Episode 223: Why Our Leaders Are Stoking the Flames of Division...And Its Dangerous Fallout.

Political violence is on the rise in America as demonstrated by the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and we examine how inflammatory rhetoric from political leaders contributes to this dangerous environment.

• Taking a deep dive into New Mexico House Speaker Javier Martinez's concerning social media post that positions himself as a victim while using divisive language
• Analyzing how politicians use fear to divide citizens for political gain
• Highlighting Bernie Sanders' balanced response condemning political violence as "political cowardice"
• Exposing Mayor Tim Keller's attempt to use taxpayer money to air his State of the City address right before an election
• Revealing shocking data showing Albuquerque TV stations have lost 30-77% of their viewers in the last decade
• Critiquing Governor Lujan Grisham's universal childcare program that removes income thresholds
• Examining the generational divide in priorities between Republican and Democratic Gen Z voters on family formation
• Sharing remarkable wildlife footage from our game cameras including bobcats and elk

Check out our website at NoDoubtAboutItPodcast.com to sign up for our emails, and be sure to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel to join the conversation.

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 2 (00:12):
Hello everybody, Welcome to the Sunday edition of
the.
No Doubt About it podcast.

Speaker 3 (00:18):
Yes indeed, indeed, we are ready to roll.
This is a packed show.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
Once again yeah, we're never lacking for content
on the show, especially asbreaking news, both statewide
and nationally, continues tohappen.

Speaker 3 (00:32):
It is off the charts, and we'll give you a quick
little update on what we'regoing to do here.
We'll start with the Kirk stuffreal quickly, go through a few
things, want to take it from alittle different angle here,
because I think as we've watchedwhat's happened over the past
few days, we have seen, I think,something become very clear in
this country, and that is wehave leaders who are more than

(00:55):
willing to stoke fear betweencitizens to get their own
political gain, and we have alocal example of it.
That is crystal clear and it isincredibly disheartening.
And so we're going to talkabout that.
We're going to talk about someleaders who I think are missing
the boat clearly.
Then we're going to talk aboutone that may surprise you.
We're going to play a littlebit of what he said, and he's

(01:17):
somebody that you would neverassociate with us jumping on and
saying, hey, well done.
The messaging seems to be a bitbetter, you know, and so we
will do that.
We'll talk about those sorts ofthings as well, and it's not
just that.
We're going to go through abunch of other things here.
One, the mayor of Albuquerque,is trying to pull something that
is flabbergasting to me.

(01:37):
He is going out and trying tobasically work his way into the
television stations, have themrun his state of the city
address, pay them to do it withyour money, by the way right
before the election.
So it's craziness, right.
And so we decided to do a deepdive on this.
We decided to look at when havethey run this before?
When have they run this stateof the city before?

(01:59):
Do they run it on TV?
They do.
Does it happen right before anelection?
You may be surprised.
And why would the televisionstations agree to do this?
We took a further deep dive.
How are the television stationsdoing money-wise?
Are they desperate for themoney?
The answer is heck.
Yes, and you won't believe someof the numbers we have.

(02:20):
You're going to be absolutelyflabbergasted when you think and
see the numbers that we'regoing to break down for you.
They're absolutely unbelievable.
So we'll do that as well.
We're going to talk about alittle bit about the special
session here, a little bit aboutthe governor deciding that
she's wants to provide freechildcare for everybody, for

(02:40):
people that have a lot of moneyin the state.
Right, we're going to.
Is that a great idea?
What might be a better idea?
We'll break that down.

Speaker 2 (02:47):
And why is she doing it?

Speaker 3 (02:48):
Right.
Why is she doing it Absolutely?
And then we'll break downwhat's going on on the
presidential front.
We'll look at some of PresidentTrump's numbers, why they may
be teetering a bit and why theremay be some hope for the
economy.
We'll get to details on that.
Plus, men and women look athaving a family very differently
now, and we're seeing some ofthese numbers and they are
surprising, and so we'll do that.

(03:09):
We have some UFO informationand, of course, Sunday game day.
So we are going to move quicklybecause we have a massively
packed show.
But I couldn't bear to pullanything out for you, if you
know what I'm saying you knowwhat I'm saying.

Speaker 2 (03:20):
I mean, I just couldn't do it, I know.
I'm just hoping you can punchit all over there.

Speaker 3 (03:23):
Yeah, I know, I know Me punching.
It's going to be a disaster.

Speaker 2 (03:25):
So again, Ella is busy.

Speaker 3 (03:27):
I don't know, I mean Ella, I mean she really should.
Oh, by the way, before we getto one other thing, the shirt.
Look at the shirt and you haveto stand up faith over fear by
the way, it's a very cool shirtwhich I love that hold on yeah,
faith over fear.

Speaker 2 (03:44):
Yeah, it's very cool love it.

Speaker 3 (03:45):
So, uh, we have a lot of friends in lovington and
dina who happens to cut my hairsfrom lovington.
She went down to lovington andsaid you gotta have a cat shirt.
And she got it.
This and we get a lot of shirts.
This one's a great show.
I mean, this shirt is going tothe top of the lineup.
This thing is comfortable, itfits, it fits You're going to
wear it to the gym.

Speaker 2 (04:06):
I mean I'll do whatever.
You'll wear it all the time.

Speaker 3 (04:08):
Yeah, we've got two in a row, I mean we got
obviously the Bulldogs yeah,he's helping us out with the
bull, with the Bulldog shirt,which was killer, and then this
one, oh my gosh, come on, allright, I don't know where the
rest of the state?

Speaker 2 (04:21):
is Maybe I need to start just writing people and
asking them to bring me someclothing.

Speaker 3 (04:26):
I don't know, I mean it's different clothing.

Speaker 2 (04:28):
I think that would look better.

Speaker 3 (04:30):
Yeah, I'm a little easier.
I'm a little easier, yeah, youare you got a little?
Different style.
Let's get to it.
Some of the breaking news here.

Speaker 2 (04:41):
Yeah, breaking news.
Obviously, the suspect has inthe Charlie Kirk shooting has
been arrested.
Tyler Robinson is the allegedshooter and, just for background
information on this, he wasturned in by his parents, I mean
his dad, his dad, who was asheriff, a former sheriff a
former.

Speaker 3 (04:54):
Yeah, now he's a now he's a construction guy, but
yeah right.

Speaker 2 (04:57):
So what's interesting that came out today is that he
was actually this, this allegedshooter is that he was actually
this alleged shooter.
Tyler Robinson was living withhis transgender partner in Utah
and now both of these folks arecooperating with police, but not
, I mean, I guess, not overlyshocking.
This is what a lot of peoplewere talking about that this

(05:18):
could have been.
There was a transgenderconnection.
And so he was like.
You can't say that Right.

Speaker 3 (05:21):
And then it took some time, and then now it appears
that they are living togetherand and there have been some
comments from both his family,uh robinson's family, and the
person that he lived with, lancetwigs right, both families
apparently uh kind of had beenthere's been some real
separation between the the youknow, twig and, and Robinson and

(05:44):
their families because of someof what was happening here.
So I think what this turns outto be is two young people who
end up down a very dark rabbithole of an ideology that ended
up pushing them toward murder.

Speaker 2 (05:59):
Right and I think when you start to look in a
little bit of what we've beendoing with Tyler Robinson's
background and his familyupbringing, it's it's actually
kind of terrifying because helooks like he.
His parents look like they werenormal.
It was like a healthy family.
I mean they went on familyvacations.
They had a very good upbringing.
I I believe they're a family offaith.

Speaker 3 (06:20):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (06:21):
Mormon faith in Utah.

Speaker 2 (06:23):
And and then then what happens?
What happens to this kid wholeaves home and suddenly just
goes down a very dark path?

Speaker 3 (06:31):
and he had a scholarship, a full ride.
Scholarship to college lasted asemester.
Uh, big into gaming, you know,you start going down these rap,
various rabbit holes that we seereoccurring over and over again
right and then and then I thinkhe definitely looked as Charlie
Kirk, as someone who, as helooked at his lifestyle, said he
needed to silence him.

(06:51):
So he's big.
Apparently, this this TylerRobinson was Mr Anti-fascist.
So Mr Anti-fascist brings a gunand Charlie Kirk brings a
microphone.
Who's the fascist?
Really?
Okay, he's the fascist, reallyOkay, he's the fascist.
Tyler Robinson is the fascist,clearly right.
It's not hard.
It's not hard to know that.

(07:12):
And so now you see what'shappening here.
So who knows what's going tohappen with him and how this all
plays out?
What I mean by that is what ishis punishment?
We don't know.

Speaker 2 (07:21):
Right, I mean we'll see.
Well, they did say, thegovernor did say that they would
seek the death penalty.
I mean when they before theyknew.
But here's the thing.

Speaker 3 (07:27):
He's not gonna be charged.
He's not gonna be charged instate court, he's gonna be
charged federally, right, whichthe feds have have the death
penalty as well, right.
So we'll see what ends uphappening.
But the governor was pretty.
You know, a lot of peoplestarted getting on Governor Cox
because he and Charlie Kirkended up crossways on some
various things, and, as a familywho ended up crossways with

(07:49):
Charlie Kirk in an election, wedid too Doesn't mean you don't
support him and don't think thatwhat happened to him was
absolutely horrendous.
I mean.

Speaker 2 (07:56):
I think that's the biggest difference here is that
you don't and kind of what I wastalking to my students about it
doesn't matter if you were afan or you disagreed with
Charlie Kirk, right, it doesn'tmatter, it's this man does not
deserve to be, you know, killedwhile speaking in the public
square.
Yeah, like that's where we haveseemed to loss our humanity and
I, you know it's.
It's exhausting kind of to see.

(08:17):
I've actually kind of shut downon social media because I
really can't.
I just can't take one more postabout the.
Basically Charlie Kirk deservethis, or he brought this on
himself.

Speaker 3 (08:29):
And we're going to get to that.
We're going to get to that,we're going to get to the
reaction, because the reactionis beyond.
If you go look it's so muchreaction here.
Yes, there there are.
Most people are normal humanbeings who look at things and
say this is a terrible tragedy,no matter what you think.
It doesn't matter what youthink of his political beliefs.
If someone went and took a shotat name your, your, your

(08:52):
liberal activist or leftactivist?
Who cares who it is, Whatever.

Speaker 2 (08:56):
AOC for crying out loud.
She can bake people's blood IfAOC.

Speaker 3 (09:00):
if AOC was was killed , it would be awful Right.

Speaker 2 (09:03):
Awful.
And so it goes against who weare as Americans, and I think
that that's what, somehow, we'relosing sight of.

Speaker 3 (09:09):
But too many people, as you go and watch this stuff,
are thrilled with it, areabsolutely thrilled.
You're disgusting.
If you're thrilled with this,you're a horrible human being.
If you're thrilled with this,you just are.
You've lost the thread andyou've lost your little piece of
humanity.
You've lost the thread andyou've lost your little piece of
humanity.
And the internet has turned youinto a monster.
It's turned you into someonewho's disconnected from reality,

(09:29):
because if you're sitting thereand you see someone get
attacked right in front of youor shot or killed or God forbid,
whatever it is, and you thinkit's good because you don't like
them politically, you've letevil into your soul.
And this is something wherethose of us who are Christians,
it's incumbent upon us tocontinue to push the message of

(09:50):
Christ, because that is what ourlives are based around.
That's what Charlie's life wasbased around.
And if you watch him and we'vetalked about our dust up with
him, right, but at the same time, over the past two or three
years, as we've watched him atcampuses, we started to go this
is really impressive what he'sdone.

Speaker 2 (10:09):
Well, he was definitely a key influencer in
the younger generation by far,and I would say he was probably
the biggest political influence,especially for the conservative
students out there, and so youknow you have to give him credit
where credit is due, Absolutely.
And I think again, just becauseyou don't agree with everything
he has to say does not meanthat this is something that he

(10:29):
was.
You know, it was his due, so tospeak.
Okay, and that really bothersme when people get into that
kind of stuff.
And another thing I want to justadd, really fast is a lot of
argument going out there onceagain not shockingly about gun
control and honestly, I'm justover that.
I'm like there's 400 millionguns in the United States.
Okay, so enough of that.
It's not going away.

(10:49):
Guns are going away.
They're here, right?
So you've got a kid that ismentally ill and something has
to be taken.
Real change with mental illnesshas to change.
Nothing else is going to changethese criminals, nothing.
You could take away everysingle gun.
I mean the guy on the train inCharlotte that was a knife,
right.
So it's like there's enoughmental illness that's happening.

(11:11):
It's not.
I'm so tired of the gun controlconversation.
I'm sick of it.
It doesn't stop what'shappening when people are not
stable, that are on our streetsand putting other people's lives
at risk.
So I'm tired of that one.
I don't want any more commentsabout that.
Okay, you're done with that.
You're not here.

Speaker 3 (11:29):
Okay, okay.
So I want to take this in alittle bit of a different
direction, and that is I want totalk about our leaders using
rhetoric that is over the top toincite people that are out of
control, which is exactly whathappened here.
Somebody who does not have hismental faculties, who is off the
reservation and sadly now, ifyou watch comments about all

(11:50):
this, there seem to be a lot ofpeople off the reservation.
So it is incumbent upon goodleaders to stand up and say
enough, I won't do this, I willnot use this type of rhetoric,
because we've seen theincreasing violence happen in
correlation with this rhetoric.
So here is Nancy Pelosi, inclassic Nancy Pelosi fashion,
making sure she won't take anyresponsibility for anything.

(12:12):
So she says I can't be heldresponsible for what other
people do.

Speaker 5 (12:17):
People don't have any intention of saying something
that's going to lead tosomething dangerous, but we
cannot take responsibility forthe minds that are out there and
how they hear it.

Speaker 3 (12:28):
And how they hear it.

Speaker 2 (12:29):
Yeah, you know what you can take responsibility for
is making sure that what you sayand what you put out there in
the first place is responsiblelanguage and responsible I mean,
I'm sorry.
How many times are you going tosay that democracy is at stake,
that you know there's a Naziregime happening again, using
that kind of language over andover and over?
I think common sense Americanscan sit back and be like enough

(12:51):
of all this drama.
They can do that right.
But you've got enough peopleout there that are not mentally
stable that they hear this andthey think, oh, I'm the one
that's supposed to go save theday, I'm the one that's going to
go and remove this person.
I'm going to save the day.
I'm the one that's going to goand remove this person.
I'm going to save the country.
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead andremove this person.
And you know, you look atsomebody like Charlie Kirk who

(13:12):
was not a violent guy, you knowand he's using a microphone, and
so you have somebody who'susing a microphone and then you
have a 22-year-old, unhingedindividual who shows up with a
rifle.

Speaker 3 (13:23):
I mean, you're on the wrong side of this, clearly,
and she won't take anyresponsibility.
And so many people on the farleft have done the same thing.
The whole party has just goneto the you're a Nazi routine and
again that has impact.
It caused an attempt onPresident Trump's life twice and
it caused some other, leeZeldin, it caused all sorts of

(13:46):
people to become targets.
Okay, and it continues tohappen.
So to sit there and say, well,we can't, we can't do anything
about how people hear it yes,you can, and this is my thing.
I think what we've got here iswe have a decay in leadership.
We have people who have nobusiness being anywhere near
leadership in this country and,believe me, there are some on
the Republican side too.
Believe me, there are.
Ok, but the violence right nowis is much more weighted to far

(14:10):
leftists right now.
This is what's happening.
It's happening right in frontof you, and you can bring up
other examples.
There's no doubt there havebeen other examples, but I think
what you're seeing here isyou're seeing this revolutionary
thought.
Right, I'm going to be arevolutionary, so revolutionary
thought right, I'm going to be arevolutionary, so I'm going to
wipe these people out, andsometimes they're trying to wipe
out Democrats too.
But but this revolutionarythought, that revolutionary
thought is on.

(14:31):
There are their leftists.
That's what they are.
It's anti -Israel, it's, it'severybody who disagrees with
them.
Is Hitler right?
We see?
it all the time, okay, so, soyou watch that.
And to me, that's the scariestthing and I think we have an
incredible example of it righthere in New Mexico because I
went and saw a Facebook post andone of my very close friends

(14:52):
sent me a Facebook post from oneof the most powerful people in
the state of New Mexico.
This is him.
Okay, do you know who this is?

Speaker 2 (15:00):
It's Javier Martinez, it is yeah.

Speaker 3 (15:02):
He's speaker of the house.
They don't get much morepowerful than this guy.
Okay, he's more powerful thanme and you and everybody within
the sound of our voice, saveMichelle Lujan Grisham Okay,
probably the second mostpowerful person in the state of
New Mexico.
He is not being targeted, he is.

(15:23):
He is the guy who determineswhat gets passed in many cases
in the House of Representativesin the state of New Mexico.
So he's got a lot more sayabout your life than you have on
his, and that's just a fact.
But let's just listen to whathe said, and you can read his
Facebook post here.
It is and again this is afterthe Kirk assassination.

Speaker 2 (15:45):
Facebook post.
Here it is, and again, this isafter the Kirk assassination.
My old man, my kid and I allfit Ice Barbie's definition of
what being quote illegal lookslike.
First, no human is quoteillegal.
Second, read a GD book.
I'm just going to bleep that,although.
Can she read Doubtful?
Third, my dad has done more tobuild this country than any of
those fascist clowns combined.

(16:07):
He is way more American thanany of them.
Fourth, if you hate my peopleand or enable that dirty sewer
rat in the White House, go kicka rock.
With all due respect to sewerrats.
Javier Martinez, speaker of theHouse and bad hombre.
Yes, this immigrant is thespeaker of New Mexico house.

(16:28):
Choke on that, haters.
Ps.
I might be my ancestors wildestdream, but I'm also a fascist's
worst nightmare.
Bring it.

Speaker 3 (16:37):
Okay, tough guy, all right, yeah, first of all, the
false bravado aside, which isjust stupid and clownish.
I don't even let's not evenaddress that portion of it from
Javier Martinez, but what hesays here at various times in
this post is exactly what I'mtalking about Mentions, fascists

(17:00):
, mentions, people not wantinghim to be speaker of the house
in the state of new Mexico.
What are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
You've been elected speaker.
You've been well, you've beenelected your house seat and then
by your peers, elected speaker.
You're one of the most powerfulpeople in the state.
What are you talking about?
I mean, I know he's taking shotsat the federal government at

(17:20):
the beginning of this.
And Christiey, no, I get allthat.
And and insulting her for herlooks, I get it.
Javier, I, I know you and thebrad pitt of new mexico, I guess
, because you can go and sitthere and insult people for
their looks, which is stupid.
Stop it, grow up.
You're our representative, youyou're in charge of helping run
our legislature, but you thenstart using things like they

(17:45):
don't want people like me, theothers.
You try to create yourself as avictim.

Speaker 2 (17:50):
If you hate my people , what is he talking about?

Speaker 3 (17:52):
Yeah, your people.
What do you look?
The fact of the matter isyou're as powerful as it gets,
but you go and write things likethis and try to act like you're
the victim of something, whenthe fact of the matter is, the
last thing we need is peoplethat act like this in leadership
.
Grow up, guy.
I mean.
You sound like a failed theaterkid where you're like everybody

(18:14):
hates me, everyone hates me andmy family.
No, they don't.
No, they don't.
You've been wildly successfulhere.
In fact, if you did your job,maybe we wouldn't be last in
education, first in violentcrime, and had no doctors.
How about you do that, brother?
And I know you're a tough guyand you're a bad hombre yeah,

(18:34):
you're a bad hombre at doingthings that actually help
people's lives.
So stop with your I'm a victimroutine.
You're not a victim.
The victims are the people yourepresent.
That you don't help, becauseyou have a huge chance to make a
difference, brother, but rightnow you seem more interested in
having people read your cheapshot words and get angry, and

(18:57):
when they do, they don't havethe control you do.
There are people out there,within the sound of your voice,
javier, who can't controlthemselves and may do something
over the line.
That isn't necessarily directlyyour fault, but when you use
language like this, it becomesan issue.
So stop, stop.

(19:17):
Stop trying to incite people.
Realize that you're the power,you're the guy with all the
power.
I don't have any, doesn't matterwhat I say, doesn't matter what
Christie says, doesn't matterwhat any Republican in Santa Fe
says.
What matters is what you do.
But instead of actually doingsomething to improve people's
lives, you decide you're goingto write a ridiculous screed

(19:39):
like this Grow up, guy, we don'thave the time for it.
We've raised kids in the state,and now what are we doing when
they get old enough to graduate?
We send them out, they leaveand they don't come back and
they don't come back.
And too often you have peoplethat show up like this and are
more interest in performance artthan actually helping someone,

(20:01):
and the problem is yourperformance art is just that,
but someone else's performanceart can be deadly.
So grow up, handle yourbusiness and help the people you
were elected to help, no mattertheir party.

Speaker 2 (20:15):
And I think it's also deflection of any
responsibility whatsoever, right?
So it's like hey, don't talk tome about what we're failing at
or what we're not doing.
Well, I'm the victim here.
Let me feel sorry for myself,let me go on and on, and I mean
I don't.
Even when I saw this, I waslike what's he even talking

(20:36):
about?
Like why is he in this day andtime, making himself into being
a victim?
I mean, we raise our kids neverbe a victim, never, never make
yourself a victim, right?
And I mean, when they start tofeel sorry for themselves under
any set of circumstances, we nipit in the bud.
Javier needs to nip it in thebud because it's not helpful.
We nip it in the bud.
Javier needs to nip it in thebud because it's not helpful.
And it's also it can add fuelto a fire.

(20:57):
I teach rhetoric in a highschool that says your rhetoric
can either incite and scarepeople and get people stoked up
for better or for worse, right?
What are you trying to do?
Like, what's your end game?
What you still want theillegals on the street here that
are criminals.
Is that what you're vouchingfor?
Like, I'm super confused onwhat you're even trying to go to
bat for it's just, it's nothelpful at all and in fact it's

(21:19):
hurtful.

Speaker 3 (21:20):
So Well, and I think, at the end of the day, though
Javier's son, he'll get the bestof the best.
Don't kid yourself.
Don't kid yourself, he will getthe best of the best.
The poor family in the SouthValley that can barely make ends
meet, they're the ones who needhis help.
They're the ones who need himto address critical issues in
the state of New Mexico and notbloviate about his garbage and

(21:40):
pull his tough hombre routine.
Okay, Nobody cares about yourtough hombre routine.
How about you care about thekids who can't get a good
education?
How about you care about thefamily that can't get to the end
of the month could desperatelyneed help from the state of New
Mexico in the respect of hey,put a little more money back in
their pocket.
Allow them to afford maybe someschool for their kids, some
additional tutoring.
How about that, brother?

(22:00):
How about that?

Speaker 2 (22:02):
Or people that actually just need a doctor.

Speaker 3 (22:03):
Yeah, right, right.

Speaker 2 (22:05):
Okay, okay.
So this so you get all thiscraziness and then there's a lot
of stuff.
I know you were on Twitterduring this whole process.
Well, yeah, and I just thinkthat's why it started to get
very disheartening is becausethere's a lot of support,
obviously, for Charlie Kirk andhis family.
There's, I mean, hundreds ofthousands of supporters out
there.
But when you start to see justthe negative out there over and
over and over, it makes you sickand it makes you start to lose

(22:26):
heart for our country.
But here is a tweet that wepulled from Chef Andrew Gruel
and basically I feel like thisjust kind of spoke very loudly
to what I was feeling.
It says the past few days haverevealed a harsh truth Deeply
cruel people are not rare orfringe.

(22:46):
They celebrate death and maliceand they're everywhere your
local salon, elementary schoollibrary or baseball league.
This isn't just about differingbeliefs.
It reflects a profound moraldecay in many, too many people
refuse to believe that and Ijust think you know people were
flooding us with toxic tweetsfrom school board people and

(23:08):
teachers and professors who werecelebrating his death, and I'm
like what is wrong with you,literally, I mean.
And somebody compared it.
They said when, when JFK wasassassinated.
There were plenty of peoplethat disagreed with his him
politically.
Nobody was out therecelebrating the death of Kennedy
.

Speaker 3 (23:24):
Well, but the problem is, now we have so much more
access to everybody's thoughtson their phone where they feel
like there is this weird wallwhere they can be completely and
totally callous, so and it'sdestroying the society is.
The problem is, is those wordsthat you it's almost like your
id right, it's like your id iscoming out, and there's so many,
so many of us, every one of uson this planet, has thought

(23:46):
things that are horrendous,right, and that we're not proud
of and we're embarrassed about.
But now, more and more of thosethoughts they come flowing out.
They come flowing out and thenpeople just throw them out there
and what it does is it slowlydecays the society, and that's
where we are, and that isincredibly scary, incredibly
scary.
So this was, I mean, this is abroader view of, I think, where

(24:07):
we are as a country, and I wantyou to listen to Noah Rothman,
because I think he's a superinteresting, very smart guy
who's writing a book right nowabout sort of what's happening
with sort of this violenceepidemic that is starting to
take over again, and he puts itinto revolutionary terms that
there are these people who thinkthey are revolutionaries and

(24:30):
it's incredibly dangerous.
So it's a little over a minutelong, but he is a really smart
guy and what he says here, Ithink, is something that will
make you smarter.
It definitely made me smarterwhen I listened to it.

Speaker 1 (24:41):
These events- continues to tick up.
You've seen, and we've talkedabout on this network, the
degree to which, in just thelast few years, you have
increasing evidence that we arein a new age of assassination
and political violence theattempt on Brett Kavanaugh's
life, the two attempts on DonaldTrump's life, the attempt on
Lee Zeldin's life, the attackson pregnancy centers and GOP

(25:01):
aides in Marco Rubio's case,because he was a GOP aide, to
say nothing of the anti-Semiticviolence that we've seen, which
has targeted Democrats too.
I mean what Democraticlawmakers were besieged in
November of 2023 in the DNC?
One lawmaker from Illinois saidthey had to be rescued by law
enforcement.
Josh Shapiro's home, joshShapiro's home, dozens of it.

(25:22):
And then you have LuigiMangione and the assassination
of Brian Thompson, a figure whofound himself on prayer candles,
celebrated at concerts, whosename was condemned by Democratic
lawmakers and yet appended avery pregnant.
But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,bernie Sanders, elizabeth Warren
, chris Murphy, all of whom saidbut you have to understand

(25:44):
where he was coming from.
You have to understand thisanger.
Maybe it's an anger we canharness.
No, no, no.
These are not your friends,these are America's enemies.
They're your enemies and youcannot channel and harness their
anger towards productive ends.
They must be defeated.
Until we have the resolve tocall what we're looking at by
its name revolutionary, romanticzeal in service to

(26:06):
anti-capitalist and anti-Westerncauses, then we're going to get
more of it, like we did in the60s and 70s, like we did in the
1910s and 1920s.
We're in the midst of that verysame cycle.
What did you think about what?

Speaker 3 (26:16):
That's right.
Too many leaders right nowthink they can ride the
lightning, they think they canbe like.
No, we don't want to say toomuch to make them mad.
We want to give them the buttmonkey, right, oh, but I know
they're wrong.
But no, no, and I think he'sexactly right and it's, it's
very, very interesting take andI think that's exactly where we
are.

Speaker 2 (26:41):
Right, absolutely, I know you know you.
You put this next one in.
I kind of disagree with you onputting this in um, because I
think Bernie Sanders has donehis own wheeling and dealing, uh
, to help stoke fires and helpstoke socialist type energies in
this country.
So I am kind of opposed to usputting this in here.

Speaker 3 (26:57):
Well, he is a socialist, he says that.
Yeah, openly but here's thething no, no, no, no, no.

Speaker 2 (27:02):
He can be a socialist .
I think he's also ahypocritical socialist.

Speaker 3 (27:05):
So I'm just putting that out there.
I agree with you.
Here's my point on this.

Speaker 2 (27:07):
He's a very wealthy socialist, by the way.

Speaker 3 (27:09):
Right, and I don't disagree with you on any of that
, but my point is that if we'regoing to get to a better place
in this country, people who have, I think, taken the wrong
approach must take the rightapproach, and so when you see
someone take the right approach,I think, or a better approach,
I don't think it was great.
This is four minutes long.
We're not going to listen toall of it.
No, we're not I'll shut thisthing down.
I will shut this thing down,but I do want to maybe listen to

(27:32):
45 seconds or so of BernieSanders, and the reason I want
to listen to this is because hedoes take more of the right
approach, and I'll let youlisten to it and then we can
kind of debate it.
Okay, all right.

Speaker 6 (27:47):
For joining me.
I want to say a few wordsregarding the terrible murder
yesterday of Charlie Kirk,someone who I strongly disagreed
with on almost every issue, butwho was clearly a very smart
and effective communicator andorganizer and someone unafraid
to get out into the world andengage the public.
My condolences go out to hiswife and his family.

(28:11):
A free and democratic society,which is what America is
supposed to be about, dependsupon the basic premise that
people can speak out, organizeand take part in public life
without fear, without worryingthat they might be killed,

(28:31):
injured or humiliated forexpressing their political views
.
In fact, that is the essence ofwhat freedom is about and what
democracy is about.
You have a point of view, that'sgreat.
I have a point of view that isdifferent than yours.
That's great.
Let's argue it out.
We make our case to theAmerican people at the local,

(28:54):
state and federal levels and wehold free elections in which the
people decide what they want.
That's called freedom anddemocracy, and I want as many
people as possible toparticipate in that process
without fear.
Freedom and democracy is notabout political violence.

(29:18):
It is not about assassinatingpublic officials.
It is not about trying tointimidate people who speak out
on an issue.
Political violence, in fact, ispolitical cowardice.
It means that you cannotconvince people of the
correctness of your ideas andyou have to impose them through

(29:39):
force.

Speaker 3 (29:40):
OK, that's why I thought that was pretty good.

Speaker 2 (29:43):
That's fine.
Everything that he said thereis fine and I agree with it.
I think that that's.
That's fine.
My issue is that he actuallygoes on to start comparing.
You know things that havehappened, like Gretchen
Whitmer's kidnapping.

Speaker 3 (29:56):
I understand, I understand.

Speaker 1 (29:59):
No, just here's the thing.

Speaker 2 (30:01):
He's also leading.
He was a leader in the no kingsprotest calling Trump an
authoritarian.
I'm, you know, like he.
He's helping stoke the rhetoric.
I'm sorry, but I look at thisand I think, yes, everything
that you're saying is true.
But when you're trying to twistwhat happened to Charlie Kirk
and say it happens on both sidesof the aisle, over and over and
over, trying to make it equal,then like Republicans are taking

(30:24):
out Democrats to like, likeit's all equal measure, right.
While there are some cases ofthat, it's largely not what's
happening, right?
I think this was a politicalmove by him.
I think he's trying to twistsomething around and try to make
it less damning for the farleft, and that and he's a, so he
is a walking, breathingsocialist.

Speaker 3 (30:45):
Well, I agree he can be a socialist.
That's fine.
That's part of this country.
You get to be a socialist.
If you want to be Great, go forit.
Whatever, go, make that case.

Speaker 2 (30:53):
Everything that you aired right there.
I agree with everything thatyou said.
I just wish he would act uponthat and not be out there and
calling Trump you know this, youknow tyrannical.
You know he's going to stokingthe fire.

Speaker 3 (31:06):
Yeah, no, I agree Again, if you don't agree with
Trump, which he doesn't.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
That's fine.
So argue with him on policy.
Stop calling him the Nazi, stopcalling him the things.
Stop doing that because it'snot helpful, and so take
ownership of that, bernieSanders.

Speaker 3 (31:22):
Apologize for being one of those people that said
those things.
I agree with you on that, andthen I'm all in for Bernie
Sanders.

Speaker 2 (31:26):
Well, I'm not all in.
I'm not all in on him either.
I'm not voting for the guy, I'mjust saying.

Speaker 3 (31:30):
I agree.
I'm just saying that.
No, my point on this is, though, that events happen, and I do
believe the Kirk assassinationis one of those events that
happens.
That, I think, is, is somethingthat changes the trajectory of
how this country moves forward.
I don't know how yet Right it's, you know it's like it's like
two I don't know pool ballshitting on the table and they're
going to go to I don't knowwhich direction we're headed.

(31:51):
Right, we could be headed intoa much worse place.
We could be headed into abetter place, but I'm just
saying I've seen enoughpoliticians over the past couple
of days say things that I justroll my eyes and go, you don't
get it and you really arepathetic.
Right, I look at it.
So many of them.
I just saw this and said youknow what?
At least he's got the righttone.
I like the vast majority of hismessage.
I listened to the whole fourminutes there are.

(32:12):
You're right, he draws someequivocation in there, but I
think, broadly though, I thinkthe message was more productive,
and so when that happens, I tryto recognize it, because I
can't stand shows where youwatch them and they are just.
You know, you just.
There's no logic to it at all.
There's just one side.
So I want people to know whenthey watch this show hey, we are
watching everything, and whenwe see someone, uh, from you

(32:34):
know a political side that wedon't agree with, you still say
you know what.
That makes sense.
Man, I appreciate you actuallysaying something that makes some
sense.
That's all I get that.
He's had this long history ofbeing who's a.
He's an absolute dictator.
And bernie does all that.
I get it.
I mean, I grew up up listeningto the guys.
The mayor of Burlington.

Speaker 2 (32:52):
Vermont.
He's wrapped up his old hockeytour, I mean come on, yeah, I
understand, I get it, I justthink he's.
I think it's a bit inauthentic.
I get it, I understand it, butat least.

Speaker 3 (33:02):
But I'm saying in in the from this statement.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
Okay, okay, fine, I'll give you that, I'll give
you one point for that.
Okay, thank you very much.

Speaker 3 (33:12):
But I absolutely don't disagree with you either.
Okay, so let's get to thisDarren White stuff.
I want to show.
I want to go through thisbecause we're running long
already, so here's a look.
I want to have you guys jumpinto the story because it is.
It's fascinating.
So Darren White comes out andhe goes and files an official
complaint with two of the threetelevision stations in town
because of what they are doingwith the mayor's state of the

(33:33):
city address.

Speaker 2 (33:35):
In the past years airing the speech on multiple
local channels.

Speaker 3 (33:38):
Sorry, sorry I didn't give you any.
So basically, mayor Keller isgoing to has paid the stations
to air his state of the cityaddress, coming up here right in
the center portion of theelection season.
Remember the election's lessthan two months away.

Speaker 2 (33:52):
Well, and early voting starts in early October.

Speaker 3 (33:54):
Okay, so sorry.
I'm sorry for not.
I didn't put the earlier clipin that you could have read.

Speaker 2 (33:58):
Okay.
In past years, airing thespeech on multiple local
channels has cost the citybetween $20,000 to $30,000 per
year.
Gallego said he did not statethe cost for this year's airtime
time.
The 30-minute speech isscheduled to run five times on
five different stations.
Krqe KRQE Fox, casa, koat TV.
No, kc.
Oh KC, sorry, yeah, casa's adifferent station, oh sorry, kc.

(34:21):
Koat TV and KWBQ TV starting inmid-September.
The latest rerun is set forOctober 5th on KRQE, two weeks
before the start of widespreadearly voting.

Speaker 3 (34:31):
Unbelievable.
By the way, four of those fivestations are just everything
that Nexstar owns in New Mexico,so that's all one station.
So they bought up basicallyKRQE, krqe, fox, kc and KWBQ,
which is the CW here.

Speaker 2 (34:47):
Okay White concluded his letter by asking the
television stations to provideequal airtime to each candidate
With seven qualified candidatesin the mayor television stations
to provide equal airtime toeach candidate With seven
qualified candidates in themayoral race.
Running an equal airtime of 30minutes each would take up a
total of 17 hours and 30 minutesacross the five stations.

Speaker 3 (35:01):
Okay.
So we know that is clearly notgoing to happen, right, right, I
mean, that is that's.
You know, all right.
So the question becomes.
The first thing I thought ofwhen I saw this story was well,
when do they usually do theState of the City?
Let's assume Gallegos is rightand they always air the State of
the City.
First of all, if you're goingto do that again, you're costing

(35:22):
taxpayer money to do it.
But you can make a case for it,right?
You can make a case that thepeople need to know what's going
on.
They buy some time so everyonecan see it on the TV stations.
Maybe you know they buy sometime so everyone can see it on
the TV stations, you know, maybethat makes some sense, right,
right?
Okay, so let's get to the factwhen they would run these things
.
So I just started going back,year after year.
This took me literally threeminutes.
So, okay, so 2024, when didthey air the State of the City

(35:44):
and when did Keller give it andwhen, roughly, did it air?

Speaker 2 (35:52):
It looks like it was in August of 2024.
Oh, okay, august 17th.
Okay, okay, august, all right,so what?

Speaker 3 (35:56):
about 2023?
Okay, 2023 says it was in May.
Yeah, may May.
Okay, may May Okay, so sixmonths ago, okay.

Speaker 2 (36:00):
Okay, and then in 2022, it was in June.

Speaker 3 (36:03):
June.
Okay.
So therefore, clearly this issomething that was pushed back
and designed to help, and themayor actually says in the state
of the state that we've got tostay the course, Like he
campaigns for himself Right Inthe state of the state.

Speaker 2 (36:23):
It's basically a political campaign.
That's what this is going to beand if anything differently is
not paying any attention.

Speaker 3 (36:29):
That's right, and so I want to tell you now.
I want to go on a deep dive onthe television stations in New
Mexico and in Albuquerque,because those are the only ones
that really matter to us.
Okay, and I want to first ofall make the case.
I started thinking okay, so ifwe know that they got a chance
to make 20, 30, $40,000, right,what would incentivize them to

(36:50):
do that?
More than anything else?
That would be, they need themoney, right?
Okay?
So I decided to dive in, and wehave enough connections here
and there to figure out what'sgoing on with, what it costs and
what the real ratings are in TVin New Mexico.
So, if you want to know how thetelevision stations really do
in their news product you'reabout to see it these are the

(37:12):
and these are not numbers thatthe television stations give you
.
These are numbers.
These are buyer numbers.
These are numbers If you go tothem and want to buy.
These are the numbers thatNielsen gives you back and you,
you see exactly how they'redoing.
So these are right.
Okay, that's what I'm sayinghere.
These aren't my opinion, and soand having been in that world
for my whole career, you liveand die off these numbers, let

(37:33):
me tell you.
And everybody says, well, hey,did you miss the news?
You're about to see why I don't.
Okay, so here we go.
Now I want to start with this.
This is a graph that shows youthe total audience basically in
the Albuquerque DMA.
So it's about 717,000, okay Ishow the Albuquerque DMA works.

(37:53):
That's what's counted in theAlbuquerque market 717,000
people.
So what that means is onerating point means about 7,170
viewers.
So when someone says I got arating of a three on my show,
you got 21,000 people watching.
If that's what you got, okay.
So that gives you a rough ideaof what every rating point means

(38:16):
.
So then I said to dive in andsay, okay, let's go back 10
years compared to today, how arethe ratings at these television
stations?
Are they so desperate forrevenue that they're going to
jump into the middle ofbasically what amounts to a
political fight?
It's possible that they wouldif the ratings have tanked
enough.
So let's go with each stationseparately.

(38:37):
So what we're going to do iswe're going to start with KOAT
and we're going to look at threedifferent rating periods
morning, evening and late nightnews.
Those are their bread andbutter.
Okay, those are the three timeperiods that, more than anything
else, create your revenue at atelevision station.
Okay, so we start with ourfriends at KOAT.

(38:59):
All right, so the bars that arein yellow are 2016 on this very
timeframe.
Okay, we pulled the exacttimeframe 2016, and then you
compare them to 2025.
So back in 2016, in the morningnews, six o'clock hour, koat got
4.7 as a rating.

(39:21):
That's roughly 35,000 peoplewatch their show.
Now they're at a three point.
They're at a 2.4.
Okay, they're about 17,000.
They've literally lost halftheir audience.
Gone from the morning show atKOAT, you go over to KOAT's 6 pm
news.
They used to get an 8.1.

(39:41):
That's a good number.
All right, that is a goodnumber.
That's 60,000 people roughlywatching you every night at 6 pm
.
Now they're half that 4.2.
Okay, they're.
They're 30,000 people.
Their bread and butter has beencut in half.
If you ran a business that losthalf your constituents or half
your, clients or whateverconsumers you'd be just

(40:06):
scrambling and they are.
Let me tell you.
Okay, 10 PM, they used to get a5.3, roughly 40,000 people
watching.
They're at a 2.1.
Okay, koat took the cash andyou can see they're trying to
find other ways to make money.
All right, let's go to KOB.
Kob's numbers are are not asdramatic, but KOB doesn't get

(40:27):
the good numbers that the othertwo stations did.
Okay so.
So KOAT I had some betternumbers, but if you go to KOB,
their morning news got a 2.6back in 2016,.
That got him about 18,000viewers.
So, not as much as not nearlyas much as KOAT, but now they're
at a 1.8.

(40:48):
They're under 15,000 peoplewatching their morning show each
morning.
You go to the evening.
They used to be at a 4.6, againwell behind KOAT, but now
they're down to a 2.8.
Okay, that's again 20,000viewers basically watching them.
Okay, you go to the 10 pm.
I mean, this is abysmal.
They had a 3.8, so every 10 pm,they'd have about 27,000
viewers in 2016.
Now they're down to 13,000.

(41:09):
Okay, yeah, it's rough.
It gets worse.
Krqe KRQE had a 3.5 at 6 am in2016.
That's about 25,000 viewers.
It's a good number actually,especially for a CBS morning
show.
They're down to a .8.
Yikes, they're basically at 5,thousand viewers in the morning

(41:35):
show.
Okay, you go to the evening.
8.4 they had in 2016.
We're the number one.
I think I was on that show.

Speaker 2 (41:43):
We're at you were on that, okay, we got an 8.4.

Speaker 3 (41:46):
We have 60 000 viewers.
Now they're down to a 2.8,under 20,000 viewers.
That's a collapse, right, andthis again.
This isn't that these stationsare terrible stations,
necessarily.
This is just showing you whatviewers are doing now.
And then at 10 pm, we had a 5.6.
We won I think 10 years in arow we won every ratings period

(42:07):
at the 10 pm show 5.6, which isover about 40,000 viewers down
to a 2.6.
So then we take one more graph.
This is the percentage ofaudience lost in each day part
for the stations in the market.
Okay, so if you look at this,koat in the mornings has lost
49% of their viewers, kob's lost31%.

(42:31):
Krqe has lost 77%.
In the evenings, half of theviewers are gone from KOAT, 40%
are gone from KOB, 67% are gonefrom KRQE, and then at the 10
o'clock, basically 50 to 60% ofthe viewers are gone.
It's unbelievable.

(42:52):
It really is unbelievable.
So when you look at this andyou say, what are they doing?
They're doing a bunch of otherstuff, trying to do digital,
trying to do podcasts, trying todo everything they can do Okay.
But when you look at this andyou tie into the fact that any
chance of decent revenue theyget, they're going to take it.

Speaker 2 (43:08):
Right.

Speaker 3 (43:08):
Because this is a this is very difficult territory
.

Speaker 2 (43:11):
Especially to take it Right, because this is a, this
is very difficult territory,especially during election
seasons?

Speaker 3 (43:15):
Oh no that's the other thing, though.
Yeah, that what I wonder,Christy, is are they are
candidates finally going to wakeup to the fact that they don't
need to?
They just don't need toadvertise as much on on the, on
the television stations for newsRight, Because you don't have
the audience you don't have theaudience.
Now, I think.
But we'll see.

(43:35):
And I'd like to see thestations adjust some of what
they do, and I think part of theissue here is the stations need
to become indispensable again.
Right, and I don't thinkthey've done that.
I don't think they've.
I think they've.
Revenues have gone down andwhat's happened?
Their staffs have shrunk.
So you can do one of two thingswhen your revenue goes down,
you can say we're going tobecome indispensable and raise

(43:56):
revenue again, or we're justgoing to tighten up and we're
going to get cheaper and cheaperand cheaper and the quality is
going to go down and down.
I still think they have a chancein these big networks like like
next star and Hearst.
They still have a chance topivot and do good things, I
think.
But boy, these numbers show youthat when you get a chance to
get 20, 30, 40 grand into yourbusiness right now and your

(44:17):
business model is doing this,you got to take it, I mean, and
they shouldn't be doing it.
Believe me, I don't think theyshould be running this speech.
They shouldn't do it, Shouldn'ttake the money.
Kob is not taking the money.

Speaker 2 (44:26):
Okay.
Anyway that's interesting, Ithink you know they, they, they,
they were smart in themarketing departments, they
would figure out why are webleeding so many viewers?
Yeah, and then, secondly, maybeyou look at other alternatives
to spend your money on whenyou're running for office, like,
I don't know, a podcast.

Speaker 3 (44:41):
Yeah.
Just saying Maybe you advertisein different areas?
Now, no, believe me, ournumbers.
Are you kidding me?
I know Our numbers are so good.
I know Our numbers are so good,I know.

Speaker 2 (44:52):
I'm starting to go oh my gosh.

Speaker 3 (44:53):
I look at this and I'm take an advertiser, but I
mean, we haven't yet, but wemight start.

Speaker 2 (44:57):
Well, yeah, who?

Speaker 3 (44:57):
knows, we'll see what happens, but uh, anyway, okay,
we've got.
We are way over, so so I wantyou to hit this story really
quickly.

Speaker 2 (45:03):
We'll just hit this.
The governor announced theuniversal child care for all
kids that the state will pay thebill.
Basically, even if families aremaking well to do right,
they're going to cover it.
So now it's a universal childcare program and the question
becomes here.
Here's just a little quick clipof it.
It says, starting this fall,new Mexico will become the first
state in the nation to launch auniversal child care system

(45:23):
providing no-cost child care forall families statewide.
The initiative announced Mondayby the governor is set to take
effect November 1st and marksthe latest step in the
governor's effort todramatically expand child care
assistance in New Mexico.
Basically, it says specifically, it will remove an existing
income threshold of 400% of thefederal poverty level in order
to receive child care assistanceeligibility, paving the way for

(45:46):
an additional 12,000 childrenstatewide to qualify for no-cost
child care.
Now, just as a quick background, this was already provided to
families who desperately neededit, right?
So now we're tapping intoallowing this for all families,
even if you don't need it, evenif you can financially afford
your own childcare help.

(46:07):
So my issue with this is acouple fold really fast.
Number one who's paying for it?
Right, because there's no suchthing as free anything right.
Number two I think that she'sdoing this obviously to get on
national news outlets and try toget some national attention,
some press attention.
She's getting that, so it'sworking in her favor for that.
Number three I just think thissounds like a socialist program.

(46:27):
It sounds like, hey, we'regoing to just be providing
everything for you all the timeto stay with government
assistance and we're going totake care of everything and
where is the work?
Like, you have to work toenable to get this.
Like there's.
I don't see any stipulations onthat.

(46:48):
And I think what's even morefrustrating is this didn't go
through the state legislature toapprove it.
Right?

Speaker 3 (46:51):
This was just signed.
They will have to approve somemoney for it, but you're right,
so far it's.

Speaker 2 (46:54):
And who pays for it?
I mean, who's funding most ofour budget, oil and gas?
People wake up.

Speaker 3 (47:00):
It's oil and gas.
No, I disagree with you on that.
Hold on, they go after oil andgas people.

Speaker 2 (47:05):
Yeah, you just wait a second.
They go after oil and gasconstantly whenever they're
running an election.
Oh the oil and gas.
That's terrible.
And yet they spend, spend,spend the oil and gas money.
That's what they do.
They fund programs like this.
So I'm just like then, ifyou're going to keep, it's like
okay, you cannot speak out ofboth sides of your mouth.
You can't trash, talk oil andgas and then go spend all the

(47:28):
oil and gas money.
I'm sorry, I might make adifferent argument, which is
forget oil and gas.

Speaker 3 (47:31):
Good for you guys.
I love oil and gas, clearly butyou know what?

Speaker 1 (47:34):
No, no, no.

Speaker 3 (47:35):
It's rich families having their child care paid for
by low income families.
It's all state money.
We're all paying into the pot.
There are people that aremaking 25 bucks an hour, that
are paying into the pot here andthey're going to cover some
million dollar a year.
Bankers kid going to child carewhy?

(47:56):
Why should they do that?
That's why we have incomethresholds for these things.
But my argument would bedifferent on this, and then that
would be that I think what wehave to do here is when you
create another huge program andyou say here we'll dole out just
enough for you, here's justenough to keep you exactly where
you are.
That's not what we need to bedoing.
We should be go going to thelegislature and our friend

(48:19):
Javier Martinez, and go to himand say, javier, let's eliminate
the New Mexico income tax,especially for every family
under $100,000 a year.
If we do that, that's animmediate 5% raise for every
low-income family in the state.
Those families are alreadygetting the free child care and

(48:40):
then you are going to bring morebusiness into the state of New
Mexico.
Go across the board, wipe outthe income tax.
You can afford to do it.
It'll cost about billiondollars a year and then what
will happen is the state willgrow actually and it'll cost you
far less than a billion dollarsa year and every mexican will
make five percent more than theydo right now.

(49:00):
But by doing that, that doesn'tfit the big brother model now.

Speaker 2 (49:04):
Big, big government, big brother model that gives you
the power, not the government.
Right, exactly, and that isit's.
It is buying, it is is tryingto trick you into staying on
government assistance at the endof the day.
They're like now, we don't justwant the kids that can't afford
it, we want all the the kids.
We're going to just we're goingto take care of all the kids
Enough.

Speaker 3 (49:21):
Yeah, no, okay, all right.
So some quick stuff here.
Harry Anton is back we got himback here, by the way, you know
and he's talking about thepresident's numbers, okay, and
he's saying the president'snumbers aren't good, but we're
going to take a little differenttake on this.
So let's just, let's enjoy acouple seconds of what he says
about President Trump's numbers.

Speaker 4 (49:38):
And look how long Donald Trump's net approval
rating has been negative.
It has been every day sinceMarch 12th, in the average of
polls.
We're talking about 181 days ina row in which Donald Trump has
been underwater swimming withthe fishes.
There is no good data forDonald Trump when looking at the
aggregate and looking overall.
He has been negative for a verylong period of time, the vast

(50:02):
majority of his secondpresidency.
What about the issues?
Ok, what about the issues?
You see this here, right?
Is there any shining light?
Is there any light at the endof the tunnel?
Well, look at the issues.
Look at this.
These are all the key issues.
Donald Trump is underwater onall of them.
Trade, obviously.
Tariffs have been a big thingat the bottom of your list minus
17 points.
The economy, which was thereason, the reason he was

(50:24):
elected to a second term to fixthe economy way underwater at
minus 14 points.
Foreign policy minus 12.
And then, I think, mr JohnBerman, the key two issues at
the top, because these have beenDonald Trump's strongest issues
crime and immigration.
But get this he is nowunderwater on both of these
issues, if barely.
But he's underwater on crime atminus two.

Speaker 3 (50:43):
Ok, so I want to stop right there for just a second
and I want a couple of things.
So I care more about the actualissues, right, that he's
talking about here.
I think let's start with theeconomy, because those are the
ones where he's more deeplyunderwater, ok, and then I'll
let you address the immigrationsituation.
But the economy issue isinteresting because I think what
you're going to see this weekand actually, yeah, late this

(51:06):
week I think we're going tostart to see interest rate cuts.
So that's what we've beentalking about.
Can that start to help things?
You know, scott Besson, thepresident, says listen we start
to cut interest rate, Thingswill be looking better.
Listen, we start to cutinterest rate, things will be
looking better.
That could be something on theeconomy front where you start to
see things move a bit betterand mortgage rates now are
starting to come down, not onlyin anticipation of the cut but
because of a variety of otherthings that are happening as

(51:28):
well.
So that could well start toaddress things on the economy.
We'll have to wait and see,don't know.
Yet those numbers are tough,but then you look at the numbers
on law enforcement andespecially immigration, and
that's an interesting battle andI think something happened
earlier last week that was sortof illustrative of what may be

(51:49):
happening here.

Speaker 2 (51:50):
Right, I would just say again, not only with certain
leaders that are, you know,taking their cheap shots at what
Trump is trying to do, which isto try to make this a safer
country as far as getting thecriminals out of the country.
Right, you have the mediajumping in shockingly, uh, also
trying to undermine anythingthat they're trying to do, right
.

Speaker 3 (52:09):
So let's just play a little clip here, not not too
shocking, it's on MSNBC, butlet's take a look, uh, and the
one thing about this, what she'stalking about the beginning of
this with Tom Homans is she'ssaying you have an ice car
parked in the wrong place.
That's what she's arguing.

Speaker 2 (52:25):
That's her whole argument.

Speaker 3 (52:26):
Her argument is don't park in places that could upset
people.
That's what.

Speaker 2 (52:30):
Right, not not.
Help us get the criminals offthe street.

Speaker 3 (52:33):
And then Homans and her go back and forth.
This is worth the listen.
It's a little long, but it'sworth the listen.

Speaker 5 (52:39):
Morning.
You have Governor Healy talkingabout ICE doing enforcement
operations at a church.
False Didn't happen.
No, they were parked there.
They did not do an operationthere, she said they were parked
in a public space legally.
But to say that and to pushthat out there puts fear in the
immigrant community.
So let me tell you what'shappening To do.

Speaker 1 (52:58):
That puts fear in the immigrant community, so let me
tell you what's happening.

Speaker 4 (53:00):
To park the ICE agent's vehicle near a church.
They are in a public street.

Speaker 5 (53:06):
She said that sir they're in a public street
waiting to respond to a criminalalien release, pulled aside the
road.
Let me tell you in the lastcouple of days what's happened.
In Boston, they arrested VictorGomez Perez, a 33-year-old
criminal alien from Guatemala,with charges of aggravated rape,
assault and battery withdangerous weapon, indecent
assault and battery on a victim14 years or younger.

(53:26):
They arrested Kaylee Espinosa,a 34-year-old criminal alien
from Colombia, with charges ofaggravated assault on a pregnant
victim.
They arrested Joshua Gonzalez,a 24-year-old criminal alien
from Dominican Republic, withcharges for trafficking heroin,
morphine, opium, resistingpolice, disorderly conduct and
drug distribution.
They also arrested SamuelArmando Barrera, a 20-year-old

(53:49):
criminal, illegal alien from.

Speaker 3 (53:50):
Guatemala pending charges for assault and battery
on a child.

Speaker 5 (53:54):
So, mayor Wu and Governor Healy, they ought to be
calling ICE and thanking themfor making their streets safer,
for protecting their communitiesand taking these people off the
street.
They have turned a blind eye tothis.
They're sanctuary cities.
Sanctuary cities and sanctuarystates are sanctuaries for
criminals.
Give ICE access to the jail toarrest a bad guy in the jail,

(54:15):
rather than having to go in thecommunity to find them, because
when you go in the community tofind them, it puts ICE officers
at greater risk, it puts thecommunity at greater risk, it
puts the alien at greater risk,because anything can happen on a
street at risk.
This is what we're trying to do.

Speaker 3 (54:27):
We're trying to— Okay , so you see he's just going off
, and then they go back andforth with each other a bit more
on this, but we'll let it go.
What's it called?
Again, when they look, you get,you keep going on the stand and
you're the, and oh, a narrative, a narrative you gotta.

Speaker 2 (54:44):
That's a narrative objection.
Narrative your honor, yeah, Imean hohen definitely took the
narrative there and I can'tbelieve that mika kelly let that
happen.

Speaker 3 (54:48):
But still mika brzezinski, yeah oh sorry, the
actress did not let that.

Speaker 2 (54:52):
Oh, that's right, sorry, yeah, hello goodness
gracious okay, anyway.
Uh, another show, that's great,all right.
So let's move on here to talk alittle bit.
We mentioned this, I don't know, a couple of months ago on a
show talking about Gen Z and howthey're really kind of changing
the difference between Gen Zmen and Gen Z women, and what

(55:12):
political party they alignthemselves and where they land
when it comes to, like, wantingto have a family, for instance,
or marriage.
Right, so it says, party linesare dividing Gen Z on big issues
that weren't political fortheir parents and grandparents.
It's called kids and marriage.

Speaker 3 (55:27):
Yeah, and a poll conducted in August and
September by NBC News asked 18to 29-year-old Americans to
choose their top threepriorities from a list that
included a fulfilling career,emotional stability, owning a
home, being spiritually groundedand being debt free.
These numbers are amazing.

Speaker 2 (55:44):
Yeah, you look at males that supported, voted for
Trump.
Number one for them.
Their number one priority ishaving children.
Yes, man.
Look at men, Okay, but I willsay women that voted for Trump.
Only they ranked havingchildren at six, at number six,
a little bit down a little bitdown, kind of midway down.
Kind of midway down.
Now you flip.
You look at males who voted forHarris having children way down

(56:05):
, a priority at number 10 intheir lives, and females way
down who voted for Harris atdown to number 12.

Speaker 3 (56:12):
By the way, this should concern, I would think,
Democratic Party leaders,because I'm pretty sure
procreation is still the way youcreate more voters.
You know what I mean and youlook at.
You look and say, yeah, the redside wants to have kids more
than the blue side does.

Speaker 2 (56:27):
Right, it's interesting.
All right, keep going.
They're just basically sayingthat value systems have kind of
changed.
Yeah, and it's really it'ssuper interesting to me.

Speaker 3 (56:36):
Yeah, and then financial independence, very
important to both men and womenwho are Republicans fairly
important as well to theDemocratic side.

Speaker 2 (56:45):
Being married is for guys that voted for Trump.
They rank at number four.
Women rank it at number nine,which ties with men who voted
for Harris at nine, and femalesthey say being married kind of a
mid, like really one of theleast priorities for them, right
?

Speaker 3 (57:01):
And the interesting thing too is, you know, when you
look at Democrats and they say,having a job or having a
fulfilling career, that's numberone for both men and women on
the Democratic side and veryimportant to them as well
emotional stability and usingyour talents and resources to
help others.
So some interesting stuff.
But the kid thing really wasfascinating, yeah, where it's
like, you know, republican menwant to have kids.

(57:23):
You know, even you know more sothan anything else.

Speaker 2 (57:26):
And we talked about this just with you know, the
generation below us, right, or acouple of generations below us.
We see more and more peoplesaying I don't want kids.
I don't want kids Like.
I agree with that 100%.

Speaker 3 (57:43):
Well, no, agreed.
I mean, no one should be like,hi, sorry, we're delivering you
four kids, I'm sorry you don'twant them, but you're getting it
, I get that, but cut it.

Speaker 2 (57:56):
But we don't have time.

Speaker 3 (57:57):
We're not cutting anything.
We're going over the hour marktoday.
People UFO.

Speaker 2 (58:00):
Yeah, okay, there's some new video out that we tried
apparently to shoot one down.

Speaker 3 (58:05):
Yes, we did, and it didn't work it bounced off of it
or something.
Yeah, we'll show you the video.
And this is George Knappheadline.

Speaker 2 (58:20):
It says shocking radar footage shows hellfire
missile fired by us militarybounce off ufo over the ocean.

Speaker 3 (58:27):
So here it is, so let's take a look at it.

Speaker 2 (58:29):
Here's the video right here and I'll just read a
little bit of the copy.
It says the speeding object waspaced by a hundred pound
hellfire air to ground round,fired by there it is an MQ nine
drone which made contact andbounced right off bounced right
off.

Speaker 3 (58:42):
I mean it's craziness .

Speaker 2 (58:43):
Yeah, this was in October of 2024, by the way.
So, um, I don't know.
I just think um George Knappsays there's a server where
there's a whole bank of thesekinds of videos that Congress
has not been allowed to see.

Speaker 3 (58:55):
Well, and we'll just, we'll take one more look at
this because it is kind of fast.

Speaker 2 (58:59):
But if you keep looking, if you look at this
missile, from the north, inother words the top of the
screen.
Boom right there, and it justkeeps going yeah, it just kind
of nicks it and bounces off ofit.
So again, I still want moreinformation about I keep saying
that I want all the informationabout all the the craziness that
we're seeing on the east coast.

Speaker 3 (59:17):
So we'll see, but see .
But we're starting to see moreand more stuff come out right
and more and more detail comeout on this stuff.

Speaker 2 (59:23):
I don't know.
It's amazing.
Here's what I think we couldcut.
We could cut Sunday game video.
We're not.
We're not Because I got somegreat stuff OK.

Speaker 3 (59:28):
OK, so first of all, one of the things on game day
that was not what we seen.
So I tell you what.
This week was a big bobcat weekup in the Northern Mountains.
We've had a lot of rain upthere, and so I repositioned one
of the cameras and I got thislittle fella that showed up
right on the cam.
Look at him right there.

(59:48):
Look at his little bobcat legs,little bobcat tail.
Right he comes walking across.

Speaker 2 (59:54):
Okay so, you see him.
And what people don't know isthat Mark has secretly wanted to
raise bobcats.
I would love to which.
I think is insanity, I'm notgoing to lie.
Huskies and bobcats, I know.

Speaker 3 (01:00:04):
I love it.
We're going to stick withhuskies, so number two.
So two days later, differentcamera, middle of the night.
Check this guy out he appearsto be far bigger.
Now I wondered at first if thiscould be a lynx.

(01:00:26):
I don't think that it is, it'sjust a bobcat.
But you see him, he's a bigdude.
Yeah, look at the size.
I'm never gonna be able to walkalone.
Look how big he is.
Look how thick he is.
I mean big fella.
Just look at him standing there.

Speaker 2 (01:00:31):
Yeah, he's giving you a little pose, so just look at
him.
He's a beauty.
I heard that mark wanted to seeme on camera, and so I've
decided to pose for you.
So here you, you go, everybody.

Speaker 3 (01:00:38):
I mean, yeah, so you can see like the toughs on his
ears aren't quite what a lynxwould be.
But man, when I saw that I waslike holy cow, Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:00:44):
And then the reposition.

Speaker 3 (01:00:45):
This is an Africa, by the way guys, the reposition
continues elk right in front ofmy other camera.

Speaker 2 (01:00:51):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:00:54):
And there help from mom.
A little milk, a little milkaction.

Speaker 2 (01:00:56):
And again, I love that they're just frozen right
in front of the camera.

Speaker 3 (01:00:59):
Yeah, I think it's fantastic.
Mom's like, all right, hurrythis up, come on, you're.
You're almost like a teenager,what are you doing here?
And then mom starts to walk off.
So that's pretty cool stuff,yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
It's definitely active up there.
It's never dull on your gamecameras.

Speaker 3 (01:01:11):
I mean it is.
I mean the game cameras.

Speaker 2 (01:01:13):
I'm sorry right then, I am loving the game.
They're great.
Oh okay, okay, really fast.
Sorry, this just came in fromour videographer up in the angel
fire area, john beck.
Yes, okay, this is a shot ofwheeler peak first snow.
Ladies and gentlemen, we haveto show this to you talk about
breaking.
Literally, you finding thebreaking news and throwing it in
right now incredible yeah, Imean, it's gorgeous out there,

(01:01:35):
so we definitely want to bepromoting anything we can.
With snow in New Mexico, it'svery exciting.
So thank you guys so much forjoining us and spending some
time with us.
If you'd like sign up for ouremails on our website at
NoDoubtAboutItPodcastcom, and ifyou want to leave a comment for
us, make sure you like andsubscribe on our YouTube channel
.
That's how we find thosecomments and we appreciate all

(01:01:56):
of your support.
That's how we find thosecomments and we appreciate all
of your support.
Have a great start to your workweek and we'll see you back
here on Wednesday.

Speaker 7 (01:02:03):
You've been listening to the no Doubt 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.
No doubt about it.
The no Doubt About it Podcastis a Choose Adventure Media

(01:02:26):
production.
See you next time on.
No Doubt About it.
There is no doubt about it.