Hunter Biden admits laptop is real, threatens media with lawsuits

From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest growing radio talk show. Brian Kilmead. Hey, thanks so much for listening, everybody. It's the Brian Kill Me Joe. You know how to reach us, 1-866-408-7669.

Wow, we have a lot going on today and so many things to discuss. As we get, you know what? It didn't take long before 2024 beginning a lot of interest. Tim Scott's on a listening tour. Nikki Haley is going to officially announce she's in.

Donald Trump responding to Ron DeSantis. Ron DeSantis responding to Trump. And it's still early. Remember, in 2015, Donald Trump didn't get into the race until June. And keep in mind, too, Jeb Bush was leading.

For the previous cycle, it was Rudy Giuliani leading. We both know both didn't get the nominations. Right now, Donald Trump's in most overall polls. DeSantis is ahead in Florida and New Hampshire, but just barely.

So a lot has to play out. Steve Moore is going to be on. You know, he's one of America's premier economists. He is Freedom Works chief economist, too.

So he'll be with us and talk about what the Fed did yesterday.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three, sponsored by Crunch Fitness. Interested in owning your own business in a growing $30 billion industry? Check out CrunchFitness at Crunch.com. Number three. And what is the total amount?

that you estimate was spent through either fraud Improper payments or waste in any of those programs. It wouldn't surprise me if it exceeds ultimately more than $100 billion. There you go, Andy Biggs, COVID Kleptos, oversight hearing show. Billions taken fraudulently as trillions in tax dollars were sent out during the pandemic. Among the thieves, China and perhaps Russia.

This can't stand. Abusers must pay. I'm hoping Dems see it that way, too. Number two. There's no invasion of migrants in our community, nor are there hordes of undocumented immigrants committing crimes against citizens or causing havoc in our community.

Claiming this continues a false racist narrative. Yeah, that is Ricardo Samiego. He is a judge in El Paso. He doesn't see a problem with the invasion of our southern border and the breakdown. Dems play their hand, and I think it's despicable.

The hearings reveal Dems can't defend their own border policy, so they play the race card and call the fentanyl crisis hype. You'll hear it all. Number one. Was that your laptop? For real, I don't know.

I know, but you know that's this is yours. I really don't know what the answer is. You don't know yes or no if the laptop is yours. I don't have any idea. I have no idea.

So it could have been yours. Of course, certainly. There could be a laptop out there. Unbelievable. Hunter Biden, we knew, was lying in 2021, and now we know for sure Hunter's laptop is real.

I know you knew that, but now Hunter admits it thanks to his new legal tactic, and that should embarrass all who called it Russian disinformation and tried to protect the big guy and others. As another FBI research takes place, another FBI search takes place. At one of the presidents' homes. The pot thickens all around. And guess what?

Hunter Biden did that, admitted that, covered the New York Post today in order to get a lawsuit together because he wants to sue everybody that knows that he was doing crack with hookers and involved in an international business deal. He invites this scrutiny. And that's part of the Attitude of a drug addict, in my view, because he's out there at the White House taunting around with his new family, kinda just saying, I dare you to and went up to Kev McCarthy at an event, I think, six months ago, almost as if to say, I dare you to challenge me. You can't touch me. We know where this usually leads.

Uh Especially with the Yavanattis of the world who have the arrogance and the swagger. But the Hunter laptop story is really finally emits it, as Miranda Devine says, one of the greatest own goals.

So this is what he writes: the revelation came in a petulant letter from Hunter's lawyers seeking a criminal probe into what they called attempts to weaponize the laptop. In the 14-page letter to Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings, Biden's attorney, new attorney, Abby Lowell, claimed the repair shop owner John Paul MacIsaac unlawfully accessed Hunter's laptop data and worked with former President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Ru Giuliani, to weaponize disordered and incriminating contents against Joe Biden. Let's do it. And let's go through some discovery, shall we? And let's really drill down on.

Who is the big guy? And what was going on there? And what was Devin Archer doing with the business deal? And what were you doing on the Burisma board? And why were you dealing with the former mayor of Moscow?

Let's talk about all that. Hunter Biden? I mean, do you believe this guy? He wants to he says, back off and I'll sue you, and even names a Fox anchor. Uh to talk about that.

Remember, here's the extended version of Hunter Biden denying that he even knows if the laptop is real with ABC. Go on. Was that your laptop? For real. I don't know.

I really don't know what the answer is. You don't know yes or no if the laptop is not available. I don't have any idea. I have no idea what it is.

So it could have been yours. Of course, certainly. There could be a laptop out there that was stolen from me. There could be that I was hacked. It could be that it was Russian intelligence.

It could be that it was stolen from me. You believe this clown? Stolen from you. You walked into a repair shop and asked to have it fixed. And didn't respond to calls, which can be proven on your voicemail.

So he said, after a certain amount of days, it becomes his. They open it up. He sees all this. When the FBI comes to pick it up, he keeps a copy of it. The FBI holds on to it.

When they realize how serious it is, Johnny Mac Isaac ends up calling Rudy Giuliani. They call the New York Post. And the FBI is ready to counter the narrative, even though the FBI knew this was all true. And his approach is to sue, really? The Washington Post reported that on September 1st, 2020.

The Biden Burisma and Hunter Burisma Documents thirty nine also reported that in october twenty twenty, someone on the West Coast accessed the drive and added the following folders.

So they're claiming, yeah, it's my laptop, but someone added folders to it. Barisma of pictures, big guy file. The timing is noteworthy. Johnny Mack Isaac reportedly sent the data to Giuliani. We know all this.

You want to make it an actionable lawsuit and back people off because you know the wagons are circling, you know the Republicans in control of the House. And you're trying to get ahead of the story. Here's Miranda Devine last night, Cut 43. Basically, Hunter Biden, through his lawyers, has admitted that yes, the laptop is his. It's not Russian disinformation, as those 51 dishonest intelligence officials told us.

It's his laptop, which we've been telling people for more than two years. And finally, they've admitted it with this kind of ridiculous attempt to go on the offensive. I think John Paul MacIsak, who I spoke to this afternoon for our story tomorrow, put it best. He said when you're over the target, the flack becomes even heavier. And so I think that there's panic in the Biden chaos.

Maybe. They seem to get away with all this crap. They have for the longest time. He's out there. With a a rich millionaire who paid his taxes for him out in Malibu hanging out.

probably feeling bad for himself and feeling like he's a target. You've seen some of those exchanges where he's talking to his daughter and saying, I'll never make you do what my dad does to me and make you the number one earner and make you support the whole family. It's a drug addict comment. And let's hope it's former. but the attitude's still the same that brought it that.

1866-408-7669. Guess what? We're going to go to Washington. And find out about the hearings, the aftermath, and more, a little about Kevin McCarthy and what that meeting was really like, what the reports say with the President of the United States yesterday as it relates to lifting the debt ceiling and so much more. And then I'll squeeze in some of your calls after talking to economist Steve Moore.

You listen to the Brian Kilmead Show. Glad you're here. Diving deep into today's top stories. It's Brian Kilmead from the Fox News Podcasts Network. I'm Ben Dominich, Fox News contributor and editor of the Transom.com daily newsletter.

And I'm inviting you to join a conversation every week. It's the Ben Dominich Podcast. Subscribe and listen now by going to FoxNewsPodcasts.com. He's so busy, he'll make your head spin. It's Brian Killmead.

Chad Bergham joins us now from Washington, senior congressional correspondent. Man, Chad, some fireworks yesterday. How do you characterize them compared to what you've seen before? This is the first shot of oversight. and judiciary in action.

Yeah, well, I mean, this is what Republicans on the Judiciary Committee said they were going to do. They were going to talk about the border. And I noted that this was part one, which means probably by the end of this Congress, we're going to have part 27. The other thing that happened yesterday is that you had the introduction of articles of impeachment for Alejandro Mayorkas, the Homeland Security Secretary. Those were introduced yesterday.

We don't know that they'll ever get to that point. And we certainly don't know with only a five-seat majority if Republicans could ever pass such a resolution through the House to impeach Mayorkis. And it certainly wouldn't go anywhere in the Senate. But Pat Fallon, a Republican of Texas, introduced those initially, and then Andy Biggs followed up yesterday.

So this is something that Republicans are going to talk about this entire Congress. They think that there is a real problem with the border. It is a real weak spot. And it was interesting to see Democrats portray this around issues of race. Um They said this is just an effort by Republicans to get on the air somewhere, make a lot of noise.

But the sheer number of border crossings illegally and certainly the gotaways, which is off the scale, helps the Republicans kind of make their case. This is an issue for the American public, and it's a very weak spot for President Biden, especially going into 2024, if, in fact, he runs for reelection. No kidding. There's certain things, Chad, where there's two sides to every story. But when it comes to what's happening at the border, there's really not two sides.

We've seen the video. We're the only ones covering it for the most part. You're talking about 4 million people, over 300,000 gotaways, incredible quantifies of fentanyl capable of killing the entire population. This is not a time to say there's no there there. I mean, that to me I found uh so it's uh kind of astounding that that would be the approach.

Listen to some Jerry Nadler as I d I don't know what you know what he was thinking. Here is uh Cut 16. Sadly, at every turn, this extreme Republican majority fails to offer genuine solutions and resorts to political theater. Republicans have proposed building a wall. Shutting down the asylum system.

and defunding the Department of Homeland Security. Those are not serious proposals. It shows people want to take action. Democrats' feeling is no problem. Is that going to work?

I'm going to warn you right now of a flashpoint. The government is funded.

Now, we're not talking about the debt ceiling right now, but the government is funded through September 30th. And Kevin McCarthy has made a point that he is going to do things by the quote regular order, move bills, appropriations bills through the subcommittee, to the full committee, onto the floor and pass each of those bills individually. It's going to be a big challenge for him when it comes to the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill and what is needed to be in that bill, what it looks like, and then certainly what it looks like when it goes to the Senate and if they can get the Senate to line up. Republicans have talked about using Their power of the purse to influence this issue.

Now, politically and tactically, that's a good move, but what they can implement when you have a Democratic president and a Democratic Senate, and you have to get something through the Senate in order to get it passed and send it to the president, that is going to be a landmine. And we could have potentially a government shutdown over this issue alone. There might be a whole host of other issues that might prompt a government shutdown or a standoff in September, but that might be the biggest one, Brian. Right. And here's more from Nadler, just to me, not even being serious.

He's from a city that has 43,000 illegals that need $2 billion because we've been flat out overrun. I'm sure you've been reading about it. We're living it. And we'll be putting them in these beautiful hotels, paying those hotels off to house these migrants who are wrecking the place. Cut 13.

The first hearing will showcase the racist tendencies of the extreme agro-Republican wing of the party that seeks to close the border to refugees from places like. Cuba and Venezuela. It almost makes me miss their usual obsession with conspiracy theories and the FBI. I know you're used to the unseriousness and people doing it, but. This is an opportunity to be Henry Quayar.

Henry Cuera says, You know, my people are having such a hard time. I don't care that I'm a Democrat. The border's busted, and my people are suffering. You would think that Nadler's policy would be. At least to the people that put him in office, right?

To try to address something that's overwhelming his city.

Well, we'll look at the contrast, and there's not unanimity among Democrats on this. You know, you mentioned Henry Coyar. You know, he represents a border district in Texas. His view on the border is very different than, say, Veronica Escobar, Democrat from El Paso, also representing a border district in Texas. She's a little more liberal.

In her comments yesterday, she's one of the ones who targeted the Republicans, who's saying this was just about race and trying to make a lot of noise. And Coyar is more moderate in his politics, but so this is a problem. I mean, he has argued about this and been very disappointed with the administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and the border security issue for a long time. But again, just contrast how two different Democrats who represent border towns, border areas in Texas see this. There's not unanimity.

It's just totally irresponsible, in my view. Here's Kevin McCarthy after meeting with the President about raising the debt ceiling and others. First big meeting, Cut 38. He said he he would not negotiate with me. He just spent an hour with me in the Oval Office.

He knew the topic we were talking about. He was aware of what we were going on. Remember why this is so important. All your viewers have to understand. The Democrats that controlled Congress for the last four years, they increased discretionary spending by 30%, more than $480 billion.

They slammed through at the last minute last year this omnibus bill that over the next 10 years will spend $1.5 trillion.

So if you want to know where inflation came from, you know where our problems. It's this runaway spending.

So we only have two choices, either responsibility or reckless spending. I know where the American people want to go.

So for the president who said he wasn't going to negotiate with me, we talked for more than an hour, gave both perspectives. I thought they were respectful. And he was optimistic after their first meeting. What do you do you read between the lines for me, Chad? Reading between the lines is that we're going to have five more months of this.

They don't have to deal with the debt ceiling until June. And they're not really talking past one another, but they're talking about different things here. President Biden said that he would not negotiate the debt ceiling. But what he didn't say is that he wouldn't negotiate on some type of spending agreement or budget cuts or something along those lines.

Now, of course, Democrats want to make a lot of noise and say, oh, you know, they want to touch your Medicare, your Medicaid, your Social Security. And Kevin McCarthy, if you decode his language here, he might be able to get a win by saying, look, I got the President to talk and we came up with some sort of a spending arrangement to rein in this spending, whether it be caps or whether it be some sort of budget packed. We don't know. Almost every time that we've seen us get into this debt ceiling crisis, certainly twenty eleven, to a much lesser degree in twenty thirteen, they have passed something that has resulted in some measure of fiscal control. And that's what the s the the super committee failed in twenty eleven, so they had the automatic spending cuts, which was sequestration.

That's still around today. There was a modest agreement between Patty Murray from Washington State at the time, was the chair of the budget committee, now the President pro tem of the Senate, and and Paul Ryan, the former Speaker, who was chair of the Budget Committee in the House in twenty thirteen.

So usually these debt ceiling crises I'm not sure that we're t to the crisis yet. They give members an opportunity to deal with spending. But here's the problem for Kevin McCarthy. He talks about balancing the budget. Uh that is Off the table, you would have to cut right now seven trillion dollars in spending.

You would wreck the economy, you would wreck the global economy. And nobody would ever vote for Republicans again because here was what you have to cut. People say, oh, we want to get rid of that waste, fraud, and abuse.

Well, you can't there's not enough of that out there. That's a great talking point. It's a great line, but you have to deal with entirely. Last question real quick, Chad. What about you on Omar?

Is she going to get tossed off committee off the Foreign Relations Committee? Yeah, it looks like it here. It looks like Kevin McCarthy has the votes. He had a couple of members come around in the past couple of days, Victoria Sparts of Indiana and also Ken Buck of Colorado. It's a simple majority in the House that will come up later this morning.

And he probably would not bring that resolution to the floor unless he had the votes. And even if he didn't, then he could weaponize this vote, turn it around on the Democrats and say, look, you voted to support Ilon Omar, and here's all the things that she did. This is tit for tat. Remember, the Democrats, they voted to get Paul Gosar, Marjorie Taylor Greene off their committees. Chad, we got it.

Thanks so much, Chad. He's the best. Information you want, truth you demand. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. My watch is taking a different path with John Salt.

As a result, the last two years of my administration, we've cut the deficit. by 1.7 trillion dollars. the largest reduction in debt in American history. While doing all the things I just said, we paid for it all. That is Joe Biden saying how great his economy is, while verifying MAGA Republicans saying that Donald Trump added more to the debt than any other president.

So here to correct the record, Stephen Moore. Stephen Moore. Welcome.

So, what do you think about that?

So, I mean, there isn't one iota, as my mom would say, iota of truth in that.

So, let's go through that. First of all, he said he cut the deficit by $1.7 trillion. Here's what happened.

So, Biden comes in. Remember, the first thing he did was pass that $1.9 trillion, quote, American Recovery Act. And then they added two more big spending bills.

So the debt. The deficit in Biden's first year went up to about $2.9 trillion in one year, $2.9 trillion, the worst year ever for the federal deficit. Then last year, the deficit fell to $1.4 trillion, which is still one of the highest levels of deficits ever in the history of this country.

So over the two-year period, that's $4.1 trillion of added debt.

So what he's doing is saying, look, the first year when I ran off the debt to the highest level in the history of mankind, compared to the second year, you know, I reduced the deficit by 1.7. That would be like saying somebody gained 60 pounds one year and then the next year they gained 30 pounds. Look, I cut my weight gain in half. I mean, what he keeps saying it. And he's going to say it in the State of the Union.

So how much did Donald Trump add to the deficit?

Well, look, I worked for Donald Trump. I was one of his senior economists. I admire so much what he did for the economy on the tax cuts, deregulation. Energy policy getting tough on China. I mean, go through the litany.

I have to admit, Trump was not good in cutting spending. You know, look, Republicans like to spend money as much as Democrats do, almost. And so, you know, Trump. You know, the deficit did rise under Trump, no question about it. But then Biden came in and he took into the stratosphere.

But I wonder where it was before the pandemic. It was less than a trillion dollars. That's still too much money. You know, we're borrowing way too much money, and it's happened under Republicans and Democrats. My point is that.

There's no doubt about it in my mind. I've studied this stuff for 30 years, Brian, that Joe Biden is. By far, by a long shot, the most financially reckless president we've ever had. And the other thing he said at the end of that clip was. He says, I think I got this right.

Didn't he say and this was all paid for? Yeah. What's he talking about? Not one penny of it was paid for. He ran up the debt by $4.1 trillion.

He said, and we paid for all of it? Where does that come from? But the other thing is, just his policies on oil and gas and what he's doing with the spending, what Joe Manchin signed up for at the end. Here's the question is now. We watch all the cuts.

We see what's happening in the tech sector. We see what's happening in banking. And yet the numbers of the unemployment numbers still say extremely low. Why is that? I mean, it makes you wonder: is someone juicing these numbers?

No, I mean, look, we laid off a lot of people during COVID, and so now we're still in the process three years later of trying to get workers back on the job. And so, part of the problem right now, a big part of the problem, is we added all these government benefit programs. You know, we were the ones that did that study that you guys have reported on, Fox and Friends. That, you know, in a lot of states, people can get $80,000, $90,000 of government benefits and not work a single hour.

So we've got to. I'm going to sound like our mutual buddy Larry Kudlow here. We've got to stop paying people not to work. And we've got to reward people for work. But all that stuff has been cut out.

No, no, no, no, no. We are still. seeing a lot of payments being made. In fact, one of the things that's going to happen I think Biden may even make this declaration in the next day or two. He's saying he's going to end the COVID emergency By I think May fifteenth.

Yeah. Wait a minute, Ryan. The the COVID emergency ended a year and a half ago. Why do you think it is that he wants to keep the COVID emergency going? I think there are two explanations.

One is it gives him almost dictatorial powers, which they love to use the phrase threat to democracy. That's a threat to democracy when you have a president who can basically do whatever he wants without the approval of Congress. The second reason that he wants to delay the end of the COVID emergency, there are all these government welfare and health programs that give more money to people because of the emergency. And that would end when the emergency is over, so that's why he doesn't want the emergency done. We're paying way too much money in unemployment insurance, Medicaid, food stamps, all these things.

You add them up. You can live pretty comfortably. And look, you and I believe in a social safety net, but come on, we've got to get people back working. We have had people now collecting government benefits for three years, not working one single hour. Here is Jerome Powell yesterday on a question from Ed Lawrence of FBN, Cut 37.

So you've talked about we had solid job growth. I'm Edward Lawrence from Fox Business, by the way. We had solid job growth, a slight falling in the increase in consumer spending. It seems so far it's been relatively mild from the economy to go from a 9.1% CPI inflation to a 6.5% CPI inflation. Is the hard part yet to come to go from 6.5 to 2?

I don't think we know, honestly. You know the uh so We of course Expected. goods inflation to start coming down by the end of 2021. And it didn't come down all through 22, and now it's coming down, and it's coming down pretty fast.

So I would say this is not a standard business cycle where you can look at the last 10 times there was a global pandemic and we shut the economy down. And Congress did what it did and we did what we did. It's just it's unique.

So he's admitting he doesn't know. What do you think? Want to go inside those numbers to get inflation from six to two? Yes, I would say that by the way, I liked his statement that he made yesterday, Brian, where he said The job of the Federal Reserve Board is to achieve price stability. And that will do the most good for the economy.

He's exactly right. The job of the Federal Reserve Board is not climate change. There are people who want them to deal with climate change. The Federal Reserve Board, these are just a bunch of economists. The job so we do have to get down to 2 percent.

I do think it's going to get tough. It's going to get harder as you get closer to that target. It's going to get more difficult. But the thing to remember is those price rises that happen, you know, prices are up about 14 or 15 percent since Biden came into office. That's a permanent elevation.

In other words, we may stop the acceleration of the inflation, but we're still going to have people really suffering. You know, my buddy, E.J. And Tony, who works with the Heritage Foundation, has calculated the average family has lost about $4,000 in purchasing power, kind of in real take-home pay, because of this high inflation. That's a lot of money. Right.

And they can't figure out how to do that and how to deal with it because supply chains will have to do with it. And then what happens with China? That's going to affect everything. We don't really control China. And we can't, you know, so whether the zero COVID policy or they all got COVID, either way, they are definitely not back up to speed.

Here's Steve Bratner on what he thought as he said this on another network, as you know, he worked for Obama, Cut 40. The economy is in a very funny place. There's a lot of really good things happening. A huge number of new jobs yesterday were posted. But at the same time, we are starting to, it does feel like the economy is starting to slow down under the pressure of these higher interest rates, and consumers are starting to pull back a bit.

You see that in a bunch of these other earnings reports. I think a lot of people are seeing that. And also with real estate, obviously. Is affected. I mean, you're going to buy that house, really, at this rate when there is hope that these are eventually going to come down?

You're going to sell your house, really? How much are you going to have to cut your price in order to get your buyer? Everyone goes to hold, let alone the commercial side. Yeah, these higher interest rates, especially on mortgages, they negatively affect people who own homes and they negatively affect people who are trying to buy a home.

So if you're trying to sell your house, you're going to have to sell at a lower price because of the higher mortgage rates. And if you're trying to buy a house, you're going to have to pay a higher price for the house because, you know, over a 30-year period, the difference between paying a 3% mortgage, which was what it was when Trump was office versus we're at about 6% now. That adds a couple hundred thousand dollars over thirty years to the cost of the house.

So that's a big deal. Don't forget also what's happening in the tech sector. We've seen almost one hundred thousand job cuts. That's why I don't understand the unemployment numbers. Yeah.

I have to say, I've kind of mystified by this too. My advice to people: if you're on the sidelines, you're thinking about getting a job. Get the jobs while they're still there. And the jobs are out there now. Whether they'll still be there six months from now, I'm worried about the direction.

It just so happens, I happen to my kids are that certain age where they're about to get their first job and they're noticing in banking that there's a real cutback and they're getting worried about the promise. When you graduate in May, you got a job. They're getting worried about that.

So I'm seeing that, the Tech Center. My son, too, is graduating from college this year, and I'm telling him, you know, David. Get out there and get that job while they're still there because this is a strong job market right now. But that could do you remember what happened in 2008, Brian, when that financial crisis hit? It was like almost overnight.

That the economy went from being healthy to the worst recession we've ever had. Right. Look, I'm not trying to be doomsday here. I pray every night that that doesn't happen again. But, Brian, when I came to Washington in 1984, the national debt was $1.5 trillion.

$1.5 trillion. Thirty years later. $31.5 trillion. It just doesn't seem real. Yeah, it doesn't seem real.

It is a locomotive that is speeding right over a cliff, and we've got to stop this. And that's why I'm with McCarthy, folks. McCarthy has to take a hard line with the Republicans. And we'll talk about that. We're going to talk about that, too, because he gave his review of what it was like meeting one-on-one with the President of the United States.

You listen to the Brian Kilmeet Show. Steve Moore's here. You know, Steve, and your role of credits includes. You are the chief economist for Freedom Works and author of Godzilla. Don't move.

Learning something new every day on The Brian Kilmead Show. Yeah. From his mouth to your ears, it's Brian Killmead. You can't sit down for one hour sitting in the Oval Office across from one another talking about positions for debt ceiling, the economy, and spending without that point.

Now, there's times that we strongly disagreed with one another, and that's respectful, but You understand when you sit down with somebody whether you think at the end of the day you could come to an agreement. Look, this is what the American people want. They want us to be responsible about it. They want to control this spending. I mean, 74% of America says they want spending cuts to find those savings.

Look, the Democrats have spent like there's no tomorrow. We want to make sure tomorrow's better than today. Kevin McCarthy, talking to Sean Hannity about what he got across with his meeting with the President of the United States. Steve Moore here, economist extraordinaire. Steve, what do you think is going to get done?

And what do you think about his tone after the meeting? Let me just say one quick thing about Kevin McCarthy. Remember, it was just a few weeks ago we had that rebellion in the House against Kevin McCarthy. He had to go through something like 12 votes to get the speakership. 15.

And he was really criticized by, you know, even conservative.

Some of my friends at Fox were criticizing them for doing this. But you know what? I think those conservatives, and I don't agree with all their tactics, but they really won a very important. Procedural changes in the way Congress works in terms of stressing that we have to get to a balanced budget.

Now, the reason I say that is because ever since then, Kevin McCarthy's been tougher. You know, and I like that about he's got to get tough with Mitch McConnell.

Well, that's a pretty low bar there.

So I like what Kevin McCarthy is saying. I hope he sticks to his guns. And look, this is a massive, massively important fight. And I feel very strongly that Republicans cannot blink on this. We have got to get a deal with Biden that lowers government spending, that lowers this debt, that puts us on a path to balanced budget.

I think the American people are behind that. Everybody knows we can't keep borrowing $2 trillion a year. But here's the thing. They keep going back at McCarthy. They say, tell me what you want to cut.

What should he say? You know what? I'm writing a piece right now for FoxNews.com on that very subject. I'll give you $500 billion right off the top. There's a $300 billion green energy slush fund.

That Biden created with one of his $300 billion. Get rid of that. We don't need it. We can't afford it. How about saving $60 billion, not hiring 87,000 new IRS agents?

I'll give you a third one. Reports have been coming out, you report on these on Fox and Friends all the time, about the massive amounts of fraud payments. It's got to be specific.

Okay. We have to go after those people, recapture. I'm not talking about billions. I'm talking about tens and hundreds of billions of dollars that were stolen. Nobody does anything about it.

So we could claw back that money, hunt down those people, get the money back from them. There, I just saved you $600 billion right off the top.

So they do need to be specific. And then we've got to get spending caps. Every year we've got to just hold spending at last year's level until we get to a balanced budget. The problem is the first thing I think Republicans agreed to is to hold this defense spending at 2022 levels while we have this growing threat of China and the growing demand from Ukraine. Everybody has different positions on defense spending.

Mine is, look, we spend $850 billion a year on defense, by far the most in the world. We can't, as conservatives, do what liberals do. They judge how well a program is working by how much we spend. No, we have to look at results. We can provide the greatest national defense system in the world and not have to continue to spend more money.

There's a lot of waste in the Pentagon budget as well. We've got to get serious about this. And the Democrats, every time we say we need another dollar of spending for defense, you know what the Democrats say?

Okay, you have to give us another dollar for social spending.

So the budget just keeps going up and up and up and up. Here is Andy Big. You talk about waste. By the way, there's two separate things. You got to fund defense and you got to increase it, but at the same time, you have to have an outside audit to come in and find out who knows the military.

You don't need somebody on the outside who doesn't understand the difference in missiles and rockets and ships, but understands the military, and it's got to be binding. Who would serve on the Simpson Bowles Committee, give up two years of your life? Drill down on it, provide it, and then have it ignored. They did a bunch of uh Pentagon Reform reports and it gets totally ignored.

So I don't know what smart person would give up their lives to do this if they're not going to listen. You know, it's very simple. I live down the street from the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. That's the largest bureaucracy in the world. And so you're telling me that we can't cut some of the and those aren't people in uniform, those are just government bureaucrats in Washington.

So I do think we can provide you and I agree, I'm a Reagan Republican. We have to have the strongest defense in the world, but we also have to, as Newt Kindrich says, we shouldn't. Salute waste just because it's wearing a uniform. Right, and we've got to find out what's new and what's not. And we go to school on what's working in Ukraine.

By the way, there's about $10 billion of green energy programs in the Defense Department. That's crazy. Here is Congressman Andy Biggs talking about cracking down. He's asking Horowitz, who's the Inspector General, cracking down on improper payments that happened during the pandemic, cut 30. And what is the total amount?

that you estimate was spent through either fraud improper payments or waste in any of those programs. Go ahead, Mr. Horowitz. Um So Congressman it's even at this point too early to give any estimate that's reasonable. I've what I've said before and I'll say again, it's clearly in the tens of billions of dollars.

It wouldn't surprise me if it exceeds ultimately more than one hundred billion dollars.

Some say as much as a trillion. Because the Chinese came in and started sucking this out, so did North Korea, and they think Russia started applying for this stuff and sucking out the pandemic money. By the way, who was the congressman asking it? Andy Biggs. Who was he asking it to?

To Horowitz. Horowitz. Who did the inspector of the IG? The Inspector General.

So, yeah, I would say it's close at least $100 billion, no doubt about it. That's money that was stolen, folks. That was criminals who stole the money. And both should get on the same page with that. We're anti-criminal.

Steve Moore, thanks so much. Appreciate your insight. Thank you, Brian. All right. You listen to the Brian Kill Me Show.

So glad you're here. From high atop Fox News headquarters in New York City, always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian Killmead. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the latest moments of Brian Killmead Show.

We have so much to talk about coming to you from Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, around the world. Professor Nicholas Giordano will be joining us. Did you hear what happened with the SUNY thing?

Well, SUNY is the State University New York school system. They now basically have to pass an equity test in order to get their diploma starting this year. An equity test.

So basically, white privilege have to admit to it, give examples of it, and how America is built on stolen land off the backs of slaves. That's going to be the curriculum in New York if you want to be part of the SUNY system and get a degree. You thought the vaccine was dividing this state. Just wait the mandates. We'll talk about that with Nicholas Giordano, who's in the SUNY system.

He is a professor that will not subscribe to it. Doug Collins is in the studio. In two hours, he is going to be on Outnumbered. Before we get to Doug, let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. And what is the total amount? that you estimate was spent through either fraud Improper payments or waste in any of those programs. It wouldn't surprise me if it exceeds ultimately more than $100 billion.

It's got to go way over that. COVID kleptos. Oversight hearings show billions taken fraudulently as trillions in tax dollars were sent out during the pandemic among the thieves, China and perhaps Russia. This can't stand. Abusers must pay.

I'm hoping Dem feel the same way. Number two. There's no invasion of migrants in our community. Nor are there hordes of undocumented immigrants committing crimes against citizens or causing havoc in our community. Really?

Claiming this continues a false racist narrative. A judge in El Paso actually said that about the border. Dems play their hand on the border, and it's despicable. The hearings reveal Dems defend their open border policy, so they decide to play the race card for anyone who has a problem with it, like let's say me, and call the fentanyl crisis hype. Really, you'll hear it all.

Number. Was that your laptop? For real, I don't know. I know, but you know that's this is the answer. I really don't know what the answer is.

You don't know yes or no if the laptop is. I don't have any idea. I have no idea what it is.

So, it could have been yours. Of course, certainly. There could be a laptop out there. That is Amy Robach, who's looking for a job now, asking Hunter Biden on a book tour if the laptop is real.

Now, we know it's real. I know you knew it's real. But now, Hunter admits, thanks to his legal tactic, that it should embarrass anybody else and embarrass all of those experts that call the Russians disinformation to protect the big guy, that the laptop is real. And they're going to sue anyone that wants to talk about the contents. As another FBI search takes place at one of the president's homes, the plot thickens.

With me right now, and I'm going to tap into his legal background, Doug Collins, former congressman from Georgia, ranking member of the Senate, the House Judiciary Committee, and host of the Doug Collins podcast. Doug, what about this legal tactic of his team coming out saying the laptop is real, but there are things added to it that are not. And if you keep saying things about it, we'll sue you.

Well, I think they finally got aggressive on this because, you know, for you. This is Abby Lowell. This is it. They've just gotten aggressive because they've been sort of sitting back taking the punches from a legal perspective. And so, from a legal standpoint, they're now saying, look, we've got some cover.

And this is one of the things I think people are missing here. Remember the letters that were sent by Jordan and Comer? These were the letters sent by Jim Jordan and James Comer about investigating the laptops, investigating some of these.

Well, the DOJ sent back saying, well, now this under special prosecutor, we're not going to give you anything.

So now, when you have the cover of DOJ supposedly in an investigation and you have the ability to now start framing your narrative. And going after those who disagree with that narrative, I mean, from a legal perspective, it's probably all he's got.

So, I mean, I mean again, you gotta take it at that that case. But I didn't think that was gonna stand. When Warner and Rubio came out and said, Are you kidding me? During the Mueller investigation, you you we uh were able to be read into everything. And now you're going to tell me we can't be reading because there's special prosecutors for Trump and there's special prosecutors for Biden?

Yeah, there was a little bit of difference. One of the problems you had is you had leaker in chief Adam Schiff in the impeachment stuff with the Mueller investigation and everything else. Anything that they were hearing, he was basically leaking. Trey Gowdy's talked about a million times. I have as well.

This one is interesting in the sense that they're now using this background. But notice, since they had that hearing last week, what's happened? I mean, we're 10 days past that hearing. We're 10 days past that briefing in which everybody got all upset about it. They haven't gotten any more closer to information.

I would assume they were negotiating, but I guess you would know better.

So here's the letter from Abby Lowell, Hunter's attorney. Mr. Johnny Mac Isaac chose to work with Donald Trump's personal lawyer to weaponize Biden's personal computer data against Joe Biden by unlawfully causing the provision of Mr. Biden's personal data to the New York Post.

Now they admit it's all true, right? This failed, dirty political trick directly results in the exposure, exploitation, manipulation of Biden's private and personal information. But they said it wasn't true. Johnny MacIsak's intentionally, recklessly, and likely unlawfully conducted conduct allowed for hundreds of gigabytes of Biden's personal data without any discretion to be circulated around the internet. Politicians and the news media have used this unlawfully accessed, copied, distributed, and manipulated data to distort the truth and cause harm to Biden.

Now, among he never came back to pick up his own laptop. It becomes the repair shop's coverage. They gave it to the FBI. The FBI held on to it. He took a copy of it and said, listen, this is national security.

Rudy Giuliani, here it is. And that's where we got where we are today. Yeah, it is interesting the way that he sort of crafted that statement in the sense of. Of looking at, you know, this was taken illegally. Where's that argument been for the last couple of years?

One, they just ignored it altogether. They said, no, this wasn't his laptop. This is a fake story. This is fake news. And now they're coming back around to saying, well, if it was, and they're admitting it was, and the post story was accurate, that you shouldn't have had this information.

This is information that is illegally obtained. Again, I don't hear a standard for what they're saying illegality is here. I mean, at some point, they're going to say, where is the illegality? It's about like you going in something and throwing something out in your trash can. And let's just say you were supposed to, I'm going to use a crazy example.

Somebody who's supposed to be in a. Not drinking at all, and they throw alcohol bottles in their trash can out front.

Somebody walks by and sees alcohol bottles in the front, and they say, Hey, I was walking by Jim's house yesterday, and there's alcohol bottles. He's out there on TV saying he never drinks alcohol. That's public information. It's just out there. You're wearing it around.

So again, I'm anxious to hear eventually what's the legal argument here. But as much as they're going to start suing now, then they're going to try and claim that some of it was planted, some of it was not. We'll just see how it goes. But that's their legal argument. Tell me if this is not dangerous.

Okay. You want to have this? Let's get into detail. Yeah. Let's go into detail.

You tell me what's not true, and you tell me what is true. And then we'll go into that.

Well, we have folders. Biden Burisma folders, they say, were added later. The Burisma documents were added later. They said Salacious Pictures package was added later. The Big Guy file was added later.

After they said at a later date, these files came into fray and they forensically can rebuild.

Okay. What's in the big guy files? What actually bothers you? As this stuff gets churned out, I could see this going not very well for Mr. Crackhead, who loves hookers.

Well, it's going to be an interesting way to how they frame it as they go forward. And again, this is where it gets into this legal argument. But it is interesting now that now the Republicans who took control. DOJ has basically locked up on anything that they're giving out for this. And now there's, and you've heard the legal fund, you've heard everything else.

Is it an outcoming out to say this? And to refute, again, to make their case, they're going to have to show, yes, the. Again, they can no longer say the laptop's not theirs. Here's their problem in looking at it, at least acknowledging it, because if they try to say this part's this, this part's not, then they have to prove what they're saying. And this is what the court system's for, but they're going to have a big lift there.

So, here is what CNN debated this because they admitted in a five-minute piece that they have a problem with some of these business deals last two weeks ago that Joe Biden was involved in that maybe need further investigation, which we find laughable. Yeah. Let's listen. This is one.

So this it seems like this Hunter Biden thing it just keeps legs, more legs, more legs, more legs. This is quite the tone shift for the Hunter Biden team, right? For a couple of years now, Hunter and his lawyers have basically tried to not comment at all on these stories. And what they're trying to do now is to say, well, these people have actually broken the law. As you know, Poppy and Don, he's under investigation for a criminal investigation by the Justice Department.

So this allows him to fight on another in another stage.

So, Doug? They are saying, number one, how bad did they look two years ago saying it's not real?

Now he basically hunters like, oh, yeah, it was real. Yeah, exactly.

So it's real.

So they're going to hunt at another stage. In the portion of you want to go fight this out, let's take a look at these business deals and tell me what's not real about it. Was there really a CEFC deal with Hunter Biden and the big guy? And when Tony Bobolinski, I think we need to see you. Yes, you did business with them.

Please show me what's wrong about the oh, wait, you have the other side of the laptop? Are you saying that they're just going to back out and they're just going to say you never should have had it? Can you have it both ways? Yeah, the legal issue here that they're going to have to deal with now if they're going forward with this and basically bringing suits against people to say, hey, you've misrepresented this, you falsify this, you've defamed my client, is they're going to have to show, okay, how that actually happened. And so yes, this is going to become the the so the next the next logical question is, okay, you're saying that this was added in.

Well, is it a complete? Are you saying it's a complete fabrication that it was added in to hurt Herner Biden and to hurt Joe Biden? Or are you saying that it came from another source and put into a different context? I mean, here's where it really gets interesting in this situation because they're now saying this was all added. They're going to say, so you're saying if it was added, it was just all made up and put in there to make anybody look bad.

And then that sort of presents the different issues of actual authenticity and how it came about. And are there other corresponding emails that again, making up an email chain is a lot harder than putting a paragraph or a picture on a on a on a a computer. Right. So as they say you never should have had it, when that gets thrown out of the window and he says our policy was if you leave it here for six months, it becomes mine. I called you three times, I'm on your voicemail, here's my calls I made.

So he provides all that and they say, okay, but you never should have let it out.

Well, I call the FBI. And the FBI had it.

So I did the right thing. And then after a while, I realized how bad this is. And I cared about the country. I have a rich patriotic background, and I see these international business deals. And as I'm doing this, people are covering this.

And then they're going to just anybody with a conscience, maybe Bob Woodward, will go, well, what was the business deal?

So instead of a guy on crack who loves hookers, which is a sad addiction story. It is what is the deal that he's doing with Romania, the Moscow mayor in Ukraine. Why were you on that board? Who is the big guy? How did they get the money?

So that's why Miranda Devine said this: cut 43. Basically, Hunter Biden, through his lawyers, has admitted that yes, the laptop is his. It's not Russian disinformation, as those 51 dishonest intelligence officials told us. It's his laptop, which we've been telling people for more than two years. And finally, they've admitted it with this kind of ridiculous attempt to go on the offensive.

I think John Paul MacIsaac, who I spoke to this afternoon for our story tomorrow, put it best. He said, when you're over the target, the flack becomes even heavier. And so I think that there's panic in the Biden campaign.

So that's a woman who wrote Laptop from Hell and was told you made that whole thing up again. You talk about a sad situation. You look at this whole situation. Let's also go back to facts. I mean, facts.

He was paid an obscene amount of money to accompany Barisma in Ukraine, which he's not qualified for. Which he's not qualified for. He was paid. I mean, there's never been a denial of the money he got from China. There's never been a denial made by the money he got from Ukraine.

All these stuff build up. And so it's like one of those things when you see the facts that nobody's denied, and then you start seeing subsects of it coming out. I mean, that's why people are sitting here. It's like, you know, okay, something's up here. What is really the tragedy here is the media presentation of this over the past couple of years.

That's, to me, is the bigger issue here. Is when did we become so polarized? And let's admit, we are. We're so polarized that we won't even take an article or a fact that is out there and say, look, Here's what they're saying. We're still trying to verify, however, you want to do it.

But they just flat out said it didn't exist, or they didn't cover it. And that's the part that Americans, every day that I go to see or talk about, they say, They just don't believe anything coming out of DOJ anymore.

So then we find out that yesterday during Fox and Friends. That they went into the Robohoboth home of the President of the United States with their attorneys who don't have security clearance watching the FBI go through his home. What is it? Since November 1st, they could have gone through.

So you had three months. I know there's a tremendous risk of throwing stuff up, grinding it out and picking up, but This after two weeks ago, we found out the FBI did go through. We heard about that search for 13 hours. And then we hear November 15th, the FBI went through the UPenn Biden Center. Can you compare that to Mar-a-Lago, please?

Which, by the way, I don't support. The President Jinnah brought that stuff back. Obviously, I'm not supporting that. But look at both these sort of stories, Doug Collins. Yeah, it is a problem.

And because, again, it goes back to this very underlying thought that most people out there in the world don't understand why there's different treatment. And it is so obvious. I mean, you have a sitting president. They go into it. We find out after the fact he's already been to the Rehoboth House, I think, many times between these searches.

He was in Rehoboth while they were searching Wilmot. They were searching Wilmington. And then they went from Wilmington. Yeah. So, I mean, again, the issue of where you should have it, not have anything else, it comes back to the fact of why is this being treated differently?

Or could it come back to what Mueller said or another said that you can't charge a sitting president? Who knows? But right now, they're not doing it. Here's my problem with this, though. Can I stop you right there?

Compare Donald Trump's first year. Raided Michael Cohen's office on a Sunday to get information about a current president. I'm going to bring it back to you. I think it was Stormy Daniels. Yeah, not even just the president's wrong residence, which was, I think, completely wrong.

This negotiation go back to Roger Stone. Go back to all these others that they have perp walked or they have caught in the morning. I talked about this. Again, I'm not. Concerned about the end of the day.

Okay, if you've got a reason to go there, okay, law enforcement, I get. But when you have press there and you go in as if you're taking down a drug cartel. For a You know, for an 80-year-old Biden who's who may or may not have, okay, it just doesn't make sense. And again, people see that, and then they turn around. And then, when it's on the opposite hunter, it's anything with the Bidens or Hillary Clinton.

Remember who got to sit in on the interviews with Hillary Clinton? Her attorney. Right. Again, it just. And now, look, and to be fair, they quote, told the Trump attorneys who were told to stand away, kept apart.

I never, I've not heard that language. They may have told the Biden attorneys to do the same thing, but again, it just, the PR side of this is terrible. All right, I want to get your take on 2024, how the race is shaping up, and also find out what's going to be unoutnumbered. Doug, thanks for coming in. Don't move.

Diving deep into today's top stories, it's Brian Kilmead. A talk show that's real. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. He still has a lot of popularity. If he runs again in 2024, will you support him?

Yes. If he decides that he's going to run, would that preclude any sort of run that you would possibly make yourself? I would not run if President Trump trained.

So President Trump put that out that Nikki Haley would not run, but it looks like on the 15th, she'll make it official. The former governor of South Carolina will run for President of the United States and call Trump himself. Doug Collins, you got a unique view of this. You know the president well.

Now you're out. You're going to be on television. Analyze Nikki Haley going in. Interesting, Gorin. I think they're playing it right now.

I think there's either of the path here. I don't, frankly, I'm not sure how far this goes. Again, it may be a - if he were Donald Trump, you know, the setup between Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis has become the main focus. You think everybody else is clearly in the second tier? They're second tier for now, yes.

Because what they may be planning on is if the two of those at the top end up killing each other, then you move up from one from the bottom. That could be her angle a little bit. Look, she has done everything but say I'm running for p it's just sort of picture sharp picture. Yeah, she's in well, but she's been doing it for three years. She's been going to every campaign in the country, she's been going to everything in the world, and she just show up.

What do you think of her candidacy? I mean, she'll have some ideas, but I just don't think she's, we'll have to see what she does with money and how she deals with perception. Nobody knows who she is. Tim Scott on a listening tour, he's got money, and he does have a lot of support. And man, he has experience.

Yeah. Tim will be interesting to see if he actually jumps into it. It's funny that it was Haley who supported Scott to the Senate. And so when DeMint resigned.

So Trump is not running away with the polls, and he's not running away with the donors. I saw Franklin Graham come out and say he was a great president, but it's time he's a little old. We saw that in the RNC meeting last week. You know, the reporting coming out of it, there was a lot of members of the RNC, which, again, that's a whole different topic. But there was a list sign and say, hey, we want to see a primary.

Lindsey Graham's endorsing him. Are you? I'm not endorsing anybody. Are you going to? I'm not endorsing anybody, right?

I'm watching 2022. What if I read? Would you endorse me? I might get you, Brian. Might, Brian.

You wouldn't even commit to it. Hey, come on. I'm going to pull a hunter here. Hey, what do you got for me? A radio show like no other.

It's Brian Killmead. Hey, joining me now is Nicholas Giordano. He's a professor at Suffolk Community College, part of the SUNY system. And what's SUNY, if you're listening around the country, of course, WABC and RCN listeners get it, WLAR. They know SUNY system is the state university system.

But here, these are considered, for the most part, they're excellent schools, 64 strong, and they are affordable if you're a New York stater. And a lot of people have chosen that way as opposed to independent colleges and costs up to $70,000. Then it comes out that this story: that social justice. You'll have to go through a social justice curriculum in order to get your degree. This is unbelievable.

We're going to learn, and you have to sign off on the fact that America is born on stolen land on the backs of slaves, that if you're white, you live a privileged lifestyle, that if you're black, the life the world is stacked against you. And This is the type of thing you're going to need to get your degree. You're going to ask yourself: would you sign off on this? Among the people that are outraged, and there's a lot. Nicholas Giordano, a SUNY professor at Suffolk.

Nicholas, welcome. Thanks for having me on, Brian. How are you?

So good. How would you describe what now students who are coming into who might get accepted and choose to come in September to a SUNY school, one of the 64 SUNY schools, what are they going to be in for?

Well, I think you're right. I think SUNY is an outstanding university system. It has been for decades. And unfortunately, why they're doing this, I can't answer that question. But what it does to students that are incoming in the fall of twenty twenty three is it's designed to make every single degree program incorporate social justice and diversity, equity and inclusion.

We're talking about degree programs in mathematics, engineering. It doesn't matter. Everyone has to go through this. And they the courses have to either be new courses developed that could be. Diversity, equity and inclusion certified, or we have to revise current courses to meet this obligation.

And there's no debating it. It's something where if you're putting this out as a degree requirement, Where SUNY specifically states courses must address how institutional and societal structures lead to inequities across groups. And Current and future social justice action. We all know they're not talking about social justice and calling for limited government. or calling for fiscal responsibility.

So They're trying to push a political agenda rather than educate students, get them to think critically and prepare them for the workforce.

So, diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice. There'll be classes to earn your diploma. They say that this has been implemented in Villanova, Brandeis, University of California system. It's essentially racial equity programs. They also claim that officials consulted with faculty and students on campus for months before approving this plan.

Were you consulted? Did you hear about this, Nick? No, we were never consulted. I mean, that's just lying. Colleges throughout the United States are moving in this direction.

A lot of them are doing it, so everyone has to pay attention. But the reality is the discussions were held at the higher levels And it was right in the heart of COVID, you know, starting in the beginning of 2021, shortly after George Floyd in 2020. And so, While professors were online trying to deal with the mental health crisis, the colleges were shut down, there was no discussion of this. And that's why they did it then, because they could get it under the radar. And then it came to light last semester because now the degree programs have to be changed and approved.

So you're a political science teacher, right? Correct.

So, how are you going to reform if you don't put this into your curriculum? They're probably going to let you go.

Well, it's going to be challenging.

So, my courses are not going to be reformed. We're not revising my courses. In fact, Um when we look at it Students will have, if they're in the political science program, they're going to have to take an elective. Of the diversity, equity, and inclusion.

So I could still teach my courses and it won't affect me, but they're going to have to take. This D E I class. And get their social justice training elsewhere. It's my job as a professor not to indoctrinate my students. I'm not supposed to give my students my beliefs on the issues.

It's my job to get them to think critically and tell them how the structures of government works. and by this blanket generalization that the system is institutionally and inherently racist and always has been, always will be, I have a big problem with that because when you push back and ask them, well, what specific institution, they can't give you any real answers. And that's the problem. But there's no debate allowed. And another thing that makes it worse is.

You are now seeing job openings for Teaching where it says the preferred qualifications are demonstrated experience in diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice. You're kidding. A commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice. That's how bad it is. But there are solutions, and that's the good thing.

Well, yeah, we'll get to the solutions in a second.

So now, if you want to indoctrinate people, not only to get a degree, but if you start convincing them that they can, let's focus on how you're discriminated against because of your gender or the gender that you choose, the class, of course, the race. And so, if those things happen, you're going to start, instead of being the melting pot, which we're a bunch of people from different nationalities, different backgrounds, shapes and sizes, but we all believe in one country, this to me is a curriculum of division. It is, it creates the victimhood culture and it encourages tribalism. Where the identity is put above country, where people are going to go and retreat to their groups. And that's going to factionalize our society.

And you know history very well. Madison warned about what happens when you have these factions. It could destroy society. It hasn't worked out well for Afghanistan, Libya and those other countries. It's not going to work out well for us especially because we're a unique nation.

Our national model, e pluribus unum. Out of many, one nation. Out of many different people from different places comes one nation built on core principles of liberty, limited government, equality, and we're erasing that now. We're saying that your individual identity is above the American identity. That your group is above the American identity.

So there's not going to be this loyalty to the country that's supposed to exist. I mean, think about it. If you grow up through an education system, K through twelve and now college, and you're told what a horrible place and an evil place America and its institutions are, How are you going to be loyal to that? Country. And you're not a big part of it.

And you gotta wonder if that's a goal.

So what can you do about it? We're talking to Nick Giordano, professor, a SUNY professor at Suffolk Community College, and we're talking about this new social justice programming that every incoming freshman from here on in will have to go through. And now the SUNY system, 64 institutions strong.

Well, and I've written about this for campus reform because part of our problem is faculty don't speak up enough. There are plenty of faculty from both sides of the political aisle that I've heard from. That are against These new requirements because they worry it's going to infringe on academic freedom and limit what they can and cannot teach in the classroom.

So faculty need to get the courage to speak up. Parents, parents can look at the schools they're sending their child to, and they could decide: well, if this Schools focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion, and not preparing my child for the workforce, my young adult for the workforce.

Well, then I'm not going to send them there. The power of the purse is extraordinarily strong. You have alumni. that could stop giving contributions to some of these schools as a way to put pressure on them. Corporations.

I've written about this. Again for campus reform where corporations are dropping degree program requirements Because They don't want social justice warriors. They want efficient and quality work being done. And so the employers need to push back against the colleges and say, hey, what are you doing here? Why are you doing this?

Give the students the knowledge they need to be productive members within society. And if we could see that unification of people speaking out, then I think we could prevent this from actually happening. But once it's implemented, it's going to be really difficult to undo. No question. And that's where the country's heading.

And then you say, well, how are they going to exist in a world that doesn't accept all these views and are not going to look at everybody as a victim and doesn't care about your color of your skin? They're just going to look for performance. But if you keep on graduating people to feel like this, soon these people will be in power. Just go to show you: there's people on the left who have a problem with this, one of which is Bill Maher. Let's listen to his debate with Brian Cranston.

It's 400 years that we've dealt with this, and our country still has not. Taken responsibility or accountability for the history. of the systemic racism that's in this country. What should we do more?

Well, I mean f for for one thing, uh critical race theory. I think it is essential to be teaching. Critical race can mean, I mean, it's just one of these catch-all terms. If you mean we should honestly teach our past, of course. If you mean, More what the 1619 book says, which is that it's just the essence of America and that we are irredeemable.

That's just wrong. And he goes on. And this is a left-wing guy debating a left-wing actor in their little bubble, but Bill Maher is not in that bubble.

Well, thank God he's not. And the sixteen nineteen projects are fraud, but four thousand five hundred school districts did adopt it. And it amazes me because the left has controlled the academia for a century. And the reality is that if we weren't teaching these things, then they're the ones that weren't teaching it. I mean, I talk in my classes about people like Felipe Omazzi, who helped write the Declaration of Independence.

It was his idea of All men being created equal. Him and Thomas Jefferson became friends and spoke about liberty. I talk about Christmas Addicts. and Brister Swenson. You know, when we look at this, Peter Salem, these are names that are hardly brought up.

But if you look at our unique culture, there were enormous amount of black contributions, there were Hispanic contributions from the founding. And so if you want to talk, how about we talk more about their contributions into the founding of America and what they were fighting for? Rather than this, America was built on racism, and there's nothing we can do to redeem ourselves for our past. The reality is, we made great strides. And what DEI social justice attempt to do in these curriculums is erase all the strides we've made over the last 250 years.

And to me, that's despicable. Right. Yeah, that with what's going on with crime and these liberal DAs, and it's unbelievable. We have like a sinister. force working within our country to take down our country from within.

And I think this is an important piece of it, and it's got to be pushed back by people like you, Professor Nicolos Giordano. And how do we get your podcast? PASREPORT. com, you can go to our PAS report website and our podcasts are on all podcast platforms, and you could also go to campusreform.org. Go get him, Professor Nicholas Giodano.

Thanks so much. Thank you for having me, Brian. You got it. Important message. I don't know what you could do at this point.

And the one thing that if you choose not to go to that school, While most of these private colleges are double.

So you might be have to you might not have a choice. An elite institution that's affordable, that you're paying tax dollars for tax dollars for, if you can get into them to walk away because of this is a tough call for parents. Not easy. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. Educating, entertaining, enlightening.

You're with Brian Kilmead.

Okay. The more you listen, the more you'll know. It's Brian Killmead. I hope that's the goal. The more you listen, the more you know.

Special thanks to. For all our guests for coming in, but Professor Giordano also putting himself out there talking about how he feels about this curriculum that's being jammed down all these students' throats. A lot of them have no choice, it's great. And Doug Collins, too. But I'm thinking to myself, you need to know more.

More to know. Sponsored by Unplugged. Reclaim your privacy from big tech snooping with Unplugged. Visit unplugged.com.

Alright, here we go. Sylvester Stallone lands the Family Stallone Reality Show with his lovely wife, Jennifer Flavin, and three daughters. I'm really surprised by this, but I'm interested in it. It'll follow him in the eight-part reality series debut on streaming services this spring. After playing some of the most legendary characters, he's now paying himself.

As a dad and a husband, in addition, the actor of the series will allow viewers to get to know his wife. Jennifer Flavin, who was born and raised in Los Angeles. I didn't think anybody was actually born in Los Angeles. Everyone migrated there. And now is the co-owner of the wellness brand Sirius Skincare.

Do you use that, Allison? I don't. Maybe they could be a sponsor. That would be great.

Sophia and Sistine Stallone co-host the Unwax podcast together. While the eldest is not interested in acting, both Sistine and Scarlett are hoping to enter the entertainment industry. Sistine is an actor. Um and model and filmmaker and Scarlett as an actor appearing alongside her dad. In the Tulsa King.

Wow, I didn't know she appeared that was with her dad. I'm trying to think which one is she. I didn't see it, but yeah, I didn't know that either. I finished the series. Really good first season.

You're coming back for a second. Fantastic. Do you think he'd be doing this reality show if his daughters didn't want to get into the industry?

Well, I remember Terry Bradshaw mentioned me. He did the reality show because his family wanted to do it.

So I think the same thing. Do you think they're married, do you think they got back together for the reality show?

Well He had a tattoo of her. He blotched it out. And then they got back together. I don't know if he unblotched. Do you think he'll get a new tattoo on the reality show of his wife?

Let's talk about it next. Parents pay at least one monthly bill for 40% of millennials. I don't know how they did this study. They surveyed 2,000 people for one-polled Chartway Federal Credit Union in Virginia.

So young adults were polled. In a new series, two-fifths of millennials say their parents still pick one or more of their monthly bills, pick it up. And the most common parental subsidy is the housing. 24% of millennials say mom or dad pay their rent, 70% say parents cover the mortgage, smaller shares of 26 to 41%. Demo reported parents help with groceries, 22% there.

Utility bills, 19%, insurance 18%, and car payments, 16%.

So Doesn't surprise me. It doesn't, but millennials are sort of on the older side now. They're not like, you know, nothing. Older millennials. Eric.

38. They're 38. Yeah. That's pretty old. Yeah.

Right. So 38, yeah, they try to do that. Did you pick up, does your mom pick up most of your bills, Allison? Oh, that's why I am able to keep this job.

Next. Short on cash, more Americans tap their 401k savings for emergencies. Squeezed by higher prices, a record of 2.8% of the 5 million people in 401ks run by Vanguard tap their retirement savings to cope with hardships such as medical bills, evictions, foreclosures, or anything like that, something big. That's up 2.1% and a pre-pandemic average of 2%. The increase is the number of people taking hardship withdrawals is probably driven by several government moves in 2018 that have loosened the rules for taking such distributions out.

So I guess the penalties aren't high. Is that bank speak for that? I guess maybe they lessen maybe some of the tax consequences with that. But I mean, that's being very short-sighted because now what's going to happen when these people try to retire if they don't pay it back? They're going to be living off Social Security, which is going bankrupt in 2030, which everyone's supposed to bring up for.

That's kind of sad.

Next, Amazon could have more robots than employees in seven years. Arc Invest CEO, Kathy Wood, predicted that Amazon could use more robots. The portfolio manager, who makes her investment decisions based on companies she believes in, will create disruptive innovations. Noted that an interview with CNBC that Amazon is currently increasing automation to a tremendous extent. It's adding a thousand robots a day.

Really? If you compare that number of robots It's adding about a thousand robots. Do we even have a thousand built a day?

Well, I mean, what do they consider a robot, right? How it, I mean, it doesn't need to be like the Terminator, right? It could be something tiny. If you compare the number of robots Amazon has and the number of employees, it's about a third. And we believe that by the year 2030, Amazon can have more robots than employees.

So maybe if it increases efficiency, if they can't get people to do it, but they did lay off a whole bunch of people, remember? I'm wondering if that has anything to do with the robot mania. Maybe, but you also can understand how a giant warehouse, how automation is much more efficient. You don't have to worry about. Them getting hurt, like a person throwing out their back or a package filled with a bunch of people.

A lot of people find it monotonous. Maybe they don't want to do it. That's true, too. Resurfacing Mr. Rogers' video features iconic TV stores seemingly warning against transgenderism among kids.

We have that audio, which you may hear at some point later on the show. Not this hour. Not right now. Right. I mean, who would even, I didn't even know what transgenderism was.

No, I mean, he doesn't, he basically sings boys are boys and girls are girls. How dare he? I know, right? He was so controversial about Mr. Rogers.

Thanks so much for listening. Prakilmicha. From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest-growing radio talk show. Brian Killmead. Thanks so much for being here, everybody.

It's the Brian Kilmead Show coming to you from Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country, heard around the world, and on hopefully your podcast schedule. Bottom of the hour, New York Post finest. Ian O'Connor, columnist, author of Belichick and many bestsellers. Last one about Coach K will bring us inside the retirement of Tom Brady and how he thinks he'll be as a broadcaster. What went into it?

Why this year and not last? Do you think he'll undo it? Ian O'Connor on that. And Raphael Mangul will be with us. He's a fellow at the head research for the policing and public safety initiative at the Manhattan Institute.

This guy knows more about crime than most people will ever even consider or read. He's also a contributing editor of City Journal and author of Criminal Injustice.

So Raphael will be with us.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. And what is the total amount? that you estimate was spent through either fraud Improper payments or waste in any of those programs. It wouldn't surprise me if it exceeds ultimately more than $100 billion.

COVID Kleptos. Oversight hearings show billions taken fraudulently as trillions in tax dollars were sent out during the pandemic. We have to get this money back. Number two. There is no invasion of migrants in our community, nor are there hordes of undocumented immigrants committing crimes against citizens or causing havoc in our community.

Claiming this continues a false racist narrative. Really? Dems play their hand at the border, and it's despicable. The hearings reveal that Dems can't defend their open border policy, so they play the race card and call the fentanyl crisis hype. You'll hear it all.

Number Why? Was that your laptop? For real? I don't know. I know, but you know that's this is the answer.

I really don't know what the answer is. You don't know yes or no if the laptop is yours. I don't have any idea. I have no idea.

So it could have been yours. Of course, certainly. There could be a laptop out there. Really? Certainly?

Of course it was. Hunters. Laptop is real. I know you know that. But now Hunter admits it, thanks to his new legal tactic, and that should embarrass all who call it Russian disinformation.

Like, for example, the 51 so-called Intel experts from Leon Panetta on down. They tried to protect the big guy as another FBI research search takes place at another one of the president's homes. The plot thickens.

So, Rafael Mangul joins us now. Raphael, welcome back. Yeah, thanks so much for having you, Dax.

So, people are watching the funeral, what happened over in Memphis. And here's what Al Sharpton said. About who is at fault, even though five black cops killed one black man. How is they going to keep crime down in the black community. And At the same time, not Be tough and rough.

Well, they do it the same way they do it on the white side of Memphis. And they keep the crime down without being rough and tough. How do you have the same department? then keep crying down on one side of town. Without beating folk to death.

But you can't do it on the other side of town. Unless you feel that you can get away with it there. I can't speak for everybody in Memphis. I can't speak for everybody gathering. But for me, I believe if that man had been white, you wouldn't have beat him like that that night.

Oh. Really? We don't know what happened leading up to the pullover, but Rafael, what do the stats say about that?

Well, the stats, of course, say that that's a ridiculous argument to make. We know that white people are subject to police uses of force, both legal and illegal, right? Does the name Daniel Shaver mean anything to you? Does the name Tony Kimba mean anything to you? These, of course, are stories that didn't get national attention in part because the victims were white.

But the idea that this was racism, I think, is You know, really strange credulity. It's something that I don't think the majority of the public is ready and willing to believe. I think everyone. You know, when one of these tragedies happens, you know, a lot of people who are kind of in the movement, so to speak, try to figure out ways to mobilize to make those tragedies work for them. And so it's not surprising that this is going to be sort of depicted through the racial lens.

But here's the problem that someone like Sharpin is forgetting. You know, policing. Every single study of policing shows that it reduces crime. Proactive policing reduces crime. Hotspots policing reduces crime.

Now What happened to Tyree Nichols was separate and apart from legitimate policing. Everyone recognizes that. There's a reason why the sort of reaction to that case was unanimous in its denunciation of the conduct depicted in those really hard-to-watch videos, right? From police executives to even the president of the Fraternal Order of Police, one of the biggest policing in the country, have all denounced this, right?

So you have to remember that A, policing reduces crime, B, policing does not mean this kind of brutality.

Now, when you think about the crime reductions of police, the most important thing to remember is that crime is not evenly distributed. Right, we know that black men are victimized at significantly higher rates than white men.

So when crime goes down, it disproportionately benefits. Black men. And so the question then becomes if Sharpton and AOC and those folks are right about policing as an institution, that it's racist, that it's designed and operated for the specific oppression of black men, why on earth Would that institution so disproportionately benefit black men when the institution achieves its stated ends as stated by the people at the institution's home, right? I mean, you ask any police chief, any law and order prosecutor, what is it that you want to achieve? They all say we want to keep crime under control, we want crime to go down.

But when that happens, it doesn't benefit rich white people. And so I'm really sort of almost at my limit. in terms of how much more of this kind of rhetoric I can tolerate. Because Every single piece of data tells us that policing is essentially an anti-racist institution. Right.

And then we also know when things like this happen, black or white, you stop with the proactive policing and all hell breaks loose. For example, what happened in Baltimore after the Gray story and what happens in just about every city because people have pulled back, especially Minneapolis. Yeah, Minneapolis, Chicago after LaQuan McDonald, New York after Eric Garner, the list goes on, and yet there seems to be an unwillingness to learn that lesson. I mean, you know, I wrote a piece about this case, you know, in part because of how horrible it was, but also just to kind of call attention to our recent history, right? And what happened to George Floyd was atrocious.

Everyone agreed. Right, the police officers were very quickly fired, very quickly indicted, arrested, charged, and convicted of murder.

Now, What happened in the wake of that is that Places around the country, including Memphis, made very rash policy choices in a very short period of time, in the year following George Floyd's death. 30 states passed over 140 police reform measures. That's just at the state level. City councils across the country enacted their own police reform. City councils across the country defunded their police to various extents.

The Memphis Police Department aligned itself with the quote unquote eight can't wait campaign, which was a campaign that promoted eight different police reforms that we were all told was supposed to minimize know this kind of outcome. What also happened though is as a result of that rash decision making, we saw police officers pull back. We saw police officers resign and leave urban departments where they're needed most. And what that meant is that the police officers that were That they were being replaced with ended to be of lower quality because a lot of departments were struggling so much to recruit and retain officers that they actually had to lower standards, get rid of educational requirements, or reduce educational requirements, look the other way on prior convictions, prior drug use. That's not a recipe for anything good.

And what really frustrates me, and what I think reveals that the sort of police critic movement isn't really about progress is that there's been a lot of progress that they never acknowledge. And if you look at the 1970s, Police officers used force at enormously higher rates than they use it now. In 1971, the NYPD shot and wounded over 220 people.

Now that number is usually around a dozen to two dozen. That's a lot of progress. I think the MIP shot and killed nine people. Overwhelming majority of those were justified. And so we have to understand that in the context of almost seven hundred thousand cops in this country making ten million arrests a year, The horrible things that we see, and we should acknowledge that they're horrible, are not representative of the institution.

And that should make us all feel better. Again, it doesn't mean we shouldn't work to make that even greater. But we got to give it a little bit of a problem. But Raphael must drive you crazy because you know the numbers and you hear the rhetoric and they just don't add up. You do this for a living, Rafael Mango, our guest, a crime expert.

They say we're about between we're at 34,000 cops in New York City. We need about 38,000. I understand Memphis is about 400 down. I understand that in New Orleans, they are so light on cops, they have to pull in from other states to actually handle Mardi Gras next week. And we know how rife they are, let alone with the quality's gone down because they're not backed up, they're not paid enough.

And we see the people's view of policing. How bad is it? Oh, it's really bad. I mean, the Police Executive Research Forum, which is an association of police chiefs and sheriffs from around the country, they produced some research over the last couple of years on what they call the workforce crisis. And the most recent report shows that only 94% of budgeted positions for police officers in this country are actually filled.

By contrast, in Canada, for example, 99%, more than 99% are filled. Right, so we have a real gap, and the gap On the national level, it's actually bigger when you dig into these big urban departments. And one of the reasons for that, I suspect. Is that those are the departments in which cops are most likely to get into the sort of trouble that they're trying to avoid, right? If they're proactive and someone resists and they have to use force and it doesn't look pretty on video.

Police officers in big cities no longer feel like they are going to be given the benefit of the doubt. In fact, I think the overwhelming feeling, at least from the cops that I've talked to, is that they are going to be tried and convicted in the court of public opinion and that their cities will not stand behind them. And that is a huge point of discouragement for people who are highly educated, highly motivated, and psychologically stable from taking that job. And the more that you discourage high-quality candidates from taking the career path of policing, the lower the quality of the median police officer and the smaller the delta between the average cop and the average perp. And then if that happens and continues to happen, you're going to see a lot more Tyree Nickel.

I want you to hear what Heather McDonald said over the weekend about what's going on here. As you know, she's also a crime expert.

Well, this makes me long for the days, Tucker, when we heard ad nauseum from academia that blacks cannot be racist because racism equals power plus privilege, and blacks by definition have neither of them.

Now we're at the point where racism is a virtually non-falsifiable proposition. My favorite example of this new paradigm is the claim that the fact that the Five officers in Memphis were indicted for murder is itself a product of racism.

So, you know, what's an ally to do? The only thing you can do is absolve favored victim groups of all accountability.

So Th th she was trying to get her head around what's going on with race and the accusations that it was still racial racially inspired when five cops uh killed a black man. Yeah, I mean, I think she's exactly right on this point. You know, again, the idea that the the way that that argument unfolds is that people say, well, even though they were black officers, they are part of an institution whose history is racist, right? They're part of an institution that produces racially disparate outcomes. Therefore, they are also perpetuating racism irrespective of their skin color, which I think is just a completely denigrating argument to all of the black and brown men and women who wear the uniform and do the job well.

The idea that they're somehow unwitting participants in their own group suppression, which is an incredibly insulting and dim view of minorities in this country. But it's also just ignorant of the massive benefits that have accrued to minority communities as a result of the efforts of policing. Again, between 1990 and 2014. The reduction in homicides added a full year of life expectancy to the average black man. It only added 0.14 years of life expectancy to the average white man.

So I ask again: given the role that police played in that crime decline, how does it comport with the racism accusation that the products of this institution disproportionately benefit low-income minority communities? And there's study after study that shows this. There was a study a couple years ago that came out and showed that for every cop, you abate 0.1 homicides a year, meaning that for every 10 cops, you avoid one homicide a year for every year that those cops work. The effects, though, were twice as large in the black community as they were in the white community. That doesn't sound like racism, does it?

So, yeah, so listen to a more from Heather McDonald's, where she says the stats just don't add up. The post-George Floyd horrors never stopped coming. We lost thousands more black lives to drive-by shootings. Not a single one of those protested by Black Lives Matter activists. And police departments are now facing a retention and recruitment crisis.

At the same time, that the pressure is escalating yet again to hire by race, pressure that began under the Obama administration and even was more long-standing.

Well, letting race Trump merit is always a disaster, whether it's in policing or in medical training. And you went on, and it seems endless. In terms of improvement, this is what the Nassau County Police Chief Pat Ryder said. And I'm going to tell you what the biggest issue that I think is something that runs through this country. the different standards of training that goes on.

There should be a standard throughout the nation that we all must follow, and it's not the standard should. To be a national standard about how you de-escalate when you're allowed to use deadly physical force, when you're allowed to use your taser.

So he's for the national standard. Just your thoughts real quick on that, Rafael? Yeah, I mean, look, I'm not sure I agree with the national standard argument. I mean, first off, there are national standards on use of force, right? The Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is very clear.

Tennessee versus Garden, there is sort of a paradigm case on that, right?

So all police are subject to the same requirements with respect to use of force, with respect to searches, et cetera. On training, I do think the sort of laboratories of democracy approach makes some sense. We should eventually work toward best practices. I don't like the idea of a top-down national standard, in part because the top can be captured by ideological. I'm going to have to hold it there.

Rafael Manguel, thanks so much. Appreciate your expertise. But he leaves rhetoric out. And I'll leave, put you in 1-866-408-7669. We go to the phones next.

If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it. You're with Brian Kilmead.

They busted him hard. I guess his account, his credit card account was flagged for suspicious activity when he didn't hire a prostitute within 24 hours. And um Same thing happens when Brian Stelter buys fruit. My last thing is, like, wasn't it probably fun for Biden to go through like a search of his own home because that's what he does every day? Oh wow.

You know, he's walking around going like, there are my kids. That's where the guest bathroom is. Oh my god, I've been using my pants.

So Jamie Lissow, having a good time yesterday on Gutfeld. You said you went and saw him on stage? I did. Last weekend, Saturday night, we went to Bananas in New Jersey. He was fantastic.

So far. Yes, he was.

So, if he, I mean, no, he travels all over the country.

So, if he's near you, I highly suggest you go see him. The thing he said to you is. I can't believe you came. Everyone says they're coming, but no one ever comes. Yes.

He did. He emailed me that after, I can't believe you came. Thank you. And yeah, I said, I'm a woman of my word. And also, it's a problem in society.

Everyone says, oh, I'm coming. And people don't show up. It's so rude. And but it's hard for you. You have three kids, all young, all at pretty much when you went on the weekend.

They're almost three. They were fine on their own. They take care of themselves? Totally fine. Right.

I think that was good. Didn't someone leave their infant at the airport? They were rushing to get a plane. I didn't see that. Yeah, that's an interesting thing.

I bet they made it. I think that's bad parenting. But at three years old. They're totally self-sufficient. And you should pay some of their bills.

And don't give me that. They need to work for it. They need to work for it. All right, that's where that's the, that's your own Reddit survey. Yeah.

Radio that makes you think. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. Good morning guys, I'll get to the point right away. I'm retiring for good. I know the process.

was a pretty big deal last time, so when I opened up this morning I figured I just press record. Let you guys know first, so. It won't be long-winded. Like you only get one super Emotional retirement essay and I used mine up last year so Really, thank you guys so much to every single one of you for supporting me. My family.

friends, teammates. My competitors, I could go on forever. There's too many. Thank you guys for allowing me to live my absolute dream. I wouldn't change.

The thing. Love you all. Seven Super Bowls. I don't think you change a thing. I think five MVPs.

Ian O'Connor joins us now in the New York Post, columnist, author of Belichick, and one of the premier sports authors in the country, biographers in the country, who's also back to writing columns in the great sports section in the New York Post. Ian, I could not wait to get your perspective on the beach goodbye from. From Tom Brady. What are your thoughts? Is this for good?

Oh yeah, Brian, I think it is. And I wasn't surprised he came back last year because there was still a lot of, I thought a lot of football left in him. And I had talked to him in 2017 about possibly playing until age 47, 48, even 50. And he was open to at least making that attempt and had said his wife had signed on to at least 45 and she was good with that. I don't know if anything changed there.

But this year, this was a tough year for him in a lot of ways. Obviously, off the field, on the field, finishing eight and nine. They made the playoffs, but The Buccaneers were not a good team, and he did not play at a Tom Brady level.

So when you look at the way he announced it. And just the visuals of it. There's no coming back from that, Brian. He is done. And I don't know what kind of a broadcaster he will be.

He might be very good. He might be better than people expect. But he is the greatest football player of all time. He's not just the greatest quarterback of all time.

Well, that's interesting for you to say because there have been so many unbelievable athletes playing all different positions in the most physical game America's ever produced. But I think what people find really astounding is that it doesn't get by you. Is that You know, Michael Jordan was going to be great. It was how great? You know, we know Kobe Bryant was going to be great.

We just know how great. You know, we knew Dan Marino more than likely was going to be outstanding. Joe Montana overachieved. I got it. But there was nobody, picking him 199th, that thought he was en route to being by far the greatest football player ever.

How was everyone so wrong? Or what changed about him? In that same conversation I had with him when I was on the phone with him for about 45 minutes about six years ago. And he described it this way. I was an oh and eight.

freshman high school quarterback, a backup on an O and eight team. I was seventh string at Michigan. And then, of course, the 199th pick in the NFL draft in 2000.

So he didn't do it on physical gifts, he did it on willpower. and determination and just refusing to not be great. And it's amazing that With his lack of any discernible physical and athletic gifts, he was able to be the greatest player of all time. And as you said, a sport that is. built on speed and power and violence, that he conquered all.

And I I do think it's a It's really a testament to the human spirit and just his refusal to allow anything other. than ultimate greatness to happen in his career. And so I think when you, if you were to rank the top thousand athletes to ever play in the NFL, he wouldn't make that list. But he's still the greatest player ever because he played the most important position. And quarterback today, as you know, Brian, I know you're a sports fan.

Is 80% of the sport. If you don't have a quarterback, you cannot function anymore anymore. More than ever, right? And here's a guy who came along again, 199th pick in the draft. He won five Super Bowl MVPs.

Nobody else has ever won four. Joe Montana won three, and that was his idol.

So he I think he could still play, by the way. You look at his numbers this year, even though I said it was a bad Tom Brady year, and it was, he completed sixty seven percent of his passes, twenty five touchdowns, nine interceptions, almost 4,700 yards passing for most quarterbacks, that's a really good year. But for him, if you looked at him, he didn't pass the eye test. And I think like most great athletes before him, they always say, when you start to lose it, that's when you have to be honest with yourself and say goodbye. And I think that's what he did.

Right. And then the question is would he going back to the Bucs, they probably wouldn't have been contenders. Why do it? And then where is he going to go? Is he going to go to a third team, learn a brand new system, get used to a brand new coordinator, go to a brand new city, knowing that his family is more likely going to be in Florida?

How much do you think that put it weight on his mind and his decision? I think family is a big factor and Obviously, getting divorced, I think it really, really impacted him on the field. He didn't talk about it during the course of the season. I don't know if he'll ever completely open up about that, but. that in talking to people who know him.

really had a significant impact on as you might imagine it would.

So I think family and being around his children more is a big factor here. He did look completely spent at the end of that season, physically, emotionally, spiritually. Yeah. Yeah, he lost weight. And I think He looked at his And this is really more in talking to people, Noah, and this did not come directly from Tom, but.

His parents had a very long marriage, successful marriage, still married today, and I think he. Feels like that's what he wanted, and he didn't have that. And it ended this year. I think that it was very hard for him to overcome that and perform on the field. In a public arena, most people go through divorce and the trauma of that deal with it privately.

Well, he's such a public figure. He had to deal with that and everybody Kind of knowing and following the details of that, and that's not easy. And I can't imagine how you would perform at work. going through all that in your personal life. And I do think that showed up on the field.

Yeah, I understand that he toured a private school, that his kids have been home schooled. I did not know that. That he's going to be living in Miami, I guess, near Giselle. And we're talking with Ian O'Connor, of course, who wrote the book Belichick. And how long did it take you to put that book together?

Really, the better part of three years, Brian. I know you've done some incredible books and biographies, and you know how that's not an easy process. Belichick is probably the greatest or the toughest mountain I've ever had to climb because he was calling people, asking them not to talk to me. And that's the first time that's happened to that extent. Not surprising given who he is.

And so, but I do think talking to, I don't know, 370 people for that book. That's probably the toughest assignment I've ever had, and hopefully, people got a chance to read it. thought I was fair and And honest and thorough, and all those things. And that's always my goal, as it is yours. Right.

So, how long did you talk to Brady for Belichick, and what did you take of their relationship? And do you think a lot of it is, well, they were just.

Now that he's retired, that maybe he might have a different perspective. What do you think it was, and what do you think it is?

Well, he didn't talk to me for Belichick. He did talk to me for an ESPN piece, a lengthy piece on his career. And so there are a lot of people, as you might imagine, who were afraid to talk about Belichick on the record. He's a punitive guy.

So many people did talk to me. without without being named and So I think At the end of the day, Tom's retirement comes down to the fact that at the end of the season, he felt like he looked like. And sounded like he had given everything he could possibly give to the sport, and there was nothing left to give. I think it was pretty simple, Brian, that he was done. He just felt it in every way.

I don't know if he feels like it was a mistake unretiring last year and playing this season because it was such a difficult season professionally and personally to get through. And yet only Tom Brady would find a way at eight and nine to make the playoffs. What's amazing, Brian, Yeah. Went to division. It was a bad division.

But the only time he missed the playoffs as a healthy quarterback was 2002. He missed it in a tiebreaker to the Jets when they went nine and seven, but he made the playoffs Every single year outside of the year he got hurt in 2008. And man, that I think says it all about his career. Maybe that's like another season.

So it was really 24 seasons.

So, Ian, but just about his relationship with Kraft, Kraft has a three-minute piece up now talking about how he wants him to retire in a Patriots jersey. But you don't see a lot of. Great things coming from Belichick, and they were always polite to each other. Why do you think that is? I think that relationship was very productive for both people.

I would say that was a transactional relationship, Belichick and Brady, where. Kraft and Brady was more transformational and they lived right near each other and they were they were very good friends and they would send text messages to each other with very adoring terms of endearment in those texts. And that's not something Brady and Belichick would ever do, but I think that a lot of us, myself included, have maybe focused on the terms of their divorce instead of, wow, they stayed together for twenty years. Yes, and it's not easy to coach a superstar for twenty years at the highest level with the pressure on the stakes, winning six Super Bowls, losing a few in there. And maintaining that relationship.

So I think probably not enough has been said about that. that Belichick and Brady stayed together for two decades and competed at the highest level and figured it out, that's not easy to do. And probably too much was was spent uh time and attention on on the terms of their divorce. I think at the end, Brady was, as one of his friends told me, bella chicked out. to get coast with that intensity for twenty four, seven for two decades.

Ultimately, he wore him out, and he went to a guy in Bruce Arians in Tampa, who's a very user-friendly, player-friendly. Coach And I think he was looking for that entirely different approach. But didn't he get rid of Bruce Arians? Wasn't that part of him coming back? Bruce Arians had to be kicked upstairs?

That was the word. Of course, everybody down there denied it. And I do think that it's interesting that after being coached a certain way by Belichick, they win the Super Bowl in Tampa in year one, everything's great, and then they don't win it the following year and everything isn't so great. And I wonder if deep down, not something that Brady would ever admit for public consumption, if he missed Belichick a little bit. Uh Bruce Arian's motto was or one of his mottos anyway was we we lose, we booze.

I mean he he was a kind of fun loving, gregarious guy and the opposite, polar opposite of Belichick. And so I wonder deep down if at least in year two, Brady missed that part of what he had in New England. That's so interesting.

Now your projection, Giselle has a I know this is the gossipy section of it, but they are the most high profile sports couple in the country by far. She has Vanity Fair. She tells her side of the story. Even though she had a tweet that said, Congratulations on your career. Do you think he's do you think DAP could have played into it?

And is he worried about some of the blowback on that? When we get divorced, obviously people aren't happy. He has not said anything derogatory that I know of. What do you expect? I don't know.

I don't know the answer to that question, Brian. What I will say is. He did tell me that she signed off on him playing into his mid-40s. I asked him that specifically: is she okay with this plan of getting to 45 and playing?

So they got divorced when he was forty five and obviously she wasn't happy about him going back to play. But When we started talking about late 40s, he did say, you know, my wife makes a lot of decisions for our family that I have to deal with. That is a direct quote. In fact, I had that in today's New York Post.

So I don't know how it unraveled there. I'm a little surprised if she was that against. him playing because she is one of the few people in the world who understood what it was like to be the best in the world at something. She was for however many years she was the top earning supermodel on the planet. It was her dynasty was greater than his dynasty.

So it was like something like 14 or 15 straight years.

So she understood what it was like and that you have a finite time to be the best in the world at something.

So But I I don't want to speculate on that because I don't know the answer to the question. I will say if that was a significant factor in the divorce, him playing football again. It it would be a little it it was surprising to me that that was the case. Yeah, crazy. I mean, we got our own personal lives to worry about.

Let's not worry about somebody else's, but it is fascinating because they're so high profile. And I guess we'll see what happens from here. Just your prediction. You said you don't know, but as an analyst, you know what goes into it. And I think he comes to Fox, and they have a great A-team, a brand new A-team.

They got a Brayton Ed2 with Olson in there. I think he's done a great job. Do you think you can step? I've never seen anyone step right into the booth. I guess Romo did, had some initial success, got a huge contract out of it.

But you've got to economize your words. I know he knows the game better than anybody else, but do you think he can. Relay it better than anybody else.

Well Greg Olson's done a really good job in year one for Fox. And I actually played a couple of years of high school football for his father.

So but beyond that bias, I think he's done a really good job. I think Tom Grady is actually going to be better than people think. I think he'll go into the booth, and he suggested this at some point, and I forget where he said it, that he might decide to fire back at some critics over the years. And I think he'll go in there and say, Listen, I was the best in my first career. I want to be the best in my second career too, and maybe surprise people at how candid and how critical he'll.

Be willing to be. Listen, at the end of the day, he can say, I'm Tom Brady, I won seven Super Bowls. Nobody else has ever done that. I am arguably the best football player who ever lived. I'm not going to be afraid to say things on the air like people think I'm going to be.

So Don't be surprised if he is really good at this, because I think there's a fair chance that's the case. Yeah, I mean, I can't wait to hear it, but I do remember Joe Montana not saying anything for a year, for a couple of years. And after a while, he goes, Yeah, I don't really like this. And Drew Brees, I thought, was going to be fantastic. He had one year, and everyone's like, he should really quit.

So you never know. No, those are good points. I just think Tom Brady's a different animal. I don't think he'd ever try anything without being the best. At it.

Right. So I guess we'll see how it plays out. And he's the only man who's better looking than you and me. Yeah, times 10. At least me, anyway.

I know about you.

Well, listen, I know about me. Ian, thanks so much. Always great to get your insight. Pick up Belichick, get more insight. Thanks, Ian.

All right. Thank you, Brian. And the New York Post. Back in a moment. Educating, entertaining, enlightening.

You're with Brian Kilmead.

Breaking news, unique opinions. Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Show. Hey, welcome back, everybody. Just a quick thing. I want to play this one soundbite for you because it's one of the few funny things to come out of late night television in a while.

Jimmy Fallon. Was does this thing are or truth or lie?

So Derek Jeter was on, and then they have to read what's in one of the envelopes, and when the one they pick, and then they have to say it out loud, then they got to find out if it's true or false. Listen to this. Let me explain shortly. I I had a new teammate that I played with in 2002, and he always had a gold thong hanging from his locker. And he told me, Any time you struggle, you wear the gold thong, you're guaranteed to get a hit.

Now I thought the guy was crazy.

So in 2004 I went through the worst offensive stretch of my career. And Every day I'd walk in, he'd point at the thong.

So so finally, I I wore the thong.

Now it wasn't Thong the skin. I had shorts on underneath, so I put the thong over the shorts. First pitch home run. No no.

So it is true that he wore a gold thong in a game. It's true. He did wear them over, as you heard, over his regular underwear, but it's not fantastic. Jimmy Found and the other singer who was there. did not think he actually did.

They thought it was a lie.

So I guess that's that's a pretty good game. You kinda tried to come up with something innovative that doesn't revolve around Donald Trump. Yeah. That that's the key. But they're all losing to all losing to Gutfeld.

So listen, we have a lot to we got a lot to go over this this hour. We're following all those stories through it throughout the day. We also know that Uh Congresswoman Omar. Is pleading her case to see if she cannot get kicked off the Foreign Relations Committee. She's anti-Semitic.

She's pretending as if she's not. That's a little bit of a problem, don't you think? Don't forget, if you want to get any of my books, BrianKillMe.com, I order them, I sign them, I send them.