3-24-25 - 9am - Chairity Should Come From and Security Clearance

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael.

Speaker 2 (00:01):
The thing that's amazing to me is how things have
ramped up to such a frightening high level.

Speaker 3 (00:08):
It used to be that if you disagreed.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
With a politician, you know, for example, with George H. W. Bush,
or maybe it was George W. Bush, he might see
a bumper stickeut that says eat it, George, and it
was a picture of broccoli because he hated Broncoli. Now
we're resorting to terrorism and assassination.

Speaker 3 (00:28):
It's crazy.

Speaker 1 (00:31):
Yeah, I'm gonna set aside the story that I was
going to start this segment out with and play off
that talk back for a moment because maybe this is
true confession time for me. I agree one hundred percent
with what you say.

Speaker 2 (00:48):
Not taxi cab confessions though, right, Not what taxi cab confessions.

Speaker 3 (00:53):
There's an old.

Speaker 1 (00:54):
HBO show there are people who are just do craeasy
stuff and taxis. Do you know that I was a
subject of one was taxi cab things one time?

Speaker 3 (01:03):
Uh?

Speaker 1 (01:04):
Taxi It wasn't. There was another it was taxi cab
Maybe it was confessions, but it.

Speaker 2 (01:11):
Was where cash cab.

Speaker 1 (01:14):
Yeah, cash cab. I was the subject of a cash
cab one time.

Speaker 3 (01:17):
No, kid.

Speaker 1 (01:18):
Ye, yep, I may have that in my archive somewhere too.
There was I remember it was two young women in
the back and it was I forget what the driver asked,
but the answer was Michael Brown, I got and they screamed,
Michael Brown, Michael Brown. It was also I was also

(01:39):
the subject of a trivial trivial pursuit game on Gray's
Anatomy one time, and I've got that sound bite. Yeah, yeah,
you need to recognize that you're working with a celebrity. Yes,
what was that I heard a mouse back then.

Speaker 3 (02:00):
Yeah, she likes to chime in.

Speaker 1 (02:03):
Busy stuff on your face with the burrito and she
had to. It's so stupid, so stupid it is. It's
frightening and exciting at the same time, because I do believe.

(02:26):
Let me pull let me pull up Mike, let me
pull up mix account. Because this is something that I
wrote about yesterday on X that I think kind of
sums it up. I wrote, which I've told you many times,
we want the ship of state turned around from the

(02:47):
Marxist highway we've been traveling. We finally at least get
a turn signal turned on, and the globalists and the
leftist Marxist go and I put a gift under it
of air explosion, the mushroom cloud blowing up, And that's
how they're reacting to it.

Speaker 3 (03:09):
Now.

Speaker 1 (03:10):
I'm glad they're reacting to it that way because it
shows that we're obviously over the target. But more importantly,
it shows that they don't really have anything to counter.
They're not interested in debate. I find it utterly fascinating
and disappointing at the same time that when we see

(03:32):
all the waste fraud and abuse that is exposed, that
other than with maybe the exception of John Fetterman and
maybe one or two other Democrats who who will at
least give you a throwaway line, Oh yeah, I'm against
waste fraud and abuse too, I would still say, who's

(03:52):
actually doing anything about it? It's being exposed, But as
Congress done anything to resend any of this money, to
resind or revoke or to abolish any of these programs. No, Now,
why do you think they're not? I think they're not
doing it because, quite frankly, they're scared that some of

(04:17):
their preferred grifts might be caught up in this too.
And I also think they're scared of the left I
think they're scared of the media narrative. Just like in
the last segment talking about the political article about five
hundred million dollars being cut from food banks. Well, our
response should be yes, because that's not the role of government.

(04:42):
We've got to change the idea, the whole mentality about
what is the function of government? Is it that we
are supposed to feed? Is the government supposed to feed everybody?

Speaker 3 (04:53):
Now?

Speaker 1 (04:54):
I know, and I know for a fact because my
parents were embarrassed by this. But my maternal grandfather had
this habit. He was I'm not gonna call him a
mum because he was my grandfather, but he didn't work,

(05:16):
and he pretty much lived off welfare's entire life, while
my maternal grandmother worked her butt off as a nursing
home nurse. She was always working, and my grandfather just
didn't really didn't work much at all. And he would
drive all the way from o Sage County, where they

(05:38):
had a small house. He would drive all the way
out to the Oklahoum Panhandle stay with my mom and
just stay with us, my family, and he would he'd
stay there for a week and when the state or
the county would distribute commodities, you know, cheese and stuff.
He'd go out there and pick it up. And I

(06:01):
remember one time asking my mom about it, and she
was just like, well, he just he just doesn't seem
to be able to work, and when she was obviously
trying to make an excuse. And I really felt sorry
for my mom about it because I could tell she
was embarrassed by it, and I could tell that it
made her uncomfortable, and so I didn't say anything else
about it. But I knew that my grandfather was just

(06:21):
kind of living off the taxpayer. And it's really it
always really bugged me. But that is I mean, I'm
talking decades ago. Well now we've gotten to where not
only is it not even embarrassing, it's like, yeah, you

(06:42):
should go do that, you should take advantage of it,
you should do whatever you can to get that because
you're paying for it. That's just the wrong attitude. The
attitude is if if you're hungry, we should have church's, synagogues, mosques,
we should have you know, business organizations, charities, we should

(07:04):
have all these nonprofits and businesses should have you know,
they every you know iHeart has they do charitable stuff
all the time, not as much as they used to do,
but they still do and we should do more of it.
A company the size of ours, or even small businesses

(07:26):
can make Every little bit that somebody does makes a difference.
It's the butterfly effect, it's the ripple effect, it's whatever
effect you want to call it. But everybody helping out
by contributing. And I fully understand why some people don't
want to because they're taxed to death. And so by
the time you pay all, have you looked at your

(07:47):
recent I had to, for I had to check on
my last pay stub because there was supposed to be
a particular amount put in that particular check and I
had to go look on the on our thing to
see if they had actually done what they were supposed
to do. And so I'm looking at, you know, the
year to day and you know that particular pay period,

(08:08):
and I'm thinking to myself, holy crap, what I pay
in federal income tax and Phyica taxes. And sometimes depending
on on well it fluctuates, but even like Denver income tax,
it's absurd, absolutely absurd. And people will people say, well,

(08:30):
you could still give, and we still do give. We
could give more, except we get so much already taken out,
and because I know what it's going to, I limit
how much I give to charitable organizations. We've got to
turn that around, and we've got to somehow change the

(08:50):
narrative that it is not the role of government to
be compassionate on our behalf. That's what our job is.
That gets to the whole idea of collectivism, and this
whole idea of collectivism is what's gotten us to where
we are today. Over the weekend, I've still got it

(09:10):
right here on my ex account. Tom what was the
talk show host?

Speaker 3 (09:17):
Name?

Speaker 1 (09:18):
Tom? Somebody? Tom Snyder? Tom from years and years ago.
He is one of the earliest late night talk show hosts.
And it was truly a talk show. It wasn't like
a Johnny Carson show, wasn't an entertainment show. It was
a talk show. He's interviewing ain Rand, and it's a

(09:39):
fascinating conversation because she's talking about universities. But in the
course of talking about universities, she also talks about collectivism
and how we have and look, I don't agree with
everything about ain Rand, but I do agree that we
have taken what she describes years ago as a warning

(10:00):
kind of reach that peak stupidity. Today. Listen to what
she said.

Speaker 4 (10:04):
Most dangerous thing in this country today are the universities
because they're teaching that kind of ideas that would necessarily
have to lead to the destruction of this country.

Speaker 1 (10:16):
The most dangerous thing in the country back when Tom
what's his name was talk show host, This had to
be in the seventies. I'm guessing she's talking about how
the universities are the most dangerous thing in the country
because the things that they teach are going to lead
to the destruction of the country. Institutions like Harvard, she.

Speaker 4 (10:37):
Says, Petuitians from Harvard on down are preaching collectivism.

Speaker 1 (10:42):
They're preaching collectivism. What does she mean by that?

Speaker 4 (10:48):
Mysticism and a bobble altruism? Self sacrifice of yourself.

Speaker 1 (10:53):
Self sacrifice of yourself. I don't think that I need
the self sacrifice for the government. I don't need to
self sacrifice so the government can force me to live
in limited means by reducing my standard of living. But

(11:15):
she goes on to point out that that is precisely
what little people, and she uses Jimmy Carter as an example.
That's their mentality that we need to rather than seek abundance,
rather than seek to grow and prosper, that we ought

(11:35):
to sacrifice. Listen to what she says closely.

Speaker 4 (11:40):
Is an above a altrees self sacrifice of yourself, the
giving up, the resignation.

Speaker 5 (11:48):
The giving up, the resignation. Can you be a little
bit more specific. I've never been to Harvard, I've never
been to Classter, but can you give me an advantage? Oh,
thank you of how they are teaching sacrifice, how they
are teaching altruism.

Speaker 4 (12:03):
Open paper and look at mister.

Speaker 1 (12:09):
Creature, mister Carter, a very peculiar creature.

Speaker 4 (12:13):
Oh, it's standing that we're going to overcome footage by
driving less, by giving up.

Speaker 1 (12:23):
It's a great example. It's a whole mindset. Look at
Jimmy Carter who says we're going to overcome the oil
shortage by driving less and giving up. In other words,
let's lower our expectations. In other words, let's diminish ourselves.
As opposed to expanding, innovating, drilling more, producing more. The

(12:50):
ideal was lower. You're living a standard, your standard of living,
lower your expectations, turn down your thermostat. In other words,
it's all about giving up. That's not how that's not
that's not American at all.

Speaker 4 (13:08):
Let us all make a sacrifice, let's lower our standard
of living, and we'll all be living better.

Speaker 6 (13:14):
Now.

Speaker 1 (13:15):
Yeah, if if I lower my standard of living, does
that make someone else's standard of living better? Well, when
the government redistributes wealth, it does only relatively, because just
giving somebody else something for nothing doesn't make them a fisherman,

(13:38):
It makes them a leech. Now do I mean that
we should never help anybody?

Speaker 5 (13:43):
Know?

Speaker 1 (13:45):
We absolutely should, but we should not the government.

Speaker 4 (13:51):
Is that a proper philosophy to tell a country that
has pride and self esteem a Harvard that would be
preaching American ideas, more specifically, reason, individualism, capitalism. If they
were doing that, you could have the biggest renaissance.

Speaker 1 (14:13):
In the world.

Speaker 4 (14:14):
Still not to leave even now. You could have a
better renaissance than the first one. This country would come
back to life.

Speaker 1 (14:21):
This country would come back to life the reason that.
And I forget how he even came across this particular SoundBite,
but I thought that's exactly Trump's attitude. Trump's attitude is,
let's instead of always limiting ourselves, let's reach for this guys.

(14:42):
I think I think that's one of his attractions to
Elon Musk, a guy who wants to dream big and
pursue big ideas. Is it possible that we could become
extraterrestrial beings and live somewhere besides on this planet. Oh? Absolutely,

(15:02):
I think we could. But that takes innovation, that takes technology,
that takes not scaling back but growing. That's the kind
of renaissance that I think Trump believes in. That's the
whole idea behind Drill, Baby, Drill, cheap abundant energy to
get us through the next five hundred years, six hundred years,

(15:24):
whatever it is, whatever we have. So during that time period,
that cheap abundant energy being used by artificial intelligence, server, farms,
or whatever it might be used by, creates the next
big thing, always growing, always expanding, becoming better. But if

(15:46):
you listen to Democrats and Marxists, that's not what they
want to do. That's the whole purpose of equity, to
lower everyone's standard to the lowest common denominator. Rand is
trying to say to Tom Snyder or whatever his name
is here, that no, that this this whole attitude of

(16:08):
diminishing ourselves is the wrong way to approach it. You're
not going to solve the oil shortage by driving less
or reducing the speed limit. You're going to solve the
oil shortage at that time being driven by OPEC and
the Saudi's by expanding our domestic production, by finding new
sources of oil and gas, of new fossil fuels. And

(16:31):
I think this is what Trump is preaching. So go
back to the talk back and this whole idea that
all of their heads are exploding. They really are because
we have turned on the turn signal and we are
getting off this highway to Marxism or communism, and that's

(16:52):
going to be I mean, it's it's not a four
lane exit. It's kind of a beat up, old gravel
road to get off this high And that's why they're
responding the way they are. Just embrace it. Just embrace it,
because we're right in their mouth.

Speaker 7 (17:09):
It is Tom Snyder who hosted The Tomorrow Show on
NBC and the first version of The Late Late Show
years later on CBS.

Speaker 1 (17:23):
Michael.

Speaker 6 (17:24):
The car years are a perfect example of what I
rants talking about. Remember when the Mustang went from a
beast of a car to a crappy ass, little hor
cylinder piece of jump to save gas returned the speed
limits to fifty five to consume less. Remember the king
phrase of all put on a sweater, turned down the

(17:47):
heat because you can't afford it to put on a sweater.

Speaker 3 (17:49):
That was harder, of course.

Speaker 1 (17:54):
But think about that's the whole mentality. The mentality is
one of limits. The mentality is one of sacrifice. Now,
I don't look, I think there are certain things that
are worth sacrificing for, you know, your children, your family.
I mean, I certainly wouldn't sacrifice for a dragon, but
you know I do in a way. I work here

(18:14):
withy them every day. But why do we think that
the answer is always less, not more? Sometimes less? You know,
we're better off with less things than we are with
more things. But those are my choices, and the whole

(18:35):
idea that we should drive less. Yeah, drive the speed
you know, fifty five miles there, God, I hated that
fifty five miles now, it drove me nuts, particularly on highways,
on freeways that are built to carry traffic, particularly out
in the rural areas at eighty and eighty five miles
an hour or ninety miles an hour. But oh no,
you can't do that, Oh you can't do that because

(18:57):
oh that'll get me off on the color of the
Howey Patrol post to Facebook all the time about their
look who we caught, Look who we caught? Or Denver
International Airport, don't you park wait here for your pickup
passenger pickup?

Speaker 3 (19:10):
Good grief?

Speaker 1 (19:11):
Or this story that I just noticed that dragging through
down because it's the comments are the best part. This
comes from westward. The Denver City Council will soon vote
on removing the minimum parking requirements from Denver's zoning code,
affecting June thirty, to coincide with a new state law

(19:32):
that would let developers choose whether to include new parking
spaces in construction projects and allow existing businesses and housing
complexes to eliminate current parking. The Denver Planning Board member
Rachel Marion said during the board's discussion of the proposal
in March nineteenth that quote less is more Sometimes the

(19:54):
city saying quote we're going to eliminate this requirement would
open up a lot of reactivity, development and vibrancy downtown
and in a number of other spaces. Would it really
do you? What do you think the real purpose of
eliminating minimum so you build a building like I'm sitting

(20:18):
in right now, a class A commercial office building. Depending
upon the occupancy or the maximum allowed occupancy, there's a
ratio that determines how many parking spaces you have, And
of the number of parking spaces, how many of those
need to be handicapped? Can you say handicapped? Is that wrong?

(20:40):
Now too?

Speaker 3 (20:40):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (20:42):
We have what do you think we have five handicapped
spots out front dragon something like that. Yeah, I don't
think I've ever seen one used ever in my lifetime
for a handicapped vehicle. Correct, Well, I've never even seen
them used at all. Are the people parked in them?

Speaker 2 (20:57):
I've seen sometimes on the weekend somebody would park there
just to try and get into the building.

Speaker 1 (21:03):
Quicker. Oh yeah, well, my space is always open. So
because nobody parks Brye Park, why why would they do that?
Why would they eliminate the requirement for any spaces?

Speaker 3 (21:17):
Oh?

Speaker 1 (21:17):
I think I know why? To discourage parking, to discourage driving.
That's what it's really about. Listen to some of these comments, Walt.
Unless the city is willing to manage lots and garages,
the unintended consequences for both residents and visitors will be
a huge price increase for overall parking, and don't offer

(21:41):
RTD as an alternative for commuters, commuters and visitors as
service is non existent on many lines after nine pm
and RTD management has never addressed security problems, in other words,
the drug usage at stations, on trains and on the buses.
Of course, it's going to drive the price of car
parking up, and I'm certain that Denver gets a portion

(22:03):
of that revenue. So but there is you know, you
got price elasticity. At some point, you're just not gonna
go downtown. And person like me, if it's so outrageously
expensive to park that I choose not to go downtown,
I do not see anywhere in my near future RT

(22:25):
or in my distant future RTD being my alternative to
get downtown. My solution is I just go the other direction.
I just won't go downtown at all. Rick responds, what
you're really saying is that our current model heavily subsidizes parking.
Many people myself included, or in favor of getting rid

(22:46):
of this massive subsidy, the market will respond to demand appropriately.

Speaker 3 (22:52):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (22:53):
Yes, but are they really subsidizing parking? I'm not really sure,
because well parking, like in this building, parking out back
is reserved for employees only, and I don't think there's
any enforcement of that, and parking out front us for visitors.

(23:15):
Nobody really enforces that either. So anybody in these apartment
condos directly to the north of this building, I know
for a fact because I see the cars park, and
I see people getting out of those cars and then
walking over to the condos because well, it's closer to
their condo, or the condos have limited parking, so they

(23:35):
just choose to park over here. And of course nobody
in this building does. Either building management or this company
does nothing about it. And I don't care because when
I get here at five am, I can park anywhere
I want.

Speaker 3 (23:48):
To his rights.

Speaker 1 (23:50):
This would be great if we had anything close to
a functioning public transit system. Well you don't, and I
don't think you ever will. The reason I don't think
you ever will is because fossil fuels are not going away,
and we don't live in a compact, dense urban area.

(24:14):
Have you ever looked at the night sky from a
satellite and looked up and down the front range and
seeing the lights just kind of running right down, right
down I twenty five in the edge of the foothills
all the way from Pueblo up to Fort Collins. Now
go look at the same thing, and look at say Manhattan,

(24:38):
and then superimpose, at least in your mind, super imposed
Manhattan on the front range. Yeah, we're too spread out,
Valdoir Rights, so fewer cars and fewer visitors. It'll be
easier for our neighbors to visit places in the suburbs
rather than travel into more expensive and less safe and

(24:59):
less accessible. I know they're always working against themselves. The crime,
the lack of parking, the construction everything downtown. Denver is
a crap hole. Denver's just a craphole city. Admit it,
it really is.

Speaker 3 (25:16):
So.

Speaker 1 (25:16):
For all of you paying into your fees into the
chamber of commerce, ask yourself, what's your ROI what are
you getting in return for that? Aaron Wright, I know
this is Kevin not seeing what people are complaining about.
Most of Denver has excessive space allocated to parking as
it is. There's also plenty of suburbia out there of

(25:37):
big parking lots and strip malls are your thing. I'm
not sure I've seen that excessive space allocated to parking
in downtown Denver. I was in downtown Denver. I think
it was last week for a lunch meeting. Yeah it
was last week with my lawyer, and yeah it was.

(25:57):
It was expensive and difficult to find aaron. More housing
lowers housing costs applying demand basic economics. If you want
a home with a parking spot is going to be
more expensive than a home without a parking spot, same
as a home with a garage is going to be
more expensive than one with just an outdoor parking spot.
Determine your priorities and decide for yourself, and other people

(26:17):
do the same, even if that means they don't want
a parking spot. I think she's kind of a free
market capitalist. Not sure or concludes Sarah, which just gives
me a headache. We need to decide if parking is
a right or a privilege we pay for. I think

(26:41):
it should be a right. I think it should be
a constitutional right that we are entitled to a parking space,
and that the government should provide the parking space for us.
You know, one of my new favorite I don't use
it that often, but I like to read about it
is FAFO around and find out Scott Jennings was on CNN,

(27:04):
and CNN is all upset because Trump has canceled the
security clearances for a lot of Democrats and a lot
of talking heads and the Biden family. I have no
problem revoking a security clearance for a former president who

(27:27):
has dementia. In fact, he probably can't read or understand,
and I don't want doctor Jill Biden explaining to him
what's in the Presidential Daily Brief. It's a great lessoning,
a great lesson in FAFO.

Speaker 8 (27:48):
When it comes to the Bidens. I mean, given the
family's long history of influence peddling and dealings with shady
people overseas, I think cutting them ball from national security
information is frankly a pretty good idea.

Speaker 3 (27:59):
That's number one. Number two, some.

Speaker 8 (28:01):
Of these people and their affiliates and the people they
are associated with at the upper reaches of the Democratic
Party have proven time and again that they are willing
to abuse their adjacency to national security information for political purposes.
We all remember the fifty one intelligence people who signed
the Hunter Biden laptop letter, for instance, And so I

(28:22):
think what Donald Trump is doing is sending a strong message.
No longer are people like this who float in and
out of government going to be able to abuse their
national security access for political purposes. And let me just
tell you something, what goes around comes around, because as
David just said, they cut off Donald Trump in twenty
twenty one.

Speaker 2 (28:40):
You want to play the game, now.

Speaker 8 (28:42):
You've got to play it when you're on the other
side of the field. Is there a logical end to
the tip for political tact Is this where it ends?
It'll come to an end when Democrats who go in
and out of government stop abusing their access to an
adjacency to national security information for political purposes. I mean,
there is no doubt that the top reaches of the

(29:03):
Democratic Party have used their adjacency and access to this information,
and then the fact that people know they have that access,
they use that as credibility to then make political arguments
against people they don't like, such as Donald Trump. They
use that credibility to try to get the news media
to report things that they say, such as the Hunter
Biden laptop letter. There is a rational basis, Elliott for

(29:25):
doing this, and it's to put a stop to people
using this kind of imprimiture for political reasons. So it'll
come to an end when people stop abusing this kind
of access. And one more issue, I just think far
too many people in Washington have this kind of clearance anyway,
and many people in both parties have acknowledged there's too
many people with security clearances. Maybe this will start a

(29:45):
conversation about ratcheting down the number of people have access
to this kind of information.

Speaker 1 (29:49):
And in fact, not only do too many people have
too many people have clearances, but there's too much classification
of information going on too. That's another thing that I
ought to tackle. I don't think it's Doze that ought
to be doing it, but he ought to set up
somebody to start looking at how we limit classification and
we limit security clearances.

Speaker 9 (30:12):
Hey, Mike, I was watching Bill Maher this past weekend,
and he did bring up something I can agree with.
There's zero cuts to be made at the Defense Department.
I'm sure that they're not one efficient. So I'd like
to see Doge go after some of that stuff too.

Speaker 1 (30:30):
I think they started last week. I know that I
thought Musk and Secretary Hegser had a meeting to get
the process started, So I think they've started the process.

Speaker 3 (30:39):
I may be wrong.

Speaker 1 (30:41):
You may or may not know or remember that we
had either three or four cops shot down in Pueblo
last week, and Chris Noler, who's the chief of police,
held a press conference and he came about as close
as I think we've gotten anybody in Colorado so far,
and ironically from Plublo, to tell us the truth about Colorado.

Speaker 10 (31:07):
Where he is alleged to have shot a person, and
he was out on the twenty five hundred dollars bond
when he assaulted my officers. A little over twelve hours later,
shortly after seven pm, our officers were looking for Billy Soto,
who was wanted for attempted murder in relation to a
shooting at the Publo Village apartments on February third, twenty
twenty five. Billy Soto was a self admitted MS thirteen

(31:29):
gang member who had a criminal history that spans pages.
He had fourteen felony arrests, most of which pled the misdemeanors.
At the time of the shooting last night, he was
out on bond on not one but three felony cases,
and as I stated, he was wanted on attempted murder
charges related to a shooting at an apartment complex in
Plublos Southside. Our officers were ambushed and shot by a

(31:54):
malicious person who should have been in jail but wasn't
because of our soft done crime legislation and bonds.

Speaker 3 (32:00):
He fired and estimated eighty.

Speaker 10 (32:02):
Rounds out responding officers, who thankfully are in stable condition
but have a long road to recovery. Our officers entered
his rampage of terror the only way they could.

Speaker 3 (32:11):
By shooting him, and he is dead.

Speaker 10 (32:14):
I'd like to just make a few statements about the
environment that breeds this type of criminal behavior.

Speaker 3 (32:19):
When we refuse.

Speaker 10 (32:21):
As a state to hold low level criminals accountable, they
become emboldened. Violent crime goes up in incidents like this
assault are the results the broken windows theory of law
enforcement worked in New York, it worked in Boston, It.

Speaker 3 (32:35):
Worked in LA and many other communities. Instead of holding
low level offenders responsible, the.

Speaker 10 (32:41):
State of Colorado has adopted the open windows theory of
law enforcement, where we hold no one accountable. Our victims suffered,
our community sufferer, and our police officers suffered.

Speaker 3 (32:53):
This year.

Speaker 10 (32:53):
They continue to try to take away any tool we
have available to whole criminals accountable. That when we find
ways around their weak policies. They try to take those
options away from.

Speaker 3 (33:03):
Us as well. I for one, am sick of it.

Speaker 10 (33:07):
I'm sick of my officers taking these risks and being
held to this kind of a crime with no recourse,
and our community should.

Speaker 3 (33:15):
Be sick of it.

Speaker 10 (33:16):
The blood of my officers lays at the steps of
our capital and the reckless and soft on crime legislation
passed out of there, And I'm tired of the needless
violence my officers in our.

Speaker 3 (33:26):
Community face because of these policies.

Speaker 10 (33:29):
It is not the people in our capital who pay
the price for these laws that do nothing but carbal
criminals and let them loose back into our community.

Speaker 1 (33:37):
Take that, Democrats, Yeah, you just got handed a big
bugget of truth. So what are you going to do.