[MUSIC]
Now, it's Red Eye Radio, Gary McNamara, and Eric Hurley,
“talk about everything from politics to social issues,”
whether you're up late or you're just starting your day. Welcome to the show from the Relief Factor Studios. This is Red Eye Radio. All across America, we are when I radio. He is currently an I'm Gary McNamara.
Just a quick look at the radar. Yeah. The weather radar. Wow, that goes all the way up. Look at that all the way up through the Midwest.
Look at that. Wow. That's a pretty big system, isn't it? Yeah. Yeah, spring is here, huh?
Yeah. I walked out the other day. And I felt like what's his name in Twister? When he walks out, and he just sort of looks at the sky, and sniffs a little bit and go, "Uh-oh."
Yeah. When I walked out-- Yeah, Bill Paxton. Yeah, Bill Paxton. Yeah.
It was not tonight, but last night. Yeah. When I went to go to work and I went, I couldn't feel the humidity. And just a very quick funny story. Hmm.
So I go to sleep probably around 20 to 6. Hmm. People know I sleep twice a day. And I usually sleep like anywhere between five, just between five and six. I go to sleep and wake up at about 10.
So at 11 minutes after six, I am just-- I'm walking up because it just was boom. I mean, the rain, my pond behind us went up about 7.8 feet in three minutes.
“And that's how hard it was-- I could not tell the difference”
between the rain and the hail. Hmm. It was just a beat down, but it only lasted about 11 to 12 minutes. It was done. Hmm.
Okay. So it took me about, you know, just because you're-- I'll be sitting your amped up. It took me a few-- probably took me about 40 minutes to go back to sleep again. So I go back to sleep and I have this dream that I'm at work.
And we're getting hit with rain and all that stuff. And we walk out to our cars, your trucks there. Everybody else's vehicles there. All the other vehicles that are around this building are there. Yeah.
My car's gone. And we figured it got washed away by the rain. Yeah. It was a huge flood. Right.
And so I'm looking all around the building and everything else and I'm getting frustrated. So frustrated that I wake up again. I wake up and I went, oh. Maybe I should go back to sleep again and see if I can find my vehicle.
I go back to sleep and for the first time in my life, the dream continues. I've had that happen a couple of times.
I've never had that happen.
Yeah. And I got all frustrated again. And I remember then where we worked. There was like a downtown area. And I'm walking down there in alleyways.
And looking getting all frustrated and going, what do I do? I don't have a vehicle. Yeah, my other ones had home, but what do I-- And I woke up again.
And I thought to myself, oh. The vehicles in the garage go back to sleep. I went to sleep woke up in my apartment. I had this dream that I was on this island. And I was alone.
But I didn't feel like I was stranded on the island. And I woke up and I thought, well, I was weird. I went back to sleep. And the dream resumed. And I'm like, this is weird.
I'm sitting there on the beach. Again, it was like I was on this weird vacation where I chose to go to an island. All alone or something because it didn't feel like I was stranded on the island. And then next thing, you know, a little fat guy, a named Skipper, walks up and calls me a little buddy,
and tells me the ginger and Marianna waiting on me to bring some coconuts in. You do remind me of Gilligan. Yeah, sometimes. Yeah. All right.
Right to it. All right. Man where the Republicans--
“The Republicans were prepared for a Taloreco win, weren't they?”
Oh, I think so, yeah. I'm social media. Yes, I woke up and it was like, wow. Yeah. Every, well, not every.
They'll find more. But every post that they, you know, put out on him was one of his radical statements. Yeah.
I had never heard this one before.
You ready for this one? All right. All right. Here he is. This is a Taloreco.
The Committee on Public Education. Here in Texas, here he is, okay? All right. Ready for this? There we go.
I want to talk to you. Where is that modern science? Obviously recognizes that there are many more than two biological sexes. In fact, there are six. Which, honestly, it revs in rough happiness.
You'll let that one go. Did he say six?
Six.
Wow.
He's not going to make it long as a liberal radical.
There aren't just six.
“Remember, Facebook years ago, identified.”
Was it 57? Yeah. Yeah. So, remember Biden, we burst out laughing when Biden said they're three. And we're like, you can do that.
Someone had a campaign stop. And it's one of these where, you know, you're mixing with the folks. And you're telling them stories about corn pop. And someone shout out, "Hey, Joe, how many genders are there?"
And he goes, "Three." He's like, "Ooh." Wrong answer. You can't be a radical and say just three.
You can't be a radical and say just six.
How dare you? Some of the analysis I saw out there I thought was just wrong. And it was the analysis that you see Democrats and Texas are smart. They realize that the radical and the flame thrower is a Jasmine Crocket. And they need to get rid of her.
They need to moderate a little bit. Yeah. That's not what happened here. No. They viewed her.
Yeah. Is the flame thrower part of it correct? Yes.
“But the fact is he's just as radical as she is.”
Democrats are just looking for somebody. The new face, the new young face that they believe can sell all the insane ideas.
Like right there with Tallarico where he said, "Uh, modern science obviously recognizes
that there are more, many more than two biological sexes in fact there are six." You know what the thing about Jasmine Crocket and I was thinking about it because some of her videos, you know, remember the dancing video and the hallway thing. You know, let's you put on TikTok. She's a radical but she's silly about it.
If you listen to Tallarico, this dude's being all serious. You know what I mean? Yeah. He's not trying to make a viral moment of himself dancing in the hallway and doing stupid things. He's being serious about the radical points that that the far left wants to be made.
That's, you know, if you like it. That's great. That's a great way to put it. He's being serious. Yeah.
And he's actually campaigning this way. She's doing selfies and dancing and trying to get people to laugh about things. And it's not, it's not, she's not taken seriously at all. I think that was probably part of the feedback because I noticed that in her ads. They were trying to make her look very serious and, you know, very contemplative.
And, you know, she's someone who thinks things through. Well, if you listen to Tallarico, this guy's seriously radical, seriously radical. This is somebody who's going to state it as if it's fact. What you just heard, he's skating in as if it's fact. He's not playing games here and they see her as playing games being silly.
Trying to make it about her. And he's trying to pretend that he's a Christian. Yes. Right. They've tried to pretend.
“And that's, they looked at that and said, well, that's what we want.”
We want the person who is a serious insane radical. Yeah. Who will pretend that he's a Christian. Right. Because that itself is laughable.
And make up stuff as he goes along. Yep. About Christianity and the Bible. Right. And, and that's that right.
And then, and trying to build credibility because it's his father's a minister. Yeah. You're, you're not going to win. It doesn't matter that your father is a minister. You clearly don't know.
You clearly are out of line. And you are clearly a radical. And on this serious tone. And here's the thing. If you think if you listen to Toleriko.
He's on the points that even a Gavin Newsom kind of hedges on. Well, I know that. And it gives his Bible head going during an interview because he can't talk about boys. Men in women's locker rooms in a serious way. Toleriko gets straight to the point.
Toleriko for the left, for the radicals is the guy that someone like a David Hogg was talking about. When David Hogg, you know, for that 10 minutes he was at the D and C. But David Hogg was saying, we need people in my age group. He's under 30, I don't know if he's turned 30 yet. But in that age group that 18 to 30, 18 to 35 age group.
They're not showing up. We need them to show up. We need to motivate them. Well, this guy, Toleriko.
This is guy.
He's on a serious radical mission.
No more of the silliness. And I think they look at AOCs the same. I think they look at AOC. I think that there was probably some growing sentiment about. Those people can't be taken seriously.
If you listen to Toleriko, he can be taken. You and I laugh at what he's saying because it is laughable. It's horrendous. But from their perspective, from the radical left's perspective, what they want to build out for their party.
Toleriko is the guy who can go up there and it's not going to, you know, himha on committing whether or not, you know, it's whatever gender. He says six genders. Again, I think that's a problem. Six is enough.
But if you listen to his tone, if you listen to his tone, he's on the radical mission. He's very serious about it. It's, we, we've said where where is the conviction? What, what that serious tone demonstrates is that his convictions lie. I mean, squarely with the radicals of today.
“And that's what the party is looking for.”
They need people who can come in and not back down in an interview. Not try and moderate in an interview. And remember, there were some that were calling Toleriko the moderate. Yeah. Six genders.
Now, now that is moderate compared to the 57 genders, I guess. Is that compromise? But that's, that's what they're, what they're looking for. They're looking for somebody who's not going to go, well, you know, it's a complicated newsroom on that one interview.
It is very complicated.
And then they finally got him to say, well, yeah, I mean, I see the concern with having boys in girls,
locker rooms and, you know, the whole thing. Was that what Charlie Kirk? Was it Charlie? I think that was the interview. Yeah, I think it was.
I think he's done the same thing when he was on with Charlie Kirk and also Bill Mar. Yeah. But Bill, but Bill Mar does the same thing where he's like, well, it's ridiculous. You can't sell this. There are some things in the transgender movement that I agree with and doesn't stipulate
what they are. Right. And that's where we believe he's trying to cover his posterior. Well, what they want on the left. And I mean, the radical rank and file that's leading the charge.
This is the radical that's out there. That is really leading the party.
They want someone who is serious, who who demonstrates that they have a conviction in these
radical beliefs. And that's what Talerego comes off as.
“And I think that's why he was more attractive in the end than Jasmine Crocket.”
But it's what we've been saying all along. The Democrats are not moderating. The Democrats are looking for someone who doesn't look crazy. Yeah. Who doesn't look insane.
Yes. But can sell the insane ideas? Exactly. Of the left. We've been saying this for a while.
How long would five, six years now get rid of the crazy guys. That's what yeah. Get rid of the crazy eyes. You know, don't don't be, look like somebody. You've got a good haircut.
You're white. You're right. They're the one. You're using the white guy. You're a white male.
But you don't think about that.
“What you just said, the crazy, you know, the crazy guys.”
You think of the whole Tim walls thing. Right. You know, he comes in jumping around like Chris Farley on an SNL skit. The wave in his hands. He was a cross between Richard Simmons and Chris Farley.
But then his wife came out. And again, I just wife enters the same. Right. I don't, I don't. Look, I'm simply observe the, you know, the, the, the characteristics of people.
The image. The imagery. And when she was screaming and she's got the googly eyes. And that's been talked about before. Yes.
The number of Democrats for some reason had these googly eyes. Right. And they've even recognized it and said, we need to find people that we can sell. To the, the Midwest. Right.
Kind of mentality. Right. As it. But then again, they're insulting the Midwest kind of mentality. Right.
Because if what you're saying, you know, when you say in things, in saying things. Your face is all contorted, that does, that doesn't sell well. If you say crazy things. And you say it in a very serious voice in this and that. And, you know, I, you know, the, the Bible endorses abortion.
I mean, you can say the craziest things and people will say, well, maybe I'll consider that.
Well, you know, it's, it's like, I think that's the attraction for, if they'r...
busy for Pete Buttigieg.
And remember when they were saying the radicals were saying he's not gay enough.
Remember that? Oh, yeah. Oh, my God. That he and, and his husband were, were not, not putting on display. They're not gay anymore.
They were trying just to be a normal family, whatever that is. And they, I mean, that was, that was a real thing for a few minutes. Right. That's, that's criticism. By the way, all this criticism is,
“I mean, I think that's the first thing that's left from the realizing what's on the left.”
Yes. And, and, but I think there are rank and file on the left that look at Pete Buttigieg. If, if there is, you know, again, any hope for his political future, I think it's that too. That, well, you know, he's contemplative. He can have a discussion on that.
But he's a radical. The things that he's saying, the things that he's fighting for, a campaigning for, he's still radical. But, but if you're on the left, you want someone who comes up again, Pete Buttigieg, another white guy. But, you know, they, man, they just can't quit, can they?
But they even Kamala Harris shows another old white guy.
But there's the problem, you know, is, is that you've got to get through, first of all,
you know, if you're, if you're going to, if we're talking the White House, you've got to get through the primers season, we're talking, and you see, you're going to have to get through the primers season. Talarico did that in Texas. And he did it over Jasmine Crocket, who, by any comparison, got a lot more airplay in, in, in the United States, including Texas, then Talarico has in the past leading up to the campaign.
“We are Red Eye Radio, brought to you by Hot Shot Secret.”
Hi, I'm Jen Lumis, a transport safety expert at JJ Keller. Once a roadside inspection is completed, the officer will close it out. If violations were discovered, most officers as a courtesy will explain the violations to the driver. If there were any out-of-service violations, the officer will normally explain what must be done to get the out-of-service order lifted. Drivers need to be very attentive during this part of the inspection.
The driver also needs to read and understand the complete inspection report. The driver has 24 hours to get the roadside inspection report to the motor carrier.
If the driver will not be returning to a company facility within the next 24 hours,
the driver needs to know to get it on the way to you via email, mail, or fax within 24 hours. This tip was brought to you by JJ Keller and Associates. Visit us at JJ Keller.com. Get in touch with Red Eye Radio, toll-free at 866. Mindy Red Eye.
We are Red Eye Radio, and he's air-accrued, and I'm Gary McNamara. This comes from a Jasmine Crockett supporter on X.
“Jasmine was the fighter that Y'all wanted, but the minute she ran for higher office, Y'all bolted.”
She uses Y'all a lot. Y'all bolted on her for the powdery white man. So much for wanting black women in higher office. Don't ever plan our faces again. Blank you all.
F you all. Wow. Excuse me. F y'all. Okay.
Not you all. I'm sorry. My Yankee came out there. Yeah. Sorry.
Y'all. Dang around me when I go fishing with my brothers a little more. Little bring out a little bit of that stuff. It's going to be interesting to see the questions that he has asked by the Texas media. Yeah, because now it's him.
Now it's just him. It's right. You know, in the center race for the Democrats. I mean, he's the nominee. So it's all him.
You know, President Trump saying he's going to make an endorsement choice. And the coming days very soon, he said. And for the GOP, and he's going to ask the other person that he doesn't endorse to drop out. I'm very curious about that one.
[ Music ] Tired of partisan noise. America's more divided than ever, but independent Americans is adding the light to contrast all that she-- Independent Americans, daily news with Army veteran Paul Rikov.
Pressing issues of the day, the leaders who are shaping what America will be in the future.
We're going to bring the righteous media five lives.
Independence, integrity, information, inspiration, and impact. Join the movement.
“Independent Americans, from belief, follow and listen on your favorite platform.”
[ Music ] Catch Red I radio live every night on the Red I radio act. Available in the App Store. Red, I radio. And he is her, Crony, and I'm Gary McNamara.
Welcome to Good Morning. Thanks so much for being here this morning. Just we got this somebody posted to us on X. And I wanted to just talk about what he wrote to us. And this is a way to write.
If you disagree with us, this is the way to write. All right, love the show.
Now always start with that.
Dan wrote, love the show. That's the way to do it.
“I'm listening to you and Eric talk about the president's military authority.”
And I agree that there are laws on the books that give the president a authority to do what he has done. But you are wrong when you say it is constitutionally authorized. The constitution authorizes the president to mobilize a militia to put down insurrection rebellion and repell invasion.
As when President Washington put down the whiskey rebellion. But in 1801, President Jefferson went before Congress to ask for a declaration of war against the pirates of Tripoli. Congress did not declare war, but did authorize military action. I hope this clears up any misconceptions.
All right, which should we address first? First off, there are no misconceptions on our part, just so you know. Right. Yeah. We're not.
We weren't confused on it. When he says when Dan writes the constitution authorizes the president to mobilize a militia to put down insurrection and rebellion. That's false. All right.
It's absolutely false, Dan. Constitution doesn't touch that. That's the insurrection act. That is a law written by Congress. All right.
So just to get that.
But as we've always said just so you understand, because it always.
It always comes out that. Well, Congress can declare war. It's means the president can't go to war or do anything. The Congress cannot attack or do anything. But as you know, studying the constitution as we know and how the constitution was formed.
Initially, the first draft of the constitution said Congress can make war. James Madison and other said, no, we can't do that. We don't know what the president, we don't know what an attack on the United States could be. Now, years from now, we don't know. For example, the founding fathers probably never thought of nuclear war.
Right. That was in the the musket time and the cannon time.
They probably never thought about not that it applies to it, but it could.
Cyber war. Yeah. Never thought about that. You can shut down and we know China and others have tried. You know, to shut down through, you know, through cyber war.
So they didn't know.
“And so that's why they changed it to declare war.”
And the concept was if we or our territories are invaded, the president can strike back, which also meant, you know, well, we'll stick to this right here. I mean, I don't want to go off because we could sit there and go off on to engines all day. When you looked at Iran, and I did some research just yesterday. Do you know what between 2023 and 2024, Iran attacked 180?
Yeah. Things that are considered American interest to American property. Right. Right. Those are all acts of war.
Yep. And so because it's so crystal clear in article two, the president is the commander in chief of the armed forces. It doesn't say he shares that with Congress. It doesn't say that is commander in chief that he shares it with the speaker or the opposition party.
One of the things that the founding fathers understood is you need one person...
And when you look at even Congress recognizing with the insurrection act that if the states,
because what went even beyond politics was the protection of the United States. So the insurrection act came along because like if states will not put down insurrection. And these things could destabilize the United States. They viewed that the Constitution would want the president if the states didn't act to protect the United States of America. They didn't give specifics on insurrection or rebellion or the level because they didn't know.
Right. And the same thing when it came to threats or attacks on the United States. If you look at Iran. Now, I did not use, I don't believe I ever used to term constitutionally authorized.
“I believe the term that we used because he wrote it directly to me.”
So I don't know if he was talking about what I was saying or what we used to say.
I don't believe we ever said that the term constitutionally authorized. I believe we used to term legal. Yeah. We did say that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional. We believe.
Yes. Yes. Right. He doesn't challenge us on that. Right. And so whether what's the difference between constitutionally authorized or legal. I don't see much of a difference in it. I just want to use the terms that we used.
When you look at the fact of what has been going on for the last 47 years.
When you look at the Iran attacks on the United States over that time. And that the attacks continue today. Remember, taking out Soleimani was because of an attack and Iranian attack on a US military-based killed soldiers. If you look at Iran itself and what has gone on.
It's one of those scenarios where the Constitution absolutely authorizes the president and his discretion to act in this. And as we've said before, if Congress doesn't like it. They can stop funding it tomorrow. The War Powers Act, which says the president must do things.
You know, notify Congress within 48 hours. Every single administration since the War Powers Act was enacted in 73 set. No, it's not constitutional. Some have said we'll abide by it. And it's a great policy politically if you can get Congress aboard.
And therefore, the people aboard to do that. But I think Jonathan Turley talked about that even after Congress voted and said, no, we're not going to limit the president what they do. The Democrats are still calling it illegal.
“But what we did say is that if you want to make the comparison, the political comparison”
for what the Democrats did in Libya, where Obama said, there's a humanitarian crisis, what was the threat to the United States? You may have a constitutional point there, which was not challenged. Was the United States, could we beat now? You could go back as we said even yesterday.
You could go back and say locker beat. They were responsible for that could justify it. But the main reason he said was humanitarian. You may have a point there. But it wasn't challenged.
And it can't really be challenged after it's done. But it wasn't challenged anyway. And the Supreme Court, most of the time, stays out of these things. They don't want to be the arbiter of the United States using military action.
“But yeah, so I think it's important just to bring it up.”
Thank you so much. We appreciate that you listen and love the way that you did it. We just disagree that the Constitution does not authorize the president to mobilize the militia to put on insurrection. That's the insurrection act.
That's not part of the Constitution. It is a legislative law that probably you could challenge. But I think most Supreme courts would say, no, if the states aren't going to act, the president needs
To be able to put down an insurrection or rebellion that could be viewed as a...
At that point, and Congress was not going to put limitations or parameters because they don't know.
“But if you look at Iran itself, and what's been going on for almost a last half century,”
that's a perfect example of what the Constitution wanted to give the president deferences to what to do. And if you don't like it, you can take the funding away if Congress doesn't like it. You can impeach him and remove him from office. Because as we found out with Trump, you can impeach for anything.
No matter. And so, or you could use the 25th Amendment if you believe that he's going to war, and it's because of his mental capabilities are not up to snuff. And that's it. But no, it's...
Well, again, there is a major separation of powers issue here at hand.
And you can't get beyond that.
Because it is by design that the president, one person has to make that decision. Think about on how many my gosh go back through history.
“It would be a series of books in terms of a president making a decision on war.”
Now, sometimes, like when Bush did it, they'd go to Congress and they ask because they understand that the campaign is going to require if it's going to be a long-term campaign. It's going to require funding. You know, this is part of the push right now on the Department of Homeland Security. DHS needs to be fully funded.
We're not playing games. Iranian proxies are likely on American soil. So let's quit being stupid. Yes, so if you look at what Iran itself has done, and then the financing of the proxies,
because hit American interest in American territory.
Because those are the actors. Those are the actors. Just, you know, a territory is a military base. Yes. I mean, and if you attack a military base, that's an act that war.
That's an act of war in the US. Right. So you could not find a clear, like you probably could buy maybe a clearer example. But it's one of the, if you look at what the Constitution looked at as the, as the, wide parameters that the president has, this is probably as close to the target as you could get.
Right. From what the Constitution authorized the president to do. Right. And the whole point of briefing the gang of eight. Very simple.
You know, I mean, you're, you're going to want. The head of our, the top of our elected representatives. Brief on what's going on. They may not like it. Oh, they don't.
You know, I'm a better man. Right. It's, I mean, yeah, in the Democrats. They're, you know, you're, one party's not going to be. They're, they're going to have concerns.
But you're going to brief them nonetheless. And this campaign, I don't know how long the campaign's going to take. The president said, you know, again, now they're talking. Okay, they're, they might be boots on the ground at some point. There might be more involvement with Iran at some point.
“I think he's just leaving the door open because it's a, it's a huge unknown.”
You really don't know how this thing is going to go. One thing for certain is the regime had to come down and their power to attack us had to come down. That to a large extent. I mean, the submarine taken down one of their ships. What about, wow, that the Kurds may be the boots on the ground.
That was wild because what did he excess say about its weird. He excess said, well, the Pentagon's not funding them. He said, other agencies may fund them and other. We don't get to look at the CIA, but you know. So, I mean, and, you know, but at the White House, they were saying, no, no, no, no.
You know, we're not, we're not, you know, we support them, but we're not, you know, funding them. It was, it's not a very clear picture. But that is a very interesting, I mean, that could be to a large extent. The Kurds, the boots on the ground, at least, temporarily. And I guess we'll see how far that goes.
We are running our radio. Coming up more with Gary McNamara and Eric Carly. It's Red Eye Radio. We are when I radio.
He's our crony and I'm Gary McNamara.
Yeah, like I said, Jonathan Turley, in fact, I'll find what Turley wrote yesterday here,
“and related here in a little bit, because when you look at the situation in a ran,”
could not be a clear picture of what the Constitution actually authorizes to use that term that Dan used. The President to do this, a ran has attacked US territories over and over and over hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of times. Couldn't be clear. And with the nuclear weapons and everything else. And the financing the surrogates, the proxies, couldn't be clear.
[Music] This is Red Eye Radio on Westwood One. But what I want to say is that you don't want to get a lot of students. The Master by Dr. Gleptopychia Soft behind the Internet. It's a master's real-time.
You can say that you're a jerk. Do you have an answer? But you don't believe me. You don't. You're a real-time worker. You're a real-time worker. You're a real-time worker. And if you then work, you'll be a jerk.
That's right. You're a real-time worker. You're a jerk. Now you're a jerk.
“Mama, how much do you love the big love?”
Hmm. Sigh. And so creamy. Hey! How can Papa creamy be? Nutella.
Or from Mama and Papa already lived. Nutella is Nutella. [music] Now, it's Red Eye Radio. Gary McNamara and Eric Hurley talk about everything
from politics to social issues and news of the day. Whether you're up late or you're just starting your day. Welcome to the show from the Relief Factor Studios. This is Red Eye Radio. All across America. We are Red Eye Radio.
Oh my gosh. What? It's just so humorous. Uh... James Talleriko wins the coveted endorsement of Better Award. [laughter]
Wow. You know, the other interesting thing that was brought up that we cannot let pass by is that Jasmine Crockett got Kamala Harris's endorsement. Oh, yeah.
That's right. I'm convinced we've said this for the longest time. We've said expect Democrats.
Because that's the reason they first looked at Newsom.
They looked at Newsom because they went, "All right. This guy looks normal. He doesn't look crazy." And then he destroyed himself. That point where they sort of went, "Okay. I might not be the guy." Was it to be? But to Santa's when he got smoked.
Everybody knew it. Yeah. Yeah. And so... I think that combined with his lack of response and bungling
of the state response to the wildfires. Oh, yeah. The one mom being right there in his face. And he said, "Well, well, I was just calling the White House." And she said, "Show me your phone.
Show me you were on the phone with a White House." It was one of those moments.
Well, quite frankly, he's always looked weak to me.
But... And that's the problem. If you're on the radical left side. If you're one of the rank and file radical left people. You want somebody who's very serious, but not over the top with crazy eyes.
That can sit down and make the point because you know,
“that's how they're going to convince people”
if they get into office. Right, that's... And Newsom gets there based on, well, you know, it's California. Gavin with a good hair. And he got in.
I mean, he owns a winery. So, what could go wrong? Those are the... You know, he was part of that celebrity factor. And while you can apply that to Donald Trump, the job that he's done as president,
you can list a... It's a long list of accomplishments.
So, there's a key difference.
Said thing with Reagan. Reagan was a celebrity.
He was also a great president. So, you look at this. And the real Gavin Newsom just starts to fall apart. Because Gavin Newsom comes off as somebody who wants to be a celebrity. The Rockstar thing for the radical left today is over.
They don't want any part of that. The rank and file doesn't want the Rockstar thing. The only reason that Jasmine Crocodile, you'll see, and maybe, I don't know where how Gavin Newsom's podcast ranks. But how any of those... The reason they get attention is because it really is a train wreck.
It's a train wreck effect.
It's exactly where it is on social media, which means nothing.
It's not real. It's not real life. It's not real convictions.
“I mean, I believe they believe in those things.”
But they come off as silly. They come off Gavin Newsom comes off as weak. Tyler Rico is one of these guys who campaigns in a serious mode. He's a serious radical. And he's going to espouse those views in a serious way.
And that I believe is what they're looking for. And I thought when you said that because you're the one that came up and said, Look, he believes that he can win by not being a apologetic or wish he watched on these particular issues like Gavin Newsom. And I think that that's one of the... When you look at it to expand this out, and it's just a thought, just a thought.
I'm throwing this out. When you look at the fact that two Republicans are leading in the governor's race, another poll came up, two Republicans, the two Republicans are leading. And all the Democrats are split like crazy. I think there's the debate going on right now in the Democratic Party started with a few years back with Newsom.
And they said, "We need serious candidates." And for 2028, we need serious candidates.
“And that's why they can't decide what to do.”
And they look at Kamala Harris and she's not a serious candidate. Whoever she's endorsing, she's endorsing Jasmine Crocket, are you kidding me? And you look at really who is viewed as the three top runners in the Republican Party for President in 2028. J.D. Vance, Desantis, and Rubio. Yeah.
All three are extremely serious people on the issues. And there's serious debaters that's, you know, if you think about not backing down in a debate, I think that's the other thing too. Is that when AOC is cornered, she can't do anything. When Jasmine Crocket is cornered, I don't know that she ever has been.
You know, because the only thing that sticks out is TikTok videos, really, and selfies. But she doesn't come off as serious. And then when she tries to be serious, again, there's no way she can have a debate. Talarico's going to, comes off as someone who's going to stand his ground, even though he's wrong. He's going to stand his ground on, on his convictions.
Again, radical convictions, but he's going to stand his ground on those. Newsom is just weak all the way around. Newsom got into it because he wanted to be the celebrity. He wanted to be, you know, popular. And that's not where the party is.
The rock star thing we've been saying this for years actually a few years. The rock star thing is over. Even though you could say AOC and Jasmine Crocket were kind of the, had the rock star thing. That was a social media presence, which again, doesn't play well. Remember, AOC a few times when she went back to her district.
Her constituents were mad. Oh, yeah. And so, you know, and she said at one point, I don't know how much longer I'm going to stay in the House of Representatives because nothing gets done here. And it's just crazy.
And you and I took that early. I did. I don't know if you did, but I took that as, you sound like you don't like the pressure coming back at you. At some point, you're going to be the oppressor. And Talarico will find that out if he hasn't already.
The far left is going to be done with you because they've moved even further left. And further left. And if you don't go where they go, you know, can he's going to have an issue.
“I believe when he says there are six genders.”
Oh, there aren't only six.
He's saying scientifically that's, you know, it's basically a fact that there are six genders.
Well, it's, it's, you can't say just with if you're a radical.
But that's the problem that he has is he going to continue to say that.
Because I guarantee a ton of Democrats just said we want to vote for the person who isn't Jasmine Crocket. Yeah, because we can't win with crazy. And this guy looks normal. You know, and then the Republicans came out with a ton of different audio cuts where he comes across as a complete radical independence in Texas vote for that.
Right. And that's where he has, that's where he has the challenge. That's where he has, you know, the, the, the problem.
“And, and I think even when you, when you look at politicians in general, you know, Trump can be”
Trump has a has a unique personality as we all know. Yeah. But the basis of Trump is extremely serious. Yes. Yeah.
You know, when you get down to who he is, you know, he, he came to the forefront because he was the one who identified what the problems were. Right. In 2015, and you believed because he had talked about these things for decades, by the way, to see the thing that came out with Trump back in 1980, caught a ran.
It's like no, Trump's been consistent. And it was like, yeah. Yeah. It was like, well, and man, it was, I mean, that was the heat of the moment. If you think about the Iranian hostage crisis.
Yeah. I saw that the other day, and I was like, wow, that's, that's a, it's pretty impressive. And boy, he looked young. Right. So did I back then?
He looked more like Donald Trump Jr. But when, and, and so you look even in the Republican side, who are the Republicans right now,
“even that serve the president who people don't feel or serious?”
And Bondi. Yeah. And it comes from waving that thing. Yeah. Something.
I've been something. I've been something and not, and not delivering. Yeah. You saw the other day that the Justice Department dropped going after all those members of Congress. Yeah.
Yeah. Who talked about not following soldiers, not following the orders. Right. That was a bad move. That was a bad move in the Department of Justice to do that.
Right. The Pentagon can look at Mark Kelly. Yeah.
“They never had a, they never had a, they never had a legal case there.”
Right. And, but she's not viewed as serious. Right. In Republican circles. Right.
Right. Now we guarantee you that. She's not viewed in Republicans and gnome blew it on the whole immigration thing in Minnesota. Who do they bring in? Why has everything settled down?
Tom Holman has been consistent for years and his approach. And he is what? He's serious. Yeah. I mean, he doesn't come down to that.
You're right. Because you're going to extrapolate that out.
Because here's, here's what people look at.
People can identify, you know, the social media approach versus a real approach, a real life approach. And with Pam Bondi and the influencers, that clearly was a social media approach. And I knew from that moment that they were waving the binders, there was nothing in them. And the reason I knew that is because no prosecution in their right mind would give any evidence to people who were going to broadcast said evidence to everybody around the world, knowing there
could be pending cases with that information. You could compromise those cases. That's stupid and it turned out there was nothing in the binders. We hadn't learned anything new. What was the moment for then?
Also nothing. And that was right out of the box. Yeah. That was just plain stupid. And there was something else that Justice Department dropped.
You know, the one thing that, and this is what I appreciate about Margot Rubio. Margot Rubio has a director approach. Yes. When you're secretary of state, I don't think there is anything. Well, I have to imagine.
I've never done the job, but I have to imagine.
There is no more serious job because of everything you are a part of. You think of every geopolitical, tiny piece of the global puzzle that you're involved in. And it's nonstop. He might be the only personal life right now, sleeping less than Donald Trump. Well, that's because he's, he's not, he's not a plane with the self-appointed Trump influencers,
Right, who simply want clicks.
Right. And he's not, he's also not John Kerry, remember that?
“Well, global warming is the biggest threat.”
By the way, I said self-appointed. Yeah, right. So they operate outside of Trump is the point. Exactly. But they believe they represent Trump on everything.
No, that's a great point. It's the, it's the, it's the, the clicks that get to you. And by the way, you know, I've seen it about that yesterday, just with the media in general looking for clips. I mean, the daily mail UK. Yeah.
I've now just dropped them completely because everything is just, you know, everything is click baiting.
It's one thing that we will never do.
Right. Right. We're not out for, we're not out for clicks. We're not out to sit there and put a headline out.
“And then what we deliver in the body of work is opposite what the click was or doesn't deliver to the click.”
Right. Just to get you, you know, just to get the click. I don't care whether they, I don't care whether they're just supporting out. I just need the click now because I get paid for the click. Yeah, I don't care whether there's good work that I've done behind that click or not.
I just want the click. Which is it, which drives, you know, in terms of the business model, the individual media. It's everything.
I don't want any part of it because it's not real.
There are some real stories that are out there. And you know when you see them, you know the headlines when you, when you see the headlines. It's why the way I've got my notifications set now, I had to just change my process altogether. Because there's still some clickbaiting on the notifications occasionally. But you learn to see it.
And that gets back to the being savvy about this. People are savvy to the whole social media thing. They may not outwardly tell you, oh, I'm a very savvy person. When it comes to knowing what's clickbait, what isn't. But most people recognize it.
Some people still click. Sometimes I still click. You won't believe what eating one banana a day will do for your belly. Damn it, I have to click. I have bananas right now.
What about two bananas? You know, it's, you know, the ones that I think almost get me on YouTube. Maybe they did a couple of times I said, and I said, I got to stop. What not to do?
“And what you must do if you're over the age of 65.”
Yes. Stop eating this right now if you're over the age of 60. I'm like. Yeah, those are the ones I've like now ignore completely. It's just like, okay, I guess.
No, because you want to once or twice just to see what. Okay, what are they talking about? Right. There's one guy and he's a very smart guy and he's a doctor. But he's a doctor of chiropractic medicine and he's talking other internal things.
But he's talking about he site studies. He's, I think he's very good about it. But on YouTube, it's all clickbait. The thumbnail required. You've got to get people to engage and then keep them engaged with the content.
That's the name of their game. Hi, radio. This morning's USDA farm report is brought to you by house products tested, trusted, guaranteed since 1920. Springtime visits to the nation's capital include typing such trips to see the title-based
and cherry trees in bloom. The director of the US national arboretum, Richard Olsen notes. It wouldn't have been possible without the United States Department of Agriculture. It was the work of Dr. David Fairchild as head of the then-plat exploration office, which later became part of what is now the agricultural research service.
In 1912, his work at growing ornamental cherries and introducing them to first lady
Helen Tath culminated in a gift from the country of Japan. The original gift had something on the order of 10 or so dozen varieties thereabouts. The national arboretum also assists the national park service as needed part of a long-term relationship between the two agencies. This year's National Cherry Blossom Festival runs from March 20th through April 12th.
I'm Rod Bane reporting for the US Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C. This report brought to you by Senax Fules and Loots. He winds up on for your goals. 866-90-red-eye on Red Eye Radio. Where were the radio?
He is there, chrony, and I'm Gary McNamara, and talk about uncerious. This story is a few days old. It was happened probably last Friday or Saturday.
Then, you know, the whole or anything happened.
We never got to talk about it, but talking about being uncerious.
The story that came out Trump was not pleased with that bi-director cash, Patel Chugging, a bear with the USA hockey team. It's not the imagery that he wants. It's not a good look. Your FBI director Chugging appears, sorry.
You can't do it.
“If you want to be there with them, and, you know,”
way of the flag and the whole thing, congratulate them, that's one thing. You know, but it's not, it's just not a good look. And again, as you mentioned, Trump doesn't drink. Right. But there is, you know, and it may sound kind of rich,
you know, talking about Trump, but there is certainly, in that moment, there is decorum, you know, is a certain level of decorum. Now, Trump parties, but, and we disagree how he parties to YMCA. Right. But that is still gay.
He does dance. Yes. He does dance. (Laughs) (Music)
Navigating the Bizarro sphere. Every night, every currently end, Gary McNamara. Red, I, radios. (Music) And he is there.
Crowley, and I'm Gary McNamara. Download our Red, I radio app today and listen when and where you want. All right.
We never got to talk about Bernie Sanders' well-text that the Democrats are proposing.
They're announced Monday the make billionaires pay their fair share act. Okay. It's a move. Sanders claims is necessary to fix a corrupt tax code. Correct.
Now, this wealth tax would be, when they came out with it earlier this week, I was like, Wait a minute. What's he saying here? Wait a minute.
“Is it just a 5% wealth tax that you pay over 10 years?”
Or is it a 5% wealth tax every year per 10 years? It's a 5% wealth tax every year per 10 years. Yep. 5% of your entire wealth. Yes.
That doesn't mean the cash on hand. In fact, most of it is not cash on hand. It's stock. Yep. It's, it's other property of some sort.
But it's mostly stock and it's mostly in companies. Yeah. Wow. And that would mean you might have to sell over a 10 year period because not all billionaires wealth continues to go up.
Right. I meant mostly in the companies that quite often in the companies that they own.
“You know, that they start like Amazon or right.”
Exactly. Right. So, but you could lose if your wealth stays even because not all billionaires wealth grows. Right. Company may go down with it.
But you could see, you know, basically he's going after half of the wealth of billionaires. Yeah. At the minimum. And the moment you start maybe not the minimum. If you could start this and get this going for 10 years.
It would never. It would never. Right. And as we all know, the problem with it as Trump learned. You know, he went about this.
I went back and looked Trump's. When Trump really was a liberal. But this shows, you know, as we said before, because we've been criticized when people say, "Well, he's a business person." Well, you can be a business person and still have dumb economic ideas.
Yeah. Yeah. Businesses fail all the time. Some of his have failed. Yes.
Yeah. Fort. Real state has been. He's done very well. Yeah.
14.25% wealth tax on the net wealth.
And it would apply to anybody over $10 million.
Yeah, I saw that when I went.
And of course, that was his idea in his book. And he, he had a pullback on that big time. He said, "You can't do that." You know, it would do to the stock market. All these people would have to basically, you know, convert that stock to cash to sell to cash.
They'd have to sell the stock.
“What happens when a bunch of shares are being sold?”
The stock market goes down. There you go. You cheap in the value of the stock by government mandating that you do it. And a non-billionaires who have, you know, things like 401(k)s or other investments would suffer as a result of that. Now, this was, remember, this was during the 1999 2000 presidential flirtation with the reform party.
Trump proposed a one-time 14.25 percent net worth tax on individuals in trust with the net worth over 10 million.
And the eliminating the national debt. But he had a back-off on it when he couldn't, economists told him, "You can't do this." Right? Well, and then you get into the, because, and thank goodness, he hasn't come up with that again. Right.
Yes. I heard Joe Kernan of CNBC, who was more on the right, say one-time, and I couldn't believe, I couldn't believe Joe Kernan was saying. And maybe he changed his position. I don't watch CNBC anymore. I don't have cable, I don't watch their videos.
I rarely watch their videos on either online or on YouTube. But I do like Joe Kernan. And I couldn't believe he was saying it. But yeah, I don't think it would be a bad idea. One-time wealth tax.
This is several years ago. This goes back several years. Again, maybe he backed away from that. And it wasn't like he was campaigning for it, right, going. I think we need to, and this needs to be, he was just, it was just a common in passing, but I couldn't believe he actually said that. It was really, really surprising to me.
But when you look at it, here's what would have to take place.
Now, billionaires are auditing on the regular. Trump gets audited all the time. But eventually, you would have to, is this thing, if you put this into motion. And it's going on for 10 years. Now, you're going to have to start, of course, because it's going to affect everybody else based on the stock market thing that we talked about.
Everybody else's wealth is also going to be depleted. And Bernie is okay with that. Now, Bernie is a multi-millionaire.
“And that's why he's not saying, that's why he's not saying this.”
We should do this against millionaires. Well, what has to happen? How do you determine the wealth? You have to audit fully all of the assets of every individual every single time. Not just what they earn for the year with an income tax.
Whether it's a capital gains tax or the, you know, however they're earning money. When you're earning that money, you go through what you earn. You go through, you know, and you're going to go through the books. But this would be different in that you're going to have to list every single asset every single time. And then there's going to have to be the question on valuation, right?
Because according to one judge, Mara Lagos worth what he say.
A hundred million or something stupid, I forget what it was. It was, or no, it was even lower than that.
It was like 14 million. Was it 14 million something like that? Yeah. And Donald Trump Jr. posted, wow, at that price, I'll take a hundred of them. But to the point, there's going to be this back and forth of what the valuation is.
18 million. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah, something stupid, yeah.
“And I don't remember what the, but you're talking about prime real estate in Florida.”
Oh, my gosh. How off the mark is that? Now, where's the back and forth? Because then you would have to have every piece of your property, every single one. You're going to have to have come in, someone come in officially.
During the audit process, there has to be an official value assigned to every...
Because it doesn't include just talks. It does include land and properties and everything else you know. I mean, someone like a, but it's not going to happen. No, it's not going to happen. Yeah.
And this is, and I'm, I'm explaining why. Because the process of doing this and determining someone's net worth. Would be mind boggling, even just for the billionaires at a single year. I don't think the left care is about that at all. No, I don't think there's, I'm explaining, I'm explaining why it would be impossible.
The reason this wouldn't pass because it would destroy the stock market and even be responsible for that. Right. And it would affect people's 401(k) is big time. Right. Yeah, we stated that.
Right.
“And then beyond that, the process you would have to go through in the valuation of, how do you determine someone's net worth?”
You know, someone asked someone talked to Jerry Seinfeld at one time about being a billionaire. You know, he's like, he's just kind of weighed.
You could, he's basically, it's not in your business.
And then I saw this story in the Wall Street Journal. I think it was last week. The hundred and some odd women who were billionaires, female billionaires. The singer Rihanna was listed on there. I didn't know she was a billionaire.
It's amazing. That great awesome for her. I don't listen to her music. But she's clearly done well. She had the same net worth as, uh, what's her name? Uh, Taylor Swift.
I think it was one, one point eight. I think billion. But if you look at, again, determining that's, you know, when they, when they do this, a new Google, what is so and so's net worth? Well, that's an estimate.
Well, can't be an estimate. There has to be a process if it's going to be written into tax code.
This is never going to happen for many reasons.
But the biggest reason is eventually you would get down to auditing every single person every year.
“You know, you've heard of the Bitcoin billionaires, right?”
You've heard of, uh, you've heard of, yeah, what's the, what's the worth? I, you figure out. Well, the, the year worth of Bitcoin. Well, think about this. I mean, I, I don't remember where the peak was. I think it was a hundred and eighteen thousand on Bitcoin.
And right now it's much lower that. It's, it's roughly half I haven't seen. I haven't looked in a couple of days. Here's a question. But it's, uh, right now it's at, well, it's at 72's at 66 the other day.
So again, that's the fluctuation and Bitcoin is kind of, you know, different in that regard. In terms of the, uh, how volatile the prices. But that's the whole point. How do you know where the billionaires are? Because then, you know, it would have to, and Jerry Seinfeld may get audited.
Uh, what's up with all these?
But here's one, another reason it would never happen.
Now I don't know what the amount would be. But all the billionaires out there. How much money do they have in treasury bills? Oh, there's, there's a, there's a great number of them that that have. Because that's a safe place to put it if you.
If you want to park it because you're not, you're not as worried about. Inflation when you're a billionaire. No. You basically can somehow find your way through it. Yeah.
So if you can get. Even now.
“Well, I think it's like what's a three and a half percent now is it?”
Hmm. I look at the other day. Three and a half. Four. I haven't looked, I haven't looked in a while.
Yeah, I thought I saw three point six for the 10 year. Is that four point one? Okay. What's it? I don't know.
I thought I saw three point six the other day. Okay. I just mean I was scanning something. It was just, you know, it was I was looking at the stock market. And I just saw the treasury bill thing.
And I don't know was six month three month or whatever. Hmm. But they park their money in there. Yeah. And the one thing that the government wants to do more than anything is get the interest right down for treasury bills because it's going to kill the budget.
Right. Right. Because I've got to pay interest on it. And that's what happened when you were paying point zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero zero one
Percent for for a treasury bill.
Great. We don't got to worry that much about the debt when it goes up.
“It's we said when it went up to, you know, four and a half.”
And yeah, it was a four and a half of five percent at one point. You've just increased the amount of the debt. You know, by hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars just the pay to interest on it. Right. So it's a safe place for billionaires to put the money.
But one of the major concern is, you know, hey, we need more people to buy treasury bills. Yeah. Right. Yeah. I mean, and all this would.
The problem is is, again, it's not going to affect just the billionaires.
It's going to rain downhill. People's 401k's and their investments are going to be affected. The bond markets will be affected. Oh, yeah. It's just, it would never work.
We are right. I radio. Get in touch with Red Eye radio toll free at 8.6. Mindy Red Eye. [Music] Here, Red Eye, Radio.
And he's certainly, and I'm very, very proud of a great point during the break.
“Because number one, what's the constitutionality of the wealth tax?”
That might be hung up in the courts for years. Yeah.
But the second thing is, as you brought up,
people are going to billionaires going to park their money elsewhere. Right. Is it constitutional billionaires say, okay, fine. We're going to park all our money in real estate in Europe. Right.
Yeah. And so your wealth tax is going to be based on what you have in other countries. Right. How does that work? Is that constitutional?
Right. Is the constitutional have a wealth tax to begin with? I mean, the basis of it all together. But you think about where their wealth is.
“Well, there's a, I'm sure a number of them have properties in,”
in other parts of the world outside the US.
[Music] This is Red Eye, Radio. On Worstwood One. [Music] See you in the Urlaub.
We're here for you. [Music] [Music] With Kindern, the on the Rütbank Hitziger debatier in the right.
The river welches Tablet Lauter is very quickly read and why to look for a large right. Yes. Our cars are in absolute impacts.
The Negal of Road trip or Geschäfts Reiser when your flight to Spatung hat, your aqua is still there. Or that you have to go to the right. What's going on here?
Yeah. If you're busy here, that's a price. If you're busy. [Music] The Dan Bontino Show.
Damn, I missed you all. I've got so much content, bottle of my head. I got a lot of stuff. This is the kind of stuff.
It's real. May not hear this anywhere else. Hard truths. There's a lot of stuff to talk about, that you think is going to open a lot of eyes.
And a lot of ignoratuses are going to get shut down. And a bold perspective, no one else can offer. They are freaking out. It's the comeback. Everyone's been waiting for.
Lovers, haters, friends, supporters to track this year all welcome. I want to hear it all. The Dan Bontino Show. Follow and listen on your favorite platform.
See you there.
