The Rod and Greg Show: Senator Mike Lee on Budget Negotiations; Foreign Truckers Causing Problems

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I signed me up. I'm done.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
I don't like I said, we're mother Nature is just
teaching us this government. But you gotta wait. It is
a beautiful day in the neighbor. Greg, I don't know
where we start today. There is so much going on today,
and we're going to try and cover it all today.
But there's just too much going on.

Speaker 1 (00:19):
Well, you know, literally, I think right right before our
show started, we have we went from let's talk about
the House YEP, hoping to get the votes for a
budget too. We have a budget, folks, we have a
budget coming out of the House. It's coming out hot,
it's going to the Senate.

Speaker 2 (00:34):
Let's go. We've got we've got that to talk about.
The latest breaking news And this happened after the House voted, Greg,
all of a sudden, the Education Department is about to
be cut in half. Apparently the employees that the department
in Washington have all been given notice that they need
to clear out their desk, possibly as early as tonight.
I mean, Lynda McMahon, the new Education Secretary, is not waiting.

Speaker 1 (00:57):
I yeah, I know, I kept I kept hearing that
that actually wasn't going to happen. Like you know, this
is more of a resolution. It's more of a symbolic
embolic symbol. I just I hit my mic, my mic
went live. But okay, it was supposed to be a
symbolic move, but it's not. It's it looks like it's

(01:18):
going to have some real teeth to it, which now
bring it on. Let me I just again, I keep
hearing people say this whole doch thing is not going
to go well for the Republicans because you know, people,
this is going to impact real people. They're just identifying waste.
Nobody's for waste, nobody's for any that this is this
is going to go fine. Yeah, I think you have
to have our seats. I think you have to show

(01:40):
what it is you're cutting. But I think they're prepared
to do that. I haven't seen any any idea that
they're not. And all these people working those buildings are empty.
Those big giant federal buildings don't have a soul inside them.
So why these no show jobs need to really be scrutinized.

Speaker 2 (01:54):
Well, we've got that. Oh, by the way, we have
a ceasefire possibly in Ukraine that was a house today,
there's a another big story of the day. Plus Donald
Trump's threat of tariffs on Canada have apparently worked. Ontario
and the one of the provinces there in Canada has
backed down on its threat to place a surcharge on

(02:15):
the electricity that they send to the United States. My
question is, Greg, if we are such an energy rich country,
why it's Toronto and Ontario sending us energy any electricity.
Doesn't make any sense to me.

Speaker 1 (02:28):
It doesn't make any sense to me either. And I
think that part of that is just some of the
states and maybe they're their own decisions about the role
of coal fired power plants in their grid or in
their system, and you know, it's you know it though,
they don't get rid of coal fire, they just get
it from somewhere else that's cold fire. It like, yeah,
Utah has been supplying coal fired power to California for

(02:50):
a long long time. After they said they're not going
to generate on their own, they just came to Utai.

Speaker 2 (02:54):
Yeah, they get that so they can argue, hey, we
aren't producing.

Speaker 1 (02:56):
Him, no, just someone else's.

Speaker 2 (02:58):
We're just taking it. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:59):
Yeah, it's it's like it's like all the drilling of
oil you see at Huntington Beach, California, you'll see it
in the restaurant sections. They got these old pumps just
right there in this restaurant section. You see it out
now offshore they sell to Mexico. So somehow they're they're
they're cleaned because they're not selling it in the United States.

Speaker 2 (03:15):
Well, we're going on. Those are just a few of
the things. Here's one that I think you really enjoy
is you work your way home tonight. Greg Glenn Beck
on his show today went off right now. You and
I talked about this yesterday.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
You know, I I did. I listened to Glenn, and
I wish I feel like I didn't do you ladies
and gentlemen a service by not expressing the vim and
vigor that you're going to hear from Glenn Beck. His guy.
He has the appropriate outrage and that that this issue
should should have. I think I undersold it in my

(03:51):
in my contempt and outrage for what. But but Glenn
Beck nails it and he says, I mean, he really
calls it what it is. And so I I think
that that's a that's a continuing story. We we we
spoke about that yesterday. But I think the things that
were shared today on a nationally syndicated and one of
the most popular programs in a Maricauntry about Utah's Salt.

Speaker 2 (04:14):
And a reporter at the Trivia.

Speaker 1 (04:16):
It's targeting a citizen. She does not work for any
think tank or any any nonprofit. She's trying to do
her bit and trying to help bring a transparency to
something that the left never thought could be ever see
it the light of day, and they attack her. And
by the way, you know the Tribune being a nonprofit,
it's exactly why they want to make her afraid, or

(04:38):
her family afraid, or out her her husband's business, because
they want her to stop doing it because you can
show those flow charts in her search engine, but show
all the leftist money that goes to the Tribune. So
they'd like that to stop.

Speaker 2 (04:51):
They like to stop, and we talked about it yesterday,
expressed our frustration. I'm not sure how Glenn picked up
on the story today, but he did, and we'll let
you hear what he had to say a little bit
later on in the show. Now, one note I want
to make before we get into all the stories we
have in front of us. Yesterday, Greg and I went
to a hockey game last night. Yes by the way. Folks,

(05:14):
if you haven't been to a hockey game with the
Utah Hockey Club, it is fun. I mean we you
and I were talking on the way into the Delta
Center last night. Greg. We never thought hockey would be
here in Utah.

Speaker 1 (05:25):
We did not, and we're hockey fans.

Speaker 2 (05:26):
We were hockey fans.

Speaker 1 (05:27):
We big hockey player.

Speaker 2 (05:30):
I grew up in hockey. Yeah, in the Northeast and
hockey is a religion back there for a lot of people.
But we never thought it'd be here in Utah. Well,
guess what it is is a good team. They played
one of the best teams in the NHL last night
in the Toronto Maple Leafs. It was a whale of
a game, it really was. It was something else. I mean,
it made national headlines. The fight, the big fight, the

(05:53):
most beautiful imagery of a great fight. But you know
that's what happens to the hockey sometimes when they still
because they don't fight like they used Toben, brawl breaks out.
Sometimes it's a big momentum changer, and it certainly was
last night, and it was so much fun to be there.
And thank you for rolling with me, not just as
a professional obligation on the Rotting Greg Show.

Speaker 1 (06:11):
But in our free time, we're out cheering for a game.

Speaker 2 (06:14):
Now I have to share with you going to a
sporting event with Greg qes. Now you you have heard him,
because they need to understand who you are. Okay, you
know he's a very passionate guy and we all that's
why we love and know Greg very very well. So
here we are at the game last night, and we
had great seats. We're two rows off the ice. Yes,

(06:35):
I mean they're great.

Speaker 1 (06:36):
Great seats learning how the other half live.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
Yeah, yeah, we don't get to do this very often,
but we took advantage of a very nice offer from
a good friend of ours and went to the game
last night. So we're two rows up. So during the game,
I think I think he was just gets wound up
even more, if that is even possible. Right. Oh yeah,
so there was a fight. He mentioned there was a fight,
and there was rumblings of us can fight a little

(07:00):
bit later on in the game last night. Right, So
what does Hughes do? Jumps out of his seat, runs
to the plexiglass, which.

Speaker 1 (07:07):
Is only by the way, folks, A two step and
two steps. It's not like I'm on a pilgrimage and
goes to the PLEXI glass and starts pounding on it
with both hands, shaking the glass and fight.

Speaker 2 (07:18):
Fight.

Speaker 1 (07:19):
There needed to be another fight. It was about that time.
It really. It was a real momentum shift in the
favor of Utah Hockey Club and they went from three
to nothing to three three with a well placed fight. Yeah,
it was time to brawl again and finish them off.

Speaker 3 (07:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (07:33):
Yeah, And I was you know, I'm sitting there going
do you have to do that? But it was a.

Speaker 1 (07:39):
Lot of overtime shootout. It was a very very very exciting, great,
great experience. If you haven't been, you need to go
out and check it out. It's a It is a
great sport always, I've always known it's a good sport.
But we got a good product here in Utah.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
Yeah. Well, and you and I were talking about we
heard we heard, you know, as you're sitting there, some
people asking questions about this rule or why did they
do that? Icing what's that all about? And it's a
good indication that Utahn's are getting interested in professional hockey
and we absolutely love it.

Speaker 1 (08:07):
Yeah, it's it is no one will be disappointed. The
speed of that game, getting a little closer to the
ice where you're kind of peer to peer. Your head
is about the same level players is. It's it's a
speed that I it was, it was something else.

Speaker 2 (08:19):
Going to an event with you, you can get upset
in the parking lot for crying out right. So we've
got a lot to get to today. We'll talk about
the need to get the Trump tax plan approved by Congress.
That's coming up next right here on the Rod and
Greg Show. Great to be with you this afternoon. You
want to a new catch line, gold star in your
forehead catch line great to be with you on a

(08:40):
gorgeous Tuesday afternoon. Well, another breaking story that we shared
with you just a few moments ago. The House today
approved a stop gap funding bill, just days before a
government shutdown. Now it's going to be up to the Senate,
and we'll be talking with Utah sender Mike Lee about
that coming up at the bottom of the hour. But
they need to get this out of the way so
they can now start to take a look at the

(09:04):
tax plan that the President has Greg and continuing that
and joining us on our Newsbaker line to talk about
it is Phil Kirpin. Phil is President of American Commitment. Phil.
How are you and welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 3 (09:17):
I'm doing great, guys, how are you?

Speaker 2 (09:18):
We're doing well, Phil, Phil. Next step now is to
get after this tax policy. Isn't it.

Speaker 3 (09:24):
Well? The House and the President want to the Senate
leadership kind of a weird situation right now. The House
and Senate have each passed a budget resolution, but they're
very different. The House budget resolution has a large instruction
to the Tax Writing Committee, the Ways and Means Committee
to do a fulsome extension of all of the expiring

(09:46):
Trump tax cuts that'll prevent a three thousand dollars per
household TAXI Like, we're staring down at the end of
this year, and they want to do no tax on tips,
no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security. The
Senate Republicans have done a budget that has zero tax
tax provisions of any kind. They want to do a
budget that just increases border and defense with so offsetting
cuts and then come back and do a second budget

(10:08):
later in the year that would address tax which if
it sounds overly ambitious, it's because it's never been done
in the history of the country. Two budgets in the
same year. So a lot of people, including myself, are
skeptical of that strategy. And we're at this bit of
a standoff right now, where the House has passed a
pretty good budget, the President supports it, but the Senate
is kind of saying, we don't like what the House

(10:30):
did on tax cuts in their budget because we want
a permanent extension of all the expiring tax provisions, and
the House probably only gets to an eight or nine
year extension, although equal I agree with the Senate it
should be permanent, but there's something really bizarre going on
when that's the excuse that they're giving. But meanwhile they're
pushing a budget resolution with no tax provisions at all.
So at the moment they're in a bit of a standoff.

(10:53):
The House is not taking up the Senate pass budget,
the Senate is not taking up the House pass budget.
I hope that we'll see some more pressure from the
President on the Senate to act, as he has endorsed
the House version. What I really think should happen is
the Senate should take up the House pass budget, ideally
amend it to make all the tax versions permanent, and

(11:13):
send it back over but at least get the process
moving so we can get this agreed to and move
to the step of actually right in the bill.

Speaker 1 (11:20):
Phil, I love the way you frame this and cancel
the tax hike immediately. I can't get people to repeat
back to me, and I'm talking whether they're members of
elected officials or not. They want to keep talking about
this or framing it as if it's a tax cut
and we want to take a tax cut, and we'd
like to deliver a tax cut going forward. There is
no tax cut. It is the current tax rate of

(11:43):
which we have. If we're talking the Trump tax cuts
of twenty seventeen, twenty seventeen.

Speaker 3 (11:47):
Well that's the new ones he wants also.

Speaker 1 (11:49):
But yeah, he does, he has new ones. But the
idea that you would have to pay, I hear this
out of the center all the time. Well we have
to pay, We have to pay for that tax cut.
You don't have to pay to not raise someone's taxes.
It does. It absolutely doesn't track.

Speaker 3 (12:01):
I agree with you. I agree with you on that.
And you know, and it is a fact that in
the two years after the tax cuts took effect, the
federal government brought in more money in total revenue than
in the two years before it took effect. And so
you can say, oh, but it would have risen by
even more, and you know, you'll never know for sure.
But one thing we do know is revenue didn't go

(12:22):
down when we cut taxes, and in fact, a lot
of money came back into the US that have been
sitting abroad overseas, and we saw a lot of the
things that we wanted, and we saw a huge rise
in real incomes in the couple of years after the
tax cuts passed. And you know, you're right, if the
tax cuts took effect the if it passed in twenty seventeen,
took effect in the beginning of twenty eighteen, that's a

(12:43):
long time ago. Now we've been living up with them
for seven years. And so this idea that you know,
if we go back to the way the tax code
was before that, you know, that's normal. That's what we
should assume. And to extend it is a tax cut.
Nobody thinks that way. If your tax rates of the
same next year as they were this year, that's just
the thing same. But if Congress fails to act and
the standard deduction is cut in half and the all

(13:05):
the rates go up, and the small business twenty percent
exclusion goes away, and so small businesses go from paying
twenty nine percent to paying forty percent, and the death
tax exemption is cut in half, and the child credit
is cut in half, all these other things that are
scheduled to occur come January first. If Congress doesn't get
it back together, nobody will feel that as oh, well,
that was already in the loss of my tax Exactly,

(13:28):
I'm paying thousands of dollars more in tax.

Speaker 1 (13:30):
And the idea that the sentence like, well, we're going
to raise your taxes because because the House only wanted
to do it for nine years, not forever, so we're
just gonna have to go ahead and raise them. I
just can't even hear. I just can't accept the logic
that a tax cut is inevitable unless you.

Speaker 2 (13:42):
Take it away.

Speaker 3 (13:43):
You're not saying it quite that way. What they're saying is,
you know, we only we're against the House resolution because
their budget doesn't get to permanent. But here's our resolution,
which doesn't do anything on taxes at all. But trust us,
by the end of the year, we'll do another one
and that will cover taxes.

Speaker 1 (13:58):
You're being very fair like the fair mindedness of your argument.
All I hear is my taxes are going up until
someone leaves that code alone, and I need to see
that in print somewhere and voted on. So I agree
with what you're saying.

Speaker 3 (14:11):
Yeah, you know, look, the sooner they do it, the better.
And here's the other thing, Like, let's say the Senate
plan could actually work, and they passed this first budget
and they passed this first reconciliation building, they do a
second whole budget process and they pass that. Let's say
that that all could work the way they want it to. Okay,
how early in the year could that possibly all get
done realistically? November December more likely. Well, by the time

(14:35):
you get that late in the year, how many things,
how much economic damage has already been done just from Hey,
I can't invest because I don't know what the tax
rate is going to be next year. Hey, my taxes
might be going up. I'm not going to make that purchase.
You know, there'll be a lot of economic damage between
now and then, even if they did eventually get it done,
And I'm not convinced they would eventually get it done,
so I want it done. I'm the same as you.
I want it done as soon as possible. I liked
when the President said get it on my desk by

(14:56):
a Memorial Day. I don't think the Senate thought the
House could what they did and pass a budget resolution
with a big instruction for the tax cuts. And they
got it done. And the Senate needs to get in
line now.

Speaker 2 (15:06):
Really, they sure do. Phil. The clock is ticking. Has
always great chatting with you. Thanks Phil, my pleasure. Good
work on our newsmaker line. Phil Kirpin talking about canceling
the tax hike immediately and permanently. I think we're all
on the same page. Get her done, as we like
to say, right all right, more coming up It is
the Rotten Greg Show with you as you work your

(15:27):
way home on this gorgeous Tuesday afternoon on Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine knrs. Still to come on
the show as you work your way home tonight now,
Greg and I kind of went off yesterday on the
Salt Lake Tribune because yeah, I thought we did too,
but really, you know, I great minds think alike. Well
who picks up the story this morning and goes even

(15:48):
harder at the Salt Lake Tribune. No other than Glenn Beck.

Speaker 1 (15:52):
Can.

Speaker 2 (15:52):
You'll get to hear what he had to say here
a little bit later on in the show, and we'll
get some of your thoughts on that coming up as well.
But joining us right now on our Newsmaker line is
you tossed on Erner Mike Lee. We spoke with Senator
Lee just a short time ago before the House approved
a stop gap funding bill. We asked him about that
and a number of issues out there, and we asked
him first of all, about where the stop gap funding

(16:13):
bill lies.

Speaker 4 (16:13):
Look, you know, the question is where the Democrats and
the Senate shut down the government if the House sends
a budget deal to the Senate. Now, Senator Schumer, as
the leader of the Senate, Democrats stopped short of declaring
the House bill dead on arrival in the Senate, And
I think that reflects some Democratic qualms about killing the measure.
In some of the past standoffs we've had, Democrats have

(16:35):
felt confident that government shut down politics uniformally, universally played
to their advantage. But I don't think that's the case
in this situation, with the current alignment of government. Senator
Kelly said, of a government shutdown, this is a huge
risk and maybe they'll decide the entire the entire government

(16:57):
agencies don't need to exist anymore. So I think that's
one of the things that's holding the Democrats back from
pushing in that direction. You can't be too sure with
Democrats these days. They've done some stranger things, but these
are in fact the same Democrats who refused to stand
to honor a boy with cancer or to recognize that
the tragedy experience broad the family of Lake and Riley.

(17:22):
So you never know what to expect for sure with him.

Speaker 1 (17:26):
So, Senator, if I was on your staff and I
was to make sure that the budget that comes over
from the House to the Senate is one that you
would take even seriously, I would say, don't give Senatorly
thirty eight seconds to read eight billion pages, because that's
a no. I would say, don't put things in that

(17:46):
bill that is going to promote and forever see NGOs
and USAID funding go forever. There are just some poison
pills that I know that would actually make it very
difficult for you, for good reasons and other Republicans to
vote for that bill. They have a slim majority in
the House. Are you concerned at all that you might

(18:07):
get a bill that you yourself wouldn't be able to support,
And is there any conversations about preventing something like that.

Speaker 4 (18:16):
Yeah, Look, this bill is not a great bill. It
is a bill that's designed to buy a few months
until the next appropriations cycle can get underway, with more
Republican priorities built into it to make sure that there
are no increases during this time period, where the White
House can work with the House and Senate Republican leaders

(18:39):
in order to get ready for a recisions package to
claw back some of the money it's been spent so far.
So this is not a bill that has any huge fans.
It's also not a bill that spikes an unusual amount
of concern.

Speaker 2 (18:54):
Under Lee, I understand you need to get this out
of the way so you can then consider the president's
tax plan. Where does that stand? What are you hearing
about that? Is there a timetable for that right now?
Because a lot of people are saying, get this passed
and get it passed quickly. Where does this stand?

Speaker 5 (19:09):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (19:09):
I just left the meeting in which Leader Film told
us that we might be turning to that as early
as week after next and this could move fairly quickly,
But there's a lot that needs to go in there
as part of this budget vehicle that sets spending levels

(19:31):
and sets in motion what we will need in order
to pass budget reconciliation where we can pass some legislation
through a simple majority. We've got to get the bottom
line numbers ironed out, and I think one of the
most important details that needs to be taken into account
is where should the spending levels be set in the budget.
It's my belief that we had to go to an

(19:52):
inflation adjusted population and adjusted variation of where we were
with pre pandemic spending levels. Remember, we went from four
point four trillion dollars immediately prior to the outbreak of
the COVID pandemic up to where we are now, which
is at about seven point three trillion dollars. This is

(20:13):
absolute madness to continue those levels, and that's one of
the details we're going to have to work out in
connection with this budget vehicle that will itself become the
vehicle for passing an extension of the tax reforms through reconciliation.

Speaker 1 (20:29):
Senator, One of the narratives around the tax package that
drives me crazy, and it's just so it's just so
inaccurate is that there is no tax cut that we're
talking about when you're looking to extend the current tax
rates or the Trump then in twenty seventeen tax cuts.
This is the estimates five thousand dollars of tax increase
per family. If you do not extend it, you don't

(20:52):
have to pay for that. That would mean that you
would assume that more taxes would be raised and more
revenue would come in. We're trying to go the opposite direction.
But I keep hearing people say, including Republicans, saying, well,
we have to figure out how we're going to pay
for those tax cuts. Now that's existing revenue. How do
we change the narrative on this, because it drives me crazy.

(21:14):
You don't have to pay it's imagining that you have
to raise people's taxes, and if you're not going to
raise their taxes, you have to pay for that somehow.
It's just so intellectually dishonest.

Speaker 4 (21:26):
Right when we're measuring against current policy, current policy as
followed right now, it is appropriately scored as a benchmark
against current policy, those are things that you don't have
to pay for. This is money that belongs to the
American people. It's not our money, and so it's not

(21:47):
appropriately scored. It's something that you have to offset or
pay for when it comes to current policy, which is
what we're primarily talking about. Things that, under existing law
and existing policy, are themselves part of our tax code.
That's not something we have to pay for.

Speaker 2 (22:05):
Senator, we're just getting some breaking news. Apparently Ukraine is
ready to accept a thirty day ceasefire and the US
is agreeing to resume military aid and intel sharing, and
that deal was just announced by a Secretary of State
Marco Rubio. Are we starting to see some movement on Ukraine?
What do you think? This is just barely breaking center.

(22:27):
You may not even be aware of it, but I mean,
what does this indicate as far as what's going on
with Ukraine, the US and Russia.

Speaker 4 (22:35):
First of all, this is an amazing development, is the
outgrowth of great leadership by President Trump and by my
friend Secretary of State Rubio and all the others who
are involved in it. It goes to show what can
happen when we have actual leadership from the United States,
leadership that's been lacking over the last four years, and
leadership that really takes the place of this humble obeisance

(22:58):
to the military industrial complex, which seeks to perpetuate war
rather than bring about peace. We've seen actual leadership that
has as its object resolving the conflict rather than prolonging it.
So this is a great development. Obviously it's not the
end of the matter, but it's hopefully the beginning of
the end, and it released peaks well to present Trump's leadership.

Speaker 2 (23:21):
You told Cnder Mike Lee joining us on our newsmaker
line a short time ago, talking about everything that's going
on in Washington, and this is a significant event in
Ukraine with a seatsfire. Now Russia has to come along,
and you know Donald Trump wants to bring the war
to an end, and he's doing everything he can too.

Speaker 1 (23:36):
I've been waiting for his Linsay to get out of
the way of himself so they can get on the
same page, so they can go see check putin Mountain,
get him to start working getting out of Ukraine. But
you can't do it until you bring bring dummy along.
And he's been fighting it the whole time. He's been
driving me crazy. Finally now they agree to things.

Speaker 2 (23:53):
Does dummy refer to Selinsky?

Speaker 1 (23:56):
Well, right, a little bit, until he figures out who
his whereas Bread's, but it's it's Zelenski. Once he figures
out who he who his teammates are, then they can
go after Putin and tell him to get out.

Speaker 2 (24:06):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (24:06):
So finally I think that's we might be there some
good news.

Speaker 2 (24:09):
We can only hope baseball season insists around the corner.
I love baseball, Yes, I love it too. Going to
be a tough year for my Yankees. They lost Cole.

Speaker 1 (24:18):
It's a tough year to be a Pirates fan every year.

Speaker 2 (24:20):
Well you'll like this, Okay, this article today in USA
Today Today Today, ranking the best Major League ballparks in
the country, The best ballparks. Okay, I know this one?
Yeah easy? What park? You're right? How did you know that?

Speaker 1 (24:36):
It's my ball It's It's in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It's the
most beautiful ballpark every single it's the worst brand of baseball.
We got a team that just can't They don't want
to spend any money on players. But you're going to
take your family because generalation, generationally, you've always gone and
it's the most beautiful experience.

Speaker 2 (24:51):
That's what say. Say Number one PNC Park in Pittsburgh.
You were spot on Number two Oracle Park and and
Giant for the Giants Family Yards.

Speaker 1 (24:59):
Is it used to be a top It's it's.

Speaker 2 (25:01):
Four, It's four. Yeah. Number three Wrily I've never been to.
Have you been to? I have show Off?

Speaker 1 (25:09):
Uh, I've been Wrigley and Fenway. Those are the two
historic parks I think you gotta go see.

Speaker 2 (25:14):
Yeah. Number five is Camden Yard. Number four is Camden Yards.
A number five is Fenway. Yeah, so I thought that'd
make you happy. You know that your your ballpark. Your
team sucks, but you got a nice stadium.

Speaker 1 (25:25):
Yeah it is. We already have people you know, that
are already right in the obituary for our team, and
we're in just spring training right now. It's like, can
we wait till June to write the obituary?

Speaker 3 (25:35):
All right?

Speaker 2 (25:35):
When we come back. Wait to hear what Glenn Ben
had to say today about the Salt Lake Tribune. We
talked about it yesterday. Hear what he had to say today?
Coming up? How are you everybody? I'm rod our Kett,
I'm citizen in Hughes. Great day on the outside today,
Still a lot to come and a lot to cover.
But this is the story that mister Hughes found this
the other day and just said, this is totally unfair,

(25:58):
this is wrong. You want to explain what we're talking about,
because we talked about it yesterday.

Speaker 1 (26:02):
Sure, so we discussed yesterday. Over the weekend, the salt
I like to call it the salt Fake Tribune, but
the Sulti Tribune did a story about real Data Republican.
If you remember, we were the first program that Data
Republican participated in, talking about the search engine that she
created through coding and AI that could take the DOGE information,

(26:24):
take publicly disclosed information about nonprofits NGOs, and create through
that search engine, you can put a name of an
entity and you can see the flow of funds from
federal and those flow funds and how they and it
was never really meant to be able to be tracked
this way, and it can show you the flow charts
of how federal money gets washed over and over and
over again through higher ed through different organizations. And so

(26:45):
it's brought a higher level of transparency than people have seen.
So what do you think would happen to a person
that does that. She's a private citizen, she didn't know,
she has not for a think tank, she doesn't work
for it she's a private citizen. Well, she wanted to.
We went to great, great lengths on this program to
preserve her privacy, to protect her private it was the
biggest concern she had. Well, somebody out at her docked her.

Speaker 2 (27:04):
Well she she she's deaf, right, yes, And it was
someone through the deaf community that was able to find
out who she was and doctor that how, that's how
she was. Doctor.

Speaker 1 (27:13):
We went to such great lengths. Her interpreter, we changed,
we kind of changed the voice just to even try
to create some you know, some additional protections. But she
was ultimately doxed. And and you know, Rolling Stone did
an article about her that was critical, as you can
imagine would be critical, but this is our local paper
decided to take it one step further. They not just
they didn't just regurgitate what Rolling Stone said. They, in

(27:36):
my opinion, uh, tragically and disgustingly named the business the
small business of her spouse. And in naming that business,
that business has now been receiving all kinds of bad reviews.
It's been harmed, it is it's it's it's her their household.

Speaker 2 (27:52):
Income, suggestions of even a boycott right business of this business.

Speaker 1 (27:56):
So The question that we spoke about yesterday is why
on her with the Saltlate Tribune include the name of
a small business that where her husband has nothing to
do with her efforts on this search engine or what
she's doing with AI encoding. Why would they do it
but for one reason, and that is to create harm,
perceived threats or real threats, and to create fear where

(28:19):
she will stop doing what she's doing because the cost
becomes too high, because they need her to stop. Because
guess what the Solid Tribune is, it's a nonprofit. You
can do the you can take her search engine and
find out where all the money goes that they receive,
how it gets there. And so I thought we were
pretty critical, and I said, look, you know, empathy is
a beautiful teacher. Let's go find these this reporter and

(28:42):
the reporter's editor, this woman, and let's go find out
what their spouses do. And let's go just because I'll
bet you if there was some because she has a
lot of attention. Elon Musk was upset about it. There's
a lot of people that have been My thought was,
would they understand the important ethics of not including it
if they themselves lived through some scrutiny that's outside of
their job and what they do. I'm on the s

(29:04):
side of that.

Speaker 2 (29:04):
Yeah, yeah, but and the same kind. Now, I don't
know how he got wind of this, Craig, but so
I'm listening to Glenn Beck this morning, and all of
a sudden during the show, he picks up on this
story and he goes off on this story as a
matter of fact, we'll we'll let you hear what he
had to say, Glenn Justice. Yes, Glenn Beck just looked
at this that this is wrong. You know, this is

(29:26):
just not fair to this poor individual. So he started
off the show or the segment on his show talking
about this today, and he talked about a letter that
he actually sent to the Salt Lake Tribune to get
some answers.

Speaker 6 (29:37):
Why did you feel it necessary to include their family
business in your reporting? How did you feel that was
relevant to Data Republican's profile. Do you regret any of
the backlash to the business in you know, review bombs
and calls for boycott's in the article's comment sections. Glenn
will be commenting about this on his national radio program.

(29:58):
Wanted to give you a fair shake if you have
any comment. Deadline seven am Central tomorrow March eleventh. No, no,
we didn't get any comment from that reporter. He was
too busy, Josh, too busy. I don't know if he's out,
you know, spray painting tesla's.

Speaker 2 (30:13):
You know, I don't know. Now, Glenn went on to
say what you and I have talked about that he
considered what the tribute an active terrorism.

Speaker 6 (30:21):
This is outrageous. What is happening? And quite honestly, guys,
this is terrorism. I said this earlier about the Tesla stuff.
When you are firebombing tesla's, what are you doing. You're
not sending a message to the driver of that tesla.
That's not what you're doing. You're not saying you know

(30:43):
why you shouldn't you should. You're sending a message to
that driver and everyone else you buy a Tesla, you
support Doge and what he's doing politically, and we will
come after you. We'll burn your car to the good
luck with that. Who knows what could happen next? That's terrorism?

(31:05):
Is that not the literal definition of terrorism?

Speaker 2 (31:09):
It is?

Speaker 6 (31:11):
So what is this? What is this you're dosing? You
have a newspaper coming out and saying, oh, by the way,
oh and her kids her kids go to this school,
You're one step away from that. What does her husband's
distillery have to do with her as data Republican?

Speaker 2 (31:31):
What does it have to do with anything? Nothing?

Speaker 6 (31:34):
You want to create terror in her life. You are
a terrorist, and you should be treated as a terrorist.

Speaker 2 (31:43):
You don't do that.

Speaker 6 (31:45):
You don't try to make people afraid so they will
stop saying what you believe is politically wrong.

Speaker 2 (31:55):
You don't do that. And then Beck pondered, what would
happen if he dogs the Tribune reporter?

Speaker 6 (32:02):
How about this Salt Lake Tribune. I'm going to take
the reporter and I'm going to dox the reporter, and
I'm gonna I'm gonna find out if he belongs to
any country club, and I'm going to tell you the
name of that country club. I'm going to find out
where he buys his clothes, where he does any business,
and I'm going to expose it. And I'm just saying,
I'm just going to tell you where he shops. I'm

(32:22):
just going to tell you where he lives. I'm just
going to tell you all these things about him that
have nothing to do with his job. Now, would they
be would they be okay with that? With the Salt
Lake Tribune, say, Glenn Beck, good job. No, they wouldn't.
They would be right for calling me a terrorist. Well,

(32:44):
what is the difference between me doing it to your
reporter and you doing it to this private individual who
is risking everything themselves and would not like to risk
their family. But they're risking everything that themselves because they
believe that the government is corrupt. By the way, for

(33:06):
all of you who don't think that, read the Founders,
read George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, all of them.
They warned this would happen. They told you government is
fire and you better control it or it will control you.

Speaker 2 (33:25):
Boy. Those are a couple of comments from Glenn Beck
this morning on his program, and we thought you'd like
to hear those and get your reaction to it, because
Greg and I Greg really was into this yesterday same
basically the same thing. Why on earth did that tributne
and reporter have to put the name of her husband's
business in the story about her?

Speaker 1 (33:43):
Absolutely, I don't know what I mentioned this earlier, but
the reason why it hits home to me and for
us is because this is a Utah residence lives along
the wall satch front and so it's it's someone that's
you know that he was here and but has taken
on this national profile. And I'll tell you the Tribune
should be careful because this person has received so much

(34:03):
attention and appreciation for the work that she has done
that there's a lot of people out there that are
bringing her work to the attention of the rest of
the country.

Speaker 2 (34:14):
So I don't know.

Speaker 1 (34:16):
If Utah laws allowed for distilleries to mail there, it
might have been the most profitable day, and that in
her husband's business is life. But you're not allowed to
mail no the booze, so you can't do it. But
people have inquired. They wanted to be supportive because they
know that here in Utah, if they can politically smear

(34:36):
this business that had nothing to do with her effort,
people will be fair. They'll do this.

Speaker 2 (34:41):
And I then pointed out by doing that there have
been some hate emails directed towards the business. There's been
a call for a boycott of the business that her
husband runs. It's not fair. We want to find out
what you have to think about all of this tonight
eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero eight
eight eight five seven O eight zero, was it zero?
Was it fair for the Tribune to actually name her

(35:04):
husband's business to get after this this woman data Republican? Yes, yeah, yeah,
right too. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (35:13):
Do you want to do you want to be like
me and present some empathy to this reporter by doing
the same so they understand ethical Maybe we should boundaries
of which she the reporter should have adhered to.

Speaker 2 (35:24):
Yeah eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero
triple eight five seven eight zero one zero or on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod,
and a lot of people are very upset with that
because it was not necessary. And to a lot of
people that could mean because so many people are upset
with Doze and Musk and Donald Trump, that maybe this
is a way for them to take some violent action

(35:45):
against that website or economic Econoland. Yeah, it's all if
you name it.

Speaker 1 (35:51):
Yeah, and you know it's not only that, it's it's
even the even Rolling Stone magazine didn't stoop this way.

Speaker 2 (35:56):
No, they did. They mentioned he owned a distillery, didn't.

Speaker 1 (36:00):
Name it, didn't out it. So got one of our
great listeners and followers on our X page said, hey,
Rod and Greg just left the distillery bought two hundred
dollars worth of stock. Good for you not think we
had to set up a dry bar inside, this, says
I'm not. I don't bube, but I think just out
of just out of you know, help, I think we
need to just stalk this place up.

Speaker 2 (36:17):
I think, yeah, well, yeah, we want to get your
reaction to this tonight. We think it's totally unfair, way
out of place. What say you? Let's go to the phones.
We begin in Augden with Zaye tonight here on the
Rodding Greg Show. Hi, Zaine, how are you?

Speaker 7 (36:31):
I'm good? How are you guys doing good?

Speaker 2 (36:33):
What are your thoughts on this? Sane?

Speaker 7 (36:36):
Yeah, I'm curious. That's that's totally unprofessional on that reporter's part.
And the first thing, first place I'm going after work
on pay Day is down to that distillery to grab
some bottles. I don't really drink a whole lot, but
I've got family members who do, and I'm sure to'll
make a great gift for them.

Speaker 8 (36:54):
You know.

Speaker 1 (36:55):
Thank you, Zaine. I'll tell you a lot of people
want to do that, but Utah liquor laws are that
you cannot. So it's really as you're in Utah, I mean,
it's a place where you know, that's not the biggest uh.
You know, it's not the wettest state in the nation,
So it's a it's already probably an inherently tougher business.
But thank you for thought. I'm gonna I'm gonna support them.

(37:16):
I'm going to do it too. Let's go to Anna
in Davis County. Anna, Welcome to the Rod and Greg Show. Hi.

Speaker 9 (37:25):
I just want to make the point that whoever interviewed her.
I saw the interview, but the deaf community is a
very solid, small community. I've been involved in it for years,
and I don't know why they didn't take more precautions
with protecting her identity. When you see somebody, when you
talk to somebody, you're going to recognize their voice. The

(37:47):
same thing happens with signing with ASL. People have accents,
and so they should have protected her her identity more.
I do not agree with any of what the Tribune did.
It was wrong, but they really need to think about
when you're in interviewing somebody that speaks ASL, they need
to give them more, maybe not put their whole I

(38:11):
saw the interview and she had an accent, and people
are going to recognize that.

Speaker 1 (38:15):
You know, Anna, there's been a number of interviews. Thank
you for the call. I appreciate the input. Because of
that small community that you mentioned, we knew that her
at the time, we were going to be the first.
We were the first interview that she had done. She
was going to be on Beck's program and it was
going to broaden from our show, but we were the first.
But to your point, even the person that was doing

(38:36):
the interpreting, we altered the voice of that person for
the reasons that you've just described, so that there wouldn't
be hopefully slowing down the voice, making it sound a
lot deeper, would would maybe confuse who that interpreter was.
Because that was an issue that I was surprised. I'm like,
if it's the interpreter, why would you ever care what
their voice sounded like? But Anna, you've just answered that

(38:56):
for me, I'd never really understood why we were taking
that level of caution. But that's so. I do think
she tried. But and I don't know what the visual
interviews because she had a kind of a hood on
some glasses, and I don't know to what degree those
were good efforts at keeping her anonymity. But but you're right,
it was that within that community that she was docked originally.

Speaker 2 (39:17):
Well and as well, Greg, you know, she was reluctant
to do our interview. She did that first request, She
didn't jump all over. It took it took a little
talking into, but then she finally did, and she said,
as long as you will protect my identity as much
as you can, And we did on the radio.

Speaker 1 (39:32):
To the extent that I never even knew her email adress. Like,
we got some information, but I kept myself away from
even producer eras nor name, no, whatever he did to
help line that up, I never inquired to even know
that what more details there were.

Speaker 2 (39:47):
All right, we want to get to more of your
phone calls, so we've got to take a break and
we'll come back with your thoughts on this story. Eight
eight eight five seven O eight zero one zero eight
eight eight five seven oa ege zero one zero, or
on your cell phone pound two fifteen say callers that
are on the line, hang with you, hang with us,
and we'll get to you as soon as we can. Well,
we interviewed her a couple of weeks ago. She was

(40:08):
a little reluctant to do so, but agreed to come
on the show and explained what she had found. Other
programs picked up her interview. She was the Rolling Rolling
Stone magazine, a very liberal magazine, decided to do a
look at her. The Salt Lake Tribune picked that up.
But here's the issue that we have with the Tribune.
They identified the business that her husband's own. Her husband owns,

(40:32):
and was that necessary? We don't think it was. What
say you? Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one
zero eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero.

Speaker 1 (40:41):
So let's go to the phones. Let's go to Brian
in Bluffdale. Brian, welcome to the Rodding Greg Show. What
do you think about all this?

Speaker 5 (40:49):
Gentlemen? There is a common law toward known as false
light invasion of privacy, and this situation with the husband
and his business and the wife who's running an independent
business completely falls in line with the UH the description

(41:13):
of this particular tort. At minimum, the reporter is guilty
of a misdemeanor. Maximum, he's facing a defamation suit. If
should they should they decide to go forward with a
legal aspect of it.

Speaker 2 (41:30):
Brian, How difficult would that be though, to move forward
through the courts? I mean, is that a difficult case
to prove.

Speaker 5 (41:36):
Well, I that I don't know, I'm I'm not an attorney,
but I did stay at a holiday.

Speaker 2 (41:42):
And all right, Brian, thank you. We appreciate that. Interesting.

Speaker 1 (41:50):
I want to and get to our calls because they
patiently waited. But I just want to point out too
that our reporter doesn't just get the parachute an article
like this into that publication. They have editors, they have people.
There are a lot of people responsible for this beyond
the reporter themselves. You got an editor of that portion
of the paper. You've got a lot of employees there
to solid Tribune that I think all of them own

(42:11):
culpability to this. Let's go to Winston and Davis County. Winston,
welcome to the program.

Speaker 10 (42:19):
Thanks Greg and hi Rod. How are you today?

Speaker 2 (42:21):
And we're doing well. Thank you Winston. What's on your mind?
What are your thoughts?

Speaker 10 (42:27):
Well, the aspect that I want to get to is
the fact that the folks on the liberal side always
turn into children. It's amazing because they play by their
rules and they don't care who they hurt, they don't
care who they step on, they don't care what destruction
they create, which goes to show their lack of ability
to actually have meaningful conversations and become part of the

(42:51):
solution versus being part of the problem.

Speaker 2 (42:53):
A good point.

Speaker 1 (42:54):
Yeah, And is it the irony that there's always the
one pearl clutching? There are the ones always pointing their
finger therebody else is so morally and intellectually flawed, and
they're the They are the most intolerant, most aggressive people
and resorting to things that adults shouldn't do and wouldn't
do like this. And again if if they have stooped

(43:18):
below Rolling Stone magazine, which is a music magazine, if
they can't even get to that level, what does that
say about that paper?

Speaker 2 (43:25):
All right back to the phones we go. We had
to Springville and listen to what Bob has to say
tonight here on the Rodden Greg Show. Hi, Bob, how
are you.

Speaker 5 (43:34):
Hey?

Speaker 8 (43:34):
I'm doing great. You guys are my local Rush Limbaugh,
and I really appreciate you.

Speaker 2 (43:41):
Thank you.

Speaker 8 (43:43):
You know, ten years ago, or even more than that,
fifteen years ago, I used to watch the nightly news
and I would get so upset that Rush. I was
going to get my news from Rush instead of listening
to that garbage. Well, my wife is bound banned me
from listening to KSL because I get the same. It's

(44:08):
totally mad of what's going on. For example, they before
Trump's even a press the president, they show about immigration
and they show these kids in cages. Well guess what
that was goring the Obama administration. And then a couple
of weeks ago, I just lost it because they were

(44:29):
talking about the accident in Toronto and they used that
as a segue to talk about how Trump was getting
rid of air traffic controllers. Now, unless you know, Canada
did become the fifty first state, we had nothing to

(44:49):
do with that. I just get so. I get so
frustrated by listening to that that kind of stuff. So
I suggest a segment for you, and that is throw
up a challenge flag. You know, we say, hey, we
need to challenge this, and you're doing it right now.
I appreciate you because it's just it's mad.

Speaker 2 (45:10):
It is it is, Bob. We appreciate your call, and
thank you very very much for that.

Speaker 1 (45:16):
Well, yeah, thanks you. But also we're gonna throw out
the challenge flag. We're gonna throw out the red flag.
We're gonna we're gonna do the video replay on the
whole thing, and you're just kind of we're gonna give
you a ruling on what you have heard.

Speaker 2 (45:26):
All right, Back to the phones we go. We head
to Provo now and hear what Marcia has to say
here on the Rod and Greg Show. Hi, Marsia, how
are you hi?

Speaker 11 (45:34):
I am so mad. I am telling that about what
they are doing to data Republican and I thank Youlon
must needs to step in here and help her sue them.
I am i will never be the stout Lake tribute again.
I'm really mad.

Speaker 1 (45:49):
You can tell I am too, Marsha. I appreciate the call.
I it has made my blood boil that this has happened.
This is a vulnerable individual as well, just to naturally,
she's so smart and she just really she doesn't work
for anyone. This wasn't even her day job. She just
knew she has a skill set and everything else, and
she wants to bring transparency that no one thought was
even these leftis certainly never thought anyone could put their

(46:10):
head to get their heads around this. Well. With her
coding and AI and the information doge and publicly information
public information about NGOs and nonprofits, she has put together
a search engine that is absolutely exposing them. And she
doesn't deserve this, and she certainly doesn't deserve her household
income to be threatened. And that and the whole point
of this is whether it's perceived or real, the fear

(46:32):
that this is meant to generate of violence or of
financial ruin is meant to get her to stop if
she's even worried that this is this could happen. If
it's enough to make compel her to not do it anymore,
that's their mission. And you don't want to see things
like this succeed. And Elon Musk has posted about this,
you know, and he's got millions of followers. But I

(46:54):
do think Marsh's right. I would hope that a lot
of people that have appreciated her work in bringing transparency
would rally around her and a Republican because they that
tactic cannot be let to succeed.

Speaker 2 (47:07):
Well, do you think Greg the Tribune or even this
reporter thought for a minute, And I bet they didn't
that an article like this can be used to terrorize
data Republican and her husband. I think they didn't. Do
you think they thought for a minute what this could
lead to?

Speaker 1 (47:22):
Absolutely? And if they did if I could see their
fingerprints treating any news subject. I mean, you can't get
an illegal alien that gets arrested in this town ever
even described as someone here.

Speaker 7 (47:33):
True.

Speaker 1 (47:34):
Okay, they will omit details that are absolutely relevant in
the news from us, and then they're going to put
in things that are irrelevant like this. I think they
absolutely know what they're doing.

Speaker 2 (47:43):
Good point Bank, all right, more of your calls coming up.
When we were out at the Home ex Bo with
advanced window products last Friday, so many people came up
and said hi, and how much they appreciate. The show
next Thursday will be out of the Sportsman's ex Bo.
You know, people just appreciate I'm telling you, and we're
grateful for that. We couldn't do this without your your support.

Speaker 1 (48:04):
That's right. I've said it over and over. But boy,
if they ever had like a Jeopardy series of radio
audiences who take each other on our audience would whoop?
Any radio audience in this country is that smart?

Speaker 5 (48:15):
Hey?

Speaker 2 (48:16):
I just want to bring people up to speed. If
you hadn't heard this story. This broke Greg right before
we went on the air today that the new education
secretary she's only been well, she've been in the office
for five days. She sent notices to about half the
staff at the Federal Education Department that, guess what, they
aren't needed anymore, no longer require you are done. I

(48:41):
tell you what, Greg, You know, for a long time
I've talked about do we really need an education department?
Do we really need an EPA? I guarantee you tomorrow, Greg,
the legacy media, the liberal media in this country is
going to go apoplectic over what Linda bing Man is
doing to the Education Department.

Speaker 1 (48:59):
You know, and as a you know, recovering public servant,
I could never see how once you become dependent on
that federal money for free and reduce lunch or special education,
how do you how do you break that relationship or
that de pendency because it is a significant amount of money. Well,
Trump has found really the only way, and that is
when they're cutting back, it gives them a greater opportunity
to block grant dollars back to states, states offices of education,

(49:23):
state school boards. And I'll tell you what, I don't
know a single state who, if they have a governing
school board or superintendent, wouldn't take the opportunity to take
block granted federal money back to handle free and reduced
lunch and special education without federal strings required or attached
to it. So I think this is the first time
I've seen a way to take the Department of Education

(49:45):
and do away with it, but empower the states with
those same resources. So it can work and should work.

Speaker 2 (49:51):
And ever since I've been talking about this, Greg and
I've been talking about it, I think ever since this
show started about fifteen years ago, is we have very
very smart people in this state. We have a smart audience.
We have very smart educators, smart teachers. They know what
needs to be done to educate the students and to
make sure the administration of those schools is working properly.

(50:12):
They don't need the federal government coming in and say, well,
we'll give you this money, but there are some strings attached.
We have very bright people in this state. And I think,
you know, there'll be some whaling and gnashing of teeth
here for a little bit, but you know what, in
the long run, this will work out.

Speaker 1 (50:26):
It's only the bureaucracy trying to protect itself or trying
to convince the general public that they're worth the bureaucracy's
worth protecting. But here's a fact education delivering education the kids.
If someone thinks that it is the same exact environment
or scenario in fifty states, without regard to demographics, without
regard to population, it's a lie. It needs to be

(50:47):
handled by the states.

Speaker 2 (50:48):
Sure does, all right. Our number three has been a bid,
big day already, another bid the hour coming your way.
It is the rotting brig joke. Stay with us.

Speaker 1 (50:56):
Back after newsping, He's like, yeah, I think his credit's
good because I like the checks.

Speaker 2 (51:01):
I don't like the Trump said he likes ronic transfer.
Apparently he's going to use He's showing supports for Elon
Musk and his dealerships, and you know, his name is
being smeared all over the country because of a job
that the President asked him to do, to take a
look at fraud, waste and abuse in the federal government system.
And uh, the President decided, you know, I'm I'm going

(51:24):
to be nice to Elon today and buy a Tesla.
So here here's Musk with about five or six different
models of Tesla's outside the White House trying to sell
the President on one.

Speaker 1 (51:35):
Of them, you know, and I can just hear the
critics saying, oh, look, how they've how they're trying to
use the power of the presidency and Donald Trump to
to push Elon Musk's Tesla's and I could just hear
the complaints. I just I'm sure they're coming if they
haven't arrived already. No, No, the left his politicized Tesla.
They're just they're they're vandalizing and destroying his state power

(51:57):
power stations and then spray painting the cars. I saw
a picture of where they took the tires off in
the lot and overnight, all the tires off of all
the cars. They're just sitting on blocks. And really, yeah,
it's just so you know, if the left doesn't like
that President Trump is highlighting the s model he likes
and he's going to go buy some for his staff
or whatever he's going to do, then they shouldn't politicize

(52:19):
a company like Tesla like they're doing. They're the ones.
They're the ones that did it.

Speaker 2 (52:23):
They sure are. Now, let's talk about this story that
broke yesterday how UTA's attorney general alleged forgery greg in
signature gathering in the process before the election and even
get on the ballot last year. You've looked at that,
what's it saying.

Speaker 1 (52:40):
So apparently the is you just point out the attorney general.
So we have this signature gathering process, and I'm sure man,
most of our listeners which I know about, there's a
number of signatures that you have to be able to
get to not have your fate decided in a convention.
You have a caucus meeting, precincts elected delegates. Delegates there's
about four thousand state wide elected and if you want

(53:03):
to become a if you want to get signatures and
not have to win the approval and the convention being
one of the top two vote getters, then you have
to get the signatures. Well, when I was in the legislature,
even that signature process was by design very difficult to
do because we wanted to incentivize really going through the
caucus convention cycle. If you if somebody signs somebody's back

(53:28):
or signature sheet and that goes in for verification. If
someone said, hey, for the same office, would you sign
another person's and they did, it wouldn't count, so they
only count one time. Well, it becomes very valuable, and
these companies have emerged. They get paid by the signature,
so they'll do a state Senate race, and they'll do
a US Senate race, they'll do the governor's race, and
they at the same time they're knocking on the door.

(53:50):
They'll get signatures for each of these cants. They get
paid per candidate. So what ends up happening is one,
you've got to get so many signatures and the pressures on,
and it gets harder to do on eight wide races.
But the second is and let me.

Speaker 2 (54:03):
Isn't it because you have to get a certain percentage
of each county on a statewide race.

Speaker 1 (54:09):
Yes, you do, and and and there's a certain number
that you have to have and and that number is high.
And if you can only sign one, you have to
be registered Republican if it's for the Republican nomination to
get to the primary. The same would be with its Democrats.
But the more people sign and then you send it
in for verification, you have eliminated that number of you know,
registered voters from being able to be on someone else's

(54:31):
signature for the same office, for the same race. So
if one US Senate candidate gets them, anybody else has
that same name, that it doesn't apply to theirs. So
it becomes it starts to become harder than more crowded races,
and more people are looking to get those signatures. Well
there's so there's that challenge, but there's also the profit
that these signature gatherers enjoy by charging. The company charges

(54:54):
so much for a signature, candidate signature, and there's a
lot of money at stake as well. So what the
found out the AG's office investigated looked at these signature
gather the signatures that were gather. There was an audit done,
but that brought brought some needed daylight to the process,
and eleven people have been charged. Now listen, all everyone's
innocent until proven guilty. These are just you know, these

(55:15):
are arrests. These are allegations at this point. But this
isn't the first company rod that's been charged with crimes
related to forged signatures to qualify someone for a primary ballot.
This has happened before, it's happened again, and so you've
got what gets kind of sticky is when you have
the candidates that used this company and eleven of its

(55:38):
employees are now charged with forging signatures to the signatures
that think that they submitted were not valid. You have
Governor Spencer Cox Congressman Blake Moore, former Senate candidate Brad Wilson,
along with state Senator Don Ibsen. This company was gathering
signatures for them, and they are they are saying that
it is in southern Utah, articularly Washington County, where this

(56:01):
forgery took place at the highest level, and so that
that throws into question whether they actually if they got
enough signatures or not. The part that is interesting to
me is, well, they turned in more signatures then they
needed to be verified, and once they hit the number
that's required, they take the rest and they stopped counting.

(56:22):
So what you'll hear people say is, look, they had
enough signature, We submitted so many more. Those forged signatures
weren't the really the lynchpin of whether they were going
to qualify because we had so many more that we provided. Well,
that's called, I think, a substantial compliance with a law.
Like we said that. You know, everybody in good faith
substantially complied with the law. What just irks me is

(56:45):
when you get to say the congressional race between Congresswoman
Celeste Molloy and candidate in the primary, Kobe Jenkins, you
had over one thousand.

Speaker 2 (56:55):
He's in Depentagon.

Speaker 1 (56:56):
Now, but you had over one thousand ballots voters filled
out and mailed, and you had stamps that are either
over top of each other where the date could not
be discerned, or it went down to Nevada, came back,
it took ten eleven days to get back, and they
used a strict compliance of the law to throw out
over one thousand ballots in an election that was decided

(57:18):
by I think two hundred votes are less so for you,
if you're a voter, you don't get a substantial compliance
of Well, look, the voter did everything in their power.
They you know, they filled it out, they did all this,
and they don't get the band of the doubt. But
if you're a candidate who it's now found out that
your signatures didn't hit the threshold, well we know you.

Speaker 2 (57:37):
It gave more.

Speaker 1 (57:40):
We assume the voter doesn't get their ballot assumed to
have been done the right way, but the candidate collecting
the signature does. And I'm not blaming the candidates and
any of this. I'm just saying that that kind of
administration and enforcement of our election laws is patently it's wrong.
It is a wrong way to do it. You can't
disadvantage the voter and say your vote doesn't count. But

(58:02):
if you're a candidate, you got signatures and it turned
out you didn't get enough, we know you meant better.
We know you had more to count. We just didn't
count them all. It's all water under the bridge.

Speaker 2 (58:10):
But doesn't this fall under the election officials here in
the state, which is a lieutenant governor's office.

Speaker 1 (58:15):
Yes, it is a double standard to hold voters to
want to say, no, it's a strict interpretation. If I
can't see that date and it's not there by that,
then you get your vote does not count, even though
you went through every process to get it there.

Speaker 2 (58:27):
Yeah, and there's no latitude. Yeah, and don't assume you've
got thousands more. We didn't know someone there. There's a
required signature, so you're okay.

Speaker 1 (58:35):
But you know, but a strict the laws as you
have to have this amount of registered signatres. Well you
didn't because you have forged ones in there and whatever
other reasons. But you know, we know you meant to,
and we know you turned in a lot more that
we didn't read, which probably would have got you there. Anyway,
you just pick a path. If you're going to do that,
then the thousand votes that you got was smudged postmarks

(58:55):
that you can't read, or it took ten days from
from leaving Beaver County to get to Clark Counting, Nevada
and back to be counted. Count the votes count, Let
the voters vote count. Don't disenfranchise the voter. Just pick
a path. And I don't think it's I don't think
there's a consistent application of our election line.

Speaker 2 (59:12):
And signature gathering is very expensive, from what I understand,
it's a rich man's game. A lot of candidates cannot
even afford to do that.

Speaker 1 (59:19):
You know, I when I ran for governor in twenty twenty,
I had I had raised enough funds to do it,
but it was like a quarter of a million dollars
for me to do that. And I said, you know what,
I'm going to take my chances in a caucus convention
cycle that I'll be one of the top two vote getters,
and I'll use that for media buys and I'll do
it a different way. But I wasn't about to give
the signature gathering company a quarter of a million dollars.

(59:41):
And I got out of the convention. But you know
that is it's and I'm sure it's that was back
in twenty twenty. I'm sure it's a lot more expensive today,
and it just has to be there has to be
something done. I just I don't think. I don't think
it does a thing for our confidence in our voting
and our election processes. To see these charge of eleven

(01:00:01):
signature gatherers happened today, and weirdly, in twenty twenty, you
could actually scrutinize the signatures that candidates were submitting, so you,
like other candidates, could look at them to see. Somewhere
down the road they changed the law where that was
a protected document you couldn't even see it. Well, doesn't
that help a frauds and nobody can look at it
to see if it's real or not?

Speaker 2 (01:00:22):
It sure does? All right, more coming up the Rod
and Greg Show with you on Talk Radio one O
five nine knrs.

Speaker 1 (01:00:28):
So you're probably just shottering, folks. It is March eleventh.
If you didn't know, Rod, it's just take a elevatory
right now. Can I believe we've gotten eleven days into
this month already?

Speaker 2 (01:00:38):
Yeah? Yeah, I'm indicating the time flies fast.

Speaker 1 (01:00:43):
I'm picking up what you're putting down. I just you know,
I just actually eleven days feels about right to Yeah,
it feels good, although I feel like I lost an
hour unjustly. Unjustly, Yeah, daylight savings in an hour of
my sleep.

Speaker 2 (01:00:56):
It's law. That's not unjust, is it law?

Speaker 8 (01:00:59):
I guess?

Speaker 1 (01:01:00):
But you know what, I didn't know that people are. Yeah,
I think there's more people bugged about it now than
I've ever seen before. And I'm riding that train.

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
Yeah, that's because you're talking it up every day. That's why.
All right, Uh, how many articles or interviews have we
seen over the past couple of weeks greg with the
Democratic Party trying to figure out who it is and
what it does. I mean, even Democrats are going, we
don't know what the heck's going on in this part.
They don't.

Speaker 1 (01:01:29):
Yeah, it's just it's just, yeah, they don't know, they
don't know what they're doing.

Speaker 2 (01:01:32):
Yeah. Well, a Michigan senator represented our sender, ALYSSA Slutkin.
Of course, she gave the Democratic response to President's speech.
A week ago is a week ago today? Yeah, it's
just a week ago today, right, Yeah, Yeah, to say
it was well and you know, and it was your
typical democratic talking point. She at the beginning, she started

(01:01:54):
sounding like Donald Trump to be honest. Well, she showed
up on the View today and she had a theory
as to why Americans elected Donald Trump.

Speaker 12 (01:02:03):
Here it is, I think there's a feeling in the country.
And I always often say this. You know, we're we're
about to turn two hundred and fifty years old, right,
We're still pretty young for a country. These are our
like like our angry teenage years, right, we are going
through this push and pull where we're happy, we're sad,
we want.

Speaker 5 (01:02:19):
This, we want that.

Speaker 12 (01:02:21):
And what do you do when you have a teenager
who's threatening themselves and others. You just try to get
them through this period alive so that their brain can
fully form and you can come back to kind of
what the country trump. No, I'm talking about our country.
We're pendulum swinging, We're mondolum swinging. And so for me,
I think that this I don't think there's a single

(01:02:41):
American who feels like this is normal.

Speaker 2 (01:02:43):
Are we a country of angry teenagers? Like a bunch
of angry teenagers can figure out who we are, what
we want to be.

Speaker 1 (01:02:50):
I think that's them. I think well, I think they're
angry teenagers. I think they're just they're just mortally that's
just deranged at this point. But I honestly think that
it is such a and again, they just don't know
where they've lost their bearings. That is the most condescending
thing to say that if you support Doge, if you
support the president, you're you're like a teenager who is

(01:03:13):
just acting out. And they're the smart they're they're the
reasonable ones. Well, look at anything that they're doing, how
they're behaving. How could she put herself in the camp
of the adults and America and those that support Trump
being the teenagers?

Speaker 2 (01:03:26):
Give me a break?

Speaker 6 (01:03:27):
Why?

Speaker 2 (01:03:27):
I have a question, greg does the term angry teenager
or her description of where America is today? Does she
mean somebody like this?

Speaker 13 (01:03:36):
Why so many people are so mad about it, because
they're just taking opportunity away from kids at all have it?
So billionaires kids and billionaires they have it. They go
to private schools. Everyone else ninety percent go to public schools.
Don't take away their opportunity.

Speaker 6 (01:03:53):
So let's stay on the fact. Sorry, no, I'm.

Speaker 13 (01:03:55):
Really angry about this because they're really angry. I taught
kids in Clara Barton High School in Brooklyn, New York.

Speaker 2 (01:04:03):
Who do you think that is? Don't know. Randy Weingarten,
head of the Large Teachers Union in this country today,
very upset about the education Department. Now, this interview was
conducted before what was announced this afternoon. You think she
was upset a couple of days ago. Oh oh, to
get away from her. Now she probably she is probably

(01:04:26):
going crazy.

Speaker 1 (01:04:27):
Well, she probably shouldn't have encouraged all these kids to
be taken out of their schools, sent into isolation during COVID,
the healthiest demographic in the United States during that pandemic,
where the year over year progress of educational progress was
completely lost, Any proficiency was drained because they couldn't they
couldn't experience the environment of education or schools. She had

(01:04:49):
a direct hand in that.

Speaker 2 (01:04:50):
Sure, absolutely, she kept on calling for him to stay closed.

Speaker 1 (01:04:52):
Yes, well they're teachers. I mean, so she's she is
so much the problem that we're going through right now,
and she's the one that's most upset about the change
that I think has to happen if we're going to
get our kids back and we're going to get them
on the right track.

Speaker 2 (01:05:06):
Well, and a lot of consternation being felt around the
country over what's happening with the stock market today and
yesterday and the day before. It's been down. But I
love this explanation. You know, people are saying, look, we're
going through a transition right now where this economy no
longer depends on the federal government to feed it. And
that's what Joe Biden has been doing the last four

(01:05:27):
years and really longer than that. This economy is going
to switch to a free market, free enterprise based economy.
So we're going greg from Wall Street to Main Street.
And that's that's going to be hard for people.

Speaker 1 (01:05:41):
And let me give so to the new to the
we give a counter to the news of the markets.
Down markets down. Terroriffs are scary, Okay. I have a
list of the things that have happened positive since the
discussion and the possibility that tariffs could be could be implemented,
where countries have respondedibilities.

Speaker 2 (01:05:59):
You know, we haven't heard that already by the legacy media.
They have been trumpening this amazing.

Speaker 1 (01:06:04):
Canada already backed out of their They're threatening to terror
for electricity. Border crossings down ninety three percent, Eggs actually
down one dollar eighty three per dozen. Gas prices are
continuing to fall. Inflation is down one point three five percent.
When you talk true inflation, this is an amount that's closed.
It hasn't been this low since September of twenty twenty.
In terms of percentage. You got job growth ninety three

(01:06:28):
percent private sector instead of the all government jobs the
Biden administration was pushing. You have you know, finally Lunsky
and Ukraine wanting to work with President Trump to get
it to a ceasefire, which is good for this world.
And now you have Canada saying, okay, we're not going
to do all these we talked about all we talked tough,
but we actually.

Speaker 2 (01:06:48):
Didn't mean it.

Speaker 1 (01:06:48):
We're gonna We're not gonna put those those terriffs in place.
Plus you've got Vietnam that is that has negotiated a
trade and energy agreement with the United States because Vietnam
doesn't want to deal with the potential tariffs that have
been talked about. Five major organizations representing the United States
steel industry are all expressing support for Trump's tariff approach.

(01:07:10):
Where it's reciprocal, you're tariff. You're putting tariffs on everything
we try to send to you. If you're gonna do that,
you're gonna get them coming back our way. And guess what,
it's having an effect without even actually having to apply
the tariff. The man's been in office for two months.
Get I mean, that's what you have so far. And
I'm telling me about the stock market. There's gonna have
to be a hard research adjustment and we're going to

(01:07:31):
be good. And we're already being positive things. Border crossings
down ninety three percent, we're playing with house money after that?
Will you get that down that much? And everything else
is just rippling in a better way than it was before.

Speaker 2 (01:07:42):
We're gonna be just fine. All right. More coming up
here on the Rod and Greg Show and Talk Radio
one oh five nine knrs. Highway to Hell. I mean,
this was a this was the story that caught our
attention today in Blaze Media. It talks about the danger
out on the highways right now because of foreign born
big truck drivers and it's causing carnage on America's road.

(01:08:04):
Let's find out what's going on. Joining us on our
Newsmaker line is Gordon McGill. He is an author, he's
a trucker contri contributing columnist, at the Blaze as well. Gord,
how why are you welcome to the Rod and Greg Show?

Speaker 10 (01:08:17):
Hi?

Speaker 14 (01:08:17):
Rod, Hi Greg, Thanks for having me on. I'm glad
I've got some readers out last.

Speaker 1 (01:08:23):
We love your stuff.

Speaker 2 (01:08:25):
Well, Gord, let me ask you what is going on
on the highways with big truckers? What has got you
so concerned?

Speaker 14 (01:08:32):
So for many years now, there's been a sort of
silent war waged on the American truck driver. At first
it was waged by American trucking companies and it's still
being waged by them, who have been telling everybody a
lie of blowney truck driver shortage, which was just an

(01:08:53):
excuse for them to not pay drivers more. And for
a good long time they hoodwinked our state and federal
government into paying for CDL schools to continue churning new
drivers through the system, and as of late that's been
drying up. So now they're attempting to use in sourced

(01:09:14):
labor from other countries. And this was really cranked up
after twenty twenty one when the Biden administration put together
this Trucking Workforce Task Group, which was one of these
silly federal initiatives to solve a problem that wasn't there,
with solutions that were not required, which thus created more problems.

(01:09:36):
I mean, this is a fairly typical thing the government does.
And now any visit to a truck stop in America
or a distribution center or anywhere there's off the truck
around is a veritable United Nations meeting. And some friends
of mine have been doing some research into this and
have found that there's been these incredible spikes in the

(01:09:59):
issu shue of CDLs in various states which are not
easily explained by domestic typical production.

Speaker 1 (01:10:07):
You note in your article that the qualifications for for
commercial driver's license CDLs have been have been lowered, requirements
to be able to speak English. There's there's just maybe
you could share with our listeners. How has the bar
lowered to satisfy this false narrative that there's not enough
truckers out there? What is what has had?

Speaker 2 (01:10:28):
What? What?

Speaker 1 (01:10:29):
What kind of lowering of the standards has happened? Because
we all drive these freeways, it'd be good to know
what what it takes to be at truck driver nowadays.

Speaker 14 (01:10:38):
Under the federal regulations in order to get a commercial
driver's license in any state in America, there's a requirement
that you understand English with a proficiency level to be
able to read highway information signs, communicate with the motoring public,
communicate with enforcement official, you know, to like, you know,

(01:11:02):
at least the sort of high school level. You know,
understand weather reports. You know, you guys are in Utah,
you go west along inter State eighty, get into California.
You got to go over Donner Pass. There's been a
number of viral videos of all these struck these trucks
stuck up on Donner Pass in the winter time because
nobody's checking their weather reports and or they don't speak

(01:11:24):
English and can't read them. And so what happened is
in the in twenty sixteen, in the waning days of
the Obama administration, the Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration made
a very curious move. They issued this memoryum which waived
the requirement of DOT and police to enforce that English proficiency. Right, So,

(01:11:49):
let's say the big truck rolls into one of these
inspection stations, they get a Level one or some other
level of inspection, and the DOT officers discover the driver
doesn't speak English. Well back in the day, they could
administer a short test determine whether or not that drivers
spoke English or not, and if they didn't, they could
place them on the service and say you're not going anywhere.

(01:12:10):
They will just stop the truck. In twenty sixteen, that
was waived, so it's created. They didn't get rid of
the rule. It's just one of these sneaky tricks where
the government decides to not enforce a certain policy in
order to accomplish other objectives.

Speaker 2 (01:12:25):
Gord, how does all of this tie in, Because we've
heard for years now there's a real shortage of big
truck drivers eighteen wheel drivers in this country today. Not true,
not true, really, never been true.

Speaker 14 (01:12:39):
No, So what they do is they keep saying there's
a shortage because the American Trucking Association will do surveys
of their members and their members will say, oh, I've
got forty trucks sitting against the fence and nobody to
drive it, or so many trucks, and they do this
with all their members, but they don't ask do you

(01:12:59):
have the freight, do you have the work? Are you
only buying these trucks as a write off or a
sneaky business expense? Nobody actually does the survey of the
available work and then divides that by the trucking capacity
is available. And so what they do is they just
they say, oh, we can't get enough drivers, and then
they come crying to the government and then they get

(01:13:19):
money for their CDL schools. Right, So, like nobody wants
to object to anyone getting a job driving a truck.
Everybody should get a chance to do that. But what's
happened is a lot of the large mega carriers with hundreds,
if not thousands of trucks, have basically become so used
to the government subsidizing their training that all these sort

(01:13:40):
of like semi free new drivers and then those drivers
they typically quit. Like there was a study done recently
in the state of California where they were trying to
figure out why they couldn't get anybody to hang around
and do agricultural trucking. And the people the academics that
led the study found that, you know, state of California

(01:14:01):
spending millions of dollars on training programs and then most
of the drivers wouldquit within a year. And you see
that all across the industry, and it has been going
on for decades because this sort of corporate welfare, finance
of entry level of truck driving jobs disincentivizes the entire
system from making the job better, paying drivers more, fixing

(01:14:22):
delay times.

Speaker 1 (01:14:23):
So, gord I have a question, because we're coming up
on a break carnage on America's roads. You combine the
lowering of the standards for cdl's licenses without a requirement
or at least an enforce requirement for being able to
speak English. You point out in your article you've got
a lot of people that are either refugees or they're
here illegally, that are at getting these jobs. To maybe

(01:14:43):
share with our our listeners briefly, what kind of what
what kind of carnage are you talking about on our roads?
What what's happening? Is it just is are there more accidents?

Speaker 14 (01:14:53):
There's been there's been a slow and steady increase. My
friends at this organization called American Truckers United who've been
studying this, have found a strong correlation between the dropping
of this enforcement of English proficiency for CDL drivers in
twenty sixteen and a slow and steady increase in truck

(01:15:13):
and bolve collisions and fatalities.

Speaker 2 (01:15:16):
Wow, tape, that's kind of frightening.

Speaker 1 (01:15:19):
Gorge did they already have standards on CD license. It
correlates with an increase in truck related accidents.

Speaker 2 (01:15:24):
Go figure, Yeah, go figure, Gord, Great chatting with you,
great article. Thanks for shedding some light on this issue.
Very important. Thank you, all right, No, thanks for having me, guys,
what's why? All right? Take care. Gordon McGill is an
author also a contributor, talking about the mass influx of
foreign board truck drivers and this causing carnage on American roads.

(01:15:45):
More coming up, final segment of the Rotten Greg Show
on Talk Radio one oh five nine k NRS. Do
you find yourself staying home more often? Yes? Do you?
Is there a reason why I have it?

Speaker 1 (01:15:55):
I guess I used to go to love to go
to movies. Question dinner, dinner, movie, don't do either one.

Speaker 2 (01:16:01):
Well, I've become very careful about the movies I go see.
If it's not a real good movie, I just don't
go to a movie to go to a movie anymore.

Speaker 1 (01:16:10):
It's got to be I think the selections down because
of streaming, and then and so and then you have
good movies streaming, so it's really stream in my social
Just Queen Bee and I getting out it's it's really changed.

Speaker 2 (01:16:22):
We don't do it. Yeah, and it's getting expensive out
there to go to dinner really, and the movie yep,
the apparently it was brought on, of course by the pandemic.
Everybody stayed home, but apparently the trends continued. Look, I
didn't make a conscious decision to do it. I just
don't go out. I just don't feel like if we
even order food, we get takeout. We don't even go
to the restaurant anymore. All Right, I'm doing this because

(01:16:44):
I know it annoys you. Well, then why it's been
such a good show. Taylor Swift, oh g Kelsey. Guess
where they spent and had dinner after the Super Bowl?

Speaker 1 (01:16:59):
I don't know, Swift? He tell me where did they go?

Speaker 2 (01:17:03):
Good? Park City, Utah? So Swifty was she didn't call?

Speaker 1 (01:17:10):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:17:11):
You call?

Speaker 6 (01:17:12):
Wow.

Speaker 1 (01:17:12):
He's just upset. He didn't know ahead of time he
would have been outside that restaurant asking for a singer.
It would have been an autograph for his grandkids. I'm sure.
But you would have been there. You'd have been you'd
have been keeping out.

Speaker 2 (01:17:22):
Doesn't say what restaurant.

Speaker 1 (01:17:24):
Board And you're just beside yourself that.

Speaker 2 (01:17:28):
You that I didn't know it.

Speaker 1 (01:17:30):
If you knew, you didn't not a swifty by the way,
restaurant Park did say say it didn't, so they didn't.

Speaker 2 (01:17:36):
I just do this to annoy you anyway, because I
know it really bothered you.

Speaker 1 (01:17:41):
Love Taylor Swift for some unknown reason.

Speaker 2 (01:17:43):
All right, that's that's good for us to I had
up shoulders back made. God bless you and your family.
And that's a great country of arts. It is, Wingman
Wednesday tomorrow. We'll talk to you for

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Senator Mike Lee on Budget Negotiations; Foreign Truckers Causing Problems

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

All Episodes