April 20, 2025 • 38 mins
A legal victory for cannabis sales in Colorado Springs sets the stage for a wide-ranging discussion about democracy, military welfare, and the erosion of constitutional norms. As Dick and Adam celebrate the implementation of voter-approved cannabis sales despite city council resistance, they unpack how this local triumph illustrates the importance of honoring democratic processes.
The conversation takes an unexpected but illuminating turn when examining military politics through a veteran's lens. Drawing from their personal experiences, the hosts debunk the common misconception that Republican administrations better serve military members. The reality? Democratic presidents have historically provided larger and more frequent pay raises for service members, while increased military budgets under Republican leadership predominantly benefit defense contractors rather than improving troop welfare or family support.
Particularly troubling are recent Pentagon policy changes, including the elimination of family days under Secretary Hegseth – a move that the hosts argue will decrease rather than increase military readiness. Even more alarming is the potential reduction of sexual assault prevention programs despite the staggering statistic that one in four military women experience some form of sexual assault or harassment.
The heart of the episode examines what may prove to be a constitutional turning point – the administration's defiance of a unanimous Supreme Court ruling to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia from El Salvador. This direct challenge to judicial authority, coupled with the firing of a Department of Justice lawyer for honest courtroom representation, signals a dangerous testing of constitutional boundaries. As the hosts note, this case represents how authoritarianism creeps in gradually, targeting vulnerable populations first before expanding its reach.
Join us weekly for "Kilmar Watch" as we track this developing constitutional crisis and continue examining political issues through the unique perspective of military veterans who understand both the importance of chain of command and the paramount value of protecting constitutional democracy.
https://bsky.app/profile/leftfaceco.bsky.social
https://www.facebook.com/epccpv
www.EPCCPV.org or info@epccpv.org
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hello everyone and welcome to another episode of
Left Face.
This is the podcast that coverspolitical topics through the
veteran's lens in Colorado, andspecifically the Pikes Peak
region a beautiful Pikes Peakhere and I'm your co-host, dick
Wilkinson, and I'm joined thismorning with Adam Gillard
Morning.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Dick, how are you?
Speaker 1 (00:19):
doing.
I am doing great.
I am excited about the episodetoday.
We're going to start local andmove to international, but let's
start with local.
It's something we've covered onthe show quite a bit.
The adult use of cannabis andcannabis sales in Colorado
Springs has crossed the line,yeah, so congratulations.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Adam Woo-hoo.
Yeah, get one of those littlepoppers.
Yeah, we need one of those.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
With green confetti in it, right.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Right.
Oh, it's funny because, likesome folks you know reached out
and like asked for comments andlike I don't really care so much
about, like the retail, thesales and stuff like that, but
for me it was a thing for avoice of the people thing and
then just a common sense, likeso now, like cool, it's done,
now we got to get to the otherside and make sure that we hold
the cannabis industryaccountable and the money is
(01:09):
coming in and you know, makingsure that you know just things
are done above board and, yeah,done properly, because any
little slip up and we know thatcity council is waiting yes,
that's true, that's very true.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
My neighbor, um, I talked to him a couple days ago
and I guess it was on the dateso legal sales for adult over 21
years old started on Tuesdayhere in Colorado Springs.
Not all the shops in town havetheir licenses to be able to do
both types of sales medical oradult use but over 20 do.
But over 20 do.
(01:43):
And my neighbor I was surprisedto hear that he knew more about
the basically the vote and thecity council part of the story
than I would have expected himto.
He does use cannabis, he's amedical card holder, but he knew
that like the city was tryingto overturn the vote and that
this next vote thing was comingup and how that all got
overturned.
(02:03):
He had seen enough mediacoverage of that to know what
was going on.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
So, because it's always a struggle in this town
getting the media coverage onthings like that, yeah, and any
kind of in any kind of positivelight, it really, you know, I'm
not saying spin, it just like behonest with how we present yeah
, yeah and so he knew, he knewthe truth of the story and how
it all went down.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
Yeah, and he understood the um city council
was kind of overstepping theirbounds or being shady and trying
to bring it back onto theballot.
And where would you put him onthe political?
Speaker 2 (02:30):
spectrum um.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
He would be a progressive veteran adam yeah,
he got my card.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
I think he might be a progressive veteran.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
He's a.
He's a former Navy guy, vapatient like us smokes.
I take him to some of myhomegrown every now and then.
But then at the same time he'sa blue-collar kind of guy.
He likes doing that kind ofwork.
So yeah, he's a progressiveveteran, I think.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
What cracks me up is I always kind of view the
enlisted corps as unions likethat.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Blue-collar workers and things like that.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
And to me, like you know, growing up.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
That's exactly what it is.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:09):
Growing up being a union person, we always voted
Democrats.
They took care of us more, butit's just so reversed on the
military side.
Like all these blue-collarworkers, they think that you
know their 2% raise makes up forthe cuts everywhere else yeah.
So it's really tough to kind ofbreak in and like have these
(03:30):
conversations with folks.
So hearing about a progressiveveteran like I always get
excited.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
And you know I'll take a minute to listen to those
in this piece of theconversation a little bit of the
flip around, if you will,inside the military, of the
perception of which party isdoing the best for me as a
service member, or which partycares the most about the
military.
Or and does caring the mostabout the military mean that
(03:54):
military members have betterlives, have better quality of
life, have less danger, haveless likelihood to fight a war
that's not worth fighting?
Right, like those are thethings that I want to measure it
by Right.
But you're right.
The soldier says I'm alwaysforever broke and if I get a
hundred more dollars in mypocket at any point in time, I'm
going to think that was a gooddeal.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Right Fewer handles of liquor.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, fill up my truck tank, gas tank
twice, you know.
So, uh, the but the.
The thing I guess that I wantto mention there is the reality
is and I looked this up and Ithink me and you this was like a
year ago, I looked this upwhere, how have the raises, the
paycheck raises for militarymembers in the modern era, since
(04:36):
, basically after the Civil War,from the Civil War forward,
once we were a union again, howhave pay raises been doled out
right?
By far, the pay raises comefrom democratic presidents more
often than they come fromrepublican presidents.
Military spending may increaseduring a republican
administration, but that moneygoes into the big prime
(04:58):
contractor, right, that goesinto not into the soldier
pockets, yeah, and so, yeah, wemay spend, right, a hundred
billion more dollars on themilitary and you said, well,
that means their life is better.
No, that means there's morebombs in a warehouse somewhere
and that's all that means, right, yeah, yeah, the quality of
life to the service member andespecially to their family
members.
There's no connection betweenincreased military spending
(05:19):
unless you really drill into itand go personnel spending right.
If there's increase inpersonnel spending now, quality
of life is going to change,right, that's it.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
I mean Clinton and Obama both got hammered for
shrinking the size of themilitary.
Yeah, but again you mentionedthat people are still getting
paid better under them.
Yes, but they're starting toget rid of that fraud, waste and
abuse in a logical, fashionablemanner that doesn't destroy our
country.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Right, waste and abuse in a logical, fashionable
manner that doesn't destroy ourcountry.
Right, so that you can increaseyour base pay of all your
enlisted people without havingto increase the overall budget
of the military.
Who would have figured?
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Let's spend money on the things that are most
important and maybe not spend asmuch money on the things we
don't need.
Right now, I don't know, it'scalled like a budget or
something.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Maybe I don't know.
We've had a couple balancedones, yeah.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
So we are biased.
But the pay raises, andespecially the higher pay raises
, the 5%, the 8%, 10% raises,those generally come under
Democratic leadership and ofcourse enlisted folks in the
military aren't paying thatclose of attention to it
honestly.
I mean, I just I was anenlisted guy and I wasn't paying
that close of attention to it.
Honestly, I mean, I just I was.
(06:25):
I was an illicit guy and Iwasn't paying that close of
attention.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
You know like you'll see more of a like when you're
working on.
You know, a 60 year oldaircraft and shit's falling
apart, and then you hear themsaying, oh, we're going to
restrict your maintenance budget.
Yeah, that affects you a lotmore every day, yeah.
So like you hear somebodysaying that and like, oh,
they're trying to take your.
You know, make this this badfor for you.
It's easy to distract peoplewith those things.
It is.
It's so much easier to distractwith the negative stuff than
(06:49):
the positive stuff and thelong-term plan.
People aren't planners.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
Presidential politics and long-term plans are not.
Never the two shall meet.
And then, when your enlistedcontract is two, three, four
years at a time that's also nota super long-thinking time frame
of how's this nextadministration going to treat me
?
That doesn't matter.
If you're only on a four-yearhook for now, you don't know if
you're going to do a career.
You don't think about thosethings.
(07:15):
So I get it.
I get it.
You know why that mentalitygets worked around the way it
does sometimes, but only untilyou retire, separate, right.
Once you separate and get backout into the regular economy and
you look backwards into thatsituation and you go wait, wait,
wait, wait.
I don't think anything we werequite grabbing onto makes any
sense now that I'm out here inthe regular economy.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Some of that stuff doesn't add up and I always like
to caveat that with anythinggovernment know anything,
government is not supposed togenerate revenue.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Right, correct.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
So, like we're there to spend money, build the
economy, protect people, provideservices, yeah, so when you
jump in, when you get somebodytrying to run it like a business
, like you're not going togenerate revenue.
Right, except for the IRS, butwe're also cutting them down.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Yeah, yes, so people need to understand that too.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
You know, like the government isn't here to you
know bank millions of dollars.
It's not, you know so.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
And yeah, customer satisfaction is basically the
only way to say if thegovernment's doing a good job or
not Right.
Whatever that looks like, rightCustomer satisfaction with
military protection.
I don't know how we measurethat necessarily, but you know
that's.
You're right.
No revenue and a lot of leversthat the rest of the world has
(08:33):
to pull to change things insidetheir organization or inside the
lives of their people that thatdoesn't exist.
Like, oh, if we can make moremoney than we can give people
raises?
No, no, there's no commanderthat has the ability to do that
right.
Yeah, so we're at the whim ofwhatever administration.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
So here's one thing that I just learned recently
Secretary Hegseth has rescindedall family days because it does
not align with their readiness.
So all family days are goneaway, and I know when I was in
Europe, we would get four-dayweekends and we'd hop on Ryanair
(09:11):
and go down to Barcelona.
That's how I ended up in yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
USAFE was big on the four-day weekends.
I was always under USAFE policy, usually right, Because of just
where I was stationed in Europe.
I was always on an Air Forcefacility and, yeah, we were
living pretty good on the USsafety policies there.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
I mean you get a 40-week and you go to Auschwitz.
You see history.
You just see crazy things beingover there.
But that was because they gaveus a family day, because they
can't give us those racesimmediately, right, but they can
give us a little bit extra timeoff and it does great things
for morale.
Improves the mission.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
You'd say, oh, if you spend a few hours less doing
maintenance on the aircraft,then you're going to have less
work done, right?
No, the service member comingback to work refreshed and being
able to focus and do their workefficiently that gets more work
done.
Absolutely no doubt.
Yeah, safety, quality goes up,morale and safety, both improve
(10:07):
because you have this extra timeoff, and I mean we say extra.
Yes, military people do getmore days off if we just call
days off than your averageworker, right?
But I mean, anybody that'slistening to this knows that the
trade-off is the military is a24 hour job, 24, seven.
You know, if you're a civilianand your boss calls you at one
(10:27):
in the morning and says likesomething bad is happening, you
can say I'll see you at sevenwhen I get to work, right?
And in the military, you can'tdo that Right.
So the the that readiness piecethis is.
This is literally permission todowngrade your readiness for a
few hours.
That's it.
It's a few hours of a mentalbreak to downgrade your
readiness for a few hours.
That's it.
It's a few hours of a mentalbreak to downgrade your
readiness.
That's valuable man that's veryvaluable.
(10:49):
People have to unplug, yeah, umand so, yeah, that that's but
yeah so, and it's a lie that theidea that you get a better,
more debt, you get a deadlierworkforce if you will, a more
lethal workforce out of doingmore work right Like crushing
people.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Yeah, you're going to get a higher stress.
Obviously, divorce rates,suicide rates we don't have
enough indicators of problems inthe military already right.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
Substance abuse, suicides, divorces, domestic
violence, you know mental healthproblems.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Sexual assaults.
They're tossed around the ideaof getting rid of the SAPR
program, the sexual assault.
I did hear about some of that.
I can't wrap my brain aroundthe idea of reducing the level
of yeah, if anybody's unawareright now, emphasis there about
one in four women come out ofthe military with some form of
sexual assault, sexualharassment.
The Sapper offices, sexualassault prevention response,
(11:41):
they, they, they talk to thesepeople and I say people because
it's not just women that theydeal with men too, men get
assaulted too.
They deal with folks, make surethat their rights are protected.
Just give them a safe place.
We as a military clearly cannotprotect our women well enough.
If one in four are beingattacked, then we're going to
(12:04):
take away a resource that helps.
Helps them heal.
Yeah, uh, it's terrifying tothink that they're just pushing.
I think they're just trying topush women out at this point
self-deport women is self-deportout of the military.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Yeah, this place is going to be dangerous for you.
You don't have to work here,yeah, yeah, that's terrible.
This, that's just terrible.
Speaker 2 (12:27):
And what really bugs me more is that the guy setting
this culture is somebody whobarely served.
And I understand you served,you served.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
I get it.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
But somebody that's going to directly change our
culture so deeply is somebodythat got to be a bitchy airman.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
He's the greens, right?
No, you're talking about Hexer.
He was in the army.
I'll own that.
Yeah, so, yeah, so like.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
Yeah so, yeah, so you know he was a bitchy private or
you know, lieutenant, whatever,but how can somebody with that
little of experience be sodeeply ingrained into us?
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Well, there's a connection here, though, about
this gentleman that tracksperfectly.
Fraternization in the militaryis illegal, but this dude
fraternized right.
Like you know what I'm saying.
Adultery is illegal, but thisdude adulterized right.
So the idea that sexual assaultis illegal didn't cross that
mind very often in previousexperiences, right?
So um it culturally hand inglove fit about some of this.
(13:30):
Right, let's get rid of theSapper program.
Right, Like he may have had abad experience with an
investigation previously.
All right, you know what I'msaying.
Like it's very likely that thisgentleman had some complaints
made about him while he was inuniform.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
Let's just say right, yeah, so, um, and we know that
because of yeah, I thoughtthey'd come out and he got
grilled on it in a Senatehearing one time and they're
like we're reading yourtestimony and he goes like no
Right exactly.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
So who knows?
But we digress for sure.
Well, that brings us, though,to the.
We're now done.
We went from cannabis onthrough to now.
We're talking about ournational level politics, which
is there's a little bit.
We talked about it previouslythe whole Huntsville comment,
and whether or not Space Force,space Command, any part of the
(14:24):
leadership of this elements,would move to Huntsville.
Alabama kind of had a bone topick last week, because our
representatives, andspecifically the one for this
region, this district, was kindof silent on the whole thing.
There's been some statements,but they're pretty weak.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
When I hear him say there hasn't been a decision
made, that means there's adecision made.
They haven't written it down ona piece of paper, you know what
I mean when I heard thatcomment.
Uh, it's a.
I'm buying time trying tofigure this out.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Yeah, yeah because a a this thing staying here.
That's easy to say right, thisthing's not moving.
I have no reason to think thisthing is moving, right.
No one told me anything aboutall of this.
And that guy's just talking,just making stuff up.
My colleague from alab talking,just making stuff up.
My colleague from alabama'smaking stuff up.
You can say that if you'reconfident, right, yeah.
But if you're like yeah, theygonna take it and you just don't
(15:21):
want to own that right now,like let that bad day happen
when it happens.
That's what I hear.
You know exactly.
You know, I know this bad day'scoming, but it's not today, so
we'll talk about that next month.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Yeah, and the whole Colorado contingent of
Republicans.
They had their responses andjust kind of echoing the stuff
that has been said for years nowabout just the readiness and
the overall readiness, yeah,Well, the cost we've talked
about the cost is really a wasteof money.
Yeah, and that was one thingthat Bober mentioned was that it
(15:55):
kind of flies in the face ofwhat the whole Doge ideal is.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
This is billions of dollars that you're probably
going to spend on it, butnothing flies in the face of
Donald Trump doing favors forsomebody, right?
You know, like nothing flies inthe face of that, right, Ted
DiBiase?
Speaker 2 (16:10):
everybody's got a price.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
For me.
I and I'll get just into thethe weeds of our local reps are
saying well, the golden dome, umis, is this huge?
It's a program of record thatbasically it dictates how well
the space force is going to work.
Right, this missile defensesystem, and because donald trump
has said that it's like a toppriority for him, everybody's
making this one-to-oneconnection that, like the golden
(16:35):
dome, is the space force right?
And basically, whatever placewould be good at building the
equipment or building thenetwork, that is the golden dome
, that that's where space forceor space command should be.
That makes no sense to me.
That's one program of recordand it, you know it's not even,
doesn't even really exist yet.
Right, if the space force has adozen program of record type
(16:56):
level you know portfolios, thisis one element in one of those
dozen things that they arechartered to do, right?
So the idea that the tail wouldwag the dog doesn't make any
sense to me.
It's like, hey, we make f-35sin, you know michigan, so the
department of the air forceshould be headquartered in
Michigan, no, that doesn't makeany sense to me.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Well, you have to understand also the jobs
descriptions in the Space Force.
They're not go load missilesand like maintain stuff like
that.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
That will all be done by contract, yeah, by
contractors.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
That'll be a big money suck there.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Because I'm not even sure what they're doing up in
the missile fields now thatthey've, you know the operators
are Space Force but, like allthe maintainers are still, you
know, Air Force.
So, yeah, people woulddefinitely get confused on what
they're talking about, movingand things like that.
But the overall capability ofthat Golden Dome I think is
needed, because when they wejust kind of watched a clip, the
guy mentioned hypersonics.
Yeah, that's a huge threat,Sure.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
You know, like whenever those Russian jets buzz
out of airspace and stuff likethat.
If they dropped off ahypersonic right there, there's
no defense to it, right yeah?
Speaker 2 (18:07):
And they can be, you know, nuclearized.
So you just go put an EMP overTopeka.
Yeah, so you just go put an EMPover Topeka and you wipe out
our electronics.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Yeah yeah, there's a risk, I don't.
I mean, I like the idea of theGolden Dome because I'm going to
sell it something For ourlisteners that don't know I do
space stuff, so I'm going tosell the Golden Dome something.
I plan on it anyway.
But where it is compared towhere the rest of the Space
Force or Air Force is isirrelevant.
It's just one mission and soour representatives are hanging
(18:41):
their hat on one mission insideone program of record, inside
the department that's asub-department of another
department.
Wrong man.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
It's not going to hold water in this argument.
But it's just that flashy thingthat they can say.
Is there a catchphrase?
Golden Dome is a catchphrase.
They say Donald.
Or is that flashy thing thatthey can say Is there a
catchphrase?
Golden Dome is a catchword.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
They say Donald Trump cares about these two words,
when they're said, close to eachother.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
Yeah, right, right, yeah so.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
I'm going to keep saying these words over and over
, and that's how I'm going toconvince myself and everyone
else that this bad day isn'tcoming.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Yeah, yeah it is.
They're all like Pavlov's dogsright now.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
Yeah, know how to behave, they'll fall in.
Yeah, yeah, if, if I complimentyou, you know, to your face, if
we all take turns complimentingyou, then we'll all get
something good out of it, right,yeah, that's, that's been that
you know sitting at the tablewith trump at the big cabinet
meetings and they all go.
President trump, you havedelivered the most incredible
change for the entire globe andeveryone loves it yeah right,
and then pretty golf, yeah, andthen there's the other one I
(19:35):
found out about.
There's a specific reporter Iwon't know.
Excuse me, he's not ajournalist or a reporter.
There is a man that hasjournalist credentials and he
has since the first trump umadministration.
He figured out.
He figured out what we'retalking about.
He always gets to ask presidenttrump a question when other
people don't get to and hedoesn't write for like a real
(19:58):
outlet, right?
Because what he does iswhatever headline was really
popular about Donald Trumpyesterday in the right-wing base
headlines Donald Trump deported10,000 people yesterday.
He goes and finds him the nextday and says sir, I have a
question for you and you say Igo ahead.
And he goes yesterday you'dimported 10,000 illegals and
(20:18):
everyone in America clapped andcheered and he puts a microphone
in his face and he goes I likethat question, that's what he
says, man.
And then he'll talk to somebodybeside him.
Speaker 2 (20:34):
He'll say Trump compliment.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:38):
And Trump loves it Right.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
Like that's his favorite dude.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
He probably likes it more than one of his kids.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
All right, you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
He has him on the Christmas card list.
All right, and yeah that dudegets to fly on air force one and
he writes for you know, likethe Topeka register, and he then
they don't know that he worksthere.
You see what I'm saying that heworks there.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
It's just crazy, all these things that we talk about,
it's textbook authoritarianism,fascism, pushing out your
propaganda, getting your yes manin place we talked about it a
little bit last week, but theSupreme Court made a ruling 9-0,
to bring back His name's righthere Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
(21:21):
Yeah, and not just ouradministration, our
administration has kind offlexed on El Salvador's
administration, so bothadministrations are saying no,
he's a terrorist, he's going tobe in jail.
Yeah, and that's the way.
We even had a senator go downand try to meet with them.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Yeah, and I think he was denied contact.
They said we don't know whichdude he is.
They all look alike Jesus.
They said he might be in here,but we're not going to find him
Right, like that was.
Their response to that visitwas no, oh yeah, because I mean
as soon as they walk in.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
they'll be like go bar Everybody stands up.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
It's like Slim Shady man, Everybody's Slim Shady.
At that point You're going tosend somebody back to America.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
Yeah, we're here.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Yeah, exactly, I'm the one.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
But you know, I don't believe that.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
I think they know.
They know exactly where he's at, they know what room he's in.
Even if he's still alive atthis point.
I don't think there's been anycontact with him.
That's another concern.
I didn't think about that.
A proof of life situation.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Yeah, but you know the administration has made it
clear that.
You know this is their.
You know, let them enforce it.
And you know when we talk about, you know the slip into fascism
and authoritarianism that we'reseeing.
Um, this is a big red line it'sa big step in that direction.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
Yeah, yeah big, big step because the court nine to
zero the most senior judges thatexist in the united states said
this is against the law.
Yeah, and you administrationhas already admitted that this
person shouldn't have beendeported and then the
administration says well, wecan't bring him back, el
Salvador has control of him now.
And of course, the judges didn'tbuy that.
(23:04):
They're like no, now theychanged the language from the
lower court ruling to the highercourt ruling to, instead of
basically directing thepresident to do it, they said
that the president shouldfacilitate.
And that little soft language,which isn't soft, it's still
direct, right, it's still.
He should not be in El Salvador, he should be out of El
(23:24):
Salvador.
You know, and yeah, theadministration, they waited like
two days.
There was no deadline set andthen they went back to the
Supreme Court and basically saidnah, we're not going to do that
, you know.
And then the president of ElSalvador came to America.
Did you see him in the?
Speaker 2 (23:41):
oval office.
I did, I think it was monday.
He was visiting, yeah and Iliked it.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Uh, the daily show said he looked like juan wick.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
He said he showed up in black on black like john wick
, you know, he said he showed uplooking like juan wick, that
was really funny.
Yeah, because, yeah, he lookedlike a gangster right well, I
mean you know his answers wereslimy, gangsterish answers.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
Yeah, they were and he said.
The president of El Salvadorsaid why do I have the power to
send a terrorist to America?
Speaker 2 (24:08):
Yeah, what a stupid dodging of every what makes you
think he's a terrorist.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Because our own administration said this dude is
not a criminal and he has anannual update to his right to
stay in america and if hecommitted any kind of crime he
would be deported.
And for nine years in a row hegot that update and they said
you can stay here, right, yeah?
And then all of a sudden he isnow an international mastermind,
(24:33):
terrorist, ms-13 gangmastermind yeah you know, dude's
been in america for the last 11years.
He's married to an Americancitizen, has no criminal record.
Now he came into the countryillegally.
I understand the argument ofthat itself is a criminal record
.
It's actually a civil offense,but it is in the minds of an
average American.
It is against the law to crossthe border.
(24:54):
But after he did that, we gavehim permission to stay.
That's our own fault.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
if you want to call it a fault, that's our own
policy, our own program, thatdid that.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
So again, no reason for him to be gone.
And yeah, the court said, do it.
And both presidents of bothcountries just said, nah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:12):
Well, and even more horrifically, Trump said he's
going to start sending themhomegrowns.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
Yeah, american citizens, yeah, yeah, yeah,
american citizens.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
Yeah, yeah, and you know, build five more prisons.
Yeah, this is literally likehow people get sent to the
fucking gas chambers.
Speaker 1 (25:27):
Yeah, people are just going to start disappearing,
yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:30):
And they've already got you know way stations.
You know Guantanamo could house30,000.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
Oh yeah, that's true and you can obfuscate.
You can basically hide people,lose them along the trail,
exactly which they've alreadydemonstrated, that, taking
people and arresting them in onepart of America and then
sending them to a holdingdetention center 10 states away.
They're doing that on purpose.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
So the Gazette just had a story today about a Fort
Carson soldier that got pickedup by ICE, bounced around to a
few states and got sent back toVenezuela.
Yeah, but they didn't take him.
So he's back in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
Yeah, yeah.
So yeah, it's, but that thatbounce around part is to
obfuscate Right so that onceyou've got everybody's head
shaved, you know you go whichwhich Hispanic dude with tattoos
on his arms?
All 400 people on this airplanelook like that, you know and
that's the point right likethat's part of it, right?
Yeah, dehumanize and just sayall these people are terrorists,
writ large.
(26:23):
We're not going to havehearings, we're not going to
have due process, we're justgoing to, we're just going to
arrest people.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
It's crazy and I mean , once you get those, these
prisons, you know, set up all ofour labor like is going to be
coming from prison labor, likeif we start, you know.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
We can build ships in El Salvador.
Well, I mean our textiles andthings like that.
Speaker 2 (26:45):
If we're in a trade war with China.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (26:48):
El Salvador is going to start getting a bunch of
factories right next door to theprisons right.
Speaker 2 (26:52):
With the tunnel that connects them.
Speaker 1 (26:54):
You don't have to go outside, right yeah, and tell me
the president of El Salvadorwouldn't, wouldn't go for that,
Right?
I mean, obviously he'd be likesure, we'll call it work.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
It's not slave labor, job, sure, whatever, whatever
you want to do man, yeah, can'tbelieve it, right?
Speaker 1 (27:11):
And so then we're left with.
This is the takeaway that I,that you know, the person that
is the focus of this, kilmar, isa convenient scapegoat for the
Trump administration to to takethat stand against the courts
and say we're not going to dowhat you told us to do.
(27:32):
And basically, the pawn in themiddle, this guy, this, this
gentleman, kilmar, he's thecannon fodder, right, he's the,
he's the rag doll that's gettingthrown around in the middle of
this.
And the Trump administrationunderstands that it's pretty
easy to make him seem like a badguy, even if he's not right.
It's pretty easy to say badthings about the generality of
(27:54):
the type of person that he iswithout pissing off everybody in
America.
Right, like it's hard to.
They know that it would be hardfor him to become basically a
folk hero.
That would fly in the face ofthe administration.
They believe they can step onhim, right?
Speaker 2 (28:07):
That's what it comes down to, well, and they've
already got you know storiesgoing out there about the whole
MS-13 connection.
His street name you know NewYork Post is still trying to you
know say that he's a.
Yeah right, you got all thatstuff.
Yeah, so they have control ofsome of the media now.
Yeah, Obviously.
Fox News is the biggest mediaIs the mouthpiece.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Yeah, and somehow also not mainstream.
Speaker 2 (28:27):
Yeah, right, right.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
Exactly.
But for me I see this as they,what topic or what item was
going to be the thing that theexecutive branch and the courts
were going to butt heads over?
And deportations of people thatwere not originally American
citizens?
The administration knew thatthat was a line that they could
cross.
(28:49):
Basically, is what I'm sayingright that they could abuse
people that are in America butthat are not citizens, and kind
of test the waters.
I guess you could say right,because if they had started with
sending, just even started withsending, regardless of his race
or origin, if it was anAmerican citizen that they sent
to El Salvador and all thisstory came out the way that it
(29:10):
was, the American people wouldprobably have a little bit
different position.
You get a further reach ofcitizens who go wait a minute,
what just happened?
The administration is doingsomething dangerous or hurtful.
If you do that to a guy who'shere on a green card, that reach
of people that are going to getupset and get concerned about
it is much, much smaller, right,and they know that.
(29:31):
And so this is a test thewaters kind of opportunity where
they can use this guy as ascapegoat.
Right, and the insert and kindof what I was saying a minute
ago is this is the point wherewe should say they came for the
immigrants and I said nothingbecause I was not an immigrant,
right?
They came for the women in myunit and I said nothing because
(29:52):
I wasn't a woman, right.
They came for my neighborbecause he was a progressive
veteran and I said nothingbecause I didn't want them to
know that I was one.
You know, what I'm saying.
And now, who's left to protectme?
Right, it's happening, right,and this is that first step
where you go, let's abuse theimmigrants and see how hard we
can abuse this whole populationof people and if that works, if
(30:14):
we can ship them out to ElSalvador, let's see what's the
next step in the process.
Let's see what's the next stepin the process.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
There's no end game for taking power.
No, there's never enough forthe.
There's never, never.
They're going to push it.
They're going to push it, yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:28):
And this is that watershed moment, I think, where
, if anybody's going to lookback at all the years of Trump
wrangling the Constitution,wrangling the judiciary, trying
to do things that were at theedge of his power, and if a
historian 50 years from nowlooks back and says this is
where that line got crossed, ifdude never comes back, this is
(30:50):
where that line got crossedabsolutely so yeah, this could
you know.
Speaker 2 (30:55):
We always joke about uh, oligarchs in russia falling
out windows and things like that, but this is a blatant
in-your-face one.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
This isn't a mystery we know exactly what happened
Right and they're saying we'regoing to do it again.
And so, to wrap up the story,the latest update in this is
that yesterday the Trumpadministration fired a lawyer
that works for the Department ofJustice under the Trump
administration.
Is not a crazy liberal that'sout here trying to defame the
(31:30):
president, or something likethat.
They were assigned to the caseto argue on behalf of the
president that Kilmar wasremoved and that basically, he's
basically that he's not comingback.
Right, that was that person'sjob.
Yeah Well, the judge in thecase, judges and lawyers have a
specific relationship.
And then the lawyer and theclient have a specific
relationship, right, and thejudge and the lawyer.
(31:51):
It's like, basically, that's afamily relationship.
Right, you're going to listento your parent.
Right, if your client that'syour classmate.
Right, and your classmate caninfluence you.
But you're going to go home andyou're going to do what mom and
dad say.
Right, and the lawyer needs to,because you lose your license.
You lose your bar license.
If you piss off the wrong judge,it's over, your career is over.
Right, you will behave and obeywhat the judge says and even if
(32:14):
that you know, they will nevertell you to do something in the
disinterest of your client, butthey will tell you to do things
that are in the interest of yourcourt the court that the client
doesn't like, right?
And guess what You're going todo?
What the judge says, right, oryou're going to get kicked off
the case, right, and maybekicked out of your profession.
So that's what this person wasdoing was doing what the judge
says.
And the judge was asking themquestions like hey, you've got
(32:35):
24 hours to go back and talk toyour clients and then come back
and tell me what the answer is.
And they would do that Sendthem off on their errand, come
back in a day or two and thentell me what the answer is.
And the lawyer would come backand say there's no answer.
Judge, the administration hasfailed to, you know, provide
these documents, has failed toprovide evidence.
The administration has admittedthis, but not admitted that.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
And just being honest , that's their job is to be 100
straight up with the judge yeah,well, they know they treat
courtrooms like the newsroomanyways so you know, like it's,
you know good morning america sothey think every courtroom just
spins center anyway, so likethey don't understand that it's
a factual place for sure,absolutely.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
and so the department of justice.
Who's the boss of that lawyer?
They're, they're totally likefacts don't matter, right, like
we're, we're, we're going to runa narrative, we're going to run
a propaganda machine and we'lljust argue with any judge that
we want to until we're blue inthe face.
Well, this lawyer basically gotthe ax because he was being
honest and doing his job in thecourtroom, but the department of
justice wanted him to be uh,probably be obtuse and
(33:39):
aggressive with the judge.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Right.
Be an instigator, yeah, and belike we're not going to tell you
that that's classified.
That's up to us.
We don't have to do that.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
That's what they wanted them to do was to go in
there and be aggressive with thejudge.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
That didn't happen.
It kind of brings up a thoughtfor me.
When are they going to reallypush their?
I'm the president, I get to dowhatever the hell I want, get
out of jail, free card, you know.
So like when a court asks themthat the president can just say
I was doing something within mypresidential duties yeah.
You don't need to know that.
Yeah, you know when are theygoing to pull that card.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
This.
They got close to that beingthe answer in this case, right?
I mean, it was clear thatthat's the Department of Justice
couldn't answer any of thejudge's questions, and so it was
.
It was kind of leading in thatdirection of, like you're going
to make me say it right.
You know hey judge, you'regoing to make me say it.
I can do whatever I want, right?
You know, but let's, we'll,we'll tap dance all the way up
to that, but I know that I canalways take this card out and
(34:33):
play it Right.
And that lawyer was just caughtin the middle of all that Right
, and so he got fired.
He, she, I can't remember, butthat person got fired.
And so the point there is.
Um, back to the, the justcrushing of dissent.
This person wasn't even adissenter.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Right.
Speaker 1 (34:50):
This person was not um pushing back against the
administration.
They were purely saying I askedthem the question and they
didn't respond.
And so, instead of theadministration owning that they
were slow playing, that theywere trying to do something.
You know strategy, instead ofowning some strategy they just
(35:10):
said that guy is stupid.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
That was truthful.
Get the hell out of here.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
Yeah, you know that guy's dumb and he doesn't
understand the game we'replaying around here, right, and
that that is again anothererosion of the trust in the rule
of law.
Right.
That if a judge says, do what Isay and a lawyer can't can't do
their job because their clientisn't doing their part, that
(35:34):
lawyer should not faceconsequence Right, but because
of the nature of who theirclient was, they got fired.
Right, but because of thenature of who their client was,
they got fired.
Right, and it's just one moreproof that you know the
propaganda is going to be themessage.
The truth doesn't matter andfact finding is optional as far
as the administration isconcerned.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
So, yeah that's crazy .
You know every week somethingnew, yeah, so don't go to El
Salvador.
Speaker 1 (35:59):
Don't travel to El Salvador.
I'll go ahead and let any ofour listeners know that would
strongly recommend that youdon't go to El Salvador.
Don't travel to El Salvador.
I'll go ahead and let any ofour listeners know.
I would strongly recommend thatyou do not travel to El
Salvador.
Speaker 2 (36:06):
Get your name tattooed on yourself first Get
an American flag.
We can find you in the prison,yeah, that's not a bad idea.
Speaker 1 (36:14):
Do you need to quickly Google Terende Aragua
tattoos?
Speaker 2 (36:22):
Because if your name is one of their words, you know
what I'm saying, adam.
No, you didn't know.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
He was the founder of Terende Aragua.
Well, there you go Travelwarnings and honestly I would
give the.
I mean, there are people thatwon't travel to America right
now because they're afraidthey'll get harassed or arrested
just because you know, Right, Idon't disagree with them.
You are putting yourself in areally weird spot.
If you don't disagree with, ifyou don't come over here with a
(36:50):
MAGA hat on, you're going to getscrutinized, yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:54):
I was talking with somebody a couple weeks ago and
they're waiting for a visa tocome through and know, asking
what the reason was that theyhad to put down on us things
like that.
And it's like, yeah, you haveto be a little more obtuse now
you know you don't want to.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
Yeah, you want to give them like game plans and
things yeah, it's like yeah, Idon't trust the people who are
asking these questions anymore.
Speaker 2 (37:12):
Right, yeah, right, yeah, yeah, literally I'm just
going to go to target and buybaby clothes yeah, I'm not
telling you that yeah, yeah,yeah.
Speaker 1 (37:19):
Yeah, exactly, cause.
Then you'll say that I'm, youknow, funding black market, you
know, uh, textile.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
I'm trying to circumvent the tariffs Right.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
I'm a Chinese terrorist, right, you know?
Uh, all right, well, thanks,thanks everybody for listening.
Um, we have a lightheartedepisode.
Maybe a little bit again nextweek and maybe Kilmar will not
be in prison by this time nextweek.
We'll see.
Actually, we should do that.
This should be one of those.
Like every week, is Kilmarwatch, right?
(37:48):
Is he still in prison or not?
Speaker 2 (37:50):
Let's do that.
Yeah, we'll have to get theexact date left and get a date
counter.
I'm sure there's probably onealready.
Oh.
Speaker 1 (37:55):
I'm sure there is, but we should include that in
the show.
Let's do that Kill more watch,Kill more watch.
Speaker 2 (38:00):
It's like the panda watch.
All right cool.
Hello everyone and welcome to another episode of
Left Face.
This is the podcast that coverspolitical topics through the
veteran's lens in Colorado, andspecifically the Pikes Peak
region a beautiful Pikes Peakhere and I'm your co-host, dick
Wilkinson, and I'm joined thismorning with Adam Gillard
Morning.
Speaker 2 (00:18):
Dick, how are you?
Speaker 1 (00:19):
doing.
I am doing great.
I am excited about the episodetoday.
We're going to start local andmove to international, but let's
start with local.
It's something we've covered onthe show quite a bit.
The adult use of cannabis andcannabis sales in Colorado
Springs has crossed the line,yeah, so congratulations.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Adam Woo-hoo.
Yeah, get one of those littlepoppers.
Yeah, we need one of those.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
With green confetti in it, right.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
Right.
Oh, it's funny because, likesome folks you know reached out
and like asked for comments andlike I don't really care so much
about, like the retail, thesales and stuff like that, but
for me it was a thing for avoice of the people thing and
then just a common sense, likeso now, like cool, it's done,
now we got to get to the otherside and make sure that we hold
the cannabis industryaccountable and the money is
(01:09):
coming in and you know, makingsure that you know just things
are done above board and, yeah,done properly, because any
little slip up and we know thatcity council is waiting yes,
that's true, that's very true.
Speaker 1 (01:22):
My neighbor, um, I talked to him a couple days ago
and I guess it was on the dateso legal sales for adult over 21
years old started on Tuesdayhere in Colorado Springs.
Not all the shops in town havetheir licenses to be able to do
both types of sales medical oradult use but over 20 do.
But over 20 do.
(01:43):
And my neighbor I was surprisedto hear that he knew more about
the basically the vote and thecity council part of the story
than I would have expected himto.
He does use cannabis, he's amedical card holder, but he knew
that like the city was tryingto overturn the vote and that
this next vote thing was comingup and how that all got
overturned.
(02:03):
He had seen enough mediacoverage of that to know what
was going on.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
So, because it's always a struggle in this town
getting the media coverage onthings like that, yeah, and any
kind of in any kind of positivelight, it really, you know, I'm
not saying spin, it just like behonest with how we present yeah
, yeah and so he knew, he knewthe truth of the story and how
it all went down.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
Yeah, and he understood the um city council
was kind of overstepping theirbounds or being shady and trying
to bring it back onto theballot.
And where would you put him onthe political?
Speaker 2 (02:30):
spectrum um.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
He would be a progressive veteran adam yeah,
he got my card.
Speaker 2 (02:37):
I think he might be a progressive veteran.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
He's a.
He's a former Navy guy, vapatient like us smokes.
I take him to some of myhomegrown every now and then.
But then at the same time he'sa blue-collar kind of guy.
He likes doing that kind ofwork.
So yeah, he's a progressiveveteran, I think.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
What cracks me up is I always kind of view the
enlisted corps as unions likethat.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Blue-collar workers and things like that.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
And to me, like you know, growing up.
Speaker 1 (03:08):
That's exactly what it is.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:09):
Growing up being a union person, we always voted
Democrats.
They took care of us more, butit's just so reversed on the
military side.
Like all these blue-collarworkers, they think that you
know their 2% raise makes up forthe cuts everywhere else yeah.
So it's really tough to kind ofbreak in and like have these
(03:30):
conversations with folks.
So hearing about a progressiveveteran like I always get
excited.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
And you know I'll take a minute to listen to those
in this piece of theconversation a little bit of the
flip around, if you will,inside the military, of the
perception of which party isdoing the best for me as a
service member, or which partycares the most about the
military.
Or and does caring the mostabout the military mean that
(03:54):
military members have betterlives, have better quality of
life, have less danger, haveless likelihood to fight a war
that's not worth fighting?
Right, like those are thethings that I want to measure it
by Right.
But you're right.
The soldier says I'm alwaysforever broke and if I get a
hundred more dollars in mypocket at any point in time, I'm
going to think that was a gooddeal.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Right Fewer handles of liquor.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, fill up my truck tank, gas tank
twice, you know.
So, uh, the but the.
The thing I guess that I wantto mention there is the reality
is and I looked this up and Ithink me and you this was like a
year ago, I looked this upwhere, how have the raises, the
paycheck raises for militarymembers in the modern era, since
(04:36):
, basically after the Civil War,from the Civil War forward,
once we were a union again, howhave pay raises been doled out
right?
By far, the pay raises comefrom democratic presidents more
often than they come fromrepublican presidents.
Military spending may increaseduring a republican
administration, but that moneygoes into the big prime
(04:58):
contractor, right, that goesinto not into the soldier
pockets, yeah, and so, yeah, wemay spend, right, a hundred
billion more dollars on themilitary and you said, well,
that means their life is better.
No, that means there's morebombs in a warehouse somewhere
and that's all that means, right, yeah, yeah, the quality of
life to the service member andespecially to their family
members.
There's no connection betweenincreased military spending
(05:19):
unless you really drill into itand go personnel spending right.
If there's increase inpersonnel spending now, quality
of life is going to change,right, that's it.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
I mean Clinton and Obama both got hammered for
shrinking the size of themilitary.
Yeah, but again you mentionedthat people are still getting
paid better under them.
Yes, but they're starting toget rid of that fraud, waste and
abuse in a logical, fashionablemanner that doesn't destroy our
country.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
Right, waste and abuse in a logical, fashionable
manner that doesn't destroy ourcountry.
Right, so that you can increaseyour base pay of all your
enlisted people without havingto increase the overall budget
of the military.
Who would have figured?
Speaker 2 (05:52):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Let's spend money on the things that are most
important and maybe not spend asmuch money on the things we
don't need.
Right now, I don't know, it'scalled like a budget or
something.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Maybe I don't know.
We've had a couple balancedones, yeah.
Speaker 1 (06:04):
So we are biased.
But the pay raises, andespecially the higher pay raises
, the 5%, the 8%, 10% raises,those generally come under
Democratic leadership and ofcourse enlisted folks in the
military aren't paying thatclose of attention to it
honestly.
I mean, I just I was anenlisted guy and I wasn't paying
that close of attention to it.
Honestly, I mean, I just I was.
(06:25):
I was an illicit guy and Iwasn't paying that close of
attention.
Speaker 2 (06:26):
You know like you'll see more of a like when you're
working on.
You know, a 60 year oldaircraft and shit's falling
apart, and then you hear themsaying, oh, we're going to
restrict your maintenance budget.
Yeah, that affects you a lotmore every day, yeah.
So like you hear somebodysaying that and like, oh,
they're trying to take your.
You know, make this this badfor for you.
It's easy to distract peoplewith those things.
It is.
It's so much easier to distractwith the negative stuff than
(06:49):
the positive stuff and thelong-term plan.
People aren't planners.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
Presidential politics and long-term plans are not.
Never the two shall meet.
And then, when your enlistedcontract is two, three, four
years at a time that's also nota super long-thinking time frame
of how's this nextadministration going to treat me
?
That doesn't matter.
If you're only on a four-yearhook for now, you don't know if
you're going to do a career.
You don't think about thosethings.
(07:15):
So I get it.
I get it.
You know why that mentalitygets worked around the way it
does sometimes, but only untilyou retire, separate, right.
Once you separate and get backout into the regular economy and
you look backwards into thatsituation and you go wait, wait,
wait, wait.
I don't think anything we werequite grabbing onto makes any
sense now that I'm out here inthe regular economy.
Speaker 2 (07:38):
Some of that stuff doesn't add up and I always like
to caveat that with anythinggovernment know anything,
government is not supposed togenerate revenue.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Right, correct.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
So, like we're there to spend money, build the
economy, protect people, provideservices, yeah, so when you
jump in, when you get somebodytrying to run it like a business
, like you're not going togenerate revenue.
Right, except for the IRS, butwe're also cutting them down.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Yeah, yes, so people need to understand that too.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
You know, like the government isn't here to you
know bank millions of dollars.
It's not, you know so.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
And yeah, customer satisfaction is basically the
only way to say if thegovernment's doing a good job or
not Right.
Whatever that looks like, rightCustomer satisfaction with
military protection.
I don't know how we measurethat necessarily, but you know
that's.
You're right.
No revenue and a lot of leversthat the rest of the world has
(08:33):
to pull to change things insidetheir organization or inside the
lives of their people that thatdoesn't exist.
Like, oh, if we can make moremoney than we can give people
raises?
No, no, there's no commanderthat has the ability to do that
right.
Yeah, so we're at the whim ofwhatever administration.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
So here's one thing that I just learned recently
Secretary Hegseth has rescindedall family days because it does
not align with their readiness.
So all family days are goneaway, and I know when I was in
Europe, we would get four-dayweekends and we'd hop on Ryanair
(09:11):
and go down to Barcelona.
That's how I ended up in yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:15):
USAFE was big on the four-day weekends.
I was always under USAFE policy, usually right, Because of just
where I was stationed in Europe.
I was always on an Air Forcefacility and, yeah, we were
living pretty good on the USsafety policies there.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
I mean you get a 40-week and you go to Auschwitz.
You see history.
You just see crazy things beingover there.
But that was because they gaveus a family day, because they
can't give us those racesimmediately, right, but they can
give us a little bit extra timeoff and it does great things
for morale.
Improves the mission.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
You'd say, oh, if you spend a few hours less doing
maintenance on the aircraft,then you're going to have less
work done, right?
No, the service member comingback to work refreshed and being
able to focus and do their workefficiently that gets more work
done.
Absolutely no doubt.
Yeah, safety, quality goes up,morale and safety, both improve
(10:07):
because you have this extra timeoff, and I mean we say extra.
Yes, military people do getmore days off if we just call
days off than your averageworker, right?
But I mean, anybody that'slistening to this knows that the
trade-off is the military is a24 hour job, 24, seven.
You know, if you're a civilianand your boss calls you at one
(10:27):
in the morning and says likesomething bad is happening, you
can say I'll see you at sevenwhen I get to work, right?
And in the military, you can'tdo that Right.
So the the that readiness piecethis is.
This is literally permission todowngrade your readiness for a
few hours.
That's it.
It's a few hours of a mentalbreak to downgrade your
readiness for a few hours.
That's it.
It's a few hours of a mentalbreak to downgrade your
readiness.
That's valuable man that's veryvaluable.
(10:49):
People have to unplug, yeah, umand so, yeah, that that's but
yeah so, and it's a lie that theidea that you get a better,
more debt, you get a deadlierworkforce if you will, a more
lethal workforce out of doingmore work right Like crushing
people.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Yeah, you're going to get a higher stress.
Obviously, divorce rates,suicide rates we don't have
enough indicators of problems inthe military already right.
Speaker 1 (11:14):
Substance abuse, suicides, divorces, domestic
violence, you know mental healthproblems.
Speaker 2 (11:18):
Sexual assaults.
They're tossed around the ideaof getting rid of the SAPR
program, the sexual assault.
I did hear about some of that.
I can't wrap my brain aroundthe idea of reducing the level
of yeah, if anybody's unawareright now, emphasis there about
one in four women come out ofthe military with some form of
sexual assault, sexualharassment.
The Sapper offices, sexualassault prevention response,
(11:41):
they, they, they talk to thesepeople and I say people because
it's not just women that theydeal with men too, men get
assaulted too.
They deal with folks, make surethat their rights are protected.
Just give them a safe place.
We as a military clearly cannotprotect our women well enough.
If one in four are beingattacked, then we're going to
(12:04):
take away a resource that helps.
Helps them heal.
Yeah, uh, it's terrifying tothink that they're just pushing.
I think they're just trying topush women out at this point
self-deport women is self-deportout of the military.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Yeah, this place is going to be dangerous for you.
You don't have to work here,yeah, yeah, that's terrible.
This, that's just terrible.
Speaker 2 (12:27):
And what really bugs me more is that the guy setting
this culture is somebody whobarely served.
And I understand you served,you served.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
I get it.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
But somebody that's going to directly change our
culture so deeply is somebodythat got to be a bitchy airman.
Speaker 1 (12:46):
He's the greens, right?
No, you're talking about Hexer.
He was in the army.
I'll own that.
Yeah, so, yeah, so like.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
Yeah so, yeah, so you know he was a bitchy private or
you know, lieutenant, whatever,but how can somebody with that
little of experience be sodeeply ingrained into us?
Speaker 1 (13:05):
Well, there's a connection here, though, about
this gentleman that tracksperfectly.
Fraternization in the militaryis illegal, but this dude
fraternized right.
Like you know what I'm saying.
Adultery is illegal, but thisdude adulterized right.
So the idea that sexual assaultis illegal didn't cross that
mind very often in previousexperiences, right?
So um it culturally hand inglove fit about some of this.
(13:30):
Right, let's get rid of theSapper program.
Right, Like he may have had abad experience with an
investigation previously.
All right, you know what I'msaying.
Like it's very likely that thisgentleman had some complaints
made about him while he was inuniform.
Speaker 2 (13:46):
Let's just say right, yeah, so, um, and we know that
because of yeah, I thoughtthey'd come out and he got
grilled on it in a Senatehearing one time and they're
like we're reading yourtestimony and he goes like no
Right exactly.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
So who knows?
But we digress for sure.
Well, that brings us, though,to the.
We're now done.
We went from cannabis onthrough to now.
We're talking about ournational level politics, which
is there's a little bit.
We talked about it previouslythe whole Huntsville comment,
and whether or not Space Force,space Command, any part of the
(14:24):
leadership of this elements,would move to Huntsville.
Alabama kind of had a bone topick last week, because our
representatives, andspecifically the one for this
region, this district, was kindof silent on the whole thing.
There's been some statements,but they're pretty weak.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
When I hear him say there hasn't been a decision
made, that means there's adecision made.
They haven't written it down ona piece of paper, you know what
I mean when I heard thatcomment.
Uh, it's a.
I'm buying time trying tofigure this out.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Yeah, yeah because a a this thing staying here.
That's easy to say right, thisthing's not moving.
I have no reason to think thisthing is moving, right.
No one told me anything aboutall of this.
And that guy's just talking,just making stuff up.
My colleague from alab talking,just making stuff up.
My colleague from alabama'smaking stuff up.
You can say that if you'reconfident, right, yeah.
But if you're like yeah, theygonna take it and you just don't
(15:21):
want to own that right now,like let that bad day happen
when it happens.
That's what I hear.
You know exactly.
You know, I know this bad day'scoming, but it's not today, so
we'll talk about that next month.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Yeah, and the whole Colorado contingent of
Republicans.
They had their responses andjust kind of echoing the stuff
that has been said for years nowabout just the readiness and
the overall readiness, yeah,Well, the cost we've talked
about the cost is really a wasteof money.
Yeah, and that was one thingthat Bober mentioned was that it
(15:55):
kind of flies in the face ofwhat the whole Doge ideal is.
Speaker 1 (15:57):
This is billions of dollars that you're probably
going to spend on it, butnothing flies in the face of
Donald Trump doing favors forsomebody, right?
You know, like nothing flies inthe face of that, right, Ted
DiBiase?
Speaker 2 (16:10):
everybody's got a price.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
For me.
I and I'll get just into thethe weeds of our local reps are
saying well, the golden dome, umis, is this huge?
It's a program of record thatbasically it dictates how well
the space force is going to work.
Right, this missile defensesystem, and because donald trump
has said that it's like a toppriority for him, everybody's
making this one-to-oneconnection that, like the golden
(16:35):
dome, is the space force right?
And basically, whatever placewould be good at building the
equipment or building thenetwork, that is the golden dome
, that that's where space forceor space command should be.
That makes no sense to me.
That's one program of recordand it, you know it's not even,
doesn't even really exist yet.
Right, if the space force has adozen program of record type
(16:56):
level you know portfolios, thisis one element in one of those
dozen things that they arechartered to do, right?
So the idea that the tail wouldwag the dog doesn't make any
sense to me.
It's like, hey, we make f-35sin, you know michigan, so the
department of the air forceshould be headquartered in
Michigan, no, that doesn't makeany sense to me.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Well, you have to understand also the jobs
descriptions in the Space Force.
They're not go load missilesand like maintain stuff like
that.
Speaker 1 (17:26):
That will all be done by contract, yeah, by
contractors.
Speaker 2 (17:29):
That'll be a big money suck there.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Because I'm not even sure what they're doing up in
the missile fields now thatthey've, you know the operators
are Space Force but, like allthe maintainers are still, you
know, Air Force.
So, yeah, people woulddefinitely get confused on what
they're talking about, movingand things like that.
But the overall capability ofthat Golden Dome I think is
needed, because when they wejust kind of watched a clip, the
guy mentioned hypersonics.
Yeah, that's a huge threat,Sure.
Speaker 1 (18:05):
You know, like whenever those Russian jets buzz
out of airspace and stuff likethat.
If they dropped off ahypersonic right there, there's
no defense to it, right yeah?
Speaker 2 (18:07):
And they can be, you know, nuclearized.
So you just go put an EMP overTopeka.
Yeah, so you just go put an EMPover Topeka and you wipe out
our electronics.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
Yeah yeah, there's a risk, I don't.
I mean, I like the idea of theGolden Dome because I'm going to
sell it something For ourlisteners that don't know I do
space stuff, so I'm going tosell the Golden Dome something.
I plan on it anyway.
But where it is compared towhere the rest of the Space
Force or Air Force is isirrelevant.
It's just one mission and soour representatives are hanging
(18:41):
their hat on one mission insideone program of record, inside
the department that's asub-department of another
department.
Wrong man.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
It's not going to hold water in this argument.
But it's just that flashy thingthat they can say.
Is there a catchphrase?
Golden Dome is a catchphrase.
They say Donald.
Or is that flashy thing thatthey can say Is there a
catchphrase?
Golden Dome is a catchword.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
They say Donald Trump cares about these two words,
when they're said, close to eachother.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
Yeah, right, right, yeah so.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
I'm going to keep saying these words over and over
, and that's how I'm going toconvince myself and everyone
else that this bad day isn'tcoming.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
Yeah, yeah it is.
They're all like Pavlov's dogsright now.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
Yeah, know how to behave, they'll fall in.
Yeah, yeah, if, if I complimentyou, you know, to your face, if
we all take turns complimentingyou, then we'll all get
something good out of it, right,yeah, that's, that's been that
you know sitting at the tablewith trump at the big cabinet
meetings and they all go.
President trump, you havedelivered the most incredible
change for the entire globe andeveryone loves it yeah right,
and then pretty golf, yeah, andthen there's the other one I
(19:35):
found out about.
There's a specific reporter Iwon't know.
Excuse me, he's not ajournalist or a reporter.
There is a man that hasjournalist credentials and he
has since the first trump umadministration.
He figured out.
He figured out what we'retalking about.
He always gets to ask presidenttrump a question when other
people don't get to and hedoesn't write for like a real
(19:58):
outlet, right?
Because what he does iswhatever headline was really
popular about Donald Trumpyesterday in the right-wing base
headlines Donald Trump deported10,000 people yesterday.
He goes and finds him the nextday and says sir, I have a
question for you and you say Igo ahead.
And he goes yesterday you'dimported 10,000 illegals and
(20:18):
everyone in America clapped andcheered and he puts a microphone
in his face and he goes I likethat question, that's what he
says, man.
And then he'll talk to somebodybeside him.
Speaker 2 (20:34):
He'll say Trump compliment.
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:38):
And Trump loves it Right.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
Like that's his favorite dude.
Speaker 1 (20:41):
He probably likes it more than one of his kids.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
All right, you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (20:44):
He has him on the Christmas card list.
All right, and yeah that dudegets to fly on air force one and
he writes for you know, likethe Topeka register, and he then
they don't know that he worksthere.
You see what I'm saying that heworks there.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
It's just crazy, all these things that we talk about,
it's textbook authoritarianism,fascism, pushing out your
propaganda, getting your yes manin place we talked about it a
little bit last week, but theSupreme Court made a ruling 9-0,
to bring back His name's righthere Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
(21:21):
Yeah, and not just ouradministration, our
administration has kind offlexed on El Salvador's
administration, so bothadministrations are saying no,
he's a terrorist, he's going tobe in jail.
Yeah, and that's the way.
We even had a senator go downand try to meet with them.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Yeah, and I think he was denied contact.
They said we don't know whichdude he is.
They all look alike Jesus.
They said he might be in here,but we're not going to find him
Right, like that was.
Their response to that visitwas no, oh yeah, because I mean
as soon as they walk in.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
they'll be like go bar Everybody stands up.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
It's like Slim Shady man, Everybody's Slim Shady.
At that point You're going tosend somebody back to America.
Speaker 2 (22:05):
Yeah, we're here.
Speaker 1 (22:06):
Yeah, exactly, I'm the one.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
But you know, I don't believe that.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
I think they know.
They know exactly where he's at, they know what room he's in.
Even if he's still alive atthis point.
I don't think there's been anycontact with him.
That's another concern.
I didn't think about that.
A proof of life situation.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Yeah, but you know the administration has made it
clear that.
You know this is their.
You know, let them enforce it.
And you know when we talk about, you know the slip into fascism
and authoritarianism that we'reseeing.
Um, this is a big red line it'sa big step in that direction.
Speaker 1 (22:43):
Yeah, yeah big, big step because the court nine to
zero the most senior judges thatexist in the united states said
this is against the law.
Yeah, and you administrationhas already admitted that this
person shouldn't have beendeported and then the
administration says well, wecan't bring him back, el
Salvador has control of him now.
And of course, the judges didn'tbuy that.
(23:04):
They're like no, now theychanged the language from the
lower court ruling to the highercourt ruling to, instead of
basically directing thepresident to do it, they said
that the president shouldfacilitate.
And that little soft language,which isn't soft, it's still
direct, right, it's still.
He should not be in El Salvador, he should be out of El
(23:24):
Salvador.
You know, and yeah, theadministration, they waited like
two days.
There was no deadline set andthen they went back to the
Supreme Court and basically saidnah, we're not going to do that
, you know.
And then the president of ElSalvador came to America.
Did you see him in the?
Speaker 2 (23:41):
oval office.
I did, I think it was monday.
He was visiting, yeah and Iliked it.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Uh, the daily show said he looked like juan wick.
Speaker 2 (23:49):
He said he showed up in black on black like john wick
, you know, he said he showed uplooking like juan wick, that
was really funny.
Yeah, because, yeah, he lookedlike a gangster right well, I
mean you know his answers wereslimy, gangsterish answers.
Speaker 1 (24:01):
Yeah, they were and he said.
The president of El Salvadorsaid why do I have the power to
send a terrorist to America?
Speaker 2 (24:08):
Yeah, what a stupid dodging of every what makes you
think he's a terrorist.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
Because our own administration said this dude is
not a criminal and he has anannual update to his right to
stay in america and if hecommitted any kind of crime he
would be deported.
And for nine years in a row hegot that update and they said
you can stay here, right, yeah?
And then all of a sudden he isnow an international mastermind,
(24:33):
terrorist, ms-13 gangmastermind yeah you know, dude's
been in america for the last 11years.
He's married to an Americancitizen, has no criminal record.
Now he came into the countryillegally.
I understand the argument ofthat itself is a criminal record
.
It's actually a civil offense,but it is in the minds of an
average American.
It is against the law to crossthe border.
(24:54):
But after he did that, we gavehim permission to stay.
That's our own fault.
Speaker 2 (25:00):
if you want to call it a fault, that's our own
policy, our own program, thatdid that.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
So again, no reason for him to be gone.
And yeah, the court said, do it.
And both presidents of bothcountries just said, nah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:12):
Well, and even more horrifically, Trump said he's
going to start sending themhomegrowns.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
Yeah, american citizens, yeah, yeah, yeah,
american citizens.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
Yeah, yeah, and you know, build five more prisons.
Yeah, this is literally likehow people get sent to the
fucking gas chambers.
Speaker 1 (25:27):
Yeah, people are just going to start disappearing,
yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:30):
And they've already got you know way stations.
You know Guantanamo could house30,000.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
Oh yeah, that's true and you can obfuscate.
You can basically hide people,lose them along the trail,
exactly which they've alreadydemonstrated, that, taking
people and arresting them in onepart of America and then
sending them to a holdingdetention center 10 states away.
They're doing that on purpose.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
So the Gazette just had a story today about a Fort
Carson soldier that got pickedup by ICE, bounced around to a
few states and got sent back toVenezuela.
Yeah, but they didn't take him.
So he's back in Colorado.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
Yeah, yeah.
So yeah, it's, but that thatbounce around part is to
obfuscate Right so that onceyou've got everybody's head
shaved, you know you go whichwhich Hispanic dude with tattoos
on his arms?
All 400 people on this airplanelook like that, you know and
that's the point right likethat's part of it, right?
Yeah, dehumanize and just sayall these people are terrorists,
writ large.
(26:23):
We're not going to havehearings, we're not going to
have due process, we're justgoing to, we're just going to
arrest people.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
It's crazy and I mean , once you get those, these
prisons, you know, set up all ofour labor like is going to be
coming from prison labor, likeif we start, you know.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
We can build ships in El Salvador.
Well, I mean our textiles andthings like that.
Speaker 2 (26:45):
If we're in a trade war with China.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (26:48):
El Salvador is going to start getting a bunch of
factories right next door to theprisons right.
Speaker 2 (26:52):
With the tunnel that connects them.
Speaker 1 (26:54):
You don't have to go outside, right yeah, and tell me
the president of El Salvadorwouldn't, wouldn't go for that,
Right?
I mean, obviously he'd be likesure, we'll call it work.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
It's not slave labor, job, sure, whatever, whatever
you want to do man, yeah, can'tbelieve it, right?
Speaker 1 (27:11):
And so then we're left with.
This is the takeaway that I,that you know, the person that
is the focus of this, kilmar, isa convenient scapegoat for the
Trump administration to to takethat stand against the courts
and say we're not going to dowhat you told us to do.
(27:32):
And basically, the pawn in themiddle, this guy, this, this
gentleman, kilmar, he's thecannon fodder, right, he's the,
he's the rag doll that's gettingthrown around in the middle of
this.
And the Trump administrationunderstands that it's pretty
easy to make him seem like a badguy, even if he's not right.
It's pretty easy to say badthings about the generality of
(27:54):
the type of person that he iswithout pissing off everybody in
America.
Right, like it's hard to.
They know that it would be hardfor him to become basically a
folk hero.
That would fly in the face ofthe administration.
They believe they can step onhim, right?
Speaker 2 (28:07):
That's what it comes down to, well, and they've
already got you know storiesgoing out there about the whole
MS-13 connection.
His street name you know NewYork Post is still trying to you
know say that he's a.
Yeah right, you got all thatstuff.
Yeah, so they have control ofsome of the media now.
Yeah, Obviously.
Fox News is the biggest mediaIs the mouthpiece.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Yeah, and somehow also not mainstream.
Speaker 2 (28:27):
Yeah, right, right.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
Exactly.
But for me I see this as they,what topic or what item was
going to be the thing that theexecutive branch and the courts
were going to butt heads over?
And deportations of people thatwere not originally American
citizens?
The administration knew thatthat was a line that they could
cross.
(28:49):
Basically, is what I'm sayingright that they could abuse
people that are in America butthat are not citizens, and kind
of test the waters.
I guess you could say right,because if they had started with
sending, just even started withsending, regardless of his race
or origin, if it was anAmerican citizen that they sent
to El Salvador and all thisstory came out the way that it
(29:10):
was, the American people wouldprobably have a little bit
different position.
You get a further reach ofcitizens who go wait a minute,
what just happened?
The administration is doingsomething dangerous or hurtful.
If you do that to a guy who'shere on a green card, that reach
of people that are going to getupset and get concerned about
it is much, much smaller, right,and they know that.
(29:31):
And so this is a test thewaters kind of opportunity where
they can use this guy as ascapegoat.
Right, and the insert and kindof what I was saying a minute
ago is this is the point wherewe should say they came for the
immigrants and I said nothingbecause I was not an immigrant,
right?
They came for the women in myunit and I said nothing because
(29:52):
I wasn't a woman, right.
They came for my neighborbecause he was a progressive
veteran and I said nothingbecause I didn't want them to
know that I was one.
You know, what I'm saying.
And now, who's left to protectme?
Right, it's happening, right,and this is that first step
where you go, let's abuse theimmigrants and see how hard we
can abuse this whole populationof people and if that works, if
(30:14):
we can ship them out to ElSalvador, let's see what's the
next step in the process.
Let's see what's the next stepin the process.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
There's no end game for taking power.
No, there's never enough forthe.
There's never, never.
They're going to push it.
They're going to push it, yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:28):
And this is that watershed moment, I think, where
, if anybody's going to lookback at all the years of Trump
wrangling the Constitution,wrangling the judiciary, trying
to do things that were at theedge of his power, and if a
historian 50 years from nowlooks back and says this is
where that line got crossed, ifdude never comes back, this is
(30:50):
where that line got crossedabsolutely so yeah, this could
you know.
Speaker 2 (30:55):
We always joke about uh, oligarchs in russia falling
out windows and things like that, but this is a blatant
in-your-face one.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
This isn't a mystery we know exactly what happened
Right and they're saying we'regoing to do it again.
And so, to wrap up the story,the latest update in this is
that yesterday the Trumpadministration fired a lawyer
that works for the Department ofJustice under the Trump
administration.
Is not a crazy liberal that'sout here trying to defame the
(31:30):
president, or something likethat.
They were assigned to the caseto argue on behalf of the
president that Kilmar wasremoved and that basically, he's
basically that he's not comingback.
Right, that was that person'sjob.
Yeah Well, the judge in thecase, judges and lawyers have a
specific relationship.
And then the lawyer and theclient have a specific
relationship, right, and thejudge and the lawyer.
(31:51):
It's like, basically, that's afamily relationship.
Right, you're going to listento your parent.
Right, if your client that'syour classmate.
Right, and your classmate caninfluence you.
But you're going to go home andyou're going to do what mom and
dad say.
Right, and the lawyer needs to,because you lose your license.
You lose your bar license.
If you piss off the wrong judge,it's over, your career is over.
Right, you will behave and obeywhat the judge says and even if
(32:14):
that you know, they will nevertell you to do something in the
disinterest of your client, butthey will tell you to do things
that are in the interest of yourcourt the court that the client
doesn't like, right?
And guess what You're going todo?
What the judge says, right, oryou're going to get kicked off
the case, right, and maybekicked out of your profession.
So that's what this person wasdoing was doing what the judge
says.
And the judge was asking themquestions like hey, you've got
(32:35):
24 hours to go back and talk toyour clients and then come back
and tell me what the answer is.
And they would do that Sendthem off on their errand, come
back in a day or two and thentell me what the answer is.
And the lawyer would come backand say there's no answer.
Judge, the administration hasfailed to, you know, provide
these documents, has failed toprovide evidence.
The administration has admittedthis, but not admitted that.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
And just being honest , that's their job is to be 100
straight up with the judge yeah,well, they know they treat
courtrooms like the newsroomanyways so you know, like it's,
you know good morning america sothey think every courtroom just
spins center anyway, so likethey don't understand that it's
a factual place for sure,absolutely.
Speaker 1 (33:14):
and so the department of justice.
Who's the boss of that lawyer?
They're, they're totally likefacts don't matter, right, like
we're, we're, we're going to runa narrative, we're going to run
a propaganda machine and we'lljust argue with any judge that
we want to until we're blue inthe face.
Well, this lawyer basically gotthe ax because he was being
honest and doing his job in thecourtroom, but the department of
justice wanted him to be uh,probably be obtuse and
(33:39):
aggressive with the judge.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Right.
Be an instigator, yeah, and belike we're not going to tell you
that that's classified.
That's up to us.
We don't have to do that.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
That's what they wanted them to do was to go in
there and be aggressive with thejudge.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
That didn't happen.
It kind of brings up a thoughtfor me.
When are they going to reallypush their?
I'm the president, I get to dowhatever the hell I want, get
out of jail, free card, you know.
So like when a court asks themthat the president can just say
I was doing something within mypresidential duties yeah.
You don't need to know that.
Yeah, you know when are theygoing to pull that card.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
This.
They got close to that beingthe answer in this case, right?
I mean, it was clear thatthat's the Department of Justice
couldn't answer any of thejudge's questions, and so it was
.
It was kind of leading in thatdirection of, like you're going
to make me say it right.
You know hey judge, you'regoing to make me say it.
I can do whatever I want, right?
You know, but let's, we'll,we'll tap dance all the way up
to that, but I know that I canalways take this card out and
(34:33):
play it Right.
And that lawyer was just caughtin the middle of all that Right
, and so he got fired.
He, she, I can't remember, butthat person got fired.
And so the point there is.
Um, back to the, the justcrushing of dissent.
This person wasn't even adissenter.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Right.
Speaker 1 (34:50):
This person was not um pushing back against the
administration.
They were purely saying I askedthem the question and they
didn't respond.
And so, instead of theadministration owning that they
were slow playing, that theywere trying to do something.
You know strategy, instead ofowning some strategy they just
(35:10):
said that guy is stupid.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
That was truthful.
Get the hell out of here.
Speaker 1 (35:13):
Yeah, you know that guy's dumb and he doesn't
understand the game we'replaying around here, right, and
that that is again anothererosion of the trust in the rule
of law.
Right.
That if a judge says, do what Isay and a lawyer can't can't do
their job because their clientisn't doing their part, that
(35:34):
lawyer should not faceconsequence Right, but because
of the nature of who theirclient was, they got fired.
Right, but because of thenature of who their client was,
they got fired.
Right, and it's just one moreproof that you know the
propaganda is going to be themessage.
The truth doesn't matter andfact finding is optional as far
as the administration isconcerned.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
So, yeah that's crazy .
You know every week somethingnew, yeah, so don't go to El
Salvador.
Speaker 1 (35:59):
Don't travel to El Salvador.
I'll go ahead and let any ofour listeners know that would
strongly recommend that youdon't go to El Salvador.
Don't travel to El Salvador.
I'll go ahead and let any ofour listeners know.
I would strongly recommend thatyou do not travel to El
Salvador.
Speaker 2 (36:06):
Get your name tattooed on yourself first Get
an American flag.
We can find you in the prison,yeah, that's not a bad idea.
Speaker 1 (36:14):
Do you need to quickly Google Terende Aragua
tattoos?
Speaker 2 (36:22):
Because if your name is one of their words, you know
what I'm saying, adam.
No, you didn't know.
Speaker 1 (36:28):
He was the founder of Terende Aragua.
Well, there you go Travelwarnings and honestly I would
give the.
I mean, there are people thatwon't travel to America right
now because they're afraidthey'll get harassed or arrested
just because you know, Right, Idon't disagree with them.
You are putting yourself in areally weird spot.
If you don't disagree with, ifyou don't come over here with a
(36:50):
MAGA hat on, you're going to getscrutinized, yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:54):
I was talking with somebody a couple weeks ago and
they're waiting for a visa tocome through and know, asking
what the reason was that theyhad to put down on us things
like that.
And it's like, yeah, you haveto be a little more obtuse now
you know you don't want to.
Speaker 1 (37:05):
Yeah, you want to give them like game plans and
things yeah, it's like yeah, Idon't trust the people who are
asking these questions anymore.
Speaker 2 (37:12):
Right, yeah, right, yeah, yeah, literally I'm just
going to go to target and buybaby clothes yeah, I'm not
telling you that yeah, yeah,yeah.
Speaker 1 (37:19):
Yeah, exactly, cause.
Then you'll say that I'm, youknow, funding black market, you
know, uh, textile.
Speaker 2 (37:25):
I'm trying to circumvent the tariffs Right.
Speaker 1 (37:28):
I'm a Chinese terrorist, right, you know?
Uh, all right, well, thanks,thanks everybody for listening.
Um, we have a lightheartedepisode.
Maybe a little bit again nextweek and maybe Kilmar will not
be in prison by this time nextweek.
We'll see.
Actually, we should do that.
This should be one of those.
Like every week, is Kilmarwatch, right?
(37:48):
Is he still in prison or not?
Speaker 2 (37:50):
Let's do that.
Yeah, we'll have to get theexact date left and get a date
counter.
I'm sure there's probably onealready.
Oh.
Speaker 1 (37:55):
I'm sure there is, but we should include that in
the show.
Let's do that Kill more watch,Kill more watch.
Speaker 2 (38:00):
It's like the panda watch.
All right cool.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.