It started with President Trump's bold and triumphant strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. It ended with massive wins at the Supreme Court on several issues, including an end to lower court injunctions on his executive orders and a green light to end birthright citizenship in the United States.
Jake Kubie, Director of Communications for the Denver Zoo explains the venue's decision to shut down on early Saturday with reports of violent teenage mobs descending on City Park.
Jake Kubie, Director of Communications for the Denver Zoo explains the venue's decision to shut down on early Saturday with reports of violent teenage mobs descending on City Park.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Caples and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
give 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. I have to
ask you again, third day in a row. Are you
getting tired of winning? Oh? My lord, this is fantastic.
(00:23):
Three or three someone three a two five five the number?
Text D an five seven seven three nine, and think
about it. Think about the magnitude of what happened today
at the US Supreme Court, and we're going to deep
dive it. You're gonna find it absolutely fascinating. It's just
so interesting on every level, legal level and public policy,
all that good stuff, sure, but the human level is
(00:46):
really extraordinary. And I think very telling about what is
to come with this US Supreme Court. Three or three
someone three eight two five five jumping anytime again? Text
d A n five seven seven three nine. So big
things coming out of the Supreme Court today, and we've
got to look at them individually because they're also interesting
and important, but taken together even more so, you know,
(01:09):
the some greater than the whole, greater part of me
than the some of the parts, and the some of
the parts are pretty darn grades. Starting with what's being
referred to as the birthright citizenship case, but that's not
really what the Court addressed today. I mean, this enormous
issue of whether a birthrights citizenship is intended by the
(01:30):
founders and by the drafters in this case, the Fourteenth
Amendment to apply to the children of folks here illegally
at the time the kids were born. That's a big,
big issue, right, But that wasn't the focus of the
birthright citizenship case. The focus of the case was these
universal injunctions when you have a single federal district Court
(01:51):
judge who then makes a ruling in the case in
front of her and then applies the ruling nationwide. Now,
just quick termology point you're hearing these referred to often
as nationwide injunctions. Not quite accurate. As Justice Barrett pointed
out today, they're more universal injunctions, meaning they apply beyond
(02:12):
the litigants in that particular case. They may still apply nationwide,
but just to those people in the case, just to
those litigants in the case. So that's what's so big
about the birthright citizenship case. The issue of whether one
judge can enjoin can stop the president nationwide in an
(02:33):
individual case so enormously important, as you know by now.
Obviously the court ruled in and you know, you want
to say Trump's favor, but it's not that it's really
a ruling in favor of the Republic. It's a ruling
in favor of every president, Democrat and Republican, because none
of us, right have to be mathematicians or constitutional scholars
(02:55):
or political scientists to understand if an individual judge can
stop the resident nationwide, then how will any president, you know,
Republican or Democrat be able to function? So this is
an enormous ruling for the coherence of the republic three
at three seven one three eight two five five text
d A N five seven seven three nine. Because the
(03:17):
day may come again. I think it's going to be
a long time, but the day may come again when
there's another Democrat president in America and that president would
face this same prospect and again, how can the nation function?
And we're going to get into some of this language
because it's so interesting, but but just one thing conceptually,
(03:39):
because some of what I'm going to be, you know,
kicking around with you is going to be Judge Jackson's dissent,
which has received so much attention, right including PI did
I say, Judge, forgive me justice? Including by Justice Barrett
who wrote the majority opinion and and was critical of
Justice Jackson and her descent in a way I've never
(04:03):
heard before. But remember it. It wasn't just Justice Barrett
who was being critical of Justice Jackson this way. It
was the entire majority. And all I'm telling you is
the stuff I'm going to be reading to you that
is not normal. Now you may decide, hey, that's just
kind of inside baseball lawyer geek stuff. And if you do,
(04:24):
that's that's great, that's great. No offense taken, even if
it was intended. But no, the point is, there's a
bigger there's a bigger message here, because these these justices
who signed on to the majority opinion, they don't sign
on to they don't sign on to language this tough
against Justice Jackson unless they're trying to send a very
(04:48):
very powerful message, you know. And and so I want
to talk with you a little bit about what that
message is they're trying to send there because it's so
unusual to see this kind of open pub blick intensity
toward a fellow justice. So and those who signed on
to the Justice Barrett opinion were Justice Roberts, Thomas, Alito Gorsich,
(05:14):
and Kevin On. Then Justice Thomas filed his own concurrence
in which Justice Gorsich joined, et cetera. And then we
can get into all that. But the bottom line is
these justices, these six in the majority, they all approved
of this harsh public criticism. Some have said ridicule of
(05:35):
Justice Jackson. So we'll get into the meat of that
and kick it around a little bit. And before we
go there, though, just big picture, I know that some
people are concerned that, wait a second, are you saying
then that if the president Democrat or Republican is doing
something unconstitutional, that this ruling means that that president gets
(05:58):
to get away with them because the district court judge,
that the federal trial court judge who has found it
to be unconstitutional, can only limit her opinion to the
parties before her. No, that's not the point. The point
isn't And I think this was part of the peak,
a word I've never used before. Ryan, I'm trying to
(06:20):
be extra polite since we're talking about Supreme Court justices.
But this is part of the let's be real, The
anger from the majority toward Justice Jackson was that she
was portraying it that way, and the majority is saying, no,
that's not the point at all. That the point is
that even judges have to follow the law, and the
(06:43):
law that where Congress gave the judiciary its powers, the
law doesn't allow individual judges to stop a president nationwide
for good reason. If it did, that the nation would
grind to a halt.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
So no, it's not saying that a president can get
away with unconstitutional behavior. It's saying that, under the law,
no individual judge can stop the president nationwide. It's not
saying the president can get away with doing unconstitutional stuff
or illegal otherwise illegal stuff. He just has to be
(07:21):
stopped legally in a different way, not by an individual
judge and in one particular district. And that's no reflection
on individual district court judges. I can tell you this.
Bring in the stack of bibles, right, do we still
keep that on the cart? And we bring in the polygraph?
Because I like to do both together, right, and stack
(07:44):
of Bibles and the polygraph at the same time. I
would tell you that every federal district court judge I've
been in front of, no matter where in this great nation,
has been a very impressive individual. Whether they share my
political ideology, my legal ideology or not, they've been very
impressive people. So this is not in any way discounting
individual federal court judges. The point is just that Congress
(08:06):
did not give the judiciary that power. Now, the judiciary
has the power to stop a president from doing unconstitutional
things or illegal things, but not through an individual judge.
That's the point of this US Supreme Court holding today.
And then you take it even bigger, you take it
out further to a broader point, which is just like
(08:28):
I said in sixteen when Trump went and set again
in November of twenty four, once again, the American people
have saved the country because think about where we'd be
at if the Democrat had won, like back in sixteen,
think where this US Supreme Court would be at, and
if the court had a majority who shared Justice Jackson's view,
(08:50):
we would now live in a nation which would be
completely dysfunctional because of individual judges. And again it's no
disrespect toward any visual judge, but if individual judges can
block so much of what a president does and block
it nationwide. How is a nation going to function now
(09:11):
if a judge if it president's wrong, president's breaking law,
Presidents do an uncon constitutional things. The law must be enforced.
Nobody's above the law. But it's just as Barrett points out,
and when I read to you what she wrote, even
if you don't like this legal stuff, I think you're
going to go wow. But as she was pointing out,
(09:31):
wait a second, Yeah, nobody's above the law and that
includes judges.
Speaker 3 (09:36):
That was a big.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Point of her of her opinion today is judges are
bound by the law as well. And the law that
Congress passed creating this this federal judiciary does not give
federal judges that power. So it's really intense stuff and fun.
We'll get back. We'll dive into the opinions and two
(09:57):
other big US Supreme Court opinions today that we are
not getting as much attention as they deserve because this
other one is so gigantic. You're on the Dan Capla Show.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 4 (10:11):
Would you say two Americans zoo fear that this is
more and more concentration.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Of power in the White House and Executive This is
what it brings back, the Constitution.
Speaker 5 (10:21):
This is what is all and this is really the
opposite of that.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
I mean, the question is fine by the sea. Opposite
the Constitution has been brought back. Yeah, that's such a
key point and a great setup to what I'm about
to read to you, because you're going to see a
lot of headlines. Who hears some clips here and there
about Justice Barris Barrett's opinion today, particularly as it pertained
to Justice checks and her dissent. But I want to
read the whole thing to you, and trust me, this
(10:46):
is not going to be eyeglazing. I would not do
that to you while you're driving. This is, I think,
really interesting in any case, but when it's in the
context of a US Supreme Court majority opinion and you
have sick justices signing on to this, really really harsh,
but I think fair critique of Justice Jackson's position on this. Yeah,
(11:10):
let me let me just read it for you. But
the reason it ties into what the President just said
is because that's what these justices and the majority are saying.
Wait a second, Justice Jackson, you want judges to go
beyond the power the law gives them, you know, what
kind of country would we have? Then? How could we
even have a country? Then? So here it is verbatim,
(11:32):
and Justice Barrett starts addressing Justice Jackson. This way, the
principal dissent focuses on conventional legal terrain, like the Judiciary
Act of seventeen eighty nine and our cases on equity.
Justice Jackson, however, chooses a startling line of attack that
is tethered neither to these sources nor frankly to any
(11:55):
doctrine whatsoever. Waving away attention to limits on judicial power
as a quote mind numbingly technical query, she offers a
vision of the judicial role that would make even the
most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush. In her telling,
the fundamental role of the courts is to quote order everyone,
(12:17):
including the executive, to follow the law full stop. The
function of the courts, both in theory and practice, necessarily
includes announcing what the law requires, and then it cites
a bunch of stuff. And she warns, if courts lack
the power to quote require the executive to adhere to
the law universally, courts will leave a quote gash in
(12:39):
the basic tenets of our founding Charter that could turn
out to be a mortal wound rhetoric aside, Justice Jackson's
position is difficult to pin down. She might be arguing
that universal injunctions are appropriate, even required, whenever the defendant
is part of the executive branch. As best we can tell,
(13:01):
though her argument is more extreme still because its logic
does not depend on the entry of a universal injunction.
Justice Jackson appears to believe that the reasoning behind any
court order demands universal adherents, at least where the executive
is concerned. Quick note before I go further, for six
(13:23):
Supreme Court justices to say that we can't even determine
what she's arguing here, and that it's not tethered to
any doctrine whatsoever. That might not sound like fighting words,
but in the history and tradition of the Supreme Court,
that's as strong as you will ever see it get.
(13:45):
And then it goes on to say, referring to Justice
Jackson's dissent in her law declaring vision of the judicial function,
a district court's opinion is not just a pers is
not just persuasive, but as the legal force of a
judgment than some other sites once a single district court
deems executive conduct unlawful, it has stated what the law requires,
(14:08):
and the executive much conform to that view, ceasing its
enforcement of the law against anyone anywhere. So that's where
again she's saying, wait a second, So a single judge
then can tie the hands of the executive nationwide. And
now she drops the hammer. We will not dwell on
Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than
(14:31):
two centuries worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,
we observe only this Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive
while embracing an imperial judiciary. So again, that's as tough
as it's ever going to get when you see a
(14:51):
group of Supreme Court justices talking to another Supreme Court
justice in front of the nation. So what do you
why do you think they did that? And I agree
with their critique of Justice Jackson's dissent, but why do
you think these justices decided to make such a public
point of it? Three oh three someone three eight two
(15:11):
five five takes d An five seven seven three nine Ryan,
what's your take on that? Why do you think they
went public with this? And I think clearly trying to
send a very loud message, right.
Speaker 4 (15:23):
And the fact that it's six' three and you, know
any fair minded person will tell you That Justice, ROBERTS
i don't think you can hin him down ideologically along
those lines and the decisions that he's. MADE i think
he's gone to great lengths to stake out that ground
as the Chief. Justice, NONETHELESS i think the fact That
Amy Cony, Barrett Justice barrett wrote this opinion speaks volumes
(15:43):
in and of, itself BECAUSE i spoke about this earlier
With kelly there had been some recent decisions that she
went along with the three liberal justices on this. ONE
i think you put a fine point on it with
her writing that opinion and then to your point calling
Out Kintanji Brown. Jackson there's a real, DISCONNECT i think
between the, justices not just in their philosophies on the,
(16:05):
bench but whether or not quite, Frankly JUSTICE kbj has the,
chops and this certainly eviscerates her along those lines and
exposes it for all to see the reason behind.
Speaker 3 (16:17):
IT i think the.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
Justices want people to know exactly what they're dealing with
behind closed.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Doors they told, Us, YEAH i think they're sending a
few different messages. Here and to your point About Justice
barrett joining With Justice jackson instead of my Or, kagan et.
Cetera on some opinions That Justice barrett came under fire. For,
YEAH i think there's a little bit of that involved
in this intensity BECAUSE i Think Justice barrett, saying wait a,
(16:45):
SECOND i have, shown you, know intellectual honesty that's gotten,
me you, know, criticized and then you're going to write
a dissent like, this it's completely off the, rails not
tether to the law at, all and advocating this judicial
supremacy over, everything going way beyond the. Law you're going
to write a descent like that aimed at me When
(17:07):
i've shown this intellectual. COURAGE i think that's probably part of.
IT i think the other part of, It ryan IS
i think the majority wanted to send a. Message, listen
if you're going to take a shot at, us a
really hard shot at, us and it's over you, know
it's based on a difference in view of case, law
or it's based on a different legal, ideology, fine have at.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
It.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
Right we're all big girls and big boys and we
can take. That but if you're going to come after,
us saying To Justice, jackson if you're going to come
after us the way that you did and not have
it tethered to the law at, all just be kind
of completely off the legal rails and kind of making
(17:51):
up your own approach to the. Law we're not going
to stand for, it and we're going to put the
hammer down and we're going to say to the, nation
this is. NUTS i think that's what the majority wanted
to do, here and they'll be respect for different opinions
and hard punches that are based on genuine legal differences in, ideology.
(18:12):
Etc but not for this kind of. STUFF i think
that's the message they wanted to, send and they sent.
It it'll be interesting to see how that affects the
court going. Forward BUT i want to take calls on
this in, text AND i want to quote from some
other parts of the. Opinion but there are some other
really IMPORTANT Us Supreme court decisions today that if you
like this, ONE i think you're going to like those,
(18:32):
two And i'll bring up to speed on those in those.
Races some interesting talk, questions such as the left going
crazy now that kids can't buy porn In. Texas there's
another winner for The. Democrats, right you're on The Dan Kapla.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
Show you're listening to The Dan Kaplis show. Podcast they're do.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
One year's Next, friday and As Sheriff steven at the
beginning of the, week we have three days of, meetings
trial prep meetings with the trial team at the starting next,
week So Sheriff steve will be in to start the.
Week i'm really grateful to have this day with, you
and Then i'll be with you Next thursday as. Well
but these enormously IMPORTANT Us Supreme court rulings that if
you just joined, us as they say In, english thank.
(19:16):
You AND i broke it down in, depth quoted extensively
From Justice barrett's majority, opinion and talked About Judge Justice
jackson pardon me her red, dissent which was so extraordinary
and it really got the majority. Going so this is
big stuff in a very very important ruling at its.
Core but there are other BIG Us Supreme court rulings.
(19:38):
Today i'll get to those in a. SECOND i think
they'll put a smile on your. Face unless you want
kids to have porn and parents to have no say
on whether their kids have to sit there at school
and listen TO lgbtq. Stories, So chris And, monuments you're
on The Dan kaplis. Show, WELCOME.
Speaker 5 (19:54):
I, DAN i appreciate you taking my call and just
wanted to comment only absolutely honishing rebuke that the six
justices have Given Katanzi Brown. Jackson it's. Merited IF i
were one of the senators that confirmed her to see
(20:15):
Them Supreme, COURT i WOULD i would take that rebuke
personally towards. Them it's these are astonishing, days amazing days
for The Supreme. Court i'm not tired of. Winning common
sense seems seems to have started to come. Back BUT
i just wanted to. COMMENT i just also think that
(20:35):
it speaks to the absolute lack of any judgment whatsoever
on the part of the previous. PRESIDENT i will leave
my comment with you and enjoy the rest of your.
Show thank.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
You. Chris really appreciate, that appreciate the, call AND i
do hope you know how fast life is right for.
EVERYBODY i hope that people just take a second and
kind of appreciate the moment we're in right, now because
we know it life just nature of. It it isn't
always like. THIS i, mean right, now so many good
things are happening all at, once and there are always
(21:07):
ups and. Downs it's just the human, experience right but
in a tremendous phase right, Now and it's not. Accidental
it builds on. Itself right people elected enough, conservatives and
then you have enough conservative, senators and you have a conservative,
president Though trump doesn't neatly fit any, category but you
have a president who's committed to appointing justices who will
(21:28):
actually interpret the law rather than make. It so then
you end up with justices who actually do, that and
then you see how that dramatically affects the nation for the.
Better so none of this is, accidental and there is
an internal momentum to, it because the more of these
good things that, happen the more the country's going to.
(21:48):
Thrive and then the more good things are going to
happen because people, Say, hey the country's thriving with these
conservatives in, Office i'm going to elect some more of.
Them so this is not, Accidental this is not. Disjointed
All i'm saying is it's not a perfect line, up
and it's subject to being thrown off the rails by
all sorts of, mistakes et. Cetera but right now we
(22:10):
are in a great, moment and we're in a great
moment that has real potential to continue, again not straight line,
up but trending up for a very long time to,
come not, guaranteed but what an opportunity three or three, seven, one, three,
eight two five five takes d an five, seven, seven three.
Nine AND i do not want to be so bold
(22:30):
as to say it's kind of exactly WHAT i predicted
a year ago today and a year and a half,
ago et. Cetera and thank you To. Alexa she just
says she may be the Actual. Alexa she may be
a computer because she texts Us dan one year ago,
tonight you And amy were on separate floors watching The
Trump biden. Debate all. True she quickly Realized biden was
(22:53):
going to lose the. Debate that From, alexa and she's so.
Right what a Memory alexa is because we were on
separate floors because of the intensity of our different political.
Views AND i give so much credit to my wife
for so, much but but this too couldn't have been five,
six seven minutes into the. Debate she came downstairs into
(23:15):
the cave and she just, said he cannot, win he cannot,
win and it took a lot for her to concede,
that And i've respected that very. Much three or three,
seOne three, eight two five five texts D an five, seven,
seven three. Nine want to get to some other texts
before we get back to hot take sound in these
(23:35):
other BIG Us Supreme court decisions, TODAY i really want
to focus on the one on porn In texas because
like The democrats are just going out of their way
to kind of concede this thing in twenty eight and
in twenty. Six, right, okay so what are their big you,
know what are the big rallying cries right? Now, well
the latest, is, yeah teens have a constitutional right to porn,
(23:56):
anyway Tax. Dan this is concerning the headline what it,
Says Denver zoo is closing early On saturday ahead of
a takeover that's set to take. Place, Wow, dan a?
Takeover that's? Crazy are you going to investigate? That from
our Friend Eric, ran have you heard anything about this
or is he waking up the wrong? Tree this is.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
Strange there's like these teenage.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
Mobs the great group we were talking about. Yesterday, yeah
well they gaged up at like a mall.
Speaker 4 (24:25):
Or, Something Northfields mall it's, like you, Know West side,
story justin sharks type stuff.
Speaker 1 (24:31):
Here, yeah AND i, knew we read yesterday on air
that they had a schedule of upcoming, takeovers but the
zoo was not on. IT i guess is a lot
of these kids have fund memories of going to the
zoo with their, parents so they want their next criminal
episode to be at the. Zoo very. Strange BUT i
got to tell you something right. Now if And i'll
(24:53):
look this story up during the, break If Mike johnston
is depriving the kids and the parents Of denver and
beyond of the zoo tomorrow in order to take a
knee in front of a mob of, Kids, yeah just
when you think they can't sink any. Lower and do
(25:15):
not blame the great men and women in. Blue they
sign up to enforce law and they would Enforce allso
if that's what's going on, here that's a political decision that's.
Horrible one it is what's going.
Speaker 4 (25:24):
On and, two you're exactly, Right, Dan why wouldn't the
mayor go you know, What, No we're not going to
be bowed or cowed by a bunch of teenage punks
coming in. Here we're gonna send all of that there
available resources that that are available for this, day from
The Denver Police department to the.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Zoo you're not going to take it.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Over No, NO i mean you think of all the
men and women out there working so hard right, now
right they can take their kid to the zoo. Tomorrow
you got all the kids who are looking forward going
to the zoo. Tomorrow one of my fondest memories in.
LIFE i could still picture. It my mom and dad
shown up outside my second great door At Saint sabinah
pulling me out of school to take me to the
(26:03):
zoo on a nice fall. Day so you're going to
deprive those kids and those, parents these taxpayers of the
zoo because you got a mob that wants to take it. Over, no,
no take a. Stand speaking of, Which Peggy, noonan what
a you, know she has so much great. Insight we
don't always. Agree sometimes she's too, tough tough On President.
(26:25):
Trump but this piece, Today trump seeks greatness as Mom donnie,
rises the iron strike leaves the president bolder than. Ever,
meanwhile Can New york survive a socialist? MAYOR i just
want to read to you The trump part BECAUSE i
think it's so intriguing and one of the Reasons i'm
so optimistic for the rest of his term and, beyond
(26:46):
because the better he, does the better chance he's followed
by a conservative in The White, house a better chance
conservatives farewell in the. Midterm here's What Peggy noon had to.
Say this is HOW i Read Donald. Trump now he's
in the greatness. Game he's already won the other games in.
Politics he established himself as the powerhouse who transformed the
(27:07):
nature of a major political. Party he's the colossus who's
changed the direction of politics and other major. Democracies it's,
big but it isn't all he. Wants he wants to
be thought of as, great not just, powerful but a beneficial,
force a great man of. History he wants utter defeat
(27:28):
for his foes and. Critics he wants history to bow
to his brilliance and. Courage and then she goes on from.
THERE i think that nails, it and it's so perfectly.
Said and it's great for this, country, Right it's great
for this country because he can only be all of
those great, things which he's well on his way, to
if he's not there. Already he can only be all
(27:49):
of those great things if the country does great and
if what he's doing is great for the, Country so
For Peggy, noon in a frequent and harsh critic Of,
trump to come out and write, that, oh she's just
acknowledging he's doing great things for this. Country so we're
in a moment right. Now we're in a. Moment savor,
it and then we just have to think, About, okay
(28:10):
what can be done all the, time every, Day what
can be done every day to extend, this to enlarge,
it to extend, it to extend it beyond this term in.
Office you're on The Dan Kapla.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
Show and now back to The Dan Kapla show, podcast asking.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
You shall receive our prayers. Answered we have a Color Jake,
kubier who is the director of communications For Denver. Zoo
BECAUSE i was losing my mind just before this break
when texters are telling me the zoo is closing tomorrow
at one because of threats that a teen mob is
going to descend on the, zoo And i'm, saying, hey forget,
(28:47):
that forget, that let's stand, up let's let the kids
go to the zoo and the. Parents, So, jake really
appreciate your. Time what The heck's going.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
On, yeah thanks for taking the time and giving me
a chance to the record a little. Bit this fortunately
is not a zoo affiliated. Event we do not anticipate
any issues with the zoo the event or. Gathering it's
actually the City park, Takeover so it's in the, park
which obviously the zoo is a part, of but it
(29:15):
is not anything to do with the, zoo and we
are certainly not expecting anything like that happening on our.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
Campus, well that, first that's great news in terms of
any potential harm to the. Zoo the news stories THAT
i saw during the break when somebody turned me onto
this portray it as a zoo. Thing but great to
know that it's this is about City. Park my position
is still the, Same. JAKE i think that for little
kids you know better THAN, i, RIGHT i, mean you
(29:41):
work there that for little, kids especially parents', families they
build their weekends around a trip to the. Zoo kids
have been looking forward to it. FOREVER i think the
city needs to do whatever it needs to do to
keep the zoo open and not send the message that
a bunch of thugs can close down the.
Speaker 2 (29:58):
Zoo, yeah, NO i hear. YOU i understand that you
know so we we are The Denver Zoological. Foundation we
operate independently of the, city but cerently in cooperation with
the city And Denver Police. Department so, yeah we definitely
understand that. Position but we're just doing what we think
is best for the safety of our, staff our, guests
(30:21):
and our. Animals and certainly we don't mean to cause the,
inconvenience but we're going to err on the side of.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
Caution, yeah let me ask, you as the city asked
you to. Close, no this was an.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
Assessment we have our own operations and security. Team we
did coordinate With Denver Police. Department it Was Denver Police
department that made us aware of this event and this
gathering that was taking. Place as you might have seen,
there there have been other similar events in the city
recently that have led to, fighting, vandalism disruption of. Business
(30:55):
so just out of abundance, precaution we decided that closingly
was our best.
Speaker 1 (30:59):
Core, SEE i love what you do, THERE i love the.
ZOO i think it's a big part of the. Community
it's a unique part of the, community, right and so
it just really bugs me that all these kids and
families planning to go tomorrow now will at least have
to be done by. One SO i guess the QUESTION
i have is is if you, asked you, know would
(31:23):
the city stand up and do what it had to
do to make sure people could.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
Go to the?
Speaker 2 (31:28):
Zoo, YEAH i understand where you're coming. From, certainly not
in my position to speak on the top of the
city Or Denver Police. DEPARTMENT i can only speak for
what's best for our. Organization you, know we obviously are
close partners with the city And Denver Police department in
parks and rec and and YES i don't, KNOW i
(31:50):
know they're doing everything they can to mitigate any potential,
issues and part of, that honestly is working with. Us and,
again we're gonna do what we think is best for
for our campus and our.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
Staff no, understood and, listen when it comes To Denver,
POLICE i already know the. Answer they would do whatever
they had to do to make sure kids and their
parents could go to the. Zoo the police would be
the first ones to line up to protect that. Freedom
so SO i KNOW dpd would be right. There AND
i understand that that you're probably in a tough spot
in this sense that you, know when it comes to the,
(32:22):
animals et. CETERA i, Mean i'm not an expert on all,
that but i'd have to imagine, that you, know mobs
of kids ROMAN i mean not kids in this, case
but teenagers who want to, fight you, know probably could be,
disturbing you, know to animals in a lot of different.
Ways but that's just why i'd personally like to see
the political arm of the city step in and, say,
(32:43):
no we're going to do whatever it takes to keep
that mob away from the, zoo away from City park
and let people go to the. Zoo BUT i love
what you're doing, There. Jake well we've got. You what's
what's the big highlight this? Year what's what's the hot new?
Animal and, yeah what's?
Speaker 2 (32:57):
Not, well we got a Baby diraft that's been a
big hit Named. Thorn he's growing like a weed. Already
he was born one hundred and fifty pounds and he's
already four hundred or more. Pounds so come come out
and see him while he's still a. Baby and then
we just open up the New Sea lion habitat just
about a week. Ago that's really a phenomenal, facility great guests.
Experience i've got an.
Speaker 1 (33:19):
Idea listen to you talk About, thorn because any mother tough,
enough well all mothers are tough right to give birth
to one hundred and fifty pound. Creature my thought, is
you guys are the. Solution you, got you Got thorn's,
Mom you've probably you've probably still got lions and, tigers,
right you got some mean critters over. THERE i think
(33:42):
turn it, loose let him, eat let him kick right
that my will do.
Speaker 2 (33:46):
That that'll open up a whole new set of issues for.
Speaker 5 (33:50):
Men if we do, that that would.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Will Be think about how popular the zoo would. BECOME
i mean you, could you could sell tickets that you
could sell and pay the place. Off but, Now, jake
love what you're doing. There appreciate you coming on the.
Show it's great to have some of that new, information
and we'll be sure to pass it along to.
Speaker 2 (34:07):
Everybody all, RIGHT i appreciate the. Time thank, You.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
Thanks, man take care of. That Is Jake, coube a
director Of, Communications Denver, zoo so helpful new. INFORMATION i
wanted to digest that together and see what you, think
see what you think what should have To AND i get.
IT i get what he's telling, me AND i appreciate him,
calling And i've got to defer to the experts at
the zoo when it comes to what the effect may
(34:31):
be on the zoo and on their. Animals and obviously
they're customers of staying open while you've got this. Mob
but it seems to, Me, YEAH i don't think you
blame the zoo for anything. HERE i think what you
do is you Blame Mike. Johnston and you, say if
you've got a mob because they put out a schedule of.
Events now, Right you've got this large mob of lawbreakers
(34:54):
who've put out a schedule of, events kind of Taunting. Johnston,
okay we just took Over North tomall In, denver and
now we're going to go take Over City park so
parents won't be able to take their kids to the.
Zoo and then what's their, Schedule, Ryan like in a
week they're going To elitch's or something like. That if
you're a mayor who is anatomically, complete you stand up
(35:17):
and you, say not on my, watch not in my.
Town remember this is the same mayor who Said i'm
going to Use denver police to go out and fight The.
Feds i'm going to go Use denver police to go
out and take on the federal government so they can't
enforce federal. Law i'm gonna get fifty thousand women From
denver to go stop The feds from enforcing federal. Law
and this Guy johnston won't stand up to this gang of.
(35:40):
Punks so now the. Zoo don't blame the. Zoo now
the zoo has to close and parents can't take their.
Kids is he a mayor or a? Mouse
This is Dan Caples and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
give 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. I have to
ask you again, third day in a row. Are you
getting tired of winning? Oh? My lord, this is fantastic.
(00:23):
Three or three someone three a two five five the number?
Text D an five seven seven three nine, and think
about it. Think about the magnitude of what happened today
at the US Supreme Court, and we're going to deep
dive it. You're gonna find it absolutely fascinating. It's just
so interesting on every level, legal level and public policy,
all that good stuff, sure, but the human level is
(00:46):
really extraordinary. And I think very telling about what is
to come with this US Supreme Court. Three or three
someone three eight two five five jumping anytime again? Text
d A n five seven seven three nine. So big
things coming out of the Supreme Court today, and we've
got to look at them individually because they're also interesting
and important, but taken together even more so, you know,
(01:09):
the some greater than the whole, greater part of me
than the some of the parts, and the some of
the parts are pretty darn grades. Starting with what's being
referred to as the birthright citizenship case, but that's not
really what the Court addressed today. I mean, this enormous
issue of whether a birthrights citizenship is intended by the
(01:30):
founders and by the drafters in this case, the Fourteenth
Amendment to apply to the children of folks here illegally
at the time the kids were born. That's a big,
big issue, right, But that wasn't the focus of the
birthright citizenship case. The focus of the case was these
universal injunctions when you have a single federal district Court
(01:51):
judge who then makes a ruling in the case in
front of her and then applies the ruling nationwide. Now,
just quick termology point you're hearing these referred to often
as nationwide injunctions. Not quite accurate. As Justice Barrett pointed
out today, they're more universal injunctions, meaning they apply beyond
(02:12):
the litigants in that particular case. They may still apply nationwide,
but just to those people in the case, just to
those litigants in the case. So that's what's so big
about the birthright citizenship case. The issue of whether one
judge can enjoin can stop the president nationwide in an
(02:33):
individual case so enormously important, as you know by now.
Obviously the court ruled in and you know, you want
to say Trump's favor, but it's not that it's really
a ruling in favor of the Republic. It's a ruling
in favor of every president, Democrat and Republican, because none
of us, right have to be mathematicians or constitutional scholars
(02:55):
or political scientists to understand if an individual judge can
stop the resident nationwide, then how will any president, you know,
Republican or Democrat be able to function? So this is
an enormous ruling for the coherence of the republic three
at three seven one three eight two five five text
d A N five seven seven three nine. Because the
(03:17):
day may come again. I think it's going to be
a long time, but the day may come again when
there's another Democrat president in America and that president would
face this same prospect and again, how can the nation function?
And we're going to get into some of this language
because it's so interesting, but but just one thing conceptually,
(03:39):
because some of what I'm going to be, you know,
kicking around with you is going to be Judge Jackson's dissent,
which has received so much attention, right including PI did
I say, Judge, forgive me justice? Including by Justice Barrett
who wrote the majority opinion and and was critical of
Justice Jackson and her descent in a way I've never
(04:03):
heard before. But remember it. It wasn't just Justice Barrett
who was being critical of Justice Jackson this way. It
was the entire majority. And all I'm telling you is
the stuff I'm going to be reading to you that
is not normal. Now you may decide, hey, that's just
kind of inside baseball lawyer geek stuff. And if you do,
(04:24):
that's that's great, that's great. No offense taken, even if
it was intended. But no, the point is, there's a
bigger there's a bigger message here, because these these justices
who signed on to the majority opinion, they don't sign
on to they don't sign on to language this tough
against Justice Jackson unless they're trying to send a very
(04:48):
very powerful message, you know. And and so I want
to talk with you a little bit about what that
message is they're trying to send there because it's so
unusual to see this kind of open pub blick intensity
toward a fellow justice. So and those who signed on
to the Justice Barrett opinion were Justice Roberts, Thomas, Alito Gorsich,
(05:14):
and Kevin On. Then Justice Thomas filed his own concurrence
in which Justice Gorsich joined, et cetera. And then we
can get into all that. But the bottom line is
these justices, these six in the majority, they all approved
of this harsh public criticism. Some have said ridicule of
(05:35):
Justice Jackson. So we'll get into the meat of that
and kick it around a little bit. And before we
go there, though, just big picture, I know that some
people are concerned that, wait a second, are you saying
then that if the president Democrat or Republican is doing
something unconstitutional, that this ruling means that that president gets
(05:58):
to get away with them because the district court judge,
that the federal trial court judge who has found it
to be unconstitutional, can only limit her opinion to the
parties before her. No, that's not the point. The point
isn't And I think this was part of the peak,
a word I've never used before. Ryan, I'm trying to
(06:20):
be extra polite since we're talking about Supreme Court justices.
But this is part of the let's be real, The
anger from the majority toward Justice Jackson was that she
was portraying it that way, and the majority is saying, no,
that's not the point at all. That the point is
that even judges have to follow the law, and the
(06:43):
law that where Congress gave the judiciary its powers, the
law doesn't allow individual judges to stop a president nationwide
for good reason. If it did, that the nation would
grind to a halt.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
So no, it's not saying that a president can get
away with unconstitutional behavior. It's saying that, under the law,
no individual judge can stop the president nationwide. It's not
saying the president can get away with doing unconstitutional stuff
or illegal otherwise illegal stuff. He just has to be
(07:21):
stopped legally in a different way, not by an individual
judge and in one particular district. And that's no reflection
on individual district court judges. I can tell you this.
Bring in the stack of bibles, right, do we still
keep that on the cart? And we bring in the polygraph?
Because I like to do both together, right, and stack
(07:44):
of Bibles and the polygraph at the same time. I
would tell you that every federal district court judge I've
been in front of, no matter where in this great nation,
has been a very impressive individual. Whether they share my
political ideology, my legal ideology or not, they've been very
impressive people. So this is not in any way discounting
individual federal court judges. The point is just that Congress
(08:06):
did not give the judiciary that power. Now, the judiciary
has the power to stop a president from doing unconstitutional
things or illegal things, but not through an individual judge.
That's the point of this US Supreme Court holding today.
And then you take it even bigger, you take it
out further to a broader point, which is just like
(08:28):
I said in sixteen when Trump went and set again
in November of twenty four, once again, the American people
have saved the country because think about where we'd be
at if the Democrat had won, like back in sixteen,
think where this US Supreme Court would be at, and
if the court had a majority who shared Justice Jackson's view,
(08:50):
we would now live in a nation which would be
completely dysfunctional because of individual judges. And again it's no
disrespect toward any visual judge, but if individual judges can
block so much of what a president does and block
it nationwide. How is a nation going to function now
(09:11):
if a judge if it president's wrong, president's breaking law,
Presidents do an uncon constitutional things. The law must be enforced.
Nobody's above the law. But it's just as Barrett points out,
and when I read to you what she wrote, even
if you don't like this legal stuff, I think you're
going to go wow. But as she was pointing out,
(09:31):
wait a second, Yeah, nobody's above the law and that
includes judges.
Speaker 3 (09:36):
That was a big.
Speaker 1 (09:37):
Point of her of her opinion today is judges are
bound by the law as well. And the law that
Congress passed creating this this federal judiciary does not give
federal judges that power. So it's really intense stuff and fun.
We'll get back. We'll dive into the opinions and two
(09:57):
other big US Supreme Court opinions today that we are
not getting as much attention as they deserve because this
other one is so gigantic. You're on the Dan Capla Show.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 4 (10:11):
Would you say two Americans zoo fear that this is
more and more concentration.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Of power in the White House and Executive This is
what it brings back, the Constitution.
Speaker 5 (10:21):
This is what is all and this is really the
opposite of that.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
I mean, the question is fine by the sea. Opposite
the Constitution has been brought back. Yeah, that's such a
key point and a great setup to what I'm about
to read to you, because you're going to see a
lot of headlines. Who hears some clips here and there
about Justice Barris Barrett's opinion today, particularly as it pertained
to Justice checks and her dissent. But I want to
read the whole thing to you, and trust me, this
(10:46):
is not going to be eyeglazing. I would not do
that to you while you're driving. This is, I think,
really interesting in any case, but when it's in the
context of a US Supreme Court majority opinion and you
have sick justices signing on to this, really really harsh,
but I think fair critique of Justice Jackson's position on this. Yeah,
(11:10):
let me let me just read it for you. But
the reason it ties into what the President just said
is because that's what these justices and the majority are saying.
Wait a second, Justice Jackson, you want judges to go
beyond the power the law gives them, you know, what
kind of country would we have? Then? How could we
even have a country? Then? So here it is verbatim,
(11:32):
and Justice Barrett starts addressing Justice Jackson. This way, the
principal dissent focuses on conventional legal terrain, like the Judiciary
Act of seventeen eighty nine and our cases on equity.
Justice Jackson, however, chooses a startling line of attack that
is tethered neither to these sources nor frankly to any
(11:55):
doctrine whatsoever. Waving away attention to limits on judicial power
as a quote mind numbingly technical query, she offers a
vision of the judicial role that would make even the
most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush. In her telling,
the fundamental role of the courts is to quote order everyone,
(12:17):
including the executive, to follow the law full stop. The
function of the courts, both in theory and practice, necessarily
includes announcing what the law requires, and then it cites
a bunch of stuff. And she warns, if courts lack
the power to quote require the executive to adhere to
the law universally, courts will leave a quote gash in
(12:39):
the basic tenets of our founding Charter that could turn
out to be a mortal wound rhetoric aside, Justice Jackson's
position is difficult to pin down. She might be arguing
that universal injunctions are appropriate, even required, whenever the defendant
is part of the executive branch. As best we can tell,
(13:01):
though her argument is more extreme still because its logic
does not depend on the entry of a universal injunction.
Justice Jackson appears to believe that the reasoning behind any
court order demands universal adherents, at least where the executive
is concerned. Quick note before I go further, for six
(13:23):
Supreme Court justices to say that we can't even determine
what she's arguing here, and that it's not tethered to
any doctrine whatsoever. That might not sound like fighting words,
but in the history and tradition of the Supreme Court,
that's as strong as you will ever see it get.
(13:45):
And then it goes on to say, referring to Justice
Jackson's dissent in her law declaring vision of the judicial function,
a district court's opinion is not just a pers is
not just persuasive, but as the legal force of a
judgment than some other sites once a single district court
deems executive conduct unlawful, it has stated what the law requires,
(14:08):
and the executive much conform to that view, ceasing its
enforcement of the law against anyone anywhere. So that's where
again she's saying, wait a second, So a single judge
then can tie the hands of the executive nationwide. And
now she drops the hammer. We will not dwell on
Justice Jackson's argument, which is at odds with more than
(14:31):
two centuries worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself,
we observe only this Justice Jackson decries an imperial executive
while embracing an imperial judiciary. So again, that's as tough
as it's ever going to get when you see a
(14:51):
group of Supreme Court justices talking to another Supreme Court
justice in front of the nation. So what do you
why do you think they did that? And I agree
with their critique of Justice Jackson's dissent, but why do
you think these justices decided to make such a public
point of it? Three oh three someone three eight two
(15:11):
five five takes d An five seven seven three nine Ryan,
what's your take on that? Why do you think they
went public with this? And I think clearly trying to
send a very loud message, right.
Speaker 4 (15:23):
And the fact that it's six' three and you, know
any fair minded person will tell you That Justice, ROBERTS
i don't think you can hin him down ideologically along
those lines and the decisions that he's. MADE i think
he's gone to great lengths to stake out that ground
as the Chief. Justice, NONETHELESS i think the fact That
Amy Cony, Barrett Justice barrett wrote this opinion speaks volumes
(15:43):
in and of, itself BECAUSE i spoke about this earlier
With kelly there had been some recent decisions that she
went along with the three liberal justices on this. ONE
i think you put a fine point on it with
her writing that opinion and then to your point calling
Out Kintanji Brown. Jackson there's a real, DISCONNECT i think
between the, justices not just in their philosophies on the,
(16:05):
bench but whether or not quite, Frankly JUSTICE kbj has the,
chops and this certainly eviscerates her along those lines and
exposes it for all to see the reason behind.
Speaker 3 (16:17):
IT i think the.
Speaker 4 (16:18):
Justices want people to know exactly what they're dealing with
behind closed.
Speaker 1 (16:22):
Doors they told, Us, YEAH i think they're sending a
few different messages. Here and to your point About Justice
barrett joining With Justice jackson instead of my Or, kagan et.
Cetera on some opinions That Justice barrett came under fire. For,
YEAH i think there's a little bit of that involved
in this intensity BECAUSE i Think Justice barrett, saying wait a,
(16:45):
SECOND i have, shown you, know intellectual honesty that's gotten,
me you, know, criticized and then you're going to write
a dissent like, this it's completely off the, rails not
tether to the law at, all and advocating this judicial
supremacy over, everything going way beyond the. Law you're going
to write a descent like that aimed at me When
(17:07):
i've shown this intellectual. COURAGE i think that's probably part of.
IT i think the other part of, It ryan IS
i think the majority wanted to send a. Message, listen
if you're going to take a shot at, us a
really hard shot at, us and it's over you, know
it's based on a difference in view of case, law
or it's based on a different legal, ideology, fine have at.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
It.
Speaker 1 (17:31):
Right we're all big girls and big boys and we
can take. That but if you're going to come after,
us saying To Justice, jackson if you're going to come
after us the way that you did and not have
it tethered to the law at, all just be kind
of completely off the legal rails and kind of making
(17:51):
up your own approach to the. Law we're not going
to stand for, it and we're going to put the
hammer down and we're going to say to the, nation
this is. NUTS i think that's what the majority wanted
to do, here and they'll be respect for different opinions
and hard punches that are based on genuine legal differences in, ideology.
(18:12):
Etc but not for this kind of. STUFF i think
that's the message they wanted to, send and they sent.
It it'll be interesting to see how that affects the
court going. Forward BUT i want to take calls on
this in, text AND i want to quote from some
other parts of the. Opinion but there are some other
really IMPORTANT Us Supreme court decisions today that if you
like this, ONE i think you're going to like those,
(18:32):
two And i'll bring up to speed on those in those.
Races some interesting talk, questions such as the left going
crazy now that kids can't buy porn In. Texas there's
another winner for The. Democrats, right you're on The Dan Kapla.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
Show you're listening to The Dan Kaplis show. Podcast they're do.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
One year's Next, friday and As Sheriff steven at the
beginning of the, week we have three days of, meetings
trial prep meetings with the trial team at the starting next,
week So Sheriff steve will be in to start the.
Week i'm really grateful to have this day with, you
and Then i'll be with you Next thursday as. Well
but these enormously IMPORTANT Us Supreme court rulings that if
you just joined, us as they say In, english thank.
(19:16):
You AND i broke it down in, depth quoted extensively
From Justice barrett's majority, opinion and talked About Judge Justice
jackson pardon me her red, dissent which was so extraordinary
and it really got the majority. Going so this is
big stuff in a very very important ruling at its.
Core but there are other BIG Us Supreme court rulings.
(19:38):
Today i'll get to those in a. SECOND i think
they'll put a smile on your. Face unless you want
kids to have porn and parents to have no say
on whether their kids have to sit there at school
and listen TO lgbtq. Stories, So chris And, monuments you're
on The Dan kaplis. Show, WELCOME.
Speaker 5 (19:54):
I, DAN i appreciate you taking my call and just
wanted to comment only absolutely honishing rebuke that the six
justices have Given Katanzi Brown. Jackson it's. Merited IF i
were one of the senators that confirmed her to see
(20:15):
Them Supreme, COURT i WOULD i would take that rebuke
personally towards. Them it's these are astonishing, days amazing days
for The Supreme. Court i'm not tired of. Winning common
sense seems seems to have started to come. Back BUT
i just wanted to. COMMENT i just also think that
(20:35):
it speaks to the absolute lack of any judgment whatsoever
on the part of the previous. PRESIDENT i will leave
my comment with you and enjoy the rest of your.
Show thank.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
You. Chris really appreciate, that appreciate the, call AND i
do hope you know how fast life is right for.
EVERYBODY i hope that people just take a second and
kind of appreciate the moment we're in right, now because
we know it life just nature of. It it isn't
always like. THIS i, mean right, now so many good
things are happening all at, once and there are always
(21:07):
ups and. Downs it's just the human, experience right but
in a tremendous phase right, Now and it's not. Accidental
it builds on. Itself right people elected enough, conservatives and
then you have enough conservative, senators and you have a conservative,
president Though trump doesn't neatly fit any, category but you
have a president who's committed to appointing justices who will
(21:28):
actually interpret the law rather than make. It so then
you end up with justices who actually do, that and
then you see how that dramatically affects the nation for the.
Better so none of this is, accidental and there is
an internal momentum to, it because the more of these
good things that, happen the more the country's going to.
(21:48):
Thrive and then the more good things are going to
happen because people, Say, hey the country's thriving with these
conservatives in, Office i'm going to elect some more of.
Them so this is not, Accidental this is not. Disjointed
All i'm saying is it's not a perfect line, up
and it's subject to being thrown off the rails by
all sorts of, mistakes et. Cetera but right now we
(22:10):
are in a great, moment and we're in a great
moment that has real potential to continue, again not straight line,
up but trending up for a very long time to,
come not, guaranteed but what an opportunity three or three, seven, one, three,
eight two five five takes d an five, seven, seven three.
Nine AND i do not want to be so bold
(22:30):
as to say it's kind of exactly WHAT i predicted
a year ago today and a year and a half,
ago et. Cetera and thank you To. Alexa she just
says she may be the Actual. Alexa she may be
a computer because she texts Us dan one year ago,
tonight you And amy were on separate floors watching The
Trump biden. Debate all. True she quickly Realized biden was
(22:53):
going to lose the. Debate that From, alexa and she's so.
Right what a Memory alexa is because we were on
separate floors because of the intensity of our different political.
Views AND i give so much credit to my wife
for so, much but but this too couldn't have been five,
six seven minutes into the. Debate she came downstairs into
(23:15):
the cave and she just, said he cannot, win he cannot,
win and it took a lot for her to concede,
that And i've respected that very. Much three or three,
seOne three, eight two five five texts D an five, seven,
seven three. Nine want to get to some other texts
before we get back to hot take sound in these
(23:35):
other BIG Us Supreme court decisions, TODAY i really want
to focus on the one on porn In texas because
like The democrats are just going out of their way
to kind of concede this thing in twenty eight and
in twenty. Six, right, okay so what are their big you,
know what are the big rallying cries right? Now, well
the latest, is, yeah teens have a constitutional right to porn,
(23:56):
anyway Tax. Dan this is concerning the headline what it,
Says Denver zoo is closing early On saturday ahead of
a takeover that's set to take. Place, Wow, dan a?
Takeover that's? Crazy are you going to investigate? That from
our Friend Eric, ran have you heard anything about this
or is he waking up the wrong? Tree this is.
Speaker 3 (24:17):
Strange there's like these teenage.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
Mobs the great group we were talking about. Yesterday, yeah
well they gaged up at like a mall.
Speaker 4 (24:25):
Or, Something Northfields mall it's, like you, Know West side,
story justin sharks type stuff.
Speaker 1 (24:31):
Here, yeah AND i, knew we read yesterday on air
that they had a schedule of upcoming, takeovers but the
zoo was not on. IT i guess is a lot
of these kids have fund memories of going to the
zoo with their, parents so they want their next criminal
episode to be at the. Zoo very. Strange BUT i
got to tell you something right. Now if And i'll
(24:53):
look this story up during the, break If Mike johnston
is depriving the kids and the parents Of denver and
beyond of the zoo tomorrow in order to take a
knee in front of a mob of, Kids, yeah just
when you think they can't sink any. Lower and do
(25:15):
not blame the great men and women in. Blue they
sign up to enforce law and they would Enforce allso
if that's what's going on, here that's a political decision that's.
Horrible one it is what's going.
Speaker 4 (25:24):
On and, two you're exactly, Right, Dan why wouldn't the
mayor go you know, What, No we're not going to
be bowed or cowed by a bunch of teenage punks
coming in. Here we're gonna send all of that there
available resources that that are available for this, day from
The Denver Police department to the.
Speaker 3 (25:42):
Zoo you're not going to take it.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Over No, NO i mean you think of all the
men and women out there working so hard right, now
right they can take their kid to the zoo. Tomorrow
you got all the kids who are looking forward going
to the zoo. Tomorrow one of my fondest memories in.
LIFE i could still picture. It my mom and dad
shown up outside my second great door At Saint sabinah
pulling me out of school to take me to the
(26:03):
zoo on a nice fall. Day so you're going to
deprive those kids and those, parents these taxpayers of the
zoo because you got a mob that wants to take it. Over, no,
no take a. Stand speaking of, Which Peggy, noonan what
a you, know she has so much great. Insight we
don't always. Agree sometimes she's too, tough tough On President.
(26:25):
Trump but this piece, Today trump seeks greatness as Mom donnie,
rises the iron strike leaves the president bolder than. Ever,
meanwhile Can New york survive a socialist? MAYOR i just
want to read to you The trump part BECAUSE i
think it's so intriguing and one of the Reasons i'm
so optimistic for the rest of his term and, beyond
(26:46):
because the better he, does the better chance he's followed
by a conservative in The White, house a better chance
conservatives farewell in the. Midterm here's What Peggy noon had to.
Say this is HOW i Read Donald. Trump now he's
in the greatness. Game he's already won the other games in.
Politics he established himself as the powerhouse who transformed the
(27:07):
nature of a major political. Party he's the colossus who's
changed the direction of politics and other major. Democracies it's,
big but it isn't all he. Wants he wants to
be thought of as, great not just, powerful but a beneficial,
force a great man of. History he wants utter defeat
(27:28):
for his foes and. Critics he wants history to bow
to his brilliance and. Courage and then she goes on from.
THERE i think that nails, it and it's so perfectly.
Said and it's great for this, country, Right it's great
for this country because he can only be all of
those great, things which he's well on his way, to
if he's not there. Already he can only be all
(27:49):
of those great things if the country does great and
if what he's doing is great for the, Country so
For Peggy, noon in a frequent and harsh critic Of,
trump to come out and write, that, oh she's just
acknowledging he's doing great things for this. Country so we're
in a moment right. Now we're in a. Moment savor,
it and then we just have to think, About, okay
(28:10):
what can be done all the, time every, Day what
can be done every day to extend, this to enlarge,
it to extend, it to extend it beyond this term in.
Office you're on The Dan Kapla.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
Show and now back to The Dan Kapla show, podcast asking.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
You shall receive our prayers. Answered we have a Color Jake,
kubier who is the director of communications For Denver. Zoo
BECAUSE i was losing my mind just before this break
when texters are telling me the zoo is closing tomorrow
at one because of threats that a teen mob is
going to descend on the, zoo And i'm, saying, hey forget,
(28:47):
that forget, that let's stand, up let's let the kids
go to the zoo and the. Parents, So, jake really
appreciate your. Time what The heck's going.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
On, yeah thanks for taking the time and giving me
a chance to the record a little. Bit this fortunately
is not a zoo affiliated. Event we do not anticipate
any issues with the zoo the event or. Gathering it's
actually the City park, Takeover so it's in the, park
which obviously the zoo is a part, of but it
(29:15):
is not anything to do with the, zoo and we
are certainly not expecting anything like that happening on our.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
Campus, well that, first that's great news in terms of
any potential harm to the. Zoo the news stories THAT
i saw during the break when somebody turned me onto
this portray it as a zoo. Thing but great to
know that it's this is about City. Park my position
is still the, Same. JAKE i think that for little
kids you know better THAN, i, RIGHT i, mean you
(29:41):
work there that for little, kids especially parents', families they
build their weekends around a trip to the. Zoo kids
have been looking forward to it. FOREVER i think the
city needs to do whatever it needs to do to
keep the zoo open and not send the message that
a bunch of thugs can close down the.
Speaker 2 (29:58):
Zoo, yeah, NO i hear. YOU i understand that you
know so we we are The Denver Zoological. Foundation we
operate independently of the, city but cerently in cooperation with
the city And Denver Police. Department so, yeah we definitely
understand that. Position but we're just doing what we think
is best for the safety of our, staff our, guests
(30:21):
and our. Animals and certainly we don't mean to cause the,
inconvenience but we're going to err on the side of.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
Caution, yeah let me ask, you as the city asked
you to. Close, no this was an.
Speaker 2 (30:33):
Assessment we have our own operations and security. Team we
did coordinate With Denver Police. Department it Was Denver Police
department that made us aware of this event and this
gathering that was taking. Place as you might have seen,
there there have been other similar events in the city
recently that have led to, fighting, vandalism disruption of. Business
(30:55):
so just out of abundance, precaution we decided that closingly
was our best.
Speaker 1 (30:59):
Core, SEE i love what you do, THERE i love the.
ZOO i think it's a big part of the. Community
it's a unique part of the, community, right and so
it just really bugs me that all these kids and
families planning to go tomorrow now will at least have
to be done by. One SO i guess the QUESTION
i have is is if you, asked you, know would
(31:23):
the city stand up and do what it had to
do to make sure people could.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
Go to the?
Speaker 2 (31:28):
Zoo, YEAH i understand where you're coming. From, certainly not
in my position to speak on the top of the
city Or Denver Police. DEPARTMENT i can only speak for
what's best for our. Organization you, know we obviously are
close partners with the city And Denver Police department in
parks and rec and and YES i don't, KNOW i
(31:50):
know they're doing everything they can to mitigate any potential,
issues and part of, that honestly is working with. Us and,
again we're gonna do what we think is best for
for our campus and our.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
Staff no, understood and, listen when it comes To Denver,
POLICE i already know the. Answer they would do whatever
they had to do to make sure kids and their
parents could go to the. Zoo the police would be
the first ones to line up to protect that. Freedom
so SO i KNOW dpd would be right. There AND
i understand that that you're probably in a tough spot
in this sense that you, know when it comes to the,
(32:22):
animals et. CETERA i, Mean i'm not an expert on all,
that but i'd have to imagine, that you, know mobs
of kids ROMAN i mean not kids in this, case
but teenagers who want to, fight you, know probably could be,
disturbing you, know to animals in a lot of different.
Ways but that's just why i'd personally like to see
the political arm of the city step in and, say,
(32:43):
no we're going to do whatever it takes to keep
that mob away from the, zoo away from City park
and let people go to the. Zoo BUT i love
what you're doing, There. Jake well we've got. You what's
what's the big highlight this? Year what's what's the hot new?
Animal and, yeah what's?
Speaker 2 (32:57):
Not, well we got a Baby diraft that's been a
big hit Named. Thorn he's growing like a weed. Already
he was born one hundred and fifty pounds and he's
already four hundred or more. Pounds so come come out
and see him while he's still a. Baby and then
we just open up the New Sea lion habitat just
about a week. Ago that's really a phenomenal, facility great guests.
Experience i've got an.
Speaker 1 (33:19):
Idea listen to you talk About, thorn because any mother tough,
enough well all mothers are tough right to give birth
to one hundred and fifty pound. Creature my thought, is
you guys are the. Solution you, got you Got thorn's,
Mom you've probably you've probably still got lions and, tigers,
right you got some mean critters over. THERE i think
(33:42):
turn it, loose let him, eat let him kick right
that my will do.
Speaker 2 (33:46):
That that'll open up a whole new set of issues for.
Speaker 5 (33:50):
Men if we do, that that would.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Will Be think about how popular the zoo would. BECOME
i mean you, could you could sell tickets that you
could sell and pay the place. Off but, Now, jake
love what you're doing. There appreciate you coming on the.
Show it's great to have some of that new, information
and we'll be sure to pass it along to.
Speaker 2 (34:07):
Everybody all, RIGHT i appreciate the. Time thank, You.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
Thanks, man take care of. That Is Jake, coube a
director Of, Communications Denver, zoo so helpful new. INFORMATION i
wanted to digest that together and see what you, think
see what you think what should have To AND i get.
IT i get what he's telling, me AND i appreciate him,
calling And i've got to defer to the experts at
the zoo when it comes to what the effect may
(34:31):
be on the zoo and on their. Animals and obviously
they're customers of staying open while you've got this. Mob
but it seems to, Me, YEAH i don't think you
blame the zoo for anything. HERE i think what you
do is you Blame Mike. Johnston and you, say if
you've got a mob because they put out a schedule of.
Events now, Right you've got this large mob of lawbreakers
(34:54):
who've put out a schedule of, events kind of Taunting. Johnston,
okay we just took Over North tomall In, denver and
now we're going to go take Over City park so
parents won't be able to take their kids to the.
Zoo and then what's their, Schedule, Ryan like in a
week they're going To elitch's or something like. That if
you're a mayor who is anatomically, complete you stand up
(35:17):
and you, say not on my, watch not in my.
Town remember this is the same mayor who Said i'm
going to Use denver police to go out and fight The.
Feds i'm going to go Use denver police to go
out and take on the federal government so they can't
enforce federal. Law i'm gonna get fifty thousand women From
denver to go stop The feds from enforcing federal. Law
and this Guy johnston won't stand up to this gang of.
(35:40):
Punks so now the. Zoo don't blame the. Zoo now
the zoo has to close and parents can't take their.
Kids is he a mayor or a? Mouse
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.