Jimmy Sengenberger fills in, talking guns and weed; Gordon Chang on the mounting Russian threat

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
This is Dan Kaplis, and welcometo today's online podcast edition of The Dan
Caplis Show. Please be sure togive us a five star rating if you'd
be so kind, and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Good afternoon, Tgif Jimmy Sangenberger here
with you, well, Dan Kaplisis out fighting for a client today.

(00:25):
Very good to be with you onanother hot one. Very nice and bright
sunny though now, but it diddrizzle in the Denver metro area a little
while ago. We have lots todive into today. Lauren Bolbert's schedule to
join us at the top of thesecond hour and bottom of this hour,
I'll be joined by Gordon G.Chang, who's phenomenal on issues of China

(00:49):
and North Korea and this meeting fascinating, the implications here and the questions surrounding
it between Kim Jong un and VladimirPutin. We'll see what Gordon G.
Chang has to say about that comingup at the bottom of the hour.
But there is now a new policygoing into a fact that the University of

(01:14):
Colorado, the entire system of seeyou as of today, as of this
morning, when the CU Board ofRegents voted to align the campuses with state
law on concealed carrie. That isto say, banning concealed carrie on campuses,

(01:41):
your license to conceal unless you fitin one of the very few exceptions
that they allow, you are notever unless they repeal this, going to
be able to carry concealed So you'rea single young woman, you're getting back
to the dorms. You're twenty oneyears old, old enough to have your
permit, old enough to have yourhandgun. And you get home and it's

(02:07):
say eleven thirty at night, andyou're by yourself going back up to your
dorm. You're not allowed to haveyour firearm with you to defend yourself.
Absolutely astonishing. Well, this isfollowing on to a new state law that
went into effect this year banning Thiswas just signed by Polis not long ago,

(02:29):
banning concealed carry on a number ofgovernment locations, including higher education institutions.
But you know there could be alawsuit. This happened with c You
actually in twenty twelve there was alawsuit against the University of Colorado regarding its
ban on concealed carry, and theylost that lawsuit and the ban went away,

(02:54):
and then they put a new policyto replace that that would enter on
regulating concealed carry as opposed to sayingyou can't do this. Now, that
was the University of Colorado that waschallenged. But let's say that the State
of Colorado has this law on thebooks, and somebody goes and challenges it

(03:15):
in court and wins that lawsuit,saying this is a violation of maybe not
just the federal Constitution, but alsothe very broad guarantees of the constitutionally protected
natural right to keep in bare armsin the Colorado Constitution. Well, then
a separate lawsuit would be required againstthe University of Colorado to get that band

(03:42):
rescinded, even if the state rescindswere to have to rescind their band.
Now this is important because of whatthe alternative could be, which is the
CU the University of Colorado doesn't havethis change, they don't have this band.

(04:02):
Somebody challenges the state prohibition in courtand wins, and bada boom bada
bing it's gone from the state,but CU still has it. That would
have been much It would have beenmuch better, much easier, much more
sound to the constitutional rights of theAmerican people, of the people of Colorado,

(04:28):
of students and staff at CU,whether it's Boulder, you see,
cs whatever, campus, anything inpart of the CU system. At least
they could have gone to court,gotten rid of the state and still had
that right guaranteed. But instead theydon't have it anymore. Now here's the

(04:48):
thing. The person who brought thismeasure forward, who proudly states quote on
Twitter, now known as the CUregents voted to follow state law and concealed
guns on campus. I am proudof the work we do on this board,

(05:09):
and that is Wanda James. Now, Wanda James is the regent representing
the first Congressional District of Colorado,which basically is Denver. She's out of
Denver, and she put this forward. And it's rather curious how she would
put this forward and be so pleasedabout it, tweeting earlier this morning,

(05:34):
we just voted to amend Region Policyfourteen point one to comply with state law
prohibiting carrying a concealed guns concealed gunon all four campuses. Thank you to
all who move this forward and foughtfor this change, saying it's just aligning

(05:59):
with the state. It is morethan that. It is not only making
it another hurdle. If the statelaw is ruled on constitutional, which it
should be, then there's another hurdleas I was talking about in court.
But it also is an endorsement bythe University of Colorado of this idea that
we should deny people the right todefend themselves when they are legally licensed to

(06:24):
carry. Now here is what's interestingthough about this whole thing. And keep
in mind, just for context,if you're not familiar applying for concealed carry
weapons CCW permits. In doing that, you have to confirm that you don't
habitually use alcoholic beverages, used controlledsubstances, or have substance addictions. You

(06:49):
also need to be twenty one yearsold, pass a background check, and
undergo meaningful training to demonstrate competence witha handgun. So we are talking about
responsible gun owners licensed to carrie concealed, leading me to raise the question to
my column for the Denver Gazette today, Wanda James concealed carry hypocrisy. How

(07:11):
will restricting law abiding citizens help fightcrime or promote safety? Now, federal
law also prohibits individuals from purchasing firearmsif you use or are addicted to drugs.
That includes marijuana. Now we sawthis play out with good old Hunter
Biden, recently convicted on three feloniesregarding this twenty eighteen purchase of a Revolver,

(07:38):
including lying on the drug question onthe mandatory gun purchase form. Now
that's just for buying a gun.Colorado law similarly banned CCW Concealed Carry Weapon
permit holders from being habitual users ofcontrolled substances under federal law, again including

(08:00):
marijuana. Now why do I bringup all of this context because Wanda James
has reportedly, from her own testimonyand news articles going back years, owned
guns for decades. It's unclear ifshe still co owns the range that she
started in Denver in twenty twenty.October of twenty twenty, the seventeen seventy

(08:24):
Armory and Gun Club established as avirtual gun range in Five Points to empower
people of color to exercise their gunrights. They also happened to be an
official partner nowadays of the US ConcealedCarry Association, which offers in depth CCW
training, and held their first CCWclass shortly after opening. Oh, by

(08:48):
the way, To be clear,Wanda James co founded this business that teaches
concealed Carrie classes, although the registeredagent for the company seventeen seventy Armory was
changed from Wanda James Grapefruit consulting firmto Brandon J. Cole, known as

(09:09):
the Nubis Hero, in June twentytwenty three. And he's their firearms instructor.
So I don't know if she stillowns the company or not. I
don't know if she has a CCWpermit or not. She did not respond
to my emailed questions. But WandaJames often boasts publicly about her personal marijuana

(09:33):
use, and I'll go over thisa little more when we go to break
here in a moment. But intwenty nineteen, she told a website called
exole Xo Nicole that she will quoteend the day and smoke a joint with
her assistant. In a February twentyeighteen interview with Cannabis Business Times, she

(09:54):
called herself a pothead. Her wordechoed in her November twenty eighteen Facebook post
stating quote, I am a pothead. I get elevated daily. And Wanta
James pioneered legal cannabis having co foundedthe nation's first black owned dispensary in two

(10:16):
thousand and nine and legal recreational potshops simply pure in twenty and fifteen.
She's very proud of that fact,ran on that fact for CU region,
and she was tapped by both GovernorsJohn Hickenlooper and Jared Polis to help shape
pot policy, raising some real questions. When you own a firearm and you

(10:43):
are open about that, and youalso are a publicly known pothead who owns
a couple of dispensaries, My goodness, there's a lot more to share on
this when we return. I'm justkidding, started Jimmy saying Berger filling in
for Dan Kaplis. Keep it righthere and now back to the Dan Kaplis

(11:07):
Show podcast. Janie must not bea student at the University of Colorado.
She's got a gun now, orshe's not bringing it now because as of
this morning, concealed Carrie on CUcampuses all across the state, all four
campuses are now was forbidden. Can'tdo it anymore. By the way,

(11:33):
I'd welcome your thoughts on this questionor this issue. At eight five five
four h five eighty two fifty five, how do you feel now about a
band un licensed concealed carrie holders fromthese campuses, whether you're a student,
your staff, you're visiting. Unlessyou meet certain narrow exceptions, it's forbidden.

(11:54):
And this was put forward as Iwas detailing in the last segment by
Wanda James. She is the ownerof Simply Pure Dispensaries. There are a
couple of them. She's a selfdescribed pothead, and she is the CU
regent representing Denver, and she happensto have been on the record for a

(12:16):
long time as being a gun owner. Not sure if she has CCW but
concealed carry weapon permit, but hergun range or at least the gun range
she helped found in twenty twenty.Is an official partner of a premier organization

(12:39):
for in depth CCW training, theUS Concealed Carry Association. By the way,
she has an associate in the cannabisspace, the marijuana space. Hashim
Coates who's running for Rapo County Commissionin District five against State Senator Ronda Fields
in a primary and he happened tobe arrested in December twenty sixteen for firing

(13:03):
a nine millimeter pistol at a carcarrying a male prostitute and three others,
including two children, and later pleadedguilty to misdemeanor prohibited use of a weapon.
At one point at least Coates helda CCW license, and he's worked
closely in the industry with James,leading Black Brown and Red Badged, an

(13:24):
advocacy group that Wanda James established tosupport a minority owned cannabis companies. I
view it as another front for herdispensary. Well. In twenty twenty one,
Hashim Coates testified for a bill establishingColorado's Cannabis Loan program, which Black
Brown and Red Badge developed with JaredPolis's office, the Governor of Colorado,

(13:50):
whose campaign for Congress in two thousandand eight Wanda James happened to manage HM
Well, James's company, Simply Puresecured an initial loan from this cannabis loan
program, and she donated five hundreddollars to a same Coats campaign. Well,
it gets more interesting. In twentynineteen, Simply Pure failed and underage

(14:16):
compliance check wan did James dispensary failedthis check and Hashim Coats, who volunteered
worked for Attorney General Phil Weiser's campaignsend an email to the Office of the
Attorney General claiming racial bias by marijuanaregulators. And why did James herself alleged

(14:37):
bias and unfair targeting, Well,despite her extensive industry experience, which you
would think indicates she should know better. Wan did James received a slap on
the wrist from regulators when she signedwhat's called an assurance of voluntary compliance that
merely pledged to follow the law withoutthe typical fine. Meanwhile, two of

(15:01):
her employees just so happened to losetheir jobs and their licenses. So,
as I write in my column forthe Denver Gazette today, Wandad James concealed
Carrie hypocrisy. Why is Wanda Jamesso cavalier about the laws that impact her,

(15:22):
yet she wants to deprive law abidingcitizens of exercising their constitutionally protected rights.
Astonishing eight five five four h fiveeighty two fifty five hour telephone number.
Jimmy Sangenberger in for Dan Kaplis andlet's go to the phones with Eric
in Castle Rock. Good afternoon,Eric, Ah, good afternoon to you,

(15:43):
find sir. But yeah, asfar as you can steal, Kerry
goes out carry weapons all my lifefor a long time, and like you
said, we have a constitutional rightto it. Their preference by not wanting
to allow that. In my opinion, I don't really care. All I
care about, and that's the mostimportant issue is if my shooting and defending

(16:06):
myself is justified right. Yes,God forbid that they ever happens. I'll
take the slap on the wrist forconcealed carrying to protect myself, my children,
and I guess other people that Idon't know. And if that's the
level I need to take it too, I will and I do do that.
It's just like the people I putthose little cute signs on that says,

(16:29):
hey, criminals, I don't wantguns in here. Well, I
haven't committed a crime by carrying myconcealed weapon into your store or facility.
I may have violated what you wouldlike, but I didn't break any law
because I have a right to carrymy weapon. So again, and if
it means that I take that riskto protect myself and others, but then

(16:52):
I'll take that risk. I don'treally care what this preference is. Here's
an ironic quote from twenty twenty fromWander James herself she said, and I
quote the idea that police are goingto be there to protect you all the
time as a fallacy. We callthe police that after a crime has happened,
if you've got five minutes to dealwith you and the bad guy,
you're going to want to make surethat you're living at the end of that

(17:15):
five minutes to be able to talkto the police about what happened. That's
what's stated by the woman on theBoard of Regents who put forward a policy
that they just passed preventing young singlewomen, just as one example, from
being able to legally for their campusesto conceal Carrie and protect themselves in those
five minutes. Eric, and asI went to many, many many classes,

(17:37):
I shoot all the time. I'mvery familiar. I have drawn my
weapon before. Unfortunately, Eric,you're saying something great, but we are
running into a it sounds like adead spot for you. But we also
have to run to our top ofbottom rather of the hour break coming up.

(18:00):
Gordon g Chang will shift gears.Hearing his insights. He's tremendous about
this meeting between Kim Jong Un VladimirPutin and a lot of these implications Lauren
Bobert coming up in an hour aswell. I'm Jimmy sang in Burger filling
in for Dan Kaplis on this Fridayafternoon. You're listening to the Dan Kaplis

(18:30):
Show podcast. Welcome back, Jimmysang in Berger filling in for Dan Kaplis
today. He's fighting for clients thisafternoon, and I'm glad to be with
you on a Friday with somebody whoreally he's got to be one of the
top go tos for anything about Chinaand North Korea and in this case Russia

(18:53):
as well, because it is gush. Things are heating up big time and
we have to get some real analysisand understanding from the senior fellow of the
Gatestone Institute, author of many bookson the Koreas and on China, Gordon
G. Chang. His handle,by the way on Twitter now known as

(19:18):
x is at Gordon G Chang andhe joins me. Now, good afternoon,
my friend. Welcome. Thank youso much, Jimmy. I appreciate
you joining us, especially because thiswas something to see. I think it's
the first time in twenty four yearsor so that the leader of Russia,
Vladimir Putin, met with a leaderof North Korea in particular. Now,

(19:40):
Kim Jong un, what was thismeeting about? What agreement? Let's start
there. What agreement did they maketogether? Yeah, they signed up a
comprehensive strategic partnership agreement, and partof that is a mutual defense clause.
Now we don't know the full extentof it, but this would be a
clause where each is bound to defendthe other. Now that's not like when

(20:03):
you have two democracies in a mutualdefense clause, because in those cases they
need it. We don't know exactlywhether Putin or Siegon or Kim Jong un
would honor thus clause. But thepoint is they're solidifying their relationship. One
more point, they actually put theirdeal together in September of last year when
Kim Jong un went to a cosmotronclose to vlood of Vostok, and there

(20:26):
the North Koreans agreed to sell artilleryshells and chart range ballistic missiles to the
Russians. Russians, we believe,agreed to provide ballistic missile technology to the
North Koreans. This what we sawthis week is basically Putin and Kim Jong
un solidifying their relationship. Now,what are the implications of this, especially
right now while Russia continues its invasionwith Ukraine and its war against Ukraine.

(20:52):
Is there support that could come fromNorth Korea for Russia in that endeavor?
Is that a piece of this Whatdo you suspect in that regard? Well,
the US believes that the North Koreanshave sent eleven thousand containers of artillery
shells and short range ballistic missiles tothe Russians for use in Ukraine. And
that's important because the Russians can't manufactureammunition at the rate that they're expending it.

(21:18):
So this really helps Russia prosecute thewar. But also really what it
does ultimately is it shows that theworld is dividing into camps, and that
the North Koreans and the Russians andthe Chinese and the Iranians and maybe a
few others, including the Algerians areactually in one side of this, and
the rest of the world, orat least a good portion of the rest

(21:41):
of the world, is in theother camp, and that would be the
United States and other democracies. Gourdingg Chang our guest author of Losing South
Korea Nuclear Showdown. North Korea takeson the world. Okay, you made
a very important point, Gordon,about these this division into camps. Is
the United States really wreckedgnizing in yourview? And if it is recognizing,

(22:03):
are they doing so adequately enough thatthis is the new reality that is increasingly
developing. No, because China isat the core of that other camp,
and the Bide administration still believes thatit can develop friendly relations with Beijing,
and they always talk about, well, you know, we will manage,
cooperate, we will manage competition,will cooperate where we can. I don't

(22:27):
think we can do that in thiscircumstance because we see China, for instance,
waging proxy wars on three continents,Europe and Ukraine, and North Africa
in its northern parts, and ofcourse the Middle East with Iran's attack on
Israel. So really what we haveis kind of destabilizing the world, and

(22:48):
they're doing that because they want totake down the great democracies. So no,
you can't engage. You can't cooperatewith a regime that wants to destroy
you. Yeah, I think thatthere's something important to be said there.
But let's unpack the role that theChinese Communist Party may be having in terms
of bringing more relations between Putin andKim, between Russia and North Korea.

(23:14):
Do you think that China has arole to play in that that they have
been executing at this point or isthis just those two states deciding on their
own we're going to reach a pack. Well, the North Koreans could not
reach a pack with Russia without theascent of China. And we know that
when you look back at the relationshipsbetween China and North Korea over the course

(23:38):
of decades and also just over thecourse of the last decade with Si Chimping
and Kim John Nun, that theNorth Koreans are obedient and the Chinese get
what they want on the big issues. They don't always demand the North Koreans
do what they want, but whenthe Chinese want something, they get it.
And I think what's going on hereis that China wants US Russia in

(24:00):
the war against Ukraine. Now they'vetaken a lot of heat in Beijing for
doing that, and I think whatthey're trying to do is distract the world's
attention saying look, oh no,it's the North Koreans who are really helping
the Russians so this actually furthers Chineseforeign policy in a number of very important
ways. Talk about nuclear weapons fora moment, because in the past,

(24:22):
North Korea would normally crop up whenthere were concerns about nuclear developments on their
part. To what extent is thatstill an issue at this point or is
it possibly becoming a greater issue withthese dynamics that play among China and Russia
and Iran in North Korea, it'sbecoming more important because the region East Asia

(24:45):
is becoming destabilized, and we've gotto worry that if China were to move
against the Philippines or Taiwan or someother neighbor, that North Korea would actually
start to pressure Japan and South Korea, and they might be able to do
that with Russia's help. So wesee these actors coordinating their policies, and

(25:07):
so we cannot assume it's just goingto be an attack by one. It
could very well be an attack byall of them. And the one thing
that North Korea has are nukes,and that got basically intercontinental ballistic missiles that
can hit any part of the UnitedStates. We don't know how good their
guidance is, we don't know howgood. Their heat shielding is, but
they could probably land a nuke inthe US, if not now then in

(25:32):
the very near future, especially withRussia's help. Gordon g Chang our guest.
We just got a few minutes leftwith the Gordon and I'm curious as
we look at the situation the ongoingwar in Ukraine. You were talking about
North Korea providing significant amounts of munitionsto Russia. Where do you think this
war is headed, particularly visa VIthe involvement in support of the Chinese Communist

(25:59):
Party and Kim Jong uns regime inNorth Korea. Well, it further divides
the world, and China is goingto make sure that Russia prevails, and
that means that it's going to takea lot more effort from the part of
the United States, NATO partners,and other countries to make sure that Ukraine
does not sail, and that meansUkraine becomes the lynchpin, the hinge point

(26:23):
for not only this decade, butthe first half of the century nowhere.
What is your take at this momenton US support for Ukraine. We are
seeing now that President Biden has redirectedair defense missile deliveries to Ukraine from elsewhere.
Do you think that's a good idea. I mean all of this.

(26:45):
The reason why I'm talking about Chinaand North Korea and the context of Russia's
invasion is because you can't separate thosecountries. So how do you view that
circumstance in US support for Ukraine.Do you think at this point it is
critical to provide additional munition and airdefense missiles and so forth to Ukraine?
Or should the US be pulling backas some suggest. We cannot pull back,

(27:07):
And the reason is if Russia takesUkraine, it's going to move against
NATO. It already is with itsattacks of sabotage attacks across Western Europe in
NATO countries already. Also, ifRussia takes over Ukraine, China is going
to make the argument that the UnitedStates is completely incapable and so therefore countries
should not side with US. ShouldChina go after some victim. So,

(27:33):
yeah, it's absolutely important, andyes it is dangerous that we do this,
but right now everything is dangerous,So saying something is dangerous is no
longer a meaningful objection. We've gotto realize this is an existential fight,
and if we don't win it,we could very well lose the world thirty
seconds. Final question, how closelyis the Chinese Communist Party watching what happens
in Ukraine and Western support for Ukrainevs a v its eye on Taiwan and

(27:59):
desire to invade that island extremely closely? And it's you know, it's not
just Taiwan, it's the Philippines,because we saw on Monday some very belligerent
activities at Tewo Thomas Schaul in theSouth China. See if you want to
look for a flashpoint for the moment, forget Taiwan, look at the Philippines.
Gordon G. Chang, Follow himon x formerly Twitter at Gordon g.

(28:22):
Chang and check out his most recentbook, The Great US China Tech
War. Always a pleasure to speakwith you, my friend. Thanks so
much for offering some insights today.Oh well, thank you, Jimmy.
Say that one more time, Gordon. I sorry, I apologize to put
you on hold. Okay, well, thank you so much, Jimmy,
I really appreciate it. There yougo, all right. Gordon G.

(28:45):
Chang joining us on Dan Kaplis Show. Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Dan today,
Join the conversation. What do youmake of it all? Should the
US continue to provide support for Ukraine? How is this all interconnected? Our
phone number eight five five four ohfive Again Jimmy sangen Burger in for Dan
Kaplis and now back to the DanKaplis Show podcast. Jimmy sangen Burger back

(29:10):
with you cover in for Capitalists today. Some fascinating insights with Gordon g.
Chang. You know, whenever youtalk, have a conversation with or just
watch or listen to him, youget a little bit you shake with a
little bit of anxiety. You can'thelp it because he's giving you a dose
of This is the reality of theworld. It is a complicated, dangerous

(29:33):
place. And bringing together North Koreaand Russia, or North Korea and Russia
coming together more on their own accordtogether in a defense pact. We don't
know specific details, but that comesat a moment. Where as Gordon was
saying, you have the world beingdivided into camps. You have a situation

(29:56):
where Russia and North Korea and Iranand of course the Big Panda Bear China
and the Chinese Communist Party have allforged this group, this camp, this
alliance, and we're seeing it playout in Ukraine and more. And one

(30:17):
thing that I really wanted to touchon from Gordon, the last question I
asked him was what about Ukraine andthe message that Western support for Ukraine and
how Ukraine is able to continue executingthis war against Russia. How important that
is in terms of sending a messageto the Chinese Communist Party that has eyes

(30:41):
on Taiwan because the world is watching, China in particular is watching. Because
if the world, the Western worldfolds in its support of Ukraine, that
could give an indication of the ChineseCommunist Party. You know what, maybe
after a little while in an invasionof war with Taiwan, the Western world

(31:07):
will pull their support for Taiwan andwon't be there. And that to me
is an unacceptable reality that cannot beallowed to form. And it is.
It is one of those things whereyou have to consider sort of the world
as it is, not as youwant it to be. And that's the

(31:30):
case in so many things. It'sthe case when it comes to concealed carry
on campuses at CU Boulder. Earlierin the show, we were talking about
or not just see You Boulder,the CU system. We were talking earlier
about now the new concealed Carrie banthat is going into a fact on campuses,

(31:51):
the four campuses of the University ofColorado system, all four CU campuses
now forbidden unless there are specific narrowexceptions that you meat. And that is
not taking the world as it is, but sort of as you that sort
of taking it completely as you wantit to be. That is to say,

(32:15):
you are denying the right for individualswho have a license to conceal carry
to exercise their constitutionally protected natural rightto keep in bare arms and to do
so concealed, and in particular,you are denying that to students who may

(32:37):
want the ability to carry so thatthey can defend themselves. That is an
ideological block, putting an ideological objectiveof eradicating guns from these different places and
making more gun free zones because weknow how well it works where you make
more gun free zones instead of recognizingthe reality of the situation and that you

(33:02):
are now making college kids and staffand visitors more vulnerable when they go to
a CU campus than before. Thatis why it is so critical, whether
it's here in this circumstance or inissues of foreign policy or the list goes

(33:23):
on, you need to make surethat you are looking at the world as
it is, not as you wantit to be. Recognize reality as opposed
to shaping reality. But then again, that is sort of the mindset of
the progressive right. It's this beliefthat the all knowing, all powerful government

(33:45):
can shape society and the economy asthey see fit, and if they believe
something is wrong, such as concealedcarry on campus, suddenly is a bad
thing, even though we don't haveany evidence to back that up, that
there's some kind of danger of concealedcarry on campuses. Well, we're gonna

(34:07):
go ahead and and try to shapethings as we want it to be.
You look at government welfare programs,the same kind of thing. Oh,
government can come in and help moldsociety in the way that they believe is
best and access. The problem,of course, is that it makes people
more dependent and makes society more poorless wealthy. Here we are in America

(34:35):
today, and as a listener textsin at five seven seven, three nine,
Jimmy, when seconds count, thepolice are minutes away. I carry
very sensible right there, Jimmy sayinga burger in for dan kaplis Lauren Bobert
in the next hour. Keep itright here, don't go anywhere,