The Trish Regan Show - Former FOX Anchor Turned Defense Sec Pete Hegseth ROASTS FOX Reporter on Live TV!

Episode Date: June 27, 2025

Former FOX Anchor Turned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth TORCHES Fox Reporter on Live TV—Poetic Justice! This is a CLIP from the LIVE Trish Regan Show Episode 170 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Other questions circulating about just exactly what has happened here vis-a-vis Iran and the damage that was done. So there's some different reports, and what I would just remind you of is everybody has a bias in this, okay? There are some people that want to say it's contained forever. And we know that, you know, look, you can always rebuild, et cetera. So it's not necessarily realistic to say that, but it's certainly not realistic to say, we got nothing, which is what you're what the media has been saying. I mean, unbelievable. I do recall as recently as Sunday morning, they were flipping out saying the president did not have the authority to do this, number one. And then, number two, they said, well, there's nothing there, right? I mean, there's nothing

there. Remember what Tulsi said a few months ago? There's nothing there. So why on earth would we be doing this? That was their MO. And then, as soon as this leaked report came out of the likes of CNN, which incidentally, one of the writers on this thing also wrote the bit about Hunter Biden's laptop not being anything but Russian misinformation, disinformation. Yeah, one of those reporters who's clearly hooked up with his deep state sources, decided to write this little number saying that really, you know, that not a lot of good was done here and they did not destroy the nuclear sites. I have seen myself intelligence suggesting otherwise, as has the president, as has

has the Secretary of State, as has the Secretary of Defense. So why is it that the media gets so stuck on this? I mean, keep in mind, like the flawed logic, all right, guys? Because hours before this report, they were saying, well, there was nothing there, right? There was nothing there. Why on earth would we be bombing? Because there was really nothing there. We didn't need to do this. Let's question his authority to do this because he doesn't have any intel suggesting there was anything there. And then they get this one and they said, oh, there was a whole lot there and they didn't get it. It's like, guys, make up your mind. I'll tell you this. The market's made up. It's mine. Look at how it's been sore in the last four days. We'll get to

that in a second. But I'm only pointing out the inconsistencies that are really pretty darn spectacular that you're seeing in the media. Well, Pete Hegseth noticed these too, along with the president, along with Marco Rubio. Everyone's noticing this, okay? And he just let him have it. He totally let him have it. He actually let his former colleague at Fox have it, too. We'll get to that. But first up, Pete Hags at totally shredding the media over their inconsistent reporting, but not only their inconsistent reporting, their refusal to actually do any kind of, you know, maybe nice reporting.

Like, hey, think about these men and women that achieved this. Like, why not actually celebrate them a little? I mean, think about World War II days back when we actually had war heroes, et cetera. There's none of that. It's all just immediately, how do we take down Trump? because we have TDS on steroids. Here is Pete Hagseth, Secretary of Defense. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours?

Has MSNBC done that story? As Fox? Have we done the story how hard that is? Have we done it two or three times? So that American people understand, how about how difficult it is to shoot a drone from an F-15 or 16 or F-22 or F-35? Or what it's like to man a Patriot battery? Or how hard it is to refuel.

mid-air, giving the American people an understanding of how complex and sophisticated this mission really was. There are so many aspects of what our brave men and women did that because of the hatred of this press corps are undermined because people are trying to leak and spin that it wasn't successful. It's irresponsible. And folks in this room are privy to that information because of the proximity here in the Pentagon. It's an important responsibility.

And time and time again, classified information is leaked or peddled for political purposes to try to make the president look bad. And what's really happening is you're undermining the success of incredible B2 pilots and incredible F-35 pilots and incredible refuelers and incredible air defenders who accomplished their mission, set back a nuclear program in ways that other presidents would have dreamed. How about we celebrate that? How about we talk about how special America is, that only we have these capabilities. I think it's too much to ask, unfortunately, for the fake news. So we're used to that. But we also have an opportunity to stand at the podium and read the truth of what's really happening. And the reality is you want to call it destroyed, you want to call it defeated, you want to call it obliterated.

Choose your word. This was an historically successful attack. We should celebrate it as Americans. And it gives us a chance to have peace, chance to have a deal, an opportunity to prevent a nuclear Iran, which is something President Trump. Trump talked about for 20 years, and no other presidents had the courage to actually do. Right? I mean, he's totally right. And I keep going back to this.

Just look at what the market's telling you. Dow, S&P, NASDAQ, all flying. I mean, this is amazing, you guys. This is definitely being touted as a success, certainly by the international financial community that believes we're closer to peace. And yet you get the media just going bonkers with their little stories in CNN first and then in, you know, in New York Times. and the rest of them all picking this up saying, oh, we didn't get anything. This was, you know, this was a lousy, lousy deal.

We didn't get anything. I mean, come on. This was rarely, really interesting. So Pete also directed some of his fury, understandable, justified fury, at one of his former colleagues from Fox, who is the Pentagon reporter. Listen to her here as she's asking him questions, and he just levels her. He's like, you're one of the worst, Jennifer. One of the very worst.

Watch. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours? We're going to do it again. That all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Fordham Mountain or some of it because there were satellite photos that showed more than a dozen trucks there two days in advance. Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved? Of course we're watching every single aspect. But Jennifer, you've been about the worst. The one who misrepresents the most intentionally.

what the president says. I'm familiar. I was the report about the ventilation shafts on Saturday night. And in fact, I was the first to describe the B-2 bombers, the refueling, the entire mission with great accuracy. So I take issue with that. I appreciate you acknowledging that this was the first, the most successful mission based on operational security that this department has done since you be here. And I appreciate that. So we're looking at all aspects of intelligence.

and making sure we have a sense of what was where. So why not acknowledge the female pilots that also participated in this mission? The early messages that you sent out only congratulated the boys. So when I say something like our boys and bombers, see, this is the kind of thing the press does, right? Of course, the chairman mentioned a female bomber pilot. That's fantastic. She's fantastic. She's a hero.

I want more female bomber pilots. I hope the men and women of our country sign up to do such brave and audacious things. But when you spin it as because I say our boys and bombers as a common front, I'll keep saying things like that, whether they're men or women, very proud of that female pilot, just like I'm very proud of those male pilots. And I don't care if it's a male or a female in that cockpit and the American people don't care. But it's the obsession with race and gender in this department that's changed priorities. We don't do that anymore.

We don't play your little games. Yes, right there. Good for him. Because that is like taking you down a rabbit hole that's a complete waste of time. I mean, for goodness sakes. Anyway, he clearly has no use for her. He knows her personally. I know her as well.

And look, here's what I'm just going to say. And I'm more to say on this. As a reporter, you always have to be very, very aware, because somebody's trying to spin you someplace somehow. Right? So you have to have your own compass. And I go in with a little bit of paranoia because I just assume somebody has an agenda. And so until I understand all sides, and I've read the documents myself,

I'm not going to sit there and have an opinion that is just what somebody else wants me to should we say in deep state? You got a lot of lousy, lousy journalists out there. You get a lot of lazy journalists, too. And so here they are spoon-fed stuff, right? Spoon-fed stuff by people with clear agendas, Marco Rubio hit the nail on the head when he said this at NATO. He's like, these people in deep state, they have a particular bias. And by the way, let me be perfectly honest, their bias might actually be towards having us in a bigger controversy. They don't care, right? Like maybe the bias is, oh, you didn't get it also.

We got to do even more, more, more, more, more. And then they play that with the media because they know as long as it's anti-Trump, the media will lap it up, right? And they'll do it all day long, singing that chorus. But you've got to understand who is the source of the info, and most importantly, what that person's bias is. So, I mean, I'm going to show you some of the reports that suggest exactly the antithesis of what CNN is trying to tell you. But nonetheless, let me go first to Marco, because the Secretary of State really outlined this well in terms of it's so critical to understand what the motivations of these particular people that are glomming onto particular sentences and highlighting that for the mainstream media that has only one desire.

And that's a take down Trump. Stuff about the intelligence. This is what a leaker is telling you the intelligence says. That's the game these people play. They read it and then they go out and characterize it the way they want to characterize and they're leakers. This is the game they play. So that's number one. Number two, here's a fact.

The conversion facility, which you can't do a nuclear weapon without a conversion facility. We can't even find where it is, where it used to be on the map. You can't even find where it used to be because the whole thing is just blackened out. It's gone. It's wiped out. Then we dropped 12 of the strongest bombs on the planet right down the hole in two places. Everything underneath that mountain is in bad shape. And I refer you to the statement of the IAEA, Mr. Grossi.

You know what he said? He said there was Iran the way it looked today before the attack and what their nuclear program looks like now. Two very different things. They are way behind where they were just seven days ago. Now anything in the world can be rebuilt. But now we know where it is. And if they try to rebuild it, we'll have options there as well. But all this leakers stuff, these leakers are professional stabbers.

That's what they are. They go out and they read this stuff and then they tell you what it says against the law. But they characterize it for you in a way that's absolutely false. There's no way Iran comes to the table somehow nothing had happened. This was complete and total obliteration. They're in bad shape. They are way behind today compared to where they were just seven days ago because of what the president did. And that's good, right?

And clearly the markets are telling you that. So when CNN comes out with this little number, let's go back to it for a moment, saying they got intel suggesting something entirely differently, entirely different. You can understand the frustration of this administration. You have the IAEA assessment, okay, that says totally different place Iran is in today. Meanwhile, you've got another organization. This would be the International Institute for Science and Security.

Let me just show you what they're saying. They're saying overall Israel and U.S. attacks have effectively destroyed Iran's centrifuge enrichment program. It will be a long time before Iran comes anywhere near the capability it once had before the That being said, there are residuals such as stocks of 60, 20, and 3 to 5% enriched uranium in the centrifuges manufactured, but not yet installed at Natazzo. These non-destroyed parts pose a threat as they can be used in the future to produce weapon-grade uranium. So that's one side of things. But then they go on to say, and this is really important because it does suggest your mission accomplished, that it is possible the Iranians tried to move.

the enriched uranium kept at the site, dismantling and transporting some of that installed centrifuges, or at least their rotor assemblies may have occurred, but this is a process that's complex and time-consuming and may have damaged centrifuges. And then this is critical, guys, okay? So here's what we had in the follow-up attack. Israel struck the site on the night of June 22nd, 23rd, reportedly targeting access routes to the facility in order to obstruct access to the Ford O site, but as yet we're unable to confirm the imagery. What I would just say is that's actually pretty important. So not only were we able to take out what was there,

but anything that might have been left over, apparently Israel was able to pretty successfully take that out, at least based on the imagery that we now have. And then this is important, okay? Because they're saying the time Iran would need to build even a non-misical deliverable nuclear weapon has increased significantly. I think this is critical for everybody. And this is a very balanced report, okay?

Very, very balanced. Like, we don't have to say win-win-win, although we did kind of win on this one, but we can be balanced here and still say the administration did a heck of a job because here's that key sentence, that time Iran would need to build even a non-missile-deliverable nuclear weapon

has increased significantly. So take that CNN. Okay? Like, that's a big, freaking big freaking deal. And they just want to spin themselves up and, you know, all the libs are running around saying, well, it didn't do anything. And I'm like, guys, if I recall like 24 hours earlier, you were trying to say that there was no uranium there. Like, we didn't have anything we need to take out, right? That was the story. Remember Margaret Brennan on CBS News on Sunday morning arguing with the Secretary of State trying to say, but why would you do this? Because the Intel

report from Tulsi Gabbard back in March said they didn't have anything. Well, now that same crew over at CBS News and the rest of these places, they're spouting a totally different thing. Because now they're saying, oh, oh, we didn't get it. It's like, guys, you're going to actually pick the side. I mean, the only side these people have is the anti-Trump side. And that they're in lies the problem, right? It's all because they hate one person and one person only. Because you, and I mean specifically you, the press, specifically you, the press corps, because you cheer against Trump so hard, it's like in your DNA and in your blood to cheer

against Trump, because you want him not to be successful so bad, you have to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes. You have to hope maybe they weren't effective. Maybe the way the Trump administration is representative isn't true. So let's take half truths, spun information, leaked information, and then spin it, spin it in every way we can to try to cause doubt and manipulate the public mind over whether or not our brave pilots were successful. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours. Has MSNBC done that story? As Fox?

Have we done the story how hard that is? Have we done it two or three times so that American people understand how about how difficult it is to shoot a drone from an F-15 or 16 or F-22 or F-35? Or what it's like to man a Patriot battery? Or how hard it is to refuel mid-air? Giving the American people an understanding of how complex and sophisticated this mission. They're not going to do those stories. Because they don't want to celebrate this.

And therein lies your problem. You have a media that is so biased against one person that they can't see the forest for the trees. Okay, take the bias away for a moment and actually look at what was accomplished. And you don't have to take my word for it, all right? I'm going to just, I'm going to go back to the market because the market's doing great. The market clearly believes that this was a success. And you know what? CNN needs to get it's, you know what out of it, you know what? because they're just a bunch of bias, silly people

that want to put forward their own bizarre sense of reality that tarnishes Trump. And I'll tell you, the more they do it, the more the American people are just sick of it. I mean, they're now trying to sort of kind of apologize. This is unbelievable. So they got caught, right? They're caught with their pants down

because, look, every other report is suggesting something entirely different than what their little intel is telling them. By the way, those reporters didn't actually read the report. No, they're going on sources that allegedly have read the report and then are like spinning something to them. It's all spin. They're not reading anything. They're just regurgitating a bunch of points that somebody wants to deliver.

And you don't even know what the biases of those people that want to deliver, whether they're just anti-Trump, whether they want to drag us into something bigger. We don't know, okay? And so it's, one, illegal for them to leak, classify, information and two for these reporters to just take it right like little lap dogs oh and now we're going to spin this and then everybody runs wild with it because they just want to hate on trump those in the markets are telling you something else entirely justin thank you for your generosity i'm going to get to some of your comments in the meantime take a look at that little guy he's not so little he's just

little but he's not so little um that is their media person he was like fired by them and then i guess rehired not to host a show because he clearly can't host a show Although that hasn't stopped CNN from putting other people on that clearly cannot host shows. Anyway, he's got some little title as their media guru. And I want you to hear him try to apologize but not apologize because, you know, he said, oh, no, we didn't really say all that. We didn't try and, you know, dismantle any of the. We're actually, oh, well, we'll let him say it.

There's so much more reporting to do on this topic. This is a very complex matter. even though Trump tried to make it sound simple on Saturday night. It's really important to note what CNN did not report. CNN did not report that this mission was a failure. Far from it. It may have turned out to be a tremendous success. We just don't know all the facts yet, and neither does the U.S. government.

That's a good little span. Okay, so they're trying to reframe things because, you see, they're in more trouble. They're in more trouble. And it's not just that they're in trouble with the administration that doesn't have a whole lot of use for them. they're actually in trouble with their viewers. Because the viewers are sitting there and they kind of agree with Pete. They're like, yeah, why don't we hear about some of the good stuff?

Ever. Well, you're not going to hear about the good stuff because this particular team of media reporters, one, are lazy, two, have a bias, and three, want to take down Trump. Okay? It's pretty darn simple. But the markets say something. else for goodness sakes wow i mean we're looking at four straight days of increases okay the market just keeps flying so that tells you a lot again you can put all the intel reports aside what does the

media say you can put that aside you can just look at where the money's going and it's going right into u.s equities this is and and you know what more's coming in so i hope you're in and if you're not please do me the favor of going to my company i'm going to put it here in the chat 76 research dot com, use code word dollar, okay? Use code word dollar because then it's just a dollar a month for the first two months. And this is my financial research company. We have a lot of great ideas. Actually, we're publishing a new idea for 76 report folks this afternoon. I think that's coming out this afternoon, maybe tomorrow at the latest. But we have another stock idea we want to tell you about one of the ones that we had put out recently is up 23 percent. It's actually, it's actually

up more than 23 percent right now because the market's been so. on fire, but since we acknowledged it recently and we expect that it's going to continue going higher. So you want to be part of this, okay? You want to be part of this. I hope you're part of this. It's a really important time for the economy and for the markets. So again, 76 research, use code word dollar there today.

We have more to get to because Leticia James is out of money. Letitia James is like really losing it. I mean, she's got her own personal troubles, right, that she's up against. But the state of New York is up against quite a bit. too. We're going to get to that. We're going to get to that. But first, quick word on oil because we've got oil prices up a little bit today. You know, I'll tell you this. Oil's been coming down rather significantly. Oil's actually been, let me give you the quote on crude right now. It's at $65. and 50 cents. So up about nine-tenths of a percent. But I'll tell you, the other day, right,

Monday, we were watching it together, is down 8 percent. I was like, wow. And then the next day, On Tuesday, it was down another 5.5%. We saw it tick up a little bit yesterday, ticking up a little bit 8 tenths of a percent today because, you know, look, there's still some uncertainties here. And I understand and would expect this. I actually was surprised that it came down so much on Monday and Tuesday. But I think that that gives you a certain amount of insight, guys, into, again, what the markets think. And the markets think this was a success.

And look, we need oil, right? We need oil. We need oil. We need oil here. Thank you very much. That's why the drill, drill thing is going over so well. And everybody wants to paint fossil fuels as bad, bad, bad, and that they're the villains, and you get that from the legacy media all the time.

But here's the reality. You know what? We've had a heat wave where I am right now in New Hampshire. Thank God for the air conditioner. Right now, that air conditioning, actually, you know, I'm a person who's in good health, et cetera. I don't need to worry about crazy heat, but there are a lot of older folks that do.

And if they don't have air conditioning, what happens to them? I mean, that's actually an example of fossil fuels keeping us safe. right? Like, they don't tell you this. Air conditioning keeps you safe. It prevents heat stroke. You know, it actually also helps us in the winter, does it not? Because we would be struggling with extreme cold if we didn't have fossil fuels. They provide low, low cost power for our storm warning systems, which are kind of important again, saving lives so that we can have time to evacuate and save our lives. So as much as they want to taint this all is, bad in oil and fossil fuels, et cetera. I think you've got to always kind of look at the whole picture

here. It's a big part of what we try and do here on the Trish Regan show. And just remember that, you know, it's not all bad because we wouldn't have been saved from so many really disastrous climate situations, extreme temperatures, drought, floods, storms, wildfires, all of those things if we didn't have the fossil fuel infrastructure and technology. You can learn more at one of our show sponsor sites oilfax.com this is brought to you by the nasdaq listed prairie operating company a high growth low cost producer of safe and responsible american energy go to oilfax.com again oilfax.com you'll learn much more about this it really though is just amazing how they try and twist and turn all of this 76 research.com for more on oil prices and how you play this right now