The Trish Regan Show - 🚨BREAKING: Letitia James Faces NEW Federal Investigation Over Campaign Payments!

Episode Date: January 10, 2026

BREAKING NEWS: Federal Prosecutors are reportedly investigating financial transactions involving Letitia James and her hairdresser. HEAD TO HTTPS://SQUARESPACE.COM/REGAN for 10% off your first purchase of a website of domain using CODE: REGAN. Meanwhile, a boycott of McDonald’s? After the fast food giant was caught on tape not allowing Fed Agents into stores in Minneapolis? This comes as Marriot and Hilton both crack down on Minnesota franchise owners. And - Conan O’Brien is throwing some serious shade at Jimmy Kimmel. Plus, Trump is very serious about Greenland… and Denmark finally seems to be willing to sit down and discuss the situation. Trish Regan has the latest on Denmark’s disaster as the administration pushes forward with its effort to purchase Greenland. MORE SPONSOR LINKS: https://oneskin.co/Regan USE CODE REGAN for Up to 30% Off 🔔 SUBSCRIBE to support independent journalism: ▶️ https://Youtube.com/TrishReganChannel ✅ JOIN the Team for exclusive content and perks: ▶️ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBlMo25WDUKJNQ7G8sAk4Zw/join 📈 For financial insights, subscribe to The 76 Report: ▶️ https://76research.com — Use CODE: DOLLAR for a special offer. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Gosh, I've sort of missed her, haven't you? I mean, Leticia James. Where have you been, honey? In the news cycle. So much going on. We hadn't heard anything about Latisha James until, well, just about now. Welcome to the show, everyone. I'm Trish Rigan.

Yeah, Latisha James is back in the news because the feds are launching some kind of investigation. According to New York Times, an investigation as well as CBS News also reporting this, a federal investigation into her campaign finance. Apparently, they think there might be something funny going on with the hairdresser. We are all over this here today. New allegations about Letitia James that are being probed. Meanwhile, meanwhile, I mean, we got the left kind of exploding, if you would, all over the country, in blue cities, all over the country.

And I'm not, you know, justifying anything that happened. Obviously, this is a tremendous tragedy in Minneapolis and the two shootings that we saw in Portland. Huge, huge tragedy. But I am going to say that they are taking this. They are seizing the moment in a way that, frankly, is not healthy for the country. And I would argue is bordering on complete bedlam and a kind of civil war, if you would. Denmark, meanwhile, oh my goodness, watch out, watch out, watch out. Looks like Greenland may just get an offer.

It can't refuse. And I mean, it really can't refuse. Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Trish Rican, good to have you here. Make sure you subscribe, share, like. It's really important. Make comment both here in the live chat and after if you're watching the replay. Make it down below.

I see everything. Believe me. Okay, Letitia James, like I said, I mean, I kind of missed her, dare I say, I've been lately, right? Well, Latisha James is back in the news, and apparently the feds aren't given up here. They're looking at her right now because they think there may possibly be, I want to be really careful. Nothing has been, in fact, implied or suggested just yet, but they're looking at the hairdresser, because the hairdresser apparently was getting a lot of money from the campaign. And apparently it wasn't all for hair.

Apparently she was an event planner as well. Well, the hairdresser has quite a interesting situation and quite the hair. You know, you'd think with all that hair, she could have done a little bit of a better job on Tissie Babe, right? I'll never get this right. Lysada, Lysada Marsh has known Ms. James, apparently, according to the New York Times, Lysidal Marsh, Ms. Marsh, we'll go with that. The hairdresser has known her for years. And last month, per the New York Times, Ms. March was indicted in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana and charged with bank fraud and aggravated identity theft.

Wow. What a gal? I mean, Letitia only hires the best, right? Theft in connection with the purchase of a Land Rover about three years ago. Court documents accuse Ms. Marsh and her nephew of using the... identity and personal information of an unidentified woman out in Ohio to buy the new vehicle. Okay. So the investigation, and they're calling it an investigation, is in its early stages, but prosecutors are interested in talking to Ms. Marsh, the New York Times reports, about past financial transactions involving Ms. James or her campaign.

And this is according to people familiar with the situation, who spoke to the New York Times, as well as CBS, provided they could protect their anonymity in order to describe this inquiry. I mean, move it to the New York Post. They got a good picture up here of the hairdresser and one Letitia James all decked out in red. The hairdresser, as I said, is being charged with bank fraud and aggravated identity theft tied to the purchase of a land rover because apparently she was using the personal information of somebody who's not been identified out in Ohio. I mean, you can't make this stuff up, right?

As I said, you know, Letitia keeps a really good company. A lawyer representing Ms. Marsh has declined to comment to the New York Times. A spokeswoman from the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Western District of Louisiana also declined to comment. And, well, we don't really know too much right now other than it appears that this particular hairdresser made more than $30,000 from the campaign, which is a little bit odd, right? just a little bit odd because, I mean, does it cost that much to do Tissie's hair? I don't know. $36,000 in all is what they're citing, and they're actually using a 2019 article from the New, from the Wall Street Journal to come up with that number. She was paid $36,000, including $22,000 for what they called a studio. So that's a little bit peculiar. I should point out that

Letitia James has not been accused of any wrongdoing here in relation to one Ms. Marsh, nor has Ms. Marsh been accused of wrongdoing related to the Attorney General Letitia James. But prosecutors are interested in this, in part because of the 2018 campaign for Attorney General making these payments to Ms. Marsh to rent a Brooklyn studio that she owned. They also scrutinized payments to Ms. Marsh related to a musical performance at an Albany, New York political event. So does she sing too? Maybe dance? I don't know.

But I think it's interesting because, you know what, they're not giving up. And by the way, that's what Abby Lolle, the attorney for one Letitia James is saying. Again, here is the lovely Ms. Marsh. Abby Loll, who represents Ms. James, is saying basically, effectively, that they're getting desperate. and this is, quote, the string of failures, a reflection of the frustration with the, quote, string of failures in carrying out President Trump's political vendetta. He characterized the prosecution of Ms. Marsh, who you're looking at is an attempt to shake down people based on their association with Ms. James.

Like their earlier attempts, Abby Lowell says, by the way, he costs a pretty penny, and I guess New York taxpayers are paying part of that. Part of it, not all of it, as we understand. This attack on Ms. James is doomed to fail. The desperation of those working for Trump is palatable and makes it a real stain on this Justice Department that I guess in his view is already full of stains. And by the way, I don't totally disagree with that

because I've been a little frustrated with this Justice Department, as you well know. I've been a little frustrated with Pam Bondi, a little frustrated that they had two indictments that they brought in Norfolk, Virginia, against Leticia James for alleged mortgage fraud, and they seem to have some pretty good documentation. We've been through it multiple times here on the Trish Regan show.

Like I said, I kind of miss the lady. I mean, we've seen it all, right? And yet they couldn't get to first base with that, which makes you kind of wonder. Like, what's going on? Why didn't they have the ability to take that one forward? And you can't tell me it was just a biased jury. I think that you're not putting very good lawyers into the slot. And, Pam, don't get me started on the statute of limitations.

And by the way, Don Backer, if you're watching this right now, I'm right on the statute of limitations. You're wrong on the statute of limitations. I see his comments sometimes in the live chat. And I'll tell you, I've spoken to numerous constitutional attorneys about this, because believe me, if there was a way to get James Comey on what is believed to have been, lies that he told, and we've played the sound bites, right, to Congress while testifying, then we would have wanted to have had that.

That was back in, I guess, September of 2020. he seems to have perjured himself. And you had only until September 30th, 2025, before that statute of limitations ran out. And even though the judge dropped those cases because, of course, Lindsay Halligan, you know, the very attractive Lindsay Halligan, we won't hold that against her, believe me.

But Lindsay Halligan did not have the quote-unquote proper ability to go after James Comey because, they waited too long. I mean, just pure, plain and simple. And this is where I get very frustrated with Pam, because she keeps telling us, okay, we got more, we got more, we got more, and it's like there's nothing there. And then when it comes time that they really might have something, they really screwed up. In the case of James Comey, Eric Seward, who was the U.S. attorney there in Eastern Virginia, I mean, he's hanging out with like Comey's brother-in-law, for goodness sakes, Comey's brother-in-law, is working in the office. Not brother-in-law, forgive me, son-in-law. That's even worse,

All right? This is the son-in-law is working in the office. Eric Siebert never brings those charges. He says, oh, I can't. Well, if it's that big a deal to you, Pam, to get those charges brought forward, I mean, you did get an indictment after all. Then why would you not have been monitoring him and had like a big sticky note on the computer saying, guess what, statute of limitations is coming up? You're not going to have a chance to go back on this one. Right? I'm sorry. They're not going to give you extra time to turn in the homework because you were sick last weekend. Okay, that's this kind of situation. You guys screwed up, it is what it is. So we're now in an environment where Letitia James and James Comey are seemingly off the hook. And I think a lot of people are really tired of that. So, you know, there may be

something to what Abby Lull's saying in fairness, right? I mean, I think they want to get her on something. And now they get the hairdresser in there. And the hairdresser is obviously kind of a sketchy character, if in fact those allegations against her are true, we're talking bank fraud, for goodness sakes. So if they go after the hairdresser, and then that's a way, gosh, it sounds like Rico or something, right? That gets a way to get after Latisha James. They might have something there. What are they looking for? They're looking for any kind of improper or involved misrepresentations, fraud, miscoding of expenses that may have happened in the campaign. The problem with this, I'm just going to say it, is that it still is hard to tag it back to Leticia because Latisha is going to look at you in

say, oh, it was my treasurer on the campaign that did this. So they're going to really have to put something together, if there's anything, they're there. But I think what's interesting is it shows you they don't want to give up. They're going back at Letitia James. We did get news just yesterday, and this is not good news, but it's not bad news. Here, let me be careful how I say this, because it's merely news that tells us that Letitia James could still be gone after, or investigated for what is considered a violation of civil rights. You might be familiar, right, with the case that had been brought against. Here we go.

I just wanted to show you this one as well, because there's a judge there in New York that said the attorney that was investigating Letitia James for possibly have violated one Donald Trump's civil rights. Well, he was told that he's not. not to have that position because he has not been properly appointed and he didn't get confirmed by Senate, et cetera. So the difference here, though, is we're not running up against the statute of limitations, right? We don't have the September 30th, 2025 deadline in the way, which means

that something could still, in fact, transpire there. So again, that judge in New York saying that Trump's acting U.S. attorney investigating Letitia James is serving unlawfully, okay, so fines you now you're going to go out and find another attorney. But that other attorney and other There are plenty of people within the New York U.S. Attorney's Office can continue that investigation. And indeed, I suspect they will. But I do get frustrated. I do get frustrated with Pam. I'm like, well, it's taken so long. Like, why haven't we seen more? I mean, Fauci, whatever happened to Fauci? I kind of miss him, too. I mean, all these people, right? Like, you thought we were going to see something with, and it's not there. I want to tell you, I'm not the only one. I've been saying

this is very disappointing. Pam Bondi, we expected a little bit more. And you know what? I like her a lot. Don't get me wrong. I like her a lot as a person. I think she's terrific on camera and I do think that she has the president's back. However, she can't do this. And maybe it's because it's just sheer volume or maybe it's because she doesn't have all her U.S. attorneys in place. That's one of the excuses we've heard from members of the White House sources tell me she doesn't have all the U.S. attorneys. Well, you know, in that case, I'd be pounded in the table. I'd be holding press conferences saying, we've got to hold their feet to the fire. We got to make sure that we get all our U.S. attorneys in place so that we can properly govern. It's not

right to hold out like this. So there are a lot of, I get it, obstacles that she's struggling with, but nonetheless, some of the sort of basic things, again, statute of limitations and having, she should have gotten rid of Eric Siebert a lot earlier if she wanted to see anything through there. I think those are some things that have been missed, and I'm not the only one, okay? I know a lot of you guys feel that way. And now James Coleman. is saying he feels that way. All right. So let's go to Representative James Comer,

who just sat down with one of my former colleagues at both, well, no, she worked at CBS after I did, but she was at Fox News with me. Wonderful reporter, excellent reporter, Catherine Harage, who has her own podcast now, and I want to share with you what Comer told her about his disappointment in Pam Bondi and what this is going to mean, by the way, from Minnesota.

Here we go. At the end of the day, I've been disappointed in some of the, criminal referrals that are collecting dust on attorney general bondi's desk i've made that very clear with the white house i'm hopeful that we'll see some action soon on uh you know the criminal referrals that that range everywhere from dr fouchy to the biden family influence peddling scheme so uh we've got that but now with respect to minnesota i'm very confident the department justice is going to make uh several more requests they've they've already made several arrests dozens of arrests down there

and they're working on dozens of prosecutions. But that's the tip of the iceberg. And the Department of Justice knows it. Homeland Security obviously is down there. You've got the Department of Ag looking at some of these food programs. So I think everyone in the Trump administration, HUD, all the different agencies are serious about apprehending these fraudsters. So you're confident there will be arrests and criminal charges brought in Minnesota in 2026?

Absolutely. Back to the Justice Department. Has the Justice Department done enough? Well, I would like to see more. I'm an optimistic person. I believe that they're working very hard. And I know the president has a lot of confidence in Pam Bondi. So hopefully they will be more successful in prosecuting some of these people that we've provided congressional evidence that have broken the law.

I'm sure you've seen a lot of the comments on X. This is a very popular chart on X. It says zero arrests for some scandals that are very important to Republicans. Is that what accountability looks like? That's the biggest complaint of every Republican on the House Oversight Committee is there haven't been enough arrest. Now, some of these, some of those issues, I don't know, it's going to be hard to arrest people. With the Biden-O-Pid scandal, what we produced in our investigation is evidence that the, the pardons and executive orders that were signed with the Autopin in the last year of the Biden administration

should be declared null and void. Now, President Trump tweeted after we issued our report that he was going to declare a null and void. But I don't believe the paperwork's ever been done and you're still going to have to go to court for that. But our congressional investigation will serve his basis to uphold the declaration of those pardons and executive orders being declared null and void. Someone for the Department of Justice just has to take it to court. Okay, so someone from the Justice Department has not picked up the ball yet. It appears that way. Okay, well, that must be frustrating.

Very frustrating. Someone, someone, Pammy, from the Justice Department, has not picked up the ball and run with it. And Comer says, yes, it appears that way. Okay, so, look, here's the good news. She's getting sidelined in Minnesota. And, you know, she needs to be, because frankly, I don't think she could. do it all. I mean, and look at what's happening. I mean, every day we're hearing about more money. You're talking about 19 billion in Minnesota, thanks to these various Somali activities that are

problematic. So guess what they're doing? They're creating, we talked about this yesterday, a brand new position just to go after these criminals that stole billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers. And by the way, sent a lot of the money back to Somalia. More on that in a second. But listen to J.D. is we are creating a new assistant attorney general position who will have nationwide jurisdiction over the issue of fraud. Yeah. Okay. So this is the big leagues, all right, which means, you know, Pam Bondi, we've been waiting. We're like twiddling our thumbs here. Wait, wait, wait, and nothing's really happening. We haven't seen any major anything. You know, the indictment you had, they fell through for goodness sakes. So we're waiting. We're not so patient anymore. You've got midterms coming up, et cetera, and you may not have the ability to do what you want to do in a given amount of time. So the window is closing, and I gave her the benefit of the doubt forever, right?

Like, I really did, you guys. And I'm on Team Trump in terms of wanting to Team America, frankly. Not really Team Trump. Let me be, let's be really fair here. If he does something that I don't like, you're going to hear about it. because I care about this country and our economy and our national security. And I will tell you, he's done a lot of really, really good stuff for that. Just look at what the Atlanta Fed is predicting for GDP, 5.4% growth for the fourth quarter.

Fantastic. I mean, fantastic, fantastic, fantastic. We've got unemployment coming down. I mean, it's all good inflation coming down. And you get Venezuela. I mean, loads of good news, right? So there's a reason to be optimistic about Donald Trump. But there's not a reason to be optimistic about his DOJ.

And this is one where maybe, you know, he needs to think broader about who might be best for that position. It's one thing to be good on TV. It's another thing to be running the DOJ. I want to tell you, I don't think Besson's going to put up with this, which is one of the reasons why she's getting sideline. They're pushing her aside and they're going to bring in someone that can really do the job because this is a lot of fraud. I mean, this is like Doge 2.0, right? And Besson is now in the state of Minnesota, where he is and his team are going after the fraud that they believe took place and any suggestions of illicit funding that went back to possibly Al-Shabaab over in Somalia. He's on it.

Listen to him speaking with Laura Ingram last night on Fox. So we're lowering that to 3,000. Oh, good. And we're also targeting the two counties here. And we're going to do enhanced surveillance. And from now on, anyone who wires money out from one of these money service businesses has to check a box saying whether they are on public assistance. And if you were on public assistance, we are going to start pushing that you cannot wire money out of the country. Oh, gosh.

And what if they lie and they don't tell us from public assistance? Well, then... That's a crime lying out of federal form. We're going to follow it up. and we are going to push that you can no longer do that. The American people, our generosity, has been taken advantage of. Our generosity is funding al-Shabaab in Iranian interest, it could be. Well, the money...

This is really bad. The money is supposed to go for alleged asylum seekers and their families and children. And if you were wiring the money out of the country, one of two things must be true. You are getting too much money and your benefits should be cut, or you are part of this conspiracy. Where did that money come from? We're going to find it out. That's what Treasury does.

IRS has a group called criminal investigations. Criminal investigations was the group. Wow. Okay. I've done a lot of investigations into terror financing in my career. I want some awards for it. I will tell you this. When you're dealing with terror financing in the Middle East,

it all goes through sort of a hand-to-hand person-to-person network called the Hawala Network. And because of that, it makes it not untraceable, but more difficult to trace. And I will also tell you it means the terror group, in this case, Al-Shabaab, is taking a percentage off the top, right? Like, there's always a cut that's going to the cause. So they're going to find stuff. And this is going to be bad news for Ilhan Omar. Let me tell you, very, very bad news for Ilhan Omar, as well as the rest of the, well, we can't say she's one of them. But you get my drift.

Some of the people that were backing her campaign that have now been convicted. and sentenced because of the fraud that they were involved in. But Minnesota is a disaster, and it's become a Tinderbox that is now looking really increasingly scary. But let's get back to why you have the Treasury Department there, and why Besson is saying he's going to investigate all these billions of dollars that were seemingly going overseas to some while you're either giving people too much money, right? Or, well, I think you're giving them too much money. if they have money that they can send out of the country.

And Brandon Gill, watch this guy, okay? Smart, young, Texan, and the kind of guy that just brings the receipt every single time he's questioning someone. He's smarter than your average congressperson. Here's Brandon Gill, Representative Gill, talking to one of these Minnesota defendants of her, I say defenders of all the Somalian fraud that. went down, it's good. There's a big difference between 54% and 7% is there not. Excuse me, sir, could I answer the question?

Let me move on. We've got a lot of questions here. What percentage of Somali-headed households in Minnesota are on Medicaid? I don't know. It's 73%. Do you know what that number is for Minnesota native households? Again, you're using the phrase Minnesota native households, but the majority... The number is 18%.

That's quite an astounding difference. I think we would agree. Can I answer the question, please? Let me ask you one more and then we can go on to that. What percentage of Somali-headed households are on welfare in general? I don't know. It's 81%. What about, let me just ask you, after 10 years of being in the United States,

what percentage of Somali immigrant households are on, continue to be on welfare? I don't know. The number is 78%. So even after 10 years, 78% of Somali immigrant households continue to be on welfare. Do you know what that number is for Native Minnesota? headed households? Again, you're using the phrase... Non-Somali immigrant-headed households.

If I can just answer the question, you're using the phrase native Minnesotans, the majority of Somali Minnesotans are, as Minnesotan as any of us, they were born in the United States. It's only 8,000 of the 108,000 Somalian... And nevertheless, the welfare usage is astoundingly different. Let me ask you again, does that make Minnesota stronger or weaker? Again, I'd like the opportunity to answer the question here. So, again, the majority of Somali and Minnesotans are born in the United States, as I understand it. Okay.

Well, what percentage of working-age Somalians who have been in the U.S. for 10 years or more? Ten years or more. How many of them speak English very well? I don't know. About half. The answer's about half. That seems pretty low, doesn't it? Again, I keep trying to...

It doesn't sound like something that makes our country stronger to me, and I think most Americans would agree with me on that. need to move on. Ms. Robbins, when would you say we concretely knew that widespread welfare fraud was occurring in Minnesota? This is good. Okay, so you saw that other guy. She's actually not there to defend them. She's actually pretty much on his side. So this is important to hear as well. But I love the part, you know, are they contributing to the economy? You know, 10 years later, they're still on welfare. We got a problem. I think they've figured out the welfare system pretty darn well for themselves, and we're all paying for it. Listen to Ms. Robbins. There have been reports since 2009 from the Office of Legislative Auditor. I would say the credible reports on child care fraud

started surfacing 2011 to 2013. So for over a decade? Yes, sir. When do you think Governor Walts knew about this fraud? From the very beginning, he was running for governor in 2018 when there were prosecutions going on when there was an OLA report, active cases in the news all the time. And what was the Waltz administration's response? They actually did nothing when they got into office, and Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan had been on the committee in the legislature that had hearings on child care fraud, and when they got into office, they did put $5 million into a little more money, but not

Nothing changed. But nothing. And let me ask you, Mr. Hudson, thank you for being here. Did those who commit this fraud, do they typically vote for Republicans or Democrats, in your opinion? In my opinion, thank you for qualifying like that. I would say they most definitely overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. Do they typically donate to Republicans or Democrats? Not to my knowledge.

In your opinion? If they don't donate to Republicans, they donate to Democrats, in my opinion, yes. Got it. So would you say this is the Somali population is an important demographic for Democrats to win over politically? Unquestionably. Got it. And do you think it would have hurt Democrats' political standing with the Somali population to investigate this fraud? Very clearly. Got it. So in other words, you're saying that there was a political incentive to cover up widespread Somali fraud. Is that right? 100. Wow, 100%. Excellent. Excellent job by Brandon Gill. By the way, he is, you may not know this,

the son-in-law of my friend Dinesh DeSuzza, who's got a wonderful daughter, who is Brandon Gil's wife. So someone said he's Matt Gates without the baggage. That's a good way to put it. He's really smart. I believe he met his wife, Dinesh just who's daughter at Dartmouth. You know, go Dartmouth, New Hampshire, New Hampshire, live for your die. But you think about all this and he's like, hang on. Like all of these people, they're taking all of this out of the system. We knew about it forever. Nobody ever did anything. Never did a thing. In fact, if anything, you had Walt's bragging about the freaking daycares in the last. debate with Vance. I mean, and you think to yourself, oh my gosh, this guy could have won. I mean,

what would have happened for goodness sakes? If he had won, what would have, I mean, we would have been Minnesota on steroids, ladies and gentlemen. That's what he wanted, remember? Passed a paid family and medical leave. You have a child? You. And I had to go back to work five days after my kids were born. This allows you to stay home a certain amount of time. What we know is that gets the child off to a better start. The family works better. We stay in their employers. We get more consistency in that. So Kamala Harris has made it a priority. We implemented it in Minnesota and we see growth. That's how you become a pro-business state. And so a paid family medical leave program, and I will tell you, go to the families or go to the businesses and ask them. As far as child care

on this, you have to take it at both the supply and the demand side. You can't expect the most important people in our lives to take either our children or our parents to get paid the least amount of money. And we have to make it easier for folks to be able to get into that business and then to make sure that folks are able to pay for that. We were able to do it in Minnesota, and I'm still telling you this. We were listed as the best state. We're still in crisis on this. A federal program of paid family medical leave and help with this will enhance our workforce, enhance our families, and make it easier to have the children that you want. I mean, you know, if there's one thing you can be thankful,

for this year and last, it's that that guy is not the vice president of the United States of America, for goodness sakes, because you want to talk about your taxes going up and getting nothing for it. I mean, like the invisible children at all these daycares, for goodness sakes. It's really pretty remarkable. But people want action on this, right? And this is why I say we're in the big leagues now. We've got Representative Luna calling on Comer, calling on the DOJ to move forward with some kind criminal charge against one Tim Walts as well as Keith Ellison for looking the

other way like why were they looking the other way the whole time this was her this week in those hearings saying you know what we got to get down to business chair recognizes miss Luda thank you chairman Comer Honorable Robbins based on your record before your committee when did governor Walls first become aware of widespread fraud in Minnesota social service programs I would assume that he has been aware of it since he ran for office for governor in 2018. By 2017, DHS investigators warned CCAP fraud could exceed 50%.

Was that information elevated to the governor's office? Yes, there was an OLA report. Thank you, ma'am. By 2020, state officials knew feeding our future invoices were fraudulent. We know that payments continue to the AG's knowledge. Did they continue to the governor's knowledge as well? Yes. Attorney General Ellison agreed on tape to fight Minnesota's own Department of Human and Health Services in exchange for Somali political and financial support.

In your personal opinion, do you believe it is a possibility that Governor Walls also made that personal deal or that he at least knew about the Attorney General's agreement? I don't know. Okay. I don't want to rehash what you guys have spent hours answering. We know that there's a big issue with the fraud in Minnesota. So on a number of things, I'd first like to point out. Thank you for being here today. But because of your testimony and because of some of the evidence

that we've seen brought forward, as well as I'm sure the fact that this committee, I assume, at Chairman Comer's direction, will be soon subpoenaing A.G. Ellison. I would like to make criminal referrals regarding Governor Walls, as well as A.G. Ellison. As you know, US Code 371 and US Code 2, which deals with criminalized conspiracies to defraud the United States and establishes liability

for individuals who knowingly aid or abet the commission a federal offense includes willing full blindness or deliberate inaction where duties to act exist. So I will be referring them later on today. Okay. And she did. And she did. And the DOJ has confirmed that they got those criminal referrals.

So Ellison, Waltz, you're on notice. I'm just waiting for Ilhan Omar. More on that coming up because Comer had a few other things to say about her. And he's actually referring her to the ethics committee. Because, you know, how do you go from negative 65,000 to third? $30 million in your net worth all in the span of a year. Pretty amazing, right? We've got total bedlam, meanwhile, going on in this country right now as a result of the Renee Good shooting, which resulted in her death. And as awful as that is, you know, we've talked about this before,

if you're confronted with a federal agent or police officer with a gun, like, you don't speed up and try and take off. And there's new video that came out. today that is from the agent's perspective which shows the car coming straight at him and don't forget, as we learned from J.D. Vance and from others, he had already suffered at the hands of another situation where he was dealing with illegal. And, you know, these things are very, like I said, it's a Tinderbox, okay? It is a Tinder box and it's unfortunate that it happened. But I would also say, you know, what's this lady doing there? And why was she trying to run off like that?

It's just all wrong. It's all wrong. And if we had a better message from law enforcement to begin with, and we don't, you know, from Chicago to Boston to L.A. to Philadelphia, which I'm going to show you in a second, we've had a terrible message. From all the local law enforcement, they are absolutely at odds. This is the resistance.

They hate Trump, anything that Trump does. And so the fact that he's actually trying to get some of the illegals, legal criminals out of the country, that's to them. Violation number one, ground zero, and a reason to resist and to encourage people to resist. And when you encourage them like that, it creates all kinds of tensions on both sides. And yes, results in unfortunate things happening. I want to go to Philadelphia where the sheriff today went off on all of this. made it very clear they are going to arrest anybody that does any such thing, such as what you saw that agent due to Renee Good. Watch.

Good afternoon. I'm Rochelle, the sheriff of the city and county of Philadelphia, and I say her name, Renee Good. Renee Good. Renée Good. Renée Good. Renée good. This should not have happened, but we're here today. Let know that law enforcement professionals, real ones, not the fate made up ice, probably trumps a new army to attack citizens of the United States. Did you hear what I said? No law enforcement professional wears a mask. None.

None. Hmm. Those. Didn't you guys like love masks at one point in time? Just saying? And by the way, aren't you trying to take all all these ice? agents and like take pictures of them and expose them and docks them. And, you know, they're struggling with us.

For goodness sakes, I'm going to get to this story too. Marriott, the Marriott Corporation had to get after their employees because they were doxing people online. This is, you know, this is why they're wearing masks, okay? Because you guys put them in this situation where they're exposed to all of this violence and all of these attacks that are up by so many thousands of percent. Here we go. They're coming to our communities wearing a mask to commit crime.

And thank God for our district attorney. Krasner who say he's going to lock him up and I'm saying now we are not going to whisk you away for them to hide your identity because when you do it there you get arrested there no whisk away for them to hide you none of that here okay so somehow they think that he's being hidden and whisked away and I guess they're trying to prove how they're so much better than Minneapolis and Minnesota because they're not going to allow that to go on in Philly. Let me also share with you what the AG is saying. She referred to him there briefly. He's making it very clear. He's going to, he's out, they're all out for blood, for goodness sakes. This is their like political dream. I hate to say this.

You know what? Because it's so unfortunate. This story really bugs me because a woman's dead. Okay. And I'm, you know, I'm sorry. She had three kids. One of her kids is now totally orphaned because the original husband, I guess she's now married to a woman, but the original husband is also dead. I mean, it's really sad stuff, all right? Like, sad. It didn't need to happen. You don't need to gin up all this anger in people.

But that's what you do. And you're continuing to do it there in Philly, in Seattle, everywhere, all through the country. I mean, Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, for goodness sake, she's now launching some nonprofit of her own because apparently a nonprofit to the way to go. Who knew? Here's the AG.

any ICE agent is going to come to Philly to commit crimes then you can get the F out of here because if you do that here I will charge you with those crimes you will be arrested you will stand trial you will be convicted whether it's in state or federal court it's my office prosecuting it that's how the law works and you You will do your time because Donald Trump cannot pardon you for a state court conviction. Do you hear me ICE agents? Do you hear me, National Guard? Do you hear me military?

You're going to jail if you commit crimes in the city of Philadelphia. You will be accountable. The law applies to all of you. And I know that there are honest, decent, moral law enforcement. officers out there by the bushel, including in ice. This is not for you. This is for any one of your colleagues who thinks they are above the law. So has anyone forgotten about all the people that have died in these blue cities because of, in some cases,

yes, you're dealing with illegals who are also criminals. So that's one problem. And also just the total bedlam that they have anyway. I mean, think about Philadelphia and the dangers you face in Philadelphia, or think about Chicago. Lori Lightfoot, the ex-mayor of Chicago, taken upon herself to now launch this big project where she's going to ask for people to input any information they can about ICE and anything that they believe ICE has done that is wrong. I mean, I'm sorry, this is horrible that this woman died, of course, horrible, and horrible that

there were two shootings now out in Portland. But I went back and I looked at the numbers. Lori Lightfoot, when she was in office there in Chicago, guess what? 17,700 people were shot, more than that. 3,400 people were fatally shot. These were homicides in the city of Chicago. Since Brandon Johnson has gotten to Chicago,

and Chicago's top of mind only because she's the one who's now launching this giant nonprofit and everybody's like, woo-hoo, rah-rah, because the Democrats are like, okay, they're like a dog with a bone. the total number of people sought during Brandon Johnson's tenure so far from May 15th through the end of 2025, so that's what, a year and a half, 4,600 people, 1,600 people have died. So it seems to me that these cities, whether they be Chicago, whether they be Philly, whether they be Baltimore, whether they be Los Angeles, Seattle, you know what you guys need to do? you need to actually focus on yourselves.

You need to actually focus on making it safe in these given cities. And I'm going to point something else out because it really drove me nuts. When Biden was president, guess what, Texas. They wanted to put the border wall back up that Biden was taken down. And they wouldn't let them, even though it was their state. Because guess what? The feds have jurisdiction over who's in the country. So even though Texas was like, we can't handle the influx.

We can't take all these people in. They didn't have a legal leg to stand on because the feds control immigration. So the feds control immigration, ICE, the DHS, and now suddenly they're out there trying to do their jobs and they're getting persecuted for it. And you have the left trying to use this as a political tool. I mean, that's terrible.

And now we've got corporations that finally, in some cases are cracking down on it. McDonald's is risking a boycott otherwise. Did you see what happened over at McDonald's in Minneapolis? They got a big signage on the wall. You know, not on the wall, on the door. You can't come in. If you're part of that ice operation, DHS operation,

you are persona non-gratta at McDonald's. Watch. McDonald's, Mickey D's, really? And this McDonald's in Minneapolis, there's a sign on the door that says ice is not allowed. We couldn't help but notice there's a sign that says no ice on the door. Yeah, just to let you know at the end of the day, this is private property. So you can't just break the law because you're a federal agent.

It's like coming into your house or coming to any other restaurant. There's rules. Did the manager put that on the door? How did that get there? I'm not sure, but it's there. Oh, that's not good for McDonald's. Um, I could see this becoming a bud light situation rather quickly. And it would be a shame, given that the president likes those fries so much. Right? I mean, he likes McDonald's. Well, you guys, I put this out on my shorts feed last night, and boy, you were all lit up. Here's, you know, truly blessed writing. I don't serve burgers and

fries out of my house. I will never eat Mac again. Last time I ate at McDonald's, I got sick. I'm not going to McDonald's again for sure. Mark Cahillow saying no Mac for me in years. It's garbage food. It's $1.00 heart attack food. Program the Dems. That's scary. Yeah, I mean, we just saw it like a ton of comments. A ton of, you know, and this is the threat here, right? to corporations because they all saw what happened to Bud Light. It was not good what happened to Bud Light. You know, Bud Light didn't act fast enough. By the time they tried to do anything, it was way too late.

Kind of upset. I stopped going to McDonald's years ago. Now I can't stop going there, so maybe they're going to stop now. This is why I don't eat at McDonald's. Ice before fast food. We got Hilton to drop a franchise, and now it's McDonald's turn to show us what side they stand on. The ice machine's down too?

Isn't the ice cream machines? Is that it? The ice cream machines never work. the ice machines never work either. Guess this guy, he writes, is their representative now. I mean, this was not good, right, from McDonald's. Now McDonald's is like, okay, we, we are taking care of this situation. They're taking a page out of Hilton's book. They said, we spoke to this franchise owner, don't forget, it is private property in the sense, except that, you know, when you're a franchisee, you sign up. Like, you sign onto a book, a legal contract this thick, saying, I agree,

of this, that, and the other. And so whatever the corporation says, you do. You don't have a lot of flexibility there. So I realize you may not like ice, you may not want them in your store, but you can't prohibit them from coming there unless you're going to get the blessing of the main corporate office. And trust me, they're not going to go with that. They're never going to go for that. So now McDonald's is saying, no, we spoke to this franchise owner, and they are going to now allow federal agents in. So maybe you don't need to boycott them. They're doing the right thing after all.

And so is Marriott, by the way. Marriott found out that they were doxing ice agents at some of the Marriott hotels in Minnesota. Unbelievable. Listen to this. Confirming they have fired the employee who leaked names, emails, and images of ICE agents staying at the hotel. The data was posted on an anti-ice Reddit group

with the caption, ICE staying at resident. in Bloomington and three males and three females staying at this hotel alongside photos of their information. Marriott's corporate office telling Fox News, quote, the privacy and safety of our guests is of the utmost importance to us. ICE is praising the hotel chain for their quick action and pointed out that agents have faced a 300% rise in assaults. That's awful.

A 1300% rise in assaults for goodness sakes. Like what is happening? What is wrong? They're just doing their jobs for goodness sakes, like they always did. I guess just for four years they didn't have to. They weren't allowed to. Biden said, come one, come all. And the next thing you know, you've got millions of people pouring in that we can't account for, that we can't help pay for, that are draining the system. And in some cases, I mean, really draining it. When you go out to Minnesota and you see what's happening with the Somali pirates, for goodness sakes, or Maine, or Washington State, or Ohio,

where we've learned of all of these things going down, and the Treasury Department is going to investigate all of it, which is why they're putting one person in charge of the entire operation to make sure that justice is seen through. Meanwhile, speaking of these corporations that are saying, oh, okay, enough is enough. We don't want to face a boycott. McDonald's trying to come in and say, oh, no, that's not going to happen.

Marriott doing the same thing. And Hilton, as well as we've discussed, right? Because Nick said, I hope I'm saying his name right, Sada went on to Twitter, and he may have a YouTube account as well, he went into the Hilton Hotel that said that they were not allowing anybody from the federal government to be staying there.

And that was exposed. And suddenly Hilton was like, no, no, no, no, we spoke to the property, the owner of the property, that's not happening anymore. It's all good. Well, Nick went in there and he found out, no, it's not all good, okay? Not all good at all.

Here he is. This is earlier this week. I'm actually just covering this person that's talking just out of respect to their privacy, but he had like a hidden camera and you can listen and you can hear what this attendant is saying. It depends because there's a lot of stuff going on right now. Is it what agency is it for using the government? It'd be a department home security. So we're not accepting people.

from immigration, I have agents, DHS, into our property. It's just the management ownership. Okay, I thought that changed today. Was that? I just talked to my, the owner of the building, and he didn't say there hasn't been any changes. So, yeah, it's just policy, you know. Yeah, I mean, that's not your fault.

Totally, totally get that. So they actually said that was, It's like, honestly, this is the most convenient occasion. Right. So they told you no that there's no... Yeah, no immigration. Well, DHS isn't all. Yeah.

There was a statement that they put out, you know, saying that they were... That they accept everybody and... Uh, I haven't been informed. I can call my owner right now if you want. Yeah. And ask them what's... That's probably good, just trying to figure it out. So, because it's...

Ever-Pee Hospitality, right? right? I'm new here. Okay. So he's a new guy. So he goes back. Nobody's answering my calls right now. Okay, so this is, this is Everpeak, though. And they said, every peak hospitality is move swiftly to a drive.

He went back and, like, spent a few minutes trying to call them the owner and apparently couldn't get through to anyone. It is Everpeak hospitality. And so this was a big deal, right? It was inconsistent with our policy of being a welcoming place for it. And he's like, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You know, look. And then here's.

No, no problem, right? You're sure you this. All right, so they lied. They lied. Hilton and the Hinton in out here in Ever Peak Hospitality, lied. Full of shit. And now they are going to, well, let's just say they effed around and it's find out time. They almost got a little bit of a pass the first time, right?

You thought they may have learned their lesson. And this is why I said that their talk is, it means nothing. You know, it's really great that we don't have to rely on the mainstream media anymore, isn't it? Because the mainstream media would never have bothered to have gone to that Hilton and done exactly what Nick did. So good for him. We get a couple of nicks. You get Nick Shirley. Nick saw it forward.

Everybody's like, all the nicks are out doing the job of 60 minutes. It is really good to see. So now the question is, we've got to go back to me. McDonald's, right? You've got to get back to McDonald's and figure out, are they really allowing people in right now? You know, it's just, it's alarming that we've got this kind of bedlam going on, that the left has taken the ball, they're running with it, and I hate to say it, but this is sort of their George Floyd equivalent, right? And Renee Good is going to be memorialized. But I think they keep forgetting one thing, which is that the climate out there, with all.

A lot of these people that feel really crazed, just really crazed. It's getting jinned up by the likes of Jacob Frye, who was swearing his head off and letting the F bombs roll right off his tongue about get the F out, right, of Minneapolis, and it's F this and F that and this anger, right, that they're stirring. It's deliberate because they want Americans to hate Donald Trump and to hate the federal government. So this is not good. It's not good for anyone.

Conan O'Brien actually realizes that. And he got after Jimmy Kimmel because Jimmy Kimmel, oh, he's, you know, Jimmy Kimmel's turned into a political show. I really think that Kimmel is going to go to MSNBC because ABC can't really afford, frankly, his show anymore. And his show isn't funny, and it doesn't rate. And so he's probably looking at a future at MSNBC. And I want to get to that.

I want to get to that in just a moment. But first of all, I got to tell you. So we have a new sponsor on the show, and I'm really excited to tell you about this because it's a little bit weird. Like at first I was like, I don't know if I want to do this because I think a lot of my audience is male and maybe doesn't care. But then I thought, no, you guys have wives, right, and girlfriends. And we do have a lot of women watching. And you have moms.

And so, you know, Valentine's Day is coming up. You may be thinking about what do I get my wife for Valentine's Day or what do I get my girlfriend. and I try a lot of different skincare products. I'm actually, believe it or not, really, really vain. No, not that vain, but a little bit, okay? And so I always try different skincare products, and I get sent to lot of stuff because a lot of advertisers want to advertise on the show

and I'm super picky, like really picky. Pickier than most. I shouldn't be this picky. I should be more of a capitalist, right? Anyway, I'm really picky. And so when, you know, this one came through, I looked at, I was like, all right, well, I'll try it because I like skincare products.

And I loved it. So it's really good. It's really good. And I actually have been using it every night for about six weeks. And I finally said, you know what? Okay. I will tell you guys about this because it's a cool product. I do use it.

And I think it's been great for sort of like hydration of my skin. I drink a lot of water. You know, I get my exercise, all that stuff. But I do think that this is a pretty cool, cool product. So I wanted to tell you about it, and it's called one skin. It's one skin. And it's kind of, you know, like I said, like I try a lot of these different things. And this one really has stuck out at me as being a whole different kind of, you know,

and the other thing I should just point out about skincare, yes, I try a lot of different kinds, but when I find a good one, I do like to stick with it. And I think it's important to stick with it. It's like any kind of New Year's resolution, right? I'm going to take care of my skin. I'm going to stick with it. Well, do you really stick with it? Because if you don't, then that's not really going to work.

This one is really good. I mean, it doesn't beat up on your skin or anything. It really does hydrate, at least from my perspective. And I'm told that one of the reasons it is so good is because it's got this particular former OS01 body, OSO1 face, OSO1I. It's got a specific kind of ability to deliver hydration, barrier strengthening, visible improvements in the skin, they say, with every product. I have used all of them. I've used the body one. I've used the eye one. I actually think it really

does hydrate in a way that allows me to still put makeup on after, which I guess only the girls will know what I mean. Sometimes like moisturizers will get like to beat it up on your face. Anyway, it's great. It's got 10,000 five-star reviews. I'm giving it a five-star review here with you guys. Again, I wouldn't normally do a sponsorship with a company like this except this one is really good. get this yourself or for your significant other. You can actually get up to 30% off. Your first three subscription offers when you use my code. So go to one skin.com. Go to one skin.com. Go to one skin.a.m. up to 30% off with your code after the purchase. They'll ask you where you heard about them. So please make sure you say Trish Regan, R EGAN is your code. Tell them we sent you.

It's helpful for us, of course, on the show, and we appreciate their sponsorship. And I think you're really going to like it. I mean, I certainly do. So again, here you go. Onskine.com, Regan, 30% off. I told you, Conan O'Brien is throwing some shade at Jimmy Kimmel. I mean, serious shade. And I think it kind of had to be said because Jimmy's show, if it was ever funny,

it's certainly not funny right now. It's basically like Rachel Maddo, except he, stands right from the beginning of the show. And all he does is rant on and on and on and on about politics. So you can imagine this week he feels like, you know, he's hit the kit and caboodle of things to complain about. And he's been on a tear going on and on about DHS and ICE, et cetera, and Christy Noem and the president, so much so that now Conan is calling him out. He didn't call him out by name. But if you listen to his soundbite, I'm going to play it for you in a second, You know exactly who he's talking about.

We know, we know, right? Here's Kimmel. We now have the full force of the White House and the commentators who have decided that their job is to support anything and everything their leader says and does, trying to convince us that a mom who just dropped her six-year-old off at school was part of a left-wing terror effort. The deadly incident that took place in Minnesota yesterday occurred as a result of a larger, sinister left-wing movement. clear that she tried to use her vehicle as a weapon mow over and ice agent. A huge SUV with a lunatic woman who guns the gas pedal. When you point a car at somebody, it's no different than pointing a gun.

And when you step on the gas, it's the same as pulling the trigger. And of course, everyone you saw took their cues from the president who falsely posted on social media that Renee Good, the woman who was killed, said she ran over the ice officer, which is clearly not true. I mean, look at the, I don't think anyone with eyes other than him would make that claim. Our secretary of Homeland Security, Christy Knoem, said it was an act of domestic terrorism, which is just flat out disgust. Which, how stupid do you think we are? That's not just an insult to Renee. Good. That's an insult to every law enforcement officer everywhere. They're not trained to do that. And again, I encourage you to watch the video. Blah, blah, blah, blah,

blah, blah. I mean, they were like, there was nine minutes of this. Oh, and then he had Rachel Maddo on his show, just in case you didn't think he was Rachel Maddow enough. I'm telling you, MSNBC's going to be calling you, Jimmy. I think you might actually have a future. I mean, Rachel needs somebody to fill in those other four nights because the other person was it, Pepper and Patty, she's not really getting the gig done. Those ratings are bad, really, really bad. Anyway, Conan O'Brien really throwing some serious shade.

I know who he's talking about. Do you know? listen. I think some comics go the route of I'm going to just say F Trump every all the time or that's their comedy and I think well now a little bit you're being co-opted because you're so angry you've been lulled it's like a siren leading you into the rocks you've been lulled into just saying F Trump F Trump F Trump screw this guy you know and I think you You've now put down your best weapon, which is being funny, and you've exchanged it for anger. And that person or any person like that would say, well, things are too serious now.

I don't need to be funny. And I think, well, if you're a comedian, you always need to be funny. You just have to find a way. And you just have to find a way to channel that anger into a way that is, because good art will always be a great weapon. will always be a perfect weapon against power. But if you're just screaming and you're just angry, you've lost your best tool in the toolbox. I mean, that would be assuming that Jimmy Kimmel was ever funny to begin with.

Like, he ever had that tool in the toolbox. You know, was there ever a time? Like, when he did the man show? I don't know. I don't know. I don't have a lot of respect for the guy. I mean, fishing from the company pond as much as he does. like all the wives, they've all come from his shows. The current wife, the current wife is the

executive producer and the head writer on his show. I remember thinking like when the whole Charlie Kirk thing happened, how could he do that? Like, how do you not have a producer? One person on your team that says, hey, you know, actually this has been disproven. That guy, Tyler Robinson, was a radical, right? Like a radical liberal who hated Charlie, who hated Trump, etc. And yet you're going to go with, oh, he was one, he was a, he was on the right. And nobody on your team actually clarifies that for you. And so you're allowed to promote these lies and misinformation because, you know, you're living in your own little bubble. And then I found out the wifie is the producer of the whole thing. And I'm like, okay, I got it now. So they're just talking their book

at home all the time, you know, and it's like ricocheting, this echo right off the wall. And that's all he hears. So this is his show. And he's now turned into a complete political show that belongs on MSNBC and not on ABC and he shouldn't make as much money, although he's probably looking at Rachel and saying, hey, she does pretty well, what's she getting? What was the latest number? Was it like 20-some-one million? 25, I think, 25 million for one show a week? Hmm, okay. You know, Jimmy's like, I can handle that. Maybe MSNBC isn't so bad. He may make more than that, actually. And they're probably losing more than that on ABC. So one of you guys asking, why is Kim allowed to lie. Well, he may not be for long. We've talked about this before because

Brandon Carr over at the FCC is like, I've had it. I mean, this guy is out there saying all kinds of bad things. And by the way, the affiliates have had it. When the Charlie Kirk incident happened, it was the affiliates that said, hey, ABC, you either pull them off the air and we let things settle down or we are not airing your content. That was. We are not airing. was a big step. So that's a little bit of like market forces taking effect because apparently the phones were ringing off the hook and all these affiliates were like furious, furious that this was on the air. But Brendan Carr is making the point that, hey, you know, there's this thing called the FCC, which I'm now in charge of, and there's this thing called the 1936. Do I have that right?

It might be 39. In the 30s. Communication might be 1934. Communication. Act, I think it's 34, Communications Act, which actually puts the FCC in charge of making sure that these shows and these networks are putting out content that's for the public good, not cable, by the way. There's a big distinction, guys, and nobody in Congress actually seems to understand this. I've talked to you about this before, and I found it really amusing that this woman who decided to take on Brendan Carr, this senator, decided to take on, Brandon Carr, and it was actually kind of amusing because she just doesn't get what actually is going on. And what's going on is that the FCC has the power over the networks. They don't have the

power over the cable companies. And they don't have the power over here's truly, right? YouTube streamers all, we get to do what we want. But the FCC does have a certain amount of power over networks, which is why historically broadcasts were supposed to be much more measured, much more fair, much more even. We know that they're not that right now. Anyway, this senator, she has no clue. And running car just shuts her down. It's good. Will you commit to opening an investigation and to Fox News for its deceptive editing of this clip? Again, yes or no, please, because I have questions for the other witnesses.

No. No. So you're an elected bureaucrat. You're deciding that some investigations should go on and others shouldn't. And are you basing this solely on the target? Or are you basing this? What are you basing this on? Can you answer that question?

This was clearly edited. Why is one edit fine and one edit not in the middle of a presidential campaign? Senator, it's based on the law. The Fox News interview was on cable. There's no public interest standard. There's no broadcast hoax rule. There's no news distortion. There's no role for the FCC there.

Well, I think there is a rule for fairness and the American public understand what's fair and just. You think there's a broad fairness rule that we should apply at the FCC? I'm going to go on to merger threats and Chairman Carr. He's like, I can't believe I have to deal with this idiot. These people are all idiots. They don't understand anything. They have no clue. Anyway, that's the way it goes.

And, you know, I've worked in both broadcast and cable. And now look at where I am over here. And I can tell you there is a difference. Okay, there is a definite difference. But the problem with broadcast now is that the bias is so rampant. And they get, you know, 22 minutes to do their evening news show. And what were they doing? They were like, they're going to just plaster this, guys.

wall-to-wall. And, you know, I'm going to tell you right now, look, and I see a lot of you referencing the actual tape. I can't show it to you on a live show here on YouTube, unfortunately. So I do have some restrictions, you see. I can't show you that video because I'm not able to put into the back, basically, sort of qualifications that show that this is somewhat violent, right? It's indeed violent because you're seeing a woman getting hit. So I can't show you that. but you've probably seen it on Twitter by now. I saw it earlier today, and it does seem to suggest that he felt that he was being threatened

because she's coming straight for him. And so as a result of that, you know, as I said, you've got a Tinderbox situation. He's scared, I mean, he's already been through it, right? He was in the hospital for weeks after having gotten dragged by one car. So now this other car is coming towards him. He's worried that this woman is, you know, he's been dealing with the harassment all day, probably all week.

he's scared, she's scared. It's not good, all right? It's not good, but you shouldn't be, you shouldn't be ignoring a police officer or a federal agent when they ask you to stop. You shouldn't be speeding up and going away. And I don't even understand why she was really at that protest as a mother of three, you know, it's just, it's not good.

Not good in any way, shape, or form. I want to get, by the way, to Greenland coming up because Trump is making them an offer they can't refuse. it may just happen. I'm feeling like, hey, you know, we did Venezuela. What was that last weekend? Maybe we could do Cuba this weekend. Greenland next weekend.

We're on a roll, right? So we've got Greenland coming up I want to talk to you about. And Comer's talk of referring one Ilhan Omar to the ethics committee for an investigation and how she suddenly started making so much money. But first, a quick word from one of our sponsors here, Squarespace. So this is really good for me. really, really good for me. I'm thrilled to welcome them on the Trish Regan show as a sponsor because you know what, I need a website. And so I was on their website as I was looking at them, did I want

them to come on as a sponsor? And I'm like, oh, this is fantastic. Because some of you have gotten on me saying, Trish, you need a website, you need a website. And I'll tell you, I do, but I don't want one that I don't understand how to use because I'm extremely hands-on, if you haven't figured that out by now. I mean, like, there's no one, like, I do it all. This is why I, I, I feel somewhat sympathetico with Trump because I get that he wants to do it all, too. In my case, like, I literally write down to the nitty-gritty of writing our lower thirds, of picking the video, we use everything. I do myself. So when it comes to my website, I want to have that kind of control. I don't want to find out that there's some issue at 2 a.m. on a Saturday, and I don't have somebody that can fix it.

So this was really interesting to me, and I think is interesting to any small business owner. It's Square. You may have heard it Squarespace.com. You can go there forward slash Regan. I want you to use Code Regan because you get 10% off. And again, it helps the show. Alphonse, good to see you here again. He's probably like, Trist, you need a website, right?

This is good. This is perfect. This is like the synergy of all synergies. So I'm going to be working on this this weekend to take a look at it. And yes, I may get some help. But again, I want something that's simple that I can actually use. Oh, I see you're talking about ICE. We'll go back to that in a second.

But you can head over, as I said, to Squarespace.com forward slash Regan for 10% off your first purchase of your website or domain. One of the things that, at least for me, is kind of cool about this is the design. I thought it was really, really pretty. All the designs that they allow you to choose from, that's really neat. They actually partner with Blueprint AI, which is Squarespace's AI. enhanced design partner, wow, or you can choose from a library professionally designed an award-winning website templates. The other thing that they've got, which is important to me, is video. So you're seeing some of the video on their site, and I want to be able to have a

place where I can put my video library from YouTube so that it's all sort of stored in one place. So this is exciting to me. I was going to sort of give you some indication of what the domain was and stuff, but I want to leave that aside for now because let's see me get it all built up and ready to go first. But in the meantime, we are thrilled to welcome them on board here at the Trish Regan show. And I look forward to getting a website out for all of you very, very soon. Again, make sure that you go to Squarespace.com forward slash R-E-G-A-N, because you'll get 10% off your first purchase of the website or domain using Code Regan. And of course, it certainly helps us. Let me go over to what Alfonso was talking about there. Let me see here.

the anti, you know, yeah, that she had trained with some members of these anti-ice groups. That is what we have learned, in fact, from the White House. You know, J.D. Vance was very, very clear with the media yesterday, and it was a very powerful moment. Before we go to, before we go to Greenland, maybe we can play that for you, because I thought that was pretty darn compelling. Do we have it? Maybe not. I encourage you. I encourage to go back and check yesterday's show. But J.D. Vance was really adamant. He's like, you know, the media, you guys are really just disgusting me

because you have only one side. You're not thinking about anything else. But that's to be expected, okay, guys, that is to be expected. And I think that, you know, anytime you go out there and you're trying to challenge a federal agent and you think that somehow you can just speed up your car and go away, like, that's not a... like, that's not a good situation for you to be in. When I was a little girl, my father taught me

four or five years old in New Hampshire, you know, when a police officer pulls you over, it's yes, sir, no, sir, whatever you want, sir, right? Like, you have to be deferential. And even if you're mad, like, you never show that. You really have to dial it back. In that video that you guys are all talking about, she didn't seem mad. And so he seemed actually kind of mad. But Then as it went on, I think he was probably also scared because you saw all of them taunting him. And then at some point she speeds up and it looks like she's coming straight for him. So someone's coming straight forward for you and you got a gun. Like, this is sad stuff, right?

Sad stuff. But again, you know, you look at all the horrible things that have happened in places like Minneapolis or Chicago or Baltimore or any of the Philadelphia. I mean, they've got a lot of problems there, and this is the federal government's job. I'm sorry. You know what? Go back to George Wallace, 1963, Alabama. He didn't want to integrate the schools. Well, guess what? The Fed said, you got to do it. And I understand. Believe me, I understand. You can say, hey, we're not going to help ICE. I don't love that. I mean, I think that if ICE is there and the federal government, you should probably be helping them. But you have that legal right to do that. But at what point does it change into you're actually impeding ice?

This is something that Tom Homan has talked about at length. Because when you're impeding ice, then we're in a situation that's really, really, really bad. And actually is probably illegal because you can't impede federal law enforcement from doing its job. That would not be allowed. And that's what it seems to be they keep trying to do. They keep trying to do because, you know, they feel like they can because they hate Donald Trump. You know, the right did not do this to the left. It's always the left trying to do this to the right.

And now we're like right back in 2020, it's Minneapolis, it's George Floyd all over again, and here we are. Trump is making a new deal for Greenland. Yes, indeed. He's preparing a fresh offer for Greenland. He wants us. He really wants us. And so here's the story that came out from Reuters. They're looking at maybe $10 to $100,000 to $100,000 for each of the residents there.

as they negotiate all this. He says it's important, it's really important, because it's strategically vital to the United States of America. Listen to him speaking about Greenland. I will say this about Greenland. We need Greenland from a national security situation. It's so strategic. Right now Greenland is covered with Russian and Chinese ships all over the place.

We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security. And Denmark is not going to be able to do it, I can tell you. You know what Denmark did recently to boost up security in Greenland? They added one more dog sled. It's true. They thought that was a great move. What would the justification be for a claim to Greenland? Oh, I don't want to talk about Greenland now.

I just say this. We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security. And the European Union needs us to have it. And they know that. Boom. Okay. So simple enough, right? We do need it for national security reasons.

It also has a lot of assets to it that would make it worthwhile to have. But I think the national security thing is the biggest deal of all, right? Because Russia is, well, still a threat, frankly. And he's right. I mean, Denmark would kind of fold, right? So how do we manage this one? Right? It's kind of like Venezuela.

You don't want the Russians, the Iranians, and the Chinese hanging out, three hours off the coast of Florida. It just doesn't work for us. And he's right in the strategic vitality of that area in terms of getting ships back and forth is really, really, really important. And so if you think about Russia and China being a threat in the future, you want to have Greenland as a buffer. Here's Marco Rubio talking about it. Why is the administration not taking Denmark's offer to discuss the situation in Greenland? And will you, will you take military intervention? I'm not here to talk about Denmark or military intervention. I'll be meeting with them next week. We'll have those conversations with them then. But I'm not having anything further to add to that today.

Can you clarify your comments to lawmakers? Does the U.S. intent to buy Greenland? Does the U.S. intend to buy Greenland? Can you clarify your comments to lawmakers this week? Well, that's always been the president's intent from the very beginning. He said it very early on. I mean, this is not new. He talked about it in his first term. And he's not the first U.S. President that is examined or looked at how could we acquire Greenland. There's an interest there. But so I just reminded them of the fact that not only that Truman want to do it, but President Trump's been talking about this since his first term.

The White House has put on the statement last night saying that the military option is on the table. They said the military option is on the table. So is the administration really willing to risk the NATO alliance by potentially moving ahead of military operations? But I think the White House said yesterday is what I will tell you now and I've always said. The President always retained the option. if he, every president, not this president, every president always retains the option.

I'm not talking about Greenland. I'm just talking about globally. If the president identifies a threat to the national security of the United States, every president retains the option to address it through military means. As a diplomat, which is what I am now and what we work on, we always prefer to settle it in different ways. That included in Venezuela. We tried repeatedly to reach an outcome here that did not involve having to go in and grab an indicted drug trafficker. Those were unsuccessful, unfortunately. way. Well, yeah, but they took care of him, right? And his wife. It was a two-for. You know,

this is, this is interesting because at first, you know, he used to talk about this and people thought it was kind of a joke. Denmark would get really upset, you know, the Danes. Don't upset the Danes. I got some firsthand experience with that. Man, oh, man, oh man. So now they're freaking out because this is getting serious. Just listen. to J.D. First of all, Secretary Rubio, I believe, is meeting with the leaders of Denmark and Greenland next week, I want to say it is, but maybe it's the week after that. We'll continue to deliver some of these messages in private, some of them in public. But I guess my advice to European leaders and anybody else would be to take the president of the United States seriously. What

has he said about Greenland? Set to the side the crazy overreactions that I've seen from the press and from certain people in Europe. What is the president said? Number one, Greenland is really important, not just to America's missile defense, but to the world's missile defense. Number two, we know that there are hostile adversaries that have shown a lot of interest in that particular territory, that particular slice of the world. So what we're asking are European friends to do is to take the security of that landmass more seriously, because if they're not, the United States is going to have to do something about it. Yeah. And we don't want to be stuck with that liability, right? And think about what's being offered now. Again, as it's come up,

Reuters reporting this first and leading report putting this out on Twitter. The president is considering paying anywhere from $10,000 to $100,000 per person. I think it works out to something like $5 billion or so. Hey, not bad, right? Look, it's a vital asset. It's one that we've actually wanted for a long time. A long time. You can go all the way back to 1867.

They were trying to do a deal. After we had gotten Alaska from Russia, they're like, okay, you know what? maybe we ought to take Greenland too. And at that time, you had the Secretary of State saying, you know what, this is a resource where each area it's got coal, it's got natural resources, but I guess they never came to a formal offer, so nothing ever happened back in 1910. They looked at it again, though. In 1910, they're like, okay, you know, maybe we could do a land swap.

And this was under Taft. Okay, so President Taft and some American diplomats were floating this idea that they could transfer Greenland to the United States. States and returned for some concessions elsewhere, but Denmark rejected it. Gosh, those stains, as I told you. So then again, in, let's see, so in 1910, they did this, and then in 1946, so at the outset of the Cold War, President Truman was looking at formally offering Denmark $100 million in gold to buy Greenland. Well, the price went up, 100 million back then. That's inflation for you, right? Now we're talking about $5 billion. And then some. In gold to buy Greenland,

citing its strategic importance during World War II, a U.S.-built airfield on the island had actually served for a major refueling point for military planes en route to Europe. So they knew that this was strategic, but it did not happen. So again, Denmark rejected the idea. So as I told you, the Danes are kind of stubborn, all right? So what are you going to do? What are you going to do? Maybe you kill them with kindness.

You just make them an offer. They can't refuse. And then I guess you get the threat of military action in the background. I don't know about that one, but I have a feeling before it's all said and done. We may just get it. We just may get Greenland. Do we want it? In my opinion, we do.

In my opinion, what he's talking about with the threat of China and Russia blocking us from having access to that sea, that is indeed a national security threat. And so when you think about America first and what really matters, that matters. And he'll be blunt about it, right? Just like with Venezuela, he's not going to sit there and tell you, okay, this is all about democracy and freeing the people. I mean, if you get that as an added bonus, it's an added bonus, but he's all about the oil. All about getting the 500 billion barrels of oil that are in the Orinoco region under the ground. Very hard to get out, very tar-like, very hard to refine.

But if you're thinking about the importance of having energy dominance for the next 50 to 100 years, it's good to be in Venezuela. certainly better for us to be there than the Chinese, right? The Trump economy, meanwhile, totally on fire. I mean, the Democrats don't know what to do about this one. They're certainly not going to talk about it because it's very, very good news for Donald Trump. We're talking about an estimate from the Atlanta Fed of 5.4% economic growth, GDP growth, 5.4%. I mean, that's huge.

Just look at what we'd been dealing with, for goodness sakes. You know, they're giving the credit to Scott Besson over at Geiger Capital, a Twitter account. but a lot of it goes to Donald Trump too, right? So a pretty winning team. Q1 was negative.5%. Then you had Q2 at 3.8%, you had Q3 at 4.3% and the projected growth in Q4. I mean, is this not a curve that you love to see or what? 5.4%. And we've had the markets rallying. Ever since we came into 2026, I think there was only one day we were slightly down, and we weren't down much, right? And it might have been only one of the indices. This is what you like to see.

I'll tell you, my friend Steve Moore, brilliant guy, great economist, and has done a lot of advising on Trump's economic team over the years. He said the economy is on fire. This is blockbuster. Listen. My God, we just got a report from the Fed Atlanta Bank that says we grew at 5.3. 3% in the fourth quarter. This is an absolutely booming economy right now. Yeah, booming, booming. And, you know, as I said, this is the trajectory you like to see.

Not to mention, okay, so unemployment's coming down. Inflation at 2.7%. I remember when we were upwards of 9% under Joe Biden. Yeah, because apparently printing money doesn't really work. Handouts to all those Somali daycares, they don't really work. half the money who ends up back in Somalia, right? I mean, none of that works, for goodness sakes. And now you've had a very innovative approach, even to the trade deficit, right? Like Donald Trump, ooh, the trade deficit really gets it.

I mean, he does not like that thing. Well, guess what? We're now looking at the lowest trade deficit for the United States of America since 2009. We're not buying all their stuff. They're buying ours. We're not buying as much as theirs. Wow. Here's my former colleague, really good guy, Rick Santelli, over on CM.

B.C. Huckle up. This is unreal. The movement in this number, minus 29.4 billion. We cut it basically in half. We cut it in half. Just consider this. In March, it was $136 billion.

Right now it's a whisker under $30 billion. We haven't been that small in a long time. I don't have enough records here to go back that far, but you're going back away. And here's the news on why it moved lower. So it moved lower productivity in part, no, forgive me, the trade deficit in part because of all of those tariffs, right? So that's had an amazing effect. When you think of 5.4% GDP growth despite the tariffs, despite the smaller trade deficit, I mean, these things are not at all what economists thought would happen.

So it's shocking people. And it's great news. By the way, we predicted it though. We predicted it the whole time over at 76 research. I encourage you guys to go there. If you're not there, please do me that favor. Use code or dollars. This is my company, my company that I started in conjunction with a very good friend,

Rob Horton, who picked stocks for 20-some-odd years on Wall Street, ran mutual funds, and he is a brilliant stock picker. And I'm not too shabby myself, at least at the macro stuff, right? I get a good sense of where the wind is blowing. And look, the financial media, they're going to just always tell you whatever. I mean, Santelli's a good guy. He's one of the few. But when you look at what was going on, even as we went into Monday, right, coming out of the weekend, we took Venezuela, wow, right? I'm like, I said to Rob at the time, this is great, like King Dollar, right? It's good for the dollar.

You're going to see treasury rates come lower. You're going to see more people pile into equities. You're going to see oil prices go down a little bit because, you know, you're not going to get all that oil out of the ground today, but it's good for sentiment. All the things that would, you know, by the way, it's good for Bitcoin too, because, you know, And now people are worried that you can just pluck somebody right out of their bunker in the middle of the night, right? So there were all kinds of reasons to be bullish. And then I looked at the futures market on Monday morning.

What do we see? Yep, lots of green on the screen right up across the board. And yet you look at what Bloomberg was putting out. And I'm like, oh, come on, guys. You know, you're just so freaking obvious. It's getting annoying. Here they are. You know what?

They're putting stocks, bonds are set for jittery start. I'm like jittery, start. Are you kidding me? Rob said, yeah, you know, the new word for up is apparently jittery. Woo. So the reality is this. Good things are happening. I told you they would.

Good things are happening. I hope that you're investing. You know, whatever we can do to make this a little bit easier for you. Yeah, the markets love this on Venezuela because it shows you that the U.S. is in charge and that we're working to keep that hegemony. for the future. So I know, some people don't like the idea that we're down there, but I'll tell you, the Chinese were, the Chinese were, ooh, what's happening to my shot now? That's a, like, see, here, you know, we're live. I'm back. Anyway, it's, I hope that you go there. I hope that you get

76 research. Go look at those model portfolios too, because we have three of them in there. And I think there's a lot of really good ideas for all of you to be taking a peek at right about now, because we still have some stocks that we like and we believe this momentum is here to stay. It is wonderful to have you here on the show. Gosh, we went long today, almost an hour and a half. Thank you. Make sure you subscribe, share, like, hit the bell

so you know when I'm live and make a comment. Let me know what you think. Greenland, yay or nay, I'll see you guys on Monday. Much more coming your way over the weekend. Until then, have a good one.