The Trish Regan Show - 5 YEARS IN PRISON?! Jack Smith Grilled Over Arctic Frost Spying on Congress

Episode Date: September 29, 2026

Former Trump prosecutor Jack Smith appeared before the Senate today amid accusations he spied on Congress — and then, mislead members of Congress when questioned about his actions. The fireworks are just getting started as politicians claim Smith and his alleged actions are “worse than Watergate!” We’ve got the story with all the highlights from the hearing…as well as a look at whether Jack Smith will be indicted. Join me for that story and much more in today’s Trish Regan Show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

My rec league goalie says he plays for the love of the game. You gave up six goals last week, Steve? Maybe play to win, huh? Like with Bet365, I get paid the second my team goes up big with early payout and can cash out at any time before the game ends. Steve, Bet365, the home of winning early. Must be 19 and older, Ontario only. Please play responsibly.

If you were someone you know is concerns about gambling, visit connectsontario.ca or call 1866-5-3-1-2,600. Terms and conditions apply. really rough being Jack Smith right about now. I mean, really, really, really rough. This is quite something today, and we're going to get all into it because this guy could actually be facing up to five years in federal prison. I kid you not. If he, in fact, lied or misrepresented, as it has been alleged, he did to Congress, that comes with some pretty serious consequences. In the meantime, boy, boy, oh boy, boy, we get some fireworks. I'm telling you guys, you are going to want to

hear this. Wow. You make me want to throw up in my mouth. You trampled on those, sir, and you did so in a way that arguably makes what Richard Nixon did in Watergate look like a Sunday picnic. Oh, they were just getting started. They were just getting started. In all seriousness, there's a lot of comparisons you can make to Watergate, and this actually does look worse if it is what we think it is, let's just say. So big fireworks on Capitol Hill. We got the U.S. State Senate, United States Senate, just piling on. I mean, you remember Jackie, right? You remember Jackie Boy, Jack Smith. He's the former special counsel who brought two, not one, but two federal cases against Donald Trump. One was January 6th in the 2020 election, and the other was, oh, those documents at Mar-a-Lago.

for some reason they found it incredibly necessary to go after Donald Trump for those documents when Joe Biden was keeping them in the garage right next to the Corvette and had him there for years and years and years and nobody seemed to care because, well, he was basically a senile old man at that point. And they wanted to make sure that Donald Trump wasn't going to run again. But you see, both those cases died when Donald Trump won the presidency in 2020. You had Jack, Jackie Boy, Jack Smith resigning, and the cases went away. well, the case is against Trump, because now there's a case against one Jack Smith. And that is why today he was sitting there in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee with Republicans,

bringing him in to basically relitigate whether, you know, those allegations are in fact true, that he was spying. He was spying on members of Congress. And we're not just talking a few. There's something like 44 members of Congress that were allegedly spied upon. and he was gathering metadata on. And then he was trying to map out the whole MAGA movement somehow because if you, as a reporter, they're saying that journalists were involved in this as well,

got any calls or any texts or any communication with any of these members of Congress, then you got wrapped into this whole thing too. I mean, this is a big deal, right? And if he did this knowingly, knowingly going after members of Congress and then, let's just say, hiding the truth in the days after, then that actually carries a fine and a sentence of up to five years. It's a big, big deal. Okay, so just to back up, Jack Smith back in December of 2025 was out there testifying under oath behind closed doors in the house, so I don't have any video to show you, but I can tell you that lawmakers did ask him about his

phone records that he was gathering, not his phone records, everybody else was phone records, okay, on members of Congress during an investigation that the FBI first called Arctic Frost. That's the code name they went with, Arctic Frost. Yeah. We're big in the Arctic these days, by the way, really big. Yeah, we got Greenland. I'm happy to talk about the Arctic, but this is a different kind of Arctic. Arctic Frost. It's the code name that they used during the Biden era probe when they were going after Trump and people around him after the 2020 election. Smith later took that work over as special counsel. And Jack Smith told all the Republicans who were asking at the time in December 25, told him that the records that his offices was seeking, right, that those were actually

called toll records and it was metadata. And they were looking at who called whom, when they called them, how long the call lasted. And they, or Jackie said, we weren't actually looking at the words. We weren't actually looking at the text. And he made a big point. of that. All right? There was just metadata. Nothing to see. I mean, the metadata even of itself, right? Like, that's pretty bad. If you find out that they are gathering all this metadata, one could say they're absolutely trying to put together this map of everybody that was involved in the MAGA movement. And then they were going to go after them, like one by one. Now, Republicans are saying at this point that that was actually incomplete. It wasn't just metadata.

And that he was actually being incomplete on purpose. So back in July, Jim Jordan, House Judiciary Chairman, he referred Jackie Boy to the Justice Department. And what he's saying is that this statute, 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, that that statute is something that Jackie's in violation of. There's something called the federal false statements law. And you can't knowingly make a material false statement to Congress or conceal a material facts. You can be fined if you do. and sentenced to up to five years in prison. Okay, so now, just to be clear,

referral's not an indictment, but that's what they're looking for here. And so that was the first step. And so today was sort of the second step in all of this in trying to determine whether or not there should be prosecution. It's going to be ultimately up to the DOJ, but just think about the temperature in the room here,

and this is kind of a big deal. I want to start off with Louisiana's John Kennedy, Senator Kennedy, who, let's just say, did not ease into it. Okay. What's telling him, but you're unbiased. You have no personal feelings. You make me want to throw up in my mouth. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, his time's up. I'd like to say a word. This hearing is of constitutional and historic importance. This witness should be allowed to answer the questions, complete a sentence. We have given that courtesy to witnesses from both political parties, and it should be extended to Mr. Smith.

Wait for it. Your time's up, Senator Kennedy. Well, I'd also like, with respect, Dick, for the chairman to instruct the witness. He's not Bambi's baby brother. Okay. He's been around, everybody knows him, and he was famous or infamous even before he was hired to prosecute President Trump, and I'd like you to instruct him not to fiddlest us. Thank you.

Before I call. Oh, out. All right. You make me want to throw up in my mop. Tell me how you really feel. Let's just say this continued on. Okay. Senator Kennedy was not done.

He was not done because he had more to say. And it got even more aggressive, more aggressive. He went on to Fox immediately following that appearance this afternoon. Listen in to this one. I'm sure Jesus loves him, but everyone else who believes in the rule of all thinks he's an idiot. He tried very hard to come across today as a, you know, dash riprock type, but he's well known around Washington. He's been hanging around this place since God was a baby. He's a bottom feeder in the Washington swamp.

He's a political operative masquerading as a prosecutor. He's the kind of Washingtonian who would unplug your life support to charge his cell phone. I believe that he was following orders given to him by Attorney General Garland. I believe Attorney General Garland hired him to prosecute him. Donald Trump because they were worried that Donald Trump would run against Joe Biden. And I think Joe Biden told Merrick Garland to do that. Yeah. Well, you know, Senator, one of the things that didn't come up.

And this is the big concern, right, so that they were deliberately engaging in this kind of political warfare. By the way, I told you there were fireworks, right? Did I not? Never doubt me. Never doubt me. I just got to say, you know, when you think about all that went down, and there's a lot that went down, you can go back to December 17th, the 2025. I mean, we talked about it at the time.

It was kind of remarkable because the senators were coming out, and they were like, I can't believe this. I can't believe this. They were like looking at all my phone records. But now what's being alleged is it wasn't just that they were gathering who you talk to and how long you talk to them for, that they were actually looking at text messages and they were looking at content.

So like it was bad enough. But now they're saying it's even worse. And then they're saying that this guy lied, lied, lied, lied, laid, laid, under oath, or at least misrepresenting. himself and misrepresented the truth. So he was asked, December 17th, asked about the subpoenas for lawmakers' phone records in Arctic Frost and the January 6th investigation. And he says his office did seek those toll records, in other words, whom, when, and for how long, but no, why, right? Because they weren't looking at the actual contents of the calls or the contents of the texts.

and, you know, on the carrier subpoenas, that part could be true. Toll records are metadata. They're like the envelope, right? You get a letter and you get the envelope. So you can see on the outside, okay, who's the letter going to? But you can't actually see the contents of that letter. And what's being alleged right now is, in fact, that he was looking at the contents of the letter. You know, all's fair, I guess, in love and war.

And he figured my side's in charge. and we're going to make sure you guys are never back there. So help me, God, right? I mean, that's kind of the mandate that I think probably he had. And this is what the Republicans are alleging. So Jim Jordan says that his answer was false. It was misleading because of a different collection. There was another collection that we haven't talked about much.

In June of 23, Smith's office, subpoenaed the National Archives for text messages. from the White House phones covering October 20th through inauguration day of 2021. And those are the phone records and messages tied to one Donald Trump, Mark Meadows, Dan Skavino, Stephen Miller, Cash Patel, Mike Pence, and some others. Now, those archive records did include text traffic between White House officials and 44 members of Congress. Senate Republicans are saying later that the Smith's team got those texts without running them through the privilege filter team that is supposed to screen speech or debate material and that the constitutional protection for members would be doing legislative work was not extended to them.

So Jim Jordan is saying, listen, it's not that the toll records don't exist. I mean, that's bad enough, right? but his argument is you told us you were just looking at the outside of the envelope. You didn't tell us you were getting the letters inside the envelope too. And this is where he may have broken the law, and this is what could get him the five years in prison. So Jordan's theory, right, is that this Jackie Boy told the committee his office only got the non-content toll records.

We only got the envelopes. And he concealed that his team also obtained actual messages with content involving the actual lawmakers. And the House referral treats that as two things under Section 101. The first would be a material omission, right, hiding the fact that this stuff mattered, and then false representation, describing the records in a way that left the committee with the wrong picture. Again, he has not been convicted of anything yet. He has not even been charged. We're talking about a referral to the DOJ and a firework. Our fantasy commission says for him it's all about the friendships.

Cute, Kevin, but I disagree. Like with Bet365. I get paid the second my team goes up big with early payout and can cash out at any time before the game ends. No hard feelings, Kevin. Just faster payouts from Bet365. The home of winning early. Must be 19 and older.

Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you were someone you know is concerns about gambling, visit Connectsontario.ca. Or call 1866-5-3-1-2600. Terms and conditions apply. for showdown right on Capitol Hill today that I think would put more pressure on the DOJ and Todd Blanche to do something. Now Smith's lawyers, they're, okay, this whole thing is meritless.

There's no way, blah, blah, blah. He didn't actually, you know, do this. And now it's turning into not just a legal fight, but I would say a very bitter political fight. I want to go to Chuck Grassley, who was just outraged because he was one of the original guys that was getting spied upon. and he kind of read him the riot act right here. Indeed, some examples. Mr. Smith subpoenaed and obtained information on Republican groups as early as 2019 and as late as 2023. You see, that's what you must do if your case is designed to map out and target

the entire Republican Party. Messages obtained between Jack Smith's senior officials also expose how they were aware of constitutional speech and debate clause concerns and targeting congressional toll records. In these messages, his future staff discussed how they can circumvent the statutory barriers, Congress put in place to obtain congressional toll records.

You know, I just want to give a special shout out to all of you guys that are making notes about what's going on here in terms of just the mechanics of YouTube right now. I'm seeing a note from Texas Gidgett and from Clive, all of you saying you were not able to get into, not able to get into the chat. And Don Baca, you're getting some notification about. disable notification for children. I don't even know what that means. And all of you guys had problems.

I can tell you my own producer, actually, because he watches during the show just to make sure, you know, everything's going okay and the audio's working and all of that. And he was going crazy trying to get in. He said he actually couldn't get into the show. So I think he had a similar challenge as all of you couldn't get into the chat. Couldn't get into the show. Thank you for being here.

Listen, if this is your first time coming here, please make sure you subscribe. Please make sure that you double check that little button that says that you are getting the alerts for the show because I want to make sure that you know when I'm here. Sometimes you're not getting the alerts and that's a concern as well. We always pin the show at the top of the channel. I can tell you can always watch it after the fact as well. You can also watch it on Spotify where I am every day too.

So I am concerned about that and I appreciate you keeping me in the loop and I can assure you I am going straight as I get off of this call. All of your complaints will be heard. I promise you, I'm going to talk to the folks I know over at YouTube and just make sure everything's going on. I know they had an update recently, and so there's been some technology challenges. But I like being live, and I want to continue being here live, and it's important that we get this all right. But I continue on, in terms of Jordan right now, because, listen, you know, they're talking about whether or not there were these phone records that were gathered, whether there was mapping that was gathered. It sounds like there was, period, right? And they were getting

donor lists and conservative groups, and they basically wanted to freeze the MAGA movement and keep Donald Trump from running again. But then, you know, lo and behold, what do you know? Donald Trump wins again. He wins again. And now this has thrown everything, I guess, into disarray. It's exposing everything. And you've got some people that I think are going to be left rather vulnerable, including Jack Smith, including Jack Smith. And so now the question becomes, will what they heard today in the Senate hearings put enough political pressure on the DOJ to really do something? Let's go to Mike Lee out of Utah. He's taking it one step further here. He says Smith did not just look at a handful of calls on January 6, but that he did do this deep dive surveillance operation on Republicans in general, again,

trying to chart the entire movement around Donald Trump. And he said, this is worse than Watergate. I played that as a little bit of a tease at the top, but let's listen to the longer clip. And I think he's making a really good point here, effectively making what Richard Nixon did. It with Watergate looked like some kind of, you know, Sunday in the park. Do you define toll records to include geolocation data? I would have to look at the subpoena. My understanding of what was most relevant to us would be the to and from and duration. I haven't looked at one of those subpoenas in a long time.

Again, like the preservation requests, I think the information requested is pretty standard in those subpoenas. I'm just not, I don't recall as I sit here, whether there were other things. What I focused on was the two from and length. I get it, and I'm out of time. My point is this, even without that bill and deal fairness becoming law, it's not yet law needs to become law.

there still were all kinds of limitations, even separate and apart from the speech of debate clause. A Supreme Court precedent involving Jones, Carpenter, more recently, Chowdry, recognizes that the Fourth Amendment, especially insofar as you're seeking things like geolocation data, you can get such an exquisite view into someone's life by tracking them that when you requested the, way with new technology, that implicates the Fourth Amendment in a very direct way, in a very direct way that often requires compliance not only with the Fourth Amendment's probable cause requirement, but also with the particularity requirement. The American Revolution was fought and won because of the flagrant abuse by the Crown and

Parliament of those privacy protections, which have their origins in many centuries of American legal precedent and tradition prior to the American Revolution prior to the Constitution. You trampled on those, sir, and you did so in a way that arguably makes what Richard Nixon did in Watergate look like a Sunday picnic. Sunday picnic. Yeah. Of course, he says, you know what, I'm not going to be silenced here. I got lots to say. I'm an ethical guy. Same one, same won't, same one. I just want to give you Jack Smith side of things. I stand by my testimony before the House of Representatives, and I will not be silenced by continued threats of prosecution

from the president or others. As I appear before you today, it is my belief that the rule of law faces challenges unlike any we have experienced in our lifetime. Individuals are threatened with criminal prosecution because they are perceived to have opposed the president. Predetermined outcomes increasingly seem to take precedence over the Justice Department's

long-standing core values and traditions. History teaches that the rule of law is rarely destroyed all at once. It's often weakened by attacks on the institutions and the public servants sworn to uphold it. Okay. You know, honestly, fine. Okay, we'll let him say his peace and so be it. But look, the reality is, I think the guy's in a lot of trouble. I mean, he just isn't a lot of trouble.

And, you know, I hate this too, right? Like, you don't like that the other side was totally trying to disable Donald Trump. And now we're in a situation where Donald Trump is trying to unravel it all. And, you know, hey, I get it. Republicans are going back at it, back at him. It's like this boomerang. But at the same time, you got to at least have some, you know, maybe two wrongs don't make a right. But, like, we got to understand what went down.

and people do have to pay the price. I mean, there's got to be consequences. Otherwise, you're only going to have one team in charge forever. If you have one team that is so, so, so are out in front and so insanely aggressive and wants to just annihilate everybody else, and that's what they wanted to do, let's be honest. They just wanted to completely kill the other side and kill them off. You can't have a system like that.

Like, you have to play fair. And so I think in terms of playing fair, we got to do what's needed right now to make sure, And look, if there's no evidence, then fine. I'll be the first to say, Alleluia. You know what, Jack Smith, you were just doing your job, Jackie Boy, and we love you for it. You know, as a good American, you're just doing your job. But I think that just based on everything I've seen thus far, there's probably, what do they say, where there's smoke, there's fire. I think there's some there there. And so we owe it, I think, to ourselves, to our country,

to actually get to the bottom of this, because if you don't, then guess what? You're going to have one team in charge, whoever is most dominant, whoever's willing to just crush the other side, and that's how we're going to live from here on out, right? I mean, Ted Cruz, he did a great job on this, too. He completely destroyed Jackie Boy. You have any regrets? Regrets regarding my work as special counsel? Yes. Yes. I regret that the people I worked with have been unfairly fired and delified for doing their jobs. Of course. Of course. You can't bring yourself, well, let me say, congratulations. because you have succeeded where Richard Nixon failed, which is weaponizing the Department of Justice and the federal government to go after your political opponents.

Congratulations. You are stepping into the shoes of John Mitchell, and yet your abuse is far greater than John Mitchell. And I understand for the rest of your life, you're going to be hailed as a hero in the resistance movement. I assume you have a pink hat somewhere at home, and people will be proud of you for resisting, but I'll tell you what you have done. You have brought the Department of Justice into disrepute, because instead of being apolitical, instead of enforcing the law, you willingly were conscripted as a foot soldier for the DNC. And you know what you also did? You reelected President Donald Trump, because the American people were disgusted at your willingness to abuse power in partisan ends. Javert from Les Miz would look at you with astonishment.

I believe you have no regrets. I believe you have convinced yourself that this witch hunt targeting half the country for partisan ends was justified. Well, let me say, you have brought. the Department of Justice into disrepute and you have done enormous damage. And I believe your conduct represents the most egregious abuse of power in the history of the Department of Justice. Wow. Go get them, Ted Cruz, right? I mean, Watergate was a break-in for one office and a cover-up. What they're alleging here is something much more spectacular. right, much bigger and a total breach of trust, a total breach of any kind of law and order.

And I got to say, you know, I got to hand it to Ted Cruz. That was something else. And look, here's the thing, right? If that is actually the case and they can prove this out, which I think they'll be able to, then there has to be a penalty. And the penalty in this case is five years in prison, okay? Five years plus a fine. and maybe hopefully at that point we can get back to some, if we ever had it, semblance of

normalcy and respect where you obey the law and you don't try and destroy the other side at any cost. I mean, that's what we actually saw. We're going to call him Hitler. We're going to say he's the worst thing since the 1930s. He's going to lock people up. He's going to put him in concentration camps. I mean, my gosh, disrespectful, right, to history, disrespectful to all those that we lost in

World War II to the 6 million Jews that died in World War. I mean, you've got to be kidding me. And this is what they do. That's not playing fair. And I don't think they played fair at all from a legal perspective either. By the way, they've also threatened. Remember, I played to the soundbite from Susan Rice saying, hey, when we get back in there, we're going to go after you for all it's worth. None of these people are playing fair. They're not. And so that has to be litigated, and that has to be addressed. You know, they want to cheat. That's how I see. And when I look at this caravan that's been moving towards our border, right, coming up through Mexico right now, I mean, wow, they want to cheat. They want to get people in.

They want to make sure they add them to the census so that they get more in terms of representation. And then they want to do what? Oh, they want to somehow convert them over so that they can vote because they think they're going to be Democrats. I mean, this is all for political power. You understand me? And we've got to be careful of it. We've got to be sensitive to it. Today, very interesting timing on the same exact day that we see this caravan moving towards the U.S.

We've got the U.S. Supreme Court handing the administration a tool that it needs, a tool that it has been fighting for, the right for now to keep on deporting people, including the countries that are not their own. So you're here illegally. You commit a crime. Guess what? You could be hauled off to any other place we see fit. We're getting you out of the country, period. And I'm going to ask a question. I'm going to ask a question that I'm just saying nobody in the mainstream media seems to want to ask right now.

But why is this happening now? why are we seeing caravans coming here now? And why are we also seeing the same kind of pressure all around the world, whether it's Sayuta, Spain, whether it's in Italy, whether it's in Germany, whether it's in the UK and Britain were five men, we're just arrested near our U.S. bomber base. Stay with me, okay, stay with me here. Because this group, this group, shall we go to the migrant cabin?

Here we go. This group is calling itself, faith and hope. It left San Pedro, Sula, Honduras, for. the U.S. on September 20th. I mean, they get some pit stops along the way. Maybe some people want to work in Mexico. You know, I don't know, but most of them want to come into the U.S. They crossed Guatemala, then they entered Mexico around the 24th, as well as the 25th. And then they sat in tapal. Am I saying this right? Tapu. I'm not even going to try. Tapachula. Tapachula, okay? Yeah. Got to work.

on all my Mexican towns. Anyway, on Sunday night, it kept growing and growing and growing, and they basically were able to make it through the storm, tropical storm, Rachel, and then they started north again right towards the U.S. survey. And again, I want to point out it's coming at a very interesting time because we got news out today that guess what, the administration can continue, can continue deporting people to wherever they see fit. So that's kind of a big deal as we get news that this caravan is still heading our way. Now, we've seen different reports at first, you know, it was in the hundreds, and now you get hundreds and hundreds of more joining to the point where it is a full-fledged

caravan now. You get DHS and Border Patrol watching it, watching it. And Washington's message is pretty blunt. Like, we're not going to have it, okay? Like, I'm sorry. Like, game over. It's done. And guess what?

You come here and we're sending you home. Oh, we're not even sending you home. We're sending you wherever we want to send you, because we just got all the authorization today from the Supreme Court to do it. Catch and release is over. If you try it, you're going to get detained, you're going to get charged, and you're going to get removed to Tim Buck too. So that's a big deal, guys, okay? And the Supreme Court just gave them the biggest tool they needed in order to do this. This was an emergency order, I should point out, not the last word here, you get justices 63 that are putting that Boston judge's ruling on hold. Remember the judge in

Boston that said, you can't send anybody to some so-called third country? No, no, no, no, no, a country that is not their homeland. That is not okay without giving them notice and a real chance to argue that they would be persecuted or possibly tortured wherever you're sending them or back in their home country. Well, the First Circuit had largely backed that judge in Boston. And so that's why I went all the way up to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court said, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. We'll hear the case, but you're not going to do anything until we've actually heard it. We're going to allow the administration to continue on. They decided 6 to 3. That's how everything is these days, right?

6 to 3, 623, 623. Final decision is coming by next summer. But Wright's groups are saying you got 25,000 people. Our fantasy commission says for him it's all about the friendships. Cute, Kevin. But I disagree. Like with about 365. I get paid the second my team goes up big with early payout

and can cash out at any time before the game ends. No hard feelings. Kevin. Just faster payouts from Bet365. The home of winning early. Must be 19 and older. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you were someone you know is concerns about gambling, visit connectsonetrio.ca. Or call 1866 5 through 1,2,600. Terms and conditions apply. It have already been sent to 29 countries under this policy. Most of them have been sent to Mexico. And the Justice Department says, when a home country will not take people back, including criminals, and they won't take them back. You know, you've got to send them somewhere. And so you shouldn't have to.

be forced to hold on to them because, say, a country doesn't want them back. You understand? I mean, what else are you going to do for goodness sake? So you get this caravan as we speak. Again, heading to us, okay? Interesting timing right as we got midterms coming on. You got the highest court in the country telling the executive branch, hey, for now, you can keep doing what you need to do. And Holman, our buddy Tom Holman, he's like, yeah, there's no way we're not going to keep doing what we need to do because we're going to have zero releases from this border. You come in illegally, you're getting turned around, you're getting arrested, you're going to be prosecuted, you're going to be deported, and just don't even try it, right?

Let's go to Tom on Fox last night. Remember the images of 12,000 illegal aliens a day coming across the border, and now they want to abolish the agency that has to find them and deport them. They haven't changed a bit, but you know, thank God, we got President Trump in the Oval Office, who I think is the greatest president in my lifetime, promises made, promises kept the most secure border in the history of this nation, even better than Trump 45, they can't stand it, but we're going to hold that border tight. The border's closed. It's going to remain closed.

Yeah. So there you have it. Okay. DHS, they're not putting on a welcome mat anymore. This is not Biden's border. This is not Kamala Harris, you know, improvising and giving you word salad on just exactly what the root cause is of migration might be. No, no, this is a reality check for you. You're not coming north, okay? You cross that southern line. We're hauling you out fast, fast, fast. But politics starts at home, though, right?

And I think that all of these people are recognizing the political opportunity here. All these Democrats are saying, ha-ha, you know, what do you know? Maybe if we just get them here and we move to New York, we can get a few more, you know, brownie points on the census. And then next thing you know, we'll be able to put more Democrats in Congress, which means we'll have more say and more sway. and it's all done for political purposes. I mean, Tom Swazi, right?

The Democrat from Long Island, Congressman, he's saying exactly that. I want to go to a soundbite from him that was kind of going viral over the weekend because he lays it right out there. He's got some pretty big goals in politics right now, and they have to do with making everybody legal. My number one issue is to try and get a resolution on immigration. My biggest desire, my biggest goal of what I want to accomplish in politics right now is I want to legalize seven or eight or nine or ten million people in our country so they will not be subject to deportation.

Okay. Your biggest goal? Your biggest goal, thanks for telling us, Tommy Boy. Thank you. We appreciate the warning. Well, you know, look, there's a reason for it. There's a reason for it. and it has to do with what the opportunity is.

There's no other explanation for bringing millions and millions and millions of people in during the Biden administration. They can get up there and talk about dignity and family and all they, whatever. It's not about that. It is about politics, pure politics only. This is a numbers game for the Democrats. And that's why all of these people are rushing the border right now, because you see, if you look at the way the winds are blowing, I don't necessarily. certainly think this is going to happen. I think that, you know, we might actually pull a rabbit out of the

hat and the Democrats might actually be left crying at midterms. I'm not giving up hope yet, but the way the wind blows right now, it looks like there won't be a gigantic red wave. And so if that's the case, again, I'm skeptical about it, you know that. If that's the case that that might help also explain why thousands now are gathering in this caravan, forgive me, maybe it's still hundreds. I don't what the actual latest count is just yet, but it's definitely getting bigger and bigger and bigger every single day. Hopefully they all decide to disperse because Homan's clear, like you're not coming here. But he says, importantly, that this is operational in scale. This is amnesty at scale. This is politically motivated at its root.

They want to normalize illegal immigration. Look, when they open that border up for four years, you know, these Democrats are complicit. They let Alehan. to my Yorkers commit perjury in front of Congress. Wasn't an accident, wasn't mismanagement, is by design. And I've been saying it for four years. Bring millions of people into the United States. Let's fly into sanctuary cities. Let's end the Trump's census rule to be counted in the next census,

which is more seats and housed with the dams. Then let the Democratic administration command a ward amnesty to 15 million people who they think are future Democratic voters. Look, they sold this country out for future political power because there's no downside in a secure border. And I've asked 100 Democrats, Give me one downside on a secure border, and they can't. Hmm.

The Democrats are very calculating and very political. And I think that it's not just happening here for political reasons. I think it's happening all over the world for political reasons. When you look at what's going on in the UK and everybody's like, yeah, fine, you know, we'll bring in some more. I mean, they had a big thing, right? We talked about it yesterday. I led the show yesterday with the five migrants that suddenly got off Scott Free. I get an update on that for you.

I mean, for goodness sakes. And the administration, the folks there in the UK came out and announced a new refugee program the same day. They let these guys go and they say, hey, we're bringing in a whole bunch of people from Palestine and from Afghanistan. And the people are like, are you kidding me? For goodness sakes, like haven't we been through enough already? So why are they doing that? It's not about making the country better. Don't kid yourself. That's not what it's at all. It's about something else entirely. It is about political power. And for here, it may be about the census and getting more Democrats because they think they're going to get more Democrats in blue states.

So you locate these people to the blue states or maybe you locate enough people to some red states where you think you can flip things. And then maybe you get them, you know, on some kind of path to citizenship as the Swazi guy out. in Long Island is so desperate to do. But think about why it's happening and what has happened, for example, in the UK. I mean, sometimes you're seeing people like fight back, right, AFD. In Germany, great example of that. George Maloney, getting her spot, although, you know, sometimes we'd like her to be a little stronger than she is, but she's leading the way in Italy. And now you're seeing this movement. I mean, look, Nigel Farage has been out in front of that one, right, in the UK for some time. Let's go to Marco who says, listen, it's going on everywhere.

You've got the equivalent of Make America Great Again going on in Spain. A lot of young professionals joining the Make Spain Great Again movement because they want to get rid of little Pedrito Sanchez who's never met a migrant that he doesn't want to bring in. I mean, his whole thing right now as he deals with Seuta is how do we do this in a humanitarian way. I'll tell you how you do it. You put up a darn wall. Okay, Petrito? You just put up a wall. There you go.

There's some nice little operational money you can find to, you know, get to work. You take your money that you got and you can actually. employ people. There's a good government works program for you, Petrito, and you build a freaking wall, but he won't do it. Ask yourself, why won't he do it? Let's go to Marco Rubio saying, listen, this immigration that we're seeing, whether it's here or whether it's anywhere in the world, it is not sustainable. We've all seen the images, for example, of what's happening in Spain. The truth is this, whether it's in Europe or in the Western Hemisphere, the United States, or whatever it may be, no country, no country in the world that's responsible, governed by

responsible people can allow their borders to just be open and allow anyone that wants to come in to flood in. You can't flood countries with migration. You know, this is a country that was built on immigration. And immigration has to happen through an orderly process in which you get to decide who comes in, you know a lot about them, and you pick and choose how many people, who and how many people can come in every single year. This is proper migration, proper immigration. What we have seen in the broader West and what we saw in the United States during the previous administration is an uncontrolled flood of people coming in. It's analogy I've always used is I'm not against rain. I'm against flooding. And that's what I would say about immigration and mass migration. Mass migration is terribly costly for any society. It's simply not sustainable over the long term. I think countries in Europe are learning that now. The United States learned that after four years under the Biden administration. And I think other countries in our own hemisphere are dealing with some of this as well.

Yeah. I mean, we're all dealing with it, okay? We're all dealing with it because you've got some liberals out there, they've figured out that this is their path, right? You just get enough people in there going to vote for them, they're going to vote for free stuff, that vote for open borders so you can get more free stuff. I mean, it actually is going to lead to total collapse. It is going to lead to collapse. It's an economic collapse. It is a culture collapse. And frankly, it is also. also a security collapse. All right? You obviously like in terms of domestic issues and the crime that we've seen along the border in the border towns, that's a big deal. So you want to nip that one in the bud, but it's bigger than that, okay? It's bigger than that because when we look at

what's going on in Europe right now and you have real concerns about Iran and who they have placed via their proxies elsewhere there in the world. They've already made these threats. The Telegraph newspaper reported on them Iran smuggling agents into UK as channel migrants. This is what Tehran was boasting of with its positioning of revolutionary people in London through a secret network. They were talking about doing this last summer. All right? Just a few months ago, right? Because it's not exactly winter yet. But throughout the summer, this is just a couple months ago. The Telegraph was reporting that Tehran had aspirations of putting their agents in the London area through secret networks. I mean, these are real problems. So you have to worry about a lot when it comes to migration.

You have to worry about, I'm sorry, like I'll just say it, terrorists infiltrating these countries. And so no, no responsible country governed by responsible people can allow this, whether it's in Sayuta, Spain, or the Mediterranean, or on the Texas, Mexico border. Like, you just can't allow it. Donald Trump has made this very, very clear. And Marco Rubio saying, I'll take some rain, but no flood. I mean, rain would be small numbers where we actually, you know, you can count the raindrops, for goodness sakes, not have some kind of flood. and you've got to be cautious in light of what we're seeing overseas.

This is a big deal because if you've got people that are not just overstaying visas, but deliberately entering countries because they actually want to run covert operations, as the telegraph had reported on, if you have smuggling networks, then you've got a big, big, big problem. Think about where we are today. We know that the five men were arrested, right, at the RAF Fairford. And that's not just a random field in the English countryside. That is actually a very important spot.

It's the British base that American bombers have been using flying from, you know, in order to go over there into Iran. So these are long-range missions. They let us in, Seuta, Spain. They're dealing with immigration problems there, sure, and they're dealing with them down by Rota and Moron in southern Spain. We can't even access our bases there. This is the base that we do use in Great Britain.

And in July, the Revolutionate Guard actually came out the IRGC and they named that base. And they called any facility that was used against Iranian territory, a legitimate target. So now you just put the dots together, okay? You get five men, early 20s, all from the London and, you know, suburb area, Camden, Westminster, a few other places. Three white vans, a farmer. Thank God for the farmer who calls it in. She's like, you know, what are these guys doing out here in masks in the dead of the night or the wee hours of the morning? It was like one in the morning. And so she called it in. and this became a big, big issue. And then what did we find out?

They let these guys go. They said they were British nationals. Okay, well, what were their nationalities? We still don't know their religion. We don't know anything about that. Nothing. Why? Well, Marco Rubio is helping to break the fog here.

Marco Rubio got out there and said some really important stuff there on Fox News last night about whether or not there were some foreign actors involved here. because that's the real concern. Here's the Times reporting. Terror police investigate possible Iran-Lincoln's suspected RAF base bomb plot. Here's Marker's reaction. Well, let me preface by saying that I have to be careful. There's some things I cannot say on the air for a lot of different reasons.

Suffice it to say that what happened, would almost happen, what could have happened in the UK over the weekend is a very serious situation. It's one that clearly involves the hands of a foreign actor. I won't get into great detail about that yet. I do want to thank the authorities in the United Kingdom who have been very cooperative and on top of it. I know a lot of people are disturbed by the news that some of these people have been released on bail, as it was some of the people who are being investigated, and obviously we're engaging with them on all of that. But suffice it to say that beyond that, I would argue, that they've been very cooperative and very helpful on something that's very serious incident. And I think it ties us to the reality here, and that is we are dealing with elements in the world.

and in the case of Iran, for example, who have openly threatened to attack American interests globally. We're going to always take that very seriously. There'll be repercussions for that if it ever were to happen or even attempted. But what happened this weekend could have been and was, I think, a very serious threat. And I want to thank the UK for their cooperation and their help on it. There's a lot more news that will come out in the days to come. But there's only so much I can say right now at this point about it other than this was a very serious thing. And it was responded to appropriately.

right i mean they were they were very he was very nice about working with the uk authorities and don't trump had some nice things to say about that just yesterday as well though he's not too thrilled that they let these guys go but this is the bridge right from the telegraph story i just showed you to what we saw over the weekend because yeah you don't have to pretend that the fairford five have been convicted as iranian agents right now they they haven't not yet anyway but you do have the secretary of state of the united states of america saying this was not a local prank right this was not just some funny thing that the kids were doing on the weekend to entertain themselves in the fields on a Sunday night. No, no, no. You get a base here that has been used to hit Iran.

You've got an Iran here that has said, hey, that that base is fair game. And then you got five men in their early 20s that were somehow released in 24 hours, which is amazing. I told you yesterday, the rule is you can detain someone for up to 14 days in great Britain, if you suspect them of being involved in a terror plot. And for whatever reason, they just let these guys go. And I'll tell you, the people of Great Britain, they are not one bit happy about it. Just listen to this British TV, talk TV host who went on a wild rant for minutes on end. But I just got to show you a quick 15 second clip here, because she is ticked off. Buck stops with you, Defence Secretary. I want to hear a concrete plan, and I want to hear you

say, admit that people coming into the country illegally are a security risk and then do something about it. Yeah, they're not doing a damn thing about it, okay? Nothing. Nothing. I mean, at least we got Donald Trump in there and we got that border sealed shut, you know, as fast as could be. But look what's going on in the UK with the migrant boats that are coming in. That's a big issue with her and she called them Muppets and a whole bunch of other things. I encourage you actually if you want to see that, we ran that today as a chapter on the page. So you can go watch it there.

You can go watch all of yesterday's show because she's just dynamite. And you need more people, frankly, in the media and elsewhere speaking up that are not afraid to be told, oh, well, you're racist for saying that. You're racist for even trying to look at what their religion is. I told you yesterday, I'm going to repeat it again. I may keep repeating it because you need to know this. You need to understand it. And I've done some studying of religion in my day.

In Islam. Okay, in Islam, they don't have guaranteed salvation or any kind of, you know, possible salvation, really. You know, you can't, like, repent. You can't say some prayers and have Jesus forgive you. Like, you know, there's not really a ton of forgiveness in that religion. And so because of that, the only way you can actually guarantee salvation is by being a martyr. So think about how that's playing on these young people in their brains. And not only are you guaranteed salvation for yourself, but you get almost guaranteed salvation for up to 70 members of your family. You can go and ask Allah, hey, can you save this one and that one and this one and that one?

And so, you know, it's a big family spectacle. You get everybody grandfathered in if you are a martyr. I mean, think about how crazy it is. Everybody talks about the 72 virgins, but think about the salvation component of that. The only way you're going to be saved and 70 members of your family are going to be saved is for you to make yourself into a martyr. So that is just pointing to, yet again, how bad. A religion in my estimation, okay, it really and truly is. And so you're allowing this to permeate your

culture. And the people in Great Britain, they're angry, they're furious. They shouldn't have to read a press release, right, to figure out just exactly what's going on. They shouldn't have to read a press release to figure out, you know, who the terror suspects are. They shouldn't have to have a local farmer called us in in the dead of the night. And by the way, she couldn't even get through on her first phone call. She had to run it all the way up the food chain. Actually, she tried. She tried to go to the bigwigs, and she didn't get anywhere, so finally she calls their equivalent of 9-1-1. I mean, I'll tell you, the channel boats were a warning, Fairford is the bill come and do. It really is.

And, you know, these schmows that can't bring it upon themselves to actually hold these guys and figure out what's going on, might have been a test run. Yeah, they tried that with 9-11, too. Remember James Wood saying he was on a plane? He was pretty darn convinced that was one test run. This might have been what we were witnessing there in Fairford. Here is President Trump. It was five suspects that were arrested. It was just released on bail.

What's your reaction to that? And is this connected to Iran? Might be, but I will tell you, I would have said, don't let them have bail. Cashless bail. Is it cashless bail, I guess? That was one of the problems that we had, which started the whole mess of crime, and we're ending cashless bail. But over there, I'm surprised that they released them.

I wouldn't have done that. Look, they've been very good. They worked for this, right? closely. We know everything about them. We would not have released them. So you said it might be. Iran might be. Can you elaborate on that at all? I'd rather not. I mean, I know the answer I can be very specific, but I'd rather not say it. But I would not have released them. Wow. Okay. So let's just add two and two together. Okay, you heard Marco. You heard the president. He said, I really can't. I can't elaborate. I know what's going on. I can't. I can't

elaborate and I would not have released them. And then you have Marco Rubio saying, I can't say a whole bunch, but I can tell you that there's a foreign connection. All right. So... Our fantasy commission says for him it's all about the friendships. Cute, Kevin. But I disagree.

Like with Bet365. I get paid the second my team goes up big with early payout and can cash out at any time before the game ends. No hard feelings, Kevin. Just faster payouts from Bet365. The home of winning early. Must be 19 and older. Ontario only.

Please play responsibly. If you were someone you know is concerns about gambling, visit connectsontario.ca or call 1-866-5-3-1-2,600. Terms and conditions apply. This family is on the brink of civil war. Mobland.

The hit original series is now streaming on Paramount Plus. We are the Harrogans. Don't know the land? And Google us. From the underworld of Guy Ritchie. Do you want to step up the ladder? I won't come up dead.

Starring Tom Hardy, Pierce Brosnan and Helen Mirren. Do I have to do everything myself? You want to want! I'll give you a... Moblad. New season is now streaming on Paramount Plus. I don't know what the Brits are thinking. I mean, he kept saying all along,

listen, you guys are going to be in trouble because of all this migration stuff you got going on. You got one big open border, and that's not going to be good for you. He said, your energy's a problem and your borders are problem. By the way, he was spot on. Give up the windmills, for goodness sakes, right?

You got some oil there. Actually drill for it, but they can't because of all their green energy nonsense. start putting all this together and start asking yourself, who's really in charge here? It seems like the bad guys, if you ask me. I look at Spain, for example, and I immediately think the bad guys, because, you know, we want to be nice to China. Let me not necessarily call them the bad guys, but they're not really the good guys either.

And I think about Pedrizo Sanchez and his old boss, his mentor, that got bankrolled, you know, by China and then allows for this whole 5G network to go in with. Huawei, which is basically a backdoor entry now into NATO communications. That's not good. I mean, his mentors in a whole lot of trouble. So he loves China. He was just over doing some little commercial. He made some stupid social media commercial with Mam Dami. And the two of them are like trying to throw trash into a waste basket. Unfortunately for them, they never actually make the basket, but it looks like they did on camera, although they didn't get a shot of it. I digress. The point being that there's something going on, okay? There's something going on.

You got a caravan heading to our border. Fortunately, the Supreme Court just put the deportations back in motion, so that's not going to get anywhere, all right? But you get a Long Island Democrat who tells you, his biggest goal is to legalize 10 million people. You get a border chief who says the motive is votes and census. He's right. Tom Holman, as borders are, is spot on.

I'm saying that too. We got a secretary of state that is saying the West cannot survive a flood, not just us, but all the Europeans. We got a British newspaper that is warning about Iran on the migrant routes. We got a British newspaper that said this was going to happen, that Tehran was going to try and put people here. Now we get five men, British passports, okay, British passports, but they're all super young, early 20s, and they're arrested at the edge of an American bomber base and they're sent home on bail. Who is bailing them out? I ask you. Why are they bailing them out? I ask you. And how connected are these things? I think they're tremendously connected. I really do. And I'm

really, really concerned. By the way, we're winning in Iran. We are absolutely positively winning. Oil's coming down yet again today. I know it's going to take a while to catch up at the gas pumps. We talked about that yesterday and maybe tomorrow we can do a deeper dive. But basically it's like a two-week spread. And so that hasn't showed up yet. But oil's coming down. Iran is facing the music. Iran is out of time. They got two weeks, basically, and they got no more oil to sell to China. They can't even get dollars for their oil, right? They have to do like trade.

They have to barter because the dollar system has been positively absolutely shut off for them. So their entire economy relies on dollars, because, you know, if they want to buy anything from anywhere, they have to use dollars. Nobody's going to trust the Iranian real. Like, that's not happening. So what are they actually going to do? They're going to go belly up in a couple of weeks. They got no more money coming in, no more good. coming in, the barter stuff, it's over, okay? Which is exactly why they're trying to get

desperate and do desperate things like perhaps if, in fact, this allegation and the things that we suspect out of Great Britain are in fact true. And there is some kind of link between this attempted bomb plot and the Iranians. Then that would explain a lot, right? Because their back is up against the wall. They're trying to do a deal with Donald Trump. He's like, no way, Jose. as I like to say, Muhammad, like that's not happening. It's just not happening. And I'm sorry, guys, you had plenty of opportunity. And I mean, plenty of opportunity and you blew it over and over again. So you know what? We're not going to make that mistake again. Good luck. You're on your own. Oil is coming down and it's going to be good. The Democrats didn't bet on that. That's why I say,

don't count Republicans out just yet in terms of these midterms. But you know who's not reporting on this? You know who's not reporting on oil ever coming down? You know who's not reporting on, well, gee, you know, maybe there's some kind of link between, gosh, darn it, you know, what's going on in Iran and the borders flooding, flooded everywhere. It's the mainstream media. They are not reporting on any of it because I guess it doesn't serve their purpose. They have one purpose and one purpose only, and that is to destroy Donald Trump. I mean, hey, they could go hang out with Jackie Boy Smith any day of the week. You get CNN, MSNBC Politico. They are still being blocked at least CNN from the pool camera. MSNBC and political, they have passes to get back

the building CNN can access its little desk and it's live shot, I guess, now. But they got a bigger issue at stake. And that's that the pool camera has left them completely in the dust. I mean, it's kind of funny, right? Because as this thing all unfolded, don't forget when Donald Trump first came for and he said, you know what, I'm sick and tired of you people. And I have security concerns. And frankly, you never actually present the news in any kind of fair and balanced way.

So you're out. I'm revoking your passes. And they went nuts. and all the networks launched this boycott, if you would. They went on strike. I'm calling it strike. And they said, the public has a vital interest in receiving accurate, independent information about its government.

No administration should restrict a news organization because it objects to its reporting. That was September 21st. Here we are, you know, just about a week and change later. And gosh darn it, they folded like as fast as they could, right? More on that in a second. But let me go back to what they originally said. They originally said that the pool was calling it quits. This is to advise, this is the Washington Bureau Chief from Fox.

This is to advise that effective today, the TV pool will not be covering events designated as pool coverage of the president. This follows the White House's position preventing CNN from fulfilling. It's assigned pool duties. There will be no replacement pool put in place. Well, like I said, that lasted about a hot minute because guess what? The pool is back, ladies and gentlemen, back in action. And CNN's just not part of it. You know, they're not really reporting much on that either.

but everybody else now. I think CBS, was it CBS that first came back? I think ABC is in the slot today and they're getting you all your pool coverage. And I guess it's just going to be when CNN's down and out that once a week we won't be able to see any footage from CNN. Oh gosh, darn it. I mean, who feels bad? I don't feel so bad. I really don't. And I don't feel bad because guess what? We got plenty of other alternatives. Real America's voice is doing a very nice job. Thank you very much. They're out there, pound in the pavement with their cameras, and they're able to shoot this just as easily, frankly, as CNN can. It's not that hard.

Point a camera and shoot. Like, they're acting like it's some kind of real privileged thing that they're all like, oh, you know, they can't possibly do that. They don't have our skills to do that. All you need is a microphone to camera. Heck, you could do with a cell phone, right? Tapper. This is the anchor that is very disingenuous and has never met,

if you ask me, a money opportunity he's willing to turn down, such as the book he did, where he's, went on and on about how the media should have recognized that Biden was like, you know, a little too, a little too, how shall we say, over the hill for the gig. Yeah, he actually wrote that book, which is really funny because he was one of the main members of the media telling us not to believe all those quote, cheat fakes as Carine Jean-Pierre would call them when we'd say, hey, I'd play the video and I'm like, I'd play it full too, because, you know, It was grand.

You didn't need to edit that stuff at all. I'd just be like, here, guys, take a look. Tell me what you think. And we all agreed. Yeah, Joe was really not up for the job. Anyway, this guy, his guy's like been reduced to total tears, right? He can't believe that his network can't get to go on Air Force One for the football game last weekend. Sir, I just want to note yesterday the White House barred CNN from fulfilling our pool assignment on behalf of the five major television networks.

As you know, we all pool coverage. and all of our affiliates and subscribers. And I would just ask if you could please convey to President Trump to let CNN back in the pool. It was not okay when President Obama tried to freeze Fox out of the pool back in 2009. And I don't think we want a world where presidents decide who gets to cover them. Well, I hear you, Jake, but I think we need fair and objective and well-sourced reporting.

And I could tell you as having being the victim, of a lot of this nonsense, my family members, and so many others. We need a free and fair and honest press corps without an agenda that tries to take facts to fit a narrative. And whether that is Biden's inability and many issues that he had that was whitewashed and then people came back around with corrections or other issues. So that's a much longer conversation. And President Trump's And by the way, there are over, what, 50 seats in the press room. I don't think all of them, like Washington Post or New York Times, are exactly positive towards this administration.

So that's a false narrative that it's about negative reporting. We need fair and objective reporting for the country. And that's President Trump's point. President Trump specifically said that there's something wrong with a country where people are allowed to report things that are purposely negative. That's his language, not mine. Well, I think he's going to what I just said in that there is a negative agenda, there is a negative narrative, and then we're going to get anonymous sources. Heck, I just saw a story where anonymous sources were referring to a now dead senator.

So this needs to be fixed, and President Trump is quite frustrated with this media bias across the board. as has every single president that I've ever covered, been frustrated with the press. But Ambassador Walses, I appreciate your time today. Thank you so much for joining us. I mean, for goodness sakes. For goodness sakes, he's on the show with you. It's not like he got totally cut off from the administration. They're giving you Mike Walts, for goodness sakes.

I mean, calm down people. So you don't get to go on the pool camera jaunt to the football game. Tennessee, Texas. I'm guessing you CNN people don't really like football anyway. No harm, no foul, right? I mean, honestly, it's all kind of silly. Anybody can point to camera and shoot, right? And by the way, you know, to get access to a lot of this video, you have to pay in. Like, that's not fair either, right? So in a really fair system, somebody should just be charged with, you know, following the president around with a camera and it should be available to all,

period, end a story. But I just think it's kind of funny that they're all worked up about this, right? They launch a boycott, the boycott big, big, big. We are taking our ball and going home. We are not going to cover the president of the United States. We are going to stand together because, you know, Real America's voice or newsmax or, you know, Lindel TV, like none of them are going to be able to shoot a camera like we shoot. And it's like, guys, it's over, okay? It's over. No one cares about you being up on your high horse because anyone can shoot that camera. By the way, you could also just hire the cameraman from CBS or ABCR. I just hire them and they'll work for the other network.

It's not that impossible. Like all of this can easily, positively be fixed. But they think for some reason that they have some guaranteed constitutional right to be there front and center with their little cameras? I don't think so. I mean, I would just say, look at Politico versus, say, Breitbart. Breitbart's a great publication. I love Breitbart.

You know what? is very biased. We know that they were getting $8 million a year, not to mention, right? They're not exactly a good look for a journalist organization to get $8 million from the administration that you're supposedly covering. All right? So they're getting, they're on the payroll. And so where do the Democrats go when they need to plant a story? 51 ex-spooks and spies and hacks decide to tell you that that Hunter Biden laptop that Rudy Giuliani alleges came from Russia, that whole story is nothing but a bunch of garbage and trash fed to you courtesy of Russia when it turns out, oh no, the garbage and trash, that was being fed to us

by the FBI, by the ex-spooks and spies and hacks that signed that darn letter. And they knew better. And yet they did it anyway. And where did they take it to Politico? So I'm just saying, you know what? You guys think you're so high and mighty. You think that MSNBC is somehow leagues ahead and so unbiased compared to real America's voice, you do realize that that is the network that hosts some of the most liberal crazy dudes and gals I've ever actually come across, all right? Like, and it gets worse each and every day now that they're spun off. They figure they have like carte blanche to get really, really crazy.

And they're getting really, really crazy. So I would argue that MSNBC is way worse. Like it's way out in left field in ways that the real America's voice just positively isn't. But let's give everybody the benefit of the doubt and say, okay, you get your right and you got your left. Can we call it a day now? Right. But they, they, they're so offended. They are so offended that any kind of streaming organization might come in there with a right point of view as opposed to their leftist nonsense. Look, it's everywhere, though. It's everywhere. It's on the view, for example. The view coming apart at the seams.

because Judge Judy didn't even go on the show. This one's great. Okay, Judge Judy doesn't even go on the view, but somehow she has the ability to get all of them melting down in real time. So this really caught my eye because I don't watch Judge Judy, but I appreciate her sentiment, and I've heard her in little clips and snippets over the years, and she seems to be a good red-blooded American capitalist like yours truly, right?

So I can relate. Anyway, she said some nice things about America, and they all lost it. And I mean, they really, really lost it. Take a look at this one, guys. And another iconic figure of television, Judge Judy Shindlin, is celebrating the 30th anniversary of her TV series, Judge Judy, where she was never shy about going out of her opinions. And in a recent interview with USA Today,

she gave her verdict on America's political climate. Watch. I have a house, and I have a home. I consider America my home. America has been good to me. We are a capitalist country that revered excellence, that revered entrepreneurship, that revered all the things that made us great.

If you don't like this country, go somewhere else. Don't come to the greatest country in the world, the most successful country in the world, and say, I want to change it. There are other countries that are the something else that you want. Go there. So basically she's saying something that I used to hear in the 60s and 70s, love it or leave it. She's basically saying that.

And she'll also have you come to the country. She's talking about immigrants there. I don't know. I'm not clear. What do you think? I half agree with her half disagree with her. You have a foundational American right to criticize the country you live in. That's enthrined in the First Amendment.

But I think she's getting at a real debate that's happening in the country right now about on a corner of the left that socialism is on the rise, democratic socialism. And that foundational to what's made America so great, the ability of anyone from any background, regardless of their wealth, their class, their education, can make it in America, that that flies in the face of it because that's part of our capitalist system. Now, again, you can also critique capitalism.

There's a lot of flaws in it. But I do generally think it's a debate worth having because there is this move on the left towards socialism, and I think it's worth critiquing it. I take umbrage what she said, and I don't like it at all. It's said to me a lot of times on social media because I criticize Donald Trump and I criticize this government.

First of all, I think we can distinguish between not liking the current government and loving America. I will not, for me, I will not complain. And I think because I love America, I have the duty and responsibility to call out the grift and the cruelty and the racism and the abuses of power. And the anti-American actions that he is taking on a daily basis, like banning the press. That is exactly what distinguishes us from communism. The fact that we have freedom of the press. So that's one.

Okay, guys, as we just went through the whole freedom of the press thing, just to be really clear, he's not telling them they can't stand outside the White House and spew their nonsense. he is telling them, I'm not going to guarantee you an actual presence in the room, especially when you are in violation of some national security things. And that gets back to all their reporting that they did on the plane, right, that actually put people's real lives at risk. That's a real concern. The judge is going to hear all that. But this is not, because by the way, freedom of the press

doesn't get you around that. That is actually a violation of the law to be reporting something that would put the president of the United States in actual danger with national security implications. So just to be really, really clear for poor Anna, who's obviously having a day every day. I've also had the experience of leaving the country I was born in. And I live in a community that's full of Cuban Americans and Venezuelan Americans and Nicarawan Americans. And I think that if you ask my parents who made the very tough decision of leaving because they wanted their children to grow up in freedom, I'm not sure that they wouldn't regret having left because you have, fight from the inside. Once you leave, you're no longer fighting. Just ask the Cubans who've

been waiting 67 years for freedom in Cuba, or the Nicaragans who've been waiting 47 years, or the Iranians who've been waiting 50 years for freedom in Iran. If you want things to change with the government, you stay, you fight, you vote, you organize, and you are part of the change. So, we heard it differently than what you're hearing. I read the transcript, then I also seeing that clip, what came to mind right away, even the fact that she said, if you want to change it, I took it as honoring Western ideals. Like to me, if you enjoy freedom of speech and religion and equal rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, if you believe in the separation of church and state, because I don't think churches should ever rule a government, it never works out

well, the law should provide equal protection. I saw the best parts of what America is, and it's less about just the excellence or the pursuit of the American dream and more about as an individual here, this is what we're about. And if you want to come and change any of those ideals, that we're not going to respect people as individuals, that we're going to conflate religion into our laws, we don't like those things, then I do think you should leave. Because those are the foundation of this. Well, then the first person that should leave is Donald Trump. Well, what I would say is this administration is dancing in that. the lane where the far left meets the far right. And it is a dangerous place to be. The freedom

of the press, the freedom of protest, the things that have defined the most colorful parts of our history. It's an imperfect. But I don't think Judy is saying that if you disagree with Trump, that you should leave the counter. No, I don't think she did either. But the first thing I heard was not about criticizing administrations. It was about American ideals. I heard it. Wait for it. because this is Sunny in her moment. When you hear what she hears, I would just say that maybe maybe she should join one of those caravans and go somewhere else, right? But you got to hear it because it's important with where I'm going. Where I'm going is that this show is in a whole lot of trouble with the FCC and they did something today that I think is going to put them in even more

trouble. But before we get to that, understand how they're thinking, right? What the psychology is and Sunny embraces it full on in this moment in time, her reaction to Judge Judy. Yeah, I heard. I heard it loud. I heard it loud and clear. And I, to quote, what did you hear? I heard a lot about me.

I have a house. I have been successful. And not a lot about the collective. Because what is success if everyone else isn't successful? What is success if there's racism and if there's classes? And people can't. can't afford food and they can't educate their children and they're gutting the Department of Education.

So that's what I heard. I heard of very selfishness. I mean, this country has been great to me, has been great to my family. I am sitting here. I got a great education here. I'm successful. But I want to quote James Baldwin because he said,

I love America more than any other country in the world and exactly for this reason I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually. And that is how I feel. I have the right. I have the right to do it. And the bottom line is America is not great for all of its citizens. And you need to be able to point that out.

It's not me, me, me. It's the collective. To be fair to know, you think it's the collective. Sonny, are you going to share your salary with everyone? You know, there's a bunch of people clapping for you in the audience that might actually appreciate a few bucks. Maybe you can just actually give it away since you seem to be doing just fine, right? You know, you go to work every day and you support everybody else.

everybody else, not just your family, right? Not just, you know, your neighbors, but you support the entire audience. You support the entire world because that's what communism is. This is what she's arguing for. We need the collective good, the collective good, the collective good. I'm sorry. You know what? Starts at home.

Okay? You take care of yourself. You take care of your family. You do the best you can with that. And if all collectively we together do our part to take care of ourselves and our family, then guess what? We got something good going on. And I realize there's going to be some parts of society that can't ever get it together,

and you need a safety net for that. Okay, I'm not saying you take any safety nets away. I am saying, though, you don't allow for the corruption that has allowed these safety nets to balloon like they did in California or in Minnesota. You don't allow that. Not in the United States of America. We need to have a clean society where everybody takes care of themselves and their loved ones. And that feeds upon itself and creates a greater good.

And for those that can't, for whatever reason, sure, we can have safety nets, but you can't abuse those safety nets. And the minute that abuse creeps in, as it has, it's got to stop and it's got to be nipped in the bud. Yes, you can, you can criticize the government all you want. You know what, be my guest. What do I do? I, on this show every day, do I not always show you the other side? Because it's important to understand it. And did I not every day, criticize not in the disrespectful way that these people do, Donald Trump, but I certainly criticized Joe Biden. If we get a Democrat in there in 28, you better believe I'm going to be here criticizing that Democrat every single darn day. And that is my privilege and my honor and my right

as an American. All right. Nobody's taking that away from you. But here's the problem for you, Sonny and Anna and Whoopi and Joy and the rest of you. You happen to work in network television. I'm lucky enough to be over here. Okay. And over here, or subscribe, over here, I don't have to be beholden to any kind of rules regarding things like equal time. You on the other hand do. Network TV, and I've worked there, is completely different than cable and completely different than the fun I get to have over here in streaming land, all right? Completely different because it's governed by the 1934 Communications Act. And this is why the view in particular is in a tremendous amount of trouble. And we're going to get to

that. We're going to get to that because Anna Navarro just said something that I think is going to trigger a lot of nastiness, more nastiness, towards the view from this administration in a pretty spectacular way. I'm going to show you that. But first, a message from our friends over to Americans for prosperity, because when was the last time that you read the words that created the United States of America? An extraordinary document, right? Because in just a few paragraphs, our founders declared a revolutionary truth that all men are created equal, our rights come from God, not from government and freedom is the birthright of every American. Those are the words that change the world. And now as we celebrate America's 250th birthday, and you better believe I'm celebrating all year long,

you can take one step, small step, to keep those principles alive. Just join my friends at Americans for prosperity on the Declaration Project. You can take the pledge to read the Declaration of Independence, with your friends at a barbecue, your friends at a pool, maybe, you know, your children before the town parade. Talk about one principle that still matters to you because freedom isn't self-sustaining. Each generation has to understand, it has to cherish, it has to pass it on. So take the pledge today, be part of a national reading of the document that made this great country possible. Just visit A250toolkit.com. Look, I put it up on the screen forward slash Trish paid for by Americans for Prosperity.

Anna, you got trouble. you got trouble girl and it's going to be coming from the FCC because Brendan Carr head of the FCC he was kind of already on to you he already knew that this had become basically an arm of the Democrat party that little show you got the view and in network television you can't do that it's very different than cable or streaming or podcasting etc this is network TV governed by the 1934 Communications Act and you've got to have equal time. So, Anna, when you come out and do things like this... ...and Key Biscayne and downtown Miami, pay attention to that race and go vote because it's going

to matter. And we can actually knock this woman out. There's a great guy running. His name is Elliot Rodriguez. Give him a look. When you do stuff like that and you tell people to go and vote for the Democrat, that actually is a problem. Like, that's kind of against the rules. Here's Breitbart reporting Anna Navarro asks ABC's The View Audience to consider voting for Democrat Elliot Rodriguez in Florida. I don't know if you've been following. There's this whole back and forth because...

Our fantasy commission says for him it's all about the friendships. Cute, Kevin. But I disagree. Like with about 365. I get paid the second my team goes up big with early payout and can cash out at any time before the game ends. No hard feelings, Kevin. Just faster payouts from Bet365.

The home of winning early. Must be 19 and older. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you were someone you know is concerns about gambling, visit connectsontario.ca. Or call 1866 5 through 1,2600. Terms and conditions apply.

Maria, oh gosh, what is her last name? She's the Hispanic woman from this particular part of Florida and the Miami area. Anyway, she is kind of up against it, I guess, in her race. and so she decided that her best tactic would be to stand with migrants against ice. And so she's a Republican. Salazar. Thank you, Salazar. Did you guys get that?

It just came to me. Sometimes, you know, even I have my Joe Biden moments too. We're all at living here, right? So, you know, I hope and pray that the words come to me on any given day, but it's Maria Salazar. So she's in a lot of trouble because she's up against it. And so for some reason, she thinks her best course of action is to stand. with migrants against ice. And so that has made her, I don't know. Maybe it's weakened her with some of the base. Maybe it's strengthened her with some people in the middle. I can't really tell just yet. We'll see how

the whole race shakes out. The president's not too happy about it. But Ana Navarro also is now pointing out the very political obvious thing here, which is that maybe the Democrat could swoop in. And she's telling her viewers, if you live in Florida, go vote for the Democrat. Again, this is against FCC rules. I just want to be really clear. For some reason, these ladies don't understand it. And a lot of people are like, oh, it's freedom of the press. It's freedom of the press. And I'm like, no, it's network television.

I've worked in network television. It was like painstaking, like during an election season. We were so careful. You had to police yourself. You had to be very, you know, very specific with your word choices. And you really didn't want to give a ton of time to one candidate and not the other. Of course, this was a zillion years ago, right? When I was first in network news, it was a while back when people actually tried to be

journalists, even if they weren't. They, like, tried to look like them. And now you get the slop that you get on the view and this Anna Navarro lady doing stuff like this. This isn't the entire soundbite because this is coming back to haunt ABC and Disney in a big way. I guarantee it. And this is like a Republican on Republican crime telenovela going on in South Florida. It's actually the district I live in. So I don't know if you all heard about this, but this Cuban-American Republican congresswoman, Maria Alvira Salazar, right? She, District 27, in Miami, she put out an ad where she's looking straight to camera and she says, Mr. President, some of your immigration enforcement efforts have gone too far.

Really, girl? This is after you voted for the big beautiful bill that funded them, but okay. And so it was astounding, though. It just made me spit out my Cuban coffee to see a Cuban-American Republican from Miami with a paid ad telling the president of, you know, her party that he's gone too far. And I had taken for granted this race because she won two years ago by 20 points. Wow. And this is a district that Donald Trump won by 15 points. So I thought, okay, you know, no point in paying attention. The polls have her dead even. So anybody who lives in Coral Gables in Miami and Keynescane and downtown

Miami, pay attention to that race and go vote because it's going to matter. And we can actually knock this woman out. There's a great guy running. His name is Elliot Rodriguez. Give him a look. Look at what is happening. But that tells you. If this is happening in Miami.

I think it's happening everywhere. It's happening everywhere. Okay. So that is a problem because you actually can't advocate for one side on network television. And what's really peculiar about this particular show is that they still classify it as a hangover from the Barbara Walter todays as being a news product. So it's produced out of New York by the news department. The news department typically does the world news tonight, Good Morning America, they've got their weekend shows, and then they get this. And so it's a little bit awkward because this happens to be a very left-leaning political,

trashy show. And Bob Iger, back when he was the CEO of Disney, was begging these ladies, including Anna, to stop to try and, you know, cover some entertainment or some other stories. And they're like, no, no, no, we want to cover politics. And so they continue to do this. And now it's gotten the attention of Brendan Carr. And Brendan Carr is actually initiating this investigation and calling on ABC to justify why. why they should have access to FCC airways. You see, just to back up for a second, the federal government actually still controls the airwaves.

So again, different than cable, different than streaming. I've explained this to members of my own family because they're like, but Trish, we know how much you defend the First Amendment. And you know, you should be concerned because if they can't say that, then what can you say? And I'm like, no, no, no. Here's the difference, guys. Guess what?

It's party time over here. I get to say whatever I want. I mean, within reason, right? like this is this is certainly not a show like some others. I try and keep it clean for the kids, right? So, but I, you know, I can say what I want. And that's that. But if I were on network television, it is very regulated.

It's actually regulated. You can't be calling for everybody to go out and vote for Democrats. You can't, like all those late night shows kept doing, have every single lefty candidate on your show and make them up into, you know, oh, we're putting them up on a pedestal while, like knocking down the Republicans. all the time that's actually not allowed by way of the 1934 Communications Act. And yet they continue to do it. And this is the news division.

So guess what Brennan's saying? He's like, this is not a news division product. You're going to have to reclassify this thing. And you guys are going to have to get your act together. Here he is explaining what's known as the equal time rule. Again, if you've worked in network television, you should know this. These ladies should know this. But I realized when I started out, it was probably a different time, a different error.

And maybe the producers that are running the, The show these days aren't clued into the law. But I'll tell you, their bosses are at fault for not making this super, super duper clear because Brandon knows the law and he's using it. Broadcast television is fundamentally different than any other means of distributing programming because they are licensed fundamentally by the FCC. You have to operate in the public interest. And when the FCC licenses a broadcast television station, again, different from cable,

different from streaming, different from YouTube, different the newspapers. You're licensed by the FCC. That means the government has picked a winner, and the people denied the microphone are effectively losers. And so the FC uses what's been referred to over the years as a public trustee model. When you are a broadcaster, you're not just looking out for your own narrow, partisan interest. You're supposed to represent and serve the needs of the entire community around you. There's lots of different rules and regulations that come out of that basic concept. One of them is this concept called equal time, which is Congress passed a law that said if a broadcaster is going to have a legally qualified candidate for office on, they have to provide comparable time and placement to all other legally qualified candidates.

This has been a rule on the books for decades and decades, but the FCC seemingly had walked away from enforcing that regulation or broadcasters had simply misread the provision as not applying because the provision does include an exception. for things called bonafide news programs. So if you're a bonafide news program and Congress at the time had things in mind like meet the press, you know, real hard-hitting, you know, journalistic programs, you didn't have to comply with equal time. But again, over the years,

people assumed that everything is bonafide news and therefore the equal time doesn't apply. We put out a public notice a couple weeks ago reminding broadcasters that no, in fact, the equal time rule still exists. There is an exception for bonafide news programming, but you have to demonstrate that you're subject to that.

Okay, see, that's really important. So, again, the view, because it was started by Barbara Walters, and the idea was it should be a bunch of women with different viewpoints from different age ranges gathered around a table talking about the news issues of the day. Because of that, it was classified as a news program, a news show. But it has obviously gravitated towards something entirely different, and it is so hell-bent on being an entertainment news show, that it really can't be classified as a bona fide news program. So as a bona fide news program, you would be exempt from some of those equal time rules. You'd be exempt because the expectation is, as a news program, it is your duty to show both sides.

And you certainly don't want the FCC knocking on your door. So again, my experience in network news was that we tried to make sure that we were very careful and showed all sides. I mean, I'm not going to kid you. The places are extraordinarily liberal always have been ever since probably the Watergate era. funny how we're kind of coming full circle back to that nowadays with Jack Smith. But I would just say that they had a bias that was extremely liberal, but they were at least acknowledging of it. They wouldn't actually do what the view is doing now. That is full on entertainment land. And so he's saying because of that, we need to actually get in there and we need to have

some kind of say over what you guys are doing. You cannot just be nonstop, one side, and one side only. And I agree with that. I mean, I don't think that that is infringing on their rights. I think that's actually using network television appropriately, again, knowing that it is there for the common good of a given society. Why should the affiliates be broadcasting the view out when they can actually get on and maybe do a show with five women from different viewpoints, from different generations in their own local community? And they can, by the way, produce it a heck of a lot cheaper and they don't need to have the live studio audience that gets told to clap on cue nonstop. They could do that and that could be very successful. And that would actually

be a big solution for the networks. That would be bad because they get paid by the affiliates for the content. And the affiliates could say, hey, you know, I got my own content. I got five ladies that want to sit around a table and drink coffee and talk issues and actually do have a difference of opinion and aren't going to sit there and spout one side and one side only. But that gets back to the producers. What the heck of the producers doing only allowing for one sentiment and one sentiment only? I mean, It's not fun to be a conservative on that show. Don't kid yourself. My friend Megan McCain was on it for a while.

Listen, so I'm sure she was thrilled to get the H-E-D-D-L out of there. And remember Elizabeth that used to be on it as well? Like every conservative is like, how quickly can I get off this show? My agent once years ago was like, Tish, do you want to go on the view? And I'm like, are you crazy? Like, have you met me? You think that I would have fun with a show like that? I mean, it's absolutely miserable because it's their way or the highway. Again, Brennan Carr's got a lot of

evidence to point to a month or two ago, he tweeted this out. We're not going to watch the whole thing. We're not because I know that, you know, we can't take it, but just a little sampling, a little smidge of what they are and why now this latest statement from Mount Navarro, which goes so far as to tell people who to vote for, is actually going to really complicate the case that ABC is trying to make in its defense. Disney, He's trying to say, we're not that. And he's got a lot of evidence, including what just happened to say, oh, yeah, you are all that and more. As long as Republicans are in power in the majority, there will never be accountability. There will never be checks and balances.

There will never be oversight. And so if Americans want this to end, want the abuses of power check, they have got to vote Democrats in November. White women, Republicans, I just read a poll that the Suburbanes are now voting Republican. That is like roaches voting for raids. You're not voting for Republicans. You're voting for a cult. Remember that. I want Donald Trump to lose and I don't play today's

that he has the economy argument. This is the kind of thing that I don't even know what to say anymore. If people still follow this fascist pig, then I don't know what else to say. 25th Amendment is time. It's time. It's ridiculous. It's the bill that would force people to have ID when they come to vote. Nobody wants.

The Save America Act, which is ironic, because it's really saving his behind. They are the Epstein File, protection party. You'd be comfortable still voting for Graham Platner if you lived in Maine? I was one of those people, and I said it. If I lived in Maine, I would have plugged my nose and I would have voted for him anyway. I think that we are in a time of existential crisis. We need to be realistic. And as a Democratic Party, we need to win.

We need to get this country. You know what to be. You know what to do on election day. You know what to. This is, we'll be right back. I want to point out, so our friends over at NewsBusters put that together, but that was Brennan Carr who tweeted that. Okay, he sent that out, the head of the FCC,

ABC, if you have not gotten the message by now, and now you have this Anna Navarro going on your show and actually digging in and actually saying, we need to have this Democrat win in Florida, go out and vote for him. That's not helping your case. Not helping your case at all. You see, they are really desperate.

And for some reason, I feel like they can taste it. They feel like they are going to win. And so there's all these things that are happening right now lately that I'm finding suspicious. Maybe tomorrow I put them together. Do you see the new cover of Men's Health magazine for New York Magazine? They've just launched a men's health version of themselves. And they have that Ellen, is Ellen Page?

Yeah, who's on the cover. Ellen Page, a woman. who now thinks she's a man. And I was like, what, what is, what is this about? You think any guy's going to buy that? No. Then someone said, well, maybe gay men want it. And I'm like, no, because, you know, she doesn't really have the,

how do I say, you know, the right equipment maybe for, you know, them to be interested. It's still a woman, after all, who still got female body parts, but just looks like a man. And now you're putting her on the cover. I'm like, what is this about? Right. What is it about, guys? You tell me. I think they think.

they can smell it, they can taste it, they're about to win, they think that they're going to squeeze out some kind of big victory at midterms. I would just say, don't count Republicans out yet. I think that, you know, you look at what the danger is of happening. You look at what they did to 44 members of Congress with Jack Smith, how we began the show to, for example, the caravan that's making its way towards the Texas border, for goodness sakes. And thank goodness we have an administration's like, no, you know, we're going to turn you

way to what we're up against with Iran. And frankly, the real terror threat and risk that we face and obviously the UK faces and every European country faces right now, these are real threats. And I would just say we can't actually allow for those Democrats to get back in. It's a really scary proposition. But it's like they can taste it. I mean, I think that's why the caravans on the move right now. I think that's why New York Magazine is like, let's put off female, you know, forgive me. She considers herself a man. I don't even know. No, I get the terminology all mixed up. This is not done in bad faith when I say that.

Do they call her a trans man or a trans woman? I think it's trans man, and I say that, and I'm not trying to be funny, because somebody will call me out for this, but I actually get it kind of confused. Anyway, she was originally a woman, and now is a man. And that's the cover of the new health magazine. And it's not men's health. I want to be careful, because it's not them, and we don't want to disparage them in any way. It is New York Magazine's new health issue that they have coming out.

I mean, bizarreo, bizarre stuff. Good to have you guys here. I am so glad that you told me about what's going on. I actually already have a note drafted. Thank you so much, Don, for the generosity. You're deplorable, huh? I guess I'm a deplorable, too. Listen, I appreciate you guys telling me what was going on with the feed today.

And I promise you, I actually have a note drafted already to our friends over at YouTube. And they've been going through some kind of funny things with their algorithm, changes, et cetera, that they made recently. So that may actually be what's kind of complicating things from a technical perspective. I'm glad you were able to get into the show. Please double check. Make sure you're still subscribed. And I am going to see you back here tomorrow, right?

again on the Trish Regan show. Don't forget to subscribe. Hit the like button. Let me know what you think. Is it time to get rid of the view? I think so. And I'll see you tomorrow.