on his website, and it's going to be, Elon Musk has said he's not going to abridge it at all.

It'll be, it's going to be live to tape, meaning that you tape it, it's recorded, but you, you treat it like it's a live broadcast. So there's no editing, there's no cutting in. It's, you might put what they call a donut on it. Something in the front, something in the back, like a video, marking, you know, an intro or whatever, and that's it. But live to tape means that they treat it like it's a live thing and there's no editing. It's just what you see is what you get for however long the duration of that interview is. And so it's going to air to, I think, this evening.

And he was getting a lot of flack, a lot of. lot of flack from it. And some people have been, I think, questioning his, you know, the reason why he's going over there and interviewing Putin. And he, in his, in this video, he put like a two-minute-long video up on X. And he was explaining that there are all of these interviews of Zelensky. And a lot of people have given a lot of airtime to Zelensky. My gosh, wasn't the wife at one of the, what is it? I can't think of it. Now I can't remember. State of the. I, now I can't remember. Union. Wasn't the wife a guest of one of the State of the Unions before?

A lot of interviews have been given to Zelensky, a lot of magazine covers. I mean, they mentioned him like at award shows and all kinds of stuff. And he thought that it was kind of weird that there has been an absence of that

from the other entity involved in this war, which he says, you know, Vladimir Putin out of Russia. Now, I don't know if it's because they've just turned them down. And I don't put anything I mean, they may have. They may have been, this may be, and don't put anything past, like a former KGB dude. Don't put anything past a former KGB guy to leverage anything.

However, Carlson's not stupid. I've known Tucker for a long time since bow tie days. And I've known Tucker since he thought that our mutual friend and a dear friend of mine who's since past Andrew Breitbart was two out there and two over the Tom. Oh my gosh, if Andrew could see Chuck or now. But I don't think he's dumb. I think that he and nobody, everyone's prejudging this interview before it's even aired. And he's asking him questions as to, well, why did you invade Ukraine? Why did you invade Ukraine? Why did you? Why is all of this happening? I mean, I think those are legitimate questions that that should be asked. I'm, I mean, especially if our tax dollars are going towards paying for this conflict and especially if,

our tax dollars and our participation in whatever council Ukraine has been receiving are involved in this. And it's reshaping the argument over foreign policy here domestically, then I think that you are owed an answer on that or as close to an answer as you can get. That's journalism. And I don't disagree with that. And I think Tucker Carlson has the right to go and interview whomever he wants to go an interview. And no one needs to you know, crap the bet over it for the lack of a better way to put it.

But there have been a lot of journalists. I'm using this very loosely that have been very upset over this. And they're super upset over the fact that Tucker Carlson's going over there

and he was interviewing him and oh my gosh. Why? I mean, I think the American people are going to realize they're not going to sit here and buy into whatever he says.

I mean, the excuses that I keep hearing from Democrats are they presuppose that Americans are so stupid that they're going to take his gospel truth, whatever comes out of Putin's mouth. I mean, this guy's, again, former KGB. And the idea that anybody in the United States should be somehow, quote, unquote, protected

from hearing any Q&A like this is as commie as the communeness that he represents. That doesn't make any sense to me either. This was Hillary Clinton. Audio soundbite 1, who, well, I'm going to play this and then I'm going to shred it. Go ahead. I mean, he's like a puppy dog. You know, he somehow has, after having been fired from so many outlets in the United States, he, I would not be surprised if he emerges with a contract with an outlet because he is

a useful idiot. He says things that are not true. He parrots Vladimir Putin's pack of lies about Ukraine. So I don't see why Putin wouldn't give him an interview, because through him, he can and continue to lie about what his objectives are in Ukraine and what he expects to see happen. It's really quite sad that not just somebody like Tucker Carlson who has, as I said, been fired so many times

because he seems unable to correlate his reporting with the truth. But also because it's a sign that there are people in this country right now who, are like a fifth column for Vladimir Putin. And why? Oh my gosh. Can we, I mean, if you want to have a discussion about any kind of fifth column from

Vladimir Putin, let's talk about how you were green lighting, certain, what is it, uranium, resources, et cetera, for Russia without going through the proper procedures in Congress. I mean, we could sit here and talk all day about what Hillary Clinton's been a fifth column for. Just, good heavens. For her, someone like her to say that, you got fired from running for president. His thing with Fox, it does, I don't necessarily, whether, I don't even, I'm not going to sit here and speculate as to what he, you know, the situation with Fox. But what other networks was he, was he fired for from?

Was she talking about CNN? Because didn't he used to do like a crossfire kind of thing at CNN? But I thought that was just their contract ended. I can't stand when people say that. People try to say that about me all the time. And I'm like, simply choosing. to not renew a contract does not mean someone was let go. But that's one of the things that the left does.

They do it to me constantly. And allowing contracts to expire and choosing to not renew them is not being fired. And for her to say that about Carlson is incredibly disingenuous, particularly, you know, this is the wipe the hard drive lady. But she's saying that, oh, her more serious accusation is that he's a useful tool. for the Russian regime. That's what she's saying. She's saying that him going over there to get this interview

and to do that. He's going to come out with a contract from a Russian outlet. Well, I don't necessarily believe that either. And again, this is someone who worked with Russians when you were talking about undermining Libyan government

to cede the ground. You had Blumenthal and everyone else involved in that. I mean, we could sit here and go on into all of the stuff that Hillary Clinton did. And to say nothing, a fusion GPS,

literally working with the Kremlin, to compile a discredited Russian dossier that the FBI refused to validate, and it was so bad and so shoddy that they literally had to lie to a FISA judge in order to get a signature to sign off on it. Oh, and let's not forget that it was Hillary Clinton's campaign that paid this discredited British spy through an unregistered Farah activist entity Fusion GPS that were, that were here lobbying on behalf of Russian oligarchs to overturn the Magnitsky Act, and she was literally working and paying for Kremlin activity to get involved in the 2016 election. So she, Ms. Bleachbitt doesn't have anything to say about this. Nothing. Close but no cigar hill. Close but no cigar.

Wink, wink, wink. But Carlson can go over and, I mean, who was, what was the guy with 60 minutes? It was Mike Wallace, Chris Wallace's dad. Mike Wallace went over and he interviewed Vladimir Putin. Why are they mad that Tucker Carlson's doing it? I don't understand. Now, keep in mind that I totally expect, you know, the Soviet spirit. And if I were thinking, if I were in the Kremlin and I was trying to, I was trying to scheme on something, you know, I would absolutely, this is a position that I would take. So you have, look at the United States right now.

A lot of people in the United States, I don't know if we've, ever lived at a time when there's been such high distrust of our, the entities that we have engaged, that we've entered into the social contract with, right? Our government. I don't know if there's ever been such a time when we, there has been such a high level of distrust, right? So you're, you have a government that's criticizing an independent journalist for going and getting the other side of the debate with the Russian Ukraine war and the people who are, you know, criticizing the journalists doing it are people who actively engaged in aiding and abetting one of the biggest transgressions against the American people in our country's history,

which was the COVID lockdown. And all of the lies that had to do with the pandemic, the same government that was spying on reporters, the same government that was spying on parents using the Patriot Act because they were speaking out in school board hearings, the same government that actually was pressuring Amazon to literally ban books, which we're going to talk about here coming up. The same government that went after Tea Party activists. The same government that has been weaponizing the IRS and politically auditing people. The same government that has been trying to suspend FFLs while at the same time protecting the president's son who illegally purchased a firearm

while he was coked out of his mind and then discarded it in a trash can across the street from a school in a coke leaden pouch. I mean, I could go on and on. I mean, there's a lot of examples and a lot of justification and a lot of righteous indignation from the American people as to great reasons why they, I mean, they have every reason to distrust their government. And if I were a Soviet entity, I would be exploiting that to the nth degree. And the left are the ones who are being useful idiots here. They should be encouraging, go and ask as many questions as you want. Find out as much information as you want. Sitting down and asking someone a question and interviewing them. And sometimes I get criticism about this on my show from people who have the same

number of brain cells as Hillary Clinton. Why would you have this person on? Because I want to ask questions, and that's what I do. I don't stick my head at my backside and then, you know, and then pretend that all my conspiracy theories are real. I want to go and I want to find out the answers. And that involves sitting down with people asking questions and getting answers to the best of my ability. And simply sitting down and questioning someone and getting answers from them isn't an endorsement. And it should have to be explained in an era where you can get a digital dictionary on your phone in 0.5 seconds. The same thing applies here. But I'll tell you, I'm sure as hell not going to take any kind of insinuations about collusion

with Russians from Hillary Clinton, the lady who ought to be in jail for conspiring with lobbyists for Russian oligarchs to discredit and rob people of a free and fair election in 2016. And now, all of the news you would probably miss. It's time for Dana's QuickFond. So a record number of Americans reportedly can't afford their rent. And it says lawmakers are scrambling to help. Help like what?

Like cutting taxes? No. Oh, no? Help like, I don't know, maybe abolishing the whole thuggery that is the IRS in the first place? No. Spending less of our money? No. Not printing money endlessly?

No. Oh, then you're not actually interested in helping. Get stuffed. Moving on. A gentleman was busted for handing out free cocaine samples with his business card. Yeah, yeah, yeah. This 30-year-old came up with a unique method for marketing his services as a chauffeur. Also maybe a cocaine dealer in Calgary, Canada.

So he was literally handing out his business card with small baggies of blow staple to them. And the card read Alex Lee, driver, and included contact details. The card was an alias, but police literally. tracked him down, conducted surveillance for a month and arrested him. And he had lots of cocaine, lots of baggies, a scale, and lots of cash. So he's charged two counts of trafficking, a controlled substance.

I mean, this is a Calgary man. This is like Florida level stuff. Who does this? Like, here's a free sample of cocaine. Police recovered two dozen bags of ice stolen from a Vinton County dollar store. This is in Ohio. They stole bags. They stole

back, 27 bags of ice stolen from a family dollar. Ice. Stolen from a family dollar. Yeah, I know. I thought like it's cold up there, right? A pickup truck with the ice was spotted at a gas station, 13 miles from the store. Two people were detained and arrested. Imagine like what do you, what do you win jail for? I stole some ice. I mean, you're going to, yeah, you're going to have a pile on just because your crime is so stupid. That's what that's going to, that's what's going to happen there. We have a lot more on the. We have a lot more on the. way, stay with us. Elevate your commute, workouts, or downtime with the Dana Show podcast. Unleash the power of knowledge at your fingertips by following Dana on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. The allegations are baseless and I'm focused on the work, which was what brings me to Las Vegas today. Republicans have indicated they may hold another vote and they might have the numbers at that

point to impeach you. If that happened, would you consider stepping aside? No, I would not. I don't like him. I feel like I would have bullied. If we were both students at the same time in school, I would have totally bullied him. I wasn't a bully. What? Welcome back to the show.

Why did you laugh, Juan? Juan's like, pf. It's almost like what you said wasn't believable. Probiotics. Talk about it. Dana Lash back here with you. Most disloyal people ever. Bottom of the second hour.

Let us how quiet Steve was. Steve didn't say anything. That halo shines bright over DJ Fun Uncle's head. Bottom of the second hour. It's good to be with you. Dana Lashier. You can listen to Coast to Coast, stream it all that good jazz. YouTube, the great discussion that happens every day and Channel 347 direct TV.

Yeah, that's Alianandro Mayorkas saying, no, I wouldn't. I just don't like the way he talks. If smarmyness had a sound, it would sound like that. He's just, he doesn't do his job. He's at the Super Bowl. And he's being asked these, I'm not going to play 11 because I'm going to get mad. I don't care about Taylor Swift and all this stuff. What do you care about?

Are there threats with the macro backlash? Taylor Swift? So goofy. Let's talk about the southern border and like the threats that are, you know, have to do with the southern border. Oh, by the way, speaking of which, oh, you guys are going to get really upset. Do I want to share this with you? Hmm. Do I want to?

Okay. So let's grab onto a counter. or something. Let's just do that. Grab on to a counter or make sure you're all seated and nice and happy because the Senate just voted 67 to 32 via Greg Price in favor of advancing a $95 billion foreign aid bill for Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, and Taiwan without the border provisions. The Republicans who voted yes, Murkowski, McConnell, Cassidy, Wicker, Young, Collins, Capito, Kennedy, Thune, Sullivan, Romney, rounds, Tillis, Cornon, Grassley. Kennedy?

Kennedy. I take back the best friend part. A foreign aid bill for Ukraine, Israel, Gaza, and Taiwan. Why are we given? Okay, Ukraine and Gaza? Why? And particularly Gaza. It's not my fault that that entity voted for a terrorist government and enthusiastically supported its terrorist government to the point where even the West Bank was going to vote for Hamas over Fata to lead them. Why?

Why are we giving money to a terrorist entity? Not everybody's over there as a terrorist. You know what? Their elected government won at this war. And guess what? You forfeit any such nuance when you decide to do something so unbelievably stupid as to launch a mini-genocide against your neighbor to the north and you're shooting babies in the head and women in their vaginas.

No, you do not enjoy the lucky. of nuance after that. I'm in the burn everything camp. I don't want to ceasefire. I want flipping lava poured on the entire thing. Because when you're voting for terrorists, you are one. So, and anyone who disagrees can go over to the Middle East because there's tons of sand to pound. That being said, why are we doing this? We don't even, without our southern border, they're voting to advance a $95 billion foreign aid bill. Okay, so reason number of 5,027, I could never be in elected office because if I were in Congress and this bill came up, I'm pretty sure I would probably get in trouble for this.

But what I would do is I would get some sort of like fire retardant backing. And I would go up with a collection of like some rocks and, you know, some like straw and some things like that, maybe just a smidge of some accelerant. And I would go and I'd put the backing down and then I would place these rocks, my rocks in a circle around it. And I would assemble in the middle a nest of, you know, my straw, my kindling, you know, things of that nature. And then I would apply a little bit of accelerant. And then I would have my super boozy candlelighter that I use when I'm trying to zen out after, you know, dropping bombs on soces. And I would use that and I would light what I had just assembled.

And then I would take this $95 billion foreign aid bill page by page. And I would add it to the flames and feed the fire of my hatred of this stupid nonsense in lieu of any spoken word. And I'm pretty sure there's probably a rule. about that. No fires in the chamber. And I would be subsequently removed from the floor, maybe even dispelled, you know, from the body itself. I don't know. Crazier things have happened. I mean, you can be gold bar, Bob and nothing happened to you, but, you know, whatever. So, you know, that, that's why I wouldn't be able to be an elected office. But there's, there's, this is, this is assonine. And why did Kennedy? Why did he? Why did he?

vote for this. I mean, maybe it was just a vote. Someone's like, well, maybe it's a vote to begin considering the aid package. I'm not even going to consider it. Nope. Nope. See, you know what to save your voice? You could just go up with to the to the dais with like a, you know how you can get one of those red joke buttons. And you could do one. You could do like a red joke button that just says no and press that every single time. This is just dumb. We don't need a $95 billion for an aid bill, particularly for you, Krain or Gaza. I mean, Taiwan wanted it. They didn't even want aid. They were like, can we purchase some weapons? Hello, can we give you some money for some weapons? They didn't even have to be your

latest and greatest. This was what Taiwan was doing. Can we give you some amazing money for some guns? It would be wonderful. Could we have? And the Biden administration was like, oh, no, that was them. didn't, they weren't even like hands outstretched like Zelensky. They weren't even like him. Taiwan was like, maybe, may we, may we please purchase some guns? Even Israel's like, might we buy some guns? Might we purchase some things? Maybe I don't, I understand what Chip Roy was saying as it pertains to aid money. I'm not forgiving anybody aid money right now. And that doesn't mean I don't love you. This is what I hate about the tribalism of politics because you get someone out there who

God love them. I don't want to make fun of the misfortune, but sometimes you come across people who literally are the result of cousin loving. And, you know, them with their single cell, you know, amoeba brain function, they get out there and they're just like, well, if you don't want to give any money to Israel

or Taiwan, that means you hate them. No, it doesn't. It means we're broke. What do you not understand this? We're broke. We're broke. No, not like the era, Baroque, the art. We're broke. Like in no cash monnet. broke. We don't have no green. We don't have no money. We're borrowing from our great green kids to

finance something. This is stupid. With all the government spending we have and all the tax money that we're taken in, we can hire 88,000 new IRS agents, but we can't even secure our own southern border. Oh, H-A-I-L-No. No. We're broke. We can't afford to be given nobody nothing because we don't even have the money to secure our own border. And that's not just a talking point. Like you literally literally have the equivalent of multiple Pittsburghs that come in every week. We don't even know who the hell these people are. I wrote a story the other day. It was a multi-convicted rapist who was able to get in.

Guess what? He raped another chick here in the U.S. of A. Then he was detained again. He'd already been deported or already been kicked back. I don't know how many times. This is what happens. You get criminals that are able to come in in the flood of people coming across the border. You get kids that are getting traffic.

Hell, we don't even know what happened to 88,000 kids that were trafficked by it, not by their own will. I mean kids, not 18-year-olds. I mean like 9-year-olds coming across the border. We don't even know where they are. Because you got Daddy Zavié Becerra up there in HHS who just wanted these government NGOs to process them as fast as possible and not even vet where these kids were going. And then surprise, surprise, you lose contact with 88,000 of them. Huh. No, that has to be secured.

and so when we don't have the cash to do that, how do we have the cash to go and give somewhere else? As Chip Roy said, I thought this was a great point. Look, in order to be an ally for a friend, we have to be able to stand and actually be the ally. And we're crippling ourselves from even just doing that right now. And he's right. Makes all the sense in the world.

So this is dumb to even consider it. There are certain things that are non-starters. I'm so tired of the stupid argument. Well, you know, Dana, we got to get to the amendment portion. We've got to get to the negotiate. No, because that presumes that I have to accept this as even entertainable, and I don't. It's not going to happen. So, yeah, $95 billion with a B, additional money being set over.

Now, in addition to this, speaking of Gaza, Israel is in a tough spot because they saw, I mean, tons of hostages. we have American hostages that are over there still. Nothing from the administration on that. It was reported that Israel was considering a deal which would see one of the top goat-loving terrorist chiefs from Hamas involved in the October 7th attacks to go free. It was like one of their main masterminds.

The offer was to allow that guy to go free to release all the remaining hostages. You know what I would do? I'd put an implant in his brain. like in Mission Impossible so that the moment that he was over in their custody I blow his brains up that's what I would do

and I would like patch the hair in real expert light so they couldn't see that there was any anything done I would totally do that yeah sure we'll let this guy go absolutely go ahead and let's get all the

let's get all the hostages why we should do that why don't people do that do that every time with everything because you could only do once and then they wouldn't trust you anymore. You know, it's like a one-time thing. But I feel like it would be worth it if you're getting like these babies that have been kidnapped

by these goat-loving pedophile Hamas members. I mean, yeah, I mean, it would be worth it to do that. But then let him go over. And as soon as they're like, yay, and then they feel like they got one over on you, got one over on the IDF or something, then, you know, beep. And then watch his head turn into pulp right there on his shoulders. I wonder how long he'd stand up right before he fell over. Does that mean to wonder?

Because I do. And then you could videotape it. it and then you could sell, sell it. Just saying you could, you could subscription-based service and then use the funds to, you know, offset what the families are having to incur by simply, because you have a lot of these families from a lot of the kibbutzis over there who can't, they can't go back because their homes have been utterly destroyed. And, I mean, their whole, you know, community murdered. And so they're, they're homeless and they don't have anything. Maybe, you know, go towards using that to rehabilitate them and get them set up again.

Some place safe. That's a good idea. I think that's a great capitalist idea. Yeah, I'd pay to watch it. Hey, pay to watch this Hamas mastermind's head blow up into like a grape. Pop. Bet's on how long he stands before he falls. Then you could get some gambling aspect in on it too and raise a little bit more money, right?

Like, I mean, you could get some odds going on that. Dana, that's so mean. No, it's not. I'm just saying. All right. Speaking of which, it sounds a lot like the power of my psych or has with one of my staffs, because I can literally like take an enemy's head and like, anyway, I don't know where that came from. It's his life mission to make bad decisions.

It's time for Florida man. Okay. So, oh my gosh. Excuse me, if Florida man asks for a ride from a stranger at a Walmart parking lot and then stabs him with a box cutter for stealing his car. That escalated quickly. the investigators of the case said Nelson Angel Bellin and he approached a 56-year-old man Saturday night asked for a ride.

Man agreed, Bellin told him where it to go. And then on the way, he told the elderly man to get out of the vehicle and or the 56, I guess he's not elderly, get out of the vehicle and then pulled out a box cutter on him and stabbed him in his stomach numerous times. Witnesses heard screaming. They saw the men struggling. The victim collapsed after getting out of the car. Bystanders went to help him.

There was a lot of cell phone video. apparently. He's the victim's in critical but stable condition. He's in the hospital. They recovered the car. They got the guy. He's being held at Miami-Dade County pre-trial detention. And they said that he's being charged with attempted murder and carjacking. Dang. Man, no good deed goes unpunished. You know what I'm saying? Like no good deed goes unpunished. Let's see here. This, okay, I'm going to get into this lady. A drunk naked Florida woman wielding a peeler knife barges into a a racetrack, convenience more, and threatens to kill staff, say, deputies.

This is in St. Petersburg. Florida woman found herself behind bars after she burst into a gas station, naked and drunk. No way to go through life. Threatening to kill staff members with a peeler and a core, like an apple peeler. Celia Barrett, 35, was arrested in charge with two counts of aggravated assault, disorderly intoxication, collie, criminal mischief, exposure of sexual organs, S-C-S-H-U-L, sexual organs trespassing after the incident unfolded at the racetrack with no K in St. Petersburg. She was previously trespassed. I didn't know that was the way you put that. This sounds like how my

grandma would put it. Barrett, who was previously trespassed from this gas station, she had been banned from it back in November. She came back though. She took, oh, golly. She told police she did six shots of liquor and then grabbed her at her peeler. and then ran off to the racetrack. Oh my gosh. She did not request money from the cashier, but she was just complaining about being previously banned.

And then she banged the peeler on the counter and she was screaming obscenities. And then the manager came over and she threatened him with the peeler to. Like, what are you going to do? Like, peel off that, you know? And then she was waving the apple peeler in the air acting like she's going to stab somebody. And then she said she was going to kill people,

lowered her weapon, and walked away. And then she knocked down a case of 50 Red Bull. drinks in one display and destroyed a cart and cigarettes. Oh gosh, it gets worse. Then she went outside and then as the deputy showed up, I don't want to read the last sentence. Should I? She be, Barrett allegedly began to inappropriately touch herself inside the gas station. She's still in custody in Pinellas County. Oh my gosh. Okay. I don't even want to get into this one. This is a guy who went to this pirate event and ended up getting in trouble because he was looking for a lady. he's met on a want ad. Oh my gosh.

There was a guy who got arrest warrant issued for a man accused of dumping a sailboat on a beach. You can't do that. You can't just leave your boat on the beach. That's actually considered like littering. Can't park there. Yeah, no parking. Stick with us. Third hour on the way. He had the opportunity to call witnesses remotely. He didn't use all of his time at trial. There was ample process here. And this is how ballot access

determinations and election cases are decided all the time. Okay. Second. question some of the rhetoric of your position I don't think it is your position but some of the rhetoric of your position seems to suggest unless the states can do this no one can prevent insurrectionists from holding federal office but obviously Congress has enacted statutes including one still in effect section 2383 of title 18 prohibits insurrection it's a federal criminal statute and if you're convicted of that you are it says shall be

disqualified from holding any office. And so there is a federal statute on the books, but President Trump has not been charged with that. So what are we to make of that? Two things, Your Honor. Section 2383 was initially enacted about six. I don't think that this is going to go the way that that attorney representing Colorado would like for it to go. I'm just, and there are a lot of people who agree with me on this. It seems like SCOTUS is going to rule in favor. They're going to decide. favor of Trump. Now, this was just the hearing. They still have a decision forthcoming, etc., etc. But even the way that, and we went over a lot of this during the first hour, but to recap,

this is about whether or not an official can disenfranchise the will of voters in a state and remove someone off the ballot who is qualified to be on the ballot. And there is no criminal charge. when you say innocent until proven guilty, a charge is not a declaration of guilt. There's due process to go through. And there's no criminal charge with J6. That's the thing. He was never charged with inciting and insurrection because he didn't. With all the everything that they could have done to try to get him on that, I don't care what you think of Trump or not.

I don't care if you hate him. He was not my pick in the primary. I frankly thought we could have gone with a million. better candidates. I don't want Joe Biden in 2024 and I'll roll, I'll drive over your dog to win. Actually, maybe not your dog, but your grandma for sure. But this is the stupidest, most specious argument that has that I think the left could make to try to kick him off the ballot because there's no bearing to it. He didn't incite an insurrection. He did. There's no, there's no evidence that he did. He actually called for the opposite. And they never could bring charges.

is against him specifically for that, which is the only thing. That's literally what they're trying to argue now under the 14th to get him off, to get him off the ballot. And they're not able to do it. And Khantanji Brown Jackson, I can't even believe I'm saying this. Hold up. First, we got Fetterman and now her. Maybe, I think she can read the writing on the wall, though, and she realizes that this is creating a nasty web that Democrats might catch themselves in later on. But she's looking at this and she's like, look, even with all of the enumerated You know, the very enumerated names, powers, et cetera, in this, talking about all of the different people that could be removed or could be affected by a state's decision.

President wasn't included. And Colorado's attorneys were trying to argue that it wasn't an oversight that the vagary necessitates or justifies them trying to make this case on behalf of including the presidency. Whereas Brown Jackson was arguing, well, there's a reason why they didn't include it in this very enumerated list. and that's because the impeachment process deals with the president, whereas this does not. So she just gutted their entire argument, like with a simple one minute, 30 second Q&A. So it was very, I think, illustrative of where they're going to go with us.

I just do not see them siding with Colorado on this. I just really don't. I really don't. It would be, this is something that the voters get to decide. The voters make this determination. And by the way, this is also the reason why I don't like term limits. And I think term limits. I agree with the founders and the federalist papers on term limits. I think they're anti-American and anti-constitutional and anti-conservative because you're talking about stripping a right of the voter and giving it to the government to determine how long people can serve an office. And that is the right of the voter. The term limit is the vote. Why are we, I can't believe conservatives are being baited into seating. more power to the federal government. Blows my mind. People seriously need to read the Federalist papers on this. It should be a required reading before casting a vote.

Now that being said, the, got a couple of other things. I was going to save this for headlines and I don't really want to. I want to talk about it now. Mutant wolves. I wasn't going to touch on this at all. Right now. I was actually going to go to something else, but I can't, I don't want to wait until

headlines and there's not enough time in headlines to give this this due justice. So, you know, everybody knows Chernobyl, right? Apparently, there are some mutant wolves exposed to the Chernobyl disaster and they've evolved a new superpower. I know what you're thinking. I'm thinking it too. When can we adopt them? Who wouldn't? What's your, what's your, do you have a pets? Oh, what do you have? I have a mutant wolf. I mean, for real, I'm recovering after the loss of Rocco, our Frenchie, who is very much not a mutant wolf. Love that dog with a brachialic dogs. Or I will tell people, can I sidebar on this? Excuse me. Still, I'm feeling a lot better. It was sick all week. Do not get a Frenchie. French bulldogs are the most adorable, most expensive, most heartbreaking dogs you will ever get in your

life. If you're considering it, save yourself thousands of dollars because you will have to get pet insurance. There is not a Frenchie. I don't know anybody who has ever had a Frenchie that has never had a problem. The way that they even come into fruition is cruel because the dogs can't even be born naturally. They have to do cesareans because their heads are so large. Like these dogs cannot exist without human intervention. The most dogs, the top killer of Frenchies is neurological issues. Like I said, I don't know any Frenchie. I know a lot of people that have them that have never had an issue, ever.

The lifespan's about nine years. And like our Frenchie Louis had a brain tumor. Rocco had invertible disc disease. So we had to get back surgery. That's common with Frenchies. And then they also have problems with breathing. can develop laryngeal paralysis, which is ultimately what Rocco had. He couldn't get surgery for it because he missed the window because of back surgery. So that's where they suffocate to death.

And they can't drink and they can't eat and they're miserable. And he was dying because he was suffocating to death. And that's a common problem with Frenchies. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you and is trying to scam you with a sick dog for a buck. Don't trust them. And I don't care if it's a family member. They're morons then. They, I love Frenchies. It's my favorite, one of my favorite breeds, but I will never own another Frenchie. As long as I live, I will never own another French bulldog. It's too heartbreaking and they suffer so much. They can't be out in heat. They, they can't cool themselves off because they're short, they're braceophallic, so they have like no, their short face. And in addition, it's not just being braciophalic.

They're, they have tons of eye issues. Rocko head eye surgery. He almost died. He already almost died from my surgery. Their eyes bulge out. They can pop out. It's crazy. They have back problems. They have even more problems and pugs. It is the most heartbreaking breed you could have. And we had two of them that had every issue. And it wasn't that they were bad breeds. Louis came from like an AKC champion line. Like his lineage had been shown at Westminster. He came from a champion family line. Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. They're super smart. They're comical, but they have so many issues. So my public service message to you, if your family's considering it, don't. Do not. It is, there's, don't do it. Now, we'll probably get it. We'll probably have,

get another dog. I think I would like to go to a rescue or shelter. And I, I need more than one dog, but I'm never going to do another French again. Now, that being said, I will take a mutant wolf. Now, you're probably wondering, Dana, you never told us about the superpowers. I know, because that's to come. So this team of researchers, they found these animals in the Chernobyl evacuation zone. They have genetically altered immune systems. And these genetically altered immune systems show a resilience to cancer.

And so researchers are now hoping that this discovery can be used to help find cures for human cancer patients. And they said that since it's explosion in 86, they got all the humans out because they had extreme levels of radiation. Wildlife flourished there. And it contains six times the allowed exposure amount for human workers. and it's still, I think that you can go to parts of it because I can't remember what I was watching. I was watching some macabre destination travel show or something like that. But they have like grizzly bears and bison and, you know,

they have deer and boar and all kinds of stuff. But they said that they're trying to figure out how the animals are able to survive and they were taking the blood samples from like wolves and all this other stuff and they use GPS collars. And they think that somehow they've been able to develop. a resistance against this. And so they're hoping that they can figure out, you know, what mutations occur there and maybe use that as a way to, you know, help them with, you know, humanity.

So it's a very fascinating thing. I know, like you, I was a little disappointed that they didn't turn into just like humans later and then go back to wolves and then, you know, like a werewolf kind of thing. I'm just saying that would have been, that have been very interesting. But yeah, for instance, they have tree frogs over there. Tree frogs normally have a green pigmentation. But in the Chernobyl area, they, apparently, the mutation made them black. And then they have like a green tinge to it.

It's very interesting. So, I don't know. I'm just saying mutant wolves. I'd be down for that. I'd totally take a mutant wolf. Can you just imagine the signage I'd have to put up? Beware, mutant wolf. I may still do it anyway.

And now, all of the news you would probably miss. It's time for Dana's Quick 5. So, let's see here. I was looking at this story. I'm going to do the Alzheimer's one. So they say this is a, it's not worth the weather channel for some reason. I don't know why. But they say that people who frequently pick their noses may be at a higher risk of developing Alzheimer's.

According to a new review of some published studies. I feel like they're guessing at this point. This sounds like guessing. Hey, guess what? That everyone that has, that gets Alzheimer's, they also wear shoes. And they drink water. So it feels like wearing shoes and drinking water could cause potentially. Alzheimer's cane.

But they say it's chronic nose picking. And it introduces germs into the sensitive nasal cavity that causes brain inflammation. and that's been linked to the onset of Alzheimer's. Again, that sounds like a guess. I don't know. Some of this stuff is so goofy. Let's see here. Pita is targeting a Wichita company over carousels because the carousel has animals on it.

Okay. You have illegal immigrants that are dragging sweet, poor dogs all the way to the southern border, abandoning them to the elements, and they're injured and sick and starving and dying, and you're worried about carousel? Like fake animals on a carousel? A North Carolina man was arrested for molesting a fire extinguisher.

27-year-old Joshua Sanders. But was it vandalism or was it? I hate the language. They said that they found the surveillance footage. and Sanders apparently broke into and damaged a fire extinguisher housing unit. And then he proceeded to willfully misuse it. I don't even want to know how this is done. Okay.

That, I mean, he kind of smotted his bits, didn't he? I mean, there's no other, okay, his mugshot is, did you have nightmares? This fascinating, okay, lemon's my favorite fruit. I love everything lemon. New York Post has a story about how these auctioneers, Brattel's auctioneers and valuers in Newport, England put a 285-year-old lemon

up for auction and it got about $1,800. So they found this fruit, this 285-year-old lemon. It was from 1739. It was hidden in this 19th century cabinet. the cabinet only sold for like $40. And readers can see the,

they can see pictures of the time-worn lemon and Juan has it on the simulcast as well. So they, the auctioneers said we thought we'd have a bit of fun and put the limit up for auction. And they said that the fruit is deep brown and color, but remarkably intact. It was carved with the words given by Mr. P. Liu Francini ever before 1739 to Miss E. Baxter.

They thought that it may have been brought to England as a romantic gift from India. So there's a bidding war that drove, they call it ancient fruit. It's not, that drove the final price of it, just shy of $1,800. So what are you going to do with it after the fact? I don't know. Would you? Are they still good at 1739? Stick with us.

We've got a lot more in store. Back after this. Elevate your commute, workouts, or downtime with the Dana Show podcast. Unleash the power of knowledge at your finger. by following Dana on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. It's more than just the political partisan advantage. There is a yearning for leaders who can kill and imprison their opponents, destroy the press, lead a life that is one of impunity, unbound by any laws. There's a yearning among certain people in our country.

for that kind of leadership. And I find that absolutely gobsmacking, terrifying. She's still tone deaf and can't read the room after all this time. Welcome back to the program, bottom of this third hour, Dana Lashire. That's Hillary Clinton. That's not what it is. She's clueless as to how the electric fields or feels are what the electorate wants. That's not at all it.

She can't even identify it. And you wonder why she never won nationwide office. She couldn't identify it because she didn't identify it because she doesn't. doesn't know what it is. People don't have a yearning to imprison their opponents. That's Democrats for sure do. Democrats want to imprison their political opponents. That's what she tried to do in 2016 when her campaign had to pay a fine after they were caught hiring an unregistered Farah agent that was lobbying on behalf of Russian oligarchs to repeal the Magnitsky Act in D.C. And they worked with this disgraced British spy, this former spy, and then they lied to a FISA judge to try to get

surveillance and try to sell and launder oppo in the press that they then used to try to say was evidence and necessary for a surveillance warrant for everyday citizens. And then they use that as a way to go and harass and try to jail people simply because they were working on her opponent's campaign in 2016. So absolutely, she personifies that. And I think that will be the biggest part of her legacy for, actually, really, that is her legacy for now and forever. But she misses what people have a yearning for. People don't have a yearning to imprison opponents. She mentions people going after the press and everything else. People have a yearning for accountability. And people kind of have a yearning for a reckoning. And that doesn't

mean imprisoning opponents. That means stopping what has been done to them for the past 20 years. longer actually. Keep in mind that when Hillary Clinton ran in 2016, there were a sizable number of Democrats who were voting Republican for the very first time. And it wasn't necessarily because they were convinced that Trump himself was the better choice. They were a hate voting against her. And then what solidify that even more in the weeks leading up to the election was the way that her surrogates, her campaign itself and other Democrats then began to impure the characters of all of these people that had so reliably voted Democrat all of these years. For any candidate, no matter how bad it was, Al Gore, they showed up and they held their nose. They showed up and they supported and they did their part for the party. But when she herself pushed it too far and it became a bridge too far for the voters, Democrat voters, Then they were cast aside after all of those years of loyal support. Oh, suddenly they were racist now.

They weren't conveniently racist when they were voting for the old white woman. But suddenly and her husband. But when they weren't voting for the old white woman, then that's somehow they were racist, which doesn't make any sense. But that's Democrats for you. If you want to talk about cultural appropriation, there it is. So her saying this, she's so completely out of it, out of touch with so many people. And that's why they don't like her. people want accountability from the press because of the way the press targets every average everyday

Americans the way the press has lied without any kind of accountability without any check and balance the way the press has destroyed the lives of people simply because they don't go along with the progressive far-left status quo wanting accountability is not yearning to imprison opponents that's you lady when you're not vince fostering them now I don't know if you've been following this case. I'm going to bring this up to you with the Supreme Court or not Supreme Court, sorry, Hawaii Supreme Court. But I have, I was reading about it. If you're unaware, the state of Hawaii, the Hawaii Supreme Court, had a ruling, the latest ruling. This is, this was yesterday. They were looking at, it's a major second decision in this gun carry,

case. And so what they found, and it had to do with this, these charges leveled against this guy named Christopher Wilson, who they said was carrying a firearm without a permit, he was saying that it violated his rights. And so the Supreme Court of Hawaii made the determination that their state constitution doesn't allow for gun rights protections at all whatsoever. And they did it in one of the most ridiculous ways possible. So they actually said, this is what they wrote, like actually in their ruling. Quote, The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally mandated lifestyle that let citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities. That's how they started it. So their argument is that. And then they quoted the wire. I'm not even kidding you.

The spirit of Aloha doesn't clash with the Second Amendment because the Second Amendment surpasses the spirit of Aloha. And what is the phrasing on this? Who wrote this? Did David Hogg write this? It sounds like remedial. Clashes with a federally mandated lifestyle. There isn't a federally mandated lifestyle.

That doesn't even make any sense. If I really desperately want to turn into a grammarist and tear this apart, federally mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons. It's a federally man, you're allowed the choice and that freedom to choose is what is protected, not mandated, it is protected because it is set apart from a civil right, meaning a privilege that is granted to you in a court of law by other people. and they say that the history of the Hawaiian Islands

does not include a society where armed people move about the community to possibly combat the deadly aims of others. Oh, they're magical. They've never had any conflict, you know. That is a, I love the progressive retconning of any kind of indigenous history, particularly American Indians.

Like when they talk about Mount Rushmore, oh my gosh, it was white Americans that came and took it, but we're not going to talk about who the Lakota took it from and who the Cheyenne took it from before them and who took it before them. I mean, you know, that's, that's just conveniently written out of history. The spirit of Aloha. I mean, who do you think wins if you had a battle of spirits? Is this what they mean by two spirit? Like, if you had the spirit of Florida man versus the spirit of Aloha, who wins?

Who wins and why is it Florida man? I'm just saying. Yeah, I just, you know, I'm just wondering. But they're arguing that both Heller and Bruin are wrong. And in their decision, and they're claiming that the individual right isn't a right at all. When they say that, well, we don't have like weapons. I mean, you, no weapons ever, not even bladed ones attached to sticks? Not even that?

Never ever. I mean this is like one of the craziest things ever I love what one listener said they go well I open the constitution and control deaf spirit of aloha and I didn't find anything but they did include human sacrifice though spirit of aloha did have that this is just it's it's wild

the reading on this but they I there's there's having a respect for history regardless of whether or not you agree with it and then there's just not believing in history This is some flat earth stuff right here, ancient aliens. So they were trying to say that somehow their particular state's history overrides that of a natural right.

They wrote that they reject Wilson's constitutional challenges. And they said that the Spirit of Aloha clashes with us. I mean, I thought, I'm going to be real with you. I thought this was a joke when I first saw the ruling because I just saw the graphic of the like second page of it where they talk about the spirit of a law. And I thought this is not a real. This is like 4chan trolling. So I just kind of discarded it. I didn't really.

Then I started seeing it pop up and I'm like, wait a minute. And it was real. I've never. That's starting to happen more and more when I'm like, oh, this is a 4chan troll. No, no. this is actually an actual legitimate. They put this on paper and they released it. That's crazy. So I can only imagine how the Supreme Court doesn't take up this case to smack down.

I mean, this wouldn't be the first time that the Supreme Court undid a decision by state court. It wouldn't be the first time. And I can't see them not doing it with us. But it just, I mean, the arguments that they have in here, they are, I mean, this is just, it's really pathetic. The spirit of aloha. Well, you know, the spirit of aloha is part of the United States and the Constitution of the United States trumps whatever spirit of aloha or non-spirit otherwise that you may claim. The end. I mean, maybe you would still have this. Oh, pain, I'm not going to say it. Never mind. It was going to be bad. Sometimes it's just a run. It was. No. Thank you.

but I will where are you like raving a sign of relief over there we're not done yet I mean I could still technically run this all the way up until 50 you know just because

but they they say that they talk about reducing firearms violence etc and a free willing right to carry guns in public to grades other constitutional rights who wrote this some lawyer is going to just make a lot of money with one of the easiest cases

ever destroying this with SCOTUS. It's going to be ridiculous. But yes, the rights of life, liberty, and your pursuit of happiness and all of your natural rights are guaranteed protection by your free will choice to use the Second Amendment to defend yourself and your rights. Okay, so cage match. Spirit of Aloha, the Spirit of Florida man or the Spirit of Texas. Who wins? Spirit of Florida and the Spirit of Texas are going to gang up on Spirit of Aloha. Yeah, you know that's going to happen. I mean, good. Oh, my gosh.

I'm going to have to make a joke about the lo, lo, lo, lo, ha. I'm going to have to make a joke. I just can't. We've got to get moving because otherwise this is going to get real snoddy real quick. As we do so. Follow Dana on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, because knowledge is your ultimate superpower. Go-Niners. Done it before.

I can do it again. And I'm rooting for that. You know, I was just literally last night talking with my husband about what our menu will be for Super Bowl. So I'll keep you posted, but we got some ideas. All of them are going to be delicious. I don't care what she's making for Super Bowl. I really don't care. I'm not watching Super Bowl.

Are you watching? I just don't. I don't get into it. I never have. And I especially didn't. I'm just not. I'm just not. I wasn't into the, like, the whole boycott thing and all of that.

Like, I disagreed with why people were. take, I've talked about this before to the point where I'd rather literally chew my own toes off than talk about it anymore, but I would, like a badger. But like you're taking the knee over a lie. If you wanted, that's dumb. You know, at least they didn't go out and riot like BLM did, but taking a knee over a lie is stupid. But I just, after everybody's like, oh, boycott in the NFL, now everybody's I don't get it. I just don't get into it. I feel like NFL's bread and circuses. I've always, I feel, I just, it's why I've never been able to get. And I like. I mean, I was a jock in school.

But I have always had a hard time getting into, like, sports teams. I like the Cardinals just because I grew up and it was such a baseball town. And I enjoy watching baseball. But I'm not, I have some friends that, you know, like when, and Kane knows this, and St. Louis in our hometown opening day, the whole city shuts down. Oh, yeah. People take off work. They're families.

They pull kids out of school. It's like they, it's a big thing. I've just never been to that extent of it. I don't know. I've always felt a little bit like bread and circuses. Oh, it's totally bread and circuses. And then they use a ton of taxpayer dollars to build the stadiums for it. Yeah, but I understand their arguments that, okay, well, if you're using it as a social contract

to bring investment in and make more money than you put in, but in St. Louis, they didn't make more money than they put in it. That's the problem. I mean, if you can make the argument and do the math, then you can bring in more than taxpayers ever have to put in so they get a return on their money. investment and then some okay then i can understand that argument but that's not what happened in st louis so that makes it a little harder everything now especially with the super bowl is being over politicized and everything else plus the companies that are advertising during the super bowl have already pledged

to be so safe as to not offend anyone that i don't see now what's the draw of watching anything on television as it relates to the super bowl who's even doing half time i don't know who is doing half time see who's doing half time Usher. I mean, it's pretty safe, I guess. Usher's doing halftime? Who else? It's not just Usher.

They have to have somebody else. No, I think it's just Usher. No, it's not just Usher. Who else they got, Seaf? Usher and his DJ got. They haven't announced like the full list, but Reba's doing the National Anthem. That makes sense.

Are they betting on the over-under and whether she's going to be two minutes or less on the national anthem? What do you mean? Under. Usher says there's going to be a surprise guess. It's under? Right now they're betting that her national anthem will be under two minutes.

Okay. So someone says that Bieber's going to show up. I don't know. I don't even care. I just don't because I'm probably not even going to watch that point. I'm probably not even going to do that. Man, I'm here for the snacks. That's it.

I'm like there for the snacks. All I know is that Kansas City Chiefs are playing and I literally only know that because of all the drama over Taylor Swift. And I don't even want to know. You're like, Dana, it's an American pastime. So are guns. What? Yeah. I want some chicken wings and some Casey Barbecue. I'll go with that.

Casey Barbecue? Yeah. What? Yeah, Kansas City Barbecue. What? Kansas City is part of Missouri. You do know that. What? I don't care. You're from St. Louis. Yeah. And Casey Barbecue is very similar. This is what it would feel like if you would tell me you're trans.

Oh my God. Yeah. Talk about being dramatic. No, it's not. St. Louis Barbecue is the only, I will physically. The drama. This is where I will throw it out. The drama. It's like you're on the. of you, speaking of which. Okay, can we play this? Sorry, today in stupidity.

It's worth it. This is not so sunny, Hosten. Juan, just play this. At first I was deeply disappointed. The slave thing is a bummer. It's a bummer. Jeez. And I still believe in reparations, by the way,

so y'all can stop texting me and emailing me and saying that I'm a white girl and that I don't deserve reparations. You don't deserve reparations because you're a millionaire on a television show. You can pay reparations to yourself since your family was involved in the slave trade. You take money from people who never owned slaves.

Like you literally sold other black families. Your family did. Other black families into the slave trade. So pay your own reparations. Yeah. Oh my gosh. All right, folks, that does it for our show today. Tomorrow's Friday.

I hope you have a wonderful evening. And I will be back with you tomorrow. Make sure you sign up for the newsletter over at Substack, Chat, and Verse. Find us on YouTube, Facebook, like and subscribe.