May 26, 2025 • 33 mins
The John Kobylt Show Hour 1 (05/26) - Memorial Day Best Of The John Kobylt Show. USC Professor Michael Mische joins John to address Governor Newsom’s smear campaign against him after he warned that California gas prices could soar to $9 a gallon. Michael Shellenberger comes on the show to expose Newsom’s record on homelessness, crime, and his desperate pivot to the political center as he eyes the White House. A Westminster police officer was caught at Stagecoach and skiing in Mammoth when she was supposed to be on disability.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Can't. I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio
app Monday through Friday month one to four o'clock, and
then after four o'clock we become a podcast John Cobelt
Show on demand. You could listen to what you missed.
We are going to talk now with Michael Miche. We've
had Michael Miche on twice already in recent weeks. He
(00:23):
is a professor at US He's Marshall School of Business,
and he had a fascinating report a few weeks ago
that after studying fifty years of California gas prices, he
came to this conclusion, Virtually all the problem has been
with the California government. That's why you pay five bucks
a gallon for gas. It's taxes, fees, regulations, just the
(00:45):
hostility has created a climate where gas ends up costing
you five bucks ago.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
It's simple.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
And he found no widespread price manipulation or price gouging.
That's another big lie that Kevin Newsom tells now he's
created mooring more more.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Discomfort for Gavin Newsom. I think that's the word.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Because two refineries are closing over the next year. And
a half or so of the Phillips sixty six refinery
here in Los Angeles, and Valero has a refinery closing
in northern California. So Michael mcchee says that that's going
to reduce the amount of refining by twenty one percent,
(01:31):
which means the price of gas could go up all
the way to eight dollars and forty three cents. You
also have to include that sixty five cent a gallon
increase because of the California Air Resources Board new low
carbon regulation. So this all comes together along with other
taxes that will get increased over time. Eight dollars and
(01:52):
forty three cents. Now, this actually broke through and got
some television coverage, and this has caused the Gavin Newsom's
office to start smearing Michael Machet and claiming that he's
bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and he's only guessing anyway. Well,
(02:13):
let's get to Michael mache and see see about all this. Michael,
how are you.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
I'm terrific, John, thanks for having me back.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Well, now, I'm certain that your research is correct. If
you drew this kind of outsized response from the governor.
Speaker 3 (02:27):
Oh, I'm stunned. H absolutely stunned at the response. Didn't
expect it. Uh thought perhaps it might be somewhat controversial.
But I actually thought i'd get a, you know, a
professional response like, hey, Michael, any chances had come to
Sacramento and walk us through your thoughts. But the but,
but the response that we're getting is completely shocking, and
(02:50):
I must say, somewhat juvenile.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
Yeah, I know, it's it's really childish. Because Newsom, I
just understand his character. I mean, you know, covered him
with some of years. He does not take criticism well,
he doesn't know how to handle it because he has
developed his political career in a state where there's no competition,
there's no other political party, and the news media is
always a bunch of lap dogs. So when he hear's
(03:15):
criticism that actually is true, he shorts out.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
And that's why you got the big smear.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Where did he get the idea that you're being paid
by Saudi Arabia for this?
Speaker 3 (03:28):
I have no clue, absolutely none. Back in twenty twenty three,
it's been disclosed since twenty eighteen. I did a piece
of work for Saudi Arabia from late twenty eighteen to
early twenty twenty one was interrupted by COVID and network
had nothing to do with petroleum. In fact, here's the irony.
(03:50):
It had everything to do with diversifying the Saudi economy
away from petroleum. It's called Vision twenty thirty and in
my particular role, along with three other very prominent, high
profile American consulting firms, was to help build a roadmap
or a blueprint for Saudi to invest in non petroleum
(04:11):
sectors in their economy. And so, you know, it's kind
of a perverse argument, but I'd like to, you know,
even bring it a little further right. So you know,
if you look in twenty twenty two, twenty twenty three,
Saudi Arabia was one of the primary sources of oil
being imported by California. I mean it was one or
two along with Iraq and Brazil, Ecuador and Guyana. It's
(04:35):
dropped in twenty twenty four, but certainly twenty twenty two
twenty three it.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
Was up there.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
So we import a lot of oil from Saudi Arabia.
In my recommendations where we should increase in state production
of oil and reduce foreign dependency. So the perversion to
me is, well, you know, why would somebody who's being
paid by Saudi Arabia recommend that the state increased production
(05:02):
of oil and reduce oil imports from you know, petro
states like Saudi Arabia in Iraq.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
I read your analysis.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
I read your analysis and recommendations, and that's exactly right.
Is that you were warning people that if we lose
our ability to refine our own oil into gas, we
are going to rely too heavily on Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Saudi Arabia, you have other oil producing nations too, and
so the question is, you know when we lose these refineries,
and apparently we are losing them. They've taken billions and
billions of dollars of write offs this year on their
financial statements and anticipation and closing operations. The question then becomes,
where will California find the gasoline to make up for
(05:50):
the reduction and in state production. It's a simple question,
where are you going to find it? And then you
know how much is it going to cost to get
it from those refineries because they're not going to sell
it to its cheap and then you have to transport
it here. Well, we have no inbound pipelines, so that
means you're going to transport these millions and millions of
(06:11):
gallons of gasoline a day on maritime vessels, either from
the Gulf coast through the Panama Canal and up the coast,
or most likely from Asia that would be South Korea, China,
Malaysia as far as India. So you're putting these massive
tankers on the ocean that are spewing out a lot
(06:34):
of greenhouse emissions. So the concept then becomes of what
we call well to wheel. So what is the total
greenhouse effect by importing all this oil? Are we actually
increasing greenhouse emissions by doing this or reducing greenhouse emissions?
That's one. But we know we're going to increase the price.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
So no, this is a political sphere job.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
That's what they do. Yeah, you know, look.
Speaker 3 (07:03):
I like I said, I thought I thought that the
reaction would be more professional. Uh and and and certainly
if I had been invited by the governor to come
up and meet with him, I would have gotten on
the first plane at my own expense and said, look,
you know here, you know, here's here's what the models
are telling us. The models, we all know are imperfect,
(07:24):
but we do know this that there are controllable components
to the price of gasoline in California, and those controllable
components are the state excise tax, the cap and trade fees,
the regulate the special blend fee, the you know, carbon
fuel standard, uh, the seasonal changeovers that are associated with
(07:46):
that underground storage fee, and this new inventory fee. It's
requiring to get the refiners to keep millions and millions
of gasoline, finished gasoline and inventory just in case all
regulatory costs.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Yeah, the proof that you're right is every day I
look at the Triple A site. It has state by
state gas prices. The national price is three fourteen. The
California price is for eighty four. So we're dollars seventy
above the national average, and we're over two dollars above
states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, Texas, Alabama, and
(08:26):
South Carolina. We're over two dollars higher than all those
states that I just mentioned. So whatever whatever we're doing here,
we stand by ourselves. Nobody else is even close. So
at your research is one hundred percent right. It's entirely
state policies and taxes and fees and regulations.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Well, thank you, I mean, as I said, over the
fifty year time period, we found no economic evidence of
price gouging or price manipulation or supply manipulation. Yes, do
refinery shut down, yes. Do they have unplanned shutdowns, Yes,
they have accidents, yes, but those are all the facts
of running something as complex and as sophisticated as a refinery.
(09:08):
And I might add that California refineries are some of
the most sophisticated in the world. We measure refinery complexity
on this thing called the Nelson Index. The average for
the United States is about nine point five. The average
for the EU is about six point five. The average
for California is around fourteen. So we have some of
the most sophisticated refineries in the world. We're really good
(09:31):
at doing this. And so when you start adding more
burden on the refiners, such as the low carbon fuel standard,
the inventory for surplus gasoline, and oh, by the way,
let's not forget that the state is banning internal combustion
engines by the year five. You're taking the incentive and
(09:55):
that you know, the state puts a cap on the
profits of the refiner. You know, you're taking the incentive
for the refiner to remain in business in the state,
so you know it's quite logical to see both of
his refineries exit.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Michael, thank you for coming on again.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
You know you're doing honest research and producing facts, and
the news press Office are a bunch of lying hacks.
That's just the way the political world is. They lie
and they smear people when you tell the truth. I
got to run, I got to do the news. Thank
you for coming on.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
Thanks John.
Speaker 4 (10:25):
All right, you're listening to John Cobelt on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Ron every day from one until four o'clock, and then
after four o'clock we turn into a podcast, John Cobelt's
Show on demand and you can listen to what you missed.
I want to talk now with Michael Schellenberger. We've had
on the show a number of times. Great writers, actually
my favorite writer on news and politics, especially here in California.
(10:53):
And he's got a website that you should subscribe to.
It's called public dot News. A lot of hit his
original writing and some others as well. And what he
spent some time on this week is, uh, well, we
we had these these two people on the show. Some
weeks back. He talked about He's talked today about Fool's Gold.
(11:15):
It's a book by Susan Crabtree and Jed McPhatter and
it is a whole review of Gavin Newsom's political life.
And I have I've read some of this book and
we had the uh he had Susan on and what
what Michael has done is really honed in on what
(11:36):
Newsom did to contribute to the massive homelessness that's overtaken
much of California. Let's get Michael Schellenberger on. Welcome.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
How are you great?
Speaker 2 (11:45):
John?
Speaker 3 (11:45):
How are you very good?
Speaker 2 (11:47):
I really, I really do enjoy your your newsletter, your
news site.
Speaker 5 (11:51):
Thank you so much. I appreciate that quite a bit, and.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
I highly recommend everybody subscribe to it. So you focused
on in this particular post the other day was how
much Gavin Newsom contributed so dramatically increasing homelessness and crime
here in California. Talk about his policies which created or
(12:13):
amplified homelessness, just made everything worse over the last like
twenty years he's been in office, going back to his
days as mayor of San Francisco.
Speaker 5 (12:25):
I mean, it's pretty straightforward, and I think a lot
of your listeners will understand this, But the policies have
essentially incentivized homelessness, drug addiction, untreated mental illness, which are
at the heart of the problem. Three numbers for you
that really stand out. He has spent at the state
level thirty seven billion dollars of our money to make
(12:48):
the problem significantly worse. A twenty four percent increase in
homelessness in that period since he took office in twenty nineteen,
and he's increased violent to thirty one percent above the
national average. These are just the straight numbers. The latter
number on crime comes from a liberal think tank called
(13:10):
the Public Policy Institute of California. So this is an
extraordinarily bad record. It's incredible to watch him basically prepare
to run for president when you've just got this very
simple to understand data showing how he made homelessness and
violent crime worse at great costs to the California people.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
What specifically did he do to make almost this in
crime that much worse?
Speaker 1 (13:37):
What policies?
Speaker 5 (13:39):
You know, it's a few things. It's you know, first,
it's essentially subsidizing housing for addicts and people that are
mentally ill and not taking their meds. Without requiring sobriety
or some sort of compliance with medical care. This studies
(14:00):
that have been done for decades show that that's the
opposite of what addicts need. What really works is to
make housing a reward for ending your hard drug use,
for ending your drug use. It's called contingency management. It's
actually the only form of treatment that's proven to work
with uppers. There is no sort of medical synthetic alternative
(14:26):
like methodon or suboxone for meth. It really works because
it creates a positive incentive to get better. By giving
away housing to people without any requirements of change of behavior,
you are basically rewarding self destructive behaviors, and then the
people are dying of fentanyl drug overdose in these little
(14:47):
crummy motels and apartments, although sometimes the newer ones are
very luxury, but nonetheless you're just abandoning people to these
rooms to overdose and die. That you would also say
these Soro's funded efforts to basically allow open air hard
drug dealing. You have to remember that Gavin Newsom opposed
(15:08):
the legislation that's seventy percent of US voted to pass
last November that increased the penalties for fensonal drug dealing.
So I don't know how Newsom's going to spin this
to the American people, but it is. It is the
worst record of any California governor in our history. And
Gavin Newsom is the worst governor in America.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Why the guys a rich kid from the Bay Area.
You have photos on your page of him dressed to
when he was twenty four years old, you know, thick,
lush hair, slick suit. He's with his friends, they're opening
one of his plump Jack wine shops.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
And I'm looking at that photo.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
It's like, how did this guy fall in love with
so many destructive policies that lead to so much death
in the streets. There's something in Congress between looking at
the photo and then reading your description of his He's
below that.
Speaker 5 (16:02):
I mean, John, it's such a great question. I'm so
glad you saw what I saw in those photos. So
these are photos of him with the Getties. That's the
Getty Oil fortune, that's his original patrons. They basically so
his father was sort of the main lawyer to the Getty's.
He helped them to get all sorts of tax benefits.
(16:23):
He actually changed the law in California So Gavin Newsome
was identified early as essentially someone that would be a
political tool for the Getty family, the Democrat Party, you know,
the left broadly in California. And he was groomed and
I just love those photos because you just see he's
just got these movie star looks. I mean, I think
(16:45):
the reaction from everybody was and this is somebody that
could memorize. He had dyslexia. He was very good at memorizing.
So he's just I mean, it's cliche to say, but
he is genuinely a puppet. He's not a thoughtful person.
He's not a deep thinker, he's not a skeptical person.
So the policies he's implemented are just the policies that
(17:07):
people at the Soros Foundation and the Hewlett Foundation and
the liberal foundations want and thought would be good. It's
also ironic. The Getty family has had serious problems with addiction,
like many affluent families, and they should know that you
have to intervene their needs. You have to hit bottom,
(17:28):
you have to raise the bottom, intervene to get people
that are addicts the help they need. The left has done,
you know, then we can talk about why that is
but they basically did the everything that would make addiction
and mental illness worse. They did it. Gavin Newsom did it,
and he did it because they told him to.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
And now that it's clearly a massive failure, they just
keep doing it. That's the part I don't get. I mean,
if they're true believers, they thought they were saving the
world with their good intentions. Well it's a disaster, so
do something else.
Speaker 5 (18:03):
Oh, you just said it right there. I mean, so
the you know, when you divide the world into victims
and oppressors, as they do, all addicts, all homeless on
this tree, all mentally ill people are categorized as victims.
These are first principles for Democrats in California. To victims,
(18:23):
everything should be given and nothing required. That's the that's fundamental. So,
you know, arresting somebody for breaking the law, arresting a
so called victim for breaking the law is viewed as
an act of oppression. Mandating treatment to somebody who just
keeps overdosing, you know, twelve thirteen times. The attitude is
(18:44):
that they would rather have them die on the street
of afensaal drug overdose than mandate rehab, which, by the way,
is something that humans have done. Since Odysseus dragged his
men away from the drug addicting lotus flowers the Odyssey,
we've known that you have to help loved ones in
those places, you have to intervene. They've opposed those things
(19:06):
out of this very dogmatic ideology. Now there's this other thing, though,
which is that Gavin wants to be president and all
of his political advisors are telling them that this homeless
thing is killing him, it's ruining his chance to be president.
Speaker 1 (19:20):
Can you hang on? Can you hang on a moment
for another segment?
Speaker 5 (19:23):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (19:23):
Sure, I want to talk about that when we come back,
because you can't look at anything he does without looking
at through the prism of he's running really an active
presidential campaign.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
It's clear. Yes, Michael Schellenberger is on.
Speaker 2 (19:36):
He's got a great piece Public dot News is his website.
You should subscribe to it, on how Gavin Newsom has
created it, created and intensified this this homeless issue in California.
More coming up with Michael Schellenberger next on The John
Cobelt Show.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
I Am six forty.
Speaker 4 (19:55):
You're listening to John cobelts on demand from KFI six forty.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
We're on every day from one to four and then
after four o'clock he listened to the podcast at John
Cobelt's show on demand on the iHeart app. And we
continue with Michael Schellenberger. He's got a several great pieces
out this week. Gavin Newsom is the worst governor in America.
That's the title of one of them at his news site,
public dot News, which you ought to subscribe to. Well,
we left off we talked about his Newsom's disastrous policies
(20:26):
in homelessness, specifically, so Michael, he's obviously running for president
and he's acting in strange ways, trying to embrace right
wing media figures, trying you know that that podcast he's
having changing flip flop flopping his views. He's got a
(20:48):
terrible record, and it's a visual record. You could see,
for example, all the homelessness he's I don't know how
he lasts five minutes in a Democratic primary.
Speaker 1 (20:58):
What is he trying to do? What is he going
to do here?
Speaker 5 (21:03):
I mean, look, Gavin made a mistake. He listened to
the activist left policy people at the Soros Foundation and
those kinds of places, and he disregarded the hard political
advice that he's been getting to deal with this problem,
and that's essentially a character problem. He's a very cowardly
(21:24):
person in many ways. He didn't want to go up
against all these people around him that sold him on
this so called harm reduction approach, which is essentially the
enabling of addiction. And now he wants to run, and
you know, he is taking serious steps. He's changed his
position on mass migration, he changed his position on trans
(21:44):
in sports. He's now calling for a crackdown. Although I
think that's mostly just to be able to blame local
governments when he runs for president so he can escape responsibility.
I mean, that's another characteristic of his reign, is that
he's obsessed with blaming other people for his own failures
or blaming climate change, blaming other things for it. So,
(22:08):
you know, I mean, it's interesting to see him. I mean,
I will say that I haven't seen other Democrats be
as strong as he has been in rejecting the really
discredited parts of the Democrats agenda. I think he's a
bit too late on homelessness. I don't think it's going
to work, but it is notable that you know that, really,
(22:30):
I mean, I always say, while I'm you know, cynical
about it and I don't respect it, it's better when
Gavin is behaving like a politician than a progressive Democrat
in California because you actually start to get the law
and forced more and you move away from the really
extreme parts of the Democrat Party.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Oh, he hasn't done much to change policies yet. I mean,
he still won't fund Prop thirty six, for example, which is,
you know, desperately needed to truly have an impact on crime.
He voices grave doubts about men and boys playing in
women in girls' sports, but he doesn't reverse the policy
that he signed.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
So is it just seems to be rhetoric.
Speaker 5 (23:14):
Yeah, I agree. I mean I think it's mostly he's
always about doing the minimum in order to appeal to
all sides. I think you're exactly right about that. And
you know, look, I just think the most devastating thing
is the increase of violence. One of the most devastating
things after homelessness, is the increase of violent crime by
thirty one percent California that happened on his watch. California's
(23:38):
violent crime rates were closer to the national average. He
pushed them to be thirty percent higher. I mean, this
is after years of the media gas light in US
and Democrats gas light in US, and him him saying
that somehow that we shouldn't believe our eyes and that
really that crime wasn't increasing, when in fact it had
increased quite dramatically and remains extremely high. But no, I
(24:00):
think you're right. I think that he didn't have the
courage to actually take action at a policy level. He
doesn't want to lose that support from the Soros Laft.
That's the thing. That's that's why he opposed the legislation
Prop thirty six, As you mentioned, that's why they're dragging
their feet to get it implemented. So they're trying to
have it both ways. I don't think it'll work. You know,
(24:23):
it's a terrible record, and I think really he's been defeated,
I think morally, even though he remains in power.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
You talk about one of the reasons the crime increased
is when he emptied the jails and prisons during COVID,
And I just saw a story in cal Matters the
other day that a third of the people they let
out of prison in one Flourish are back in prison
and thirty of them are accused a murder.
Speaker 5 (24:53):
Yep, that's exactly right. It's an incredible thing. Not but
this new book you had mentioned, fools Gold highly recommended.
They discovered they had a whistleblower from the prison system
who said that Gavin Knewsome lied when he said that
they needed to let people out of prison for COVID.
He just wanted to get all these people out of
prison in order to win the support of the Soros types.
(25:18):
So you know, look, lives have been lost as a result.
In me, Like you said, thirty lives were lost that
shouldn't have been lost because of his reckless and irresponsible behavior.
Speaker 2 (25:27):
You think he goes through with running for president because
he's not going to be treated warmly by Democratic opponents.
Speaker 1 (25:34):
One thing I've.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
Noticed, you know, following him all these years, he's never
dealt He's never had to operate in a critical environment
between having a one party rule in Sacramento and an
incredibly compliant news media adoring him. I don't think he's
designed to take a lot of criticism when he gets it.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
He doesn't handle himself.
Speaker 5 (25:55):
Well, No, I think you're exactly right. I mean, I
think he's deaf running I mean that's why he did
the podcast, That's why he's having conservatives on his podcast
with him. That's why he's been carefully and deliberately changing
his position on a number of issues. But I think
you're right. I mean, it is the podcasting era, it's
the social media era that has been disruptive. It allowed
(26:19):
for the election of Donald Trump and a Republican majority
really only made possible by Elon Musk. Purchase of x
X is not a friendly place for Gavin Newsom anymore.
You know, the media are themselves more skeptical because in
some ways they are now following x which is the
leading media platform. But I think you're exactly right. The
problem for Gavin Newsom and for really all Democrats is
(26:43):
that they need to appeal to swing voters, and those
swing voters agree much more with the base of the nationalist,
populist Republican Party than they do with the base of
the Democrat Party. The base of the Democrat Party wants
to transgender children, and they want trans and sports. They
want they want to make energy expensive, they want to
(27:05):
let people out of prison, they want to leave people
on the streets to die. That's what the base of
the Democratic Party wants.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
All Right, one more question.
Speaker 5 (27:12):
Voters won the exact opposite.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
All Right, one more thing before I got to go
eight point fifty a gallon for gas? How did if
that happens, How's he going to survive that?
Speaker 5 (27:26):
It's a great question. I mean, there's a way in
which he's still it's kind of still. You see him
pivoting a little bit. But the real world has moved
so far, so fast than the last year or two,
and he's still sort of stuck in that night, that
twenty twenty period, twenty nineteen, twenty twenty period when climate
apocalypse was, you know, maybe the biggest issue in the world.
(27:49):
I don't I think he's pivoting. I don't think he's
pivoting fast enough.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Good talking with you again, Michael, Michael Schellenberger, Public Dot News.
Speaker 5 (27:56):
Jean, great to be with you.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
All right.
Speaker 4 (27:58):
You're listening to John Cobelts on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
Am six forty more stimulating talk radio John Cobelt Show.
We're on from one until four after four o'clock. John
cobelt Show on demand. That's the podcast downloaded millions due.
You should too, and you can keep track of every
single thing we do here. Well, listen to this. There's
just nobody you can trust, Nobody to believe in. A
(28:25):
Westminster police officer claimed over six hundred thousand dollars in
workers comp for a head injury that she claimed kept
her from working. Investigators found that she had no trouble
skiing at Mammoth Mountain, going to Disneyland, or dancing at Stagecoach.
(28:49):
She's now facing fifteen felonies workers' comp insurance fraud. Her
name is Nicole Brown. If she's convicted of all the charges,
she faces up to twenty two years in prison. That's
six hundred thousand dollars tax money. Yeah, she ought to
go to prison for twenty two years. She had a
minor cut on her forehead while trying to handcuff a
(29:13):
suspect in March of twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
She go to the emergency room.
Speaker 2 (29:18):
The er doctor releases her no restrictions, but she didn't
return to work for more than a year. She claimed
severe concussion syndrome she was diagnosed with. That found some
suspect doctor and started collecting over six hundred thousand dollars.
(29:40):
They also think her stepfather, Peter Schumann, worked with Nicole
Brown to I just realize her name, to orchestrate the
whole scheme. She claimed she couldn't work, she had headaches, dizziness,
sensitivity to light and noise. However, in April of twenty
twenty three, she was and drinking at Stagecoach. Seventy five
(30:03):
thousand other people were there, seventy five thousand witnesses, loud music,
bright lights, the temperatures were over one hundred degrees and
she was having no problem. They also found that she
went snowboarding or skiing at Mammoth Mountain and Big Dare,
Big Bear.
Speaker 1 (30:20):
She ran two five k races.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
She went to three soccer conferences, she went to Disneyland,
went out golfing, and she started taking online courses with
the local university. Three days after she was at Stagecoach,
she had a zoom meeting to talk with the Westminster
Police Department about what duties she still could perform even
(30:45):
though she had this head injury. Brown was sitting in
a dark room, claimed she could not look at the screen.
The stepfather Schumann did all the talking and stated she
couldn't even She couldn't even do the paperwork. Maybe can't
do phone calls either, and then she was admitted to
an impatient center for traumatic brain injuries, all apparently fake
(31:10):
according to prosecutors. You know what she for one of
the jobs she had when she was a Westminster police officer,
a homeless lives on offer, lives on officer trying to
connect people experiencing homelessness to resources. What why do journalists
(31:31):
write in government jargon which is designed to obscure the truth.
It's drug addicts and mental patients. They're not experiencing homelessness,
They're experiencing drugs and mental illness. And what's resources somebody
who could treat the drug addiction and the mental illness?
(31:54):
Could you write in English as well? It's the La Times.
Of course, of course they write in non sensical gibberish.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
Go back to the English language. Oh my god.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
That is a lot, you know, And I know there's
a lot of there's a lot of fraud in fake
in workers comp There always has been. I mean, you
really have to be outrageous. But because you know, when
you go to a when you go to a Stagecoach festival,
there's seventy five thousand people, and you go to Big Bear,
(32:26):
and you go to Mammoth where there are thousands of people,
and then you're running publicly in five k races.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
People are gonna notice.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Somebody's gonna get wind of it and make a phone call,
leave a tip. That's outrageous. Nicole Brown. Prison, Prison for
that woman if she's guilty, all right, and uh Debra
mark Litten the KFI twenty four hour Newsroom. Hey, you've
been listening to the John Cobalt Show podcast. You can
always hear the show live on KFI Am six forty
from one to four pm every Monday through Friday, and
(32:56):
of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
Can't. I am six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John Cobelt podcast on the iHeartRadio
app Monday through Friday month one to four o'clock, and
then after four o'clock we become a podcast John Cobelt
Show on demand. You could listen to what you missed.
We are going to talk now with Michael Miche. We've
had Michael Miche on twice already in recent weeks. He
(00:23):
is a professor at US He's Marshall School of Business,
and he had a fascinating report a few weeks ago
that after studying fifty years of California gas prices, he
came to this conclusion, Virtually all the problem has been
with the California government. That's why you pay five bucks
a gallon for gas. It's taxes, fees, regulations, just the
(00:45):
hostility has created a climate where gas ends up costing
you five bucks ago.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
It's simple.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
And he found no widespread price manipulation or price gouging.
That's another big lie that Kevin Newsom tells now he's
created mooring more more.
Speaker 1 (01:04):
Discomfort for Gavin Newsom. I think that's the word.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Because two refineries are closing over the next year. And
a half or so of the Phillips sixty six refinery
here in Los Angeles, and Valero has a refinery closing
in northern California. So Michael mcchee says that that's going
to reduce the amount of refining by twenty one percent,
(01:31):
which means the price of gas could go up all
the way to eight dollars and forty three cents. You
also have to include that sixty five cent a gallon
increase because of the California Air Resources Board new low
carbon regulation. So this all comes together along with other
taxes that will get increased over time. Eight dollars and
(01:52):
forty three cents. Now, this actually broke through and got
some television coverage, and this has caused the Gavin Newsom's
office to start smearing Michael Machet and claiming that he's
bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and he's only guessing anyway. Well,
(02:13):
let's get to Michael mache and see see about all this. Michael,
how are you.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
I'm terrific, John, thanks for having me back.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
Well, now, I'm certain that your research is correct. If
you drew this kind of outsized response from the governor.
Speaker 3 (02:27):
Oh, I'm stunned. H absolutely stunned at the response. Didn't
expect it. Uh thought perhaps it might be somewhat controversial.
But I actually thought i'd get a, you know, a
professional response like, hey, Michael, any chances had come to
Sacramento and walk us through your thoughts. But the but,
but the response that we're getting is completely shocking, and
(02:50):
I must say, somewhat juvenile.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
Yeah, I know, it's it's really childish. Because Newsom, I
just understand his character. I mean, you know, covered him
with some of years. He does not take criticism well,
he doesn't know how to handle it because he has
developed his political career in a state where there's no competition,
there's no other political party, and the news media is
always a bunch of lap dogs. So when he hear's
(03:15):
criticism that actually is true, he shorts out.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
And that's why you got the big smear.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Where did he get the idea that you're being paid
by Saudi Arabia for this?
Speaker 3 (03:28):
I have no clue, absolutely none. Back in twenty twenty three,
it's been disclosed since twenty eighteen. I did a piece
of work for Saudi Arabia from late twenty eighteen to
early twenty twenty one was interrupted by COVID and network
had nothing to do with petroleum. In fact, here's the irony.
(03:50):
It had everything to do with diversifying the Saudi economy
away from petroleum. It's called Vision twenty thirty and in
my particular role, along with three other very prominent, high
profile American consulting firms, was to help build a roadmap
or a blueprint for Saudi to invest in non petroleum
(04:11):
sectors in their economy. And so, you know, it's kind
of a perverse argument, but I'd like to, you know,
even bring it a little further right. So you know,
if you look in twenty twenty two, twenty twenty three,
Saudi Arabia was one of the primary sources of oil
being imported by California. I mean it was one or
two along with Iraq and Brazil, Ecuador and Guyana. It's
(04:35):
dropped in twenty twenty four, but certainly twenty twenty two
twenty three it.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
Was up there.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
So we import a lot of oil from Saudi Arabia.
In my recommendations where we should increase in state production
of oil and reduce foreign dependency. So the perversion to
me is, well, you know, why would somebody who's being
paid by Saudi Arabia recommend that the state increased production
(05:02):
of oil and reduce oil imports from you know, petro
states like Saudi Arabia in Iraq.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
I read your analysis.
Speaker 2 (05:10):
I read your analysis and recommendations, and that's exactly right.
Is that you were warning people that if we lose
our ability to refine our own oil into gas, we
are going to rely too heavily on Saudi Arabia.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
Saudi Arabia, you have other oil producing nations too, and
so the question is, you know when we lose these refineries,
and apparently we are losing them. They've taken billions and
billions of dollars of write offs this year on their
financial statements and anticipation and closing operations. The question then becomes,
where will California find the gasoline to make up for
(05:50):
the reduction and in state production. It's a simple question,
where are you going to find it? And then you
know how much is it going to cost to get
it from those refineries because they're not going to sell
it to its cheap and then you have to transport
it here. Well, we have no inbound pipelines, so that
means you're going to transport these millions and millions of
(06:11):
gallons of gasoline a day on maritime vessels, either from
the Gulf coast through the Panama Canal and up the coast,
or most likely from Asia that would be South Korea, China,
Malaysia as far as India. So you're putting these massive
tankers on the ocean that are spewing out a lot
(06:34):
of greenhouse emissions. So the concept then becomes of what
we call well to wheel. So what is the total
greenhouse effect by importing all this oil? Are we actually
increasing greenhouse emissions by doing this or reducing greenhouse emissions?
That's one. But we know we're going to increase the price.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
So no, this is a political sphere job.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
That's what they do. Yeah, you know, look.
Speaker 3 (07:03):
I like I said, I thought I thought that the
reaction would be more professional. Uh and and and certainly
if I had been invited by the governor to come
up and meet with him, I would have gotten on
the first plane at my own expense and said, look,
you know here, you know, here's here's what the models
are telling us. The models, we all know are imperfect,
(07:24):
but we do know this that there are controllable components
to the price of gasoline in California, and those controllable
components are the state excise tax, the cap and trade fees,
the regulate the special blend fee, the you know, carbon
fuel standard, uh, the seasonal changeovers that are associated with
(07:46):
that underground storage fee, and this new inventory fee. It's
requiring to get the refiners to keep millions and millions
of gasoline, finished gasoline and inventory just in case all
regulatory costs.
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Yeah, the proof that you're right is every day I
look at the Triple A site. It has state by
state gas prices. The national price is three fourteen. The
California price is for eighty four. So we're dollars seventy
above the national average, and we're over two dollars above
states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, Texas, Alabama, and
(08:26):
South Carolina. We're over two dollars higher than all those
states that I just mentioned. So whatever whatever we're doing here,
we stand by ourselves. Nobody else is even close. So
at your research is one hundred percent right. It's entirely
state policies and taxes and fees and regulations.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Well, thank you, I mean, as I said, over the
fifty year time period, we found no economic evidence of
price gouging or price manipulation or supply manipulation. Yes, do
refinery shut down, yes. Do they have unplanned shutdowns, Yes,
they have accidents, yes, but those are all the facts
of running something as complex and as sophisticated as a refinery.
(09:08):
And I might add that California refineries are some of
the most sophisticated in the world. We measure refinery complexity
on this thing called the Nelson Index. The average for
the United States is about nine point five. The average
for the EU is about six point five. The average
for California is around fourteen. So we have some of
the most sophisticated refineries in the world. We're really good
(09:31):
at doing this. And so when you start adding more
burden on the refiners, such as the low carbon fuel standard,
the inventory for surplus gasoline, and oh, by the way,
let's not forget that the state is banning internal combustion
engines by the year five. You're taking the incentive and
(09:55):
that you know, the state puts a cap on the
profits of the refiner. You know, you're taking the incentive
for the refiner to remain in business in the state,
so you know it's quite logical to see both of
his refineries exit.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Michael, thank you for coming on again.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
You know you're doing honest research and producing facts, and
the news press Office are a bunch of lying hacks.
That's just the way the political world is. They lie
and they smear people when you tell the truth. I
got to run, I got to do the news. Thank
you for coming on.
Speaker 3 (10:24):
Thanks John.
Speaker 4 (10:25):
All right, you're listening to John Cobelt on demand from
KFI AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (10:33):
Ron every day from one until four o'clock, and then
after four o'clock we turn into a podcast, John Cobelt's
Show on demand and you can listen to what you missed.
I want to talk now with Michael Schellenberger. We've had
on the show a number of times. Great writers, actually
my favorite writer on news and politics, especially here in California.
(10:53):
And he's got a website that you should subscribe to.
It's called public dot News. A lot of hit his
original writing and some others as well. And what he
spent some time on this week is, uh, well, we
we had these these two people on the show. Some
weeks back. He talked about He's talked today about Fool's Gold.
(11:15):
It's a book by Susan Crabtree and Jed McPhatter and
it is a whole review of Gavin Newsom's political life.
And I have I've read some of this book and
we had the uh he had Susan on and what
what Michael has done is really honed in on what
(11:36):
Newsom did to contribute to the massive homelessness that's overtaken
much of California. Let's get Michael Schellenberger on. Welcome.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
How are you great?
Speaker 2 (11:45):
John?
Speaker 3 (11:45):
How are you very good?
Speaker 2 (11:47):
I really, I really do enjoy your your newsletter, your
news site.
Speaker 5 (11:51):
Thank you so much. I appreciate that quite a bit, and.
Speaker 2 (11:52):
I highly recommend everybody subscribe to it. So you focused
on in this particular post the other day was how
much Gavin Newsom contributed so dramatically increasing homelessness and crime
here in California. Talk about his policies which created or
(12:13):
amplified homelessness, just made everything worse over the last like
twenty years he's been in office, going back to his
days as mayor of San Francisco.
Speaker 5 (12:25):
I mean, it's pretty straightforward, and I think a lot
of your listeners will understand this, But the policies have
essentially incentivized homelessness, drug addiction, untreated mental illness, which are
at the heart of the problem. Three numbers for you
that really stand out. He has spent at the state
level thirty seven billion dollars of our money to make
(12:48):
the problem significantly worse. A twenty four percent increase in
homelessness in that period since he took office in twenty nineteen,
and he's increased violent to thirty one percent above the
national average. These are just the straight numbers. The latter
number on crime comes from a liberal think tank called
(13:10):
the Public Policy Institute of California. So this is an
extraordinarily bad record. It's incredible to watch him basically prepare
to run for president when you've just got this very
simple to understand data showing how he made homelessness and
violent crime worse at great costs to the California people.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
What specifically did he do to make almost this in
crime that much worse?
Speaker 1 (13:37):
What policies?
Speaker 5 (13:39):
You know, it's a few things. It's you know, first,
it's essentially subsidizing housing for addicts and people that are
mentally ill and not taking their meds. Without requiring sobriety
or some sort of compliance with medical care. This studies
(14:00):
that have been done for decades show that that's the
opposite of what addicts need. What really works is to
make housing a reward for ending your hard drug use,
for ending your drug use. It's called contingency management. It's
actually the only form of treatment that's proven to work
with uppers. There is no sort of medical synthetic alternative
(14:26):
like methodon or suboxone for meth. It really works because
it creates a positive incentive to get better. By giving
away housing to people without any requirements of change of behavior,
you are basically rewarding self destructive behaviors, and then the
people are dying of fentanyl drug overdose in these little
(14:47):
crummy motels and apartments, although sometimes the newer ones are
very luxury, but nonetheless you're just abandoning people to these
rooms to overdose and die. That you would also say
these Soro's funded efforts to basically allow open air hard
drug dealing. You have to remember that Gavin Newsom opposed
(15:08):
the legislation that's seventy percent of US voted to pass
last November that increased the penalties for fensonal drug dealing.
So I don't know how Newsom's going to spin this
to the American people, but it is. It is the
worst record of any California governor in our history. And
Gavin Newsom is the worst governor in America.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Why the guys a rich kid from the Bay Area.
You have photos on your page of him dressed to
when he was twenty four years old, you know, thick,
lush hair, slick suit. He's with his friends, they're opening
one of his plump Jack wine shops.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
And I'm looking at that photo.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
It's like, how did this guy fall in love with
so many destructive policies that lead to so much death
in the streets. There's something in Congress between looking at
the photo and then reading your description of his He's
below that.
Speaker 5 (16:02):
I mean, John, it's such a great question. I'm so
glad you saw what I saw in those photos. So
these are photos of him with the Getties. That's the
Getty Oil fortune, that's his original patrons. They basically so
his father was sort of the main lawyer to the Getty's.
He helped them to get all sorts of tax benefits.
(16:23):
He actually changed the law in California So Gavin Newsome
was identified early as essentially someone that would be a
political tool for the Getty family, the Democrat Party, you know,
the left broadly in California. And he was groomed and
I just love those photos because you just see he's
just got these movie star looks. I mean, I think
(16:45):
the reaction from everybody was and this is somebody that
could memorize. He had dyslexia. He was very good at memorizing.
So he's just I mean, it's cliche to say, but
he is genuinely a puppet. He's not a thoughtful person.
He's not a deep thinker, he's not a skeptical person.
So the policies he's implemented are just the policies that
(17:07):
people at the Soros Foundation and the Hewlett Foundation and
the liberal foundations want and thought would be good. It's
also ironic. The Getty family has had serious problems with addiction,
like many affluent families, and they should know that you
have to intervene their needs. You have to hit bottom,
(17:28):
you have to raise the bottom, intervene to get people
that are addicts the help they need. The left has done,
you know, then we can talk about why that is
but they basically did the everything that would make addiction
and mental illness worse. They did it. Gavin Newsom did it,
and he did it because they told him to.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
And now that it's clearly a massive failure, they just
keep doing it. That's the part I don't get. I mean,
if they're true believers, they thought they were saving the
world with their good intentions. Well it's a disaster, so
do something else.
Speaker 5 (18:03):
Oh, you just said it right there. I mean, so
the you know, when you divide the world into victims
and oppressors, as they do, all addicts, all homeless on
this tree, all mentally ill people are categorized as victims.
These are first principles for Democrats in California. To victims,
(18:23):
everything should be given and nothing required. That's the that's fundamental. So,
you know, arresting somebody for breaking the law, arresting a
so called victim for breaking the law is viewed as
an act of oppression. Mandating treatment to somebody who just
keeps overdosing, you know, twelve thirteen times. The attitude is
(18:44):
that they would rather have them die on the street
of afensaal drug overdose than mandate rehab, which, by the way,
is something that humans have done. Since Odysseus dragged his
men away from the drug addicting lotus flowers the Odyssey,
we've known that you have to help loved ones in
those places, you have to intervene. They've opposed those things
(19:06):
out of this very dogmatic ideology. Now there's this other thing, though,
which is that Gavin wants to be president and all
of his political advisors are telling them that this homeless
thing is killing him, it's ruining his chance to be president.
Speaker 1 (19:20):
Can you hang on? Can you hang on a moment
for another segment?
Speaker 5 (19:23):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (19:23):
Sure, I want to talk about that when we come back,
because you can't look at anything he does without looking
at through the prism of he's running really an active
presidential campaign.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
It's clear. Yes, Michael Schellenberger is on.
Speaker 2 (19:36):
He's got a great piece Public dot News is his website.
You should subscribe to it, on how Gavin Newsom has
created it, created and intensified this this homeless issue in California.
More coming up with Michael Schellenberger next on The John
Cobelt Show.
Speaker 1 (19:53):
I Am six forty.
Speaker 4 (19:55):
You're listening to John cobelts on demand from KFI six forty.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
We're on every day from one to four and then
after four o'clock he listened to the podcast at John
Cobelt's show on demand on the iHeart app. And we
continue with Michael Schellenberger. He's got a several great pieces
out this week. Gavin Newsom is the worst governor in America.
That's the title of one of them at his news site,
public dot News, which you ought to subscribe to. Well,
we left off we talked about his Newsom's disastrous policies
(20:26):
in homelessness, specifically, so Michael, he's obviously running for president
and he's acting in strange ways, trying to embrace right
wing media figures, trying you know that that podcast he's
having changing flip flop flopping his views. He's got a
(20:48):
terrible record, and it's a visual record. You could see,
for example, all the homelessness he's I don't know how
he lasts five minutes in a Democratic primary.
Speaker 1 (20:58):
What is he trying to do? What is he going
to do here?
Speaker 5 (21:03):
I mean, look, Gavin made a mistake. He listened to
the activist left policy people at the Soros Foundation and
those kinds of places, and he disregarded the hard political
advice that he's been getting to deal with this problem,
and that's essentially a character problem. He's a very cowardly
(21:24):
person in many ways. He didn't want to go up
against all these people around him that sold him on
this so called harm reduction approach, which is essentially the
enabling of addiction. And now he wants to run, and
you know, he is taking serious steps. He's changed his
position on mass migration, he changed his position on trans
(21:44):
in sports. He's now calling for a crackdown. Although I
think that's mostly just to be able to blame local
governments when he runs for president so he can escape responsibility.
I mean, that's another characteristic of his reign, is that
he's obsessed with blaming other people for his own failures
or blaming climate change, blaming other things for it. So,
(22:08):
you know, I mean, it's interesting to see him. I mean,
I will say that I haven't seen other Democrats be
as strong as he has been in rejecting the really
discredited parts of the Democrats agenda. I think he's a
bit too late on homelessness. I don't think it's going
to work, but it is notable that you know that, really,
(22:30):
I mean, I always say, while I'm you know, cynical
about it and I don't respect it, it's better when
Gavin is behaving like a politician than a progressive Democrat
in California because you actually start to get the law
and forced more and you move away from the really
extreme parts of the Democrat Party.
Speaker 2 (22:50):
Oh, he hasn't done much to change policies yet. I mean,
he still won't fund Prop thirty six, for example, which is,
you know, desperately needed to truly have an impact on crime.
He voices grave doubts about men and boys playing in
women in girls' sports, but he doesn't reverse the policy
that he signed.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
So is it just seems to be rhetoric.
Speaker 5 (23:14):
Yeah, I agree. I mean I think it's mostly he's
always about doing the minimum in order to appeal to
all sides. I think you're exactly right about that. And
you know, look, I just think the most devastating thing
is the increase of violence. One of the most devastating
things after homelessness, is the increase of violent crime by
thirty one percent California that happened on his watch. California's
(23:38):
violent crime rates were closer to the national average. He
pushed them to be thirty percent higher. I mean, this
is after years of the media gas light in US
and Democrats gas light in US, and him him saying
that somehow that we shouldn't believe our eyes and that
really that crime wasn't increasing, when in fact it had
increased quite dramatically and remains extremely high. But no, I
(24:00):
think you're right. I think that he didn't have the
courage to actually take action at a policy level. He
doesn't want to lose that support from the Soros Laft.
That's the thing. That's that's why he opposed the legislation
Prop thirty six, As you mentioned, that's why they're dragging
their feet to get it implemented. So they're trying to
have it both ways. I don't think it'll work. You know,
(24:23):
it's a terrible record, and I think really he's been defeated,
I think morally, even though he remains in power.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
You talk about one of the reasons the crime increased
is when he emptied the jails and prisons during COVID,
And I just saw a story in cal Matters the
other day that a third of the people they let
out of prison in one Flourish are back in prison
and thirty of them are accused a murder.
Speaker 5 (24:53):
Yep, that's exactly right. It's an incredible thing. Not but
this new book you had mentioned, fools Gold highly recommended.
They discovered they had a whistleblower from the prison system
who said that Gavin Knewsome lied when he said that
they needed to let people out of prison for COVID.
He just wanted to get all these people out of
prison in order to win the support of the Soros types.
(25:18):
So you know, look, lives have been lost as a result.
In me, Like you said, thirty lives were lost that
shouldn't have been lost because of his reckless and irresponsible behavior.
Speaker 2 (25:27):
You think he goes through with running for president because
he's not going to be treated warmly by Democratic opponents.
Speaker 1 (25:34):
One thing I've.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
Noticed, you know, following him all these years, he's never
dealt He's never had to operate in a critical environment
between having a one party rule in Sacramento and an
incredibly compliant news media adoring him. I don't think he's
designed to take a lot of criticism when he gets it.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
He doesn't handle himself.
Speaker 5 (25:55):
Well, No, I think you're exactly right. I mean, I
think he's deaf running I mean that's why he did
the podcast, That's why he's having conservatives on his podcast
with him. That's why he's been carefully and deliberately changing
his position on a number of issues. But I think
you're right. I mean, it is the podcasting era, it's
the social media era that has been disruptive. It allowed
(26:19):
for the election of Donald Trump and a Republican majority
really only made possible by Elon Musk. Purchase of x
X is not a friendly place for Gavin Newsom anymore.
You know, the media are themselves more skeptical because in
some ways they are now following x which is the
leading media platform. But I think you're exactly right. The
problem for Gavin Newsom and for really all Democrats is
(26:43):
that they need to appeal to swing voters, and those
swing voters agree much more with the base of the nationalist,
populist Republican Party than they do with the base of
the Democrat Party. The base of the Democrat Party wants
to transgender children, and they want trans and sports. They
want they want to make energy expensive, they want to
(27:05):
let people out of prison, they want to leave people
on the streets to die. That's what the base of
the Democratic Party wants.
Speaker 1 (27:11):
All Right, one more question.
Speaker 5 (27:12):
Voters won the exact opposite.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
All Right, one more thing before I got to go
eight point fifty a gallon for gas? How did if
that happens, How's he going to survive that?
Speaker 5 (27:26):
It's a great question. I mean, there's a way in
which he's still it's kind of still. You see him
pivoting a little bit. But the real world has moved
so far, so fast than the last year or two,
and he's still sort of stuck in that night, that
twenty twenty period, twenty nineteen, twenty twenty period when climate
apocalypse was, you know, maybe the biggest issue in the world.
(27:49):
I don't I think he's pivoting. I don't think he's
pivoting fast enough.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Good talking with you again, Michael, Michael Schellenberger, Public Dot News.
Speaker 5 (27:56):
Jean, great to be with you.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
All right.
Speaker 4 (27:58):
You're listening to John Cobelts on demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
Am six forty more stimulating talk radio John Cobelt Show.
We're on from one until four after four o'clock. John
cobelt Show on demand. That's the podcast downloaded millions due.
You should too, and you can keep track of every
single thing we do here. Well, listen to this. There's
just nobody you can trust, Nobody to believe in. A
(28:25):
Westminster police officer claimed over six hundred thousand dollars in
workers comp for a head injury that she claimed kept
her from working. Investigators found that she had no trouble
skiing at Mammoth Mountain, going to Disneyland, or dancing at Stagecoach.
(28:49):
She's now facing fifteen felonies workers' comp insurance fraud. Her
name is Nicole Brown. If she's convicted of all the charges,
she faces up to twenty two years in prison. That's
six hundred thousand dollars tax money. Yeah, she ought to
go to prison for twenty two years. She had a
minor cut on her forehead while trying to handcuff a
(29:13):
suspect in March of twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
She go to the emergency room.
Speaker 2 (29:18):
The er doctor releases her no restrictions, but she didn't
return to work for more than a year. She claimed
severe concussion syndrome she was diagnosed with. That found some
suspect doctor and started collecting over six hundred thousand dollars.
(29:40):
They also think her stepfather, Peter Schumann, worked with Nicole
Brown to I just realize her name, to orchestrate the
whole scheme. She claimed she couldn't work, she had headaches, dizziness,
sensitivity to light and noise. However, in April of twenty
twenty three, she was and drinking at Stagecoach. Seventy five
(30:03):
thousand other people were there, seventy five thousand witnesses, loud music,
bright lights, the temperatures were over one hundred degrees and
she was having no problem. They also found that she
went snowboarding or skiing at Mammoth Mountain and Big Dare,
Big Bear.
Speaker 1 (30:20):
She ran two five k races.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
She went to three soccer conferences, she went to Disneyland,
went out golfing, and she started taking online courses with
the local university. Three days after she was at Stagecoach,
she had a zoom meeting to talk with the Westminster
Police Department about what duties she still could perform even
(30:45):
though she had this head injury. Brown was sitting in
a dark room, claimed she could not look at the screen.
The stepfather Schumann did all the talking and stated she
couldn't even She couldn't even do the paperwork. Maybe can't
do phone calls either, and then she was admitted to
an impatient center for traumatic brain injuries, all apparently fake
(31:10):
according to prosecutors. You know what she for one of
the jobs she had when she was a Westminster police officer,
a homeless lives on offer, lives on officer trying to
connect people experiencing homelessness to resources. What why do journalists
(31:31):
write in government jargon which is designed to obscure the truth.
It's drug addicts and mental patients. They're not experiencing homelessness,
They're experiencing drugs and mental illness. And what's resources somebody
who could treat the drug addiction and the mental illness?
(31:54):
Could you write in English as well? It's the La Times.
Of course, of course they write in non sensical gibberish.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
Go back to the English language. Oh my god.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
That is a lot, you know, And I know there's
a lot of there's a lot of fraud in fake
in workers comp There always has been. I mean, you
really have to be outrageous. But because you know, when
you go to a when you go to a Stagecoach festival,
there's seventy five thousand people, and you go to Big Bear,
(32:26):
and you go to Mammoth where there are thousands of people,
and then you're running publicly in five k races.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
People are gonna notice.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Somebody's gonna get wind of it and make a phone call,
leave a tip. That's outrageous. Nicole Brown. Prison, Prison for
that woman if she's guilty, all right, and uh Debra
mark Litten the KFI twenty four hour Newsroom. Hey, you've
been listening to the John Cobalt Show podcast. You can
always hear the show live on KFI Am six forty
from one to four pm every Monday through Friday, and
(32:56):
of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
True Crime Tonight
If you eat, sleep, and breathe true crime, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT is serving up your nightly fix. Five nights a week, KT STUDIOS & iHEART RADIO invite listeners to pull up a seat for an unfiltered look at the biggest cases making headlines, celebrity scandals, and the trials everyone is watching. With a mix of expert analysis, hot takes, and listener call-ins, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT goes beyond the headlines to uncover the twists, turns, and unanswered questions that keep us all obsessed—because, at TRUE CRIME TONIGHT, there’s a seat for everyone. Whether breaking down crime scene forensics, scrutinizing serial killers, or debating the most binge-worthy true crime docs, True Crime Tonight is the fresh, fast-paced, and slightly addictive home for true crime lovers.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com