Speaker 1: Jesse Kelly, So Chris crock and for Jesse Kelly get
Speaker 1: one more hour with you. Well, so the Republicans win
Speaker 1: in Texas. The Democrats have come back. I love their
Speaker 1: declaring victory. Yes, yes, they were gone. They come back
Speaker 1: for Special Session Session number two and all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: ba la victory. If victory means we redistrict five seats,
Speaker 1: then yes, that's victory. So the quorum is back and
Speaker 1: that will be passing very very soon. In the meantime,
Speaker 1: Governor Gavin Newso and the Democrats in California are planning
Speaker 1: on redistricting. This is crazy, bizarre because the people of California,
Speaker 1: according to the Politico, of course, a leftist publication, you
Speaker 1: know news outlet, says that that a massive margin of
Speaker 1: California voters liked the independence of their redistricting commission want
Speaker 1: to keep it that way. Second of all, if Gavin
Speaker 1: Newsom does pull off this trick he's talking about doing,
Speaker 1: you will have it's only going to be for like
Speaker 1: two or three elections then it goes back. So it's bizarre,
Speaker 1: but it's a super rig if they want to do that,
Speaker 1: And that's not a problem because if they do want
Speaker 1: to do that. Florida's queuing up, Ohio's queuing up, Indiana
Speaker 1: might be queuing up. They were visited by JD. Vance
Speaker 1: not too long ago because of that. I was filling
Speaker 1: it in Chicago when that went down, when he was
Speaker 1: visiting over there and the leftists were freaking out and
Speaker 1: going crazy. They lied that he had the river rays,
Speaker 1: which he didn't. That was secret Service in their advance visit,
Speaker 1: they said, nope, can't do that. They got stuck in
Speaker 1: the in the river. They did a dry run, which
Speaker 1: they always do or before the president or vice president
Speaker 1: comes out, so secret Service doing it. Was doing a
Speaker 1: dry run in the river and in the Cincinnati area
Speaker 1: there and one of their people kayaking got stuck because
Speaker 1: it was too shallow, like, well, we can't have the
Speaker 1: president stuck in a kayak an easy target from wherever.
Speaker 1: So no, so they had to raise it, and so
Speaker 1: they blamed him. Gavin Newsom attacked him for running around
Speaker 1: at I think that was a disney World or Disneyland,
Speaker 1: and it was because he was playing a game with
Speaker 1: the sun that they played for years, like a chase
Speaker 1: after hide and seek or something of his young son.
Speaker 1: And for that the liberals attacked him. So there you
Speaker 1: have it. But we're gonna win. I don't know if
Speaker 1: you've gotten the full background on this, and it's it's
Speaker 1: it's really important. The reason why the Texas redistrict is
Speaker 1: going to happen, and the reason why it was all
Speaker 1: prompted was yes, by the Trump just by the Trump
Speaker 1: Trump administration. But you had the Assistant US Attorney for
Speaker 1: the Office of Civil Rights, I believe her, or Deputy
Speaker 1: Attorney General Harmat Dylon. She's in charge of the Office
Speaker 1: of Civil Rights. Harmon I follow her on Twitter, she
Speaker 1: follows me. She's awesome. I'm sure you've heard of Harmat Dillon.
Speaker 1: She's a great lawyer, great advocate. She sent a letter
Speaker 1: to the Texas officials and she said, because of a
Speaker 1: US Court of Appeals decision last year, you have to
Speaker 1: redistrict now. And there is nothing in the law that
Speaker 1: says you can't. You cannot redistrict in between census periods.
Speaker 1: You can. There's nothing saying you cannot. What did Harmonae
Speaker 1: Dylan write for what cases she's citing from last year?
Speaker 1: It was a US Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that
Speaker 1: said that quote unquote majority minority districts cannot be achieved
Speaker 1: by cobbling together two or more minorities and say, oh,
Speaker 1: we have twenty percent Hispanic and thirty one percent black.
Speaker 1: Oh we got a majority minority district. No, the US
Speaker 1: Circuit Court of Appeals said, the federal court. The US
Speaker 1: quart of Appeals said, no, it has to be one
Speaker 1: minority fifty just over fifty percent to be a majority
Speaker 1: minority district. That can be a majority Black, it could
Speaker 1: be majority Hispanic, all sorts of of minorities. It can be,
Speaker 1: but it can't be a cobbling together more than one.
Speaker 1: It's one. And so because of that, those districts were
Speaker 1: not properly done. They were done in the thought that
Speaker 1: they needed to be a majority minority district. But they're
Speaker 1: not because none of them reach fifty percent or higher
Speaker 1: with one race. So that is a Those are false
Speaker 1: minor majority minority districts. Redistrict them now based on a
Speaker 1: court case that just happened last year. That was the
Speaker 1: genesis the impetus for this. So they're doing it. They're
Speaker 1: doing it rightful and righteously and even well. First of all,
Speaker 1: before the redistricting, Texas has a ten percent It's literally
Speaker 1: a ten percent difference between the percentage of Democrats in
Speaker 1: the state of Texas and the percentage of representation they
Speaker 1: have for US Congress. Ten percent difference versus in Illinois.
Speaker 1: I think it's like forty percent or forty four percent.
Speaker 1: New York, it's similar. California, it's similar. I think it's
Speaker 1: even worse in California. So you literally have the closest
Speaker 1: parity among all these states that are mad and hosting
Speaker 1: Democrats or saying they're going to redistrict much more parity
Speaker 1: in Texas. After the redistricting, it'll still be better parity
Speaker 1: between how many Republicans versus Democrats the state of Texas,
Speaker 1: you know, how many voted for Trump versus Biden, et cetera.
Speaker 1: And matching up with a percentage of congressmen in the state,
Speaker 1: it will still have better parity than New York, California,
Speaker 1: and Illinois. So that's why this is so righteous and rightful. Now,
Speaker 1: the political reporting that Newsom faces an uphill climb in
Speaker 1: California redistricting, well he should nearly two to one, by
Speaker 1: a nearly two to one margin. Voters in California prefer
Speaker 1: keeping the independent drawing lawn dry line drawing panel to
Speaker 1: determine how seats two to one margin. They prefer keeping
Speaker 1: it independent. Only thirty six percent back returning congressional redistricting
Speaker 1: authority to state lawmakers. It's not surprising, says a veteran
Speaker 1: policy professor at UC Berkeley. It's not surprising. California has
Speaker 1: voted twice for this independent review commission, not all that
Speaker 1: long ago. The poll shows independent redistricting enjoys widespread popularity
Speaker 1: in California. Among the general public, sixty four percent support overall,
Speaker 1: want this independent panel, not the Democrats rigging it. Independent
Speaker 1: voters are the most enthusiastic backers of this independent panel,
Speaker 1: seventy two percent Independents favorite. Isn't that wild? Same thing
Speaker 1: with Democrats and Republicans, very very close. Republicans wanted to
Speaker 1: keep the independent district at sixty six percent. Democrats, even
Speaker 1: Democrats sixty one percent say leave it with independent and
Speaker 1: independent hands. So you have an overwhelming majority who do
Speaker 1: not want this independent panel being changed. If they blow
Speaker 1: it up, they're going to be going against the majority
Speaker 1: of the independence, the Republicans, the Democrats, all of them.
Speaker 1: So this is the This is under the context that
Speaker 1: you see Gavin Newsom, he literally all he's doing is
Speaker 1: trying to do it for his political ambitions, not because
Speaker 1: of what's right or what's wrong, but just to make
Speaker 1: him look good. So, by the way, Jazzy Jasmine Crockett,
Speaker 1: she says she might consider running for US Senate, which
Speaker 1: would be so cool to be like Beto Hussein O'Rourke,
Speaker 1: the cultural appropriator, who lost three times in the Great
Speaker 1: State of Texas, once for US Senate against Ted Cruz,
Speaker 1: he lost once for governor against Governor Greg he lost
Speaker 1: there too, and then another time when he ran for
Speaker 1: president and lost there too. So I want Beto Hussein O'Rourke.
Speaker 1: I call him Husseina Rourke Hussein because he's just like Obama.
Speaker 1: He's like a white version of Obama. So Beta Husseina Rourke,
Speaker 1: the cultural appropriated. I wanted to run a fourth time
Speaker 1: for a quad fecta of losses. And you know he
Speaker 1: when he went to the University of Chicago, he was
Speaker 1: so perfect he was there. I would like, I said,
Speaker 1: I was just in Chicago this past weekend, and I said,
Speaker 1: you know, he's he literally is perfect where he's at
Speaker 1: when he teaches at University of Chicago. Those are his
Speaker 1: people way more so than any Texan, which is why
Speaker 1: he cannot win in the state of Texas. But Jazzy
Speaker 1: Crockett says, the fact that I represent one thirty eighth
Speaker 1: of the state, it's daunting to think I could be
Speaker 1: competitive state wide if she ran for Senate. It's so funny.
Speaker 1: What do you mean you only represent a small part
Speaker 1: of the state. You're literally everywhere crying racism and saying
Speaker 1: swears or whatever, and you know, acting a fool. Everybody
Speaker 1: knows who you are. You have recognition, and you know that.
Speaker 1: It's too bad that she's not getting kicked out of
Speaker 1: her district. That's so funny. She'll have to run for
Speaker 1: a different district, but she'll still win. What I what
Speaker 1: I see here, Okay, I've got some people making fools
Speaker 1: of themselves with this redistrict thing. I'm gonna get to
Speaker 1: that coming up next. Also, bank executives nailed and admitting
Speaker 1: that they were debanking Conservatives, Christians Trump and his family.
Speaker 1: All that's coming up next with Chris crockn For Jesse Kelly,
Speaker 1: the inimitable Joe Walsh, there is no greater He gave
Speaker 1: the Eagles their testosterone that they never had, had plenty
Speaker 1: to give to those poor folks. The eagles, they're low
Speaker 1: te Okay, do you remember Jolanda Jones, Democrat from Houston,
Speaker 1: when she said this on the Don Lemon podcast. Let's
Speaker 1: see where she here she is and.
Speaker 2: Then integration happening. Everybody thought they accept this. They don't
Speaker 2: accept this. They are showing us who they are believe in.
Speaker 2: And we better have the curse to stand up otherwise
Speaker 2: we will fall for anything. And in this country we
Speaker 2: will be defeated, deported. I mean, we will lose all
Speaker 2: of our rights. And if you think it can't happen,
Speaker 2: it can. And I will liken this to the Holocaust.
Speaker 2: People are like, well, how did the Holocaust happen? How
Speaker 2: is somebody in a position to kill all their people? Well,
Speaker 2: good people remain silent.
Speaker 1: Redistricting is what caused the Holocaust, says democrat from Houston,
Speaker 1: Jolanda Jones. Jolanda was talking to the New York Times,
Speaker 1: or at least was quote of the New York Times yesterday.
Speaker 1: All the Democrats, well not all of them, but a
Speaker 1: quorum has taken place and they're gonna The Republicans in
Speaker 1: Texas are going to redistrict, but not Jolanda. Jolanda says today,
Speaker 1: I am not coming back. Wait a minute, you're gonna lose,
Speaker 1: and you're still not coming back. I am not coming back.
Speaker 1: The only power we have is the power to deny
Speaker 1: them at quorum. Well that's too late. So does this
Speaker 1: poor fool like does she know that there's a quorum
Speaker 1: or does she not knows a quorm even though it's
Speaker 1: been everywhere that there's gonna be, there's a quarm Now,
Speaker 1: she says, who goes to a fight where you've already lost?
Speaker 1: So does that mean she's gonna stay hiding out in
Speaker 1: some other state and abdicate her role as a Texas
Speaker 1: House member as long as the Republicans are in control
Speaker 1: or whatever? And is she going to stay for years
Speaker 1: until Democrats win, which is going to be a long
Speaker 1: long time if that happens, and it will one day,
Speaker 1: but they happen anywhere near in the state of Texas.
Speaker 1: So is she just gonna hide out in some other
Speaker 1: state for the next five, ten, twenty years? And then
Speaker 1: she says, we will lose one black seat in Houston,
Speaker 1: one black seat in Dallas. I didn't know there were
Speaker 1: black seats. There's actually black seats. She claims. It's not
Speaker 1: the people whoever they may be black, white, et cetera.
Speaker 1: They are black seats. They are allowed for no one else.
Speaker 1: I see m The New York Times saying this yesterday,
Speaker 1: with the news of the quorum being achieved, the Democrats
Speaker 1: returning home at least enough to call a korm The walkout,
Speaker 1: the New York Times says, did not change the raw
Speaker 1: political dynamics, which is the Democrats are still screwed. Democrats
Speaker 1: were made in the situation they were before they left,
Speaker 1: So it's the same situation. Oh man, are you kidding me?
Speaker 1: Ah Man, wrong button. I misfired. That's my fault. I
Speaker 1: meant to hit this one. There we go, not a goal,
Speaker 1: but a loser to But there you go, you lose. Meantime,
Speaker 1: we have this Democrat from California. It's just fun to
Speaker 1: listen to these people say, what's going to happen with redistricting.
Speaker 3: Me to preserve redistricting in the future is to make
Speaker 3: sure that that doesn't become the case. If California is
Speaker 3: if a year from now, or a month from an hour,
Speaker 3: or if a week from now, if your cousin is
Speaker 3: kidnapped off the street, if UCLA closes down, if we
Speaker 3: announce that there won't be an election, if the census
Speaker 3: that we're relying on for the Commission's next stab at
Speaker 3: redistricting doesn't include one point five million Californians in it.
Speaker 1: He's talking about the illegals. We need the illegals so
Speaker 1: we can get more seats. Trump was right. Tucker Carlson
Speaker 1: was right when they said, the replacement theory is real.
Speaker 1: I've been saying that for years. Folks that criticize us
Speaker 1: are right. It's the replacement theory. We need the one
Speaker 1: and a half million I llegals in California to have
Speaker 1: more representation, even though it's not lawful.
Speaker 3: If we have no democracy left and we look back
Speaker 3: and said, if only we could have done something, well,
Speaker 3: the nice thing about this is that we are in
Speaker 3: a time machine. We can do something. We know what
Speaker 3: is company coming because it's in pride of twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: Okay, there you go. He drank the kool aid. Cuckoo.
Speaker 1: It's a California legislator. A judge just gave yesterday, this
Speaker 1: is awesome, an expanded restraining order to betto Hussein O'Rourke,
Speaker 1: the cultural appropriator, the fake Mexican. He now was given
Speaker 1: an expanded restraining order yesterday from the judge that's handling
Speaker 1: this because his group, quote the judge, he says, well
Speaker 1: the News and the Daily Daily Mail beatos group quickly
Speaker 1: got involved, sending over one million dollars to the Texas
Speaker 1: Legislative Black Caucus and the Texas House Democrats. However, they
Speaker 1: are now they were barred and are now at barred,
Speaker 1: especially extra doubly barred by an expanded restraining order that
Speaker 1: was just handed down by a judge. They're barred from
Speaker 1: sending money out of Texas. The case was brought forward
Speaker 1: by Republican Attorney General Ken Paxson. Paxson Texas at Tony General.
Speaker 1: Harm is imminent to the state, the judge said, due
Speaker 1: to O'Rourke's fundraising conduct, it constitutes false, misleading, and deceptive
Speaker 1: acts under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The judge
Speaker 1: said that if they don't issue the order, then the
Speaker 1: state will be irreparably injured. Absolutely correct. Beto is trying
Speaker 1: to bribe people and give them political bribes and incentivizations
Speaker 1: to stay out of the state. You cannot do that.
Speaker 1: It's illegal in the state of Texas. Meantime, as you know,
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom is trying to redistrict in California. Governor Abbitt
Speaker 1: did respond saying that the GOP will eliminate up to
Speaker 1: ten of the twelve Democrat seats in the state. If
Speaker 1: California goes through with redistricting, we'll just go up to
Speaker 1: We'll eliminate all but two Democrat districts in this massive,
Speaker 1: great state of Texas. If they want to do that,
Speaker 1: we can do that. Ours is legitim and I told
Speaker 1: you why with the court case. Theirs is not. They're
Speaker 1: just reactatory. And if they do that, then we'll react
Speaker 1: to that. It'll go on and on. But here's the problem.
Speaker 1: Democrats have rigged almost every place they can rig already.
Speaker 1: They have very few to rig compared to Republicans who
Speaker 1: have not played this game. So this really really really
Speaker 1: gets me mad reading about de banking. Imagine if it
Speaker 1: was you or me imagining. Imagine if you happened to
Speaker 1: be in DC on the January sixth riot there at
Speaker 1: the Capitol. There were a lot of people that were
Speaker 1: that were in DC on January sixth that had nothing
Speaker 1: to do with what happened on January sixth, and they
Speaker 1: were d banked, they were investigated. So one banking executive
Speaker 1: told Fox News the pressures were very very real. Regulator
Speaker 1: gives you a suggestion, it's not a suggestion, it's an
Speaker 1: order of the political stuff is very real. Those pressures
Speaker 1: are real. A senior banking executives said, they're closing accounts,
Speaker 1: they're denying service. I'll get more into this coming up next. Also,
Speaker 1: a man is suing because he was kicked off a
Speaker 1: female volleyball team and lost a female volleyball scholarship at
Speaker 1: a college. He's suing. He wants me able to take
Speaker 1: away the rights of women all that. Next, Chris Crocket
Speaker 1: for Jesse Kelly for Jessic Kelly's show Excellent, excellent song
Speaker 1: and producer Chris asking me, is the who another low
Speaker 1: t Ben? Of course not? And then he got me
Speaker 1: to he got me to say that perhaps I don't
Speaker 1: like the Eagles. I just like Joe Walsh. I'll tell
Speaker 1: you I like the Eagles when they're with Joe Walsh.
Speaker 1: How's that all right? So there we have it. Okay,
Speaker 1: we have a little bit of audio of a California
Speaker 1: State Senator overseeing the effort to redistrict apparently being asked
Speaker 1: time and time and time again and simply not telling us, oh,
Speaker 1: this is this is a very clear, simple process. We
Speaker 1: can we can all, uh, it's a transparent process. But
Speaker 1: she will not answer, over four minutes, repeatedly, who actually
Speaker 1: drew the new congressional maps that they're trying to get
Speaker 1: past it.
Speaker 4: So the Rules Committee was responsible of putting the maps
Speaker 4: onto our public website, the Committee on Elections, and so
Speaker 4: that has now been posted since Friday and then adjusted
Speaker 4: on Monday per ab six. So four okay, So did
Speaker 4: this committee meet then to draw the lines? And we
Speaker 4: were just trying to ascertain who exactly is responsible for
Speaker 4: drawing these maps.
Speaker 2: At this point.
Speaker 4: So the criteria has remained the same from the CRC.
Speaker 4: Seventy six percent of the districts remain the same. And
Speaker 4: that is what Californians will see. There were many folks
Speaker 4: stakeholders who have had an input on the map drawing process,
Speaker 4: but ultimately this is up to the decision of California voters.
Speaker 4: Whereas the she.
Speaker 1: Just won't answer who drew the maps, who actually drew them.
Speaker 1: It goes on and on from the two Gosh, another
Speaker 1: three minutes, but she won't answer. Very transparent process. Oh
Speaker 1: why is it transparent because we say it's transparent. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's transparent. I see transparent transparency for dummies. Mm hmm
Speaker 1: h de banking real quick. This this is uh, this
Speaker 1: is very angering to mean.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: It's unbelievable to see that. Even Donald Trump was debanked,
Speaker 1: as you know, by JIMP Chase more JP Morgan Chase,
Speaker 1: Bank of America and others refusing his one Listen, if
Speaker 1: Trump is debanked and they don't want his one billion dollars,
Speaker 1: and Malaney and her son Baron were debanked, is debanked
Speaker 1: as well, that is insane. If if if they get
Speaker 1: kicked out and it's the former president in the United
Speaker 1: States who is now the current president obviously thank god,
Speaker 1: but if he gets kicked out with a billion dollars,
Speaker 1: we're screwed. We blink the wrong way and they're going
Speaker 1: to kick us out. And it really really angers me
Speaker 1: when I see a bank debank somebody because they're a
Speaker 1: firearm company or because they're buying firearms, or saying we
Speaker 1: won't buy firearms with our money. I don't want to
Speaker 1: give any bank my money. That does that, and they
Speaker 1: don't want to admit it. Here's one of the things though,
Speaker 1: apparently the way the laws are right now, any administration
Speaker 1: can come in and tell the bank debank them or else,
Speaker 1: and the banks say, there's nothing we can do because
Speaker 1: they could literally shut us down or ruin our company
Speaker 1: or ruin our profits or someone how just destroy their
Speaker 1: way of business. And so they it's depicted as almost
Speaker 1: something they have no choice over. Trump had an executive
Speaker 1: order to stop this, but I mean, you need a
Speaker 1: law that will surpassed this president any other president, because
Speaker 1: this is insane, absolutely insane. In the meantime, this is
Speaker 1: so awesome because it's so unbelievable and so audacious. A man,
Speaker 1: How does this saying go? You? A grown ass man?
Speaker 4: A man?
Speaker 1: A thirty three year old man who identifies as a
Speaker 1: woman is suing Westcliff University in Irvine, California, along with
Speaker 1: two athletic associations after losing his again man after losing
Speaker 1: his volleyball scholarship and being ruled ineligible to complete. He
Speaker 1: calls himself a thirty three year old latina even though
Speaker 1: he is a man, despite being a male. This is
Speaker 1: from Campus Reform he's represented by. This is so classic
Speaker 1: mald f You know Mexican American Legal Defense Education Fund,
Speaker 1: which is all about men stealing women's positions in sports.
Speaker 1: I just can't believe they have the balls, literally and figuratively,
Speaker 1: the balls to blatantly bald face sue and claim you're
Speaker 1: being victimized because you can't steal a woman's scholarship, because
Speaker 1: you can't steal a woman's position on the volleyball team.
Speaker 1: Maldof's press release says attorneys for this transgender man, a
Speaker 1: man who says he's a woman, say that he had
Speaker 1: experienced emotional distress and anxiety. It's about him. It's not
Speaker 1: about the women. No, it's about him. He's the one
Speaker 1: on a pedestal. You gotta go. These people are used
Speaker 1: to being worshiped, and so they're so agilated, so applauded,
Speaker 1: so lauded that when they actually get their butt handed
Speaker 1: themselves like it should be because they have no business
Speaker 1: stealing our daughter scholarship, our wive scholarship, our daughter, our wives,
Speaker 1: slots and sports. When they when they get kicked off,
Speaker 1: they're the victim. It's all about them so much so
Speaker 1: that they will absolutely unabashedly, unashamedly put their name on
Speaker 1: a lawsuit and go to the press and claim they're
Speaker 1: a victim. This is so wild, but this is good.
Speaker 1: Let let let the let folks see who this guy,
Speaker 1: who these folks are When I say to these folks,
Speaker 1: have been anybody would steal a woman's position and shamelessly
Speaker 1: claim they're a victim, which steal a woman's scholarship. This
Speaker 1: guy's a thief and he's a liar. They say that
Speaker 1: he exposed. This is so great experience emotional distress and anxiety.
Speaker 1: What did the world What did the woman who's uh,
Speaker 1: whose position you stole from herselle? What are the woman
Speaker 1: whose scholarship you stole from herselle? No, she doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: I matter? Okay, I see. He says his educational goals
Speaker 1: were subverted. Holy crap, because of his inability to pay tuition.
Speaker 1: So he has stress and anxiety. He's being subverted because
Speaker 1: he can't steal your daughter's scholarship, because he can't steal
Speaker 1: your daughter's slot on a team. Isn't it wild? The
Speaker 1: General consul at maldef says the Latino community, He isn't
Speaker 1: he supposed to say LATINX since he's a leftist. The TINKX,
Speaker 1: the Tink's community is often first to be targeted under
Speaker 1: practice of irrational discrimination, and this case falls within that
Speaker 1: pattern irrational discrimination. You could literally flip this because that's
Speaker 1: what's happening. He's doing these things to women. He's doing
Speaker 1: committing irrational discrimination against women. By taking a stand, I'm
Speaker 1: not just fighting for myself, he says, I'm speaking for
Speaker 1: every trans person who's been silent. Our stories and our
Speaker 1: rights matter. Good luck with that champ. He's an angry fellow. So, uh,
Speaker 1: that's just wild. That's the kind of how do you
Speaker 1: overcome this? You can't a What a sad fool that
Speaker 1: guy is? Huh Okay, let's get into Oh this is
Speaker 1: a good one. It's short but sweet. Look at this.
Speaker 1: This is from the Wall Street Journal today. Leading pediatrics
Speaker 1: group recommends COVID nineteen shot for your young child. What
Speaker 1: this is? How I mean you've known this for several
Speaker 1: years now that how far gone the American Academy of
Speaker 1: Pediatrics is. Their immunization guidelines released today recommend that COVID
Speaker 1: nineteen shots for all children ages six months through twenty
Speaker 1: three months. Did you imagine putting that crap into your
Speaker 1: child's body, your six month old child, your twenty three
Speaker 1: month old child. As of the last time I checked,
Speaker 1: now one child has died from COVID, and that's obviously
Speaker 1: when you don't have a comor better. They're just a healthy,
Speaker 1: average child. They don't die and cod They never do,
Speaker 1: They never have. I've never heard of it once. Children
Speaker 1: in that age group six months to twenty three months
Speaker 1: old are particularly vulnerable to COVID nineteen severe COVID nineteen
Speaker 1: infections that the vaccines would help protect them against serious illness.
Speaker 1: The American Academy of Pediatrics says, I will not trust
Speaker 1: anything or do anything they say. I can't believe they're
Speaker 1: saying that crap. Who do they? I guess they must
Speaker 1: read the transgender guy's lawsuit and feel bad for him,
Speaker 1: and the trans gender guy must read that and agree
Speaker 1: with them. They're I got on their own planet. Now.
Speaker 1: Coming up next, I'm going to tell you exactly why
Speaker 1: the Democrats wanted Trump and jail. Why do the Democrats
Speaker 1: try so hard for so many years to put Trump
Speaker 1: in jail? It's because I'm of what I'm i about
Speaker 1: to tell you. Coming up, next. What I'm about to say,
Speaker 1: what I'm about to tell you up coming up next
Speaker 1: is exactly why they wanted to put him in jail
Speaker 1: for song, and they're so angry they couldn't because of
Speaker 1: all effective he is. I'll explain. Coming up next, it's
Speaker 1: Chris crock And for Jesse Kelly on the Jesse Kelly Show,
Speaker 1: Jesse Kelly Show, Chris croc Million on Jesse Kelly's program
Speaker 1: all over the country. Okay, here we are inside the
Speaker 1: DNC's money problems. So I read this. I'm going to
Speaker 1: read some of the highlights to you. But this is
Speaker 1: exactly why the Democrats wanted to put Trump in jail
Speaker 1: for so long and have been trying and trying and trying.
Speaker 1: They knew how much of a threat he was and
Speaker 1: is to them. They literally saw him as a massive
Speaker 1: threat before I did. In other words, they saw something
Speaker 1: in Trump that many of us, or at least I'll
Speaker 1: just say for me me, didn't see earlier on. They
Speaker 1: recognized how great of her president he would become, and
Speaker 1: so they sought to destroy him. If he wasn't a threat,
Speaker 1: they wouldn't have done this. He represents that much of
Speaker 1: a threat to the Democrat Party and to the status
Speaker 1: quo and your example of why they wanted the film
Speaker 1: in jail cell Ballet look at us from the politico
Speaker 1: Inside the DNC's money problems. Here's just a few highlights
Speaker 1: from this three or four page piece. The DNC wildly
Speaker 1: betrayals the Republican National Committee in by nearly every fundraising metric.
Speaker 1: By the end of June, RNC had eighty million compared
Speaker 1: to only fifteen million for the DNC, The gap nearly
Speaker 1: twice as large as it was at this stage in
Speaker 1: Trump's first presidency. Whoo doggie, you better put that man
Speaker 1: in jail, including spending more than fifteen million this year
Speaker 1: that Democrats had to on Kamala's presidential campaigns. They're still
Speaker 1: paying they. I think they gave a million dollars last
Speaker 1: month alone to continue to try to pay off this
Speaker 1: woman's profitlygate spending. The DNC had less cash this summer
Speaker 1: than they did in any point over the last five years.
Speaker 1: The DNC's money woes stand in star contrast to the
Speaker 1: Republicans who have leveraged Trump's fundraising prowess to raise records.
Speaker 1: Sums gotta jail him. He's doing two he's succeeding too much.
Speaker 1: They can't beat him. If you can't beat him, throw
Speaker 1: them in jail, they say. Don't see the DNC as rudderless,
Speaker 1: off message and leaderless, says the political Still, the longer
Speaker 1: the DNC struggles to build up cash, the harder will
Speaker 1: be to close that gap heading into the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: six midterms and beyond. Just listen to this. Just forty
Speaker 1: seven donors gave the maximum contribution to the DNC in
Speaker 1: the first half of this year, compared to one one
Speaker 1: hundred and thirty over the same period in twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1: You're literally they went from one hundred and thirty maximum
Speaker 1: contribution donors from one thirty to forty seven four years
Speaker 1: later under Trump right now, Wow, So there you have it.
Speaker 1: That's why they gotta throw him in jail. He's just
Speaker 1: winning too much. This is so much fun to watch
Speaker 1: MSNBC be stripped of everything, denuded in front of the world,
Speaker 1: in front of all the American people. I love how
Speaker 1: they've lost their ms NBC ties. All the reporters from
Speaker 1: fake news NBC like Andrew Mitchell, who just an over
Speaker 1: raging leftist, over the top comically left Andrea whatever her
Speaker 1: name is, it came I just had, I just said it.
Speaker 1: What's your name? Andrew Mitchell? They lose all these NBC reporters.
Speaker 1: They're scrambling to try to get reporters. But the funniest
Speaker 1: thing in the world is, well, we didn't lose our
Speaker 1: ms NBC because of anything bad, just rebranding. It's ms now,
Speaker 1: my source for news ms now. Woo woo wow. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's all. That's great. It's catchy, very catchy. But you
Speaker 1: know who didn't lose the NBC moniker? Do you know
Speaker 1: who's not being denuded, spanked, stripped, and uh and uh
Speaker 1: defrocked CNBC. Oh, they'll say, well, well that was originally
Speaker 1: the consumer News and Business Channel. No, no, no, no, no, no.
Speaker 1: CNBC is affiliated with NBC and we all know it.
Speaker 1: CNBC gets to keep its name c NBC. Why because
Speaker 1: they don't embarrass people that own them, CNBC says, did
Speaker 1: they get to keep it? The new logo ms now
Speaker 1: is notably missing the peacock imagery of NBC News, which
Speaker 1: has become fairly useless, really useless. So here we go. Also,
Speaker 1: guess what else they're being kicked out of? Thirty Rock
Speaker 1: and fell applause. They're scrambling to get some studio that's
Speaker 1: gonna be temporary. They're gonna be They're gonna be moved
Speaker 1: some temporary studio out of thirty Rock, and then after
Speaker 1: that they have to get some other play. This is
Speaker 1: just so funny. They've lost the peacock, they've lost thirty Rock,
Speaker 1: they've lost the talent, and they've lost the name. There
Speaker 1: you go, that's a victory for us, that's fun. Here
Speaker 1: you go, enjoy it, or a victory for them. I
Speaker 1: guess whatever. Former president Whosain Obama? I literally didn't fully
Speaker 1: realize that aberration that is going up into the sky
Speaker 1: was his library. It's so embarrassing. It looks like some
Speaker 1: kind of a spaceship. It's horrifying. The people of this
Speaker 1: predominantly African American neighborhood are in rage. They have been
Speaker 1: for some years. Remember these They were chaining themselves to
Speaker 1: the gate and all this kind of stuff, trying to
Speaker 1: stop it. But here we go. Folks criticizing this are saying,
Speaker 1: here's an older woman who represents much of that working
Speaker 1: class neighborhood. Fox News says every time large development comes
Speaker 1: to communities, they displace the very people they want to
Speaker 1: improve it for. This is no different we're living in
Speaker 1: is exactly what is happening. We're going to see rents
Speaker 1: go higher, We're going to see families displaced. That's all right,
Speaker 1: as long as mister Hussein Obama gets his library, which
Speaker 1: by the way, has gone massively, massively over budget. The
Speaker 1: estimate in twenty twenty one, I'm sorry, the estimate when
Speaker 1: it was bought is three hundred and thirty million was
Speaker 1: estimate to build the estimated to build Hussein Obama's library.
Speaker 1: It has now gone from three hundred and thirty million
Speaker 1: to eight hundred and thirty million. Yes he's a Democrat,
Speaker 1: Yes he's a liberal. Yes, yes, three hundred thirty million. No,
Speaker 1: eight hundred and thirty million. It's more than double. He
Speaker 1: added five hundred million dollars to the project. He's like
Speaker 1: Jerome Powell. Hey, he should be our next Treasury secretary. Huh.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 1: One man that grew up in the area called it
Speaker 1: a monstrosity, says Fox. Dude, all right til next time,
Speaker 1: So long. Jesse Kelly Show