Transcript
Full text
Welcome to the necessary conversation. I'm Chad Coulson. With me today is only my mom. Once again, we've been doing these little things in the middle of the week where I try to show you mom some media coverage of some big news story that's happening from the left. CNN, MSNBC is where we've been going. I'm going to start branching out to some other uh left-wing media sources as well. But I like doing these because I know you don't watch this presentation of these stories. is you're getting your news primarily from Newsmax. Right. >> Right. And you are also like you called me 30 minutes ago. Hey, you want to watch a clip with me? This is like it's like on the spot. This is real. >> I'm not even sure what you're going to show me exactly, but here we go. >> Well, what I'm going to show you relates to this story that is kind of breaking this week. Tom Hman, who was the head of ICE, now the borders are, was caught in an undercover FBI sting where two undercover FBI agents bribed him with $50,000 in order to get a government contract. When Trump, and that was during uh Biden, when Trump took over, he had the DOJ and the FBI drop the case. That's the story we're looking at. Okay, we're going to Hello. Yeah. But when did this happen? >> When did what happen? >> When are you saying that they that this occurred? >> During Biden's administration >> was the bri. >> Oh, during Biden's administration, >> but the reporting is just coming out now. This week there was a Let me just play the clip. Okay, here we go. >> Yeah. >> So, this weekend, MSNBC reporters Carol Lenig and Kendallian got a gargantuan scoop. Trump's borders are Tom Hman was caught on tape accepting $50,000 in cash after indicating he could help businessmen secure potentially lucrative government contracts from the Trump administration. That was the promise. Now, only the businessmen weren't actually businessmen. They were, of course, undercover FBI agents. Again, just an incredible swoop they got. This reporting is based on conversations with multiple people familiar with the probe, as well as internal documents reviewed by MSNBC. This undercover operation happened last September. So a year ago it took place be >> Okay, let me stop it here and just ask you this question. Do you believe this? >> No, one year ago. Why are they bringing this up now? One year ago. >> It was a year ago. It was a year ago. >> Hang on. You got two conflicting ideas here. One is you don't believe this happened >> and one is that it happened a year ago so it's irrelevant. Which one are you going with? I'm going with it was a year ago and if it did occur, why didn't they bring it up a year ago? >> Because as you'll see in the rest of this clip, it was an ongoing undercover investigation. >> Of course, it was. Play the clip >> before Trump even won re-election. And at the time, the FBI had been investigating someone else who claimed that Hman was soliciting payments in exchange for awarding government contracts if Trump won the election. So FBI agents hid cameras and posed as businessmen and recorded Homeman accepting $50,000 in cash from them. Can't make it up. Now, according to sources familiar with the matter, because the cash grab happened before the election and before Holman was actually a government official, the FBI and Justice Department sat on that recording and waited to see if he would try to hold up his end of the bargain once in office. But after Trump became president, his justice department shut the investigation down, claiming that despite the recording, they quote found no credible evidence of any criminal wrongdoing. Okay. Now, for its part, the White House has called the investigation blat blatantly political. Homeman himself did not respond to requests for comments from MSNBC about the original story, but since MSNBC published that scoop, the reporting has been matched in advanced by outlets like the New York Times and Reuters and the Washington Post, which is quite telling. those outlets. >> So, you think MSNBC, Washington Post, Reuters, New York Times are all lying about this? >> I don't think they're lying that it occurred, but I think they're lying that he was he was probably entrapped into doing this. And that's why the White House is saying no. >> What do you mean entrapped? >> It was a political entrapment that they were trying to get him on. They were trying to get him to take this money to be evil or whatever. It was an entrapment. >> No, you got to listen to the reporting. So, in this clip, what she's talking about, she's saying he was soliciting bribes from people, saying, "If Trump wins and you give me money, I'll help you get government contracts." He was soliciting those. The FBI was investigating somebody else and they heard about this. So, they're like, "Well, let's put some undercover guys on this." They sent in two undercover agents to pose as business people with $50,000 in cash. He took it. >> Right. Right. It was a political like we're going to try to entrap him. It was a hit. A political hit job. >> But he took the money >> and that's what the White House is calling it now. That's why it took the money. >> Right. Okay. They didn't take his hands and force him to take the cash from them. He did that, >> right? >> Of his own accord. >> They were trying to ent trap him. >> Okay. But he took the bait. He took the trap. >> Okay. But if they were trying to trap him, that's why the White House now has come out and said it was it was not legit. >> But he did the crime. He took the money. But that's nonjustice, too, to try to entrap someone as a political hit against them. >> Let's keep going. We have uh three minutes left of this clip. >> Added fun little pieces of color, too, like how the $50,000 in cash was handed over in a bag from the fast food chain Cava. Okay. And more serious details of two, like this one from the New York Times. That paper reports that law enforcement notified the incoming Trump administration about all of this, and they chose to appoint Homeman anyway. No surprise. Now, all weekend the White House has insisted that Homeman has not been involved with awarding any government contract since his appointment. Yesterday afternoon, the White House just flat out denied Homeman even ever took the money, ever even took it. And then last night on Fox News, Hman himself addressed the allegations. >> That story is out there and I imagine you want to respond to that. >> Absolutely. Look, I did nothing criminal. I did nothing illegal. And there's hit piece after hit piece after hit piece. And I'm glad the FBI and DOJ came out and said and you know said that nothing illegal happened and nothing you know uh no criminal activity. >> No notice home at no point did not is actually taking the cash. He just declared that nothing he did was criminal. He just says that Trump's justice department and Trump's FBI have cleared him. Nothing to see here folks. Trump's guys say he's good. Why not just take the Trump administration's word for it? I mean, Lord, just look at their record on public corruption. Yesterday, notice reported that under Trump, the team at the Justice Department that focused on fighting government corruption has gone from a team of 36 lawyers down to two lawyers. That's it. Just two lawyers plus a single parillegal. Certainly seems like Trump does not want anyone on the job actually investigating government corruption at all. Now, do you believe that that the Trump administration has dismantled the organization that is supposed to be looking into government corruption? >> I have read nothing about that. That's the first time I've heard it. And I don't like that lady on this clip anyway. So, I Yeah, I would have to No, the other one that Jen um >> I've never liked her during the Biden administration. >> Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter if you like her or not. It's it's about the information being conveyed here. >> Whether to believe her or not is the question. >> But she's not even she's not even the one reporting this. Hang on, Mom. >> I do believe. Okay. What >> she's put she's saying, as you can see the headline there that she has posted, the Justice Department had 36 lawyers fighting corruption full-time. Under Trump, it's down to two. She did not report that. She's showing you what this other newspaper is reporting. Do you believe that's true? >> I would have to investigate that. Why would I believe her? And until I do investigation, I don't believe anyone anymore. I try to investigate from all different sources than make my mind up. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, you think that may be a complete lie. >> I don't know. I need to investigate. I like to read from different sources. Even though you think I'm just all one-sided, I'm not. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Well, let's say that it is true. Do you think that's problematic that the Trump administration has gone from 36 lawyers trying to fight corruption in government down to two? >> If that is true, yeah, that's not right. >> Okay, >> they should keep everybody on board that they had. >> Right. Okay. >> And that fits a pattern we have been seeing for a while now because back in January, Trump kicked off his new term by firing inspectors general at various government agencies. He ultimately fired or demoted 20 of them in total. Those are the people who are supposed to investigate corruption inside government agencies. No. >> Do you believe that's true? This is reported by I think she had AP News and this is the New York Times reporting these things. >> I like again, can I read before you throw stuff in my face like this? I would like to read that. >> Of course. I I'm just asking you like when the New York Times reports something like this. >> If that's true, that's if that's true, that's very strange. Why would they dump all those people? Yes. because they're corrupt and they don't want to be caught doing their corrupt activities >> as all politicians are corrupt. But I would like to research and read that myself. >> All politicians may be corrupt, but no politician has come in and completely decimated the tier of legal professionals whose job it is to find corruption in the White House, almost specifically in the White House, but certainly in the government at large. No other president in the history of our country that I'm aware of has done anything like this. Just uh firing everyone who could possibly come after them. And you're also seeing Trump now come out publicly and say our DOJ needs to go after my political opponents or lawyers like Leticia James who who um tried his case. >> Well, but she has wrongdoing herself. So that's a whole another subject that we could debate on the necessary conversation at some time. What I'm saying is before I agree to you, yeah, that's true. I need to research some of this. >> And that's fair. >> Of course. I I'm not You're free to research anything you want. I'm just saying like when you see something like this that's presented to you with the headline from the New York Times >> or or AP, >> it does give you a question. Why? >> Okay. But you don't at face value believe that reporting? >> No, I don't. I don't like her. I don't believe anything from her. She's way leftsided. Way left. >> Mhm. Okay. >> No more need for them, I guess. In February, Trump fired the head of the agency that is supposed to protect government whistleblowers. No more whistles to blow, I suppose. Why? Who needs them? Now, a few days after that, Trump paused Justice Department enforcement of bribery laws for US companies overseas. Who needs those? And then in April, Trump's Justice Department disbanded the unit in charge of investigating cryptocurrency fraud. And that is a great example of Trump administration transparency. You see, this year has been the most lucrative year of Donald Trump's entire life. >> And do you believe any of this? >> You know, I don't know. Like I said, Ched, but what I don't like about her, she is very um her remarks are very one-sided and what do you know? I don't like the tone in her voice, the way she's describing all this stuff. If you're a real reporter or whatever she wants to report, report it. Let people make up their mind. She's not doing that. >> Okay. So, for you, it's about her. It's about the reporter. >> Part of it is I don't like her. I never have as a reporter. But try to set that aside and look at the information being presented. The the piece here that they're putting together for you is it starts with Tom Hman takes a bribe from undercover FBI agents. Donald Trump >> I have researched that. You told me that last week. I did research it. Everything I I saw the press secretary said that he did nothing wrong and he did nothing wrong. Nothing illegal. >> Okay. Right. The the investigation though was we send in the undercover agents, he takes the bribe, then we have to wait to see what happens if Trump gets into office and he tries to make good on that bribe by giving these people a government contract that then is illegal. >> But before he could do that, >> they tried to entrap him. They tried to entra him. >> Okay. Before he could do that second part of it, Trump eliminated the investigation. And like the reporting says here, Trump knew about this. The FBI told the administration, Tom Hman took a bribe from us and they were like, "I don't give a shit." >> Still hired him. So he must have thought it was no big deal and he still hired him. >> Or hear me out, Trump. >> Yes. >> And the entire White House is also corrupt. >> Okay, that's your opinion, not mine. >> Well, >> and hear me out. And hear me out. >> Okay. Who had the cocaine in the White House? >> Oh my god. The cocaine in the White House. >> Now we're just going to go down this this rabbit hole and it's like Trump >> no >> was best friends with Jeffrey Jeffrey Epstein. Like if you want to talk about crimes. He's a he's a 34time convicted felon. >> Oh my goodness. I thought we were talking about Tom Holman and we just go on and on. >> We're talking about this news because trapping me. No. Tom Hman is is a he's a small piece of the much bigger puzzle which is this administration is incredibly corrupt and he we now have a guy in it who is the head of all of his immigration policy or enforcing it at least who is >> on tape the FBI has tape of him accepting the bribe. >> Like I said the press secretary said entrapment more or less and nothing was illegal. But I do hear what you're saying, Chad. I really do. I do. >> Okay. Well, let's We got about a minute left here. >> Okay. >> His net worth has nearly doubled since he won last year's election. And it's not hard to see why. I mean, last week, the New York Times reported that back in May, the ruling family of the UAE deposited $2 billion into the Trump family's crypto startup. Two weeks later, the White House agreed to allow the UAE access to hundreds of thousands of the world's most advanced and scarce computer trips despite national security concerns for doing so. Now, I should say that >> now we talked about that unnecessary conversation when it happened. >> Do you remember that? >> Yes, I do. >> Do you believe that this happened? >> Yes, I do. I do. >> Okay. >> Because I read about that. I did read about that. >> And what do you think of that? I think all presidents get rich. Not just Trump. Anybody that becomes president, vice president, >> they all get rich. >> But not while they're president. You have never seen a president taking two billion dollars from a country and then giving that country special favor while he's in office. We have never seen that. >> Okay. So Biden and all his 13 family members that were mentioned didn't take in what 30 40 million during his >> 40 million. Look at the screen you're looking at. >> Yes. >> The UAE gave Trump $2 billion. >> Uhhuh. >> Taxfree by the way because it's his crypto. >> Billion millions. China. Biden. >> Now you're just saying words. What? Do you understand the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars? >> Yes, I don't have a billion. I might have million, but I don't have a billion. Yes, I know the difference. >> It's drastic. Let's just say that. And okay, >> what she's reporting on here is that he fired the person who was in charge of cryptocurrency fraud basically, >> right, >> in the government. And then he does this. He launches his memecoin which is just basically a money laundering operation where he can take money from any country anyone he wants. They in quotes buy his memecoin then he gives them all these computer chips. >> That's your opinion that it is. >> No, that's literally what happened. That's literally what happened. You're looking at the reporting right here. UAE gave him $2 billion. He gave them these computer chips. That's a bribe. >> Okay. >> Just like Homeman took. >> All right. Well, it's not ent trapped. Money didn't get entrapped. >> Keep going. >> What do you think entrament is? >> That you set someone up and you set someone up an illegal action set them up to make them go to prison or do something bad or go to jail. >> But if they commit a crime, whether the scenario of it is set up or not, if they commit a crime, they still commit a crime. You agree with that? But it's someone doing it on purpose to make them go to jail. >> Okay. >> Company deny any connection between the two deals. But wouldn't it be worth looking deeper to see if there is a little bit of a quid crop proquo pro quid proquo there? Sorry. Well, now thanks to Trump, the systems we used to have to investigate stuff like this that we've long had. To really get to the truth, those systems are either gone or are a shell of their former selves. That brings me back to the beautiful simplicity of MSNBC's scoop about Trump's borders are Tom H. Home. Homeman and the $50,000 bag of cash in a cav. You see, Hman reportedly took that bag of cash and made that deal on tape. Tape the FBI has and that Trump himself could order released at any time. So, there isn't a ton of investigative work that needs to be done here really at all. If the White House wants to deny that story, you know, Cash Patel also runs the FBI, so there's that. If that story is really all just some big misunderstanding out there, why not just release the tape? Sounds familiar, doesn't it? >> All right, so there you have it. Um, let's discuss that final question she poses. If all this is nothing, why not release the tape? Cash Patel could >> because it's because it is nothing. As she said, why release something that's nothing? >> Why not though? Why not release the Epstein files if he has nothing to hide? Why not release this tape if they have nothing to hide? >> I have no idea. >> Because they have something to hide, Mom. >> Okay. Not on the Tom Holman thing. We know there are names probably on the Epstein list that people don't want to see those released. >> Donald Trump is one of those names >> on both sides. On both sides. Dems and Republicans. Both sides. >> Yes, for sure. But >> Donald Trump right now is the one in power. He controls everything. He can release those files if he wants to. He's not. >> I still think they will be. I still think they will be >> after they redact his name out of all of it. >> We will see. >> So, watching this coverage, your main takeaway was that you don't like the host. >> Yeah. Well, no. My main coverage is I totally I believe that he was entrapped and if Trump thought it was a big deal, he wouldn't have him as borders are. He would have not hired him to be borders are. >> But you're not getting >> But he did hire him. >> You're not getting the bigger picture that Trump and everyone around him is corrupt and they are only in all of this to make as much money as possible. I don't believe that, Chad. That's your belief. >> But he took two billion dollars >> to give the UAE these these computer processors. >> All presidents take money to get rich while they are president. And after >> that is absolutely wrong. No president has ever done what Donald Trump is doing. He is selling merch. He is taking bribes. He is opening nightclubs. He's upping his uh fees at Mara Lago. You just heard the reporting. He's made more money this year than he ever has in his life. He has doubled his net worth >> and that's bothering you. Why? >> Because you >> He's still leading our country fine. He's still being our president. >> Well, we'll have a show on Sunday to see how fine he's leading our country. He's not. I mean, obviously the the thing with the acetaminophen that just came out this week, he's talking about Tylenol. We're going to talk about that. I shouldn't >> Okay, but let's talk about it real quick. The funny part about this is >> he and Kennedy came out and, you know, said that those are their findings or beliefs now that that autism, >> right, to stay away from it. >> Yeah. >> And then what happens? the crazy libs on the other side. There's clips of pregnant women just downing a bottle of it, downing it. So, what we need to do is say, "Don't or yeah, don't do this." And they will. >> Okay. So, fine. We're we're talking about it. Let's just go there. Tylenol came out, I think it was in 1955. Autism. The term was first coined, I believe, in 1911. >> I know. >> No. Came out way before Tylenol. >> People had autism way before Tylenol is is basically what I'm getting at. >> So, >> okay. >> Right there. The whole argument kind of falls apart, doesn't it? Where he's talking about in Cuba, nobody takes Tylenol and they don't have any autism. Yes. So, he's basically saying it's >> Yeah. >> Huh. >> We we need to talk about that on Sunday. >> Okay. We will >> for sure. >> Um and Okay. So the bottom line is you don't think Trump is corrupt in any way. And what I just showed you, which is evidence that his borders are is corrupt, evidence that he is corrupt, none of that is meaningful to you because >> thing if the borders are a thing, if Trump really thought that that was bad, he would have never hide hired the guy. >> But but try to reframe this in your head. Trump is extremely corrupt. Just imagine that this is true. Whether you believe it or not right now, just imagine it's true. Or don't even think it's Trump. >> Okay. Don't think about it as Trump. >> Think about it as Biden. >> Biden is corrupt. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Yes, he is. >> He's taking bribes from everybody. He's doing all kinds of corrupt to enrich himself while he's president. >> Don't you think he would want to hire people all around him who are also equally corrupt? >> Probably. Which he probably did. >> Yeah, exactly. How about the How about the sun doing the paintings for like $10,000 a pop and people paying for those? That wasn't corrupt. >> Making a painting and selling it is corrupt. What do you mean >> for tens of millions of dollars? >> I thought you just said 10,000 foreigners. >> H >> I don't know what you're talking about exactly. Oh, and son Hunter, >> don't you remember selling all these paintings that were like for millions of dollars? >> No, I don't remember. Um, >> okay. >> I'm not saying they weren't corrupt. I'm I'm saying that you you have this weird argument where you're like, "All politicians are corrupt. What about Biden?" Okay, let's go down that path. You say, "All politicians are corrupt, therefore Trump is corrupt." >> Probably. And you're okay with it, >> but not what the borders are. That thing they try to ent trap him. >> Uhhuh. And do you believe the two billion dollar >> cryptocurrency scam that he's running is corruption at all? >> I don't see how that's a scam. >> The UA literally gave him $2 billion so they could get preferential treatment and he said, "Thanks for the money. Here's the computer chips you want." >> I need to research more about that. I know we've only talked about that once. >> Yeah. Um, well, that wraps this up. I I don't know if these little things showing you news from the other side is getting through to you at all, >> but I feel like it might >> show you my next time we're going to do one of my clips and see if I can get through to your brain on the other side. >> I'm down to play anything and look at anything you want to show me. >> Okay. Didn't we do that last time? We showed one of my clips and you didn't say much about it. >> Yeah. Well, you got to ask me questions and stuff about it as well. >> Okay, I'm doing the best I can here. I I will have us one. Okay, >> for the next one. >> Maybe next week. Well, thank you, Mom, for joining me. Thank everyone out there for joining us on this little attempt to show some truth to my mom. Um, we'll see you on Sunday with a full hourlong show. I believe the whole family will be present, >> I think. So, the B12 is helping. He's being pumped up a bit. Yes. Is he awake? Will he be able to be awake during it? >> I hope so. He's >> all right. >> Not awake now, but that's okay. >> Good. Have him sleep all week and just wake up on Sunday. Um, thank you everyone for joining us and we will see you Sunday. >> I love you, Chad. >> I love you too. >> I love you. Bye.