Polls for Biden, Trump, and DeSantis

Today on the Jimmy Barrett Show:

• Polls for Biden, Trump, and DeSantis
• Edwin Walker on the murders in Allen and Brownsville, Texas

Episode Transcript

(00:03):
What we need is more common sense. We got the youth breaking down the
world's nonsense about power American common sense. We'll see us through with the common
sense of Houston. I'm just procommon sense for Houston. From Houston dot
Com. This is the Jimmy BarrettShow, brought to you by Viewin dot

(00:27):
Com. Now here's Jimmy Barrett.Okay, today we're gonna start off a
little polling data. You know me, I have to have a fascination with
poles, always have, always,probably will, even though I realize that
polls can be easily manipulated and oftentimesare to get the results that they're looking
for. It's all about how youask the question, who you sample,

(00:49):
and there's no guarantee with any pollthat the sampling is going to be fair
or the questions are gonna be fair. We just look at the results and
see if we can see some trends. So we're way out from twenty twenty
four. We haven't even officially nominatedthe candidates yet. But it's always interesting
because there's two different things going on. On the Democrat side, you have

(01:12):
an incumbent who probably close to let'scall it, sixty four percent of Democrats
really would like to see him notrun again. They would prefer that they
didn't have to have a Joe Biden. They would prefer something else. I
don't think they have a better alternative, But about sixty four percent of Democrats

(01:37):
aren't real happy with Joe Biden rightnow. That's number one. And then
on the Republican side, you've alsogot a former president in this case,
who wants to run again, whothe mainstream establishment part of the party doesn't
want to have anything to do it. They don't want him, they want
they want his opponent, bron DeSantis, who hasn't even declared yet that

(01:57):
he's a candidate for president, butprobably will, we're told now in June.
So that is what we're dealing with. Let's start with Biden first,
though. Biden has his own setof problems, not the least of which
is he has lost a tremendous amountof support. His approval rating is thirty
six percent. Thirty six percent.That's pretty low. That is pretty low,

(02:23):
thirty six percent. Can he comeback from that? What would bring
him back from that? Is thereanything that is going to improve between now
and the time that the campaign actuallygets going. That's going to drive that
number up. Can't even imagine whatit would be unless they plunge us into
war. I suppose that's one thingyou could try to do, is is

(02:43):
to go to war. And maybethat's part of what they're thinking. I
can listen, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't be shocked if we went
to war. I would not beshocked if Democrats got us into a war
to try to retain power. I'mtelling you we're at a point in this
country where or anything's as far asretaining power or getting power back, anything

(03:04):
is on the table. But let'sstart with the thirty six percent approval rating.
Here is This was on ABC,by the way, George Stephanopoulos was
the host of the show. Headmits that these are dismal numbers. And
there it's an ABC Washington Post Bowl. So if it's going to be skewed,
it is gonna be skewed a littlebit in favor I would think of

(03:24):
Biden. But here he is,you know, talking about the numbers which
are not good. This Polish isbrutal for President Biden. Absolutely. George
and you talked earlier about that recordlow approval rating for President Biden. It's
actually six points down just since February, and the skepticism over his leadership extends
deep inside his own party. Onlythirty six percent of Democrats think that their

(03:46):
party should nominate Joe Biden for asecond term. Fifty eight percent say they
would have support someone else or forfer someone else. That's despite the fact
that the entire DNC, most ofthe Democratic establishment has rallied behind President Biden.
And you're seeing real weaknesses in thecoalition that powered Joe Biden to the
presidency. Back in twenty twenty,Biden carried independence by thirteen points against Snald

(04:08):
Trump. He is now trailing Trumpby nine points among those same voters.
He carried Black voters by seventy fivepoints in twenty twenty. Now he is
up just thirty five. That maysound like a lot, but the fact
of the matter is in modern politics, that is not the kind of number
that a Democrat needs to be victorious. Thirty five thirty five percent approval amongst

(04:28):
African Americans, that is historically low. That has got to be an all
time historic low because Black's avidendency tovote Democrat. But now thirty five percent
approval writing amongst African Americans, thirtyfive percent support sixty five percent. That
means do not support the current Democratpresident of the United States. That's pretty

(04:49):
unheard of, it really is.All right, that's the Democrat side.
Let's go to the Republican side,where it's all about Trump against de Santez,
and Trump has a huge lead.The first one you're going to hear
is a mainstream establishment polster, youknow, from the Karl Rove ground.
And then we go into somebody who'sa little bit more unbiased. But here's

(05:13):
a couple of polsters talking about Trumpversus DeSantis. Bron DeSantis leads to Joe
Biden in every single important battleground stateand in fact, Trump loses again to
Joe Biden and all those states,but not just in those states, Laura,
I mean, one of the mostalarming things I've seen recently his numbers
came out of Texas yesterday from theUniversity of Texas poll that actually had Trump

(05:34):
down to Joe Biden in the loneStar state. And look, if you
can't hold Texas, then you probablyshouldn't be the nominee. And let's look
at the implications of that. Theramifications of a Joe Biden victory, which
right now not even giving Joe BidenTexas. If you still keep that in
the Trump column, if it wasa Trump Biden race, you would have
a wipeout in electoral college, similarto what occurred between Barack Obama and Mitt

(05:57):
Romney. And I think if thathappened and you're looking at a Democrat taking
the House back, Democrats would expandingtheir leading the Senate. They get rid
of the filibuster, they stacked theSpreme Court, washing DC becomes a state.
It's just the list goes on andon the problems that are created by
the Donald. By Donald Trump's thenominee. And that's why it's so important
that Ron De Santus is a nominee. And I would say that if you

(06:18):
look at the organizations being put togetherby never back down, the preparation is
there, in fact, and whenyou begin to look at the early states
Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, the Desantist organization there I
think will be very very strong.All right, Robert, Now, you
were very famous for being the onlyPolster to correctly call Trump's win in twenty

(06:38):
sixteen. I don't think you gotto write in twenty twenty. But you
say that there are some things thatTrump has definitively going for him in these
swing states. Explain, Yeah,actually, we had the lowest air rat
of any poster in twenty twenty aswell, just a little difference in the
final outcome. But now what we'reseeing, it's been it's easy tow on

(07:00):
some of the you know, you'vegot polls that are showing that Trump could
win the swing states and some thatare saying that he can't. But it
really depends on who's doing the polly. What they're incentive is University of Texas.
They've never thought the Republican because itcould win Texas. So I'm not
gonna fool with that. But thereare numerous Republican candidates who can win this
general election, and Donald Trump ismost certainly one of them. One of

(07:24):
the things that people really upset aboutand worried about these days is with you
know, Putin and she and thoseguys getting together. It's made people very
scared, more than even at anypoint during the Cold War. And so
if you ask a simple question,would Russia have invaded Ukraine ive Donald Trump
was president, Every one of thosesame swing states. Majorities say no.

(07:44):
And again we're talking to swing stateshere, all right, swing states.
We're not talking about deep red states. We're talking about swing states. But
again, you know we're we're wayway out here. We got a long
way to go. Like I said, I find I find poles interesting.
I will find the same poles interestinggoing forward and just compared you know,
apples to apples orangest oranges as faras you know, the polsters go and

(08:07):
we'll see what's over trend we seegoing on? All right, quick little
break back with Marna, Mamma JimmyVerrett show. You're a name nine fifty
k prec a horrible, horrible,horrible weekend in not only in Allen,

(08:28):
Texas north of Dallas, but alsonow at the southern tip of our state,
Brownsville, where you had two decidedlydifferent incidents, both involving were told
Hispanic males. One supposedly has somesort of a quote unquote white supremacy background.
At least that's what they're saying.Isn't that interesting. We still haven't

(08:50):
gotten anything from the manifesto of theNashville shooter, but we are already painting
this shooter in Texas is being awhite supremacist. One we get no information,
the other one we can't. Theycan't wait to give us information.
One evidently fits their narrative versus theother one, which obviously does not.

(09:11):
I hope Americans are seeing through this. I know you are, but I
hope the rest of Americans are allseeing through this. We'll get into it.
By the way, Edwin Edwin Walkerfrom my mind blank there for a
second, Edwin Walker from he's agun law expert. He's at walker Taylor
Law dot com. He's going tobe joining us coming up here in another

(09:33):
twelve thirteen minutes or so to kindof talk about those two incidents. And
of course the calls out there againfor gun control, even Fox News,
even Fox News is calling for moregun control. Shannon Shannon bring him on
her show, her Fox News Sundayshow had the governor on. Yes,
they kind of ambushing him about guns. Is if somehow there's a gun law

(09:54):
that could have been changed that wouldhave prevented what happened this weekend from happening.
And by the way, the brownsField that wasn't a shooting, the
guy did it with an SUV.He fought a big, heavy suv into
a crowd of people. That's howhe killed his victims. But anyway,
we'll get into all this in justa little bit next segment here on AM
nine to fifty KPRC. First all, let's get into this a little bit.

(10:16):
Representative James Comer pay for play.We've talked a lot about paper play
and whether or not the Bid administrationis guilty of that. Did did Hunter
Biden go out and solicit Chinese individuals, Chinese companies, or in other foreign
power companies and promised them either changesin policy or influence in return for money.

(10:39):
And in the case of China,did Biden change policies to benefit China
at the detriment of the United Statesand return for money. There's accusations that
he did so. Supposedly the whistleblowerhas evidence that he did. The FBI
is not investigating, at least notat this point. They're not investigating,
at least not seriously investigating. Butthere's evidence out there, and Representative James

(11:05):
Comer says, right now, theinformation that the whistle blower told them about
is contained in a document that isnot classified. So Congress should be able
to subpoena it and get it now. The question becomes, will Biden end
up classifying it before they can gettheir hands on it. Here is Representative
Comber yesterday on Fox talking about thesethese pay to play policies and trying to

(11:30):
get their hands on that document.There are many decisions that Joe Biden's made
that clearly put China first and Americalast, and their decisions he's made that
I don't think a lot of peopleknow about in other countries pertaining to a
host of different issues that put Americalast. So the question arises, what

(11:52):
if the Biden's done to receive allthis money? You know, the most
frustrating thing about this investigation thus far, Marie, has been when I disclose
that we identified seven additional Biden familymembers that were receiving payments, bringing the
total to nine. The first thingthe media did was asked, what did
this have to do with Joe Biden? I mean, what are you talking

(12:13):
about? What does it have todo with Joan? How do the young
relatives of the President of the UnitedStates receive anonymous wires from our adversaries around
the world. I mean, obviouslyit has to do with Joe Biden.
So what we're trying to determine isis this president compromised and were these bad

(12:35):
decisions that put america lives made becausethe payments made to his family or even
to him. Now, this whistleblower claims that these payments were made to
the vice president of United States.And look, there's a pattern here with
the bank records that would verify thisclaim by the whistle blower. And we
want to know did the FBI evencheck into this because we've heard many stories.

(13:00):
Jim Jordan's doing a great job lookinginto the weaponization the DJ and FI
you all, along with anything pertainingto Joe Biden. Where's classified documents,
whether it's the mischief that his son, the crimes that his son's committed.
The FBI and the irs have ahistory of turning a blind eye and burying
it, just like they did withthe laptop. They thought when they got

(13:20):
that laptop from the repairment that theytook it disappeared. They didn't know that
there were copies out there, Sowe want to know what did they do
with this document. There's no question, Maria, whether or not this document
it exists. There's no question asto whether or not this whistle blower is
highly credible. The question is,what did the FBI do with this information,

(13:41):
very damaging information that they received duringa presidential election? Well, and
where's that information? Now? Who'sin charge of that information? Now?
Does a whistleblower have a copy ofthis? I hope so, because whatever
file they came from has probably beenspirited away this point. So so my

(14:03):
guess is if if Congress subpoenas aparticular piece of records there somehow they're not
going to find it. Well,we don't seem to have anything that pertains
to what you're talking about, atleast I wouldn't expect them to find anything.
The FBI is part of the deepstate. The FBI at this point
is part of the deep state.You talk to people who have served for

(14:24):
the FBI, especially people who whoserved for the FBI for years and years
and years and are about retirement agenow, and you ask them about what's
going on the FBI. Most ofthem will tell you how disgusted that they
are, and most of them areretiring because they can't stand it anymore.
They never thought they would be workingfor an agency that does what the FBI

(14:45):
does. Can the FBI be trustedat the highest levels. No, are
there plenty good people still working atthe FBI? Well yeah, Fewer and
fewer though, and getting worse allthe time. Here's Greg gutfield stake on
the deep State, of which theice part of it the deep state helping
up Biden. Newly released emails showformer acting CIA director Michael Morrell had ulterior

(15:07):
motives when he wrote the twenty twentyletter discrediting Hunter's laptop and the motive stink
worse than Joy Behar's jog Brau.You know the letter. It was signed
by fifty one former Intel officials claimingthe laptop was Russian to Sinfoe, a
claim as credible as a prius winningthe Indianapolis five hundred. It's the biggest

(15:28):
license. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, which
I told my staff before eliminating theirhealth plan. Morrell admitted drafting the hoax
as a talking point for Joe touse in the debate with President Trump.
True, Joe needed all the helpyou could get with his talking points.
Most of the time he can't talkor point. Hell, he needs help

(15:48):
with his walking points, Morrell urgedCIA boss John Brennan to sign the letter
and admitted he was deliberately trying tohelp Biden's twenty twenty campaign. Brennan immediately
reported the corruption to the American public. No, he didn't, just kidding,
He said, add my name tothe list. Good initiative, and
thanks for asking me to sign.I bet he blames Russia when he forgets

(16:11):
his anniversary. So some of thehighest ranking Intel officials with obvious political motivations
teamed up to help knock the guythey didn't like out of the White House.
It was basically a silent coup bythe deep state, a swamp deep
enough to hold Ted Kennedy's car toosoon. And while fifty one officials played

(16:34):
along, some didn't. In fact, the CIA's former Moscow station chief,
Daniel Hoffman, refused to sign itbecause there was no evidence of Russian involvement.
You know, he's just the formerMoscow station chief. What the hell
does he know? Hey? Bythe way, great Gutfield, you see
this. Of course he was numberHe was number one in his time slide

(16:55):
against all the late night talk showsbefore these Hollywood right strike went into effect.
None of the shows that are upagainst him are currently on because they're
all honoring the Hollywood Writers strike.So he has virtually no competition at this
point. He's got he's got nobodyup against him. So what else are

(17:18):
you gonna watch? I guess ifyou're up that late. Personally, I'm
never up that late. But that'sme, you know. The schedule I
keep is a little bit different thanmost people do. But there's just no
doubt in my mind, and I'mguessing probably very little of any doubt in
your mind that the deep state's beenhard at work, has been hard at

(17:40):
work, working for one side andone side only. And the deep state
used to be used to fall todeep state because you really didn't know that
much about their existence. They operated, you know, behind the scenes,
you didn't really hear about things thatthey were doing. But less and less
so after the presidency of Donald Trump, because Donald Trump brought them out of
the muck and up towards the surface, because they had to go up there

(18:02):
in order to grab the Trump andthe things that Trump was doing. So
now they're out there and they're obviousfor everybody who wants to see them back
with more. In a moment,we will visit with the Edwin Walker gun
law experts and Edwin Walker Taylor lawsshould say he's coming up next year.
On NA nine fifty KPRC, Iwas a deadly weekend here in Texas.

(18:32):
He had two different incidents, onein Allen, Texas at them all involving
a shooter with a high powered weaponwho shot and killed eight people. I
believe made is the last I've heardas far as the death count. You
know, just seemed to be arandom shooting at them all. And then
you had another one. I thinkfive were killed in this one in Brownsville,

(18:52):
Texas, that did not feature agun, that featured a man with
an SUV who plowed into a crowdof individuals. There is a was an
encampment of illegal aliens across the street. I don't know if that's all of
who was hit or that was justsome of what was hit. But you
had two different incidents there, oneinvolving a gun, one not involving a

(19:18):
gun. Of course, the onethat gets everybody's attention is the one that's
involving the gun. You even hadFox News, as he said earlier yesterday,
Shannon Breem had Governor abandon and ShannonBream was just really kind of needling
him for more gun laws or causinghim about doing more gun laws. We
have this conversation all the time.We have it after every one of these
shootings about whether or not we needmore gun laws, or don't have enough

(19:41):
gun laws in place, or whetheror not we have a mental health issue.
It's the governor's opinion that it's primarilya mental health issue. But I
think we seem to have given upon the idea that we can prevent crazy
people from perpetating these crimes. Allwe can hope to do is to prevent
them from getting a weapon. Atleast I seem to be the prevailing attitude.
I doubt if that's the attitude over. Next guest, though, Edwin

(20:03):
Walker joins us Walker Taylor Law.They specialize in gun cases. Edwin,
Welcome back to DAM nine fifty kpRC. Long time and they'll talk to
how you been. Oh, I'vebeen doing great. Thanks for having me
back. Good to have you,sir. All right, So I guess
this tackle what happened in Allen,Texas. First. You know, the
thing that doesn't get reported is thatwe had a police officer who just happened
to be there with a weapon.Of course, who tracked down the gunman

(20:26):
and dispatched with the gunman fairly quickly, or this could have been a whole
lot worse. Yeah, he justfrom whatever dy happened to be there investigating
some other type of disturbance and thisthis man just jumped out of a car
and started shooting people, and hewas fortunate enough to be there. Uh.

(20:48):
You know, when we talk aboutthe proverbial good guy with a gun,
you know that that does include policeofficers whenever we talk about this,
So you know, I know thatthe anti gun folks will say, oh,
well, they're they're authorized by law, and they're trained and et cetera,
et cetera. But the thing aboutit is is that most of the
times you're not fortunate enough to havea police officer around. But a police

(21:10):
officer is, you know, bylarge, obviously a good guy who has
a gun, who's able to stopthe shooter. You know, nobody,
even though this happened, or atleast it started in a parking lot,
there did not appear to be anybodywilling to, you know, try to
hit this guy with their car oranything else. So it was going to
take armed intervention in order to stopthis person. And I think that one

(21:33):
of the things that I have foundkind of unusual is that there's very little
coming out about I think so farall we have is the guy's name,
but there's very little coming out about, you know, his background or what's
been found. And I think somebodysaid he had a white supremacist patch on
which I saw the pat. Imean, I saw what the patch said,

(21:57):
and it did not it did notseem to me to indicate any kind
of of white supermacy. But Iguess that's a whole other topic. But
yes, the the you know,it's kind of interesting brought up Shannon Bream
because I actually saw the exact sameinterview and she brought up this whole list
of things that she said people arein favor of, And those polls have

(22:19):
always struck me as odd because theynever quite were the question correctly, Like
people who are in favor of backgroundchecks? Well, did the question say
that we already have background checks forvirtually every gun sale? You know,
people agree and we have those uhthat you know, whenever says we mentally

(22:41):
people shouldn't get guns, well,do people know that mentally ill people have
been legally prohibited from purchasing firearms forat least the last twenty five years,
you know. So, so theyjust throw up these things to say people
are in favor of this. Well, yeah, a lot of these things
we do have to a very largedegree. And one thing that you know,

(23:03):
of course, is very very hottopic now, especially with the mass
you know, the killing of theneighbors in same Sino County. You know,
how did the person get the gun? Because by and large we see
that what they call for universal backgroundchecks, those are not going to help
whatsoever. I mean, a personwho buys a stolen gun out of the

(23:26):
trunk of a car from a personin a back alley is not going to
go through a background check, regardlessof what the law says. And usually
all's going to do is I'm gonnasay usually what happens in these cases too,
is you have somebody who is itturns out maybe mentally ill or unstable,
but they don't have an official diagnosisor there's nothing that has been flagged
for them, So there's no wayduring a background check that's going to show

(23:49):
up and they're still able to legallypurchase a weapon. Is there a problem
do you think with the reporting systemas relates to people who may be a
danger to themselves. And well,I think people need to become more educated
because you know, and this isanother one of the anti gun folks talking
for us that we need red flaglaws. Well, Texas already has a

(24:11):
red flag law. We don't callit a red flag law, but anybody
who observes somebody having a mental episodeis able to call the police and the
police will respond, and the policehave authority under the Texas Health and Safety
Code to take that person, notonly take that person into custody, but
also sees any kind of weapons thatthey are in possession of. And so

(24:34):
once somebody is turned into the system, if they're involuntarily committed, that goes
into the system, which then willprevent them from lawfully purchasing possession firearms in
the future. And so I thinkthat the systems already exist. I don't
know that people know about them.So perhaps there's a education about what laws

(24:56):
are out there, because a lotof it. You'd be surprised at many
anti gun folks that I have eitherheard or spoken to who believes that there
are no laws in place whatsoever.They they they're just completely ignorant of the
situation, to know that, tonot know that firearms are one of the
most heavily regulated pieces of personal propertythat exists in the United States. You

(25:19):
know, you're giving them, You'regiving them a benefit of the doubt.
I'm not sure I'm willing to givethem. I think most of them are
aware of the laws that exist.But what they want is for people to
believe that the laws have failed orthat laws won't be passed because they want
an excuse for gun confiscation. Yeah, I agree with you completely. That
is their ultimate goal, because that'sthe thing if you ask for you know,

(25:44):
and they are, at least fornow, they are in a place
where they are afraid to say itbecause they know how unpopular it is and
how anti American it sounds. Butyeah, whatever you say. Okay,
here's an individual who just snapped forwhatever reason. We don't know what reason.
Maybe his wife left him, maybeheo his parents die. Who knows

(26:06):
why he snapped, but he otherwise, he lawfully purchased the firearm, he
passed the background check. And thisis just one of those situations where the
person just you know, just justbecame an evil Uh, you know,
no, conscious sociopath overnight what wouldstop this? And their ultimate answer is

(26:26):
going to be, well, obviously, if we would have just confiscated all
the firearms, then he wouldn't havehad the ability to to have a firearm.
But maybe he would have been likethe guy in Brownsville who just used
the motor vehicle instead. But yeah, that is there. That is their
ultimate conclusionist to the only way wecan quote unquote stop gun violence is that

(26:48):
nobody has guns. And I thinkyou see some people that while they're not
willing to say it, they arewilling to invoke places like Great Britain,
Australia, New Zealand, now Canadawhere they do have very strict firearm bands.
Um, you know, I wondertoo, Edwin Walker. You know,
we take a look at you know, you've mentioned a little bit earlier

(27:08):
that supposedly there's some sort of,at least in the Allen, Texas shooting,
some sort of a white supremacy componenthere which may or may not exist.
But it's interesting, is it not? That after the Nashville shooting.
I mean, there's an entire manifestothat exists that no doubt explains in great
detail why this transgender decided to goback to the school and do this crime.

(27:32):
But they won't release it. Theywon't even release tidbits of it.
If they do ever release it willbe so highly redacted you probably won't learn
anything from it. And and it'sbeen under complete silence and completely hidden by
the FBI. And here we are, though, and they can't wait to
get the information out that there mightbe some sort of a racist component with

(27:55):
this Texas shooting, which we don'tknow for a fact that it exists.
But it's funny how one narrative getcompletely squashed and the other narrative gets gets
blown out of proportion. Oh yeah, no, it's it's complete dishonesty in
the media. And you know it'sI guess it's the media being complacent to
the government or perhaps doing the government'sbidding. But there absolutely is, and

(28:17):
more and more people are realizing it. And we're not just looked as looked
at like centical crackpots anymore, butthere are, you know, it is.
It's as plain as the nose onyour face that that the you know,
the shooter who in all cases,anytime you take an innocent life,
you are a you know, youare a mentally disturbed, fundamentally evil person.

(28:41):
So regardless of what your other motivationis, that's who you are.
And and of course the only waythat we're going to be able to further
find out who these people are,what they think, is to look into
their motivations. And it is surprisinghow many of them do in fact lead
manifestos, and those ought to beyou know, once the investigation is concluded,

(29:03):
they can no longer hide behind theexcuse. Well, we are not
allowed to comment on pending investigations.Obviously, the National shooting doesn't need any
more investigation. We know, youknow, we know who the person was,
we know that they are not goingto have a trial, and you
know, and I think that they'vewrapped up any kind of co conspirators,
if those even exist. And soall of that information ought to be public

(29:26):
information, and it certainly ought tobe We ought to have the ability to
scrutinize it so that we can tryto find out and prevent these further motivated
individuals, which, you know,one thing we also need to look at
is is that every year our populationgrows exponentially, and so whenever you keep

(29:48):
adding tens of millions of people,to the United States population through whatever means,
whatever means they get here, whetherthey're born here, whether they immigrate
here, you're just increasing the likelihoodthat out of that ten million, there's
going to be, unfortunately, severalcrazies. If we were to be able
to read the materials from these shootersor delve int into finding out exactly what

(30:14):
their motivations are. Do you thinkwhat are the common things you think we
will would find about all of theseshooters. Are there things that you think
they all have in common? Well, I think that they probably have all
been treated for a mental illness.And one thing that I've kind of,
you know, become more and moresuspicious of is how pharmaceuticals are affecting these

(30:37):
people, because these these drugs arepurposely designed to rewire brain function, and
you know, unfortunately, the youknow, rewiring the brain is something we
actually know very little about. Andso I'd be curious to find out what
pharmaceuticals this person was under, andyou know, did that contribute to somebody

(31:00):
just losing their inhibitions? I mean, that's the thing about it. That's
one of the things I mean,you know, not not to be facetious,
but you know, We all everysingle day have fits of anger.
We have, you know, peoplethat we want to lash out at people
we you know that we we wemaybe you wish ill harmed to, but
we as rational people, suppress that, and we are inhibited both both through

(31:26):
our our mental our emotional health,and the law from doing anything about it.
But are these pharmaceuticals just eliminating people'sinhibitions that they no longer have that
you know, they no longer havethat that mental lock, that that block
that keeps them from actually acting ontheir impulses, that little little safety mechanism

(31:48):
that hopefully existed, not maybe notall of us, but most of us.
Good points. Yes, good talkingto you, sir, Thank you
as always come back again soon,Yes, sir, well, thank you
for having me. It's always apleasure. Pleasure. Edwin Walker with Walker
Taylor Law joining us here on anine fifty KPRC quick little break back with
more in the moment Jimmy Barrett Show. All right, time to pay some

(32:22):
reparations. At least California's getting closerto doing that, it seems like it.
Anyway, they have they basically theyput together a you know, a
blue ribbon panel. If you willof people to recommend wanting to be appropriate
for reparations, and they've come upwith some recommendations, a whole slew of
them. Actually. Man, it'skind of like you can tell with some

(32:43):
of those, kind of like howmuch more do you think we could get?
How much more should we ask for? The one thing they evidently have
all agreed upon is every black Californiashould we get one point two million dollars
up front before you talk about anythingelse. One point two million dollars.
Now, who's that go to.Evidently it doesn't matter. It is based

(33:06):
on the color of your skin.It's not based on whether or not you're
a lifelong Californian. You could move. I guess you could have moved to
California thirty sixty ninety days ago andstill be eligible for this, because,
after all, you know, you'reblack and therefore reparations need to be made.
Now I'm hearing a lot of complaintsfrom some some people on the left.

(33:27):
One point two million's not enough.That's not enough, yo. They
promised forty acres in the mule whenthe slaves were freed, and that's worth
two hundred million dollars in California.Now, I don't know what forty acres.
I guess it depends on where theforty acres is right in California as
far as what it's worth. Butat any rate, I think all that

(33:47):
happens as a result of this ispeople end up asking for more or not
being satisfied with whatever is being offered, and of course the people who are
paying. This is Larry Elder's goingto point out. Larry Elder, course,
the conservative black Republican from California ranfor governor lost Here he is talking
about the reparations, which he findswholly unfair. If for no other reason,

(34:09):
then you've got people who were neverslave holders who are responsible for paping
paying people who were never slaves.Here he is I ran for governor.
I'm familiar with the state budget.It is three hundred billion dollars. This
would be six hundred billion dollars,give or take twice what the state budget
is. There is a twenty billiondollar deficit, and there's a one point

(34:31):
five trillion t as in Tyrannosaurus,one point five trillion dollars unfunded pension liability.
From where is the money going tocome? They're going to have to
tax people. And by the way, most people in California aren't even white,
the people of color. Even ifyou accept the premise here now,
reparations is the attraction of money frompeople who are never slave owners to be

(34:52):
given to people who are never slaves. And California was admitted as a free
state. So what the task forcesays is doesn't matter. It's about mass
incarceration, red lighting, and overpolicing that legally explains a racial gap.
Really, how do you explain thefact that the Japanese Americans have a higher

(35:14):
household income than whites do, eventhough in California there were laws that for
bad Japanese from owning farmland. Howdo you explain the fact that Chinese Americans
have a higher household income than dowhite Americans when there were laws in the
Bay Area that for bad Chinese fromparticipating in the laundry business. There are
lots of people who are discriminated against. You want to you want to assign

(35:35):
the racial gap to all of thatstuff. The real gap, Rachel,
that they don't talk about is afatherlessness gap. When I was a kid,
virtually every one of my friends hada mother and the father in the
home Now that is rare. Seventypercent of black kids now enter the world
without a father in the home marriagewith the mother. You cannot tell me
that there's more racism today than itwas back in nineteen fifty two when I
was born. All right, that'sLarry Elder, of course. Yeah,

(36:00):
I'm thinking too. If you're Italian, if you're of Italian heritage, or
you're of Irish heritage, how wereyour ancestors discriminated against when they came into
this country. Both the Italians andthe Irish retreated rather poorly, as I
recall from reading a little history.When they first came to the United States.
They had names for the Irish andfor the Italians. But they're all

(36:25):
proud, upstanding members of our societythese days. Yo, discrimination has existed
as long as mankind has been around. You never completely eliminate discrimination. People
will always discriminate against others for whateverreason. Sometimes for a good reason.
Sometimes there's a good reason to discriminate. Sometimes you sometimes you discriminate. I

(36:47):
just you know what, I discriminateagainst criminals. I discriminate against criminals.
I don't want to be associated withcriminals. I don't want to hang out
with criminals. I don't want criminalsliving next door. What does that make
me? You're an anti criminal?Yes, I am, I'm an anti
criminal. You're absolutely right. NothingI'm doing what nothing to do with criminals.

(37:10):
Well, there's been times in thepast where wrongly we have assumed the
same types of things about ethnic groupsof people, and luckily we evolve the
time and we grow up and welearned the truth and we stopped doing those
types of things. But if we'regoing to go back retroactively and have a
paid day for everybody who's ever beendiscriminated against in naty way, shape or

(37:36):
form, we're gonna have a lotof groups. We're gonna owe things too,
and I don't think we got enoughmoney to We'll end up just paying
each other. We'll trade How aboutif we just trade checks. I'm twenty
eight percent Irish, so you couldjust I and my wife is almost a
hund percent Sicilian. So if youwant to just go ahead and send us
some money because you know your ancestorsdiscriminated against our ant says that's cool.

(38:00):
No, it's not. We wouldn'twant it, We wouldn't ask for it.
Yeah, we came here. Youknow, our ancestors all came here
to find the American dream, andeventually they did. Doing this just continues
to divide people. But then again, there are those who want to continue
to divide us, and they willcontinue to divide us every chance they get.

(38:22):
All right, y'all, have agreat day. Say tomorrow morning,
bright and early five am a shareover a news radio seven forty KTRH.
We are back here at four ona nine fifty k PRC