Episode 189: Ignoring the Real Problems. How New Mexico Avoids Addressing Critical Issues

This week on the No Doubt About It podcast, we go full throttle.

Victory News anchor Mike Garofalo joins us to tackle some of the most outrageous—and revealing—stories making headlines. We kick things off with a head-scratching article from the Albuquerque Journal asking why we don’t have bigger buildings downtown. The piece dances around the issue with a list of bizarre theories… but conveniently ignores the obvious: when crime, drugs, and homelessness go unchecked, developers stay far away. Mark breaks it down—and doesn’t hold back.

Then we dig into a heated exchange between the Albuquerque City Council and the Police Chief, showing once again how local leadership loves political theater more than solving real problems.

But it gets worse. In Las Cruces, there’s actually a proposal to create "safe spaces" for addicts to shoot up drugs. You read that right. Mark unleashes on how dangerous—and cruel—this policy is, and how it's a guaranteed path to tragedy.

We also break down Trump’s interview with Kristen Welker of Meet The Press, where she tried to corner him and ended up outmatched. Krysty walks through where the media got it wrong—again.

And finally… we end with Trump as the Pope. Yes, really. A tweet that sparked everything from laughs to internal debates. Let’s just say not everyone on our team was amused.

Website: https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/
Twitter: @nodoubtpodcast
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NoDoubtAboutItPod/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/markronchettinm/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
You and I are told increasingly we have to choose
between a left or right.
Well, I'd like to suggest thereis no such thing as a left or
right.
There's only an up or down.
This is the no Doubt About it.
Podcast.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
No doubt about it, and now?

Speaker 1 (00:18):
your hosts, Christy and Mark Runcay.
Wildfire, you can't catch usnow Running, running, running
dead.

Speaker 3 (00:28):
Well, hello everybody .

Speaker 4 (00:29):
Hey, hey.

Speaker 3 (00:30):
I know you're trying to plug in last-minute weather
stuff, aren't you, don't?

Speaker 4 (00:33):
you get ready to do.
That's exactly what I'm doing.

Speaker 3 (00:34):
I know we were doing a little small chat about the
rain coming our way.

Speaker 4 (00:39):
Yeah, it's called small chat.
Some people call it small talk,but not us.
We call it small chat.

Speaker 3 (00:44):
Mike, you're a follow from Victory News joining us as
well today.

Speaker 4 (00:47):
Mike, do you want to take part in the small chat?

Speaker 6 (00:49):
No, I prefer yeah, no .

Speaker 3 (00:51):
No small talk, no small chat for you, Okay.

Speaker 6 (00:53):
Mike, let's get right to it.
I just do big talk.

Speaker 3 (00:54):
You just do big talk.
Okay, good, big talk.
We're going to do big talk withMike today.
With Mike, let's talk a littlebit about the.
Do you want to start with alittle bit of weather?

Speaker 4 (01:10):
Yeah, actually, ava, I am just sending this, you can?
It's, it's in my text chain tomyself on this and, yeah, I
think it's a great call.
We're going to talk just a realquick second and send it over.
There is a major league springstorm system coming in which we
have talked on this show a lotabout how we had a horrendous
winter for snow across themountain West as a whole, here,
especially in Northern NewMexico.
Southern New Mexico stormsystem is back well to our West

(01:31):
and is slowly going to creepinto the state here over the
next couple of days.
As it does, it's going to do agood job of drawing easterly
moisture in.
This is critical.
I mean, this is really, reallyimportant.
In fact, I'm going to show youone other thing, ava go ahead
and go into the text I sent toBJ important, in fact.
I'm going to show you one otherthing, ava go ahead and go into
the text I sent to BJ.
He's our builder up in AngelFire and I sent him some of the
moisture outlook that we'reexpecting from this storm.

(01:51):
Okay, here, it is right here.
So this is over the next coupleof just over the next 36 hours.
By the way, this is not somelong term, you know, week long
deal.
So across the eastern plainsthis thing's going to be a very
good storm and if you go up intothe Northern Mountains we can
see liquid equivalents of one totwo inches of rain.
So that you know you're goingto see some higher peaks, above
10,000 feet.
They could pick up eight, 10,12 inches of snow.

(02:11):
That's very waterlogged, sothis could be very, very good.
Here in Albuquerque, as you cansee, we got the possibility of
doing very well as well, so wecould see over of an inch.
Not out of the question here.
So this is the kind of stormthat is critical for us, because

(02:31):
we don't have the slow melt offof snow we need to back fire
danger down.
Every one of these storms weget is critical.
Now, is it as good as a bigsnowpack?
It's not.
It's not because you get a bigstorm like this and it helps you
green everything up and thenwithin two weeks we get some
more wind and we've got moreissues.
So I still think we have a realrisk here of a major fire
danger problems here.
We already have them in place,but this will be helpful.
So if you're up places likePonderay or Mora or areas up
through the northern mountains,looks good out toward Clayton,

(02:53):
raton, down into Fort Sumner,northern portions of Lincoln
County over two inches of snowor, excuse me, rain out of this
whole deal in especially theSacramento Mountains, cloudcroft
, ruto, so they desperately needthe moisture too.
Now, not as much out west as youcan see, this is easterly
moisture.
Slow-moving storm Moisturedraws in from the east here.
So I do think it's really,really exciting to see this

(03:15):
thing and it's really developedhere over the past four or five
days.
It's looked better and betteras we move forward, you guys,
and one of the things we're veryconcerned with here we don't
want to see another horrendousfire season and if we can get
away with a few more storms likethis long duration storms this
one will take a few days and ifyou look out at the moisture
possibilities even beyond thenext couple of days, really this

(03:36):
next week or so, it lookspretty good.
In fact, here in theAlbuquerque area, not only are
we looking at a very good chanceat moisture through Tuesday,
wednesday timeframe, so reallythis thing's coming in and it's
a couple of different piecesthat are going to come in.
This is really promising, superpromising.
So I just I'm thrilled withthis.

Speaker 3 (03:55):
Really, that's good news.
Mike, are you taking back alittle bit to your history of
working with Mark, as when youwere news anchor at channel
seven?
Mark rolls in with the weather.

Speaker 6 (04:01):
Yes, he does.
Yeah, I just have one questionfor him.
Yeah, yeah, what's my drivegoing to be like to Denver?

Speaker 4 (04:04):
today we are going to start to see some showers
develop.
Everything you're going to seebetween here and Denver is going
to be rain, okay.
So you're not looking atnecessarily a snow issue.
That's much higher up this timeof year Sure, not a total
surprise, although we've hadsnowstorms in May, even in some
lower elevations in New Mexico.
That's not going to be theproblem.
So you're going to be goingthrough rain, okay, and
hopefully you can handle that.

(04:25):
If you can't, then youshouldn't be driving a car.
Do you know what I'm saying?

Speaker 6 (04:28):
I know what you're saying.
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 3 (04:30):
Mark getting fired up again to talk about the weather
.
Maybe we start with weatherfrom now on, cause my goodness
gracious guy, you get off.

Speaker 4 (04:40):
Well, no, I mean, and we're talking about what the
show we're doing, the TV showwe're doing, the weather's going
to be a huge part of that, sowe're not done with the weather
thing.

Speaker 3 (04:46):
Oh, I know You're never going to be done with the
weather thing.
People question me and they askme all the time does Mark still
talk about the weather All thetime?

Speaker 4 (04:56):
You just may not see him as much talking about the
weather.

Speaker 3 (04:58):
But I don't know we may join a for you to talk about
weather.

Speaker 4 (05:00):
Yeah Well, if I had done this a little better and
thought about a little more, Iwould have added some other
graphics.
Oh my gosh, we'll get you alittle green Walmart.

Speaker 3 (05:06):
We'll like paint the wall green behind you.
You can stand up.
We'll just let you have like alittle sport coat and a little
tie on real quick, and thenyou'll change into like your
casual hoodie.

Speaker 4 (05:18):
We're excited, so next couple of days Okay.

Speaker 3 (05:20):
Here in Albuquerque, we're going to get rain through
Wednesday too.

Speaker 4 (05:22):
Yes, We'll be in and out of rain pretty regularly
through Wednesday.
Northern mountains above 10,000feet you're going to be looking
at rain and snow.
And out to the east side of thestate, boy places, you know,
colfax Union, down into CurryQuay, over into Lincoln County,
even into Chavez County, somepretty good moisture.
You go further west you don'tget as much but you're still
going to get sun showers.

Speaker 3 (05:41):
Okay, all right, that's good.
I'm sorry, lightning.

Speaker 4 (05:44):
You know, yes, severe weather is going to be an issue
across Eastern New Mexico hereover the next 24 hours, so that
is a problem.
No doubt Hail will be apossibility as well in some of
these areas.
So, yes, east side of the state, though less so mountains
westward.

Speaker 3 (05:58):
Okay, all right, so give everybody a little bit of a
overview of what we're going totalk about today.
We kind of got a little mix oflocal and national news.

Speaker 4 (06:04):
Yes, we do.
So we're going to take a bunchof your emails because they're
really interesting, so we'regoing to knock some of those out
and then we're going to getinto three stories locally that
I think all tie together in avery weird way, and that is that
we are not addressing the majorissues that we have in this
state.
We've stopped talking about thereal cause of problems and
we're going down rabbit holesand we're like, well, we have

(06:25):
these huge problems, but why?
And we don't address anythingthat really does matter to
people.
And so I think it's this weirdpoint that we're at that.
It's almost like our leadersaren't?
They're offering no solutions,they're not being honest about
the problem, and so then we'rejust kind of making up fairy
land where we go around andwe're like, oh, we have this
problem.
I wonder why.

Speaker 10 (06:46):
And we don't ever say why Right.

Speaker 4 (06:47):
Right, so we have three different stories on that,
three equally, you know, kindof infuriating stories on that.
And then we're going to getinto Trump's interview on Meet
the Press, which was interesting, and we're going to tie in some
of the broader issues, withMike talking about that, and
then we'll end with some, maybesome, craziness.
In the realm of some people arepretty fired up about this
Trump picture as the Pope as weget ready for the conclave.

Speaker 3 (07:10):
Yes, we'll talk about that as well.
We'll talk about that, okay,all right.
Well, let's get into some ofthe emails first that we got,
obviously, our last episode, ifyou missed it.
We talked about this newproposed heat illness prevention
rule that the New Mexicoenvironment department is
pushing, and we got quite a fewemail responses.
So I just wanted to uh incomments.

Speaker 4 (07:29):
Yeah, and by the way, that that rule just I mean
basically it would do everythingfrom once you go above 80
degrees, you have to have a heatplan for your employees.

Speaker 3 (07:38):
Which I was trying to explain this to Mike and Mike.
The gist of it is a little bitif it's over 80, you have to
allocate, like acclimating youremployees to be able to handle
heat right Above 80.
So you can work like 20% of theday, then 40% of the day and
then if you go on vacation youhave to come back and
re-acclimate.

Speaker 6 (07:55):
Yeah.
So what they're saying is theywant no new businesses to move
into New Mexico.

Speaker 4 (07:58):
That's exactly it, and the point we're making is
this absolutely is anotherbarrier to entry for a small
business community that isalready devastated in this state
, having to do everything theyhave to.

Speaker 3 (08:08):
Yeah, I was trying to explain to Mike like water you
have to provide so much waterper hour.

Speaker 4 (08:13):
Eight ounces every 15 minutes.

Speaker 3 (08:14):
Yeah, now, if you get up, into around 100 degrees.

Speaker 4 (08:16):
Eight ounces every 15 minutes.
You're going to be going to thebathroom or drinking the whole
time.
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (08:22):
There'll be no work done.
Oh, no, no, no into thebathroom or drinking the whole
time.

Speaker 3 (08:25):
There'll be no work done.
It's a face reality here.
And then shade structures.
Don't forget about it.
You have to have appropriateshade structures.

Speaker 4 (08:29):
that follows the crew around everywhere you go, no
matter what you are.
If you're out ranching, andthey're like, you're out on a
ranch land you're like where'sthe shade structure?

Speaker 6 (08:36):
What if you have three drones connected to each
other and they have a shadestructure.

Speaker 4 (08:40):
That's the kind of thing we need.
Yeah, that's what we need.

Speaker 3 (08:41):
That's going to be the latest business here.
Okay, so John Beverly wrote in.
We are creeping ever closer toCalifornia with a crazy rule
like this.
Government intervention to thisextent is ridiculous.
The ranchers here in CatronCounty are already fighting the
quote endangered wolves.
Now they have to carry tentsaround for shade.
What about the poor horseshaving to endure horrific

(09:02):
80-degree heat?
It's unreal.
Then we jumped down to Patricia.
She says never going to get anywork done.
Refer, uh refers usually startearly and quit early.
This is so bad for New Mexico,javier says.
As if the road projects don'ttake long enough, this rule is
going to add two times more tothe project more time, more
money, less production, moreincentive to automate.

Speaker 4 (09:21):
That's a great question, or point from.
Javier Cause you do think aboutsome of the warmest conditions
you have If you're layingasphalt down in Southeastern New
Mexico, where, I guarantee you,the temperatures are going to
be a hundred or above for muchof the summer.
That is going to now these guys, it's not that you don't care
about how hot people get, butyou allow them the resources to
handle it themselves.

Speaker 3 (09:41):
Yeah, Let them be adults and let them make sure
they're managing themselves.
Okay, Um, here we have she.
She wakes as Senator andbusiness coach here.
I don't know if I should laughor scream.
I need to know whose grand ideathis was.
Well, again, this is the newMexico environment department.

Speaker 4 (09:56):
It's a bureaucrat, right.

Speaker 3 (09:57):
So you got.

Speaker 4 (09:57):
It's a bureaucracy, and then they just empower the
bureaucracy to say let's makesome more rules.
You know he says, well, whatlaw was this?
It ain't a law.
It's how they are implementingwhat they're trying to do in an
administrative sense, and that'swhat makes it so insidious,
because a lot of times it's nota law, it's how they implement
these things and it's you.
You go to a bureaucrat who says, nope, nope, go back, do it

(10:18):
again.
And all of a sudden you wonderwhy people get so frustrated.

Speaker 3 (10:21):
Okay.
And then L Davis says well,this work environment thing is
plain stupid.
How do these people get intoposition to come up with this?
Thank you for bringing thingslike this to our attention.
And then, finally, these peoplehave never worked in the oil
patch, especially on a drillingrig or pulling units.

Speaker 4 (10:36):
And I wonder and that's Gerald Smith I wonder,
gerald, if that's not reallywhere this is aimed.

Speaker 3 (10:41):
Right, is it oil and gas Is?

Speaker 4 (10:42):
That's not really where this is aimed, right.
Is it oil and gas?
Is oil and gas sector trying tocreate issues there?

Speaker 3 (10:45):
Okay, well, and they also have to monitor their
employees for the next fiveyears.
Let's not forget that either.

Speaker 4 (10:51):
So they can show up.
You have to keep all thepaperwork for five years.
It's like it's like the taxes.
It's like taxes All of a suddenit's so ridiculous.

Speaker 3 (10:58):
Okay, mark, this is a .
This was on.
We were talking about the BillBelichick 24-year-old girlfriend
stepping in on the interviewlast week, right?
So this one comes in.
On a more serious note, billBelichick is not the greatest
NFL coach Mark of all time.
He had a great roster withBrady and Gronk and the NFL of
today is not the NFL of Lombardiin Lander days.

(11:18):
What happened when Brady andGronk left?
Belichick was close behind themand, quite frankly, I have
little respect for a 73-year-oldman having a relationship with
a 24-year-old.
Finally, he adds thanks foryour shows and your producer
deserves a raise.

Speaker 11 (11:33):
Yes.

Speaker 3 (11:34):
I do.

Speaker 11 (11:35):
I will take that at any time.

Speaker 3 (11:36):
Who wrote this?
It's a gentleman named.
I believe his name is Dan.

Speaker 4 (11:40):
Dan.
Yeah, dan, look a couple ofthings.
First, on the producer.
I don't appreciate you tryingto sew discord on the team.
Uh, our producer is providedlodging food, apparently,
college tuition, yeah, her owncar, yeah, and money to do this
show.
She is more than wellcompensated.
So don't put any ideas.
Don't put any ideas in her headI might unionize that's exactly

(12:04):
what I'm afraid of.
Right there, the unionizationcall, and again now, once we go
above 80 degrees, somebody'sonly going to work half an hour
out of every hour so that's aproblem for us.

Speaker 3 (12:12):
Now we do have air conditioning, so I don't think
we can use that rule ava, justso you know.

Speaker 4 (12:15):
But yes we don't shoot outside yeah, good point
and then.
So a couple of things.
First of all, this whole thingthat the belichick isn't the
greatest coach of all time.
Look, I love Tom Landry.
He was the, the, the legendarycoach of my favorite team.
He was a great coach, lombardia great coach.
But to say that the Belichickwas successful because of his
players, well, guess what?
Every NFL coach who's ever beengood has great players.

(12:38):
That's how it works, you know.
If you're talking about Landry,he had Roger Stalback.
If you're talking about Landry,he had Roger Stahlbach.
If you're talking aboutLombardi, he had Bart Starr.
When you lose those guys, guesswhat happens?
You're not as good, and sothat's the way it goes.
Winning six Super Bowls in anera of the NFL, the way it is is
incredibly impressive.
So he is, in fact, the greatestof all time, and I don't say

(12:59):
that with any sorts of pride.

Speaker 3 (13:01):
I know I was going to say say, Dan, you have no idea
how hard that is for Mark toeven say, oh, I don't like
Belichick he doesn't like him.
He doesn't like the Patriots.
He is a diehard Cowboys fan,for the record for everybody out
there.
So you can boo and hiss all youwant at home but he's not a

(13:23):
Patriotsold.

Speaker 4 (13:23):
You're a guy who's not against dating a 24-year-old
, am I right?
Oh my gosh.

Speaker 6 (13:28):
I think that age difference is rather ridiculous.
It's a little strong.

Speaker 3 (13:31):
Okay, the gap is huge .
It's 50 years, 50 yearsbasically, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 6 (13:35):
Yeah, and then watching the interview and her
comment and basically controlthe show show.
Yeah, I mean come on.

Speaker 4 (13:41):
Yeah, no, it was wild to watch someone who you know
and you know this, I meanChrissy you.
You graduated college, youended up in TV for I don't know
three, four years and then yougot into PR for years before you
even tried to to get into thatworld of of what is some high
stakes PR, which you've done.
You work for Richard Bransondirectly.

(14:01):
You've been in the middle ofthis stuff for her to jump in at
24 and start thinking she canstart running interviews.
It's I mean especiallyinterrupting, Like if you had
interrupted a seat, if you hadinterrupted Richard Branson in
the middle of an interview.

Speaker 3 (14:16):
How would that have gone?
The only time I ever interruptedRichard Branson in an interview
and there was one time it wasbecause he um, he was a guy that
tended to use colorful languageand in America we don't quite
use that same word.
So I just said and they werejust doing it, it was an
interview with one of theentertainment shows in LA and so
I just said, we just redo thatreal quick.
And I just went over andwhispered in his ear and just

(14:37):
said you know, he just keep inmind like we don't drop the
F-bomb here.
That's basically what I had tosay to him and he was so nice.
He was like oh my, you know myapologies and I'm so sorry.
Let's try this again.
That was the literally the onlytime in my history of of
talking with big CEOs, bigbrands, of saying you know you
could have thoughts and if theyreally were going to interject
something, you get the CEO'sattention Right and hopefully

(14:58):
you've trained the CEO enough toknow what they answer with.
I'm sorry, bill Belichick, howmany interviews has that guy
been in in the course?

Speaker 1 (15:04):
of his life Right.

Speaker 3 (15:05):
I mean he's, and for this 24-year-old to chirp in who
has zero PR or marketingexperience.
I'm sure to start with Right.
I just felt like sheoverstepped.

Speaker 4 (15:13):
Literally.
She graduated from college lastyear.
I mean, I'm sorry.
Yeah now I mean it and I thinkfor her what the thing is, and
it would be a bummer if shelights her reputation on fire
going forward because of allthis.

Speaker 3 (15:27):
I don't know how you're getting a job in PR
anytime soon.

Speaker 4 (15:30):
I think what she's counting on is just staying with
Belichick, right, I mean, justyou know whatever that is.
But but I think what's whatshe's not looking at is the
long-term implications here thatshe's going to have a career.
So she needs to look out in away for herself to not look like
this kind of controlling yeah,Kind of this Machiavellian kid

(15:51):
right out of college whereeverybody kind of looks at her
and goes, okay, yeah, no.
And I just worry that for hershe's not seeing that right,
she's not seeing all this.
She's seeing herself in themiddle of the action and not
realizing she's doing damage toherself and her own prospects
going forward.
I don't think she cares.
I mean, I don't think she cares, I mean I don't think she knows
.
But I think it's ignorance,mike, I think she would care if
she knew.
Yeah, you know what I mean.
Like, how do you imagine it?
Like you're in the middle ofthis and you're dating Susan

(16:12):
Sarandon, mike, and you're 24,right, right, okay, and you're
like, and all of a suddenSusan's like deferring to you
and all this stuff, and you'rethinking you hung the moon man.
You're like I, I'm incrediblewhat I've done here, and then
she's not realizing everybody'sgoing to suddenly look at you
when the when the merry-go-roundstops.
They're going to look at youand be like, uh no, we want
nothing to do with you.
Sure, and that's the thing Iworry about for for her, and I

(16:33):
don't.
I mean I know I've been harshon her, but I don't think you're
being harsh on her.
I mean I'm sorry that my firstTV job was out of college.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
I got drilled by my news director If I even acted
remotely like I had a clue whatI was doing.
Basically, I was slapped downto be like you're here to learn
first and let's get an educationunder your belt on how this all
goes before you start shootingoff your mouth.
And so even when I lefttelevision after being in it for
about five and a half years andI went into media consulting, I
still treaded lightly thereuntil I really got to know the

(17:08):
CEO really well, learned theirbrand.
I didn't put myself in themiddle of like them in it and a
reporter thinking I was all thatyou can't.
I just don't think that thatdoes.
It doesn't make you look good.
It certainly doesn't make yourCEO and his, his or her brand
look good.
Make you look good.
It is certainly doesn't makeyour CEO and his, his or her
brand look good, and that, to me, is what your vibe like.

(17:29):
Ultimately, if you want to bein a position of being a media
consultant or being in PR, yourjob is to promote that brand and
that individual and make thatperson look good.
You should be in the back andnobody sees you.

Speaker 4 (17:39):
Well, but then.
But how do you then?
How do you balance that withthe fact that she's dating him?

Speaker 3 (17:42):
Well, she should not be his public.
I mean, she should have nothingto do with him on a
professional level.
Like, if you want to be likehey, do you mind if I post some
stuff on Instagram about us asyour girlfriend, then have at it
, right.
But like I don't know how inthe world she's quote working
for the guy.
But that doesn't make any sense, somebody that has at least I
mean, at least five years ofexperience.

Speaker 4 (18:03):
I mean this guy, is you like it or not, he is a
massive figure in the footballworld.
And if you're in the Universityof North Carolina, I mean
you're looking at this going.
What did we sign up for?

Speaker 3 (18:15):
We did not sign up for rookie.

Speaker 4 (18:17):
Coming in here and just you know girl right out of
college deciding to light ourprogram on fire.
I mean, think about it, that'sall anybody's talking about.
College deciding to light ourprogram on fire, I mean, think
about it, that's all anybody'stalking about.
Nobody's talking about footballwith UNC, is she?

Speaker 3 (18:26):
going to be sitting there at the press conferences
after every game and answeringon his behalf.

Speaker 6 (18:31):
I don't know, will she be there?

Speaker 3 (18:33):
Yeah, anyway no, I, I , you know.
I think she just needs to takea few lessons, like go work for
a company.
If this is what she wants to do, she should go work for a
company for a while, get someexperience in her belt, stay
Bill's girlfriend for whatever.
That's up to you I guess.
I'm not going to make anyjudgments there, although I
think it's ridiculous.
But anyway, that's her business, not mine.
And then come back if she wantsto work in a marketing position
with him.

(18:53):
You know if he's still workingby then.

Speaker 4 (18:55):
Yeah Right, I mean it is weird because someone who
has built up a reputation asjust beyond, I mean somebody who
is gruff but incrediblycompetent.

Speaker 3 (19:05):
He does not need anybody to tell him what to say
in an interview, by the way.

Speaker 4 (19:08):
No, agreed, and he absolutely does not suffer fools
, and so then he looks like thefool, which is weird.

Speaker 6 (19:17):
It's just weird to watch with him, because he just
sat back and allowed her to doit.
Yeah, I mean, I wasn'texpecting that, yeah.

Speaker 4 (19:22):
No, I agree I agree, especially I wasn't expecting
that.

Speaker 3 (19:24):
Yeah, no, I agree.

Speaker 6 (19:24):
I agree, especially as gruff as he is, exactly.

Speaker 3 (19:26):
You've seen him?
Did you see Dynasty, thatreality show on?
I think it was on Apple TV.
It was a documentary about thePatriots and their big wins, all
their wins.
And when he got asked questionsabout Brady or whatever that he
didn't want to ask, he justsaid we're not going to talk
about that.
Like he had no problem sayingover and over and over I'm not
going to talk about that.
I'm not talking about, like heknows how to handle the quote

(19:46):
unquote, tough questions.

Speaker 4 (19:47):
So, anyway.

Speaker 3 (19:48):
okay, let's move on to some local news.

Speaker 4 (19:50):
Yeah.
So let's get to these firstthree stories, and I don't know
if you guys saw this.
It was in the Albuquerquejournals, a featured story in
the Albuquerque journal, and itwas written by Kylie Garcia, and
here's the headline.
It says why doesn't downtownAlbuquerque build up?
So the crux of the story is whydon't we have more skyscrapers?
Okay, and so here's the thingabout this story and what was

(20:13):
very difficult to read about it.
It was it focused on yeah, whydon't we have?
Why hasn't our downtown justturned into what other downtowns
have turned into?
Okay, why are we not Austin?
Why are we not Austin?
Why are we not Tucson?
Why are we not places whereeverybody?

Speaker 11 (20:30):
goes to congregate, okay.

Speaker 3 (20:30):
We all know the answer.
We all know the answer.
Okay, but hold on, I'm not.
I'm not interested.
I'm not interested in youractual answer.
It's literally like answers fora hundred.
Alex, it's that easy of ananswer.

Speaker 4 (20:38):
Okay, you're exactly right.
So, let's, let's go with this,and I want you to just I'm going
to give you a couple of thereasons that were mentioned, and
there are some smart people inthis article, by the way, jim
Long is is probably one of theprobably the preeminent operator
of hotels in New Mexico.
He is a very good businessperson and he talks about some
of the technical reasons youcan't get investment money in

(20:59):
and, and various things likethat.
He talks about some of thenormal things and then at the
end he actually gives a realreason.
But we'll get to that in asecond, and then we also have
another group here.
So do you mind reading thisright off the top?
This is the.
This is the author of the story, and then she goes to Michaela
Renz Whitmore, manager of thecity's urban design and
development division, for alittle bit of an explanation,

(21:20):
and you guys might not realizewhy there's no development
downtown, but she gives a reasonyou may not have thought of.

Speaker 3 (21:26):
Well, she said that she thinks it's culture that's
playing a role in thedevelopment of the downtown
structure quote as part of aSouthwest culture where people
really appreciate our vistas andour views.
I think culturally we kind oflike our low spread out
development and I think thatabsolutely set the flavor for
what got developed.

Speaker 4 (21:43):
Yeah, really really smart observation.
I mean, you've seen this inPhoenix, you know what I mean.
They just don't haveskyscrapers.
We like the low Adobe, whereyou just look over and take a
look at this thing.
You go into Phoenix you don'tsee any skyscrapers.
You go to Dallas you don't seeany skyscrapers.
Austin you don't see anyskyscrapers.
What are you talking about?

Speaker 3 (22:00):
I don't know.
I feel like that was just shewas reaching for something to
add that somebody.
I don't know why she wasreaching for that, but that's
where she reached, so shereached for that Right.

Speaker 4 (22:08):
And then and then they you know Jim Long, gives
some explanations on capital andthings like that.
So so I'm reading this goingare they never going to actually
talk about why we don't havedevelopment downtown?
But we keep going.
And then David Silverman, whois a part of Geltmore LLC.
He and his family run Geltmore.
They're great investors,they're really smart people.
Okay, and then David, you know,he says, hey, look, we're going

(22:31):
to invest downtown to somedegree and read a little bit of
what he has to say and he's,he's very optimistic.

Speaker 3 (22:37):
He said why wouldn't we invest in some density in our
core?
If people say the health ofyour city is judged by your
downtown, then why wouldn't wetry to make our downtown better?
He also adds all of these othercase studies like Tucson.
All these other little placeshave done it.
We can do it, we just need somevision.

Speaker 4 (22:51):
Okay, okay, that's just.
I appreciate him being positiveand I like him as a person, but
but again, not addressing theissue, right, Okay?
So then at the end, jim Longhas a statement, and I know
these interviews work.
I don't know how the interviewwith Long went, but I know I sat
down with him before.
He's a smart guy, so he gets it.
But I want you to read what JimLong says at the end, after he

(23:13):
gives some real technicalreasons.
Listen to what he says here atthe end of the article.

Speaker 3 (23:16):
This is a Long agreed .
Adding downtown should growvertically when the market
demand warrants it.
If you were to build today, itwould be an economic disaster.
Okay, why?

Speaker 4 (23:27):
Why would that be Jim ?
And the reason why and Jimknows this better than anybody
is because crime, homelessnessand violence is out of control
downtown.
Nobody wants to invest downthere and until you make
downtown a safe place to be,where people want to go, you are
never going to get investmentdollars.
But instead of actuallyaddressing the issue, we are

(23:49):
forced to read an article.
A man be Pamby.
We want higher buildings.
Why isn't it happening?
It's not happening because it'sout of control.
Down there you have homelesspeople everywhere.
You have crime everywhere.
If you take your family fromout of town and they come into
Albuquerque, you don't godowntown because you love your
family.
Okay, it's that simple.

(24:09):
And the fact that they don'taddress it at all, don't even
mention crime, homelessness oranything else, it gives people
the impression just don't know.

Speaker 3 (24:17):
Just don't know.
I wonder has this reporteractually driven downtown?
Did she see the buildings thatare boarded up?
Did she see the broken glass indowntown?
Does she see the buildings thatare boarded up?
Does she see the broken glass?
Does she see the cars that arebroken into?
How about you interview DougPeterson, who's incredibly vocal
and one of the largestcommercial real estate brokers
in the area?
I don't know if statewide, butI know in Albuquerque he's
pretty prevalent and he's veryvocal on this because he has all

(24:38):
these buildings.
He's the one that's having topay for private security to try
to protect his buildings becausethe police department can't do
it anymore.
So it's like come on, like putsome reality check into this
article.
I don't know if she's new totown, but I'm like drive down,
look up Twitter type in downtownon Twitter and Doug Peterson
will I swear will be the firsthit that you get because he's

(24:59):
very vocal about it.
So she missed the mark.

Speaker 6 (25:01):
Yeah, and let me throw this in there too.
This is an article from KOBfrom this January.
A new year brings new laws forAlbuquerque and new fees for
some property owners with thedowntown vacant premises
ordinance.
You know what that is?

Speaker 10 (25:13):
No, I'll tell you what that is.

Speaker 6 (25:15):
City councilors passed that ordinance Monday
night in January.
It forces building owners topay to register their properties
every year if it has beenunoccupied for more than nine
months.
This includes buildings from1st Street to 8th Street,
between Gold and Copper.
Councilor Joaquin Baca proposedthe bill.
He said vacant propertiesdowntown attract crime and

(25:35):
negative activity and thatfixing them up would make the
area safer and bring moreopportunities.
We have properties that havebeen vacant or empty for more
than 40 years, is what he said.

Speaker 4 (25:45):
What an idiotic take.
What an idiotic take.
That is like putting the cartbefore the horse.
It's like the building's empty.
So we have crime.
No, we have crime because wehave crime out of control.
And then the buildings areempty because of the crime?

Speaker 3 (25:58):
Yeah, because businesses leave, they depart,
they're gone.
I mean they're sick of beingbroken into and have no security
down there.
Plus, as a customer, I'm sorry,but as a customer of anybody
downtown, I don't want to godown there.
I mean, our daughter used toperform at the chemo theater.
That thing's been ravaged.
They had to come back andreally try to protect it.
No-transcript.

(26:26):
The first person that made acomment about our culture.

Speaker 4 (26:28):
Mike, that's a great argument too.
I mean, that's unbelievable.
That's exactly right.
These guys literally are likewe have empty buildings, so we
have crime.
No, because you have crime, youhave empty buildings.
Right, I mean unreal.

Speaker 3 (26:42):
Yeah, I don't see huge investment going on
downtown yeah.
But, until you get the crimeunder control.
I don't know how this changes.

Speaker 4 (26:49):
I'm sorry, but it's stop writing inane articles that
don't actually address theissue.
Let me chime in with this realquickly.

Speaker 6 (26:54):
Baca says.
An example is what's known asthe Gizmo building on 4th and
Central.
According to Baca, the Churchof Scientology owns the building
, which has been vacant forlisten to this 46 years and up
for sale for about twenty.

Speaker 3 (27:07):
And nobody's buying it.
Nobody's buying it.

Speaker 6 (27:09):
It's been for sale for 25 years.
Yeah, no, it's been vacant for46 and for sale for 25.
Yes, Unbelievable.

Speaker 4 (27:15):
Somebody call Tom Cruise.
We need to figure out what'sgoing on with the Scientology.

Speaker 3 (27:19):
Well, you probably could.
You were in a movie once, soyou could probably call Tom
Cruise I always did a movie withKevin Costner.

Speaker 4 (27:24):
We're friends.
Not Tom Cruise, all cruise, allright, although kevin costner
wouldn't know me from all in theworld, but you were his
security guard in the movie Iwas, I was a little swing vote
if you guys haven't seen mark.

Speaker 3 (27:36):
He's in it for like this.
Did you know that, mike?

Speaker 6 (27:38):
you know what?
I was actually I gotta, I wassupposed to be in it, but my
general manager would not let me.
I was supposed to be a reporterin swing vote yes and I was
cast.

Speaker 4 (27:46):
I begged for forgiveness.

Speaker 3 (27:47):
I didn't ask for permission and so got in but
then Mark comes home from likeone day of doing it and he's
like I would never do this again.
He's like I you couldn't pay meto go be an extra in a movie
ever again.

Speaker 6 (27:58):
Who were you working with then?
Which station in town?
I was a 13.
Okay.

Speaker 4 (28:01):
Yeah, so I was a seven.
Yeah, oh, yeah.
Well, mary Lynn Roper's notgoing to allow anything fun to
happen yeah, she's like nopenope, not doing, it not
happening, and you would haveloved it mark's like he looked.

Speaker 3 (28:12):
He was the security detail for kevin cost me, I
think was supposed to bepresident right at the time.
Yeah, yeah, and so you're likehis security detail and it's
totally mark like with hisglasses.

Speaker 4 (28:20):
He basically just showed up as his weatherman
outfit yeah, and then they stolemy suit that I wore by the way
for the filming the.

Speaker 3 (28:26):
The production ended up keeping my suit which was was
a custom suit, that you boughtit.
Yeah, yeah.

Speaker 4 (28:31):
Yeah, costner's probably still got it in his
closet.
Oh, I'm sure, costner, he does.

Speaker 3 (28:35):
It's probably one of the suits he wore on Yellowstone
.
Let's be honest yeah, heprobably did.

Speaker 4 (28:40):
I don't know if it fit him, but okay.

Speaker 11 (28:42):
Story number two.

Speaker 4 (28:43):
So story number one Again, we have issues here.
You know thing.
Okay, city council meeting lastweek.
Louis sanchez is running formayor of albuquerque.
He's a democrat but he'srunning against keller.
He's very much in opposition tokeller and the work he's done.
Louis sanchez is also a formerpolice officer, so he comes at
this from from a perspective ofunderstanding law enforcement

(29:04):
and protocols and things likethat.
Well, chief medina, mayorkeller's chief of police, comes
in to present to the citycouncil and they're talking
about what's going on with theNational Guard coming into the
Albuquerque metro area, whichagain we've talked about on this
show.
It's very much a performativething and some sort of power
struggle deal going on.
We've speculated on that, butwho knows?
But Louie starts to go rightafter the chief of police.

(29:28):
Thank you, madam Chair.

Speaker 7 (29:31):
Nice of you to show up in a polo shirt today, chief.
That's the uniform that yourdeputy over there is is the
uniform that I'm used to, withwearing a badge of office,
looking nice, tip-top shape.
Thanks for disrespecting ustoday.
Appreciate that.
First thing is I'm glad thatyou're okay with losing $5.4

(29:53):
million in cut.
It seems to me that theadministration threw you under
the bus pretty good, and alsoprobably all of us.
So my first question is why didyou not consult with this body
City Council when you decided tohave the national guard come to
albuquerque, and why did youdisrespect us in reference to

(30:15):
that?

Speaker 8 (30:16):
madam chair, who is not in her seat?
Councillor sanchez, respectgoes two ways.
You expect me to respect.
You respect this body, and lookat the way you just addressed
me, and I hope the whole city ofalbuquerque just saw that
unprofessionalism.

Speaker 4 (30:31):
They did.

Speaker 7 (30:31):
You just look at yourself.
Let me finish in the mirrorBefore you come into this.
You can come in and you cancome in with a professional
attitude and a professional look, and that's what you need to do
.

Speaker 8 (30:47):
There's only one person who starts off
unprofessional here, but I'm notgoing to sit here and let you
abuse me, madam Chair.

Speaker 4 (30:54):
Okay, okay, all right .

Speaker 3 (30:57):
We need a cat noises.
I mean my goodness.

Speaker 4 (31:03):
Yeah, so a couple of things.
I think obviously you know mypoint again, same through point.
Here we have the National Guardflowing into the city because
crime is out of control.
The mayor didn't.
The mayor didn't advocate forthis, the governor did.

Speaker 2 (31:16):
Right.

Speaker 10 (31:16):
So this is a power play, yeah.

Speaker 4 (31:18):
Which which are.
Our theory is that it was notsomething that the mayor was
looking forward to, right, butthe governor, which again, hey
look, whatever.
Has it worked?
No, probably not.
I don't think whatever.
But the point being here, theseguys are squabbling about
wearing a polo.

Speaker 3 (31:35):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (31:36):
Ridiculous, not even answering the question.

Speaker 3 (31:37):
I mean it begs the question because, mike, to bring
you up to speed really quickly,I mean basically you had the
mayor come out and say crime'sdown, basically reelect me,
because we're in election yearright now for the mayor.
That's going to be in thisNovember, and then two days
later the governor announcesthat she is sitting in the
National Guard in the city ofAlbuquerque and then you have

(31:58):
this police chief scrambling.
He does another pressconference and basically puts
out oh well, we had asked herfor help.
So none of it lined up right.
So I think what's interestingis he goes in front of city
council.
He's getting accused of notcoming to city council to ask
for their support with bringingin national guard.

Speaker 4 (32:14):
It's because it didn't he didn't even ask for it
.
He can't say that yeah.

Speaker 3 (32:20):
All these lies have spun out of control, where he is
going to get into a fight aboutwhat he's wearing because he
can't.
There's no way he can be like.
Well, by the way, I didn'tactually ask them to come.
Therefore, I didn't go to youguys to ask permission.

Speaker 4 (32:32):
It was news to me when they showed up Like can you
say that?

Speaker 3 (32:35):
It's a freaking clown show.
I'm sorry, but this is a clownshow.

Speaker 4 (32:38):
Yeah, no, at this point I agree.

Speaker 3 (32:44):
And meanwhile we have I think we're ranked what 20th
in the nation right now.
For I think is what we arecurrently, and this is what
we're arguing about Polos, and Imean this whole scheme about
National Guard.
It's all a bunch of ridiculousclown show behavior.

Speaker 6 (32:59):
And what do they have in National Guard doing?
Are they still here, yeah?

Speaker 4 (33:02):
they're doing like they're not on the front lines
of fighting crime.
So that's part of the problemtoo.
They, they're they're nottrained for that Right.
They're in a support role.

Speaker 3 (33:10):
Yes, they're like supposed to be like helping with
traffic during constructionthings.
Yeah.
So then supposedly the officersthemselves?
Can get off can go out andactually fight crime.
That's the.
That's what's been put out tothe public.
What's actually happening?
We have no idea, yeah.

Speaker 4 (33:31):
Yeah, it just it.
It point being in all of this,we think the governor really is
backing a different candidatefor mayor.
Probably Not publicly.
I say Christy thinks she willpublicly.

Speaker 3 (33:40):
We have a bet, mike.
I say the governor is going tojust think, hmm, I wonder who
she's going to support.
Our our little casual bet is, Ithink, that she's publicly
going to endorse this guy, right, and Mark said he, she will not

(34:01):
do that, she will not get inthe middle of that publicly, so
he owes me a new chair If I winthis bet.
It's behind you, covered induct tape.
Yeah, all right.
So anyway, that's the gist.

Speaker 4 (34:10):
Third story Very good takes.
Third story is out of LasCruces and actually dates back
to last year, where Las Crucesis thinking about providing safe
spaces for people to shoot updrugs.
Okay, they're continuing downthis road.
And so I went and unearthed aclip because I was always
wondering how do they make thecase for this?
How do you make the case forthis?

(34:33):
How do you make the case forallowing people to do this
compassionately?
How do you do this, knowingthat when you are an addicted
drug user, it ends one way it'sa progressive disease and it
ends with you dead.
That's how it works, right?
Okay?
So by you providing an avenuefor people to basically commit
suicide in slow motion.
How do you make that case?

(34:54):
Okay?
So are we going to address theissue of dependency on
substances and are we going tohelp fix it, or are we going to
allow people not let's just,let's just not address it put
the fingers in the ear, handsover the eyes and say, no, we
don't want to address it, let'slet them use them.
So that's the third example ofnot addressing these issues.
You're not going to believewhat you hear from a Kaylin C.

(35:16):
She's the person who isadvocating for this and she is
with the Overdose PreventionCenter.

Speaker 10 (35:22):
These are some pictures of what the sites in
New York look like, so you cansee that they're bright, they're
big, they're dignified spaceswhere people who use drugs will
want to hang out, so optics arevery important when we do this
work.
No question, we don't want thesites to look like people would
expect them to look.
If it looks like a shootinggallery, that's the kind of
reception that we're going toget from law enforcement,

(35:44):
emergency services, uh, andother stakeholders in the
neighborhood.
If it looks like a well-run,clean, organized and dignified
space, then we're suddenly morewelcome.

Speaker 4 (35:54):
Hold on, Stop it right there for one second.
Ava.
A dignified space to commitslow speed suicide.
She's advocating for adignified space to destroy
yourself.

Speaker 3 (36:06):
And if she driven down into our war zone and
seeing what these people looklike when they take off all
their clothes?
They're the bathroom public,like wherever they want.
They're shooting up at the sametime, like it's.
It is the saddest state youcould ever imagine somebody
being in.

Speaker 4 (36:19):
No, that's not important.
What's important is a nice,dignified space to be naked
shooting up in.

Speaker 10 (36:24):
All right, let's keep going and a member of the
larger community.
I want want to point out heretoo, before we move on
volunteers and jobs, you'll seethat 40 plus there.
What that means is that wereally believe that one of the
best things we can do for theneighborhood is create work for
people in the neighborhood.
So local jobs for local people.

(36:46):
We are an income generator, weare providing jobs for people
that need them, and we're alsohiring full-time salaried
positions with medical benefits,people who use drugs directly
from the OPCs and other programs, so really interrupting the
cycle of addiction with otheropportunities that are all
coming out of the program itself.

(37:07):
So this idea of closed loopservice provision.

Speaker 4 (37:10):
Okay, okay, okay, okay.
So not only does sheludicrously assert that they're
going to make money off thesepeople, okay, she then says
we're going to take people whoare addicted to drugs and give
them full-time jobs andinsurance when they need
treatment.
And you just look at this andgo how do you have this

(37:33):
perspective?
I can't even wrap my mindaround what she says.
She's basically and they makethemselves sound so
compassionate but she doesn'tcare about the user.
She's fine.
What happens to the user ifthey continue to use Bye-bye?

Speaker 6 (37:49):
They die, okay, they die In this case, they die with
dignity.
They die with dignity in a niceplace with a window.

Speaker 4 (37:54):
It looks good, it's awful.
It is a weird mix of totalignorance and complete and total
disregard for human life.
It's unreal yeah.

Speaker 3 (38:09):
It just doesn't make any sense to me, None yeah, and
to spend any money on itotherwise make it just doesn't
make any sense to me None, yeah,and, and, and.

Speaker 4 (38:17):
Just spend any money on it.
Otherwise too, it's just pooruse of funding.

Speaker 10 (38:21):
Oh forget funny.

Speaker 4 (38:22):
Look, they need.
They need treatment.
Yeah, and that's expensive.
We're going to spend a lot ofmoney.
I think you should.
I think you should.
It's the compassionate thing todo.
It's not compassionate to saylet's watch and see how you
commit slow motion suicide overthe next two years, but, but,
but, at least it's in a niceplace.
Maybe a leather chair.
I mean, they could get aleather chair out of this.
You could sit in a little chair, it could be big windows, there
could be all sorts of funthings.
It just is it's so.

(38:43):
So again, we have a majorfentanyl crisis.
Their solution is to let morepeople shoot up fentanyl in a
very nice environment.
That is the most cruel approachpossible it is, I think, your
life is worth nothing, so keepkilling yourself.

Speaker 3 (39:02):
Yeah, terrible.
Okay, let's move on to somenational news, cause we had we
had Trump on meet the press thismorning, and even NBC had to
admit that the numbers of theborder are looking much better.
So let's take a quick look atthis first clip and then we can
talk about it.

Speaker 12 (39:15):
Things have plunged under Trump.
According to Customs and BorderProtection, there were over
22,000 encounters at thesouthern border in February and
March this year, compared toover 378,000 in the same period
last year, and according to theDepartment of Homeland Security,
the administration has deported150,000 people in its first 100

(39:38):
days.

Speaker 4 (39:39):
Days.
Wow, all right, holy cow, right, I mean those numbers.
They're down 20 fold.
20 fold apprehensions at theborder Unbelievable.
So then, of course, kristenWelker comes out and is like
we've got to put a stop to this,don't we?
I mean, we got to put a stop tothis.
I mean you've solved theproblem, so can we go back to
the way it was is basically whatshe's trying to do.

Speaker 3 (40:00):
It doesn't make any sense.

Speaker 4 (40:01):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (40:02):
The big emergency right now is that we have
thousands of people that we wantto take out and we have some
judges that want everybody to goto court.
Some of them you appointed sir,including three on the Supreme
Court.
They change.
I mean, it's unbelievable.
It's unbelievable, how thathappens but they do change.

Speaker 9 (40:20):
Just to button this up, though are you planning to
lift that emergency orderanytime soon, now that the
border's secure?
We?

Speaker 5 (40:25):
have an emergency.
We have a massive emergencyoverall.
It's an overall emergency onimmigration and if the courts
don't allow us to take peopleout, if we had to have a court
case, every single think of it,every single person we have
millions of people, we're goingto have millions of court cases.
Figure two weeks of court case.

Speaker 3 (40:46):
It would be 300 years yeah, I mean, think about the
numbers, you guys.
We have what we that we know ofus about 10 million that
crossed over under biden atleast, at least, yeah we've
deported 150 000.
So to say that this, oh, theemergency is now it's all, it's
all over it's over, yeah it'sdone is not understanding how to
do basic math I, I agree.

Speaker 6 (41:07):
I mean think about it for a second.
And the nice thing about whatTrump did is he sealed the
border without having to passany laws from Congress.
Like Joe Biden said, I can't doit myself.
Well, guess what?
The president that wanted toseal the border could seal the
border, and he did.
Now the question is what's itgoing to take to get these 10 to
15 to 20 million people thatcame across the border during

(41:28):
Joe Biden out Right and thejudges?

Speaker 4 (41:31):
are causing a problem .
Well, and so, really, that isthe whole approach, right?
The whole approach is they'rein here now.
How can we stop them fromleaving?
And it doesn't matter ifthey're a criminal, if they're
this Abrego, I mean AbregoGarcia, that that situation is
crazy.
I mean he, his wife is onrecord talking about how he beat
her regularly and all of asudden, they're still going to

(41:51):
defend him.
Why would they do it?
Because they want to stop thesystem.
So, on CNN, scott Jenningstalked about the fact that this
is ludicrous.
What the approach is, which istry to create so many different
loopholes and differentapproaches to stop the
exportation of people back outof the state.

Speaker 2 (42:10):
The political analysis of this, though, is and
a lot of average people arelooking at it this way why is it
that we can let 20 millionpeople into the country, just
walk across whatever and there'sno real process for them to do
that across whatever, andthere's no real process for them
to do that, but then we have toindividually pick out every

(42:31):
single person and go throughyears upon years upon years of
paperwork and this and that andthe other, and all we're trying
to do is send them back to wherethey came from, because they
came here illegally in the firstplace.
Twenty million in with noprocess how do you get 20
million out, with years andyears of people fighting every
single case?

Speaker 11 (42:47):
You can cherry pick any case you want.

Speaker 2 (42:50):
But the reality is, the crisis that put Donald Trump
in the White House was causedover years and years and years
of neglect and letting peoplewalk into here without any
process at all, and now you'retrying to gum up the works to
keep them here.

Speaker 3 (43:06):
A lot of them came in with parole.
A lot of them came in pollingshows.

Speaker 5 (43:10):
Fifty four percent of Americans want Mr November
polling show Donald.

Speaker 2 (43:14):
Trump won.
All right, right there, hold on.

Speaker 4 (43:16):
This guy had the goal to say fifty four percent of
Americans want an MS-13 gangmember back.
That's ludicrous.
It is ludicrous, and Jenningsis right.
You know what they want to dois allow everybody in and then
be like, well, you can't go backout now.
You can't go back out now.
And where does it say?
And, by the way, a lot of thistoo.
Really, what we're talkingabout here is two different

(43:37):
things.
If you come into this countryillegally and do not claim
asylum, you don't have to have ahearing, you don't have any
rights, you're done, you're gone, you're right back out.
So that's part of it, okay.
But if you claim asylum, thenall of this when you cross.
By the way, when you cross, whenyou cross right, yeah, right,

(44:05):
well, no, six years later, whenyou're arrested, reality is what
this gets down to is the asylumclaim system has to be reformed
.
You have to provide judges withsummary judgment, meaning they
can briefly look at the case andthen provide judgment right
away without going through a lotof different process.
That's just part of what needsto happen here.
But but this whole thoughtprocess that even those who have
committed violent crimes andbeat up their wives, let's get

(44:27):
them back in here Again.
I think this is a terribleplace for Democrats to be.
I don't think it works Okay,and I think eventually you're
going to see them back away fromit.
But just listening to that guyat the end, 54% of Americans
want to pray.
Go, go see you back.
No, they don't.

Speaker 3 (44:47):
No, they don't Ludicrous.
Yeah so, and how was it framed?
How was the question framed inyour survey, right?
No, no, no, it's a survey atthat point.
So okay, so moving back on.
So let's talk a little bitabout this next clip that you,
that you brought in.

Speaker 4 (44:51):
Yeah, so Elise Stefanik was on Fox news this
morning, Okay, and she talked alittle bit about what's going to
happen with the economy andthen we'll tie this back into
Trump's interview with KristenWelker.
But overall this we've talkedabout this the biggest danger to
Trump and Mike, I'd love yourtake on this Biggest danger to
Trump to me is if he doesn'tproperly address the economy
quickly and pass a tax bill,pass a big economy bill right,

(45:17):
Because it includes a lot morethan just taxes.
But if he doesn't pass thisthing quickly, he's in trouble
on that issue.
He can't continue to let thingskind of linger and allow
tariffs to kind of mentally dragthings down.
What I mean by that is notnecessarily solid tariff policy,
but just the overall feelingaround tariffs pulling earnings
down and things like that.
So overall, do you see theeconomy the same way that we

(45:40):
just had?
We have a situation where thisis the biggest threat to Trump
it's the reason he got elected,I think and then the biggest
threat if he's not going to besuccessful.

Speaker 6 (45:47):
Right and he and he's true, you're right, he's trying
to move this through as quicklyas possible.
We're talking about gettingthis through by midsummer at the
very latest.
I think that big beautiful billif you will.
July 4th, I think, is whattheir goal is.
Right, they don't continue theTrump tax cuts.
I mean this would be a massivetax increase for Americans.

(46:09):
I mean nobody would want tolook at this and how it's going
to affect their bottom line.

Speaker 3 (46:13):
And Mike talk a little bit about that just
briefly.
But again, there's suchmisconception on those tax cuts
only impacting the super, superrich in the country which is not
true.

Speaker 6 (46:22):
No, it's not true at all.
It's going to affect Americansacross the board.

Speaker 4 (46:33):
82% of Americans got a tax cut of over $1,000.
82% it was the most progressivetax cut in the history of the
country.
It really did.
It went bottom up, itabsolutely did, and so I want to
have Elise Stefanik give hertake on what she wants to do.
Remember she was going to behead of the UN.
She ended up going back to theHouse because their majorities
are so slim in the House.
She has to stay in to shepherdthis bill through.

Speaker 11 (46:52):
She's very sharp and here's what she says about the
big, beautiful bill HouseRepublicans' responsibility to
deliver the hallmark ofPresident Trump's agenda, where
he won a historic popular vote.
We know the stakes areincredibly high and we are
committed to getting this done.
And this one big beautiful bill?
It includes so many importantprovisions unleashing American
energy independence,continuation of the historic
Trump tax cuts and also addingno tax on tips, no tax on social

(47:14):
security, as well as liftingthe state and local tax, the
salt deduction for high taxstates like New York, where
people are struggling to makeends meet.
These are commitments PresidentTrump and Republicans made and
we are committed to getting itdone.

Speaker 4 (47:27):
Okay, interesting stuff, okay.
So she lays that part out thereand how critical it is to do
all this.
I think the no tax on tips, notax on social security, critical
stuff You've got to put that inbecause you made promises on
that and those are your voters.
That's the Trump voter now.
It is that middle income lowerincome wage earner who just
wants a fair shake and I thinkthey'll pass that through.

(47:47):
But remember just one otherquick thing, mike, before you
jump in on this the point that'scritical in all this is they
don't need 60 votes in theSenate.
It's a budget bill.
They can do it with 50.

Speaker 6 (47:57):
It's reconciliation right, that's right.

Speaker 4 (47:58):
Yeah, that's all I need.
So they do not need Democraticsupport, they need to get this
done.
The problem isn't the Senate,the problem is the House.

Speaker 6 (48:04):
Right, but reality is , who would not want these tax
cuts?
No tax on tips, no tax onSocial Security, and I don't
know where this stands.
But Trump also talked aboutinterest on auto loans.
That are American auto loansbeing deductible.
Deductible.

Speaker 3 (48:21):
Think about that for a second.
Well, I mean even Harris at thevery end.
Remember she came in and saidno tax on tips.

Speaker 4 (48:27):
She joined in too, so how many?

Speaker 3 (48:29):
Democrats are in the House saying we shouldn't do
this.

Speaker 4 (48:32):
Oh, you're not going to get a single Democratic vote.
It's not happening.
But the question is rememberthough, no, no, no, that's not
the issue.
If you've got three or fourRepublicans that can't get.
Yeah, no, no, no.
This is about guys like ThomasMassey and some of these other
Republicans who never vote foranything.
You have one opportunity topass this bill and then you're
done Like, if you don't get thispassed and you don't get a good

(48:55):
bill passed, you're going toraise taxes on everybody, we
will go into recession and youwill absolutely have more issues
with the tariff stuff, and thisis going to be a disaster.
Everybody knows it.
And so there's about four orfive people in the House that
are Republicans that matter.
Democrats don't matter in this.
They don't factor in.
They don't factor in.

Speaker 3 (49:09):
None of them are going to support it.

Speaker 4 (49:11):
Very few.

Speaker 3 (49:11):
Very few, okay, so why would five Republicans not
be supporting this?

Speaker 4 (49:15):
So have you dealt with the whole Massey thing
before?
On Victory News?
Yes, okay, you want to explainhim a little bit.
You're right, a lot of peopledon't know, christy, what this
guy?
He's just one example.
There's a few of them in thehouse.

Speaker 6 (49:26):
Well, first of all, he is all against big government
and he looks at this as likebig government.
He thinks much more drasticthing needs to happen, so he
pushes back again.
That's my opinion, anyhow.
He pushes back against anythinghe considers to be big
government and part of meunderstands what he's saying.
But at the same time you needto get along to move forward and

(49:47):
he's not willing to do that andhe's ticking a lot of people
off.

Speaker 3 (49:51):
I mean even like small steps.
I mean, you know, you thinkabout, can you, can you help?
Like even I mean I know this isa sidebar conversation, but
that reminds me of even like theabortion laws.
Right, where, if you can savesome babies, is that, is that I
would think that's worth effort.
Right Versus like well, no, no,no, we have to fight for all
saving every baby, whichobviously I agree with, but
sometimes that's not feasible.
To get across the finish lineright away.

(50:12):
Right, he's an absolutist.
Right, you know, you're right,he's an absolutist.

Speaker 1 (50:15):
Right, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 4 (50:16):
And so, and there's about four or five.
So if they lose these people,they're going to lose it, and so
you know the white house isleaning on these guys heavy, and
so this is all going to beRepublican.
It really is.
I mean, you may get a fewDemocratic votes, but probably
not.
But you could get a couple inthese Trump districts, right, if
you have a big Trump districtwhere you have a Democrat
sitting there, they better lookat this very carefully, because

(50:37):
if they're going to go out andsay no, they're going to say no
to no tax on tips, no tax onSocial Security and a and a tax
increase for everybody in yourdistrict.
So we'll see what happens.

Speaker 3 (50:45):
Okay, and the big thing that continues to drive me
crazy is all the narrativebehind this big beautiful bill
is going to have major Medicaretax cuts.

Speaker 4 (50:55):
I mean cuts to Medicare?
Yeah, medicare, Medicaid, theyjust want to keep saying.

Speaker 3 (50:58):
That's the narrative.
They keep pushing out the door,regardless of how many times
Trump and Social Security.

Speaker 4 (51:01):
What the hell, we'll throw that in.
Oh yeah, they say that to everyentitlement, which no one's
ever done.

Speaker 3 (51:05):
But they've never done that.
Trump has said over and overand, over and over I'm not
cutting Medicaid, medicare, I'mnot cutting your Social Security
benefits.
In fact, I'm trying to increasethem, if I can, or at least
make them last longer.
Here During this meet the press, she comes at Trump again and
wants to put him in the hot seaton this once again.
So let's take a listen to this.

Speaker 9 (51:27):
Happ on this once again.
So let's take a listen to this.
What happens if it comes toyour desk?
Has the tax cuts, but also cutsto Medicaid.
Would you veto that?
Well, we're not doing thatWould you veto that?

Speaker 5 (51:35):
I would if they were cutting it, but they're not
cutting it.
They're looking at fraud, wasteand abuse and nobody minds that
If illegal immigrants are inthe mix, if people that aren't
supposed to be there, peoplethat are non-citizens, are in
the mix, Nobody minds that Waste, fraud and abuse.
But we're not cutting Medicaid,we're not cutting Medicare and

(51:56):
we're not cutting SocialSecurity.

Speaker 6 (51:59):
Let me just throw this out there, okay.
Who's been saying, who's beenthreatening and trying to scare
the American people with wordslike this?
The Democrats she is a reporter, she's supposed to be a
reporter and trying to scare theAmerican people with words like
this?
The Democrats.

Speaker 3 (52:15):
She is a reporter, she's supposed to be a reporter.
She looks like she's heavilyleaning one way.
Yeah, oh, even like when sheinterviewed Rubio last week.
We showed those clips and shewas.
She kept talking about well, soyou're deporting now
two-year-olds, american citizen,two-year-olds and Rubio was
like again, we are not and we'llnever deport two-year-old.

Speaker 6 (52:27):
He put her in her place.

Speaker 3 (52:29):
So you definitely know where she leans right, like
it's not a, it's not a secretanymore where these mainstream
media people often lie Right.
But again it's like how manytimes does he need to say I'm
not cutting Medicaid, medicareor social security benefits?
They're going to keep saying it.

Speaker 4 (52:42):
I love the way she phrased it.
It was so horrendously phrasedthat it's like going in, like
listen, if you go to buy the carand it looks like exactly the
car you want, except for there'sa bomb in it that's going to
blow up in five minutes, willyou still buy the car?
Trump's like no, the car willblow up.
It's a bomb.

Speaker 10 (53:00):
I don't want to kill my family.
What are you talking?

Speaker 4 (53:02):
about.
She's like well, it couldhappen.
About it's like well, it couldhappen.
It could happen if this billgets through and and it's got
all your tax cuts, but it's alsogoing to end your presidency.
What are you going to do?
Yeah, it's like what is this?

Speaker 6 (53:12):
yeah, it's crazy.
I'm a little surprised hedidn't come out and just say
that's another dumb question,right, right right, yeah, no, no
doubt it's so funny.

Speaker 4 (53:20):
Um, okay, a couple other quick things.
The future of maga, she askedhim are you, is there any future
of MAGA without you?
I kind of thought Trump wouldbe like well, but he didn't.
He thinks there absolutely is.

Speaker 9 (53:33):
Who looked to the future.
Mr President, Do you think theMAGA movement can survive
without you as its leader?

Speaker 5 (53:40):
Yes, I do.
I think it's so strong and Ithink we have tremendous people.
I think we have a tremendousgroup of people.
We talked about a number ofthem.
You look at Marco.
You look at JD Vance, who'sfantastic.
You look at I could name 10, 15, 20 people right now just
sitting here.
No, I think we have atremendous party and you know

(54:00):
what I can't name?
I can't name one Democrat.
I mean, I look at the Democratsthey're in total disarray.
What do you think?

Speaker 6 (54:08):
I don't know why she wasted her time on that question
.
He's a little more than 100days into his second term.
I mean this is ridiculous.
Why are you even going there?
Nobody's thinking about thatstuff, but she is.

Speaker 3 (54:19):
Well, no, I think she asked the question to try to
trap him, because she's likelet's show his narcissistic side
and let me just go ahead andpaint him as a narcissist again
and have him up there sayingwell, this is why I might run
again for a third term.

Speaker 6 (54:29):
I think he gave a big , beautiful answer.

Speaker 3 (54:31):
He did give a big, beautiful answer on that.

Speaker 4 (54:37):
And he did, he did you know he mentioned.
Rubio, which is Rubio, isascending, there's no doubt.
How long will he be ascending,who knows?
But he's done a done a verygood job of being a reasonable
voice for the administration andI would say I think he's a more
significant voice than Vance,at least recently he has been.
Now that'll change.
Jd will step up and do what hehas to do, but it's going to be
a very interesting race and MikeI think part of the reason
she's asking this too, andChristy, I think you're probably
right probably did want to gethim to walk into a bear trap.

(55:00):
I think it's absolutely that'sa good way.
Yeah, no, I think it's a reallygood point.
But also, you know you'retalking about within 18 months
they're going to be declaring.
I mean, this is going to be.
This is the problem with secondterm presidencies is that the
reality is you have two years atmost.
So guess what?
Trump's second term is reallygoing to be defined by that one

(55:23):
economic bill, really, and allthe executive orders.
But it's going to be that theeconomic bill, how he deals with
tariffs and the EOs.

Speaker 6 (55:32):
And reality also is he really has surrounded himself
with an all-star cast.

Speaker 4 (55:37):
I mean he really I might push back on that a little
bit.
I'm a little.
I think he does have some greatpeople, don't get me wrong.
At least five super solid people, I agree.
But there are some times whereyou wonder who's pulling down
the reins a little bit, just tosay calm things down.
And I don't mean you don't pushfor what you want, but I do
mean that you have to do it inan orderly way so that you don't

(55:58):
create your own problems.
The one thing about his firstterm was because he had so many
people around him.
I think that either he didn'tknow very well or didn't realize
that they maybe had dividedloyalty.
Ok, that moderated histendencies and what the end
result was was kind of astandard Republican presidency
which actually worked, which theeconomy did well.

(56:22):
You know there's a lot of thingshe did very well.
So and I know as he looks backon it, I'm sure he looked back
and said I made this mistake, hemade this mistake, I made this
mistake, I got this guysabotaged me, this person.
You know we've all been part oforganizations where some people
working within the organizationdid not do what was in the best
interest.
But you do need occasionallypeople adding, pulling back the
reins, saying wait a minute.
I'm not saying those peopledon't exist, but they aren't as

(56:43):
front forward facing as theywere in the first administration
.

Speaker 6 (56:46):
Yeah, and you're right, I firmly believe in the
first Trump administration.
It was a learning curve.
He learned the hard way manylessons.
He also took it every day fromthe media.
I mean, they were aggressiveand out of control.
They're still there to acertain degree, but not not to
that extent, you know.
So I think I and I you know,and he knows how to shake things
up and so, but I know whatyou're saying.

(57:09):
Is there somebody there to pullback on the reins?

Speaker 4 (57:12):
I don't know and again, I don't necessarily mean
in a policy sense, I mean in apolitical sense, where you're
just like be tactical, astactical as you can be right now
they're a bull in a china shopwhich has good and it has bad,
and so you, just you have toweigh those out.

Speaker 3 (57:27):
Yeah, like no chainsaw from Elon to talk about
, like hey, we're coming afterfraud and all this stuff.
At the same time you'reannouncing all these cuts to
USAID which needed to happen.
But again, you don't need achainsaw just to like, don't
poke the bear of the Americanpeople, Like make sure that you
are doing things on behalf ofthe American people in a
professional stance.
So that to me, I think, isthat's something that would like

(57:49):
show some maturity, a littlebit Sure.

Speaker 6 (57:51):
I agree.

Speaker 3 (57:51):
Okay, another thing that we're going to talk about.
We're going to speaking ofpoking the bear.
Okay, I, I you guys are goingto disagree with me on this one
I.
I think this latest picturethat the white house has put out
of Trump and I know this is atrolling picture of Trump
dressed up as a pope is not agood look or move by the White

(58:13):
House.
I think it was poorly executed,terrible timing.
I understand he's trying to befunny.
He's trying to make fun of him,of the media and everybody else
.
That's gone over crazy.
I think it was in bad taste andI think that he's going to
offend more people than heneeded to.
There was.
It was in bad taste and I thinkthat he's going to offend more
people than he needed to.
There was zero reason to dothis.

Speaker 4 (58:31):
Okay, mike.

Speaker 6 (58:33):
Well, first of all he was asked the question who do
you think the next Pope shouldbe?
And he jokingly said how aboutme?

Speaker 3 (58:38):
You know that's exactly that's the question that
she was asking to meet thepress, what does MAGA exist If
you're gone?
She was looking to see if shecould hook him in to talk about.
Oh no, I am the leader of MAGA,right?
So he falls for the question.
When it comes to the pope, it'slike I should be the pope
Really.

Speaker 6 (58:56):
Really.
And then this picture comes out.
Obviously you know it's all injest, as we know, but reality is
this Anything you give theopposition to use to attack you
with, they're going to use andthey're finding this to be a
sword.

Speaker 3 (59:12):
Well, it's low-hanging fruit, so of course
they could use it.

Speaker 4 (59:14):
Yeah, I tend to be pretty liberal on these things,
in the respect that it's a joke.
And being Catholic, the mostimportant part about being a
Catholic is about faith in JesusChrist, period.
Okay.
Now if Trump goes out?
And I asked myself thisquestion if Trump shows up
dressed like Jesus, do I have aproblem with it?

(59:36):
I do I do.

Speaker 10 (59:38):
at that point I'm like you don't.

Speaker 4 (59:40):
That's the guy you don't mess with.
To me, this is like it's a bitof a it's a bit of a joke.
To me, I think it's.
I understand your point,chrissy.
I do.

Speaker 3 (59:47):
I'm not even Catholic , I'm just saying I, but I do
think that this could beoffensive to some Catholics.
You have a major sense of humor, Mark.
You have thick skin.
There's a lot of things thatpeople haven't poked fun at you
about and you're like whateverLike.
I's like and just and all thelike.
The narratives about you not,you know, being born in New
Mexico, the nativism, you know,jokes you can have a field day

(01:00:10):
with that.
We do mean tweets to make funof things that people have said
about you in the past, right.

Speaker 4 (01:00:14):
Right, it's no big deal.

Speaker 3 (01:00:15):
You're very much on humor.
Humor is the way to handle yourcritics, right, yeah, and Trump
has a very good sense of humor.
I mean, we saw that during thecampaign.
I mean when he's on stage hecomes up with stuff that I'm
dying.
At that I was like, oh my gosh,I didn't know this guy was
actually this funny, but I justthink bad timing poor taste,
Well timing, you can't do thisany other time.

Speaker 4 (01:00:35):
You can't do it when we don't have a conclave coming
up.

Speaker 3 (01:00:42):
Everybody's like.
Why is he like the don't thinkyou should do it.
That's all I'm saying.
I think it was unnecessary.
It felt egotistical in me.
It felt a little narcissistic,you know, narcissistic, and
again like.
I think here's my real problemwith this, when it boils down to
it too, is, my biggest argumentwith people is like, well,
you're a Christian.
Like, if they're against Trump,well, you're a Christian.

(01:01:05):
How, as a Christian, can yousupport Donald Trump?
And my answer has always beenhe's not my pastor, he's not my
spiritual advisor, he is thepresident of the United States,
right?
So this goes against like them,him coming out and be like well
, maybe I should be the nextPope in jest, I get it's in jest
.
But no, like Trump is not likethis superhero Christian guy.

(01:01:25):
To start with, like, right, youdon't put him on this pinnacle
of some sort of Christian hood.
That's not why you voted forthe guy, if you voted for him,
in my opinion, right.
So this I just feel like toofar too.
He jumped the shark with this,okay.

Speaker 4 (01:01:37):
Okay, fonzie, I think he jumped the shark.
Okay, one last thing.
I don't, but I read this tweetfrom the Daily Mail and I have
no idea what it means, so I justthought I would read it to you.
So, by the way, kuyong is aregion in Australia.
Okay, I looked that up.
But I looked it up, I didn'tknow it.

(01:01:58):
Kuyong election results.
Teal doctor Monique Ryan, whodoesn't answer journalist
questions, has a rogue husbandwho tears down candidate signs,
celebrates victory after beingpooed on by a bird on election
day.
I have no idea what any of thatmeans and I don't see.
Is the poo?
Am I missing the poo heresomewhere?

(01:02:18):
I don't see it.
I don't see it either, butanyway.
So Kuyong is apparently inAustralia.
I don't know how she's a tealdoctor.
Is she?
Is that mean?
Is is apparently in Australia.
I don't know how she's a tealdoctor.
Is that a town?
Is she just wear teal?
Everybody behind her is wearingteal.
Is that what's going on?
And then her husband I don'tknow what his deal is with
tearing down signs, and then shegets pooed on by a bird on
election day and I think she won.

(01:02:40):
So congratulations to MoniqueRyan on a big win for the teal
doctor.
But watch the birds.
A bit bizarre, a bit bizarre.

Speaker 3 (01:02:48):
It's a bit bizarre.
Maybe Daily Mail should cleanup what they actually tweet so
we can all understand whatthey're talking about.

Speaker 4 (01:02:53):
Yeah, I don't even know what's going on here.
Okay, by the way, Mike, thanksfor coming in.

Speaker 7 (01:02:56):
I appreciate it.
It's always my pleasure.

Speaker 4 (01:03:00):
By the way, what's going on?
Victory.

Speaker 6 (01:03:01):
News this week.
I'll be live in Denver all week.
Of course.
We've got Victory News, ofcourse, 12 and 5 pm East Coast
time, monday through Friday.
So it's going to be aninteresting week.
Of course, we're going tofollow what's going to happen
with the conclave, which starts,of course, on the 7th.

Speaker 4 (01:03:15):
Yep, and speaking of the conclave, we are going to
have Father John Carney on onWednesday evening show.
We're going to talk to himabout it.
Again, he's not been behind thescenes of the conclave but as a
Catholic priest he's going totalk to us about the importance
of selecting this pope, whatkind of pope he'd like to see,
what kind of values he wants tosee in the pope.
So he's hilarious.
If you've never seen him, wehad him on our holiday special.

(01:03:37):
It was very well received andhe's a great guy and a lot of
fun.
We talked about all differentsorts of issues.

Speaker 3 (01:03:43):
Yeah, he'll be on later this week.
Again, if you guys want to makea comment on the show or write
in, you can write it to info atno doubt about it.
Podcastcom.
Please subscribe on YouTube.
It really does matter.
It helps our algorithm.
Thank you Hit, subscribe.
Follow us.
Tell your friends about us.

Speaker 1 (01:04:02):
We appreciate all your support.
Thanks so much.
Have a great week.
You've been listening to the nodoubtbt About it podcast.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
We know we had a blast.
Make sure to like, rate andreview.
We'll be back soon, but in themeantime you can find us on
Instagram and Facebook at noDoubt About it podcast.

Speaker 2 (01:04:20):
No doubt about it.

Speaker 1 (01:04:22):
The no Doubt About it podcast is a Choose Adventure
Media production.
See you next time on.
No Doubt About it is a ChooseAdventure Media production.
See you next time on no DoubtAbout it.

Speaker 4 (01:04:30):
There is no doubt about it.