Pritzker Warns Trump

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Sandy Shack sitting in for Jeff Kooner on

(00:02):
the Kooner Report. President Trump has said he will go
into Chicago with the National Guard to fight crime if
he is asked. The Mayor of Chicago responded to that
with yeah, under no circumstances. He's argued that jailing offenders,
by the way, this is one of his arguments, besides
the fact he thinks that President Trump is authoritarian and

(00:24):
this is overreach. He says that jailing offenders is racist, immoral,
and unholy and does not curb violent crime. We've tried that,
it doesn't work. Did he fall down and hit his head?
Jailing people does not curb violent crime. I think Chicago

(00:45):
is an example of exactly the opposite of that. Look
what happens when you do the nobail. When you do
the you don't prosecute lower levels of crime. You don't
you take away money from from the from the police.
Have a rise in crime. You have seven people dead
over last weekend in fifty four shot. We're not even

(01:07):
talking all the crime. That's just a gun crime.

Speaker 2 (01:11):
So wow.

Speaker 1 (01:13):
And he's not the only Democrat who believed that arresting
criminals is racist or that President Trump is targeting black
mayors in regard to his crime jihad. Over in Baltimore,
Mayor Brandon Scott, I'm also afraid of a visit from
the National Guard is yelling the same tired old accusation.

(01:38):
Cut one eight please.

Speaker 3 (01:40):
Mike, there's a target on the backs of black mayors
in the United States of America. I heard that the
black mayors have been chit chatting amongst one one another,
that you all have been having meetings. Can you take
us inside? Because what is the strategy here?

Speaker 4 (02:00):
First and foremost, we have to let folks know that
and call it out. It's very clear that the target
is on us, right, and I think that folks have
to understand what they're trying to say here. What they're
trying to say is that we cannot be a part
of the solution of reducing a problem because when we
know if we're going to call the space to spade.
When you think about the way that those folks think,

(02:21):
they especially someone young, black and male like myself, I
can't be a part of solution because I am the problem.

Speaker 5 (02:28):
Right. That's the way that they think.

Speaker 1 (02:30):
Well, you could be part of the solution, except that
you're saying no to help, you don't want the National
Guard to come in? Is fighting crime racist? Because that's
what I'm hearing now from Brandon Johnston and Brandon Scott.
Is this what the Democrats do when they don't have
a response for something, is to go to this tired

(02:53):
old diatribe that if they don't like something, it's racist,
If they don't want to agree to something, it's racist. Is
fighting crime racist? Or is this just deflection? Is that
what you're hearing. Let's go to Joan in Boston. Joan,
Welcome to w RKO. How are you Joan?

Speaker 6 (03:14):
Hello?

Speaker 7 (03:15):
Hi, yeah, Hi, Sorry, I have a bad connection. I
guess Hi, how are you?

Speaker 2 (03:19):
I'm fine?

Speaker 1 (03:20):
So so Mayors Johnson and Mayor Scott say Trump coming
in to help help get crime in hand is a
racist thing. Do you agree?

Speaker 6 (03:30):
No?

Speaker 7 (03:30):
If you ask the people of the West Side and
South Side of Chicago, they would disagree. They're begging for
Trump to come in. They're going to the city council meetings,
arguing with Johnson, pleading with him. He's just so stubborn
and his ego is more important than the people of Chicago.

Speaker 2 (03:50):
That's the sad thing.

Speaker 7 (03:52):
We moved here seven years ago, we kept our house
in Chicago because the plan was we were going to
move back. I'm born and raised in Chicago. I want
I love my city. And because of the crime and
the way things have changed and escalated, we sold the
house in Chicago.

Speaker 8 (04:11):
Wow.

Speaker 7 (04:12):
Yeah, I was going out there last year and a
friend of mine said, oh, by the way, we were
told if you want to get gas in Chicago, do
it before six pm because there's been a lot of carjackings.
Oh gosh, and I don't live on the West Side.
I mean, we didn't have a house on the West
side of Chicago. Yeah, so you know, things have drastically changed.

(04:35):
Something needs to be done. This is ridiculous. You're offered
help take it.

Speaker 1 (04:41):
Yeah I can't. That's the thing that it's one thing
to be having serious problems and denying that you have
problems and we'll deal with it. But you got somebody
who says I have the answer. And look at DC
I just did this here, and look how happy they are,
even though they're progressive liberals too, they're very happy with
what happened. But they had they were dragged into kicking
and screaming. But once they realized that this was good

(05:05):
for everybody. They jumped on board. I don't understand with
that example, even even if you hate Donald Trump, as
Mayor Bowser does, why you wouldn't put your people first.
I think there's something psychotic about that.

Speaker 7 (05:22):
I hate to tell your audience. Fifty four in a
weekend is really nothing. That was kind of low every weekend,
every it's a free for all once Friday comes you.
I mean, this is common, It's nothing new, and this
has been going on for decades. It's gotten worse than
the last ten years.

Speaker 1 (05:41):
Yes, do you think five years do you think that
President Trump should go in without being asked? Do you
think you should find a way?

Speaker 7 (05:48):
I think that people want that, especially the people on
the West Side and South Side where most of these
crimes are committed. Yeah, they want it. They can't. They
can't live like this any longer.

Speaker 1 (06:01):
If he does, If President Trump goes in, if they
get a handle on crime, would you consider moving back
to Chicago?

Speaker 7 (06:07):
Absolutely absolutely I would.

Speaker 2 (06:10):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (06:11):
It's a great it was a great city. I mean
now you walk down Michigan Avenue. I don't know if
you've ever been to Chicago County. Of your listeners, I
mean Chicago Avenue was our you know, that was our
pride and joy. Now it's sad, you you, it's totally changed.

Speaker 1 (06:27):
I have not been to Chicago for maybe ten years,
but I've I've when a number of times before that.
Michigan Ave was amazing, just a beautiful place. As a
matter of fact, I've been to a number of big
functions in Chicago and they were all. I have nothing
but fond memories of any time I've spent in Chicago,
but I haven't been in ten years. Six one seven

(06:48):
two six six six eight six eight. President Trump says,
I will go to Chicago with the National Guard and
help you out with crime if you want me to.
You got to ask. I think it's going to be
a cold day in Hell before either Pritzker or mayor Johnson.
And it has to be Pritzker. He's the guy that
has to give the thumbs up. Well, invite him. Should

(07:10):
he wait for that invitation. Let's go to Jimmy and Dorchester. Jimmy,
welcome to w RKO. How are you yes?

Speaker 9 (07:18):
You should go to Chicago, You should go to New York,
and should come to Boston. I'm going to tell you why.
You know, how many people are shot in Dorchester over
the years, how many have died from drug overdoses? Three
years ago, I was in Countie Hospital. When we still
out of Countie Hospital. I was crying because I was
there around Christmas. What I saw when they brought in

(07:40):
these guys that were drug overdoses from FENTANL and the
baby and the girl, little baby girl and her son
crying for their daddy.

Speaker 8 (07:50):
Dad.

Speaker 9 (07:50):
He is screaming and he died from drugs from and
it broke my heart. But his here's the part that
really got me because I was there for a week,
and then you brought in the cases where guys were shot,
and you see the same thing, a same scenario where
family members would be weeping and they'd be praying and

(08:11):
praying to God, but they weren't able to say that's
how bad it is, and he's got to come and
that Mayor of Boston. Have we done any audits on
where the money's going, who's it going to? And who
an audits on who's given her the money? From what
I hear from friends and from what I see in Dorchester,

(08:34):
a lot of the guys dealing with drug dealers that
I know are Chinese is she involved, because I'm hearing
it from these people, the young kids that are druggies,
and they told me, is this true? Is she in
cohoots with Chinese mobs?

Speaker 1 (08:50):
Well, I think I let's not go there. That's what
you call that's a that's a slander. We have no
idea about any of that, and there's no proof of that,
and that's just at the moment, that's just basic baseless accusations.
So we don't go there, Jimmy. That's that's not something
that that that we can support. Unless there's a proof

(09:12):
of something like that. You don't you don't do that
on the air. That's just not right. But I appreciate
the call, thank you very much. If it ever becomes
a story, then you know, absolutely positively we will we
will put it on the air. But until such time,
you don't just toss out accusations like that within any
kind of proof, based on rumor that you heard on

(09:33):
the streets. But I but thank you for your call,
and I'm so sorry. I know what you're talking about.
In regard to the emergency room situations, I've I've seen
that myself. When I was a patient in emergency room,
I saw somebody who they were desperately trying to save,
coming in like that too, and it does break your heart.

(09:54):
And yeah, so that's the question that that Alderman and
mister Lopez asked. He goes, how many, how many deaths
is enough? At what point do do Pritzker and do
mister Johnson say, you know, enough's enough? I instead of votes,
I need to protect lives. I think that they need

(10:15):
to look in the mirror and ask themselves that question
because too many families go through what you were describing.
Let's go to Dan in New Hampshire. Dan, Welcome to
w RKO.

Speaker 10 (10:24):
How are you good?

Speaker 11 (10:27):
Good Sandy, thank you very much for taking my call.
You're doing a great job quite being. Here is we
got death and destruction down in the lower levels of Chicago,
I mean violence. It's great, but what nobody's doing nothing
about it? Trump wants to do about something about it.
But these what are you going to realize here is

(10:48):
these democrats are Marxist socialist communist democrats. Okay, they're voting grades,
they're zero to twenty five. They vote against your US
Constitution seventy five to one hundred percent of the time. Okay,
So these people and when you look at Prickster, Okay,

(11:10):
the family's tied into millions and millions, maybe hundreds of
millions the usaid. You have sixty four NGOs. Okay. Governor
prist was even getting money from to two of his company,
from COVID to Path Group and q Health. He got
thirteen million dollars. Okay, the Pricks the family Okay, is

(11:34):
even got a foundation called Taiwani Foundation. Okay, it donated
money to even Republicans like John John McCain and Mitt Romney. Okay.
On top of it, Katie Prixter in twenty two in
his budget for fifty five point three billion, included five

(11:55):
hundred thousand dollars to a private college, Lincoln College, that
had been close for three years.

Speaker 2 (12:02):
So what's going on?

Speaker 11 (12:03):
Where did the money off? So it's when you've got
corruption at the top, you got a severe problem because
the people in between and at the bottom are stuck
with nowhere to go. I mean, you've got cases okay,
where I mean I'm gonna I mean, when you have
the Jiu jitsial not even on top of it violating

(12:25):
the law, okay, with Trump right, they're violating the law
by legislating from the bench. Okay, you got the voters
are trying to do their jobs right in Massachusetts. The
guy did bring up a good point. You got how
Steve the Marino set up President Silka and Governor Healy

(12:45):
who are refusing to comply. They put the ballot question
and seventy two percent, that's nearly three quarters of the
voters voted for a forensic audits and they're.

Speaker 2 (12:57):
Saying no, So with the.

Speaker 11 (12:58):
People, where's our power?

Speaker 8 (13:01):
Right?

Speaker 11 (13:01):
And on top of it, look in your HARESHI you
got dirty road. Judge rule off who ignores Okay. The
next step is Danie Richard's case on illegal un constitutional
election laws. He's dismissed this case twice and Daniel Richard reapplied. Okay.
And the breason is is because this trial would blow

(13:23):
the lid on the entire country. It's the only country
on election law laws being violated. Okay, because they're illegally
enough constitutional, changing them without the consent of the voters.
You have to put it on the ballots, get two
thirds majority vote from the people. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (13:41):
No, I don't disagree with that, Dan, I mean I
understand what you're saying. And you asked the question. You know,
where where is our power. Our power is in doing
our due diligence and voting accordingly. As you are suggesting,
you have to do your research into the candidates that
are running. You have to take a look and find
out if they're telling the truth or not. People in Chicago.

(14:02):
We had Joan call earlier who was from Chicago, and
she basically says, this guy has been been putting his
party first for a long time and the results are
what you see now in Chicago, to the point where
she sold her house out there. She didn't want to
move back, even though it's her home, because it is

(14:24):
so dangerous. The people, the voters of Chicago, needed to
start paying attention to what was happening and not just
go with you know who Uncle Fred is employed by,
or you know who, you know who's members the teachers'
union is telling them how to vote. You don't have
to vote the way the union tells you to, as
far as I know. When you go into the voting
with it's just you and the pen and the piece of paper,

(14:47):
it's there's nobody in there with you. You can vote, however,
you need to vote regardless of what your your union
tells you how to vote, or your party boss tells
you how to vote, or your uncle Fred tells you
how to vote. So I think everybody has to take
respont ononsibility for their own vote. And and uh, if we
do that, then you're not going to have people like
Pritzker and people like Brandon Johnson in power anymore. I

(15:10):
think that's that's one of the keys. Thank you so
much for the call, Dan, I appreciate it very much.
Six one six six sixty eight sixty eight. Should President
Trump ignore the wishes basically because they've made it pretty
clear they don't want him of both Pritzker and Johnson
in Chicago and bring the National Guarden to help clean
it up. Do the people of Chicago need that to happen?

(15:33):
Or can he wait to be invited because I think
pigs are going to be flying by the window before
they invite him to come in. Let's go to Harry
in Maine. Harry, welcome to w RKO.

Speaker 8 (15:42):
How are you, hey, Sandy? Good morning, And I'm going
to be very brief this morning. First of all, I
want to nominate Darryl from Georgia. He was so articulate,
he was and he was so accurate.

Speaker 1 (15:55):
It was a great way to start to show yeah, yep.

Speaker 8 (15:57):
And what should be done and in the reason else
of cleaning up that city, we'll speak for themselves and
we need to change the voting mentality. And he nailed it.
The other thing I wanted to say, Sandy was where
I would invite anybody that's listening that's on the left,
including Buddy Bill from Sudbury, anyone in the Boston Red

(16:18):
Sox organization starting with John Henry. Where is b l M.
Henry put that large flag on them and draped it
over the left of a wall several years ago, and I,
for one boycotted the Red Sox sense And I just
feel that, you know, the hypocrisy is so thick here

(16:39):
that you can cut it with a knife. So I
put it out to your listeners. Anyone who's an advocate
for BLM and that phony beloney anarchist organization, let them
pick up the phone and give you a call. I'd
like to hear where they Where are they now? Where
it's documented that there's black on black crime and people,
innocent people are getting shot and killed daily in that city?

(17:01):
Is all in these other cities Baltimore and all the
other ones we know about that way everywhere else where
is bo em and it's all I have to.

Speaker 1 (17:09):
Say, Well, thank you for the call, Harry. I appreciate
it very much. That was a very sixtinct articulate point.
It is kind of ironic that they are calling they
meeting Mayor Johnson. Both Mayor Johnson in Chicago and Mayor
Johnson are Mayor Scott in Baltimore, are calling President Trump

(17:32):
wanting to go in and help with crime prevention and
to combat crime as a racist thing. It's a racist thing.
Why would it be racist? Well, because both those mayors
are black. Well if it's you know, would it be
okay if both those mayors were white? I mean, does
it matter what color the mayor the are. I don't
think it matters. I think what matters is that people

(17:52):
are being killed, People that are black and white are
being killed, and anybody crime is racist when you have
seventy percent of massive murder rate is black on black
as opposed to any other racial mixture. Doesn't know what
they're talking about. If they if they think that it's
a racist situation, well you know, that's their story, and

(18:13):
they're sticking to it because they don't know what else
to say. I am Sandy Shack filling in for Jeff
Kooner here on the Kuner Report. And claims have been
made that President Trump's plan to use a national guard
to fight crime is a racist thing to do and
if that doesn't work for you, the dem say it's
politicizing crime because the president is only targeting blue, blue

(18:36):
colored cities. Is that true? Do you think he's just
targeting blue cities, blue states the Democrats to point out
that they are bad when it comes to dealing with crime,
or is he being equally is he is he just
going after crime as opposed to blue crime, blue state
crime is do you think he's being evenly handed when

(18:59):
he when he goes after when he says he's willing
to go anywhere. Now, Christy nom was asked that question
just the over the weekend regarding saying, you know, is
he targeting people here? And she says absolutely not. Cut
twenty please, Mike.

Speaker 12 (19:19):
You mentioned there are a bunch of cities in democratic
controlled states with Democratic mayors, and there's been a lot
of questions asked about that focus. There are Republican cities
with major crime issues as well, and we haven't heard
about plans to deploy, say to Dallas, or to Oklahoma City,
or to cities in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi that have
considerable crime rates in some cases higher percentage wise than

(19:41):
those other cities you mentioned. Are there plans to go
to red states and Republican controlled cities in this kind
of way.

Speaker 13 (19:47):
Absolutely every single city is evaluated for what we need
to do there to make it safer. So we've got
operations that again I won't talk about details on, but
we absolutely are not looking through the viewpoint at anything
we're doing with a political lens.

Speaker 1 (20:04):
She says, no political lens.

Speaker 14 (20:06):
Do you believe her?

Speaker 1 (20:07):
I believe her because you know President Trump just yesterday
mentioned in the same breath where he's talking about Chicago
New York saying, hey, Louisiana has asked him in Cut
sixty one, a please.

Speaker 6 (20:19):
Mike, Washington, d C. Is a totally safe city. You're
not reporting any crime because there is none. They said
crime is down eighty seven percent, and I said, no,
it's not, it's down one hundred percent. We have a
great thing going. I could do that with Chicago, We
could do that with New York. We could do it
with Los Angeles. So we're making a determination. Now do

(20:42):
we go to Chicago or do we go to a
place like New Orleans, where we have a great governor,
Jeff Landry, who wants us to come in and straighten
out a very nice section of this country that's become
quite you know, tough, quite bad.

Speaker 1 (21:02):
So Louisiana is on his list of where to go next.
Does that sound like a political issue to you that
he's he's picking states based upon the major ruling party
in them. It sounds to me like he's going after crime.
That's what he promised that he would do when he
ran for president. He would take care of crime was

(21:22):
one of the big issues. And he's just checking the
boxes off, is what it sounds like to me. Do
you think I'm wrong? Let's go to Larry and Uxbridge. Larry,
welcome to w RKO. How are you, sir?

Speaker 2 (21:39):
Larry? Are you there?

Speaker 11 (21:40):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (21:41):
Yes, yep, I can.

Speaker 15 (21:43):
Good day, Happy thirsty Thursday to you, my good lady,
and all the best of the all the best of
the coon a man. I suggest the media do some
work and maybe put some totals on the shootings that
are going on in every city, like they did with
the COVID deaths. Maybe that'll catch people's attention and put
a little pressure on these these politicians, so to speak,

(22:06):
to do something, put a little pressure on them. I mean,
like it's not and it's it's people are just set up.
It's ludicrous, it's insane. It's what's going on.

Speaker 11 (22:15):
It's goin to stop.

Speaker 15 (22:17):
Really, it's gotta stop.

Speaker 1 (22:19):
I actually do have crime statistics, Larry, if you're interested,
that'll that'll show you, you know, what the homicide rates
are of the twenty cities with And this is just
this is just to show that I don't think that
President Trump is picking on blue cities. I think because
of progressive policies, those cities have a, you know, a

(22:42):
pretty high crime rate. But he's not. He's not picking
them because they're blue. He's picking them for high crime rates.
Because of the twenty cities in the country with the
highest homicide rates, fourteen are in blue or purple states.
And I can you know, I can give you a
list Saint Louis, New Orleans, Detroit, Washington, d C. Was One, Atlanta, Indianapolis, Richmond, Chicago, Compton, Oakland, Hartford, Rochester, Syracuse, Greensboro, Dallas, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Newark, Denver,

(23:12):
Los Angeles. Those are the top crime cities, and of those,
twenty fourteen are in blue of purple states. Then I
think of those that are not in Purple states, the
six that are in red states. Only one of those
has a Republican mayor, and that's Dallas's Eric Johnson. He

(23:34):
was twice elected as a Democrat and then switched over
to become a Republican in his second term. The other
five cities, despite being in red states, have been under
Democratic control for years, if not decades. I think it's
been twelve years since Greensboro last had a Republican mayor,
and the last time there was a Republican mayor in
Saint Louis was nineteen forty nine. Atlanta hasn't had a

(23:58):
Republican mayor since eighteen seven. New Orleans hasn't seen you
one since eighteen seventy two. So I'm noticing a correlation,
Larry with the with Democratic leadership, not because they're bad people,
but because they followed this whole defund the police. Let's

(24:20):
put our money into social programs instead of swat teams,
and this is what has happened. So I don't think
the president is targeting blue cities. I think he's targeting
crime which happened to be in blue cities. Do you agree.
I'm sorry, Larry, I can't hear you.

Speaker 15 (24:40):
I think you were misinterpreting me. I wasn't having him.
I didn't say he was targeting blue citties.

Speaker 2 (24:45):
Oh no, I don't.

Speaker 1 (24:46):
I'm agreeing with you.

Speaker 11 (24:47):
All right.

Speaker 15 (24:48):
I'm just saying, in general, don't you think the media
to just put the daily shootings and the murders on
the on the television screen, Larry.

Speaker 1 (24:56):
That's my point. That's why we were saying, these are
the statistics, and I'm agree with you that they should
be publicizing these statistics. This is what we should be
seeing instead of instead of the stories that President Trump
is using this as a political weapon, when the statistics
show that it's not. These are the highest These are
the cities in the country with the highest homicide rates.

(25:20):
They happen to be not all of them, but they
happen to be in in a lot of them happened
to be in blue cities, and it's not. So it's
about crime, not about politics. So I was agreeing with you.

Speaker 15 (25:32):
Larry Diagnostig and The other thing is, I don't know
if you saw, but I don't think one student in
that city pasted the math test, the standards math test.

Speaker 1 (25:43):
Is what Chicago?

Speaker 15 (25:44):
Yes, And that's horrific. Isn't that sad? I mean, come on,
the whole police just needs to be just white delta
top to bottom. With it seems like in every category, education,
the police, the politicians. I mean, how bad does that
have to get? And I don't know if you remember
a few years ago one of them may is maybe
back in the seventies, actually slept and completing Grand the

(26:07):
high rises. They're trying to prove a point, and after
like two days he or she said, I'm out of here.
This place is insane.

Speaker 1 (26:12):
Yeah, yeah, I do remember that. I mean, and a
lot of these people, Larry say, you know, ask the question. Well,
first of all, you have the two mayors, the mayor
of Baltimore and the mayor of Chicago, saying he's targeting
black mayors. He's not targeting black mayors, he's targeting crime.
He doesn't care what color the mayor is. One and
two people ask, what does it matter who the mayor

(26:34):
is of a city? You know, isn't it matters because
crime is local, and local law enforcement is what controls
the crime level wherever you are. And if you've fallen
down on the job in regard to local crime suppression,
then there's nobody but to blame then yourself. And so

(26:56):
Mayor Johnson and Mayor Scott need to look in the
mirror and say, Okay, doesn't matter what my party is,
or what my skin color is, or what my gender is,
I have not done a good job on law enforcement. Instead,
they're trying to blame President Trump, saying he didn't give
us sufficient resources. Well, he's offered to give you resources

(27:17):
and you've turned it down. A and B. The federal
government does not supply local crime enforcement resources. That's your job.
You had a budget. Your job was to put as
much into local law enforcement as you needed to, and
you didn't do it, you know. And so what we
have here is the results of progressive mayors and progressive

(27:41):
district attorneys too, because don't forget your public safety as
a residant is dramatically impacted by the DA, who decides
what cases to charge and makes decisions regarding bail. It's
affected by your police department and by whether the local
politician support and adequately fund that police department and the
prosecutor's office. It doesn't matter where these cities are. If

(28:04):
Democrats run them, it's more likely than not that residents
are stuck with local prosecutors who won't prosecute crimes, police
departments that are understaffed and demoralized, and criminals who, if
they're caught, get released on cashlest bail, and political machines
that keep these people in power decade after decade after decade.

(28:24):
That is why the cities are that are mostly mentioned
in regard to crime are blue. It's not because they're
being targeted. It's because they've set themselves up to be
bastions of crime. Thank you for the call, Larry. I
appreciate it very much. Let's go to Sam in North Andover. Sam,
Welcome to WRKO. How are you Sam?

Speaker 9 (28:47):
Great?

Speaker 2 (28:48):
Thank you, Sandy. Enjoy listening to you this morning. Thank you.

Speaker 10 (28:54):
Yeah. You know a lot of good points have been
made this morning, and I agree with them, and I think,
you know the problem in some of these black communities
is it just demonstrates that they've been abandoned by the
Democrats in these in these places that have been taken
for granted, you know, their votes are they are expected

(29:16):
every two or four years, and the politicians who could
make their lives better, they don't do anything.

Speaker 2 (29:25):
They just take their vote and then forget about them.
And then the point about the black mayors, black governors, whatever,
I think. You know, in racial issues, there's a term
disparate impact. Well, but this the the criminal activity, unfortunately,

(29:46):
appears to be happening more in those places. And as
you said, that's where Trump is going, not based on
the color of people's skin, but based on the level
of crime. And you and the last point I'll just
make is I I thought it very ironic that this
was the twenty year anniversary of Katrina. As I'm sure

(30:06):
you recall. Back during Katrina, uh, you know, Bush was
attacked as being racist, did not provide help to the
folks who were affected by the hurricane because they were black.
Now Trump's being attacked but it's like to help with
crime in the areas, and they say, oh, it's because

(30:28):
they're black. It seems like, you know that this race
card has played, you know, not not with any integrity.

Speaker 1 (30:38):
Not rationally. It's yeah, yeah, you know.

Speaker 2 (30:42):
And I thought it funny that I said gee, they
made a big thing about this, like, uh, you know,
Bush purposely you know, slowed the aid or you know,
didn't do what you know, federal government didn't do what
they were supposed to do because of the racial makeup
of the area most affected in the hurricane. And then
here is the opposite. They're being faulted for trying to help.

(31:06):
And then they yeah, so it's the same old playbook.
Actually it is race, it's just you know, different circumstances.

Speaker 9 (31:14):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (31:14):
Apparently, apparently the race card is something you can play
in any game, at any point in time, whenever you
don't like something. That's what it's come to mean. So
that when a charge of racism used to mean something
and be appalling, now it seems to have I think
lost its gravitas because it's it's been overused, and it's
been used in situations like this where I think this

(31:36):
is ridiculous. I mean, I have seen I've seen racially
inequitable policies in the past, but this is not one
of them, in my opinion. You don't have to agree
with me. I don't think it is. I think this
is not about race. I don't think this is about politics.
I think this is one hundred percent about crime. And

(31:57):
you may or may not agree with me, but I
think think Mayor Bowser in DC, who is crying racism
to begin with, isn't saying that anymore. Thank you for
the call, Sam, I appreciate it very much. Let's go
to Gardner in New Hampshire. Gardner, welcome to WRKO.

Speaker 5 (32:13):
How are you, Ray, Sandy? Thanks for taking the call.
It's been an absolutely fascinating show, and I just wanted
to call in to mention one thing, which is you know,
this is I often try to look at it as
an educational learning opportunity for myself or any of my
students or whatever, and this is one of those instances

(32:34):
where I can bring up to the kids. This actually
is a situation where if we look at the Constitution,
the Constitution in Article four, section four actually requires that
a state legislature, or if the state is not in session,
have to request the federal troops or federal forces to

(32:59):
come in. And so both Trump.

Speaker 1 (33:04):
Garner, you were breaking up there.

Speaker 10 (33:06):
Can you go?

Speaker 1 (33:06):
Can you repeat what you just said just the least sentence?

Speaker 5 (33:09):
Sure, Yeah, I was just going to say the Constitution
in Article four, Section four actually says that the federal
troops under a president or anything, can only go into
a state if the state legislature or the governor, if
the legislature is out of session, request that they go in.
So both Pritzker and Trump, they're not actually explicitly mentioning it,

(33:33):
but by saying he doesn't want them to come in,
he's not making the call. They're actually tacitly acknowledging Article four,
Section four of the Constitution. So that's one of the
big things to sort of learn about this in this
entire debate, which is a constitutional lesson that can come
out of it.

Speaker 1 (33:51):
It can and so the question, so this is why
we were talking about earlier, the president can go in
if he's invided. We can also if there's an insurrection
declared bypass Article four section four. But that you know,
that's a really slippery slope one and two. You know
that immediately that's going to be challenged in federal court,

(34:13):
and so we're going to have to deal with challenges
and legal machinations, and it's a huge headache. So my
question basically is does the president wait for an Article
four section for invitation to go in or does he
roll the dice try to declare an insurrection and go
in anyway and by himself a whole slew of headaches.

(34:37):
And that would only be because, in my opinion, he
can't stand to see more people die, because that's the
cost of waiting. Are more people dying? What do you
think of that, gardener, Oh, I have.

Speaker 5 (34:50):
To say that the Insurrection Act is inferior to the Constitution.
So regardless of what anyone says about the Alien Enemies
Act or the Insurrection Act, both of those are inferior
to the Constitution. And so, for example, the Whiskey Rebellion
is a perfect example to Washington.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
I don't want to gardener, I don't want to get
into the Whiskey rebellion. But what I'm saying is I
understand that the Insurrection Act is inferior to the Constitution.
What I'm saying is that it buys some time. I'm
not saying that it wins. I'm saying it buys some time.
Does he declare an insurrection and move because in that
period of time, which may be days maybe less, that
he would have the ability to bring the National Garden

(35:31):
before he's told he has to get out. He can
save people that would be the reason why he would
not wait for an invitation that he knows is never
coming from the governor. Do you think it's worth doing
that is my question.

Speaker 5 (35:44):
And even though the statute is on the books, I
would look at it as being unethical because there is
no power given to the executive branch to declare in
the constitution. In the Constitution, there's no power to declare
an insurrection on the executive branch side. Regardless of the
practicalities of it, I would look at it as I

(36:04):
understand that people have very very strong feelings about what's
going on, but as far as the constitutional oaths of
these people are concerned, even Trump, you cannot declare that
it's just not constitutional.

Speaker 1 (36:16):
And that, of course, is what the Democrats are screaming,
is that that's what he's planning on doing, and that's
why they're saying calling him a dictator and he's overseeing
the bounds and he's this is too authoritarian. So that's
that's what they're that's what they're I think they're hoping for,
don't you They want him to do that because that would,
in fact be the fulfillment of all their dire warnings,

(36:38):
and that's that's why they want him to do it,
and that, my guess, is one of the reasons why
even though people are dying, Pritzker and Johnson's saying no, no,
you can't come in because they want the overreach because
it proves them right and it takes them off the
hot seat a little bit, don't you think.

Speaker 5 (36:54):
Yeah. I think he makes some great points. Absolutely, and
it's a shame that all this politics and the racial
injection to get involved with all of this, because they
shouldn't be involved with any of this stuff.

Speaker 1 (37:05):
I agree with you, it shouldn't be involved. Thank you
so much for the call, Gardner. I appreciate it very much.
Let's go to John in Maine. John, Welcome to WRKO.
How are you, sir?

Speaker 9 (37:14):
Good morning.

Speaker 14 (37:15):
Maybe I'm veering off the point a little bit, but
I'm just astounded referencing a call earlier where he was
talking about the egos of these small town hunk politician
want to be like Pritzker and so forth. I completely
agree with him, and I'm just astounded that they can't

(37:39):
put their egos aside and do what their job calls
for and savior cities or whatever they have to do.
And you know, let trump constitutional or not. I was
trying to follow that argument. I'd want to hear more
of the argument of the previous caller about that, because
it was very interesting. I'm reading a book by Montia Williams.

(38:04):
It's called The Sailing of the of the Intrepid, and
it talks about the ramp up to World War Two
and the beginning of the war just after Pearl Harbor
and those boys. I'm telling you, they had egos. They
earned their egos right from there, you know, the boats,
the boatsin's on the boats, and all the way up

(38:24):
to the captains. I mean, those people had egos, and
they came together in contrast to what these mayors and
guys like Pritzker, I call them punks because I can't
start listening to them. I came from I was raised
for a generation of all navy veterans, and I could
just I could just imagine sitting around.

Speaker 7 (38:46):
With them today.

Speaker 14 (38:46):
They've all passed my father and his brothers and my
other uncles, and so I could just imagine sitting with them,
listening to the craft that we that's going on, you know,
with these in the cities, with these mayors and so forth.
So that's all I have to say. I mean, I'm
just really astounded. I listen every day, you know, whenever

(39:07):
I can can, and it's just, you know, we're all
casting around for answers, and sometimes I have to go
to the church, and my church is my parents, my
parents generation, and my uncles and so forth, and that
Navy generation, they are all Navy.

Speaker 1 (39:24):
I can I can imagine John coming from a family
that feels duty as much as apparently, you know, it's
obvious your family does. To run up against people who
don't feel duty to anybody but themselves has got to
be a complete shocker. It's because, you know, you you

(39:44):
come from a military family, where honor means something, where
something belief in something bigger than yourself means something. We're
putting other people first mean something, and that's obviously not
the case with the elected officials in Chicago. So I
can understand how they look like aliens to you. They
look aliens to me because I was raised in a
household that they had a belief in something bigger than

(40:06):
yourself as well. Thank you for the call, John, I
appreciate it very much.