← The Tony Kinnett Cast
The Tony Kinnett Cast
Ep. 546 - Iran Rejects Ceasefire Amid Bankruptcy, Another Democrat Resigns, SPLC Indicted
01:32:56
The Iranian regime is in disarray as several members of the diplomatic delegation go to Islamabad, some stay behind, the president of Iran says one thing, and a major general from the IRGC says something else. Scandals and indictments here at home.
Loading summary
Transcript52 lines
- [00:01]
A
Some follow the noise. Bloomberg follows the money. Whether it's the funds fueling AI or crypto's trillion dollar swings, there's a money side to every story. Get the money side of the story. Subscribe now@Bloomberg.com
- [00:18]
B
Tony Kennett, Tony Kennett.
- [00:20]
A
Tony Kennett.
- [00:21]
B
Tony Kennett. Tony Kennett.
- [00:22]
C
Tony Kennett.
- [00:23]
B
Tony Kennett, host of the Tony Kennett cast. Let's get down to business. You're listening to the Tony Kennett cast on 93WibcyTV here on the Daily Signal. Good evening and welcome to the Tony Knittcast here on the Daily Signal, nationally syndicated, first on 93 WIBC. We have got a lot of news that is flying in. Information on a Department of justice indictment against the Southern Poverty Law center. Will be joined by Tyler o', Neill, our senior editor, a little bit later. He'll break down that stuff for us. And let's be real, kind of need a couple of minutes to put some of the notes together on this because that is a major development. Speaking of major developments, well, the president of the United States is extending the Iran ceasefire. Sort of. When I say sort of, I mean the president of the United States put out a statement and a lot of people are saying this is Trump taco ing out. Ah, he's chickening out. He's not moving forward with his announcement. Well, this comes after the Iranians said they weren't sending anyone to the ceasefire talks. And then another group of Iranians said, wait a minute, we are sending someone to the ceasefire talks. And so Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President J.D. vance and Secretary of War Pete Hagseth and presumably the President of the United States, Donald Trump, looked at each other in the Oval Office this afternoon. And Trump said, that sounds kind of weird if we're sending you all the way over to Islamabad. JD Seems kind of weird if we don't even know who's gonna meet you there. Could be Rosie o', Donnell, could be the ayatollah, could be the foreign minister supreme. And so the statement from the president this afternoon came, quote, based on the fact that the government of Iran is seriously fractured, not unexpectedly so. And upon the request of Field Marshal, excuse me, Field Marshal Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shabazz Sharif of Pakistan, we have been asked to hold our attack on the country of Iran until such a time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal. Now, that's a totally, totally different thing than kind of what was initially reported by outside groups. So we're going to get to what the Iranian media reported. I'm not joking. Five different media outlets from state affiliate television. Rather strange, curious, for sure. But the president continued, quote, I have therefore directed our military to continue the naval blockade and in all other respects remain ready, enabled, and will therefore extend the ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted and discussions are concluded one way or the other. President Donald J. Trump. So here's the. Too long, you know, didn't read all the President's response here. The request for a ceasefire came from Pakistan, which means it came from China. Essentially, you had the leaders going, please, oh, please, don't bomb the living crap out of them again. Because this time, Trump said, it's time for planes, trains, bridges, automobiles, power plants, Baskin, Robbins, all of it. And that's something that the President of the United States has been indicating for a while. The United States, right before the last ceasefire began, said, hey, you see this bridge? Well, it's not finished yet. But what if it was really not finished? What if, in fact, this bridge, instead of being in a couple of pieces, was in lots of pieces? And then there was some screaming and crying and Iran said, okay, okay, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Well, that was back when Iran had kind of a unified approach. I'm going to be as, as candid with you as I can here. It is very difficult to keep all of the various names of the Iranian regime in order in my head, much less on the notes in front of me. They're essentially a jumble of phlegm and consonants. And every time I go through the show with you, there's a different set of names, different foreign ministers, different parliament officials, different major generals and general majors that are out there doing their stuff. I mean, everyone except for Tim Walls in full combat dress in Italy appears on these news reports of who is supposedly speaking for the Iranian regime. So what about this? Why do we need a unified Iranian proposal? What's the point? Well, boys, girls and squirrels, because a ceasefire from the United States is not a natural wonderful good thing that we're just seeking for the fun of it. There are some out there who think that the White House really desperately just wants a ceasefire, because ceasefire sounds like a really good word. No, no, no, no. You may remember, in fact, I would encourage you to remember that the President of the United States made it quite clear not too long ago that at least as far as this administration was concerned, the ceasefire was for Iran's benefit. If they were willing to give the United States some of the stuff that it wanted for Example, uranium dust, need a little bit more than pledge to wipe it up, that kind of thing. Also, the Strait of Hormuz being open and unmolested as the Iranians threw last gasp in trying to throw a little RPG or five at every passing boat. Now, the Iranian media really doesn't know what to do with this because they want to make it seem as though the United States wants the ceasefire. But also the United States blockading the Strait of Hormuz is a violation of the ceasefire, but them blocking the Strait of Hormuz is not a violation of the ceasefire. Yeah, it doesn't make any sense to absolutely anybody at all. And it doesn't make sense to them. And you can tell that because the various Iran linked state news outlets, this, this being Tasnim, saying Iran says its official position will be announced at a later stage. Yeah, pretty cool stuff. Yeah. And then a totally different outlet said a couple of minutes later, quote, Iran does not recognize the extension of the ceasefire today announced by Trump. It may not commit to it. Oh, little, maybe, maybe there. And it will act in accordance with national interests. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, again, I'm, I'm impressed. But that's not all, Billy Mays. But wait, there's more from the, from a separate news agency. They've announced that the United States continuing the naval blockade means there was never a ceasefire to begin with. Iran will not open the Strait of Hormuz as long as someone else's blockade continues. By the way, just for the record here, as far as the Strait of Hormuz is concerned, it is not an Iranian body of water. It is considered by the United nations an international body of water, both by mileage distance from the coast as well as based on the international trade routes going through this raid of moves in the Persian Gulf as a whole. And that's going to be important here because Iran is begging and pleading and pleading and begging the United nations over the US seizing a boat that was violating the blockade. So anyway, they've announced that Iran is going to break this blockade and they are going to attack with force. And there is yet another announcement, this one from a spokesperson for the Khatam Al Anbiya headquarters, that's the headquarters of the irgc, think the Pentagon, but with less everything. Anywho, they say, quote, in light of the repeated threats from the US President, we warn that our forces are on full alert with their finger on the trigger. So yesterday they were ready to reveal new cards. That's right, Skip Bow Uno, maybe the five cards of Exodia. That's right. So many cards, so little time. Today, their fingers are everywhere on the pulse, on Eric Swalwell, on the trigger, who knows? And so they're saying this is in case of any aggression or action against Iran. But they've also just said that the naval blockade was the action against Iran. I'm sorry, you really shouldn't try to piece the logic together. I mean, because there is none. There's nothing here. There's nothing of substance. And the infighting in the Iranian regime is getting worse. The President making that case. You openly have members of the IRGC that are, are feuding with Foreign Ministry. And this is the real reason the United States is not sending J.D. vance over. The real reason they're not sending them over is if the foreign minister shows up and then what happens? Last time the IRGC says no, that foreign minister was lying. He was way out over his skis. He had no idea what he was talking about. We say no. And the Trump administration said, okay, well then send a representative of the irgc. And the Foreign Ministry said, well, he's not legitimate. I'm legitimate. It's essentially the episode of the sitcom where two people are somehow, look, they look the same. And they're trying to convince the main character, oh, no, I'm the real person. No, I'm the real person. That's what's going on amid Iran's critical bankruptcy. Iran is out of money, it is out of food, it is out of pretty much everything. And China sending a bargain bin of crazy Uncle Kraken's fireworks from the side of the interstate over to Iran to try to make ends meet for just a little while. Yeah, they're not getting there. They're not getting there. Now, this doesn't stop senators from Connecticut like Chris Murphy from being the dumbest person that you know, which you know for him is kind of run of the mill, except he got extra, extra stupid. We're going to talk about that over on the live stream side of things. Radio crew, we're going to send you over to the commercial, a big show tonight. Don't go anywhere. It's the Tony Kinnit cast here on the Daily Signal. Now, like I said, here on the live stream, we don't make you guys sit through commercial breaks. So while they're enjoying FCC regulated commercial time, allow me to share some additional updates. So Iran lead negotiator, Golly Boff's advisor said that Trump's ceasefire extension lacks logic and is a move to buy time for a surprise Strike. You can't have it all of these different ways. And again, the Iranian state media can't even agree with itself. But that doesn't stop some of the bigger idiots around the entire world from really engaging with the stupidity as hard and as heavy as they can. Case in point, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. So he was roasted in probably one of the worst ratios, meaning that he posted something and everyone made fun of him when he. When a random account. Ali Vaiz, this, this propaganda mouthpiece for Iran made the claim that 26 of the Iranian shadow fleet. That's right, the shadow fleet of Iran. Yeah. You didn't know they had a shadow fleet, did you? The super special Super Duper Ninja Extreme, Pride of allah, super duper 007. Force of extra submarines. They don't just travel in the ocean, they travel underneath it. Yeah, 26 of those vessels had, according to Ali Vaez, made it through the US Blockade. The force with all of the satellites pointed at the Strait of Hormuz. And who is firing holes in the sides of any boat that comes near it, removing engine blocks faster than a discount oil swap here in the United States? Well, Chris Murphy, again, senator from Connecticut, decided this was his time to shine. And so he, quote, tweeted this and said, awesome. Now you, you might be wondering why a certain senator of the United States of America would be cheering on the propaganda of an enemy of the United States. And you would be right to wonder why he would be doing that. As Molly Hemingway, good friend of the show and might be joining us here on the show here pretty soon of the Federalist, pointed out some of her previous reporting that Chris Murphy has spoken off the record in situations very questionably legal to members of the Iranian regime before, but, you know, probably not the case here. So Chris Murphy gets raked because, again, a United States senator making the case. That would be awesome, man. I sure hope that the United States loses this. That is not only something very unpopular with Americans, it is just a very stupid thing in general to do. Now, he was. A lot of times there will be online posts and people make a bigger deal of it than it is. Too many people live in the online spaces. Well, Chris Murphy was roasted over this so severely that he was like forced to go on the record over this. Like, TV reporters are following him around going, sir, do your parents receive sympathy cards on your birthday because you're just that stupid. Here was his response to this.
- [13:22]
A
Twitter's become kind of a cesspool.
- [13:23]
B
I probably should give up on sarcasm. Twitter, obviously, anybody that's seen anything that
- [13:28]
A
I have said about Trump's war knows
- [13:31]
B
that I think it's bungled, mismanaged, and he should end it as quickly as possible. But sarcasm is not something, I guess, that's allowed on Twitter any longer. Allow me to very, very briefly remind everyone that if you have to explain away something that you said, oh, I was actually joking. You didn't understand the fact that I was joking because you don't get it. And that's why they are being roasted to kingdom come. He couldn't just let well enough alone, or I guess let poor enough alone in this particular instance, because he then got back out on social media after he did this report, and he's like, okay, Twitter, I can't believe I need to clarify this, but obviously Trump's bungled mismanagement of this war is not awesome. As I've said a million times here is a disaster and he should end the war immediately. My tweet was something called sarcasm. Yeah, okay, bud, okay. We all believe you. We don't. But incredible. And by the way, not even the Iranian regime tried to make this particular claim. Iranian state media later tried to say that actually nine ships had passed through of their super shadow Navy, and then they revised that down to five. So our thoughts and prayers, you know, go out to Chris Murphy, the Ayatollah of Connecticut. Now, by the way, as far as actual traffic data, in this particular instance, before things got a little spooky and gun shooty, rooty tooty again, marine traffic via NBC, about 12 commercial ships ended up passing through the Strait of Hormuz, none of them affiliated with Iran whatsoever. We got to send the radio crew, we got to bring them back in from commercial. Don't go anywhere. Tons to talk about, including resignations from Congress. It's the Tony Kenneth cast, The Tony Kennett cast on 93 WIBC. So after representative Eric Swalwell resigned because the allegations got worse and worse and worse and worse. And it went from, hey, remember that time you groped a woman 17, younger, 17 years younger than you. And as, as Ruben Gallego put it, when he was sweating and shivering like a child brought in from the snow on Little House on the Prairie, he was saying, oh, he was just a flirt. Now, it turns out that Swalwell may have done a little Bill Cosby date raping right after this, a very pleasant scandal for the House Democrats. Republicans said, hey, wait a minute, you have other individuals in your caucus who, going forward, you know, we're happy to throw out. We threw out George Santos, the Liar supreme from New York, of course, also Tony Gonzalez down in Texas. As George Strait would put it, he's gone sorry, wrong, wrong country actor for that analogy. But not important. I'm going to move on here. It really would not be a very good thing for the House of Representatives right now to have yet another major resignation and scandal. By the way, the joke was would be Brooks and done in the bootscoot and boogie. But sorry, ADHD works in mysterious ways. The House did go forward with a major ethics committee investigation after back on November 18, 2025, Sheila Sherfilis McCormick, representative of Florida, was charged by a grand jury in Miami indicting her for stealing federal disaster funds from fema, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, then laundering the proceeds and then using the money to support her 2021 congressional campaign. Because, you know, if you can't get people to donate to your campaign, steal it from fema. Come on, who of us hasn't? Her family healthcare company received a $5 million overpayment on a FEMA funded COVID 19 vaccination staffing contract. Remember when there were those telling you that there were people likely going to be misusing COVID 19 relief dollars, remember? And then you were told, oh no, no, that that's not happening because you know, Biden has to just pump money into the economy uncontrollably. I mean, of course he has to is like required. And then she took that money that, you know, you were told she wasn't using and then stuffed it into her campaign. That's according to the US Department of Justice. So the specific charges include theft of $5 million in FEMA funds, money laundering, making illegal campaign contributions, and conspiring to file a false federal tax return. She also allegedly used some of the FEMA money to buy a $109,000 3.4 carat yellow diamond ring, which by the way, I've seen. And it's freaking ugly anyhow, just a little side piece because, you know, again, nothing says classic Democrat fraud like also throwing on some bling. You know, remember good old Senator Menendez up in New Jersey? The Democrat senator who was paid off by Egypt in solid gold bars and then his wife, you know, picked up a nice fancy sports car because, ah, you know, why not so beautiful. Beautiful stuff indeed. She, by the way, would face up to 53 years in prison if convicted. And then of course, her brother Edwin and two co defendants. No, no, no, no, no. Not, not her brother, husband. That's a different squad member. Nadej LeBlanc, and tax preparer David Spencer were also charged. Man, can't even find a guy to cook the books correctly. That trial set to begin February 2027, but the charges came down in November. Now, did Hakeem Jeffries say, hey, maybe you should think about resigning in November? No. You were told that's a super political evil, bad, super stinky, awful thing. No, of course she's not gonna resign. Oh, this. This is partisan investigating. Remember. Remember that? Oh, now, several months later, after congressman after congressman after congresswoman after congresswoman, getting caught from everything, from receiving texts from old Jeffrey Epstein and how you go after the Trump administration to Bill Cosby date raping. Allegedly, man, maybe keeping, you know, Sheila Syphilis McCormick around isn't too good for the party. Isn't too good for Congress heading into the 2026 midterms. And again, please do not take my word for it. Right before today, that would being yesterday. For those of you calendar experts. Hakeem Jeffries, the House Minority Leader, was asked, hey, you going to expel Sheila? You're going to give her the old Brooks and done boot scooting boogie as well? You thinking about it? This is how Hakeem Jeffries, Mr. Super, if I would have known, I would have removed Eric Swalwell immediately. I would have taken action. This is how he responded to that. Again, remember the charges, the indictment, the evidence has been out for months regarding old Sheila. Here's how Hakeem responded.
- [20:37]
A
Is this a vote of conscience for
- [20:39]
B
Democrats to determine what should be done with Sheila Sherfilis McCormick? Oh, her middle last name is pronounced Sherfilis. Huh, I didn't know that. Are we going to convene as a
- [20:51]
D
caucus in the aftermath of the recommendations
- [20:55]
B
that we anticipate at some point this week? I love it when when the academic class stitches fancy words together. We're going to consolidate our commiserate in committee ables which we could synthesize a photosynthesis automatopia. Yes. Academia. Yes. And if possible, for with their hitherto absolute mentally from the Ethics Committee. And then we will proceed in a
- [21:22]
D
manner consistent with our approach to these types of ethics matters, which is to
- [21:28]
C
always and at all times follow the
- [21:31]
D
facts and apply the relevant law without fear or favor.
- [21:37]
B
I've often made fun of Hakeem Jeffries, given that he sounds like a love child between Barack Obama and William Shatner as Captain James Tiberius Kirk. But in this instance, neither Obama or James Tiberius Kirk as William Shatner. Excuse me, William Shatner as neither of them were that bad. Holy dodging the question. Batman Not a good look. Not a good look at all. But it gets worse. It does. It gets a whole lot worse because just minutes, minutes before the House Ethics committee hearing this morning, in which they would bring her before the ethics committee and ask questions like, hey there, did you, did you take a bunch of money from fema? And hey, these tax records say you got paid out a big cha ching level check here. Did you steal it? Did you launder it? What did you do, Sheila? And you know, I mean, I mean, that would have been great tv. Uh, but the bipartisan committee, before they even got to the, you know, before we even got to the committee, she decided, nope, I'm out. Because nothing says, hey, I'm innocent. Like right before an ethics committee starting. Matt Gaetz dropping out because this is a sham. And please don't ask that 17 year old homeless girl on record whether I solicit her for sex to pay for her braces. Matt Gaetz. But the Democrats are just as good at this. So ol Sheila, she resigns and releases this big you can't fire me because I quit kind of statements. Now I. Guys, I love these statements. I do. From the bottom of my cold dead Hoosier heart. So she says, ahem. This was not a fair process. The ethics committee refused my new attorney's reasonable request for time to prepare my defense. By going forward with this process while a criminal indictment is pending, the committee prevented me from defending myself. Nope. No, they did not. See, the cool thing is you can actually go before the committee and defend yourself. It's real neat. You stand there and then you answer questions and then you defend yourself. It's pretty nifty. Kind of cool, huh? See, I don't need to go through all of these loops and hoops and jumping on, you know, pleading the fifth like act blue yesterday or in, in old Sheila's case here, just like, you know, throwing my toys out and saying, I'm not gonna answer any questions because, you know, I don't commit federal fraud. It's kind of cool. Radio crew, I know you guys don't commit federal fraud either, so try not to resign from Congress. You know, you take a bit of time here, you go to the commercial break. We're gonna continue. Cause it gets even worse. On the live stream. YouTube.com DailySignal it's the Tony Kennett cast. And uh, we'll see you guys back in a few minutes. Now never fear, boys and girls. Not only did she throw her toys down, the House Ethics Committee was not very kind. So the House Bipartisan House Ethics committee found her guilty on 25 of 27 charges. Now, that was back on March 27th. So that's that kind of a hearing. At that point, they were gonna bring her up again and say, hey, right before we do a little expulsion vote, right before we decide it's time, you know, should you stay or should you go? That kind of a thing. You know, maybe. Maybe you come before us one final time and tell us who stole the cheese. And she wouldn't do it. She wouldn't do it. Now, again, when a bipartisan committee finds you guilty of the indictment, it really shouldn't have come this long. But she was part of that deal. Well, what deal was that a part of? Well, when Representative Corey Mills, also a Republican of Florida, you know, the guy who had a lot of issues. Again, the Blaze has reported on this extensively. Highly recommend their reporting. It just so happens. It just so happens that he also got married at the Al Qaeda mosque and may have lied about his faith and military service and was never actually a sniper at all. Shout out to Tim Walsh. Just a whole series of serious issues. So I've got a better suggestion for each of you out there. Okay, here's my suggestion. Don't do weird expulsion swaps or protection swaps when you find them doing the stinky stuff, expel them from Congress. Now, it's easy. Now, there are some other individuals that also should be up for consideration in this, but, you know, are they going to get the boot? Maybe. This is where you would expect me to say, probably not. There's a lot of momentum right now in the country to get rid of a lot of congressmen and women who suck. Because it turns out that the midterm, as I've been saying for months and months and months, Somebody get the Tony. Ken, it was right jar. Americans are not going to come out for this midterm, which means anytime you have a Democrat that can give Democrat voters an excuse not to come out, or anytime you can get Republican voters an excuse not to come out and vote for Republican. It's like canceling plans. Americans love canceling plans. You tell Americans tomorrow they don't have to go to the DMV to get their license renewed. It's that cycle, you know, this year. You can just renew online. They're absolutely going to take that opportunity. And so House leadership on both sides of the aisle does not want this right now. Well, you know, unfortunately, that's not all. Ilhan Omar is in a rather bad situation because her net worth skyrocketing is getting a lot more attention. And of course you know, the immigration fraud of allegedly marrying her brother. We've already covered that information here on the show. Her net worth jumping to remarkable levels. And then of course suggesting it was an accounting error. You know, like how J.B. pritzker said he made millions and millions of dollars because he had a couple of really lucky hands of blackjack. You know, like we all do. Well, the Lindell TV reporter who gets more in the face congressional interviews and statements than anybody else on Capitol Hill. Really impressive. Here she was today being asked about this net worth thing. Doesn't come away looking good. Senator Gallego. Sweating and shivering kind of a thing. The last time I spoke to you, you said that I was stupid for asking you about your financial disclosure. But there's some discrepancies on there. Would you like to explain that? How safe I'm salutely for asking me anything. I am. Yes. Well, what about the American people who are wondering how you made such a big. I have to explain to the American people. What's the explanation? I have given them the explanation. Do you want to tell our viewers? Cuz they're. I don't want to tell you, Jack. How about that? Okay. You have a good day. Thank you. You go girl. I don't want to tell you, Jack. I'm so. I'm so brave and stunning. I gave an explanation. What's the explanation? Well, I'm not talking to you. I'm gonna go home and hang out with my breathband. Excellent, Excellent. That looks great. Heading into midterms, we gotta swing back, pick up the radio crew from commercial, then we're gonna talk about the other side of the Senate. Don't go anywhere. Tony Kennett cast here on the Daily Signal. Dad. Bingo. It's the Tony Kennett cast with special guest Rob Bluey. You heard the music. It's time for Rob Bluey, president of the the Daily Signal. Rob, good to see a lot of stuff going on out there in the nation's capital.
- [28:55]
C
Good to see you, Tony. Yes, not just in our nation's capital, but apparently all over the world. So whether Vice President Vance actually takes off for Pakistan is, you know, is a big question mark. But yes, right here on Capitol Hill, there's no shortage of debates that are taking place, that's for sure.
- [29:13]
B
So I've got this comment, I've gotten this question at least 10 times in the last week and a half and I can't put it any other way than just pitching it to you. Are we ever actually going to see the government open. Like, is it going to fully open at this point or is it just going to be partially closed like an old mattress firm? What's the, what's the scoop?
- [29:31]
C
Yeah, this is, this has reached proportions that, that I never expected. And quite frankly, Tony, thank you for bringing it up because so many news organizations in the legacy media, if this had been a Democrat president and a Republican Congress, there would be tickers on every single news website that you could imagine. It would be a topic of conversation every single night in primetime. T. It's just frankly not received the attention it deserves. You're absolutely correct. There are portions of the government that remain closed because Democrats refuse to fund those agencies that, that do immigration enforcement. It's put Republicans now in a position where they're trying to figure out if there's a workaround where they don't have to use the normal budget process, the appropriations process for, for funding these agencies. And they've turned to this tool, this budgetary tool called reconciliation, because it requires a simple majority rather than the 60 votes. In the Senate debate, though, you're having between conservatives and Republicans is there are conservatives who at the Republican Study Committee and others on Capitol Hill who said we should use reconciliation and we're glad to include ICE and Customs and Border Protection, but don't just do those two agencies. Let's actually do something more substantive that enacts a larger part of President Trump's agenda. And that's exactly what the debate is taking place on Capitol Hill right now.
- [30:48]
B
I mean, are we still seeing this debate take place? I'm not really seeing a lot of new statements coming from senators offices where they're talking about this. And this goes back to your original point about news outlets covering it. When I see a new statement that comes out from Senator so and so's office, I can say, ah, hey, look, here's a little bit of an update. Here's something new. And instead it just seems like they're all standing around with hands in the suit coat pockets. At least that's the perspective outside the Beltway that we're getting.
- [31:13]
C
Sure. And you've had some Democrats at certain points who had seemed willing to pass this, this funding for these two, these two agencies. Again, we're talking about immigrations and Customs Enforcement and custom border protection. And so you, you have a debate that's really so you have the conservatives, the Mike Lee's of the world and the Heritage foundation and Heritage Action, which say don't squander this opportunity. We know how difficult it is to get anything passed on Capitol Hill. And if you're going to take the easy road out and use one of your opportunities for reconciliation only on these two agencies, albeit for the next three years, it's really a missed opportunity. And so the establishment Republicans, though, Majority Leader Thune and others, they have coalesced around this idea of doing what they call a skinny, or as I think Mike Lee has called it, an anorexic reconciliation bill, because literally there's, there's almost nothing to it. Tony, let's think back to the one big beautiful bill that, that Congress passed last year. Think about how, how many committees were involved, how many different pieces of, of, of legislation were combined into one big, beautiful bill, as the president called it. And yes, it did take a, a bigger effort on the part of Speaker Peter Thune, but we're all better off for it today as a result of that, the Congress working together. In fact, I was just this morning at an event at the Department of Transportation with Secretary Duffy where he was touting the 12 and a half billion dollars in air traffic control improvements that were included in that bill. Now, if you just do the ICE and CBP funding, you're not going to have an opportunity for President Trump to really tout all the other wins that he would like to, to have. And Tony, let's also remember one final thing. This might be their last opportunity. If Republicans lose control of Congress, they're not going to have a chance next year.
- [33:02]
B
This is one of the things that I wanted to ask you today. Just in general, there seem to be a lot of individual departments in the administration that are trying to do different things. You have the Department of Justice in the USDA looking at, you know, some of the meatpacking facility stuff. You have the Department of Transportation completely retrofitting, trying to revamp how we do our air traffic control, an upgrade that is decades in the making. Then, of course, we have the FBI looking at those who are trying to escape to other countries after participating in foreign influence and terrorism plots here in the United States. All of these departments are doing all of these different things, but I'm not really seeing it communicated to the American people. That's got a lot of Americans wondering as well. I don't know if you've seen the footage of people going around to bartenders and things and asking about their tax returns. And they've been, they said, well, yeah, we got a huge tax return this year. We don't know why. What do we need to see as far as like an actual communication point to the American people. If this really is the last chance. I mean, some, maybe a carrot instead of just the stick to get the Senate moving.
- [34:04]
C
That's, that's a great point, Tony. I was thinking about this last week in particular, as, as we were embarking on Tax day, which I believe was Wednesday of last week, and we were talking about anything, it seemed, but the large tax returns. Granted, there's some media bias there. They obviously don't want to highlight the success and this big, monumental win for the Trump administration. However, I do think that members of the administration themselves probably need to focus more on less of the personality conflicts. Again, we had the Labor Department, Labor Secretary resign after a number of scandals that came out like, those are the headlines. You don't want. You want to be talking about all of the positive changes that the Trump team at the Labor Department has implemented over the course of the last year and a half almost. And so I really do hope that they take your advice and look for opportunities to sell some of these wins, because that's what the American people truly need to hear. If they're going to reelect a Republican Congress, they need the confidence that that Republican Congress is actually going to be a better alternative than the Democrats, who, quite frankly, we saw what a disaster it was when Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer were in charge last time.
- [35:19]
B
I mean, I guess that just kind of from a more inexperienced perspective, looking into the way that politics function in Washington and how American people perceive it, it's a difficult thing when you're trying to task, packaging a win together, because if it comes across as disingenuous, as though you're trying to game the public into believing there's more of a victory than there is, then they won't trust you. But then if you ignore the victory, then they don't take it into account anyway. Has there actually been a time that we've seen, and I don't have an answer in mind here. I'm really asking this, just if there is an answer. In modern American history, is there a time where the American people were given a series of wins and it generated its own kind of momentum from administration or congressional announcements?
- [36:06]
C
You know, I'd have to go back and do a closer study of history. The one immediate thing that comes to mind, and I'm putting this in the context of a midterm election year, because obviously that.
- [36:17]
B
Yeah, very, very important. Yes.
- [36:19]
C
So. So, I mean, if you think back to 2002, Republicans should have historically lost and they were able to make some gains. Now, we were in a completely different country at that point, it seems. And it was obviously in the aftermath of 9 11, the country was a lot more unified behind George W. Bush. But if you look at what happened to Bush in 2006, that's when Democrats took control of the House and the Senate. If you look at what happened to Barack Obama in 2010, you could go down the list. Donald Trump in 2018. And so historically speaking, yeah, it's hard for the administration in power to package up the wins. Even Joe Biden attempted to do it right. With the Inflation Reduction act and other things that he did. I just don't think, as you see,
- [37:04]
B
that's what I'm saying, we're buying it, trying to con. I mean, that's, that's the, that's the kicker. Right, because you don't want to be Biden over packaging. I mean, do you remember being a kid and thinking there was some kind of a dessert or some kind of a treat that just looked incredible? The packaging, the marketing was amazing. You got it and it just tasted like garbage. I mean, I don't want that. I don't want to see that. Because you're right, there's a lot of people who believe this is the only chance we've got. And so I guess that just kind of out of curiosity, I'm looking for the common points because, you know, one of the things that we do here on the show is that we do advocate for certain things to occur. And I have an issue if I don't see it in my mind of what I'm advocating for. It's hard to suggest it. Like, I don't like pitching hypotheticals, you know, so it's, I just wanted to float that pass.
- [37:51]
C
Yeah. And I think ultimately, Tony, a lot of people will probably judge this on the price of gasoline, the price of groceries and how much they're paying in rent or a mortgage. And so those are the big factors that probably will have a much bigger consequence on the outcome of the midterm elections than sadly, you know, some of the geopolitical gains that Donald Trump has made or even in the case of what we've just been talking about, all of the great provisions in the one big beautiful bill.
- [38:17]
B
Well put. Rob Bluey, president of the Daily Signal, thanks for giving us a couple of those updates from Capitol Hill.
- [38:22]
C
Thanks, Tony. It's good to see you.
- [38:24]
B
All right, really quickly, before we get over to some of the bonus Tonus style information, we're going to cover some of the breaking News out of the Department of Justice and then the Southern Poverty Law Center. I mean, these are some huge, huge indictments. So we're gonna send the radio crew over to the commercial so we have enough time to get this stuff in. Guys, if you're on the radio side. YouTube.com DailySignal Tune in with us right now. It's some pretty big stuff. It's the Tony Kinnid cast. We'll catch the radio crew on the other side. All right, so first and foremost, pretty huge stuff. The Southern Poverty Law center, which is an organization that as Tyler o', Neill, we're going to bring him on in a couple of minutes here. He's our senior editor at the Daily Signal. They have done some really wild stuff over the last couple of decades. And now, realistically, in the 21st century, originally, of course, doing some fighting against the KKK, then pivoting that to suggesting that anyone who is to the right of Bundy Sandos is essentially a hateful, evil, terrible, awful, bigoted, racist Nazi. And they'll just go after anybody. Doesn't matter who it is that they are or how innocuous they are. Like the family research or the Focus on the Family, excuse me, labeled them a hate group. Just really weird, bizarre stuff. So the Southern Poverty Law center has now been charged by the Department of Justice in a pretty huge indictment. The SPLC had reported earlier today, Earl, and late yesterday that they were being investigated by the Department of Justice and then released of their own volition. Oh, hey, by the way, we once paid some informants. We had some paid informants to let us know some super sneaky, weird stuff. And, you know, again, you'll hear Tyler's breakdown in a second. That's pretty bizarre. Here is the list of charges over from the doj. So first, that they had paid an alliance affiliate a million dollars. They had paid the Aryan Nation $300,000. They paid a Unite the Right member. That would be the Charlotte situation. Charlottesville, excuse me, $270,000. Former National alliance chairman, $140,000. Former KKK members, $73,000. The American Front president felt $19,000. Some pretty, pretty crazy stuff. And again, this is a primary leftist group to go after anyone on the right that they want by saying they're actually an evil, super duper terrible racist. So Tyler o', Neill, our senior editor over at the Daily Signal, he has a thread breaking a lot of this down. Again, we're going to have him on here in just a couple of minutes. His. His outline of what's currently going on with the Southern Poverty Law Center. Six counts of wire fraud. Because while it claimed that it was dismantling white supremacy, it appears to have funded a broad swath of white nationalist groups. So again, you'll hear me kind of make this illustration over to Tyler here in a couple of minutes. Just. If you're going to dismantle an organization, you're going to fight crime, don't be involved in the crime. There's a difference between an informant and then someone who is actively fostering the crime taking place or saying, hey, you. You guys in Michigan who don't like Gretchen Whitmer? What if you kidnapped her? You're not allowed to do that. So is he talks about in the SPLC wire fraud charges here. The SPLC set up five fictitious entities in order to funnel cash to its informants, which resulted in a series of false statements to the bank. You can't do that. You're not a cop. You're not the FBI. You're not allowed to falsify records. But I was doing it for a really good cause. No, that's not allowed. That's not how that works. So we're going to bring over Tyler here in just a second. Don't go anywhere. We have a lot to cover tonight. It's the Tony Kenneth cast. We got to bring that radio crew back from commercial. Is the Tony Kenneth cast on 93 WIBC. We go over to Tyler O', Neill, my colleague at the Daily Signal, writer extraordinaire, and the investigative prowess behind the Woke the Bus. Great book. Highly recommend it. Not just because it's well written, but because the Southern Poverty Law center is once again in the news. Tyler, break this down for us. What in the world is all this paid informant stuff?
- [43:14]
A
Yeah, thanks for asking me, Tony, and thanks again for having me. So I think the big issue here. You know what's fascinating, we only know about this from the SPLC's perspective. So it seems like the gears are moving in the Justice Department and the SPLC comes out and is doing damage control. How are they doing damage control? By not only saying that the Justice Department is investigating them in a criminal investigation.
- [43:42]
C
Right.
- [43:43]
A
Also by suddenly revealing that they have paid informants. Now this. You know, I think we should unpack this a little bit because the SPLC has long monitored, you know, real violent extremist groups like the KKK. They had their fire, their offices firebombed in 1984, so. Or 1983. So this is, you know, it stands to reason that they were actually facing violent threats. But color me skeptical as to whether if they had this paid informant program all the way back in the 80s, whether they'd now be facing charges about it in a criminal investigation from the doj. Right now, I think this is probably involving more in something that has come more recently, and they're reaching back into the 80s to try to make it seem as though this is an old program. Nothing to see here. This is from the civil rights era, when in reality these are activities that they've been engaging in in more recent years.
- [44:51]
B
I mean, is there possibly some kind of a situation in which they could be involved in the same kind of things that the FBI team in Michigan was involved in? And, for example, suggesting that the group kidnap Gretchen Whitmer? That idea coming from the feds is the reason that all of those guys, a part of that plot, ended up getting off the hook here. Is there a situation we could see where the SPLC's paid informants were suggesting some of the things to these groups that the SPLC would then later report on?
- [45:21]
A
That is an excellent question. Many of us have long highlighted how it seems like the SPLC benefits from whenever somebody on the far right is engaged in something truly horrible, the SPLC will report on it and say, oh, this is big and bad and we're fighting this, therefore send us more money. Exhibit A really came in Charlottesville when, you know, leading up to that, that whole conflagration, that Unite the Right rally, right, The SPLC had been demonizing Confederate monuments. They even published a map with every single Confederate monument across the country. And they even included military bases, middle schools, high schools on that list while people were engaging in violent attacks against many of these monuments. So that was. That was a very shocking development. And they leading. You know, that's almost like a dog whistle to these people on the, you know, the white nationalist fringe who are saying, oh, the SPLC is coming after us, that engages them. And then if they had paid informants in those same groups, they could be working both sides of this. And the big thing about the Unite the Right rally is right after it, you had Tim Cook, you had JP Morgan Chase giving millions of dollars to the SPLC and CN, then blasting the SPLC's hate map all across the Internet. And so clearly, the Charlottesville, in the whole Charlottesville incident helped the splc. And there's a lot of questions in my mind as to whether they might have helped that incident become what it was.
- [47:08]
B
I mean, it's really, really interesting. Not to mention the fact they've also got a couple of defamation lawsuits. The Southern Poverty Law center is really in the thick of a lot of mud puddles of their own making. Tell us a little bit about this defamation lawsuit.
- [47:22]
A
Yeah, so right now, just recently, last week, a defamation lawsuit was appealed. So this is what I think is one of the strongest cases. For those who don't know if you, if you grew up on Iraq, the splc, their stock in trade is that they sued the Klan into bankruptcy back in the 1980s.
- [47:43]
B
Right.
- [47:44]
A
They took that reputation and they weaponized it against conservatives. So now they have a hate map where they list Alliance Defending Freedom, the Family Research Council, Moms for Liberty, Turning Point USA, PragerU. Pretty much almost. If you're anybody, if you have any name in the conservative movement, you're going to be on this map if you aren't already. And so the SPLC uses the map and to demonize and stigmatize conservatives. And this actually led to a terrorist attack in 2012. But in this particular case, there was a nonprofit called the Dustin inman Society. In 2011, the SPLC said this is not a hate group. And then in 2018, they suddenly reversed course and said this is a hate group. So this is one of the clear instances where we have the SPLC by its own admission, having reason to doubt the veracity of its claim that an organization is a hate group. And really, just to highlight the issue here, this, this group, Dustin Inman Society, has legal immigrants on its board. The SPLC calls it an anti immigrant hate group and says that it focuses on vilifying all immigrants even though it has legal immigrants on the board. And the founder, his sister is, is a legal immigrant. I mean, you can't, you can' make this up how extreme it is. But this is just one more example of how the SPLC weaponizes its history to demonize conservatives. It's the main thing I wrote the book about. And now we have a Justice Department investigation into their corrupt practices. So we will have to see where that goes. But I'm very glad they're finally getting the scrutiny they deserve.
- [49:33]
B
Absolutely. Tyler o', Neill, senior editor over at the Daily Signal, thanks for giving us a couple of minutes here and we'll keep on checking out some of the reports that you're updating us with on, on this.
- [49:41]
A
Thanks, Tony.
- [49:42]
B
Now, let's dig into some of those indictments again, according to Tyler o' Neill, as these counts come down. And then we're going to get over to Cash Patel's response, the list of informants Is. Guys, this is just. It's just bizarre. The full indictment is. Is pretty crazy. Counts one through six, though, wire fraud in which they set up fictitious entities, five of them, to funnel cash to their informants. That's illegal. Counts seven through 10, false statements to the bank. Again, guys, you are not allowed, if you are not the police, if you are not a federal agency, to go out there and say, oh, I'm going to pay the mob so I can get informants, like, PI Investigator style. Yeah, that. Yeah, you can't do that. You can't do that. Nope, not allowed. Very, very illegal. Not something that is. Okay. And then that, you know, know. Count 7 through 10, false statements to the bank account. 11, conspiracy to conceal money laundering. Oh, that stings. That does sting. And the indictment says the SPLC will forfeit any property coming from this allegedly illegal activity. That means they can't profit off of this junk. So essentially spiking the water and then running around and saying, oh, the well's been poisoned. Who could have done this? Yeah, no, we're going to continue on the live stream. Radio crew, TV crew, you guys take care. It's the Tony kind cast here on the Daily Signal. All right, guys. It's just. It's just bizarre, the amount of money that flows in and out of the splc. Over to the left side of things now. We also have some information on the Virginia redistricting race. So that election took place today. Um, it's. It's the. The votes are tallied. They're, you know, coming in. It is not going Abigail Spanberger and the Democrats way at this point in time, and there's a couple of reasons why. And now we're gonna maybe get a chance to check in with one of our Daily Signal crew over on the Virginia side of things on the ground. Actually, he's Joe Thomas. He's a radio host out in Virginia. Just a true professional. I believe he's running an event out there. We'll see if we can get a couple of minutes where he can step away and give us an update. But regarding the situation in Virginia right now, already, it was an unpopular measure among Virginians, independents, Republicans, even some Democrats. The idea was that they were going to turn the western half of the state into one huge Republican voting district, just one huge Republican district district. And then they were going to cram down all of these teeny, tiny little. Just tons of Democrat districts. And it's a little weird because when you're looking at Republican states doing a lot of gerrymandering, which, by the way, is a constitutional process. I'm not claiming it's illegal. It is supposed to be a very political process. However, I will point out that when Republicans do some gerrymandering, the map always ends up looking at with some pretty. You have some pretty sizable chunks of reporting of Republican voting districts. And then when Democrats do their gerrymandering, looking at you, Illinois, looking at you, Massachusetts, there are always these teeny tiny districts that are curly cued around with sewing that would make the dyslexic one armed grandmother's knitting project for your sweater look really nice and tidy. So not a really popular thing going forward. The actual referendum question, and I want to pull up the exact wording for this for you, the actual ballot question from Virginia is not, should we redistrict the state and gerrymander in the middle of the election? No, it is, are you ready for this? Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census? They didn't even give their own voters the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia. They didn't even give them the common courtesy of saying what they were voting for. They Owenschlussed the people of Virginia in this election. They Anschlussed them. They basically came up with this big, huge, convoluted, would you be in favor of fairly. It's the Hakeem Jeffries monologue from earlier on in the show. Show. They can't even say, would you Restoring fairness to democracy. That's some panicking level crap already. It is. Um, now, what we have right now from the decision desk headquarters giving some of the details, the information, it does appear that a lot of the more liberal areas like Loudoun County, Prince William, Virginia Beach, Chesterfield, Arlington, Norfolk, they've already put in. They've already reported their ballots. So Loudoun is 95% in. Prince William, 95% in. And the margin is yes by 22 points. Prince William, yes by 26 points. Virginia beach is 63% in, yes by 1.8 points. Chesterfield, yes by 0.6 points. 59% of that vote is in. In Norfolk, 95% of the vote is in. In Arlington, 88% of the vote is in. In Arlington, it's 61 points. Yes. In Norfolk, 43 points. Yes. So it's. You'd think it would be pretty close, except right now it's. It's still a Little too close to call. As of Right now, with 54% of Virginians reporting, it is currently 5,742. No redistricting. Otherwise very favorable for Republicans heading into the midterms. So, you know, we're gonna, we're gonna take a second here. We're gonna wait. We're gonna make sure that we have all of the. The data going in regarding this redistricting election. Looking at another kind of live results. Ballot casting in here. Yes. Right now, according to PBS records. Not right now, with 58% of the votes counted, according to the Associated Press numbers, 950,211 votes. No. No Democrat gerrymandering and 857,605 votes for yes. So right now it's 52.6 to 47.4. Again, a lot of the heavy liberal areas have already reported in. Now, as a reminder, Abigail Spanberger's popularity has plummeted like a rock in the deep blue sea over the last couple of months because she ran as a moderate. She ran as a centrist, as just a nice, you know, Glenn Youngkin in a wig probably, maybe, who knows? And then it turned out she has governed like and Zoran Mamdani and Gavin Newsom, which is not what people of Virginia were looking for. And when they were like, hey, you got any ways that you can help lower our bills? And she's like, what if we increase taxes and also cut off a lot of your energy sources? And people of Virginia have looked around and said, wow, I'm being given two middle fingers right to my face. So now, after Abigail Spanberger promised, Pinky promised she wasn't going to pursue redistricting. She did. So now, again, I've said this before. I want to make this clear right now. Redistricting, constitutional, not a bad thing. It is supposed to be a mechanism that encourages voters to hold their state legislatures by a short noose. Excuse me, a short leash. That's supposed to be the point. You're supposed to care about your state legislatures. And who is your state representative? Who is your state senator? If you're in California, you pour sod your state assemblyman. If you're in one of the. If you're in the unicameral legislature. I don't know your state, Is it Nebraska or Iowa? That's the unicameral legislature, your state cornmen, whatever. You're supposed to care who they are because they're supposed to have as much power as the federal government. Supposed to be an equal balance of power. Now, there is a little bit more news that we do need to report in. We'll try to bring you some information. As you know, we get through some of this information. There's some Fairfax county questions that we're looking at as well. Just kind of trying to keep an eye on the whole election. Looks like it's going to be a close one, but so far not going in the Democrats direction. I'm sure that Maricopa county in Arizona is already voting for Virginia to redistrict. By the way, so far, voter turnout in rural Virginia in the rural Virginian counties is outperforming turnout for the 2024 presidential elections. Now this is from CNN responding right now, Nebraska. Thanks producer, Producer Daniel Also Guam and the Virgin Islands also have unicameral legislatures. Well, I don't care. They don't, they don't count. Oh, the state of Minnesota. I thought the state of Minnesota had a bicameral. Well, either way, boys, girls and squirrels, we're going to be keeping an eye on this particular story. There's a couple other things that I do want to cover, but I want to get a chance here. If I can get the clip loaded over into the show. I want to show you CNN apparently having a really rough time over rural Virginians pouring out, not to be lumped into one massive voting district. Again, some, some could have perhaps seen this coming. But you know, here you go in real time from Virginia. The pivotal vote could give Democrats an edge in the midterms. Right. This is about a redistricting effort. It is a dramatic and still early
- [59:48]
C
look at these numbers here.
- [59:49]
B
You can see about 36% of the vote is coming in. So it's coming in pretty fast here. We're not able to call it yet right now. Man. I don't know why the clip has decided to pick it up into hyper hamster mode. But still not a good look. Not a good look for the left trying to make their pitches for the midterms. It's all about turnout. It really is. Yeah. Minnesota's by camera. I thought so. Thanks, Daniel. Checking in on some, some of that stuff here and there. Again, we'll have to see how this goes. I'm again, not, not trying to get ahead of anybody here. I'm just making the point so far. I don't want to, you know, get out here. 64% of the vote counted in right now according to decision desk and it's 52.2% no to 47.8% yes. It's going to be a real squeaker. So we'll come back to that in a minute. We're going to dive into a little bit more on the news side because over on the House again, if we're trying to get people out and excited for midterms, the Democrats are going in the most. As the poet said, back ass word way of doing so. This would be Pramila Jayapal talking about Cuba today, saying that, hey, well, the United States really is losing to Cuba on healthcare, which is not a pitch that you should be making in the midterm year. But I worked on global health for 10 years before coming to Congress, so it's an area that I'm very interested in. Cuba has a remarkable public health system. Lowest infant mortality, maternal mortality, sort of the opposite of what the United States has. I worked on global health for 10. Forget all of the Cuban whistleblowers that allege the government of Cuba is lying about its medical numbers because, you know, communist regimes do that. As John Ashbrook over at the excellent Ruthless podcast pointed out. He said, yeah, I mean, Cuba's healthcare, really great quote, which is why Cubans hand paddle 90 miles on Styrofoam to reach Florida. I mean, the Cuban healthcare is just so great, so amazing. That's why people are desperately trying to flee. Very, very acute take by John Ashbrook over at Ruthless. The kind of hypocritical, weird, bizarre pitches to the American people are not looking good across the board. AOC and Ayanna Pressley. So you may remember aoc, the bartender who became a congresswoman who thinks there's two branches of governments, thinks that you can drink air. You know, that, that particular, you know, thinks that Deloitte, the accounting firm who probably should have been the one for the record to do the SPLCs and, you know, Sheila McCormick's taxes. Deloitte, she thinks that Deloitte is the chemical agency that leaked a ton of chemicals into Cleveland and set the river on fire. So again, AOC doing stellar over there. And then Ayanna Pressley, who is, is very, very mad. And, and, and just, just the rage that seeps through on a daily basis is very. Ayanna Pressley. Well, they had themselves a little announcement. They're doing a State of the Movement. Ooh. And a Fireside Chat. Oh, exciting. There's just one problem, because if you want to go to this event, maybe you do. I don't know. Well, you do need to show government ID to get into the event. So you have to show voter excuse me, government id. So, you know, coming to vote, no problem. Show up. No id, no problem. Not an issue. Probably racist. But you do need an ID to get in to hear Ayanna Pressley and Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. Guys, voters do notice this stuff. Now, as we talked about with Rob, Republicans don't really seem to be doing too much so far. But if you actually see the DOJ pointing out that the Southern Poverty Law center is in some dire straits, well, you know, that may not look too good for the left heading into the election. I believe Todd Blanche had a comment on this earlier today. Want to roll that one? According to the charges in the indictment, the SPLC is a nonprofit entity that purports to fight white supremacy and racial hatred by reporting on extremist groups and conducting research to inform law enforcement groups with the goal of dismantling these groups, as the indictment describes. The SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred. Good. From the acting attorney General. Also Kash Patel, director of the FBI on again, a pretty wild series of indictments today.
- [64:24]
D
We're here today is to announce what the what the general just told you. The Southern Poverty Law center, in a massive sweeping indictment, has been charged with allegations of fraud and using the banking system to perpetrate that fraud. I just want to talk about a couple of brief things here. The Southern Poverty Law center themselves advertise to raise money to dismantle violent extremist groups. For a period of at least a decade, they used their donor network to raise money to purportedly dismantle violent extremist groups. However, the splc, the Southern Poverty Law center used the money they raised from their donor network to actually pay the leadership of these very groups. I just want to say that again, they used the fraudulently raised money by lying to their donor network, thousands of Americans alliance, to go ahead and actually pay the leadership of these supposed violent extremist groups. The groups, as the general laid out, include the Ku Klux Klan, the United Klans of America, Unite to Right national alliance, the National Socialist Movement, the Aryan Nation Motorcycle Club, and the National Socialist Party of America and also the American Front. In at least one of these matters, our investigation revealed that funds were used to facilitate the commission of further state and federal offenses.
- [65:52]
B
Oh, gee whit. There it is. There it is. I knew it. I had the hunchiest of hunches. You know, I put me in the bell tower at Notre Dame. I tell you what, I had a hunch that that There would be a couple of dollars. Again, we're just using informants. Again, things you are allowed to do, you are allowed to have inside sources. I have inside sources. I have inside sources in, for example, the Indianapolis Star, who keep me up to date on a few things happening inside that organization. I have inside sources in the Indiana Democratic Party, in several other state Democratic parties, in the dnc, in the rnc. I have a couple of sources. I have some. I do. You have, you develop these kinds of things. However, here's what you're not allowed to do. You cannot pay them to break the law. That's not allowed. Very much not allowed. You also can't encourage someone to violate the law in, in a setting like this because you become an accessory. So again, the reason that I bring up the situation regarding Gretchen Whitmer in, in Michigan is that the reason that that group of guys who were like 3 percenters or whatever, they were gonna go capture Gretchen Whitmer and bring her somewhere. The reason they had come up with this plan is that one of the FBI insiders, the undercover dudes, was the one who suggested, hey, you should go kidnap Gretchen Whitmer and here's how you should do it. You can't do that. That's very illegal. And the SPLC is not even a government law enforcement body. The left's idea of having all of these various nonprofit or activist groups that think they can take foreign dollars like Code Pink, or that they can take foreign dollars like Act Blue, that they can and you know, solicit all of this stuff. And then Biden's Department of Justice who used the SPLC to go after individuals, would then feed information to, to the SPLC and other activist groups to go after people in, in pro life situations and cases. Various groups that the Biden administration worked with in a very disturbing fashion. Not just the splc, but also working with again, Planned Parenthood, several pro, you know, pro choice groups, the splc and in racial matters, as Tyler Point, going after middle schools that had a statue to a person in American history. It truly it. Again, I, I shouldn't, I should be shocked. I'm not shocked that they were. In order to prop themselves up and impress you, in order to say, oh yeah, you know, we're fighting white supremacy, then creating a little of the white supremacy to yell about. Oh wow, who could have seen this come coming.
- [68:33]
D
Totaling over $3 million. Furthermore, our investigation revealed that the Southern Poverty Law center, on top of perpetuating this widespread decade long multimillion dollar fraud, conducted more criminal Activity. They attempted to hide their criminal activity from our financial banking network. They set up shell companies and entities around America so that the financial institutions that we rely on as everyday Americans were deceived in believing that money was not coming from the Southern Poverty Law center in the perpetration of this scheme and fraud, but rather fictitious entities. They stood up to perpetuate this ongoing fraud. This is a serious and egregious violation of a group that purported to dismantle violent extremist groups, but in turn actually only fueled the hatred.
- [69:26]
B
Now, I do appreciate that immediately after this there were a bunch of reporter questions. You and I know that there was very little to actually do with the Southern Poverty Law center here. No. What are the reporters immediately go to? Hey, the Atlantic said you get drunk sometimes and that you're, you're missing in action and stuff. And that's, that's the concern. Huh? And you can't even say, oh, they're doing this as a distraction for Cash Patel. Guys, the investigation has been ongoing for months. Months, months. There's a lot of stuff to sift through. And again, please do not take my word for it. Go read Tyler o' Neill's the Woke to Bus. It's an excellent book. He kind of goes through the entire history of the Southern Poverty Law center and what they have done, acting politically by just painting anyone they don't like as a white supremacist, super duper Nazi or whatever. It's really, really good reporting. And again, it's a summit of history that shows individuals in the United States who do get these kind of, of fluffy benefits to just do whatever it is that they want and not pay the price for violating the law. I hope that that kind of thing comes to an end. Is it going to come to an end? Well, you know, your, your guess at this point is as good as mine. We're going to need to see who is indicted inside the splc. And then kind of how that breaks down back to some of the news in Virginia and then we might take a question or two of mail time here, here. So the gap is narrowing again, I, I don't believe right now we have Fairfax county reporting. That's a left leaning stronghold there. It is currently 52.2 to 47.8. Producer Daniels reporting that Gap is now 51 and a half to 48.6. Still in favor of. No. Now, now some of you may say, hey, wait a minute, 51 and a half plus 48.6. That doesn't sound quite right. Fairfax is Starting to come in at 20%. We don't quite know. Keep, keep in mind some of these numbers are on the fluid side and some of the polling websites, as they begin updating this information, they don't check some of the data that they're entering to some of those graphs and things don't autocorrect. So we'll have to see if Fairfax is enough to tip things over in Spanberger and the Democrats favors. It's really a catch 22 that doesn't benefit the Dems. It doesn't benefit the Dems if the Democrats succeed here in gerrymandering the state of Virginia or excuse me, the commonwealth. Virginia, not like Texas, but like Massachusetts, like Illinois. That's really going to Rio. That's going to rile up some Republicans come election day. Now again, there's still some court battles that'll have to come out but if you get rural Republicans out there to vote again, gerrymandering a district doesn't guarantee that you have it locked in. It's kind of a something that doesn't quite fit the. You know, a lot of people tell you once something is gerrymandered it can never go the other way. There have been a lot of flip gerrymander districts. It wouldn't be a wise move. And then of course if the measure to the constitutional amendment I hate, I despise constitutional referendums to the general population. I hate them. I think they are the most garbage way of having a state or commonwealth constitution they're in is. I think it's dumb because the way that a question like that is posed to the voter is inherently political. We read again the way that it was written. Should the constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General assembly to restore fairness in the upcoming elections for democracy? That kind of crap. It's inherently political. And also all of the campaigns essentially become vote yes, vote no on Prop 12689. That's not how the constitutions were originally supposed to be set up because again, that's kind of mob rule. Your state legislature is supposed to do things. It's not just your state is not just supposed to be something you kind of pay attention to sometimes so the federal government can end up doing most of the work. That's not the purpose of it. And there was a mail time question about that. I did hopefully want to address that just point blank. I hate constitutional referendums. I don't like them. I also don't like recall votes either. For that matter. I think maybe the state legislature should have a Recall vote opportunity maybe depending on the situation. But the idea that you can just overturn anything you want at any time in a voting populace. Well then again, voting for things, voting for members of your republic to represent you has no bearing. And I'm of no interest in making the American people lazier. I don't, I don't like that at all. Looking at one of the one, one of the questions here, have I seen the plan from the, from some of our allies suggested that we run a pipeline under the sea from Alaska to Japan and South Korea. I have seen a little bit on this. I haven't had enough time to go through and see if I really like the plan or I don't like the plan, who's constructing it. This proposal of liquid natural gas, it would be about a 10 day trip. That pipeline, the LNG liquefaction plant newly built in Alaska, 67% of the vote is, is now in Fairfax, still at 20% in 51.3 to 48.7 in Virginia. I'm all for additional pipelines again. Right now it takes 30 days to get natural gas to Japan or to South Korea via the Gulf of America through the Panama Canal. I think that a pipeline, again a North Slope gas field pipeline would be a very good move. I'm all for just expanding energy infrastructure. It's why I thought the Trump administration, as soon as this Venezuela and Iran thing was getting started. Yeah, I mean I'm going to level with you guys. It's just not. If we are in any kind of combat whatsoever, then the energy production of this country is under threat. And if another country can simply hike the gas prices in the United States and get the United States to abandon a military action, then it's a national emergency. That would be an instance right then and there when a national emergency declaration from the executive is appropriate. So I wish that the Trump administration would have signed that executive order as they he just signed in yesterday. It's a huge deal, not a lot of coverage given to it. It's a shame because now a lot of oil and natural gas production facilities, refining facilities, now they can open up and be ready for business and get through a lot of those garbage EPA regulations. Oh no. The three footed Saskatchewan east mosquito breeds here. Well, screw that mosquito. Put a natural gas plant there and shut up. So also some, some news the United States that President Trump might be brokering a deal with Anthropic. We'll have to see how that goes as well. Again, I'm sorry, if you're looking for me to be the doom and gloomer on AI one way or the other. I'm just not. I'm just not. So just I know we've gotten a couple of questions on that in the last couple of days as well. Question from our wearing why doesn't President Trump go back and finish off the mass firings? Seems a good time to make a point if the Democrats, Democrats don't want to come back. Well, he's kind of put in a bit of an issue there by John Thune. So again, the Senate majority leadership is making it a bit difficult for the President of the United States who should have done a bunch of recess appointments, yet we're still here in endless committees and nomination hearings. There's, there's a lot of dragging to the feet and I again, I am the kind of guy that tried to give any out possible to Thune when he stepped in. Senate Majority leader is a difficult position and again, same with Kevin McCarthy before the age of Speaker Johnson. But when you drag your feet through the gravel and the broken glass when time is running out for the Republicans, the only reason he could do that is if he could make the pitch to the American people. Hey, trust us. You want us in the second two years, it's gonna be really great. Expand our lead so we don't have to kill the filibuster. No one's buying it. Dude, low turnout elections. Unless you give people a reason to get riled up. There's no and people aren't going to get riled up. Have you not seen really crappy sports teams try to encourage people to come out for family friendly nun dodgeball nacho night. And then you get out there and like no one shows up and it kind of stinks and all the nuns are eating nachos and playing dodgeball, by the way. Still very entertaining and awesome. But this is kind of the same thing. If Congress isn't delivering, then don't sit here and tell me that I should be excited. So that said, there's a really good take from Dan McLaughlin over at the National Review saying that the reason that yes remains kind of the the underdog despite the current lead would be that you still see some of the kind of, you know, Franklin City, the Fairfax, Henrico, Southampton, Richmond City, also not yet in there. There's still a little bit of time here. Still a little bit of time here. I know there are a lot of people getting really, really excited. Don't be getting hasty. It's 51.3% to 48.7% no. Is currently in the lead, 74.2% reporting. Just interesting. I mean I don't know if I have another way to describe it right now, but we are starting to get into flashpoint territory heading into this election and if the rural voters are turning out by huge numbers, I also want to see what the urban environment is looking like. I mean I'm seeing some interesting, interesting takes. Peter J. Peter J. Hasson over at the Free Beacon, an excellent guy, really, really appreciate his work. He points out that there is really egregious seeing that Virginia's wealthiest residents are straight up trying to steal voting power from the state's rural and working class voters. Well, again, yeah, a lot of people in Washington D.C. especially in these federal agencies do live in those small pockets. They want to do this and then they want to turn around and make D.C. a state on top of it. It's so hilarious. Is it really? It really is. It really is funny. Also, another comment that I wanted to throw out this evening, the Ilhan Omar argument that while her net worth was raised up to $30 million in assets and then turning around and claiming that it was actually less than $100,000 in assets because of an accounting error. That is a wild, wild downgrade. Someone asked me to kind of give a little more explanation there, dude. From 30 million to a hundred thousand because of an accounting. Boo. Boo. I don't know about that one, Chief. I don't know. So I'm now getting a, a report that maybe Virginians have actually passed that they're calling the election for, for the gerrymandering. I don't know. I don't know about that. I haven't, I haven't seen the full report again. Wouldn't be surprised. But I know I'm, I'm seeing some of the information that the, the votes are all in and that it's, that they're, they're going to pass overwhelming this particular measure. I, I, I, I'd wait a minute there, I would wait just a minute there before we, before we get out there ahead of some skis. Yeah, I, there are a couple of accounts on the social media side that, that some of us follow because they often do have a kind of a first report first look on things. Yeah, I, I don't know. Well, the decision desk is, is projecting now reportedly that the amendment is going to pass again. We're going to take a, gonna take a look here and see exactly what it is that they're suggesting. If that's the case. That's that's certainly something. 72% of the vote is in. It is 50.5. No, 49.5. Yes. I'm just, I'm just interested in, in, in seeing before the actual numbers flip. That's pretty bizarre based on the size and the location of the remaining vote. Ah. They're suggesting that the Virginia and Fairfax are going to carry that through. Well, that's certainly a way to get a lot of Virginians really unhappy and to give again, the. If you were making the argument that we are simply responding to things as Democrats were trying to do when they used California to respond to Texas, to flip that around really, really hard and suggest now. Oh, yeah, well, you know, I mean, clearly we had to, you know, make this Massachusetts and go from 6 to 5 to 10 to 1. Again, not saying it's illegal. I don't. I mean, I'm hearing the argument. The courts need to strike it down. I would need to read the detailed arguments in the Virginia Constitution for the Commonwealth to look into this. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not going to levy any kind of an argument there. But do I think that this would be something where we start to get close enough to the election that really would start to rile up Virginia voters? Yeah, it might. It might. And digging, people, again, the kind of gross optimism in the digging of the own graves category. A bizarre decision to make, for sure. So the decision desk is calling it. I'm not seeing the Associated Press calling it yet. Again. We'll kind of keep an eye on this. What a wildly close election, though, for this. I mean, both sides were running Obama campaign ads. Currently with 73% of the votes counted, it is 50.5% at 1 million. Oh, excuse me. 50.7%. With 74% of the vote counted. 1,190,674 for the no. Do not redistrict things to the yes. 1.155 million. That's 49.3%. Again, the ballot question, should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to Rep. Restore fairness in the upcoming elections while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census? That is such a bizarrely, worded, deviously worded ballot question. Just tell people you want to redistrict temporarily and include a picture of the map. What's the problem with that? Be honest. You don't have to say, oh, well, you know, I mean, a very, very thin majority to take 90% of the seats is Lee Wolf. Wolf points out it's close, definitely a lot closer. I want to see how the turnout looks like. Excuse me, what the turnout looks like for the Virginia cities, as opposed, like in percentages compared to 2024 as the Virginia suburbs and then the rural areas, as opposed to 2024. Restore fairness is a biased statement, says Monterey1. Yeah, I mean, I don't like that. I don't like. This is why I don't like constitutional amendments, no matter the state. I don't care. Republican, Democrat, don't. I do not care because someone has to write the question. This is an argument that I used to get into a lot back when I was in public education, when I was the science coordinator for the district Indianapolis Public Schools. I argued every single question had some type of inherent bias in it. So saying that there are these questions that if you ask a kid, oh, well, hey, you know, kid has five hockey pucks and you take away four, how many hockey pucks has he had? That's a racist question because black kids don't know what hockey is. All questions are inherently biased. I mean, that's, that's really bizarre. But also. Yeah, there are situations and cases. Absolutely. In which you can totally alienate an individual based on how the question is asked. We talked about this with Akeem Jeffries responding to questions earlier, asked about a, you know, Sheila Surefilas McCormick. And I see the comment from, from Kane. Rural voters being disenfranchised. Yeah. But also at the same time, it is within the power of Virginian voters, if they don't like it, to elect a better state legislature that doesn't do this. Now, again, when you have a constitutional amendment kind of a thing, well, then it becomes a big mob rule kind of a game. And yeah, I think there is some disenfranchisement going on there, but I don't think it's disenfranchisement based on the state legislature passing a different map and a different rule, like the state legislature proposing an amendment. The disenfranchisement would come whenever you allow people to wildly flip switches because the mob rule says, yes, go do one vote. Big thing I don't like. I don't, I don't care for. That mob rule stuff is kind of garbage. It's like the presidential election compact thing. Yeah. The whole popular vote now. No, don't, don't, don't, don't care for that. So stop calling balls and strikes or call balls, strike. Don't be courteous. Well, no, I mean, I, you know, I'm, I am not giving the benefit of the doubt when I say that gerrymandering is legal and that it is how the system was set up. It is. The system was set up to allow gerrymandering. The state legislatures are supposed to be in charge. They're not supposed to set up bi, bilateral, bipartisan independent commissions. They're not supposed to do that. Because you and I, even if we're on the same side of the aisle, we're going to separate districts in entirely different ways. I talked about this in a debate on NTD today with, with Mike Leon over on the other side of the aisle and things. Is that what I believe you should separate a district line on socioeconomic status, political affiliation, religion, gross and net income tax brackets? That's different from socioeconomics because that would be the anthropological relationship between the economics and family status. The type of industry that you're looking at. How the roads are mapped out 20 miles out from the city of DFW of Dallas Fort Worth is totally different than 20 miles outside the city of Philadelphia. So districting things, it's a hugely different procedure. It's going to be political. And the reason it's political like that is because you're supposed to care. The way that things were set up, your state legislature elected your senators to the, to the federal government. So that was a direct involvement between your state legislature and Congress on the state side. And then you elected the House of Representatives members, but the districts, again, to involve your state legislature, your districts were drawn up by the state legislature. That was the whole point. So that your state directly elected your senators until the 17th Amendment gave a middle finger to that very obvious framing. And then your state legislature was also supposed to draw the districts. This was so your state. And you had an equal amount of actual investment in the federal government's activities. People don't care about that anymore. They don't. And that's, that's a serious problem. And, and I think that's, that's a big part of this. So again, that's, that's kind of my take here. You know, I, I think that putting it right out there, that's. When I say balls and strikes, I, I, that's the ball and strike that I'm, that I'm given there. And I want my independent redistricting committee back from cadence. I sympathize with you. You're not getting it. There's no such thing as an independent committee. Independent of what? The people still have politics on the committees, do they not? Show me the people. I mean again, who decides what the shapes are and why? I mean it's a, it's an inherently political thing. It is whether it's Indiana or Texas or Massachusetts or Illinois. Now you can say, hey look, we recognizing that this is a nuclear deterrence game, I'm going to try to draw this map fairly. And you are. Because if we both get into this tit for tat, then eventually the thing is going to burn down and topple. Yeah. I mean that is what was supposed to be the off ramp for it. But instead we've created these constitutional amendment things where something passes and then you word it funny and you do a big huge campaign and then it's treated as some type of national football to throw back and forth. That's the issue. And you know, as some of the comments point out. Yeah, I mean, you know, Abigail Spanberger did run as a moderate and is now campaigning very far to the left. It's why she's had the sharpest decline in a gubernatorial approval rating, you know, of all projections according to Tyler Bauer over at Turning Point USA say that essentially suggesting about 120,000 vote loss for the no vote. The yes passing by 120,000 votes. As Scott Pressler points out. Yeah. That's about 600 ballot chasing staff that could have closed that gap. 600 people would have gone out and done the door knocking. Things would have been different because we have that data from prior elections. That's why we had Scott Pressler on earlier on in the, you know, earlier on in the day. So. Yeah, bizarre. Bizarre for sure. But that does, you know, one would think that this would be some kind of a spur to action. But as long as the Senate's, you know, kind of doing nothing and we're kind of goofing. Goofing. Yep. It's going to get closer and closer and yeah, I, I don't see that, I don't see that being different again. I'm going to go ahead and wait one more time for kind of the data on this particular election here for the Associated Press. Let them bring in some of that data and then I think we'll call it with it with a pretty much guesstimate no or excuse me, a guesstimate yes on the ballot measure. 76% of the votes. Excuse me, a slight update here. Oh, and it's, it's wildly close. So yeah, I can see the nose definitely being passed here in a second. 76% of the vote counted according to the Associated Press. 50.5% for no. Expected to be overtaken by the 49.5% for the yes. That ballot, that referendum for the amendment passes, passing. So there you go. We'll talk about some of the fallout and the gloating and if we actually see individuals moving forward. I mean, I made the case back during the Virginia gubernatorial that running winsome Earl Sears for the same reason that Kamala Harris was picked is probably not a good idea. Also, having her get out there and say, I'm not Spanberger, I'm not gonna do this, instead of actually saying, hey, Virginians, here's where we could go. That was a bad choice. It was a bad choice. But again, that's just part of it. The state legislature election matters way more than your congressional election. Another case. Why? We'll see you guys tomorrow, 7pm Eastern, for more of the Tony Kenned cast. We'll catch you guys on the flip side of things. It's the Tony Kinnick cast here on the Daily Signal, nationally syndicated and first on 93 WIBC. See you for season two. Take care.