Rod and Greg Show: The Olympic Women's Boxing Scandal; Death Penalty in Utah

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, man, we have got a lot to talk
about again today on this Wednesday afternoon, and uh, we'll
get to all the political stuff in a minute, but
we've got to start off, yes with the major story
of the day, Roger ban developing story. And you cannot
deny that this is the number one story in the
world today, folks.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Rod has been in a dead panic since this hit
the news wire. He's not been able to talk about
anything else, anything else. This is all we've talked about.

Speaker 1 (00:26):
Here's the story. Taylor Swift's Era's tour in Vienna has
been canceled due to what Austrian police say was a
planned terrorist attack targeting the concert.

Speaker 2 (00:40):
You don't have a bigger swiftye than and found than
Rod Arquette, and he is beside himself on this in
all serious is a good thing that they caught them,
But boy, I just Rod really can't think of anything
else story as a swifty, a dedicated swifty, everything else
looks irrelevant.

Speaker 1 (00:58):
Earlier today, officials said two men were arrested in connection
with an alleged planned attacts on major events in Vienna.
She was due to perform there tomorrow. One of the
men arrested by Austrian federal and state police was a
nineteen year old who allegedly pledged his allegiance to Isis,
Vienna police say at a news conference on yesterday or today.

(01:21):
Officials say both men had become radicalized through the internet.
So Taylor Swift concerts canceled in Vienna for the next
three days because.

Speaker 2 (01:30):
You are breathing a great sigh of relief. Yeah, we
all are, but you, especially you, you especially, I mean
you not that big of a swifty Oh yeah, Have you've.

Speaker 3 (01:38):
Been to a concert?

Speaker 4 (01:39):
Yes?

Speaker 5 (01:39):
Or no?

Speaker 4 (01:39):
Yes?

Speaker 3 (01:40):
Okay, there you go.

Speaker 1 (01:41):
Yeah, boy, you go to a concert and you become
a swiftye.

Speaker 2 (01:43):
Well, I bet you you're not fitting the demo. I
bet you you're a little bit outside the demo, my friend.
And I think I'll bet you you were dancing around
and standing on your chair and you're probably the most
excited one at the concert.

Speaker 1 (01:56):
As also the oldest one of the.

Speaker 2 (01:57):
See your smile, I know I'm right is one of
the Well you did not correct me, so.

Speaker 1 (02:04):
Yeah, all right, Well, we're going to be talking about
a lot today. No more about Taylor today. That story
is done. We're all talk about Tim Walls and what
the media is trying to do to him. I mean,
it's pretty amazing. We're going to spend some time talking
about Kamala's record as a law and order whatever you
want to call her, but apparently she is not as
law and order ish as you may have thought.

Speaker 2 (02:25):
I'm going to tell you, folks, at warp speed, you
have a media, a cooperating media, and a Democrat National
Committee and a Kamala Harris campaign trying to frame and
create invent like a Frankenstein, a new Tim Walls, one
that you've never seen before, no one's ever seen before.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
But he's just so.

Speaker 2 (02:44):
Folksy, and so we're gonna we're gonna give you the
real record, the real record of Kamala Harris. We're gonna
give you the record of this of Tim Walls, and
we're going to actually show you some of the morphing
of this guy that's going on in real time, so
when you spot it you can share.

Speaker 4 (02:58):
With the others.

Speaker 1 (02:58):
And in the five o'clock apparently the LDS Church's media
owned companies are calling out top officials in the state
and we're probably we're not a top official in the state,
maybe third or fourth tier official or a voice or
a voice calling people out for raising questions about that
boxing match in the Olympics.

Speaker 2 (03:17):
Yes, multiple back matches with multiple athletes, two athletes.

Speaker 1 (03:21):
I believe we'll talk about that. So we've got a
lot to get to today. As always, great to have
you along for the ride with Rod and Greg eight
eight eight five seven eight zero one zero, or on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod,
all right, let's talk about the remaking of Tim Walls.
It's pretty amazing.

Speaker 3 (03:36):
Yeah, I don't you know, I got my you see it.

Speaker 2 (03:38):
All my notes are scattered all over this studio because
I don't even know where to begin. So can we
begin with one of the most ridiculous segments I've ever heard?
First off, this Barnacle guy, Mike, Mike Barnacle, he was
from the Boston Globe, got fired because he's a plagiarist.
He took fifty jokes of George Carlin, plus all kinds
of other stories, don't made them as if they were

(04:00):
his own. He was fired in disgrace. Back in the
late nineties, MSNBC resurrected his career and he's been some
kind of know it all from the left ever since.
He has a way of describing Tim Walls that I
can't do it. I can't do it justice. We just
have to listen to Mike Barnacle talking to Joe Scarborough
and Morning Joe about this great new pick.

Speaker 6 (04:22):
There's a bit of reagan Esque openness and friendliness toward him.
And the most important aspect of Coach Waaltz, I would
think is this. He knows, as does the running mate,
the vice president.

Speaker 1 (04:35):
Who's at the top of the ticket.

Speaker 6 (04:37):
They both know that elections are about tomorrow. Elections are
about the future, not yesterday. The other two guys running
on the Republican ticket, they constantly refer to things that
happened four years ago. They can't give it up, they
can't stop talking about it. America wants to know where

(04:57):
we're going to be four years from now. We know
what happened four years ago.

Speaker 1 (05:03):
Did he call him coach Walls.

Speaker 2 (05:05):
Coach Walls like a coach Saban, like a coach Lou Holtz.
So here's Reaganesque. Barnacle wouldn't get it. He wouldn't touch Reagan.
We're on Reagan with a ten foot poll. This guy's
never been Reagan. Esk here he doesn't like Reagan, so
to call him reagan esque as a complete farce. Coach
Walls calling him that you get ready for that. By
the way, folks, you're gonna hear Coach Walls because he's

(05:27):
just down to earth, he's folksy, he's Coach Walls. Okay,
And this is the best one. They're gonna want you,
ladies and gentlemen, to always look to tomorrow, never today,
and certainly not yesterday or the last three years. They're
going to try and convince you that anybody that would
like to discuss the current record, the current performance of

(05:49):
either Kamala Harris or Tim Walls in Minnesota is looking backwards.
You're just not a visionary, are you.

Speaker 3 (05:56):
You can't look at these are this is just a scam.

Speaker 2 (05:59):
These these are words and these are images that the
media is participating full blown into this campaign, trying to
create a guy that doesn't exist. So let's go to
the next the next clip. I hate to just rattle
these off, like you know, just quickly, but it just
keeps going. How about from the former senator she was

(06:20):
CNN or whatever she was on one of the ano
This is another MSNBC. Just again, this is today. Listen
how great walls Tim Walls is now.

Speaker 7 (06:30):
And let's compare vans and Walls. I mean, you know,
Walls is mac and cheese and a trip to the
hardware store. Walls is exactly what jd Vance is pretending
to be.

Speaker 8 (06:46):
He is of the heartland.

Speaker 1 (06:48):
He is not coastal Lee mac and cheese and a
trip to the hardware store.

Speaker 2 (06:53):
Can you believe these descriptions that they're coming up with.
I mean, we spoke yesterday about the record of Tim
Walls and it is not I found no mac and
cheese in the in the record, I found no hardware
store in the record. I found COVID, draconian COVID requirements.
I found just all kinds of problems with his extreme
leftist agenda as the governor of Minnesota. But they call

(07:17):
out this is what I love. They call out he
is exactly what jd Vance is pretending to be. What
does jved Vance have to say about all that?

Speaker 4 (07:25):
Again?

Speaker 5 (07:25):
If you guys ever get an opportunity to ask Tim
Waltz or Kamala Harris some questions, he made this interesting
comment that the Kamala Harris campaign put out there, and
I bet they were great regretting they put it out
there now because he said that we and he was
making a point about gun control. He said, we shouldn't
allow weapons that I used in war to be on
America's streets. Well, I wondered, Tim Waltz, when were you

(07:48):
ever in war? When what was this weapon that you
carried into war? Given that you abandoned your unit right
before they went to Iraq and he has not spent
a day in a combat zone. What bothers me about
Tim Waltz is the stolen valor garbage.

Speaker 3 (08:01):
Do not pretend to be something that you're not.

Speaker 5 (08:03):
And if you want to criticize me for getting an
Ivy League education, I'm proud of the fact that my
mam all supported me, that I was able to make
something of myself. I'd be ashamed if I was him
and I lied about my military service like he did.

Speaker 1 (08:14):
Stolen valor garbage. And that's exactly what it is from
Tim Walls.

Speaker 2 (08:18):
Yeah, he's never He left before he was to be deployed.
He got he found an excuse. I think he had
a hang now I can't remember what, but but jd Vance,
he saw, he did serve and he saw combat. And
that's actually, but you know what that is. That's looking back.
That's looking like yesterday you're guilty. That's not looking at tomorrow.

Speaker 1 (08:38):
You're looking back.

Speaker 2 (08:39):
You're not supposed to ever look at what they're saying
and compare it with their record.

Speaker 3 (08:43):
But that's what we'll do here.

Speaker 1 (08:44):
Shouldn't do that now when we come back, we'll talk
about some members in the media who are saying the
pick of Tim Walls ain't going to help that much,
and we'll break that all down for you coming up
right here on the Rod and Greg Show. Great to
be with you on this Wednesday afternoon. If you want
to be a part of program eighty eight eight five
seven eight zero one zero, or on your cell phone
dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod, Steve Kornaki.

(09:07):
Does that ring a bell to him? Yes, Steve Kornaki
is kind of like the election guru at MMSNBC. I
think he does a pretty good He does a fair
job of breaking down the numbers, yes, looking at things right. Well,
apparently a number of MSNBC viewers are outraged at MSNBC
because Krnaki kind of told the truth about Tim Walls

(09:29):
on the ticket. Now with Kamala Harris, and he explained,
if you look at the numbers right now, Tim Kornaki
does nothing to help the Democratic ticket.

Speaker 9 (09:39):
Democrats.

Speaker 10 (09:39):
We already know in areas like the Twin Cities in
the Midwest and everywhere, Democrats have been doing great here
no matter who they're running. So the question is the
areas of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania that are like Greater Minnesota,
that's where they've been struggling, small towns, blue collar areas.
Did Walls do anything in Greater Minnesota that suggests he
defies those limitations on Democrats. And the answer really is,

(10:01):
you don't see it at all.

Speaker 4 (10:03):
No.

Speaker 1 (10:04):
And you've got a map there showing the rural areas
of Minnesota and you can see it's a lot of red.

Speaker 3 (10:11):
Yeah, it's all red.

Speaker 2 (10:12):
I mean, if you take if you take just like
all these cities that you know where Democrats are winning
in Georgia, they're wearing winning in Arizona, America, you have
a uber you have this megatropolis county like Americopa County
of Fulton County in Georgia, and here in Minnesota, it's
no different. They've got you can count on its ten counties.

(10:32):
If and then there's a zillion red counties. He has
made no inroads. They're all red, they all vote the
other way. He hasn't made any inroads in the conservative
rural parts of Minnesota at all.

Speaker 1 (10:43):
Yeah, not at all, not at all. Someone else on MSNBC,
Charlie Sykes, who used to be a radio tun show
host by the Way in Milwaukee for a number of years,
is now a contributor to MSNBC, and he talked about
the fact that Tim Walls not really a safe pick
for the Democrats. No deep breath here, this was not
a safe pick.

Speaker 11 (11:01):
Josh Shapiro seemed like the obvious pick for two reasons.
Number One, Pennsylvania is the key swing state with nineteen
electoral vote. Josh Shapiro would also be able to appeal
to centrist Obviously, the decisions has been made here has
been to go with the strategy of making sure you
take care of the base and based enthusiasm as opposed

(11:23):
to reaching out to centrist. Now, Kamala Harris may do this,
may do this in other ways. But there was a
you know, basically an internal battle between the people who
said what the ticket needs to do is move to
the center versus those who say no, let's go with
the more progressive.

Speaker 3 (11:42):
Bernie like a candidate.

Speaker 1 (11:46):
So yeah, a safe pick.

Speaker 2 (11:48):
Well, and here's how they're addressing it. Okay, they see
if a state like Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, they think
that's their base. They want to get the vote out
there and get a leftist like Tim Walls sided with
Kamala Harris, who's also left. He might be more the
left to her. But then what they have to do
are two things. They have to convince the centrists or

(12:09):
the people that are persuadable that he's just assault of
the earth Midwestern dad as a coach. He's a coach,
he's coach. Walls, he's progressive, he's Meccan cheese and hardware stores,
and on and on and on. And they got to
sell this farce. And then you know, after they sell it,
after they package it as a campaign, they need the
national media to run with it. Run like their hairs

(12:31):
on fire.

Speaker 1 (12:32):
They are.

Speaker 2 (12:34):
And so what what the headline should be is like
I'm looking in one article that says America is ready
for a Jewish vice president the Democrats are not. Which
is the truth, right. I'll tell you what, though, our
very own. Uh there's a local public radio shouldn't I
mean public radio station. They're they've they've taken the queue.
They are going to sell a sky.

Speaker 1 (12:58):
So many of you know who that is. I dout
if any of you listen to it.

Speaker 2 (13:01):
And so they tweet as well as air their shows
and the whispery voice, and this is the tweet that
they sent out. He was raised on a farm, he
was a school teacher. He knows the challenges that families
deal with every single day, said incoming DNC member for Utah,
Claire Collared. They that's the cue. See you see how
the talking points run. This This was today, this came out, Uh,

(13:25):
you know on August seventh, this morning, there's the queue.
They're going to paint him as a centrist, because he's not,
but they're gonna paint him that way. And then they
need the media and all those it'll take the talking
points and run and explain to you folks that he's
actually just an everyday guy.

Speaker 3 (13:39):
And then they get both.

Speaker 2 (13:40):
They get their they get their extreme left, they get
they don't get the Jewish person that they were afraid
that the left would hate because they don't like Jewish
people and then, and they hope to confuse you or
convince you that he's not who he really is. Again,
look to tomorrow. Don't look at today. Never look at today,
Never look at yesterday, because if you did, you'd see
a record that doesn't really fit with the narrative that

(14:02):
they're trying to push for this new VP pick.

Speaker 1 (14:04):
He's just a good old boy, raised on a farm,
football coach, community leader, who, by the way, wants to
mutilate your child, to allow abortion at birth, to put
tampons in a boy's bathroom. He's just one of these
guys Minneapolis. He just wants to let Minneapolis burn. But
he's just a good old guy. Now, speaking of Minneapolis burning,

(14:25):
I don't know where they found this, but this is
an interview that the media did with Tim Watson's wife,
Gwynn at about the Minneapolis riots. Listen to what she
found enjoyable about those riots.

Speaker 5 (14:38):
I would say, those first days, you know, when there
were riots, I could smell the burning tires and.

Speaker 8 (14:50):
That that was a very real thing.

Speaker 1 (14:54):
And I kept the windows open for as long as.

Speaker 12 (14:56):
I could because I felt like that was such a
touchstone of what was what was happening.

Speaker 1 (15:01):
A touchstone of what was happening, Greg, to allow people
who've worked all their life to build a business, and
her husband as governor, refused to call in the National Guard,
and those businesses burnt to the ground.

Speaker 2 (15:13):
I like to keep the windows open so I can
smell the burning tires. That's gotta be worse than Marie antoinettes.

Speaker 3 (15:19):
Let the meat cake. It has to be. It has
to be.

Speaker 1 (15:21):
It's just nuts. It's just nuts. Now, when we come back,
we're on pay attention focus more now on Kamala and
her law and order records. We'll talk about that coming
up right here on the Rod and Greg Show on
this Wednesday afternoon with Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine K and RS. Let's go away from Tim walls.
He's such an easy target.

Speaker 4 (15:40):
You know.

Speaker 1 (15:41):
I saw this article today the problem with walls. People
don't know what to attack because there's so much there.
They described it as a target rich environment. I'll say,
when it comes to Tim Walls, they watch that Wiley media.

Speaker 2 (15:53):
Boy, they got they got, they got mac and cheese
and hardware stores to talk about.

Speaker 1 (15:58):
I sure will. Well, let's talk about Kamala Harris.

Speaker 4 (16:00):
Now.

Speaker 1 (16:00):
One of the issues that she likes to brag about.
Is her law enforcement expertise when she served as Attorney
general in the state of California. Joining us on our
Newsmaker line to break that down and see if in
fact it is true. Is James Caygigliano, retired FBI Supervisory
Special Agent. James. Thanks for joining us tonight. What is
the ugly truth James about Kamala's law enforcement record?

Speaker 4 (16:23):
Well, Rod and Greg, first of all, thanks for having
me on. And you guys certainly remember back during the
twenty twenty presidential campaign when then Congressional Representative Tulci Gabbard
absolutely eviscerated then Senator Kamala Harris's record as a prosecutor.
She served for six years, I believe, as the DA

(16:45):
in San Francisco, seven years as the Attorney general for California.
And really there's just a litany of things that she
has said and done. I don't even need to editorialize him.
I can run down a quick list for you. You'll
all remember that in twenty four teen, an African American
teenager in Ferguson, Missouri, was shot and killed by a
police officer that his name was Michael Brown. Well, that

(17:08):
caused whole scale riots and protests and cities were burning
in the whole nine yards. Well, the Obama Justice Department,
led by Eric Holder, determined that that was a justifiable shooting.
Just five years later, in twenty nineteen, Kamala Harris, as
a senator, remarks on Twitter about the murder of Michael

(17:30):
Brown and puts up a memorial tweet. Now, this person
is the sitting vice president and has a possibility of
becoming our next president. That's case number one. Number two,
we all remember the Jesse Smolett hate crime hoax that
took place in Chicago back in twenty nineteen. Jesse Smolette
was an actor. Said he went out in the middle

(17:51):
of the night to go get a hamburger or a
hot dog and was jumped by two maga enthusiasts who
wrapped a rope around his neck and poured bleach on him. Now,
Kamala Harris was a prosecutor, but she jumped on board
that and called it a modern day lynching her words,
and has never ever walked that back. Number three, we

(18:13):
all remember in twenty twenty, at the height of the
George Floyd protests, when cities were being burned and police
precincts were being immolated. In the federal courthouse in Portland
was being firebombed. Kamala Harris promoted a Minnesota bail fund
that took not peaceful protesters who were arrested, but rioters
who were arrested and paid their bail to get them

(18:35):
back on the street. One of those people whose bail
was paid for and got out then went on to
commit murder point number four. Point number four. Kamala Harris
has been a fervent supporter of the defund the police movement.
Now we see what defundus has happened with the progressive

(18:56):
movement to do that across the nation, and cities that
were supporting that, whether it was Portland or Minneapolis, Minnesota,
places like Atlanta, they've all now walked that back, realizing
that people, young people don't want to be cops now
and recruitment and retention is a big, big, big problem.
And then I'll close with the borders are tag So

(19:18):
she was given the responsibility by the President of the
United States to be the borders are. Unfortunately, of recent
many of the migrant crimes, violent crimes that have happened
are putting a stain on this because more and more
people are gideaways, more and more people acrossing the border illegally,
and she's been in charge of that. So all of that,

(19:39):
her record that I just laid out proves that she
is not the law enforced, the forcement or law and
order candidate. And the bumper sticker that she's used, you know,
the prosecutor versus the felon, just doesn't meet muster gentlemen.

Speaker 2 (19:53):
So that was a gatling gun of absolute, you know,
just indictment of her record. I appreciate every one of
those points. So here's my question. When you look at
this vice presidential nominee, the governor that let Minneapolis burn
at least three days before he called in the National Guard,
someone who said, if you're going to build a wall,
I'll go get a ladder tall enough for wan to

(20:15):
get across. Every single point you made, I could think
of one that was complimenting that point, a point that
shouldn't be complimented by this Tim Walls, the governor of Minnesota.
My question to you is is did she pick him
because he does compliment her approach or lack of approach
to public safety so well? Or is this a wild coincidence.

Speaker 13 (20:37):
Gentlemen.

Speaker 4 (20:38):
First of all, that is a great question. Now I'll
let you in a little secret. I am a sitting
mayor in the village of Cornwall in Hudson, New York,
a small community of three thousand people about an hour
north of New York City. Now, when you're picking someone
to be your running mate, you generally want to pick
somebody and I'm going to put on my political hat
and take off my law enforcement hack here, Genny. Want

(21:00):
to pick somebody that compliments you, that picks up something
that you don't have, from a region or a swing state,
that's going to help you. She decided to out progressive herself.
She picked somebody, and you just made the point. She
picked somebody who is further to the less than she is.
And don't forget he was the He was the governor

(21:24):
or is the governor of Minnesota when the George Floyd
protest and riot started, and he patiently waited what I
feel like, as a law enforcement professional, was far too
long to bring to bring law and order back there,
and to bring in the National Guard. So, yes, this
is a befuddling and beguiling pick, and I don't know

(21:44):
how it's going to play but I can't understand why
why she would have done that.

Speaker 1 (21:48):
James. You know, you laid out a case and the
five points that you made that were they were they
were excellent points to make. But how do we convey
that horrible record on law and order to the American people?
Because you know, the media is not going to do
anything about it. Her campaign's going to hide it as
much as they can. How did the American people find
out about all these things?

Speaker 4 (22:09):
Well, it shows like yours and it's people like me
that write and speak about this. Again, I try to
look at this from the perspective of the biggest responsibility
of the president of the United States is to keep
us safe. Well, when you're dealing with somebody who is
in charge of our two thousand mile border between Mexico

(22:32):
and the southern United States and has basically done nothing
except help with President Biden unravel all the things that
we're working. And I say this as a retired FBI
agent who served as the legal attache down in Mexico City.
I know the border issues very well. And to see
how the successes that were had during the four years

(22:52):
of Donald Trump's presidency and how they were unraveled that
is it is beyond maddening to me. Number Two, how
do you get these some seven hundred and seventy thousand
uniformed men and women in blue who keep all of
us safe at night? How do you get their support,

(23:12):
and there's a vast majority more than that that are
retired or formers. How do you get their support when
you lie and smear some of the actions of these major,
major cases that were incendiary cases, and you pour fuel
on the fire by distorting things and contributing to the
trope that is law enforcement officers hunt people of color

(23:36):
for sport. It's disgusting, it's shameful, and that's what I
just I struggle to reconcile that and understand how anybody
who backs the blue could support this person to be
the most important figure in the world, the President of
the United States, and hope that we're going to return
to law and order, something that in the last couple

(23:57):
of years we've seen has taken a downward turn in
cities across the nation.

Speaker 2 (24:02):
So, finally, final question with your public servant, hat On
as a mayor, as a veteran member of law enforcement,
and all the experience that you've had and everything that
you've just described CNN's headline after the big speeches from
Kamala Harrison Walls yesterday says happy Warriors. Harrison Walls proposed
an anecdote to Trump's American carnage. In your opinion, mister mayor,

(24:24):
what's the Trump carnage looked like in the past compared
to what America looks like today?

Speaker 4 (24:31):
Great question, and I feel like I'm six degrees of
separation from everything. I actually worked at CNN as a
law enforcement analyst for four years. I know the network well.

Speaker 12 (24:41):
I was a law.

Speaker 4 (24:42):
Enforcement analyst there and it was right before, you know,
from twenty sixteen to twenty twenty, right before obviously the
protests and the riots happened. I remember and recall the
American carnage comment from the former president President Trump during
his inauguration speech, and what he was talking about and
referring to was this. And I'll put my academic hat

(25:04):
on really quickly, because I'm a doctoral candidate Saint John's
University in Homeland security. In nineteen ninety, when I arrived
in New York City as a brand new, freshly minuted
FBI agent, New York City had just suffered the peak
of its homicides. A city of you know, eight point
four million people, they had two hundred and sixty two

(25:26):
homicides with broken windows, stop questioning, frisk, with CompStat and
proactive aggressed policing. By twenty eighteen, that number had been
reduced below four hundred. We're now tracking back upwards because
police are not allowed to be proactive. They're not allowed
to go out, seek out the crime, find it, and

(25:48):
stop it by being proactive. They're forced to sit on
their hands and when people commit crimes. The Progressive Prosecutor
Movement Alvin Braggan Manhattan is one of those. They're all
across the nation, in blue cities across the country. They
will just put these people back on the street. That's
the American carnage. And again it might sound like superbly,
but I understand why the former president was using that term.

(26:11):
And I'm hoping that so long as we don't have
a continuation of the last four years, we can start
to turn things around and people can start to feel
safe in the major cities around this country.

Speaker 1 (26:21):
On our newsmaker line, James Cagliano, James, thank you. He
is a retired FBI Supervisory special Agent talking about law
enforcement and Kamala Harris Moore coming up. I'm the Rodin
Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh
five nine knrs.

Speaker 2 (26:36):
And when we come back after the break, we're going
to talk about the boxing all times.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
All kinds of interesting issues on this that are I
think it's still a developing storm.

Speaker 2 (26:44):
I'm going to tell you there's a lot of complexity
to it. But I need we need the callers on
this eight eight eight five seven zero eight zero one
zero when we come back from the break, get your
feedback on it. Yeah, I want to know what you feel,
how you feel because there's been a little bit it's
not just transgender people that think they're they're boys and
think they're girl these boxers is a little bit more
to the story.

Speaker 3 (27:02):
Let's say you I really do want to hear.

Speaker 1 (27:05):
Let's get into this whole Olympic women's boxing controversy that
we talked about. Was it about two weeks ago when
the Olympics started, when this first surface. It's really I
think the controversial controversial issue of the Olympics so far.
I mean, there've been a couple of others, but this one,
Greg continues to dominate the discussion about transgenderism and women

(27:27):
and men and women's sports, and it just goes on
and on, and you know the the the governor sender
Lee Mike Schulz, Stewart Adams called out by one of
the LDS church owned media properties calling them out for
uh spreading misconceptions about that race or about that boxing match.

(27:47):
And then you've got an article today that we need
to pause before we share something that's a very complicated issue.

Speaker 2 (27:54):
It is anybody who wants to say that someone lied
or somebody jumped to conclusions are either tone deaf to
the times that we are living in right now, or
they're trying to pick a fight do the very thing
that they're telling everybody not to do. And I'll tell
you why we are living in a time where transgenderism
is a front burner issue. You have men young men

(28:16):
boys that identify as girls. You have the issue of
sports and how that's all supposed to work out, that
is happening and unfolding in this country in real time.
Then you have the Olympics and you see a boxing
match here and you see someone who is bigger, looks
like a male, and the amateur boxer in forty six

(28:37):
seconds of an amateur bount. Now, I know a little
bit about amateur boxing. You boxed, I know this sport.
You don't see Rod. You don't see amateur boxers get
their nose broken forty six seconds in the first round
of a fight, or you don't see it often. I
haven't seen that kind of injury sustained. Amateur boxing is
more about scoring blows. It's more a pity pat it's

(28:57):
more of a busy sport. It's not like professional boxing.
So when you see someone who looks like a male,
you have this going on. You're told that this fighter
has an X chromosome, that there's a it has maled
that you know, the testosterone levels are high, and and
and the boxer's opponent gets her nose broken in forty
six seconds in the first round. It is not a

(29:20):
large leap. It is not a bridge too far to
object to what happened in that ring that day, and
to have the ensuing debate about this issue.

Speaker 1 (29:29):
Well, there are some in the media who've been defending
these two boxers, one of them of course, from male Jerry,
and I think she or he fight for the gold tomorrow,
if they haven't already done it today, but so we
decided to do some digging into this. She had claimed
that she was raised as a female, always thought of
herself as a female, and that's why she was boxing

(29:50):
in the in the women's sport. Now, the history of
this is what was it a couple of years ago?
What association is that? The International Boxing one of those
organizations I think you know, claims to have tested this
woman named Iman Khali from Algeria and another woman I

(30:11):
think she's from China or Japan and found that they
in fact contained why chromosomes and because of that, greg
they were not allowed to box in this boxing match.
Am I am? I getting that right?

Speaker 4 (30:22):
Now?

Speaker 3 (30:22):
That's correct?

Speaker 14 (30:22):
Right?

Speaker 1 (30:23):
Well, the Olympics took this organization because they thought the
Russians had something to do with it, so called testing,
and kick this association out from the Olympics and they
handle boxing in the Olympics on their own right. And
they say, you know, they've been raised as women, they
fought as women. We have no question about this whatsoever.

Speaker 2 (30:43):
Yeah, it was the International Boxing Association which used to
oversee the Olympics as well as international competition in amateur boxing.
And there was some controversy about their testing of these
these fighters and declaring them boys because of the presence
of an X and a Y chromosome.

Speaker 1 (31:01):
Yeah yeah, And now so we decided to do some
digging into this, and now there is and here's the
question that Greg and I have, and this is where
we want to talk to you about it tonight. The
presence of Y chromosomes. Okay, women have XX, guys have
X Y. The presence of Y chromosomes is responsible for
male development and humans. Although there are rare cases in

(31:25):
which women have X Y chromosomes, having X Y chromosomes
has not been proven to give an advantage to female athletes.
That's where I would disagree Greg. I mean, if you
have that Y chromosome in there, it does it changes things?
And I think it does give you an advantage. Maybe
maybe not. This story said it doesn't, but I wonder

(31:46):
if it does.

Speaker 2 (31:47):
So I don't know if it's been I have looked
at for this issue. I've researched this to try and
find out more about it. It appears that it is
not a transgender issue where someone has just decided that
they were going to identify with a different gender. This
is something uh, the Swires syndrome is I don't know that.
I don't know if that is what these boxers are

(32:08):
claiming that they have. That they were born you know,
with both.

Speaker 3 (32:15):
Plumbing. I don't know what to call it, but anyway,
one doesn't work, one does.

Speaker 2 (32:18):
But they do generate more chromosomes or more testosterone than
a than a woman. Well, look, all I know is
this if you watch the bouts, If you watch these
boxers and you I think you can even fit. You
can see by the way the bouts are being fought,
and you can see in appearance a greater masculinity to

(32:38):
these fighters.

Speaker 4 (32:39):
UH.

Speaker 2 (32:39):
Now, the USA Boxing UH executive director, who I happen
to know, Mike Mcattee. I could actually text him. I mean,
he's a he's a good guy and he works tirelessly
at this. He is saying that, you know, he's been
part of USA Boxing's UH program and has been running
the USA Boxing for UH in three Olympic Games and

(33:00):
to the Games, he has never been aware that these
two boxers, lenn and Khalif, had extraordinary levels of testosterone
when they fought, and he pointed out that they have
had defeats at the hands of women in their amateur
careers and and so he's saying that the information of
increased testosterone, he's as the USA Boxing, he's been unaware

(33:24):
of it. What I would like to ask Mike, and
I haven't before the show or before this segment, is
did they test for it, because.

Speaker 3 (33:31):
It'd be different.

Speaker 2 (33:32):
I don't know, being unaware of it and it being
the case, or if there's been more testosterone because we
live in a political time where you could probably do
that if you wanted to have more testosterone. Now, all
those things could be in play. Bottom line, it comes
down to this for a level playing field and competition.
If you have females that are boxing and you have

(33:54):
a competitor who has more testosterone, even if it's natural syndrome,
which the testosterone is going to with muscle development and
everything else, make you stronger, I think it leads to
the injury. You saw that the Italian boxer suffered at
that first round, betting your nose broken, which doesn't happen
particularly in any amateur boxing, let alone women's boxing.

Speaker 3 (34:17):
You know it's not common. I don't know that that's
a level playing field.

Speaker 1 (34:21):
Yeah, I'm with you on that. I'm with you on
that one. Greg because I think if yes, they may
have been raised as a woman, trained as a woman,
but if they have this this why advantage a little
you know, the extra testosterone in their system because of
this syndrome I think it's called swire or something like
that syndrome. Should they then be allowed to box or

(34:44):
in any competition, be allowed to be in a women's
competition because of that little extra edge that they may have.

Speaker 3 (34:51):
And is it little?

Speaker 15 (34:52):
Is it a little?

Speaker 1 (34:54):
It may not be.

Speaker 2 (34:55):
And so I just think that what you want in
the spirit of competition is a level playing field. You
want everyone to you want that to happen. Look, my daughter,
Sophie played soccer. I'm going to tell you that if
somebody was if there was somebody that was just built
stronger and they had a physical advantage, and my daughter
was harmed over that and it was something that's not appear,

(35:16):
you know, female athlete. As a father, I would be
upset by that. I would be upset by that. So
I'd like to know what the listeners think. I mean, look,
it's okay, it's not a transgender issue, but it's still
pretty complicated and I don't know that it meets the
spirit of competition if someone has an inherent advantage over
other competitors.

Speaker 1 (35:36):
Yeah, So the question is, if a person has this syndrome,
this wire syndrome, they do have extra testosterone because of
the X Y situation that we just described, should they
be allowed to compete in women's competition knowing they may
just have a slight advantage eight eight eight five seven
eight zero one zero triple eight five seven o eight

(35:56):
zero one zero on your cell phone dial pound two fifteen,
say hey, Rod, would love to get your thoughts on
this here on the Rotten Gregg Show and Talk Radio
one oh five nine knrs.

Speaker 2 (36:06):
One sport that's captured everyone's attention on a bunch of
levels is female boxing and the debate. Yeah, the controversy
about two individual boxers who have X and Y chromosomes
and a LART and a higher dose or a higher
level of testosterone than other female boxing boxing competitors, and

(36:26):
whether that's fair or not.

Speaker 4 (36:27):
I do.

Speaker 2 (36:28):
There's been many articles about it, there's been discussion, there's
been a lot of finger wagging, and you know, people
wrapping your knuckles for even bringing it up, as if
you should have never even mentioned it, and it was
it was wrong. To talk about. It isn't wrong to
talk about. It's why we're talking about it. But what's
say you folks in terms of this issue. I don't
think it's a level playing field. It might not mirror

(36:50):
the transgender issue identically, but I do think it's an issue.

Speaker 1 (36:53):
Yeah eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero
on your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say
hey Rod to the phones we go. Case in West
Valley has been waiting patiently to weigh in on this Casey,
thanks for joining the Robin Greg Show. What are your
thoughts on this casey, Rod, Greg.

Speaker 8 (37:09):
Thanks for having me on. As an amateur bodybuilder, I
get a total body scan once a year which measures
my muscle density, my organ density, my bone density, and
it tells me exactly where I'm at pound per pound,
what each thing in my body weighs, and how dense
it is. This would not be overly complicated for the

(37:30):
Olympics to perform on, especially contacts sport athletes. Now, with
the X Y chromosomes being present in a female, that's
going to raise that female's testosterone from her ovaries. A
normal female would be anywhere from zero to about fifty
nanograms per death leader, they're active or pre testosterone in

(37:51):
their blood, This would raise it to over two hundred
sometimes up to four hundred nanograms per death leader, which
is a vast improvement in performance. The world record deadlift
for a woman is six hundred and sixty pounds. She's
two hundred and forty pounds heavier than I am at

(38:12):
two hundred pounds. Mine is five hundred and fifteen. Wow,
that's just because my natural testosterone level is about eight
hundred nanograms per death leader. So for them to just
discount this as a non starter, you can't fault biology.

Speaker 4 (38:29):
No.

Speaker 8 (38:30):
This is why we have weight classes, this is why
we have gender separation. This was not a fair fighte Wow.

Speaker 2 (38:37):
Casey, what a great insight there. That is really good
because what he's saying is, okay, take x y. You
can get down to the density of the muscles. You
can look at that and if that test saucerne is there.
Of course, it makes sense that the world record for
a female is at six sixty and Casey is an
amateur bodybuilders at five point fifteen. I mean, those aren't
Those numbers are not far apart for unless you're asosterone

(39:00):
and you're a male and one an whether you're a
female and grank you for that information.

Speaker 1 (39:05):
Let's go to Ray and Roy. Ray and Roy, that's
not easy to say, right, Thanks for joining us tonight
on the Rod and Gregg Show.

Speaker 12 (39:13):
Uh yeah, kind of echoing in the last part of
what the last colors said there. I mean, there's a
reason they separate men and women's sports, and I mean
they didn't just do it because somebody thought it would
be cool idea or something. There's a real reason to
separate them.

Speaker 4 (39:26):
And as far as when I get out of.

Speaker 12 (39:28):
This argument is there's some nuance to it. It's an xy,
but it's not really full. And I thought everything now
that is all safety first, and every especially Olympics or
whatever they're supposed to be all on on on top
of everything about that kind of stuff. And then so
if there's any doubt or there's any gray area, you
air on the side of safety. I mean, you're talking
about a sport where you're punching people in the head.

(39:50):
Is I think if there's anywhere to err on the
side of caution, it's that.

Speaker 4 (39:53):
Yeah.

Speaker 12 (39:54):
And I mean, furthermore, just to conclude my statement, I
think it's ridiculous that we.

Speaker 11 (39:59):
Even have to.

Speaker 12 (40:00):
I have to be afraid to mention this kind of thing.
I would never bring this up a worker of them,
and I have to be the one afraid of whatever it's.
This is the point our site he's got at where
the normal people have to be afraid to talk to
say common sense, normal things. And I don't know, I'll
let you go on, go on, but it's starting to
get pretty ridiculous that that the common thing is the

(40:22):
ridiculous now.

Speaker 1 (40:22):
So yeah, yeah, Ray, you make a good point. A
matter of fact, we've got a story we may mention
a little bit later on tonight that CEOs are now
being instructed as to how to deal with political discussions
in the workplace. This would be I guess you would
call this as social or political discussion. Greg, you and
I are having a conversation about this.

Speaker 3 (40:40):
That's right.

Speaker 1 (40:41):
Our listeners are listening in. They can join in on
this conversation and give us their take on it. That's
what we need to do is talk about this and
try and figure out a way through it, if that's
even possible.

Speaker 2 (40:51):
And raise points are spot on safety first, air on
the side of safety, this is a contact sport. You
have a difference in weight classes in gender for reasons
those are There are good reasons for those separations of
class and gender, and you've got to make sure it's
it's safe. This article, it says that something about a
lie making its way around the whole the world while

(41:14):
the truth is still getting its boots on, comes to mind.
There's no lie when people are talking about what's wrong
with this? And Ray also talked about the normal people.
Crystal Queen Bee Chrysto calls on the normies. The normies
are just getting ignored out here.

Speaker 1 (41:28):
Yeah, you know, all right, let's go to Skip in
Midvale see what he has to say on this tonight. Skip,
thanks for joining the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 13 (41:36):
So I understand that part of what we agreed to
when we took it on the Olympics is to deal
with doping. The question I pose is how do we
figure out if if they're not doing blood exchanges and
providing the additional hormones and or oxygen levels or whatever
that may be necessary for that individual to win.

Speaker 2 (42:00):
I agree, Skid, I think it gets more and more
complicated as we go on, because I've been worried and
talking about doping. How you scan and make sure that
people don't use performance enhancing drugs. What if you had
the scenario here and you just could raise the testosterone
even in a situation where you have sire syndrome. But

(42:21):
you can now because you think politically or culturally you
can get away with that. You increase your your testosterone
because of that.

Speaker 1 (42:28):
I want to pick up on something our last callers said,
talked about the Olympics and the theme of the Olympics safety.
Another issue though, is inclusion and did inclusion override safety.

Speaker 3 (42:40):
In this the expensive safety at.

Speaker 1 (42:41):
The expensive safety and it may have all right, more
of your calls and comments coming up right here on
the Rod and Greg Show and Utah's Talk Radio one
oh five nine K and arrests live everywhere on the
iHeartRadio app. We're talking about the controversy concerning female or
women's boxing at the Olympics and the argument about these
two boxer who you know, initially a lot of people said,

(43:02):
wait a minute, these are men who are competing in
a women's sport. Well, come to find out these two
were raised as women, as girls, and then of course
women they may have a syndrome which you know gives
them an X Y chromosome or chromosomes, we should say.
And our question is, I think I'm asking this right, Greg,
is does this give women like this a fair advantage?

Speaker 4 (43:26):
You know?

Speaker 1 (43:26):
And how do we deal with this and how do
we treat this? It's a very complicated question.

Speaker 2 (43:31):
It's a rare It's rare in some of the research
we've done. And look, I'm no source on any of this,
but I've just done I've tried to look into this.
It impacts one out of eighty thousand people in the world,
and so it's you know, you do the math. It's
not a ton of people, but it does happen. But

(43:51):
that level of testosterone, I think one of our at
least one of our colors who understands physiology pretty well
in terms of muscle mass and and what tesosrom does,
believes that it is a distinct advantage.

Speaker 1 (44:04):
All right, Let's go to the phones, get more of
your calls and your thoughts on this. Let's go to
Ray and Lee Hide tonight here on the rod On
Greg Show. Hi, Ray, I you know a.

Speaker 15 (44:15):
Lot of the things we're hearing the talking points in
politics right now, is the term common sense when you
look at these kind of issues that's all you need
to apply. Anybody thinks who thinks that the Olympic Boxing
Committee doesn't understand the use of steroids or other performance
enhancing drugs, what our chromosomal makeup is all of these

(44:40):
things go into the testing process, so they know full
well what they're doing. In addition to that, I don't
know if you've noticed this, but every other commercial during
every channel that has the Olympics on is ads for
Kamala Harris. To add to that, you've got professional basketball
players that take up slots that could have been used

(45:02):
for young men that are growing up in the inner city.
In many cases the only way out is through athletics,
basketball being one of them. You don't hear any of
these liberals whining while they're taking these spots and going
over there and basically, you know, trouncing on amateurs. You
don't hear them whining about the slots they're taking.

Speaker 4 (45:23):
We have to wake up.

Speaker 9 (45:25):
This is all politics.

Speaker 15 (45:27):
If you've ever boxed, you know, you know two thirds
of a pound can make the difference between being competitive
with another dude and not every one of the women.
These guys are women fought was beaten. It is true
that they did beat some women earlier in their amateur careers.
But the fact is, you look at any fighter, they're

(45:50):
going to have knockouts and KOs at the hands of
lesser fighters as they progress through the ranks to become
fighters and then professionals. But there's reason why we have
You know, if you're just this last weekend, a guy
was like a pound and a half overweight. It was
a non title fight. That's how serious the pros take

(46:11):
your weight. So for them to act like this is
no big deal is It's ridiculous. It's common sense. The
whole thing should actually be scrapped because it's not right.

Speaker 1 (46:21):
Yeah, common sense is right now. There are some NBA
players who do play in the Olympic teams on other countries,
not to the level that we have on the US team.

Speaker 3 (46:30):
You know, I love Ray's point.

Speaker 2 (46:32):
I mean common sense is is just absent from so
much of the discussion and the narratives and the agendas
today and and and I'll tell you if you were
one of these leftists, even if you have international players
that are NBA, wouldn't you argue for the the down
the inner city kids and the people that are coming
up out of high school playing in college sports to

(46:53):
have this world stage to play. Our college basketball players
are good. You would at least think they would whether
the argument was agreed upon or not. And we left
the NBA players playing in the Olympics, you would think
at least the left to demand that this this issuld
be ignored or not or couching. It is nothing but
bigotry that someone with X and Y chromosomes or fighting women.

(47:17):
You'd think that those same voices would at least be
advocating for, you know, people that less advantage, people being
able to play in the NBA as amateurs.

Speaker 3 (47:26):
Ye, not the NBA, but the basketball.

Speaker 1 (47:28):
Bes the love venue in the Olympics.

Speaker 4 (47:30):
Ye.

Speaker 1 (47:30):
All right, more of your calls and comments coming up
right here on the Rod and Greg Show. Height eight
eight five seven eight zero one zero on your cell
phone dial pound two to fifty and say, hey, Rod,
all right, if you're just joining us now, we're wrapping
up our conversation with you today, and we've appreciate those
of you who have shared your information about the controversy
over what happened in the Olympics and women's boxing. The

(47:52):
of course, focus is on the woman from Algery. I
think the second one from Japan who claim, you know,
who fought as women. Even though a lot of people
raised questions greg as you know about about are they
are they men who are in a women's sport? They
claim they were raised female, that they are female. The

(48:12):
IOC itself says, we, you know, we don't have any question.
We believe their female and they allowed them to box.
And of course it began when an Italian boxer took
on the boxer from Algeria and gave up after forty
six seconds, said she'd never been hit as hard and
raised questions about you know, is is the other box
or a male or female?

Speaker 2 (48:33):
Yeah, and you know, even the Italian boxer was made
to feel guilty for her protest and quitting in that range.
She didn't want to shake hands and she was really upset.
She'd worked hard to get the Olympics and felt like
she ran to a literal brick wall. But she has
since apologized for her conduct and she regrets that she
had done it. What I feel bad is is that
we just live in this is one of the colors

(48:55):
pointed out an era without common sense, where we should
be sympathetic for that Italian boxer and what she went through,
and she shouldn't be made to feel ashamed or upset.
I do think it's unfair. I do think she ran
into a situation that's not competitive. Well think it's unfair
and we had there are you know this.

Speaker 1 (49:14):
You know what's funny about this, Greg, It took the
acceptance of gaze or the gaze in this country and
same sex marriage. It took about forty or fifty years,
Greg for that one to work its way through the
courts and everything else. Right, transgenderism is about five to
ten years old. And look how rapidly that has made
its way into the discussion that we have in America today.

(49:36):
It's pretty amazing it is.

Speaker 2 (49:38):
And again there's no way I just it bothers me
when you see this this finger wagging from this editorial
saying you know it was a lie and you perpetuated
a lie, and you you know you should you should
test what you say, you know, with the standard of
is it nice? And you know they don't. This very
paper doesn't follow that suggestion, by the way. But but

(50:00):
the thing is, in the climate that we are in,
it is one hundred percent understandable that people are confused
and people are asking questions about issues like this, and
they deserve to be asked, and they deserve to be scrutinized.
And you shouldn't be made to feel ashamed to question it,
to not be comfortable with it.

Speaker 3 (50:16):
And and here we go. We're going to be dealing
with this for quite some time.

Speaker 1 (50:20):
Yeah, well, you don't take this takes me back to
the situation involving Natalie Kleine. Remember the Utah State school Board?
Remember that. I mean she you know, a father reached
out to her and said, I see this picture. How
do I raise questions about this one player who I
think may be a boy and not a girl. And
she wrote about that and look what Look what happened

(50:41):
to that. But you've got to be we've got to
be able to ask these questions.

Speaker 3 (50:44):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (50:46):
Look here here, here's the thing is I've heard this
excuse over and over and from politicians, and I've heard like,
you know, you're you're just really going after such a
small group of people. There's just not that many people
that they are going through this that you're targeting. So
you're telling me is if we get eight thousands of
people in this situation, now we can talk about it.
Would it then be more humane to talk about this

(51:06):
is an issue that we should be heading off at
the past.

Speaker 1 (51:08):
Yeah, let's go to Tom and Ogden. He's got a
thought on this tonight as well. Tom, thanks for joining
the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 16 (51:16):
Yeah, just I just had one question. You guys, are
you keep saying the words raised as a female?

Speaker 1 (51:21):
And I'm like like, okay, so, what what does that mean?

Speaker 16 (51:27):
I mean that that mean? I mean if I'm raised
as a dog? Am I a dog?

Speaker 9 (51:32):
And me bond?

Speaker 4 (51:33):
Yeah?

Speaker 16 (51:34):
I mean that doesn't I mean what Basically, nobody's asked
the most basic question of all I'm the I don't
and I don't know if it even knows, and I'm
not sure I even want to know. But on the
genitalia side, like you can be raised one way? What
how are you born? How did you come into this world?

Speaker 13 (51:51):
Which which goes.

Speaker 16 (51:52):
Down the scientific side of testosterone and all the things
that you've already talked about.

Speaker 4 (51:56):
But I go, I go.

Speaker 16 (51:57):
But somebody's saying I was raised this way. I'm like, okay,
well that's something professional.

Speaker 1 (52:04):
Yeah what does that mean? Good point? What does it
mean to be raised?

Speaker 4 (52:06):
Is?

Speaker 17 (52:07):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (52:07):
And and and this is this swire syndrome. It's different.

Speaker 2 (52:10):
That is where that came into play is that at
birth there was some differences in this and these babies
that are born where they have plumbing, you know, body parts,
and so that that's what that goes on. But the
existence of the excellent wife chromoson I think answers it.
But if you want to get more technical, we've had
colors point out you can you can look at density
of muscle, you can look at all kinds of variables

(52:30):
that will show you whether there is a fair competition
happening or not. And the presence of testosterone gives a
female athlete a far greater advantage. And I mean I
don't have to be a doctor to know that. It's
pretty obvious. I've gone back and forth. I was when
I was young, you know, I was an editorial editor
for Utah Valley then State College and yeah, and World

(52:52):
according to Greg was my column and and I I
was I was pro death penalty, and and I went
through a time as a as a state lawmaker where
I became more distrustful of government. It's processes and who
gets the death penalty and who does and who doesn't.
And it didn't feel like it was very even handed,

(53:13):
which led to suspicion or cynicism on my part, and
so I became more of a critic of the death penalty.
But I have just as you're open to new ideas
and continuing to learn, especially in the times we're living
in now, where I find this there is soft on crime,
or that there is no crime, and just seeing what's

(53:35):
going on in this world. The concerns I have about
the death penalty, if it can be used to even
leverage someone's guilty flee to get closure, to get confessions,
if if we can see justice served in a time
where it just doesn't seems as it doesn't seem possible.
I'm actually I'm back.

Speaker 3 (53:55):
I'm back. I'm back. I'm back with it death only.
I'm okay with it again.

Speaker 1 (53:58):
I was trying to figure out what you were saying.
I was about to ask you, are you in favor
or against that?

Speaker 3 (54:02):
I'm back, I'm in favor of it.

Speaker 4 (54:04):
I am.

Speaker 2 (54:05):
I still hold that I still hate sentencing hearings. Once
you've been found guilty in a capital murder k or
a capital crime where they're seeking the death penalty, if
you've been found guilty, that ought to be it.

Speaker 3 (54:17):
I don't even know.

Speaker 2 (54:18):
Once you've been found guilty, you have some sentencing hearing
where the victim's family gets up and testifies, and then
the convicted's family gets up and testifies, asking for mercy,
and then the judge the jury decides on what is it?

Speaker 3 (54:30):
Sympathy, is it what?

Speaker 2 (54:31):
And that's where women don't aren't sentenced to death as
often as men. There's all these different variables that find
their way into a decision like that. I say it
ought to be if you're going for the death penalty,
it ought to be even handed and you should get
it if you've been found guilty.

Speaker 1 (54:45):
Well, my take on it is this greg and it's
pretty pretty simple to be real, honest, I just feel
that I support the death penalty. I'm like you, but
I don't know if it's that much of a deterrent anymore,
if it was it originally meant to be a deterrent,
because I don't believe it is a deterrent anymore because

(55:05):
of the appeals process and how many years it takes
to carry it out. I remember a couple of years ago,
and I think it was in California, there was a
drive underway in California to allow a death row inmate
to make I think it was three appeals, and after
those appeals were exhausted, you would carry out the execution right,
and I think it failed. If you're going to have

(55:26):
a death penalty, then let's use the death penalty and
do not let it drag out on and on again.
And I'm with you the poor families of these victims,
you know, who have to keep on showing up at
course cases and track this to make sure justice is
carried out. To me, it's just not fair.

Speaker 2 (55:43):
And I listeners, don't get me wrong, I'm not a
bleeding heart on this. What really fires me up is
when I see a crime so heinous that if there
is a death penalty and it's not applied to someone
who's murdered their own wife pregnant wife, shoved her and
a mattress and put her out in the landfill, if
that person isn't sentenced to death, then what do you have?

Speaker 1 (56:04):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (56:04):
Then to me, you don't have it.

Speaker 2 (56:06):
I just don't even understand how some are getting away
with not having that done or not getting the death penalty,
and others are. I think it ought to be uniformly
applied and be fair. And that's that's really been my
concern with it.

Speaker 1 (56:19):
It takes too long, and that's my argument is simply, now,
would it change things if, like I said, you had
three appeals or there was a certain amount of time
put on it. You know that you could appeal, but
they exhaust these appeals time and time again, and it
costs the state. Now, what I don't understand on this,
greg is you will hear that the cost of an

(56:41):
execution is more than incarcerating that convicted murder.

Speaker 6 (56:46):
Is that right?

Speaker 1 (56:46):
I mean, you may have some insight into this, but
why does it cost so much for an execution? I
don't get that.

Speaker 2 (56:52):
So, you know, I've seen the numbers vary, and depending
on what side of this issue you stand on your count,
you're counting different ways. But in this case, I think
it's twenty five years that this was being from being
found guilty. Today you're looking at this gentleman that's going
to be executed, it's twenty five years. The argument of

(57:14):
why it should take so long is that they should
have due process, that every legal option that any citizen
would have they should have as well. But when you
look at something that is now into the decades. You
can reasonably argue that that has been drug along far
too long for everyone everyone involved. It doesn't seem to
be a humane way to go. And so I think

(57:35):
that you should be able to see due process. None
of your constitutional protections and rights should be infringed upon,
but you should have an expedited process to get that
through so that you can get to the end of
the row, whatever that decision may be, through the courts.

Speaker 1 (57:50):
Well there it was I noticed in this in looking
back and doing some research this it was only what
about three years ago, As I recalled greg there were
some Utah process uters who went to the state to
try and abolish capital punishment in the state. The bill
would have replaced the death sentence and death sentence with
a forty five years to life prison term, but have

(58:11):
failed to pass out of the committee. So my senses
up on Utah's Capitol Hill, you would have a better
read for on this than I would. Utah all achers
still favor of the death penalty.

Speaker 4 (58:21):
They do.

Speaker 2 (58:22):
I grappled with this when I was Speaker of the House.
The Senate actually passed getting rid of the death penalty
out of the Senate and send it over to the
House and we had it on the last night of
the session. There wasn't the votes to pass it, and
I again I was a bit suspicious of our government
processes with all of this. But I've just got to
tell you that we are bending over backwards as a

(58:47):
society for the criminals. The criminals are now the victims.
The criminals are the ones that we're staring at. The
victims of crimes are in the back seat. We are
seeing a lawless society that's growing and growing and growing.
And the last place that I'm worried about out right
now is in moments like this because, as I've spoken
with law enforcement and even county prosecutors and das, just

(59:07):
the prospect that you could pursue the death penalty if
you don't get some cooperation from a suspect has brought confessions,
has brought closure, has brought convictions that didn't actually end
in the death penalty, but just the prospect of it,
the existence of it, and and and the ability to
go there absolutely has it has it has it has

(59:33):
brought closure to confessions for crimes, heinous crimes because they
took the death penalty off the table to get to
that that conviction, and so to lose that tool for
for prosecutors and law enforcement to lose that tool, it's
not a it's not a fair trade off.

Speaker 4 (59:49):
You know what.

Speaker 1 (59:51):
We have been debating this in this state for a
long long time. You know, you many of you may
remember that after the Supreme Court allowed the death penalty
to go forward, Utah was the first state to carry
it out. This was back in nineteen seventy six with
Gary Gilmour. So you know, Utah has had this and
has worked this over the years. The question would be

(01:00:11):
have we softened. I don't think we have. I mean,
I haven't changed my position. You did a little bit,
but then you've come back to your position now, and
i'd like to, you know, let's open up the phones
on this ones tonight eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero eight eight eight five seven eight zero
one zero, or on your cell phone dial pound two fifty,
and say, hey, Rod, what is your position now on

(01:00:31):
the death penalty? Has it changed?

Speaker 2 (01:00:33):
Yeah, it's a good question. I think that there's been
more debate of it about it lately. You have some
libertarian organizations that have really pushed against the death penalty.
But I again, I on the whole, on the whole,
it is. It is an It is a tool that
that law enforcement and prosecutors have to find justice, to
seek justice, and when we do see justice because these

(01:00:56):
things are here, think about the putting these families through
these long situations and on and on. Byway, I think
it's I think that it's it's it's not something that
you love. By the way, maybe when we come back,
I'll tell the story about when I voted when there
was the bill to get rid of the firing squad,

(01:01:16):
and I was the loan vote to keep the firing squad.

Speaker 1 (01:01:19):
Yeah, I was a freshman lawmaker. My question is do
prosecutors want this taken away? Do they want it off
the table? Because sounds like they use it.

Speaker 3 (01:01:27):
They do, they do.

Speaker 2 (01:01:28):
And I've seen even from what you would consider maybe
more left of center prosecution offices of prosecutors who want
this tool at their disposal.

Speaker 1 (01:01:38):
Yes, all right, your calls, your thoughts on this. It's
been what what do we say since nineteen ninety nine,
since we've had an execution in this state twenty ten,
is that.

Speaker 3 (01:01:48):
What it was would mark the first execution of the
state since twenty ten.

Speaker 1 (01:01:51):
Twenty ten. All right, fourteen years ago eight eight eight
five seven eight zero one zero, or on your cell phone,
I'll pound two fifteen and say, hey, Rod, your thoughts
on the execution. We're about to carry one out here
in the state of Utah in less than six hours.
Your calls and comments coming up right here on the
Roden Grade Show. We've kind of framed this issue. Let's
go to our good callers, and let's go to Carl
in provo. Carl, welcome to the show. Thanks for joining us.

(01:02:13):
What's say you? Thank you very much.

Speaker 9 (01:02:17):
You know, I think the death sentence actually saves lives
because the people who are inclined to commit murder like
that would think twice if they thought they were going
to get the death sentence instead of just life in prison. However,
that being said, this hony guy, he did. What he
did was terrible, and he got sentenced to life. I

(01:02:37):
don't know if I would execute him. He's shown him
to be a pretty good model prisoner and tried to
be good and do good things while he's been in
prison over the last several years. I think it would
I would despair his life and let him continue to
be of good service. That's my feeling about him.

Speaker 1 (01:02:54):
What kind of service has he done on the edge
on this phone? Yeah, Carl, but what kind of service
has he done that you think warns him staying alive?

Speaker 9 (01:03:04):
You know, I can't specifically say. I was just looking
at the witness of some of the people that have
talked about him, some of the prison guards that have
been around him. He's been a model prisoner. He's been
cooperative and so forth. He hasn't He doesn't look like
he was proud of his crime. I don't know for sure, Rod,
I can't give you an intimate detail in this man's life.
I'm telling you from kind of a disadvantage point. He

(01:03:25):
doesn't seem to be like a Gary Gilmore or.

Speaker 1 (01:03:29):
Well, I'm sorry there, Carol cuss out there.

Speaker 2 (01:03:31):
No, that's a great point looking in there. That's the
humanity's side of it. Look at he's trying to be
a model prisoner. And and I just the tough, the
moral dilemma you have in a moment like that is
to the families, the victims family, When does when does what?
Bar are you meeting? And his objective and and and
those things. It's it's just it's it's why it's a

(01:03:51):
tough is show.

Speaker 4 (01:03:52):
One.

Speaker 1 (01:03:52):
Let's go to Lorraine in West Haven tonight here on
the Rod and Gregg Show. Hi Lorraine, how are you?

Speaker 4 (01:04:00):
Oh?

Speaker 14 (01:04:00):
So I had drastically changed my mind on the death
penalty once I had a family. Was definitely a bleeding
heart liberal before then, once we started seeing that trend
of egregious, horrible, heinous crimes and in Utah, I changed
my mind and definitely thought the death penalty was applicable. However,

(01:04:22):
I want to see swift justice. If we're going to
condemn people to death for their crimes, why are they
allowed to sit on death row at the taxpayer's expense
for years on end trying to litigate out of that.

Speaker 8 (01:04:35):
Let's deal with it.

Speaker 14 (01:04:37):
And to the previous Colors point, he wouldn't have had
an opportunity to demonstrate model prisoner behavior if we had
taken care of him within six months to a year
of his death penalty. Why is that allowed to drag on?

Speaker 18 (01:04:52):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (01:04:52):
Yeah, a good point. I mean, I'm with you, Lorraine.
I like the idea of swift justice. If you've been
found guilty, the evidence is clear cut, I mean, beyond
a shadow of doubt. Guess what carry out the death penalty.

Speaker 2 (01:05:04):
So we see there are times where courts expedite cases.
I mean you see them in elections, you see them.
You'll see this happen a lot. You'll see cases that
make their way to a supreme court state or the
US Supreme Court in a very quick manner because the
issue requires it. I think this is one of those
issues that should be done, that should be expedited so
that it's not drug along. I do think twenty five

(01:05:26):
years is a mockery at all. I don't think anybody
has served well when it's a twenty five year incubation
period from sentencing to.

Speaker 3 (01:05:35):
Execution.

Speaker 1 (01:05:36):
You know, and you know, Greg, I just think about
the families, the victims' families, and what they go through
and the waiting and the waiting and you know, if
there's a hearing, they have to go to the hearing.
It just you know, it's got to be hard on families.
First of all, the loss of a loved one and
in many cases in a violent way, and then have
to sit and wait for justice to be carried out.

(01:05:59):
How long do you have to wait?

Speaker 3 (01:06:01):
That's right?

Speaker 2 (01:06:01):
And then and then when you get into scenarios where
you got a one of the worst serial killers we've
ever heard.

Speaker 3 (01:06:09):
Jeffrey Dahmer.

Speaker 1 (01:06:09):
Okay, oh yeah, that guy.

Speaker 2 (01:06:11):
They didn't have a death penalty in that state, so
that guy's not subject to it. Talk about a guy
that's probably in front of the line, who should have
been so much so that when he got to prison,
they decide, the prisoners decided to do it. He didn't
even last long in prison because he's such a horrific killer,
serial killer. But even that where some in some states
they have it, where others they don't. I don't like

(01:06:33):
the sporadic or they're the less than consistent application.

Speaker 1 (01:06:37):
Back to the phones. Let's talk with Dane in West
Valley tonight here on the Rowden Gregg Show. Hi, Dane,
how are you. Thanks for joining us, Jane.

Speaker 18 (01:06:45):
I'm doing good. Thanks for having me on. I just
think there's an argument to be made for well, let
me give you this question. What do you consider the
worst thing that could happen to you is a death?
Because I don't so for me, there's an argument be
made that the site for being humane could actually be

(01:07:08):
ending the life of someone who doesn't want to, or
that more punishment is languishing in prison. For a longer term,
that sometimes getting them on with their eternal life and
moving them on to the next is more humane than
than keeping them around and keeping them sitting there. And
then also the argument of the taxpayer dollar.

Speaker 2 (01:07:32):
Look, I've actually thought this trust It made me sound crazy,
but I've thought about what Danas said, and I've said, Look,
if we get back to breaking rocks, if you could
put them in some some stripes and put them out
there in the West desert making break rocks every day
of their life till the till they meet their maker,
maybe that would be the more Uh, there would be more.

Speaker 3 (01:07:47):
Justice to that.

Speaker 2 (01:07:48):
But you know, three hots and a cot, some TV,
some hanging out. I I don't know, ye, I don't.
I don't know, but I think Dane, I think that
point is brought up. If I felt like prison could
be a place where that punishment's met and then you
then you meet your maker for the punishment in the
next life.

Speaker 3 (01:08:04):
Maybe that's the case.

Speaker 2 (01:08:05):
And again I'm sensitive to the taxpayer dollars, but I
think that that with that autumn mean is that that
we see this adjudicated in a much quicker way.

Speaker 1 (01:08:14):
You see right now, all right, mar your calls coming
up here on the Rod on Greg Show eight eight
eight five seven eight zero one zero triple eight five
seven o eight zero one zero in less than six
hours now, of course, the execution of U Taberon Honey
will take place here in the state of Utah. A
lot of coverage on that tonight. Has been quite a
while since Utah has carried out the death penalty. We're

(01:08:35):
getting your reaction to it. Eight eight eight five seven
eight zero one zero, triple eight five seven eight zero
one zero on your cell phone. Just dial pound two
fifty and say hey Ron, Greg and I are just
talking about the death penalty. We're both supporters of it.
We have some issues with it, but we want to
see what you have to say as well tonight telephone
eight eight eight five seven oh eight zero one zero

(01:08:57):
or on your cell phone. All you do is have
to dial pound two fIF fifty and say hey Rod,
that's pound two fifty and say hey Rod. We want
to go back to your calls right now, and let's
go to Anne, who's in Twila tonight here on the
Rod and Greg Joe, Hi, end, how are you, Hi?

Speaker 15 (01:09:14):
How are you?

Speaker 1 (01:09:14):
We're doing just fine?

Speaker 4 (01:09:15):
Thank you.

Speaker 14 (01:09:18):
Good?

Speaker 19 (01:09:19):
I served as a juror on a murder trial, and
whenever this conversation.

Speaker 17 (01:09:25):
Comes up about the rights of the criminal, the real
problem is we're not considering nor did that person consider
the rights of the individual that they killed.

Speaker 19 (01:09:42):
And all that they denied them. So let's let's do
the steeds on behalf of the person that he killed
and robbed of their life.

Speaker 4 (01:09:53):
And that's all.

Speaker 3 (01:09:54):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:09:54):
Ad what a perspective has it served as a juror
and would have would have a perspective I certainly don't have.
And I do think that in society in general, we
are forgetting about the real victims and making victims out
of criminals.

Speaker 1 (01:10:07):
Yeah, and generally you've made that point before, and that's
a good point to make.

Speaker 2 (01:10:10):
I love the calls, appreciate the audience. You're the smartest
audience in all the land. Let's go to Tyrone in
West Jordan. Tyrone, thank you for calling into the program.

Speaker 3 (01:10:19):
What say you, sir?

Speaker 13 (01:10:23):
Yeah, I say, I'm kind of with you.

Speaker 19 (01:10:26):
Guys.

Speaker 20 (01:10:27):
Is I would say, get a little bit more aggressive
with it, but it's got to be totally black and white,
like we've seen them on camera do the crime very heinous.
Ninety day thing, cut and dry, No, twenty five years,
nothing like that.

Speaker 13 (01:10:44):
And if they're just.

Speaker 20 (01:10:45):
Prisoners or whatever, then I don't know, maybe we just
build a little factory and send them up to the
oil fields and get cheaper gas instead of putting them
in a penitentiary.

Speaker 2 (01:10:58):
I've always been for breaking the road going and doing
some hard labor if they're going to have to be around.
I mean, I agree with you, Tyrone, Thank you for
the call. This is how ridiculous, how the time takes.
You have people that have been on death row that
are passing away from natural causes. It's a bit ridiculous.

Speaker 4 (01:11:14):
Yea.

Speaker 2 (01:11:16):
The last two, Ronald Lafferty and as Floyd Mayths both
died of natural causes. The other two and that was
in twenty seventeen. Two former death row and mates before
that also died of natural causes, so they never saw
their sentences happen. I just think if you're passing away
from natural causes before the justice can be delivered, then

(01:11:39):
that's undermining the system.

Speaker 4 (01:11:41):
You know.

Speaker 1 (01:11:41):
This thought just came to me, and I may be
totally off on this when Greg, but it almost appears
that we are treating people who are convicted of killing
somebody else, They have shelter, they get three meals a day.
There are a lot out there, and we've got hundreds
of homeless people on the street and we're doing anything
about it.

Speaker 3 (01:12:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:12:01):
Well, I.

Speaker 3 (01:12:03):
Three hots and a cot, that's what they call it.
It's a good life.

Speaker 4 (01:12:06):
I get.

Speaker 2 (01:12:07):
I look, I just think that I think the colors
are right. I think it's how I feel. I've, like
I said, I've changed my position on this over time.
I was for it, then I was cynical about it all,
and I'm back to being a supportive again, but with
some changes. I do think it needs to be uniformly applied.
I think justice needs to be just. I think it

(01:12:28):
needs to be uniformly applied, and I also think that
it needs to be expedited and there needs to be
swift justice because this process that we're watching right now,
it's it. I don't think it serves anyone anyone involved.

Speaker 1 (01:12:42):
Yeah. The question I have about this, and we've touched
on this briefly already, Greg, the cost of simply carrying
out an execution. You know, you're locking down the state prison.
They're locking down the prison down there in Gunniston. You've
got you know you've got you know, police officers all
over the place. You know, the cost to me just
seems ridiculous. And I don't have all the details of

(01:13:04):
what it caused to carry out an execution, but I
know the number is very high.

Speaker 2 (01:13:08):
So you know, we're one of the few states that
that gave the option of a firing squad. And there
was a bill when I was a freshman lawmaker that
I was the loan vote against making it. I did
not want to get rid of the firing squad. I'm figuring, Look,
it's it's an execution. And to your point about costs
and everything else, just anyway, that Daily Show and tell.

Speaker 1 (01:13:32):
The story because you after it was known that you
were in favor, the only one in favor of a
firing squad, you got a call from John Stewart in
the Daily.

Speaker 2 (01:13:39):
Show, that National show, and their producer called me and said,
Representative Hughes, I understand you voted to keep the firing squad.

Speaker 3 (01:13:46):
Yes, I did. You're the only one in your body
that voted that way. Yes, I am.

Speaker 2 (01:13:51):
Can you explain that position? I said, I sure can.
I'll do it through a show I like called All
in the Family.

Speaker 3 (01:13:58):
Edith bunker. She took quote her.

Speaker 2 (01:14:01):
I quoted he this bunker and saying, and she said,
I'm for the death penalty so long as it's not
too violent. And I think, there go, that is the
essence of it. Okay, the executing someone is inherently violent,
and I don't think we have to worry about offending
anyone's sensitivities. Once you've decided someone's going to be executed,
so let it.

Speaker 3 (01:14:21):
Let it be.

Speaker 2 (01:14:21):
Let it let it be by firing squad. Let it
be an execution. I at that point, what are you
gonna do put You're gonna put some oil or some
alcohol swab on before you inject the lethal injection. You're
gonna put some alcohol in there. No, So I just
think I didn't I didn't have any problem with the
firing squad. I don't think it's a I think if
you're going to have an execution, have it you got

(01:14:42):
to put on TV. Wow, Yeah, let people know. Let
people know what you're doing. I think, if you're gonna
do it, make sure people know.

Speaker 1 (01:14:52):
If if you put it on television can turn public
opinion against.

Speaker 2 (01:14:55):
It or people maybe it's a higher debt, Maybe it
becomes a deterrent. Maybe it maybe if someone looks at
it and goes, I don't want to do that.

Speaker 1 (01:15:04):
Do you have all do you have any details about
what takes place on a fire Rainge squad? Because I
was always told there were ten ten people and there
would be one bullet, and none of them knew which
had the I.

Speaker 2 (01:15:15):
Think there's I think someone has a blank. I think
there's more bullets and more than those blanks, so no
one knows if they were the one that had the
blank versus the bullet.

Speaker 3 (01:15:24):
And that's how they all kind of.

Speaker 1 (01:15:25):
That's how they work it. Yeah, never knew. All right,
more coming up final segment of the Rod and Greg
Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine a NRS. There were five executions in twenty twenty.
I think I've got this ready ray and four point
seven million dollars was spent on carrying out those executions.

Speaker 2 (01:15:45):
Yeah, federal executions, federal And this goes to a point
that that I want to make, and that is these
fiscal notes and the costs, Okay, because that becomes a
big part of the discussion on executions and death penalties,
executions in federal prison. The estimated cost for the five
executions four point seven million. Now go on over there

(01:16:07):
to North Carolina. You know, you know what the price
tag is down there the South. It's sixteen thousand, seven
hundred bucks per execution at tally.

Speaker 3 (01:16:17):
So you know they got they got the blue Light.

Speaker 2 (01:16:19):
Special in North Carolina for the executions at sixteen thousand,
seven hundred, and you got nearly a million dollars in
execution in federal a federal you know, inmate. So sometimes
I worry that fiscal notes on the cost of an
execution might come down to the people counting the dollars
and what it costs. There might be a broader point

(01:16:41):
that's trying to be made there that whether it's they
should have them or not, cost prohibitive or not, and
so that can seep its way into some of these numbers.
It's hard to believe that one costs a million and
the other cost sixteen thousand, and you're doing the same thing.

Speaker 1 (01:16:56):
But housing an inmate cost fifty one thousand regardless. Okay,
so you're looking twenty five years, maybe someone's convicted and
they're in prison until they die. Fifty one thousand dollars
per year a lot of money.

Speaker 2 (01:17:09):
It is, And I actually, like I said, I think
we should have some hard labor going on in there.
I think they had to break rocks.

Speaker 3 (01:17:17):
I really do.

Speaker 1 (01:17:18):
Yeah, you you're right. Well, we'll see what happens. I mean,
it's a little bit more than five hours from now, Yeah,
shortly after midnight.

Speaker 2 (01:17:27):
The only thing that gets a little gruesome is if
they these things go wrong, Like, this is the last
thing you want.

Speaker 1 (01:17:32):
You don't want to go wrong. There have been a
few cases in there, Yeah, there have been a few cases.

Speaker 4 (01:17:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:17:37):
They use a new lethal injection chemical or something, and
all of a sudden, it doesn't it doesn't go right.
That's what you don't want to because even the people
that witness it, you gotta have witnesses. You don't want
to stain their brains for the rest of their lives
over this whole thing. I mean, it's already an unseemly
it's already a tough deal, already tough.

Speaker 13 (01:17:53):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:17:53):
Yeah, you don't want to you don't want to make it.

Speaker 1 (01:17:55):
Worse, all right. A couple of other notes that we
didn't bring up today, you know stories that are out there.
First of all, the how are we going to do
this great? All right? The Biden administration has now apparently
declared war on plastic silverware. So in what they're trying

(01:18:16):
to do, in any federal building that you go into,
right and maybe they have a lunch room, you will
not be able to use plastic silverware. Not sure what
you'll use. Maybe maybe your hands, maybe your fingers.

Speaker 2 (01:18:30):
They're gonna have, they're gonna have cutlery and then wash
it for me to eat off of them.

Speaker 3 (01:18:34):
Yeah, that's about right.

Speaker 1 (01:18:35):
Yeah, that's what they're trying to do.

Speaker 2 (01:18:36):
You know, while the government keeps getting dumber. Do you
know who gets smarter? John Fetterman from the senator from Pennsylvania.

Speaker 3 (01:18:44):
Do you know of him?

Speaker 2 (01:18:46):
Well, yeah, he's still kind of easy to make fun
of it. I will tell you that since he went
in for psychiatric treatment. Okay, do you remember he had
to leave the Senate and he had to go away
for a while.

Speaker 1 (01:18:55):
He had just suffered a stroke.

Speaker 2 (01:18:57):
Yes, well, he had a stroke and then he got
came back and he somehow still won as a stroke victim.
But he won, but he came back, and I swear
to you he's talking more common sense, he's more he's
he doesn't understand why Senator Goldbar Menendez is still sitting
in the Senate rips on him. Okay, he loves to

(01:19:20):
show the Israeli flag to the pro Hamas protesters likes
to tount him and show him the flag. He waves
it outside of his house at him when they try
to intimidate him. And now just breaking news he is
saying today, I guess in an interview, he's saying Pennsylvania
predicting John Senator John Fetterman predicts in Pennsylvania that former

(01:19:40):
President Trump will win Pennsylvania.

Speaker 1 (01:19:44):
Nice because Josh Shapiro's not on the ticket.

Speaker 2 (01:19:46):
Yeah, behind it, I don't know, because the story goes
that he's the one that dissuaded Klina Harris from picking
Josh Shapiro. But now he's saying he's predicting a Pennsylvania
win for President Trump. See the guy's getting You're getting smarter.

Speaker 1 (01:20:01):
See it's getting smarter.

Speaker 2 (01:20:03):
I don't you know, just don't know why. But that
psychiatric treatment really went far. We got we got a
lot of mileage out of that. You've got to think, Greg,
and you're from Pennsylvania, you know you grew up there.

Speaker 1 (01:20:14):
You know this is the state. How much is of
a role does fracking play big in that state? I
mean it's big, big, big in Pennsylvania.

Speaker 4 (01:20:22):
Yes.

Speaker 1 (01:20:22):
Uh, and you've got Kamala Harrison. I want to get
rid of it. Yeah, for somebody like that.

Speaker 3 (01:20:27):
And look, you know, they they lie.

Speaker 2 (01:20:32):
They tell you they're when they are when they are,
when they are running in Pennsylvania, they say they're for it.
As soon as they get elected, they go against it.
And then if they have to run for reelection or
a new one comes up, they change their position again
and say they're for it until they get elected, then
they're against it again. Obama played that game, yeah, and uh,
and he won some of the rural counties that were,

(01:20:53):
you know, natural resource rich, and like there's a county
in Pennsylvania called Washington County Obama wanted the first time
in two thousand and eight. I think in twelve he
lost it because he wasn't truthful about his position on.

Speaker 1 (01:21:05):
Well, speaking of franking, good friend Steve Moore, who I
hope to we hope to have on the show this tomorrow.
He's with the Committee to Unleash Prosperity. Well known economists
right his website today had this story about natural gas.
Get this Greg because of modern drilling technologies, including horizontal
drilling and fracking. Natural gas is now cheaper than bottled water.

Speaker 2 (01:21:31):
And by the way, that has low emissions. If everybody's
so worried about carbon emissions. We have enough reserves in
Utah that we could be Utah energy independent if we
were using gas all by ourselves. It's massive, massive reserves.

Speaker 1 (01:21:43):
Clean, clean burning fuel. And they, you know, and here
are the crazies, and they just want to get we
could use it for cars, you could use it for everything.
And whatever happened to that. There's a big push in
one time natural gas powered cars. It kind of went away.

Speaker 2 (01:21:56):
Because the lefties said, you're still drilling. It's still extraction.
Now you can you can extract for the lithium and
the batteries and everything, and they don't have a problem
with that.

Speaker 3 (01:22:03):
But you can't.

Speaker 2 (01:22:04):
You can't drill for natural gas, even if it's low emission,
and it would be a less expensive fuel for your vehicle.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Rod and Greg Show: The Olympic Women's Boxing Scandal; Death Penalty in Utah

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes