Trump, Biden legal troubles expose 2-tier justice system

From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest growing radio talk show. Brian Killmead. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the latest moments of the Brian Killmee Show.

So glad you're here. 1-866-408-7669. Big hour coming your way. A lot of exciting things happening during our show. We'll cover it all and we'll bring some perspective to it.

One of the biggest stories that we should be talking more about, but because of all these antics with the documents and the Georgia investigation and Alvin Bragg being the clown that he is as a DA in New York City, we have not discussed it, but I'm going to discuss what's going on with China and how weak we look, begging for a meeting in Beijing, which is going to happen. Mike Pillsbury, best-selling author, knows China inside and out, key advisor to President Trump, director for the Chinese strategy at the Hudson Institute. He'll be joining me in 34 minutes. But first, let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. There is a reason for Democrats to be worried. I mean, you have Marianne Williamson. She's polling at like five, six, seven, eight percent.

Jr., he's pulling like 20% or so, almost as high as DeSantis is. He hasn't even run a campaign yet, he doesn't even have a campaign. That is Chris Bedford analyzing what's happening on the left because everyone's focused on the interesting and the intrigue on the right. 2024 gets another Republican contender, and Dems begin to deal with the reality that they are stuck with the Biden-Harris ticket. Let's discuss it.

Number two. I'm not surprised by the indictment because that is a lower standard. It just requires reasonable cause that Penny committed a crime. But I've got to tell you, the Manhattan DA has a hard haul ahead. Yep, that's Brian Claypole.

He's a legal expert. Danny Penny indicted. The subway savior who grabbed Jordan Neely, protecting the other passengers on the train, was indicted by a grand jury. Another epic fail from the Manhattan DA. We bring you the case against the former Marine.

Number one. This is a double standard. Brian, 60% of the country now thinks the Justice Department follows a double standard. You know why they think that? Because it's true, and Americans with common sense, despite the press not covering this, can see right through it.

That is, of course, Jim Jordan with me last night on the eight o'clock show, Fox News tonight. Biden and Trump legal troubles. Maybe a hurdle, but not a stop sign as they both blaze a path to the nomination. We look at the cases and the different ways the media is covering it. And man, they could not be more stark.

I mean, look at the Donald Trump situation. You see all, it looks like he's going to look at two more indictments, January 6th in Georgia, and August. And then you've got to figure out times on the calendar to do all this stuff.

Now, think about this. He's getting a boost when he's indicted. Can you imagine if he gets exonerated, if he gets beat, you know, they work out a deal and it's done and it's through? You talk about major momentum. It's if you're in baseball starting to win a three-game series getting set for the playoffs, and the playoffs would be the fight for the nomination and for the presidency.

Other people write, well, Donald Trump is guilty. He's got to get convicted, and he could also become president and preside over the presidency from jail. Biggest question in Donald Trump's accusation is Merrick Garland behind it, the guy that was supposed to be a Supreme Court justice, until Donald Trump won the election, and then, of course, we get Um we get a a different nominee. We get Kavanaugh to take his place instead of Merrick Garland, and all hell breaks loose. Is Merrick Garland getting his revenge?

What was his role in not only picking Jack Smith, but making sure an indictment would result? Cut one. Can you give the American public a very clear sense of what exactly your role was in the indictment process, just so people can understand what that role is? My role is completely consistent with the regulations that set forth the responsibilities to the Attorney General under the special counsel regulations, and I followed those regulations.

Well, what does that mean? Said you put a special counsel in place. Does it mean that you can't talk to Jack Smith and say, make sure you put the ring out of this guy, as much money as you need, resources as you need, flip an attorney if you can? We got to get him. That is the sense on the right.

Now, if it's not the case, I would say it. Very simple. Don't tell me I did what I was supposed to do as a part of the regulation. How about this? I appointed Jack Smith.

Talk to him three times. All just to get an update on the money spent and the distance gone, whatever it was. Then he handed me his recommendation and I went with it. How about that? Here's more, cut ya.

Given the historic and extraordinary nature of the case. Uh explain to people if you would. Why this was the best. and most appropriate step that was taken and why there were no other alternatives. This again is asking for particulars, and I'm not going to be able to comment.

All of the comments on this will have to come in filings in court. I just think when you're a public official, you should learn to present, especially if you're a lawyer. Why can't he ever speak? And number two, Janet Yellen, she might be a genius. I haven't seen it yet.

She's a terrible communicator. I just think it's a minor thing that you could develop. And to say that you just got to lay up from, I think that's. The guy from ABC. You just gotta lay up.

Tell me about yourself, son. That's like an interview with Tell me what's good about you. Instead, he said, I'm not going to get into that. No, you should get into it. People deserve an explanation because the night before, President Trump accused you of getting vengeance on him, weaponizing the DOJ.

Why would you not come back and define it unless, of course, you don't mind being characterized that way?

So a couple of things behind the scenes, who was written up today, and I think the Washington Post, that Tom Finton, who I know is a good guy, smart guy, he evidently is the one behind the scenes pushing Donald Trump to go ahead and push for a trial. When Christopher Keis, who's a Got $3 million ahead of time to represent President Trump. And the other attorneys said, hey, you know what? Let's just give the documents back to a deal. Tom Finton was the one.

To say, no, judicial watch, hold on to it, you have the right to keep it. Obviously, the the attorneys were right. You don't want this headache. You don't need the Iran attack plan. You weren't going to attack Iran.

Remember, Mr. President?

So that would have been great to listen to the attorneys. Timothy Polator made no bones about it. He thinks there's a lot to defend for the president. There's a lot to be thrown out for President Trump. Here he is explaining.

Uh the tactics. Of Merrick Gorland and how it could get this, put this case, the prosecution in jeopardy, cut for. This team acted so radically different from every professional U.S. Attorney's Office that I've ever dealt with. They've shown no regard whatsoever for attorney-client privilege.

And it's more than just the issue of Evan Corcoran. I went before the grand jury myself. They wanted to hear about the searches that we did for additional documents. They wanted some staffer from Mar-a-Lago to go down who wasn't going to be able to really talk about it.

So I voluntarily went in 45 separate times. They asked me about my conversations with my client. And at one point, we kept getting into this fight because they kept implying, oh, you're keeping this from the grand jury. You won't let them know this. No, no, the ethics rules prohibit me from saying.

Listen. Does that sound right to you? I mean, I wouldn't expect that with John Gotti's attorney. You think he's out there? People are dying.

Business is being extorted. I got to find a way to get Gotti behind bars.

So I'm going to flip his attorney. I mean, this is the way they're going after all the attorneys representing Donald Trump over documents, not over murder. Nobody sold the Iranian attack plan to the Iranians or to to MEK, which is the Iranian Uh group uh that wants to overthrow their government. That this is politory. This is not Corcoran.

And Corcoran, Evan Corcoran, was the one that was flipped. They said he was complicit in hiding the documents and said you go to jail unless you flip and become a witness against Donald Trump. 45 times they brought him in, kept asking the same question in front of the grand jury, cut five. I believe this case there's going to be serious litigation in the pretrial stage over prosecutorial misconduct by this team, which could entirely upend this case. We may never get to a trial.

We may never actually have to address any of the substantive issues because of the misconduct of Jack Smith and his team.

So That is true. And by the way, look at Jack Smith's record. He blew Governor McDonald's case in Virginia. It was overturned. He blew Senator Menendez, that seemed like the biggest layup Democrat.

He blew John Edwards, blew that one up, that didn't work. No one's convicted. No fines paid. High-profile case with Congressman Renzi. That didn't work.

But goes to The Hague, gets a gown, and comes back and goes after Trump. And I'm not saying that Trump's playing perfect. I'm not saying that everything he did, taking the documents, it's like going up to a gang who you know is has a penchant for violence and putting it out your chin and saying, take a shot. I'm not telling you to take a shot, but if you take a shot at me, it's an assault. But I wouldn't put my chin out.

And I probably wouldn't go in that neighborhood. Trump puts his chin out. 'Cause he's confident, he knows he's being targeted and he doesn't want to be intimidated. But with these indictments It allows them to be tripped up and overwhelmed the real issues of the country. We got China as an issue.

We have inflation as a major issue. We have to get our defense fully funded. It's below inflation. There's so much to be done in terms of an overall comprehensive strategy when it comes to Central and South America. I mean, we could name so many things.

That needs to be attacked in this country, including getting back to becoming suppliers of our own energy. But we can't get out of our way of all these indictments.

So, on the other side, you see a total pass, the plot thickening big time for President Biden. What he did as vice president is coming up to the surface. It's going to be very hard for even CNN to ignore it.

Soon, people are going to see what this guy was up to as vice president. And they're going to be forced out. Were you working With Hunter Biden on these international business deals? What is James Comer actually pursuing? Here's Senator Kennedy.

On the fact that they only can get so far with these investigations, but they know there's a lot of there there, Cut 15. But I believe there's a perception out there among the American people, there's certainly a perception of that on Congress, and only the Attorney General can address that. And dog the bounty hunter couldn't find the Attorney General right now. He refuses to talk about it.

So does the FBI director. These are all fair questions. They're not going away. For the integrity of the FBI as an institution and the Department of Justice, the two heads need to look the American people in the eye in front of God and country and tell them the truth. And until that happens, this isn't going away.

So what Senator Blackburn brought up, and they're in the minority thanks to losing some key congressional races in New Hampshire and Arizona and Pennsylvania, they're in the minority by one, even though Senator Feinstein's a shell of herself and Senator Fetterman is not there. I mean, he's there physically.

So they have the advantage.

So they're calling for a special counsel to look into the Biden scandals. James Comer is doing a great job. He's just one committee, the Oversight Committee. They're starting to unwind all the banks in these international business deals, trading on their dad's name. They have no other talent or resource.

They have no other service to offer.

So you know, like for example, Rudy Giuliani was known internationally and wanted internationally when he was done being mayor. Why? Because he understood security, the interaction, the integration between security and government. To stop the next terrorist attack, the next bin Laden from focusing on your city, even the next gang from infiltrating, organized gang from infiltrating into your capital. That's a marketable commodity.

All Joe Biden has his influence. Hunter Biden has no talent. He has a law degree and a cracker, and he had a crack addiction. Neither do his partners. They don't have any international business experience to bring lucrative.

Uh payouts. They had, hey, my dad's Joe Biden. He's control. He's a major player in the number one economy in the world. We kind of know where the bodies are buried.

We never found that out. Here's Senator Ted Cruz. Why? Because the FBI is not pursuing this. And one of the major things the FBI is not doing is pursuing the fact that there might be tapes available showing that Joe Biden is extorting a official over in Burisma.

Were they extorting him by taping it? and his role in the business dealings. The new relegation is you know those business partners that President Biden, then Vice President, said he never met of Hunter Biden? Turns out they all attended a Christmas party together one week after the President got back from Ukraine. Coincidence?

Here is Senator Ted Cruz, cut sixteen. Part of the reason that the FBI and the DOJ can be so contemptuous of the American people is that they believe they will not be called to account. Senate Democrats certainly don't care about the answers. They don't care. Whether it is true or not that Joe Biden received a $5 million bribe from a foreign national.

Not a single Senate Democrat asked about that. Senate Democrats will not hold a single hearing on that question. And they know that the corporate media will cover it up and hide. You mentioned none of the corporate media even mentioned the allegations. When Joe Biden was asked at a press conference about it, he laughed and said, Where's the money?

You know what, Al Capone said the same thing. He's mocking the American people. I 100% agree with Ted Cruz, and I don't agree with him all the time. When he turned around and when he was asked that question about the million dollars, he goes, where's the money? smiled and said, I'm only kidding, it's Malarkey.

But that moment when he said it And when he looked straight ahead and then he smiled, that's Joe Biden. And the people that said, one thing about Joe Biden, I can trust him, not like that Donald Trump. His trust factor is in the toilet right now because people understand what he's really about. I know he's old. I know he lost his fastball and his curveball and his sinker.

And we are stuck with him. I know he has trouble standing up, but he has that diabolical way when he was in his prime that he never got called out on because he never achieved highest office that he strived for three separate times.

Now he's there. And he's still got that conniving way. He's been totally mislabeled as honest and trustworthy. That's another reason why I think to say that Trump can't win the general is wrong. We got three years.

We'll have three and a half years of Joe Biden. Instead of imagining an honest Joe Biden, we've had a chance to see him in action, and it ain't good. Maybe you think it's good, and that's fine. I'll take your calls next. 1866-408-7669.

Also, some emails were pouring in last night. A lot of you obviously are listening to the podcast at the time that you choose.

So I'll get to some of those comments and questions. Don't move. It's Brian Killmead. I've been saving the world for a while now on this podcast, and I'm ready to take it to the next level. Starting on June 26th, you can listen to me, Kennedy, five days a week right here.

Listen at FoxNewsPodcast.com or wherever you download podcasts. 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. Uh He's so busy, he'll make your head spin. It's Brian Killmead. There is no active investigation. President Biden has not engaged in any provable wrongdoing and there's no evidence for such.

I think to bring that up and to try to equivocate these two things is completely false. It's really not true, AOC. You know, there's great assimilarities because he had, over the course of decades, had classified documents at all levels in the most odd spots possible. The brand new Biden Center, how did the classified documents get there? 14, couple of dozen, minimum, at your Rehoboth House in Delaware.

How many people passed through there? And any relevant documents to some of the things that you'll be investigated for on some level when you were vice president, for example, with Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and China? Was it out and available to people like Hunter, who were bringing international business people to meet with you? I don't think. I mean, if I'm AOC, I'd pretend it's no big deal.

But. In reality, it's obviously a big deal. What is a bigger story is the lack of curiosity amongst most of the media and the FBI who should be investigating it. And that was some of the interviews that were done at the Hallways yesterday. And I give AOC some credit because you see, Hillary Vaughn said, Do you mind if I ask you a few questions and walk with you?

Obviously, the answer was yes.

Well, we've I think Fox helped make her pretty well known.

So I would not, if I was her, feel a little bit of an obligation to us.

Meanwhile, I want you to hear Bill Barr talk about what he knows about the Biden bribery scheme, Cut 13. It was a pending investigation when I was there. I set up a process. The reason there is a 1023, the reason that information was collected, the reason the person was interviewed is because I set up that process. And they went back and they reassembled the thing, and then they went out and did further work.

And it wasn't Rudy Giuliani. It was not Rudy Giuliani, and it was sent to. Three U.S. attorneys' offices, and those offices were briefed on the information. And he does not know the answers to the investigation because once you leave you're not supposed to be commenting people you work with.

But I saw Bill Barr here for doing a doing he's doing a special. And I talked to him for about 45 minutes. I think one thing President Trump's got totally wrong. He is one of the most important people he ever hired and the best hire he ever made. He just calls it as he sees it and he saw the president getting screwed and he stepped up and stopped it with the Mueller report and then offered the Durham report.

Information you want, truth you demand. This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

So we believe intense competition requires intense diplomacy, and that's what you're seeing from the State Department. It is a responsible way, we believe, to manage tensions, clear up misperceptions and miscalculations even, and it is in our interest to try and figure out a way to work together. That is KJP talking about the pending trip of Secretary of State Blinken to China.

Now, normally, that's a good thing, right, to the world's biggest economies and military speaking, but not in my view under these circumstances. Do you know what yesterday was? They spent all that time scolding our Secretary of State by the way we're acting. It wasn't up to par. They don't like the way we're challenging them, going over international skies and using international through international waterways.

Michael Pillsbury will not be intimidated. He's director for Chinese strategy at the Hudson Institute and so much more. He wrote the book, The Hundred Year Marathon, China's Secret Strategy to Replace America as the Global Superpower. Michael, welcome back. Thank you, Brian.

Glad to be here. China under these circumstances? No. We're in a bad negotiating situation. And frankly, if you've got some spare time sometime at the beach this summer, you should read a book called American Appeasement.

By a professor named Arnold Offner. It's all the cables from 1933 to 1939. from the US Embassy in Berlin. about Hitler. and how we have to reach out to Hitler, we have to avoid misunderstandings, We have to continue trade.

He wants to buy synthetic fuel so his tanks can go faster. Let's sell him the synthetic fuel factories, which we did. It's just sickening. At the same time, he quotes The Autonomous Magazine in London. I'm referring to mister Hitler.

as somebody we have to trade with and deal with and invest in Germany. And attacking Winston Churchill. Churchill was considered a crazy guy at the time, a pariah. The Economist magazine didn't like him. Neither did our American embassy diplomats in Berlin.

So we've been down this path before, where no matter how evil a regime is, the diplomats. And frankly, they're liberals, all want to reach out the hand of friendship and try to change their approach. It never works. often leads to war.

So just to give you an idea of what happened yesterday, yesterday he got a tongue-lashing on a phone call from the Chinese Foreign Minister. He came out and said publicly, we scolded Blinken. We told him to respect China. Stop interfering in international affairs. Stop undermining our sovereignty and focus on developing competition.

Do you believe that? This is the country that poisoned the world, costing millions of lives, still lying about it. And then took over and plowed Hong Kong, sent a spy balloon over our country, set up a spy station in Cuba, and there mad at us? Yeah. I think there's this even worse trip.

Um The guy we confirmed, only Marco Rubio, God bless him, was against the confirmation of our ambassador to China. It's a guy named Nick Burns. In this confirmation, he admitted he had consulting contracts with China. He's had a series of speeches where he praises China, the opposite of the things that you're saying right now, Brian. were being fed by Nick Burns.

Only one senator tried to block his nomination.

So everybody in the government saw this. He gets confirmed. He now tweets every day about different companies he's meeting with in China, how much he loves the Chinese people. Press This ambassador presides over the largest embassy we have in the world. It's fifty I'm if I get this right, twenty three hundred staff.

In that embassy, fifty federal agencies Are in that embassy. You can go to their website, usembassybeijing.gov, and it will tell you what all of our 50 agencies are doing to help Chinese growth. We're even helping them build an airliner so they can compete with us. The FAA has an office. has been helping this airliner factory in Shanghai.

So you and I you and I might think this is a terrible thing, but the House Republicans have barely begun to scratch the surface in terms of How are we? How our relationship with China of cooperation and assistance still continues. That's why they can be rate. It's like the State Department is working for a different country. They have no interest in a policy that even Democrats and Republicans can get on the same page on, in many respects.

You've seen some of the progress made on the select committee in the House, chaired by Mike Gallagher. I'm very encouraged by their focus and their bipartisanship. This might be an opportunity for any real leader, but not with the State Department that's acting like it works for China. That's right. And I'll give you another example of something really quite shocking.

The House Republicans got it together. They put a ban in the Pentagon's authorization last year. no purchasing Chinese drones. for the U.S. Army or anybody else.

Majority of drones the U.S. Army has purchased all come from China, one particular company called DJI.

So the band was in the Senate, it was in the House. It goes to a kind of secret conference to regulate the differences. Guess what? The sentence about drone purchases was taken out mysteriously and secretly, so the drone purchases can continue.

Now, you take this time as a thousand. Um, actually, I would just say a hundred. That's our new heritage foundation report: a hundred things. uh Congress could do legislatively. To counter the China threat.

And we're trying to keep score. We're trying to help Mike Galabier's committee, which, as you know, Brian, he doesn't have any legislative jurisdiction. He can have hearings. And write out bad pieces, but he can't actually pass bills. He has to persuade the other committees to.

Pass legislation. But Gallagher needs help, and this committee needs to be bipartisan and focused on specific legislation about China, not just. Uh general you know, declarations. How damaging how damaging was all those visits from those high profile CEOs from Elon Musk to Jamie Dimon last week or two weeks ago as they go over there and talk about being a bridge? It's damaging because it sends a psychological message.

that it's okay to invest in high tech sectors in China. After all, it's not even monitored. That's one of our heritage proposals. There ought to be legislation that requires Treasury to monitor. High-tech investment in China by American companies.

Right now, we're not doing it, we don't even know how much is going on.

So when you have high profile billionaires or CEOs, Make a visit and say positive things, it's a green light to all the middle-sized companies jump back into China. And you saw Janet Yellen's testimony. yesterday, she's saying we're not going to decouple. Let's listen to her. Let's hear here's what she said.

I think we gain and China gain from trade and investment Um That is as open as possible, and it would be disastrous for us to attempt to decouple from China. De-risk, yes, decouple, absolutely not.

So, if you want to give me that public rhetoric, I'm fine with that. D-risk, I'll start with de-risk and work towards decouple. But de-risk, get the pharmaceuticals out of there, get all the chips out of there almost immediately, stop the best we can to bring manufacturing out from Nike to Apple on down. We have to start doing this.

Well, de-risking would be a good place to begin. But even that's not happening. There's no legislation. on the House or Senate side to derisk to convert it into to a law. There's no legislation to decouple either.

So It's when I used to be a Senate staffer, when senators got angry about something like Janet Yellen saying no decoupling, you know what they would do? They would ask for the list of nominees. In this case, from the Treasury Department or related agencies, and they would put a hold on. For a year. They'd say until you change this policy, we are not going to confirm staff who work for you.

And it has a dramatic impact. On the department concerned.

So, right now, the question is going to be to think about in the next week or so. Is anyone going to put holds on Janet Yellen's appointees or friends? and tell her, look, you modified this policy or you explained to us the difference between derisk and decouple, or we're not confirming these five officials in your department. That is the way politics works when the senators and congressmen are really angry and really serious. My fear is, Brian, no one's going to do this.

They're going to say, oh, what a terrible thing Janet Yellen said, and then do nothing. That's why the Heritage Foundation is putting out this report. It's kind of like a checklist Of a hundred things that haven't been done, but that could be done, there's bipartisan support for it if we would just. uh get on the case as it were. Yeah, you can certainly help just by raising these issues.

You're helping a lot. Yeah, I hope so.

So, there's a story today out that China's economy is stumbling badly in May. Industrial output and retail sales growth is a missing forecast, adding expectations that Beijing will need to do more to shore up their post-pandemic. And by the way, they're getting hit by another variant right now of the pandemic they thrust on the world. They say they lost momentum in the second quarter, prompting China's central bank this week to cut some key interest rates with expectations of more to come. We know about their unemployment rate among young people.

And then there was this story today, and getting ready for our segment for the New York Times. Listen to this: as ties to China turn toxic, even Chinese companies are breaking them. The Chinese companies are trying to make their. Companies untraceable, putting a lot of their manufacturing in Ireland and Singapore because they have so little faith that the government's not going to come and take their stuff. Yeah.

Yeah. This thing about the Chinese economy, we hear all these stories about how they're about to collapse. But in the long term, they I just saw the World Bank IMF forecast for next year. America's growth rate is supposed to be 1% or 1.2%. China is supposed to be 5%.

That's 500 times faster. There's a famous Mike Pence speech he gave in 2018. where he made fun of the people who said the Chinese economy is going to collapse. There's a book by that title in 2001. He said, since 2001, the Chinese economy has grown 900%.

It's nine times bigger.

So you got to be very careful about crossing our fingers and hoping the Chinese will collapse when, in fact, the historical record is the opposite. That's why they're now about 80% of our GDP and closing the gap fast. Right. They just don't seem to have a monetary system that has any logic to it. I mean, they just, where are they coming up with this money?

Yet they're not earning it, and people don't seem to be working. And they're starting to take incentives out of their economy. They had this. Yes.

So, you know, the jack ma could emerge. That there's no new jack ma. If they get close to being successful, the government takes your business. I want you to hear the other big story. Cuba gave away a portion of their country.

So, see, so for billions of dollars.

So. China can set up a sophisticated spy base. Listen to John Kirby deny what we all know is true. But we were as forthcoming as we should have been given the nature of this information. Sadly, Not everybody seems to take it as seriously as we do because clearly there's a source or sources out there that think it's somehow beneficial to put this kind of information into the public stream.

And it's absolutely not. And there's a limit even now. to what we can say. uh about uh about our knowledge of these activities. First, deny it.

It's a flat-out lie is unacceptable. To say we don't comment on spy installations in other countries, it's another thing. Number two, you let it happen. You've done nothing, and you're still begging for a meeting.

Well, and number three, what's the Congress going to do about Cuba. for doing this. Probably nothing. But in fact, the Biden administration has been very clear they're going to improve relations with Cuba. They're looking for a state visit.

They want to sort of c cut down the f fifty or sixty years of Controls we've had on dealing with Cuba and open it up.

So you would think somebody would introduce legislation. Saying until the Chinese spy station, whatever it is, we don't have to give the details that they're top secret, but until this alleged spy station agreement is canceled, we're not opening up to Cuba. A congressman or senator could do that today. Yeah. I hope someone does.

But, Michael, Michael Pillsbury, our guest. Michael, the main thing is, there was an uprising about a year and a half ago, a year ago, where the people rose up and wanted a degree of freedom and control with their lives. And it was one of the biggest demonstrations anyone's ever seen in Cuba. We did nothing. And now, if China's playing a role with the billions of dollars investment for the spy station, you know what they're also good at?

Spying. And they can go and identify those leading the protests for democracy and freedom and throttle them and jail them. And that is some of the expertise reportedly China is bringing to Cuba to keep their communist dream alive.

Somebody should ask Admiral Kirby. doctor Pillsbury says over the last four or five years There have been a number of Chinese generals and their delegations of other military officers visiting Cuba. Is there any chance Cuba could become a military base for China in addition? To this by base. and then watch see what his answer is.

Because this is these some of these trips are publicly announced. Why are so many Chinese generals visiting Cuba? Yeah. It's a pretty big question, wouldn't you say? Monroe Doctrine is in tatters.

nineteen sixty two, Cuba the Cuban Missile Crisis of 'sixty two, as you know, Brian, it began with President Kennedy denying there's any anything going on down there. There's nothing there are no missiles, there are no Soviet ships. That turned out to be totally true. Then they had to rush To show how tough they were to get the Soviet nuclear weapons and missiles out of Cuba. I hope we're not going to see a rerun of that with China, but it's not impossible.

It's not impossible. Their belligerence and their anger at us is real. We should walk away and say, let's see, we'll beat you economically, we'll beat you militarily. You could rally the country around this cause. There's an opportunity here, and I think it's for the next president because this one doesn't get it.

Michael Pillsbury, thanks so much. Thanks, Brian. He's the Director of Chinese Studies at the Hudson Institute. I appreciate it. When we come back, it's your turn.

1866-408-7669. Sorry, I know it's more interesting for some people to talk about Trump's travails and even the Biden-Ukraine stuff, but this is the stuff that really affects our country. Brian Kelly Chill. Politics, current events, and news that affects you. Brian's got a lot more to say.

Stay with Brian Kilmead. From his mouth to your ears, it's Brian Kilmead. We have plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the way across the Indian Ocean. We have plans to build in Angola, one of the largest solar plants in the world. I can go on, but I'm not.

I'm going off script. I'm going to get in trouble. Number one, you're the president. You keep saying that. Does anyone want we're going to have an underground railroad under the ocean in Angola?

That's what we're focusing on? Can you just get our border straight? Do you really think we need a train to Angola? What was his talk? Can I hear that again, Eric?

I'd like to hear that again. We have plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the way across the Indian Ocean. We have plans to build in Angola, one of the largest solar plants in the world. I can go on, but I'm not. I'm going off script.

I'm going to get in trouble. Let me ask some. Are we building a tunnel like where we We're building a train that's gonna be able to hover over the water like Jesus? from the Pacific all the way to the Indian Ocean. That's a lot of railroad track.

That is a lot of track. We're going to need John Henry and even more to build that railroad. By the way, we do have Transcontinental Railroad. I think we pretty much handle that.

So once we get that railroad done, are we going to get back to reshoeing everybody's horse? I mean, this has been a technology that's been out for quite some time. There's high-speed rail. That would be kind of intriguing. Japan's got that down since 1980.

That's Joe Biden for you. There's the vision we're looking for. That's why people are trying to get in this race on the right. They don't think Trump's going to last. They think they can beat him one or the other, and they know they could beat Joe.

And nobody has a strategy to get rid of Joe Biden on the left. Gavin Newsom could do all the interviews with Sean Hennedy he wants. For some reason, he's not going to get the nomination. He's not going to go for it. RFK couldn't care less about the Democratic establishment.

And he's got between 16 and 20% of the vote. That's while not getting interviewed on any other network or any other major newspaper. Just coming to Fox. Hey, don't forget, I'll be on at 8 o'clock tonight. 8 o'clock tonight, Fox News tonight, all week long.

And then Saturday, I'll get to sleep. But most importantly, I'm with you now, Brian Kilmicho. Special thanks to Talkers Magazine. You ranked Dick Joe number three in the world. Love it.

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 the Bryant Kill Me Show.

So glad you're here. What a historic week for all the wrong reasons, but we're glad that you have chosen this show to listen to it. We come to you from 48th and 6th, of course, Midtown Manhattan. And this is where a lot of action's happening with Danny Penny and the subway and the subway hero who's going to be indicted for doing it. And we'll discuss some of that as well as crime running rampant.

You also have a mayor in this city who's bizarre. I appreciate the fact that he actually is trying to do his job, unlike the previous mayor who would sleep all day and have his wife just run up huge bills we can't pay. But this mayor has lost 11 key aides because he doesn't want to empower anyone to do their job, including the police commissioner, who, by all accounts, was doing a fantastic job, but was throttled.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. There's a reason for Democrats to be worried. I mean, you have Marianne Williamson, she's polling at like 5, 6, 7, 8 percent. Kennedy Jr., he's polling at like 20 percent or so, almost as high as DeSantis is.

He hasn't even run a campaign yet. He doesn't even have a campaign. Chris Bedford weighing in on the bizarre situation on the left. 2024 gets another Republican contender, and Demps begin to deal with the reality that they're stuck with the Biden-Harris ticket. Number two.

I'm not surprised by the indictment because that is a lower standard. It just requires reasonable cause that Penny committed a crime. But I've got to tell you, the Manhattan DA has a hard haul ahead. Danny Penny indicted. The subway savior who grabbed Jordan Eely protecting the other passengers on the train was indicted by a grand jury.

Another epic fail from the Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg. We bring you the case against the former Marine. Number one. This is a double standard. Brian, 60% of the country now thinks the Justice Department follows a double standard.

You know why they think that? Because it's true, and Americans with common sense, despite the press not covering this, can see right through it. That is Jim Jordan. Last night with me on Fox News tonight: Biden and Trump legal troubles. Maybe a hurdle, but not a stop sign, as they both blaze a path to their nominations.

We look at the case and the different ways the media is covering it. And Mark Tiessen joins us now. Mark, first I got to ask you: do you think the Danny Penny story has got national interest? Even though there's a lot of cities listening to us now without even subways, you have a guy acting heroically to throttle a 34-year-old with a background of 42 arrests, three assaults in the last 18 months, and now he's up for murder too. I mean, do people outside this city care about this story?

He was a Michael Jackson impersonator. What are you talking about? Oh, you're talking about the yeah, Jordan Neely. Yeah. I mean, of course, look, what people are seeing across this country in cities with and without subways is that the police have been so beaten up and so mistreated that in many places they're not taking risks to do their jobs to defend citizens because they know they're not going to get covered by their leaders if something goes wrong.

You've got prosecutors. I mean, I think there's something like 75 Soros-funded prosecutors across the country who have openly said we're not going to enforce. We're not going to prosecute people if they're arrested for a bunch of crimes. And so when a private citizen steps up to do what should be a job that the police do to restrain somebody who's harassing people on the subways, who shouldn't even be on the subway because he should be in jail for some of the previous crimes he's committed. And then they look at that and they say, this guy stepped into a situation that he should have never been in.

and protected other people, and he's being prosecuted. The prosecutors won't prosecute the actual criminals, but they do pro uh prosecute a good Samaritan who goes and defends an entire train car of people from a from a lunatic.

So yeah, that resonates across the entire country because it's emblematic of everything that's going wrong. It's like it's an Orwellian world where the criminals don't get prosecuted, but this Good Samaritan does. And you have a situation where immediately Al Sharpton says it's a black-white situation. When he put his round around his neck, he put his arms around all of us at his funeral. Nobody was around for this guy to help.

He was mentally ill. He obviously was harassing his own family. And then the fact that he walks out of a mental institution into the thrust of a city that I go in the subway four times a week, and I'm always seeing some dicey character try to do something where you got to say you could never look down, even read your phone.

So, because you can't expect cops to do stuff, I just think they looked into this guy's background. There's nothing negative. He likes to surf. He was going to grad school. He's got seven medals from his years in the Marines, was in Afghanistan.

That's what he did. He graduated high school for going to La Crosse scholarships to join the Marines. And then he stands up for a bunch of people when this guy stood up and said, I will die. I don't care if I die. I want to kill somebody.

And I don't care if I go to prison for life. That's when he's like, I'm taking my headsets off. I'm going to wrap this guy up. You know, and whatever. I I'm just so d d I'm just so blown away that a New York grand ju uh jury would indict him.

Well, you can get a grand jury to indict anybody because that's that doesn't you don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

So I'm not surprised that they were successful in doing that. But but I will tell you also in not only has the system failed this Good Samaritan, it's it failed the guy who got killed. Because there sh you shouldn't be allowed to walk on the streets when you're mentally ill like that. You d the the system didn't help him either.

So it's a double failure. It's a failure of the system to keep us safe.

So, that somebody has to step into it, but it's also a failure of the system that we've got we've got people who are mentally ill living on the streets and panhandling and harassing people on the subways. That shouldn't be allowed. It's not good it's not good for us as ordinary citizens, but it's also terrible for them. These people need help.

So let's look at the Republican. I noticed your column today. Definitely, people are snapping to attention talking about it. It's called Biden Should Pardon Trump, really.

So before any conviction happens. We know about the New York case, it's ridiculous. We also know that still pending, probably two indictments, one for January 6th and one for whatever happened in Georgia. And then we have the documents case that came down this week. and you're looking at all these cases and you're seeing the President's ratings doing any going up if if not staying fat, but going up if anything.

And you're saying this is good you just you just see a conviction on this, don't you? I think it's overwhelming. I mean, look, two things can be true at the same time, Brian. Which is that President Trump's handling of classified information or mishandling of classified information is egregious. unlawful, criminal and put national security at risk.

And he's also the victim of a of selective justice by a politicized Justice Department that's been going after him for seven years. Those things can be true. What drives me crazy about this story, Brian, is that he's his own worst enemy. You go through the Mueller probe, which was an absolute travesty, and it turned out to be nothing more than a conspiracy theory that we spent three years and tens of millions of dollars investigating. You get cleared on that.

And you would think your first reaction would be, you know, okay, the Justice Department is weaponized against me. I better not give them a pretext to go after me. He doesn't do that. He the next thing he does is call Zelensky and say which sparks the impeachment. And after that, you think, okay, well, now I'll be careful.

And no, he does this. It's like he keeps giving them softballs to go after him. And they keep jumping at him because they want to destroy him.

So, you know, he did it. It's egregious. Can you imagine what a different world we'd be in right now if Hillary if they prosecuted Hillary Clinton? There would be no defense then for him. And the problem he faces is that the argument of selective justice is not an argument in a court of law.

It's an argument in the court of public opinion, but it's not an argument in the court of law. You can't go to a judge and say, Well, they didn't prosecute Hillary. And the judge doesn't care. He just cares, Did you do it? And so, so you that doesn't help him in terms of his legal jeopardy.

And but the problem is that the country, a large segment of the country, I think for a poll came out that like half almost half the country thinks that the charges are political, and 80% of Republicans do. And so any conviction is not going to be seen, even if it is justified, is not going to be seen as justified by a large segment of the population. It's going to tear our country apart. We've never had a situation where a first that a president of the United States, former president of the United States, has been indicted, but also that he's been indicted by the executive branch led by the sitting president of the United States, who he is challenging in an election. Yep.

I mean, that's so fraught for our democracy. And so the the Biden could be seen as an absolute statesman by just stepping up and saying, I'm pardoning him, we're going to move on. Instead of a jury in Miami, we're just going to be put to the jury of the American people. And have You know, the special counsel does what Durham did and what Mueller did: issue a report, lay out the facts, and put those before the American people and let them decide. This should be decided by a jury of the American people, not by a jury in Miami.

So, you heard the president's speech. It was very scripted. I did not think. I thought, as I mentioned yesterday, I thought it would be a magic marker speech. Here's a few points.

Here's my speak in Bedminster, and that's it. But he said, This is my theory, this is what I'm doing. Jack Smith's a thug, and the Justice Department's been weaponized against me, and that my opponent is trying to jail me.

So, Merrick Garland, to me, has an opportunity to say, I had nothing to do with this. I appointed Jack Smith, he told me what he recommended. I signed it, and that's it. Here's Merrick Garland. This does anything but dissuade people who think he's out to get Trump.

Cut one. Can you give the American public a very clear sense of what exactly your role was in the indictment process, just so people can understand what that role is? My role is completely consistent with the regulations that set forth responsibilities to the Attorney General under the special. Special Council regulations, and I followed those regulations. That's really going to resonate in Oklahoma and Idaho.

I have those regulations right in front of me. Let me refer to it. I have a pocket copy.

So, I mean, come on. Do you have an ounce of emotion? Do you understand what just took place? Do you see how divided this country is? How much scrutiny was just put on you by the former president?

I mean, I don't think you don't have to go sweating, but at least acknowledge what you did is unprecedented. What you presided over is pretty significant. And you can't hide behind that also, because keep in mind, he's acting like, look, I appointed special counsel, I got nothing to do with it. Biden's saying, I've got nothing to do with it. No, I'm sorry.

We actually, this is a special counsel, not an independent counsel. We actually, bipartisan majorities after the Star investigation got rid of the independent counsel specifically because they wanted political accountability to have a play. They wanted political supervision by the elected leaders of our country. We're never going to have an independent counsel answerable to no one who can do whatever the hell they want.

So The the J Jack Smith works for Merrick Garland, who works for Joe Biden. And they're accountable for his actions. He is under their authority. Yeah. And so they can't just wash their hands of it.

And that's the problem: is that this is see when you can, if you look at this indictment in a vacuum, it's devastating. I mean, it's absolutely devastating. Anybody but Donald Trump will be seriously pursuing a plea bargain right now. Uh based on these charges. But you can't look at it in a vacuum, and Americans won't look at it in a vacuum.

They'll look at it in the context of the of the Mueller probe and the failure to prosecute Hillary Clinton and the and the and the true impeachments and the Alvin Bragg indictment and the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop and the and the uh the foot dragging when it comes to investigating uh the the Joe Biden bribery allegations. It's all in that context. And you can't pretend it's not. And so, I always try, I was trying to, when I was talking about this with Martha the other day on the air, I was like, I want to separate the legal from the political and just look at it from a legal stovepipe. Devastating.

Political seems great. You can't separate them because that's not how Americans think. It's all seen mixed up. And so, you know, this is just so bad for the country, so bad for our democracy. It's so unprecedented.

Even if he's guilty, which I think he probably is, and he doesn't have a good legal defense, we should put this behind us. And the only person who could do that is the President of the United States. Couple of things. I've just read Cestori. The thing is, too, I think the president's just got to listen.

If he listens to his attorneys, 90% of his problems go away. Because he's got a good group around him now. He had a good group. You know why they're getting paid? There's a $100 million legal fund that he got legitimately.

So this guy, Christopher Keis, got $3 million up front.

So he's actually doing a good job. He's got this reputation.

So they say, listen, Mr. President, let's just cut a deal. Give the documents up. Let's just end this thing now. Whatever rebuke you get, whatever rebuke you get, it's going to be minor.

No one's going to remember it. And Tom Fitton, who I like from Judicial Watch, who's done a lot of great things, evidently went right up to the president, said, Don't give in. They have nothing to go for. You'll never be indicted. And sure enough, and he's still being told to fight it out.

So if you're an attorney, you throw up your hands and say, guys, the money's good, but no one's listening to me. I'm out. And that's why he's having trouble filling out his roster. It's not because he's a Republican or people don't want to be associated with him. It's because, as a client, he's listening to the wrong people.

people. Yeah. Well, he's listening to the wrong people about a lot of stuff. I mean, if he had listened to the right people, he would have never contested the election. He would have turned around and spent the last two years talking about his record instead of trying to really litigate the 2020 election.

And if he had spent the last two years saying, look at my record and look at the disaster that Joe Biden is talking about. I think there was a poll that came out the other day that 68% of Republicans want him to stop talking about 2020. And he can't stop talking about 2020.

So he doesn't listen to good political advice. He doesn't listen to good legal advice. You know, it makes me think if he could have listened to good military advice, if he could listen to good advice, it's probably not. But Mark, let's do your thing full circle. Why do you think Joe Biden should pardon the guy he hates so much?

Because I think that it will first of all, it will We it'll restore some modicum of trust in our judicial system. People think that this is politicized and weaponized. And look, if you do this to Donald Trump. then there's going to be enormous pressure on the next Republican President to do it to Biden and to his family and to Democrats. And if they're going to play by these rules, if they're going to take the gloves off, we're going to take the gloves off.

And that's just not good for our country. There should be impartial justice. And people have lost trust in the judicial system. And also, quite frankly, you want to go into the election with people believing that the justice system has been weaponized, that there's a deep state conspiracy that's helping drive Trump. Take it away by partnering him.

It's immediately that whole issue goes is off the table for Biden. And whatever you want to say, nobody went after Hillary Clinton. Yeah, nobody went after Hillary Clinton when Pres when when President Trump won, he did not go back after Hillary Clinton. Yeah. All right.

Exactly right.

So read Mark Thiessen's column in the Washington Post today. Mark, thank you. Thank you. Take care. You got it.

1-866-408-7669. I'll go around the country, around the phones. Also, I'm seeing your comments coming in from my website, BrianKillme.com. Both sides, all opinions, it's Brian Kilmead. A talk show that's real.

This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

Hey, let's go out to Chris. Listen on WDBO. Hey, Chris. Hey, Brian, congratulations, brother, on moving up. I'd like to see if I would pay off.

Thanks, man. Appreciate your support. What's in your mind? Yeah, no worries. I think it's pretty clear that weaponization and politicization of the FBI, the DOJ, the IRS is abundantly clear.

But something I think everyone's kind of missed with the raid in Mar-a-Lago was prior to that, the National Archives director actually filed a complaint against Trump. I believe it was in February of 2022 and then again in June of 2022. And then he suddenly retired, right? And no one's talked to him.

So it doesn't it wouldn't surprise me. And I actually believe that more than likely the National Archives is now being weaponized and politicized because they didn't file a complaint against anybody else. And I think every president's taking stuff with them. It doesn't make it right what has happened or how he handled it. But again, it leads right back to just a lust to get rid of him in any way, shape or form by using any particular department that they can.

Yeah, I mean, it looks like they call the FBI. It's like the archives narc to the Department of Justice. This guy is not giving my papers back. Department of Justice says, let me do a probe here. Department of Justice gets frustrated, says, let me unleash the FBI.

The FBI should have said, Are you kidding me? We're desperately trying to depoliticize. You want me to raid a former president's home? Are you nuts? Just work out a deal, subpoena him, go in there, make it public, whatever.

Don't make me raid. But the minute they raided, we're heading down the indictment path. Good point. I mean, now we ought to worry about the archives having a political agenda. Librarians.

Librarians with an agenda. This episode is brought to you by Sol de Janeiro. At Sol de Janeiro, touch isn't just for screens. Physical connection is so essential to how we communicate, it's infused in everything we offer. Scents are so irresistible, PDA is guaranteed.

Textures are so luscious, skin is huggable. Get into a Sol de Janeiro state of mind. Receive 10% off on your first order on SolDeGeneiro.com, plus free shipping with the code Sol de Genero 10. A radio show like no other. It's Brian Killmead.

No one's above the wall. Oh. But um I've said then, and I've said since this first came to light that look, every American's entitled to be presumed innocent. Until proven guilty, and that includes former President Trump, is entitled to a presumption of innocence. That being said, I looked at this indictment over the weekend.

And there are serious charges in this indictment.

Now the President's entitled to make his defense. I look forward to hearing what defense he might have. But I can't defend what is alleged. Right. That is Mike Pence weighing in, being honest.

He had some classified documents. He called up and said, come take him. They raided his house. They raided his house. They went through his house and went through twice.

And they decided there's nothing here. Obviously, you shouldn't have done it. You made a mistake. And that's how quickly we could have solved this thing with President Trump. And having said that, I think there's probably, maybe it's too late, but there's probably a deal to be had if the President wanted to do it.

My thing is, I just want to focus on the issues. The president's strong on the issues, the former president. Mike Pence is strong on the issues. I mean, I don't disagree with Mike Pence on almost anything. You know, I don't think that for the country, they're aware he is on pro-life.

If you run on pure pro-life, I want zero weeks. I don't think you win it. But if you look at all these Republican candidates, And maybe some on no labels that might pop up. If you put them on the issues that matter most, and I think most of the country says the economy matters most right now more than ever. The president still, the foreign president still does well.

But he's dominating with the negativity because people see a political Agenda It is just maddening. We spent the whole week there.

Now, this Saturday at 8 o'clock on One Nation, I'm going to focus on maybe in the open, though, some of the issues we need to be tending to, like what's going on with China. Do you know that we started talks with Iran? Do you know that the counteroffensive has started in Ukraine? Do you know that we pledged another, I think, $300 million to Ukraine? Do you know that we rushed over seven Bradley fighting vehicles to Ukraine?

I mean, all this stuff is going to Spy station that's basically confirmed? Do you know the Secretary of State's going to Beijing? Do you know what happened with the forest fires burning in Canada, choking major cities up the northeast seaboard? What's happened since? All this stuff matters, right?

Dean, W. A. B. C. in New Jersey.

Hey Dean. Yeah, hey, Brian. You know, I'm listening to everybody talking about how President Trump doesn't listen to the right people. Thank God he doesn't listen to the right people. If he was listening to the right people, we wouldn't have our embassy in Jerusalem.

We wouldn't have our NATO paying their amount, NATO paying what they're supposed to be paying. We wouldn't have tariffs on China to change their mind about how they're treating us. There's so many things. We wouldn't have the Abraham Accord if he was listening to the right people.

So when he doesn't listen to the right people, it hurts him. I got that. But when he doesn't listen to the right people, it helps American.

So your point's well taken because he went against a lot of his advisors in all those things you mentioned.

So that's a good point. Shows you paying attention. And those stuff worked out. And the tariffs, they're so bad. Why does China beg, if they're so bad for us, why do they beg the Biden administration to lift them as soon as possible?

And why does Biden leave them in place that they're so ridiculous?

So that backs up your point. But I'm just talking about basic things. For example, what's Who advised him to take all 64 now 75 boxes? I and then when it happens, call your legal expert and say, How do I get out of this? You know, you don't call People you that might have your best interest but don't have the legal background.

So, I mean, I'm just reading this story today. It said, President Trump has consistently been in full compliance with the President's Record Act, which is the only law that applies to the President's records. In the course of negotiations over the return of the documents, President Trump told the DOJ official, anything you need from us, just let us know. Sadly, the weaponized DOJ rejected that offer of cooperation and conducted an unnecessary unconstitutional raid on the President's home.

So they were going to work out a deal. But then Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, who's a great guy and done a lot of good things, on a range of others, told him he could legally keep the documents. and should keep them from the Justice Department. Trump would often cite Finton and others. When his lawyers would say, return them, let me just work out a deal to come get them.

He kept saying, Fenton. Said not to. And they had dinner together on Monday night at the club. He's eating feet filet mignon at the former with the former president at his club. And this is what we're at right now.

Now, the President's got to spend millions of dollars on a legal fee. had to go through the humiliation of an indictment? all the pageantry that went along with it And I just don't see the advantage to that. Kathy lists on WABC. Hey, Kathy.

Hi. I wanted to say, first of all, I think the President had every right to keep those documents. President Clinton wasn't indicted when he kept the 79 tapes of foreign policy information in his sock drawer due to the Presidential Records Act. And then Clinton and other people who have kept records that weren't presidents were never indicted. But there's another example of a two-tiered system of justice.

Both special counsels, Mueller and Durham, found for Donald Trump that were appointed for Donald Trump's issues, found instances of wrongdoing against Donald Trump, but no one was indicted. And here Donald Trump has a special counsel, and they indict him for some bogus Uh uh Foreign Policy Act or whatever it is.

So so Kath Kathy, a couple of things. There's no way we should be at an indictment phase over documents. There's no way a raid should have been taken place. They offer the subpoena, there's a way to enforce it. You come forward, you talk to people, you tell people the ramifications are doing it.

There's no way it had to come to this. For the DOJ to unleash the FBI in this political environment is absolutely insane. But would you also agree? The top secret documents are top secret for a reason. If we're about to get Bin Laden and he's still out in the loose, and those documents are out and left out in a bathroom or anywhere else, that is a problem.

If someone leaves up the daily brief to George W. Bush in nineteen two thousand one or to Barack Obama in 2009 or to Donald Trump in 2017. The compromises The national security, whether it's nuclear weapons on down, we all agree that's a problem. That is not just presidential records. Don't you agree?

These are federal government records. Right, but we haven't seen the evidence and we don't know that he left anything out. We know that Biden left out things in his garage behind his Corvette.

Well, we know they were at Mar a Lago. To your point, they're not sold. No one ever if they thought they were trying to he was trying to sell them to Germany or Iran, they would have put that in the document. Nobody said they got in enemy hands. Nobody said that they were used for diabolical purposes.

And as People have said that you know President Trump. He likes memorabilia. He likes looking back at stuff. He likes to hold on to newspaper articles, to go through it. If you see Donald Trump's study, when he gets on a plane, you know what he gets on the plane with?

Usually an armful of newspaper articles and newspaper stories. He likes the old-fashioned, not electronic reading stuff, going through it. And what he said is, I'd have time to go through it, go through everything. And he was a little offended that everybody wanted it back. And I think he's also a little ticked off that he lost the election.

That was part of it. Mike Baker, CIA guy. Was back on the network yesterday. He was on Gutfeld. Here's what he said: cut eight.

The Democrats. Do messaging very well. They stay together. and they stay on message. And You know, they've kind of been given this gift because honestly, what Trump has done is a self-inflicted wound, right?

And he's had a series of those over the years. But by that I mean he didn't have to be in this position. This is not a difficult thing to not hold on to classified documents when you leave office. I mean, I know there's others have done it, but then just hand them over when you he could have stayed out of this mess. And that's the frustrating thing.

Yeah, just hand them over. And then get it back. Or, you know, you have somebody, you got a huge staff.

Somebody with security clearance goes through and say, you know, there's some things I'd like to keep. I'm putting together a book. If I give him back, it's so hard to get it back. I'm not setting up a library. You know, evidently, setting up a library, putting together memoirs from Michelle and Barack Obama.

He evidently went through and said, Listen, I want to keep a lot of this stuff. And they love Obama. And the archive said, Yeah, whatever you need, sir, you're so charismatic. With Donald Trump, they're not nearly as much leeway. But Donald Trump, as Mark Levin brought up, nobody else, Donald Trump was putting together a book of letters to leaders.

And a lot of them you forget about. I forget about, I'm not even president. I forget about a lot of correspondents. I look through stuff and I said, Oh my goodness, what is that?

So if you want to keep it, you leave with 75 boxes, you give back 15, and then they want the rest, and you go, Wait, I haven't gone through it.

Some of these are newspaper articles. I'll tell you, what's this negotiate? And I think everyone had a disproportionate Portion it. idea of what this whole thing would result in. And you just look at it, and that's what Bill Barr said: Alvin Bragg's a joke, but the document case is problematic.

Linda listening in St. Louis. Hey, Linda. Hey, Brian. Look, you know, all this talk we're talking about with Trump and how unfair it is, and I agree 100%.

One thing we seem to be overlooking here, the fact that Trump was very cooperative with the FBI, right? Said, you know, if you want to come get you just quoted a few minutes ago, Brian, about how he said you come and get whatever you want, but they didn't want to do that. They wanted to do a rate at an ungodly hour. And not only a rate. Linda, I don't know if that's correct.

I mean, I don't think they should a rate it. They should have negotiated to get it, but if he just turned around Here's your 15. You know, by the end of the summer, I'll get you the rest. I need to go through it. And they go, No, you can't do that.

That's what it's called in negotiation.

So they totally misjudged each other. But go ahead. Did they have? Here's my point: is they would not let his lawyer be there.

So, how easy would it be for an FBI that's already a Trump hater to come in there with no witnesses and plant?

some of these incriminating documents and then say, boom, we got 'em. Does that not make sense then? Linda, I listen, that suspicion's legitimate. And you know what backs up what you thought, and I'm not saying they did it, is when they fanned out all those papers on his office floor, They actually mocked up that picture and said, look at these classified documents, take a picture, we'll put it out. You'll put it out.

Since when's the FBI doing publicity? And they say, whose floor is that? Donald Trump doesn't throw papers on the floor. And they go, Yeah, well, we mocked that up. And then he indicated, too, at a speech at Bedminster that that box that fell off famously that appeared in the indictment, the 49-page indictment.

They say I wouldn't doubt the FBI knocked that box over to make it look like classified documents were with paper clipping, newspaper clippings.

So the fact is they did it in his office. He claimed they did it in the storage room. Why wouldn't you believe Trump on this, who has a proclivity to believe the former president? And then for those people like Rachel Maddow and Jake Tapper that just hate him and believe the worst of everything, they'll say Donald Trump left that box and classified documents, let it spill on the floor.

So this done nothing but make people dig in. But if you're Donald Trump, you need to get the nomination. And then you got to convince all those people. who didn't vote for you last time, moderate independent suburban uh women. That I'm going to be much better this time.

And that should worry the Trump camp. which should get the Trump camp excited. is how poor Joe Biden's been. And how old he has become. He is in old eighty.

And nobody, including the majority of Democrats, thinks he should be running again. That's a huge advantage for Trump. Real quick, John from WABC. Hey, John. Hey, Brian, uh I have a question about Every time anybody, especially Democrats, mention Biden and that he took the documents.

They right away talk about he returned them right away. He he gave them right back. But no one seems to ask why was he taking documents for the last thirty odd years Over and over. I mean, technically, isn't that stealing? He was a senator.

He wasn't supposed to take them once, okay, twice a mistake. But he took them over and over again. I know. And what did he do with them? Because no one seems to get to the bottom of that.

They all talk about, well, he returned them. He was so friendly in returning them that he allowed them to search the house. But who cares about now? Because the documents are old. What did he do with them?

And why was he taking them? over and over again. Robert Hurr is in charge of that special counsel. You know what we heard from him? Nothing.

Last week, he's put out a statement that said we're not close to finished. That's not okay. And that's why Jim Jordan's being urged as oversight committee chair. and the webization of government chair to demand an update. To find out if there's any documents there that relate to any of these Ukrainian, Kazakhstan, Chinese, Romanian deals that.

Hunter Biden was involved in, because we know Hunter Biden was staying in that house a lot. And then who's driving the Corvette with the other documents? What was in the Penn Center? What's in the University of Delaware? We don't have any updates.

And I agree with you. People say, well, he said, go wherever you want. Yeah. After you were found to have had these documents, then you said go search. And when they searched, they found more.

And we don't even know if his Iran Contra in 1983. I mean, I think he came in during the Nixon side. He might be Nixon Watergate stuff. Or it might be something fresh off the Obama administration that helps Joe Biden in business. Who get a right to know?

Because nobody thinks that Donald Trump took any of this material in order to sell it, make a profit from it. All right, 1-866-408-7669. The lines are filling up. I'll take some more calls and also find out if you need to know more. The fastest growing talk show in America.

You're with Brian Kilmead. The more you listen, the more you'll know. It's Brian Killmead. People against Trump, and it's wrong, and it's scary. They're supposed to be a watchdog, they become an attack dog for the.

People against Trump, and it's wrong and it's scary. I think the American people need to wake up. Governor, nice to see you. I'll talk to you again soon. And thanks so much for reading my books in prison.

Thank you. You got it. I thought it's he did read him in prison, so I thought I'd bring that up. Yeah, you have fans all over the world. He told me I read him when I was in jail.

I wasn't putting him down. No, but I mean you have fans all even in prison. You could you can boast that, you know, Brian Kilmicho, top right when they get out top author in prison. When they get out, they could be in Nielsen Home just like you, Pete. Good.

They count. They count. If he bought I mean, did he you know, did he buy it in prison or did it was it given to him as part of the I could be in the library. That that's true.

Somebody slipped it to him with some other edit. There's more to know. More to know. Invest in premium American whiskey as it ages. The older it gets, the better it gets, and the more valuable it gets.

Go to caskdeeds.com. That's caskdeeds.com to learn more. Paid for by Spirits Capital Corporation.

So InterMiami got Leonel Messi, Lionel Messi, and he is going to be coming there on the 21st of July. And ticket sales are going through the roof. Normally, they cost about $29. The cheapest resale for a Miami Leagues Cup match against Cruz Azul on July 21st has soared 1,034%. At the start of the week, tickets on StubHub went from $8,100,000 to $20,000 for an MLS game.

What an impact this guy has made. InterMiami will also add 3,000 seats to his DRB PNK stadium by August to somewhat cope with the demands to see Messi in action.

Now their capacity will be. 22,000. I believe that when he comes to play the Red Bulls in August, I think they should get Met Life. Do the math. And if the meth is even close, you could sell out 65,000 seat stadium.

Oh, easily. Did you see that? Also, I said the Charlotte team sold 10,000 tickets within a few hours, within a couple of hours after he signed with Miami, because they're going to be playing them later in the season. It reminds me of, you know, what it reminds me of, not comparing the legacy of the players, A-Rod signs with the Yankees. Their season tickets went through the roof, so they made their money back within a few hours.

Riley Gaines slams Karine Jean-Pierre's response to questions about trans participation in girls' sports. She says it's no big deal. Gaines said, When they say inclusion, just know that they really mean exclusion. The message this sends to all women is that our safety doesn't matter, nor does our privacy, our fairness, our equal opportunities, our dignity. The misogyny is slapping us all across the face.

Listen, don't blame me. I am not for trans men playing with women.

Next. Ryan Secrets early talks to replace Pat Sajak or Wheel of Fortune. He'll be awesome, but shouldn't we give somebody else a chance? He's great at all that stuff. This would be so easy for him.

Yeah, there's also reports that maybe Pat Sajak's daughter could be in the running as well. That wouldn't be nepotism, right? She would just be picked randomly with everybody else.

Well, uh, on a random way. On the cattle call. Yes.

He had 41 seasons, done since 2024, was named there in 1981 by none other than its creator, Merv Griffin, who mentored Brian Seachrist. 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 Kilmeat Show, final hour of the day, or this hour of the day, and the latest hour of the day is happening right now.

Keep in mind, I'll be on at 8 o'clock tonight at Fox News tonight, and who knows what's going to be breaking by then. But we'll have news breaking within our show, a lot of activity in Capitol Hill, and maybe in your house. Every single study shows that you care not about indictments, even not about the horse race. You care about the economy, energy. Affordable college.

And so when we do all these crazy indictments and political play, I think the average family listening to me right now says, kind of interesting, like this hope opera at home, the reality show I watch, but it has nothing to do with my life.

So my hope is this show is about to do with your life.

So let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. There's a reason for Democrats to be worried. I mean, you have Marianne Williamson, she's polling at like 5, 6, 7, 8 percent. Kennedy Jr., he's polling at like 20 percent or so, almost as high as DeSantis is.

He hasn't even run a campaign at. He doesn't even have a campaign. While 2024 gets another Republican contender, and Dems begin to deal with the reality that they are stuck with the Biden-Harris ticket, let's discuss. Number two. I'm not surprised by the indictment because that is a lower standard.

It just requires reasonable cause that Penny committed a crime. But I've got to tell you, the Manhattan DA has a hard haul ahead. Danny Penny, indicted, the subway savior who grabbed Jordan Ealy protecting other passengers on the train, was indicted by a grand jury on Murder Two. We'll discuss this and the outrage of having a Manhattan DA named Alvin Bragg. Number This is a double standard.

Brian, 60% of the country now thinks the Justice Department follows a double standard. You know why they think that? Because it's true and Americans with common sense, despite the press not covering this, can see right through it. That is Jim Jordan. Last night with me on Fox News Tonight: Biden and Trump legal troubles.

Maybe a hurdle, but not a stop sign as they both place a path to their nominations. We look at the cases in different ways. The media is covering it. Let's bring in Jillian Turner. And, Jillian, thanks so much for joining us.

I appreciate it. Hi, Brian. The one story, you know, we're covering the indictments. I get it. You know, we're covering Danny Penny, the subway I think hero.

I understand it. The legal troubles are bolt, the way the media does it, I get it. But the story that people really should be focusing on is something you have a passion for, that's foreign policy. And our battle with China, we're basically begging to have a meeting in Beijing and getting scolded by even asking in the process. Listen to what John Ratcliffe said he observed on being the DNI as well as being out of politics.

China is in a Cold War with us, and we are not in one with them. And as a result, China is winning that Cold War because this administration, and you've touched on this before, Maria, there could be a number of reasons for it. It may be an issue of cowardice. It may be an issue of competence in terms of the president's abilities, or it may be an issue of complicity. None of those are good, but clearly China is gaining the upper hand and will for the next two years in this administration.

It seems like we've got to get tougher. Could you talk about what's happening here? The biggest story last week was the admission that the Cubans have sold a portion of their country for billions of dollars to Cuba to set up a to China, to set up a spy station. Yes, so those revelations came courtesy of the Wall Street Journal at the end of last week. Brian, they had this bombshell report that China has been operating a spy base out of Cuba since at least 2019, or at the very least, they have been trying to get this spy base up and running on Cuba since 2019.

This is something that made front page headlines for a whole lot of reasons, some of which DNI Ratcliffe just laid out. Interestingly, what happened with this story, Brian, it became a story about White House mismanagement. Because what happened was the report came out. John Kirby, National Security Council spokesperson, shot the reporting down in its entirety. He said, nothing in this report is true.

Received a lot of pushback from the media, a lot of questions. This was on Thursday. On Saturday, he came out. The administration sent out an anonymous source who told reporters: actually, it is true that this spy base has been set up since 2019. What's going on now is the Chinese are trying to revamp it.

So there was an admission that part of the reporting actually was true. Since then, the White House has been facing a barrage of criticism for how they handled it.

So they're hanging it on national security. They're saying, Well, we didn't tell you guys because we felt like we couldn't at the time. But you don't lie. What you say is, you say, I'm not going to confirm any intelligence leaked that may or may not be true. That's not what we do.

You used to do this all the time, not lie. But spin, you can't say all the national secrets just because someone asks a good question, but when you come out and say it's not true, I you lose all credibility from here on in. Uh you know, to that point Um something that DNI, the former DNI Ratcliffe, was telling you last night about the Cold War, how there's now a new Cold War with China, is something I'm hearing echoed by national security sources across this administration and across the former the Trump administration. Everybody seems to be on the same page saying China is ramping up its aggression towards the United States. I can list some of those things for you, but your listeners are all familiar with this.

Just in the last few weeks, harassing Chinese, harassing U.S. military planes in international airspace, harassing U.S. ships in international waterways. The spy base we just talked about, they violated U.S.

sovereignty when they floated the Chinese spy balloon a few months ago. A whole lot of these things taking place at once is not a coincidence. It is part of a coordinated campaign.

So this is why we're hearing this clarion call from Republicans and from the President's critics now saying the United States needs an equally aggressive counterpunch strategy here. And not begging for a meeting. They're the ones with the spy balloon that we shot down and got mad at us for shooting it down. They're the ones who poisoned the world with their pandemic and never admitted the origins. And we found out that it was the first three to get it were scientists at the Wuhan lab.

And they're the ones who are harassing our fighter jets and trying to head off our destroyers. And yesterday, evidently, maybe you could tell us more, Jillian, our Secretary of State got a Tongue-lashing on a phone call from the Chinese foreign minister and said Blinken was scolded. He told Blinken to respect China, stop interfering in internal affairs, stop undermining our sovereignty. And develop a true sense of competition. Really?

And that we have to absorb this in order to get a meeting where probably nothing's going to be accomplished?

So that phone call happened yesterday between Tony Blinken, the Secretary of State and the Foreign Minister, which is Chinese is his Chinese counterpart. The reporting you mentioned comes in because after that phone call, both sides release a readout of the call, the U. S. readout Was released yesterday, pretty standard. You know, they talked about a range of diplomatic issues and how to best cooperate on blah blah blah blah blah.

The Chinese readout came and it was openly hostile towards the U.S., the Biden administration, the Secretary of State. The Chinese said, We gave it to him, we scolded him, we said, know this and know that. That's a lot of bluster. The Chinese are famous for doing that. That's their MO.

Whether they actually said that on the call or not is anybody's guess. But what's interesting about that is the degree to which. Think about it this way. The U.S. is sending their top diplomat Tony Blinken to their country to meet with them in person.

Think about the frame of mind the Chinese government officials need to be in ahead of that trip to put out a readout that is so hostile. It's essentially the Chinese saying, look, We actually don't care if he comes or not. Even that this bluster in a stupid readout. Right, is like an indicator of where they are diplomatically. They are so aggressive that they are willing to risk the entire relationship or so it would seem.

And the thing is not going to work by continuing to insist on talk, it just looks as weakness. We act like two people, mature people, going to get in a room and work it out, but they're already showing that they have no interest in doing it.

So, why do we put ourselves in that compromising position? And it gives a sense of weakness for our allies, especially in the region where they're nervous already about their sovereignty. What are they thinking in Taiwan? Julian, can you give us an update? And I have not read it anywhere, on how close we are to getting Taiwan the $33 billion worth of equipment and their new orders that they just put in?

Uh for missile defense? Yeah, well, a whole lot of delay is involved in the delivery of weaponry to Taiwan. That is. If you look at the scheme of US engagement around the world, that is pretty standard, but Brian, the reality is that when we need to get Equipment and weaponry around around the world quickly. We do it.

The administration can lift roadblocks. The administration can cut red tape when they need to. That's not really happening when it comes to. defending, helping Taiwan Defend its sovereignty and fend off a potential invasion by China. At the same time, US officials from General Milley to the Secretary of Defense are all insisting we are nowhere near China launching a ground invasion into Taiwan, trying to quell US fears.

I'm mentioning all this by way of giving you the context. I think that the US government is trying to, right now, Solidify around its position, which is calming the fears rather than stoking the fire. They want to project. confidence that A ground war in Taiwan is not going to happen. Whether delaying shipments of weapons is part of that strategy, only people with top-secret SEI clearances know the answer to that.

But all my sources that I talk to in the administration say pay attention to the messaging right now, which is there's no war imminent, there's no panic, so we don't need to act urgently.

So, lastly, I was kind of surprised to find out that we're having top-secret meetings with Iran in Oman. There's been three meetings in particular. Iran wants access to the billions that we froze in the U.S. in exchange for getting hostages back in nuclear concession, for exchange for the nuclear concessions on their part, because once again they claim that they can make a nuclear weapon.

So, number one, is it in our best interest to do that? Do you know when you, you know, that obviously rubs Israel the wrong way? And even though they are talking, they are the rival of Saudi Arabia in the region. And there's no question, Brian, that Iran's government, not the Iranian people, but Iran's government, are a bad actor on the world stage. That everything that they stand for, everything that they pursue globally is at odds with what the United States wants.

The Biden administration's belief is fairly true. Transparent. I mean, they say no matter what. Diplomacy is always the way forward. Diplomacy is always the way to get things that we want.

It is always better to talk to somebody. Than not talk to them.

So they say. We're engaging with Iran. We've been open from the days of the campaign that this is something we wanted to pursue. They wanted to revive the nuclear deal. They pursued that for more than a year before it finally fell apart once and for all.

So now they're setting up, once again, these sort of backdoor diplomatic channels to try and keep the connection alive. I think they fear, the administration fears, that losing diplomatic constancy will ultimately cost us a lot more in national security than not talking to them. Obviously, Republicans disagree with this wholeheartedly. Republicans would say, we don't need them. What matters is being tough and deterring them from You know, developing their nuclear weapons programs further and doing all kinds of terrible things around the world, you should absolutely not talk to them.

So, what you think about this depends on what side of the aisle you stand on. Yeah, I just think it's not in our national interest to deal with Iran, who's a terrorist nation, who are undermining, who are actually supplying the drones that are killing so many innocent Ukrainians right now to Russia.

So they're applying that to Russia. We know in Syria they actually attacked our bases. Their surrogates attacked our bases there. And they're working against us in Iraq, even though the Iraqis begin to realize we're better allies than them, while they continue to help the Abraham Accords take off because most people feared and worried about Iran and knew right away, Jillian Turner, that Israel was never going to be a threat to them. You're almost like a foreign policy expert.

Wow. To hear them from you? I like how you took us around the world. That was very good. I learned something.

Wow. I did not know I could ever do that with somebody with your background. But so wh what are you gonna are you do you know what your schedule is this weekend? Where are you anchoring? Oh, I'm off this weekend.

I'm at the White House who the rest of it today. I will be back reporting and anchoring next week starting on Monday. Will you have a press conference today? I will. I'll let you know what time.

Well, that's nice. I'd I'd rather hear directly from you. And do you know what questions you're going to ask? Yeah. Oh, no, we're not having a White House press conference today.

Sorry, I was making a joke about me giving a press conference. Oh, yes, that would have been great. I've seen the president twice, though, just so you know, once in the afternoon, once in the evening, but he's not planning on taking questions. But we will hear from the president. Right.

We love when he just walks away from questions. Why should he be accountable to the American people? I've always said that. Julian, thanks so much. I enjoyed our time together.

Me too. Thanks, Brian. All right, go get him. 1866-408-7669. The great Jillian Turner joining us from Washington.

By the way, that could have been a TV shop. We use it from the TV booth. And then Andy McCarthy at the bottom of the your.

So glad you're here, Brian Kilmicho. Expanding your knowledge base. It's the Brian Kill Meet Show. If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it. You're with Brian Kilmead.

Well, there's something rotten about this prosecution, just like there was something rotten about the prosecution of Jose Alba, the bodega store worker who was defending himself. Daniel Penny's a Good Samaritan, and if you listen to the witnesses' accounts of what happened, it defies logic that he's being prosecuted. Yeah, and that is Bruce Blakeman, the outstanding Nassau County executive on Fox and Friends earlier today, talking about Danny Penny's being prosecuted. A grand jury said he should be charged for murder, too. Tracy, listening on WSKY.

Hey, Tracy. Hey, hey, how are you? You, Brian. Great. What's on your mind?

Oh man. You know, I Just pretty much your entire show today, brother. It's uh, you know, it's um. Pretty, uh, pretty hot topics, uh, across the nation, but you know, this, um, related to this, um, you know, penny guy getting Getting tipped out.

So, Tracy, you like the show? Yeah, oh, absolutely. Yeah, I listen to watch a podcast, uh, you know, and um online all the time and I've been following you a few years now. Yeah. No, I appreciate it because we've been on there about five years.

And because of stations like WSKY, we're number three in the country now.

So, what's on your mind? Um, you know, um, I mean, obviously uh obviously you're talking about this uh you know, Daniel Pink I know. My phone's going a little crazy. you got to recognize that when you're in a confined area like that, you've got a United States Marine Um you know, he he signed his life away to to serve. you know, his country and and to provide freedom, you know, for those those who who think freedom is free, you know, and and he he paid the price.

And Tracy, wouldn't you like to know if you're in trouble that the guy next to you is a marine has been trained to take action and has been decorated in battle? Absolutely. That you know, I I think that um that's that's the first part of this. And you know, and then you just you look at history, right? I mean, just recently with all the attacks and everything going on in the New York City subway system, You know, I mean, the the police are overburdened and and, you know, They're understaffed and you know, people are just going crazy.

I know, but I would say this, Tracy. It seems as though your police officers are backed in Florida. And maybe there's some cities where a mayor or two, but for the most part, I know so many cops that picked up and left and went to Florida because even if the pay isn't as great and the benefits are okay, it's just to be backed and appreciated for doing your job. You guys don't have subways, I get it, but you do have challenges. Radio that makes you think.

This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

As President, the law that applies to this case is not. The Espionage Act, but very simply the Presidential Records Act. which is not even mentioned in this ridiculous 44-page Indictment. Under the Presidential Records Act, which is civil, not criminal. I had every right to have these documents.

Is that in fact true? I don't think Andy McCarthy thinks so, but that was part of what the president presented to his friendly audience two nights ago. And then we see where we go with this indictment and what the president can do from here. We did find out some backstory that he was advised by his to cut a deal when all this was going on last year. And instead, he listened to Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch, according to the Washington Post story, who said that the feds don't have a case.

Andy McCarthy joins us now, best-selling author, Fox News contributor, and he is also a great columnist. Andy, does the president have a good plan? Is he right?

Well, no, he's not he's not right, but um I guess. It's hard for me to believe, Brian, that Tom is the only one Whisper in his ear there because you know, he had lawyers. Yeah, I don't know. I shouldn't say because I don't I'm not in the conversations, right? Um, because every I like Tom, he's a very innovative, hard-working guy.

You and me both. I agree. But if this story is correct, they say that every time the lawyer would say, listen, this is a mess, let's just get these documents back and end this, he said, no, they have no right to take them back. And Trump went with him and they had dinner on Monday night. Yeah, so here's the thing I think about that, Brian, just for what it's worth.

First, Tom is not a lawyer. He's a very smart guy, but he's not a lawyer. And the second thing is I think judicial watch Has read too much. into the you know, they're the losing side in the so-called Clinton stock drawer case. And I think they You know, in in in losing that case, I think they have read too much.

into what it means. Um To me First of all, you know, when we're talking about the Clinton-Sauke case, which the president has kind of. hooked up to the Presidential Records Act, and that's like collectively his The fence here. It just seems to me that the The politics of that case. are probably more important than the law.

in the sense that Um Judicial Watch finds out that these tapes exist between Clinton and the historian, Taylor Branch. that they made during Clinton's administration Judicial Watch finds out about it in about 2009, and they make a Freedom of Information Act request and find out that the government doesn't have the tapes because Uh Clinton never Uh, recorded them or archived them and never even tried to like say their personal records, he just took them.

So They try to nudge the National Archives into getting the tapes back from Clinton. But the thing is, there's no power in the statute in the Presidential Records Act that allows NARA To either seize things or, you know, that's got to be done by the Justice Department or by Congress. Um And they didn't go to the Justice Department of Congress.

So you said to yourself, why didn't they go to the Justice Department of Congress? And I think the simple answer is. At that period of time, for those of us who remember it well, Obama had just been elected. The Democrats had overwhelming control. of Congress The Attorney General was Eric Holder, who had been Bill Clinton's deputy attorney general, and Clinton was married to the Secretary of State.

They weren't going to take Any Action against Bill Clinton. And the judge who caught the case was Amy Berman Jackson, who was an Obama appointee who had just gotten on the bench. Wasn't going to tell you know she, and this is 12 years after. By the time she rules on the case, it's 12 years after Clinton left the White House, they weren't going to. What were they going to do about it at that point?

So I just think it's, you know, the politics of that is that it's so impossible that they were going to do anything under those circumstances at that point that I think we're. I think it's a mis mistake to try to draw extravagant legal principles out of that because I mean, it's not even a It's not even an appellate case. It's just a district court Case, it's a it's a one-off.

So evidently this attorney, Christopher Keis, wanted to quiet everything down in the fall, and he approached the Department of Justice to see if they could negotiate some type of settlement that would preclude all the charges, hoping the Attorney General and the Department would wait and would go for an exit ramp. But to take the temperature down. But Trump was not interested after listening to other lawyers who urged a more pugilistic approach.

So Keis never approached the prosecutors. Three people briefed on the matter said a special counsel was appointed months later. Those are the types of things that were done over a documents case where no one alleged. If they had alleged he sold Iranian fight plans back to Iran or to the MEK that wants to overthrow the government or something like that, if he tried to make money off a Saudi thing, that would have been a problem. But they're trying to say, okay, this is wrong, but there's no harm, no foul yet.

And do you think that would have been an approach the Department of Justice might have entertained? Yes, I do. I think that it it I think That Up until the time That Um they Only gave in June of 2022, after the grand jury subpoena had been. issued If he had given them everything instead of just giving them thirty eight documents and then they find out that he's still holding on to stuff, I think he would not have been prosecuted. And I don't I think also They did something that I thought was was sneaky in The In the search warrant, they included this statute that dealt with not just classified information or obstruction, but also all government records like stealing government records.

Um That was because, as we just discussed, There's no criminal enforcement provisions in the Presidential Records Act.

So I think NARA and the FBI and the Justice Department decided to stick that crime in there to basically criminalize The The Presidential Records Act to the extent that it allowed the FBI to get a criminal search warrant and seize not just the classified information, but all of his government boxes, which is why we see these pictures in the indictment of boxes and boxes, even though we're only talking about what, like 600 pages of documents, right? Um I think once they got that stuff back, Brian, they weren't interested. The reason there's no you know, that charge is not repeated in the indictment.

So that suggests to me that they only wanted to get their stuff back. And I think as late as June of twenty twenty two, before the grand jury got misled, allegedly. If he had just given all the stuff back, I think this would have gone away. Because I think the Biden administration knows this is explosive. And my own view of it for what it's worth is that what they always really wanted to try to get him on is January 6th.

I don't think I just don't think they were. They were looking at this as Eddie. I trust your experience, but just my hunch is you don't put Jack Smith on this case, have him flip attorneys, allegedly put the hammer down, put the squeeze on all these witnesses, some of the aides close to him. If you're saying to yourself, let's just see how we can get the documents back. They seem to go for the juggler here.

Yeah, but Brian, let's remember, I agree with you, but Let's remember the timeline. I mean, I started saying that I thought it was now certain that Trump would get charged in September of 2022.

So what I'm talking about now is June of twenty twenty two, right before this really goes south, when they only give thirty eight documents, when he's got all this other stuff back. They don't even bring Smith into the case until November. He gets appointed in November.

So I think that the Biden Justice Department had already decided to bring this case when they did the search warrant. I think at that point, things had changed because the FBI remember, the FBI didn't want to do the search warrant. The FBI wanted to ask President Trump for permission to search his place, and it was the It was Brat. in the National Security Division and other people in the Biden Justice Department who who decided, no, we're going for it.

So, real quick on Justice Cannon, a lot of people on the left feel as though she's going to be deferential to the President because he appointed her there. Also, in Miami, according to Marco Rubio, she's only one of two judges that would be eligible. Evidently, there are a few judges down. They got some open positions there.

So, if they're worried about Judge Cannon, and Smith goes for the he's going for the win because he doesn't seem to win much, could they shift this case to New Jersey, being that now we know that he took some of the papers to New Jersey? Could they go for a friendly judge in New Jersey? I don't think so. I mean, it looked if They wanted to do the case in Washington, right? The reason that they, which is where the grand jury was.

And the reason they didn't is because some of these counts is only venue in Florida. Like to the extent he was holding thirty one documents illegally in a place is the allegation. The venue on that is Florida.

So I just, you know, these complaints about Judge Cannon, I I have to say, Brian, I You know, I mean I was a prosecutor for 20 years. There's a lot of judges in New York who I think were excellent judges, and there were some of them that were kind of mediocre judges. A lot of them were pro-defendant. Do you think that every time I got a case that was spun out To a judge that happened to be like have pro-defense leanings and wasn't a very good judge. That I filed a motion to do with the court till I get the judge recused or moved to take the case someplace.

Be a big boy, strap up your, you know, you know what, and let's go. You go to trial and you do the best you can. You know, you can't. The judge is the judge. You gotta just deal with the judge.

Don't don't complain about the refs and the field and the stadium and the traffic before the game gets started. Just find a way to win. There's always excuses. Number two, Chris Christie said something yesterday That I found interesting. He believes that this thing could seed the courtroom in January.

And I did not hear that speculation elsewhere because it looks like they'll waive their right to a speedy trial and get close to November if Trump gets the nomination. Why would any judge want to interfere with the outcome of a general election? I don't see any possibility that this case, because they indicted it more as an SD and OJAC case, than. a uh than an obstruction case. I don't see any possibility that this case can go to trial before No the November twenty twenty four election.

Because the way classified information cases work. You have to litigate all the admissibility issues under the Classified Information Procedures Act. prior to trial. And those are very long litigations. I was mentioning to someone before.

Um I had a a a DIPA, Classified Information Procedures Act. I had an issue like that in the Blind Shake case. It took us 18 months, Brian, to litigate it. It was less complicated than what we're dealing with here. And by the end of it, I read a nine-line stipulation to the jury at the trial.

But it took 18 months to get there. And that was just with one discrete issue.

So I don't that was that was a situation where neither I nor the defendants had four other trials to worry about. You know, this was the the only game in town for us. Besides the complexity of this case, Trump has three or four other litigations that he's got going at the same time. I just don't see how this case gets to trial. All right.

I want you to hear what Chris Christie told me here, and not many people agree with him here, but you're Andy McCarthy. Let's see what you said. 27. If you get it, would you pardon the president? I think it's impossible to answer that right now and be fair.

Remember, the pardon power is the power to say. If you think someone's been treated unfairly, if you think there's not been a fair trial, you have to consider all those things. I can't imagine if he gets a fair trial. That I would pardon him. I can't imagine that I would.

Remember the other problem: to accept a pardon, you have to admit. Your guilt. To accept a pardon. You have to say, yes, I was wrong. And I and I accept the pardon.

I can't imagine Donald Trump would ever do that. Do you have to accept that you were wrong, to accept the pardon? Yeah, so I think what Governor Christie is doing there, I wrote about the pardon issue the other day, and I did hear what Governor Christie said. I think what he's saying, Brian, is what the guidelines are. for the J Department of Justice pardon attorney.

Where the Justice Department takes the position that if you want to apply for pardon, you have to ask for it, and it's got to be like after your proceedings are over and after your sentence is done, and they expect you to exhibit some contrition, and you know, there's a whole formula for it. The thing is, The pardon power constitutionally doesn't belong to the Justice Department. It belongs to the President. Right. So, for example, Abraham Lincoln mass pardoned Confederate soldiers in the Civil War.

Jimmy Carter mass pardoned Draft deserters. uh in connection with the with the Vietnam War, you know, draft Dodgers. Um, the president has the power to pardon whether somebody's been charged or not. The president has the power to pardon even if somebody doesn't ask for a pardon. Um, and whether or not it looks like there's going to be a case or not.

Now the President can't you can't give a prospective pardon. In other words, you can only pardon based on some crime that's already been committed. And the President can only give a federal pardon So it doesn't have any effect on any state proceedings. But what Governor Christie said isn't wrong. It's just what he's regurgitating.

are the Justice Department guidelines for a pardon, and the President is not limited by the Justice Department's guidelines. Yes, let's see if it gets to that point. But if there's one thing you could do to make sure if the President, for whatever reason, doesn't get the nomination, And you want to make sure that he still stays with the team, the Republicans, you just say, hey, listen, if Trump gets in, I pardon him. If I win, I pardon him. And then Trump will be the full force of his followers.

So it's one way to. But if he doesn't get the nomination, that's one way to keep him on the team. Yeah, well, what I said in the piece I wrote about this is: if I was a candidate, And I was asked, are you going to pardon Trump? My answer would be, has President Trump asked for a pardon? Because in public, most people think if you ask for a pardon That means you implicitly did it and you think you need a pardon.

And most people who are not guilty want to get vindicated in court. If you get pardoned, people assume that you committed the act.

So I wouldn't presume that he wants a pardon. I would listen if he asked for one, but I wouldn't. Right. I think with every fiber in his being, he does believe he's 100% correct. And I've talked to him a couple of times offline.

There's no way he thinks he did anything wrong. Andy.

Well, my daddy wants a pardon, then, Brian, I think. Because if he gets a pardon, people will say he did it. Andy McCarthy, you're the best. Thank you. Back in a moment.

Learning something new every day on The Brian Kilmeat Show. Breaking news, unique opinions. Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Joe. My dad taught me that you get to choose your battles. And I am choosing the biggest one of my life.

I'm going to run for president. I'm going to run for your children and mine. And that is uh Mayor? Asuarez. He is going to be running for President of the United States.

I mean, he really has Miami thriving. He has be was the head of all mayors for about a year. He is different from DeSantis. They don't get along great. He has originally voted for I Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over Trump.

He says, I've gotten a chance to see him see his policies. I've come around on that. He's going to have. Kellyanne Conway amongst his informal and formal advisors, and he's going to launch. And he's going to be on Fox and Friends tomorrow.

We'll probably get him on here again pretty tight with him. He had a lot to do with, I think, you know, getting that stadium built in Miami, where Messi will now be calling home, as well as the Marlins getting their stadium too. And he, under Hispanic man of Cuban descent whose parents escaped from that horrific island under that horrific government, he really appreciates this democracy. Spent a lot of time with him. I have a great feature on him with the history of Little Havana.

He joined me in Little Havana before I really had a chance to know him. Extremely impressive, very comfortable, very successful in business. And I think he's going to be formidable. Man, he's definitely charismatic.

So look for that. Another talented person on the right. Can't really say that for now on the left. See you tonight at eight. Listen to the show ad-free on Fox News Podcast Plus, on Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music with your Prime membership, or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

Mm.