search icon
Live chat

Kash’s Corner: Elon Musk Should Release Slack Channels; Why Was My Deposition Not Included in Jan. 6 Committee Report?

In this episode of Kash’s Corner, we discuss Elon Musk’s latest “Twitter Files” drop on censorship of COVID-19 related information, including vaccine harms to children, and Kash Patel reflects on his time as chief of staff at the Department of Defense during Operation Warp Speed and the initial COVID-19 vaccine rollout.

We also discuss the release of the final Jan. 6 committee report, which notably did not include Patel’s deposition.

“There were hundreds, if not thousands of depositions taken,” says Patel. “I know they haven’t released all of them. They probably haven’t even released half of them.”

To get notifications about new Kash’s Corner and American Thought Leaders episodes, please sign up for our newsletter! Here 👉 Get Alerts


Kash Patel:

Hey, everybody. I hope everyone had a wonderful Christmas. Welcome back to Kash’s Corner. We got a jam-packed episode today. Jan, where are we going to get started?

Jan Jekielek:

We have to go to the Twitter Files 9, and that’s actually dubbed the Fauci Files, or at least the first part of the Twitter files related to COVID censorship. We have this moment where the then deputy counselor at Twitter, Jim Baker, basically tries to censor a tweet from President Trump when he’s recovering from COVID. He’s saying don’t be afraid of COVID, don’t let it dominate your life. And as far as I can tell, Yoel Roth has to talk down Jim Baker from trying to censor this. What are your thoughts?

Mr. Patel:

There’s so many places to start here, but let’s do a basic timeline. When President Trump got COVID, it was October of 2020. We were in the throes of COVID, and it’s always optimistic to hear the commander chief saying, “Look, I got this virus and it’s beatable and I’m healthy and I’m doing well.” That’s  the optimism you want exuding out of the White House. To attack that blindly doesn’t make any sense. But then you have to go to the actor that’s attacking it, and that’s James Baker. And as you know, Jan, we’ve discussed extensively that he’s one of the Russiagate architects, a former FBI general counsel, who launched a faulty FISA with false information and lied to a federal court.

The fact is that after he gets fired from the FBI for those abuses, he lands the job at Twitter as the number two lawyer, and now as the lawyer is proposing that Donald Trump’s verbiage about how he is telling the country to be upbeat about beating COVID somehow has to be censored legally, which has to be walked back by none other than Yoel Roth.

Let’s remind everybody who Yoel Roth is. Yoel Roth is one of the senior figures at Twitter, and we now know Yoel Roth participated selectively in this unlawful, or at least unethical, censorship of a lot of people who shared President Trump’s views, especially around an election time. We’ve talked about Hunter Biden’s laptop. He was involved with that and so was James Baker, and so was Vijaya Gadde.

The fact that James Baker has to be walked off this quote, unquote, “cliff” of censorship for President Trump by Yoel Roth really tells you something. This lawyer couldn’t figure it out? I don’t believe that. I believe Jim Baker’s an incredibly smart human being who is cunning and deceptively so, and was trying to put on a guise by saying, “Hey guys, did you miss this one? Maybe we should censor this.” And then, Yoel Roth coming in over the top saying even he couldn’t get that one across the finish line, because there was nothing wrong with it.

And that’s the key, Jan. This statement by the president, along with many others, there was nothing wrong with it, and it should never have been censored. It didn’t violate any policies that Twitter put up on quote, unquote, “COVID health warnings” and vaccination warnings. It was the message you wanted to hear from your president at the time of a pandemic to reinforce to the citizenry that the disease was beatable. Even if you’re an elderly person, it was beatable. That was something that President Trump wanted to stress to the citizenry around America. And it’s no surprise James Baker tried to throttle it.

Mr. Jekielek:

The thing about this is the pervasiveness of this fear narrative, which was so grossly disproportionate to the realities of COVID in this country. And this is the president reassuring people. This type of narrative that I saw in that tweet is the kind of narrative that I would like to see from public health authorities most of the time. It does not help to have heightened cortisol levels in the midst of a pandemic. It doesn’t help to have people being afraid and cowering in their homes. This is not good for your health too I might add. So, this is really bizarre.

Mr. Patel:

Yes. Let’s just rewind the tape again. If you remember before Fauci became Fauci and went on a partisan diatribe, you would remember him in the beginning when no one knew who he was and he was the NIH number one medical expert for the United States, and arguably in the world, coming out and saying positive things, saying, “We can beat this. This is beatable, this is not going to get you down.” Did they censor Fauci, or did they talk about censoring Fauci in the beginning?

It was one of the only things Fauci ever said that was truthful and accurate and correct. We’ll get into some of this other stuff in a minute, but you see the double standard here. If candidate Joe Biden had said something like, “Hey, this disease is beatable and we can win and we will overcome this,” would they censor him? No. They did a selective targeting operation, which has now been put on full blast thanks to the release of the Twitter files. But we got a long way to go, Jan.

Mr. Jekielek:

I want to highlight another type of censorship, and this could really crystallize something for me in my mind, although I generally have been thinking along these lines. Some of the tweets that are highlighted that were censored are those by Martin Kulldorff, one of the world’s leading epidemiologists at Harvard at the time. He’s the designer of many of the vaccine safety protocols that are in use in this country and all over the world. He shared a tweet where he’s talking about his look at the data and he’s saying, “Number one, you don’t need to vaccinate children.” He knew that very, very early on.

The other thing that he’s talking about is natural immunity, that natural immunity is something that’s real and robust, and the tweet with both these things in it is censored. That’s now connected with another tweet that’s in the files later, which is showing a study that mRNA vaccination is associated with some cardiac harms for children. This is all in this one thread by David Zweig, and it’s unquestionable to me that the combination of all this cost lives.

Mr. Patel:

Absolutely. It’s just one tragic example of politician censorship costing the lives of children, of adults, of Americans, and of citizens of the world. If they were censoring this type of tweet on this type of individual who is, as you said, arguably one of the leading epidemiologists in the world. What else are we going to uncover that was censored that led to deaths of innocent Americans, of innocent people around the world? That’s the tragedy of it all. Again, you see the two-tier system of the double standard in the mainstream media, and this is just another example.

Mr. Jekielek:

Let’s jump in with another tweet here. And this is Elon Musk we’re tapping on. Last night Elon Musk posted something that opens up all sorts of questions that many have already been thinking about. He writes about gain-of-function essentially being another way of saying bioweapon, gain-of-function research being intentionally making a virus more deadly. He talks about how Fauci authored a paper in 2012 arguing for gain-of-function research, and that Fauci restarted this. At the same time, Twitter had an internal Slack channel that he says was called Fauci Fan Club.

Mr. Patel:


Mr. Jekielek:

There’s so many pieces in here. Yes, go ahead.

Mr. Patel:

Yes, we got the Fauci Fan Club, the Slack channel, but let’s start with gain-of-function research. Most of our audience knows what that is, but it’s just fancy for putting money into biological programs that create viruses and then look for their vaccinations. That’s why this is encapsulated in this bioweapons verbiage that we see out there a lot. Remember, Fauci came on the scene and said, “Oh, no, American dollars were not put into the Wuhan laboratory and were not put towards gain-of-function research.”

We now know that is a lie. You have the head medical expert in the United States setting that marker out there, and we now know he knowingly lied. It wasn’t just like a mistake, and he wanted to set a political narrative. Now, it becomes so deadly for people who are listening to him to believe anything else he says, because he’s nuked any credibility he ever had.

When COVID broke out, I was the deputy director of National Intelligence under Ric Grenell, the number two at the IC, and we had informed President Trump on the classified intelligence we had on COVID origins. A week or two later, President Trump rolled out the China ban, and basically the media set itself on fire calling him a racist. Of course, as it turns out, we and President Trump acted on facts and intelligence and it proved to be correct, while they acted on hyperbole. And we now know Fauci helped them. Now we learn not only while all that was going on, we also have Twitter having Slack channels with people who are Fauci lovers, and we now know those are people who basically hate Donald Trump.

What’s a Slack channel, Jan, for a lot of people who don’t know? This term has come out in the FBI space too, which we’ll get to in a second. Basically, a Slack channel is like instant messaging back in the day. You would sit on your computer, and it was called AIM when it first came out. You’d shoot a message over to so-and-so, whether they were sitting a couple of houses away, a town away or on the other side of the country. That’s all a Slack channel is. It’s internal messaging that you put on certain communications or channels, because it’s never really going to be made public.

That’s the key, Jan, the fact that there was an entire fan club based on Fauci’s lies, and they wanted to glorify him for his lies, because it was helping make Donald Trump look like the enemy, which was their goal. It shows you that the world’s largest media platform, Twitter, was slanted to such a degree that they didn’t want to put the truth out on this matter and so many others.

It’s disturbing to see that the Slack channel existed. Hopefully Elon will come out and put out the actual contents of the Slack channel. But for me, what’s more disturbing, Jan, is a revelation that FBI agents had these Slack channels too. Now, you have a cross-communication going on with the private sector and the FBI on censorship, on COVID origins, on Fauci, and on gain-of-function research. I still say we have an incomplete release by Elon Musk on these Twitter matters.

Why hasn’t that Slack channel information been released? Why don’t we know the depth of the FBI involvement? We’ve been calling for it on this show for months, because we know the FBI was so much more involved than what’s been revealed with this minimal $3.5 million contract. Way more. We know there was a day-to-day deluge of communications between the Twitter head shed and the FBI task force on election security and COVID. What else is out there?

This is a partial cover-up operation, for lack of a better word, by Elon, because he hasn’t put everything out there. The question remains to me, Jan, why? Why, if he has come in to say, “I want to put a full and clear transparency effort forward,” has he failed to do just that?

Mr. Jekielek:

I want to focus on this bioweapon part of Elon’s tweet, because this where a lot of our insane response to COVID starts to make more sense. Normal pandemic, conventional pandemic, and tried and tested pandemic guidelines were thrown out the window, and this new shelter-in-place policy was put in along with all sorts of other measures, and that turned into further measures down the road.

Now, here’s the question. From my viewpoint, no one knows what the CCP is up to. We’ve known that it’s the Chinese Communist Party that has a bioweapons program, and it’s very high on its priority list. We know that everything is dual use. We know that Wuhan of the Institute of Virology is absolutely going to be doing military-related research. A lot of this makes a ton more sense if we understand the response as a biodefense response as opposed to a health response. You were in the middle of this as deputy director at DNI, and then later through to the vaccine rollout where you were already chief of staff at DOD. What do you think?

Mr. Patel:

It’s a national security issue, and for me, that’s my wheelhouse, Jan. Under President Trump, we had a great intelligence collection operation against all our enemies. The CCP was right there at the top of the list, if not always at the top of the list. Whatever national security interests they were interfering with when it came to America, whether it was gain-of-function research, bioweapons, or actual military programs, President Trump made it no secret that we were going to focus our national security apparatus on those intent on harming American interests, and the CCP in this matter is a great example.

I still don’t have the ability to get into all the details of the information that we made these decisions on. Maybe one day Congress can release them in the coming months when the gavel flips in the House, but until that day, I can just tell you that we continued like we did with COVID origins, like we did with other measures taken against the CCP, be it tariffs or be it military defensive operations. We made those decisions based on actual intelligence.

Bioweapons are not something to be taken lightly, and we know, and you know, and our audience knows the CCP has no rule book. They just have a book that says, “How do we get after our enemies?” They don’t care about ethics, and they don’t really care about anyone who dies that gets in their way. Remember, this is a country that has three separate genocides going on as we speak.

The leadership of the CCP has one interest in mind, themselves. We have to remind our audience, that’s the lens they look through. And we defended ourselves with whatever it takes that we could lawfully defend American citizens against any threat put forward by the CCP. I think we were very successful. As you said, now people are going back and saying, “Wow, look at how bad the CCP wanted to come after the United States of America.” Now you have an impetus as to why we acted so harshly against the Chinese Communist Party.

Mr. Jekielek:

Let’s jump forward to Operation Warp Speed. Now, the quick creation of these COVID genetic vaccines and related vaccines is basically in motion. It’s extremely fast. We know from data that’s been released that all sorts of corners were cut. We don’t know if it was intentional or by accident. We know there was pressure to get some sort of treatment out quickly.

We also know that there were conventional forms of treatment by things you couldn’t name on Twitter in the past, like Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. There are another 18 drugs that are used successfully to treat COVID, especially in the early stages. All of this was happening. DOD was charged with facilitating the rollout of the vaccines towards the end of the Trump presidency. Can you tell me more about that? Also what about you, yourself? What is your vax status?

Mr. Patel:

Yes, we’ll get to that. Just to remind people, this was at the height of the COVID virus, a lot of the country and a lot of the populace was looking for a solution, looking for an answer, so that obviously they wanted people to stop dying and people to stop getting sick. We looked to the medical experts for that, and the thing that came to mind was of course a vaccine. In that instance, the government made the decision to partner up with the private pharmaceutical companies to see if there was a vaccine that we could roll out.

What we did was we went to the military, because logistically, Jan, there is no other private organization or company that has the logistical capacity to move and engage with the private sector and then distribute the vaccine in a safe way throughout the country. You literally need planes, trains, automobiles, a cyber-infrastructure network and a communication system that’s able to be up and running and engaged with the private sector, and the only place that that could happen is the Department of Defense.

When I was chief of staff over there, we had Operation Warp Speed, and the president charged DOD with its logistical rollout. I will always say, and I’ll defend to this day, that the men and women in uniform executed that plan, Operational Warp Speed, to the highest professional degree. It was really a monumental feat for them to implement the logistical capabilities to distribute what would be millions of vials of vaccines across the country and around the world in a record speed.

That was what they were charged with. Now, that is entirely separate and apart with any sort of talk about a mandate, which I will remind our audience, there was no talk or implementation of a mandate under the Trump Administration, especially not for the men and women in our uniform services.

When we rewind the clock, and I was chief of staff in November of 2020, the Secretary of Defense and I and the leadership at the Department of Defense were charged in overseeing Operation Warp Speed and making sure it was implemented. But what we were also charged with was a mission, and that is the no-fail mission of the Department of Defense. We had the opportunity to decide whether or not we were going to receive the COVID vaccine when it first came out.

I remember looking at the Secretary of Defense, Chris Miller at the time, and saying, “Sir, this is a leadership decision. If we cannot be the ones who take this mission forward, then we should not be in the position to offer the vaccine to the men and women in uniform and the civilian population if we’re unwilling to do so.”

We took the mission and made it our priority and we called it Mission First. I took the vaccine, but we never mandated it to anyone in the uniformed services or anywhere else. What we wanted to do was show as leadership of the Department of Defense and as President Trump’s implemented leadership at the DOD, that we were willing to back our position.

That’s a separate question from looking at it two years down the road on the efficacies of the vaccine and the intelligence that we now have, which we didn’t have back then. But I still say, and I still agree with President Trump on this one, that the Operation Warp Speed itself was the right decision to do and was a success. I believe that the DOD leadership, including my and the Secretary of Defense’s decision to take the vaccine, was the right decision in terms of leadership, because if we weren’t willing to do it, then we should have stepped aside. But the mandate decision is a totally separate conversation.

Whether or not I would’ve taken the vaccine with all the intelligence that I now have and all the facts and all the studies, that’s also a separate matter. I remind our audience not to do this Monday morning quarterback thing. Look at it through the prism of the situation we were in in the throes of COVID at the end of the Trump presidency, trying to get the American populace and the world a remedy for a pandemic that had broken out as a result of what I believe was the CCP’s doing.

Mr. Jekielek:

One way or another, the CCP lied about it extensively. There’s basically all sorts of data points, whatever the origin, and we don’t need to litigate that part. It’s more like their response to it clearly made it a bioweapon. This is something that Gordon Chang talks about, and I can imagine how you in those roles would’ve been looking at it and responding.

Maybe disambiguate something for me quickly. With Warp Speed, the development of the vaccine itself is part of Warp Speed. And then, the deployment is also a part of Warp Speed, which you were involved in. Who had oversight over the development?

Mr. Patel:

The development was entirely by the private sector, the pharmaceutical industries. The names will sound familiar now, Pfizer and Moderna were the two that were engaged in the development of the vaccine. While there was crossover between the private sector and the Department of Defense, the medical experts and the doctors that created it were in the private sector.

The Department of Defense folded in to engage in the logistical rollout of getting the vaccine out to the population. That’s the delineation. As far as I’m aware, the DOD did not have an operational lift in developing the vaccine. That was the pharmaceutical companies.

Mr. Jekielek:

Kash, you spoke to this already, but there’s just a lot of people in hindsight who believe that operation Warp Speed was a colossal mistake at many levels. How do you react to that?

Mr. Patel:

Yes, I get it and I appreciate that in hindsight. As I said, it’s easy two years down the road to Monday morning quarterback it with the intelligence that has since come out, and with the facts and studies that have come out. If we’re winding back the clock, we had limited information and we were relying on the professionalism of big pharmaceutical companies to roll out what a large portion of the public at the time wanted, which was a solution, a vaccine to this deadly virus, this pandemic.

At the time, Operation Warp Speed was the correct decision to make. A distinction that needs to be made is that there was no mandate attached to it, not for the private sector, and not for the government. So, that’s the decision. It was a hard decision to make at the time. Just think of it this way. What if, Jan, we had made a vaccine in a timely fashion in the throes of COVID and President Trump shut it down and said, “We’re not doing it, we’re not offering it.”

That would be a much harsher, much more drastic position to have taken, the incorrect one, and I don’t think the American public would’ve viewed that kindly, to say the least. It always helps to flip the script a little to put the light on why I feel the way I do about the decisions we made then.

Mr. Jekielek:

Looking at the response to the pandemic, you basically had Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci running the show. President Trump brought in other experts who offered countering views, like Dr. Scott Atlas, and Dr. Paul Alexander, who turns out had the right idea, once again looking in hindsight, but they were railroaded out. I’m very curious why that might have happened.

Mr. Patel:

Yes. That’s no surprise with my experience in the Trump Administration. One of the things I value most about President Trump is that he brought in differing opinions on any issue, national security, defense law enforcement, education, and here we’re talking COVID, COVID origins, and the vaccine. When he brought in additional people, that was, as far as I’m concerned, how he operated.

I didn’t have direct communications with these individuals at the White House on a day-to-day basis on how they were counseling the president and what decisions to make. But what I do know is that you have to remember who these people are that Dr. Atlas and company were up against. Dr. Fauci and Birx were dubbed the number one and two experts on COVID.

And Dr. Fauci, specifically, with the title as the number one NIH medical expert in the country, was able to take his megaphone and shove the other people aside. And the media was of course willing to go along. Now we know that Fauci’s position was to basically glorify himself in the media and attack President Trump, while putting the facts aside. That’s what I believe happened in terms of why there was this horse race, and why there was winners and losers when it comes to the final decisions during the pandemic.

Mr. Jekielek:

From what Elon says, a lot more will be coming out from these Fauci files or the next batch of Twitter files. Hopefully, as we’ve been calling for on this show, we’ll get much larger comprehensive data dumps sometime in the near future.

Mr. Patel:

Yes. I forgot to add this too. Elon released the so-called information that there were Slack channels and that this information was communicated on the Slack channels, but he refused to highlight the Twitter employees who were engaged in these efforts. So again, Jan, while I appreciate that he’s putting out some of this information, I still have to question why he’s not reaching the full transparency effort he said he was going to achieve by naming the people who are participating in these conversations—by naming the FBI, and by naming their Slack channel content, because it would be sent to Twitter and they would have it. So again, we’re calling for the full release. The window is closing, Jan, because the attention span and the lifecycle of this is going to leave us soon. We’ll be in 2023 and we’ll be talking about something else.

Mr. Jekielek:

Something else that is being talked about right now or perhaps not being talked about enough, because it was dropped over the Christmas holidays is this 845-page report by the January 6th Committee. I certainly haven’t read through the whole thing, but one thing I did notice is that the testimony you gave to the January 6th Committee is nowhere to be seen in there.

Mr. Patel:

It’s not, Jan. And to remind the audience, I was the first person subpoenaed by the January 6th Committee. The legal bills on that one were in excess of $250,000. We’ve gone and done the clinical analysis of what happened on January 6th on past episodes of Kash’s Corner, so I encourage our audience to check it out.

But the important thing to remember here is that this is a congressional committee that says they were dedicated to oversight and finding the truth. How do you do that when you exclude critical information and testimony and transcripts from the likes of me, the chief of staff at the Department of Defense when January 6th occurred? Why isn’t that information released?

My lawyers have been demanding the January 6th committee release that information, and they keep coming back to us in writing, and I hope they call us out because we got the receipts, “Oh, we’re getting to it, and basically we don’t have a timeline.” But the ironic thing is, Jan, they would send us a notification that would basically read, “You and your counsel have 24 hours to review the transcript and then we’re going to release it.” We would jump through monstrous hoops to get that done in a totally what we call unfair fashion, and still no release. Why? Do they not want my testimony regarding the events leading up to January 6th?

And here’s another question. They said they wanted the information from everyone. Where are Nancy Pelosi’s texts? Why didn’t she testify before the January 6th committee? As we now know, unequivocally, as I said previously, and to the committee, that Nancy Pelosi, Mayor Bowser were the ones who shut down the request for the National Guard days before January 6th.

That singular event and decision in time was the one that is solely responsible for excluding the presence and deployment of the National Guard on the lead-up to January 6th, including on the day of January 6th. We’ve talked about how different January 6th would’ve turned out with 10,000 national guardsmen and women surrounding the United States Capitol.

This committee has done a selective investigation to meet whatever headlines it wants to do, and what we have to do is get out there and remind Americans that these are the same people, most of them, who perpetuated the Russiagate hoax, the fraud I should say, and took it to the media. Now they’re taking it to the media again. And they also lobbied a recommendation, and I want to include this as a former federal prosecutor, they recommended charges against President Trump for insurrection.

Again, where is my transcript? You asked me these questions under oath. You have forbidden me from speaking about them publicly until this testimony is released. Unlike you, I play by the rules. We did it with Russiagate. When Devin and I investigated, we didn’t leak information. We played by the rules and released in a timely and lawful and ethical fashion, and I’m going to continue that today. I’m sure I could just sit here, Jan, on our show and just tell you everything.

But that is not how you conduct constitutional congressional oversight. I’m sure some of our audience is saying, “Just do it anyway.” That’s not how I was brought up and that’s not how I’m going to do it here. But I’ve given you enough examples to show you that the January 6th Committee is hiding information from you, from the American public. If they truly wanted to get to the bottom of it, they would see to it that everything’s released immediately.

This charge of insurrection, as I’ve said publicly, how can it logically stand? I’ll put it this way, since I can’t talk about the content of my testimony yet, how can it logically stand if President Trump ordered the transition of power from the Trump presidency to the Biden presidency? And how do I know he ordered that? Because the only person that can order it is him. The only agency or department that can execute that order is the Department of Defense, where I was chief of staff.

And by regulation, the chief of staff at the Department of Defense is the head of the presidential transition for the Department of Defense. With that fact, in and of itself, how could he have been inciting an insurrection, which is basically using the military to perform a coup? It is factually impossible. Again, I’m calling for my transcript to be released along with every exhibit I asked to be put in there.

Here’s another fact. I asked to be included in my deposition transcript, the DOD timeline, the Capitol Police timeline, Mayor Bowser’s letter, engagements with Nancy Pelosi and the Department of Defense, all related to National Guard deployment and our meetings with President Trump on the lead-up to January 6th, where days before he authorized, as the president can only do, up to 20,000 National Guard. The law commands and requires that a request be made, and that request was shut down by Mayor Bowser and Pelosi.

There’s a lot of information and facts and truth for the American public to digest, but this committee is a farce and is preventing America from getting to the real truth. At the end of the day, Jan, it just hurts Americans’ faith in Congress, and also hurts our national security. It’s a tragic, sad ending to a committee that never wanted to get to the truth in the first place.

Mr. Jekielek:

The committee did recommend that President Trump be indicted. The report, again, from the cursory view I have of it, seemed to be very, very focused on material that would support that, at least in their description. What do you think will happen with this indictment recommendation?

Mr. Patel:

I don’t think that he’ll be indicted for anything related to January 6th. It’s just not factually supported. It reminds me of the FBI specifically going to a federal court and withholding evidence of innocence or the other evidence that they had. That’s exactly what this committee’s doing. They’re withholding my transcript Exhibit 1. They’re withholding the exhibits in my transcript. What other transcripts are they withholding? There was hundreds if not thousands of depositions taken. I know they haven’t released all of them. They probably haven’t even released half of them. Once we get down into the weeds of those transcripts, we’ll know the truth.

But here’s what they want. They want to ram past this thing because they know they got less than a week left, when they, the Democrats are still in charge of the House of Representatives. Then, this committee will be shuttered, and the news cycle will have moved on and they will have gotten their headline, which is what you just said. But I don’t think that headline meets the factual representations that were made to that committee. It is just hyperbole, and America should ignore it.

Mr. Jekielek:

We’ll see what happens. Kash, it’s time for our shout-out.

Mr. Patel:

It is indeed time, Jan, for our shout-out, and this week’s shout-out goes to Margie CJ. Thanks so much for posting your comments on our wall. And thanks, everybody, for participating in our live chat on a weekly basis. We’ve really enjoyed the back and forth that we have on Friday nights. As year 2022 comes to an end, we wanted to wish everybody a Happy New Year, and thanks for making Kash’s Corner such a success in 2022. We’ll see you in 2023.

Read More
Related Videos