The Howie Carr Radio Network
How Did This Happen? The Secret Service's Massive Security Failure | 7.15.24 - The Grace Curley Show Hour 2
Grace breaks down the left's sudden calls for unity with The Federalist's John Davidson. Later Josh Filler--former New York City, White House, and Department of Homeland Security official-- weighs in on the security failure that occurred at the Trump rally in Butler.
- Duration:
- 38m
- Broadcast on:
- 15 Jul 2024
- Audio Format:
- mp3
- Today's podcast is brought to you by Perfect Smiles. Dr. Houghton, Dr. Tam, and the whole team has helped me. They can help you too. Contact them today at perfectsmiles.com. (upbeat music) - Live from the Aviva Tretria Studio, it's The Grace Curly Show. - We gotta bring in a new voice, a young voice, a rising voice, Grace Curly. - You can read Grace's work in The Boston Herald and The Spectator. - Well, you don't want too much Grace. - Here's the millennial with the mic. - Grace Curly. - Grace Curly. - Grace Curly. - Let's bring in the host of The Grace Curly Show, a Grace Curly. - You either have Grace or you don't. - Especially Grace, Grace stand up. - Grace Curly. - Welcome back everyone to The Grace Curly Show. We have so much to get to in the next two hours. We're gonna play a lot of sound from right after the attempted assassination of Donald J. Trump, including a witness who was perplexed as to why the police in the area or the Secret Service did not act faster. But joining us right now is John Daniel Davidson and he has an excellent piece in the Federalist today. What amazes me, John, is after almost four years of the Unifier in Chief, as he was, you know, as we were told Joe Biden was going to be and his parrots in the media, maligning Trump, maligning MAGA Republicans as threats to democracy, this weekend it all came to a head and now these same people are turning on a dime and as you pointed out, it was before the blood on former President Donald Trump's face was even dry that they were calling for taking down the temperature. Give people a little taste of what your article talks about today. - Yeah, basically the argument is, no, we're not gonna take down the temperature, we're not gonna come together and, you know, have a kumbaya moment and say that we're all unified for America. These are the same people who spent years pushing what we call assassination prep rhetoric. That's what all of this comparing Trump to Hitler saying that he's a threat to our democracy, that he's going to end our way of life and destroy America and institute a new form of government. We hear this not just from like the corporate media, but we hear this from Joe Biden's White House and the President and the Vice President almost every week and we have for the whole of Biden's presidency, that kind of rhetoric that is so outside the normal bounds of like political debate in America has become normalized in the era of Trump. And the same people who are saying that Trump is Hitler and he's gonna destroy our country are now saying like, oh, well, we should come together. No, we're not gonna come together until you renounce that kind of rhetoric and admit that you were wrong to engage in it. - That's the second part of what you just said is the key for me. It's like, well, I'm always being told that I need to hold hands with, you know, the other side and come to a point of unity. And I feel like I have no problem forgiving people. I have no problem moving on from things, but the start has to be an apology. The start has to be some sort of acknowledgement that you have been a part of the problem, a major part of the problem. And they really don't think that, John. I know you saw this over the weekend. Margaret Brennan was lecturing Steve Scalise on how Donald Trump should have asked to lower the temperature. The lack of self-awareness there, you have people who are now still David Frum still putting out headlines that are, you know, fomenting this kind of derangement against Trump. There's no lessons learned. - No, absolutely not. They think that Trump should apologize for his rhetoric. Well, he's not the one who's been demonizing his political opponents for the past, you know, three, four, I mean, actually going back eight years now. That's what the Trump collusion, Russia collusion hoax was all about. He's supposed to demonize Trump, place him outside the bounds of normal political discourse in America, and paint him as an enemy and a traitor to this country. So the people who put, you know, who photoshopped pictures of Hitler and Trump together on the cover of their magazines, like the New Republic just did, or devote entire issues of their magazines to how life under Trump will be this like horrible grim tyranny in anarchy and autocracy, like the Atlantic just did. Those are not the people right now who we should be listening to about lowering the rhetoric. Why don't they lower their rhetoric first and apologize for what they did? And then we can have a conversation about coming together. But that's not gonna happen because these people haven't changed their minds about Trump. - Yeah, and something that you pointed out in this latest column, and I'd love for you to explain it to people, you said consider a bill recently proposed by the former head of the January 6th committee, Representative Benny Thompson. Tell people what happened with this, because I saw rumblings of it on social media, but there hasn't been nearly enough attention paid to this story. - Yeah, this is a democratic congressman who is the head of the January 6th committee. This was back in April, proposed a bill to strip secret service protection from all former presidents or anyone who would be entitled to secret service protection, who is also a convicted felon. In other words, this was looking forward to a felony conviction of Trump back in the spring, and this law, if it had been passed, and the law would have affected only one person, Donald Trump, and would have removed secret service protection from them. Now, why would you want to remove secret service protections from the leading political candidate for the opposing party and a former president who is leading in all the polls and who has all kinds of threats aimed at them on a daily basis? That like, has anyone asked Benny Thompson that? Is there any acceptable answer for that? The only possible reasoning that you would have for wanting to remove secret service protection is because you're hoping some harm comes to Donald Trump. - Yeah, and I think that a lot of the people today, and this is part of the conundrum, I think that the leftist found themselves in, they can come out today, and Benny Thompson is one of the people, there's been several who come out and say, prayers for Donald Trump, we're glad to see, and you can tell they're doing it progrudgingly, like they throw it in at the end of their statement, I'm sure it pains them to write, we're glad Donald Trump isn't dead, but the part of it that doesn't make sense, and I gotta give credit to Matt Walsh for pointing this out, John, but I would love your two cents, is if all the things you have said up to this point are true. If he truly is gonna usher in this fascist era in America and he's gonna throw people in jail, and he's going to kill his political opponents, and he's the worst thing since Hitler, then why are you wishing him well, why are you praying for him? It just doesn't, those two things don't make sense. - Yeah, exactly, it's the most basic straightforward logic, like, would you wish Hitler a speedy recovery if he had been hit by an assassin's bullet and survived? And to Matt Walsh's point, the conundrum that they're in is that they have to either admit that they didn't really mean that, Trump really isn't the reincarnation of Hitler, and he's not the threat that they've been scary, been scaremongering about all this time, or they have to sort of own their rhetoric and say, well, no, I actually wish that he'd been killed because he's the next coming of Hitler, and it would be better for the whole country and the whole world if the assassin's bullet had sounded smart. They're not gonna come out and say that, but their rhetoric suggests, their rhetoric for years suggests that they should. - You know that, or they need to sort of repent and recant and renounce their own rhetoric and their own way of arguing in our political arena. - Yeah, like always, we're just taking the left at their word, you know, God forbid we listen to what they've said over the last eight years. Another thing I wanted to get your two cents on, John Daniel Davidson from the Federalist, is what happened today on MSNBC, because this really is, I know there's a lot of news out there, the classified documents case, there's just so much Trump's gonna announce his VP, there's so much to tackle. But for some reason, I keep being drawn back to this story, that MSNBC is so worried about their flagship morning show, having a horribly inappropriate reaction to the attempted assassination of a U.S. president, that they pulled them off the air on what I would say is one of the biggest news days in American history, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski, Mike Barnacle, Al Sharpton, nowhere to be found. What does that tell you about this program? And what does it tell you about, you know, a future, are the people in cable news starting to figure out that they are liable for this kind of violence? - Well, I think, I mean, I don't have any special insight, but I think it suggests that sort of the higher ups, the suits, you know, the actual corporate bosses that own these networks, understand that they can't just let these radicals, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, or radicals, go on the air and just spout the kind of insane nonsense and assassination prep rhetoric that they've been spouting for months and months now. Now that sort of it comes down to brass tacks, and there actually has been an attempt on the president, I think maybe some of the people who are outside of the newsroom, but are the sort of the money and the owners realize that they're exposed here and they'd better rein things in. Now it shouldn't take an assassination attempt to rein things in. People on the editorial side should have, you know, enough common sense and decency and professional judgment to have already reigned this in, but apparently they don't. And so now their bosses have to come in and basically just unplug them, as you say on the biggest news day, you know, in recent American history. So it's a remarkable brush back, I think I'm hoping that it indicates an era of maybe a little bit more responsible journalism, but I'm not gonna hold my breath on that count. - Yeah, no, I think that's a wise move. What do you expect to see this week with the RNC? Trump's gonna make his VP pick and there's been a lot of talk about him changing up his speeches, changing up the tone of his addresses. What do you make of that? Would you suggest it? - Yeah, I mean, there's no way it can't change the makeup of what was going to be a pretty straightforward, uneventful convention, sort of more of a media spectacle, nominating Trump, who we all know is going to be the nominee. But I think now the tone will change and I hope that it changes to one of defiance and confrontation, you know, that same Trump that we saw on stage raises fifth as he was carried away by the Secret Service agents. I hope that ethos and that attitude of fight, you know, we have to fight because the opposition in this case wants Trump dead. You know, it's not just the assassin who wanted Trump dead. Many, many people in the corporate press and in the Democratic party and in these institutions and in academia want Trump actually literally dead, not just figuratively. So they see us as not just as their opponents, but as their enemies. And as you said a minute ago, we have to take them at their word. If they say where their enemies find, then where their enemies, when they're ready to be friends again, we'll be friends again. But for now we're enemies. And until that changes, we have to, we have to take them at their word and take them seriously. And I think that will be reflected in the convention. I certainly hope it will be. - Yeah, what I really loved about your column and it kind of reminds me of when you have an issue with someone and, you know, maybe you have some sort of relationship with them and you hit a point in life where you go, maybe we're just not, maybe we're not meant to be friends. Maybe this relationship has served its purpose and it's time to move on. And there is something to be said with these calls for unity. I don't know if I want to unify with people who have been calling Donald Trump, who truly believe that Donald Trump is Hitler or who lie about it and just want to convince other people that he's Hitler. I don't know if I want to unify with those people. - Yeah, exactly. Exactly. They don't trust them for one thing. They've proven themselves to be untrustworthy. And it's not just that they think Trump is Hitler and a Nazi. They think that I'm Hitler and I'm a Nazi and that you are too and that everybody who's with Trump is just like him and deserves it to be silenced, deserves it to be shut down. We've seen this over and over. They don't think that we should have any First Amendment rights just to say what we want. And if Elon Musk hadn't thought Twitter, then a lot of us would be shut down right now if they had gotten their way. So yeah, these are people, I'm not sure I want to be friends with them either. On what basis are we supposed to come together right now? When Joe Biden says now is a time for unity, he should be forced to answer the question, not that he can answer questions, but on what basis are we supposed to unify after they've been fomenting this kind of divisive rhetoric for years now and demonizing their political opponents as Nazis and tyrants? Give me a break. - Yeah, the ship has sailed. I don't want to be friends with any of them anymore. John Daniel Davidson, thank you so much for coming on the show. Let people know where they can follow you on Twitter. - Yeah, @JohnDDavidson on Twitter and all my stuff is at federalist.com. Thanks, Grace. - Thank you so much. He was off Twitter for a while. He was banned for quite some time, but luckily thanks to Elon Musk and others, he's back. Thank you, John Daniel Davidson. We will be right back. We're going to take a lot of your calls. And at 1.30, we're going to have a former Homeland Security expert join us. He's also a former attorney, so he will be able to give us his insight into what happened there with the Secret Service. Don't go anywhere more of The Grace Curly Show when we come back. You're listening to The Grace Curly Show. This is The Grace Curly Show. (upbeat music) - Hello everyone and welcome back to The Grace Curly Show. I love Miranda Devine's piece about Melania Trump. I thought her statement was really well-written and the sentiment behind it was beautiful. And I also thought Ivanka Trump had an interesting take where she thinks that her mother, Ivana, who passed away a few years ago, was watching over Donald Trump. It's hard to see that photo, especially the one from the New York Times photographer where the bullet is just whizzing by Donald Trump's head and not think that maybe there was a higher power. I don't usually go that route here on The Grace Curly Show, but you have to think somebody had his back in that moment. And also, just before I forget, 'cause I got a list of things I want to get through today. Shout out to the photographers who cover those events. I mean, I give a lot of grief to New York Times reporters. I give a lot of grief to journalists and they deserve it. 99% of the time, they deserve it. But the photographer is getting an exception. They are an exemption to that rule because that takes Kehone's to run towards the bullets so that you can get the shot that's gonna live on in history. And one of those shots of Donald Trump with this fist in the air, it's already become iconic. And it's only been two days and it's already on t-shirt. It's already everywhere because of just the picture and what it means to so many people in this country. Eight, four, four, five hundred, 42, 42. I also wanted to mention here how devastating it is that a man did die, was killed because of the shooter at the rally, a Pennsylvania father. And he was in plastics manufacturing. He was a volunteer firefighter. He loved his family more than anything. A girl dad, Peter, and I'm afraid I'm gonna mess up, comparatory, I'm sorry if I'm pronouncing that. That's something that I always do. I'm gonna mispronounce things. But he, by all accounts, his neighbor was actually quoted in the story who's a Democrat and Peter is obviously a Republican and very excited to go to this rally. And he said, yeah, we disagreed on politics but unbelievable guy, like just wonderful man. And loved his family, loved helping others, loved Donald Trump and to think that he went to a political rally and now he's dead is just, it's unfathomable and it's really disturbing. Eight, four, four, five hundred, 42, 42. Still so many questions though about the Secret Service. And we're gonna talk to our next guest about that at 130. How did this happen? How did a shooter get on the roof 400 feet away? And I liked that today on Fox News, or I'm sorry, yesterday, Lawrence Jones was on the site. He was outside of the event. And he said, there's not a lot of buildings here. That was one of the questions he got. Are there a lot of buildings in the area? And he said, even if there were a lot of buildings, that's not an excuse. There are times where the Secret Service is expected to secure active buildings in foreign lands where people are still coming in and out of them and using the offices or using the buildings. And they're expected to keep the president safe from those buildings. So if you're basically in farmland and there's a low building 400 feet away and you don't secure that, that says a lot about the level of this security failure. We'll talk about that when we come back with our next guest. We'll do the poll question. We have so much more to get to in this show. So many reactions that I wanna talk about. And of course, take your calls. We will play that BBC interview before the show wraps. Morning Joe, off the air today. And my question is why stop at Morning Joe if you're the head of MSNBC? What about Joy Reid? What about Nicole Wallace? Why should they be on the air? We'll talk after the break. Live from the Aviva Trattria studio. We noticed a guy crawling, army, you know, bear crawling up the roof of the building beside us 50 feet away from us. So we're standing there and, you know, we're pointing, we're pointing at the guy crawling up the roof. And he had a gun, right? He had a rifle. We could clearly see him with a rifle. Absolutely. We're pointing at him. The police are down there running around on the ground. We're like, hey man, there's a guy on the roof with a rifle and the police were like, huh, what? You know, like they didn't know what was going on. You know, we're like, hey, right here on the roof, we can see him from right here. We see him, you know, he's crawling. Yeah, just a stunning interview courtesy of the BBC of a witness who saw this man with the rifle crawling up the building, which was about 400 feet away from the stage and his attempt to assassinate Donald Trump. And I think this interview is going to become very important as people look into what happened and what went wrong. Joining us now is Josh Filler. And I gotta thank everyone at WGAN for giving me the contact info for Josh. I heard him today breaking this down this morning on WGAN. And Josh, what I like that Matt did at the beginning of your interview, he had you explain to people what you do every day and why I would go to you as a source in a situation like this. So give people, if you would, a little bit of background on your line of work. Sure, and good afternoon and thanks for having me. So I have been in the Homeland Security Public Safety Arena for about 25 years. I started my career as an attorney, working for Mayor Giuliani on public safety matters in New York City with the NYPD, fire and emergency management. After 9/11, I went down to the White House, was appointed the Director of Local Affairs at the Office of Homeland Security and then was appointed Director of the State and Local Coordination Office at the Department of Homeland Security, where I actually had Secret Service uniform personnel report to me as part of my law enforcement outreach responsibilities. And I've been a consultant with state and local and federal law enforcement and emergency management for the last 18 years. So needless to say, you have plenty of experience analyzing what we saw, situations like what we saw over the weekend. And I did want you to first just give us your takeaways. When you first saw this happening, I know everybody is probably gonna remember now for the rest of their lives, where they were, when they got the news, they turned on the television and they saw this rally go so awry. What were your first reactions to how this was handled by the Secret Service? We can go into the local police and what went on there. But as someone who was dealt with the Secret Service before, did you have any initial reactions to this? - So I got a text that shots had been fired at Trump, at his rally. And my initial reaction was, how is that possible? How did somebody get close enough to take a legitimate shot at a former president, presidential candidate, under Secret Service protection? I didn't know if he'd gotten inside the wire, inside the perimeter, or even if he was outside the wire, which is where he was, it was still just shock as to how they could actually get a shot off like that and actually hit him and come within inches of killing him. - And I wanna talk about how far away that building was because there has been different conversations about, and now you have Secret Service saying that was an area where the local police were supposed to have security around it or they were supposed to be vetting out that area. What do you make of that? Is it typical for the Secret Service to designate buildings to the local police and say you guys get cover that and just trust that it's gonna be handled properly? Or is that a situation where every single building should not only be vetted and made sure that it's not being used by a shooter, but also maybe wouldn't a building typically have a Secret Service member at the building like inside of it or on the roof? - So just let's take a step back for a second. So the Secret Service is a relatively small agency and it literally cannot do its job protecting the president, vice president, candidates and so forth without the help and support of state and local law enforcement. And so that was part of my job at the department was coordinating with state and local law enforcement and part of that entailed working with the Secret Service. So yes, they must rely on state and local law enforcement. However, that does not alleviate them of primary responsibility for overseeing the security plan and being ultimately responsible for the protection of the president, the vice president or the candidate as the case may be. As for this particular building, the shooter never should have been accessed to the building. He never should have had access to it. This thing, I don't care if it was 250 yards away. It had a clear line of sight to where Donald Trump was standing at a minimum. They should have made sure that access to the building was completely cut off and cleanly the roof. They could have had agents there. They could have deployed state and local law enforcement on the roof. They didn't have a drone apparently, which is also a standard operating procedure. The bottom line is this was a catastrophic failure of fundamental responsibility and that ultimately resides with the Secret Service. - Yeah, I wanna talk about the timing of it 'cause that's what's really stood out to me the most. You had those witnesses and of course, when people are relaying what they remember, they can get a little foggy, you know, 10 seconds can feel like a minute and vice versa. But my question there is if you have these people who are saying we saw this guy and we were yelling about it and you had this man, the witness from the BBC, saying we were telling the police and no one was really doing anything, what does that tell you about how long it took for this threat to be eliminated when other people on the ground were aware of what was going on? - The whole thing is shocking. I mean, the fact that there were witnesses on the ground now who we've heard as you say pointed this out in the law enforcement, they apparently did not know what to do and how to respond to it. It's unclear as to when the counter snipers actually got eyes on this guy and when they actually took the shot after they got eyes on him. Clearly they failed because the shooter took multiple shots that Trump hit him and killed a rally goer. So, you know, the whole thing again is just mind boggling to me that he was given access to the roof, that they had eyes on him at one point and yet nobody seemed to act until after shots were fired. They essentially used, the former president was turned into bait, right? They waited for the guy to shoot at him before they actually took him out, which is inexplicable. - Yeah, I'm speaking with Josh Filler, former Department of Homeland Security official and I wanted to ask you, when we're talking about this, we're obviously right now talking about the shooter, the sniper, his response time, what was going on in that building, how the local police were supposed to secure it and the fallout from that, but something else that caught people's eye and obviously these people aren't experts, like you are Josh and I would be one of them. I'm just someone who's watching it and giving my initial reaction. The way the Secret Service handled Trump on stage after the shots rang out, that is sticking out to people as well. Did you have any reactions to that or did you think that was handled properly? - Well, I guess I'll be a glass half full. It was better than the way they handled the shooter. I will say that, but there were plenty of mistakes made there as well. They're supposed to swarm him, the protectee, they're supposed to cover him and then they are supposed to literally hustle him out, throw him into the car, which is why the car is so close to the stage to begin with and get him out of the area. That's it. They're supposed to get him away. They're not supposed to stand and fight and it's not a movie, it's not Hollywood. It's get him covered and get him out. Their coverage of him was not great. Some of the agents were physically not big enough to cover Trump and I know it's an iconic photo, him standing up and waving his fist and so forth and everybody loves it. But the truth of the matter is, he was exposed in that moment. Had there been a second shooter, he may have been hit again and that's why the goal is to get him out because you don't know in that moment what the nature of the threat is. You don't know if there's one shooter or five shooters. - Yeah and you didn't say this, Josh, but I am gonna point it out. A lot of the people who weren't big enough to cover Donald Trump, they were women and there were videos of some of the women outside of the motorcade trying to put their guns back in their holster, looking, appearing to be in a panic and I'm sure there are women secret service agents who are excellent and I don't doubt that, but there has been a conversation now happening mostly on social media, but I'm sure we'll start to see it in conservative publications about whether or not the DEI agenda or this kind of hiring people of different genders to try to check certain boxes, whether or not that is really serving people like Donald Trump who are in positions of very, very, it's very high stakes wherever he goes, whether it's at the RNC or it's in Butler, Pennsylvania. Do you think there's any truth to that that sometimes there is a job where you just have to say to someone you're not tall enough or you're not strong enough or you're not qualified enough? Is that a fair conversation to be having right now? - I think it is and I think it goes way beyond the secret service. I mean, I think this is an issue and I mentioned that even this morning that you do not want a DEI higher to fly your plane. You don't want a DEI higher to operate you in the emergency room and you don't want a DEI higher to protect you if you're the president or the vice president or so forth and so forth. I think that should be part of the conversation to see if standards are being lowered within the secret service based on race, based on sex, based on whatever, in order to diversify the agency at the expense of competence and as you said, that doesn't mean there aren't qualified women to do the job, there are, but nobody should do that job, male or female, if they're not qualified, period. - Yeah and it's one of those amazing things where you really don't know how people are gonna react until they're in a situation like that and one of the women you could hear her when the shots initially rang out saying, "What are we doing? What are we doing? What are we doing?" And it just wasn't what I pictured Josh and I don't know if maybe it's because I have only seen this kind of stuff in movies, but I always pictured secret service agents being able to keep calm and carry on and do the job. I just didn't think that the level of panic, at least the visible panic was necessarily what most people would expect from the secret service. - Yeah, I mean, to be fair, in any kind of situation like this and we haven't seen anything like this since 1981 when Ronald Reagan was shot, it's going to be chaotic, it is gonna be pandemonium. And yeah, you're never gonna know how someone's gonna react. I mean, is the agent actually gonna be willing to stand there and take a bullet the way the guy, the agent that protected Reagan did? I mean, he literally stood there getting ready to take that shot. You just don't know how a human being, it's such an against instinct reaction, right? To stand and take a bullet. But these people are highly vetted and highly trained or at least they used to be. And if they're no longer, then we need to get back to that because it is a once in a lifetime moment. And when it comes, you have to be able to meet it. - Josh Filler, my last question for you. What do you think needs to happen now? For someone like you who has such high expectations and knows so much about the secret service and how things work, what do you think needs to happen as far as someone being held responsible? Do people need to get fired? Does there need to be an investigation? What is your, as far as the next step goes, what do you say? - I say there needs to be an independent investigation conducted by Congress to determine, A, what happened operationally at the site, at the venue where Trump was shot? And then I think there needs to be a larger investigation into the culture and policies of the secret service. And whether that in any way is inhibiting them from achieving their mission. And it has to be independent. It cannot be done within the executive branch. It has to be done by Congress. - And I know Josh, I just said last question, but I do have one more. Are you, if you were part of Trump's private security team, would you be hesitant about him speaking at the RNC this week and going out there with such a big stage with so many people there? Would that be something that now you're concerned about? - Not at all. I mean, look, there's a huge difference between a venue that's inside and a venue that's outside. Trump is gonna be inside, everybody's gonna be screened. There really is no outside the wire and the way that you have in an outside venue where rooftops become a major issue. At the end of the day, Donald Trump should go forward as if you would, had this not happened. It's up to the secret service to make sure that everything goes according to plan from this point forward. - Josh Filler, we loved having you on. I hope I can have you on again. And I thank my friend, the WGAN for letting me steal you for the day. We appreciate it. We'll be right back with more. We'll take your calls. What did you make when you were watching this? Did anyone have, I know some people were focused on a woman in the background who had her phone out almost immediately and they're suspicious of whether or not that meant something. Why did this woman know to take her phone out really quickly? But I will say this, there were a few of those things flying around and I'm not verifying anything. I just saw it on social media. But I will say, I think people underestimate how crazy people get now for content, like how crazy people are to film things. People almost forget about their own safety or the fact that they're not living on Instagram, that they're there in real life and they pull out their phone. So I don't think that every single person who pulled out their phone or who acted in a strange way, as Josh Filler pointed out, you never know how you're gonna react in a panic situation. We'll be right back. We'll take your calls. Do you use scented candles, cover up sprays or air fresheners for bad odors in your home? We'll stop masking these smells with more odors. All you're doing is adding more harmful odors to your home. You're adding more fuel to the fire, to the stink fire. And you need to destroy odors with an eat and pure thunderstorm air purifier. It uses oxy technology to send out all three molecules into your home that destroy bad odors rather than just covering them up. Candles and cover up sprays must be bought over and over again. It's a never-ending cycle. You get on that hamster wheel and you can't get off. We are offering you an off ramp here. Start saving money, get yourself a thunderstorm and eliminate those stubborn household odors for good. Plus, if you're listening to this and you're saying, "I don't have a stinky cat. "I don't have a smelly house." Well, good for you. But you might deal with allergens and pollutants. So it's just good to purify the air no matter what. Get $200 off a three-pack today for a whole home protection. Visit eatimpeardeals.com and use discount code GRACE3. That's eatimpeardeals.com, discount code GRACE3. I know we've had a lot of guests so far. The two o'clock hour is reserved for all of you, for all your calls, all your takeaways from this weekend. We'll be right back. - Hi, it's Toby from Cape Gun Works. I'm taking all your firearm and self-defense questions every Tuesday. Join Grace and me for 2A Tuesday, Tuesdays at 2PM. [THEME MUSIC] This is The Grace Curly Show. [MUSIC PLAYING] Today's poll question is brought to you by J.J. Manning auctioneers. By the way, meet the experts. New one, just drop with Justin Manning. You guys can check that out at gracecurlyshow.com. And if you want to sell your residential, commercial, or land, J.J. Manning can get your property sold now. To learn more, contact Charlie Gill at 800-521-0111 or go to jjmanning.com. Taylor, what is the poll question and what are the results thus far? Today's poll question, which you can vote in at gracecurlyshow.com, is will Biden grant RFK Jr. Secret Service protection following the assassination attempt on President Trump? I don't think he wants to. Well, obviously, he doesn't want to. But I think at this point, he might have to. 64% say no. All right, let's go to Nick. You're next up on The Grace Curly Show. What's going on, Nick? Hi, I've been a couple of days, obviously. And some things just don't make sense. However, I'm starting to go the opinion of this supposed shooter. Is he really the shooter? Why have they taken his phone and sent it to some highly exclusive place to figure out what has crawled into whom? What's that all about? Why does he show up? Probably no more than six minutes, seven minutes. They saw him climbing up. He shared climbs up a lot. Oops, I guess I'm going down. Yes, sorry, Nick, your connections are not great. There are a lot of unanswered questions. I don't want to comment on anything that I don't know about yet. And there's also a bit of a ton of fake news pervading social media this weekend. So I'm going to hold off on that. Brian, you're up next on The Grace Curly Show. Go ahead, Brian. Hi, Grace. I'm a longtime listener, a big fan of you guys there. Just wanted to call because I saw an article on the Gateway pundit that said that some of the Secret Service assets that were usually working with Trump's team were actually diverted to and reassigned to a campaign event that Dr. Jill was at this past weekend, which I think is what led to the people that were there protecting Trump, seeming a little confused as to what exactly they were supposed to be doing when the shots rang out. You can actually hear on some of the videos that are online of the shooting, one of the Secret Service agents running by the microphone to go jump on top of Trump. And she's yelling, what do we do? What do we do? Yeah, I did hear that, Brian. And I did see the reports about that. The Secret Service is denying it per Newsweek. They're denying that any resources were diverted to protecting Jill Biden. But I'll keep an eye on it. I think there's a lot of things that the Secret Service is going to have to answer for. And I don't think blaming the local police for not securing the building is going to cut it. We'll talk more about this. Thank you for the call. Thank you for listening. We'll be right back. (upbeat music)