Desperate Jack Smith files new indictment against Trump

From high atop Fox News headquarters in New York City, always seeking solutions, never sowing division. It's Brian. All right, well, thanks so much for being here. It's going to be a big Wednesday show. And as I've been saying Monday and Tuesday, oftentimes this is the week that people take off in our business.

It's like the week between Christmas and New Year's, but not in this election cycle, not with what we just saw with the Democrats not coming out of that convention, not with this change of positions. Of course, the assassination investigation is still going on. There's all types of things that are happening that I just don't feel as though. There's even a weekend anymore. There's just so much going on that I just love talking about, and I think we have to cover and stay in touch with.

We know both campaigns are in action today, J.D. Vance. J.D. Vance is out and about today. There's going to be the Waltz team is going to be in Massachusetts for morning remarks, and then they're going to do a bus tour.

It looks like Harris and Waltz only feel comfortable together. They're traveling together. And then J.D. Vance will be out and about. And on Thursday, on Friday, President Trump's going to have a rally in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, and he's going to have a town hall in Michigan.

Remarks in Potterville, Michigan, and then a town hall in La Crosse, Wisconsin, I should say. But this hour, going to be joined by Rich Lowry at the bottom of the hour. He's got a big editorial in the New York Times today. But right now, let's bring in Governor Glenn Youngkin, the 74th Governor of Virginia. Governor, always great to hear from you.

Thanks for calling in. Brian, great to be with you. And again, welcome to Virginia. I know your show is now broadcast all over the Commonwealth. And thanks for keeping Virginians fully informed.

Oh, thanks so much. And the quality time, too. We just got word yesterday: WNIS is now taking all three hours, and that's Virginia Beach. And, of course, Richmond and Charlottesville and just about everywhere else.

So, Governor, I got to ask you. Uh the last time I spoke to you it was before the the switch out of Biden. And Harris. Has that, for a while, Virginia was in play. It was like a flat-footed tie with Biden and Trump.

As Harris pulled away, Uh s since she took control since she took control of the party. Yeah, but Brian, first of all, uh The latest public poll has uh Kamala up a bit, but in the margin of error. And so Virginia is competitive. Let's be serious. And the fact that we're having this conversation that Virginia is competitive when Joe Biden won by ten points In 2020 is stunning.

And I think it's reflective of the fact that the key issues. on voters' mind are the economy, and the border. And those are big issues in Virginians' minds. And that's why they have seen, by the way, that common sense conservative leadership works Listen, we have been roaring in Virginia for the last two point five years when we turned around the failed policies of the previous administration. And Virginians saw what President Trump did when he was President in his first term, where he built this rip roaring economy that lifted up all Americans, and they want it again.

And that's why Virginia is competitive when, and you look at the other battleground states. I mean, listen at Arizona and Nevada and Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Georgia and even North Carolina. Listen, you know, the number one issue is the economy, and the second issue is the border and immigration. And he has 20-plus leaves on Kamala Harris on those top two issues.

So this is going to get to issues and policy and the future of America. And Americans want strength back in the White House. Virginians want strength back in the White House. And that's why this thing is going to be so tight and so hard fought over the course of the next 90 days. You know, Governor, you never hesitated.

You went from the business world to political world, but you never thought to yourself, I better not do interviews. You were everywhere.

So and there was a risk to that. Because if you showed, if you showed that you were a rookie and if you showed naivete in these issues, or if you ever said, I don't know, they would have been like, oh, that guy, Glenn Young, is not ready for prime time. But instead, you beat Terry McAuliffe, who was trying to get another four years as governor, and you became one of the fastest rising stars on the right. Here's an experienced politician that will only do an interview, one interview, with her running mate. Tim Waltz, how do you explain the reluctance to sit down with an interview?

Well if I I think first and foremost, the fact that it has been 37 days and she has not. sat for a real interview to talk about anything of substance. And in fact, they've been using anonymous sources to float all the flip flops is stunning, and I just want to be really clear. Kamala Harris has not changed her position on any of the left liberal views that she has always had, and they are literally floating these ideas that she's going to flip-flop on these topics, almost because she can't stand in front of a microphone and actually defend her position. And at the end of the day, She wanted to ban fracking.

At the end of the day, she wanted Medicare for all. She wants to not hold illegal immigrants accountable by prosecuting them. She wants to fund them. There's no jail time. She wants literally free health care for them.

She absolutely never saw a spending bill that she didn't support. She, at the end of the day, was the last person in the room with Joe Biden on the failed evacuation from Afghanistan. And God bless President Trump for standing with those Gold Star families this week and recognizing the three-year Anniversary of horror that that withdrawal represented. She was the one that signed the deciding vote in order to unleash spending on America. Her track record, her track record is the Biden-Harris track record.

Americans know this, and that's why, that is why she cannot go in front of folks and explain it because she knows these are all loser issues in Americans' eyes. I mean, can you believe that, number one, she's no longer for an EV mandate? She ran on that. She is no longer for the new Green Deal. She co-sponsored it.

She's no longer supporting Medicare for All. She ran on that in 2019. She never explained why she didn't want that, how that's going to alienate a lot of people on her left. And then, what I think is the craziest thing ever, the thing that she called a medieval vanity project, she is now for finishing the war. I mean, are you kidding me?

Finishing the wall. I said that sarcastically when she came out and stole Donald Trump's idea to not tax tips. She did it without apology, as if she came up with it. And I said, what's next? Is she going to say I'm going to build the wall?

And that's what we woke up till today. She's actually going to do this. Yeah, well Brian, let me reiterate. You've not heard her say any of that because we all firmly know. That she believes that there should be a Green New Deal and that there should be a ban on tracking, and she believes that illegal immigrants should not be prosecuted.

She wants them to have free health care. She believes that we should abolish the filibuster. She believes this stuff. And therefore, they're having anonymous sources float these ideas in order to temper people's beliefs, how left liberal she really is. When she has to stand up, when she has to stand up and express her true views.

I believe that she will be unable to avoid the truth. That she believes in all of these progressive left policies. That's where Kamala Harris has always been. That's where she will be. And that is why she won't do a media interview.

You know, when you were co-CEO, I think, of the Carlisle Group, when President Trump starts running in 2016, and he came out and said, I got to build the wall. Illegal immigration is the problem. Mexico is not sending us their best. We are going to crack down on that. We're going to build up America's defense again.

Okay.

Some people were for that, some people were against it. Hillary Clinton didn't take any of his issues, except for she backed off that trade deal, the TPP. Besides that, Hillary Clinton just ran. You know, Joe Biden pretended to be a moderate, but he just ran. He never stole Donald Trump's issues.

They realized that Trump's issues are now more popular now in 2024 than they were in 2016. In fact, now 53% of the country want the wall finished when he was running with 42%.

So instead of admitting it, they're just taking it without acknowledging it and saying they're evolved.

So this is stunning while doing very few interviews and only committing to one debate. Governor, have they reached out to you about being an active surrogate over these next 70 days? Yes, so Of course. I have fully endorsed the President and stood strong for him. I just so appreciated the opportunity to speak at the convention and express my clear view that America is ready for strength back in the White House and is tired of weakness And this is an election about strength versus weakness.

And as we discussed, Virginia's competitive. And I look forward to enthusiastically working to do everything we can in order to make sure that Donald Trump is our president next and Kamala Harris is not.

So I imagine they'd be smart to tap into you to do just that.

So, Governor, you got a lot going on in your state. Number one, I got to salute you. You're pushing also for a ban on cell phones in schools. Where are you at with that? Yes.

So our executive order is in place that we are issuing a draft policy now that's in that's being circulated to enable to enact cell phone free education, bell to belt. We want the cell phones not in school, and it is going to be an absolute revolution in the mental health of our kids, in the learning capability of our kids, and on top of that, combating the crime that goes on in schools.

So many, if not 100% of the illegal drug trades that happen around schools happen on cell phones. And so this is a great opportunity for us. To put boundaries around children and protect them from what social media has been doing to them from a behavioral standpoint, depression standpoint, to increase academic outcomes, and most importantly, to allow them to be kids again and to fully enjoy relationships with each other as opposed to with an electronic device. We're pressing forward aggressively on this. What I'm most encouraged by, Brian, is that in advance of finalizing our order, we're already seeing 113 out of 131 school districts even run faster and say, Governor, we agree with you, and we're going to put these in faster than you've even asked us to do.

And that, I think, reflects the fact that America is just, Virginians are just tired of what cell phones and social media are doing to our children. There's no doubt about it. I think it's a great move, and I don't think there's going to be much pushback on it. In terms of election integrity in Virginia, you guys really have not been a problem, but you've taken it to another level. What are you doing in terms of making sure who's voting is legally here and legally a citizen?

Yeah.

Well, the reality, of course, is that the voter motor law that was passed two decades ago forced DMVs to offer the ability to register to vote to everybody that does business in a DMV in our division of motor vehicles. And therefore, whether it was purposeful or by accident, non-citizens have ended up on voter rolls. And so we went to work aggressively to make sure that we are using all of the data scrubs that we can, the Social Security Agency and all of the identification data that we have, to scrub non-citizens off the data rolls. And gosh, we had 6,300 of them that came off. We've also done the same thing with regards to the national data on deaths.

And we found in 2023 nearly 80,000 people who had sadly died in Virginia that were still in the voter rolls. And I think at the heart of all of this is using all the tools at our disposal to make sure that we have the cleanest voter rolls in the country. And I've been really encouraged. By the efforts across the nation, particularly by Republican governors, to do exactly this. Listen, at the end of the day, America's elections should be decided by American citizens.

And my job as a governor is to use every tool in my toolkit to make sure that our elections are trusted, that they are transparent and they are secure. And I will say that one of the great things about our elections, Brian, is we have paper ballots, we do not have voting machines, we have counting machines, and across the Commonwealth, there are signs posted this year because of my executive order that will make it very clear that if you are voting as a noncitizen, you are violating the law. And that was successful, Governor DeSantis, too. If you do this, you fake, you vote twice, you're going to go to jail. 100% paper ballots, that's huge.

We've got to take a step back to make people feel secure. I don't care who wins. I just want the right person to win. And I think most of the country also wants voter ID: blacks, whites, Hispanics. It's an insult, I think, to say a certain race or a certain gender is not able to get ID.

We can't function. I can't get in this building. You can't get on a plane or a bus, Amtrak, or anywhere with that ID. You can't get a credit card. I think there's other things you could have, regardless of how much money you have.

So I hope people get with that. But I'd be remiss if I didn't bring you to this. On One Nation Over the Weekend, I'm going to be talking about both economic plans that we know. And Governor Harris is doing something that many people think is good for the economy. She wants to raise the corporate tax rate.

What I've always understood, and you did international, you did international business, is that when you lower the corporate tax rate, you make it more desirable for companies to come to America. We were at 35 percent. Trump dropped it to 21. She wants it to ratchet it up to 28, saying greedy corporations have had it too good for too long. Can you tell us the reality of the ripple effect of that?

Yeah, and if I can, Brian, in a big picture. What the progressive left wants to do is raise taxes. And they want to raise them on everybody. And do not be confused by the fact that a tax raise on corporate America is going to be a tax raise on everyone. Don't be confused when they start talking about allowing all of the great tax reforms that were put forth in the first Trump administration to expire.

It's a tax raise on everyone. And we recognize finally that when they increase taxes on everyone, it is a blow not only to our economy, but we already have Americans living, 66% of Americans living paycheck to paycheck. They can hardly make it work because of the inflation that was unleashed by the unbridled spending by the Harris-Biden administration. Let's be clear. Who was pulling the strings?

I think Connell was pulling a lot of them. And so when you begin to focus then just on corporate taxes, The reality is businesses have brought more money home because of the tax cuts and jobs acts changes. We've seen much more investment in the United States because of this. And therefore, any increase in taxes that makes America less competitive with the world damages American business. We want Businesses to build in America.

We want them to invest in America because it is the best place in the world to be right now before Kamala Harris tries to ruin it. We've seen it in Virginia. Let me just be clear. We immediately came in and said we're open for business. We streamlined regulations.

We provided tax relief. And guess what? We have had record job growth. We have had record investment. Nearly $80 billion of companies that are here or coming have committed to invest in Virginia, which is multiples of anything we've ever seen before.

When we allow companies and Americans to keep more of their hard earned money, they invest it and they spend it, and that is good for the economy. Governor, do you want to run for President less or more since you've seen it up close with President Trump and you've seen this process? Right now, Brian, I am. I'm so happy with the job I'm doing as governor. And I have to say, Brian, I can't express.

How purposeful I feel every day going to work. Virginia is roaring. It's exciting to see. Notwithstanding the fact that I fight against a legislature that is controlled by the Democrats, we get an enormous amount done because common sense conservative policies work and people want more of them. And I think we've all got to go to work this fall to make sure that President Trump wins and that America has strength back in the White House.

Yeah, I know you two really hit it off. I know from his perspective anyway, I think you feel the same way. And I've seen you in action, Governor. You truly love this job. Governor Glenn Young, 74th Governor of Virginia, and you're not going to get reelected.

It's not allowed.

So we'll see what happens next. And hope to talk to you again soon, Governor. Thanks so much. Brian, God bless you. Thanks for having me.

All right, back in a moment with your calls. Brian Kilmead Show. It's Brian Kilmead. Kudlow on Fox Business is now on the go for podcast fans. Get key interviews with the biggest business newsmakers of the day.

The Kudlow podcast will be available on the go after the show every weekday at FoxbusinessPodcasts.com or wherever you download your favorite podcasts. From his mouth to your ears, it's Brian Killmeade.

So I want to move along with the governor. I apologize, it'll be a shorter block. Coming up next, Rich Lowry talks about how Trump's tapping to his personality to win. It's kind of interesting take on this. And I'm just dumbfounded.

By Tamal Harris decide, maybe you're not. Deciding to do a sit-down with Dana Bash on CNN, which was expected. But with a running mate? Really? With her running mate.

And then I'm reading these stories.

Well, Tim Waltz has really got to find out and get familiar with the governor, the vice president's policies first.

So they're going to do this together. Excuse me. No one's asking Tim Waltz about the policies because she hasn't told anybody. about the policies. She hasn't told anybody about what she's gonna do.

We've heard from other people some bullet points about what she did, and we got one speech 15 minutes long on the economy. I'm pretty sure he's a strong surrogate he was for Biden. She's there, he is there to watch her back because she talks in circles and he'll interrupt like he always does and wave his hands. A talk show that's real. This is the Brian Kill Me Show.

I think Harris wants to unnerve Trump. And I think that she's proven that that's kind of her style in the debate. You know, she's going to say things about the Trump administration that Trump is going to consider vastly untrue, get under his skin, and hope to throw him into a tirade. I think that's the clear strategy. And so they want open mics.

Look, Trump is right. They agreed to those rules. I think it's crazy that there's only one debate scheduled. The American public should have three debates. They should have regular press conferences with their candidates.

And they should have position papers in order to make intelligent votes. Yeah, I mean, they could still do all that. And these huge staffs.

Now, look at this. Look at the size of Kamala Harris's staff. She's got the whole Biden White House team. They left him in two seconds. She's got all these assets.

You know, she's his sitting vice president. Don't tell me. You know exactly the issues. You know exactly what you agree and disagree with. And if you don't, then your chief of staff does, somebody does.

And if you don't, it's sinful. By the way, it shows you shouldn't get the job. You should be queen of England. You should not be president of America.

So. It's just crazy when they say we're too busy.

Now they're going to do a tandem interview with Dana Bash. Dana Bash will ask fine questions because you're not going to embarrass herself, but it's all about the the velocity of the follow up. Look at Christine Welker. Look at her go after JD Vance multiple times, everything about abortion, as if abortion is the only thing in the news and January sixth is the second biggest thing. And then he gets she gets Elizabeth Warren on, and Elizabeth Warren has an average ninety second answers, not a word from her.

So that's the difference.

So, Dana Bash will let him finish. Won't have the number of follow-ups as if it was Trump. But She'll ask real questions. Why are you for fracking?

Now why you were against it?

Now, why are you for finishing the wall? You called it a medieval vanity project. Why are you for taxing tips? You know you're the second one in on that. And if you're going to build a wall, why are you waiting?

Get your ratchet out. Rich Lowry is the editor of the National Review, author of The Case for Nationalism. He's got a big editorial today in the New York Times, Trump Can Win on Character. Rich, welcome back. First off, your thoughts about the first interview, going to CNN Dana Bash in a tandem.

Well It's so ridiculous. I mean, this has been like the moon landing. All the care and planning they've taken just to do one interview. A cable interview with a joint interview with your V sitting next to you. I mean, this is what JD and Trump did.

Like, they must have done numerous versions of that kind of interview after he was announced.

So it just gets to how hesitant she is, how scared they are about having her out there.

Now, I think Dana Bash is a pretty respectable choice. You know, I feared they do Rachel Maddow or Gail King or something like that. She'll ask the questions as you say. It won't be as skeptical and hostile in tone as if it were a Republican, but she'll ask the questions. And I think what they'll try to do is.

You know, have a fairly good exchange and then say we get our interview and the other one after we're inaugurated.

So, Rich, you wrote about President Corona on character. In what respect? can win on character.

So, I think presidential politics is always about character. And the example I use in that piece: Mitt Romney, whatever you think about him, whatever you think he said about Trump, we can all agree he's a fine, upstanding guy. But the 2012 Obama reelection campaign destroyed him on character. They hit him hard on the issues, but all the issue hits went back to the underlying character. Character case that he was an out-of-touch vulture capitalist who didn't care about people.

And that was just devastating. That's how they won the election. And if Trump wins, it's not just going to be hitting her plans. It's going to be making the case that she's weak, a phony, and doesn't truly care. And everything to ask.

So this they've been doing and he's been doing, but I think it needs to be much more concentrated and focused. Right. Just make it very specific. And you could be Trump led you could be Trump by Trump by attacking your style with issues. And don't worry about the attacks on character because you could be Pope John Paul II.

And they're still gonna that's the way the Obamas fight. And that's the way the Bidens fight. That's the way the people running Harris's campaign are the Obama people. David Pluff is now in the lead, it seems.

So that's what they plan on doing.

Now they got a guy who they think is of questionable character, so they're trying to draw him out. Do you think the whole taxing on tips is part of the taunting? Do you think I'm going to finish the wall as part of the taunting? Or is it looking at the polls and saying, this is very popular? I think I'll take it.

Yeah, I think it's more the latter. I think the tips is, you know, it'd be very nice. Nevada's important. And Trump hit on something that's very popular in Nevada, and they realized it.

So she got on board. And then she's just trying to minimize the differences on the border and minimize the debacle they created. I do think that there will be some element of taunting at the debate, or if not taunting, just the hope that he will go on a tirade. And that was the obvious play asking for the open mics. Clearly, they wanted to be interrupted, and then they make the whole debate about the interruptions.

So the Trump team is smart to insist on the old rules. But we don't really have the verdict. Because Trump said, Trump didn't say, yeah, but I would assume it's going to be closed mics. If it's open mics, I think that's very bad. Because, you know, look, Brian, if truth is, you look at Biden's debate performance, after the first 10 minutes, it wasn't great, you know, but it was okay.

And the thing that killed him was searching around for the phrase or thought and then coming up with, look, we finally beat Medicare. That was a rambling answer with a bunch of pauses. If there had been open mics, I'm certain Trump would have interrupted him prior to that point.

So the closed mics destroyed Joe Biden and helped. Donald Trump. And I I would expect this a version of the same dynamic to hold here. I know you're right, Rich, because I know a couple of times on the State of the Union, he was actually getting lost in his copy when Marjorie Taylor Greene yelled it out. Uh you know, s something about um Say her name or whatever he said.

Yeah, yeah, right, right. Yeah, so he kind of saved her. And Trump did too. He goes, Will you shut up? He turns around and he said to Trump, Will you shut up?

And everyone remembers that.

Now, Mike Pence out-debated her. No question. What do people remember? The bug that landed on his head, and when she said, I am speaking, or let me finish.

So you know that Trump's. That's when the bug landed on his head. I forgot. I always knew a bug had fallen on, landed on Pence's head, but I couldn't remember. I literally cannot remember one thing about that debate.

I've been meaning to go back and watch. I have to go back and watch. And I think that, by the way, guys, that would be a great guest. Mike Pence on how to debate Kamala Harris. I think Tulsi Gabbard would be great, but we've talked to her a couple of times and she is helping him out on it.

But here's what Tom Holman said yesterday. As you know, he'll be head of Border Patrol if he'll be, or head of ICE, if Trump wins.

So when it came out clear that she wants to build the wall, here's what he said: cut seven.

So build the wall. Do it tomorrow. The contracts are in place. We're spending millions of dollars to these contracts not to build a wall.

So simply make a command decision tomorrow, start the contract. You've got the materials, you got the money, do it. But she's not going to do it. Look, she doesn't support the border wall. We all know this.

What she's proven to To me, and hopefully to many Americans, she has absolutely zero integrity because she's foot-popping on everything. Yeah.

So, I mean, the thing is, it's so dramatic. You gotta admit, Rich, were you expecting this? In terms of the flip-flopping and she came out yesterday against the EV mandate, too. She signed it. I don't think she can run anything she said in 19 or 20 or on a lot of what they've governed on.

So it's a classic play to kind of fuzz it up and sound moderate. She signaled it in the convention speech, right? You had John Carl saying she sounded like a Republican. And that's what she wanted people to conclude. It's clearly absurd.

And there's just so much material. Again, in this New York Times uphead, I had made a reference to the famous in 2004, the John Kerry, I voted for it before I voted against it. Bush basically won the entire election on that and making Kerry into a flip-flopping insider who couldn't be trusted. They have Trump has so much more material than that. There's so much to work with.

Again, they just need to hit it in a disciplined way.

So I mean, keep in mind, the policies that she would run on. got Do uh Joe Biden 38% approval rating. Went up slightly now that he dropped out, and it had her at 32 percent a year ago yesterday. And that's why, because out of the performance of what you believe, the American people said no. They're not into it.

When you ask people about the economy, they like the Trump years better, about safety and security. They like the Trump years better, about inflation. I don't have to finish that sentence, but on even foreign policy, please tell me where we're better off today, anywhere.

So the Trump's got all this going. And just logically, the momentum of being the pick, not being Joe Biden helped, picking Tim Waltz, more of a juice. Then you get more juice from the DNC. But now the game started last Friday. And I really think the bump will come out this weekend, and then I think it's a fight to the finish.

And in terms of quality, I still think Trump is in the same place as sooner or later. In one week, he'll be in the same place as he was against Biden, slightly ahead. Yeah, I think that all that is right. The bottom did fall out a bit for Biden, not necessarily because of the debate, but because he spent three weeks with his own side devastating him, which is going to have an effect. But she's one background with Democrats, obviously.

She's one background with some traditional Democratic constituencies that Biden was scuffling with. And her favorite roller rating has increased substantially.

So she but she's not winning by ten points. She's not winning by five points, I don't think. And she needs to be winning you know, by two or three nationally, and maybe, you know, on another point or two, just to to account for one, the the electoral um the the way the Electoral College tilts in Republicans' favor, and two, that's probably a percent or two of the Trump votes being missed in the polling.

So if she's tied, I think you if it's tied nationally, that definitely favors favors Trump and we'll have to see where it settles out. But it's going to be a very close race and the debate is going to matter, I think. I think so too.

So I also think that J. D. Vance has been phenomenal in these adversarial situations. I don't I mean, people try to they'll grab one sentence that they think is awkward, and I'm laughing because he's phenomenal in the most hostile situations, and he seems to like it. Yeah, I'm writing a piece about this very thing as we speak.

Yeah, they made a big thing out of this donut shop stop. And I haven't seen the full video, but I've seen a longer clip than the one they've been spreading online. And there are two or three junior employees who are freaked out because this huge entourage with 17 cameras shows up and they won't make conversation with them.

So they kind of put that on JD. And then you can finally, towards the end, you see there's someone like a real who comes and JD starts having a conversation with them. But there's another, you can watch a 10-minute video of JD showing up at a diner like a week or two ago. And it's awesome. You know, he's comfortable in that situation and perfectly comfortable, I think you're right, in any situation.

On Meet the Press, he was challenged on like eight things where there are all sorts of traps and landmines he could have stepped in, didn't step in one, came out totally unscathed, and he's doing that weekend after weekend. He's scared of nothing. Right. And by the way, he's got four or five surrogates that will go into enemy territory and sell his story. And that's good because most independents and Democrats might be watching those Sunday shows and other channels.

No offense to Shannon Bream. She's got a huge audience, too. You also talk about when she rolled out her economic plan last Friday or two Fridays ago, she talked about price controls. She talked about gauging instead of gouging, about what she wanted to do for housing, build 2 million homes, and incentivize the private sector to do it. But you said, in particular, when it came to price controls, it was such an epic fail that no one will even talk about it.

And now she seems to have backed out and said we misinterpreted it. And you write about that. Yeah, and this is not something this wasn't like a pull side at a tarmac with a reporter, and she's done a couple of those very briefly. This was a speech that was written by someone who thought about it, and she read it, right? And they immediately it was savaged even by center left.

Folks, and now all all the Democrats are privately saying, Well, she didn't really mean it. She just wanted to signal she cares a lot about the issue, it never passed. Even if she wanted to get it.

So to she definitely wasn't any good on policy in 19 and 20, and they're disavowing that. They even have to disavow things she said three weeks ago now. Yeah, so we'll see what happens on Thursday. Rich, lastly, when it comes to what's happening in the Middle East, we have two aircraft carrier striker groups right in that region. Iran has reached out in some weird way.

The Ayatollah says, We're open to talking about the nuclear program. Hezbollah feels as though they took their shot now or even. Where do you think this is heading as we speak? The IDF is moving in the West Bank, nine dead overnight. Yes, I think they want to avoid a major war.

Probably both sides do, but there's a potential that, that's what we get, and it will increase the sense of chaos abroad during these three and a half years of Joe Biden when clearly we've lost our deterrent force, no one takes it as seriously as Trump says, and everyone thinks he's weak for an understandable reason. The IDF aside, the other focus is Ukraine. Zelensky is going to come here in a week, and he's going to tell Biden, you gave me great stuff. Can I use it? I know where the Russians are.

They back out to the distance that you determined that we can't shoot into. We just had the biggest devastating attack yet, yet we penetrated inside Russia. Let us fight. Take the handcuffs off. What do you think Biden will do?

I think he'll half-measure it. I mean, that's been the approach all along. If we give them what they wanted with no restrictions in the first year, there's a chance they could have pushed the Russians all the way out, or close to all the way out. I don't know whether they ever could get them out of Crimea, even in the best circumstances, but we didn't. And it's turned into this long war of attrition that is tipped one way.

China's not telling Russia, oh, don't hit the energy infrastructure in Ukraine. That'd be too provocative, right?

So I think Ukraine should be allowed to hit back. And if Trump gets elected, I think there's a chance something kind of shakes loose here and maybe he could get a peace deal. They want to speak to, but you can't do it unless you have some leverage. He knows that. I worry about the far right, and you might be included in that.

I don't think so, that doesn't believe Ukraine is of interest in America's best interest to support. I worry about the Steve Bannons of the world. Even Tulsi Gabber, to agree, who I have great respect for. Wh how big is that faction of the De Republican Party? I think it's big and it's important.

And I think the polls have showed support for Ukraine funding eroding, especially among Republicans, but not disastrously so. I think the public is basically evenly divided. And in Congress, as we've seen, there's strong bipartisan majorities for Ukraine funding. The thing is, if Trump came in and just listened to those folks and said we're cutting him off, he could do that. But he's never said.

His allies have said that. Occasionally, people have met with him and say he's saying that privately, but he's never said that publicly. In fact, he had, I think, a quiet role in getting the Ukraine latest tranche of Ukraine funding through a couple of months ago.

So I think he'll try to get a deal. And if he concludes that Putin Is the obstacle, then he'll fund Ukraine to the hilt.

Well, he is the obstacle. Rich Lowry, National Review. Thanks so much, Rich. Thanks, Brian. I've got a great column with the New York Times today.

Listen, back with you calls in just a moment. Brian Kilmicha. Coming to you on a need-to-know basis because Mandy you need to know it's Brian Kilmead. A radio show like no other. It's Brian Killmead.

I read a story this morning that her advisors are considering just copying all of Donald Trump's policies. They're more popular. In fact, I've heard that for her debate in just a couple of weeks, she's going to put on a Navy suit, a long red tie, and adopt the slogan, Make America Great Again. I mean, no doubt about it. If he's stealing everything else, I think she's doing half of it to get on his nerves.

The other thing is that Trump's policies are popular, and almost any Republican running. will be saying the same thing. Hey, George, you're in Missouri. George, what's on your mind? Hi, Brian.

I I think we are in a precarious position in the Ukraine-Russian war. I believe we're as close to nuclear war now as we were in the in the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1963. The Russians have lost 600,000 troops. And if Putin is is in a corner, I think he's going to launch high CBMs against us.

Now he won't use tactical nukes against Ukraine because the nuclear cloud takes that over over Russia.

So they're poisoning themselves if they do that. But I don't think they will mind launching an attack against the country that's supplying them with F-60. Good luck with that. He'll be dead before you know it. George, I don't think so.

There's always a risk. I'm not foolish, but it's been two years of war that he started. It's not our fault he lost 600,000 guys. It's not our fault he doesn't have to train an army. Doesn't want to draft rich people in Moscow.

From the Fox News Radio Studios in Midtown Manhattan, it's the fastest-growing radio talk show. Brian. In Kill Mead. Hi, everyone.

So glad you're here. Brian Kilmey Show. Come to you from Midtown Manhattan, heard around the country and around the world. Of course, the UN just across the way in Times Square, six blocks away. This hour, we're going to be joined by Mark Madsen.

We're going to talk a little about the economy. He's a Madsen Money founder and CEO and author of the new book, Experiencing the American Dream: How to Invest Your Time, Energy, and Money to Create an Extraordinary Life.

Sounds good. We also got this great study out about how much so-called the American Dream costs now. It's gone up.

Well, let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. It's the shrinkflation indictment. It's the same packaging, just less product inside. It does not hold together, in my view, very well.

Yeah.

That is, of course, Jonathan Charley, law fair, new indictments from Jack Smith. Who else? As his relentless personal legal attack on President Trump continues, what will its effect be? It could boost the 45th and raise the stakes for winning the election and raise some money. Number two.

Madam President President, there's been a lot of questions about when you're going to sit down for your first interview since being the nominated. And now it's set up. I don't know if you heard that, but the question was: when are you going to sit down for your interview? It will be. Kamala goes to Georgia.

Trump heading for Michigan. But incremental progress made as Harris selects her sit-down. Yes, it's Dana Bash on CNN. Here's the bad news: it's with her running mate, yeah, Mr. Waving Arms, the coach, the liberal governor from Minnesota.

What questions must she be asked? I want to get it from you. Number one. Her advisors are considering just copying all of Donald Trump's policies. In fact, I've heard that for her debate in just a couple of weeks, she's gonna put on a Navy suit.

A long red tie and adopt the slogan, make America great again. And she claimed it as her own. Flip-flopophobia. It's a disease Kamal Harris has, and there does not seem to be a cure. As the left-wing Democratic VP has decided that Donald Trump is so politically savvy, she should steal all his foundational ideas.

This week, two more hijacked. She thinks this nation is full of ignorant idiots, and we're not. What am I talking about? How about this? Do you remember she was talking about EV mandates?

Joe Biden, so proud of the Inflation Reduction Act because it was full of green technology, green incentives for car companies, reimbursements. If you bought an electric car, problem is, three years later, we don't want them.

Some do. Go get them.

So a lot of people love the Tesla. That's fantastic. But the mandates, the incentives to do it, the mandates on these dealerships are out of control to the point where Forge is just collapsing their electric vehicles. They're stopped building the Ford Lightning, I think, entirely because nobody wants it. They want a gas-powered.

Car with the same type of environmental sensitive equipment on it, but they don't want to walk away from it. She knows that, and she is walking away from what she said in the past. And that's the crazy thing. The other thing you're not going to believe, she now wants to build the wall. Yeah, I want to finish the wall.

I want to pass the bipartisan. Immigration plan that Senator Langford and Senator Murphy kind of pioneered along with Senator Cinema. She said in it though they put $650 million worth of wall.

Well, let's do it.

Well, if you want to do it, you can finish it right now. And by the way, what has she said about walls in the past? Listen to this, cut four. On the subject of transnational gangs, let's be perfectly clear. The President's medieval vanity project is not going to stop them.

And he has held up the United States government and its workers Around his vanity project called A Wall. For the sake of this. President's medieval vanity project called a wall. Good for him. He talks about that wall.

He wants everyone to be preoccupied with his billion dollar, multi-billion dollar vanity project. This issue. is about a vanity project for this president. Really? It's pretty dramatic change, don't you think?

For every Democrat, Now, people like AOC are going to change their policy, or are they keeping that mouth shut because you know she doesn't mean it? I sense it's the latter. She knows she doesn't mean it. Wall is now great. As president, she's promising more funding and a stricter border policy than she did as the border czar.

Drawing the contrast, Trump visited the border last week, proclaiming we built the wall, pointed to what was left on the ground, how they didn't finish the wall. And there, she met with Lake and Riley's parents. Lake and Riley was murdered by an illegal immigrant, went to New York, then went and murdered her in Georgia. Important. Anaxios.

Harris advisors note: the bipartisan board of bill proposal didn't include any new money to continue the wall building.

So, what are they talking about? It just extended the timeline to spend funds that have been appropriated during Trump's last year as president. They say, though, the legislation has new restrictions to ensure the money is spent on barriers. Barrier means a wall, it's a bollard wall, but it's a wall. Yeah.

She takes tax on tips. She's now strong on the border. She's going to be strong on defense, even though they've underfunded the Pentagon, not even to keep up. With the cost of inflation. But she's changing.

She's changing because Donald Trump's policies are right. People want them. Fifty three percent of the country, when surveys say I want that wall built, she knows she's on the wrong side.

So instead of trying to talk her way out of it, she has surrogates say she changed her mind. Senator Lindsey Graham is not buying it. Cut six. When you ask people in Arizona, who do you trust to fix a broken immigration system? It's Trump plus nine to the people in Arizona.

Do you really believe she's going to build a wall? That's just bullshit. She's had four years to build a wall and she's done nothing. For the last four years, they've turned every Trump policy upside down that prevented illegal immigration, and we're being overrun with 10 million people. They're not going to do anything to fix America's problems.

If you're looking for her to get this nation back on track, you're looking to the wrong person. Right. How about the EV mandate? I don't want to do that. Oh, you don't?

Okay.

Well, Senator Harris, you were the co-sponsor of the Zero Emissions Vehicle Act of 2019, a bill that initially proposed to require 100% of new car sales to the BEVs or otherwise emission-free by 2040. Harris later campaigned during the failed 2020 presidential bid on having all new car sales be zero-emission models by 2035. Pretty sure. That's an EV mandate. What changed?

Because she doesn't want to be from California anymore. She wants to be from Oakland, California. You don't want to be from San Francisco, Oakland. Problem is, that's where the hospital was, but you grew up right by Berserkly. You know that everybody knows that you don't want to be associated with San Francisco.

You know what they did yesterday? And I'll take a break on this. Governor Neussens being asked to sign a bill that would give illegal immigrants in a lottery system 2,000 of them 150,000 for their first home.

So, think about you're in California, your tax up to Wazoo, your tax if you even leave. And you're taxed like crazy, you're seeing your quality of life dip, homelessness, drug abuse, illegal immigrants, and now you find out your tax dollars are going to give illegal immigrants $200,000. $150,000 to buy their first home. It is an absolute kick in the groin. And guess what?

Gavin Newsom will sign it. And guess who's horrified by it? The other 49 states. Maybe in 2016 they were okay with it. We're not now.

We've sobered up. We've seen Denver. We've seen New York. We've seen Philadelphia. We've seen the airports in Chicago.

We hear the complaints from Boston and all throughout Massachusetts. We don't want to pay for it. We don't want them here. We want them to use the normal immigration system. And then you're welcome to be an American.

Next, Mark Mattson joins us. We'll talk about the American dream. and how you can get it. Richard Vatts, professor over at Towson State University, author of The Only Authentic of Persuasion, The Agenda Spin Model. He's also a debate expert, also a media commentator.

This is the Brian Killmeat Show. Covering this election year like no other. It's Brian Kilmead. The more you listen, the more you'll know. It's Brian Kilmead.

Hey, welcome back, everyone. Mark Mattson's my guest, Madsen Money founder and CEO and author of a brand new book. It's called Experiencing the American Dream: How to Invest Your Time, Energy, and Money to Create an Extraordinary Life. And then they got this report out today. Mark, great to see you, that talks about how much the American Dream costs.

Let's say, in theory, it's two kids in a house in the suburbs, and it's going up a lot, a lot to do with inflation. Depending also where you live, too.

Well, the inflation's been terrible. You know, got to figure everything's 20, 30% more expensive than it was three and a half years ago. What's the focus of this book? What could we take from this book? The focus is that even though we're facing hard times and even though we have a lot of challenges in America, the American Dream is still real.

The idea that if you focus on adding value for other people, you work hard, you innovate, that you actually can still have the American Dream and have a fulfilling life at the same time. What's your story?

Well, my mom and dad came from Charleston, West Virginia, up in the Hollers in the hills. My grandpa was really, really poor. My dad's side, they lived in a little shack by the railroad. The rats would come in when it was cold outside. They would take the tops off of instant carnation milk cans and nail it to the baseboard to keep the rats from coming in.

And my grandpa had a view of the world of scarcity, pain, suffering, entitlement, victimization. My dad, on the other hand, had this idea that if you asked the right questions, you could actually get out of that destitute poverty.

So I had two very different models. My dad became an entrepreneur. He was an innovator. He got into the investing industry.

So I had two very stark different ways of looking at the world that informed me.

So this one, so what was your break? What was your big break? I think my big break was just watching my dad. And he gave me when I was 10 years old. This is going way back, but he gave me a copy of Think and Grow Rich that thoughts are Napoleon Hill, and that ideas are real things.

And that if you apply yourself, that you can create wealth and prosperity. My message for people today is, you know, who want to live the American dream, we still live in a great country. It's still available. You can innovate. And if you'll focus on helping other people create their dreams and ask the right questions, you can still have a great life and create the freedoms here that aren't all over the world.

Instead of what's bad, what's good? What's positive today?

So by helping enough people get what they want, you'll get what you want. That's right. If you help other people create their American dream, you have two different ways of looking at the world. One driven by scare. Scarcity, driven by victimization, driven by entitlement, and that will never create anything for people like that.

And we get a lot of that from our politicians. And that's what they want. They're being screwed. That's what they want. They want to keep people victims because that keeps them dependent on the state.

And entrepreneurism is based on the ideas of capitalism. If you create value for other people, you'll be rewarded. And that means 100% responsibility. My dad used to tell me, I believe it to this day, nobody owes you anything that you don't create on your own, and that you're not entitled to things without working hard for them. That work is its own value.

And these are the principles that lay down the values of the American Dream. Right. So they look at the American Dream now and they say the two kids, the house in the suburbs, and traditional wife, Americans pushing back retirement. 82% have considered delaying retirement because their dream has been put off or back in. 92% worry they will have to work longer than planned.

39% fear not having enough money stashed away. Your thoughts on that?

Well, I You know, even the whole idea of retirement might be an outdated idea these days because the happiest people I know and they never actually stop working. They always keep innovating, keep changing, consulting, sense of purpose. And I talk about in the book: look, even money can't make you happy. People always think, well, if I had millions of dollars, I'd be happy. Not necessarily.

I've seen people with tens of millions of dollars that are absolutely miserable. And you only have to think of people like Elvis and Marilyn Monroe and Howard Hughes. Money and fame don't make you happy.

So you were helping people get what they want, but obviously you've experienced great success. How do you characterize success? For me, success is. First, you have the screen of the American dream as a way of living life. And then success comes in your self-expression.

It comes in how I relate to other people, how I can use my creativity. It says in the Declaration and our founding documents, happiness. We're one of the only countries in the world that has happiness in their founding document, that we have a right to that.

So expressing love, expressing connection, expressing creativity. Most people think of entrepreneurs as greedy. I think of them as artists. Right. And what do you think to being smart with your money, that also being practical?

Practical, what advice do you give?

Well, you got to stop speculating and gambling with your money. Once you have a purpose in your life that's greater than money itself, then you recognize that I don't want to gamble with my money. And academics show that there are three things people do with their money that are gambling. They do stock picking. Right now you can have your Robin Hood app right next to your DraftKing app in your pocket.

Market timing, trying to get in and out of the market based on an unpredictable future. And then trying to just give your money to a money manager who got lucky over the last five years and picked five good stocks. These are all forms of gambling by academic Nobel Prize-winning research, and that's where Americans get into trouble. And in 95 to 2000, SP made 22 percent for five years in a row. Tech stocks made 45 percent, but then look what happened, and that's what people are doing today: large stocks and tech stocks.

Tech stocks lost 75 percent of all their value in two years, and uh the SP lost 50. People need to start diversifying, and they need to start getting real with how much risk they have.

So, why does uh why do you hear Warren Buffett say diversification is dumb? Basically, he thinks it shows a lack of conviction about what you're doing. Why would you keep half your money in something that you don't believe is going to be successful? Yeah, well, it's because you can't see the future. All the knowable and predictable information is already in the price today, therefore, only unknowable and unpredictable information will go forward.

And obviously, Warren Buffett had a good role, but he hasn't beat the SP. In quite a time. Where do you stand if you wanted to be conservative? Are you somebody looking into metals? Are you gold and silver?

Gold and silver are terrible diversifiers. Gold historically has only made about 4.5% with the standard deviation or volatility of the market. Large stocks has made 10% with about almost double. Small micro-cap stocks have made 12%. That's why you don't need the stock pick if you'll just own all of them.

And then emerging markets have done quite well over the years. You've got to be globally diversified. How worried are you about the world getting off the dollar as the standard? I'm not worried about that at all. I mean, already there's.

You see BRICS and the other alliances just looking at. Yeah, I mean, our money's already digitized. All the economies trade in different currencies. It's. I think that just is scare tactics.

People try to get you to buy a trend.

Well, because the world's in the dollar, if we get short of money, we could always print it. And if we can't do it, which got us into trouble.

Well, that's what got us into terrible trouble. That's what gave us such massive inflation. Look, you can't run these $2 trillion spending gaps on the green New Deals. The vice president who wants to be president created the massive inflation she says she wants to put an end to. That's hypocrisy at its greatest.

How do you feel about a $2 million investment incentive to get people to start building more housing? We have a housing shortage in our country. That's what Camela Harris is pitching. I believe in free markets. I believe if you just let government take their boot off the neck of free enterprise and entrepreneurs, they'll find the real prices for all the goods and securities.

45% capital gains tax, will that help close the deficit? That will destroy the economy. This is what Kamala Harris wants to say. It would destroy the economy. Look, people want, you're getting me going here, Brian.

So when you make your money, they want half of it. Right. Half. And then when you invest it, they want half of the gains. And then when you die, they want half of anything that you had left.

And this is the destructive of capitalism. You can't have a 45% capital gains and a 25% unrealized gain. They will destroy the foundation of capitalism. I think that's not being talked about. The American dream has got to have free markets and capitalism.

And these tax policies want to destroy it. What about anti-gouging legislation? Has gouging been a problem? Competition is always the solution to gouging. Price controls would not please you.

Price controls. This is full-blown communism at its worst. People talk about 28% where she wants to raise corporations to 28%.

So what? Those corporations are rich enough. Think about how insane this is. This is double taxation. The corporations pay 28%.

Then, if you get your dividends, you've got to pay 45% on that. It's one of the most onerous taxes in the world, is taxes on corporations and dividends. Did it bring back business when Trump dropped it from 35 to 21 as an incentive to bring manufacturing businesses back? Did it work?

Well, of course it did. I mean, unemployment was at 2%. I mean, and right now, and the problem is now that we also have jobs people won't take. Mark Mattson, congratulations. Pick up his book, Experiencing the American Dream, How to Invest Your Time, Energy and Money to Create an Extraordinary Life.

Mark. If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it. You're with Brian Kilmead. Millions upon millions of illegal immigrants that have come in just since Kamala Harris became the war czar a few years ago. She was put in charge of the root causes of migration.

Well, the root causes of migration, I would say, Kristen, is that Kamala Harris refuses to do her job.

So, if you want to get control of the illegal immigration problem, you have to stop the bleeding. You have to stop so many people from coming here illegally in the first place. And that means undoing everything that Kamala Harris did practically on day one of the administration. And that was J.D. Vance being able to get a word in against Kristen Welker of Meet the Press.

When you see the sparring, they went back and forth and the focus only on abortion and his childless cat lady comment. He made it on a podcast two years ago. You wonder when we're going to talk about the issues that matter most. Number one, the economy, comparing hers, making her explain it. What about her choice not to do interviews, not to do town halls?

What about the fact that she's going to choose one interview? It's going to be a sit-down with her nominee, a vice presidential nominee. Is that okay with you? What about not saying anything that you're going to do virtually if you become president? Is that okay with you?

But no, let's focus on that. I'll play another cut a little bit later. But that stuck out to my next guest. He is Richard Vatts, professor at Politi F of Political Rhetoric at Towson State University and author of the book, The Only Authentic of Persuasion. The agenda spin model.

Richard, welcome. Brian, good to be here, bud. Uh first off, you wrote a column basically just outraged about what's happened to meet the press. That's not the place that Tim Russert left. And this was a case in point, was the sparring with J.

D. Vance as compared to Elizabeth Warren. Yeah, that's absolutely right. Meet the Press has really fallen downhill. You could see it in Chuck Todd, certainly, and certainly now with Kristen Welker.

Her interviews three days ago were just really appalling. I mean, if you're going to be a journalist, you've got to have some integrity. And for her to simply browbeat him for 10 minutes on point after point after point and ignore his answers, and then she interviewed Elizabeth Warren, who I guess is representative of the points of view of Meet the Press. And she doesn't question her or anything. Warren claimed that Trump will support Project 2025, which he has disavowed.

And of course, Welker doesn't even mention that. And that goes point after point. And so it's really, Meet the Press used to be. a very serious exchange between reporters and people who were prominent in the news. It no longer is.

And it's the same thing, it's the same thing with ABC's this week. which has Jonathan Carl. About whom I wrote in a book several years ago by Bob Denton. 2020 presidential campaign. And it's just it's just really appalling that Jonathan Carl is openly anti-Republican in each and every interview he does.

And both of them could be. Especially anti-Trump. He just gets the look on his face when Trump's name even comes up, especially after he did the book. Oh yes. Yes, the look on his face.

That's right. What I wrote about three years ago was the fact that he always made these bizarre facial expressions anytime Trump would come up. And he was very clear about the fact he could not stand Trump.

So you could say he's an honest reporter, but he's honest in his dishonesty. Right. But by his questions and demeanor, he doesn't come out and say, I don't like Donald Trump, but you know where he stands. Here's more from that sparring session with Welker and J.D. Vance on abortion.

If such a piece of legislation landed on Donald Trump's desk, would he veto it? I think he'd be very clear he would not support it. I mean, he said that explicitly. Yeah, I mean, if you're not supporting it as the president of the United States, you fundamentally have to veto it. Would he veto a federal abortion ban?

I think he would. He said that explicitly that he would. He wants this to be a state decision. States are going to make this determination themselves. And by the way, it's never going to get to his desk.

It's not even going to be offered up.

So if he is the President of the United States again, she was just relentless. And then she let Elizabeth Warren go for like three minutes. Yeah, yeah. And and no disagreements with Elizabeth Warren. And Elizabeth Warren was talking about all kinds of things that are contentious.

And she uh she pushed the two-state solution for Israel and Palestinians, which by the way is controversial. She didn't ask anything uh Quelker didn't ask anything about that. I mean, it's really it's really sad when these news shows that used to be so really impressive. I mean, I'm an old guy. And I remember Lawrence Vivak and Tim Russert, who was excellent, by the way, even though he was liberal, when he did a show, he let both sides have it.

And Dill Monroe, they had excellent, excellent interviewers. And these shows have really just simply become democratically supportive shows. And it it's they're no longer new shows. But the thing is, if you're a Republican, you have to deal with it because you need undecideds, you need disaffected Democrats, you need moderates, and you might find more of them here. Even though we got a ton of moderates listening to Fox and Democrats, we just have more people if you look at the rating.

It's not even my opinion, but it's true. But you still, if you want to reach an audience outside those who might not know you exist, that's what you do. Here's an example of what you're talking about. This week, Jonathan Carl with Tom Cotton. Listen.

You would have thought watching the Democratic convention last week that the Democrats are not in office, that they're not in power, that they're campaigning against an incumbent Republican, when in reality, she's been part of the failures of the Biden-Harris administration for four years. And when she campaigned for president in her own right, she did, in fact, promise things like decriminalizing illegal immigration, taking away the money. But that's his position she's clearly changed on in the middle. No, she said she has changed. Yes, yes, yes, she has.

John, she has not said that. And it went on. He's right. She didn't say anything. Yeah.

Exactly, exactly. I mean, it's again, it's an embarrassment when disinterested reporters and that's what they're supposed to be in a in a in an interview. Disinterested reporters come out clearly on one side and say, if you don't agree with me, then you're simply wrong. And uh i and it's really become embarrassing. You know, Fox really has, I'm an independent, but I can tell you that Fox has people who are so excellent at each and every point.

I mean, you know, I think you're very good. And Dana Perino is really one of the most exceptional journalists I've ever heard. She's on top of everything. She's articulate. She's fair.

And every time she's on, I say to my wife, listen to Dana Perino. She is really exceptional. And she's an analyst and strategist.

So, for example, when it comes out of nowhere, Kamala Harris says, in front of a Nevada audience. I believe that we should not tax tips. And not even acknowledging that that was Donald Trump's idea from the previous month. That was so popular, she just took it without attribution.

So, when it came back to the panel, know what she said? If you want to do that, Than say Donald Trump don't attack on tits. But here's what I'm going to do: I'm going to take it a step further. Fill in the blank. You can't just take it.

And hope that people are stupid and ignorant. Exactly. And while we're on Dana Perino, she always provides good, incisive rhetorical analysis and who's fair and who's unfair. I mean, when I watch her, I just think to myself, she is an incredible source for good journalism. Yeah, and she's also good in the clutch.

She's a great crisis manager. I was talking to Richard Vatz. He's really a media expert, professor over at Towson State University, author of the only authentic book of persuasion, the agenda spin model. Richard, you also have an expertise in debate, and you're a great debater. I wonder what you think about the debate now, about the debates, where out of nowhere, Joe Biden says, I want to debate Trump, and I want it to be in June, and I want to kill no audience, and I want to kill the mics.

And I thought, I never even heard of this. But you do it, and it ended up helping to destroy Joe Biden because he couldn't fill up the time, and he was left by his own devices.

Now, Kamala Harris says, yeah, I want the same debate. I want an ABC. I don't want an audience. And I want the mics up. What do you say to that?

It it looks to anybody who is fair as if Kamala Harris is trying to manipulate a debate and and Trump is confident enough that he's willing to go in and whatever the rules are, I'll follow him. You know, he he never says, if you make this rule, I'm not going to debate. He says, let's debate, because he is so confident that he is going to be sufficient in in his arguments that he doesn't fight on these things. And there should be some level of disdain from the audience and concern from the audience that everything the Democrats do is manipulative. They always try to change things around to get this little strategic advantage or that little strategic advantage.

And sometimes it's it's sometimes worse than that. I mean, you know, obviously you know the story of Donna Brazil, who suppr supplied Hillary questions for a debate years ago in a roundtable. I mean, how is he ever on how is he ever on the media again? That's just absolutely outrageous. He's on ABC.

Yeah.

And she was here. She's a really nice person. She blew it. And how many other times did other people give questions? You wonder.

And if people wonder, I mean, the presidency is at stake. The power in Washington on the number one country in the world, you can't overstate it.

So Quinton Folks is the Harris deputy campaign manager. When asked about the debate, Trump came out and put it on Truth Social. We're done. Mics go down. I'll do it on ABC, and I hope to have more.

Quentin Folks says, no, not yet, Cut 11. According to former President Trump a day or two ago, he said that he would show up and that he wanted the mics unmuted.

So I guess that him and his team have some things to work out. We do hope he shows up and we look forward to showing up where the mics are muted and both him and the Vice President can have a substantive conversation about the issues facing Americans. Right. So who do you think has the advantage if the mics are muted? And then, and I'll ask you, who do you think has the advantage if they're not?

Well, I really think that it doesn't make a lot of by the way, that's an awfully ungrammatical statement that folks made. But I don't think the advantage accrues to the rules so much as it does a clear appearance on the debate as to who's in charge of the issues, who knows the issues, who doesn't know the issues. And that's where I think that Harris really is going to fall apart, because I really think she's unprepared on these matters.

So we'll see what happens when she's tested. But that whole lawyer thing where you can zero in on a question and you do the follow-up on a question, like she did good when General Kelly was going through the nomination process as HSS Secretary, as Justice Kavanaugh was trying to get confirmation. You know, people point to those moments when she tries to take apart Senator Jeff Sessions when he tries to become Attorney General. Why do you think that she did better there than she did in the debates against Biden and Tulsi Gabbard and against Mike Pence? I think She does not do well.

when the issue is the substance of issues. When she can turn it around And say, I'm a victim. You cannot put up with being a victim all the time. They can't victimize me. I think that that helps her to do that, but I think it's an illegitimate way to have debates.

Debates should be substantive, they should be on issues. And when you have them on issues, she falls apart because she's inconsistent on issues. She's now changed on a wide range of issues to say that she's taking Donald Trump's positions without saying they're Donald Trump's positions. And I think that that should be revealed in the debate.

So the other thing is, what role do you think moderators should have in fact-checking?

So let's say I come out and I say, you know, under my watch. I have tripled defense spending when in reality I only made it just above inflation. Do you think it's the moderator's job to say, excuse me, Mr. President, you didn't triple? Uh you only went up five percent.

I really think it's the job of the debaters to point out the weaknesses of the other debaters' positions. and they've got to be given opportunities.

So the moderator has to give the opportunity to the other debater to make those points. I don't think it's a good idea for the moderator to see making those points.

So ask the question. Do the follow-up when necessary. But in terms of fact-checking, not your place. Exactly, exactly. opportunity for fact checking to offer to the opponent is critical, and that's what you've got to do.

Just back finally, before I let you go on Meet the Press, Eric just pulled up Chuck Todd. You said that's when this whole show went left. Here's an example on something so matters so much, and that was a laptop. Why does it matter? Because it looks like Joe Biden is doing deals with other countries on the basis of his office and his influence through his son.

And they told us the laptop that proved it wasn't real. After the election, we found out it was. We all knew it was. Any logical person knew it was. And Biden knew it was.

But listen to Chuck Todd. Instead of Roger Stone and WikiLeaks, it's Rudy Giuliani. And some computer guy in Delaware.

So this didn't work, so he'll try another planted story or another Russian use some other discredited Russian propaganda. And for those of you spreading misinformation, shame on you. Shame on you. I don't know how some of you sleep at night who are doing this for a living. television.

Yeah.

There's a disinterested moderator. I mean It's not tall. It sometimes is a joke to anybody who likes serious exchanges. And the real crime on that is that he's a very bright guy. And so you can't claim that he just doesn't understand.

I mean, he is willfully unfair. And that ruins the job of journalists who are supposed to be disinterested and supposed to investigate issues. And he just doesn't do that. I would say that I got a chance to meet Tim Russia. We had the same birthday.

And when he died, it just shows you how fair he was because there were as many Republicans who showed up as Democrats. Tim Russ. Was wonderful. The word is that he was generally liberal in his own thoughts. when he did interviews, you could not tell whether he was liberal or conservative.

He was right down the line, and he was critical of everybody. When they tried to play fast and loose with facts, he would point it out. He was excellent throughout. He is Richard Vatts. Thanks so much, Richard.

His book, The Only Authentic Book of Persuasion, the Agenda, Spin Model, is also a debate expert, over a thousand where he's a professor of political rhetoric. Thanks, Richard. Thanks for having me, Brian. You got it. Back in a moment with your calls.

Brian Kilmicho. Diving deep into today's top stories, it's Brian Kilmead. Radio that makes you think. This is the Brian Kill Me Show. Hey, welcome back, everybody.

Let's go out to Julie. Listen, FM News Talk 97.1. Hey, Julie. Hey there, I loved your guest's point that Harris is ineffective unless she's talking about her victimhood. I like to call her biography Berkeley Elegy.

There is a dossier circulating on X, not getting too much traction, but it's her mother's immigration file to Montreal in 1976. At that time, she declared twenty thousand dollars. in assets. That is equivalent to $110,000 today. 15% of Americans have that much money.

So she wasn't lower middle class. We all bought the busing story. And I always thought she was probably a poor kid. She was anything but. And her mother, she said her mother didn't buy a house until she was a teenager.

That is because she was moving university to university. She was in Illinois. She was in Wisconsin. She lived in a beautiful neighborhood in Montreal. I really feel like this is something that we're leaving on the table.

Rich Lowry even said, you know, we cannot just accept her biography. And also, you know, the fact that she had 92% worker staff turnover. I mean, it is all a facade.

So we cannot just accept it. We really got to go. Um all guns on this. No no question. I mean, she does not say she's from Uh she says she's from Oakland.

That's where that's where the w the hospital was. She wasn't remote on. She was raised by her mom who was a cancer doctor. Obviously, her mom worked a lot, right? Great example.

She did a hard thing. She raised those kids alone. The father left at six, seven, or eight years old. They got a brutal divorce. They agreed that he would have nothing to do with them.

So he goes and becomes a Marxist professor. He's since, I guess, reformed his ways. I'm not sure. We had Victor Davis Hansen, who said, I used to know him.

So he was a vowed Marxist.

So when he would show up, and he was Jamaican, when he would show up, it would just make appearances. He was upset about her appearance on Charlemagne the God when they asked her if she ever smoked pot. And to me, you should just answer honestly, don't try to be one of the guys. She says, Yeah, I'm Jamaican. Her father said, I'm outraged.

Why are you doing the stereotype that everyone in Jamaica smokes pot? Thanks, Julie. You're right. Focus on the biography. They're all over Trump's biography.

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 Brian Kill Meet Show. It's so good to be here. I'm going to be on outnumbered at the top of the hour, but now it's all about you. This hour, I'm going to be joined by Ambassador David Friedman. He's got a brand new book coming out called One Jewish State: The Last Best Hope to Resolve the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

You know, he spent four years there, he's been there for everybody, he's been four years for Donald Trump. It had a lot to do with the Abraham Accords and the success, and seen all the unrest since. James Trustee at the bottom of the hour. We have another indictment on President Trump. Are you kidding me?

From Jack Smith. He just changed it around a little in conjunction with the Supreme Court decision on immunity.

So, before we get to my guest, let's get to the big three.

Now, with the stories you need to know, it's Brian's big three. Number three. It's the shrinkflation indictment. It's the same packaging, just less product inside. It does not hold together, in my view, very well.

Jonathan Turley will expand on that lawfare. New indictments from Jack Smith. His relentless personal legal attack on President Trump continues. What will his effect? It could boost the 45th President like the previous ones.

Number two. Madam President, there's been a lot of questions about when you're gonna sit down for your first interview since you're gonna need your game. I've talked to my team. I want us to get an interview schedule before the end of the month. Let's hope the campaign Kamala Harris hits Georgia.

Trump heading for Michigan, but incremental progress made as Harris selects her sit-down. Yes, she'll sit down on CNN, okay, with an interview. All right, the bad news is with her running mate. Why does she need the security blanket? What questions is she afraid of?

Why is this a major event? She should have done 20 interviews by now. Number Her advisors are considering just copying all of Donald Trump's policies. In fact, I've heard that for her debate in just a couple of weeks, she's going to put on a Navy suit, a long red tie, and adopt the slogan, Make America Great Again. Flip-flopophobia is a disease Kamala Harris has, and there does not seem to be a cure.

As the left-wing Dem VP has decided Donald Trump is so politically savvy, she would steal all of his foundational ideas. This week, two more hijacked. One on EV mandate, she no longer wants them. The other is, you guessed it, she's going to build the wall. I know.

Nuts. David Freeman, not nuts. Great guy, great insight. Ambassador, welcome back. Congratulations on the book you're about to put out.

Thanks, Brian. Great to be back with you. First off, we saw operations with the IDF in the West Bank. What do you the nine dead, but what is the challenge in the West Bank? The challenge is enormous.

I mean, it has a significant Hamas component there. uh a lot of uh a lot of radicalized people, um a lot of dangerous uh Activity and a lot of um a lot of innocent people living in close proximity. This is not Gaza, where you know. It's, you know, the Jews left 2005 and haven't been back since. This is, you know.

An area integrated with uh Jews and Arabs and you know Palestinians, and and and Hamas's presence there is a is a real danger.

So And not to mention the proximity to the center of Israel. You know, uh as as Netanyahu says, Israel's fighting a war on seven fronts, you know, and this is one of those fronts and uh you know, they're up to the task. They'll they'll they'll they'll you know ultimately have to defeat their enemies in order to bring peace. And this is just part of that program. I want you to hear what Congressman Moskowitz said, Cut 29.

It doesn't appear to me that we've made dramatic progress. It doesn't mean that there aren't negotiations going on and that we're not getting closer, right? But we just don't know how close. It's not clear to anybody whether Sinoir is interested in a deal at all. And it doesn't appear to me that pressure has worked, whether it's international pressure or local pressure.

In fact, it just appears to me all the pressure continues to be. on Israel. And he's one of these Democrats that seems to get it, Congress Ambassador. As a congressman, it's kind of rare on the Democratic side. What do you think about these negotiations taking place right now?

I think they're in Egypt. Yeah, I look, you know, heart bleeds for the hostages. I'd love to see some.

Some progress. They found one yesterday alive, a Bedouin Arab hostage. By himself, yeah. I mean, and well, they ris they they had a they were under fire for from a terrorist before they found him, but Look, um it's so asymmetric between you have Israel, a democratic country, you have a bunch of other countries, and they're all kind of begging to be to get responses. from a guy who is uh you know who is a terrorist who's a g you know who was In Israeli jails.

Israel saved this guy's life, this guy sin where they saved his life, performed brain surgery on him to save his life, and he comes out, and all he wants to do now is just kill Jews. you know, the idea that this is like gonna result in a in a in a real negotiation It's just you know, you're dealing with, you know, real people on one side. Who wants to get an objective? And the other guy is fighting for his life. You see, everybody else around him has already been killed.

He's like kind of like a caged animal. And uh I'm not surprised that they're not getting anywhere. And I think ultimately the the The ability of the hostages to be saved is a function of Israel's ability to continue to gather intelligence. Hamas is crumbling now at an exponentially greater rate than at the beginning of the war. It's just starting to fall apart.

And more and more people are talking, and more and more people are giving Israel intelligence, and more and more tunnels are destroyed, so the risk to the soldiers. Yeah.

And um you know, Israel will win the war and hopefully that that process they will come across live hostages that they can save, but I just thought Yeah, we kinda lost it. Are we gonna get it back? Yeah, it can be offered to get any outcome here.

So, just so you know, and you know these names, the IDF is saying they eliminated terrorist Faris Kazam, a significant terrorist for Islamic Jihad. He helped design a lot of the operations in Syria and Lebanon.

So, we're getting a lot of these names coming out. Not Sinoir yet. Do you know this name? Yeah, I I've I've heard the name. He's a Islamic jihad guy.

I mean, the one thing that Israel's showing right now. is that, and I think it has everybody on the other side scared, they can reach Anyone? any of their enemies they can reach. They can target anyone of the upper echelon of any of their enemies. They did it in they did it with Shukar for the the guy that in Lebanon.

They did it with Hania in Iran. Um They're starting to assert their dominance over the conflict. It took a long time. But, you know, th th this is uh This is a time for Israel to defeat its enemies. It's the only way that we're going to get to peace.

And unfortunately, That hasn't been the the path that America has encouraged Israel to take. Because they want a quick end to the ceasefire. They see the unrest in the U.S. and they see their popularity dropping.

So that's all they see, correct? Yeah, but it's not going to result in anything. Israel's got 80,000. citizens. That have been evicted from the north.

They live in towns in the north. of Israel and they haven't been home in a year. And you know, the school the school starts like everywhere else in the world, school starts in a few days. and they can't go home and they can't go to school. And so, you know, Hezbollah has this You know, Hezwan knows they can't defeat Israel, but this kind of low-intensity battle that they're fighting, which just keeps 80,000 people away from their homes.

Is enough for Hezbollah to have real leverage and really to declare victory. Israel's got to push them back. I mean, if they don't push them back, they will be perceived. Just having lost this war, and they're just not being given the opportunity by America. America wants to keep them on with handcuffs and beg for mercy and beg for deals and beg for relief.

And in the Middle East, it's just not. a strategy that works. And they ought to know that because They've been trying it for a while and haven't succeeded. Why do you think Iran hasn't gotten retribution for the killing of Haniya in Tehran? Because because they can't.

Because the the the the the Iranian you know, as as much as they talk a good game, you know, their their assets are relatively limited in there. You know, they're eight hundred miles away and they can shoot a bunch of missiles and you know Israel will intercept them or the Americans there will intercept them. And they kinda know that there are their limits on what they can do. They try to hear and they shot 300 missiles. A few months ago, and 99% of them were intercepted.

And, you know, look, it's great that America. offers Israel this this this package of assets that protects Them from Iranian missiles, but it's very clear. The messaging is very clear. These are only defensive assets. You know, I I I kind of analogized, you know, you could play soccer with the world's best goalie.

But if you don't have an offense, you're not going to win the game. And that's what it we're Israel's right now. They have a great defensive apparatus right now, but America's not letting them go on offense. And that is that does not permit kind of deterrence necessary to get a good outcome. From your sources, Ambassador Friedman, are we still slow walking weapons to them?

Yes, I think so. I think what I'm hearing is that. is that there still are are weapons that they need that they're not getting. And for clear reasons, America does not want Israel or the Biden administration does not want Israel to go on offense. They're happy to d to defend them.

They'll keep them and they're using that defensive capability as leverage. to prevent Israel from going on offense. Again, because of, as you point out, the political ramifications of the war intensifying.

So people keep talking about a two-state solution. Here's what Kamala Harris would do as Commander-in-Chief. Tell me what you think. CUP 31. As Commander-in-Chief.

I will ensure America always has the strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world. I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself And I'm always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself. Oh never. Hesitate.

So take whatever action. Action is necessary to defend our forces and our interests against Iran and Iran-backed terrorists. Do you believe her? No, I mean I think you can take those words and twist them into a policy. where she wouldn't technically be lying.

But I think the um Tha this whole point about, you know, Israel's right to defend itself is a really meaningless platitude. First of all, every country in the world Every country has the right to defend itself. It's not unique to Israel and standing for it. It's really not standing for anything all that significant. But second of all, and this was my point earlier: this idea that Israel can defend itself.

is really a code word for Israel. You know, it should be a punching bag. They should sit there like a sitting duck and wait for incoming. And when that happens, America will be there and make sure they have the assets or the resources to defend themselves, but never to go on offense. There's no way to win a war without offensive capabilities.

There's no way to establish deterrence without offensive capabilities. Israel hasn't had a day of peace Since 1948, it's been a state of war with Lebanon and Syria since that they had found it. And the only way Israel survives, I would say thrives in this environment. Is through its deterrence, and its deterrence is much more than just having the right to defend itself, which again, everybody's got. One Jewish state is the name of the book.

David Friedman is going to be coming out soon. Ambassador, does that mean you see no two-state solution?

So you see Palestinians with not ruling any not ruling Gaza or the West Bank? Yeah, no, and that's and I like I wrote the book because you know, first three things, October 7th. Second of all, eighty two percent of the poll the polling credible polling showed that eighty two percent of Palestinians and the West Bank supported uh the October seventh massacre. And then the Biden Harris uh comments that this that the fix here is a two state solution. I mean The fix here: a two-state solution will be a final solution for the Jewish people in Israel.

It will create a terrorist state within easy range of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. And it will really result in the end of the Jewish state. you know, half of my book is to make the point why we can never have a two state solution, but the other half Is okay, well, then what? I mean, we just create a vacuum where we actually try to make things better, and that's the idea of the one Jewish state. That I believe that whether you are on the right or the left or the center, whether you're Secular or religious, whether you care about just the Israelis or just the Palestinians or both.

Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank is the only means by which Both Jews and Palestinians can live together in peace, with security, with the chance of prosperity and human dignity. It's the only way, and the proof of that. The only place in the world. Where you know, where there's an Arab minority living in prosperity and human dignity is in the state of Israel, 20% of Israel. is uh is Arab.

And those Arabs uh have uh the More than 20% Of the students in the elite universities are Arabs, you know, the doctors, lawyers, they've achieved every level of. you know, of achievements within, you know, uh business echelons and academic and legal. That's what the model that has to be exported into the West Bank. Not this idea that you're going to allow. The West Bank to be free of Jews, devoid of Jews, as Hitler used to say, Judenrein.

And then, in that hope that that Palestinian entity somehow doesn't become a terror state, which I guarantee you it will.

So, one Jewish state is the only kind of alternative. Serious alternative to a two-state solution that, to my knowledge, anybody who's got any experience in U.S. government has been advocating. I hope people read it and it becomes something that people talk about seriously. When's it out?

It's out on Tuesday.

So, a week from yesterday. Great. Ambassador, I look forward to having you back. We'll have you on TV too. Ambassador David Friedman, one of the real linchpins of Donald Trump's Israeli policy, Middle East policy, and I'm sure he'll be back again if Trump is to win.

Ambassador Friedman, thanks so much. The name of the book is One Jewish State. Go get it now. Thank you. Thanks.

Thank you, Brian. You're with Brian Kilmead. Breaking news, unique opinions. Hear it all on the Brian Kill Me Joe. It's the shrink inflation indictment.

It's the same packaging, just less product inside. And what they did is kept the four charges, and they just took out any evidence that clearly would have contradicted the Supreme Court's decision on presidential immunity. It does not hold together, in my view, very well. So I'm going to talk to I'm going to talk to Jim Trustee, who was the former attorney for Trump. He was with the Justice Department or with George W.

Bush. And I want to find out what he thinks about this latest Jack Smith indictment. I will say this. If you didn't think the stakes were high for President Trump's legacy, It's actually for his freedom too. Because this guy's not going to stop.

Gregg over in the villages. Hey, Gregg. Yes, yes, thank you so much. Regarding this amendment of this indictment from Jack Smith, my question is, it was alleged that Jack Smith or the FBI rearranged some evidence and put it in front of Eileen Cannon, Judge Eileen Cannon. And if Trump wins the election and his Attorney General finds out that Jack Smith had any misconduct whatsoever.

Could Jack Smith be prosecuted? Because I'm sick of looking at his ugly face, and number two. the one hundred million dollar lawsuit that Trump has filed against the DOJ. If Trump wins, could his Attorney General opt to settle that suit? Like, who pulls the strings here?

Thanks, Brian. All right, you know what? I'm not equipped to answer that, but Jim Trustee is, and he's next. Dean, listen on WABC. Yeah, hey, Brian, you know, when 60 Minutes asks J.D.

Vance what he thought about what he said 22 years ago, his answer should be: I will answer that. I will be glad to clarify it or change my mind and let you know, but you're going to have to go to a real journalist in order to find the answer, unless You ask Harris those questions also, what she felt two years ago, and let her explain why she changed her mind or clarify what she said. Otherwise, you're not going to get the answers from me. You'll have to go someplace where they have actual journalism. I mean, Dean, isn't it amazing?

You have two guys split up. They don't have to have security blanks. They don't need to ride in the same car or the same bus. They do interviews in hostile territory non-stop. And you have another people, they won't won't do any interviews.

because they're afraid of not having an answer. Could you I mean, how do how do the how are these two tied? I mean, how are these two tied? How could you go for this job and not know what you will do, or worse, refuse to tell us what you will do? Yep.

Mm-hmm. That's it. All right, Scott. And by the way, Scott in Pennsylvania, as I bring you up, real quick. She did a 60-minute interview.

She didn't like the way it turned out. That's why she didn't go back. Scott, what's on your mind?

Okay, I'll keep it short. Israel, years ago, they went after uh German you know leaders uh the uh put them in their their jails for you know killing Jews. Yep. And also went I think Antebe and rescued all his people and and stuff like that. Nintebe.

Why Are they going out and killing all these Arab guys? But why can't they go out and kidnap him? The way it turned out.

Alright, I'll work on that. We should do more kidnapping. Mental note.

Alright, um James Trustee's next. Brian Kill Me Joe. The fastest three hours in radio. You're with Brian Kilmead. It's not uncommon.

For a prosecutor to do this, it's actually a smart move. With the trouble that he's having with the now former but uh as of an hour ago current indictment. He now supersedes He streamlines and he tries to. Uh take that indictment. Further.

I mean, it really is a smart move on Jack Smith's part. Whether it'll survive, is uh is unclear right now, but Uh it is a slick move. By Jack Smith to pare it down and resubmit it, give it to a grand jury who would put forward the indictment. That was William Brennan, the former Trump Organization lawyer. He was on CNN, talking instantly about the news that broke yesterday afternoon about Jack Smith at it again.

I wonder what Jim Trustee thinks about that. He's a former attorney with Trump. He's also a former federal prosecutor, attorney, and former defense attorney for the 45th president, focusing on the documents case.

So, Jim, number one, great to hear from you again. Thanks for hopping on Skype with us.

So, if you're watching the show and if you're on our app, you could see him. Jim, first off, were you surprised Jack Smith went at it again? Uh actually no. And it's funny, I'll do a quick victory lap. I was on another network two nights ago saying, I think Jack needs to supersede.

I don't think he reacted to me. It was Roland before that project. What do you mean by supersede?

Well, supersede means you go back in this case to a totally new grand jury and you present represent the case with the change in the indictment. That's the way you eff effectively modify or streamline the indictment that you have. All right, so you got to have a grand jury check it, but you're pretty certain they're going to check the box. Where is this grand jury, and where is the judge?

Well, it's a DC grand jury, and here's the the devil's in the details of why they did this. It's not necessarily a slick move, it's kind of an aggressive and defensive move at the same time.

So let me just explain for a sec. The Supreme Court immunity ruling didn't just say immunized information shouldn't be held shouldn't be part of the trial. It also said it contaminates the grand jury process if you present information that's immunized. And so what that means is, and I know firsthand, Jack Smith presented everything but the kitchen sink to these grand juries to get them to indict. They had all sorts of information that was going to drop out as falling within the official acts of the presidency.

So, what he's doing, instead of waiting for the hearing and hearing what Judge Chutkin allows in or doesn't allow in, he said, I'm going to reframe this thing. I'm going to take the first whack at it and try to get the judge to go along with me. But here's the problem. If he's wrong on a single thing in this new indictment. And there's a couple that are pretty problematic.

I think Mark Meadows' testimony certainly feels like that's going to be within executive privilege. Right. And just for layman, Jim, just to remind you, with the immunity, they're saying if you if this is in conduct happens within being President of the United States, you can't be sued for it.

So, Mark Meadows as the Chief of Staff is interacting with the current sitting president. Regardless of what you think of that sitting president, that's what's called into question. Exactly. I mean, what we're doing, and it's not just civilly, it's for criminal cases too. You cannot use this information that we want to protect, like any sort of privilege, like attorney-client privilege.

You can't use that as part of your indictment or it contaminates the whole process.

So, Jack could have waited until Judge Chutkin had this really extraordinary hearing to decide which things are going to be permissible for the trial. Instead, he's trying to set the tone. He's doing things like saying that President Trump consulted Mike Pence as the president of the Senate rather than the vice president. That is a thin read, right? I don't think Trump was, I don't think President Trump was going, Mike, I need to talk to you, but put on your legislative hat.

No way. I don't even think Trump knew that. No comment. But look, I mean, but the bottom line is, like, you know, that is a very creative, as we've seen from the beginning, an inventive, creative way to look at it. If Judge Chutkin disagrees with Jack on any of these points, Or if an appellate court disagrees, guess what?

He has to go back to a new grand jury and start the process all over again.

So, we're in for a long haul here. We haven't even dealt with the issue of Jack's statutory authority to be special counsel in D.C. Obviously, that's the basis for the dismissal in Florida. But there's a ton of litigation coming. There's going to be this extraordinary hearing about what's an official act and what's a personal act.

And then you can almost bet we're right back up to the Supreme Court at some point.

So the D.C. January 6th case is essentially grinding to a halt with a whole bunch of tricky litigation coming. The judge was going to cut off her European vacation in order to come back. And hear all this evidence. And regardless of what you think and what sticks, as they were running through it.

The hope, in my view, was that people would say, oh, Donald Trump, that reminds me. I don't like that guy. I can't believe he took those documents. I can't believe this happened.

So as they present the evidence, it's almost going to be they're putting him on trial. Without him having a chance to cross-examine the judge.

So as people go up there and go, yeah. Here's this document. Here's another document. Here's this. Can you describe what's going to be allowed in and out?

People are making their judgment there about the 45th President of the United States and whether he should be the 47th. And Jack Smith stopped that, didn't he?

Well, certainly unintentionally he stopped. Remember, the beginning of the case in the January 6th trial was the judge and Jack Smith. Being hell-bent for an incredibly quick trial, to try you know, to start the trial before Super Tuesday in the primaries. There's no basis. Look, I've been a prosecutor and defense attorney for 30 years.

I've never seen a situation for a non-incarcerated defendant who waived his speedy trial right. Being rushed to trial, but that's what they wanted to do. And remember, Jack also tried to get the Supreme Court to jump in while there was an appellate issue before the DC circuit.

So everything's been hell-bent for speed. It's collapsing of its own weight. I mean, they are going to get the political benefit probably of a hearing where there's testimony trashing President Trump. Uh relating to the January 6th evidence. Good question.

I mean, again, with Jack with Jack and Judge Chutkin, I suspect they'll try to have that hearing before November. Uh, and that'll be juicy for people that want to select pieces of evidence and hang it on the president. I mean, isn't this so biased, Jim? I mean, in your profession, I want to get justice, I was hired to do a job. What's with the speed?

Why do you care if the defendant is going to be president of the United States or wants to be head of sanitation for the local county? It should not matter in theory. But instead, obviously Jack Smith wants to stop him from winning. And there's no other reason for it. And I saw you on CNN.

One thing you said is the trials in Arizona, that's the normal speed, 2026. That's when this usually takes place. That's what happens in normal situations. They're rushing it because it's Trump. Yeah, absolutely.

Brian, look, this is what drives me nuts as a former prosecutor for 27 years, as somebody that worked. at the department, pretty high position in the department for seventeen years altogether. You know, I'm seeing things that never happen. If the Attorney General, who's really running the show here, very quietly hiding behind Jack Smith. If the Attorney General wanted to do right by the institution, Of the Department of Justice.

He'd say he would have walked in the court, Jack would have walked in the court and said, Judge Shutkin. We're ready for trial. We're going to be an open book in terms of discovery. We're going to share everything that we have. With the defense, and you tell us when to try this case, and we'll be ready because it's important, it's historical, and we need to be transparent as an institution.

To me, that would at least give you some respect. For the motivation. But when you walk into court and for the first time ever you say, oh, we need a speedy trial, how about the day before Super Tuesday? It's transparent. It's displaying.

You don't have to be a lawyer to figure out that there's a political motivation to this stuff. And I think that's really damaging for DOJ for many, many years. I mean, that's not something that stain is not going to wash out quickly. Merrick Garland, you think is behind this? Just be logical, or do you have information?

Well, it's a little of both, but I mean the reality is Special counsel is not the same as independent counsel. Independent counsel was something we had years ago during the Nixon years. It was set up to be a separate chain of authority from the president, from the attorney general. Special counsel answers to Merritt Garland.

So, the Attorney General, he can hide behind Jack and say, Oh, Jack's got a free hand, but he is Jack's supervisor. And so, that is the person that I think. You know, and look, he felt comfortable having press conferences four days after the Mar-a-Lago raid. But then, when the tide seemed to turn against the special counsel activity, some of the behavior that the special counsel is engaged in, he got real, real quiet. But the reality is, he runs the show, and he should have to answer for some of the anomalies of how they go after President Trump.

So, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson. Is going to have a book coming out, sat down with CBS, and she talked about the immunity that brought us to this place in many cases and delayed some of the trials for Donald Trump, which was a victory during his convention. Cut 22. In your dissent, you wrote that the court declared for the first time in history that the most powerful official in the United States can. Under circumstances yet to be fully determined, become a law unto himself.

It sounds like a warning.

Well, I mean, that was my view. Of what the court determined. You were concerned about broad immunity. I was concerned about a system that appeared to. Provide immunity for one individual under one set of circumstances when we have a criminal justice system that had ordinarily treated everyone the same.

Y the dissent was under criticism too, and everyone thought that was partisan criticism. How do you feel about her explanation on the dissent? Praise the fact that the dissent was viewing this in, I think, a very sensational manner. They're using phrases like the king can do no wrong and unlimited power. The reality is, this is limited immunity.

It does not mean that the president of the United States could run out and push a reporter under the metro and say, you know, hey, it was part of my official immunity. There's still absolute non-immunity for personal acts, and that's the way it should be. And I think the majority of the court honestly was not lost on the majority of the court. That there was this Lilliputian effort to tie down the president in Georgia, in New York, by Jack Smith. I mean, all of the things that are coming out about weaponized law enforcement, biased law enforcement, people that pronounce ahead of time, I will target this man, which is completely unethical.

That's the context that led to this ruling. And I think the majority was aware of the fact that we don't want to have any president, no matter what their name is or what the initial is for their party. Being subjected to kind of constant threat of lawfare, which is what we're seeing play out in this case.

So I think the dissent, you know, they accuse the majority of trying to favor President Trump, in so many words. I think the dissent is obsessing on President Trump themselves instead of the institution of the presidency, which needs some protection from lawfare.

So they're not going to win, regardless, do you think these cases go forward? If Trump loses, Do you think these cases go forward full blast?

Well, you know, my hope is that because they're so inventive, because it's lawfare, that some of these die of their own weight. In other words, that the judges, the safety valve of appellate courts at the very least, Continue to kind of look at it and say, well, the government's not acting in good faith. They're doing things they shouldn't do. This is a unique charging decision, et cetera.

So there's a chance that no matter what happens, that even if it gets fully litigated, these cases get dismissed, like the current state of the Mar-a-Lago matter. I would also think. That if you're a president coming into authority and you're not President Trump, you might look pretty statesmanlike if you call off the dogs.

Now, that also kind of dignifies that it was always political. But I do think there's at least an opportunity for someone to rise to the occasion and say, this is not good for our country. This is third world stuff, and I'm going to put an end to it, at least the federal cases. And just from Jim Trustee, with your love of the law, how would you feel about packing the court or rotating him out after 18 years? These are some of the things that Senator Schumer, if he stays in the majority, and Harris will put forward.

I mean, if if it's packing it with me and you, of course it's okay, Brian. No, I mean, look, I think there's a couple of things. The term limits would require essentially a constitutional convention, so I don't think that's ever going to happen. The number of justices. Has been shot down as court backing correctly over the years.

It hasn't changed since right around the time of the Reconstruction. Look, I think that the current administration has a lot to answer for demonizing the Supreme Court, suggesting that these political hackers Endings of packing the court are legitimate means to change the law. I think it's terrible. It's a horrible precedent. It's horrible that they're so comfortable attacking the institution of the Supreme Court, not protecting justices when they're literally under fire in their own neighborhoods.

And I hope that stuff goes away quickly with the political season. Just like we said, people have their opinion on the decisions, especially educated people like you. But I never saw the personal attacks like I've seen the last few years. And it's scary. Who would ever want to do this?

They don't do it for the money or the fame, not in theory. Jim Trusty, always educational. Thanks so much. Sadly, we need you a lot. Listen, I'm going to go on out and number at the top of the hour.

When we come back, I'm going to find out if you need more to know. More to know. Sponsored by Previgen. Previgen is the most recommended memory support brand by pharmacists. Is he going to call you dad at practice in the locker room?

No, we already laid that. Cannot call me dad in the workplace. All right. Once we leave out of the private facility and the gates close. I could be dad again in the car if we ride together at home.

I could be dad. No, he got to call me like 2-3 or Brian.

Okay.

Or, you know, GOAT if he wants to. It's up to him. I mean, it's up to him. It's easy for me because I've been calling Bronnie for so long. It's not like I've been calling a son, a son.

Like, so it's easy for me. It's going to be the adjustment for him.

So, Bronny got drafted by the Lakers as a favor to his dad. He's a good player. He needs more time in college. Everybody says it. But he got drafted anyway.

And when they go together, the question was: who was asking the question? Was it Stephen A. Smith?

So this is a sh uh a show called The Shop. Oh yeah, that he hosts, right? Yeah, so uh the shop, I think it's his, executive producer on. You're right, it says here right in the paper. Uh but I wish him luck.

I hear he's a great kid. I just wish they'd let him just relax and go to USC and grow as a player next. The Kelsey Brothers inked a three-year podcast deal worth $100 million. This is very similar to the deal I signed, so I wonder if the fine print is the same way. Travis and Jason had this podcast called New Heights.

I've not listened to it, but everyone who listened to it says it's fantastic. According to Bloomberg News, Variety and Wall Street Journal, Wondry, which is this podcast network, declined to answer questions from the post about the financial terms. The deal comes with the podcast third seasons. It's first under Wondry and launched today, but a week before the NFL season starts. One guy's retired.

The other guy's about to be retired. And one guy is Drace as Tasing, dating a very famous woman whose name alludes to me right now. Does anyone know? I forget Orfan her name. My question is: I want to go back to the other story.

What if you were playing with your son in sports? Would you be okay if, say, in the heat of the moment of the sports? On the basketball court. Hey, dad, pass me the ball. I'm open.

Would that bother you? Would he have to call, you know? No, that wouldn't bother me at all. I'd be easy with me. I'd call him Brian.

But him calling me by my first name, that would bother me more. That would be more jarring. I don't too bad we didn't have that problem because I wasn't good enough.

Next, from Major League Baseball pitcher Greg Swindell says his daughter, Brenna Swindell, has been missing since last Thursday. She's now been found safe. He was a dime-backs pitcher. The releaver shared the positive update and the post on Facebook.

So that's good news.

Next. This is home to me. The five best pumpkin spice products for the fall. I love pumpkin spice. I love the fall.

I like summer better. The consensus best pumpkin spice products. You got number five, the Philadelphia Pumpkin Spice Cream Cheese.

Sounds terrible. Pumpkin Spice Cheerios. Much better. Cheerios are the plainest thing ever invented. Tate's bake shop pumpkin spice cookies.

Have you guys had that? Perhaps You're not even paying attention? What could you be doing? How could you what do you mean say it again? You gave me this story, Pete.

Tate's baked shop pumpkin spice cookie. I'm not sure if I'm going to be an issue here for sure. Right. Okay, fine. Blame it on Eric.

Do you like to take, oh, you just swipe me to the next one? The next is the Dunkin' Pumpkin Spice Goldfish Grams and Starbucks Pumpkin Spice Latte Creamer. My problem with pumpkin spice is it's got to be brewed. It shouldn't be syrup. And lastly, Lowe's became the latest company to end DEI policies amid growing backlash.

Home improvement retailer Lowe's is retreating from its diversity, equity, and inclusion commitments. The concessions include no longer participating in surveys for LGBTQ groups, the human rights campaign, Lowe's will also combine its employee resource groups for diverse employees into an organization. It's about time that I feel good about America again. Going back to Lowe's. Right.

Now we can go back. Home Depot, you're going to have to fight for our business now. I like the way Lowe's writes their name in their own penman. I like the way Home Depot makes their people write their name on their smock. Uh that's cool.

I don't like formal little rectangle name tags. I want to know what you write like Is that too much to ask? Penmanship is key when you have to ask a question to anybody. I'm going to go on on outnumbering. Hope they have room for me.

The Will Kane Show is now dropping five episodes a week. Join Fox and Friends weekend host Will Kane as he tackles the latest headlines from his unique perspective, along with thought-provoking interviews with leading figures and live calls from viewers and listeners. Listen wherever you download your favorite podcasts. Listen to the show ad-free on Fox News Podcast Plus, on Apple Podcast, Amazon Music with your Prime membership, or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Mm-hmm.