05-14-26 Part Two - Trump, China and a COVID Cover-Up

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, he is their crony and I'm hearing McNamara.

A lot of people expected that Trump would, you know, have some words, the meaning with the U.G. is over, went longer than expected, and now they went to the Temple of Heaven, so there's, you know, there's, you know, video of them walking together, whatever. No, no statement. And again, anything that comes out of this,

I don't see as any more than just a, a framework or a nudge a certain way with a, with a ran. And O.G. did come out, and they were talking about the fact that he was saying, "Well, if we don't solve the Taiwan problem, there'll be an issue." Well, the Taiwan problem is-

You mean having CBS in a certain time when- [laughter] Is that the issue? Gary, you're rid of that berry-wise. [laughter]

And they put a real communist back into our private CBS news. [laughter] All right, all right, so I just- I just have to mention, because I posted yesterday and I saw that I saw that you, you, you saw it.

Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I didn't see until I came in tonight. Yeah. A great friend of the show, a writer, director, producer, actor,

a comedian, a stand-up comedian, Steve Bern posted yesterday on X. And he said, "Well, he said the president now heading over to China to meet with the communist, he'll land in California. [laughter] Arcadia, California.

Right, at any moment now. [laughter] It's like, I love it. And- And, you know, there's zero trust that you can put in China.

“I always see these things, I think, especially with Trump as going through the motions.”

Regardless of what he says, you know, "Oh, we had a great meeting. You know, a president G is so nice. He's the nicest person on the planet or whatever he wants to say." In the moment, you know, it's all- it's the Trump hyperbally that you weed through to get to what I believe Trump really thinks.

And that is, nobody can trust this guy. You keep your friends close and your enemies closer. And it's been the policy, you know, I think with him, based on his actions. Now, the question going forward is, what happens with trade?

The one thing that we thought during the first Trump term was going to happen

is that they were going to put pressure on China, and especially through terrorists back then, which, of course, we support against China. When you're talking about putting the pressure on them for intellectual property. You know, the CBS reported that we played earlier. That was actually in Taiwan.

From almost live from almost China, that brings up the, you know, that they build the phones, but the technology comes from the US.

“Well, but it's being stolen by China is if you want to finish that sentence,”

the intellectual property rights of companies, which expand wealth greatly in this nation and other Western nations and now in China, when they're stolen by China, they deplete wealth. And it becomes a problem in terms of having to compete with,

basically stolen intellectually intellectual properties that hit the marketplace

and become dirt cheap to people. And that didn't get done. I don't think it's going to get done this term. I hope to be wrong on that. But the way that it was approached, we could have done it.

And what's interesting is the idea was that we talked about it, cut-load talked about it, and during the first term. And it was put the pressure on China to get all your, all your trade partners on your side and align and say, we're going to put the pressure on you and choke you out.

If you don't do something about intellectual property rights.

“Now, the first problem with that is that you have to take that approach and it wasn't done.”

But also, nobody has the intellectual technology stuff that we have.

And so they don't have the same interest necessarily that we do.

“It's not a priority for them as much as it is a US priority.”

But if we put pressure on them to go with us and face China, that's where the pressure would be on China to choke them out. Now, interestingly, they didn't do that.

He didn't do that, and what happened in his second term,

when you put the tariffs in place, China goes to establish trade routes with other trade partners around the world, their trade partners, and some, and many of ours, so put pressure on the US. And I thought, well, isn't this ironic?

Hey, I'm Chris Fanfleet, go behind the scenes and beyond the headlines with the biggest names in pro wrestling and beyond. You could pop up in WWE tomorrow. Would Sire be there or would page be there? Hey, it's 100% there.

So when you're setting up Logan Paul to frog splash you through the announce table, it's going through your mind.

“This should make every headline in the world.”

It makes sense, right?

In Jelly Roll, we knew we had that kind of a moment.

Mindset, motivation, and what it takes to succeed. Insight with Chris Fanfleet, follow and listen on your favorite platform. What I wonder is, and this is not a criticism. Sometimes people might think that if a question is asked,

it's a criticism. What is the purpose of bringing so many of the CEOs over there? Yeah, I think it is to show what could be done with cooperation. So, you don't bring over CEOs as many as he did in high tech and everything, industry, high tech, you name it.

Yeah. 30? Yeah. There weren't that many when he made the trip to the Middle East. There were some, but not that many.

And so you said they're saying, okay, it's about trade. Yeah. If you're bringing over CEOs, then you would assume they're going to be talking to other CEOs, which means you don't start off that type. You can start off a conversation with two politicians on tariffs.

Yeah.

“That's why I'm wondering what's going on with him, you know,”

bringing it, and again, this is not a criticism. I just wonder what the specific purpose is, and who the CEOs will be talking to and what will they be talking about. What is, what is the overall game plan? And I say this based on the fact, a couple of things yesterday that,

and I saw from a Bloomberg and CNBC in some experts, and Andrew Stuttford and National Review lied it out. Well, it's, you know, the situation Bloomberg and CNBC looking at the, the government figures right now, and this is all relating to Kevin Warrish. But this is all about the economy.

Trump wants lower interest rates. It's not coming. Right. Yeah. Even with the new Fed head, he's a Fed head, but Bloomberg noted that

investors snagged 5% yield on 30 year treasury bills for the first time since 2007.

Yeah. As surge in energy prices pushed inflation and expectations of more of it. That's a number that will have been noted in Iran among other places as the regime there tries to calculate the White House's tolerance for the economic and thus domestic political pain brought about by the war.

The immediate trigger was the rise in wholesale PPI inflation, which rose a seasonably adjusted 1.4% in April, annualized of 6% a lot higher than expected. Much of the blame lies with higher energy prices brought by the, by the Gulf conflict, but not only that as CNBC reported,

the services sector accelerated 1.2% the biggest gain since March of 2022. We mentioned that yesterday. Two thirds of the move was attributed to a 2.7% gain in trade services, a sign that tariff costs are now starting to have a larger impact on prices. Yeah.

Inflation is sticky and accelerating. The core reading confirms a deeper structural trend, especially in services and David Russell, global head of the market strategy at trade station. The Hormuz crisis is aggravating the problem,

Market prices points to little chance of any interest rates cuts

“through the rest of the year, though odds for a hike climb to about 39%”

following the PPI report. Well, see, there's the problem. Here's a conundrum for wars. You get in. You're going to convince the rest of the board to not go up.

And imagine that's his first move.

Let's say mid June the next meeting is a non-move. That's going to stand out in the media, given that it's Kevin wars now at the helm. A zero move. Nothing happens.

No change. Because if it's not lowered, which would be a Trump move, that's what Trump wants. He wants interest rates lowered. Then it works, you know, it shows well,

warsh is working in his favor. But again, you're talking about the entire board. It's not just warsh. And so the question would be,

“well, what happens if by the time we hit the mid June meeting?”

They're looking at, well, a quarter of a point increase.

And that would be warsh's first move.

Well, that's the, you know, that's the problem. We go back. We talked yesterday. I'm old enough to remember when Voker became. The Fed chair in order to stop 10 years of inflation.

Right. The skyrocketing of interest rates too. Who, to bring it down. And, you know, when you look at it. And the, the figure show.

It's beyond just oil. Yeah. That's the worry. Yeah, right. That it's beyond oil.

Even though I might make the case. Yeah, but oil affects everything. In shipping and everything else. So when you look at how everything's tied together. It does oil have a bigger and I don't know this.

I'm, you know, it's just the question that I had. Does oil have a bigger impact. Because just prices, they're, they're, the, the, the, the public just won't stand. If you raise prices, they're not going to buy.

Well, and here's what stood out to me for the core inflation numbers from yesterday.

Is that the two big misses. Uh, the, the median forecast on, uh, the April. Uh, PPI was 0.5. But it was actually 1.4. The median fact of forecast on core PPI was 0.3.

And it actually was 0.6. So you, again, if, if the market's missing that on the forecast on the month over month forecast, I don't have the breakdown on the year over year forecast. But we went from the previous month, was 4.3. Uh, PPI year over year.

And the, uh, the new updated forecast from yesterday's or the new updated is 6%. Six, even, uh, 3.7 on the core PPI year over year, uh, when you go back a month. And then from yesterday, it went up to 4.4%. So I don't know what, it doesn't show here what I have in front of me. What the median forecast on those two numbers were.

But the misses on the month over month. Again, I have to ask and, and the markets weren't like completely rattled. I know that dial was down, but the NASDAQ was up. Again, I just don't know what, how to read into this long term. But if, if it indeed is, and it, we know to a certain extent, the question is,

“to what extent is, are the terrorists adding to the costs right now and what's to be done about it?”

And, and again, I, I believe, as I said yesterday, the impact of the terrif should be coming down because it went from 15 to 10%. They're pulling it a lot fewer dollars from the end, but the, the 10% could be reversed. But we're talking about what the situation is right now. But it went from a much higher percentage of terrif rates to a lower. So does that have any effect?

Or are we just seeing the cumulative effect over the terrif's over the last year? I don't, I don't know that. I don't know if anybody does. Which brings me back to the point of, there is no other reason that I can think of. Why you would bring all the major heads of industry with you to China,

unless you're talking about massive cooperation. Yeah. With China to do what? Trade. It's trade.

And I think there's a couple of things. And if it's trade, you're the, the CEOs do not want to be listening to terrif talk.

And the question is, what are they looking for? What is a president looking for out of that?

“And, and how does a private sector basically help in that regard?”

What would be the promises being made? A basically, alright. Investment in China? Well, Americans don't want to hear that. Yeah.

So, well, but companies really don't, you know, the, the, the, the problem is looking at the problems.

And China has a ton of problems. As, as you can see, the S pointed out, believe it or not earlier, that we played that audio. The, the one thing is, if you're going, if you're, you would, you would rather, you would rather trade. And then, again, I think when, when you look at the situation when you look at a lot of these countries now, because you wonder, you know, the pressure is on a communist government,

you wonder, do you want to have, we see what happened with industry, some of the industries that we put in Venezuela, how they were, you know, taking over. Yeah.

“And when I say investment in China, I don't mean necessarily production in being moved to China,”

but, but the technology and the technology world, there, there would obviously have to be partnerships. Right. With China, right, which is the closest thing you can get to.

Well, by the way, if you do partnerships with China, especially on tech, then you have licensing

agreement, which is less stealing of intellectual property, which could also be a part of the goal of what they want. And maybe that's the, maybe that's the, the end goal here. It is, look, we can partner with you if you play by the rules. And, and the thing is, I know we have investment in plants, GM, whatever, automobile companies, all over the world.

My point is when you look, start looking at totalitarian governments in long term. Yeah. Just like businesses are moving out of California, Illinois, New York, and going to places where there's more, you know, freedom. They can still sell to wherever they want, whatever state they want.

Right. And that's something that, you know, what, what is the, what's the long term of investment in China when it comes to actual plants for American CEOs. Right. And, and what can you trust out of any agreements that come of this.

Exactly. You know, I mean, you can show them a big grand picture long term. They still want control. We are right, I radio brought to you by FPPF fuel power max. Eidling a diesel uses about a gallon of fuel per hour, which can cost you about $180 per week

at 450 per gallon if your truck idle's eight hours a day. Eidling easily can cost you a few thousand more in fuel alone for a year. Not including the added engine maintenance expense that results from excessive idling. In addition to operating cost, many governments impose no idling laws and regulations with fines as high as $25,000.

Instead, there are many alternatives. An extra blanket for cold temperatures. Window screens for win the weather is warm. Bunk heaters and various auxiliary power unit options about in this day and age too. Many power just by batteries.

Owner operator business 101 is provided by overdrive partners and business program. Go to overdriveonline.com to the partners and business section of the website for more details on this and many other topics. Brought to you by Shell Rotella. With advanced synthetic technology is designed to help keep you are rig running

with more mileage and less maintenance. Get in touch with Red Eye Radio, toll-free at 866. Mindy Red Eye. Red Eye Radio. He is our honey and I'm going to make the mayor a welcome in a good morning.

Thanks so much for being here. Let's play this audio here from James Erdman, a career CIA operations officer who was a whistleblower.

And here's what he had to say yesterday about the COVID coverup.

Dr. Fauci's role in the coverup was intentional. Dr. Fauci influenced the analytical process and findings by leveraging his position to ensure the IC consulted with a conflicted list of curated subject matter experts, public health officials, and scientists. This included some of the authors of the paper, the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2, and other public health experts who have been in his orbit for the last 20-plus years.

Uh, nothing surprising. No. We had already figured that out, but his voice absolutely is needed. I have no idea why the CIA objected to him yesterday. Did you see that? Yeah, I don't know. What in the world is going on there? Did you notice of a much larger involvement?

“What I noticed was not one Democrat showed up. Why not pound him? Why not demonize him?”

Right. Is it because the president's in China?

You're listening to Red Eyed Radio from the Rayleigh Factor Studio. We are when I radio. He's early and I'm hearing McNamara download our Red Eyed Radio app. Today you can listen when and where you choose. All right, just to clarify something because I had asked the question, you know, why did the CIA come out against Mr. Erdman yesterday testifying. And then I said, and then Democrats didn't show

at all, not one Democrat. And I was answering the first question.

You were answering the first question. And that was a little bit confused on my face. We said, well, because the president's over in China.

“And I was looking at you like, why would Democrats care about that?”

Yeah. Democrats, it's a, you know, it's a, it's a no show because it's a non-winner for them. I think it's, it's one of these moments where I don't think they can defend Fauci anymore. Well, that was, that's the thing that really got me. There was no attempt.

Yeah, not because Democrats normally would just go, even if look, we, we saw, we saw the Democrats talking to the, the Secretary of the Interior, Bergman yesterday. And, and that, you know, they'll actually make arguments when he was like, no, no, no, we, you know, solar and wind basically can't cut it.

So I'm going to get stark.

We had batteries, you know, don't you know, please put into the record this guy doesn't know the technology of the battle of the Interior that we have batteries. We don't have damn batteries that can run a city, stop it. Right. I mean, so ignorance and arrogance is not new to the

Democrats. And so I figured they would come out that somebody, did you see anybody defending Fauci yesterday? No, no, I didn't see any.

“Because because they can't, and I think they would really like this”

sleep and dog to lie. I would really, I think they would really like to move on from this and let this try and make this a non story. I think they know the more they bring something up, the more it becomes an issue.

But they also have to know that most people look at this for the, the COVID, the whole COVID thing. And realize it's a non winner. And the rank and file people look at it and say, we were screwed out of productivity.

We were, this, this became something where there was way too much government control. The Democrats over and over, overplayed their hands. And you got to a point where you couldn't even post something on social media without being punished for it.

And there's no way to make that look good. And Fauci's no longer useful to them. And that's a, that's a, that's a great point. He's not useful. So we have, we have seen where once you don't become useful anymore

and there may be a problem. Yeah. What do I think you know, Mr. Swallow? Yeah, exactly. But, you know, you and I were not surprised by any of this kind of

friends say, see, we, you know, he said, the, the 10 foil people were right. And I went, what are you talking about? Yeah, that wasn't 10, this isn't 10 foil.

This isn't 10 foil. This is we, we had, we went Fauci first confronted.

It actually would be when when Rand Paul first confronted Fauci. Yeah. And said, did you do gain a function research? Because no, I did. It was, yeah, you did.

Yeah. And then he changed the definition of it. And we, we were actually screaming at Rand Paul saying, forget about the label. Ask change your change your method.

I'll do it in your questioning. Right. And we, I give Rand Paul all the credit for going after him. And he did that multiple times. And I think that was, there was great value to that.

But let's explain it. The follow up should have been, forget what you call it. Did you work to enhance this virus at all to make it more susceptible to humans, more dangerous to humans? I don't care what you call that process. This is our tax squared dollars with our dollars.

Right. And then you do that at the Wuhan lab. And we did. Right. We did.

Yeah. And so, and because we had asked to begin with, why is the federal government trying to hide? Where the virus came from?

“Remember when Trump would call with the China virus early on?”

Right.

He had to say, you know, you need to, she went to her district.

“And she said, you need to shop in Chinatown and, you know, in the neighborhood in her district.”

And all of this, and don't be racist in every kind of town had anything. Right. Like any Chinatown in the United States had anything to do with the COVID. Exactly. That's how lost they were.

But we had all we said, why are they? Why are what is the motive for hiding it? Right. Why are they doing everything to hide? And demonize and destroy people's career.

Attempted to destroy their lives and careers because they're saying, no. This isn't that it is implausible when you say, all right, we're the lab that we actually

Mutate these viruses on purpose.

Right. Is just a mile from the fish market? Right. What are the odds of that happening? Right.

“And that's where a virus that we've never seen before that could be manipulated.”

We have the ability to do it just a mile away. It doesn't make any sense. Thank you, John Stewart, for bringing that out. Remember that one. Oh, yeah.

He came out. It was it was uncool bears show. His old buddy co bear.

And he just laid it down and comedic fashion, but with truth.

Right. It was funny because it was true. And you know, you think about that. It's just, this is where our term, that soup crazy came from. Because we can't say the other word, but also, I mean, it was during, it was during that

time when we coined that phrase because they were saying, and I remember an article and forgive me, Washington Post, New York Times. Sorry, they all blend together at some time, at some point. But somebody wrote the article. It's not even a debate.

It's a consensus now that it came from a wet market. And I thought you're so far behind the times. But this is exactly what you get from the activists that still believe some of them, or still push the idea that Russian collusion actually happened.

“Well, the, I think it's important as we said back then.”

Again, what is the motivation for so many in the American government to hide where the COVID virus came from? Right. Because when you, this is something that stopped the world. Yeah.

That destroyed people's lives. Yes. That destroyed people's income. That destroyed their jobs. Yes.

That, that did things that are unconscionable. What we did keeping young kids out of school and how we shut down society. I have a little bit of curiosity to find out how this happened and why it happened and who might be responsible for it. So we're like the whole time, why are they trying to protect China?

They weren't trying to protect China. They were trying to protect the fact that taxpayer dollars that they're not supposed to be used for gain a function research was being used for gain a function research even if Fauci wanted to change the definition of the word or the phrase gain a function.

That's what they were hiding. Yep. The United States tax, the United States involvement in it and Fauci's involvement in it and other American, you know, research entities. They're involved in doing something that Congress had said you can't do anymore.

Right. That's what they were hiding. They were hiding, not, they weren't protecting China. They were protecting themselves. There was a CY, not a CIA operation, a CY operation.

And we, by the way, we're not just saying this now. We said that four years ago, five years ago. Yep. It's, it is mind-blending how bad this thing was. Because really, there were two epidemics.

There was the epidemic of the virus itself. But the greater epidemic of the control by governments, local, state, and even federal governments all across the world. But here at home, we are greatly concerned about the actions taking taken by people who, by the way, didn't buy the science themselves.

We know that because they were in public or caught in pictures numerous times Gavin Newsom without a mask, even early on.

They didn't believe it.

“So this entire thing was absolutely just mind-boggling”

and how much government control they looked to get.

Think about that. This was the time when Elon Musk didn't own X. You know, it wasn't controlled yet by, well, free speech for somebody who believed in free speech. It was, the FBI was there.

We know that social media, look at what happened to the New York Post. You only had because the, the Hunter Biden line, think about the censoring of the Hunter Biden laptop from the New York Post was the same. That's the same thing. That's the same thing.

Anything that had to do with the, the, the, the virus coming from the Wuhan lab. Yep. And the United States involvement. And it was the same mission to control the messaging, control the messaging, control the messaging, control the messaging, control the people, control their movement.

Control their access.

Control their means of production.

How they feed their families. They're jobs. All of it. And they thought they had won it forever. I firmly believe that.

Here we have something that, because they talked about it. Remember, remember, dark Brandon? I forgot about dark Brandon. Someone's got to make that t-shirt. It probably already is made.

But Biden, we're going into a dark winter. Like shut up. Was that with the red behind him? Yeah, I don't know if he was talking about the virus at that point. But he, but I, but he also made the statement.

We're going into, it's going to be a dark winter. Like, you know, this was the drama being played up to instill fear. It gets to a very serious point because the truth isn't being known by the people. And then you had a spike in suicides with adolescent women.

“And I believe there's a connection there.”

When you have a world telling them that all of the authority around them is telling them, if you breathe on someone, you could kill them. If they breathe on you, they could kill you. That it was this fear building that led to, in part, that kind of behavior. I'm convinced that was part of it because it was during that time.

It was during that period. They couldn't leave their home even to go to school. They could barely communicate with friends. They certainly couldn't hang out with friends or otherwise. The SWAT team would be in their front yard in some cases. And the attempt to censor, you couldn't go to church.

The attempt to censor all, you know, all information on anything that eventually, the left disagree, you know, disagreed with. And because remembered the point that this got to, remember social media. Yes.

Banning the Babylon be. Yes. Yes. For anybody who's my age, that's like the government banning mad magazine. Right.

When we were kids. Yeah. That's how far the left got to. Yes. Think about that.

“In the United States of America, a parody website, which was just like mad magazine.”

Right. Or any of the political cartoonists over the years. Right. Yeah. Exactly.

That band, no, you're going to be at the government is going to censor you. Yes. And the go, no, it was a face, but yeah, from pressure from as we know. As we know now, the government. Yes.

You know, we know the coercion that went on there. Right. Thank you, Twitter files. Right. Thank you.

The Democrats, you know, Barry Weiss, Michael Sheldonberger, Matt TIEB and others who brought that forward. And a former liberal, who made it happen by buying the real state of Twitter, which became Max Elon Musk. Yeah. We wouldn't have known any of this.

And the Democrats. Who knows where we would be? But the Democrats don't care.

But to me, that's really one of the most incredible things.

Not one Democrat Democrats. All they want to do is demonize. They couldn't demonize. They didn't want to take a chance of demonize the herd minister. Right.

No. No. We are right. I radio. We'll be right back with more Red Eye Radio, with every currently getting Gary McNamara.

We are going to radio.

Great story that the Wall Street Journal had National Review also had it too.

“The Democrat Socialists need a new model.”

And this is the member that we just get calls all the time. Why can't we be like Sweden? Sweden is no longer like Sweden. Right. And all the free market principles coming in and cutting taxes now.

Right.

And the fact that a third of their schools now are private.

Right. Yep.

“They're completely reversing where they were as a socialist nation and moving more towards”

free markets. Why it wasn't working. It wasn't working. And in the, I don't know, can we still say information age.

That sounds like a data term.

But in it would technology. They know what's available to them and what works and what doesn't. Here it is. One of three one in three public high schools is now privately run up from 20% in 2011. And school operators are now listed on the Swedish stock exchange.

Nearly half of primary health care clinics are now privately owned. Wow. Yeah. Yep. I guess we're getting it.

Gonna not be more like Sweden. Right. [laughter] Be better. We're going the other direction.

Yeah. Right. [music playing] [music playing] This is Rida Radio on Westwood One.

Hello America, Mark Levin here. Many people seem to be incubating a rage looking for somewhere to go.

“Are there times when you think the country is out of control?”

Do you see all these things and you wonder what in the world is going on? What's it this way? Five years ago, 10 years ago, 20 years ago. Do we have the will or not? But we are Americans.

And I believe we absolutely do have the will. I do this show for you. And when you're not interested anymore, I will just go away. I got my book in show.

of In Show, follow and listen on your favorite platform.