8-4-25 - 9am - Maple Syrup and Woke Hoax

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The situation, would Michael Gown turn this, don't turn it down?
This opinion stories collide, I'm balling for a while, ride therounds,
got the mic in hands, come the bottles, going across
the land. The situation starts right now to be lean
and let's break it down.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
So one of the things about having you guys on
is background noise between four and six am. Is I
get to sleep and get used to the normal cadence
and rhythms of your voice. Whatever the heck you guys
are starting to do with the program.

Speaker 3 (00:32):
I gotta tell you, I think you've.

Speaker 2 (00:34):
Jumped the shark a bit because it sounds weird, but
I like.

Speaker 4 (00:37):
It, and I can only assume he's talking about the
new fan made intros. I don't know if they're staying,
but the dude made them, so I'm gonna give them
some runs. See how they work. Now, we have many
permanent changes. Nothing we're just putting around. You might say

(00:58):
we're farting around.

Speaker 5 (00:59):
What we're really doing.

Speaker 6 (01:03):
Farting around with a lot of stuff. As a matter
of fact, if you wouldn't know the truth, behind the scenes,
we were farting around with a lot of stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:09):
Dragon had to be.

Speaker 6 (01:10):
This story about the Denver Popo releases the metrics for
the second quarter of the year, and I just skimmed
through it, and I'm kind of confused by something. Let
me just show you what or tell you what the
the stats are. This is for the second quarter of
the year, so this will be April, May and June.

(01:32):
More than one hundred and twenty seven thousand total calls.
These are calls for service. Seventy four thousand were resident
initiated calls and fifty two thousand were officer initiated calls. Okay,
but what does that tell me? I mean, this comes

(01:52):
to us from KDVR. That doesn't tell me anything. Then
the number of traffic stops eleven thousand, three hundred and
one traffic stops. Who do you think that one person
was it made the eleven thousand, three hundred and First,
did they get a prize like you know the confetti
come out of a confetti gun or anything. They get

(02:13):
a prize like you're or the number three hundred or
just eleven thousand. You know, you were ten thousand, nine
hundred ninety nine, you got into eleven thousand. Woo, you
get a prize? So eleven thousand, three hundred one traffic stops,
all right, Then arrests eight thousand, one hundred and forty
eight total arrests. One thousand, two hundred and ninety nine

(02:36):
fell in the arrest. Now that's disappointing because you could
have gotten to thirteen hundred. If you had worked a
little harder, you could have gotten thirteen hundred fell in
any arrest, But no, you only got one hundred thousand,
two hundred ninety nine. But one that I skipped over
is this one guns recovered. Five hundred and twenty six
guns were recovered, taken off felons, stolen guns found, random

(03:04):
guns found a homeless encampments.

Speaker 3 (03:09):
How many of those were your own guns that you know?

Speaker 6 (03:11):
Oh, I've actually left it in the stall in the
year or nothing at the yarinal.

Speaker 3 (03:16):
What a meaningless come on, KDBR. You can do better than.

Speaker 6 (03:22):
That legal bill for the Denver mayor for his sanctuary
city hearing swells too. Remember they had agreed to a
retainer of what was the It was one thousand bucks
an hour Kevington Berling, Oh a maximum cap of two
million dollars, and they were paying a discounted rate of
one thousand dollars an hour, three hundred thousand dollars extra

(03:48):
This past week brings this whole cost so far to
five hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

Speaker 3 (03:55):
And let's see, it's also because that breaks it down.

Speaker 6 (04:00):
They also spent traveling Lodging for the trip for the
hearing was eleven thousand, three hundred dollars. They spent two thousand,
seven hundred and seventeen for meal. I should point out
it includes the mayor and four staff members. The chief
of staff I can go for that, senior advisor for
strategy and planning, Mary Bowman. You didn't need to go, Mary,

(04:22):
Acting city Attorney, Katie McLaughlin. Why did you need to go, sweetheart?
If you hired an outside firm, why did you go?
And of course the press secretary I might buy that,
so a couple of them probably unnecessary. The five travelers
of airfare accountant for two thousand, seven hundred and seventeen.
At least it sounds like you didn't fly. First class

(04:45):
meals cost one thousand, three hundred and eighty and a
majority of the trip's overall tab went to hotel expenses
of seven thousand, two hundred and twenty one dollars money
that you would have had to spend if you weren't
a three points uh sanctuary city Dragon? Do you do

(05:05):
you ever use real maple syrup? Not not the fake stuff,
not you know, Aunt Jemimocrat? But like I shouldn't say
that because Pearl Aunt Jemima. Why did we get rid
of Aunt Jemima because we're racist?

Speaker 3 (05:16):
Is that? Why? Why did we get rid of.

Speaker 4 (05:18):
Missus Butterworth because we're racist? Why do we get rid
of the landa Lake's Indian because we're racist? Don't forget
the brownni guys still there. Mister Clean's still there, and
the keebler elves are still there.

Speaker 6 (05:31):
So the elves the fairies are okay, and the the
bald headed white guy.

Speaker 4 (05:37):
Well, there's a commonality between the ones that are still
here and the ones that are gone.

Speaker 3 (05:42):
White racist male are all the are all the keebler elves? Male?
I don't know, I think so are they so white males? Yeah? Okay?
All right? Anyway, do you ever do you do you
ever use like real syrup?

Speaker 4 (06:00):
We have some When my parents come to town. They
prefer the real maple syrup, so we keep them around
for them.

Speaker 3 (06:06):
It's really good.

Speaker 4 (06:08):
But you know we're we're typical to the chemical fake
maple syrup.

Speaker 6 (06:13):
Well, I'm even worse. I if i'my around eating pancakes,
I have the fake chemical sugar free syrup. Yeah, but
I love real maple syrup. In nineteen fifty, before either
of us were born, how much of the world's maple

(06:36):
syrup did this country produce?

Speaker 3 (06:39):
What do you think? The United States? Next to none?

Speaker 6 (06:44):
Eighty percent? No kidding, eighty percent. In nineteen fifty, the
United States produced eighty percent of the world's real natural
all no fake maple syrup. You know what it is today?

Speaker 3 (07:00):
Oh, it's next to none twenty five percent.

Speaker 6 (07:02):
Twenty five percent. But you got it from eighty percent
to twenty five percent. Now, what happened during those decades
was not the result of climate chain No cultural disinterested.
We lose interest in real maple syrup. No, because you
can still find it on the store shelves. It's still there.
How about a lack of maples? You know, don't we

(07:24):
just squeeze maples? Is that how you get it? Don't
you pick the maples and then squeeze them somehow?

Speaker 3 (07:29):
And how you get yeah? Or do you milk? Do
you milk the maples. Yes, I think you milk the maps.

Speaker 4 (07:35):
You're exactly right, right, that's that's why that hand gesture.
You're doing exactly what.

Speaker 3 (07:40):
You do it is.

Speaker 6 (07:43):
I'm glad you're the at least somebody picked up on it.
I don't know why everybody else oid there didn't pick
up on my little land gesture here.

Speaker 3 (07:49):
I'd say a fewer than half the audience can probably
see it, but.

Speaker 6 (07:51):
Yeah, exactly, well, yes, half the audience can see me
because you're looking at me. You know, you got an
audience in too. Half half the audience can see it,
So that's great. No, it wasn't India that What happened
was the emergence of a government backed cartel north of

(08:12):
the border. That cartel was designed to manipulate the market,
control prices, and monopolize a once shared North American agricultural tradition.
It's a true cartel, and it's cloaked in a bureaucratic name,
a euphemism, if you will, the Quebec Maple Syrup Producers,

(08:33):
the QMSB. It even has an acronym, the qms B,
the Quebec Maple Syrup Producers. Now they've not only cornered
the global supply. But they've actually weaponized the power of
the Canadian government to undermine competitors, chiefly American maple syrup farmers. Now,
I want to be clear, Canada's maple cartel it's not

(08:56):
just some quirky feature of you know, Quebec regulation. It
is a weaponized trade tool. It is designed specifically to
suppress US prices, to limit producer autonomy, and to entrench
and enrich Quebec's global nominals worse than OPEC, which at
least has to contend with you know, rival oil powers.

(09:20):
You know, oil goes into an international market, people bid
for oil and you you know, you establish But no,
not maple syrup. There is no meaningful competitor to the
Quebec maple producers. Uh what was it Quebec, I can't remember. Producers,
Quebec maple syrup producers. Not no meaningful contender whatsoever.

Speaker 3 (09:45):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (09:45):
And to add insult or economic insult, to be specific
to injury, Canada raised its import tariff on American maple
syrup from twenty five percent to thirty five percent. So
the United States, ever, the dutiful free trader, doesn't impose
a reciprocal tax on Canadian maple syrup. So this unilateral

(10:10):
escalation but the Canadians is not only unfair, it is
strategically corrosive. American farmers are being choked by a foreign cartaeil,
while our own government just yawns and doesn't even pay attention.
This year, there was an academic study using four decades

(10:31):
forty years of price data found that Quebec's quota regime
has depressed US maple syrup prices by about three dollars
and fifty cents a gallon, even after accounting for Canadian
price trends and for currency fluctuations between you know, the
maple leaf and the dollar. Now, because processors and exporters

(10:55):
benchmarked their contracts off Canada's government fixed rates, farmers in
the United States don't have any leverage at all to negotiate.
One researcher that I read put it this way. Canadian
prices influence American prices positively, but the overall effect of
Quebec's quotas is suppressive. The model in the study explained

(11:20):
more than eighty six percent of the variants in US prices.

Speaker 3 (11:24):
So what do we have. We've got a rigged gain
it's not.

Speaker 6 (11:29):
The invisible hand of the marketplace, he said, it's the
iron fist of a cartel, and the economics they come
with a cartel because Quebec's producers don't compete. They collude,
and they collude legally under Canadian law. And then they
get propped up, not because they have better trees or
better maples, or better sap, or better squeezers or better

(11:53):
better bottles or better anything else, but they get propped
up by the legal structures that if we did it
in this country would be unfair trade practices and would
be illegal. So think about structurally how the mechanics of
this works. Since the late nineteen eighties, every Quebec syrup

(12:14):
farmer has been legally required to sell their bulk syrup
through the Quebec Maple Syrup Producers Cartel. They set production
quotas and they enforce those quotas with fines, seizures or
actual bands. So imagine being a maple farmer in Quebec.

(12:35):
You could actually if you don't comply with what the
Producers Association tells you to do, you could be fined,
you could lose your farm, you could be banned from production.
And if you overproduce. If you produce too much, you know,
which would push down prices, you get punished if you
try to sell your syrup in Canada independently, that's treated

(12:59):
as small. Now that's to me, sounds like a old
Soviet era style command and controlled economy, except instead of
you know, like wheat or anything, it's syrup. And instead
of bureaucruts in Moscow, it's bureaucruts in Montreal. And then
there is the and I'm not kidding dragon, are you

(13:20):
ready for this? There is the Strategic Maple Syrup Reserve. Really,
I'm not kidding. That's kind of awesome.

Speaker 3 (13:31):
You would like that, wouldn't.

Speaker 6 (13:32):
Yeah, But we need that in this country so we
can we can compete. But unlike it's counterpart, in this country,
it's not designed to cushion emergencies. It's designed to manipulate
the market. So this the maple Syrup, the Strategic Maple
Syrup Reserve, I just find this hilarious, is spread out

(13:53):
all over the country, nondescript warehouses all across Quebec. The
reserve holds as many as ninety one thousand barrels. That's
more than fifty million pounds of maple syrup, so it's
not really a reserve, it's a weapon. Two years ago,
actually three years ago technically, when the harvesting Quebec fell short,

(14:15):
the cartel released nearly half the reserve in order to
maintain the global supply and at the price level that
they wanted to keep it at. But then in years
of surplus they bank the syrup and they turn the
tap off. Meanwhile, if you're maple syrup producer in this country,
you have no such stabilizer and you're just left to

(14:38):
ride the whipsaw of the free market.

Speaker 3 (14:40):
Whatever it does.

Speaker 6 (14:42):
So the result of this OPEC style discipline ought to
be clear. Canada controls seventy five percent of global maple
syrup production. Now the United States we have four times
as many tapped maple trees as does any other country

(15:03):
in the world, yet we're reduced to barely twenty five
percent of the market. Vermont, the largest syrup state, only
produces three point one million gallons per year compared to
Quebec nearly twenty million gallons. So you've got a calculator

(15:24):
assume that the loss to the American mabel farmers must
be staggering. According to one report, Quebec's legal maple cartel
dictates prices for Vermont maple producers. But it gets worse.
The Canadian cartel has resorted to strategically increasing their output

(15:50):
in order to stop any growth among American farmers. So
nine years ago, the Quebec maple syrup producers proposed boosting
production by twelve percent, not because there was demand for it,
but because all of a sudden American farmers were starting
to increase their supply. They were kind of waking up.

(16:11):
This is not and was not economic efficiency, is market sabotage.
So now, rather than retreat in face of Trump and
the tariffs, Canada has decided to double down. A ten
percent tariff increase on American syrup this year is actually
just a hostile trade maneuver, a sugar coated slapping the field.

(16:34):
They've just taken a bottle of maple syrup and they've
just slapped it all over our faces as because they
continue to flood the market with subsidized syrup, yet slaps
American producers with tariffs if they attempt to compete. That's
not trade, that's a trade war. And they've won. Now

(16:56):
those to try to be objective here which I really
don't want to be, but I'm gonna try to be
the Quebec maple syrup producer's cartel. They will argue, has well,
we bring stability to a volatile industry. And it is
true that syrup prices have you know, seen few dramatic swings,
and you can imagine that you know, depending on you know,

(17:17):
what kind of weather you have, and you know, just
you know, some years some trees will produce more than
other years. But this stability has been brought about through coercion,
pots and price fixing gets true cartel behavior. So if
Trump's serious about restoring American industry, we can talk about cars,

(17:39):
and we can talk about chips, wean talk about all
sorts of stuff. But how about we establish a nation
national maple Reserve, not to manipulate prices, but to protect
our producers from cartel manipulation.

Speaker 7 (17:52):
Michael, I'm confused. I thought maple's you squeezed, and then
you said there are trees.

Speaker 3 (18:00):
I don't get it.

Speaker 6 (18:02):
Trust me, I'm as confused as you are. I could
have sworn that, you know, every day the farmers would
get up. They kind of heard the maples into the
corral and then they put them in the chute and
then they would you know, squeeze the little maples and
you know, get the little drops of maple syrup out

(18:23):
and you go right into the bottle. You know, it's
a very efficient process, just you know, straight from the
maple into the bottle, and then it would go on
to convey our belt. They'd slap a label on it
and send it off and show up at the store
and you put it on your pancakes or you're a
Belgian waffle.

Speaker 3 (18:39):
I don't know. You learn something new every day. What
I also learned is.

Speaker 6 (18:46):
I never thought I would talk about, excuse me, strategic
maple syrup reserve, and we need to do the same
thing in this country so they can fight them. So
the whole tariff war is actually being fought at a
very granular level about many things, including something as silly

(19:07):
as maple syrup. Let's let's swerve into another topic, and
that would be science. Yes, let's talk about science. I
forget I was watching you know, I was looking for
different sound clips and I, oh, wait, no it was
I'm not gonna play it. It was Kamala when she
was on with Stephen Colbert and she was talking about

(19:30):
things that I don't know, things that were important to her.

Speaker 3 (19:32):
Something.

Speaker 6 (19:33):
She was talking about cooking and she'd been watching some
TV and how science And then she turns to the
audience and she says, yeah, like scientists, you know, like
somehow we're mocking scientists. No, what we're mocking is the
fake science. A woman by the name of Helen pluck Rose.

Speaker 3 (19:53):
Now, I'm not.

Speaker 6 (19:54):
Making that up. Pluck Rose. That's prittish. That's all I
can do. Maybe, Ossie, I'm not sure. Helen pluck Rose,
along with James Lindsay and Peter Bogosian, infamously exposed what
a steaming pile of crap the Ivory Tower has degenerated
into because they published a hoax paper. Hoax paper in

(20:19):
an academic journal that goes by the name of Gender,
Place and Culture.

Speaker 3 (20:26):
The title of their article.

Speaker 6 (20:27):
Was Human Reactions to rape culture and Queer performativity in
Urban dog Dogs. I'm sorry, let me just start it
all over again. It's a typical scientific paper, so it's
got a long title to it. You have to put
the right emphasis on the right emphasis. Human reactions to

(20:51):
rape culture and queer pormativity in urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon. Dragon,
tell me what I just said.

Speaker 3 (21:03):
We're worried about the dogs, rape.

Speaker 6 (21:07):
Culture, queer formativity in urban dog parks, right.

Speaker 3 (21:15):
Okay, got it all? Right?

Speaker 6 (21:17):
Now, this is apparently a leading feminist geography journalist some
sort gender place and culture. Now, apparently the journal was
so impressed by the rigorous research which featured the inspection.

Speaker 3 (21:32):
Of ten thousand dog genitals.

Speaker 6 (21:38):
The author, the primary author, Helen pluck Rose, explains what
they did.

Speaker 8 (21:47):
One of your papers, tauted insights and I'm quoting from
a newspaper here into male ripe culture based on the
inspection of ten thousand dog genitals.

Speaker 9 (22:00):
Really, what was the what did it claim to show?

Speaker 3 (22:04):
And who published that?

Speaker 5 (22:06):
That was gender place and culture. That's a feminist geography
a journal, So we're not worried about geography. It's not
one of the high up geography journals. But when you
get a kind of identity study attached to any other
discipline like feminist geography, feminist social work, then that is
when you see some real sort of madness appear. So yeah,

(22:28):
our dog park paper, as we call it, it's it
argued that by examined by looking at dogs in a
dog park, and incidents of unwanted humping among them, and
how humans react.

Speaker 6 (22:41):
Unwanted humping among the dogs and the dog park. I
see it all the time every weekend at the dog park,
unwanted humping, and I think Germany Christmas society is just degenerating.
See this, why do it do that?

Speaker 5 (23:00):
Working to that we could confidently state that both dog
parks and nightclubs were rape and downing spaces, and that
we should train men like dogs. And we submitted a
first draft of this and it was received positively.

Speaker 3 (23:15):
One of the reviewers.

Speaker 5 (23:16):
Suggested it could be benefited by the addition of black
feminist criminology, so we did that and it really is
an absolutely absurd paper. But there's also a very dark
element there because the reason it went down well was
because we were claiming a kind of implicit bias. You've
seen the reference to implicit biases. We can't see racism

(23:38):
and sexism so easily anymore because it's been criminalized and
it's also frowned upon, but it's still a belief to
be there. So a lot of scholarship looks into ways
to dig it out and make it visible. So by
making these claims about how people responded to their dogs.
We were feeding into that, and by making men the
villains of the piece, we were also flattering the political biases.

Speaker 9 (24:04):
Data fabrication was what was behind being accused of falsifying data.

Speaker 5 (24:09):
Well, I hope you won't think less of us, but
we didn't actually examine ten thousand dog genitals.

Speaker 3 (24:23):
This is what we've tried.

Speaker 5 (24:24):
We've tried to point out to people that even if we.

Speaker 9 (24:27):
Were not irresponsible and stupid for publishing this rubbish, we've
done the wrong thing because you didn't examine ten thousand
dog genitals.

Speaker 5 (24:36):
Yeah, and this is one of the criticisms that a
few of our papers had data and it wasn't real,
but we did need to test where the highly implausible
data would raise any concerns with them. I mean, how
is it possible to have ten thousand different dogs in
one town and to examine their genitals while asking the

(24:57):
owners about their sexuality. It really should have been questioned,
and even if we had been able to show that
we had done that, it wouldn't justify the claim that
that dog parks and nightclubs are raped in downing spaces.
So this focus on the data and whether or not
it was real is really a red herring to get

(25:18):
away from the fact that we shouldn't have drawn the
conclusions from it, then that we did anyway, Well, you.

Speaker 6 (25:27):
Know, woke scholarship is a worthless farce, heavily subsidized by you.
Now in this case it happens to be Australian, but
if it can happen in Australia, it can happen here.
Question everything. Don't let anybody fool you into thinking that somehow, oh,
just because the data is there, that it is legitimate.

(25:51):
Question Question, question everything. Jaguar, Jaguar land Rover, we're in
big on Pride. What a couple of months ago now
they apparently heard that the trendious youngsters, the hipsters are
really into it. So Jaguar land Rover dedicated to promoting inclusion,

(26:16):
ensuring a safe working environment and policies for LGBTQ plus colleagues.
Our CEO, Adrian Mardell. They posted on X joined colleagues
at Birmingham Pride this weekend where our pride wrapped Jaguar
F type convertible and Defender were featured in the parade.

(26:37):
I had heard this story and then I realized, Oh,
as I was reading through zero Hedge that apparently that
marketing strategy didn't work out too well. Zero Hedge wrote
that Jaguar was trying to advertise a vehicle the retails
for six figures to a market of broke, mentally disturbed

(26:57):
people living off their boomer parents. Well, obviously it didn't
work because sales have collapsed. So now you read this,
this is according to Reuters, the Jaguar CEO is stepping
down months after leading a controversial, woke rebrand campaign for
the auto company. Jaguar Land Rover CEO Adrian Mardell, the

(27:19):
one that they were all touting earlier or less in June,
is now said to retire after three decades at the
luxury car company and serving as CEO for three years,
according to a spokesman for the automaker.

Speaker 3 (27:31):
Now you can't help but draw a contrast.

Speaker 6 (27:35):
Jaguar CEO to step down following the disastrous attempt at
rebranding at the same time that, you know the Drudge Report,
which I keep up over here on one of these monitors,
just see there's any breaking news has refreshed And guess
what the big picture is on the Drudge Report. Oh,

(27:55):
it's miss Sweeney and well, she's got a cotton but
she's got denim jeans on, and she's got her butt
up in the air, and she's looking very sultry in
the photograph. Now, if you look at the Jaguar commercial,
you'll see a bunch of I'm not quite sure whether

(28:16):
they're male or female. I haven't quite figured that out yet.
It's no wonder that the leftists hate capitalism. What they
have to offer, they've got to impose on us by force,
because apparently normal people don't want to choose it voluntarily.
As it seems to me, the free market keeps proving.

(28:38):
So huh, Sweeney cells.

Speaker 3 (28:42):
Uh.

Speaker 6 (28:44):
People that are I'm not quite sure male or female
doesn't seem to sell and the CEO steps down.

Speaker 3 (28:52):
Shocker, right, Michael.

Speaker 7 (28:55):
I'm confused. I thought maple's you squeezed, and then you
say they're trees.

Speaker 3 (29:02):
I don't get it.

Speaker 6 (29:04):
No, they're little maples. They're just a little maple. You've
heard of Marl. They're little Marlin maples. There's little Marlin maples,
is what they are. And you just you kind of
squeeze them. You know, I think I'm doing the appropriate
hand gesture here, So just go look, go google it. Go, yeah,
go google it. In the United Kingdom, if you want

(29:25):
to watch porn, they have a new facial age verification process,
so they've got some sort of AI system that the
porn sites have to use. So you've got to show
your face to you know, to I guess somehow it
reads that, well, you got enough wrinkles or whatever that
you must be over the age of eighteen, so we'll

(29:47):
let you in. But this guy, he's really upset. He's
going to probably sue because he's known as the King
of Ink. He has legally modified his identity. He's now
been barred from X rated websites as a result of
the filter that flags his inked face as somehow masking

(30:09):
his face, so he can't get onto porn. Among the
websites they're asking for image verification like selfies, and it's
not recognizing my face, it's saying take away your mask
as a result of the expertise. As a result of
the expertise has made so you possibly can't maintain up
an image to the digital camera or put on a mask,

(30:31):
so you can't watch porn because you got too many tattoos. Meanwhile,
to show you exactly how this country continues to deteriorate.
Have you heard about California Assembly Bill fo AB four
Sometimes this comes from to us from full crim seven

(30:53):
news in California. California simbly Bill AB four N five
allow any adult to take guardianship over any minor child
with a simple one page form. The form would allow
a non related adult to go to a public school
and seize control over any minor child without any proof

(31:15):
of a family relationship. Now, I'm sure this will win
the support of the liberals in California because it's basically
helping to facilitate child sex trafficking. The purported justification, according
to the California Assembly, is to allow the children of
illegal aliens who have been deported to stay in the
United States rather than leave with their parents. That's the

(31:39):
justification for allowing anybody to walk up.

Speaker 3 (31:43):
So even if you don't.

Speaker 6 (31:44):
Have any ill will or any you know, perverted intentions,
you can go into a school hand them a form
that says I want Jose Padilla over here, because little Jose,
who's twelve years old, is I'm now going to take
him and take care of him, and the schools are

(32:05):
going to have to do that. Who's going to go
pick up jose? Huh, who's going to do that? So,
as Aaron Friday, an attorney and president of something called
Our Duty USA, it's a parent advocacy group called AB
four ninety five, a Child Traffickers and Kidnappers Dream Bill.

(32:29):
There is no background check, no welfare check, no court oversight,
no verification. All you need is this piece of paper
and some form of identification, with no obligation for the
adult handing the child over to verify the identification, and presto,
someone walks away with your child. Yeah, doesn't take I

(32:51):
mean even I can cat to figure out where this
is going. The ease with which child sex trafficking could
occur under this bill kind of reminds me of what's
going on in Britain with all the Muslim rape gangs,
where they would often just pick up girls from orphanages
or foster home schools, even police stations, and the people
in charge of those establishments would just allow it to happen.

(33:15):
The bill was introduced by a Democrat duh by the
name was Celeste Rodriguez. She calls it the Family Safety
Plan Act. Seriously, that's what you call it? If this
is the Family Safety Plan Act. Isn't that like calling

(33:36):
the Inflation Reduction Act the Inflation Reduction Act because you
somehow believe it's going to reduce inflation. Well, this is
not going to improve family safety.

Speaker 3 (33:44):
This is an.

Speaker 6 (33:44):
Open window, an open door, an open invitation to child sex, trafficking,
and kidnapping were even worse, unbelievable.

Speaker 3 (33:54):
You know, California and Colorado we kind of we're.

Speaker 6 (33:58):
In a nose to nose race who can be the
most degenerate, you know, state in the country. California is
slightly ahead right now, but give us time.