12-22-25 Jimmy Sengenberger fills in for Michael Brown

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Jimmy Sangenberger here with you on this holiday week filling
in for Michael Brown. Thanks so much for joining us
being a part of the festivities. You know, I'm here
today and tomorrow. We've got a special Christmas theme show
coming up tomorrow. But today is Monday, with plenty of

(00:24):
news and so much that has been going on in
the world just over this weekend, in fact, and we
will get to the question of whether or not Colorado
is being retaliated against with the decision to withhold federal

(00:46):
funds and not allow for a disaster declaration for fires
this fall. But a lot of this also connects to
Excel's blockouts, which quite frankly show that it is behind
the times, that Excel Energy is behind the times. As

(01:06):
I wrote in my column for the Denver Gazette on Friday,
I was noticing something. So I live in Douglas County,
so I'm not was not in the area affected by
these shutoffs, but I did briefly have to go with
my fiance into Golden on Thursday night when all the

(01:26):
lights were off. It was like going into a ghost
town and realizing how hard hit families are in that
situation and were was a real wake up call for me.

(01:47):
And when my column went to print, rather it was
Wednesday night, and when my column went to print on Friday,
it was somewhat influenced by that notion of this is
the impact that people are having. And my fiance's work
has been was down for days because it's in Golden
and the power was out. The amount of spoiled food

(02:13):
in the refrigerator at her office, let me tell you,
it's astonishing. But that's what families have been dealing with too.
If you have been had been suffering through the shutoffs,
or maybe you still are, as I understand, there's still

(02:34):
what about a thousand people without power. God bless you,
and I wish you the best of luck. Unfortunately, for
everybody in this state, I have a warning to give you,
which is brace yourselves, because if things continue along the
trajectory that they are right now, things are going to
become well, these are going to become more and more routine.

(03:00):
In fact, this whole process of excel energies, planned public
safety powers shut down, of course, the triggered for these winds.
But I would not necessarily say by these winds, insofar
as there are more explanations behind the scenes for what
would bring about this particular response, But we had some

(03:24):
one hundred thousand people adversely affected by all of this.
Employees sent home, losing hours, businesses shut down, losing customers.
Think of all the kids who lost out in their
few last few days of the semester, which you know,
probably a lot of the kids are like, hey, more
school vacations already going on. It's just like camping now

(03:46):
to start it. But the fact is that while a
kid might be happy to have some extra days of
Christmas vacation, it doesn't mean that there's not a loss
there because they're not getting the education that is due
to them lost classroom time, all the spoiled food, on

(04:06):
and on it goes.

Speaker 2 (04:07):
Now.

Speaker 1 (04:07):
Excel In the government like to say that it is
all an inconvenience. Of course that's an understatement because we've
noticed the real world harms that Colorados have endured, especially
think about the low income families. I had folks who
were reading my column who were reaching out to me saying, Hey,

(04:28):
I've got my eighty five year old father whose powers
out and they have oxygen and this and that and
all of these concerns for people who have been dealing
with this, and then, on top of it all, excels
not reimbursing people unless something has changed. EXCEL is not
reimbursing people for ruined groceries for their lost wages. And

(04:50):
it's Christmas time, so people have been spending money on
Christmas gifts, eating up their holiday budgets. It's not like
a lot of folks can just go out. Actually, if
you're lower middle income, you've out your budgets for Christmas time,
maybe overextended yourself a little bit, and you didn't have
a backup charger. A lot of people can't just go

(05:10):
to the store and buy a backup charger for their phone,
let alone another device like your computer or a gas
powered generator. Now, the threat of wildfire, of course, though,
is the understandable reason for what went on here. We
know about the Marshall fire. We saw that you may

(05:32):
have endured that. If you're listening now, you may have
lost your homes or no friends who've lost their homes
or had other tragedies as a result of the Marshall fire.
In fact, it's probably hard to find people who don't
know somebody who was affected directly by that fire. And

(05:53):
lost something by that fire. Now, of course, remember it
was at the Twelve Tribes site amid extremely dry conditions
that the first or that the fire started. And then
when you had the Excel spark that added to the
pre existing of fire. Now that brought about a heck

(06:13):
of a lot of lawsuits Boulder County Superior, Lewisville, the
company settled, paying out millions of dollars. And so the
response is this PSPs public safety power shutoffs. That's, of
course the safety mechanism to reduce wildfire risk by cutting

(06:35):
weather conditions. We've seen this in California. PSPs is not
a last resort any longer, but it's a standard fire
season practice. So I was wondering the question is this
going to continue in Colorado. Excel would never admit it,

(06:55):
but I would say yes, absolutely, And and this is
much more about dollars, cents and liability as it is
about public safety, if not more. In fact, you can
go to Longmont. Longmont Power and Communications contracts year round

(07:18):
with a tree trimming company so they can minimize vegetation
that damages power lines, so they can clean up some
of the fuel for the fires. They've started moving electrical
lines underground as opposed to being above ground, which some
would say is sort of the gold standard.

Speaker 2 (07:36):
You know.

Speaker 1 (07:36):
I remember I'm a big fan obviously of the Blues,
but Joe Bonamas is one of my favorites, and I
remember after the Los Angeles fires last year, he went
on a chair on social media about how reckless and
irresponsible LA was for not doing more proactively to bring

(07:57):
those power line underground. And he was absolutely right, and
it's something he said, I've been telling people, and we
need to do this for years, and nobody is listening
in the incompetent city of Los Angeles. The fact of
the matter is that these investments really matter. Long Moted
Lions didn't need to shut off electricity last week, largely

(08:20):
because of their enhanced power line safety settings that automatically
cut off power lines a power line when a fault
is detected, and most cases that's all it should take.
But when they do a shut off like this, the
big problem is how long it takes to get it
back on. You got to inspect every foot of the
line before restoring power. That can take forty eight to

(08:43):
seventy two hours, even longer, as some folks have been
dealing with You need modern solutions, Otherwise shut offs can
make the solution worse than the problem. Frankly, Excel Energy
is behind the time, but we are in for more
of this. I want to go. It was really interesting

(09:05):
on Friday to see this clip from Phil Wiser. Of course,
he's our current attorney general running for attorney running for
governor now to replace Jared Polis, and he had this
to say on Friday about the Excel shutoffs across Colorado.

Speaker 3 (09:21):
Right now, people don't have power. Excel shutoffs shouldn't be
this way. People have gone days now, Businesses are hurting,
people don't understand.

Speaker 1 (09:31):
We've got to do better. As governor, I'm going to
make sure're.

Speaker 3 (09:34):
On top of this issue, building resilience, getting out ahead
of these issues, helping protect Colorado. We need to make
sure people are safe, We need to make sure business
can stay open. We need to make sure that everyone
knows what's going on. As your governor, always put you first.

Speaker 1 (09:49):
So my question too, they want to be governor or
Phil Wiser, and I retweeted this on AX and I
pose this question is does this mean you are going
to oppose the electrification agenda? Phil Wiser? Of course they

(10:11):
never got a response on social media. Not that I
expected that, and I didn't ask him the question. It
was more of a rhetorical question that didn't ask him directly.
I might, but the point is not in so far
as what the silence might be, but that the problem.

(10:34):
The root problem here is the electrification agenda. The company
has not. Excel Energy has not sufficiently hardened its electric
grid against known risks. Its potential liability exposure outweighs the
cost of outages, so regulators are all too willing to

(10:55):
accept that trade off for the monopoly utility. Remember, Energy
has a grant of monopoly from the government, and regulators
will prefer blackouts no matter the social or economic fallout.
Now you can look at long Mind. It's a municipal
owned utility, so one might say, well, oh wait a second,

(11:22):
the answer is to nationalize or to make its state owned.
Right have Excel be state owned. But this gets to
my question to Phil Wiser, because this is not about
Excel being a private, shareholder bound company and Longmand's utility
being municipally owned. Excel is extraordinarily regulated. Again, operating as

(11:45):
a guaranteed government monopoly. They have to seek approval from
the Public Utilities Commission, including just last week they got
approval to invest over a billion dollars in grid upgrades,
and the approval was only granted on last Monday. It's
expensive to put utilities or power lines underground, but it

(12:08):
is the responsibility of the utility to look at that
and other measures. But the problem is that Colorado's regulatory
focuses aren't on hardening the electrical grid against wildfire and wind.
It's on electrification. We want all these electric vehicles and
trucks and electric homes and electric appliances. No more gas

(12:33):
stoves to cook your soup, by the way, when the
power is out for days. So electricity demand is growing,
but regulators have said, for example, in Pueblo, the Kamanchi
station had three different coal fired plants. One of them
is already down, Komanchi one, Kamanchi two was supposed to

(12:55):
be discontinued retired next year, but there are extending out
the life by a year because and this is apt
the governor's request. For example, because Kamanchi three, which is
scheduled for shutdown in twenty thirty, is already down right
now for repairs. So they don't have both to shut

(13:20):
down the one so they need the other in order
to keep things going. But the target is in twenty
thirty to make it permanently offline. Both of those a
massive twelve billion dollar boondoggle to meet the state's extraordinary
greenhouse gas emission mandates for state utilities. As Colorado shrinks

(13:44):
reliable energy sources by government debt, electricity demand is going
to continue increasing with the population. Meanwhile, Excel is putting
its money into meeting electrification because that is the priority

(14:05):
of the state. By twenty fifty, they now want to
have one hundred percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in
the state of Colorado. It is insane. Excel Energy, pushed
by its government enforcers, is willfully disregarding the actual harm

(14:26):
from actions meant to advance a political agenda. And let's
be real here, the agenda is not safety or reliability.
It is electrification. So get ready for more shut offs.
They are about to become routine because the state's priorities
don't align with your priority of getting by day to day,

(14:51):
of being able to heat your home in the winter
whenever we finally really get winter here in Colorado, or
your work, your home for electronics, you name it. This
is an extreme, extreme agenda. Now on the Gazette, John

(15:12):
Caldera also has a piece that hits on some of
these very same points that came out over the weekend.
Didn't like the blackouts, better get used to them. You
can check out both my column from Friday and John's
from yesterday at Denvergazette dot com. Meanwhile, of course, there's

(15:33):
a disaster declaration that Governor Polis had put forward for
some fires this fall and the summer. The Leaf Fire
burned over one hundred and thirty seven thousand acres, both
contained by September the Lee and elkfires, while severe flooding

(15:55):
hit parts of Colorado months later in October. So Governor
Polis had put in a request for the Disaster Aid
say hey, please declare this as a disaster that will
free up federal funds to help us pay for the
costs of what we had to do for this natural disaster.

(16:19):
And apparently, in an allegation from Governor Polis of political games,
the Trump administration has denied the funding request. Paulus saying
I call on the president's better angels and urge him
to reconsider these requests. This is about the Colorados who

(16:39):
need his support, and we won't stop fighting for them
to get what they deserve. Colorado will be appealing this
decision now to the Washington Examiner. The White House rejected
the characterization of the decision as political. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson
said there is no politicization to Trump's decision on disaster AID,

(17:04):
also saying that the Trump administration provided two aerial firefighting
systems that were then loaded onto military aircraft to help
contain the two wildfires. Now, the question, though, is did
the Trump administration do this specifically to retaliate over Tina Peters?

(17:24):
Remember over the fall back, and I think it was September,
maybe it was before that President Trump first started really
talking about Tina Peters, the disgraced former clerk of Mason
County spending nine years behind bars for an election security
breach and identity theft scheme, and President Trump started bringing

(17:48):
her out as this sort of hero for election integrity,
hero for the cause of the stolen twenty twenty election.
I frankly, I don't think he's been given accurate in
from about what actually she was charged and convicted of,
among other things related to that case, and he's doing
this for other reasons in terms of his support for

(18:10):
Tina Peters, but he threatened harsh measures. That was the term,
harsh measures if Tina Peters was not released. Well, is
this part of those harsh measures. There's also the climate
I forget what the actual facilities called, but the Climate
change outfit up and Boulder Scientific Establishment that was shut

(18:34):
down that they're Democrats are saying is in retaliation for
Tina Peters among other things. Is this political retaliation? We'll
talk about it later on in the program, because it
may or may not be. I'm not entirely convinced that
it is, but there is some good cause to believe it.
We'll see, I'm for to be saying it. Burger filling

(18:56):
in for Michael Brown. Lots to talk about today five
six six zero, the CHOA Common Spirit health text line.
We'll get to that more coming up as we continue
on KOA with Shannon Scott behind the glass in for Dragons. So, yeah,
I understand we're not exactly following the rules of engagement
today because we feel like breaking the rules. We're renegades,

(19:21):
but we do still want your talkbacks, and we've got
one on this whole Excel Energy nonsense. But before we
get to the talkback, I do want to give acknowledgement
because this is a very fair note. As I was
critiquing the blackouts and the fact that with the electrification

(19:42):
agenda being put at this forward at the state level,
the electrification agenda is only going to bring about routine
blackouts on the KOA common Spirit health text line five
six six nine zero text coming in and I know
you're on a rant about Excel. I was sharing my column.

(20:04):
If you want to call it a rant, fair enough,
Well here's the key. Please remember the line out there.
Linemen out there putting the system back together. It wasn't
a big switch that excels shut off. Linemen are working
tirelessly in a thankless job. Please acknowledge them. I'm going
to do that. Thank you for noting that, because well,

(20:26):
Excel Energy may have a lot of issues. I'm talking
about this. The electrification gen only going to make it worse.
These are people, men and women who are doing, yes,
a thankless job, working diligently, heading into Christmas, just doing
what they're told and making sure that the lines can

(20:46):
go back on safely. So let me say to those
working the thankless job. Thank you for what you're doing.
The criticisms that are being leveled at Excel Energy are
not on you. We do have a talkback, Shannon, please
let's go ahead and run the talkback here on KOBA.

(21:06):
And you can think the freaking dirt worshipers who worshiped
the creation rather than the Creator were all these blackouts.
They wanted both ways. And it's like that Taylor Swift
song that says, this is why we can't have nice things.

(21:28):
There you go, the Taylor Swift reference in the talkback.
Well played, well played, Keep the talkbacks coming. We'll dip
in and out. We'll shake things up a little bit
today as we are just a couple of days ahead
of Christmas Eve. And on Friday you had the dump

(21:52):
of Epstein files. Now is a Friday night or late
Friday that the files were finally released. This is as
required by law, but there are some complaints because some
things were not included. Some stuff that had images of
President Trump and other components of the Epstein files have

(22:13):
been redacted. There are pages and pages that are pretty
much all redacted. And the allegation from the sponsors of
that legislation Thomas Massey, a Republican and Rocana, a Democrat,
who co sponsored the bill for releasing the Epstein files,
is that they are violating the law in that Attorney

(22:36):
General Pambondi may be subject to impeachment charges over this.
That issue was pressed to Hakeem Jeffries, who was asked
about the idea of non compliance with the Epstein Files law.
Of course, this is the head of the Democrats, the

(22:58):
minority leader in the US House Representatives.

Speaker 4 (23:01):
Congress has acted decisively bipartisan majorities in both the House
and the Senate bill signed into law by the President,
and it does appear, of course, that this initial document
release is inadequate. It falls short of what the law requires. Now,
the statute requires the so called Department of Justice at
this moment, within fifteen days to provide a written explanation

(23:24):
to Congress and to the American people as to why
they've withheld certain documents.

Speaker 1 (23:29):
We expected that.

Speaker 4 (23:31):
Written justification should be transmitted within the next week or so,
and then Congress can take it from there as relates
to determining why this non compliance has occurred.

Speaker 1 (23:42):
Looking into non compliance now, well, let's listen to the
next part, because the question is about possible impeachment of Pambondi,
the Attorney General, over the non compliance that has been alleged.

Speaker 5 (23:54):
You're a democratic colleague, Roe Conna said that, and if
the Justice Department is not in compliance, and he clearly
believes that they are not, that there should be impeachment
proceedings for Attorney General Pam BONDI.

Speaker 1 (24:09):
Do you think that's is that on the table?

Speaker 4 (24:13):
Well, I think there needs to be a full and
complete explanation and then a full and complete investigation as
to why the document production has fallen short of what
the law clearly required. And so the next step in
the process is going to be that written justification to
try to explain the Congress, to the survivors, most importantly

(24:35):
and to the American people why things have apparently fallen
short of what the statute requires in terms of turning
everything over from the Department of Justice investigatory files.

Speaker 1 (24:49):
Notice that he did not give an answer to that question.
He didn't actually say whether there should be impeachment or not.
And maybe that's because he understands that pambond Quite frankly,
I think she's done everything right on this whole Epstein thing.
I really do, because This isn't just about the victims.

(25:09):
It is also about people who may be alleged to
have done something wrong, or may and then have been cleared,
or maybe they just had some kind of another personal
relationship with Epstein that was or professional that wasn't illicit.

(25:31):
I mean, here's my theory on Jeffrey Epstein. Tell me
in a talkback or shoot a text of course, Michael's
text line three to three one zero three ka common
Spirit health text line five sixty six nine zero. But
I think most of the high profile people that were

(25:53):
associated with Epstein were all a cover to give him legitimacy,
to give him friendship that he could rely on in
certain circumstances, and that most of the people who were
friends with Jeffrey Epstein did not engage in a legal
activity with him, but were unwitning sort of shields for

(26:18):
him with society to give him the appearance of legitimacy,
the appearance of just a wealthy philanthropist, and to get
rid of any questions that might come up. Now, of course,
he was convicted things. That is a different story arguably

(26:42):
for many of the friends that kept up a friendship
after he had been convicted of or rather had that
plea for the state charge in Florida and so forth.
But after all that went down and people knew more
about what he was about, there's not so much of
an excuse to have that association. But does that mean

(27:06):
that anything is fair game in just releasing those materials
if somebody was investigated and then cleared, But then the
materials get put out suggesting otherwise, and then you can
have conspiracy theories for me and say, oh wait, look
what this person did. I think they're guilty in this
way or that way. Which, by the way, there are

(27:28):
people saying the same things about Donald Trump. So if
your big Trump supporter, there are folks who are looking
at this and saying, oh my gosh, they're hiding to
cover for Donald Trump because he's one of the people,
similar to a lot of Republicans saying, well, hey, look
at Bill Clinton. He's one of the people. It'll be
interesting to see what we can actually gleam from all

(27:50):
of these. But these Epstein files, But the idea that
Pam Bondi should be impeached, it's just that's ridiculous. Then
I think she's been doing everything right in this situation
for many months except for the messaging. That's the problem.

(28:11):
We got to run to a break overdue for that.
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Michael Brown. Do keep
talkbacks and texts coming as we continue on KOA on
KOA playing some of the best Christmas bumper music known
to man today and tomorrow. Three three one zero three
is Michael's text line, and I'm also getting text in

(28:33):
the KOA Common Spirit Health text line. At five six
six nine zero, we were talking about Jeffrey Epstein, and
I think that Pam Bondy is doing a good job
on the whole as Attorney General, and I don't think
she deserves to be pilloried for how she is handling
the Epstein files, even now with the allegations that she's

(28:58):
doing non compliance, which are by by the way, refuted
by her deputy Attorney General, Todd Blanche. Bring it on.

Speaker 6 (29:05):
We are doing everything we're supposed to be doing to
comply with this statute. And Congressman Massey and these other
congressmen that are coming out speaking negatively about Director Patel
and the Attorney General have no idea what they're talking about.

Speaker 1 (29:19):
That again, Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General question coming in
from the text line Goober won five zero seven, So
what about Clinton's and Biden His death? That would be
Epstein's death came at a very opportune time for them.
Here's the thing. I believe it was actually as suicide,

(29:44):
and I think he knew what was going to come,
what was going to happen. He had the opportunity, and
he did it. I understand the whole Well, look at
all the people that had, you know, mysteriously had something
happened to him that are tied to the Clinton's over
the years. But look, I think we need to be

(30:06):
very careful about getting so deep into conspiracy land on
these kinds of things and try and live a little
bit within reality and what we can be provided. It's
hard to do, but I get what you're saying, but
I'm not going to play that game. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger
in for Michael Brown, our number one spent on bye.
We got two more up ahead as we continue on KOA.

(30:28):
Jimmy's sanging Berger here with you in for Michael Brown.
With just a few days to go until Christmas, if
you can believe it, and we will have an exclusive
conversation with Santa Claus tomorrow on the show. By the way,
that'll be a lot of fun. I hear there's some
issues in Shenanigan's going on at the North Pole. We're

(30:49):
gonna get to the bottom of that with mister Clause
on the program then. But today we've got a couple
of guests, and my first one of the show is
a journalist, an independent writer for at the Club twenty
Foundation with a fascinating piece entitled the Apples to Apples

(31:12):
Energy Problem at Club twenty Foundation dot Org. Lyndy Browning,
veteran journalist extraordinary, joins me here on KOA. Good morning, Lindy,
and Merry Christmas.

Speaker 2 (31:26):
Merry Christmas, Jimmy, how are you. I am doing.

Speaker 1 (31:29):
Pretty darn well, trying to get in the holiday spirit.
But at least here in the Denver area, you know,
it's in the mid to high sixties. I think we're
getting easter weather on Christmas. It's kind of crazy. Now
you're the Western slope. What's it like there?

Speaker 2 (31:46):
You know, it's sunny and beautiful rather easterlike here too.

Speaker 1 (31:49):
Yeah, Eastern for Christmas. I mean that's the kind of weather.
I want that, but I want snow. I've dreaming of
a white Christmas and there ain't no way we're going
to get that. No.

Speaker 2 (32:00):
Maybe a little rain on Christmas Day, but that's about it.

Speaker 1 (32:03):
Yeah, unfortunately. But you know what we definitely need on
Christmas Day is energy. Everybody needs their home to be powered,
to not have them shut down, and particularly not have
the all knowing, all powerful government at the state level
impede on energy production. And yet, and this is a
big thing that you're touching on, and you've got a

(32:25):
series you're writing as well on the energy issues. That's
what we're seeing so much at the state Capitol. Before
we get into some of the things you're talking about
in your piece, let's set the stage for a moment
when it comes to interference at the state capitol on
the Western Slope and other rural areas that quite frankly,

(32:46):
for one hundred years or more, have been in the
business of creating energy. Why should we not be letting
those communities, pardon the pund lead the charge when it
comes to powering Colorado running.

Speaker 2 (33:01):
Well, what I will say.

Speaker 1 (33:03):
Is rural Colorado.

Speaker 2 (33:07):
Has been providing, like you said, energy for not only
the state of Colorado, but the nation we our people
have developed coal, we have the eurovin uh energy belt, uranium,
natural gas, We've got oil, we've got hydro, we got wind,

(33:29):
we've got solar, we got we We've been doing this
for a really long time. On the Western Slope, we
are not in the fight. We are the fighters to
bring energy independence right and and and effects our land,
the landscape we live on. It affects our economies. It

(33:50):
is our life blot. And so to have the governor's
top down energy clean energy mandatesn't really He did this
great mandate and we all want clean air and water,
but what he didn't do was an interim plan of
how we're going to replace the retiring fossil fuels, right,

(34:12):
and so that leaves a big gap in the local
economies in energy to your home. It's just it's really
frustrating because those of us on the Western Slopes that
have been in the industry for so long, we're just
not part of the conversation. There's there's top level decisions.

(34:36):
We have political appointees and commissions that are making decisions
without really looking at all of the above, let alone
the best of the above.

Speaker 1 (34:47):
Well, the difference, yes, absolutely one of the things that
stands out to me, and I talked about this earlier
on the program, is just as an example down in Pueblou,
and I know there's a similar thing in Craig with
the coal fired plant in Pueblo. Excel Energy has their
Komanchi station where they have shut down already, Komanchi one

(35:08):
one of their plants. Then they have two number two
and number three that are set to retire by force
because the government and it's infinite wisdom has said, we
don't need your stinking, dirty cold, so we're gonna get
rid of it. Well, the number two was supposed to
shut down next year, but they've been forced to extend

(35:29):
it for a year because number three is down for repairs. Now.
Number three is supposed to be retired in twenty thirty.
Shouldn't this be a sign that maybe this isn't the
way to go, And especially when it's top down from
the state headquarters in Denver telling Pueblo or telling Grand

(35:49):
Junction how they're supposed to do things.

Speaker 2 (35:52):
Lindy, you know what it really is. Not only is
it like a big sign, it's a glaring, flashing kneon
sign saying hey, you know we're gonna mandate queen energy,
but we don't have enough. And so when you think
about the footprint of what it would take for windmills

(36:12):
and solar, which there's a place for that, and there is,
and I'm not advocating against it, but when you when
you when you look at the footprint to be able
to generate the energy that commands you too is put
Now you need hundreds of thousands of acres of solar farms.

(36:38):
Who who does that affect? That affects the local communities
if this goes on their landscape, maybe that's not what
they want to do with vast swaths of their land.
Maybe they want to farm it, maybe they want to
ranch it. Maybe maybe they would prefer something along the
lines of advanced nuclear. I don't know, but those are

(37:02):
the questions that need to be apked.

Speaker 1 (37:04):
We're talking with Lindy Browning, journalists at the Club at
twenty Foundation, and you have a piece out this weekend
entitled the Apples to Apples energy Problem. And one of
the things that I haven't really thought about is you say,
we've been trying this is with different energy sources. We've
been trying to compare apples to oranges and sometimes pineapples

(37:27):
without a shared scale. Talk to us about what you
mean here? Why do we not have well, first of all,
what is an apples and apples comparison and energy as
you're writing about it, and why don't we have that?

Speaker 2 (37:42):
So I think we have a lot of great studies
from each of the industry specifics that we have great
studies from natal gas that talk about the longevity, the cost,
the return, the economics to the community where it's being developed.
We have this same with wind, we have the same
with solar, we have the same with coal. But the

(38:05):
way those things are measured is different in each industry.
And there's really nobody, nobody that I have found and
I've looked that's like, well, wait a minute. So renewables
are subsidized by the taxpayers, which is fine if that's
what people want to do, and so those calls aren't

(38:29):
aren't built in transparently because we don't talk about that,
We don't talk about and analyzed side by side. So
when this energy source, so wind turbines only last for
so long, solar only lasts for so long, and then
you have to start replacing it. Oil wells run dry,

(38:51):
gas loads run dry. Where is a baseline comparison for cost, longevity, reclamation,
community benefit in the communities where these activities happen on
the landscape. No one that I'm aware of is doing
a complete and thorough analysis like that where people where lawmakers,

(39:18):
local lawmakers, local utilities, local residents that count on that
tax base to be part of their economy. Those people
would really like to have those answers and they could
make better decisions for the constituencies if they had a
true apples to apples comparisons.

Speaker 1 (39:40):
And I want to jump I want to jump in,
Lindy real quick. I want to jump in and just underscore,
especially from your perspective in the Western Slope and really
understanding these energy issues well, particularly from your journalistic background
and more, why is that so important? Like underscore put
a pin on that point point as to why it

(40:01):
is essential, especially in this moment when we have the
governor's clean power plans and so forth, getting to one
hundred percent reduction and renewable energy by twenty fifty and
absolutely acidie and insane objective, but nevertheless that's what it is,
especially with that context. Why is it so critical to
be able to make apples to apples comparisons among these

(40:25):
different forms of energy or sources of energy.

Speaker 2 (40:29):
So part of the answer to that is the local economy.
When you're talking about fossil fuels, whether it's coal, oil,
or gas, those companies and those producers pay what is
called the severance taps. Wind and solar is exempt from
a severance tap, So that's revenue that the companies pay,

(40:53):
and then that money's supposed to come back to the
community where the development occurs. And in the past it
was for things like theeer Edge rebuilt an entire water line.
Colbron built a hospital. Multiple communities on the Western Slope
built libraries, fund ambulance districts, and meet the needs in

(41:14):
the communities right so that severance tax isn't charged on renewables.
Instead the taxpayers are subsidizing it. So it's easy to
see how that impacts local economies. But from the lawmaker's perspective,
people that are trying to permit things and build things
in their own communities to generate on the Western Slope,

(41:36):
where we've done this for hundreds of years, we need
long term stability on those economics, and we need to
understand who's going to be responsible when it's time to
do reclamation. What's that going to cost? What's that going
to cost our county? What's that going to cost our taxpayers?
How much land do we want to take out of

(41:58):
farming and food produce for solar farms? How is it
impacting our big game migration with wind? And I mean,
how are all these And it's not that anyone is bad,
It's just we need those answers. And is there a
best of the above choice rather than an all of

(42:21):
the above choice? All of the above is really to
me a politician's way of just not offending anybody when
they say in their campaigns what we are for all
of the above, Well, that doesn't that's not a plan.
This is a box checking exercise. What we really want
is leadership. That's ask the questions and demands the answers

(42:46):
in an apples to apples comparison. What is the best
of the above, and how are we engaging the local
stakeholders that do this and do it better than anybody?
That's the difference. Is that making sense to here? Answer
your question? To me?

Speaker 1 (43:03):
It does, Although I would ask this Lindy Browning, who
just got a couple of minutes left with you. So,
I am a big proponent of limited government, which means
I want to unshackle deregulate all forms of energy. I
don't believe that government should be providing unnecessary and there
are some necessary impediments, but unnecessary impediments to various forms

(43:27):
of energy. A big fan and you and I have
talked about this a lot, of the new modular form
of nuclear energy and enabling that to be more unleased,
oil and gas, allow wind, solar. When it comes to
all of the above, for me, it's not let's have
government go in and micromanage things to advantage one or

(43:47):
the other, or claim to be advantaging nobody and just
trying to micromanage a way to get to all of
the above, But it's let's pull back on government interference
period in all these forms of energy and let the
market work. What do you say to that sort of
all of the abovement?

Speaker 2 (44:05):
What I would say to that, Jimmy, is I think
that it's been a false narrative, and I think the
government picking winners and losers. All of these energy sources
should be brought to bear, none none more regulated and
disincentivized than the other. Right, I think that there should

(44:29):
be a level playing for you exactly, and let.

Speaker 1 (44:32):
The market drive that.

Speaker 2 (44:33):
Because with the rise of AI and data centers and
the ever increasing demand on energy, I don't think that
as Americans we want to politically disenfranchise any energy resource, right.

(44:56):
I think that there's a lot of things that can
work together as teams. So maybe we want, maybe we
want a little of what works in each area to
have to be used on a free market. To do that, Well,
you don't want to say, well, over here you're going

(45:18):
to have nuclear, and over here you're gonna have coal,
and over there. We want teams fossil fuels, advanced nuclear,
color and wind where it makes sense, hydropower may it
makes sense, biomass where it makes sense. We want Western

(45:39):
color well, not only only Western Colorado, but certainly we
know this because we've done it forever, but but really
all of America, all rural parts of America. Why not
develop what we have and what the community is willing
to support everywhere. It's our national independence, of our national

(46:02):
security and lippon and a cost down.

Speaker 1 (46:06):
And then that's why we need those apples to apples comparisons.
I think you're right out there so.

Speaker 2 (46:12):
That people know the real numbers right over a sixty
eighty one hundred year timespan. What that's going to look.

Speaker 1 (46:18):
Like, Lindy Browning our guests real quick, I got like
twenty seconds. What's going on with Club twenty Foundation and
some of the journalism that's happening at Club twenty foundation
dot org. For example, your article in the apples to
Apple's energy problem, which anybody interested in this topic should
definitely follow your work for sure.

Speaker 2 (46:40):
So we the Club twenty Foundation is new. We we knew.
We stood up about three months ago, and one of
the things that was important to all of us was
that we had a credible arm of journalism that wasn't activists,
that wasn't biased, that we could just really educate people

(47:04):
around the issues of rural America. We're obviously focused on
the Western Slope, but really it's the same issues in
rural western Colorado as it is in rural Idaho, rural California,
rural Nevada, rural everywhere. Yeah, are the issues. So we

(47:25):
talk about wildlife, we talk about energy, we talk about water,
we talk about transportation, we talk about local issues that
are unique to rural America, and we talk about a lot. Yeah, yeah,
that was really the mission.

Speaker 1 (47:44):
There, and I think those of us in the front
range need more understanding of those issues happening in rural
communities and especially out there on the Western Slope. Club
twenty Foundation dot org. Glendy Browning, journalist extraorda, thanks so
much for joining us this morning here on KOA. Really
appreciate your time. And Merry Christmas, my friend.

Speaker 2 (48:06):
Merry Christmas everybody on the East Slope.

Speaker 1 (48:09):
There you go once again, Lindy Browning joining us from
the Club twenty Foundation here ONKOA, talking a little bit
about the free market and what that means in this
context of not picking winners and losers and having government
policies that are particularly shutting out the expertise and experience

(48:31):
of the rural communities that have been leading the charge
literally and figuratively on energy production since we've been doing
it here in Colorado. Now there is a question about
the free market and who is the air apparent in
that regard. This was interesting from Rand Paul yesterday on

(48:53):
the Sunday Shows, of course, the libertarian senator from Kentucky.
I think there needs to be.

Speaker 7 (49:01):
Representatives in the Republican Party who still believe international trade
is good who still believe in free market capitalism, who
still believe in low taxes. So you used to separate
conservatives and liberals. At conservatives thought it was a spending problem.
We didn't want more revenue, we wanted less spending. But
now all these pro terror protectionists they love taxes, and
so they tax, tax, tax, and then they brag about

(49:23):
all the revenue coming in. That has never been a
conservative position. So I'm going to continue to try to
lead a conservative, free market wing of the party and
we'll see where things lead over time.

Speaker 1 (49:33):
And that's not jd Vance. No, And you know what
I have to agree with that JD Vance is. I
like a lot of things about him. He's impressive. He's
the first millennial vice president, and as a millennial myself,
there's a certain maybe a little bit of generational pride

(49:56):
that I see. We may be totally shutting out gen xers,
see what happens, but if you're in gen X, maybe
you'll be shut out from the presidency because well, Kamala
Harris right, So not entirely, but mostly anyway, the whole
situation with J. D. Vance is he's not a conservative,

(50:18):
he's not a limited government guy. We need somebody in
the free market wing. That's for Darren Shore. More on
that coming up. On the other side, what do you
think j d Vance for Vice president? Could he lead
the free market wing of the party. Here's ran Paul Wright.
Keep the text coming. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for Michael
Brown on KOA. Jimmy Sangenberger in for Michael Brown here

(50:40):
on KOA today and tomorrow, Mary Mary Christmas. And this
is just a great tune. Check it out. If you
have not I miss Greg Allman, I mean the Allman Brothers,
best band in history. No debate, no if ann's or
butts about now. I have not said this yet and

(51:04):
we need to get to it. Don't forget the twenty
four seven three sixty five. You can check out my
latest columns. You can check out podcasts for my fill
ins here on KOA and our sister station KOW and
reach out to me twenty four to seven, three sixty
five and more Jimmy Sangenburger dot com. Keep in mind
there's no AI or you in Sangenburger. It's all ease,

(51:29):
all the time. Once you know that Sangenburger is easy listener,
text coming in. This is an interesting one from Colton,
who is now in the solar industry in developing solar projects.
How do conservative county commissioners balance private property rights with

(51:53):
their opposition to renewable development. It's an interesting question. The
explanation here he says, what seeing our conservatives getting in
between a private company with private money and a landowner
who have willingly entered into an agreement on their land
to develop a solar farm. They're stepping in and using

(52:14):
government to shut it down. Now, look, if it's in
a neighborhood and it's not on your roof, maybe there's
something to be said for it, especially for Hoa's. But
if you're talking like a more rural area or where
you have really large yards, it's not quite a neighborhood.

(52:37):
You have, you know, a lot of different circumstances. I
could think of Samarias and longmand for example, where there's
solar farms. It's not really a neighborhood. But somebody's got
a solar farm on their yard and is pretty massive.
I'm with you, brother, I think that the government should
not interfere if a local individual and that's sort of

(53:00):
a circumstance it's not obstructive in a neighborhood dramatically or heck,
you know, put it on a roof if you are
in a neighborhood and don't get in the way of that.
I mean, I'll say this. I remember being a kid
in New Jersey in the late nineties and we had
neighbors move in next door and they put solar panels
up on their roof, which was just crazy. It was

(53:21):
so early on at that point, and I have that
distinct memory, distinct memory as a kid from that. Now
this day and age very different, much more advanced. I
don't think you're talking about the roofs. I think you're

(53:43):
talking about on a property and the county getting in
the way. What business does the county have getting the weight?
When I was talking before about how the market should
be able to work and we shouldn't have government interference
that includes fearing with somebody's property rights to put the

(54:05):
kind of energy that they want on their property. What
business does government have to interfere with that? They don't.
So I'm with you on that point, And that goes
to my approach to the all of the above is
let's pull back on all of the interference on all
of the restrictions, so on and so forth, the whole

(54:27):
list of things that government has no business with. Speaking
of what government has no business with, let's talk about tariffs.
I mean, technically government does, but not in the way
that the Trump administration is going at it. Yesterday on

(54:50):
oh Is Margaret Brennan's CBS, she had Kevin Hassett, one
of the top economic advisor advisors on the White House
about these tariff checks, this notion that all people are
going to get two thousand dollars dividends from the tariffs, which,
by the way, reminds me of the gimmick that Governor

(55:14):
Polus played with Tabor and talking about how remember a
few years ago when they restructured the Tabor refunds so
that they would be a flat raid, and he called
them a dividend, and so forth, he had all these
fancy schmancy tidbits and information, they're tidbits, different names for it,

(55:41):
and it was all but Tabor refunds, and they were
just table refunds. Well, listen to this response.

Speaker 8 (55:46):
Let me ask you a bit about tariffs. Since as
far back as July, we have heard the present refer
to this idea of two thousand dollars checks being given
out to households. The Treasury Secretary said this would go
to households making less than one hundred thousand dollars. Should
Americans plan to receive those checks in twenty twenty six, that's.

Speaker 9 (56:08):
Going to depend on what happens with Congress. Congress is
going to have to send those money to those peoples.
But the thing we can say is that since July,
we've had a lot of positive news about the economy.
We've had a couple of quarters of almost four percent growth,
We've got a big government surplus actually running for a
few months in a row. The deficit relative to last

(56:29):
year is down by six hundred billion dollars. And so
in the summer I wasn't so sure that there was
space for a check like that, But now I'm pretty
sure that there is, And so I would expect that
in new year, the President will bring forth the proposal
of Congress to make way.

Speaker 1 (56:41):
Wait now, now it's about a proposal that Congress needs
to pass to make it happen. But then, okay, how
are they going to pay for this? What's the source?
Is it actually going to be tariffs?

Speaker 8 (56:52):
So a new proposal for these it's not necessarily coming
from existing tariff revenue.

Speaker 9 (57:01):
Well, it could come from teriff revenue, but in the end,
you know, we get taxes, we get terriffs, we get
all revenue from lots of places, and then Congress decides
how to spend those moneys. That's an appropriation, and so
this would have to be money that would be an appropriation.

Speaker 8 (57:15):
So don't bank on it in other words.

Speaker 1 (57:18):
Don't bank on it in other words, because Congress has
to give it to you. And this is word games.
So Trump is talking about how we want to give
you a tariff dividend. Jared Polis talked about wanting to
give you a Colorado dividend. And in both cases it
had nothing to do with the authority of the President

(57:40):
or the governor, just unilaterally saying I'm doing this, but
they've taken credit for it. We're putting the idea out there.
I think part of this is to try and sell
the argument, the idea that the Supreme Court can't rule
against President Trump's illegal, unconstitutional tariffs because there's too much
skin in the game for the American people. There's too

(58:01):
much money that has been taken in and that is
being allocated for things for the Supreme Court to interfere
with that, even though it would be just the Supreme
Court doing exactly what it should and standing up for
the constitution, the rule of law, and the separation of powers,

(58:22):
saying this is the purview teriffts or constitutionally the purview
of Congress. Congress can delegate some authority to the president,
but the extent to which he's taken it upon himself
is in violation of the law and the constitution, even
if he has legal authority in statute, even though he doesn't.
Even if you took that still would be unconstitutional and

(58:44):
unconstitutional delegation, in violation of this non delegation doctrine as
it's called. But they're trying to put up all of
these barriers pr wise to put the Supreme Court in
a box, and God willing it won't work. But getting
out for oh my gosh, look at the the terroriffts.

(59:05):
And now we're gonna have a tariff dividend. Ladies and gentlemen.
President Trump, the hero on tariffs, is bringing in all
this money. We're gonna do this, but oh wait, we
need Congress's approval and it might not actually come from tariffs.
Guess what. We have had tax rebates and these kinds
of things from the federal government for many years, and
many times. We did during COVID, we did during Obama,

(59:27):
we did during Bush and guess what it doesn't do.
The promise that they say in terms of greasing the
skids of the economy or anything else is nonsensical. And
this is another nonsensical example dressed as some kind of
wonderful tarra thing. I'll be real, can't sugarcoat it. I'm
Jimmy Sangenberger in for Michael Brown. Keep it here as

(59:49):
we continue on KOA Jimmy Sangenberger in for Michael Brown
today and tomorrow playing some of the best Christmas bumper
music known to man. And we're still doing talkbacks on
the iHeartRadio app. And that includes one that I cannot
not play, Shannon hit It brother. Some jazz notes in there,

(01:00:35):
but it's not as easy as the harmony, not as
easy as the harmodica. Now I must say I can't
play that. Although the vocal you know, coming to my time,
I don't even want to sing it because my regular,
my actual singing voice, not my blues voice, doesn't work
so well, but I can hear it in my head
the vocals, thank you for that fantastic treat. Merry Christmas

(01:01:00):
to you and amazing on the accordion. That to me
is the best talkback I've gotten this year when I've
filled in for Michael Brown. Because it was special, it
was unique, it was different, and it may be easier
than the harmonica, but I have to say it. I

(01:01:20):
just Shatton, I have to say it. Says he said it,
but I appreciate it. Merry Christmas to you, Merry Christmas,
one and all, just a little lick of harmonica. There.
We got another hour up ahead. Rashmi Riis Kamara, one
of my favorite guests going back over a decade, will

(01:01:43):
join us on the other side. She's from Minnesota. Could
Mike Lindell become the next governor of Minnesota to replace
Tim Walls? And how are we supposed to handle civil
times with our families if we disagree over politics? Got
that more coming up in the next hours. We continue
Jimmy Sangenberger and for Michael Brown on KOA and for

(01:02:04):
Michael Brown on this Monday, the twenty second of December.
Just a couple of days until Christmas Eve, although it
doesn't feel like it, we're going to get what I
call easter weather for Christmas in the sixties, high sixties.
I just don't I don't understand it. But alas, here

(01:02:25):
we are, as we roll along, Jimmy Sangenberger here with you.
So great to have you along for the ride and
to be joined by good friend of mine. You have
heard her on KOA with me periodically when I sit in,
and I've interviewed her now for well over a decade

(01:02:49):
on the air. Rashini raj Kumar is the host of
the Crisis Files podcast. She is a veteran TV news reporter,
a license thettorney, the author of Communicate That Your Toolbox
for a Powerful Presence, and a crisis and communication coach

(01:03:09):
with some of the most top notch con clients that
you can imagine, including at one point the Minnesota Vikings,
who happened to defeat my New York Giants yesterday. But
we will be civil despite all of that. Rashini Raskumar
joins us here on KOA. Merry Christmas, Rashine.

Speaker 2 (01:03:29):
Merry Christmas.

Speaker 10 (01:03:30):
Yes, you will always be civil, Jinny, but I am
glad that the Purple beat you guys.

Speaker 1 (01:03:35):
You know what, we can just leave it there. It
was a sad day. The Broncos lost, the Giants lost.
I'm just upset and all. There you go, so that's
how it goes. But I was not surprised. The Giants
are having a rough year, that's for sure. Anyway, Rashini,
you were based out of Minnesota, and I found something
to be utterly fascinating and completely and that's a new proposal.

(01:04:03):
Sorry about that. Michael Lindell aka Mike Lindell, the My
Pillow Guy, CEO of My Pillow, Well, he's announced he's
running for governor of Minnesota. And of course, this is
a guy who's been fighting legal battles in court over
his lies about the twenty twenty election, and he had

(01:04:25):
been sued by the I was there in court, watched him,
you know, I watched him in person in the courtroom
when he was sued by the former Demian Vice president
Eric Coomer. That was fascinating. And could he be your
next governor in Minnesota?

Speaker 2 (01:04:43):
For real?

Speaker 10 (01:04:45):
It seems doubtful for me, he just says, someone who
is not only originally from here now, I've been living
here for the last twenty years, watching what I've been
seeing and also understanding some of the legal challenges of
his situation, I would be surprised. But remember we I'm

(01:05:07):
also from the state that in nineteen ninety eight elected
former WW east ar Jesse Ventura as our governor, So
anything can happen to me.

Speaker 1 (01:05:18):
I just I can't fathom this. But then again, President
Trump has already kind of thrown his support behind Mike
Lindell in which should be a crowded Republican primary. I
find it to be a moment where, for well, first
of all, Rasheny, if you really believe that the elections

(01:05:39):
are irrevocably rigged and that the whole system needs to
be thrown out, root and branch, why in the world
would you run for public office in the first place,
because you don't even trust the system you're running it.

Speaker 10 (01:05:53):
Yeah, I mean that's a really interesting point. You know,
there's something to be said for what the Framers originally wanted,
which was you leave your life, whatever that is, whatever
your job is, and you get in there and serve
for a while and then leave again. That in theory,
and just when you hear those words is a beautiful thought,
but unfortunately, a lot of people of the last maybe

(01:06:15):
ten to twenty years use public office for their own
means and their own whether it's gaining wealth or gaining
a name. So it's really getting tougher and tougher to
be a voter because you have to be even more
discerning about how intentional and ethical any particular candidate is.

Speaker 1 (01:06:35):
Yeah, that's a good point. And the ethics of running
for office these days, I mean, doesn't it seem like
so much of it is thrown out the window. You're
a communication coach, a crisis coach, when you are counseling
folks who are maybe they're elected officials, but probably more
likely they're CEOs of Fortune five hundred companies or otherwise,

(01:06:55):
how do you approach that ethical mindset? Rashmi rash and saying, Okay,
you need to address these real issues, but you have
to do so in a way that is ethical, above
board and defensible.

Speaker 10 (01:07:09):
Well, you know, the sad thing, Jimmy, is a lot
of these campaigns aren't asking the ethical and epics question first.
They're asking how do we get votes? How do we
appeal on social and other digital platforms to potential voters?
And they almost are curving messages to really get certain
segments of the vote. And I'm all about audience analysis

(01:07:30):
and sculpting your choreography to really hit those target markets.
But I would like to place and continue to place
a higher ethical standard on anyone running for office. And
we've seen across both federal, local, even and national races
that ethics is barely the first question anyone asks anymore.
I mean, even in the process has it become questionable.

(01:07:54):
So I mean it's fun for us as talk show
hosts to see what happens. Not sure always if it's
great for the citizenry in any particular jurisdiction.

Speaker 1 (01:08:04):
That's for sure. Let's talk for a moment about Tim Walls,
the governor of Minnesota. Of course, he just ran unsuccessfully
last year for Vice President of the United States on
the Harris Walls ticket. And I'm asking you this, of course,
amid the multi year social services fraud scandal. Ninety two defendants,

(01:08:25):
many of them residents of Somali descent, charged in this
scandal of the safety net system defrauding it. Sixty have
been convicted, according to prosecutors. And there's a lot of
questions about what Governor Walls knew or didn't know and
so forth. Talk to us for a moment about that

(01:08:45):
and how that's playing out in Minnesota and also your
view of Governor Walls in the big picture.

Speaker 10 (01:08:53):
Well, I'll give you just a couple of stats that
are out there. Since Minnesota adopted for you terms in
nineteen sixty two, no Minnesota governor has been elected to
a third term. So there's a little bit of history
there on that. Also, because of the fraud, which only
just the headlines keep getting worse. Whether you're a Minnesota

(01:09:15):
resident and believe me, I am appalled, or someone watching us.

Speaker 2 (01:09:18):
From another state, like from Colorado, I'm sure.

Speaker 10 (01:09:21):
You're appalled when you see these numbers, and it's really
shocking to me. There was a time in our lives
that these kinds of headlines, this kind of heat was
coming down on a candidate or even an actual governor
or senator. They would resign from office, but no double
down and once or tripled down and once the people

(01:09:43):
in Minnesota would elect him again. So regardless of what
state it is, I would say this about any candidate
that's facing these kinds of headlines that are just terrible.
I mean, they would wipe out so many different people.
I think I have not talked with him, but my
guess is he's banking on the fact that he's the incumbant.
But I think this is one of those times the

(01:10:04):
investigative reporting you will be happy to know Jimmy is
stepping up on all this fraud. And I would really
like to see my personal opinion if Governor Walls never
asked me as he should step aside and let the
Democratic Party find.

Speaker 2 (01:10:20):
A viable contender or two that.

Speaker 10 (01:10:23):
Has a chance and doesn't have the baggage of all
of this fraud, of some of his previous baggage from
other things that have nothing to do with the fraud.
So it just comes down to the ethics always for me,
and integrity. If you're really a leader that understands succession planning,
you wouldn't be running for a third term with these
kinds of negative headlines. So obviously you hear I have

(01:10:44):
a lot of passion in that response.

Speaker 1 (01:10:47):
Just one minute in this segment. Let me ask you, though,
let's handicap the wacky race. Tim Walls versus Mike Lindell.

Speaker 10 (01:10:55):
Oh wow, well, that is something I'm going to tell
you right now.

Speaker 2 (01:10:59):
I do not want your seat, and.

Speaker 10 (01:11:01):
That is that is something that would be a very
hard election for me to even vote. I don't even
know that I could fill in the dark circle for governor.
And that is you know how shocking that is to hear?

Speaker 1 (01:11:12):
Oh me, I can't blame you. I mean, Mike Lindal
is a charlatan, especially on all this election staff and
the way that he has approached it as being one
of the folk rooms in a network pushing all sorts
of falsehoods perceiving people. He was heavily involved in the
saga of Tina Peters, the former clerk and recorder here

(01:11:34):
in Colorado, because who's behind bars? Because he had that
she was recruited by a guy that he was paying,
doctor Douglas Frank, to travel all across the country making
presentations on these conspiracy theories about phantom voters. And there
was a meeting in April of twenty twenty one doctor

(01:11:55):
Douglas Frank with Tina Peters and that's when she was recruited.
And he is part of Mike Lindl's network. You can't
make this stuff up. Rasheeni raj Kumar, a guest host
of the Crisis Files. We'll pick up the conversation on
the other side here on Koa Jimmy and for Michael,
Don't Go Anywhere, or a whole case of socks for Christmas.
I love that song.

Speaker 2 (01:12:16):
J D.

Speaker 1 (01:12:16):
Makepheerson socks. Gosh, every kid you get socks and you're like, wait,
why am I getting socks for Christmas? Rashinie Raj Kumar
joining us, host of the Crisis Files podcast. Rashinie, how
about socks for Christmas?

Speaker 10 (01:12:33):
You know, I don't mind them, but I've gotten so
many over the years that I've kind of asked people
to slow it down.

Speaker 2 (01:12:38):
Slow that rule.

Speaker 1 (01:12:40):
There you go, Well, yeah, I love this song. It's
so perfect because everybody get it. As a kid, You're like, wait,
what why am I getting socks for Christmas?

Speaker 2 (01:12:48):
Uh?

Speaker 10 (01:12:49):
I mean you know what, I will tell you on
a nostalgic level, which some of your listeners will relate to.
Uh So, my mother passed a few years ago, and
I'll tell you we used to give each other holiday
soxs all holidays, and when I put on any sock
that she gave me, it's just a sweet memory. So
I think I'm going to keep those no matter what,
as long as they don't have holes in them.

Speaker 1 (01:13:09):
There you go oh, I love that. I love that.
Let's talk for a moment about the division in America
because so far we have a society at this moment
where American American freedom of expression has devolved into let's
bash one another, let's mistreat one another, and so forth.
And especially at the holidays, I think this is just

(01:13:31):
an important time to talk for a moment about how
we should be conducting civil conversation, and especially with families.

Speaker 10 (01:13:41):
Yeah, it is a really good time to not only
remember to bring hun your best attitude to the dining
table over all these holidays, or to the holiday parties
with family and even close friends, it's another time to
remember that if you aren't going to get into discussing
controversial topics, whether that be politics or the local pta,

(01:14:04):
whatever it is, we have to remember that the Constitution,
as you know, I call it the Good Book, protects
that freedom of expression and freedom of speech. But just
like it protects that for each one of us, it
also protects that for the people.

Speaker 2 (01:14:18):
We're talking with.

Speaker 10 (01:14:19):
So if they don't agree with us, it doesn't mean
they're bad or evil or should go to jail. It
just means they disagree with us. And I'm hoping that
we can use the season of love and peace and
joy to remember that if we are going to get
into these kinds of conversations, to bring a good attitude,
bring civility forward, and of course.

Speaker 1 (01:14:41):
Respect, respect and remembering that is just it's a challenge
when it's so divisive. Unfortunately we're out of time, but
I want to ask you real quickly about your latest
episode for the Crisis Files, number one seventy eight. This
sounds fun, Crimes of the Art.

Speaker 2 (01:15:01):
Oh, it's thing.

Speaker 10 (01:15:02):
I spoke with a retired special agent with the FBI
who part of her work catching criminals was those who
had heist art. And we're not just talking about like
the jewels from the Loeuver that got stolen in October,
the things ancient artifacts remains from Native Indian burial grounds.
The Nazi you know, the Nazis stole I want to

(01:15:24):
say about twenty percent of European arts. Wow, a lot
hasn't even been recovered. So it's a fascinating episode and
also shares some tips for if you know of how
you can help the FBI solve some.

Speaker 2 (01:15:37):
Of these crimes.

Speaker 10 (01:15:37):
And it's about a fifty billion dollar a year where
art of all kinds gets stolen.

Speaker 1 (01:15:44):
Wow. The Crisis Files iHeartRadio app and The Crisis filesdapt com.
Thanks so much for joining us, My friend and Merry Christmas, Rashini, Rascobar.

Speaker 10 (01:15:55):
Mary Christmas, Jimmy once.

Speaker 1 (01:15:56):
Again Rashini Raj Kumar joining us the Crisis Files podcast
for a break. Jimmy in for Michael on KOA as
Rudolph gets ready to help out Santa on his quest
to deliver gifts all the good girls and boys coming
up on Christmas Eve. It's just a couple of days

(01:16:17):
away now tomorrow. Among the guests and the festivities we
will have, there's a lot of shenanigans going on at
the North Pole lately. We need to check in with
one Santa Claus, who will be joining us for some
Christmas fun tomorrow about what's happening in the North Pole.

(01:16:38):
He'll be joining us probably at eleven thirty. Jimmy Sangenberger
in for Michael Brown today and tomorrow on KOA. And
by the way, I'll be in for Roskiminsky of Roskiminsky
on the News with Gina joining me all next week
minus New Year's Day from six to nine, So be

(01:17:01):
sure to join in. Then we've got some great stuff
in the work. So last segment, we began the bumper
with Rashini Raj Kumar or guess with the song Socks
by JD. McPherson about how you know, if you're a kid,
you open up the gift, it's socks and you don't

(01:17:22):
like it. Now as an adult, you want the socks.
I've literally laid my fiance and I get into a fight.
I want socks for Christmas. She doesn't want to give
me socks for Christmas. We'll see if I end up
somebody giving me socks for Christmas.

Speaker 2 (01:17:35):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:17:36):
I like it. As a kid I did, and as
an adult I do. But nevertheless, there's oftentimes that's a
gift that you get. And Rashini told the story about socks.
She would get Christmases from her mom, special socks and
so forth. Well listen her text coming in. Remember both

(01:17:58):
Michael's chext line he won zero three and the koa
Common Spirit health text line five sixty six nine zero
Goluber number five nine one zero. My grandma gave socks
every year to her grand and great grandkids. It was
a tradition. When she passed away, My kids were very

(01:18:19):
sad about not getting socks, so I had to start
giving everyone socks. Tradition was more important to them than
I ever knew. That is beautiful, That's truly beautiful. I
love these kinds of stories, and that's I don't have
a special affinity for socks. I just want them because

(01:18:41):
I'm weird like that. But I love the stories of
those who have a special reason. Mother in the case
of Rashini or this texture, my grandma gave socks to
her grand and great grandkids. That's beautiful A family tradition.
Five six, six, nine zero three three one zero three.
Is there anything that you get that you either are like,

(01:19:05):
I get this every year or I would get this
every year as a kid and I hated it, or
I loved it. It means something special to me. I've
passed it on to my family. Now I have one
gift that I will share. So years ago, on another station,
I was doing fill in twenty twelve. It was really

(01:19:27):
early in my radio career and it was day after Christmas,
I think, and there were a couple of co hosts
on the show and they asked me, so, what you
get for Christmas? And for whatever reason. I didn't plan
out in my mind anything that I was gonna say.
I got, so I said, after thinking an ottoman, I

(01:19:55):
kid you not. I was at what'd you get for Christmas?
And an automated is the one thing that case of
my bite and that I said out loud, which became
the most famous Christmas gift I ever got because I
would hear for people for a long time, Hey, how's
the ottoman? What a great Christmas gift? Getting get out
of it like I was in my early twenties, so

(01:20:18):
you know, I'll getting out on my own and so forth.
It's like an outom. It was great, But I just
I just that's what I said. There you go five,
six to six and nine zero three three one zero
three memorable gifts as we head into Christmas. So there's
a big controversy. We heard it in the news. Governor

(01:20:38):
Jared Polis, Senator John hicken Hooper, Senator Michael Bennett. They're
all blowing the whistle saying that the Trump administration is
intentionally withholding funds denying a disaster declaration request, multiple of
them from Governor Polis, denying it Saturday night for the

(01:21:02):
Elkin Leaf fires as well. As for flooding in the
western part of Colorado, wildfires began over the summer, with
Lee Fire burning over one hundred and thirty seven thousand acres.
I think that's in the top five largest fires in
Colorado history. Both contained by September, but then severe flooding,

(01:21:24):
of course hit parts of Colorado in October. A handful
of rural counties were impact and I think, by the way,
most of them are Republican. And of course polists and
others are saying this is all retaliation, particularly because President
Trump threatened harsh measures against the state months back if

(01:21:50):
they didn't free Tina Peters, the disgraced former clerk and
recorder of Mason County, spending nine years behind bars, or
at least that's her sentence. She'll end up being paroled
in early twenty twenty eight, that's when she's eligible. By
the way, you don't hear people talking that saying that, Hey,
by the way, hey, Tina's gonna get on in a
couple of years. Let's make sure that happens. No, it's

(01:22:12):
Tina's gonna serve nine years, and it's an unjust sentence.
Never mind the fact that she could have served nineteen years,
but didn't get that much. But you know, we can
forget about parole because when you're grifting and you're making
hay out of something that isn't true, you gotta do
what you gotta do, right. You gotta get the legal

(01:22:34):
team and other people paid. That's what it's really all about.
And never mind the stuff that she did in the
election security breach, the identity theft scheme, all of that.
Oh no, no, never mind that. But President Trump did
his pardon last week that a couple weeks ago. Now

(01:22:59):
that was not an hour pardon, because you can't pardon
if you're president somebody for a state crime number one.
At number two, what I think I talked about this,
I think I was hosting that day number two. The
crimes that she was convicted of that have her in
prison for felonies have nothing to do with elections. It's

(01:23:22):
the scheme surrounding what she did for the breach. But
neither here nor there. Let's get back to the declaration
of disaster that Trump declined to provide with that funding.
I asked a of course, this would be a great
conversation for me to have with the host of the program,
Michael Brown given his background with FEMA. But I asked

(01:23:49):
a person I know who is in the world of
disaster stuff for a government in this state. I'll leave
it at that, but I asked the question Trump's rejection
of disaster declaration legitimate basis or Tina politics, And this
person replied, And it's really interesting, especially when you actually

(01:24:12):
pull up the relevant document summarizing a memo written by
Cameron Hamilton from FEMA entitled Actions to Rebalance FEMA's Role
in Disasters April twelfth, twenty twenty five. Now, Cameron Hamilton

(01:24:35):
wrote this memo right before he was fired for saying
in a congressional hearing that he didn't think eliminating FEMA
was the right solution, and of course that's the policy
of the Trump administration. They want to get rid of FEMA.
So this person replied, someone who knows this really well
and understood this letter to probably neither. Again, my question

(01:24:58):
was legitimate basis or Tina politics. Probably neither. Back in April,
a memo titled, as I mentioned, Actions to Rebalance FEMA's
Role in Disasters said that FEMA should quadruple the per
capita indicator for major disaster declarations. Essentially, it would make
the state's damage threshold before FEMA says they are overwhelmed

(01:25:25):
and need help to seven dollars and fifty six cents
per person versus one dollar and eighty nine cents per person,
or forty four point nine million dollars versus eleven point
two million dollars. The memo deemed that an action that
just required White House concurrence to implement immediately. Based on

(01:25:46):
other disaster declarations this year, it's assumed that it had
been implemented, but no one actually said anything. We definitely
didn't hit the higher number of uninsured damage. We did
hit the lower number. Unless FEMA's last trump specifically say
the real reason for the denial, there isn't much way

(01:26:07):
to know if that was the reason. Appealing the decision
should get closer to an answer, will see, But basically,
what I'm told is that the threshold and the certain
things for when FEMA would kick in with support was changed.

(01:26:27):
And so maybe a policy you disagree with, maybe something
you don't want. But in the beginning of the show,
I asked the question, is this actual political retaliation or
is there a legitimate case to be made for why
Colorado has been denied the disaster relief and the assumption

(01:26:49):
has just been near universally, Oh my gosh, it's got
to be political retaliation. Even on the right, supporters of
Tina Peters, Hey, this is Trump bo aren't you trump Boyne,
and then Polus saying, wow, this is political retribution, but
is it really? The Trump administration denies that it is

(01:27:11):
political retaliation, that there is politicization to Trump's decision. That's
through spokeswoman Abigail Jackson, who also said that the Trump
administration provided to aerial firefighting systems that were then loaded
onto military aircraft to help contain the two wildfires in question.

(01:27:37):
So it seems like if they implemented this policy, it
may not be a wise change. You can have a
debate about that, a discussion We probably should have a
more of a discussion about natural disasters and how the
federal government should respond. Is it the way to go
to get rid of FEMA or ratool FEMA? Do you
just send block grants of certain money to the states,

(01:28:00):
What do you do? What's the solution? But it seems
like there's an actual rational, non political basis for this,
even though and this is the problem when the president says,
I'm threatening harsh measures. You better comply and release this prisoner,
calls her a political prisoner and makes ay And by

(01:28:20):
the way, I don't think Trump knows deadly squad about
what actually happened in this case. I don't think he
actually knows the facts. I don't think he's been informed
on that. He's been given narratives by certain people around him,
and it's unfortunately what he's decided to run with because
probably at a loyalty or the sense that, like, my
base really loves Tina Peters and she did this for me.

(01:28:43):
So I'm going to say all of this stuff. There's
no politicization, the White House says, Pola says there is.
I'm inclined to think there isn't. But the basis for
the lack of funding maybe weak. I don't know, something

(01:29:06):
I gotta look into. But don't just jump right into
it and just say, oh, well, this is definitely what
said Jimmy Segenberger in for Michael Brown today and tomorrow
been getting text in on the Kowa Common Spirit health
text line at five six six nine zero. How is

(01:29:32):
the FED so federal government not the Federal Reserve withholding
funds any different from police withholding funds from cities for
not complying with this housing mandates that the state is
being sued for. Well, let's see. If the basis is
for Tina Peters, then it is entirely different because it

(01:29:56):
is not a policy dispute. It is over something that
is not within the president's jurisdiction that was prosecuted the
case by a Republican district attorney in Dan Rubinstein in
a Republican county two to one for Trump. We're talking
Mason County, one of the most maga counties in the

(01:30:17):
state of Colorado. Trump won two to one in both
twenty twenty and twenty twenty four. George Brockler just had
a great piece the other day in the Denver Gazette
about Keena Peters and the situation there and why she
earned her time and Republicans need to move on. Check
out the piece. Absolutely fantastic from my district attorney, George

(01:30:39):
Brockler in the twenty third Judicial District. By the way,
but there's no basis here in law or spirit for
Trump to do what he's doing. Jana Peters deserves the time.
So if that's the basis for this and it's retaliation

(01:31:00):
over Tina Peters. It is actually very different. If that
isn't and there's some other policy basis for saying, you
know what we're going to withhold because you're not complying
on this, then you're right, it is an apt comparison.
And then this is another question. I'm not sure of
the time frame, but when is that illegal immigrant that

(01:31:22):
police commuted the sentence for getting out. We're talking about
the Ice seventy truck driver who killed four people and
injured many others on I seventy a few years back,
the one that Polis got pressure from Kim Kardashian from
to commute the sentence. I'm not sure when he'll be

(01:31:44):
let out what the status is on that, but oh
my gosh, that was a grievous injustice and absolutely grievous injustice.
But by the way, because you're bringing it up in
the context of the Tina Peters discussion, I hear people
talking about it. That does not provide any justification for
why Trump should say, oh, well, go ahead, and you know, please,

(01:32:08):
Paula's pardon Tina Peters. And then Paula says yes, like
there's no doesn't mean one does not mean that the
other should happen. The first one never should have happened,
and so I'm not going to say, well, he did that,
so go and do this part and that shouldn't happen
as well. Two wrongs don't make a right. And by

(01:32:30):
the way, we're talking about a Republican district attorney again
in Masa County, in Dan Rubinstein, who went to the
county commissioners and said, hey, guys, do you want me
to prosecute this case? They're all three or a Republican
and they said, yeah, go ahead and do it. Rubinstein,
by the way, has run multiple times unopposed, including after

(01:32:54):
Tina was sentenced. That should kind of show you that
Masa count he's aok with what he did, because, by
the way, she was indicted by a grand jury and
convicted by a jury of her peers in accounting with
only thirteen percent Republican. So is a Republican grand jury

(01:33:17):
Republican jury by a large So do you really want
the law and order das a Republican to be overridden
by police because police commuted a sentence he never should
have for the I seventy truck driver, or because other

(01:33:37):
district attorneys are weak on law and order and make
terrible mistakes or intentionally do things because they're politically progressive
and very light on crime. No, that's not how this
should work. That's crazy. If my wife doesn't get socks,

(01:34:02):
it's a problem. I always give fuzzy socks in her stocking.
I gotta end on that. Back to the socks discussion.
That's it for me today. Tomorrow, Christmas Eve Eve will
have a very special fun show. Do not miss it
from night to noon. As I fill in for Michael
Brown once again on KOWA, I'm Jimmy Sangenberger. Have a

(01:34:23):
great day, Merry Christmas, and may God bless America.