Chris Hinkle (3:33)

No, you're not wrong. And I've been a high. A proponent, and I've made recommendations to the FBI through my contacts that we need to get back to the business of the day of having the professionals in the room hold a press conference, stand before a podium, have the people with subject matter knowledge around you get briefed on it, give your briefing and then field questions to reporters so that the reporters can get the information that we need. This running around to different podcasts, and no disrespect to yours, I understand why there is some reluctance because you ask cogent civil and cogent pointed questions, and those things are often tough for our elected and appointed representatives.

Bill O'Reilly (4:17)

Well, if they can't answer, they can just say, I can't answer. Now, look, we put in a call. Cash Patel turn us down. All right? He doesn't want any part of this ahead of the FBI. Okay? I mean, Comey wasn't going to come on when Biden was in. We got it. And then Besant. Bessant did what Besant did. But right now, what I'm looking at is a story where a foreign adversary, through an American citizen, is pumping in tens, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars to foster violence in this country. And. And we can't get any kind of direction from the people who are supposed to protect us from that. That's crazy.

Chris Hinkle (5:01)

I do think that they do need to take the time to say, here are the things that we are doing that we're looking into. You don't have to name specific people, because I do think that would be a violation of due process. But you can say, here are the activities that we're looking into. You can say, here are some of the things that we're doing. You don't have to get super technical on it. I am confident that the FBI is looking into this. They're very good at tying up, tying things together, from financial to physical actions to networks and things like that. It does take time, but it would.

Bill O'Reilly (5:35)

Make them look good. If you're very confident and you know way better than I do, it would make them look good to explain it. See, this is. This is the conundrum. And would they, Cash Patel, look good now? I know he has to get permission to do it. I understand the bureaucracy. The FBI is ridiculous, but it makes the federal government look good. If they can explain. Look, we're taking this seriously, right?

Chris Hinkle (6:03)

I agree. I think you should talk about the investigative measures that you are taking. What I counter people with are the people out there that are saying, I want to see somebody in handcuffs. Right?

Bill O'Reilly (6:14)

Yeah, yeah, I know we don't.

Chris Hinkle (6:16)

I'd like to see people in handcuffs, but I want to see people in handcuffs only to have their case overturned later.

Bill O'Reilly (6:21)

Yeah. Unless there's evidence about it. Right. Right. Now, do you believe as a. As a trained investigator, many years of experience, that the state of Minnesota, under walls and fry, is in rebellion against the United States, or am I overstating this?

Chris Hinkle (6:41)

I don't think you're overstating it. As my good friend Jim Galliano said in his New York Post piece, it has all the hallmarks of insurrection that's going on from these individuals in these states. These states can't come in and tell the federal government, you're not going to enforce federal law. And they're not to put obstacles in the way. We have the Supremacy clause under Article 6 of the Constitution of the United States that says that we get to do this. The president has plenary power under Article 2 of the Article 2 branches of the United States to execute these types of investigations. And I'll go even one step further under the Alien Enemies act with dealing with foreign nationals that are coming in and affecting things inside through crime and stuff. That case was litigated back in 1948. And you know what the Supreme Court said it's not subject to judicial review. The president has this power. And when we have a governor and a mayor trying to stand in the way of that, it puts lives in danger. Not just the citizens lives in danger. These officers lives in danger.

Bill O'Reilly (7:48)

These two Minnesota citizens who were killed would be alive if the Minneapolis police had protected the ICE agents. Right.

Chris Hinkle (8:02)

Well, not just protected the ICE agents, but protected the citizens and.

Bill O'Reilly (8:06)

Okay, okay. But stood in the middle and prevented this kind of chaos. But they didn't.

Chris Hinkle (8:14)

And that's not a violation. That's not a violation of your First Amendment rights. You have a right to protest. You have a right to. To march. You have a right.

Bill O'Reilly (8:22)

Yeah, but they were interfering in the investigation.

Chris Hinkle (8:24)

Right to interfere in a law enforcement.

Bill O'Reilly (8:26)

And that's what they were clearly doing. Both of the victims. All right, Mr. Engel, I. I hope you will, you know, if you get anything, any inkling, because I want to be fair here. I'm not looking to down grade the FBI or anything like that. I am almost beside myself in the sense that I don't think their messaging is helping this country right now. That's where I'm coming from. All right. So if you can cajole them or whatever, Cash Patel is welcome anytime on his program. And if he can't answer, I will respect that. I'm not going to scorn him or anything like that. All right, Mr. Engel, thanks very much. Really appreciate it.

Bill O'Reilly (9:08)

You're listening to the no Spa News Weekend Edition.

Bill O'Reilly (9:13)

India, I went over it with you. I can't tell you what a big story this is. And of course, the media ignores it because it doesn't help them damage Trump by saying, hey, you know, the president's doing pretty well overseas and he is. I mean, I don't the presentation about Greenland, I told him, I, if you guys, I said, look, you can't be threatening invading green. But I knew it was going to work out just like Panama worked out. But if you go down the list of accomplishments overseas for Donald Trump's phenomenal, there's nobody close to him in modern times. As far as foreign affairs, problem is that Americans don't care about foreign affairs. And when I say problem, I'm talking about the midterm elections. So emerging as the major problem for the Democratic Party and President Trump is the cost of health care insurance. That is worrying people. It's out of control and I don't know what the president's going to do about it. Very complicated issue. A couple of polls. Used to be the Kaiser Family Foundation. That's not, they changed their name to KFF. They did a poll. Okay. 1400 US adults. First question. Thinking about the past year, would you say your cost of living has increased a lot? 50%. Whoa. Increased a little. 32. That's 82%. Stayed about the same. 12. That is not a good number for the president. Second question. How worried are you to be paying these bills? Health care very worried 66 not worried 34 food 57 worried 43 not. Rent mortgage 52 worried. 48 not monthly utilities 57 worried 43 not. Pew Poll. This is different than the poll I just gave you. It's very simple. Do you approve or disprove Donald Trump's handling his job? Proof. 37 disapprove. 61. Obviously, that is not a great number for Donald Trump. Next question. Do you think Trump administration's actions since taking office last year have been better than expected? About as expected? Worse. Better. 21 about 28. That's 49%. That's not a bad number. Worse. 50. So it's about a tie. Another Poll. This is the McLaughlin Poll. Now, John works for President Trump. It's a Republican generated poll. That being said, John McLaughlin's been very accurate with verbocare. Help is always ready before, during and after your stay. We've planned for the plot twists, so support is always available because a great trip starts with peace of mind. We wouldn't use them if he wasn't. So, 1,000 likely voters. The Pew poll is 8,500 U.S. adults. Nothing to do with likely voters or registered voters. Okay, These are people who are avid under McLaughlin. Question, do you approve or disprove of the job Donald Trump is doing? Prove 50. Disapprove 47. That is the biggest discrepancy I've seen quite some time. Okay, do you support or oppose deporting known criminal and terrorist migrants? Support 87. Oppose 10. Do you support or oppose deporting all migrants? Support 62. Oppose 4. 32. That startling number right there. Joining us now is John McLaughlin from Upstate New York. So when you saw the Pew poll goes way the opposite way of your poll, you said to yourself, what?

Bill O'Reilly (13:13)

Let me check the internals, let me check the demographics, how they did it. And it's only, it's, it's, it's, it's literally 28% Republican. We model ours after actual voter turnout. My survey matches up with the CNN exit polls from the last presidential race. Their poll, we have Republicans, 35% Democrats, 34. Very close to the CNN poll. Their poll has only 28% Republicans.

Bill O'Reilly (13:42)

So are you saying they cook the books here?

Bill O'Reilly (13:45)

Sure, they've been cooking the books. These media polls have been cooking the books against Trump since 2016. Remember the Hillary lock, There's no way Trump could win.

Bill O'Reilly (13:53)

Right. So that's a pretty strong accusation you're making against Pew that they're cooking the books. They're trying to get the negative number to hurt Trump going forward. And you believe that?

Bill O'Reilly (14:04)

I believe it because it's, it's adults and they know, they know it's not apples to apples, but they get a big headline and you look at polls, I mean, there's been a series of them in the last couple of weeks. Our friend Larry Kudlow did a series on this where you have, like when you look at the New York Times poll that was registered voters, they only have 38% Trump voters. We got 50 in the last election. We got 50% of the vote. We won the popular vote. You have polls like the Economist, YouGov. They come out with a poll where they had, in their poll, you're referring to notes. I gotta refer to my notes. But they had more Harris voters, 46% to only 34%. Trump voters out of 1722 adults. This is adults. They could be interviewing illegal immigrants for all I know. And you have the same thing with Pew, where Pew, it's adults and they do it online.

Bill O'Reilly (15:00)

I believe you. You don't have to convince me any further. I believe you. That they're not honest polls. No surprise in this country at this point. Now, when will the polling matter for the midterms? Still 10 months away. And when do you think that people will begin to lock in on because this is vitally important for President Trump?

Bill O'Reilly (15:23)

Well, I don't think the voters pay as much attention to the polls as we do. They're going to vote based on their own situation. And we have the Republicans down to in the generic ballot most of last year, and certainly in 2024, the Republicans were ahead in the generic ballot for Congress, which it doesn't, you know, when you come down to it, it matches up by the, you know, people vote on the names that are in the district. But generically, the Republicans shouldn't be two points behind the, the Democrats. The Republicans need to get much more aggressive. They need to run a contrast election. For example, in that same poll where we had 87 to 10, they favored deporting criminal illegal immigrants. In the same poll, when we asked would you defund and abolish ICE, 46% of all voters said they would, 48 didn't. And when you're looking at disconnect, well, who is going to deport criminal illegal immigrants? It's the immigration. So the Democrats and you mentioned up front about this fellow Neville Singham from overseas running a campaign against immigration. And if you get rid of the immigration police, you have open borders, then the country's destabilized and these illegal people.

Bill O'Reilly (16:43)

Don'T link it together. It's all an emotional response. We know that. But this health care insurance situation, coupled with car and house insurance insurance companies are battering the American people. I talked to President Trump about this and, you know, if that continues unabated for the next 10 months, the Democrats could win on that alone.

Bill O'Reilly (17:05)

Right? And we did a survey for the Great American Health alliance. Last week it was released in Washington. Almost four to five voters support healthier savings accounts. This was an idea Steve Forbes came up in 95, 96. The presidential race where you get money that's tax deductible, could be your own money, could be your employer's money. It's in an account and you buy insurance above that.

Bill O'Reilly (17:29)

Trump did that. Trump announced that last week. Right.

Bill O'Reilly (17:34)

What a coincidence. But it's you now you have to get Congress to change the laws to allow this to happen.

Bill O'Reilly (17:40)

Okay, people. But maybe they will and maybe they won't. The messaging, though, on all of this, look, it's very clear, John, and I don't know how you, as opposed to you processes. There are two issues. The press, the media is driving Epstein and ice. They don't want to know about India or favorable trade agreement or they don't want to know about savings accounts that would, you know, provide money for kids. And they don't want to know about any of that. Okay? Because the two issues that they've latched onto, they believe the corrupt American media will damage the Republicans and Trump in November. So they're going to just jam this all day long, every day. And that's what's happening. So how do you overcome that?

Bill O'Reilly (18:35)

You have to overcome it the way President Trump did in his last campaign. The tough part is he's not on the ballot this time.

Bill O'Reilly (18:41)

But he really is. He really is. He is.

Bill O'Reilly (18:44)

Well, but it's the disadvantage because people are voting on you as a national referendum even though you're not on the ballot.

Bill O'Reilly (18:52)

Right.

Bill O'Reilly (18:52)

Has to get outside the Beltway. In the campaign, we broke through the mainstream media by going out directly to the voters using social media. President Trump did like over 100 policy videos, people that would go to his rallies. We might get 100,000 people there. You would have hundreds of thousands of people send us emails and texts trying to go. The campaign could then use that information to promote ideas and our position on the issues and do a contrast, a straight contrast with the Democrats. President Trump ran because one, because he ran directly against Biden and Harris's failed policies. The Republicans need to hold Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries accountable for open borders, for wanting to raise taxes. How can they talk about affordability when every Democrat in the House voted to raise taxes by 4.5 trillion Next this year? That's what they did last year. They voted to do.

Bill O'Reilly (19:46)

They voted against the bill that would.

Bill O'Reilly (19:49)

No one's holding them accountable. We have to get out there. We have to go outside.

Bill O'Reilly (19:53)

Well, I don't know about the we, but it's going to be tight. But I think things will happen. Dramatic things are going to happen in the next nine months that will. And we really appreciate you talking to us, John, from time to time. If you see any trends emerging, let us know. I Think about September. The polls will really start to matter. And thanks for coming on tonight.

Bill O'Reilly (20:15)

This is the no Spin News, Weekend edition.

Bill O'Reilly (20:19)

All right, there's a new book out, was released yesterday and you might want to consider. It's called Rage in the the Unfinished Story of the American Revolution. Now, it's a little pinheady, but I read it and you'll learn a lot. The first part of the book is the difficulty of getting American society and the American government running in a way that benefited all Americans. Thomas Paine, very crusty guy. Everybody hated him except me. I liked him. And Jonathan Turley, the author goes off, goes all through that. So if you like history and you read my books, you'll like this. Then the book takes a turn into well, are we going to be able to keep what we have here? Our republic is going to keep it because we got now a surge in AI. We got new texts, we got a corrupt media, we got academia that's falling apart. Well, the holidays have come and gone once again. But if you've forgotten to get that special someone in your life a gift. Well, Mint Mobile is extending their holiday offer of half off unlimited wireless. So here's the idea. You get it now, you call it an early present for next year. What do you have to lose?

Bill O'Reilly (21:38)

Give it a try@mintmobile.com switch limited time.

Bill O'Reilly (21:42)

50% off regular price for new customers. Upfront payment required $45 for 3 months, $90 for 6 month or $180 for 12 month plan tax, taxes and fees. Extra speeds may slow after 50 gigabytes per month when network is busy see terms. Can we keep it so joining us now is the aforementioned Jonathan Turley is a law professor at George Washington University. And you see him on TV all the time. Read his columns. All right. I want to stay in the present day because you are right in the fire zone. So you teach at very liberal university George Washington. Some of your columns and commentary are, I wouldn't say conservative right wing, but they're not liberal. And you do go after some people on the left. What has happened to you because of that?

Jonathan Turley (22:33)

Well, I'm one of the few libertarians, conservatives, contrarians left in academia. Recent surveys have shown that many departments don't have a single conservative or Republican or libertarian. Yale reached sort of nirvana stage not long ago where they found that not a single faculty member at Yale contributed to the Republican Party. So there's been this purging that has gone on since I first went into teaching over 30 years ago. And I talk about this in rage in the Republic. Because the second half of the book, as you note, Bill, is looking at whether we can this Republican survive in what we're facing now. Part of that is what I call the rise of the new Jacobins. And the Jacobins were, of course, those people who brought about the French Revolution. Because the book looks at both the American and French revolutions and the personalities involved and asks why did one, the American Revolution become the most successful, oldest democracy in history, and why did the other become the Reign of Terror? And what we could learn from that. And the Jacobins began as professors, journalists, lawyers, who talked about due process and the rights of man. And then they became architects of the terror. And what the book suggests is we're hearing those voices again, these new Jacobins. You have the dean of Berkeley Law School saying that the U.S. constitution is a failure. This is on our 250th anniversary. You have the New York Times regularly publishing law professors saying we have to break the system down, pack or get rid of the Supreme Court, make these radical changes. And what the book raises is that these are people who are trying to remove the very elements that got us here today, the very elements that saved us historically from the demise that, that we saw in things like the French.

Bill O'Reilly (24:34)

Revolution and in modern times, in the fascist states all around the world. But why? Why would intelligent people, number one, veer so far left? Do they fear robust debate? Do they fear allowing the American people to make their own decisions?

Jonathan Turley (24:59)

Well, there is this echo chamber environment that benefits many of these, particularly law profess professors, also journalists. They write for each other. You know, the. If you eliminate anyone who's a dissenting voice, it helps you. You get more invitations to conferences, more publications, more control. The last thing you want is someone who's going to say you're wrong. And I never thought we would be in this position, quite frankly. You know, as I said, I went into teaching 30 years ago. But more importantly, as I talk about in the book, when I went to University of Chicago, it was an awakening for me. There were people. I grew up in a liberal Democratic, politically active family. I knew there were young Republicans. I just never met one. And I went to University of Chicago and in the basement, the Trotskyites would meet. And upstairs we had militant Vegans, and next door we had these bizarre libertarians. It was like walking into the Star wars bar scene. And for me, it was absolutely just thrilling. I loved every minute of it. I was fascinated to see people that saw what I saw and saw something completely different. My Students simply don't have that anymore. Most law schools, for example, don't even have a Republican or conservative. If they do, they just have a couple. Now, keep in mind, this country is a majority conservative or libertarian. And I had a debate at Harvard with one of their professors and I raised with him, and I like him a great deal, but I raised with him this issue that the faculty at Harvard has only a handful of conservatives or Republicans, and the student body is less than 9% in a country that's divided equally and where the majority of judges are conservative. He immediately said, well, we're Harvard, we're an elite university. We don't have to look like America. And I said, but Randall, you don't even look like Massachusetts. I mean, Massachusetts is over 30%.

Bill O'Reilly (26:56)

But see, that's the key to changing traditional American society, the classroom. So if you get the urchins at age 13 and by the time they get out of college, they're 22, and all they hear is America's bad stolen land. That amused me greatly at the Stupid Music Awards. If all they hear is that, then you're indoctrinating a whole new generation of Americans to move to the radical left. So I think this is a very well thought out plan. No, it is.

Jonathan Turley (27:36)

And in fact, regional republic goes into that. Because I talk about Mondami, I talk about all these socialists. The polls show that socialism and even communism are being embraced by really record numbers of young people. And as I talk about in the book, these are people with no memory or experience with the socialist governments that collapsed in the 20th century. So all they know are these sound bites like Mandami saying, I'm going to introduce you to the warmth of collectivism.

Bill O'Reilly (28:04)

Right.

Jonathan Turley (28:04)

It's very much like as I talk in the book, when Mitterrand was elected president of France, he actually appointed a minister of leisure because he was promising the French they'd have so much time paid by the government that he was going to have someone manage to make sure they could get all the leisure they want.

Bill O'Reilly (28:21)

I know.

Jonathan Turley (28:21)

And of course the economy collapsed, but these kids never saw that.

Bill O'Reilly (28:26)

Well, I mean, the warmth of collectivism is tough because Mannami can't even plow the snow off the streets of New York City. So that's collapsing pretty fast. But I think that you're correct in saying that when you have a monolithic left wing educational system, and you do in this country, that's going to change the voting patterns, it has to. Now, the second thing is the corporate media has bought into that. They like that. You often appear on a Fox News Channel. George Washington University can't be happy about that. Are they?

Jonathan Turley (29:11)

No. I've been shunned for years, but I've been shunned since I testified in the Clinton impeachment. So if you can't be fired because I have a chair. Tenured professor. So instead you're largely shunned.

Bill O'Reilly (29:25)

What does that mean, shunned?

Jonathan Turley (29:28)

The thing is, this is a group that'll try to take away everything that has meaning to an intellectual publication of papers, joining conferences, those types of things go. If you really sort of violate this orthodoxy.

Bill O'Reilly (29:45)

Have you ever had words with these people who are trying to sabotage your career?

Jonathan Turley (29:50)

I didn't think the pain from the.

Bill O'Reilly (29:51)

Shingles rash would affect simple everyday tasks like bathing, getting dressed, or even walking around.

Jonathan Turley (29:58)

I was wrong, though. Not everyone at risk will develop it. 99% of people over the age of 50 already have the virus that causes shingles, and it could reactivate at any time. I developed it and the blistering rash lasted for weeks. Don't learn the hard way like I did. Talk to your doctor or pharmacist today. Sponsored by gsk. No, because I don't have words with many academics because I am Persona non grata.

Bill O'Reilly (30:26)

They don't even talk to you.

Jonathan Turley (30:28)

And there are very few of us left in academia. And it's amazing because half of the students are coming in this country are coming from conservative or libertarian families, and they get to law schools and there's virtually no that can share that view. But one of the things that worries me most, and I go into this in raging the Republic, is that we're going to be facing challenges that we have never encountered before. I talk about robotics and AI, but also global governance systems like the eu. But even as the book goes into even taking the most conservative estimates, this book is a roaring endorsement of capitalism. I believe in capitalism. Milton Friedman ruined me at the University of Chicago. I do believe that capitalism will adjust. But we are looking at a massive job loss that we have never encountered before. And that means we're going to have a lot of people that may be on a subsidy of the government. And the book looks at how that would change us politically, not just economically. Sure, what if we have a kept citizenry that is being subsidized by the government?

Bill O'Reilly (31:39)

Well, that's what happened in the early 1930s. The Hoover people come in, very conservative people, capitalists to the top of their forehead, and they booted the recovery of the Great Depression. And then FDR came in and the whole electorate changed over. But I'm very interested in your personal story because you do write in a personal way in this book. So you get it on the FOX News Channel now. There's pressure there to toe that conservative line. Do you feel that I haven't.

Jonathan Turley (32:15)

You know, I've worked twice as legal analyst for NBC, twice legal analyst for cbs, also with BBC. So I've worked for four networks and I have good memories of all four networks. I've never felt pressure at Fox.

Bill O'Reilly (32:33)

I'm glad to hear that because I never did when I was there. They never, ever interfere with what I did. But when you're on there, do you understand the vilification? Because that was crazy on my, from my experience, I got attacked every hour on the hour. I never understood it. So why do you care what I say? When you got five other news outlets that are saying what you want to hear, why is one outlier me or you? If you say something the left doesn't like, why does it bother these people? I never got that.

Jonathan Turley (33:12)

I think that, and I go into this in the book as well, that part of the problem with this orthodoxy, both in the media and in academia is that it makes you increasingly intolerant to hear opposing views because all you hear in your echo chamber, if you just go from Ms. Now to CNN or if you don't leave that, that, that silo, you become more and more entire intolerant, which is what we're seeing. And also social media has changed us a lot. You know, I, I've had a lot of death threats, my family's been threatened. I, that was the uptick was when I testified in the second impeachment involving Donald Trump and I received hundreds of threatening emails.

Bill O'Reilly (33:56)

What did you tell the people? Just so if people don't remember, what did you say your crux of your remarks were? What about Trump impeachment?

Jonathan Turley (34:03)

Well, I test, I testified the hearing and I was the only Republican witness and I opposed the impeachment.

Bill O'Reilly (34:09)

Okay.

Jonathan Turley (34:10)

Which I think was an abuse. And I do, I also think the second impeachment was an abuse. But you know, it having been in with one foot and on the, on the media side for 30 years, it has changed in that social media has unleashed a lot of that rage. And you know, this book talks about rage. You know, the all country, well, not all countries, but many countries are the product of revolution and revolutions are caused by rage. And our revolution was caused by rage. That's what the Boston Tea Party was, was rage. The problem is it's easier to start a revolution than to end it. And the reason we succeeded is we had two absolute genius figures among many. But Thomas Paine was sort of the righteous rage of the revolution. But it was James Madison who was the pious logic. So Paine knew what it would take to move a people to rebellion and it was Madison that knew what it would take to move a revolution to a republic. And it was the combination of those.

Bill O'Reilly (35:21)

Two characters and they were totally opposite those guys.

Jonathan Turley (35:24)

There could not be more.

Bill O'Reilly (35:26)

Could not. All right, professor, it's a fascinating book. Rage and the republic out now. Good to see you. Thanks for coming on and we'll talk again soon, I hope.

Bill O'Reilly (35:36)

Thank you for listening to the no spin news weekend edition. To watch the full episodes of the no spin news news, visit billow riley.com and sign up to become a premium or concierge member. That's Billow Riley.com sign up and start watching today.