Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Good morning from South Dakota. Airplanes landing on top of toyotas.
What'll they think of next? Everyone, have a great day.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Good morning, Jimmy Sangenberger here with you on a Friday.
It is ka in for Michael Brown. The situation with
Michael Brown, with so much to talk about, and Dragon
Redbeard in fact behind the glass.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
How you doing there, brother the I'm good, buddy yourself.
You know I'm doing all right? You little frazzled this
morning running around. It's been crazy. This week is absolutely crazy.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
And we got a gig tonight, The Jimmy Junior Blues
Band is playing at in the Zone in Golden from
seven to eleven pm.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
And after this I gotta go get.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Equipment from up north to bring to Golden And so,
you know, crazy afternoon and lots lots happening more on
this show that we've got tonight at in the Zone
later on in the program.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
But it would be absolutely great time.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
I always love playing harmonica and you know, being up
there on stage doing the blues with the Jimmy Junior
Blues Band, and we're going to have a great time.
But Dragon, I want to start off with an apology.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
Well, real quick. Is there a chance that wis Oh, sure,
get some harmonica? Maybe you know I've got the briefcase
full of blues right here.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
I can't not have the briefcase full of blues with me,
and if I don't on a given day, you have
my permission to scold me, both on and off air,
can do so.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
Yes, there may be.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
A harmonica serenade, and that would absolutely be worth a
very very important, necessary apology. But I'm also going to
offer an apology. I'm going to offer an apology to
the host of this program, Michael Brown, for how much
of a jerk you were to him the other day.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
Me. Yeah, of course exactly.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
But I'm apologizing for your behavior to Michael Brown. I'm
announcing that I'm doing this, but you may not accept.
So may not Governor Polis or Attorney General Phil Wiser,
or Dan Rubinstein, the district attorney in Mason County. Over
(02:25):
the fact that apology is kind of like pardon me
when the President of the United States issues a pardon
that he does not have the authority to.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Oh, it's kind.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
Of like me saying I'm apologizing to Michael for the
daily jurgree that you bring I have no jurisdiction over
your apologies and Michael Brown's feelings.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
But guess what, Donald Trump doesn't.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Have any authority to pardon the disgraced former of Mesa County,
Tina Peters, who was convicted by a jury of her
appears in a die hard Republican county where Donald Trump
in twenty twenty and twenty twenty four one two to one.
(03:18):
And in fact, you don't just have to take my
word for it that this is a state charge and
he can't really do anything about it. Why don't you
take his from September, listen to this.
Speaker 3 (03:31):
They arrested her said of the people that did the cheating,
it's a state charge, so it's hard to do anything
with But we're gonna we're gonna do something what they
did in Colorado.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Wow, you know, something is gonna be maybe performative stuff.
Maybe it's symbolic like this pardon eventually came about. He
knows that this is a state charge, that these are
state conviction, four felonies, three misdemeanors, and he has no jurisdiction. Now,
(04:05):
how do we know that Trump has no jurisdiction yet, Nah,
he might do something like this despite that fact and
that nothing will come of something like this. Well, let's
go back to earlier last month, in mid November, when
(04:26):
a pardon was granted to seventy seven different people regarding
January sixth and twenty twenty stuff. Sidney Powell, John Eastman
were among them. Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows is chief of staff,
(04:47):
a very broad language pardon for crimes that are mostly
state crimes, which meant he didn't have the authority. And
how do we know nothing has come of it? Literally,
anybody who may have been in jail or prison for
(05:08):
crimes that were at the state level that were included
in this part and are still in jail or prison.
So those who are thinking that Tina Peters is suddenly
going to be set free because federal marshalls are going
to show up at the doorstep of the Department of
Corrections prison facility.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
In Pueblo, Colorado.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
Have another thing coming. Because that isn't going to happen.
I mean, sure, there's an off chance it could, but
it's not. We haven't seen it anywhere else. This is,
more than anything, an opportunity for President Trump to tell
Tina Peter's supporters I did it. I gave the pardon,
(05:54):
and you know what, I'm putting on all kinds of
pressure to Governor Polis to release to Peters. And he's
not complying. I'm saying, free Tina. He's not doing it.
If you saw this statement from the governor last night
about this, you clearly, clearly he is now digging in
(06:17):
his feet. He's digging in deeper into Look, I really
thought that there's a big chance that police would end
up doing this. I've been telling people, I think this
was a high possibility. In fact, I thought it was
more likely than not that Polis was going to do something,
whether that was going to be authorized the transfer of
(06:41):
Tina Peters from state custody to federal custody, as the
Trump administration had requested a couple weeks back.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
I thought that.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
And another alternative, maybe he'd commute the sentence. I think
you'd grant a full pardon, but he'd do something and
he'd horse trade it. He'd get something from the White
House in exchange for doing that. Well, now I don't
think that's the case at all, because Trump just put
(07:18):
this out there bigly and gave every reason for Jared
Polis to say no, because now this.
Speaker 1 (07:28):
Is a fight.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
This is he has the chance to become known for
pushing back against Trump's attempt to get an election denier
out of prison. Like the Democrat narrative around, this is
pre baked, pre baked. But Polis said on X quote tena.
(07:52):
Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers, prosecuted
by a Republican district attorney, and found guilty of violating
Colorado state laws, including criminal impersonation. No president has jurisdiction
over state law, nor the power to pardon a person
for state convictions. This is a matter for the courts
to decide, and we will abide by court orders. He's
(08:17):
digging in now, folks, And in fact, I would suggest
that this is backfiring if you actually want Tina Peters
out of prison, because that's not happening now.
Speaker 1 (08:27):
There was a chance.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
You could have asked me a couple of days ago.
So you're saying there's a chance, and I.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Would have said, yeah, hell, yeah, there is. I think
Polish might cave. Now I don't think you will.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
And federal marshals ain't showing up at the Pueblo prison
to get Tina Peters. Here's what would happen in that scenario.
The state and the Attorney General would say, no, you
have no jurisdiction here, run along now. Then the FEDS
might file in court. I think it would be the Fed.
(09:04):
Maybe Tina Peter's legal team could do it. Then it
goes to district court and that drags on for a
long time.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
Then it finally gets maybe to.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
An appeals court after they lose, and then you know,
year down the line, you a petition to the Supreme
Court say hey, will you take this case and they
say no, we're we're not going to take the case,
which means the lower court, the Court of Appeals decision
would stand, but it will take months even years for
(09:34):
this to work through the system. Then there's the habeas
corpus case, where the Tina Peters legal team had gone
in court and said, hey, we want to exercise her
right to habeas corpus and have you re examine what's
going on and do this whole thing over her appeal
(09:56):
and so forth.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
I'm not going to get into those details.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
And that case was dismissed last week by a judge
who said, I don't have the ability to address this.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yes, he said, we.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
Do have some constitutional issues, some serious constitutional questions that
are raised here, but I don't have the jurisdiction.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
Now, by the way, raising serious.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
Constitutional questions does not mean that they actually have merit
that the answers to those questions would be yes, you
guys are right. Whereas Tina Peters folks are all like, hey, look,
there's a little little bit that we can take away
from this dismissal.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
There's an opportunity here.
Speaker 2 (10:41):
Here is the dirty little secret about the cottage industry
of stolen elections.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
This is all a big grift.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
All of these people are going to continue to make
money off of the promise that if you just do this,
if you.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
Just do that, if we take this step now, then
Tina will be free. Just help us, support us.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
It's absurd, it's deceptive, and it's not realistic in any way,
shape or form. Again, we heard from Trump they.
Speaker 3 (11:20):
Arrested her said, of the people that did the cheating,
it's a state charge, so it's hard to do anything with.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Yeah, he has acknowledged before previously he can't pardon for
state crimes.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
So this is performative and nothing more than that.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Now, last week over on her sister station, k. How
I interviewed Dan Rubinstein, the Republican District Attorney of Mesa
County who prosecuted this case. And you know, President Trump
has made certain claims about what happened. In his pardon
(12:05):
announcement last night, he made the assertion, the Democrats have
been relentless and they're targeting of Tina Peters, a patriot
who simply wanted to make sure that our elections were
fair and honest. Today, I am granting Tina a full
(12:25):
pardon for her attempts to expose voter fraud in the
rig twenty twenty presidential election.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
Guess what he is saying.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
He's pardoning her not just for stake stuff, but for
a crime. She was not convicted of ladies and gentlemen.
She was convicted of three felony counts of attempts to
impersonate or excuse me of attempts to influence.
Speaker 1 (12:53):
Public officials.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
She was convicted of a felony count of conspiracy to
commit criminal impersonation, and then three misdemeanors, only one of
which is actually an election related crime, because.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
All the crimes were what she did around this.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
She got credentials for an IT contractor by lying to
people spinning stories, then took the credentials from that IT
contractor without his knowledge and gave him to.
Speaker 4 (13:23):
A former pro surfer turned computer hacker named Conan Hayes,
who went in surreptitiously pretending to be that IT contractor.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
And copied the election server hard drive before and after
and then a software update, and then the material got
leaked online all of the oh and by the way,
she shut off their surveillance cameras before all of this
(13:56):
classic move. Ye's district Attorney Dan Rubinstein with me on
Ka refuting some of the things from President Trump about this.
Speaker 5 (14:05):
To characterize any of this as she was trying to
preserve election records, not a single one of the crimes
she was convicted of was necessary for her to preserve
any records. The first of all, Secretary of State had
already directed her how to preserve the election records. She
claims that there was more than just what the Secretary
of State wanted her to preserve that she wanted to get,
(14:27):
but either way, she had made the first image on
a Sunday when nobody was around. She brought this guy,
Conan James Hayes into the tabulation room and made it
before the software upgrade image, and then the second image
was made after the Secretary of State people finished their
software upgrade, So there was nothing about any of the
(14:48):
crimes she committed that had anything to do with protecting records.
She could have protected the records exactly the same way,
probably unlawfully, but not for the crimes she committed by
doing what she did, of just making a before and
after image. The proper way to go about it, of course,
is to, you know, if the Secretary of State won't
let you do it, you file an action in district
court and say we need to preserve these things, and
(15:11):
we want the court to order the Secretary of State
to allow us to do it. But even if she
didn't do that, she'd still preserved all the records without
having to lie to a bunch of officials, steal our
pass codes, put them on the internet. All those things
happened independently of her getting the before and after image. So,
you know, characterizing it as it was necessary to protect
(15:33):
the records, it clearly was not necessary, not at all,
not by any long shot, not by any version. As
far as she's trying to stop Democrats from dealing the votes,
I mean, there was no election that was going on.
And did she think that the election in Mason County
was rigged? No. Actually, at her own sentencing, she said
(15:57):
she didn't find a single irregularity. She can find a
single vote that was changed, not one. And I mean,
if she's claiming that the Mason County election was riged,
and she claiming that President Trump didn't win Mason County,
of course he did.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
Yeah, he won two to one, and yet it was
rigged somehow. One more thing, because I got to go
to a brag. Dan Rubinstein also had this point in
the discussion that I raised, Well, just take a listen.
As the clerk and recorder of Masa County, you're required
to hold the actual physical paper ballots for twenty five
(16:33):
months after the election. In January of twenty twenty one,
one of the county commissioners you mentioned before, Cody Davis,
went her and said, hey, let's do a hand recount,
just to be sure.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
We'll cover it.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
We'll cover the cost as a county. And she said, no,
we don't need to do that, nothing to worry about,
and instead proceeded to do this election security breach.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
She could have recounted.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
The paper ballots that were in her possession, Dan Rubinstein.
Speaker 5 (16:59):
Yeah, right, we still have the balance. So you know,
the computer version is just a computer scanned version of
the paper copies that we still have.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Exactly.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
The computer version is a computer scanned version of paper
copies that they still have. And by the way, they
could potentially recount again if they wanted to. I'll get
to your text. We've got a lot of them coming
in as we continue KOA Common Spirit Health a text
line here on a program of course, five sixty six
and nine zero. I'm Jimmy sang In Bergreen for Michael Brown.
Speaker 6 (17:30):
KOA, Jimmy, all this goes to show that it's all
about the team.
Speaker 7 (17:37):
If a Democrat does it, and it's the Democrats, it's.
Speaker 6 (17:40):
Fine, and we're becoming no different than Republicans. Uh, they
say we stole the election from Al Gordon Hillary Clinton,
Well we do the same thing for Donald J. Trump
and then some.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Jimmy sang In Burger you're with you in for Michael
Brown on KOA. Yeah, if that's fair that I think
that's absolutely a valid point and analogy to make five
sixty six nine zero the KOA Commic Spirit Health text
line the texts have been blowing up. Let me get
to a couple of them here, and I want to
(18:21):
get to one that somebody says I don't talk about
on the air because I can't make sense of it.
There is no way anyone in Colorado can make sense
of people getting probation for killing people and people getting
nine years for record tampering. You don't talk about that
on the air because you can't make sense of it.
Actually I can make sense of it. We have a
(18:42):
law and order republican district attorney in Mason County and
we have left wing progressive das and other counties.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Other parts of the state. There's the difference to start.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Now, that doesn't mean in that you know, a rock
ribbed conservative jurisdiction won't give a sentence that we're in
a reach a plead deal with somebody that might be
less than one might expect, but that can happen on
a case by case basis. By and large, which you're
talking about is not in Mason County.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
It's in a place like.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
Denver or Rabbaho or other jurisdictions where you have these progressive,
soft on crime das. Should the district attorney in a
Republican county who is all about law and order. Are
you seriously asking him to just forget that and go
along with what the progressive das do when it comes
(19:45):
to crime, because I don't think that makes sense. Now,
let's be clear about something too, This is really important.
Peena Peters is serving eight and a quarter years in
prison and served half a year in jail. And I say,
you know, when I round up, I say nine years
(20:08):
behind bars, because it's only a little over eight years
in prison. Then there's some in jail, and there is
a big difference between the two. Now, and I've confirmed
this with the DA, Tina Peters will be eligible for
parole in the beginning of twenty twenty eight, eligible for
(20:32):
parole after three years ish in prison, three and a
half years behind bars. Now, for what she did, four
felonies and three misdemeanors, she could have gotten twenty years,
just shy of twenty years in prison in jail, and
(20:52):
she didn't. She got what I said, just shy of
nine years behind bars, and she's eligible for parole after
three in prison. So January February something like that, early
twenty twenty eight. Not only that, her lawyers have made
claims that she's having medical.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Issues, that things are difficult.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
Well, guess what, there's a process called special needs parole
specifically meant for inmates when they have medical issues that
are legitimate to.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Go through to get out early.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Tina was never really expected to spend more than three
and a half years in prison. And guess what, that's fair,
that's right, that's justice, that's appropriate. And the comparisons to
other cases just don't fly.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
They just don't fly. And yet I keep per it
over and over again.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Now this is big national news with Trump saying he's
pardoning Tina Peters. Again, doesn't get you anywhere, because the
president can't pardon.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
Now, there is one possible idea of an exception.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
The text coming in Trump's pardon of Tina Peters prevents
future federal prosecutions, so serves a purpose. Well, it depends
on what he actually says the pardon is for, because,
for example, none of the crimes that she was convicted
of apply here, even at a state level to what
(22:39):
he said.
Speaker 1 (22:41):
Was his justification for this, what he was doing.
Speaker 5 (22:50):
So I.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
Don't think that gets you anywhere. Actually I thought about that, well,
maybe this will protect her from future federal prosecutions in
another administration because there's been a federal investigation.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
Into this.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
My understanding is one of the reasons that the DA's
office didn't really pursue some of the things that they
could have against unindicted co conspirators in this case the
state level was because there were federal issues they could
that that were really implicated here and that the Feds
would have to handle. And there has been a federal
investigation into this, So I don't know. I find the
(23:39):
whole discussion of this to be missing significant context and
actual information, and it is unfortunate the people are being deceived,
and meanwhile the people who are doing the deceiving keep
making all kinds of money with the promise that something
else is going to happen. Just wait, just wait, whether
it's I'm getting Tina Peters out of prison or the
(24:00):
next evidence of twenty twenty that's supposedly gonna drop, it
never comes. It's an absurd world in my view. Well,
we're gonna move on. There's so much more to talk about.
Appreciate the text five sixty six nine zero and the
KOA Common Spirit Health text line. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in
for Michael Brown on KOA.
Speaker 7 (24:23):
As much as I despise Jared Poulis and Jenna Griswold,
I'm at the point where I'm saying that Tina Peters
should just serve the full ten years in prison, and
if along the way she buys the farm in prison, hey,
so be it.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
And if Jared.
Speaker 6 (24:45):
Jenni Grizzwold want tottend their funeral to rub it in,
let them. I would if I were in their shoes.
Speaker 1 (24:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
Well, we'll see what happens how much time Tina Peters
will indeed serve in the I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for
Michael Brown. Thanks so much for joining us on KOA.
And look, today there is a new editorial out for
the Gazette entitled Bigger Name, Broader Mission for Energy Lab.
(25:20):
And this might have gone under your radar a little bit.
I think it's really significant. The National Renewable Energy Lab
has been renamed by the Trump administration. Now this lab
is based in Golden It's a Golden, Colorado lab. It's
one of the largest employers in Jefferson County. Well Enral
(25:42):
has been renamed the National Laboratory of the Rockies by
the Trump administration. Fantastic news, I mean. And what's interesting
about this too, and the editorial opens with this, is
that when President George H. W. Bush renamed the Solar
(26:03):
Energy Research Institute the National Renewable Energy Lab in nineteen
ninety one, he touted outstanding progress that the facility in
Golden had accomplished, noting that the redesignation is a national
lab reflected quote a commitment to finding new ways to
produce and use energy that is cleaner, more efficient, and
(26:27):
more sustainable. So that was an evolution of the institute
to the laboratory. Well, now thirty five years later just
about is another evolution, changing with the times, just as
a scientific institute should do. The Assistant Secretary of Energy
(26:54):
Audrey Roberts Robertson said, quote, the energy crisis we face
today is unlike the crisis that gave rise to ENRAL,
basically referring to the origins of the lab after the
global oil crisis of the nineteen seventies. We are no
longer picking and choosing energy sources, which.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Is fantastic news.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
You shouldn't be And the Trump administration has a much
broader vision here on energy policy.
Speaker 1 (27:25):
Just go to the gas tank.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
And notice how much less you are paying now than
a month ago, two months ago, a year ago when
Biden was still president. And you know that the energy
policies of the Trump administration are clearly superior to anything
that Biden was doing. That it is a reversal of
(27:52):
a disaster, but also moving ahead in the right direction.
The Trump administration really is just giving the lab an
overdue update, almost thirty.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
Five years after the last one.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
The revamped name and mission advances the Trump Administration's laudable
goal of achieving energy dominance by slashing ideologically motivated regulations
and limiting barriers that inflate energy prices. This is excellent
news because what it will do, what it is already doing,
(28:28):
is allowing for the greater unleashing of America's energy potential.
And we have to look to a Colorado through and
through Chris Wright, Secretary of Energy, and all the wealth
of experience he brings as a founder former CEO.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
Of Denver based Liberty Energy.
Speaker 2 (28:49):
He gets the complexities of the regulatory landscape, the burdensome costs,
as the editorial says, and the need to unleash every
energy source at our disposal. It is a vision that
we are seeing now embodied in the renaming of the
National Laboratory of the Rockies, recognizing that the mission needs
(29:11):
to be much broader than a very narrow renewable energy mandate.
This isn't just about solar and wind. This is about
nuclear and gas, oil and gas and clean coal, the
all of the above energy approach that the Trump administration
is moving forward with full speed ahead under the leadership
(29:33):
of Energy Secretary again Colorad and Chris Wright.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Excellent news.
Speaker 2 (29:37):
Check out today's editorro really interesting stuff, bigger name, broader
mission for energy lab. That's in the Denver Gazette and
the Gazette, And of course I'm a regular columnist for
the Denver Gazette. New column out today which I'll talk
about later on in the program. But we are done
with the first hour. Two more hours yet to go.
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger Filly in for Michael brid On k
(30:00):
o A
Good morning from South Dakota. Airplanes landing on top of toyotas.
What'll they think of next? Everyone, have a great day.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Good morning, Jimmy Sangenberger here with you on a Friday.
It is ka in for Michael Brown. The situation with
Michael Brown, with so much to talk about, and Dragon
Redbeard in fact behind the glass.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
How you doing there, brother the I'm good, buddy yourself.
You know I'm doing all right? You little frazzled this
morning running around. It's been crazy. This week is absolutely crazy.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
And we got a gig tonight, The Jimmy Junior Blues
Band is playing at in the Zone in Golden from
seven to eleven pm.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
And after this I gotta go get.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
Equipment from up north to bring to Golden And so,
you know, crazy afternoon and lots lots happening more on
this show that we've got tonight at in the Zone
later on in the program.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
But it would be absolutely great time.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
I always love playing harmonica and you know, being up
there on stage doing the blues with the Jimmy Junior
Blues Band, and we're going to have a great time.
But Dragon, I want to start off with an apology.
Speaker 1 (01:19):
Well, real quick. Is there a chance that wis Oh, sure,
get some harmonica? Maybe you know I've got the briefcase
full of blues right here.
Speaker 2 (01:26):
I can't not have the briefcase full of blues with me,
and if I don't on a given day, you have
my permission to scold me, both on and off air,
can do so.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
Yes, there may be.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
A harmonica serenade, and that would absolutely be worth a
very very important, necessary apology. But I'm also going to
offer an apology. I'm going to offer an apology to
the host of this program, Michael Brown, for how much
of a jerk you were to him the other day.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
Me. Yeah, of course exactly.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
But I'm apologizing for your behavior to Michael Brown. I'm
announcing that I'm doing this, but you may not accept.
So may not Governor Polis or Attorney General Phil Wiser,
or Dan Rubinstein, the district attorney in Mason County. Over
(02:25):
the fact that apology is kind of like pardon me
when the President of the United States issues a pardon
that he does not have the authority to.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Oh, it's kind.
Speaker 2 (02:38):
Of like me saying I'm apologizing to Michael for the
daily jurgree that you bring I have no jurisdiction over
your apologies and Michael Brown's feelings.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
But guess what, Donald Trump doesn't.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
Have any authority to pardon the disgraced former of Mesa County,
Tina Peters, who was convicted by a jury of her
appears in a die hard Republican county where Donald Trump
in twenty twenty and twenty twenty four one two to one.
(03:18):
And in fact, you don't just have to take my
word for it that this is a state charge and
he can't really do anything about it. Why don't you
take his from September, listen to this.
Speaker 3 (03:31):
They arrested her said of the people that did the cheating,
it's a state charge, so it's hard to do anything
with But we're gonna we're gonna do something what they
did in Colorado.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Wow, you know, something is gonna be maybe performative stuff.
Maybe it's symbolic like this pardon eventually came about. He
knows that this is a state charge, that these are
state conviction, four felonies, three misdemeanors, and he has no jurisdiction. Now,
(04:05):
how do we know that Trump has no jurisdiction yet, Nah,
he might do something like this despite that fact and
that nothing will come of something like this. Well, let's
go back to earlier last month, in mid November, when
(04:26):
a pardon was granted to seventy seven different people regarding
January sixth and twenty twenty stuff. Sidney Powell, John Eastman
were among them. Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows is chief of staff,
(04:47):
a very broad language pardon for crimes that are mostly
state crimes, which meant he didn't have the authority. And
how do we know nothing has come of it? Literally,
anybody who may have been in jail or prison for
(05:08):
crimes that were at the state level that were included
in this part and are still in jail or prison.
So those who are thinking that Tina Peters is suddenly
going to be set free because federal marshalls are going
to show up at the doorstep of the Department of
Corrections prison facility.
Speaker 1 (05:26):
In Pueblo, Colorado.
Speaker 2 (05:29):
Have another thing coming. Because that isn't going to happen.
I mean, sure, there's an off chance it could, but
it's not. We haven't seen it anywhere else. This is,
more than anything, an opportunity for President Trump to tell
Tina Peter's supporters I did it. I gave the pardon,
(05:54):
and you know what, I'm putting on all kinds of
pressure to Governor Polis to release to Peters. And he's
not complying. I'm saying, free Tina. He's not doing it.
If you saw this statement from the governor last night
about this, you clearly, clearly he is now digging in
(06:17):
his feet. He's digging in deeper into Look, I really
thought that there's a big chance that police would end
up doing this. I've been telling people, I think this
was a high possibility. In fact, I thought it was
more likely than not that Polis was going to do something,
whether that was going to be authorized the transfer of
(06:41):
Tina Peters from state custody to federal custody, as the
Trump administration had requested a couple weeks back.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
I thought that.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
And another alternative, maybe he'd commute the sentence. I think
you'd grant a full pardon, but he'd do something and
he'd horse trade it. He'd get something from the White
House in exchange for doing that. Well, now I don't
think that's the case at all, because Trump just put
(07:18):
this out there bigly and gave every reason for Jared
Polis to say no, because now this.
Speaker 1 (07:28):
Is a fight.
Speaker 2 (07:29):
This is he has the chance to become known for
pushing back against Trump's attempt to get an election denier
out of prison. Like the Democrat narrative around, this is
pre baked, pre baked. But Polis said on X quote tena.
(07:52):
Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers, prosecuted
by a Republican district attorney, and found guilty of violating
Colorado state laws, including criminal impersonation. No president has jurisdiction
over state law, nor the power to pardon a person
for state convictions. This is a matter for the courts
to decide, and we will abide by court orders. He's
(08:17):
digging in now, folks, And in fact, I would suggest
that this is backfiring if you actually want Tina Peters
out of prison, because that's not happening now.
Speaker 1 (08:27):
There was a chance.
Speaker 2 (08:30):
You could have asked me a couple of days ago.
So you're saying there's a chance, and I.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Would have said, yeah, hell, yeah, there is. I think
Polish might cave. Now I don't think you will.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
And federal marshals ain't showing up at the Pueblo prison
to get Tina Peters. Here's what would happen in that scenario.
The state and the Attorney General would say, no, you
have no jurisdiction here, run along now. Then the FEDS
might file in court. I think it would be the Fed.
(09:04):
Maybe Tina Peter's legal team could do it. Then it
goes to district court and that drags on for a
long time.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
Then it finally gets maybe to.
Speaker 2 (09:13):
An appeals court after they lose, and then you know,
year down the line, you a petition to the Supreme
Court say hey, will you take this case and they
say no, we're we're not going to take the case,
which means the lower court, the Court of Appeals decision
would stand, but it will take months even years for
(09:34):
this to work through the system. Then there's the habeas
corpus case, where the Tina Peters legal team had gone
in court and said, hey, we want to exercise her
right to habeas corpus and have you re examine what's
going on and do this whole thing over her appeal
(09:56):
and so forth.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
I'm not going to get into those details.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
And that case was dismissed last week by a judge
who said, I don't have the ability to address this.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yes, he said, we.
Speaker 2 (10:09):
Do have some constitutional issues, some serious constitutional questions that
are raised here, but I don't have the jurisdiction.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
Now, by the way, raising serious.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
Constitutional questions does not mean that they actually have merit
that the answers to those questions would be yes, you
guys are right. Whereas Tina Peters folks are all like, hey, look,
there's a little little bit that we can take away
from this dismissal.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
There's an opportunity here.
Speaker 2 (10:41):
Here is the dirty little secret about the cottage industry
of stolen elections.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
This is all a big grift.
Speaker 2 (10:51):
All of these people are going to continue to make
money off of the promise that if you just do this,
if you.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
Just do that, if we take this step now, then
Tina will be free. Just help us, support us.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
It's absurd, it's deceptive, and it's not realistic in any way,
shape or form. Again, we heard from Trump they.
Speaker 3 (11:20):
Arrested her said, of the people that did the cheating,
it's a state charge, so it's hard to do anything with.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Yeah, he has acknowledged before previously he can't pardon for
state crimes.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
So this is performative and nothing more than that.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
Now, last week over on her sister station, k. How
I interviewed Dan Rubinstein, the Republican District Attorney of Mesa
County who prosecuted this case. And you know, President Trump
has made certain claims about what happened. In his pardon
(12:05):
announcement last night, he made the assertion, the Democrats have
been relentless and they're targeting of Tina Peters, a patriot
who simply wanted to make sure that our elections were
fair and honest. Today, I am granting Tina a full
(12:25):
pardon for her attempts to expose voter fraud in the
rig twenty twenty presidential election.
Speaker 1 (12:31):
Guess what he is saying.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
He's pardoning her not just for stake stuff, but for
a crime. She was not convicted of ladies and gentlemen.
She was convicted of three felony counts of attempts to
impersonate or excuse me of attempts to influence.
Speaker 1 (12:53):
Public officials.
Speaker 2 (12:55):
She was convicted of a felony count of conspiracy to
commit criminal impersonation, and then three misdemeanors, only one of
which is actually an election related crime, because.
Speaker 1 (13:08):
All the crimes were what she did around this.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
She got credentials for an IT contractor by lying to
people spinning stories, then took the credentials from that IT
contractor without his knowledge and gave him to.
Speaker 4 (13:23):
A former pro surfer turned computer hacker named Conan Hayes,
who went in surreptitiously pretending to be that IT contractor.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
And copied the election server hard drive before and after
and then a software update, and then the material got
leaked online all of the oh and by the way,
she shut off their surveillance cameras before all of this
(13:56):
classic move. Ye's district Attorney Dan Rubinstein with me on
Ka refuting some of the things from President Trump about this.
Speaker 5 (14:05):
To characterize any of this as she was trying to
preserve election records, not a single one of the crimes
she was convicted of was necessary for her to preserve
any records. The first of all, Secretary of State had
already directed her how to preserve the election records. She
claims that there was more than just what the Secretary
of State wanted her to preserve that she wanted to get,
(14:27):
but either way, she had made the first image on
a Sunday when nobody was around. She brought this guy,
Conan James Hayes into the tabulation room and made it
before the software upgrade image, and then the second image
was made after the Secretary of State people finished their
software upgrade, So there was nothing about any of the
(14:48):
crimes she committed that had anything to do with protecting records.
She could have protected the records exactly the same way,
probably unlawfully, but not for the crimes she committed by
doing what she did, of just making a before and
after image. The proper way to go about it, of course,
is to, you know, if the Secretary of State won't
let you do it, you file an action in district
court and say we need to preserve these things, and
(15:11):
we want the court to order the Secretary of State
to allow us to do it. But even if she
didn't do that, she'd still preserved all the records without
having to lie to a bunch of officials, steal our
pass codes, put them on the internet. All those things
happened independently of her getting the before and after image. So,
you know, characterizing it as it was necessary to protect
(15:33):
the records, it clearly was not necessary, not at all,
not by any long shot, not by any version. As
far as she's trying to stop Democrats from dealing the votes,
I mean, there was no election that was going on.
And did she think that the election in Mason County
was rigged? No. Actually, at her own sentencing, she said
(15:57):
she didn't find a single irregularity. She can find a
single vote that was changed, not one. And I mean,
if she's claiming that the Mason County election was riged,
and she claiming that President Trump didn't win Mason County,
of course he did.
Speaker 2 (16:10):
Yeah, he won two to one, and yet it was
rigged somehow. One more thing, because I got to go
to a brag. Dan Rubinstein also had this point in
the discussion that I raised, Well, just take a listen.
As the clerk and recorder of Masa County, you're required
to hold the actual physical paper ballots for twenty five
(16:33):
months after the election. In January of twenty twenty one,
one of the county commissioners you mentioned before, Cody Davis,
went her and said, hey, let's do a hand recount,
just to be sure.
Speaker 1 (16:43):
We'll cover it.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
We'll cover the cost as a county. And she said, no,
we don't need to do that, nothing to worry about,
and instead proceeded to do this election security breach.
Speaker 1 (16:53):
She could have recounted.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
The paper ballots that were in her possession, Dan Rubinstein.
Speaker 5 (16:59):
Yeah, right, we still have the balance. So you know,
the computer version is just a computer scanned version of
the paper copies that we still have.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
Exactly.
Speaker 2 (17:08):
The computer version is a computer scanned version of paper
copies that they still have. And by the way, they
could potentially recount again if they wanted to. I'll get
to your text. We've got a lot of them coming
in as we continue KOA Common Spirit Health a text
line here on a program of course, five sixty six
and nine zero. I'm Jimmy sang In Bergreen for Michael Brown.
Speaker 6 (17:30):
KOA, Jimmy, all this goes to show that it's all
about the team.
Speaker 7 (17:37):
If a Democrat does it, and it's the Democrats, it's.
Speaker 6 (17:40):
Fine, and we're becoming no different than Republicans. Uh, they
say we stole the election from Al Gordon Hillary Clinton,
Well we do the same thing for Donald J. Trump
and then some.
Speaker 2 (17:59):
Jimmy sang In Burger you're with you in for Michael
Brown on KOA. Yeah, if that's fair that I think
that's absolutely a valid point and analogy to make five
sixty six nine zero the KOA Commic Spirit Health text
line the texts have been blowing up. Let me get
to a couple of them here, and I want to
(18:21):
get to one that somebody says I don't talk about
on the air because I can't make sense of it.
There is no way anyone in Colorado can make sense
of people getting probation for killing people and people getting
nine years for record tampering. You don't talk about that
on the air because you can't make sense of it.
Actually I can make sense of it. We have a
(18:42):
law and order republican district attorney in Mason County and
we have left wing progressive das and other counties.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Other parts of the state. There's the difference to start.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
Now, that doesn't mean in that you know, a rock
ribbed conservative jurisdiction won't give a sentence that we're in
a reach a plead deal with somebody that might be
less than one might expect, but that can happen on
a case by case basis. By and large, which you're
talking about is not in Mason County.
Speaker 1 (19:21):
It's in a place like.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
Denver or Rabbaho or other jurisdictions where you have these progressive,
soft on crime das. Should the district attorney in a
Republican county who is all about law and order. Are
you seriously asking him to just forget that and go
along with what the progressive das do when it comes
(19:45):
to crime, because I don't think that makes sense. Now,
let's be clear about something too, This is really important.
Peena Peters is serving eight and a quarter years in
prison and served half a year in jail. And I say,
you know, when I round up, I say nine years
(20:08):
behind bars, because it's only a little over eight years
in prison. Then there's some in jail, and there is
a big difference between the two. Now, and I've confirmed
this with the DA, Tina Peters will be eligible for
parole in the beginning of twenty twenty eight, eligible for
(20:32):
parole after three years ish in prison, three and a
half years behind bars. Now, for what she did, four
felonies and three misdemeanors, she could have gotten twenty years,
just shy of twenty years in prison in jail, and
(20:52):
she didn't. She got what I said, just shy of
nine years behind bars, and she's eligible for parole after
three in prison. So January February something like that, early
twenty twenty eight. Not only that, her lawyers have made
claims that she's having medical.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Issues, that things are difficult.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
Well, guess what, there's a process called special needs parole
specifically meant for inmates when they have medical issues that
are legitimate to.
Speaker 1 (21:27):
Go through to get out early.
Speaker 2 (21:31):
Tina was never really expected to spend more than three
and a half years in prison. And guess what, that's fair,
that's right, that's justice, that's appropriate. And the comparisons to
other cases just don't fly.
Speaker 1 (21:54):
They just don't fly. And yet I keep per it
over and over again.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Now this is big national news with Trump saying he's
pardoning Tina Peters. Again, doesn't get you anywhere, because the
president can't pardon.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
Now, there is one possible idea of an exception.
Speaker 2 (22:17):
The text coming in Trump's pardon of Tina Peters prevents
future federal prosecutions, so serves a purpose. Well, it depends
on what he actually says the pardon is for, because,
for example, none of the crimes that she was convicted
of apply here, even at a state level to what
(22:39):
he said.
Speaker 1 (22:41):
Was his justification for this, what he was doing.
Speaker 5 (22:50):
So I.
Speaker 2 (22:55):
Don't think that gets you anywhere. Actually I thought about that, well,
maybe this will protect her from future federal prosecutions in
another administration because there's been a federal investigation.
Speaker 1 (23:10):
Into this.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
My understanding is one of the reasons that the DA's
office didn't really pursue some of the things that they
could have against unindicted co conspirators in this case the
state level was because there were federal issues they could
that that were really implicated here and that the Feds
would have to handle. And there has been a federal
investigation into this, So I don't know. I find the
(23:39):
whole discussion of this to be missing significant context and
actual information, and it is unfortunate the people are being deceived,
and meanwhile the people who are doing the deceiving keep
making all kinds of money with the promise that something
else is going to happen. Just wait, just wait, whether
it's I'm getting Tina Peters out of prison or the
(24:00):
next evidence of twenty twenty that's supposedly gonna drop, it
never comes. It's an absurd world in my view. Well,
we're gonna move on. There's so much more to talk about.
Appreciate the text five sixty six nine zero and the
KOA Common Spirit Health text line. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in
for Michael Brown on KOA.
Speaker 7 (24:23):
As much as I despise Jared Poulis and Jenna Griswold,
I'm at the point where I'm saying that Tina Peters
should just serve the full ten years in prison, and
if along the way she buys the farm in prison, hey,
so be it.
Speaker 1 (24:43):
And if Jared.
Speaker 6 (24:45):
Jenni Grizzwold want tottend their funeral to rub it in,
let them. I would if I were in their shoes.
Speaker 1 (24:54):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
Well, we'll see what happens how much time Tina Peters
will indeed serve in the I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for
Michael Brown. Thanks so much for joining us on KOA.
And look, today there is a new editorial out for
the Gazette entitled Bigger Name, Broader Mission for Energy Lab.
(25:20):
And this might have gone under your radar a little bit.
I think it's really significant. The National Renewable Energy Lab
has been renamed by the Trump administration. Now this lab
is based in Golden It's a Golden, Colorado lab. It's
one of the largest employers in Jefferson County. Well Enral
(25:42):
has been renamed the National Laboratory of the Rockies by
the Trump administration. Fantastic news, I mean. And what's interesting
about this too, and the editorial opens with this, is
that when President George H. W. Bush renamed the Solar
(26:03):
Energy Research Institute the National Renewable Energy Lab in nineteen
ninety one, he touted outstanding progress that the facility in
Golden had accomplished, noting that the redesignation is a national
lab reflected quote a commitment to finding new ways to
produce and use energy that is cleaner, more efficient, and
(26:27):
more sustainable. So that was an evolution of the institute
to the laboratory. Well, now thirty five years later just
about is another evolution, changing with the times, just as
a scientific institute should do. The Assistant Secretary of Energy
(26:54):
Audrey Roberts Robertson said, quote, the energy crisis we face
today is unlike the crisis that gave rise to ENRAL,
basically referring to the origins of the lab after the
global oil crisis of the nineteen seventies. We are no
longer picking and choosing energy sources, which.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Is fantastic news.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
You shouldn't be And the Trump administration has a much
broader vision here on energy policy.
Speaker 1 (27:25):
Just go to the gas tank.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
And notice how much less you are paying now than
a month ago, two months ago, a year ago when
Biden was still president. And you know that the energy
policies of the Trump administration are clearly superior to anything
that Biden was doing. That it is a reversal of
(27:52):
a disaster, but also moving ahead in the right direction.
The Trump administration really is just giving the lab an
overdue update, almost thirty.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
Five years after the last one.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
The revamped name and mission advances the Trump Administration's laudable
goal of achieving energy dominance by slashing ideologically motivated regulations
and limiting barriers that inflate energy prices. This is excellent
news because what it will do, what it is already doing,
(28:28):
is allowing for the greater unleashing of America's energy potential.
And we have to look to a Colorado through and
through Chris Wright, Secretary of Energy, and all the wealth
of experience he brings as a founder former CEO.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
Of Denver based Liberty Energy.
Speaker 2 (28:49):
He gets the complexities of the regulatory landscape, the burdensome costs,
as the editorial says, and the need to unleash every
energy source at our disposal. It is a vision that
we are seeing now embodied in the renaming of the
National Laboratory of the Rockies, recognizing that the mission needs
(29:11):
to be much broader than a very narrow renewable energy mandate.
This isn't just about solar and wind. This is about
nuclear and gas, oil and gas and clean coal, the
all of the above energy approach that the Trump administration
is moving forward with full speed ahead under the leadership
(29:33):
of Energy Secretary again Colorad and Chris Wright.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Excellent news.
Speaker 2 (29:37):
Check out today's editorro really interesting stuff, bigger name, broader
mission for energy lab. That's in the Denver Gazette and
the Gazette, And of course I'm a regular columnist for
the Denver Gazette. New column out today which I'll talk
about later on in the program. But we are done
with the first hour. Two more hours yet to go.
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger Filly in for Michael brid On k
(30:00):
o A
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.