The Trish Regan Show - BREAKING: Mark Kelly SPIRALS on LIVE TV as PANIC Over Pending Court Martial Sets In!

Episode Date: December 11, 2025

Mark Kelly is getting hit with a hard dose of reality. The deadline has arrived for the Department of War’s report on whether Senator Kelly violated federal law — and let’s just say… he sounds nervous. Meanwhile, Jasmine Crockett is facing her own reality check. Texas voters aren’t buying what she’s selling — and her Texas Senate ambitions may be over before they even get off the ground. I’ll explain why “Jazzy’s” campaign is collapsing early. PLUS — Donald Trump just changed the entire Warner Bros. Discovery deal. New reports say he’s insisting that ANY sale of the WBD conglomerate MUST include CNN. That move could squeeze out players like Comcast and Netflix — and it may explain why CNN is suddenly trying (I repeat trying) to look less biased. And, the Fed cut rates a quarter point. This is good news for the economy! Join me LIVE — big stories, big implications, and the truth you won’t hear anywhere else. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Time's up for Mark Kelly, ladies and the gentleman. This was the deadline. It's here. Pete Hagseth is getting the information on whether or not they should move forward with a court marshal. And you know what? It sounds like the guy's going to get court-martialed. If you ask me, all right?

If I'm a betting woman, I think that Mark Kelly's in a whole lot of trouble right now, which is why he's increasingly sounding nervous, which is why you have moments ago, the Democrats are getting so desperate as to send a letter to the Secretary of Navy pleading that they kind of reverse this because things have gotten a little bit bad. But you know what? It's because he went there in a way that he shouldn't have. And we've got historical precedent for this. Go back to 1967, Captain Levy.

He was court-martialed as well. We're going to talk about that famous case. Welcome to the program, everyone. I'm Tushrigan. Make sure you subscribe, share it, like, all that good stuff. Make a comment. I'm watching. I'm here in real time in this live show.

We're going to talk about that. We're going to talk about the latest and greatest out of the White House, The president says, you know what, any deal with Warner Brothers discovery has got to include the sale of CNN, which means he wants it to go to David Ellison, which means, yes, sometimes are going to roll at CNN. We'll talk about the implications for the media industry. I'll tell you, it's so much better over here. I got to say, independence is everything. You know, if only this had existed like 20, 30 years ago when I was first. Actually, it probably did. I just didn't know you could actually do it. YouTube, that is. Make sure you subscribe, share, like.

Like, as I said, the big story being one Mr. Mark Kelly, Senator Mark Kelly, who's got himself in a whole bunch of trouble right about now because you see, he decided to take it upon himself to tell everybody not to follow orders. I mean, he didn't know exactly what orders they shouldn't be following, just reminding everybody, hey, don't follow illegal orders. The problem is now that's being viewed is trying to stir up controversy in a way that you simply can't, right, if you're a former member of the military. Well, the Democrats are so worried right now as this investigation winds down.

that they have sent a letter to the Secretary of the Navy, John Feeleon, and they are, you know, addressing their concerns, shall we say, in the last 24 hours of what they think might be coming, for one, Senator Mark Kelly. What might be coming is, in fact, that court-martialing. It came up over the weekend on that lovely network. I don't even know what to call it right now, but I shouldn't feel so bad because apparently Rachel Maddow doesn't really know what to call it either. And she works for it.

Ms. Now, you know, they changed their branding to red, white, and blue, but it didn't make them any more patriotic. Anyway, you see here that the letter basically was an effort to plead with the Department of War to say, hey, you know what? And Defense Secretary, Department of Warhead. Pete Hague said that Kelly didn't do anything wrong. This was just his First Amendment thing. And, you know, by going out there and telling everybody in the military, hey, don't follow illegal orders. that was just don't follow illegal orders. The problem is, when you do it, the way they did it. And boy, they did it with Big Bang, right? It kind of makes it seem like they're going to come after you. They had a

whole sort of rollout for this thing. It wasn't the best rollout, but they kind of kept their momentum up as the days went on. And so you first of all had the quote unquote seditious six with their video saying, oh, don't follow illegal orders. Don't follow illegal orders. You remember right here. I'm Senator Alyssa Lachin. Senator Mark Kelly. Representative Chris DeLuzio. Congressman Maddie Goodlander. Representative Chrissy Hulahan.

Congressman Jason Crow. I was a captain in the United States Navy. Former CIA officer. Okay, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. We hear all their accomplishments, and so you have to take them seriously. Like us, you all swore an oath. To protect and defend this Constitution.

Right now. Okay. To protect and defend the Constitution. And then they go on to say, if for some reason you don't think that the Constitution is protected, then guess what, you don't have to follow your orders. And so it was just kind of a weird thing to do, right? Because it's not like the president has done anything illegal, although if you listen to Amy

Globetcher, she thinks sending the National Guard into Washington, D.C., into California, into, I don't know, you name it. I mean, Charlotte, where is it these days? They are actually really happy to have it, believe it or not, in Washington, D.C. The mayor even said, hey, A-OK. But they're trying to say that that's illegal and that they're going to then come after anybody in the National Guard, that participated in any of that. So they're trying to effectively sow chaos. And that is the problem here. That is the danger. And that is why they're moving forward here with this investigation into Captain Mark Kelly. So it just wound down. Well, it may be, you know, they may get an extension. Let's see. It's six o'clock. We'll see. Pete's probably like, I need it on my desk by 10. He'll want to have an answer for the president. I don't think it's

going to come tonight or even tomorrow. I think they're going to take their time and look through what Phelan has put together, but this is why they put that gentleman from the Navy there in charge of this investigation because of these serious allegations of misconduct dealing with 10 U.S.C. 688 and other applicable regulations, a thorough review of the allegations are being looked at. They're also saying that, you know, there's federal laws for these retirees, if you used to work as a member of the military. And those laws mean that you have to look at things like 18 U.S.C. 2387 prohibiting actions intended to interfere with the loyalty, the morale, or the good order or discipline of the armed forces,

any violations will be addressed through appropriate legal channels. I mean, you can't kind of incite this kind of discord. I mean, I realize they want to do it between the regular old citizens of America and they've been quite successful in doing that, but you're going to go and do that at the military? You know, look, the president sent something out about the New York Times overnight because they were picking on his health. He didn't appreciate it. And then Captain Mark Kelly came back a few hours ago. go with this. There's a lot you could say about this unhinged late-night rant from the president, but the most reckless part is how easily he throws around the word seditious. Whenever something,

or someone says something he doesn't like, it undermines our democracy and puts people in danger. Does he actually think that maybe like that little video he made might have sort of stood to undermine the democracy and perhaps put our troops in danger? I mean, let's go to Buzz Patterson. I think you guys have seen some of this, but you may not have seen all of it. I want to play most of it here. He made this little video. This is the guy that carried the football for Bill Clinton, lived in the White House, had a pretty important job, right? And he's retired now, Air Force, and he's like, this is bad. Watch. I am very appalled at what the Sedition 6 is done with their video. I think it's a violation of their oaths of office, especially in the case of Senator

Mark Kelly. I believe it's a violation of the UCMJ. And I hope that that President Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth hold them accountable. They are violating and they are politically using their positions to undercut the command of President Donald J. Trump and they're circumventing the chain of command. Congress and members of Senate are not in the chain of command. President Trump is, however, is our commander in chief. So I fully support going forward with, whatever prosecutions are warranted and legitimate, and I think they are, on these individuals.

They use their positions, military, and in the intelligence community to expose, I think, and put at risk those of us who serve in uniform. I think that what's going to happen is because they violated the military chain of command. People are going to die. They undercut the underpinnings of the military, which is good order and faith and trust in their leadership. and in my estimation what they did was treasonous and seditionists, and I hope they are prosecuted to the full extent. Whoa, okay. Again, my name is Buzz Patterson.

I served in combat. I've served in war. He's like, look, you know, this is my name. I served in combat. Had a big job at the Clinton White House, for goodness sakes. And I don't think this is the right thing to do, not the right thing to do at all. And, you know, he's not alone. A lot of people feel that way.

But Mark Kelly, I think he sounds kind of nervous. So on Sunday or is it Saturday? He went on the MIS network, and he decided to sound maybe, like he had a little bit of contrition in there. He's like, oh, you don't really think it was going to get this out of hand. Really? Because I kind of think you did. I kind of think you guys had it all gamed out. I mean, you can't tell me you didn't know what you're doing.

This was an orchestrated attempt to try to sow division within the rank and file of our armed services, and it's pretty messed up. And I think you probably should pay some kind of penalty. I don't know what it is, but some kind of penalty. Maybe that retirement that you had, that giant pension. I'm sorry, you know what? You actually have to live by a different set of rules. We all get freedom of speech. Hey, I'm over here commenting.

I get to say whatever I want. Well, within reason, right? I try not to be overly disrespectful to the nation. Like, did you hear me ever talk about Biden the way they talk about Donald Trump? It's really sort of remarkable. and they think it's perfectly fine. I mean, it's so insulting and so insulting to our country. It's insulting to the world the way they go on.

But, you know, TDS has a funny way of working its way through the brain. And that's sort of on display with Mark Kelly. Although, again, I think he's getting nervous. Watch. I've been in combat. I've sunk two ships myself. I've got a lot of questions about how this operation is being conducted. Senator, I'm wondering if back to your potential court marshalling that is scheduled for this week,

is there any conversation amongst you and the other lawmakers who participated in this video about suing the administration back? We had Eric Swalwell on last week, who has taken action against Bill Pulte and the Federal Housing Finance Agency and is suing them on the basis of violation of the Privacy Act and First Amendment rights. Is this something that's under discussion when you say that, you know, the administration wants to silence you and you're not going to be silenced? Well, they're clearly in violation of my First Amendment rights. I said something, you know, that was lawful. It was pretty simple. It was a message that I felt members of the military at this time when you consider who this president is and who the Secretary of Defense is they needed to hear, you know, this pretty basic message.

and there wasn't anything wrong with it i didn't expect this response from the president um but he's trying to silence me but he's not silencing me i'm still speaking out uh i still am because you're such toughy every single day regardless of whether this president wants to kill me hang me execute me or shut me up i'm not going to shut up you know litigation you know coming from me it's not like in my nature you know to do that i'm going to respond i've got you know, a legal team that will respond to... I bet you do. Or DOJ forcefully because they're in the wrong here.

And I think people know it. And it's kind of a ridiculous proposition that because of something I said, they want to either kill me or now prosecute me under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It's ridiculous. He didn't really mean that on the killing thing. Just saying. I'm sorry, Mark, you knew exactly what you were doing. Don't give us that BS. You knew darn well. I mean, it's all politics. It's all theater. Remember the other day I played you that song, but we don't have to watch it again, but you had Scott Jennings going on. God bless him. Kara Swisher's show. She gives Rachel Maddow a run for her money in terms of the haircut, etc. Anyway, this woman is a tech person. Like she used to be a tech reporter, a pretty decent tech reporter until she decided to get super political and now she covers politics oddly. Anyway, although who's talking, right? Like I'm a markets report. We will talk about the Fed at some point today.

But Kara said to Scott, oh, come on. It's just politics. What they did with the 51x spooks and spies in terms of the, oh, that's not Joe Biden's son's laptop. No way. No way. That's just misinformation fed to you courtesy of the Russians and one Giuliani. That's what they told you.

Oh, when it was just politics. What do you think this is? This is just politics. But now you're involved in the military, which takes it to a whole other scale, for goodness sakes. That's when it just starts getting really super duper weird. And I'm sorry, but we can't go there. We can't, even though you keep trying, Mark. So first of all, they confirmed the double-tap strike today, the White House, even though two days ago, Sean Parnell at the Pentagon was saying the entire story was fabricated, made up

out of whole cloth, he said. It seems as though they're saying that Hegstaff gave the order to kill everyone on board, a lethal strike, and that Mitch Bradley, I'm sorry, Admiral Frank Mitch Bradley, was in charge. He's a head of special forces,

and that he gives the one that gave the order for the second strike, the double tap on the whatever survivors there were. Who is ultimately responsible if there is something wrong with the double tap, with the second strike? Well, Jake, I I think it's going to be really important for my committee, the Armed Services Committee, that I sit on, the same thing in the house, to get these people in the room and get testimony from them under oath.

Maybe part of it in a SCIF and a secure facility and part of it publicly to get what the exact real story is. I think this is what happens when you put an incompetent individual in perhaps the second most important job in our country, the Secretary of Defense. Pete Hegseth had no business being nominated. Republicans in the Senate should not have confirmed him. And he's been there for less than a year now, maybe seven or eight months. And this is the result of incompetence at the highest level. Here's a guy runs around on a stage talking about lethality, warrior ethos, killing people. The president even echoes that.

We're going to kill people. We're good at this in the military. We have the most professional and capable military. this planet has ever seen. But when you have leadership that speaks in those terms, that aren't talking about the things that really matter, like training, what kind of combat power do we have? How do we make our military more efficient and effective?

And talking about, like, what are the laws? The law does matter. Well, you tell me, because you fired upon boats in the Gulf War, right? I mean, as a Navy commander. I sunk two ships. You sunk two ships. Are you allowed once the ship starts sinking, and there are survivors, I mean,

The Washington Post says they were clinging to the wreckage, but whatever. They're survivors. We know there were survivors. Are you allowed to then attack the survivors? Absolutely not. See, absolutely not. He says you cannot actually go back for the second strike. General Jack Keene, who I actually trust a whole lot more than a politician like a senator

Mark Kelly, General Jack Keene, a phenomenal guy. He's a longtime Fox News contributor, has said, no, you can go back for a second strike. And in this particular case, and we can get to this. I want to get to this in just a moment. You even have a situation where ABC News had to go on and report. Yeah, they had JAG officers in the room. So they had attorneys in the room determining whether they could do this. They determined that it was a threat and they made the decision, the legally, you know, sanctioned decision to go back and have a second strike. But I just want to go back to Kelly for a moment because as we await

his court-martialing, and I suspect that's going to happen in some way, form or another. Again, the materials have just been turned over to Pete Hegseth and the team of the department of war. But it goes back to 1967, and there was a Captain Howard Levy, who was probably the most prominent case in the Vietnam era of somebody who decided, well, you know, I don't agree with this war and I don't agree with what our military is doing. Therefore, I am going to stand up to it in my way, and I am not only just going to stand up to it, I am actually going to go out and tell troops that they should not be engaging in this. And so that was considered at the time, and it was upheld actually by the Supreme Court to be a form of sedition. You can see the New York Times

actually didn't give it that much ink. I went back and looked at the archives, and it's like some little story. Some little story. The issues went beyond the case of Captain Levy. You know, they go to the war itself, basically, but he refused to direct lawful order. He was in the army and he had this personal disagreement, right, over the commands that he was getting. He did not think that the order was lawful because he didn't think the war was lawful.

And his special forces, he believed, were liars and killers of peasants. So he used his authority as an army doctor to influence enlisted soldiers telling the troops that, you know, the special forces are bad and the U.S. was committing atrocities and that they shouldn't support the mission. And so it was concluded by the Supreme Court in Parker v. Levy that that actually was not a form of free speech, but rather by sort of trying to challenge the chain of command, that was actually political agitation. So in that case, you know what? That guy, Levy, let's take another look at him, he crossed the line. Here's an article in some education product on the project online where they're talking about how he is a physician,

faced a court-martial for refusing to train U.S. Special Forces soldiers for Vietnam. And instead of training them, he was actually trying to turn them against the war. And, well, that gave him the infamous title of being someone who was disobeying lawful, So now the question of, you know, can you disobey an unlawful order? Yeah, duh. Of course you can. Okay? Like, nobody's debating that.

But like, why are you guys bringing that up? Because nothing's been declared unlawful. So it really seems to me you were pulling what we call in the media business a political stunt. That was a pure political stunt. And yeah, that could be viewed by a lot of people. Maybe even the Supreme Court. as a form of sedition. I don't know, but it was definitely the wrong thing to do. And you can't politicize, for goodness sakes, the military. It's not like anything even happened. They went to the

second strike thing later saying, oh, we knew something was going to happen. It turns out the second strike thing. That's not illegal either. Here is, of all people, Stephen A. Smith, having to defend the president of the United States on that godawful show. We still wonder why that thing is on TV. Let me just give you the prediction. If the Republicans stay in power, it really won't be because it goes against so many FCC violations. This show is utter trash. But nonetheless, I thought Stephen did a really good job defending the President of the United States and defending sort of this rule and law and order and that you can't just go out there and do

what this group of six former intel professionals did, just like you can't do what the 51x spooks and spies did, right, with their big letter to Politico. Oh, this is nothing but Russian misinformation. I mean, Hunter Biden would never have a laptop like this. Yeah, right, watch. So you... And again, this is how you know we're live because I would never allow this in tape.

So you recently accused Senator Mark Kelly, a veteran, an astronaut, of crossing the line for participating in a video reminding troops that they can refuse to follow illegal orders. Okay. Let's see some of what you said, my friend. Sure.

You know better, Senator Kelly. You know better. How dare you do that? You could go to the house. You can put up drawer paperwork. You can try to start articles of impeachment if you think there's something illegal. I mean, damn, it ain't like y'all haven't done it before. You impeached the man twice. Where that gets you? God is behind back in the White House. Had you left them alone since 2020, maybe you wouldn't be back. You don't tell military men and women to ignore an order. from the commander-in-chief? You don't do that. Caffeine's a match, you know? Now, let me just remind you that Pete Hegseth said in 2016, I do think there have to be consequences for abject war crimes. If you're doing something that is just completely unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that.

That's why the military said it won't follow unlawful orders from their commander-in-chief. Now, given the fact that the secretary, himself said that. I'd love to give you the opportunity to perhaps change your position on what you said. I'm not changing the thing. You want to stay loud and wrong?

Well, you could call it loud and wrong all you want to. You're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine. That is so good. I loved it. I loved it. Good for him. I know we're not like Hugh Chance, Stephen, over here,

but I saw the comment about ESPN, by the way. You think he single-handedly tanked ESPN. I forgot that he was at ESPN, so maybe that's like the ABC connection, but they're looking for any conservative. they can find, he's not really a conservative, but hey, you know, like call it out when you see it because that's not okay. And I'm not going to scream at the camera like that. You know, that's not my style. Like Stephen! But I'll tell you, it was not a good move. It was a political move, and I think we're all onto it. So he chose to go super political, and that's just wrong. You know,

Buzz Patterson said it was wrong. I'm telling you it's wrong. Steve even knows it's wrong. And you know who else knows it's wrong? This is amazing. This is amazing to me because I don't think that, you know, there's a whole lot going on upstairs over there for the husband and wife team over at Morning Joe, other than how to cash a paycheck and kind of outlast everyone. But anyway, these two, she seems to disagree with him, but even Joe Scarborough was like, yeah, that was kind of a niffy move. Like, that was not cool. And if I have a criticism of what the Democrats have been saying, well, they fumbled the ball this weekend. But from the very beginning, when they say, you don't, you know, it's such a democratic thing to do. You know, you don't have to follow illegal orders.

You know what a Republican? You can't follow illegal orders. It's against your oath. And it is against their oath. So here's what Senator Alyssa Slotkin of Michigan, who was part of the effort, said yesterday, when asked by ABC News to be specific about what illegal orders are, being issued by the White House. So let's talk right now.

Do you believe President Trump has issued any illegal orders? To my knowledge, I am not aware of things that are illegal, but certainly there are some legal gymnastics that are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything. Okay, so, like, if you don't think there's anything illegal,

then why the H-U-L are you putting out that stupid little video? Politics. Related to Venezuela. Okay. Wrong answer. Oh, by the way, we just seized an oil tanker for anyone interested in Venezuela. This is about Venezuela. I thought the Democrats wanted Maduro out.

Like, I'm getting confused. You can't keep up with them. I get it. It's we want anything that's against what Trump wants. Even if we wanted something in the past, now it's different because if Trump wants it, we don't. I mean, they can't even think straight. I'm sorry, with all due respect. Wrong answer.

Yeah. President of the United States. The commander in chief does have Jonathan O'Meer wide latitude. just does. And the Senate can take that up, but he has white latitude on strikes. As Barack Obama and drone strikes. Ask George W. Bush and drone strikes. But where we know the president has... Okay, that's actually an important point. And I love the look on that guy's face. He's like, I can't argue with the boss here, you know. Morning Joe, he kind of keeps me employed. So I'm going to be careful on this one. But it's a good sort of point that they're bringing up. And I'll tell

you, this is something that Barack Obama was confronted with. I'm trying to see if I have the sound for you, because I'll play it. He was confronted with this, and he stood his ground, and he's like, look, I'm the President of the United States, and I absolutely, this is going all the way back to 2013, guys. So he in 2013 said that, you know, what, civilian deaths caused by his drone strikes will haunt him for the rest of his life. But in fact, those drone strikes were the right thing to do because they helped America. And the goal is to be looking after America. So I have the sound. Let me see if we can get this up for you because I think it's important in light of what everyone is saying, just to remember, right? Just to remember where we once were before the days

of TDS. I realize that TDS is debilitating and it interferes with the brain cells. And you know, all of a sudden you can't think straight. You're just consumed with your hatred for one person. But, you know, the guy that they loved more than anything in the world, here he is in 2013 saying, yeah, the president has the right. Much of the criticism about drone strikes, both here at home and abroad, understandably centers on reports of civilian casualties. There's a wide gap between U.S. assessments of such casualties and non-governmental reports. Okay. Nevertheless, it is a hard fact that U.S. strikes have resulted in civilian casualties. A risk that exists in every war.

And for the families of those civilians, no words or legal construct can justify their loss. For me and those in my chain of command, those deaths will haunt us as long as we live. Just as we are haunted by the civilian casualties that have occurred throughout conventional fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. But as commander-in-chief, I must weigh these heartbreaking tragedies against the ultimate. alternatives. Do you? Because you're president. To do nothing in the face of terrorist networks would invite far more civilian casualties, not just in our cities at home and our facilities but also in the very places like Sana'a and Kabul and Moldavish. You guys hearing what I'm hearing? Where terrorists seek a foothold. Remember that the terrorists we are after target civilians

and the death toll from their acts of terrorism against Muslim dwarfs any estimate of civilian casualties from drone strikes. Okay. So then, what do we say now? Nothing is not an option. What? What? What? You get it?

Okay. So why is it suddenly? Just because they don't like this particular war or somebody had a great cartoon. I think I got this one for you too. Look at this. I'm pulling elements on the fly. Not bad, right? I think I can pull this one for you because I just thought this was sort of funny. Who is this spy? I think I've seen this political cartoonist before. If you can look, it says something,

S.K., something cartoons, but take a look, guys. Okay? So, like, on the one hand, right? All right, I'm just going to put this front and center. It's going to ruin the graphics. But that's okay. It doesn't have to be perfect. Look at this. Hero, you know, when he does a drone strike, and then when the President of the United States and Pete Hexeth order one, Don't do not da, war crime. I mean, it's like completely totally different standard. And not only is it a war crime, but now they're telling you you're going to pay for it. I mean, Gallegos, Senator Gallegos, how do these people get these jobs?

I mean, don't you remember Day when there was like respectable people? I mean, at least they seemed it. Maybe we just didn't see them doing like these little two-minute interviews on CNN where they were just trying to sound as awful as possible. So this guy's out there trying to scare the living and you know what out of it. of everybody. Because he's saying if you're in the military and you follow any orders that you think might be wrong,

I guess suddenly everybody has to become like a Supreme Court clerk or scholar that's just rank and file. Isn't it, Guyagos? ...into Senator Kelly. What is your level of trust in the U.S. military justice system if it were to get that far to handle this? I trust them actually. a lot. And for a couple reasons.

Number one, these are professionals. They are also swearing to the Constitution of the United States. They know that there will be fallout and consequences if they are used in a, you know, a hard, you know, way to basically railroad someone like Senator Kelly, because Donald Trump's going to be gone a couple years. And if you're part of the military that is going after sitting senators, sitting members at Congress, and part of, you know, the representation of government, there will be consequences without a doubt. So, you know, I think there's going to be a lot of officers.

Really, tell us. Tell us why. Because you're going to get back in office and you're going to do what? That would be part of this, you know, potential tribunal if they want to call that. They're going to be looking over their shoulders because they know that Donald Trump will be gone and they will not have that protection. They're going to have to do the safest thing possible, which is follow the Constitution of the United States and you'll be fine. Oh, lovely, lovely. Again, like, I'm going to go back to what I was saying. in last week, I think this is some kind of coup. Because by the way, they don't have a second strike thing here. You know, they're piecing it together. They get Kelly out there, seditious six out there. I'm just going with that, right? We can call them that because I think we're all on the same page here.

I don't know, maybe some of you guys, look, there's no bigger proponent of the First Amendment than me. But when it comes to former members of the military or former members of our intel department, like, I'm sorry, I put a different, like, wait on what they say. So when they try and spin me, I really don't appreciate it. And neither should you, right, because you expect a little more. Granted, they're politicians now. So they're doing what politicians do. Spin, spin, spin. It's all they know how to do is spin. But I'm sorry, you need to be held to a higher standard. And I think in this case, they're going to say with Kelly, hey, we've got to hold you to a higher standard because otherwise, this thing is going to turn into more of a circus than it already is. Right? I mean, especially when

There's no there there, as ABC News reported the other night. Tonight, new information, according to a source familiar with the incident, the two survivors climbed back onto the boat after the initial strike. They were believed to be potentially in communication with others and salvaging some of the drugs. Well, there you go. Because of that, it was determined they were still in the fight and valid targets. A JAG officer was also giving legal advice. This backs up the entire second strike.

Yes, I mean, it doesn't get more crystal clear than that. The mission is take out the boat, stop the drugs, keep this vessel and its cargo from reaching our shore using lethal means. And our amazing military, the heroes of the United States Armed Forces did exactly that. President Trump, Secretary Hague Seth, and this entire government are concerned. committed to finally using our military to defend our people, our borders, our family, our culture, our history, our heritage to defend the United States. We're not going off running around the Middle East trying to build democracies in caves and deserts and in distant sands that have never known democracy.

We're using the military to protect American security, American prosperity, American lives right here where we live, where our children live. Amazing. And again, I'm looking, I'm looking at all of your stuff. And I so appreciate all your comments, guys. I really, really do. I'm looking at Cat Crazy Sam here who's writing, I think the less attempts at division are becoming way more obvious than before seems to me to be one big panic attack. I love how you think. You're like totally in sync with me, Cat Crazy. just moving your thing off of the screen. There we go. Anyway, I agree with you. I think that they're absolutely freaking out. I think that Mark Kelly bit off more than he could chew. And, you know,

he said it. I played it for you in the beginning. He's like, oh, you know, I didn't think it would really incite this much. Discord. What do you think, buddy? I mean, you're trying to, this just reminds me the 51x books all over again, but it's worse. I mean, in that case, they were just saying, it was pretty bad. They were saying, oh, you know, this is misinformation. if you believe what Rudy Giuliani is saying, then you are just perpetuating misinformation. And, you know, how are we to know? And I even say that as a reporter, right? Like, it stops you in your tracks. And it's like, Ben, they're done that. Now you're pulling it again. You're trying to do something again? Like, we're over it. Enough already. And so I think that this is

coming back to hit them pretty darn hard. Not too much you got the Admiral who's about to testify. that they were actually continuing. I think he did testify, actually, that they were continuing with their drug mission. And so if you've got an admiral surrounded by JAG officers, making the call, making the decision that they are still looking at a threat and they need to take out that threat, you're going to tell me that he can't and that if he does,

you're going to then hold his entire team or anybody involved with that responsible because you don't agree with the strikes to begin with, I mean, you know, hey, I mean, I don't think that many people thought that the strikes on the innocence in Afghanistan by one Joe Biden and Anthony Blinken and his entire team were any great shakes, right? Oh, Jake Sullivan, I'm looking at you. Your wife, Maggie, is part of that seditious six from, God forbid, my lovely, live for your die state of New Hampshire. So Maggie's from New Hampshire. Apparently Jake and she bought up a little place in Portsmouth together. My cousin's the mayor of the town.

He probably likes him. He's a Democrat. So what can I say? But Jake Sullivan's there in New Hampshire. He's the former head of the NSC. He's the guy who's trying to tell us, yeah, no problem. Right before that horrible, infamous day in October, oh, we fixed the Middle East. Yeah, you're right, right. Well, it's his team, right, that had the bad intel and they killed innocent people. But, you know, did you see anybody saying you should defy military orders? No. No. And yet they do this. So this is, to me, it's a coup. It is a, it's an attempt at a coup. And I don't say that lightly. But then again, you know, I'm not a senator from Virginia like Mark Warner saying, crapola. That's my new word this week. Like this. Unprecedented disrespect when they were all brought to get a pep rally in front of Hegsef and Trump. This is an administration that's fired. You know, uniform generals from the head of the NSA, the head of defense intelligence agency.

And I think in many ways, the uniformed military may help save us from this president and his lame people like Hegsep because I think their commitment is to the Constitution and obviously not to Trump. And I expect Bradley to adhere to that. So, Senator, let's go a little further on this. What are concerned you have about the galley of these strikes at all? Of course, everybody's concern is about the Constitution. And if you're going to tell me that the President of the United States doesn't have the power to take out, you know, when they're declaring this war on drugs, I think we're inching towards something in Venezuela that, you know, I hope this gets resolved pretty quickly.

You know that we just took the oil tanker today. That news came out just a few moments ago before we came on the air. And we hope that Maduro goes easily, peacefully, quietly away because I think it would be wonderful for the news. the people of Venezuela to have some kind of normalcy back. It's my understanding that Maria Carino Machado, who won the Nobel Peace Prize, and is actually a big supporter of Donald Trump's, she made it out of the country just days before that was announced, and I think is trying to make it to Norway to get it at some point, but she's sort of considered the likely successor there. It's what she's always wanted.

She's told me personally she's always wanted to be the first female president of Venezuela, and she may indeed get that. But, you know, I look at what the Democrats are doing right now. I got to tell us a little freaky. It's a little bit scary. This is not right. That we should not be doing this. We should not be trying to sow all this discord in our military for goodness sakes. What can we say? This is what they do, right? They want to cut off one entire side, even if it means having a coup. I mean, we certainly saw a kind of a coup, if you would, in the financial sector back when President Trump lost after 2020 at that whole ordeal. I mean, you think about the previous administration and Joe Biden, and we have seen these very vague outdated policies and

pressure from politically motivated regulators that have wound up leading to the closure of Americans' bank accounts, specifically, Republicans, conservatives' bank accounts. I mean, heck, they're tapping the phones. Oh, we have to say, what, logging the phones? There's some, like, semantics issue there that somebody's going to call me out on, so I have to be careful on that. But, you know, suffice it to say. They were spying on over 400 members of MAGA, including like eight senators. So, you know, this shouldn't surprise you. I mean, they were cutting bank accounts off, left and right. Eric Trump told me right here on this show that they shut down 200 of his account. So the president comes in, he goes to the way, and he makes the executive order that we're

not going to do this anymore. But it's not enough. And this is why Americans for free markets and I have teamed up in this effort. I appreciate their support here on the show. show. They're one of our sponsors, which is something we're quite grateful for, especially when I get to talk about things that I care so passionately about. But they're thanking, along with me, President Trump, in those efforts to square up this whole debanking thing because it's not right. And you can't have regulators deciding who gets to have a bank account and who doesn't. I mean, it's just not right. So Congress should work with the administration to fix some of these outdated laws. We need that to happen. You need to increase transparency. You need to increase accountability in the

financial regulation arena so that future administrations will not weaponize the financial system again. I mean, that's what it was, right? So to protect the financial freedom of yourself and future generations and your family and your friends, go check out what for free markets.org is talking about. Americans for free markets. We're all calling on Congress right now to advance these critical reforms and strengthen President Trump's leadership on fair access to financial services. it seems like a no-brainer, right? But yet, these executive orders, they can be redone.

Look, I don't trust anything right now. You want to get the law on the books. So go check it out at four-freemarkets.org. Portions of the Trishie Regan show are brought to you by the good folks over at four-freemarkets.org. Jasmine Crockett is like over before she began. You know, we knew she was delusional. We knew she was a little out there. but she clearly has like no grounded sense of self, no sense of Texas, shall we say. And Leslie, if you're watching, I know you'd agree with me on this. She's like, I'm going to have to like move out of Texas. If Jasmine Crockett were going to be elected.

But here's the good news, Leslie, Jazzy's getting nowhere. And I mean nowhere fast because of this new appearance. I showed you an appearance she did yesterday or like the day before we showed it yesterday on CNN, but it got worse last night. It's like worse by the day. She just keeps imploding on live television. If I were her handler, I'd say, you know, Jazzy, let's lay off the TV stuff because you just can't help but do Mild In Foot. So here she is going on with Jakey Boy, Jake Tapper, who I wonder, maybe out of a job, should Ellison go in and buy CNN?

We'll talk about that in a moment because that Paramount deal is a big one and the president just weighed in on it. But I digress. Here is Jazzy on with Jakey talking about how she doesn't need Trump voters. In Texas, nonetheless. You can appreciate that, can't you? Watch. Let me ask you about a quote that you've made that has some Democrats worry about your ability to win statewide. In a December 2024 Vanity Fair profile, you talked about quotes, and I'm going to read a lot of the quotes, just to put it in the context.

Quote, all the complexities within the Latino community, the immigration thing has always been something that has perplexed me about this community. It's basically like, I fought to get here, but I left y'all where I left y'all, and I want no more y'all to come here. If I wanted to be with y'all, I would stay with y'all, but I don't want y'all. She just has the best possible grammar imaginable too, right? This is kind of a long quote, but it's worth hearing and it's worth listening to her response. So just bear with me. Let's watch it together. I'll come into my new home.

It's actually only 30 seconds. It almost reminds me of what people would talk about when they would talk about kind of like slave mentality. And the hate that some slaves would have for themselves. It's almost like a slave mentality that they have. Now, about the time that that was published last year, around a million Latino voters in Texas were voting for Trump. Do they all have slave mentality? No, and that's not what that said at all, to be clear. Really?

Because he just read the whole long passage so we could hear how you said they seem like they have slave mentality, Jazzy. I'm sorry, that's what you said. Your own words are coming back to haunt you. And you're not smart enough to think on your feet and figure out a way out of this one. that every Latino has that type of mentality. No, no, but the ones that vote for people who believe in strong or Trump's immigration policies. So I don't believe that the people that voted for Trump. They're not getting what they need.

Whatever. Jesse, you're not working your way out of that one. I mean, when CNN is coming down on you, and you can't even defend yourself on a network like that, I don't know what to say, but, you know, she's kind of good, just the wrong approach. And anybody that decides to put her up as the nominee, well, you know what? Hey, I'll take that trade all day long. I will take it over and over and over and over again because that's actually really good for the Republican Party. Because I'm sorry, Texas has not changed that much. And this is no Beto, okay? Or Beto, Beto, however they say his name, O'Rourke, he's like checking all the boxes there. He's got Spanish, he's got Irish.

Hey, not bad. Anyway, Jazzy is like a whole other breed. And she thinks that what plays in New York City is going to play in Texas, and you know that's wrong, right, Leslie? Leslie knows that's wrong. New York City and Texas couldn't be further apart. Watch. Let me tell you something.

Mandami has not backed down whatsoever from his rhetoric against the president in the Oval Office, he stood there and he said what he said about him being a fascist, yet he was able to win those voters. So Democrats that believe the only way that you can win is by being soft and sounding like a Republican, that is not true. What people are looking for are people that are tough and are fighters and are going to fight for them. Hmm, like you, like you, like you're going to fight. You know, the last I heard, Jazzy really wants to spend her time in her apartment working, up her lines that she can then use on camera or in social media to try and, you know, start up some controversy. Hey, look, the woman has just been redistricted right out of her district.

And if you look at the map of Texas, we're looking at bright red everywhere for days and days and days, right? The red, red, red, red, red, red, red, red. So how are you going to win an election when you don't even want to pretend that you care about Trump voters? When you look at people who are here legally as Hispanics and you say, well, you guys are just a bunch of slave mentality folks. I mean, you're basically cutting off a whole lot of people that you're going to need, Jazzy, if you're going to pull this thing up. You can't run a Mamdami campaign. You don't have enough college-educated hipsters from Brooklyn out there willing to pound the table for you. So, you're kind of, you kind of screwed. All right? And you don't get it. That's the funny thing about it.

This is the one from the other night. She's, I mean, the woman's absolutely clueless. it's actually dangerous to have somebody this stupid and not just in Congress but certainly in the Senate. How will you make voters who previously voted for Trump, particularly given that you have been an outspoken critic and he has inserted himself, just take your campaign video as is. He has inserted himself at every turn when it comes to your commentary.

How will you convert those who are supportive of him to voters for you? Yeah, I don't know that we'll necessarily convert all of Trump. supporters. That's not our goal. Do you need to? Our goal is to definitely talk to people. No, we don't. We don't need to. Our goal is, woo, we don't need them. We don't need them. We're going to double down on reparations and this, not in the other. Let's listen to the rest of what she says. Make sure that we can engage people that historically have not been talked to because there's so many people that get ignored specifically in the state of Texas. Listen, the state of Texas is 61% people of color. We have a lot of good folks.

that we can talk to. We know that when Beto came really close, Beto, who is a progressive, we know that he got 65% of the Latino vote. So what did they do after that? They specifically went after Latinos. We know that he got close to 90% or right there at 90% of the African American vote. So honestly, what we need to do is start talking to the vast majority of Texas. I think my message is very much a mainstream message. I don't know who disagrees with the fact that affordability is a real thing except for the president. who says it's a democratic hoax. But when somebody goes to the grocery store nowadays,

whether it's in East Texas or whether it's right here in Dallas, Texas, or whether it's in Austin or West Texas, let me tell you, they are looking at those grocery prices and they are thinking we deserve better, knowing that we do the amount of trade that we do in the state of Texas. Yet right now, there are these unwarranted tariff wars that is directly impacting us, knowing that we do agriculture big in Texas.

We do everything bigger in Texas. But we do ag big. and understanding that we are hitting record-breaking bankruptcy filings by our farmers. Listen, my message is real simple. I'm looking out for you, your survival, and the survival of your kids as it relates to affordability, being able to actually go and access health care, being able to send your child to school, being able to afford a roof over your head. If that's not, you know, what Trump supporters wants and fine.

I'm just laughing at your comments. David's like, keep her talking, keep her talking all day. long. Steve says, Jasmine's looking for a job on the MS network, the Ms. Network, right? You're right. I think that's exactly. She knows this like, this is not going to work in Texas. But, you know, if she can become the new Joy Reed, of course, it didn't work out so well for Joy Reid, right? Maybe she's got a future at something. I mean, it's unbelievable. Oh, and one of you, this was good, this was good. Who said that she had, oh, who said that she had the new, on candy? Gloria Gainer hairstyle.

I mean, big hair, right? But, you know, hey, she figures she's going to win in Texas. Nothing against big hair. I've had my share of big hair over the days, too. You know, you'd be amazed what they can do at Fox. I mean, the amount of teasing and hairspray that goes into that. I'm not quite capable of that on my own. Anyway, Gloria Gainer hairstyle.

I don't know. She's over before she started. And I think that there's something to that, that she's actually looking for her next gig and the gig is not going to be in politics, the gig is probably going to be in media, and she's hoping to either get a gig on the view. But, you know, they kind of have that stacked already. You get a lot of libs on there. MTG, Marjorie Taylor Green may have a better shot at that one.

Jasmine, I'm thinking maybe you can work something out with Versaunt. Versant, it's about to be spun off because nobody wants it. It's like a hot potato. Nobody wants MSNBC. Just like nobody wants CNN. And literally nobody. Now the president's saying, well, one of you has to take it. It's a hot potato and you know where you're going to do a deal unless somebody takes it. I'll go more on that story coming up. But before I get to that, a quick shout out for another one of great sponsors here on the Trish Regan show. And that would be balance of nature. Balance of nature is great. They actually have a whole health system that I wanted to tell you about because it's actually on discount right now, 50% off. The whole health life system. You can get it for life. 50% off limited time offer. you go to balance of nature.com. Use my code, Trish, to claim this offer. They have all kinds of really good things there. I mean, you know, look, it's hard to get all your fruits and veggies,

definitely for me, for a whole variety of reasons, like one being that I couldn't possibly cook that much in any given day. But you want to get a variety of nutritional things into you, right? And 31 different fruits and vegetables, that's kind of hard to argue with. They have all kinds of, I mean, they have ingredients like in the whole health system anyway, flaxseeds, cinnamon, turmeric, mango, pineapple, wild blueberries, shataki mushrooms, spinach, kale. I mean, I could go on and on. The balance of nature, whole health system actually includes 47 ingredients, a total 47 ingredients of 100% real whole foods, whole fruits, I should say, vegetables, spices and fibers, perfect for

your daily routine. So check it out. You can get 50% off right now. with code word Trish at balance of nature.com. This would be the whole health system for life. New and existing consumers, customers can lock in the whole health system at $79.99. $79.99. $79.99 per order for life.

And if you cancel in the future, I guess you actually lose that price. I have to say that, but it's a pretty good deal right now. So try and lock in. All right. I told you things are rocky at CNN. Things are really, really rocky at CNN and they're really not happy about the latest and greatest out of the White House. look at this. Okay, so there's this company called Paramount. You know it, right? They just bought

CBS and CBS is reeling, right? The CBS News Division doesn't know what hit them because now Barry Weiss is in there who left the New York Times and a huff because she said they weren't reporting really fairly and she's really done an excellent job at trying to be more fair and down the middle of the fairway. I mean, it's hard in that business. I'm just going to tell you because I think nobody really trusts the media. They don't trust these institutions and they're looking at them and saying, well, where do you stand, right? And there's a feeling that because we've been burned for so long and we have that you can't really trust any of these institutions. So Barry's there to try and, you know, bring back the trust, build back the trust. We wish her well. I think it's hard,

especially in this day and age where you have podcasts you can come to like this show right here. Reminder, subscribe, share, like, make a comment, all that stuff. Careful on the comments. I am watching them. I see the bad stuff too. I, you know, we try and ban you in real time, but I'm not always so quick. Anyway, um, you know, the point is hopefully you're feeling something, right? When you watch this show and even if you're angry with me, even if you love me, whatever, you're feeling some kind of reaction. I think that people are going to a lot of news sources and podcasts where they, they feel something, right? So this medium has changed drastically. And what do you get at something like a CNN or a CBS?

Lately, it's just a whole bunch of one side and one side only. I mean, you see that the New York Times, too. I can't even take it seriously anymore. Scott Besant was great the other day. Did you see him? On that thing with Andrew Ross Sorkin from the New York Times. He was having his deal book conference. And Scott Besant looked him straight in the face and said, you know what, this is no longer the paper of record. I'm sorry, but I don't take it seriously anymore. I don't read it anymore. And I'm like, wow, you know, I know what that feels like. And I read a lot of different things, but the New York Times is not so high on the list anymore. And increasingly, I've lost faith in it. I've just lost faith in it.

Just like, I'm losing faith in the seditious six, right? You know, people that used to work for the Intel Department that now are in politics that should be above some of the nonsense, but they're not. And this is what's happened in the media. And so now we hear Paramount, which has taken over CBS and CBS News, is trying to buy Warner Brothers Discovery. And Warner Brothers Discovery does not want to get bought by, you know, that MAGA guy, David Ellison, who bought, Larry Ellison's son, by the way, who bought Paramount.

And they're like, no, we don't, we don't want anything to do with this. And one of the interesting things about this deal, I'll just say, is that David Ellison is the only guy standing that wants CNN. God bless him, who the heck knows why, but he's like, I can do something with this. So more power to him. And as a result of that, he's factoring that into his bid. And he's putting him at like, okay, this is kind of a long, it's a little bit dense. But for those of you that like business news, you'll appreciate this.

Let's watch it together. Ellison is like, you know what? I'm going to value this thing. I said yesterday a buck 25, but his number is even lower. Here we are with him talking about his offer because David Zaslov over at Warner Brothers Discovery was like, I'm not talking to you. I'm not going to you. I'm not talking to you.

I'm looking at Netflix and I'm looking at Comcast. So you can buy it and you can shut it down, but you don't have to buy it. Like somebody's going to have to, they're not going to sell Warner Brothers discovery. Now, there will be questions about whether or not the president has this kind of say, but it doesn't look good from an antitrust perspective because don't forget, the DOJ has to sign off on this. So if you're doing a deal, you want the most secure possible path, right? If you're a shareholder, you're like, okay, how much is David Ellison offering?

He's offering more money than the other guy, Netflix. He's offering more money than the other other guy, Comcast, owner of NBC. But even Comcast is like, we don't want CNN either. Heck, we're spinning off MSNBC. So nobody wants it. It's the hot potato. The only one that's willing to take it is David Ellison. So from an antitrust perspective, just keep in mind, if you want to get the deal done

and you're a shareholder, you want that deal done. You don't want to be long out, you know, and the deal doesn't close because the DOJ says we're not going to approve this thing, that this is a violation of anti-trust. trust. And so that's what has come up. Well, apparently the rumor mill has it that David Ellison has promised Donald Trump that he would fix CNN, which might include getting rid of some of those network stars that the president is not too fond of. So I want to play for you what David Ellison, again, this is the guy whose dad is Larry, who's really good friends, one of the wealthiest men in the world, really good friends with Donald Trump.

Donald Trump likes these two. And I think Trump would like to see, like, the media have some kind of normalcy returned. I mean, it's hard. As I said, Barry Weiss has her cut out for her. But nonetheless, this could be interesting. Let's listen to David. Our offer is $30 a share, all cash, $41 billion in equity that's backstopped by the Ellison family in Redbird, $54 billion in deal.

But it also includes what's... Oopsie, Daisy. I fast forwarded. That's a big deal. Okay, so he just said he's going to backstop that with his own family's wealth. And as I pointed out, his dad's like one of the wealthiest guys in the entire world. With commitments from city, Bank of America and Apollo, we have faster regulatory certainty to close.

Okay, that's because translation, they know Trump. They got Trump on speed dial. Trump wants them to have it. Okay, so they've got much more certainty in being able to close the deal. They get the money and they get the, the, the, the, the problem. president and that probably means less antitrust issues. So they're the ones to go with, hello, hello, bored. David Zazlov, you really hate the guy that much. You're not even willing to take his call. You rush to do a deal with Netflix. You could be in trouble, you know,

because you have a fiduciary duty. Do you not forget to your shareholders to get the best price. And guess what? David's got the best price. And our deal is pro-consumer. It's pro-creative talent. It's pro-competition. And we believe that when you actually, to further contextual, There are $30 in cash, or sorry, $30 a share is basically $17.6 billion in cash more than the $23 in share that they signed up. It's like so superior. It's not even funny. You're not.

Obviously, you're paying for global networks. Their deal doesn't involve paying for global networks. Okay, what is global networks? That's going to be like CNN and some of its other cable networks that they're going to spin off because they can't figure out how to make money with them. He's willing to take them on. Again, he's willing to absorb the hot potato. So watch.

It gets interested. Trade is its public company. Which, by the way, also figures very prominently here in trying to determine what the overall value of the respective deals are. Because there are 2775, including obviously the stock portion of their deal. But it also includes, well, what's global networks? Is it a $2 stock? Is it a $4? What do you see?

Because that can go a long way in terms of at least determining why the board may have said, no, we think Netflix is superior. So respectfully, we think that basically that's valued at a dollar a share. Why a dollar? So if you look at Versa and where the median of all of this is, it's about four and a half times. You have to get to five times equity value or more to basically get to the kind of $3 plus that you're claiming. But again, I think the most important thing to go back here is, look, we're sitting on Wall Street where cash is still king. We're offering shareholders $17.6 billion more cash than the deal that they currently have signed up with Netflix. and we believe when they see what is currently in our offer,

that that's what they'll vote for. Yeah, I mean, but you know that nobody would even know about this offer if he didn't get out on TV and, like, broadcast it everywhere, because behind the scenes, the CEO, I mean, that's pretty awful. The CEO of Warner Brothers Discovery was ignoring his text messages because he had already done a deal with Netflix. And the thing is you still, right up until the very last moment, you have this obligation to do the best deal for your shareholders. And even if you politically are more aligned with Netflix, I'm sorry Warner Brothers Discovery.

You got to go with the, you know, the one that's offering the most and like has the most secure path to getting the deal done. And yeah, it might mean that Jakey boy and a few others are going to be out of a gig because the president's out there saying, hey, you got to take. you got to take the red-headed stepchild, CNN with you. All right. It's got to happen. And then David's on with David Faber over at CMBC. Another one of my former colleagues, it's getting a little weird. I feel like I know everybody in the media business right now.

David's a good, good guy, but, you know, I'm sure he's getting, I'm sure he's getting pumped with information from the other side. Let's be clear. because when you start questioning, oh, the valuation, oh, we really think it could be worth this. You think it could be worth that? You think CNN is worth $3 a share? Good luck. Global networks, as they're going to call it. Good luck. You know how much money they're going to be losing? If David can figure out a way and Barry to actually turn that into something, I would be super impressed. Madly impressed. Okay, because the news business, as we know it, is dead over finito.

the entertainment industry kind of feels like it's dead over finito. A source I spoke with yesterday morning who knows David Ellison and has worked with him on deals in the past. You know what, this guy's really smart. This guy is thinking about entertainment and video and all this stuff in a whole new way. He's got the tech background, obviously, giving his dad. And I think there's going to be infinite opportunities in the future for content creation. And a lot of it's going to come down to the individual. You're not going to have the big institutions anymore.

But so how does the institution diversify away from that, but still play some kind of role in news gathering going forward? Those are the things that they're going to have to ponder. And David's out there saying, hey, I'm willing to take it on and ponder those things. And I'm willing to pay you a premium for it. So how does he not get the deal done? I think you will. I think you will.

That is my prediction. It's going to happen. We should put a note out on this. Reminder, Rob, if you're watching, 76research.com. That is my company I hold with Rob Horton, a brilliant investor who spent decades on Wall Street. running mutual funds and now picks our stocks alongside me. I wanted to make sure I had somebody who was really good at numbers though. I mean, I'm not bad at numbers, but let's face it, I've been on the front lines reporting on all of this for the last couple of decades while he has been

actually crunching the numbers and making the decisions on investment. So we have three portfolios, model portfolios over there at 76 Research. You can get the newsletter that we put out. We actually are unveiling a whole additional component to that newslet. that's designed to track Mag 7 stocks because they're kind of the most important stocks in the universe right now. So we want to have a separate thing just for that. So you would get the 76 report plus the mag 7 report. Get that newsletter. Go to 76 research.com. Use my code word dollar. It's a great Christmas gift as well. Um, so check that out. You can in addition, I should point out, uh, sign up for the model portfolios. And then I think you get the 76

research report for free, uh, if you get one of those portfolios. So lots to look at. It's a dollar a month for the first two months. Use code word dollar. It goes to $9.95 thereafter. But this is really fascinating. I mean, Paramount is making a huge bid. And my prediction is, ladies and gentlemen, David Ellison is going to win the day. Not just because he has the president on speed dial. Okay. That's, I mean, that helps. I know it shouldn't, but it does help. And if you're a shareholder, you're like, oh, but this guy can get it over the finish line, right? on the antitrust side, because they're still going to have antitrust issues in terms of what's going to come up, even with Paramount and Warner Brothers Discovery, CNN. But the idea that they have

this good relationship, I think, is going to be very helpful for the deal. And I think ultimately, it is going to mean bye-bye to a lot of those anchors that have made their careers at CNN, but have such obscene bias. Either that or they're going to put. put them off into some kind of section where you can have that bias, right? Because I can have bias here all day long. And I do. And I tell you about it, but I always try and be fair. And there's no sense of fairness, if you would, in some of these media institutions anymore. I mean, you saw what Margaret Brennan did the other day. And by the way, she works for Paramount right about now. Oh, Margaret. This was not good. She had Scott Besson on the show. And Scott Besson went on to talk

about his concerns over Ilhan Omar. Ilhan Omar, who, let's face it, is not exactly a stand-up person, at least, you know, from my estimation on the character front. And, you know, Besson made it very clear that he was pretty concerned. I mean, he's now at the point where they're doing a full-on investigation into whether or not there was any terrorist financing activities. And she wasn't having it. Take a peek. The president told you, though, this week, to look into Somalis who, quote, ripped off that state for billions of dollars. He said they contribute nothing. What exactly are you investigating?

Well, Margaret, to be clear, the initial fraud was discovered by the IRS, for which I'm the acting commissioner, is discovered by IRS criminal investigations unit. This was not an endogenous thing that the state of Minnesota decided we had to go in and clean up the mess for them. and this is part of the continued cleanup. A lot of money has been transferred from the individuals who committed this fraud, including those who donated to the government, governor donated to Representative Omar

donated to A.G. Ellison. But they've been transferred to something called MBSs. And those are... Mortgage back security. Sorry. Transferred to what? These are money, the Bureau, services and they are wire transfer organizations that are outside the regulated banking system.

And that money has gone overseas. And we are tracking that, both to the Middle East and Somalia, to see what the uses of that have been. Okay. But you have no evidence of that money being used to fuel terrorism at this point, which is what some conservative writers are alleged. That's why it's an investigation. We started it last week. We'll see where it goes. But I can tell you that, you know, it's terrible. You know, the representative Omar tried to downplay it, said, oh, it was very, the, you know, it was very tough to know how this money should be used. You know, she was gaslighting the American people.

Well, we'll talk to her. Yeah. But, you know, when you come to this country, you've got to learn which side of the road to drive on. You've got to learn to stop the stop signs. And you've got to learn the not to defraud the American people. Wow. Wow, he just smoked her. That's like, that's like a trick that anchors use when they're like, yeah.

It's like a teacher, right? Like an annoying grade school teacher. You're done. I'm not going to hear from you anymore. We're going to talk to her. We're going to get the truth. And only the truth from Ilhan Omar. Good luck.

I mean, that was unbelievable. You got the Treasury Secretary of the United States of America. It was like one of the smartest guys in the world. By the way, took down the bank of England. This is like no joke. He is brilliant when it comes to finance. By the way, we've got lower interest rates today. You may have seen down a quarter of a point that's good news for the economy.

Look, I think our economy is actually doing okay. I think it was necessary to get these lower interest rates. And we could probably go even lower at some point, which is interesting for me to say, right? Because I'm very against money printing. But I don't think that's our worry right now. I think we've got to kind of get things moving. We do have inflation that's come down drastically thanks to Donald Trump.

And that's all good news. But as for Ilhan Omar, my gosh, I mean, she's, she's a really, I think she's actually in a lot of trouble between us. I think the other person that's in a whole lot of trouble would be, oh, you know who I'm talking about, Timmy. Timmy Wals is in so much trouble right now because you see, you've got whistleblowers coming out saying, oh, we, you know, we were on to him. They're saying we, we knew what he was up to, we actually warned him and his chief of staff, but they didn't do anything about it. And Timmy's response is an interesting one. I think you're going to get a kick out of this because Timmy somehow thinks, if we can find

it here, that this is really just because he's so masculine. Oh, I kid you not. He went on with Gavin Newsom, who apparently has a podcast now, because, you know, all the cool kids have a podcast. I don't think anybody actually watches. That's going to cut. He needs some political money, sort of gooseing that one, shall we say. Anyway, Newsom has him on, and Walt says to him with a straight face that he's intimidating because he's so masculine. Tampon, Tim is so masculine. You could have watched this to believe it. But I think this notion of, I think it's this notion of toxicity and masculinity needs to be separated.

and I think it's been conflated. And I think we're going to have to work on that a little bit. And I think there's, look, there is a crisis. I think some of us scare them. I think I scare them a little bit, to why they spend so much time on it. No, I'm serious because I can fix a truck. They know I'm not bullshitting on this.

I'm not putting this in people's grill. I don't know if my identity is not hunting. My identity is not football coaching. My identity is not, you know, a beard in a truck. I'm sorry. I mean, my identity is. is super masculine, but you know, I don't do any of those masculine things. Like, that's okay. Hey, you know what? You don't have to. Okay. But you don't need to sit there like a circus clown

performing like a trained seal for who knows who. I mean, I think we're all kind of wondering just exactly what Timmy was really all about, right? And in spite of the headwinds we're up against, Minnesota ranks economically, economic growth, happiness, number of people insured, education levels near the very top. So I'll tell you what, I have no interest in having this state look like Oklahoma or Mississippi. And if folks are going to commit crimes here thinking because our generous spirit and our programs that we have is going to give them some kind of cover, they are satisfied. mistaken. He's trying to sell like a tough, tough guy on what's been going down. But Ilhan's district, as you know, has been accused of stealing at least a billion.

They're estimating it could be $8 billion. And the interesting sort of wrinkle in all of this now, and we'll have more on this on tomorrow's show. You know, I've done a lot of work in my career tracking money to terror organizations. And this is a big deal. So one of the problems that you have in the Middle Eastern culture is a system called Hulwala, and this is how they transfer money, and it's sort of word of mouth, it's family connections, clans, et cetera. And it means that the Huala network, which does donate

some of its proceeds to terror organizations, is not allowing for that money to have been transferred overseas via those wire services without skimming something off the top. So even if you've got Ilhan saying there's no way, you know, that any of this would have been transferred overseas, gone to terror financing, I don't think that she can really, really say that and be confident in that because of the Hulala system. And this is what Treasury is going to find out. And by the way, Treasury knows this. So they're going to find out some bad stuff.

She was asked about it. I think we have the sound. Of the 87 people charged all but eight are of Somali descent. And that has added to the spotlight being put specifically on your account. community. Why do you think this fraud was allowed to get so widespread? I want to say, you know, this also has an impact on Somalis because we are also taxpayers in Minnesota. We also could have benefited from the program and the money that was stolen. And so it's been really frustrating for people to not acknowledge the fact that we're, you know,

we're also, as Minnesota and as taxpayers, really upset and angry about the fraud that has occurred. Right. We're victims, too. She wants to make sure that you guys know. We are victims, too. Look, you know, her allies, and I'll tell you, the media is refusing to cover this. no wonder the president wants a new team over at CNN for goodness sakes i mean the media absolutely refusing to cover this sort of shocking because they had a show on last night you know that one that scott besant is so kind to go on and and they they just completely blew off the reality that is her connections to all of this they completely ignored it and it's sort of like guys i mean, enough already. You can't just ignore the truth so vehemently. And I think that this is going

to come back to haunt them rather significantly. If I can find the sound, I'll play it for you. Otherwise, we'll get to it tomorrow, I promise, because I think it was pretty stunning to CNN absolutely positively refuse to acknowledge what Ilhan Omar's connections are. Now, we're not saying that she herself sent the money, but we are saying, look, you actually have a problem here because of the Huala system and any money that was siphoned off for fraud that was going back to these places. And we're talking about countries like Somalia elsewhere in the Middle East, that is actually going to be tagged by the network for terror funding. And so there's sort of no way that you can get around that. Anyway, I'm making a note to bring that soundbite with me

tomorrow because I want you to see this. And this just once again reflects upon the utter insane media bias. I don't know how you can sit there with the straight face and try and tell us that she didn't have anything to do with this at all. That she, forgive me. You might be able to say that. That's not actually what went down. She's saying that they have no connections. The anchor of that show is like, well, she has no connections to those people. And it's like, have you seen? The photos all over Instagram? Have you seen the reports? I mean, she had her big dinner when she won, hosted by the one of the guys who got convicted of five million bucks. There was another guy. It was three million bucks. He was one of her staffers, for goodness sakes. So don't tell me that she doesn't

know anybody or is not connected to anybody that's involved in this massive fraud. It's just, it's, you lose me. Okay, you really, you've lost America. Nobody's watching you CNN. And there's a reason for that. There's a reason for that. Anyway, so good to have all of you guys here. It's an important time. These are important times. I keep saying, you know what?

We are on the front lines of history right now. We really and truly are. And so I love being here with you. Thank you for all you do to keep this channel and this show going. Make a comment. Let me know your thoughts. Make sure that you share. Make sure you hit the bell.

So you know when I am here live every single day. I am, not always at the same time, usually late afternoon, but I'm always here and I will always be here. This is so important that I think you hear fresh perspectives. And we cut through this bias that's out there because it's so massive and it's so significant. And frankly, it's so dangerous. So thank you for all you do to make this channel a success. It gives you a voice as well. We're in this together. You know it. All right, we're going to be back tomorrow with more on the Hawala Network. and more on how, I don't know how Ilhan Omar and Tim Walts don't take some responsibility for

what's about to come because this money, a lot of it was going overseas. I'll see you tomorrow.