← The Josh Hammer Show
Loading summary
Transcript43 lines
- [00:01]
Josh Hammer
Hey, Sal.
- [00:02]
Alex Canceroitz
Hank, what's going on? We haven't worked a case in years.
- [00:05]
Josh Hammer
I just bought my car at Carvana and it was so easy, Too easy. Think something's up?
- [00:10]
Alex Canceroitz
You tell me.
- [00:11]
Josh Hammer
They got thousands of options, found a
- [00:14]
Alex Canceroitz
great car at a great price, and
- [00:16]
Josh Hammer
it got delivered the next day.
- [00:18]
Alex Canceroitz
It sounds like Carvana just makes it
- [00:20]
Josh Hammer
easy to buy your car, Hank. Yeah, you're right.
- [00:23]
Alex Canceroitz
Case closed.
- [00:25]
Rachel Bovard
Buy your car today on Carvana. Delivery fees may apply.
- [00:36]
Josh Hammer
I'm Josh Hammer, and this is JOSH Hammer show. Lots going on in the news. The prime minister of Japan met with Donald Trump in the White House earlier today. Much going on in the war against the Iranian regime overseas. We have an update for you when it comes to Joe Kent, the disgraced former director of the National Counterterrorism center who's currently being FBI investigated. Also, our friend Rachel Bovart joins us shortly for an update on what is happening with the Save America act and the debate over the debate as to whether to force Democrats to mount a talk in filibuster. All that in today's episode of the Josh Hammer show. But for now, we begin with this. Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are the two leaders, the two respective leaders of the Democratic caucuses. Their party is of mixed at best, shall we say, popularity according to all the polls that we have. In fact, the only saving grace right now, when you look at Republicans, we're currently facing a lot of economic, a lot of economic headwinds, a lot of traditional, just structural headwinds are going into a midterm election year with your party controlling the White House. Typically, this is a very uphill battle to try to maintain control of one at this point. Also both houses of Congress. The only saving grace really for Republicans at this time is that the Democratic brand embodied by people like Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer is really, really, really stinking low. It is not just in the toilet. It is frankly, in the sewer. The latest evidence of this was some Democratic primaries from this past Tuesday out in Illinois, you might say, Josh, what do Democrat primaries have to tell you about the popularity of the Democratic Party? Well, what they said was that the left wing of the Democratic Party, which this party has been pretty much uniformly leaning into for at least five years now, they got a wallop. So the AOC winning, the squad lost up and down the ballot in these primaries happening over in the land of Lincoln in the state of Illinois just this past Tuesday, all the squad endorsed or dsa Democrat, Socialist America, sympathetic members were essentially all just gutted in their primaries. Which in theory, ostensibly is good news for Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer because they are not particularly well liked by the insurgent radical left wing of the Democratic Party. But in theory, it is something of a soft rebuke to the Democratic brand. But the firmer rebuke to the Democratic brand comes when you actually look at, at what some of the actual issues are the Democrats are acting, or as the case may be, are not acting upon. So the number one bill that is currently pending in the US Senate, it's already passed the House, is the Save America Act. This is an updated version of what was previously known simply as the SAVE Act. It is a comprehensive statute that would essentially secure American elections from the threat of illegal alien subversion. It is, according to Donald Trump, an absolutely indispensable must pass piece of legislation. He is saying that he will not consider or sign any other bill other than a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security. We'll get to that in just a moment here. Other than this particular bill. Now, what the bill would do is, among other things, it would require voter id, it would require proof of citizenship. When it comes to actually registering to vote in the first place, these are not particularly partisan issues. Gallup, for instance, found 84% support across the board for voter ID, 98% Republican approval, 67% of Democrats approve. Pew Research center finding 83% of Americans, including majorities of every racial or ethnic subgroup, Whites, blacks, Latinos, you name it. So this is a very, very popular piece of legislation. And there is a debate happening inside the center Republican caucus right now being led by John Thune, the somewhat feckless leader of the Senate Republican Caucus, somewhat perhaps being a little too charitable, if anything. And the debate is essentially how to get this bill that Donald Trump calls a must pass piece of legislation passed. And a lot of the hardliners, people like Mike Lee of Utah, who I interned for many moons ago and think very highly of Mike Lee basically said that if your Republican senator is not supportive of all tactics, including using the talking filibuster to actually force Democrats to talk about this bill until they can't talk anymore, then you should vote the bums out. A lot of Lee's more milquetoast colleagues in the caucus were not happy with him, but he was fundamentally correct. This bill really, really, really ought to pass. And the only reason that we're even having this debate over whether or not we should force Democrats to do a talking filibuster and by we in, I just mean Republicans. Whether conservatives should force Democrats to do a talking filibuster. The only reason that this debate's even happening is because Democrats don't support this. Then maybe, maybe, maybe John Fetterman, maybe John Fetterman, by the way, was the only reason that Mark Wayne Mullen, the new nominee to replace Chris Noma, dhs, John Fairman, provided the vote to actually get Mark Wayne Mullen out of committee after his highly contentious confirmation hearing just yesterday. So Rand Paul, the chairman of the committee, voted no on that. John Fetterman crossing the political aisle to vote yes. So Fetterman maybe, maybe, maybe would vote yes on the Save America Act. I wouldn't bank on it for what it's worth, but it's possible. But really no one else. So they're not going to be able to simply invoke cloture and get to 60 votes. So this is a big problem and that's why we're going to have this drawn out debate over this deeply, deeply commonsensical piece of legislation that again, when you actually look at the actual criteria when it comes to voter id, when it comes to proof of citizenship, has approval ratings or support ratings, something in the 75 to 85% category, give or take. On the other hand, Democrats are also refusing to reopen the Department of Homeland Security. They've been dragging on for weeks and weeks and weeks now. And specifically what they are refusing to do is they are refusing to consider to even countenance any kind of new DHS funding bill unless Republicans make concessions when it comes to immigration. Now, the irony of this, and what Democrats apparently think that we the people are too stupid to realize, is that all the immigration components of the federal government within dhs, when it comes to ice, et cetera, cbp, it's all been funded already. It's not even an issue. The funding is there. So the only debate are over the parts of DHS that are currently shut down, things like tsa. And some of these images that are coming through these videos are shocking. TSA security wait times at Hartsfield Jackson in Atlanta. This is one of the largest airports by passenger traffic in the entire world. This morning reached over 90 minutes on the TSA security line. All sorts of other airports, whether it's Philadelphia, New Orleans, Houston reporting increases in wait times at TSA by more than 50%. There it is, a veritable, veritable mess. And the deputy administrator of the TSA man by the name of Adam Stahl had this to say on CBS News talking about how TSA employees are hurting. They are hurting right now. They're sleeping. Your car is pretty, pretty crazy stuff. Go ahead and watch this. People are hurting every single day. We have individuals sleeping in their cars drawing blood to afford to pay for gas to get to work. So the situation financially is dire for officers. Acting Deputy TSA Administrator Adam Stahl, if the caller does climb, there could be scenarios where we may have to shut down airports. This is a serious situation. It sounds like every day this goes on, you think it's going to get worse.
- [07:43]
Rachel Bovard
Yes.
- [07:44]
Josh Hammer
The longer we do not receive funding for both the department and for tsa, this will get worse. This will not get better. Adam Saul, the deputy administrator of tsa, speaking there on CBS Evening News. Here's what Speaker Mike Johnson had to say. He had a very similar line. Let's go ahead and watch this with Speaker Mike Johnson. The House Democrats, Senate Democrats are joined together. The same group that gave us wide open borders and defunding the police, Sean, they're at it again. They are refusing to reopen TSA and FEMA for the American people unless they can also reopen the borders for illegal aliens. So what exactly are Democrats doing? Why exactly are they doing this? Well, they're banking that on a strategy of essentially just burning everything down and blaming it on Donald Trump. Rinse and repeat. How I know that? Because they actually at times say the quiet part out loud. It was a congressman from Virginia, a Democrat by the name of Don Beyer, who had a remarkable quote. Every so often one of these guys is a quote where you just say the quiet part out loud. And that's exactly what Congressman Don Beyer of Virginia said, speaking about the DHS shutdown and what exactly is accomplishing. Congressman Beyer said this. He said, quote, it's not forcing any change. In the meantime, we're making people hurt. The long lines that can't make us more popular. We're on the right side of ice, he said, but not on the rest. Okay, well, they're not on the right side of ice. But hold that aside for now. He is literally admitting that the Democrats are currently making people hurt. He is saying that explicitly. So one of the questions that I have in watching all this, when it comes to the Save America act debate, when it comes to this legislation that has overwhelming support across the entire political demographic subsections of America, when it comes to voter id, when it comes to proof of citizenship, when it comes to tsa, when it comes to dhs, there they are literally saying the airports might be shut down, folks. Easter Sunday is two weeks from this Sunday for us Jews. Passover is coming up two weeks as well. This is a time where people are traveling. Do you want to risk the airports being shut down? Do you want to deal with hour and a half long TSA security lines at the airport?
- [09:55]
Rachel Bovard
This is nuts.
- [09:57]
Josh Hammer
And why is the media seemingly not covering this in anything remotely resembling an objective perspective? There should be wall to wall coverage over the fact that a bill, the Save America act, that has massive, massive support is currently not being allowed to even get a straight up, thumbs up, thumbs down vote because, well, there's basically one at most Democrat who might support us. You have to kind of potentially force a talking filibuster or do various other tactics that we'll discuss shortly. When it comes to our guest here, Rachel Bovart. When it comes to dhs, what exactly are they doing? What exactly is the angle here? It is chaos for the sake of chaos. And is chaos for the sake of then essentially making your room dirty and then saying that someone else forced you to do it. They are essentially just throwing trash everywhere and then blaming the younger sibling or blaming someone else and saying, ah, no, he forced me to do it. Trying to blame Donald Trump essentially for their own mess. And this is in theory the role of the fourth estate, the role of the media to say no, that's actually not what's happening here. What's actually happening is that you guys is that you guys are causing a mess for the sake of causing a mess. By the way, it's not necessarily a whole lot better when it comes to the foreign policy stuff either, either. Ever since Donald Trump launched this righteous war, he didn't really launch it, frankly. Iran launched this war 47 years. Ever since Donald Trump decided to enter in a more concerted effort, Operation Epic theory there. What have Democrats done? I mean, admittedly only some of them are crying over the fact that people like Ali Khamenei, the so called Ayatollah, are dead. I'm not saying that they're all doing that. They're not exactly though supporting this, are they? You hear a lot of rhetoric to the contrary. This is Donald Trump's war. What is he doing? What is he doing? What is he doing? No, it's really not. It's actually the Iranian regime's war. And now they've been so obsessed with trying to force various votes to either cut off funding or to force a congressional authorization or this or that there, they've been pretty far from supportive. So they're basically just acting in a deeply obstructionist fashion. And fundamentally, the proper framing of what we're seeing here, tying all these strands together, is that what we see is that Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are launching a concerted attack on we the people, on we the red hearted American patriots, on we the Constitutionalists, we the conservatives, we who love this country dearly from enemies both foreign and domestic, who want secure elections, who want well funded airports, who want to be able to travel in airports, and who want to defeat terrorists abroad who seek to kill us first. That's really not asking a lot. That's asking for just sound governance. Unfortunately, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have no interest right now in providing that to us.
- [12:33]
Alex Canceroitz
Hi, this is Alex Canceroitz. I'm the host of Big Technology Podcast, a longtime reporter and an on air contributor to cnbc. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, in meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology Podcast wherever you get your podcasts.
- [13:11]
Josh Hammer
So returning to join the program today is a good friend of the show and a good friend of mine that is Rachel Bovar. Rachel is the vice president of programs at CPI Conservative Partnership Institute, also just an all around sage of the Senate, Rachel Bovar, noted Senate sage, among other hats and titles that she wears. So she joins us now to discuss the ongoing debate over the debate as the case may be when it comes to the Save America Act. Rachel, let's zoom out a little bit here. This audience I think, knows that this legislation is about voter id, it's about proof of citizenship, all these things that have overwhelming support for the American people. So the discussion in the Republican caucus with people like Mitch McConnell's side is not so much whether this legislation is good and should be passed. Rather, the debate is more about how this can be passed with a 50 plus 1 majority. Donald Trump saying it must pass legislation. John Thune's been all over the map. Where do things stand at this time? Kind of update us and fill us in as to what the current state of play is when it comes to passing this bill in the Senate.
- [14:12]
Rachel Bovard
Well, so after months of resisting calls to actually move to the legislation, John Thune Made the decision, yes, we are going to put this bill on the floor. So earlier this week, he proceeded to the bill. So that's the first step, step in considering the bill. And because of the way the House sent it over, the Republican House passed this bill, sent it to the Senate in a way that was privileged. It's called a House message. So normally when you get on a bill, you have to break a filibuster on that process, but because it was sent over this way, it only required 51 votes from the Republicans to get on this bill. So you saw Mitch McConnell, even though he opposes the legislation, supported proceeding to it, while Lisa Murkowski from Alaska voted no. And Thom Tillis from North Carolina, retiring, just took a walk, just didn't even vote. But they the 51 necessary to get on the bill. And now they are what we call on the bill in the Senate. So they are debating it. And what John Thune did in that moment is he said, I'm not, you know, he said he doesn't want to do a talking filibuster. He doesn't think he has the votes for it. But he went to the floor and he filled the amendment tree. So that's simply a device that allows a certain number of amendments to be pending before the Senate at one time. And that included some of the changes that President Trump wants to see to the legislation. If you remember this truth social that he put out saying in addition to voter id, we should do stuff on mail in ballots, we should ban trans surgeries for minors and we should protect girls sports from male participation, things like that, all of those changes are now in the amendment tree. But what he didn't do, and this is kind of how the Senate operates normally, is that you move to end debate before debate ever happens. You file cloture on the question. He did not do that. And so what's happening now is actually a real deliberative process to some extent on the Senate floor, and it makes the Senate floor more open than it's been in about a decade. So he's not forcing a talking filibuster per se, but the Senate is actually debating. The Senate is moving. The Senate is considering the question. And what's fascinating about this is after multiple months of Chuck Schumer and the Democrats saying this bill is Jim Crow 2.0 and we could never support it, you saw Chuck Schumer actually say, I think a day ago or two days ago, oh, well, we don't oppose the voter ID part. Right. And so this is really important because this is what happens when you actually deliberate in the Senate. You have no idea the political pressure it puts on people yields unpredictable and interesting results. So in my mind, Chuck Schumer has just given Republicans an opening to start negotiating something that maybe at the end could result in something getting 60 votes.
- [16:51]
Josh Hammer
So I think I actually missed that. And that is a positively shocking concession, frankly, from Chuck Schumer. It really was not that long ago, back in Georgia in 2021, the first year of the Biden presidency, they were calling the Georgia bill at the time Jim Crow 2.0. Jim Crow on steroids. All these Hollywood studios are moving out of Georgia because they said it was an oppressive racist state. And the debate then was essentially just voter id. So if Chuck Schumer is now conceding that even his own party. Cuz again, Democrats actually poll in favor of voter ID as well. It's not a partisan issue. This is not a conservative versus liberal issue. There's. That's frankly, a shocking concession. So with that in mind and kind of turning attention to what this now looks like over the next week, two weeks, how long is this going to play out? I think a lot of folks, Rachel, had this conception that a bill is produced in committee, then gets to the floor. And the floor is like a very quick process. It's like a quick like thumbs up, thumbs down kind of thing. And that's essentially not how it works there. So how long is this going to take there? And especially with these Schumer comments in mind, are you perhaps more optimistic for a positive outcome than maybe you were just about a week ago or so?
- [17:52]
Rachel Bovard
Yeah. You know, to your point, the reason a lot of us were pushing this talking filibuster strategy was just to get to the bill, to the floor because it's an 80% issue. And it's so common sense voter ID that a lot of people think it's already the law. So our theory and our thesis was if you actually force Democrats into deliberation, it could produce some kind of negotiated outcome here. And that is what is so encouraging about seeing Chuck Schumer a day into this saying, oh, well, maybe there is an opening. And what that portends is how the Senate has passed legislation for literally 200 years. Right. It's this. You put a bill on the floor, you amend it, you see where the votes are, you may be compromised. Maybe you take a cloture vote to see where things are, then you return to the negotiating table, you try again. That does take time. And you know, John Thune has said, well, we'll spend maybe a week on this bill. But I think what people want to see is, you know, not just one failed cloture vote causing everybody to throw up their hands and move on to the next thing. No, we want a repeated and consistent effort to consider this bill. Now the Senate will have to do other things, right? They have to confirm Mark Wayne Mullen, they have to reauthorize fisa. They have to maybe do a DHS deal. That's fine. Right. They can move to do that. But the expectation should be this is not over. We are going to continue to work on this bill. We're going to bring it up to the floor again. We are not going to let a single failed cloture vote just decide how this is going to be handled. Now, this is a muscle that the Senate has not flexed in a very long time, this sort of deliberative negotiating process. But I do think Chuck Schumer has given an opening to Republicans. It would be nice if they would, they would take it.
- [19:22]
Josh Hammer
Yeah. Republicans, as you and I both know, Rachel, from following this for a long time now, have this unique ability to never miss an opportunity. To miss an opportunity. Which kind of then leads to my next question, which is John Corn himself. Corn is a card carrying member of the Republican establishment if there ever there ever was one. He actually did something of a bit of a John Kerry flip flop on the issue of the talking filibuster. He had a very interesting New York Post op ed in the context of this pressure from Ken Paxton, his primary challenger down in Texas, there. Cornyn seemingly is now open to this strategy that you and others have been pushing for a while of the talking filibuster. John Thune, last I checked, as you already indicated in our conversation, has not yet fully endorsed this yet. So is Thune ready and willing at this point to actually put every tactic available to get Donald Trump's must pass piece of legislation, the Save America act, passed or is he still waffling and equivocating?
- [20:13]
Rachel Bovard
He does not want to do the talking filibuster. And what he will say is I don't have the votes in my conference, conference to do that. What he means is he does not have, he thinks the votes in the conference of Republicans to table or kill Democratic amendments that would be offered in that process because when you have a talking filibuster, it is a wide open deliberation in the Senate. Any senator can offer amendments and he thinks that some of these amendments would be too difficult for Republicans to vote. Against. However, if you saw the interview he did with Bret Baier earlier this week, he listed off several topics, meaning they could offer amendments on ACA subsidies or war powers in the Iran war and trade and tariffs and all these things. Republicans have already had to vote down those things. They voted on everything from the Epstein files to like Trump tariffs. They've already done this. So the idea that somehow they just can't get themselves together to do it again I think is a little bit ridiculous. But at the end of the day, a talking filibuster is also very hard. Right. It requires a lot of physical effort from both sides of the aisle. It requires the Senate to stay in session pretty much, you know, continuously with not a lot of breaks. And as we know, that's also a muscle. The Senate doesn't flex very often. They work two and a half days a week. Right. It's a pretty cushy schedule. And so I think he doesn't want to go that road. Has he ruled it out entirely? I don't think so. The strategy he's chosen right now with the amendment tree doesn't rule it out entirely. So you hope that he's able to sort of, you know, move with the ebb and flow of the political process and really, you know, force Democrats to the mat either through negotiation or by, you know, more hardball procedural tactics.
- [21:49]
Josh Hammer
So what it seems to me, and what I can hear from you is that now is the time to mount an even more aggressive full court press, essentially, which is where people like Mike Lee come in who have been just full throated proponents of this legislation. It's time for folks like that, time for folks like me and you to kind of really amp this level up. So Rachel, just about a minute left here before I have to let you go. But real quick, what's going to happen within the next month, if you like to make an actual prediction, put on your prognostication hat one month from now, call it a month and a half from now, is this bill going to be signed to law?
- [22:17]
Rachel Bovard
Anything is possible. I think Schumer has given them an opening I didn't even see coming this early in the process. So I think if they take it seriously, it's possible we see some sort of bipartisan product. What I actually think will happen is Thune will try to move off this bill entirely at the end of one failed clincher vote. I think he is dying to move off it to something else. So I do think the expectation has to be given to the Republican Senate. It is fine for you to go do the time sensitive things you need to do. But we do not expect this to be over. This is a concerted effort that you need to put in for the rest of the year until this bill is passed. And that's going to take work. It's going to take negotiation, it's going to take political skill and strategy. And that is what we the voters expect from our Senate.
- [22:57]
Josh Hammer
Well, a hearty amen to that, Rachel Bovard, folks. Follow her on X at Rachel Bovard, VP of Programs at CPI Conservative Punishment Institute all round Sage of the Senate. Rachel, my friend, thank you for joining us. We really do appreciate it. As always. Please.
- [23:08]
Rachel Bovard
Thanks. Josh.
- [23:10]
Alex Canceroitz
Hi, this is Alex Canceroitz. I'm the host of Big Technology Podcast, a longtime reporter and an on air contributor to cnbc. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, in meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology Podcast wherever you get your podcasts.
- [23:48]
Josh Hammer
So while all this is unfolding and percolating on the domestic front, when it comes to the Save America act, when it comes to the DHS funding standoff, things very much still happening overseas as well, perhaps above all when it comes to the Islamic Republic of Iran. So there was a press conference at the Pentagon just this morning, Pete Hegseth confirming the secretary of War that he is seeking an additional $200 billion in more funding to prosecute the war against Iran. Your mileage may vary as to exactly how you weigh whether this money is worth it. Our stance here on the show is that this war is 47 years overdue because Iran essentially declared war on us 47 years ago. There. Pete Hegseth has been nothing but firmly defensive of his boss, perhaps in contrast to some other people within the administration. We'll get to that in just a moment here. But here was Petex at the speaking at the Pentagon this morning about what the missions are. A lot of folks say, what is the mission? What is the goal here in Operation Epic Fury? Well, Pete Hex saying this very, very clearly this morning. Watch this. Our objectives given directly from our America first president, remain exactly what they were on day one. These are not the media's objectives, not Iran's Objectives, not new objectives. Our objectives unchanged on target and on plan. Destroy missiles, launchers and Iran's defense industrial base so they cannot rebuild, destroy their navy and Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. Our objectives from day one, pretty clear stuff. And that's what we've been saying on the show since day one as well, is that success and victory in Operation Epic Fury is defined as the neutralization of Iran as a threat to the United States and our interest, Period. Full stop, end of story. That's exactly what Pete, he said there. That's what we've been saying all along. If only though all the individuals within the administration could bring themselves to so fulsomely defend President Trump's righteous, righteous efforts to neutralize the Iranian threat. As Pete Hegseth if only. Unfortunately, that is not necessarily always the case. In her testimony earlier this week in the US Senate, the DNI Director Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence, refused to squarely address Senator Jon Ossoff's question as to whether or not Iran was an imminent threat. She essentially punted and said that she would defer these decisions to the Commander in Chief, that he alone is equipped to actually make that determination. That doesn't really cut it, though, does it? Ma', am, you are the Director of National Intelligence. That is definitely your role to assess the level of the threat and to make a determination, a calculation in your best ability as to whether this actually is an imminent threat. To be sure, you end up deferring to whatever the commander in chief judgment is. But you are totally qualified to make that determination. The fact that you couldn't do so is unfortunately quite damning. But it's hardly surprising because as we've been explaining this week, there seems to be something of a shadow war that's being waged against President Trump and his agenda that we highly speculate is focused on that particular office, on the office of the dni. And we saw a very high profile, you might call it, resignation letter that came earlier this week that we discussed a little bit already. This came from Joe Kent, the now former director of the National Counterterrorism center, who resigned. And he had hyper conspiratorial language that has been just utterly, just crapped on by everyone from Caroline Levitt, the White House press secretary, secretary to the former Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino, to Mike Johnson to Tom Kahn and many, many others. There. Joe Kent essentially saying that Israel talked the United States into this war, repeating a lot of Code Pink talking points, a lot of Nick Fuentes style talking Points as well. Joe Kent, we can now say, though with a high degree of confidence, we actually think we know and it's not a big shock, is it? We now can say with a very high degree of confidence why he chose this moment to do his very flowery resignation letter. It actually had nothing to do with Joe Kent's highly compromised moral conscience. It actually had nothing to do with his beliefs about Iran, about Israel or anything there. Actually, if anything, Joe Kent was saying totally different things on the question of Ron as recently as a year and a half, two years ago. He seems to have been totally radicalized on this question, probably by his gray zone writing new wife just over the past six months to a year or so. But we now can say that the reason that Joe Kent resigned is because the FBI is now investigating. Yes, the FBI under Cash Patel is now investigating Joe Kent for allegedly leaking in criminal fashion. This was apparently an open secret was that Joe Kent was leaking like a sieve. Over the course of much of his tenure as the director of the National Counterterrorism center, working under Tulsi Gabbard, a lot of these leaks seemingly found their way into the hands of less than fully savory actors. There's been a lot of speculation over the past 24 to 36 hours as to whether or not Joe Kent actually was the source of none other than Candace Owens receiving this. This WhatsApp chat from last October that I among others was a part of there a highly debated and scrutinized WhatsApp chat over Charlie Kirk's stance on Israel. Jokint apparently was of the opinion that Israel might have been involved. He actually bought that conspiracy, apparently fought with Kash Patel on this there. So I mean good freaking riddance that this lunatic is no longer in a position of this power. The real question is how he actually got there in the first place. There are presumably all sorts of stones that remain to be unturned there when it comes to the White House ppo, the personnel office and things of the nature as well. Joe Kent though resigns to get ahead of this FBI investigation there and hopefully he's lawyering up because dude, these are pretty serious charges that he might be facing there and but his very first move was to run to Tucker Carlson to tell his version of the story. And the most remarkable thing when Joe Kent ran to Tucker Carlson show last evening was I noticed that a lot of these clips were being regurgitated by an account on X called Press tv. Press TV folks is an Iranian regime state owned news media organization owned by Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting. It is a 24 hour Tehran, Iran based regime propaganda network. And they were just playing clip after clip of Joe Kent on Tucker Carlson. So Kent resigns to get ahead of the FBI investigation runs to Tucker. Tucker's show has been previously shown on Iranian state tv, by the way. And this Iranian regime propaganda is just regurgitating. CLIP and their captions in English are things like, so American soldiers are dying for Israel. Just saying exactly what you'd expect the Iranians to say. I mean, guys, spot the operation when you see it, okay? Spot the operation when you see it. By the way, among the utterly insane things that Joe Ken said was he tried to argue to Tucker that Ali Khamenei, the former Ayatollah is not, was not and had no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons because of a fatwa that he apparently issued when it comes to nuclear weapons. Yes, he actually really said this. Go ahead and watch this. Was Iran on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon?
- [31:06]
Joe Kent
No, they weren't, you know, three weeks ago when this, this started. And they weren't in June either. I mean, the, the Iranians have had a religious ruling, a fatwa against actually developing a nuclear weapon since 2004. That's been in place since 2004. That's available in the public sphere. But then also we had no intelligence to indicate that that fatwa was being disobeyed or it was on the cusp of being lifted. The Iranian strategy, it's actually pretty pragmatic. The Iranians are obviously aware of what's taking place in their region and their strategy was to not completely abandon their nuclear program because they saw what happened to Muammar Gaddafi in Libya when he said, hey, I've got no more nukes, I'll do what you say, I'll give up my nukes.
- [31:47]
Josh Hammer
And we gave him the Nobel Peace Prize.
- [31:49]
Alex Canceroitz
Yeah.
- [31:50]
Joe Kent
Regime changed him and he was, you know, executed by his own people in the most horrific way.
- [31:54]
Josh Hammer
Oh, sodomized by a bayonet.
- [31:55]
Alex Canceroitz
Right.
- [31:55]
Josh Hammer
Ok, so that's what, that's the lesson, I think that the entire region took from that when Hillary Clinton, unfortunately, that
- [32:02]
Joe Kent
is what the neocon, neoliberal warmongers, that's the lesson that they showed everyone in the region.
- [32:08]
Josh Hammer
Okay, so he's saying that Khamenei told us that he can't have a nuclear weapon, therefore we believe that he can't have a nuclear weapon. And then this is getting regurgitated by the literal Iranian regime propaganda channel, press tv. I mean, like, what is there even to say about that. First of all, this alleged fatwa literally does not exist. It's actually just a total lie. It was spread as regime antiprop and it was picked up by people like Max Blumenthal, a gray zone people apparently like Joe Kent. It's just not true. By the way, this same TV network in Iran that was just disseminating and regurgitating all this Tucker joking content called Press TV is actually one of the subjects of a brand new study out today from a great group based out of New Jersey called ncri, the Network Contagion Research Institute, which has this whole new study just out today. You can check it out@networkcontagent us about how Iranian state media, led by Press TV is involved in a sprawling influence operation on U.S. soil. Now the NCRA study is mostly focused on left wing organizations such as the Workers World Party, wwp. But it seems to us, based on what we can tell, that they have some, shall we say, friendly mouthpieces when it comes to people like Joe Kent and Tucker Carlson as well. Fortunately, the American people are just simply not buying any of this whatsoever there. They firmly stand with President Trump and not with people like Kent and Carlson. We have some new polling on that that we will discuss among other things after a very short commercial break folks, dates. We will be right back with some closing thoughts on all this.
- [33:46]
Alex Canceroitz
Hi, this is Alex Canceroitz. I'm the host of Big Technology Podcast, a longtime reporter and an on air contributor to cnbc. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, in meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology Podcast wherever you get your podcasts.
- [34:23]
Josh Hammer
Welcome back. So this is clearly an information operation as we've been explaining on the show all week, and you should have your eyes and ears tuned up for the good news. And it's very good news is that Republican voters simply are not buying this whatsoever. It's actually a brand new poll just out Today on Thursday, March 19th from JL Partners. The new York Post covered this in article this morning. A new JL Partner survey showed that 83% of likely Republican voters strongly or somewhat support Operation epic fury. Only 9% say they strongly or somewhat oppose it. 84% of respondents say that they agree with Donald Trump's foreign policy. Only 6% say they agree with Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly on this stuff as opposed to Donald Trump himself. So the numbers on this don't lie. There is just overwhelming, overwhelming agreement that Donald Trump has this correct, at least within his own base, within the mag Republican base. Our friend Harry Entin over at CNN has some other numbers in this. It's pretty persuasive stuff. Go ahead and watch this.
- [35:25]
Alex Canceroitz
Yeah, you know, sometimes you look at the polling data and there are numbers that just jump off the screen at you. And this is one of those because just take a look here. MAGA GOP view of Trump approve 100%. 100%. If you are a member of MAGA and the GOP, you approve of Donald John Trump, 0% say that they disapprove. You don't have to be a mathematical genius to know you can't go higher than 100%. He is the 1972 Miami Dolphins. Now, there are some Republicans who disapprove of Donald John Trump, but they are not members of the Make America Great Again movement. The bottom line is this, if you are a member of MAGA, you approve of Donald Trump.
- [36:08]
Josh Hammer
Harry with the historical 1972 Miami Dolphins reference. For those of you who are not as big football fans as Harry or myself, the Miami Dolphins from 1972 are the only team in NFL history to ever go undefeated. So Donald Trump, literally undefeated, much like the 1972 Miami Dolphins in this particular poll. So Donald Trump soaring on popularity right now. And a lot of this, frankly, that's why a lot of folks say, you know, what's the point? And well, that's confrontation, perhaps for another day. But these people have an agenda. It's just not a good one. And more to the point, it is an agenda that is actually really not being supported by anyone close to calling him herself a MAGA Republican. Now, in other sports related news outside of the of the confines of the 1972 Miami Dolphins, we're big, we're big sports fans here on the show. It's not a sports talk show. You don't necessarily watch this program to get your sports news. Maybe you go to outkick or barstool sports or elsewhere. Today is a big day on the sporting calendar. It is the first full day of the NCAA men's basketball tournament, otherwise known as March Madness. I've been following this tournament for as long as I can remember, literally, I think since I was in third or fourth Grade. I have all sorts of fond memories from being in middle school and high school and trying to sneak away on the opening Thursday and Friday of the tournaments to try to stream some games from. At that time was a much slower Internet connection in the high school library. I literally think back to the online streaming. There was a very funny button on the old streaming. I'm not sure if it still exists today where it called it Boss Mode. And if you click Boss mode, the stream immediately turns into what looks like a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. So basically, if you're working in the office and you're trying to watch the UNC or Kentucky game at 2pm and your boss comes by, oh my God, click Boss mode. And therefore the game disappears and you look like you're crunching numbers. It's kind of gimmicky, but it's just a funny thing there. I love this tournament. It is maybe my single favorite sporting event on the American sporting calendar on a year in, year out basis. The only thing really that comes to mind, the really, I guess only two things that come to mind as being in the same caliber of that, that would be the Masters, the golf tournament, which is right around the same time. Actually, the Masters is always around the same time as the Final Four. It's usually the weekend right after the Final Four, actually. And then there's the US Open in tennis, which is deeply, deeply sentimental for me and magical event in and of itself. But March Madness, what is there to say? It is the quintessential story of the records, the statistics, it all goes out the window. They call it March Madness because every team has a shot. It is kind of the ultimate example of egalitarianism in American sports. I'm not saying that there aren't favorites. Of course there are favorites. In fact, I actually vividly remember the very first final four was 2008, where the one seed from all four regions actually made it to the Final Four. That was the year 2008 where the title game was Kansas versus Memphis. It was Bill Self's Kansas Jayhawks versus John Calipari's Memphis Tigers. Memphis was actually leading most of that game. Long story short, Kansas ends up winning on a heroic Mario Chalmers shot. So that was actually the first year the final four was actually all 41 seeds. And as a Duke fan, I know you're probably gonna boo me, boo or whatever, I don't really care. As a Duke fan, I think a lot about 1 seeds this year and last year because our team has been probably the single most frequent one Seed in the tournament in the era of the modern 64 team tournament, which been going on for about four decades, since around 1984, 85, 86. That was the adventure of the 64 team modern tournament there. And that is my team. I am a die hard, die hard Duke basketball fan. I started following Duke basketball when I was in third grade. Probably the long story short of it is that my parents took me to a local carnival and there was like a little basketball game at the carnival and I made the shots. And my prize was like, was I won a little miniature basketball and my favorite color is blue. So I picked the blue basketball, which happened to be a Duke basketball. I had no idea what Duke was. I asked my father, I said, what is Duke? He said, duke is a good basketball team. I was like, cool. And then the next year, that's when I was in third grade. The next year I was in fourth grade. This would be 1999, 2000, no season. At the time, Duke was the number one team in the country. And their best player was a man by the name of Elton Brand, who ended up having a pretty decent pro career. Elton Brand was from about 20 minutes north of where I was from. He was kind of the local hero in Westchester county. And I started following Duke that year. Duke lost in heartbreaking fashion to UConn in the title game that year. Unfortunately, that'll be the exact same case in the 2004 Final Four in San Antonio. Duke and UConn actually the top two seeds in the East Region again. So we're looking at a potential Elite Eight matchup between Duke and UConn in Washington, D.C. in about two weeks. There we will see if that transpires. According to the numbers here, Duke is the odds on favorite. They are picked to win it by the highest percentage of brackets this year on espn, looks like Arizona, which is the overall. The second overall one seed. Arizona is the second highest likelihood. Michigan would be number three. And then Florida and Houston kind of rounding out the pack there. There's so much to say, but it's just a beautiful, beautiful tournament. There is really a minimization of corporate sponsorships. There's really no major sponsorships on the jerseys, on the floors. It's all for the love of the game. That's the beauty of college sports. And one of the reasons that I've been so personally distraught in recent years when it comes to nil, when it comes to all this money that's sloshing around now, when it comes to NCAA athletics, there was this big meeting at the White House a couple weeks ago, Ron DeSantis was there, Tiger woods was there talking about college sports. I saw Nick Saban, the former Alabama football coach, was there as well. And all of this threatens at some level to diminish the beauty of this competition. I mean, I think back to times where I've seen college players just burst out into tears because they lost or they won. Just the level of raw emotion and passion, you don't really see that all too frequently when it comes to professional athletics. You know, if LeBron James or Steph Curry is winning the NBA championship, you're not going to see LeBron James break out and cry. It's really fundamentally a younger person's thing. So I'm actually also a huge Formula one racing fan. I watch every single race. And this past weekend was the Chinese Grand Prix over in Shanghai. And for the first time, Kimi Antonelli, who is a 19 year old, he's now a sophomore, not a rookie, he won a Grand Prix for the first time and he started crying. It was a really beautiful thing. But this level of passion, emotion is many ways a younger person's thing. And there's so many traditions of this tournament. After the final game, after the team wins it all, they play a very special song every year. One shining moment's been around for decades. And they customize the video to the whole tournament there. This year, the Final Four is actually back in Indianapolis. I say back because I have personally been to the Final Four in Indianapolis twice. I was there in 2010 and I was there in 2015. What happened in 2010 and 2015? Duke won the national championship both years. In 2010, I was a junior in college. We drove from North Carolina to Indianapolis for the Final Four in the championship game. In 2015, I was in law school in Chicago. Drove from Chicago, short drive down to Indianapolis for the games as well. If Duke does make it that far again, I will have a very hard time saying no to trying to fly back to Indy. We shall see if that happens. Duke has a very difficult draw. In fact, they probably have the toughest draw of any of the one seats there. But regardless of who you're rooting for, whether you, like me, are rooting for big, bad, evil Duke. Go Devils. Whether you're like me or whether you have another team in mind there, enjoy this tournament and try to just smile. Think not about necessarily all the things we talk about on today's show and all our shows, just smile. In sports, sometimes there is just pure unmitigated joy and that really, above all, folks, is what it's all about. Folks, have a great rest of your evening. Enjoy the games. We'll be right back. Much more tomorrow.
- [44:32]
Alex Canceroitz
Hi, this is Alex Canceroitz. I'm the host of Big Technology Podcast, a longtime reporter and an on air contributor to cnbc. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, in meetings with your colleagues, and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology Podcast. Wherever you get your podcasts.