On this episode of the California Underground, we discuss new revelations that AG Bonta may have been blackmailed with a video of him in a "compromising position." Eric Swalwell wants all Californians to be able to vote by phone. Cloobeck is out, Steyer in. Karen Bass thinks people who ask questions about the LA wildfires are dangerous and spreading "misinformation."
Are you a Californian who feels isolated and alone in your political views in a deep blue state? Feel like you can’t talk about insane taxes, an overbearing government, and radical social experiments without getting a side eye? Then join us on the California Underground Podcast, the most trusted podcast on all things California politics.
Original air date 11.25.25
*The California Underground Podcast is dedicated to discussing California politics from a place of sanity and rationality.*
Check out our full site for more information about the show at www.californiaunderground.live
Join the Members Only California Underground Telegram —> https://im.page/7c0306da
For more in depth California political news coverage, make sure to subscribe to our Substack at https://caunderground.substack.com
Check out our sponsor for this episode, StopBox, by going to www.stopbox.com/californiaunderground to get 10% off your order
Follow California Underground on Social Media
Instagram: www.instagram.com/californiaunderground
X: https://twitter.com/CAUndergound
Tik Tok: https://www.tiktok.com/@californiaunderground?_t=8o6HWHcJ1CM&_r=1
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj8SabIcF4AKqEVFsLmo1jA
Read about our Privacy Policy: https://www.spotify.com/us/legal/privacy-policy/
00:00:00
Eric Swalwell wants everybody in California to vote by phone.
00:00:03
As if we don't have enough issues with mail in ballots.
00:00:06
Rob Bonta's whole story with $400 in legal fees gets a
00:00:10
little bit stranger with a new letter that emerged.
00:00:14
Also, Karen Bass believes that people who talk about the
00:00:16
wildfires are dangerous because they're spreading
00:00:18
misinformation. All that and more on tonight's
00:00:21
episode The California Underground, starting right now.
00:00:40
What's going on, everybody? Thanks for tuning to another
00:00:42
episode of the California Underground.
00:00:44
I am your host, Phil. We have a ton of stuff to get to
00:00:47
tonight, so we're going to get to it.
00:00:48
Thank you. If you are here already because
00:00:51
of the Thanksgiving holiday, wherever you are traveling.
00:00:54
So we're going to hop right into it.
00:00:55
But before you get started, make sure you subscribe, like, share,
00:00:59
follow, all that stuff, helps with the algorithm, helps people
00:01:02
find us, helps people who are interested in California
00:01:04
politics find us. And as always with me, my
00:01:07
trusty, of course, the best, the fastest researcher in the West.
00:01:10
Camille, how are you doing tonight?
00:01:12
Good, thank you. How are you?
00:01:14
I'm good. I want to thank again everybody
00:01:16
who is out there watching us, wherever you are traveling or
00:01:19
whatever. Maybe you're trying to take a
00:01:20
break from hanging out with family.
00:01:25
Maybe it's already too much family for you with this
00:01:27
Thanksgiving week. So thank you, everyone for
00:01:29
tuning in. Wherever you are, whether you're
00:01:32
traveling, let us know in the chat.
00:01:34
Now, preface to tonight's episode, if you feel like you're
00:01:38
watching this episode and you're saying to yourself this feels
00:01:41
like Deja vu, did I watch this episode or listen to this
00:01:44
episode already, you wouldn't be that far off because tonight we
00:01:50
are kind of talking about two stories we talked about last
00:01:53
week. We've talked about Eric Swalwell
00:01:54
a little bit more stuff came out and he kind of hit the ground
00:01:58
running with campaigning. So we have more of his unique
00:02:02
ideas on what he was due as governor.
00:02:04
New candidates have entered, old candidates have dropped out.
00:02:08
The Rob Bonta story, which we were joking before we hopped on,
00:02:12
sounds like it's going to end up as a Netflix documentary.
00:02:15
That's how strange it's getting. And then Karen Bass trying to
00:02:18
deflect from any responsibility for the wildfires.
00:02:21
So we have a ton of stuff to get to.
00:02:24
But the first story I want to talk about is this Rob Bonta
00:02:27
story. So last week we talked about how
00:02:30
Rob Bonta had spent $480 in campaign funds for legal fees.
00:02:37
And that was basically, that was the big news.
00:02:39
Everyone was like, wait, why are you spending $480 with this
00:02:42
law firm that specializes in white collar crime?
00:02:47
I'm I'm I'm, I'm imagining he's hiring them for white collar
00:02:52
crime because everything else is like corporations or IPI don't
00:02:56
think that he's hiring them for that.
00:02:58
And that's a lot of money to spend for something that's not,
00:03:02
there's no crime. So I do want to go back.
00:03:06
This story has been ongoing for a while and it gets crazier and
00:03:09
crazier. And like I said, this is
00:03:11
probably going to end up somebody asked, do we engage
00:03:15
with the chat? We do.
00:03:16
So we are watching the chat. So, you know, if you have any
00:03:19
questions or comments or anything like that, we are
00:03:21
watching the chat. Check in and let us know where
00:03:23
in California where you're tuning in from.
00:03:25
I like my visual aids. So I went ahead and engaged in
00:03:28
some arts and crafts and create came up with this nice little
00:03:32
chart, basically outline all the players.
00:03:35
Because before we really jump into this story, we have a video
00:03:39
and breaking news. Let's take a look at this.
00:03:43
Andy Duong is one of the Duong brothers who is being indicted
00:03:48
by the feds for bribery and corruption.
00:03:51
This was, this happened I think almost a year ago.
00:03:54
We were looking at like I think almost a year ago, maybe January
00:03:57
of last year. And he was engaged in
00:04:00
corruption, bribery, bribing politicians.
00:04:04
So he's like the big head honcho.
00:04:06
I guess you could say he was the big fish that they were going
00:04:09
after with the feds. That's why he's at the top.
00:04:11
He was also a big donor to a lot of heavy hitting Democrats.
00:04:15
Gavin Newsom, Rob Banta. Obviously, we know about Sheng
00:04:20
Thao, who was the former Oakland mayor until she was indicted and
00:04:24
had to quit. She is facing federal charges
00:04:28
for corruption involving Duong brothers.
00:04:30
So there's a trial for that going on.
00:04:33
That's going to happen in October of next year.
00:04:36
So she's facing federal charges. He's federate, facing federal
00:04:39
charges. Rob Bonto last year was
00:04:42
connected and we looked at it and said, oh, that's
00:04:44
interesting. He had to return $155.
00:04:47
I wonder why now It came out that he spent almost half,
00:04:51
$1 on legal fees related to this criminal investigation.
00:04:57
And then there's this other gentleman, Mario Juarez.
00:05:00
And Mario Juarez is, I call him like the bagman for the Duongs
00:05:05
because he was like the money man.
00:05:07
So he was a Democratic insider in Oakland.
00:05:11
Keep in mind, this is all like Oakland politics.
00:05:13
Like this is how corrupt and bad Oakland is.
00:05:15
Is like, this is all Oakland. Like they're all Oakland
00:05:18
natives. Mario Juarez is an Oakland
00:05:21
native. He was almost gunned down
00:05:24
outside of his house. That's how crazy this story
00:05:27
gets, is I think the Duongs put out a hit on him to shut him up
00:05:33
when they were facing speculation.
00:05:35
I just, yeah, speculation. That's what I'm speculating is
00:05:39
that the Duongs put out a hit on Mario Juarez.
00:05:41
They almost killed him outside of his house in Oakland.
00:05:44
So he's like the bag man. He's the money man.
00:05:46
He's the one who like, arranged all the money for the
00:05:49
politicians. There's belief that he is the
00:05:52
whistleblower and the feds like #1 witness in this case.
00:05:57
So he's spilling all the beans on what's going on because he
00:06:00
knows where all the bodies are hitting, where all the skeletons
00:06:04
are. So any questions before we move
00:06:07
on to the video and then we'll continue talking about this
00:06:10
story. Anybody from the chat?
00:06:12
Camille? This is all goes back to the the
00:06:18
federal lawsuit of the mayor, right?
00:06:21
Yes. Yeah.
00:06:22
This was all part of the federal indictment linking to the mayor.
00:06:26
When she was there was an FBI raid on her home and they found
00:06:30
all this information. Yeah.
00:06:32
That so that there was all this money with the jawongs who owned
00:06:34
like a waste management company up there.
00:06:39
And then Rob Bonta hasn't been accused of anything, but he was
00:06:44
brought in for questioning or brought in as a witness and
00:06:47
immediately lawyered up almost 500K.
00:06:51
And that was back in February that he paid.
00:06:53
And you looked at the the law firm and like you said, they
00:06:55
deal with a lot of this sort of white collar crime.
00:07:02
And I just want to make sure I like that me and the chat that
00:07:07
were caught up. I know we talked about it
00:07:09
before, but this story. So then we we know Mario, right?
00:07:17
Is that his name? Mario Juarez was gunned down.
00:07:20
We know that happened. We don't know why or who was
00:07:23
behind it, but we are speculating that it goes back to
00:07:26
this somebody was paid likely. We're not saying somebody was
00:07:33
paid, but there's a lot of speculation.
00:07:37
She leaves the she leaves line up.
00:07:38
It appears that you know, because it happened like right
00:07:42
after a bunch of this started coming out.
00:07:44
And here we are today and more has come out with Rob Bonta, the
00:07:50
attorney general of California. Yep, a lot of people checking
00:07:54
in. I just want to let the chat out.
00:07:57
A lot of people checking in from the East Bay tonight.
00:07:59
So this is right in your backyard.
00:08:00
All of this nice corruption, this story that you have you
00:08:04
have insider information or you know, rumors.
00:08:07
Tell us, you know, rumors. Let us know.
00:08:09
But let's check out this news story and what has transpired
00:08:15
since. Last week, a defendant in the
00:08:18
bribery and corruption case surrounding former Oakland Mayor
00:08:21
Shang Tao allegedly took a secret compromising video of
00:08:25
California Attorney General Rob Bonta.
00:08:27
That is just one of the explosive accusations in a
00:08:30
letter obtained by the ABC 7 News I team that appears to have
00:08:34
speed up the FBI investigation. Good evening.
00:08:36
I'm AMMA Dates. I'm Dan Ashley, thanks for
00:08:38
joining us here. The I team's Dan Noise is
00:08:40
investigating all of this and is here with the latest Dan.
00:08:43
Well Dan and Amma, this letter may also help to explain why the
00:08:46
Attorney General spent $468 of campaign contributions on
00:08:51
legal fees to help him deal with FBI investigators.
00:08:55
I want to emphasize that Rob Banta has not been charged in
00:08:58
this case and there's no indication he is a suspect.
00:09:02
In the letter dated May 9th, 2024 to Attorney General Rob
00:09:06
Banta, Mario Juarez writes about his business partners from
00:09:10
Oakland based California, Waste Solutions.
00:09:13
I have first hand knowledge of various criminal activities
00:09:16
perpetrated by the De Wong family, including money
00:09:19
laundering, illegal political donations, falsification of
00:09:22
contracts and exploitation of straw donors.
00:09:26
These activities extend to facilitating prostitution for
00:09:29
elected officials, including minors.
00:09:33
I'm just going to stop right there.
00:09:36
We, it seems to me we have in California our own Jeffrey
00:09:43
Epstein, right? Like, this sounds like a Jeffrey
00:09:47
Epstein sort of story where the Duongs are so powerful and they
00:09:50
funneled so much money to politicians for power.
00:09:55
They got kickbacks. They got favorable contracts.
00:09:57
They got whatever they wanted because they were so embedded
00:10:00
with a lot of these Democratic politicians.
00:10:02
Now, there's allegations that they were trafficking minors to
00:10:06
politicians. Now, I'm not saying that again,
00:10:09
allegedly, we don't want to get in hot water with the attorney
00:10:12
general of California. But allegedly Rob Bonta was
00:10:17
videotaped in a compromising position by the Duongs so that
00:10:23
they could use it as blackmail on Rob Bonta to get whatever
00:10:28
they wanted. So that's that's just a
00:10:31
clarification. It seems like we quite literally
00:10:35
have a Jeffrey Epstein story on our hands here in California
00:10:38
with the Duongs. Rob Bonta, attorney general,
00:10:42
knew far more of what was going on in this investigation with
00:10:46
the Duongs then then. Any of us knew.
00:10:50
Steven Tavares runs the political sub Stack East Bay
00:10:53
Insiders. He first broke news of the
00:10:56
Juarez letter and I obtained it from another source.
00:10:59
The letter shows that Mario was despondent and that he was
00:11:03
basically going to get back retribution against the Duong's.
00:11:07
Mario Juarez was partners with David and Andy Duong in
00:11:10
Evolutionary Homes, a company that converted shipping
00:11:13
containers to housing for the homeless.
00:11:16
But war his rights that on May 3rd, 2024, the Duongs locked him
00:11:20
out of the showroom on the Oakland waterfront and that they
00:11:23
ordered an attack by a group of armed men.
00:11:25
Quote I was threatened with firearms and a knife, assaulted
00:11:29
and robbed the personal belongings including a gold
00:11:31
chain and Rolex watch the I team obtained these photos showing
00:11:35
Juarez's injuries, his swollen face and head.
00:11:38
He goes on to say he was coerced into delivering an apology to
00:11:42
David Dewong while Andy and Christina Dewong recorded the
00:11:46
interaction. Then just one month later.
00:11:49
And he started shooting back, like firing back.
00:11:54
Juarez got into a shootout with men who broke into his SUV.
00:11:58
Tavares believes it's no coincidence that just days
00:12:01
later, the FBI raided the homes of David and Andy De Wong and of
00:12:06
then Oakland Mayor Shang Tao and her partner Andre Jones. 11 days
00:12:10
later, the raids happen. It strongly suggests that the
00:12:15
FBI had found Mario Juarez, made him the star witness When this
00:12:21
got out, that he was cooperating.
00:12:23
They moved quick. Some of what Mario Juarez wrote
00:12:26
in that letter appears in the Federal Bribery and Corruption.
00:12:29
Just one more break. Well, probably another break.
00:12:33
So here's the timeline. Is that Mario Juarez Newton put
00:12:38
out this letter and then the Duongs locked him out, beat the
00:12:42
crap out of him, stole his personal belongings.
00:12:45
He tried to go home and then he was almost assassinated.
00:12:50
And then, of course, law enforcement picks him up because
00:12:52
there's this shootout. And then I guess he becomes the
00:12:55
star witness in this whole Duong thing.
00:12:57
And then 11 days later, so let's put the little bread crumbs
00:13:01
together. Mario Juarez, who was on the
00:13:04
outs with the Duong, all of a sudden, 11 days later, now
00:13:07
they're being raided by the FBI. And Sheng Thao, who are now
00:13:11
facing federal indictment. So it sounds like he was trying
00:13:15
to get this letter out to say, I have all this knowledge of
00:13:18
illegal activity. They try to allegedly, allegedly
00:13:24
try to get rid of Mario, and then law enforcement scooped him
00:13:28
up before he could be in any more danger.
00:13:30
So that's where we're at right now.
00:13:36
Indictment His name isn't there, but he's believed to be listed
00:13:39
as Co conspirator. 1 Wilson Leung is a former federal
00:13:43
prosecutor. It is interesting that this
00:13:45
letter came out, gosh, more than a year ago now, and some of its
00:13:49
allegations seem to have been proven sufficiently correct so
00:13:54
that the feds are willing to take action on some of them.
00:13:56
Lawyers for Andy Dewong emailed me that he vigorously denies the
00:14:00
baseless allegations in this letter.
00:14:02
David Dewong's lawyers say he strongly denies them.
00:14:05
They both argue that Juarez has credibility issues and cannot be
00:14:09
believed. Dan Newman, spokesperson for
00:14:11
Bontes reelection campaign, confirms the attorney general
00:14:15
received the letter and forwarded it to the FBI.
00:14:18
Juarez also wrote Bontes should know that Andy Dewang in
00:14:22
particular has a recording of you in a compromising situation
00:14:26
and that he routinely engages in entertaining elected and other
00:14:29
officials to extract recordings without their knowledge for
00:14:33
later use in blackmail circumstances.
00:14:36
A recording of him in a compromising situation, although
00:14:38
it's uncertain what that means, it's also uncertain whether
00:14:41
that's true. So there's a lot of questions
00:14:45
that this letter prompts. The spokesman for Rob Bonta
00:14:48
tells me the attorney general is not concerned about that report
00:14:52
of a compromising video and says Mario Juarez wrote that letter
00:14:56
as a desperate guy at a desperate moment with walls
00:14:59
closing in. All right.
00:15:04
So I don't want to speculate what the compromising position
00:15:07
is, but it seems like so far, what this Mark Juarez has said
00:15:16
has been backed up. So that's why the feds are
00:15:18
continuing to listen to him. And he's continued to be like
00:15:21
their star witness. So a lot of this stuff that he's
00:15:24
put out there seems to be true. And it seems this isn't just Rob
00:15:28
Bonta, it's a lot of politicians.
00:15:30
So I wonder a year ago, back in May of 2024 / a year ago, which
00:15:36
is when it looks like this happened, we said, boy, I wonder
00:15:40
how deep this goes. Now.
00:15:43
I really wonder how deep this goes because if they take videos
00:15:47
of people in compromising positions, I just again, we
00:15:52
might have like a Jeffrey Epstein situation on our hands
00:15:56
where these duongs have videos of politicians and all these
00:16:00
compromising positions. Somebody said there was a
00:16:03
council member from San Leandro, Leandro, just South of Oakland
00:16:07
that is also caught up in the investigation into Shengtao.
00:16:10
So there's a lot more people who I think are going to be caught
00:16:14
up in this. Here's an article from the SFS.
00:16:17
It goes in a little bit more about long.
00:16:20
Not long after Shang Thao's house was raised by the FBI in
00:16:22
the summer of 2024, a quickie scandal bubbled up that state
00:16:25
Attorney General Rob Bonta has some tangential involvement vis
00:16:28
a vis helping steer $680 in state loan money to a failed
00:16:33
energy startup run by one of the figures in the Shang Thao
00:16:36
scandal. That scandal never went
00:16:39
anywhere, and Bonta, who was state assembly at the time of
00:16:42
the loan, was never shown to have any wrongdoing on his hand.
00:16:48
So this was all the way back, how many years ago, back in 24?
00:16:55
So he's been involved with the Duongs since he was an
00:16:58
assemblyman. This was the the law firm
00:17:01
Wilson, Sasani, Goodrich and Rosati, presumably to defend him
00:17:05
from that mess, though notably it's generally believed that
00:17:09
Juarez is now the FB is informant and whistleblower in
00:17:11
the Shang Thou case and has turned against the alleged bribe
00:17:13
givers who are now being prosecuted.
00:17:15
The letter to Banta's day of May 9th, 2024, which is a few weeks
00:17:18
after the Shang Thou raid a few weeks before.
00:17:23
And there's a nice little picture of Rob Banta.
00:17:25
This is Rob Banta and I believe Andy, this is Andy Duong and his
00:17:28
wife Mia Banta. So that's them hanging out, and
00:17:31
there's lovely little limo that he probably took them out in.
00:17:36
But then it goes on to talk about the letter disco that
00:17:39
Shank Thao's boyfriend, Andre Jones, was being paid more than
00:17:41
$80 for fictitious work as well as illegal financial
00:17:44
contributions during the mayoral campaign, which the FBI said was
00:17:49
true. More craziness.
00:17:52
And how deep this really goes really becomes the big question.
00:17:58
And I did want to take a look at this real.
00:18:00
There's some more pictures. This was Rob Bonta with Andy
00:18:04
Duong at a Warriors game. It looks like Golden State
00:18:10
Warriors, and then this is them and that limo again, this was
00:18:15
the shootout. That's what the car looked like.
00:18:17
So there's plenty of pictures of Rob Bonto with Andy Duong.
00:18:19
So they were very close. They were very friendly.
00:18:24
And where this goes, that's all we can speculate at this point.
00:18:30
Like this is really one of those crazy stories where it just gets
00:18:35
deeper and deeper and deeper. And I can imagine I, you know,
00:18:39
as an attorney myself, I've talked to other like attorney
00:18:43
buddies of mine and said $500 for legal fees is a ton
00:18:51
of money for legal fees, it is a ton of money.
00:18:54
You usually don't drop $500 on legal fees right at the
00:19:01
beginning unless it's a huge retainer, unless you have trial
00:19:04
or something like that. But if there's nothing there,
00:19:07
you don't usually drop $500 on something like this.
00:19:11
So it is very fishy. It is very odd that all of this
00:19:16
is happening. I wonder how much Rob Bonta is
00:19:20
trying to cover up, how much he is trying to trying to get ahead
00:19:26
of. Maybe he's trying to get this
00:19:27
legal team ahead of all of this. Maybe he wants to be
00:19:30
cooperating. Who knows?
00:19:32
But again, this might be sort of a Jeffrey Epstein of California
00:19:36
sort of situation where who knows how deep this goes, How
00:19:41
many politicians are probably implicated in all of this.
00:19:46
Looks like we lost Camille for a second.
00:19:47
So I'm just going to keep going. The story keeps unfolding.
00:19:53
That's literally what's happening here is that the story
00:19:55
keeps unfolding and it looks like, oh, here's Camille, she
00:20:00
came back. Hey, Camille, I was just
00:20:03
finishing up my thoughts. We were showing some pictures of
00:20:05
Rob Bonta, Andy Duong. I mean, this is really kind of
00:20:09
like A to be continued story. Like right now there's.
00:20:14
This is the information we have. There's supposedly a letter he
00:20:17
spent $500 on defending himself from a crime that
00:20:20
supposedly didn't happen and where it goes from here.
00:20:25
Obviously we're going to keep on top of it, but I wanted to get
00:20:28
your thoughts about all of this because I've been talking for a
00:20:31
little bit now. Yeah, thank you.
00:20:35
So this story, like you said, it has been crazy.
00:20:39
And I think we even said when we first started talking, before we
00:20:42
knew that Rob Monto was involved in the story where we were
00:20:45
talking about it on a previous episode last year or earlier
00:20:47
this year, whatever it was, we said we need to start looking
00:20:51
into everybody that the Duong family has donated to.
00:20:55
And we had pulled up like they had been involved in other
00:20:57
corruption at issues, but we said, we speculated how deep
00:21:03
does this really go? And then even this, I feel like
00:21:05
this isn't as deep as it goes. And like you said, this should
00:21:09
be and could be a Netflix documentary someday.
00:21:12
And this is a crazy California story, might be the most crazy
00:21:16
California story happening because, I mean, it involves our
00:21:19
attorney general of all people, the attorney general who again,
00:21:23
I understand he hasn't been accused of a crime.
00:21:26
And then you, we do know the 468 K that came from the campaign
00:21:31
funds earlier this year. But then I wonder what has come
00:21:33
from him privately, if he's, you know, paid more lawyer fees
00:21:37
since then privately that we obviously are not Privy to
00:21:40
because they're not public record.
00:21:44
And then I'm sorry, I don't know if you covered the FPPC filing
00:21:49
because a lot of people, Yeah, good call.
00:21:52
That's you're, you're probably, if you're on social media often,
00:21:55
you're probably seeing this, you're making a big deal about,
00:21:58
yes, an FBBC. What complaint has been filed
00:22:02
against Rob Bonta? And I'm not saying nothing
00:22:06
happened because again, we don't really know what's going to go
00:22:08
on with this story. But I do want you to know that
00:22:11
an FBBC complaint could be nothing.
00:22:14
It could absolutely be nothing. It could be huge.
00:22:17
I have looked at the like for for years now.
00:22:22
Literally I look at the monthly agenda of the FPPC and I'll see
00:22:26
where they'll come up with somebody had a complaint and
00:22:30
they researched the complaint. And then what the FPPC does is
00:22:34
that if the complaint is valid, they will open a case.
00:22:38
If it's not, they just close it. I have had a few FPPC complaints
00:22:43
of my own. One of them has been dismissed,
00:22:45
one of them has been, they've checked into it and closed it.
00:22:49
Another one, they asked for information and it's been
00:22:53
pending for a few more years. Like they actually contacted me
00:22:55
and asked me for a bunch of information.
00:22:57
So I just want to say that the complaint could go nowhere or it
00:23:02
could be huge. But we're seeing a lot of, you
00:23:06
know, sensationalized posts about, yes, there has been an
00:23:08
official complaint. Like anybody here can go and
00:23:11
make an A complaint and then it could go nowhere.
00:23:15
So just wanted to add that. Yeah, yeah, it's, it's very
00:23:19
sensational because a lot of people think it's a big deal,
00:23:22
but it it happens all the time. Anybody can make it and it can,
00:23:27
anybody can do it. People make FPPC complaints all
00:23:29
the time. Whether they're going to look
00:23:31
into it is another issue that's, you know, FPPC doesn't move very
00:23:37
quickly in our experience is that it doesn't move very
00:23:41
quickly at all. So, but the feds on the other
00:23:43
hand, move very quickly. So the feds might be moving
00:23:46
pretty quickly when it comes to bond to again, $500 to drop
00:23:52
on legal fees for no crime is quite the story.
00:23:54
Somebody said $500 is like OJ style billable hours for the
00:24:00
whole trial like that. Yeah, it's kind of like that.
00:24:02
Like I I mean, I haven't even heard of a case in my lifetime
00:24:06
that build over $500. Like usually it's to go through
00:24:09
trial, maybe they get to $200, but those are pretty
00:24:13
big civil trials, not usually things of this magnitude.
00:24:18
So we will keep our eyes and ears open and obviously as stuff
00:24:23
happens, we'll keep updating you.
00:24:24
What's going on with this whole Rob Bonta story?
00:24:26
Just keeps getting more and more interesting.
00:24:30
Switching gears from trafficking in prostitution and compromising
00:24:35
positions, which is a little bit dark and serious.
00:24:38
Let's move to something a little bit more light hearted.
00:24:41
Our favorite gas passer in waiting to be governor, Eric
00:24:46
Swalwell, who announced last week that he was running for
00:24:50
governor. We did a couple of clips.
00:24:52
He hit the ground running. He immediately hit the ground
00:24:55
running. He had campaign events.
00:24:57
He went on all these different shows.
00:25:00
One of the shows he went on was with Alex Michelson, who is now
00:25:03
a new CNN guy he was with who is a KTLA or Fox LA.
00:25:10
He might. So he moved from Fox LA.
00:25:12
He's Ala based reporter now he's with CNN, but he had a video
00:25:18
interview or he had an interview with Swalwell and he came out
00:25:21
with this idea to for all Californians when it comes to
00:25:26
voting. So let's take a watch real
00:25:27
quick. I know you from a style
00:25:31
perspective, respect what Governor Newsom has been doing
00:25:34
in terms of taking the fight to Donald Trump.
00:25:36
I know you're close with him. But from a.
00:25:38
Policy perspective? Is there any major change?
00:25:40
I want to modernize the state. And, you know, he wrote a book
00:25:43
called Citizensville, which I read when I was up and coming
00:25:47
Lieutenant. And he laid out a lot of, you
00:25:48
know, great ideas then and he implemented some of them.
00:25:51
And and he, you know, was a modernizing force.
00:25:55
He's leaving. And and so there is going to be
00:25:56
a void. I want us to be able to vote by
00:25:58
phone. I mean, every California vote by
00:26:01
phone. Yeah.
00:26:02
If we can do our taxes, do our you know our make our healthcare
00:26:06
appointments, you know make. I don't know anybody who does
00:26:14
their taxes by phone. I'm just going to throw that out
00:26:17
there. I don't know anybody who does
00:26:18
taxes by phone. You may talk to your accountant,
00:26:22
you may talk to H&R Block by phone, but I don't think you
00:26:27
actually do your taxes by phone. It feels like a little
00:26:30
something, a little bit more serious.
00:26:31
You should taxes or something. Of course, we're not fan of
00:26:35
taxes here, but you know, if you don't do your taxes, then the
00:26:38
government comes down on you with the threat of force and
00:26:40
imprisonment. But so you have to take it
00:26:43
seriously. So I wouldn't just trust a phone
00:26:46
to do my taxes or do some sort of app.
00:26:50
That's all I'm saying. I I don't know anything about
00:26:53
people who use their phone for taxes.
00:26:55
We'll talk about the whole voting by phone in a second,
00:26:58
but. Actually your do your banking
00:27:00
online, you should be able to vote by phone.
00:27:02
Make it safe, make it secure, but it's actually already
00:27:05
happening all over the United States.
00:27:07
I want us to be a blue state that doesn't do just a little
00:27:09
bit better than like Georgia or Alabama when?
00:27:13
It's happening all over the United States.
00:27:16
Yeah, he said that like it's happening phone, vote by phone
00:27:19
is happening all over the United States.
00:27:21
Is that just like he's running to be the governor of the
00:27:24
country of California? Was that him?
00:27:27
That's the point. Is that a Freudian slip?
00:27:31
Didn't he say that, though? Sorry, I know that's a totally
00:27:34
different topic, but did he not say I'm running to be the
00:27:37
governor of the country of California or something like
00:27:40
that? Yeah.
00:27:40
And Jimmy Kimmel, he said that California is the greatest
00:27:42
country in the world. And then Jimmy Kimmel was like
00:27:45
the greatest country. And he's like, yeah, it's the
00:27:47
greatest country. Now.
00:27:48
Let's listen to that again. He definitely said he was a
00:27:50
modernizing force. He's leaving and and so there,
00:27:53
you know, our maker healthcare appointments, you know, make
00:27:58
essentially your do your banking online.
00:28:00
You should be able to vote by phone.
00:28:02
Make it safe, make it secure, But it's actually already
00:28:04
happening all over the United States.
00:28:08
Again, that was a good catch, Camille, because what do you
00:28:12
mean? It's happening all over the
00:28:13
country. I don't know any state that
00:28:15
allows you to vote by phone. This is the reason this is going
00:28:19
viral is because it's such a crazy cockamamie idea that
00:28:23
everybody's looking at going, excuse me, vote by phone.
00:28:26
Like as if mail in ballots and just shoving mail in ballots in
00:28:29
everybody's box isn't already an issue.
00:28:32
And now you want people to quite literally like press 1 for
00:28:36
Democrat, press 2 for Republican?
00:28:38
Like, is that how this is going to go?
00:28:39
Is that how how are they going to verify It's actually you
00:28:42
like, not that they actually verify anybody who is anybody
00:28:46
voting in California without voter ID or anything like that.
00:28:50
But I is that a slip where he said people are voting by phone?
00:28:55
I don't know. I my conspiracy hat is on
00:28:58
tonight because after that last clip we were just talking about
00:29:02
this is off topic. But with the last story, we're
00:29:04
just talking about putting my tinfoil hat on.
00:29:08
What if the story of Dana Williamson, who was indicted for
00:29:13
corruption and was the former chief of staff for Newsom, and
00:29:18
this Duong story are all connected?
00:29:23
Somebody cue The X-Files music. Anyway, let's finish.
00:29:28
What else does his bright ideas on how to modernize and maximize
00:29:32
democracy? This to be a blue state that
00:29:34
doesn't do just a little bit better than like Georgia or
00:29:37
Alabama when it comes to like voting access.
00:29:39
I want us to Max out democracy also as it relates to democracy,
00:29:43
if you wait in line for 30 minutes or more.
00:29:45
If you do want to vote in person, I think you should find
00:29:48
every county for every minute that a person has to wait
00:29:51
longer. We have to be better, not just a
00:29:53
little bit better than the other states.
00:29:55
The DMV I don't think. Did he just propose a new tax?
00:30:02
He did. He proposed a new tax on the
00:30:04
counties. If you if you don't move people
00:30:06
through the lines fast enough within 30 minutes and who's
00:30:09
who's keeping track of this? Who's keeping track of the fact
00:30:12
that you're in line for 30 plus minutes?
00:30:15
Like these are all really crazy ideas.
00:30:19
And this is what he's leading with.
00:30:20
This is what Eric Swalwell leading gubernatorial campaign
00:30:23
with. I feel like he basically just
00:30:25
said I don't want senior citizens to vote because first
00:30:28
of all, they're probably going to be slower in the poll like in
00:30:31
person on the computer screen or either in person, you know, like
00:30:35
they're going to probably be a little bit slower than the rest
00:30:37
of us in person. But then I can't even imagine
00:30:41
that them trying to figure out this app or whatever on their
00:30:45
phones to vote. And so he's basically just like,
00:30:49
don't stand in line, don't like and use your phone.
00:30:52
And it's like, what are the senior citizens supposed to do?
00:30:56
But OK, I guess they have mail one.
00:30:59
Some of the chat said you need to get a few solid clips on your
00:31:01
soundboard. The X-Files one would be a good
00:31:03
one. Yeah, that'd be a good one.
00:31:04
Every time we come up with a new conspiracy, we just hit The
00:31:07
X-Files name like tinfoil hat time.
00:31:10
All right, let's see what else he has to say.
00:31:12
Californians should have to go in person to the DMV anymore.
00:31:16
I think we can do that virtually.
00:31:17
I think you you can have the DMV employees do it virtually, but
00:31:21
that's a lot of real estate. Is that the most popular
00:31:23
position of DMV? I mean, nobody wants to go to
00:31:29
the DMV, but are you going to like reduce the personnel of the
00:31:34
DMV to service people in person? How are you going to get a
00:31:38
picture ID like Howard? Yeah, I have to renew my license
00:31:44
next month and by thing like, you know, normally whatever a
00:31:49
few years go in, I will all go in because my birthday's after
00:31:51
Christmas. I'll go in on Christmas Eve
00:31:53
early in the morning and I'm in and out really quickly.
00:31:55
But this one, they're like you have to do the like the written
00:31:58
test but already. But how old am I and the new eye
00:32:03
exam and get a new photo and I'm like, I can't even renew online.
00:32:07
I'm I mean, I'm, I'm kind of with him on like no one should
00:32:10
go to the DMV. But I guess I have to do all
00:32:14
like I have to go in person. I don't have the option of doing
00:32:16
this online. And I wish I did.
00:32:19
Yeah. I mean, nobody wants to go to
00:32:21
the DMV. Are they going to reduce
00:32:22
personnel? Are they going to try and make
00:32:24
it more efficient? Are they going to try and save
00:32:26
taxpayers money by making it virtual?
00:32:28
Are they going to save them money by not having to charge
00:32:30
for all the real estate? Like he was talking about how
00:32:32
much they have to do that. I doubt it.
00:32:35
I doubt that will. I doubt as Eric Swalwell is
00:32:39
actually going to reduce the cost of running the DMV, not to
00:32:42
mention all the people who are going to have to get pensions
00:32:44
who work at the DMV. But that's his idea.
00:32:49
He wants to vote by phone. I, you know, it's bad enough
00:32:54
like the argument has been made and I sort of agree with the
00:32:57
idea of like, if you can't get your butt off the couch to even
00:33:00
like walk down to a polling station.
00:33:03
You know, outside of if you have like a disability and you can't
00:33:05
get to the polling station, you, you go out and you request an
00:33:08
absentee ballot and you request all the reasons why you need it.
00:33:12
That's what it should be used for.
00:33:13
But if you're too lazy to get off the couch and like go to a
00:33:19
voting center, I don't think you're that engaged in the
00:33:22
political process wherein you should be voting like, I don't
00:33:26
know, like if if you're not, if you're not bothered enough to
00:33:30
actually get off the couch and do anything like is, are you
00:33:33
bothered enough to do research on politics?
00:33:36
Are you bothered enough to read about politics?
00:33:39
Or to me, it just seems like it's an issue of maybe the
00:33:42
people who really want to vote should be able to just walk in
00:33:45
and vote and and get rid of the mail in balloting.
00:33:48
Like we, we brought it all in because of COVID and the
00:33:51
universal mail in ballots. And then there was ballot
00:33:53
harvesting, which is even crazier that someone can show up
00:33:56
to your door and ask for your ballot and be like, Hey, have
00:33:59
you voted? If not, like I can get it for
00:34:02
you and bring it to the like, just collect all these ballots.
00:34:05
I don't know. There has to be a little bit of
00:34:08
effort on the part of voting. And if you just have to sit on
00:34:11
your couch and and press a button of who you're going to
00:34:14
vote for that, that seems fishy to me.
00:34:18
Like I, I wouldn't trust that. I don't know if anyone in the
00:34:21
chat would trust voting by phone.
00:34:24
I feel like even if you're trying to get in customer
00:34:26
service, like fix like a bank issue or your cell phone, like
00:34:30
it you, you have trouble just getting through to like customer
00:34:33
service. Now you want your like one of
00:34:35
your most important rights as an American to be trusted to some
00:34:38
sort of phone tree or phone bank.
00:34:39
Like, I don't know, I don't, I don't think anyone's well, this
00:34:44
is going to be an app, an app that'll probably take AI mean
00:34:47
OK, the Cal Access website, which is through the Secretary
00:34:53
of State, which is where you go and you can look up all these
00:34:55
financials of these candidates and politicians.
00:34:58
Like it's where you can, you know, see who's filed, look at
00:35:02
their spending, their their earnings and all that.
00:35:06
They have been in the works for how long now to they were
00:35:09
supposed to get a new website with the whole program was
00:35:12
supposed to be upgraded, I want to say like 10 years ago.
00:35:16
And it was supposed to take a couple years.
00:35:19
And like with everything else, the budget has gone, it's been
00:35:24
overblown and hasn't even happened yet.
00:35:27
It's like a decade behind just, you know, like the high speed
00:35:30
rail, like so even this idea, if they implement it, we're going
00:35:34
to get taxed. You know, the last few pennies
00:35:38
that we even have of our paychecks to go to this app that
00:35:41
will probably never even come to fruition because it's just going
00:35:44
to all all the issues that they're going to have with it
00:35:47
and creating it. And just this is how the
00:35:49
California government works. So I feel like even if he
00:35:53
somehow gets this through that it's like an approved idea that
00:35:58
it's just never going to actually happen.
00:36:01
And I did see a story we I was thinking about it being a topic
00:36:04
tonight was new SIM and the government spent $450 million on
00:36:10
revising or updating the 911 system and it didn't happen.
00:36:16
They never updated it. And it just nothing ever got
00:36:20
better. So just to give you an idea of
00:36:22
California and how they can modernize things and make things
00:36:26
better, we spent a half a billion dollars to update the
00:36:28
911 system and it didn't help at all.
00:36:32
So there's a half a billion dollars in taxpayer money down
00:36:35
the drain. So I spent $6 billion to end
00:36:38
homelessness or 24. How much, how much should we
00:36:41
spend on homelessness that? Well, it was 24 billion before
00:36:45
they asked for Prop 1. And then Prop One asked for an
00:36:48
additional $6 billion in bond, which then we did the math is
00:36:53
going to end up being about $10 billion for taxpayers to pay
00:36:56
back with interest. So I'm sorry, this was not
00:37:00
supposed to be Chide's topic, but but yeah, just as an example
00:37:03
of like, if you think you can trust the California State
00:37:06
government to fully enact and be able to do some sort of safe and
00:37:13
secure method of voting by phone, I've got a bridge to sell
00:37:17
you. Yeah.
00:37:19
So. But yeah, Eric Swalwell, his
00:37:23
entrance into the race has caused another candidate to just
00:37:27
be overwhelmed with his his prowess, his intellect, his
00:37:32
charisma. And he decided I'm out.
00:37:36
You know, I'm, I'm out now. I'm going to step back.
00:37:39
And I think it's time for me to relinquish the the reins over to
00:37:45
Eric Swalwell. I'm going to watch this clip
00:37:47
real quick and try not to cringe too badly.
00:37:51
So you're dropping out of the race?
00:37:52
I am dropping out of the race and supporting Eric Swalwell as
00:37:57
the next governor of California and he will be the greatest
00:38:00
leader of this great state, California.
00:38:03
So, and with that, you know, I've been with you and I brought
00:38:07
props. You like a good.
00:38:10
Prop. I like a good prop but I have
00:38:12
this pin that I had made. It's.
00:38:15
Golden Bear. It's the Golden Bear, and I give
00:38:17
it to you as I wore it proudly, and I want you to wear it
00:38:20
proudly. Thank you.
00:38:22
Yeah, let me put that. On Well, look at that.
00:38:26
I mean you 2 you 2 are long time friends.
00:38:29
What? What?
00:38:31
In in case you're listening on audio or you missed it, Steven
00:38:35
Klubek. And if you ask who this guy is,
00:38:37
we'll explain in a second. Took his Golden Bear pin and
00:38:43
gave it to Eric Swalwell as a way of passing the torch.
00:38:49
You might be asking, who the hell is Steven Kubek?
00:38:52
Well, it doesn't matter anymore. He was pulling at 0% anyway, so
00:38:55
he's a nobody. And he passed it to Eric
00:38:58
Swalwell as if it was this big gesture of like, you go get him,
00:39:02
son. I'm really impressed with you.
00:39:05
What does this mean to you, This moment?
00:39:08
Thank you, Steven. It does mean a lot.
00:39:10
And I've admired the race that you've run You you ran to bring
00:39:13
down. Costs day one.
00:39:16
I let everyone know that I didn't intend to get in this
00:39:19
race and I interviewed every single candidate and I could not
00:39:24
find one that was qualified, so I decided to jump in myself.
00:39:28
When Eric jumped in the race, we sat and talked, and Eric's a man
00:39:35
of integrity. I mean integrity like dating a
00:39:41
Chinese spy, but whatever. Integrity like possibly being in
00:39:48
trouble for mortgage fraud? Sure, that sort of integrity.
00:39:53
Character values and a great leader, and it'll be a great
00:39:59
leader of this wonderful country, the state of
00:40:02
California. And I'm happy to say tonight
00:40:06
that I'm going to merge my campaign into his and give him
00:40:09
all the hard work that I've worked on and let him take it
00:40:12
forward and cheer him on so. Quit spider I just that was
00:40:21
emotional that was I was taught that is a OK all yourself
00:40:29
together Camille. I know it's a touching moment of
00:40:31
Steven Klubeck who everybody in the chat is going who Stephen
00:40:36
Hubeck Steven Hubeck Steven. I was about to state Steven
00:40:42
Hubeck. Steven Klubeck was a billionaire
00:40:47
who ran as a Democrat again. Democrats hate billionaires only
00:40:50
when except when they run as Democrats.
00:40:54
He pulled it 0%. A fun story about Steven Klubeck
00:40:59
for us behind the scenes. Here's a little inside baseball
00:41:03
we were getting at least. I was approached by the Steven
00:41:07
Klubeck campaign a lot because they said, well, would you be
00:41:14
willing to wear Steven Klubeck's clothing or merchandise and do a
00:41:19
post about Steven Klubeck? You know, we'll, we'll give you,
00:41:23
we'll send you the date, we'll send you the merchandise.
00:41:26
There might be a little bit of a payment.
00:41:29
Just do the post. And I was like, if anyone knows
00:41:33
this show, anyone who's a new listener, we don't do any
00:41:36
endorsements. We never endorse a candidate.
00:41:38
That's not the point of the show.
00:41:40
Our whole thing is we believe our listeners are smart enough
00:41:42
to hear the information and make their own decisions.
00:41:45
And I said, look, we're, we're not into that.
00:41:47
We're not doing that. So I guess that was his whole
00:41:49
thing was buying off influencers and giving them free merch and
00:41:53
making them do like little skits or something on social media.
00:41:57
We didn't because I was like, that's stupid.
00:42:00
So that's our little inside baseball.
00:42:01
Steven Klubek. So I guess that's what responded
00:42:05
with Steven Hubek. I said who?
00:42:09
That's all he said. Who?
00:42:10
Just give me this. I'm sorry, is this the wrong
00:42:13
number? I don't know who you're talking
00:42:14
about. Steven Kubek.
00:42:16
Can I say your name again, bro? And I was like, does he want to
00:42:21
come on the show? Like, is that what you're
00:42:22
asking? They're like, oh, well, maybe
00:42:24
maybe he wants to come on the show.
00:42:25
But just, you know, do you want us to give you money in this
00:42:28
merchandise? I was like, no, I don't want you
00:42:31
to give me money or merchandise because that's not who we are.
00:42:33
And I don't, I'm not going to wear merchandise of a guy who's
00:42:36
pulling at 0%. So Stephen Kluebeck's out.
00:42:40
And I'm sure you're all devastated that Stephen
00:42:42
Kluebeck, A billionaire's out. But don't don't fret.
00:42:45
Just when one billionaire Democrat leaves, there is
00:42:48
another billionaire Democrat who has entered the race.
00:42:50
So everyone hold on, don't don't fret.
00:42:53
There's another billionaire who has jumped into the race.
00:42:56
He's a familiar face, big anti Trumper.
00:43:00
So let's take a look at his campaign ad.
00:43:04
The richest people in America think that they earned
00:43:07
everything themselves. Bullshit.
00:43:09
Man, that's so ridiculous. There's a reason everybody comes
00:43:14
here to start businesses, because this is the place that
00:43:16
invents the future. I never want to lose that spark.
00:43:19
I'm Tom Steyer. I wanted to build a business
00:43:22
here now it's worth billions of dollars and I walked away from
00:43:25
it because I wanted to give back to California.
00:43:27
I've taken on the out of state corporations that refuse to pay
00:43:30
their California taxes. I've taken on.
00:43:31
Yes, he did not walk away from the business.
00:43:36
He sold his shares of the business for like millions or
00:43:40
billions. Yeah, he didn't walk away.
00:43:44
As a businessman who is a billionaire, he got paid for his
00:43:49
business, so didn't walk away. He didn't give up billions of
00:43:54
dollars like this altruistic guy.
00:43:57
The oil companies I've taken on, the tobacco companies, we've
00:44:00
raised billions of dollars for California citizens without
00:44:03
charging California citizens. And now every day I was judged
00:44:07
by numbers. So let's get down to brass
00:44:09
tacks. Californians deserve a life they
00:44:12
can afford. But the Californians who make
00:44:15
this state-run are being run over by the cost of living.
00:44:18
We need to get back to basics, and that means making
00:44:22
corporations pay their fair share again.
00:44:24
Californians deserve the top ten education state.
00:44:27
They deserve to be able to afford to live.
00:44:30
I mean, at this point, California's so bad in
00:44:32
education, maybe just top like 25 would be an improvement
00:44:37
because right now they're what, 45th?
00:44:39
47th in education? Did they lose their way to 38th?
00:44:43
Oh, OK, they're making progress. So maybe shoot for 20, top 25,
00:44:47
you know, don't make it like too high of expectations, but top
00:44:53
half of the country would be an improvement where it is now.
00:44:56
In a decent house, I will launch the largest drive to build homes
00:45:00
that you can afford. In the history of California, we
00:45:03
have the second highest. I always fret over politicians
00:45:08
saying they're going to help build housing because unless
00:45:13
you're next, the next words out of your mouth are I'm going to
00:45:16
scrap Sequa, I'm going to reduce regulations.
00:45:20
I'm going to, you know, work on making getting rid of
00:45:23
regulations that make building materials so expensive, make it
00:45:26
so that not everybody has to be a union contractor again,
00:45:30
bringing down the cost of building the house.
00:45:32
I don't really want to hear your solution because your solution
00:45:36
as a politician and likely as a progressive Democrat means
00:45:39
taxing the hell out of somebody to build some sort of housing
00:45:43
that nobody wants, like some high density apartment complex.
00:45:48
So yes, also name one bill that the California legislature has
00:45:54
passed regarding affordable housing that has brought down
00:45:57
the cost of housing. Well, none, because it just
00:46:01
keeps going up. So I can't think of any.
00:46:04
Exactly. In the country, if we break up
00:46:07
the monopolistic power of utilities, we're going to
00:46:10
unleash a complete wave of innovation and drop our sky
00:46:15
high. I'll let you go 1st.
00:46:17
I have a comment on this too. I I think you and I probably
00:46:22
both agree because we complain about like a high cost of
00:46:24
utilities all the time and that and we do agree that they are
00:46:28
like their monopoly. At this point.
00:46:30
It's basically PG&E owns SGG and E in Edison and I don't know
00:46:34
what they call it up north, but yes, PGD pretty much has the
00:46:38
control of the power over this entire state.
00:46:43
And I'm not going to go down the rabbit hole of the different
00:46:46
things that we could do. I'm sure you're going to.
00:46:48
But anyway, he doesn't say how he's going to do this, but if
00:46:54
he's doing it as governor, I don't think he's going to like
00:46:57
in any way, shape or form try to privatize it.
00:46:58
He's going to do it as a government thing.
00:47:00
And so then it just becomes, it's no longer for the
00:47:03
corporations to do, it's for the government to do.
00:47:06
And that's just one more thing we don't need to give to the
00:47:08
government because it will never become affordable.
00:47:11
It will just keep going up or, you know, tax like crazy.
00:47:14
Anyway, your comment, yeah, my comment was I I agree with them
00:47:18
in principle that power companies and utility companies
00:47:24
as a public monopoly are why utility prices and electricity
00:47:29
continue to rise. And there's nothing you can do
00:47:31
about it because there's no competition.
00:47:33
Like who's going to stop SDG and E or PG&E or anybody like that
00:47:37
from raising your prices? Doesn't matter.
00:47:39
You're not going to get electricity from anyone else
00:47:41
anyway. So in principle, I agree with
00:47:44
the idea that you should just get rid of like these public
00:47:46
monopolies. But to your point, I think he's
00:47:50
probably not leaning towards let's allow more competition,
00:47:54
allow other companies to come in and make it better.
00:47:57
I think he's probably saying the government should have a bigger
00:47:59
role in utilities. And it's already bad enough when
00:48:03
the government is sort of in a public private partnership with
00:48:07
utilities. And let's see how that's going
00:48:08
because the government is sort of in bed with the utility
00:48:12
companies and they have no power over them.
00:48:15
So it's either competition, like unleash competition and let's
00:48:19
see what happens. Let's see if companies build
00:48:21
like more nuclear power plants to create more like low cost
00:48:24
energy. But I, I have a feeling it's not
00:48:28
that. And we tried to find his website
00:48:31
and he doesn't have a website yet, which is funny as a
00:48:33
billionaire, you think you'd be able to afford like paying
00:48:35
someone. He does.
00:48:37
Oh, he does have a website. Yes.
00:48:39
I just I didn't know what it was.
00:48:41
Sorry, I wasn't clear when you asked me earlier.
00:48:43
I just googled like Tom's stare is it stare star for governor?
00:48:49
And then it like whatever it was popped up and because there was
00:48:52
something on there that I had copied and pasted to you in text
00:48:57
where I made fun of like he says this, but yet this is what he's
00:49:01
done. So I'm sorry.
00:49:03
I I should have found it and sent it to you.
00:49:06
My apology. I did.
00:49:08
I did go through DuckDuckGo and nothing came up.
00:49:11
So maybe it's just not up in the search results yet.
00:49:13
But yeah, I feel like he's moving towards to finish our
00:49:18
thought. I think he's probably moving
00:49:20
towards the government needs to take over and allow for more
00:49:22
competition, which when the government takes over, something
00:49:25
that never allows for more competition.
00:49:28
Energy prices. This is about disrupting the way
00:49:31
people think so we can get a completely different and much
00:49:34
better outcome for the people of California.
00:49:36
I'm saying we have a broken government.
00:49:38
It's been bought by corporations.
00:49:40
And my question is, who do you think is going to change that?
00:49:43
Sacramento politicians are afraid to change up this system.
00:49:48
I'm not. They're going to hate this.
00:49:51
Bring it on. I'm Tom Steyer and.
00:49:55
I'm running. I love the tough guy act.
00:49:57
They all do it. They all just to I'm going to
00:50:00
take on Sacramento. I remember I'm I'm going to take
00:50:03
on the powers. Sure you are.
00:50:06
So just to be clear, when billionaires who run as
00:50:10
Democrats and vow to take on the system and drain the swamp,
00:50:15
good. But when Republican billionaires
00:50:20
say they want to take on the system and drain the swamp,
00:50:22
that's bad and that's fascist. So just so we're all on the same
00:50:27
page, like, OK, so we just understand that Democrat
00:50:30
billionaires are fine. Even though I, I'm not sure that
00:50:34
either of these two guys, Steven Klubek, Stephen Hubek who just
00:50:37
left the race, and Tom Steyer, he didn't do well.
00:50:40
He ran for president. That's right.
00:50:43
He ran for president, actually got into some debates and stuff
00:50:47
like that. Obviously didn't earn any votes
00:50:50
or anything like that, dropped out almost immediately.
00:50:52
He was a big anti Trumper. He funded tons of stuff against
00:50:56
Trump and ads and all that stuff.
00:51:01
Let's see how people respond to Tom Seyer being a billionaire
00:51:04
and running. But it seems like there are more
00:51:07
billionaires on the Democratic side who are jumping into the
00:51:10
race. As far as the Republican side,
00:51:12
there is Sheriff Bianco, who as far as I know, is not a
00:51:16
billionaire. He's been in law enforcement.
00:51:19
So and Steve Hilton, that's it. And neither of those guys are
00:51:24
billionaires. So you had more billionaires on
00:51:26
the Democratic side than you did on the Republican side, which is
00:51:29
interesting. What are your thoughts on Tom
00:51:34
Steyer running for governor? OK.
00:51:38
I actually think politically it does make sense because he has
00:51:40
been, you know, he's a big climate change guy.
00:51:43
He has donated it like a ton of money and time to endorsing
00:51:48
different propositions, endorsing politicians like what
00:51:51
He walked away from his business, his billion dollar
00:51:56
business. He he'd left to get involved in
00:51:59
politics and vowed to donate a ton of his personal money to,
00:52:04
you know, climate change and politicians and making change.
00:52:07
Whether we agree with this policies or not.
00:52:09
Like it makes sense that he would step into this because he
00:52:11
has been so politically active for over a decade.
00:52:14
And so I, you know, and then there was the presidential run.
00:52:18
So I see how that makes sense for him.
00:52:21
Yes, he on his website that does exist, he said that he would
00:52:28
like to ban corporate money, corporate PAC money from you
00:52:34
know going to politicians and controlling political activity.
00:52:39
And yet he has an LLC far of HRLLC that is explicitly like
00:52:47
for donating it's it's basically donating big money to packs and
00:52:53
Democrats. And so I think that's very funny
00:52:55
that who like $12 million, I think it was that is gone from
00:53:02
his LLC is, you know, so his corporation to political
00:53:07
activity, whether it's been belt initiatives and props and
00:53:13
Democrats so and the and the Democrat party.
00:53:17
So I just find that really funny that he suddenly is against that
00:53:20
when he runs for governor, which also, sorry, this is a like a
00:53:29
legal question. Citizens United versus the FEC.
00:53:33
I understand the FEC is not California.
00:53:35
I understand it's federal, this is state, but I do feel like it
00:53:38
set a precedent. In 2010, there was that lawsuit
00:53:41
that basically Citizen United, which is a pack.
00:53:45
The Supreme Court ruled that packs are like money, money is
00:53:52
free speech. And so I don't see how he could
00:53:56
ban the corporate. Like again, I understand that
00:53:59
that's a federal thing and that this is now he's talking about
00:54:01
state, but wouldn't it be covered under that?
00:54:04
Like, you can't ban that. I'm sorry if I didn't make sense
00:54:08
to anybody. No, no, because the First
00:54:10
Amendment is incorporated into the states through the 14th
00:54:14
Amendment. There's likely a First Amendment
00:54:18
argument that if you suppress corporations exercising their
00:54:22
free speech by donating to certain politicians.
00:54:26
Yeah, there's probably a case there that if that's what
00:54:29
happens, that he tries to do that, he could probably try to
00:54:32
limit it. But again, this is all assuming
00:54:35
in the crazy world that Tom Steyer actually ends up being
00:54:38
governor of California, which I don't believe he will be.
00:54:42
And it's always interesting how these billionaires who made a
00:54:46
ton of money in California are all of a sudden these, like,
00:54:51
super liberal, progressive Democrats.
00:54:53
It's like they pulled up the ladder behind them.
00:54:55
Like, yeah, you did really well and you're a billionaire and you
00:54:58
can afford literally everything. And now all of a sudden they're
00:55:01
fans of pushing the stuff that makes it more unaffordable for
00:55:05
the middle class and more regulations and a bigger
00:55:08
Sacramento and a bigger parasite up in Sacramento.
00:55:12
I was just thinking off the top of my head, I wonder if Eric
00:55:17
Swalwell, I, I mean, I, I believe Eric Swalwell jumped in
00:55:20
for one reason. That's because Katie Porter
00:55:22
imploded. Like because of all the stuff
00:55:24
that happened, Eric Swalwell jumped in.
00:55:26
I think Tom Steyer also jumped in because Katie Porter
00:55:30
imploded. It's getting more and more
00:55:33
crowded. The vote is getting split
00:55:35
probably 10 ways at this point. There's like 10 name Democrats
00:55:41
who are vote or run. I mean, there's like a crap ton
00:55:43
of Democrats who are running, but like 10 recognizable names
00:55:47
that are running in the Democratic primary.
00:55:52
So I think her vote is getting more and more watered down.
00:55:55
And I'm sure Eric Swalwell is trying to swoop in and be the
00:55:58
moderate guy, the moderate fighter.
00:56:01
I did read or I saw an interesting article I did want
00:56:04
to read. Maybe we'll read it next week.
00:56:06
But it was going over the whole fact that like you have all
00:56:10
these Democrats who are running for governor of California and a
00:56:14
lot of their message like Katie Porter is anti Trump.
00:56:20
So what are they going to do when there is no Trump?
00:56:23
Like their whole thing is being anti Trump.
00:56:26
Like Eric Swallow is anti Trump, Tom Styer is anti Trump, Katie
00:56:29
Porter's anti Trump, Xavier Becerra is anti Trump.
00:56:31
They're all running on this like hate Trump, Trump or is really
00:56:34
bad, the orange man bad. So it's interesting and like,
00:56:38
OK, now you got to really think about what are you going to do
00:56:41
for Californians? And I think more Californians
00:56:43
are starting to wake up to this and go, well, what are you going
00:56:45
to do to help Californians? As maybe there's a, there's a
00:56:49
portion of the people who do hate Trump and will vote based
00:56:53
on Trump. But for governor, I feel like
00:56:55
there's going to be a lot of questions about affordability
00:56:58
and what they can do to actually help California.
00:57:03
So that'll be an interesting kind of thread throughout this
00:57:06
election for the next year is OK, Trump's not going to be in
00:57:10
office in two more years. What do you do?
00:57:13
You're all campaigning on we hate Trump.
00:57:16
OK, but what's next? Like, what's, what's your real
00:57:19
strategy here? What are your thoughts?
00:57:22
Right. Well, yeah, two things regard.
00:57:25
Yes, regarding that. I I did believe that that's why
00:57:28
Eric and Tom have jumped in is because it became clear that
00:57:32
Katie was losing popularity very fast.
00:57:34
And of course there's always the diehards who are just going to
00:57:36
stick with her. But I think they were like, wait
00:57:39
a second, we're we're in a we're in a hot mess here.
00:57:42
We got to do something. And so it makes sense other
00:57:46
people jumped in and the I don't care if they hate Trump truly
00:57:50
they could they can hate Trump any, any of you can have it.
00:57:53
You can love Trump, hate Trump, I don't care.
00:57:55
It doesn't change my opinion of any of you like great, cool.
00:57:58
But when you're a politician or you're running for a certain
00:58:00
office that well, yes, you would have to work with the president
00:58:03
for a couple of well, you have to work with the president, the
00:58:06
sitting president the whole time.
00:58:07
But regarding Trump, it's just going to be like 2 years and the
00:58:11
one of those years, he'll be like a lame duck at that point.
00:58:13
But it's yeah, it's this is about California.
00:58:19
California has issues. We have many issues.
00:58:21
I don't need to name them. What are you going to do to fix
00:58:23
California? How are you going to help
00:58:24
Californians? We don't need you to have these
00:58:28
cool gotcha Trump tweets. Like that's not what
00:58:31
California's need. And and so that's why it's like
00:58:35
cringy when I see Gavin Newsom's office trying to like, they have
00:58:38
that press office on X, trying to copy that.
00:58:41
It was funny once I did laugh. I can appreciate a good joke at
00:58:45
a good pun. And I get like, you know, but
00:58:47
then it just became cringe because it was like copycat
00:58:49
Trump. But what, you're not doing
00:58:52
anything for California. We know you want to run for
00:58:54
president and that you're, you know, basically running a
00:58:56
campaign at this point, Newsome. But California still needs you
00:59:00
to do something to do a lot of somethings.
00:59:03
And so so, yeah, I wish that they would just stop talking
00:59:07
about Trump. And I guess that is how they
00:59:09
think they're going to get all their votes is like, oh, well,
00:59:11
as long as we let everyone know we hate Trump, they're like, oh,
00:59:13
OK, you're you got my vote. And that's sad.
00:59:17
And back to the the Tom ad real quick.
00:59:21
So he made his money in white collar.
00:59:24
There was like banking and hedge fund stuff and like, that's what
00:59:27
he did. And that's fine.
00:59:29
But he, his whole video had like blue collar stuff going on in
00:59:33
the back. If he was, I don't know, he was
00:59:35
like trying to make it like, I'm, I'm this person.
00:59:39
I'm one of you. And I'm so tired of, of these
00:59:41
politicians doing this because they do.
00:59:43
They act like I want your vote and I'm just like you and I, you
00:59:47
know, I know what it's like to struggle to pay the bills.
00:59:49
And it's like you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.
00:59:51
Please sit down and shut up. Yeah.
00:59:56
All right. Speaking of a because we're
00:59:58
heading up in the air, I want to get this one more story Speaking
01:00:02
of Democratic politicians who hate Trump and blame everything
01:00:05
on Trump. Karen Bass went on Alex
01:00:08
Michaelson's show to talk about the wildfires because there's
01:00:11
been some reporting out of the LA Times about them being the
01:00:15
firefighters being ordered to leave the site that then started
01:00:18
up the fire again. But I want to take a quick look
01:00:21
at that and we'll take a look at the articles as well and then we
01:00:24
will comment and give our thoughts.
01:00:28
But you know, there's plenty of critics, Spencer Pratt, who's
01:00:32
online a lot talking about this, has pointed out the fact that
01:00:35
there were no infrared cameras that were used to to see
01:00:39
potentially this thing smoldrum. Is that a mistake?
01:00:42
All of that has to be looked at. That is certainly a tool that
01:00:46
could have been used and it's my understanding if that tool had
01:00:49
been used they might have been able to see that.
01:00:51
But that's why now there has to be the after action at the
01:00:54
Lochman, at the Lochman Fire. And you know that it was at the
01:00:58
the AT FS report and the arrest of the arsonist that a lot of
01:01:03
attention focused on the Lackman fire.
01:01:04
So Austin Buettner, who is now running for mayor against you,
01:01:08
says we need to do an independent investigation, that
01:01:11
the LAFD should not be investigating itself.
01:01:14
That is happening as well. There is an independent
01:01:16
investigation that the governor has ordered and we we don't
01:01:20
anticipate that full report to come out for a few months, but
01:01:23
there might be parts of it that comes out soon.
01:01:26
We have to do both. We have to do all of the above
01:01:28
but. The there will be parts so we
01:01:30
can make sure we can do proper damage control slowly but
01:01:33
surely, or we can make sure we edit things before they all come
01:01:37
out all at once. Line is is that there needs to
01:01:40
be significant change and it will happen.
01:01:43
Rick Caruso, who ran against you for mayor last time and may run
01:01:46
against you for mayor the next time, put out a statement saying
01:01:50
the lack of transparency, responsibility and
01:01:52
accountability in all of this for the mayor's office is
01:01:54
staggering and inexcusable. We need full transparency, not a
01:01:58
political cover up. What's your response to that?
01:02:00
Well, my response to that is, is that we absolutely need to get
01:02:04
to the bottom of everything that went wrong.
01:02:06
There is absolutely no political cover up that is happening here.
01:02:10
But one thing that I think is so important is, is that people are
01:02:13
still suffering, people who lost their homes, who lost
01:02:17
relationships, the people that lost their lives, those family
01:02:20
members. And one of the things that I
01:02:22
think has been a tragedy in this whole situation are people who
01:02:25
take advantage of folks grief and people who use it for
01:02:30
political gain and political reasons.
01:02:32
And I think that that is frankly changing.
01:02:34
Is that what you think Caruso is?
01:02:35
Doing. I don't know what he's doing.
01:02:36
OK, what do you make? But you know, there's a lot of
01:02:39
people that are angry when they hear about these text messages,
01:02:42
when they hear about the fact that there was nobody pre
01:02:45
deployed, when they hear about the infrared, they feel like
01:02:48
this fire could have been prevented and they feel like the
01:02:51
city, if the city would have done more, their home wouldn't
01:02:54
have burned and 12 people wouldn't have died.
01:02:56
What do you say to those people? Absolutely understand that
01:02:59
people would feel that way. We will get to the bottom of it.
01:03:02
Change is underway and this. So the text messages that she's
01:03:08
referring to is this story from the Los Angeles Times.
01:03:11
Days before Palisades inferno, firefighters were ordered to
01:03:14
leave smoldering burn site. Firefighters mopping up a small
01:03:18
brush fire, the authority said reignited as the Palisades fire
01:03:21
five days later were ordered to leave the original burn scene
01:03:24
even though they complained the ground was still smoldering and
01:03:27
rocks remained hot to the touch, according to firefighter text
01:03:30
messages reviewed by The Times. To the firefighters surprised,
01:03:34
their Battalion Chief ordered them to roll up their hoses and
01:03:37
pull out of the area on January 2nd, the day after the 8 acre
01:03:40
blaze was declared contained, rather than stay and make sure
01:03:43
there's no hidden embers that could spark a new fire, the text
01:03:46
messages said. In one text message, a
01:03:48
firefighter was at the scene on January 2nd wrote that the
01:03:51
Battalion Chief had been told it was a bad idea to leave the burn
01:03:54
scar unprotected because of the visible signs of smouldering
01:03:59
terrain and the rest is history. The revelation that firefighters
01:04:03
fear the Lachman fire could reignite comes as Pacific
01:04:06
Palisades residents and others who lost homes and loved ones
01:04:08
demand to know why more wasn't done to protect their
01:04:10
communities. Complaints that the city and
01:04:12
state failed to properly prepare and respond to a January 7th
01:04:16
fire are already under the subject of numerous lawsuits and
01:04:18
a Republican LED inquiry by the US Senate committee.
01:04:22
City Council member Tracy Park, who represents Palisades, said
01:04:25
she had heard from residents that there was smoke at the site
01:04:27
before January 7th. Quote, I think it raises the
01:04:31
question, knowing that there was fire on January 1st and then
01:04:34
rekindle activity, knowing that there's an enhanced risk in the
01:04:36
area, why weren't additional resources staged or deployed in
01:04:40
around the area? Let's see, this is from
01:04:44
Villanueva, who is the current interim Fire Chief.
01:04:48
He said as far as we were concerned, the fire was
01:04:51
extinguished. Unbeknownst to us, it was still
01:04:53
rooting, still in the rooting system.
01:04:55
So to get all technical, there's like there's fires that can
01:04:59
happen underneath the soil, like so you don't see it, but there's
01:05:03
like fires happening under the ground, like just little embers
01:05:06
and stuff, and that can bubble up and reignite.
01:05:10
So that's sort of what these firefighters were saying is,
01:05:12
hey, a lot of these rocks were hot to the touch, meaning that
01:05:15
there is something going on underneath.
01:05:17
We should probably keep an eye on it.
01:05:19
Quote, it is common practice for firefighters to check on past
01:05:23
wildfires because you want to make sure it is dead out, said
01:05:26
Patrick Butler, a former LAFD assistant chief who is now the
01:05:30
Redondo Beach Fire Chief. Butler managed several large
01:05:34
fires for the LAFD and oversaw its arson team.
01:05:37
Quote, you don't leave until you have 100% mop up because fire
01:05:41
can hide underground and reignite unexpectedly even weeks
01:05:46
later. So it looks like a lot of
01:05:50
protocol was not followed and it was baffling to many
01:05:56
firefighters who were on the scene.
01:05:58
But they basically said in these text messages, the bad idea we
01:06:01
think that it's still undergoing, like it's still
01:06:04
underground. There's still something there's
01:06:07
embers like this could reignite at any moment.
01:06:09
So the fact that they were told to leave and then it reignited
01:06:12
days later and caused more damage is obviously raising a
01:06:17
lot of red flags like who issued the order, why was the issue the
01:06:20
order issued and in regards to the permits and the people
01:06:25
suffering this story can This is from the Daily Caller.
01:06:29
LA Times ripped for Palisades fire rebuild report after permit
01:06:32
records tell a different story. The Los Angeles Times ripped
01:06:35
online after publishing a story saying a home had been rebuilt
01:06:38
in the Palisades since the fire. The Times ran a piece already
01:06:41
under the headline. The first home has been rebuilt
01:06:43
in the wake of the Palisades fire, the story reported.
01:06:46
A2 story showcase home by developer Thomas James Holmes
01:06:49
had received a certificate of occupancy from Los Angeles
01:06:52
County shortly after the article went up.
01:06:54
Users on X accuse the outlet of lying.
01:06:58
Your former district Coalition's director and U.S.
01:07:00
House communications director Phil Hardy blasted the post,
01:07:03
saying it's not even true. It's just all an absolute
01:07:05
disgrace. Plans were submitted on November
01:07:08
8th, 2024. So this was before the fire.
01:07:12
So they submitted this their their plans well before the
01:07:15
fire. Not a fire rebuild just to
01:07:17
develop respect from 2024. So permits have been slow
01:07:24
rebuilding has been slow. Even though she is saying that
01:07:28
there she feels for the people who are suffering.
01:07:32
Yeah. Permits have not been issued as
01:07:33
fast as possible. It's a mess.
01:07:38
What are your thoughts? Yeah, it's it's a mess.
01:07:44
And they clearly use that story to try to act like they're
01:07:47
achieving something. And it wasn't even their story.
01:07:50
It wasn't something they did. So that's kind of embarrassing.
01:07:55
They tried to say that, oh, there's look at, there's this
01:07:57
first house that was built and it wasn't even actually anything
01:08:01
to do with the fire. I was looking up some
01:08:04
information permits issued between March and April 2025.
01:08:07
There's only three initial approvals July 2025 / 800 across
01:08:12
Pacific Palisades so far under 230 projects underway.
01:08:17
But this is probably the most disheartening and I, I clipped
01:08:20
this because I want to show this.
01:08:24
Experts say the best case scenario for recovery from
01:08:26
January's wildfires in Los Angeles to rebuild more than 80%
01:08:30
of destroyed homes won't be until mid 2028.
01:08:35
And to achieve this goal, roughly 300 homes need to be
01:08:37
built every month, according to the authors of Project Recovery.
01:08:42
So yeah, that's where we're at is that it doesn't look like the
01:08:47
majority of the Pacific Palisades will be rebuilt until
01:08:50
2028, almost three years after the fire.
01:08:57
And keep in mind this happened in January of 2025.
01:09:00
So it will be longer and then three years to rebuild the
01:09:04
majority of the Pacific Palisades.
01:09:08
That's sick, That's sad, that's very sad.
01:09:11
So for all of her crowing and bragging about they set up a one
01:09:16
stop shop and they are doing everything they can, they're
01:09:19
cutting the red tape, it does not look like it's going any
01:09:24
better for the poor people in Pacific Palisades.
01:09:26
And it looks like it's just getting worse and worse.
01:09:28
And they just, they, there's no relief insight.
01:09:31
And you have a mayor who is denying who's pushing
01:09:35
responsibility. And most importantly, what I
01:09:38
want to show that clip is the fact that she basically called
01:09:42
out people who question this. So Spencer Pratt was brought up.
01:09:47
He's been covering this a lot. So basically saying like, this
01:09:50
is dangerous. Like this is a disservice to the
01:09:53
people and people like Rick Caruso, who's questioning what's
01:09:57
going on with the fire, Like, you know, he shouldn't be asking
01:10:00
these questions. It almost seems like she's
01:10:03
trying to gaslight people that people who ask questions about
01:10:06
the Pacific Palisades are spreading misinformation and
01:10:10
they are more dangerous. The fact that people are
01:10:12
spreading this, quote UN quote, misinformation.
01:10:14
It's just people reporting on what they see are more
01:10:17
dangerous, and that's really the danger here, not the fact that
01:10:20
LA can't get its act together and get more permits out there
01:10:24
so people can rebuild or get out of the way and cut red tape.
01:10:28
No, it's people like Spencer Pratt who are just reporting on
01:10:31
this, or people like you and me who are just reporting on this,
01:10:33
or Rick Caruso who is out there asking questions.
01:10:38
We're the ones who are the danger and we're really harming
01:10:41
those poor people in the Pacific.
01:10:42
I'll say it's by asking questions and wondering, hey,
01:10:45
what the hell is going on? Why is this not going faster
01:10:48
than you promised? Because right now it's it's not
01:10:51
going very fast. And three years is a long time
01:10:53
for people to wait to get their home back.
01:10:56
And I imagine a lot of people are just going to pick up and
01:10:59
leave pretty soon. We're, we're coming up on a year
01:11:02
anniversary. And I imagine sooner or later
01:11:05
people are just going to pick up and leave and say, I'm I'm done
01:11:07
with this. I'm out of here.
01:11:10
What are your thoughts? And anybody in the chat as well
01:11:12
if you have any thoughts. Did I lose Chameleon?
01:11:22
Anyone in the chat throwing it out there to you as well?
01:11:26
Let me see. Let's see, somebody said.
01:11:30
I have open claims in the Oh, here we go.
01:11:34
I think she's back. Here we go.
01:11:38
I finished off asking what are your thoughts?
01:11:39
And then you froze at the perfect moment.
01:11:41
So cool. There was my thoughts.
01:11:44
No, so I, I was thinking about this.
01:11:47
It feels like the word misinformation is a liberal or
01:11:52
Democrat buzzword that they started using in 2020 against
01:11:56
anybody that goes, you know, with, like we saw with COVID, if
01:11:59
you go against their belief or their narrative and you ask
01:12:05
questions, you are now spreading misinformation and need to be
01:12:08
shut up. That seems to be just their
01:12:11
thing. Like how dare you question the
01:12:14
permit process? That's misinformation.
01:12:17
How dare you question the reservoir being empty?
01:12:19
That's misinformation. How dare you question if the
01:12:21
COVID vaccine is safe? That's misinformation.
01:12:25
Yeah, someone, someone in the chat said I have open claims in
01:12:30
the Palisades in Eaton. LA County is directly to blame
01:12:34
for the delay. I've insurers running out of
01:12:36
alternative living loss of use funds while their places are or
01:12:42
were to be rebuilt. So far out of 55 claims I've had
01:12:46
23 sold and left for other states.
01:12:49
Wow. So there you go.
01:12:52
Someone has insurance claims, knows that half of them have
01:12:55
just given up and left because your insurance is supposed to
01:12:58
cover where else you're supposed to live.
01:13:02
But they're running out of money.
01:13:03
Like the insurers are just running out of money because
01:13:05
they can't keep paying for these people to be living in hotels or
01:13:09
wherever they're living for for super long.
01:13:13
It wasn't meant for it to be that long of a time and three
01:13:17
years isn't fathomable to think that the insurance companies are
01:13:20
going to continue to pay for three years for your lives for
01:13:23
somewhere else. Someone asked are they still
01:13:25
paying property taxes and there was a response.
01:13:28
Yes property taxes do in the window for have adjustments have
01:13:31
done coming. Coming when it's criminal.
01:13:34
I agree. So people are paying property
01:13:36
tax. It's just like they've botched
01:13:38
this so badly. And I've said this before, like
01:13:41
back in January when we first covered this story.
01:13:43
I I think LA and the wildfires is a perfect encapsulation of
01:13:49
all the issues with California when it comes to over
01:13:53
regulation, incompetent leadership, a slow and
01:13:58
inefficient government. That's what I think of like it.
01:14:01
It all came to a congruence in LA and just it came at the worst
01:14:07
time to fall. I mean, it's what you call a
01:14:10
Black Swan event. Like they think they can keep
01:14:12
this game going with how big and bloated the government is as
01:14:16
long as there's no Black Swan event, meaning a catastrophic,
01:14:20
catastrophic event that no one sees coming.
01:14:21
And then the Black Swan event happened and now all these
01:14:24
people are out of their homes and it's just an absolute
01:14:27
disaster. So I mean, people are still
01:14:31
rebuilding what paradise up in Northern California.
01:14:33
They're still rebuilding up there from that fire.
01:14:35
And that was like, Jerry Brown was the governor when that
01:14:38
happened. And Trump, yeah, that was like
01:14:40
the at the end of his, right, Like Newsom had already been
01:14:43
elected. But it's Jerry Brown.
01:14:46
Yeah. That's how long ago it was,
01:14:47
though, 20, Yeah. It must have been like 2018.
01:14:50
So that's how long ago. And people in Paradise are still
01:14:53
rebuilding up there. So that's seven years later.
01:14:57
They're still rebuilding up in Paradise.
01:14:58
I mean, that's insane. Obviously not acting as quickly.
01:15:03
So, yeah, quick shout out to the chat, everyone, for being here.
01:15:08
Yeah, thank you, everyone for being here.
01:15:10
We went a little over today, but like I said, we did have a lot
01:15:12
to cover. Any final thoughts tonight,
01:15:15
Camille, before we sign off? How do I have final thoughts?
01:15:19
I don't think so. I know we went long, so I don't
01:15:21
want to keep everybody. I I really do appreciate you
01:15:24
guys being here with us sincerely.
01:15:27
I don't just say that. It's like I'm sometimes a
01:15:29
baffled. I mean, I think we put out good
01:15:31
information, but I'm like, oh, you guys all actually choose to
01:15:33
be here and like those of you in the chat, we always loved the
01:15:37
chat before I was on this podcast, I loved being in the
01:15:40
chat. I think it's it's fun.
01:15:42
So thank you. Thank you really for being here.
01:15:45
And I know it's Thanksgiving week, so it's kind of a shorter
01:15:47
week and you guys have a lot to do.
01:15:49
So the fact that you actually take your time to to be here and
01:15:52
chat with us, it's really awesome.
01:15:54
Thank you. Yeah.
01:15:56
We. We love when we see an active.
01:15:57
I'm grateful for you to be to be all you know.
01:16:02
I'm. I'm thankful for the people who
01:16:04
TuneIn. Thank you.
01:16:06
Yeah. You could be anywhere.
01:16:07
You could be watching reruns of your favorite sitcom or show or
01:16:10
something like that. You could be watching reruns of
01:16:12
the Office or something. But you've chosen to hang out
01:16:14
with us and learn about California politics and keep up
01:16:16
to date. So everyone have a great, safe,
01:16:20
happy Thanksgiving wherever you are around California, wherever
01:16:24
you are listening. Maybe it's not in California.
01:16:26
So thank you again for everyone for tuning in.
01:16:28
Best way to support the show that is 100% free is share it
01:16:32
with someone else. Tell someone about this show and
01:16:34
say, hey, you got to join me and TuneIn live at 8:00 PM every
01:16:37
Tuesday night, which is where we go live on YouTube and we'll see
01:16:41
you on the next one later.