Speaker 1: And here we go. Welcome to the Big Podcast on
this Wednesday. Today is the twenty ninth day of July,
year of our Lord, twenty twenty six. My name is
Tom Sullivan. And busy day, busy, busy, busy day. We've got.
Oh you don't want, do not open your bank statement,
just don't. It was an ugly day on Wall Street.
Today we've got The FED also had their meeting, second
meeting which Kevin Walsh sat as Chairman of the FED,
and they left interest rates unchanged at three point five
to three point seventy five on the federal funds rate.
So Wall Street tanked on that it was already down,
it was already down. But at two o'clock when the
announcement came out that they were leaving interest rates unchanged,
a lot of the market sold off. A lot of
people are very concerned that inflation not only is above
the Fed's target. And Kevin watsh keeps talking about the
fact that we are going to make sure that that
we're going to tackle that inflation. I mean, he's talking tough,
but they left it unchanged. Now, there are twelve people
that make the vote, but it was three of the
federal Reserve. Open Market Committee members voted to hike interest rates.
And if you think inflation is growing and getting out
of control, you hike interest rates to slow down the economy.
That's that's the proper reaction. And yet they left it unchanged,
which a lot of people on Wall Street are going,
Oh my gosh, the Fed is going to fall behind
on fighting inflation, and inflation is just going to keep growing.
So yeah, three and a half to three point seventy
five is the federal funds rate the thirty year treasury
the highest yield since Liberation Day back in April twenty
twenty five. It's five point two percent for a thirty
year treasure government treasury treasure bon So that's what the
concern is. So Wall Street doesn't like it. We'll get
to the numbers here in just a minute. The big,
the big drama of the day, and I emphasized drama,
was the hearing by Rand Paul Senator and Paul of
doctor Fauci, and he was there was there's a lot
going on there. I don't know where you sit. This
is supposed to be somehow, It is supposed to be
a political that if you are a Republican, you do
not like doctor Fauci. If you're a Democrat, you love
doctor Fauci. That's kind of the overwhelming political thing, you know,
in political press. I'm looking at it and going, well,
I always want to believe science over a politician. So
I'll listen to a doctor before I listen to a
member of Congress when it comes to things like health,
like COVID and yes, here we are twenty twenty six,
and you go, oh, wait a minute, have that was
a long time ago. It's been five plus years and
ran Paul, So anyway, let me stay with doctor Fauci.
So Fauci is slippery guy. He's not your average doctor.
He is they I still don't know how Ran Paul
got hold of Fauci's eleven hundred page diary. But in
the diary he was writing his personal thoughts about all
things COVID, and they were the complete opposite of what
he was saying publicly. So it appears that he was
lying to us. And there's you know, the stuff in
there about the fact that he really thought that he
really wrote that he thought that he was the most
important person in the United States and that he is
now a global celebrity. So he was all taken away
with the globe man. Did the camera bug bite him? Absolutely?
So I'm going Fauci doesn't seem like the kind of
character I would put a lot of faith in. But
then again, Ran Paul Man, he's a piece of work too.
I mean, this guy, he's a hothead. He has a
reputation for being a hot head. He I mean the
story about his neighbor came over and they got into
a physical fight and Ran Paul had broken ribs and
a bunch. I mean, he's that kind of guy. He
is one hothead and he's got a thing. He's a
medical doctor. I believe he's an ophthalmologist, but still, you know,
he had had to go through medical school, so he's
not an infectious disease expert like Fauci. But he has
had a hard spot for doctor Fauci for the last
five plus years and it came out big today. So here,
let me let me play for you the essence of
what happened during this big hearing with doctor Fauci.
Speaker 2: No function.
Speaker 3: Research on monkey poks being conducted at the National Biodefense
Analysis and Countermeasure Center and back at Fort Detrick.
Speaker 4: On the Advisive Council, I respectfully declined to answer based
upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
Speaker 3: Doctor Fauci, did the CIA ever transfer funds to NIH
under an interagency agreement?
Speaker 1: On the Advisive Council?
Speaker 4: I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under
the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
Speaker 3: Ardra Fauci, did the NIH ever conduct research for or
in coordination with any element of the Intelligence Community CIA ODNI.
Speaker 1: On the Advisive Council?
Speaker 4: I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under
the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
Speaker 1: I mean, you get the you get the idea, right
that that went on, that went on. Somebody kept track that.
He said the Fifth Amendment thing one hundred and eleven times. Yeah,
so yeah, somebody kept track of it. And so wait,
it went nowhere. And as a result, the members of
the Senate on this committee that we're sitting there, they
weren't going to get any answers, so they just did
what they loved to do anyway, which was given They
have five minute windows they give they gave five minute speeches.
I mean, I was I was watching this one Senator
Margaret his song from New Hampshire, and she used her
she's a Democrat, she used her tire entire time to lecture.
Fauci didn't ask one question, well, no reason to ask
a question. So it was it was it was everybody
knew this was going to happen. So this was all
a performance. This was all theater. It did not get
one thing. We did not learn one thing out of
this hearing. And what it kind of showed, it wasn't
right down the line. But it's basically, like I said, Republicans,
you're supposed to hate Pauci. Democrats you're supposed to love Fauci,
but that's not universal. But he seems like a bad character.
Fauci does and Ran Paul seems like he is obsessed,
which doctor Fauci said in his opening statement here he is.
Speaker 4: Member Peters, members of the committee. I served at the
NIH for over fifty four years, thirty eight of those
as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
Over that period, I proved that I believe in and
respect the value of legitimate congressional oversight. In fact, I
testified before and or briefed Senate and House Congressional Senate
and House committees well over two hundred times over those
thirty eight years. During and after the COVID pandemic, I
have appeared multiple times for hearings in the Senate and
the House, usually under oath, and sat for several days long,
transcribed sworn interviews answering questions about the very issues that
are now the subject of this hearing. However, given Senator
Paul's obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution, his repeated
slanderous comments about me, and recently his publicly releasing my
unredacted personal diary aimed at embarrassing and intimidating me, the
only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason
he is calling me before this committee is to get
me to say something, anything that could vindicate his repeated
public pledges that I end up, in his words quote
behind bars.
Speaker 1: Well, yes, that's true. That's exactly what rand Paul has
said again today too. He wants him in jail the
worst way. So listen to this. So that was the
only thing you heard from doctor Fauchi. He gave his
a little opening statement. It went about a minute, and
sitting at the table with him was his attorney, and
there were a whole bunch of people behind him sitting
in the galley, and they well, it became a problem
for Rand Paul that the attorney was sitting next to
and listen to thiss.
Speaker 3: By today Center Beaters. You're not recognized, You're not recognized.
If you are unruly, you will be removed from the proceeding.
You are not you are not recognized, and you you
are not recognized, sir, sir, you are not recognized. You
are not recognized. Security, we'll, we'll, we'll hold off, but
you will respect these proceedings. You were told not to
sit at the table. You insist on sitting at the table,
and we told you you would not be recognized. You
are not invited here for testimony. Sir, you are being disruptive.
Would you behave this way in a courtroom? No, because
the judge would put you in jail. I can't do
that today, but I can have you escorted from the premises.
So I would say, sir, sit quietly and don't say
another word. I said, sit quietly, you are not recognized.
Speaker 5: Another word and you're gone, Swister, Chairman, I'd like to
hear what the attorney has to say.
Speaker 3: He's not recognized by the committee or the chair. If
he speaks again, he will be removed from the room.
This testimony is from Anthony Fauci. This is not a
game with his lawyers. He can advise, his lawyers can
give him advice. He's got a half dozen here. They're
all allowed to talk to him. Yes, all right, but
the attorneys are not recognized. In fact, the attorney was
told not to sit at the table and he's not
obeying that recommendation. There's a row behind you, sir, that's
where you were told to sit, and you're not. And
now you're disrupting the proceedings. And so look, this is
the way Anthony Fauci wants to be remembered. For a lawyer,
not listening to the rules, that's the way you want
to be remembered. And that's where you're going to do.
You are not recognized, sir. Security police it in from
the room.
Speaker 1: I just opened there.
Speaker 2: So you think, yeah, let the record state that doctor
Fausci will still have the advice of the other half
a dozen attorneys that he brought along today.
Speaker 1: Senator Peters, Oh, you talk about performance, Well, they and
the attorney while the attorney was being a jerk in
my humble opinion, and so later they caught him in
the hallway. They ran out there and wanted to find
out what why were you still tried to talk when
you ever told you weren't supposed to even say at
the table. And this is what the attorney said, have
you ever.
Speaker 6: Seen this happen in a congressional hearing?
Speaker 7: He has a valid Fifth Amendment privilege and he has
the right to assert it.
Speaker 1: That's what you were trying to say. That's what I
was trying to tell the committee.
Speaker 6: And obviously I've covered a lot of these hearings on
Capitol Hill, very very tense moment there. And despite the
fact that I've covered a number of these hearings, I've
even covered a number of really fiery hearings where Senator
Ran Paul was the chairman. I have never seen a
lawyer of someone kicked out of the room. Obviously, that
was an extremely, extremely fiery moment that you saw there.
Repeatedly throughout the last hour and a half, Doctor Fauci
has just continued to plead the fifth whether that was
a question about his time leading the coronavirus response in
this country, or whether it was a question that was
as simple as what the color of the room was.
He continued to argue, he was pleading the fifth on
the advice of Council. It was an extreme, extremely tense hearing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, the attorney was that was stupid because what
he was trying to say, he said, was I wanted
to let the committee know that the doctor Fouchi had
the right to the Fifth Amendment. Well we all know that,
mister attorney. It was pretty obvious right out of the gate.
So you did not need to do that, and you
did violate what the chairman of the committee said is
you couldn't sit at the table with him. So it
was everybody, everybody in this thing is just kind of
like a capital jay jerk. In my opinion, Fauci, you
can't trust him. Ran Paul is a hot heead. The
attorney is just out of line. And that's what happened
on That's what our lawmakers are, the leaders of our
country are working on today in dc AH. But there's more, Yes,
you ask, this is about Todd Blanche. So Todd Blanche
wants to be the attorney general. They he went through
the Judiciary Committee and had his hearing and everything else,
and they're right down now to wear the vote on
whether to go ahead and make him the nominee, to
approve his nomination. That would then go on to the
floor of the of the Senate, but the committee, since
Lindsey Graham was one of the members of the committee,
without him there, the Republicans have one vote majority over
the Democrats. The Democrats are already said they're going to
vote one hundred percent against Todd blanche to be the
attorney general. On the Republican side, there's a problem. There's
two members there that are well one member of the
Judiciary Committee, and that would be John Cornyn. And John
Cornyan was one of those who was rail wrote it
by President Trump. He said, I want Ken Paxton instead
of John Cornyn to I will, I will sponsor, I
will give my emperador John to Ken Paxton for the
Texas Senate nomination. And so Ken Paxton won and John
Cornyn lost, which means he's done. At the end of
this year, he is no longer a Senator and he
goes home. So he has a bad chip on his
shoulder for the president. And President Trump was warned at
the time. John Cornyn is a very well liked senator
on Capitol Hill, not only among Republicans but everybody. Apparently
a super nice guy. Everybody likes him, so he got
the shaft and a lot of senators don't like it. Well,
one senator that doesn't like it is John Cornyn. And
President Trump was told, you're going to need John Cornyn
in your corner to get a lot of this stuff
done that you want to get done. And the President
ignored that advice and went for Ken Paxton. Well, this
is where it's blowing back at the President. Cornan today
was out in the hallway and there was a bunch
of reporters that cornered him because the deadline for the
Judiciary Committee to vote on whether to pass Todd Blanche's nomination. Well,
the deadline was four o'clock this afternoon and the vote
is supposed to take place tomorrow morning. But in the
hallway here's John Cornyn saying, all I want from the
Department of Justice is remember that weaponization built for one
point eight billion dollars at the President wanted, and Todd
Blanche wrote up that piece of legislation from one point
eight billion dollars and the money was going to go
to anybody who was treated badly by the government, but
it was specifically for the Jan sixth people, and a
lot of people in this country said no, no, that's
too far. But it got publicity. And so there's Blanche
testify and was asked about it, and he said, no,
we've already dropped it. We're not going to do that
anti weaponization bill. And he was asked a couple different
ways by a couple different people, and he kept saying, no,
it's dead, it's gone, it's over. Well, what John Cornyn
wants is he wants that in writing. He doesn't trust
President Trump, he doesn't trust Todd Blanche. He wants it
in writing, and he wants it in writing before he
will vote for Todd Blanche. So from there, let's pick
up the conversation and in the hallway.
Speaker 8: Todd Blanch is off. We made clear from the outset
that we expected some written proposals to modify the release
that was signed in the tax dispute with President Trump
and his and his organization. It's clear President Trump was wronged. Obviously,
the guy who leaked the information is now in prison
violating the law. But the scope of the release is
really the problem. And as you sought heard during the
During the hearing, I asked him, for example, that is
this intended to release people who are not parties to
this lawsuit? He said no. I said, well the audit
protection of about future audists. Is this intended to apply
to anyone other than the parties to the lawsuit? And
is it retroactive? He said yes, it's not. Does to
provide prospective immunity from tax audits. And then third, I said,
is this intended to apply to anyone other than the
defendants and the lawsuit, which are the I R S
and the Treasury and not other federal agencies? And he
said yes. To me, it's pretty simple. They could state
that in a modified release form and that would be
responsive to my request. But for some reason, I don't
know whether it's the staff of the DOJ or who
it is, but they simply they know what they need
to do, but they simply refuse to do it.
Speaker 9: So are you a no?
Speaker 1: Are you in no tomorrow? If it's come to a vote.
Speaker 8: Well, Senator Grassi tells me that we need to know
by four o'clock this afternoon whether the markup is still on,
So we still got a little time and hopefully they
now recognize the seriousness of this and will be be responded.
Speaker 10: If it so stands as it is now, if it
stands now, if it stands that it is now right now, would.
Speaker 4: You vote no?
Speaker 8: I'm not prepared to vote yes. Let me let me
put it that.
Speaker 11: Would you recommend did you recommend a Chairman Grass lead
that tomorrow's vote is postponed to allow for more time
for discussions?
Speaker 8: We still got uh, we still got what about another
five or six hours? That's plenty of learning. There's plenty
of time to resolve this. But there's also a you know,
there's no real need to have a meeting if they
will just produce the documentation that we've requested and it's
and that he testified to under oath during his hearing.
Speaker 9: What was the proposal they submitted today?
Speaker 1: What was this President?
Speaker 6: Is that the Department of Justice did submit some records
to today or some draft?
Speaker 1: Is there a reason why what they submitted was not?
Speaker 8: I haven't seen a single piece of writing that is
responsive to whatever requestion.
Speaker 1: What if they send you, what are they sent you?
What are they sent you to you? At all? Have
they communicated to you at all?
Speaker 8: They've been there've been a lot of back and forth
with my staff. I don't know whether it's just the
reluctance of the DOJ staff to deal with this. You know,
I'm uh so, I'm I'm open to it if they
will just simply be responsible.
Speaker 1: For you've you've been center.
Speaker 10: Do you think the president has an issue with taking
this off the table?
Speaker 9: Some of the reporting that we have done indicates that
the President really wanted this text deal, and so did
his family.
Speaker 1: Do you think ultimately this is an issue for.
Speaker 8: Well, I can see I can see why he wants
wants it because it provides immunity from audits that no
other taxpayer could possibly get. And that's why we need
to conform the actual document to what Todd blanche testiflied
to do under.
Speaker 1: Oath so you can see what's going on. He wants
in writing what Todd blanz testified to that the one
point eight billion dollar slush fund that would be used
for the jan six people would be would he said,
it's but he wants it in writing, and he also
wants the fact that the president was going to get
special treatment by not having any audits done by the
IRS for anything in the past revolve regarding the Trump family,
Trump Organization all that, and he wants that in writing too,
and the Justice Department won't do it, which makes people think.
And then the report, some of the reporters said, well,
the President, apparently, behind closed doors, still wants that slush
fund and still wants to be immune from audits. So
even though Todd Blanche said that that's all been dropped,
apparently the president is still pushing for it behind closed doors.
So that's why John Cornyn wants it in writing. Besides
that he's got a bone to pick with Donald Trump.
And Trump was warned that this would be the problem
if he did not endorse Cornyn for the Texas Senate nomination,
and he did not, and now this is all blowing
back on him. So a lot of theater today, and
that's what people in Washington are wringing their hands about.
The DSA. The Democrat Socialist of America I a little
bit more on that. Today. We got the national co
chair of the Democrat Socialist of America gave an interview
and apparently it's having quite a bit of impact on people.
Here's the Democrat Socialist of America co chairman.
Speaker 11: Well, the Senate is an anachronistic institution. It comes from
the British House of Lords. It is made to protect power.
For you know, the Senate was part of the system
that was made to make sure that the people didn't
have too much of us. Say so, we want to
expand Congress significantly, but make it a unicameral legislature.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's just one of the things they wanted to do.
They wanted to do away with the the Senate. So
John Kennedy, the Senator from Louisiana, was asked about her statement.
Speaker 7: Well, I listened to the interview. My jaw is is
still stuck on the floor. I guess it's not a
news flash that the Graham Platner wing of the Democratic
Party is in control.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 7: They seem to be concentrated in deep blue jurisdictions. They
say things that would get them a psychiatric evaluation and
the rest of the country. At first, I thought, well,
these people are just misinformed, for they're the product of
fifty years of high school civics being taught by football coaches.
But then I realized there they're serious. They're serious as
an aneurism. They want to, I don't know, kill all
the millionaires, open all the prisons open, the mortars, defund
the cops defund ice. Every single one of them knows
the words to the Cuban national anthem.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 7: They're all socialists. Socialism, I think history is proven is
for morons. Don't take my word for it. Just look
at Cuba and Argentina before changes there, Venezuela, China, the
old uss Are. I noticed that all of these neo socialists,
they don't they don't want to go live in a
socialist country. They want to live here. I think I
just can't imagine them in charge of the United States
of America. If these people ever do get in charge,
we we we might as well, you know, turn out
the lights and make sure the cats inside and go
to bed because it's over.
Speaker 1: That's John Kennedy classic about the Democrat socialists of America.
The war is well, surprise, surprise, the pause. I guess
it doesn't translate well the word pause into Farsi, because
overnight last night the Iranians sent all kinds of missiles,
five of them into Jordan. They were intercepted, thank goodness,
but they're trying to hit US bases and they are
They're going to keep on going on attacking us. We
may not, the president may not want to continue military strikes,
but Iran does. And the President Lake this afternoon made
these comments about what we're doing. He thinks it's I
don't get this at all. He thinks it's our turn
to fire back.
Speaker 10: So we had five rocket shot going eighty five hundred
miles an hour, and all five rockets were knocked down
to the ground, but they nevertheless took a shot. So
it's our turn, and we'll see if we get there
with an agreement at some point, but we're going to
hit them very high.
Speaker 1: Still looking for that agreement. I'm not looking for an agreement.
I know I've gone total hawk on all this. I'm
looking for taking out the regime. Now, there are reports
that the attacks that they fired at us, we fired
back at them, and that there may be some of
the leaders of Iran that were taken out in our
response to their attack. Not only was it U was
but also the Saudis were involved in attacking back. And
there was a location in a rock where some of
these Iranian missiles are being launched from. So they have
some operation in the country of Iraq and that now
has been involved. So is the war spreading Saudi Arabia,
Iraq in addition to Israel, the US and Iran and
who knows where else next. So stand by because the
president says it's our turn. This isn't. He doesn't have
a war mentality. He just doesn't. It's I don't know
what you want to call it, but it is not
a warrior mentality. And that's not him. It just isn't.
But I know there's a bunch of warriors that are
working for him, that are going crazy. Here's Admiral Robert
Harward reacting to all of this.
Speaker 9: How didnthor You're seeing the pressure build on Iran on
all fronts in this attack, but you're also seeing up
in Lebanon, you see the Lebanese government making an agreement
with Israel to undermine and try to get rid of Hezbala.
You've seeing the British rolling contribute ships to the blockade.
You've seeing other countries rolling to go after the Huthis.
So the pressure's building tremendously in Iran and you're so
to see some of the breaking points there and the
executions in Isfahan yesterday the people came out to protest
and they had to shoot him death to prevent them
from overwhelming the execution team. So the pressure in Iran
is building and we could see a tipping point coming
here on the not too distant future.
Speaker 1: So very optimistic military man who thinks that this is
all going to come to fruition, Well, Wall Street, I
tried to hold off. I told you that there's a
whole bunch going on. First of all, the fact that
the war has all of a sudden picked up. That
led the market lower right out of the gate this morning.
We were down a couple of hundred points, and then
the Fed came out and said we're not going to
make any change in infrast rates, and that caused a
huge sell off. The Dow finished down one thousand, one
hundred and fifty three points to fifty one thousand and
five ninety four, the S and P down one hundred
and twelve, the Nasdaq down four hundred and thirty three.
The price of gold up twelve dollars to four thousand
and fifty one, and oil going back up again. Once
you start shooting back and forth, oil price is up
five dollars and fifty cents, just about eighty five dollars
now for one barrel of West Texas Intermediate. So that's
it for today. Thank you for coming by. We will
be back tomorrow. I hope to see you then