The Rod and Greg Show Daily Rundown – Friday, March 13, 2026
4:38 pm: Senator John Curtis joins Rod and Greg for a conversation about his opposition to the talking filibuster, which Senate Republicans could theoretically use to pass the SAVE Act.
6:05 pm: Amanda Head, White House Correspondent for Just the News, joins the show for a conversation about the results of a recent poll that shows most voters are unaware of what the SAVE Act would accomplish.
6:38 pm: Mateo Forero, Director of Investigations for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, joins Rod and Greg to discuss his report on how states with anti-border agendas are harming election integrity.
4:38 pm: Senator John Curtis joins Rod and Greg for a conversation about his opposition to the talking filibuster, which Senate Republicans could theoretically use to pass the SAVE Act.
6:05 pm: Amanda Head, White House Correspondent for Just the News, joins the show for a conversation about the results of a recent poll that shows most voters are unaware of what the SAVE Act would accomplish.
6:38 pm: Mateo Forero, Director of Investigations for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, joins Rod and Greg to discuss his report on how states with anti-border agendas are harming election integrity.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, you're excited because you're on vacation next week. Well,
you're on vacation. We're not joining us.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
I am I think you not leave this audience. I
will be with you. I'm going to be broadcasting from
the iHeart Studios in.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
San Diegaro Command Post. Yes, but I am not.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
It's even a mobile, it's not even a remote. I
will be in studio, but I'll see you through a
video screen.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you'll be there. Your voice will
be heard.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Of our listeners. I don't that's a long time. Yeah,
you see you a bent. You go on vacation, you
kick everyone the curve, me, our listeners, not me. I'm here,
I'm not going anywhere.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
You need help, you really do need help. Well I've
heard that. Yeah, it's great to be. We have got
a lot to talk to you now. As promised, we've
had a lot of callers over the last couple of days.
We debate the Save America Act about Utah Senator John
Curtis and where he stands on all of this, yes,
and his position. Well, the center will speak to us
(00:54):
coming up at four thirty five, and you'll get a
chance to hear his explanation. About his stand on this
America Act. I know a lot of people are looking
forward to that. You'll hear that we hope to have
the Center on the air with us at about four
thirty five. Also, the Senate is lurking on some kind
of gimmick or gambit that may get a lot of
debate going on on this if there isn't a talking filibuster,
(01:16):
which I think both you and I believe, that's when
we need to get this done. But we'll see what
John Thune comes up with. Who knows at this point.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Yeah, people like to take shallow water, muddy it up
and call it deep, but it's about that. It's a
talking filibuster, the philibuster, the zombie filibuster it's been called
today isn't what it was. It's not what the founders established.
It isn't what helped pass the Civil Rights Act in
the sixties. That was a talking filibuster. This is a
moment where we have to get this passed, and I
think that philibuster is absolutely critical in achieving that.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
If I'm wrong, show me how you're getting a pass.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
But I don't want to hear there's a Senate procedure
that gosh darn too bad. We can't do it because
the procedures in the Senate just don't afford it or
allow it.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
I don't.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
I'm a little bit I have a little bit of
a jaundiced eye to that, to that reasoning, Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
I don't buy it.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Well, we saw it in the State Senate when they
couldn't find a sponse setup sponsor for a bill that's
the centate procedure.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
Ye ye, that is a procedure. So we'll hear from
John Curtis will explain. I know a lot of people
are interested to hear what he has to say. I've
already had several emails today Greg saying they've been trying
to get a hold of the center. Please ask the
cenator to these questions, and we'll attempt to do that.
So it should be an interesting conversation. A lot more
to get to today coming up a little bit later
on on the show. Is America living in a big lie?
(02:34):
That throws you?
Speaker 3 (02:36):
You mean like the movie?
Speaker 1 (02:37):
You looked at me?
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Huh, Well, I don't know. Are we living in a
matrix movie or red will we?
Speaker 1 (02:42):
America may be living in a big lie? And I'll
explain what that lie is. You'll disgressing me. You're talking
about you will disagree with me like crazy on this.
I just I just I just know you yes, and
I'll make you feel good. We'll pose that question to
our great audience and they'll probably agree with you. See,
(03:03):
I've just set you up because I don't want I
know your ego is very fragile.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Why do you do this to yourself?
Speaker 1 (03:07):
I don't even understand to support you?
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Okay, thanks, I appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
I know your ego.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
You're bringing me up. I appreciate that you're helping me out.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
You're you're you're fragile, and I'm just trying to help you. Well,
we're all talk about that.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
It is.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
Thank Rodin greg Is Friday love to open up the
phones to people today. Oh yeah, hear what they have
to say.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
Yep, I think I really, folks, I think that when
we because it's going to be what in the four
thirty five, Uh, we're going to have that interview with
John Curtis. You we have heard from you that this
is the interview you've been waiting for. We've had Center
Lee on the on the program talking about the Save Act.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
Senator John Curtis is a co signer.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Yeah, he is found he was at that bill.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
So where he sits and where what his position is
on that bill and how to get it passed if
it's going to pass. I think this is a discussion
that everyone's been waiting for for a long time. We're
going to have that, and I think that is going
to bear some commentary from our listeners.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
I think there'll be some reactions. I will be curious
to hear.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
They'll probably get mad at you because of the softball
questions you are throwing, maybe to the center. I know
you've throwed all questions, so we'll see what happens. You
know what's funny, we had two tragic, uh terrorist attacks
in the country yesterday and three in the last week.
If you're throw in Austin with that and a part
of the concern I brought this up yesterday. You've got
these terrorist attacks taking place, and where is funding for
(04:27):
the Department of Homeland Security.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
Yeah, it's to me, it's stuck in inexcusable.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
Right. Well, now, after these attacks, the Democrats are saying,
maybe we should pay for the Department of Homeland Security.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
They didn't see this coming.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
They didn't the price.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
They just didn't even see that this was might be
an issue big paper security and the prospect of of
terrorist attacks.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
But now they're upon us.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
Ray, we've got a sound bite. We've got a SoundBite
with Michigan Senator a Leaf Slotnik, you know, one of
the rising stars so to speak and the Democrat Party,
and she has just realized, maybe we need to do
fund the Department of Homeland Security. Played if you would rate.
Speaker 4 (05:07):
Certainly we need to fund the Department of Homeland Security,
and we need in my view, to cut away all
the conversation on ICE, which is its own conversation, from
all the core missions in the Department of Homeland Security.
But they're essential, they're on the job, they're working today.
Speaker 1 (05:23):
There you go.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
She she just voted for days folks.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
Two days ago she voted to not fund DHS. So
two days ago she wasn't talking the way she just spoke.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Now. Yeah, yeah, Well we'll get into a lot of this,
a lot coming up today. Have you had anything lucky
or unlucky happened to you today.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
I've been very fortunate.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
Oh you've had a good day.
Speaker 3 (05:43):
Well, we had a lunch today, we have we had
a lun the.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Way we need to mention. We had a really nice
lunch with many of our advertisers, potential advertisers. They were
just a lot of fun and we got a chance
to talk to them, tell us about what we're trying
to do each end every day. Hear their stories. There
are some just great stories out there about business here
in Utah.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
Yeah, it was a great lunch.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And so when you asked that question, I immediately thought
felt fortunate for the day's events today I have I've
enjoyed today and I'm stuffed.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
Yeah, me too.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Don't lunch. We ate at Rudizio and the food just
keeps on coming and it's just good.
Speaker 3 (06:14):
And said, would you like more of this? I say yes, yeah,
I don't. I look at it.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
Yes, yes, yeah.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
You didn't get that here?
Speaker 5 (06:23):
Right?
Speaker 3 (06:23):
We sent that out here?
Speaker 6 (06:23):
Right?
Speaker 2 (06:26):
The spam you know, check the email spam. I'm sure
it's there all right here.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
In a few minutes, we'll talk with Utah Senator John
Curtis about the Save Act, Save America Act. A lot
of people interested on where he stands, but there is
word tonight I'm going to ask the Senator about this
as well. But apparently the Republican leadership, greg according to
this story today, is eing what is being described as
a hybrid style debate gambit over the talking filibuster CENTI
(06:52):
Majority leader John Thune, according to this story Today, says
he will bring the legislation to the floor for a
full and robust debate. His decision comes after the President, apparently,
according to this story and The Daily Caller Today, kept
up pressure on congressional Republicans to send the act to
his desk. Now, apparently what they're thinking about doing is
(07:15):
Thune has opted to allow the legislation to proceed to
a standard vote with a possibility of extended floor debate,
rather than triggering a talking filibuster. Mike Lee was asked
about this and talked about it when he posted this
answer today.
Speaker 7 (07:30):
Okay, important update on the Save America Act and the
effort to get it passed. Look, I am guardedly optimistic.
We've turned kind of a corner over the last few days.
There's been some uncertainty about exactly what procedure we will
be and will not be using. In the end, We've
been working closely with later Thune and his staff, and
they've been great to work with. What we're coming up
(07:53):
with is something that I think is best described as
a hybrid version of the talking filibuster. But look, let's
not get MEYERDWN and nomenclature. What matters far more than
what we call it is what we do with it.
We're going to bring it to the floor, We're going
to debate it for an extended period of time before
filing cloture. And I, in my view, at least I
don't want to speak for anyone else, this bill needs
(08:14):
to remain on the Senate floor before we file cloture
on the bill, for as long as it takes to
get it done. Now, the fact that later Thron in
his office has been willing to work with us on
this and they appear open to a variation of that
is a good thing. So let's keep up the momentum.
Let's encourage them to continue to do this. Let's put
the bill on the floor. Let's make those who want
(08:36):
to filibuster speak and keep it on there as long
as possible.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
That's huge out center Mike Lee explaining this gambit that
they're going to run greg According to the story, again,
under this approach, the majority can attempt to wear down
opposition through continuous debate and enforcement of the sentence to
Speak rule, which lists limits each Senator to two speeches
on some legislation. So I don't know exactly procedurally what
(09:02):
they're doing.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
You know, I don't know what the words they want
to use. And they want to call the procedure, but
that sounds to me like a filibuster, you know, a
talking filibuster. Call it whatever you want, if it makes
you feel better. At the end of the day, get
to get the votes and get it done. And I'm
going to tell you there's no other version, and there's
no Senate procedure that you're that anyone's going to argue
to me is more important than getting them. You have
the majority in the Senate as Republicans, and you better
(09:25):
do something with it because the Democrats certainly will.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
There is no doubt in my mind.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
I don't even entertain for a second the idea that
if the Democrats take the majority in the Senate one day,
they will do whatever they want to do, they achieve
and they will not be apologetic about it. Well, we're
wringing hands about procedure. It's just we have to get
this done.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
They have no bounds when it comes to doing what
they want to do. We've learned that for sure over
the year as well. More to come on this busy
Friday is Rod and Greg Joe on the road from
the International Sportsman's Expo down here at the Mountain America
Expost Center in Sandy. Our conversation with you, Senator John
Curtis about the Save America Act coming up right here
on the Rod and Great Show and Utah's Talk Radio
(10:06):
one oh five nine KNRS. A lot of people over
the last several days have been contacting us saying will
you get Senator John Curtis on the show and talk
about where he stands on the Save Act? Where does
he stand on the filibuster? And we reached out to
his office yesterday and they said sure, we'd love to
come on now. We had a chance to talk to
him just about ten minutes before the show started today.
(10:26):
His schedule was very tight, and it's great to have
him on the show and hear what he has to say.
Speaker 3 (10:30):
It is it's good. I like it that he wants
to talk.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
He usually gets mad at me if I talk about him,
but not to him, so I think, so let's have
it let's have that direct discussion.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
All right, Well, we asked Sender Curtis to begin with
to give us his stand on the Save America Act
and where he stands on the talking filibuster.
Speaker 8 (10:47):
Yeah, so unequivocally. I'm a co sponsor of the Save Act.
I'm just really grateful for Center leads and some very
very heavy lifting on this so that one's pretty black
and white, very easy say a co sponsor. I will
say that the Stave Act does change a lot. And
for instance, just in the last few days, they talked
(11:09):
about mail in balloting. They talked about some LGBTQ issues,
and all of those things are important. The mail in
balloting is a particularly interesting one for our state, and
I'm you know, if that gets thrown in the bill,
then you know, I think there are some lively discussions
about states rights and federalism and everything. But just black
(11:33):
and white for me, yes, I support the Save.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
Act, you know, Senator, looking at the numbers, I think
that the best we're going to we can hope for
is fifty one votes in the Senate to pass that.
That would require a talking filibuster some Senate procedure to
allow the majority of senators to vote if it's a
bill that you deemed worthy to support. For that bill
to pass absent a change in that process or a
(11:56):
talking filibuster or something like that, it looks like that's
a procedural way to keep that bill from actually getting
having a chance to pass. Where do you stand on
the talking philibuster or whatever procedure would be necessary to
get the fifty to one votes needed.
Speaker 8 (12:12):
I think a really important question before you can even
ask that is how important is permanency? And that that's
really what's relevant when you talk about the talking philibuster,
because there's no better example than what Harry Reid did
with Judges when he thought he was being so smart
to lower the threshold to fifty one, and then President
Trump got to just totally reverse everything on him. And
(12:34):
so my concern is not whether or not we want
to pass the Save Act. My concern is how do
we make it permanent? And I also think it's been
a little bit of a mistake to focus on only
one alternative. So, for instance, even President Trump himself said, well,
can we pick up some Democrat votes? This is an
issue that polls at eighty twenty. If it really polls
(12:56):
at eighty twenty, and I think it does. Why can't
we get half a dozen or a few more Democrats
to vote with us? And now we're talking about permanency,
and I just think that's a conversation that we want
to have as conservatives and people who don't want to
see this undone in a couple of years. And by
the way, it only wouldn't it wouldn't only be undoing this,
(13:17):
it would be then the Democrats put their election law forward.
And we've seen that in HR one and we know
that's ballot harvesting, and so my concern is far far
more than just the Save Act, but it's how do
we make it permanent? And that that's a discussion that
I think we need to have a little bit more
as we go into this.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
So, sender, are you saying the risk of a talking
filibuster may be too great to go along with it?
What exactly you're saying when it comes to the talking filibuster?
Speaker 8 (13:45):
So let me try to simplify it. If Republicans use
the talking filibuster to pass the Save Act, Democrats will
use the talking phil filibuster to undo the Save Act
and then pass their election law. That is why I
want to be very very careful about how we do this,
and so I just think those are questions that we
(14:06):
really need to be thinking through and saying it's like, Okay,
well that's great, we get it passed. But if it's
passed for two years or even four years, and then
undone and worse than undone, the Democrats passed their election
law instead, then we've made a mistake, just like Harry
Reid made a mistake changing the fillus the rules to
fifty one for judges.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
Well, let me ask you this.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
I hear what you're saying, but how much how optimistic
are you that if the Democrats one day were to
get a majority in the Senate and as you describe,
maybe reverse this. I felt like you had West Virginia's
senator mansion and you had Arizona Senator Cinema, who were
the firewall from preventing the Democrats from getting rid of
(14:50):
the Filbuster maybe entirely. And beyond the Save Act, you're
talking two states that they would make out of Puerto
Rico and Washington, DC. You're talking about a staff potential
Supreme Court. You're looking at the electoral college being debated,
whether it's still relevant is what gives you any belief
that if they get the majority with or without the
Save Act, that these are not the moves that this
(15:11):
party and these senators will make. I don't find I
don't see the mansion out there anymore. I don't see
the cinema. Who what what confidence do you have that
these changes you're talking about aren't coming our way if
the Democrats get majority anyway?
Speaker 8 (15:26):
So legitimate question. Let me first point out that Democrats
would love us to do to pass the Save Act
this way because then at green lights everything you just said,
and as you know, there's even more behind it than
that and changes they would make. So I would say
a couple of things to that. First of all, this
is kind of a crude analogy, and you'll you'll excuse me,
but it's kind of like why And you know, I think, okay,
(15:50):
I think in my marriage, at some point, my wife's
going to cheat on me, so I'm going to go
cheat on her first. And that's like, that's how a
lot of people view this, saying, well, just because they're
going to do something terrible for our democracy, just because
they're going to do something terrible for the institution, I'm
going to go do it first. Now, I think even
more important for this conversation is, you know, walking the
(16:14):
halls of the Senate, you get a real sense for culture,
You get a real sense for how things work. People
say all the time that they want to build to pass,
that they don't really want to pass. They say all
the time that they want to build, not to pass,
that they want to pass. And so it was really
easy for Democrats to do a lot of grand standing
before when mind Shin and Cinema were holding it up
(16:35):
and say, oh, we need to do this. I would
do this. But I'll tell you what. Imagine had they
done that and then Trump came in with the House
and the Senate, how they would have regretted that. And
I think they're all looking at anybody that thought that
was a good idea, or looking at that and saying,
holy cow, if we had done that, now the shoe
would have been reversed and they would have seen the
(16:56):
Harry Red thing all over again. And I really just
don't believe, despite their buster that they would go there.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
Well, let me push back a little bit.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
I hear what you're saying, but to go along with
your analysis or your analogy, I think they have cheated
on their spouse. And I'll tell you why Department of
Homeland Security is still not funded. Okay, it is closed.
We had two terrorists attacks yesterday. I do not see
the political will and I have no confidence. I think
that the Democrat Party ran Senator Mansion and Center Cinema
right out of their party. Senator Cinema had a Democrat opponent.
(17:27):
I'm hearing from Pennsylvania that Vetterman will have a very,
very difficult time winning the party nomination, even though he
votes ninety percent with Schumer. You talk about this, but
I think we've seen the infidelity with this crazy party.
I don't see any of the hope that there's a
firewall between losing the filibuster entirely. I might be a cynic,
but doesn't it worry you when you can't get to
(17:50):
your colleagues on the other side of the how to
even fund Department of Homeland Security?
Speaker 8 (17:55):
Well, I mean exactly everything what you're saying is exactly
why I feel as strongly as I do, I do
not want to hand them the keys to the car
to go do this. I mean, basically, what you're saying is, Okay,
we're just we're accepting that they are going to go
do this. So here's the keys to the cars. Guy,
we're going to We're going to show you the path.
(18:16):
Here are the keys, go do all those things. And
by the way, Fetterman is one of the most popular
politicians in his state. And yeah, so yeah, yeah, but
he speaks his mind. And I'll tell you, you know,
I just I just get the advantage of seeing the
(18:36):
institution from the inside, and i'd probably have just look
everything that you're saying, I totally get. I mean, it's
so disparaging what Democrats would do, the fact that that
they have shut down the very people that protect us.
I'm embarrassed to walk through an airport and they go
through TSA as I look those people in the eye
that aren't getting paid.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
It's just wrong.
Speaker 8 (18:55):
And of all times, at war time, when we know
very well somebody we're trying to do it, we do
this harm, you know, in our air travel and things
like that. It's just wrong. But that to me is
even more reason I'm not willing to hand them the
keys the car.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
Sunder Curtis, let me ask you, there's a story out
there today about the GOP possibly floating some floating some
kind of hybrid debate gambit to appea. You know people
who are upset about that, and apparently it would allow
legislation to proceed a standard vote with the possibility of
extended floor debate and wear out the opposition. Can you
tell us what that gambit is and what they're trying
(19:30):
to do and would that work or would that help
get this path?
Speaker 8 (19:34):
So let me just say this in essence, what people
are trying to figure out is what is the path
to pass this with fifty one votes? And the problem
with that logic is if you create or show the path,
they will use the exact same path to undo it.
(19:54):
So that's where I'm saying, let's let's be even more
thoughtful than that, and let's figure out how to pass
it with sixty votes. So it cannot be done and
we don't give them the keys to the castle. And
I'll tell you even President Trump a couple of days
ago tweeted out and said, let's go get some Democrat votes.
This is like you say, it's an issue that polls
eighty twenty. There's more Fetterman's out there that we could
(20:16):
go convince and say, look what and maybe Okay, fine,
if we have to tweak exactly how you show id,
let's have that conversation to get their votes, because that's
how you make this thing permanent.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
Senator, don't you think they have the Schumer and the
Democrats have the key to the castle right now? If
it takes sixty votes to open up our government, to
open up DHS, to open up tsay, don't they hold
the cards now that your analogy feels like it's playing
out in real time, they hold the cards right now.
Speaker 8 (20:44):
So I guess Greg, what you're pointing out is the
system that our founders created gave some difference to minority
now in Utah, and when you were Speaker of the House,
there was really nothing compelling that made you give any
difference to the minority party other.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
Than that super nice.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
I was just good.
Speaker 8 (21:04):
Yeah, you're just in the good of your heart.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
Right, Yes, thanks.
Speaker 8 (21:07):
The founder built that in. They wanted the minority to
have some kind of voice. Now it's not a dominant voice.
They're they're kind of Their options are very few. One
of them is to refuse to fund something. And Republicans,
by the way, have tried this one hundred times more
than the Democrats. Have to shut down, and we've kind
(21:29):
of figured out it doesn't work, and Democrats are going
to figure out it doesn't work either. But that's the
system our founders set up, is that minority does have
a few rights, not very many, but i'll tell you what.
You want to take all those rights away from the minority,
then this shoe goes on the other foot when that changes.
Speaker 2 (21:48):
So the Founders set it up Civil Rights Act. It
went through what seventy days of a filibuster before it
was able to muster the votes to pass. Hasn't the
filibuster morphed over time from what the Founders envisioned for
the rid of body like the Senate to get.
Speaker 8 (22:01):
Well as it is now, point the minority.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
It's the minority a stronger voice. And I hear what
you're saying, but I don't know that it's what you're
what the practice in the in the in the Senate
right now is is what was imagined for the filibuster.
And I think it has changed, hasn't it?
Speaker 1 (22:17):
It has?
Speaker 8 (22:18):
But it's been you know, one hundred plus years right
that we've been operating this way. And I would just say,
look like, I'm not sure why we're giving up so
quick on getting sixty votes like this is this is
an issue that pulls at eighty twenty. Right, There's there's
there's videos of Chuck Shimmer all over the place saying
(22:38):
how important it is to get ID when you vote. Now,
we have a few wrinkles that I think we need
to work through, and we probably should work through anyway
about really what qualifies as ID. And I think if
we did that and we were thoughtful, we were walking
away with sixty plus votes, and this thing is permanent
and we don't have to worry about them on doing
it in a few years. And really, look, all I'm
saying is, let's have those convers let's be thoughtful about this.
(23:03):
Let's not let's not just jump into this without thoroughly
exhausting every avenue that we have in front of us.
I think that's I think that's what people want us
to do is and I think that's what I'm hearing
is past the Save Act, but thoroughly exhaust every avenue
in front of you. Look at everything that you've got there.
And I'll go back to President Trump himself saying, go
(23:24):
see if some Democrats will vote for this. We haven't
even really tried to do that.
Speaker 1 (23:28):
On our news MAGA a line our conversation Greg and
I had just a short time ago with Utah Center
John Curtis and flesh out what he thinks about the
Save Act and you know, all the procedures. We've got
a few things now.
Speaker 2 (23:39):
And I'm sorry, Boss, I kind of elbowed you out
of that discussion. I just kept having more questions follow
ups I wanted to ask, and I didn't mean.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
To do that, but there are a lot of questions
out there. But did he answer your questions about this?
Speaker 3 (23:52):
Well? He gave answers. Whether what I think agree with.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
Him or not. We'll get into that coming up, but
we need to take a break for our listeners who've
been asking a lot of question about this. We want
to hear from them. I mean, you know, he laid
it out there. My sense is I'm with you, Greg.
You know he talked about, you know, cheating on your
husband out of wife, and you're right. I think the
Democrats have been cheating on us forever and we've allowed
(24:17):
him to get away with it. Yes, heyes, And we
as conservatives or Republicans have tried to play the game fairly.
And I think people need to realize now they don't
play fair, and maybe it's time for us not to
play fair anymore.
Speaker 2 (24:31):
I found the analogy. I found the analogy if you
don't want to do what Harry Reid did, because Harry
Reid took the Supreme Court judges and lowered that threshold
of fifty one votes? Look how bad that? That was
not bad?
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (24:43):
Okay, that's actually worked out pretty well for us. I
wouldn't go back to a sixty vote. Can you imagine
who President Trump could have or would have been able
to nominate if it was a sixty vote threshold.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
So I don't know that that.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I I was surprised to hear him say that that
was such a disaster when that actually.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
He plays real real don that favors anyway?
Speaker 2 (25:02):
What say you, folks? I'd love to hear from our listeners.
Eighty eight five seven zero eight zero one zero is
the number to call.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
Number our number two of the Rotting Gregg Show coming up,
Stay with Us with Senator John Curtis. I don't know Greg,
I don't I just think he's he's caught up in
too much procedure. We want this done. Figure out a
way to do it now. He brought up Harry Reid. Now,
(25:30):
Harry Reid did something that allowed on judges, could not
something similar be done on election laws or whatever the
case may be, that we could move forward with this.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
Yeah, and if you didn't catch the interview, and I
don't want to speak for the senator, but and I'm
going to give it the most fair ball and strike
accounting of what I heard him say, and that is
he is worried that if you do a talking filibuster,
if we do something other than the zombie filibuster where
if you just don't have sixty votes, you just can't
move forward if you actually have to engage in the debate,
(26:02):
that would delay the vote through speaking on the floor
of the Senate. So that's a talking filibuster that we
would be opening the door that in the when the
Republicans are no longer in the majority in the Senate,
we would see that the Democrats take our example and
run with it and do away with or themselves practice
of talking philibuster. That would undo everything we're doing now,
(26:24):
is what he is saying. I think the answer back
to that is, I think that's the state of play.
I think that the Democrats will have abandoned that filibuster.
The second they have fifty fifty votes and a vice
president or fifty one votes in the Senate, we will.
Speaker 3 (26:39):
No longer have it.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
And I say that just because of the insanity we're
seeing now where they won't reopen our government Department of
Home Land Security with what we're seeing now, but also
the reasonable Democrats in the Senate that stopped that from happening.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
They were run out of their out of the Senate.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
They didn't seek reelection because they were attacked for doing so.
So who would Senator Curtis look to in the Democrat
side of the aisle, who would stop a filibuster if
we didn't do it. I just don't think it's a
real choice. I don't I think that. I think the
Democrats have proven that they are ready to jump the shark.
They are in a hole, they keep digging, And I
(27:18):
don't think that there's a Senate decorum that you'll see
the Democrats follow in the Senate that we have to.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
You know, we can't be the bad example, so to speak.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
I think we have a majority and we have to
exercise that majority while we have it, or why have it?
Speaker 1 (27:31):
Well, you brought up. We discussed with Sender Curtis, John Fetterman.
John Fetterman has already come out and said no on
the Save America. Yes, he's come out and said it. So,
you know, I think what Senda Curtis says and what
he claims that Donald Trump has said is go get
some Democrats. I don't think there are any Democrats to get.
Speaker 2 (27:50):
I really, if you did, you would have to water
it down to basically let illegal people vote.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
They could pass it by name only.
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Yeah. So I want to get your reaction to it.
We've had, like I said, we've emails and calls from
people over the last several days. Let's find out what
John Curtis has to say on this. So let's go
to the phone.
Speaker 3 (28:06):
Let's go to the phones.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Let's go to Karen who's been waiting and Lake short yep, Karen,
welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.
Speaker 9 (28:14):
Thank you. I just want to say that I think
John Curtis is blowing smoke. Anybody who knows the Senate
knows that it only takes fifty one vote to pass
any law in the Senate. It takes more than that
for closer, but for the actual law it's only fifty
one votes, and the talking filibuster is always on the table.
(28:38):
That's in the regular Senate rule. Yes, and it's not
used except rarely because it's so costly. But what is
more important in costs than solidifying our elections so that
we can trust them. I'm not as nice as Greg.
(28:59):
I really think it's a Senator Curtis has never left
his Democrat roots. He was the chair of the Democrat
Party in this state. And I don't know who he's protecting.
Speaker 6 (29:13):
But you can't.
Speaker 9 (29:15):
Before this bill and then say you're not for the
talking filibuster, because that's the only way we're going to
get it done.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
It is the only way.
Speaker 5 (29:23):
It is.
Speaker 1 (29:24):
It is Karen, Karen, thank you for calling Campbell.
Speaker 2 (29:27):
I think her observations are exactly right, and it is
part of the procedure. And I was surprised the Senator
didn't really drill in down to the Civil Rights Act
that was passing the sixties.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
It hasn't been over one hundred years.
Speaker 2 (29:38):
It was used in the sixties to pass that and
now was seventy plus days and they had like twenty
five votes yes, when they started at filibuster, they got
fifty one or more than fifty after seventy days of debate,
And so I do think it's been used.
Speaker 3 (29:52):
It is part of their rules, it's part of their process.
Speaker 2 (29:55):
And to say that you don't want to do it
for fear of what the Democrats will do, I don't
think you're seeing anything from Themmocrats to give you confidence
that they would not do worse.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Well, what I think has to happen, Greg, And here's
what's frustrating to both of us. I said yesterday, I
think there are lawmachers who were lazy. Yeah, they do
not want to work for legislation. They do not want
to work hard for and it may take a filibuster,
it may take several days. The Civil Rights Actor was
more than two months. Yes, the philibustering on that this
is difficult in important legislation and you've got to work for it, Well,
(30:27):
just throw your arm both day, coach.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
Just so that we don't sound overly cynical, can I
just point out that that the Obamacare passed on what
Christmas Eve in the House. You saw it, you saw
critical votes when it was time to go home for
the holidays, or you saw the big beautiful bill pass
in August when it was time for August recess. And
it is absolutely the case that some of the biggest
(30:50):
pieces of legislation really only get the political will to
move when it's time to go home, when it's time
to have that vacation, it's time to enjoy the holidays,
and all of a sudden, you see a you see
a political will that you haven't been able to generate
up until those very moments.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
That's a tell.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
That's a tell that maybe the decision tree isn't what
we would expect from those that we send into Washington.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
Was that Obamacare approved by one vote? Something like that?
Wasn't all democrat?
Speaker 3 (31:15):
Was a Democrat? That's not a single Republican.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
Let's go to Jerry Jerry's and Oakley tonight, listening into
the rodin Greg Joe, Hi, Jerry, how are you.
Speaker 10 (31:25):
I don't believe anything he said. It's just ocfuscation. It's
starting to seem to me like he wants us to
lose the midterms. I got two letters I got from him.
I wrote him a letter about I encouraged to do
the Insurrection Act. He responded with a letter about the
National Guard. He sent me a letter about Alan Credit,
(31:47):
the crazy person who got shot by ice. I didn't
even write him a letter about that. I emailed you
a letter he sent to my wife. He's just he's
just going through the motions. I mean, if they could
do it in Somalia a national ID voter and citizenship card,
why can't we do it in America?
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Boy, that's a very good point when you say Somalia,
is that what they're doing, Jerry, I mean, that's not
a country you want to look up to. But what
exactly are they doing in Somalia?
Speaker 10 (32:13):
Yeah, they have a biometric national ID card that everyone
over fifteen years old is required to get. Okay, I'll
send you the copy of it.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
We can't do that.
Speaker 10 (32:29):
You also sent you the email that he said.
Speaker 5 (32:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 10 (32:32):
I mean if the average IQ in Somalia is sixty
seven and they've got biometric voter ID.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Yes, well, you know, I think we're I think most
of the country will have a requirement and a way
to verify citizenship for the right to vote. It's not
a crazy it's why it's an eighty twenty issue at
eighty five to fifteen issue. Thank you for Jerry, thanks
for the observation, thanks for the discussion, and I get
no rum for me.
Speaker 1 (33:00):
Yeah, yeah, all right, we'll get tomorrow. Your calls eight
eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero eight
eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero, or
you can leave us a talkback comment as well, or
on your cell phone just disle pound two fifty and
say hey, Rot live today at the International Sportsman's Expo.
A lot of big a lot of fans coming out
by listeners.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
I love meeting the listeners are great.
Speaker 2 (33:21):
And by the way, I know you hear says lumping
on that app e Ray loads up every show as
a as a as a podcast, so it's the Rod
and Greg Show if you were to look for it
in the search engine or search window after the other
than canter us and then that gives you each of
the segments of the show that we've done it. It's
like I said, it's loaded up at the end of
the show and some that we're here, we're not able
(33:41):
to hear our interview with Senator John Curtis and wanted
to be able to hear it later, so that will
be as a podcast loaded up after the show.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
So yeah, well, let's go back to the phones. Greg.
A lot of people want to weigh in on our
car and say our conversation. We should say with Senda Curtis,
let's go to provo and hear what Mark has to
say tonight, Mark, welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.
Thanks for waiting, Mark, what are your thoughts on this?
Speaker 11 (34:03):
Well, I think the senator has forgotten that he's supposed
to represent us and vote and do how we would
expect him to do, not how he wants to do
or thinks he knows better than us to do. But
he kept saying when they get back in power, they're
going to do this when they get you know, when
it's their turn. If you pass the sayback you are
(34:24):
going to drastically reduce the chances of that even happening.
If you take out of vot vote you know, fraud
and all these people that should not be voting. If
you don't have to say back, you almost ensure that
they will get their turn and it will be centered
rather than later.
Speaker 3 (34:41):
I agree, Mark.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
I think that's why the Democrats fight so hard against
this issue. I think it's a real tell they don't
have a good reason. They keep saying, well, married people,
married women won't be able to vote. It's the craziest
thing on an eighty twenty issue. So I agree with him,
all I completely.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
Well, what frustrates me, Greg, is this our two hundred
and fiftieth birthday this year. Yes, what a way to
celebrate America by saying you can vote in America. We
want you to vote in America, but only if you're
a citizen.
Speaker 2 (35:08):
About what we're talking about, nobody's argued that the people
that are not legally here should be able to vote
every They're not saying that they should. So it should
be the easiest piece of legislation to ever pass. To
just re emphasize if you think that there's no voter
fraud at all, well we're just we're just being redundant.
Vote for redundancy, rote vote for an exclamation mark on
what you think the laws.
Speaker 1 (35:29):
All right, let's go back here, let's go direct.
Speaker 2 (35:31):
No, No, let's go to Dean and Bountiful. Dean, thank
you for holding. Welcome to the Rod and Gregg Show.
Speaker 8 (35:37):
Hi.
Speaker 12 (35:38):
Hey, two points real quick. First off, if the Republicans
are under the impression that, hey, we can hold the
vote and we'll blame the Democrats, not this time. We
will blame the Republicans just as much as the Democrats
the other. But here's the point that I really wanted
to make here, and that is this Mike Lee yesterday,
I'm on Glenn blench Ben. Glenn said JD. Vans can
(36:02):
come up to the Senate anytime he wants and immediately
assume the position of presiding office chairs and he can
take care of this procedural vote. Glenn Beck said, absolutely,
if you're listening to the White House do this. What
do you think about that option?
Speaker 1 (36:19):
Well, I heard that conversation, and you're right, I think JD.
Vance does have that authority to do so. Now if
he would do it, who knows. If the President wants
this badly enough, would he tell JD Vans to do this?
Who knows?
Speaker 2 (36:31):
Greg, Look, I love the idea, and I think it's
that serious and I think it's that kind of moment.
It is bizarre to me that the that the the
Senate Republicans, that this Republicans in the House hand some
of them handering about all what Trump's doing and what
he's doing, and I ran everything. How about you, as
a member of Congress or a Senate, do something with
(36:52):
a Republican majority that makes your case about why you
want to be re elected in the midterms. This is
your moment. This is the moment where Republicans need come together.
They have the majority, get this done. The Democrats. You
don't have to beg them to take their majority and
do what they did. That's how Obama Care passed. It
passed with not a single Republican vote to be found. Unapologetically,
(37:12):
I think we should do whatever it takes to really
strengthen the integrity of our elections. It sounds silly to
have to say out loud and to try and make
a case for that that should be, that should be
fundamental your foundation.
Speaker 1 (37:25):
Yeah, all right, We've got more calls, more talkback comments
coming up. It is the Friday edition. Thank Rod and
Greg Is Friday on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine knrs. Before we go back to our callers on
our John Cotis interview, the President has just tweeted out
moments ago, yes, that the US military has totally obliterated
(37:45):
military installations on carg Island. Now, you say, why is
carg Island so important? Carg Island is where Iran refines
all of its oil.
Speaker 2 (37:56):
I would say, well, I would use the past ten
that Rod, I just say that was a memory that's
might might be a beautiful memory for Iran, but that
they I don't think they're going to be doing that
anytime soon.
Speaker 1 (38:07):
Well, he hit them hard, and he says they have
been totally obliterated. Sooner or later, the Runnings are gonna
wake up and say, you know, we probably should do something.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Yeah, I think the guys, the guys got it in
his head what he needs to do to be done
with them, and you.
Speaker 1 (38:20):
Know he's gonna do it no matter what's right.
Speaker 3 (38:23):
Let's go back to let's get back to the calls.
Let's go back to Let's go to Rex and Sandy.
That's been on hold. Rex, thank you for holding. Welcome
to the Rod and Gregg Show.
Speaker 11 (38:33):
Hey, thanks guys.
Speaker 13 (38:34):
You know I wanted to, uh think that last caller
who talked about smallies have a National Voter ID card.
That would be fantastic because our driver's licenses don't say.
Speaker 11 (38:46):
You're a citizen. Because Green card.
Speaker 13 (38:48):
Holders also have REALID driver's licenses.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
You are correct.
Speaker 13 (38:52):
So you have to have a passport, so you can
only fifty percent of people have a passport. Others, you know,
you gotta have your certificate.
Speaker 11 (39:01):
If we have something like a national.
Speaker 13 (39:03):
ID card, that'd be great. But when you have to
pay to get a passport or pay fifty dollars for
copy of your birth certificate, how is that not an
unconstitutional poll tax? You could end up getting rid of
the filibuster and have the Supreme Court pulled up the
(39:26):
law because they find that's an unconstitutional poll tax.
Speaker 3 (39:30):
Yeah, I'll tell you why. I don't think that's the case.
Speaker 2 (39:32):
I think that if you are a US citizen, what
you do have to provide to have real idea is
a passport or a birth certificate. The people you're talking about,
which I just learned, and you're right, people that are
here legally on a visa can also get the real ID.
So to your point, that would allow illegally for someone
who's already the federal law to vote when they shouldn't.
(39:52):
But it isn't a poll tax for an American because
we already are required to have the idea if we're
going to use our license to bank or to go
to an airport or anything like that. So I don't
think it's a poll tax for the legal resident who
would exercise their vote or present a real idea ID
to vote.
Speaker 3 (40:09):
But it does not close the loophole.
Speaker 2 (40:12):
You've you've you've pointed out that those that are here
on a on a residency visa would have that real idea.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
All right, thank you, good real id car good point.
Let's go to Kate in Ogden tonight. Kate, how are
you welcome to the Rod and Greg show?
Speaker 3 (40:27):
Good?
Speaker 14 (40:27):
Yeah, I just wanted to make a couple points. The
biggest one is like when are we going to be
done with nursery rhyme conservatism? And then as far as
the uh, why we should just pass it and everything
else is once this passes, Democrats have a hard time
winning any election if this passes. Yeah, so why don't
(40:48):
we pass it? Well, not worry about the filabuster or anything.
Just pass it and let's do this.
Speaker 1 (40:52):
Yeah, that's what a lot of people are saying. Pass
it and let's just be let's be done with this
and get this on. One more calls that will break.
Let's go to h John, who's in Murray tonight listening
to rodin Greig, John, how are you? Thanks so much
for joining us?
Speaker 15 (41:04):
Go ahead, John, doing great, Good to hear you guys again. Hey,
Senator Curtis is a great guy. I think he's doing
her good job. He's also a freshman, so he's got
to kind of walk gently and try to get on
the best committees that he can as a senatorial career progresses.
But what Sudent's doing is he's putting himself into Paul
(41:24):
ryan territory. And the problem is Paul Ryan did everything
he could in Trump's first term to undermine him. And
what happened after that the Democrats took over the House
and the Senate, right, but what happened to Paul Ryan
no consequence. He wind up on the board of Fox
News or Fox Fox, you know, a network, so they
(41:44):
can do whatever they want to do, whatever they want to,
never mind anybody else. What they're what a lot of
these guys do is all they're trying to do is
to secure their future in their next position.
Speaker 2 (41:54):
I couldn't agree more. Look, I think you're right. I
think that soon, the majority leader soon is playing this game.
I think it's I don't think anyone's buying it either, Rod.
I think people know it's a game and and and
people are seeing it. I think the irony with Senator
curtis the color point out. He's a freshman senator and
Senator Lee is that you have the sponsor of the
(42:14):
Save America Act in Senator Lee, you have you have
the one single vote because it takes if there were
only three, we could still get it through. But the
fourth vote being Senator Curtis to stop the filibuster, the
voice filibuster from the same state, representing the same ironic, they.
Speaker 3 (42:33):
Both represent us.
Speaker 2 (42:34):
So how can we have such a dichotomy the one
one senator that's stopping it against the one senator sponsoring it.
It just seemed for us as as constituents to both
of those senators, that is what makes it so difficult,
I think.
Speaker 1 (42:48):
So we're in Utah, Yeah, it is weird, all right,
more of your calls coming up. The Rod and Greg
Joe carg Island totally obliterated, according to the President, all
their military installations there that is a island. Will explain
why coming up, But we want to go back to
your phone calls. Listen to some of your talkback comments
about our conversation with Senator John Curtis.
Speaker 2 (43:08):
Yeah, so let's go right back to the phone. Let's
go to Rick, who's been waiting in Centerville. Rick, Welcome
to the Ron and Greg show.
Speaker 16 (43:15):
Good efternoon, gentlemen, I did not hear the interview, but
you know, Senator Curtis, he just liked range Hatch three
point zero. We got Romney, each one of those guys, well,
I don't know about Curtis, but Romney and Patch. Yeah,
the only reason why they ran is because of vacating
(43:36):
senator because they couldn't compete against anybody. And I don't
know what is I would defer to Senator Lee's lead
on constitutional procedure when it comes to this, because you
know what, Senator Curtis, he's a greenhorn. What you got
what do they call him?
Speaker 1 (43:56):
Junior senator? Well, you know what.
Speaker 16 (44:01):
He has to remember, he does the work. He works
for us.
Speaker 1 (44:04):
I'm sick and.
Speaker 16 (44:04):
Tired of politicians just injecting their own personal views. They
have no freaking business doing their own fill their own
nest for whatever purpose they want, and they work for us.
And that's the problem with these politicians, especially in Washington.
Speaker 1 (44:24):
Yeah, you're right, you're right, Rick, And I think that's
a that's a frustration that people have out there as
they feel they aren't working for the people they represent.
And you've probably heard that as a politician yourself before.
Speaker 3 (44:35):
So here's the thing, Senator.
Speaker 2 (44:37):
Senator Curtis acknowledged this issue is a eighty twenty issue.
Speaker 3 (44:41):
He said, eighty.
Speaker 2 (44:42):
Percent of America supports this. If that isn't your tell
you got Senator Lee who's sponsoring it representing Utahns, you
might want to be on that eighty percent side.
Speaker 3 (44:52):
I really do.
Speaker 2 (44:53):
I think the Senate procedure discussion, even if it's authentic,
it is it is. I I think it's a moot
point because the Democrats are gonna do whatever they can.
Our listeners have pointed out, as they've called in, you
don't get to say back. That's how you get Democrats
in their majority. They don't get the majority as easy
if they can't cheat.
Speaker 1 (45:11):
We have some comments on our talkback line. Listen to it.
Let's listening to one of them right now.
Speaker 17 (45:16):
Hey, guys, I'm gonna chime in with my usual canter.
I think John Curtis is lazy an rhina. He just
doesn't want to do the damn work. He's lazy, that's it.
He's lazy, lazy, lazy, just like Barack Obama and Mitt Romney,
(45:37):
all these entitled people. Lazy.
Speaker 1 (45:41):
All right, we got another quick one. He right, go ahead.
Speaker 17 (45:45):
Hey, what do you think of giving Mitch McConnell and
John Curtis some of that steak and lobster that the
army is handled out?
Speaker 1 (45:51):
I think that would get them to vote.
Speaker 14 (45:55):
I love.
Speaker 1 (45:58):
Why do we get a sense that connl and Curtis
can get staken loved to any time?
Speaker 2 (46:02):
They're probably getting it all the time, you know, but
you know what, maybe that'll it's interesting to understand what
the decision tree is over in that Senate.
Speaker 3 (46:08):
I don't really get it, but that's true. But you know,
we're here to report.
Speaker 2 (46:12):
I actually give the Senator some you know, credit for
calling in and and and and talk speaking with us.
I think he knew our take, or at least mine
you I don't know, but he knew that he gave
us a take. I don't hear our listeners picking up
what he's putting down. I don't know if they're buying
what Senator Curis is selling. I don't think, but it
has been I think a really good conversation.
Speaker 1 (46:32):
All right, when we come back an update on the
US going after carg Island in Iran and Americans saw
Sary says they don't understand the say aack get into
that as well. Not our listeners, but other Americans want
to update you on a couple of stories. First of all,
in the last half hour, the President announcing that the
military has basically totally obliterated any military installation on Kark Island,
(46:59):
and it's just off the shore of Iran. It is
their number one island where all their refineries produced the
oil and refine the oil. But didn't hit the refineries,
but hit the military installations, and said, I'll hit even
harder if you continue to block the straight of horror movees.
Speaker 2 (47:16):
It's hard for me to imagine if you hit those
military installations that hard that it hasn't somehow hit the
infrastructure of their refining refineries.
Speaker 3 (47:26):
But that said, I.
Speaker 2 (47:27):
Guess it could get worse for him if they don't,
if there isn't some kind of.
Speaker 3 (47:32):
Surrender that he's pursuing.
Speaker 1 (47:34):
Yep, he's not putting up with anything, is it. Well,
we've been talking a lot about the America Save America Act,
that is, the voter id legislation tied up in the Senate.
It's going to be an interesting week next week to
see what happens with this. Greg But joining us on
our newsmaker line to talk more about. This is our
good friend Amanda Head and she has a White House
correspondent for Just the News. Always fun to have Amanda
(47:54):
on the show. Amanda, how are you? And to welcome
to the Rod and Greg Show.
Speaker 3 (47:59):
Thank you, Rodding.
Speaker 1 (48:00):
Always great to talk to you, vote, Thanks for having me.
I saw you. I saw you a story that you
wrote about the voter ideal legislation and you say a survey.
I don't know where you're getting this information, Amanda, but
there's some Americans out there who don't seem to care
that it is tied up. Explain what you see going on? Yeah,
And I.
Speaker 6 (48:17):
Don't really blame them, you know, the American people. And
to be quite honest, this is one of those journalistic things.
I struggled with the headline because you have to make
a punchy headline. But the headline, if I were being
accurate but also a little on the nose about it,
I would have said, I would have said, you know,
landmark voter legislation that Americans don't seem to care about,
(48:40):
because the American people don't And this survey, this is
from Neapolitan News, which is Scott Rasmussen's service, and so
it found that only twenty three percent of voters can
accurately describe what the Save America Act is. And as
I said, I don't really blame them, because the American people,
you know, they are living their daily lives. You know,
(49:02):
people are about to be going on spring break, and
meanwhile we've got crazy weather happening all over the country.
People are trying to pay their bills, they're trying to
put gas in their car, They're trying to make sure
that they're not in an area like the West Coast
where iron might be targeting.
Speaker 1 (49:16):
You know, the American.
Speaker 6 (49:17):
People have so much on their minds and so much
on their plates, and so I don't necessary I don't
besmirch anyone for not knowing what it is. But it
just goes to show you, Rod and Greg that you too,
me as well, the three of us, and all of
my colleagues in Washington, everyone within the Beltway. You know,
we really do live in this political bubble. And while
(49:40):
the Save America Act is on the tip of our
tongues and the forefront of every conversation that's happening in Washington,
DC right right now, the American people don't really know
or care about it.
Speaker 5 (49:51):
Now.
Speaker 6 (49:51):
Here's the thing, though, the American people should know what
it is because when you I mean, a CNN poll
a month ago showed that seventy six percent of Black Americans,
eighty two percent of Latinos, and eighty five percent of
White Americans support nationwide voter ID which is one of
the main tenants of this legislation. So it's an important
(50:11):
Not only is it important legislation, it's what the American
people support, and it doesn't matter how you break down
the cross section of this country. Everybody sees it as
common sense. But when you talk about it within the
context of how much how much relevance it has in
people's lives that they know of, then that's a totally
different conversation because, like I said, I mean, people have
(50:33):
a lot on their minds and they are too busy
to be paying attention to what the rest of us
have unfortunately made a job of.
Speaker 3 (50:40):
So, Amanda, you will believe this.
Speaker 2 (50:42):
But we feel in Utah at the epicenter of this
very issue, Save America Act because we have the sponsor
of the bill and Senator Lead, but we also have
the fourth Republican Senator in Senator John Curtis, who says
he will not support a talking filibuster. So it's the
one senator who's sponsoring it and the one that's actually
preventing it procedurally from moving forward. We had Senator John
(51:04):
Curtis on the program earlier in our program, and our
listeners are tracking this. I mean, we are talking about
this at great length, especially after our interview with Senator
Curtis to explain what's motivating him in this decision. But
let me ask you this. I was going where you
just said, we're such a large percentage bipartisan. It's an
(51:25):
eighty twenty issue, it's an eighty five to fifteen issue.
It leads me to believe that America is tracking this,
but you're saying it's on the principle of showing ID
to vote. My big question is is there accountability. Let's
say that this fails, we don't get this Save America
Act pass, which is we've put high importance on. If
the American people don't understand what the Save America Act is,
(51:46):
will they re a consequence for failing to do right
by the American people and protecting our elections?
Speaker 3 (51:54):
I hope so.
Speaker 6 (51:55):
But you look at how neck and next someone like
John Cornyn is with Ken, which you know, I'm going
to pull the veil back a little and show that,
as a journalist not supposed to be having an opinion,
I have an opinion, and they are two very different
brands of Republicanism. And just to be diplomatic here and
(52:16):
not show my bias, you look at the polling, you
look at the support of President Trump. Ken Paxon is
the one who aligns with Donald Trump. So that would
lead one to believe that Ken Paxton's brand of Republicanism
is more favorable to Texans than John Cornyan, But the
two of them have been neck and neck in the polling.
So what it tells me is that the American people.
(52:38):
I don't think that it's that they don't know the issues.
I think that anyone living in Texas at this point
sees a very clear delineation between John Cornyn and Ken Paxon.
But maybe they're not showing up for the midterms, maybe
they're not answering the phones. I don't know what it is.
So back to your question, will there be a come up?
I certainly hope so. But then again, Thune, who has
(53:01):
been very critical of President Trump in the past. I
do not think was the best choice for majority leader
in the Senate, and yet he is. I think that
someone like a Rick Scott would have been better, or
a Tommy Turberville. I think that there should have been
someone else with more of a spine, coupled with someone
who is America first, and that's not what we have
in John Thune. I hope that there will be repercussions,
(53:25):
but I'm worried there won't be because look at all
the rhinos we still have in the Senate and well
and the House sometimes who opposed President Trump's agenda, even
though we came into office with a very strong mandate
with the popular vote, and yet they won't get anything done.
President Trump was able to extract Maduro from Venezuela in
under what seven hours? He was able to bomb the
(53:46):
Bejesus out of Iran, and yet we can't get to
Save America Act past.
Speaker 1 (53:50):
Come on, yeah, you know, Amanda, I love what you're
saying here, and I say to myself, with as important
a piece of legislation this is, and how this could
impact America, almost every American depending on impact on future
elections and the like, when you see these numbers, I
almost think it's like a sad commentary on America today.
(54:10):
Am I wrong in that event?
Speaker 6 (54:13):
No, I don't think you're wrong. I think that, you know,
On one hand, it's great because the American people clearly
see common sense and they see that having to show
an ID to vote just makes sense. If you have
to show an ID to get on a plane to
go into Costco to buy cigarettes, whatever, then you should
have to do that to make a decision that affects
(54:35):
your fellow countrymen. At the same time, maybe people, you know,
is it a sad commentary on civics in this country?
Speaker 3 (54:44):
Maybe?
Speaker 6 (54:45):
Is it a sad commentary on the fact that the
American people are not as involved in politics as they
should be.
Speaker 14 (54:52):
Maybe.
Speaker 6 (54:53):
But at the same time, for people who aren't involved
in politics and don't pay attention to it, I got
admit I'm a little.
Speaker 1 (54:57):
Envious, ha ha ha life would life would be better?
Speaker 6 (55:05):
Yeah, a lot easier if I didn't.
Speaker 2 (55:07):
Have I just struggle with the entire premise, Amanda. I
struggle with the entire premise that just the news and
Amanda Head is not just leading. Uh, You're not the
thought leader informing this country and that the Rotten Greg
Show is in backing that up with commentary. I just
think everyone is watching and listening. I think we have
between the three of us, we've got this down.
Speaker 1 (55:26):
Yeah, well you know.
Speaker 6 (55:28):
And it could be and they should just let us
make all the decisions.
Speaker 1 (55:31):
There we go, There we go. I think it would
be a commentary that Greg, you and I and Amanda
we're just very sick people.
Speaker 3 (55:37):
I don't know. I think I think we see it.
Speaker 1 (55:39):
We're just I mean, we need help.
Speaker 2 (55:41):
If people don't listen to us, this is why they
can't have nice things that could be.
Speaker 1 (55:44):
Amanda, always a pleasure chatting with you. Enjoy the weekend, Amanda,
thanks for talking to us. Thank you both same, Thank you.
All right. That's Amanda Head, White House correspondent with Justin
News Solomon. She is great. They're both Great's fun. They're
calling it the spirit of Forgive. The charges have now
been dropped Greg against the five students involved in that
(56:04):
prank gone wrong that killed a very popular Georgia high
school teacher after a plea from the family. We had
that story what was a couple of days ago, yes,
where his wife and mother of his children came out
and said, please drop the charges. This is a she
didn't want these kids to go to prison.
Speaker 3 (56:21):
Well, it's a horrific accident.
Speaker 2 (56:22):
It was on purpose, and I just what those kids
have to live with making that mistake. If you don't
know the story. It was a teacher, was a chemistry teacher,
be a teacher. His wife's also a teacher at the
high school. There's some traditional pranks that are played around
prom time, and he was not. He was waiting for
them to maybe toilet papers home or to come to
(56:43):
his home, as is the tradition, not because he was angry,
but to catch him in ye just kind of like
to tease him. He ran out of been raining, He
ran out in the street, slipped and fell, and at
the twilight or that, without good lighting, one of the
students ran over him and their truck and killing killed him.
And so they were the students were charged, and you know,
(57:04):
nobody left the scene of the accident. Nobody was trying
to get away with anything. It was a horrific accident.
And his widowed, you know wife, she she asked the
prosecution to please not press charges on these young students,
that it wasn't on purpose, and so it looks like
that is now official that they.
Speaker 3 (57:22):
Are not going They have dropped.
Speaker 1 (57:24):
Dropped charges today. I'm looking if there are any comments.
But Greg, as you mentioned, he was just kind of
hiding in the in the bushes outside his home, wanting
to catch these kids because this prank and we're talking
about te peeing someone throw toilet paper all over the trees,
the bushes in the house. And he was there not
not to punish them, but to catch them and have.
Speaker 2 (57:43):
A little bit of fun with them, That's right, And
so what a what a nightmare, nightmare situation. And I
think she I think the you know that that young
you know wife and mom and and teacher, they for
her to not want to see those children suffer more
or all of them to suffer more than they already had.
I think that's some grace you're seeing there happen, And
(58:05):
we need some we need stories like that.
Speaker 3 (58:07):
A crazy world we live in.
Speaker 1 (58:08):
And what was so fascinating about this story all these kids,
I think there are four of them involved in this prank.
When they realized what had happened, they didn't take off, No,
they stayed there. They did whatever they could. He got
run over is what really happened. He slipped on the
wet pavement and somehow got run over. Not sure exactly
what happened, but you know, the kids stayed there. They
(58:30):
didn't run, they didn't scram they stayed there and helped out.
And you know, here you had the police having to
charge them, you know, but then the wife coming out
asking them the charges to be dropped, and the judge
looked at the case today and said, we're going to
drop the charges. Yeah, in a real I think, in
a real spirit of forgiveness, yep.
Speaker 2 (58:49):
And I don't know that that would have happened absent
the widowed wife and mother.
Speaker 1 (58:56):
I wonder what would have happened if she would have remembered.
Speaker 2 (58:58):
I don't think I think they would have continued ford
because I think it's a I think the manslaughter is
when you recklessly kill someone. I think it fits the
description of the crime. And I think that they would
have they would have proceeded absent her intervention.
Speaker 1 (59:13):
Yeah. Well, his wife said following this, Greg that he
has committed his life to investing in the lives of
young people to help them succeed, and he wouldn't have
wanted this to happen, and she said, we're going to
follow his wishes, and I'm so glad to hear that
the charges are being dropped.
Speaker 2 (59:29):
And those kids their their journey's not done. I mean,
that's something to live with, that you have to live with.
It's just a really tough situation.
Speaker 1 (59:37):
Yeah, it is all right, mare coming up the Rod
and Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one
oh five nine k n RS. Well, we've been talking
a lot today, of course about the Save America Act
and the impact is having. The great folks at the
Federation for American Immigration Reform otherwise known as FAIR have
now done an investigation into election integrity in this country
(59:59):
and basically what they have found is anti border states
are harming election integrity. Joining us on our news to
talk about that is Mateo fer Oral. He is with
the organization, he's done the investigative work. Mateo, thanks for
joining us tonight. Tell us about the investigation and what
you've found out about voter integrity.
Speaker 5 (01:00:21):
Yeah, absolutely, thank you for having me on the program,
and that's absolutely right. Our recent investigative report titled Manufacturing
the Vote takes a close look at how states influenced
by an anti borders agenda have implemented a variety of
policies that you know, are justified on the basis of
(01:00:45):
administrative convenience, but what in reality they do is undermine
election integrity. And that's especially the case in eight jurisdictions
that we took a close look at that have what
we call a dangerous tripe fact of policies. That is
automatic voter registration, drivers licenses for illegal aliens, and universal
(01:01:07):
mail in voting. So we took a close look at
you know how those states basically create a pipeline for
non citizens to be able to get on the voter
roll and to actually cast ballots. And you know what
the harm is to our free and fire elections in
the United States.
Speaker 2 (01:01:25):
You know, we're a conservative state of Utah, but of
the checklist you just shared, we do have a driver's
privileged card for undocumented residents. We do do unsolicited mass
mailing of ballots. We have there's a number of things
that you've mentioned that we struggle with here. So we
just finished a general session, Mattel, and we have county
clerks that say that and you mentioned it about convenience
(01:01:47):
or how they're supposed to do it. Every argument being
made about election integrity, about the chain of custody of
ballots and how they receive them. They say that there
is no fraud. Fraud does not exist. It's it's decimal dust.
But your report shows numbers that are unlike any numbers
that are at a Utah County clerk would argue exist
in any way, shape or form maybe share with us.
(01:02:09):
Were you able to get that information openly from those
states or did you have to do some digging to
see people ineligible to vote in the thousands per state
as you've uncovered.
Speaker 5 (01:02:23):
Yeah, so you're absolutely right that, you know, I believe
those criticisms that non citizens being able to register and
vote are rare. That's been completely debunked. I mean, it's
been widely reported that several states have found thousands of
non citizens registered to vote.
Speaker 16 (01:02:45):
For example, Oregon.
Speaker 5 (01:02:47):
Admitted that they had at least seventeen hundred individuals. Nevada
had six thousand, with at least four thousand having evidence
that they actually cast balance in their elections. It is
not true that these problems are rare, But you know,
even if they were rare, you know, any single nonsensant
(01:03:12):
voting cancels out the voice of an American who cats
a ballot on election day, and that's serious. Not only
is it unfair to US citizens, it's actually illegal under
federal law. So it's a problem that needs to be
addressed that states need to address on their own turf.
That's their constitutional duty to do so under the election's
(01:03:33):
clause of the Constitution. And if they fail to do so,
then there needs to be both federal action to correct
these problems.
Speaker 1 (01:03:41):
Mateo. Your organization Fair Today relates to report showing that
illegal migrant population is almost at nineteen million people in
this country as of today. I mean, we've got to
be kidding ourselves if some of those illegals in this country,
one or two or even a million of those nineteen
million aren't voting in our elections. I mean, let's be realistic.
(01:04:01):
Something's going on here, isn't.
Speaker 5 (01:04:05):
Absolutely you're absolutely right about that. I mean, the numbers
are just staggering. And then when you look at that
through the lens of these states that have these lax policies,
you know, then then the problem multiplies really because you know,
you've got states that are issuing non real ID compliant
(01:04:25):
licenses and ID cards that's going into the same you know,
pipeline at state DMVs that are processing you know, real
ID applications for people that are actually you know, US
citizens and can provide documentary proof. And then the reality
is there's no real safeguards. And to kind of get
(01:04:47):
back to your earlier question, you know, we we specifically
asked a lot of these states, hey, okay, you know
you have these policies, but you know what safeguards do
you have in place to make sure that you're not
violating federal while like the National Voter Registration Act and
keeping your voter rolls clean. Unfortunately, these states, instead of
providing answers and providing quality data, they just engaged in
(01:05:11):
massive stonewalling. I mean, I'll give you a just an
add a crazy example. The Colorado Secretary of State came
back in response to our public records requests and said
that it was going to take them one hundred and
eighty thousand man hours to process our request and that
it would cost fare six point two million dollars to
(01:05:32):
compel the disclosure of these documents. So that's just one example.
But you know other states you know, claimed exemptions, you know,
delayed and delayed to the point that we actually had
the file stuit against the District of Columbia DMV and
that litigation is ongoing. So yeah, you know, unfortunately this stonewalling.
What it does is it shook Pats a big question mark.
(01:05:57):
You know, if you did have safeguards in place, then
why not you know, disclose that to the American public.
Speaker 2 (01:06:02):
You know what you're saying sounds familiar. Sadly, in our state,
we had a bill that a great representative was running
that would just require them, upon receiving a ballot, to
be able to see the photo ID and be able
to scan it like you would have a borer club
that you'd walk in to scan the idea and if
the name and an address matches the ballot, you accept
it and that chain of custody becomes strong. They put
a fiscal note on that bill of ten million or
(01:06:24):
some number that what they knew would be high enough
that it would make it budget wise very difficult to pass.
Speaker 3 (01:06:31):
So what do we do?
Speaker 2 (01:06:33):
You're describing things we see and we confront an our
state in terms of election integrity, chane of custody, transparency,
Any any ideas watching this roll out in other states,
what our listeners should or could do to kind of
overcome this. It's not okay to just have a system
the way we do where we don't have these check
these safeguards in place. So looking for some guidance from you,
(01:06:55):
what should a state like Utah do in this regard.
Speaker 5 (01:07:00):
Absolutely so Prision Trump last their pasts and executive order
Executive Order fourteen two four eight, which expanded the utility
and access to the SAFE program, which is a database
program that run through the Department of Homeland Security and
made it freely accessible to states to use to cross
(01:07:21):
check their voter roles against federal immigration and citizenship data.
And several states have already been actively participating with the
federal government to use the SAVE program and have found,
you know, mass deficiencies and errors of non citizens being
on the voter rules. Texas, for example, found almost three
(01:07:44):
thousand non citizens flagged, Alabama had several hundred, Ohio had
nearly six hundred non citizens registered. So states like Utah
have these tools available to them to immediately conduct audit
can clean up their voter roles so that their compliance
with the nbr A. And you know, we we in
(01:08:06):
our report we also encourage other state officials to you know,
launch investigations into their state agencies like the d MBS,
making sure that they have state guards in place. And
then of course there's always the legislative fixed state. You know,
at the state legislature level, states can enact laws to
(01:08:27):
require proof of citizenships or you know, similar safeguards to
ensure that elections are being conducted properly and in accordance
to federal le.
Speaker 1 (01:08:38):
Mateo Forrero, he is a director of investigations with the
Federation for American Immigration Reform talking about, you know, voter
fraud again, great, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:08:47):
And I think that Executive Order fourteen four two eight
that's safe act where you can your your state can
cross uh just across what do you call it, analyze
your our voter roles with their crossed to them. I
think if we're not doing that that that was a
good pro tip to hear about that.
Speaker 1 (01:09:06):
It was we need to talk to talk to Abby
someday she is a country or her country, her home country.
The UK has some of the weirdest contests. Are you
ready for this one? To have and to hold? Took
a new meeting two dozen couples who put their relationship
to the test on a grassy hill in New England,
wives and girlfriends clung onto their deer for their dear
(01:09:29):
life as their partners carried them up and down a hillside.
Speaker 2 (01:09:33):
Oh well, I okay, okay, I can do that with
Queen Bee could nicely?
Speaker 3 (01:09:39):
I think I could hauler up the hill.
Speaker 1 (01:09:40):
And the finished payer who won the contest? Right, you
know what? They get a barrel of ale.
Speaker 3 (01:09:46):
But how did you bring Abby into this?
Speaker 6 (01:09:48):
Was?
Speaker 1 (01:09:48):
She's from the UK? This is a this is a
UK event?
Speaker 3 (01:09:51):
Oh I thought I thought you said this was here
in the UK.
Speaker 1 (01:09:55):
It's one of one of those weird hey.
Speaker 2 (01:09:58):
By the way, they sean da please share that ration.
I announced a ground stop by the FAA of four
airports in the DC area.
Speaker 3 (01:10:06):
That's the Reagan Airport, the.
Speaker 2 (01:10:07):
Washington Dulles Baltimore Washington International, and the Richmond International Airport.
All four of those those airports have been halted because
of strange smells. Maybe this would motivate the Democrats that
might maybe be serious about opening up Department of Homeland
Security and making sure that those things aren't threats.
Speaker 1 (01:10:29):
All right, that does it for us? Tonight? Head up,
shoulders back, May God bless you and your family. Everybody
have a great weekend. You'd be safe, mister Hughes, Hall
and Dave. Thanks for setting us up today. Been fun here.
Have a good weekend everybody. We'll be back on Monday.
Well, you're excited because you're on vacation next week. Well,
you're on vacation. We're not joining us.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
I am I think you not leave this audience. I
will be with you. I'm going to be broadcasting from
the iHeart Studios in.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
San Diegaro Command Post. Yes, but I am not.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
It's even a mobile, it's not even a remote. I
will be in studio, but I'll see you through a
video screen.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you'll be there. Your voice will
be heard.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Of our listeners. I don't that's a long time. Yeah,
you see you a bent. You go on vacation, you
kick everyone the curve, me, our listeners, not me. I'm here,
I'm not going anywhere.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
You need help, you really do need help. Well I've
heard that. Yeah, it's great to be. We have got
a lot to talk to you now. As promised, we've
had a lot of callers over the last couple of days.
We debate the Save America Act about Utah Senator John
Curtis and where he stands on all of this, yes,
and his position. Well, the center will speak to us
(00:54):
coming up at four thirty five, and you'll get a
chance to hear his explanation. About his stand on this
America Act. I know a lot of people are looking
forward to that. You'll hear that we hope to have
the Center on the air with us at about four
thirty five. Also, the Senate is lurking on some kind
of gimmick or gambit that may get a lot of
debate going on on this if there isn't a talking filibuster,
(01:16):
which I think both you and I believe, that's when
we need to get this done. But we'll see what
John Thune comes up with. Who knows at this point.
Speaker 2 (01:23):
Yeah, people like to take shallow water, muddy it up
and call it deep, but it's about that. It's a
talking filibuster, the philibuster, the zombie filibuster it's been called
today isn't what it was. It's not what the founders established.
It isn't what helped pass the Civil Rights Act in
the sixties. That was a talking filibuster. This is a
moment where we have to get this passed, and I
think that philibuster is absolutely critical in achieving that.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
If I'm wrong, show me how you're getting a pass.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
But I don't want to hear there's a Senate procedure
that gosh darn too bad. We can't do it because
the procedures in the Senate just don't afford it or
allow it.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
I don't.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
I'm a little bit I have a little bit of
a jaundiced eye to that, to that reasoning, Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
I don't buy it.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
Well, we saw it in the State Senate when they
couldn't find a sponse setup sponsor for a bill that's
the centate procedure.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
Ye ye, that is a procedure. So we'll hear from
John Curtis will explain. I know a lot of people
are interested to hear what he has to say. I've
already had several emails today Greg saying they've been trying
to get a hold of the center. Please ask the
cenator to these questions, and we'll attempt to do that.
So it should be an interesting conversation. A lot more
to get to today coming up a little bit later
on on the show. Is America living in a big lie?
(02:34):
That throws you?
Speaker 3 (02:36):
You mean like the movie?
Speaker 1 (02:37):
You looked at me?
Speaker 3 (02:38):
Huh, Well, I don't know. Are we living in a
matrix movie or red will we?
Speaker 1 (02:42):
America may be living in a big lie? And I'll
explain what that lie is. You'll disgressing me. You're talking
about you will disagree with me like crazy on this.
I just I just I just know you yes, and
I'll make you feel good. We'll pose that question to
our great audience and they'll probably agree with you. See,
(03:03):
I've just set you up because I don't want I
know your ego is very fragile.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Why do you do this to yourself?
Speaker 1 (03:07):
I don't even understand to support you?
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Okay, thanks, I appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (03:11):
I know your ego.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
You're bringing me up. I appreciate that you're helping me out.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
You're you're you're fragile, and I'm just trying to help you. Well,
we're all talk about that.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
It is.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
Thank Rodin greg Is Friday love to open up the
phones to people today. Oh yeah, hear what they have
to say.
Speaker 2 (03:25):
Yep, I think I really, folks, I think that when
we because it's going to be what in the four
thirty five, Uh, we're going to have that interview with
John Curtis. You we have heard from you that this
is the interview you've been waiting for. We've had Center
Lee on the on the program talking about the Save Act.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
Senator John Curtis is a co signer.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
Yeah, he is found he was at that bill.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
So where he sits and where what his position is
on that bill and how to get it passed if
it's going to pass. I think this is a discussion
that everyone's been waiting for for a long time. We're
going to have that, and I think that is going
to bear some commentary from our listeners.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
I think there'll be some reactions. I will be curious
to hear.
Speaker 1 (04:04):
They'll probably get mad at you because of the softball
questions you are throwing, maybe to the center. I know
you've throwed all questions, so we'll see what happens. You
know what's funny, we had two tragic, uh terrorist attacks
in the country yesterday and three in the last week.
If you're throw in Austin with that and a part
of the concern I brought this up yesterday. You've got
these terrorist attacks taking place, and where is funding for
(04:27):
the Department of Homeland Security.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
Yeah, it's to me, it's stuck in inexcusable.
Speaker 1 (04:32):
Right. Well, now, after these attacks, the Democrats are saying,
maybe we should pay for the Department of Homeland Security.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
They didn't see this coming.
Speaker 1 (04:41):
They didn't the price.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
They just didn't even see that this was might be
an issue big paper security and the prospect of of
terrorist attacks.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
But now they're upon us.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
Ray, we've got a sound bite. We've got a SoundBite
with Michigan Senator a Leaf Slotnik, you know, one of
the rising stars so to speak and the Democrat Party,
and she has just realized, maybe we need to do
fund the Department of Homeland Security. Played if you would rate.
Speaker 4 (05:07):
Certainly we need to fund the Department of Homeland Security,
and we need in my view, to cut away all
the conversation on ICE, which is its own conversation, from
all the core missions in the Department of Homeland Security.
But they're essential, they're on the job, they're working today.
Speaker 1 (05:23):
There you go.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
She she just voted for days folks.
Speaker 2 (05:27):
Two days ago she voted to not fund DHS. So
two days ago she wasn't talking the way she just spoke.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
Now. Yeah, yeah, Well we'll get into a lot of this,
a lot coming up today. Have you had anything lucky
or unlucky happened to you today.
Speaker 3 (05:40):
I've been very fortunate.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
Oh you've had a good day.
Speaker 3 (05:43):
Well, we had a lunch today, we have we had
a lun the.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Way we need to mention. We had a really nice
lunch with many of our advertisers, potential advertisers. They were
just a lot of fun and we got a chance
to talk to them, tell us about what we're trying
to do each end every day. Hear their stories. There
are some just great stories out there about business here
in Utah.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
Yeah, it was a great lunch.
Speaker 2 (06:01):
And so when you asked that question, I immediately thought
felt fortunate for the day's events today I have I've
enjoyed today and I'm stuffed.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
Yeah, me too.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Don't lunch. We ate at Rudizio and the food just
keeps on coming and it's just good.
Speaker 3 (06:14):
And said, would you like more of this? I say yes, yeah,
I don't. I look at it.
Speaker 1 (06:18):
Yes, yes, yeah.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
You didn't get that here?
Speaker 5 (06:23):
Right?
Speaker 3 (06:23):
We sent that out here?
Speaker 6 (06:23):
Right?
Speaker 2 (06:26):
The spam you know, check the email spam. I'm sure
it's there all right here.
Speaker 1 (06:30):
In a few minutes, we'll talk with Utah Senator John
Curtis about the Save Act, Save America Act. A lot
of people interested on where he stands, but there is
word tonight I'm going to ask the Senator about this
as well. But apparently the Republican leadership, greg according to
this story today, is eing what is being described as
a hybrid style debate gambit over the talking filibuster CENTI
(06:52):
Majority leader John Thune, according to this story Today, says
he will bring the legislation to the floor for a
full and robust debate. His decision comes after the President, apparently,
according to this story and The Daily Caller Today, kept
up pressure on congressional Republicans to send the act to
his desk. Now, apparently what they're thinking about doing is
(07:15):
Thune has opted to allow the legislation to proceed to
a standard vote with a possibility of extended floor debate,
rather than triggering a talking filibuster. Mike Lee was asked
about this and talked about it when he posted this
answer today.
Speaker 7 (07:30):
Okay, important update on the Save America Act and the
effort to get it passed. Look, I am guardedly optimistic.
We've turned kind of a corner over the last few days.
There's been some uncertainty about exactly what procedure we will
be and will not be using. In the end, We've
been working closely with later Thune and his staff, and
they've been great to work with. What we're coming up
(07:53):
with is something that I think is best described as
a hybrid version of the talking filibuster. But look, let's
not get MEYERDWN and nomenclature. What matters far more than
what we call it is what we do with it.
We're going to bring it to the floor, We're going
to debate it for an extended period of time before
filing cloture. And I, in my view, at least I
don't want to speak for anyone else, this bill needs
(08:14):
to remain on the Senate floor before we file cloture
on the bill, for as long as it takes to
get it done. Now, the fact that later Thron in
his office has been willing to work with us on
this and they appear open to a variation of that
is a good thing. So let's keep up the momentum.
Let's encourage them to continue to do this. Let's put
the bill on the floor. Let's make those who want
(08:36):
to filibuster speak and keep it on there as long
as possible.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
That's huge out center Mike Lee explaining this gambit that
they're going to run greg According to the story, again,
under this approach, the majority can attempt to wear down
opposition through continuous debate and enforcement of the sentence to
Speak rule, which lists limits each Senator to two speeches
on some legislation. So I don't know exactly procedurally what
(09:02):
they're doing.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
You know, I don't know what the words they want
to use. And they want to call the procedure, but
that sounds to me like a filibuster, you know, a
talking filibuster. Call it whatever you want, if it makes
you feel better. At the end of the day, get
to get the votes and get it done. And I'm
going to tell you there's no other version, and there's
no Senate procedure that you're that anyone's going to argue
to me is more important than getting them. You have
the majority in the Senate as Republicans, and you better
(09:25):
do something with it because the Democrats certainly will.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
There is no doubt in my mind.
Speaker 2 (09:29):
I don't even entertain for a second the idea that
if the Democrats take the majority in the Senate one day,
they will do whatever they want to do, they achieve
and they will not be apologetic about it. Well, we're
wringing hands about procedure. It's just we have to get
this done.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
They have no bounds when it comes to doing what
they want to do. We've learned that for sure over
the year as well. More to come on this busy
Friday is Rod and Greg Joe on the road from
the International Sportsman's Expo down here at the Mountain America
Expost Center in Sandy. Our conversation with you, Senator John
Curtis about the Save America Act coming up right here
on the Rod and Great Show and Utah's Talk Radio
(10:06):
one oh five nine KNRS. A lot of people over
the last several days have been contacting us saying will
you get Senator John Curtis on the show and talk
about where he stands on the Save Act? Where does
he stand on the filibuster? And we reached out to
his office yesterday and they said sure, we'd love to
come on now. We had a chance to talk to
him just about ten minutes before the show started today.
(10:26):
His schedule was very tight, and it's great to have
him on the show and hear what he has to say.
Speaker 3 (10:30):
It is it's good. I like it that he wants
to talk.
Speaker 2 (10:32):
He usually gets mad at me if I talk about him,
but not to him, so I think, so let's have
it let's have that direct discussion.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
All right, Well, we asked Sender Curtis to begin with
to give us his stand on the Save America Act
and where he stands on the talking filibuster.
Speaker 8 (10:47):
Yeah, so unequivocally. I'm a co sponsor of the Save Act.
I'm just really grateful for Center leads and some very
very heavy lifting on this so that one's pretty black
and white, very easy say a co sponsor. I will
say that the Stave Act does change a lot. And
for instance, just in the last few days, they talked
(11:09):
about mail in balloting. They talked about some LGBTQ issues,
and all of those things are important. The mail in
balloting is a particularly interesting one for our state, and
I'm you know, if that gets thrown in the bill,
then you know, I think there are some lively discussions
about states rights and federalism and everything. But just black
(11:33):
and white for me, yes, I support the Save.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
Act, you know, Senator, looking at the numbers, I think
that the best we're going to we can hope for
is fifty one votes in the Senate to pass that.
That would require a talking filibuster some Senate procedure to
allow the majority of senators to vote if it's a
bill that you deemed worthy to support. For that bill
to pass absent a change in that process or a
(11:56):
talking filibuster or something like that, it looks like that's
a procedural way to keep that bill from actually getting
having a chance to pass. Where do you stand on
the talking philibuster or whatever procedure would be necessary to
get the fifty to one votes needed.
Speaker 8 (12:12):
I think a really important question before you can even
ask that is how important is permanency? And that that's
really what's relevant when you talk about the talking philibuster,
because there's no better example than what Harry Reid did
with Judges when he thought he was being so smart
to lower the threshold to fifty one, and then President
Trump got to just totally reverse everything on him. And
(12:34):
so my concern is not whether or not we want
to pass the Save Act. My concern is how do
we make it permanent? And I also think it's been
a little bit of a mistake to focus on only
one alternative. So, for instance, even President Trump himself said, well,
can we pick up some Democrat votes? This is an
issue that polls at eighty twenty. If it really polls
(12:56):
at eighty twenty, and I think it does. Why can't
we get half a dozen or a few more Democrats
to vote with us? And now we're talking about permanency,
and I just think that's a conversation that we want
to have as conservatives and people who don't want to
see this undone in a couple of years. And by
the way, it only wouldn't it wouldn't only be undoing this,
(13:17):
it would be then the Democrats put their election law forward.
And we've seen that in HR one and we know
that's ballot harvesting, and so my concern is far far
more than just the Save Act, but it's how do
we make it permanent? And that that's a discussion that
I think we need to have a little bit more
as we go into this.
Speaker 1 (13:36):
So, sender, are you saying the risk of a talking
filibuster may be too great to go along with it?
What exactly you're saying when it comes to the talking filibuster?
Speaker 8 (13:45):
So let me try to simplify it. If Republicans use
the talking filibuster to pass the Save Act, Democrats will
use the talking phil filibuster to undo the Save Act
and then pass their election law. That is why I
want to be very very careful about how we do this,
and so I just think those are questions that we
(14:06):
really need to be thinking through and saying it's like, Okay,
well that's great, we get it passed. But if it's
passed for two years or even four years, and then
undone and worse than undone, the Democrats passed their election
law instead, then we've made a mistake, just like Harry
Reid made a mistake changing the fillus the rules to
fifty one for judges.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
Well, let me ask you this.
Speaker 2 (14:29):
I hear what you're saying, but how much how optimistic
are you that if the Democrats one day were to
get a majority in the Senate and as you describe,
maybe reverse this. I felt like you had West Virginia's
senator mansion and you had Arizona Senator Cinema, who were
the firewall from preventing the Democrats from getting rid of
(14:50):
the Filbuster maybe entirely. And beyond the Save Act, you're
talking two states that they would make out of Puerto
Rico and Washington, DC. You're talking about a staff potential
Supreme Court. You're looking at the electoral college being debated,
whether it's still relevant is what gives you any belief
that if they get the majority with or without the
Save Act, that these are not the moves that this
(15:11):
party and these senators will make. I don't find I
don't see the mansion out there anymore. I don't see
the cinema. Who what what confidence do you have that
these changes you're talking about aren't coming our way if
the Democrats get majority anyway?
Speaker 8 (15:26):
So legitimate question. Let me first point out that Democrats
would love us to do to pass the Save Act
this way because then at green lights everything you just said,
and as you know, there's even more behind it than
that and changes they would make. So I would say
a couple of things to that. First of all, this
is kind of a crude analogy, and you'll you'll excuse me,
but it's kind of like why And you know, I think, okay,
(15:50):
I think in my marriage, at some point, my wife's
going to cheat on me, so I'm going to go
cheat on her first. And that's like, that's how a
lot of people view this, saying, well, just because they're
going to do something terrible for our democracy, just because
they're going to do something terrible for the institution, I'm
going to go do it first. Now, I think even
more important for this conversation is, you know, walking the
(16:14):
halls of the Senate, you get a real sense for culture,
You get a real sense for how things work. People
say all the time that they want to build to pass,
that they don't really want to pass. They say all
the time that they want to build, not to pass,
that they want to pass. And so it was really
easy for Democrats to do a lot of grand standing
before when mind Shin and Cinema were holding it up
(16:35):
and say, oh, we need to do this. I would
do this. But I'll tell you what. Imagine had they
done that and then Trump came in with the House
and the Senate, how they would have regretted that. And
I think they're all looking at anybody that thought that
was a good idea, or looking at that and saying,
holy cow, if we had done that, now the shoe
would have been reversed and they would have seen the
(16:56):
Harry Red thing all over again. And I really just
don't believe, despite their buster that they would go there.
Speaker 3 (17:02):
Well, let me push back a little bit.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
I hear what you're saying, but to go along with
your analysis or your analogy, I think they have cheated
on their spouse. And I'll tell you why Department of
Homeland Security is still not funded. Okay, it is closed.
We had two terrorists attacks yesterday. I do not see
the political will and I have no confidence. I think
that the Democrat Party ran Senator Mansion and Center Cinema
right out of their party. Senator Cinema had a Democrat opponent.
(17:27):
I'm hearing from Pennsylvania that Vetterman will have a very,
very difficult time winning the party nomination, even though he
votes ninety percent with Schumer. You talk about this, but
I think we've seen the infidelity with this crazy party.
I don't see any of the hope that there's a
firewall between losing the filibuster entirely. I might be a cynic,
but doesn't it worry you when you can't get to
(17:50):
your colleagues on the other side of the how to
even fund Department of Homeland Security?
Speaker 8 (17:55):
Well, I mean exactly everything what you're saying is exactly
why I feel as strongly as I do, I do
not want to hand them the keys to the car
to go do this. I mean, basically, what you're saying is, Okay,
we're just we're accepting that they are going to go
do this. So here's the keys to the cars. Guy,
we're going to We're going to show you the path.
(18:16):
Here are the keys, go do all those things. And
by the way, Fetterman is one of the most popular
politicians in his state. And yeah, so yeah, yeah, but
he speaks his mind. And I'll tell you, you know,
I just I just get the advantage of seeing the
(18:36):
institution from the inside, and i'd probably have just look
everything that you're saying, I totally get. I mean, it's
so disparaging what Democrats would do, the fact that that
they have shut down the very people that protect us.
I'm embarrassed to walk through an airport and they go
through TSA as I look those people in the eye
that aren't getting paid.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
It's just wrong.
Speaker 8 (18:55):
And of all times, at war time, when we know
very well somebody we're trying to do it, we do
this harm, you know, in our air travel and things
like that. It's just wrong. But that to me is
even more reason I'm not willing to hand them the
keys the car.
Speaker 1 (19:09):
Sunder Curtis, let me ask you, there's a story out
there today about the GOP possibly floating some floating some
kind of hybrid debate gambit to appea. You know people
who are upset about that, and apparently it would allow
legislation to proceed a standard vote with the possibility of
extended floor debate and wear out the opposition. Can you
tell us what that gambit is and what they're trying
(19:30):
to do and would that work or would that help
get this path?
Speaker 8 (19:34):
So let me just say this in essence, what people
are trying to figure out is what is the path
to pass this with fifty one votes? And the problem
with that logic is if you create or show the path,
they will use the exact same path to undo it.
(19:54):
So that's where I'm saying, let's let's be even more
thoughtful than that, and let's figure out how to pass
it with sixty votes. So it cannot be done and
we don't give them the keys to the castle. And
I'll tell you even President Trump a couple of days
ago tweeted out and said, let's go get some Democrat votes.
This is like you say, it's an issue that polls
eighty twenty. There's more Fetterman's out there that we could
(20:16):
go convince and say, look what and maybe Okay, fine,
if we have to tweak exactly how you show id,
let's have that conversation to get their votes, because that's
how you make this thing permanent.
Speaker 2 (20:26):
Senator, don't you think they have the Schumer and the
Democrats have the key to the castle right now? If
it takes sixty votes to open up our government, to
open up DHS, to open up tsay, don't they hold
the cards now that your analogy feels like it's playing
out in real time, they hold the cards right now.
Speaker 8 (20:44):
So I guess Greg, what you're pointing out is the
system that our founders created gave some difference to minority
now in Utah, and when you were Speaker of the House,
there was really nothing compelling that made you give any
difference to the minority party other.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
Than that super nice.
Speaker 3 (21:02):
I was just good.
Speaker 8 (21:04):
Yeah, you're just in the good of your heart.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
Right, Yes, thanks.
Speaker 8 (21:07):
The founder built that in. They wanted the minority to
have some kind of voice. Now it's not a dominant voice.
They're they're kind of Their options are very few. One
of them is to refuse to fund something. And Republicans,
by the way, have tried this one hundred times more
than the Democrats. Have to shut down, and we've kind
(21:29):
of figured out it doesn't work, and Democrats are going
to figure out it doesn't work either. But that's the
system our founders set up, is that minority does have
a few rights, not very many, but i'll tell you what.
You want to take all those rights away from the minority,
then this shoe goes on the other foot when that changes.
Speaker 2 (21:48):
So the Founders set it up Civil Rights Act. It
went through what seventy days of a filibuster before it
was able to muster the votes to pass. Hasn't the
filibuster morphed over time from what the Founders envisioned for
the rid of body like the Senate to get.
Speaker 8 (22:01):
Well as it is now, point the minority.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
It's the minority a stronger voice. And I hear what
you're saying, but I don't know that it's what you're
what the practice in the in the in the Senate
right now is is what was imagined for the filibuster.
And I think it has changed, hasn't it?
Speaker 1 (22:17):
It has?
Speaker 8 (22:18):
But it's been you know, one hundred plus years right
that we've been operating this way. And I would just say,
look like, I'm not sure why we're giving up so
quick on getting sixty votes like this is this is
an issue that pulls at eighty twenty. Right, There's there's
there's videos of Chuck Shimmer all over the place saying
(22:38):
how important it is to get ID when you vote. Now,
we have a few wrinkles that I think we need
to work through, and we probably should work through anyway
about really what qualifies as ID. And I think if
we did that and we were thoughtful, we were walking
away with sixty plus votes, and this thing is permanent
and we don't have to worry about them on doing
it in a few years. And really, look, all I'm
saying is, let's have those convers let's be thoughtful about this.
(23:03):
Let's not let's not just jump into this without thoroughly
exhausting every avenue that we have in front of us.
I think that's I think that's what people want us
to do is and I think that's what I'm hearing
is past the Save Act, but thoroughly exhaust every avenue
in front of you. Look at everything that you've got there.
And I'll go back to President Trump himself saying, go
(23:24):
see if some Democrats will vote for this. We haven't
even really tried to do that.
Speaker 1 (23:28):
On our news MAGA a line our conversation Greg and
I had just a short time ago with Utah Center
John Curtis and flesh out what he thinks about the
Save Act and you know, all the procedures. We've got
a few things now.
Speaker 2 (23:39):
And I'm sorry, Boss, I kind of elbowed you out
of that discussion. I just kept having more questions follow
ups I wanted to ask, and I didn't mean.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
To do that, but there are a lot of questions
out there. But did he answer your questions about this?
Speaker 3 (23:52):
Well? He gave answers. Whether what I think agree with.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
Him or not. We'll get into that coming up, but
we need to take a break for our listeners who've
been asking a lot of question about this. We want
to hear from them. I mean, you know, he laid
it out there. My sense is I'm with you, Greg.
You know he talked about, you know, cheating on your
husband out of wife, and you're right. I think the
Democrats have been cheating on us forever and we've allowed
(24:17):
him to get away with it. Yes, heyes, And we
as conservatives or Republicans have tried to play the game fairly.
And I think people need to realize now they don't
play fair, and maybe it's time for us not to
play fair anymore.
Speaker 2 (24:31):
I found the analogy. I found the analogy if you
don't want to do what Harry Reid did, because Harry
Reid took the Supreme Court judges and lowered that threshold
of fifty one votes? Look how bad that? That was
not bad?
Speaker 1 (24:43):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (24:43):
Okay, that's actually worked out pretty well for us. I
wouldn't go back to a sixty vote. Can you imagine
who President Trump could have or would have been able
to nominate if it was a sixty vote threshold.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
So I don't know that that.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
I I was surprised to hear him say that that
was such a disaster when that actually.
Speaker 3 (25:00):
He plays real real don that favors anyway?
Speaker 2 (25:02):
What say you, folks? I'd love to hear from our listeners.
Eighty eight five seven zero eight zero one zero is
the number to call.
Speaker 1 (25:08):
Number our number two of the Rotting Gregg Show coming up,
Stay with Us with Senator John Curtis. I don't know Greg,
I don't I just think he's he's caught up in
too much procedure. We want this done. Figure out a
way to do it now. He brought up Harry Reid. Now,
(25:30):
Harry Reid did something that allowed on judges, could not
something similar be done on election laws or whatever the
case may be, that we could move forward with this.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
Yeah, and if you didn't catch the interview, and I
don't want to speak for the senator, but and I'm
going to give it the most fair ball and strike
accounting of what I heard him say, and that is
he is worried that if you do a talking filibuster,
if we do something other than the zombie filibuster where
if you just don't have sixty votes, you just can't
move forward if you actually have to engage in the debate,
(26:02):
that would delay the vote through speaking on the floor
of the Senate. So that's a talking filibuster that we
would be opening the door that in the when the
Republicans are no longer in the majority in the Senate,
we would see that the Democrats take our example and
run with it and do away with or themselves practice
of talking philibuster. That would undo everything we're doing now,
(26:24):
is what he is saying. I think the answer back
to that is, I think that's the state of play.
I think that the Democrats will have abandoned that filibuster.
The second they have fifty fifty votes and a vice
president or fifty one votes in the Senate, we will.
Speaker 3 (26:39):
No longer have it.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
And I say that just because of the insanity we're
seeing now where they won't reopen our government Department of
Home Land Security with what we're seeing now, but also
the reasonable Democrats in the Senate that stopped that from happening.
Speaker 3 (26:54):
They were run out of their out of the Senate.
Speaker 2 (26:56):
They didn't seek reelection because they were attacked for doing so.
So who would Senator Curtis look to in the Democrat
side of the aisle, who would stop a filibuster if
we didn't do it. I just don't think it's a
real choice. I don't I think that. I think the
Democrats have proven that they are ready to jump the shark.
They are in a hole, they keep digging, And I
(27:18):
don't think that there's a Senate decorum that you'll see
the Democrats follow in the Senate that we have to.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
You know, we can't be the bad example, so to speak.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
I think we have a majority and we have to
exercise that majority while we have it, or why have it?
Speaker 1 (27:31):
Well, you brought up. We discussed with Sender Curtis, John Fetterman.
John Fetterman has already come out and said no on
the Save America. Yes, he's come out and said it. So,
you know, I think what Senda Curtis says and what
he claims that Donald Trump has said is go get
some Democrats. I don't think there are any Democrats to get.
Speaker 2 (27:50):
I really, if you did, you would have to water
it down to basically let illegal people vote.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
They could pass it by name only.
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Yeah. So I want to get your reaction to it.
We've had, like I said, we've emails and calls from
people over the last several days. Let's find out what
John Curtis has to say on this. So let's go
to the phone.
Speaker 3 (28:06):
Let's go to the phones.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
Let's go to Karen who's been waiting and Lake short yep, Karen,
welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.
Speaker 9 (28:14):
Thank you. I just want to say that I think
John Curtis is blowing smoke. Anybody who knows the Senate
knows that it only takes fifty one vote to pass
any law in the Senate. It takes more than that
for closer, but for the actual law it's only fifty
one votes, and the talking filibuster is always on the table.
(28:38):
That's in the regular Senate rule. Yes, and it's not
used except rarely because it's so costly. But what is
more important in costs than solidifying our elections so that
we can trust them. I'm not as nice as Greg.
(28:59):
I really think it's a Senator Curtis has never left
his Democrat roots. He was the chair of the Democrat
Party in this state. And I don't know who he's protecting.
Speaker 6 (29:13):
But you can't.
Speaker 9 (29:15):
Before this bill and then say you're not for the
talking filibuster, because that's the only way we're going to
get it done.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
It is the only way.
Speaker 5 (29:23):
It is.
Speaker 1 (29:24):
It is Karen, Karen, thank you for calling Campbell.
Speaker 2 (29:27):
I think her observations are exactly right, and it is
part of the procedure. And I was surprised the Senator
didn't really drill in down to the Civil Rights Act
that was passing the sixties.
Speaker 3 (29:37):
It hasn't been over one hundred years.
Speaker 2 (29:38):
It was used in the sixties to pass that and
now was seventy plus days and they had like twenty
five votes yes, when they started at filibuster, they got
fifty one or more than fifty after seventy days of debate,
And so I do think it's been used.
Speaker 3 (29:52):
It is part of their rules, it's part of their process.
Speaker 2 (29:55):
And to say that you don't want to do it
for fear of what the Democrats will do, I don't
think you're seeing anything from Themmocrats to give you confidence
that they would not do worse.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
Well, what I think has to happen, Greg, And here's
what's frustrating to both of us. I said yesterday, I
think there are lawmachers who were lazy. Yeah, they do
not want to work for legislation. They do not want
to work hard for and it may take a filibuster,
it may take several days. The Civil Rights Actor was
more than two months. Yes, the philibustering on that this
is difficult in important legislation and you've got to work for it, Well,
(30:27):
just throw your arm both day, coach.
Speaker 2 (30:30):
Just so that we don't sound overly cynical, can I
just point out that that the Obamacare passed on what
Christmas Eve in the House. You saw it, you saw
critical votes when it was time to go home for
the holidays, or you saw the big beautiful bill pass
in August when it was time for August recess. And
it is absolutely the case that some of the biggest
(30:50):
pieces of legislation really only get the political will to
move when it's time to go home, when it's time
to have that vacation, it's time to enjoy the holidays,
and all of a sudden, you see a you see
a political will that you haven't been able to generate
up until those very moments.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
That's a tell.
Speaker 2 (31:05):
That's a tell that maybe the decision tree isn't what
we would expect from those that we send into Washington.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
Was that Obamacare approved by one vote? Something like that?
Wasn't all democrat?
Speaker 3 (31:15):
Was a Democrat? That's not a single Republican.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
Let's go to Jerry Jerry's and Oakley tonight, listening into
the rodin Greg Joe, Hi, Jerry, how are you.
Speaker 10 (31:25):
I don't believe anything he said. It's just ocfuscation. It's
starting to seem to me like he wants us to
lose the midterms. I got two letters I got from him.
I wrote him a letter about I encouraged to do
the Insurrection Act. He responded with a letter about the
National Guard. He sent me a letter about Alan Credit,
(31:47):
the crazy person who got shot by ice. I didn't
even write him a letter about that. I emailed you
a letter he sent to my wife. He's just he's
just going through the motions. I mean, if they could
do it in Somalia a national ID voter and citizenship card,
why can't we do it in America?
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Boy, that's a very good point when you say Somalia,
is that what they're doing, Jerry, I mean, that's not
a country you want to look up to. But what
exactly are they doing in Somalia?
Speaker 10 (32:13):
Yeah, they have a biometric national ID card that everyone
over fifteen years old is required to get. Okay, I'll
send you the copy of it.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
We can't do that.
Speaker 10 (32:29):
You also sent you the email that he said.
Speaker 5 (32:31):
Yeah.
Speaker 10 (32:32):
I mean if the average IQ in Somalia is sixty
seven and they've got biometric voter ID.
Speaker 2 (32:42):
Yes, well, you know, I think we're I think most
of the country will have a requirement and a way
to verify citizenship for the right to vote. It's not
a crazy it's why it's an eighty twenty issue at
eighty five to fifteen issue. Thank you for Jerry, thanks
for the observation, thanks for the discussion, and I get
no rum for me.
Speaker 1 (33:00):
Yeah, yeah, all right, we'll get tomorrow. Your calls eight
eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero eight
eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero, or
you can leave us a talkback comment as well, or
on your cell phone just disle pound two fifty and
say hey, Rot live today at the International Sportsman's Expo.
A lot of big a lot of fans coming out
by listeners.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
I love meeting the listeners are great.
Speaker 2 (33:21):
And by the way, I know you hear says lumping
on that app e Ray loads up every show as
a as a as a podcast, so it's the Rod
and Greg Show if you were to look for it
in the search engine or search window after the other
than canter us and then that gives you each of
the segments of the show that we've done it. It's
like I said, it's loaded up at the end of
the show and some that we're here, we're not able
(33:41):
to hear our interview with Senator John Curtis and wanted
to be able to hear it later, so that will
be as a podcast loaded up after the show.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
So yeah, well, let's go back to the phones. Greg.
A lot of people want to weigh in on our
car and say our conversation. We should say with Senda Curtis,
let's go to provo and hear what Mark has to
say tonight, Mark, welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.
Thanks for waiting, Mark, what are your thoughts on this?
Speaker 11 (34:03):
Well, I think the senator has forgotten that he's supposed
to represent us and vote and do how we would
expect him to do, not how he wants to do
or thinks he knows better than us to do. But
he kept saying when they get back in power, they're
going to do this when they get you know, when
it's their turn. If you pass the sayback you are
(34:24):
going to drastically reduce the chances of that even happening.
If you take out of vot vote you know, fraud
and all these people that should not be voting. If
you don't have to say back, you almost ensure that
they will get their turn and it will be centered
rather than later.
Speaker 3 (34:41):
I agree, Mark.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
I think that's why the Democrats fight so hard against
this issue. I think it's a real tell they don't
have a good reason. They keep saying, well, married people,
married women won't be able to vote. It's the craziest
thing on an eighty twenty issue. So I agree with him,
all I completely.
Speaker 1 (34:55):
Well, what frustrates me, Greg, is this our two hundred
and fiftieth birthday this year. Yes, what a way to
celebrate America by saying you can vote in America. We
want you to vote in America, but only if you're
a citizen.
Speaker 2 (35:08):
About what we're talking about, nobody's argued that the people
that are not legally here should be able to vote
every They're not saying that they should. So it should
be the easiest piece of legislation to ever pass. To
just re emphasize if you think that there's no voter
fraud at all, well we're just we're just being redundant.
Vote for redundancy, rote vote for an exclamation mark on
what you think the laws.
Speaker 1 (35:29):
All right, let's go back here, let's go direct.
Speaker 2 (35:31):
No, No, let's go to Dean and Bountiful. Dean, thank
you for holding. Welcome to the Rod and Gregg Show.
Speaker 8 (35:37):
Hi.
Speaker 12 (35:38):
Hey, two points real quick. First off, if the Republicans
are under the impression that, hey, we can hold the
vote and we'll blame the Democrats, not this time. We
will blame the Republicans just as much as the Democrats
the other. But here's the point that I really wanted
to make here, and that is this Mike Lee yesterday,
I'm on Glenn blench Ben. Glenn said JD. Vans can
(36:02):
come up to the Senate anytime he wants and immediately
assume the position of presiding office chairs and he can
take care of this procedural vote. Glenn Beck said, absolutely,
if you're listening to the White House do this. What
do you think about that option?
Speaker 1 (36:19):
Well, I heard that conversation, and you're right, I think JD.
Vance does have that authority to do so. Now if
he would do it, who knows. If the President wants
this badly enough, would he tell JD Vans to do this?
Who knows?
Speaker 2 (36:31):
Greg, Look, I love the idea, and I think it's
that serious and I think it's that kind of moment.
It is bizarre to me that the that the the
Senate Republicans, that this Republicans in the House hand some
of them handering about all what Trump's doing and what
he's doing, and I ran everything. How about you, as
a member of Congress or a Senate, do something with
(36:52):
a Republican majority that makes your case about why you
want to be re elected in the midterms. This is
your moment. This is the moment where Republicans need come together.
They have the majority, get this done. The Democrats. You
don't have to beg them to take their majority and
do what they did. That's how Obama Care passed. It
passed with not a single Republican vote to be found. Unapologetically,
(37:12):
I think we should do whatever it takes to really
strengthen the integrity of our elections. It sounds silly to
have to say out loud and to try and make
a case for that that should be, that should be
fundamental your foundation.
Speaker 1 (37:25):
Yeah, all right, We've got more calls, more talkback comments
coming up. It is the Friday edition. Thank Rod and
Greg Is Friday on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine knrs. Before we go back to our callers on
our John Cotis interview, the President has just tweeted out
moments ago, yes, that the US military has totally obliterated
(37:45):
military installations on carg Island. Now, you say, why is
carg Island so important? Carg Island is where Iran refines
all of its oil.
Speaker 2 (37:56):
I would say, well, I would use the past ten
that Rod, I just say that was a memory that's
might might be a beautiful memory for Iran, but that
they I don't think they're going to be doing that
anytime soon.
Speaker 1 (38:07):
Well, he hit them hard, and he says they have
been totally obliterated. Sooner or later, the Runnings are gonna
wake up and say, you know, we probably should do something.
Speaker 2 (38:15):
Yeah, I think the guys, the guys got it in
his head what he needs to do to be done
with them, and you.
Speaker 1 (38:20):
Know he's gonna do it no matter what's right.
Speaker 3 (38:23):
Let's go back to let's get back to the calls.
Let's go back to Let's go to Rex and Sandy.
That's been on hold. Rex, thank you for holding. Welcome
to the Rod and Gregg Show.
Speaker 11 (38:33):
Hey, thanks guys.
Speaker 13 (38:34):
You know I wanted to, uh think that last caller
who talked about smallies have a National Voter ID card.
That would be fantastic because our driver's licenses don't say.
Speaker 11 (38:46):
You're a citizen. Because Green card.
Speaker 13 (38:48):
Holders also have REALID driver's licenses.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
You are correct.
Speaker 13 (38:52):
So you have to have a passport, so you can
only fifty percent of people have a passport. Others, you know,
you gotta have your certificate.
Speaker 11 (39:01):
If we have something like a national.
Speaker 13 (39:03):
ID card, that'd be great. But when you have to
pay to get a passport or pay fifty dollars for
copy of your birth certificate, how is that not an
unconstitutional poll tax? You could end up getting rid of
the filibuster and have the Supreme Court pulled up the
(39:26):
law because they find that's an unconstitutional poll tax.
Speaker 3 (39:30):
Yeah, I'll tell you why. I don't think that's the case.
Speaker 2 (39:32):
I think that if you are a US citizen, what
you do have to provide to have real idea is
a passport or a birth certificate. The people you're talking about,
which I just learned, and you're right, people that are
here legally on a visa can also get the real ID.
So to your point, that would allow illegally for someone
who's already the federal law to vote when they shouldn't.
(39:52):
But it isn't a poll tax for an American because
we already are required to have the idea if we're
going to use our license to bank or to go
to an airport or anything like that. So I don't
think it's a poll tax for the legal resident who
would exercise their vote or present a real idea ID
to vote.
Speaker 3 (40:09):
But it does not close the loophole.
Speaker 2 (40:12):
You've you've you've pointed out that those that are here
on a on a residency visa would have that real idea.
Speaker 1 (40:18):
All right, thank you, good real id car good point.
Let's go to Kate in Ogden tonight. Kate, how are
you welcome to the Rod and Greg show?
Speaker 3 (40:27):
Good?
Speaker 14 (40:27):
Yeah, I just wanted to make a couple points. The
biggest one is like when are we going to be
done with nursery rhyme conservatism? And then as far as
the uh, why we should just pass it and everything
else is once this passes, Democrats have a hard time
winning any election if this passes. Yeah, so why don't
(40:48):
we pass it? Well, not worry about the filabuster or anything.
Just pass it and let's do this.
Speaker 1 (40:52):
Yeah, that's what a lot of people are saying. Pass
it and let's just be let's be done with this
and get this on. One more calls that will break.
Let's go to h John, who's in Murray tonight listening
to rodin Greig, John, how are you? Thanks so much
for joining us?
Speaker 15 (41:04):
Go ahead, John, doing great, Good to hear you guys again. Hey,
Senator Curtis is a great guy. I think he's doing
her good job. He's also a freshman, so he's got
to kind of walk gently and try to get on
the best committees that he can as a senatorial career progresses.
But what Sudent's doing is he's putting himself into Paul
(41:24):
ryan territory. And the problem is Paul Ryan did everything
he could in Trump's first term to undermine him. And
what happened after that the Democrats took over the House
and the Senate, right, but what happened to Paul Ryan
no consequence. He wind up on the board of Fox
News or Fox Fox, you know, a network, so they
(41:44):
can do whatever they want to do, whatever they want to,
never mind anybody else. What they're what a lot of
these guys do is all they're trying to do is
to secure their future in their next position.
Speaker 2 (41:54):
I couldn't agree more. Look, I think you're right. I
think that soon, the majority leader soon is playing this game.
I think it's I don't think anyone's buying it either, Rod.
I think people know it's a game and and and
people are seeing it. I think the irony with Senator
curtis the color point out. He's a freshman senator and
Senator Lee is that you have the sponsor of the
(42:14):
Save America Act in Senator Lee, you have you have
the one single vote because it takes if there were
only three, we could still get it through. But the
fourth vote being Senator Curtis to stop the filibuster, the
voice filibuster from the same state, representing the same ironic, they.
Speaker 3 (42:33):
Both represent us.
Speaker 2 (42:34):
So how can we have such a dichotomy the one
one senator that's stopping it against the one senator sponsoring it.
It just seemed for us as as constituents to both
of those senators, that is what makes it so difficult,
I think.
Speaker 1 (42:48):
So we're in Utah, Yeah, it is weird, all right,
more of your calls coming up. The Rod and Greg
Joe carg Island totally obliterated, according to the President, all
their military installations there that is a island. Will explain
why coming up, But we want to go back to
your phone calls. Listen to some of your talkback comments
about our conversation with Senator John Curtis.
Speaker 2 (43:08):
Yeah, so let's go right back to the phone. Let's
go to Rick, who's been waiting in Centerville. Rick, Welcome
to the Ron and Greg show.
Speaker 16 (43:15):
Good efternoon, gentlemen, I did not hear the interview, but
you know, Senator Curtis, he just liked range Hatch three
point zero. We got Romney, each one of those guys, well,
I don't know about Curtis, but Romney and Patch. Yeah,
the only reason why they ran is because of vacating
(43:36):
senator because they couldn't compete against anybody. And I don't
know what is I would defer to Senator Lee's lead
on constitutional procedure when it comes to this, because you
know what, Senator Curtis, he's a greenhorn. What you got
what do they call him?
Speaker 1 (43:56):
Junior senator? Well, you know what.
Speaker 16 (44:01):
He has to remember, he does the work. He works
for us.
Speaker 1 (44:04):
I'm sick and.
Speaker 16 (44:04):
Tired of politicians just injecting their own personal views. They
have no freaking business doing their own fill their own
nest for whatever purpose they want, and they work for us.
And that's the problem with these politicians, especially in Washington.
Speaker 1 (44:24):
Yeah, you're right, you're right, Rick, And I think that's
a that's a frustration that people have out there as
they feel they aren't working for the people they represent.
And you've probably heard that as a politician yourself before.
Speaker 3 (44:35):
So here's the thing, Senator.
Speaker 2 (44:37):
Senator Curtis acknowledged this issue is a eighty twenty issue.
Speaker 3 (44:41):
He said, eighty.
Speaker 2 (44:42):
Percent of America supports this. If that isn't your tell
you got Senator Lee who's sponsoring it representing Utahns, you
might want to be on that eighty percent side.
Speaker 3 (44:52):
I really do.
Speaker 2 (44:53):
I think the Senate procedure discussion, even if it's authentic,
it is it is. I I think it's a moot
point because the Democrats are gonna do whatever they can.
Our listeners have pointed out, as they've called in, you
don't get to say back. That's how you get Democrats
in their majority. They don't get the majority as easy
if they can't cheat.
Speaker 1 (45:11):
We have some comments on our talkback line. Listen to it.
Let's listening to one of them right now.
Speaker 17 (45:16):
Hey, guys, I'm gonna chime in with my usual canter.
I think John Curtis is lazy an rhina. He just
doesn't want to do the damn work. He's lazy, that's it.
He's lazy, lazy, lazy, just like Barack Obama and Mitt Romney,
(45:37):
all these entitled people. Lazy.
Speaker 1 (45:41):
All right, we got another quick one. He right, go ahead.
Speaker 17 (45:45):
Hey, what do you think of giving Mitch McConnell and
John Curtis some of that steak and lobster that the
army is handled out?
Speaker 1 (45:51):
I think that would get them to vote.
Speaker 14 (45:55):
I love.
Speaker 1 (45:58):
Why do we get a sense that connl and Curtis
can get staken loved to any time?
Speaker 2 (46:02):
They're probably getting it all the time, you know, but
you know what, maybe that'll it's interesting to understand what
the decision tree is over in that Senate.
Speaker 3 (46:08):
I don't really get it, but that's true. But you know,
we're here to report.
Speaker 2 (46:12):
I actually give the Senator some you know, credit for
calling in and and and and talk speaking with us.
I think he knew our take, or at least mine
you I don't know, but he knew that he gave
us a take. I don't hear our listeners picking up
what he's putting down. I don't know if they're buying
what Senator Curis is selling. I don't think, but it
has been I think a really good conversation.
Speaker 1 (46:32):
All right, when we come back an update on the
US going after carg Island in Iran and Americans saw
Sary says they don't understand the say aack get into
that as well. Not our listeners, but other Americans want
to update you on a couple of stories. First of all,
in the last half hour, the President announcing that the
military has basically totally obliterated any military installation on Kark Island,
(46:59):
and it's just off the shore of Iran. It is
their number one island where all their refineries produced the
oil and refine the oil. But didn't hit the refineries,
but hit the military installations, and said, I'll hit even
harder if you continue to block the straight of horror movees.
Speaker 2 (47:16):
It's hard for me to imagine if you hit those
military installations that hard that it hasn't somehow hit the
infrastructure of their refining refineries.
Speaker 3 (47:26):
But that said, I.
Speaker 2 (47:27):
Guess it could get worse for him if they don't,
if there isn't some kind of.
Speaker 3 (47:32):
Surrender that he's pursuing.
Speaker 1 (47:34):
Yep, he's not putting up with anything, is it. Well,
we've been talking a lot about the America Save America Act,
that is, the voter id legislation tied up in the Senate.
It's going to be an interesting week next week to
see what happens with this. Greg But joining us on
our newsmaker line to talk more about. This is our
good friend Amanda Head and she has a White House
correspondent for Just the News. Always fun to have Amanda
(47:54):
on the show. Amanda, how are you? And to welcome
to the Rod and Greg Show.
Speaker 3 (47:59):
Thank you, Rodding.
Speaker 1 (48:00):
Always great to talk to you, vote, Thanks for having me.
I saw you. I saw you a story that you
wrote about the voter ideal legislation and you say a survey.
I don't know where you're getting this information, Amanda, but
there's some Americans out there who don't seem to care
that it is tied up. Explain what you see going on? Yeah,
And I.
Speaker 6 (48:17):
Don't really blame them, you know, the American people. And
to be quite honest, this is one of those journalistic things.
I struggled with the headline because you have to make
a punchy headline. But the headline, if I were being
accurate but also a little on the nose about it,
I would have said, I would have said, you know,
landmark voter legislation that Americans don't seem to care about,
(48:40):
because the American people don't And this survey, this is
from Neapolitan News, which is Scott Rasmussen's service, and so
it found that only twenty three percent of voters can
accurately describe what the Save America Act is. And as
I said, I don't really blame them, because the American people,
you know, they are living their daily lives. You know,
(49:02):
people are about to be going on spring break, and
meanwhile we've got crazy weather happening all over the country.
People are trying to pay their bills, they're trying to
put gas in their car, They're trying to make sure
that they're not in an area like the West Coast
where iron might be targeting.
Speaker 1 (49:16):
You know, the American.
Speaker 6 (49:17):
People have so much on their minds and so much
on their plates, and so I don't necessary I don't
besmirch anyone for not knowing what it is. But it
just goes to show you, Rod and Greg that you too,
me as well, the three of us, and all of
my colleagues in Washington, everyone within the Beltway. You know,
we really do live in this political bubble. And while
(49:40):
the Save America Act is on the tip of our
tongues and the forefront of every conversation that's happening in Washington,
DC right right now, the American people don't really know
or care about it.
Speaker 5 (49:51):
Now.
Speaker 6 (49:51):
Here's the thing, though, the American people should know what
it is because when you I mean, a CNN poll
a month ago showed that seventy six percent of Black Americans,
eighty two percent of Latinos, and eighty five percent of
White Americans support nationwide voter ID which is one of
the main tenants of this legislation. So it's an important
(50:11):
Not only is it important legislation, it's what the American
people support, and it doesn't matter how you break down
the cross section of this country. Everybody sees it as
common sense. But when you talk about it within the
context of how much how much relevance it has in
people's lives that they know of, then that's a totally
different conversation because, like I said, I mean, people have
(50:33):
a lot on their minds and they are too busy
to be paying attention to what the rest of us
have unfortunately made a job of.
Speaker 3 (50:40):
So, Amanda, you will believe this.
Speaker 2 (50:42):
But we feel in Utah at the epicenter of this
very issue, Save America Act because we have the sponsor
of the bill and Senator Lead, but we also have
the fourth Republican Senator in Senator John Curtis, who says
he will not support a talking filibuster. So it's the
one senator who's sponsoring it and the one that's actually
preventing it procedurally from moving forward. We had Senator John
(51:04):
Curtis on the program earlier in our program, and our
listeners are tracking this. I mean, we are talking about
this at great length, especially after our interview with Senator
Curtis to explain what's motivating him in this decision. But
let me ask you this. I was going where you
just said, we're such a large percentage bipartisan. It's an
(51:25):
eighty twenty issue, it's an eighty five to fifteen issue.
It leads me to believe that America is tracking this,
but you're saying it's on the principle of showing ID
to vote. My big question is is there accountability. Let's
say that this fails, we don't get this Save America
Act pass, which is we've put high importance on. If
the American people don't understand what the Save America Act is,
(51:46):
will they re a consequence for failing to do right
by the American people and protecting our elections?
Speaker 3 (51:54):
I hope so.
Speaker 6 (51:55):
But you look at how neck and next someone like
John Cornyn is with Ken, which you know, I'm going
to pull the veil back a little and show that,
as a journalist not supposed to be having an opinion,
I have an opinion, and they are two very different
brands of Republicanism. And just to be diplomatic here and
(52:16):
not show my bias, you look at the polling, you
look at the support of President Trump. Ken Paxon is
the one who aligns with Donald Trump. So that would
lead one to believe that Ken Paxton's brand of Republicanism
is more favorable to Texans than John Cornyan, But the
two of them have been neck and neck in the polling.
So what it tells me is that the American people.
(52:38):
I don't think that it's that they don't know the issues.
I think that anyone living in Texas at this point
sees a very clear delineation between John Cornyn and Ken Paxon.
But maybe they're not showing up for the midterms, maybe
they're not answering the phones. I don't know what it is.
So back to your question, will there be a come up?
I certainly hope so. But then again, Thune, who has
(53:01):
been very critical of President Trump in the past. I
do not think was the best choice for majority leader
in the Senate, and yet he is. I think that
someone like a Rick Scott would have been better, or
a Tommy Turberville. I think that there should have been
someone else with more of a spine, coupled with someone
who is America first, and that's not what we have
in John Thune. I hope that there will be repercussions,
(53:25):
but I'm worried there won't be because look at all
the rhinos we still have in the Senate and well
and the House sometimes who opposed President Trump's agenda, even
though we came into office with a very strong mandate
with the popular vote, and yet they won't get anything done.
President Trump was able to extract Maduro from Venezuela in
under what seven hours? He was able to bomb the
(53:46):
Bejesus out of Iran, and yet we can't get to
Save America Act past.
Speaker 1 (53:50):
Come on, yeah, you know, Amanda, I love what you're
saying here, and I say to myself, with as important
a piece of legislation this is, and how this could
impact America, almost every American depending on impact on future
elections and the like, when you see these numbers, I
almost think it's like a sad commentary on America today.
(54:10):
Am I wrong in that event?
Speaker 6 (54:13):
No, I don't think you're wrong. I think that, you know,
On one hand, it's great because the American people clearly
see common sense and they see that having to show
an ID to vote just makes sense. If you have
to show an ID to get on a plane to
go into Costco to buy cigarettes, whatever, then you should
have to do that to make a decision that affects
(54:35):
your fellow countrymen. At the same time, maybe people, you know,
is it a sad commentary on civics in this country?
Speaker 3 (54:44):
Maybe?
Speaker 6 (54:45):
Is it a sad commentary on the fact that the
American people are not as involved in politics as they
should be.
Speaker 14 (54:52):
Maybe.
Speaker 6 (54:53):
But at the same time, for people who aren't involved
in politics and don't pay attention to it, I got
admit I'm a little.
Speaker 1 (54:57):
Envious, ha ha ha life would life would be better?
Speaker 6 (55:05):
Yeah, a lot easier if I didn't.
Speaker 2 (55:07):
Have I just struggle with the entire premise, Amanda. I
struggle with the entire premise that just the news and
Amanda Head is not just leading. Uh, You're not the
thought leader informing this country and that the Rotten Greg
Show is in backing that up with commentary. I just
think everyone is watching and listening. I think we have
between the three of us, we've got this down.
Speaker 1 (55:26):
Yeah, well you know.
Speaker 6 (55:28):
And it could be and they should just let us
make all the decisions.
Speaker 1 (55:31):
There we go, There we go. I think it would
be a commentary that Greg, you and I and Amanda
we're just very sick people.
Speaker 3 (55:37):
I don't know. I think I think we see it.
Speaker 1 (55:39):
We're just I mean, we need help.
Speaker 2 (55:41):
If people don't listen to us, this is why they
can't have nice things that could be.
Speaker 1 (55:44):
Amanda, always a pleasure chatting with you. Enjoy the weekend, Amanda,
thanks for talking to us. Thank you both same, Thank you.
All right. That's Amanda Head, White House correspondent with Justin
News Solomon. She is great. They're both Great's fun. They're
calling it the spirit of Forgive. The charges have now
been dropped Greg against the five students involved in that
(56:04):
prank gone wrong that killed a very popular Georgia high
school teacher after a plea from the family. We had
that story what was a couple of days ago, yes,
where his wife and mother of his children came out
and said, please drop the charges. This is a she
didn't want these kids to go to prison.
Speaker 3 (56:21):
Well, it's a horrific accident.
Speaker 2 (56:22):
It was on purpose, and I just what those kids
have to live with making that mistake. If you don't
know the story. It was a teacher, was a chemistry teacher,
be a teacher. His wife's also a teacher at the
high school. There's some traditional pranks that are played around
prom time, and he was not. He was waiting for
them to maybe toilet papers home or to come to
(56:43):
his home, as is the tradition, not because he was angry,
but to catch him in ye just kind of like
to tease him. He ran out of been raining, He
ran out in the street, slipped and fell, and at
the twilight or that, without good lighting, one of the
students ran over him and their truck and killing killed him.
And so they were the students were charged, and you know,
(57:04):
nobody left the scene of the accident. Nobody was trying
to get away with anything. It was a horrific accident.
And his widowed, you know wife, she she asked the
prosecution to please not press charges on these young students,
that it wasn't on purpose, and so it looks like
that is now official that they.
Speaker 3 (57:22):
Are not going They have dropped.
Speaker 1 (57:24):
Dropped charges today. I'm looking if there are any comments.
But Greg, as you mentioned, he was just kind of
hiding in the in the bushes outside his home, wanting
to catch these kids because this prank and we're talking
about te peeing someone throw toilet paper all over the trees,
the bushes in the house. And he was there not
not to punish them, but to catch them and have.
Speaker 2 (57:43):
A little bit of fun with them, That's right, And
so what a what a nightmare, nightmare situation. And I
think she I think the you know that that young
you know wife and mom and and teacher, they for
her to not want to see those children suffer more
or all of them to suffer more than they already had.
I think that's some grace you're seeing there happen, And
(58:05):
we need some we need stories like that.
Speaker 3 (58:07):
A crazy world we live in.
Speaker 1 (58:08):
And what was so fascinating about this story all these kids,
I think there are four of them involved in this prank.
When they realized what had happened, they didn't take off, No,
they stayed there. They did whatever they could. He got
run over is what really happened. He slipped on the
wet pavement and somehow got run over. Not sure exactly
what happened, but you know, the kids stayed there. They
(58:30):
didn't run, they didn't scram they stayed there and helped out.
And you know, here you had the police having to
charge them, you know, but then the wife coming out
asking them the charges to be dropped, and the judge
looked at the case today and said, we're going to
drop the charges. Yeah, in a real I think, in
a real spirit of forgiveness, yep.
Speaker 2 (58:49):
And I don't know that that would have happened absent
the widowed wife and mother.
Speaker 1 (58:56):
I wonder what would have happened if she would have remembered.
Speaker 2 (58:58):
I don't think I think they would have continued ford
because I think it's a I think the manslaughter is
when you recklessly kill someone. I think it fits the
description of the crime. And I think that they would
have they would have proceeded absent her intervention.
Speaker 1 (59:13):
Yeah. Well, his wife said following this, Greg that he
has committed his life to investing in the lives of
young people to help them succeed, and he wouldn't have
wanted this to happen, and she said, we're going to
follow his wishes, and I'm so glad to hear that
the charges are being dropped.
Speaker 2 (59:29):
And those kids their their journey's not done. I mean,
that's something to live with, that you have to live with.
It's just a really tough situation.
Speaker 1 (59:37):
Yeah, it is all right, mare coming up the Rod
and Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one
oh five nine k n RS. Well, we've been talking
a lot today, of course about the Save America Act
and the impact is having. The great folks at the
Federation for American Immigration Reform otherwise known as FAIR have
now done an investigation into election integrity in this country
(59:59):
and basically what they have found is anti border states
are harming election integrity. Joining us on our news to
talk about that is Mateo fer Oral. He is with
the organization, he's done the investigative work. Mateo, thanks for
joining us tonight. Tell us about the investigation and what
you've found out about voter integrity.
Speaker 5 (01:00:21):
Yeah, absolutely, thank you for having me on the program,
and that's absolutely right. Our recent investigative report titled Manufacturing
the Vote takes a close look at how states influenced
by an anti borders agenda have implemented a variety of
policies that you know, are justified on the basis of
(01:00:45):
administrative convenience, but what in reality they do is undermine
election integrity. And that's especially the case in eight jurisdictions
that we took a close look at that have what
we call a dangerous tripe fact of policies. That is
automatic voter registration, drivers licenses for illegal aliens, and universal
(01:01:07):
mail in voting. So we took a close look at
you know how those states basically create a pipeline for
non citizens to be able to get on the voter
roll and to actually cast ballots. And you know what
the harm is to our free and fire elections in
the United States.
Speaker 2 (01:01:25):
You know, we're a conservative state of Utah, but of
the checklist you just shared, we do have a driver's
privileged card for undocumented residents. We do do unsolicited mass
mailing of ballots. We have there's a number of things
that you've mentioned that we struggle with here. So we
just finished a general session, Mattel, and we have county
clerks that say that and you mentioned it about convenience
(01:01:47):
or how they're supposed to do it. Every argument being
made about election integrity, about the chain of custody of
ballots and how they receive them. They say that there
is no fraud. Fraud does not exist. It's it's decimal dust.
But your report shows numbers that are unlike any numbers
that are at a Utah County clerk would argue exist
in any way, shape or form maybe share with us.
(01:02:09):
Were you able to get that information openly from those
states or did you have to do some digging to
see people ineligible to vote in the thousands per state
as you've uncovered.
Speaker 5 (01:02:23):
Yeah, so you're absolutely right that, you know, I believe
those criticisms that non citizens being able to register and
vote are rare. That's been completely debunked. I mean, it's
been widely reported that several states have found thousands of
non citizens registered to vote.
Speaker 16 (01:02:45):
For example, Oregon.
Speaker 5 (01:02:47):
Admitted that they had at least seventeen hundred individuals. Nevada
had six thousand, with at least four thousand having evidence
that they actually cast balance in their elections. It is
not true that these problems are rare, But you know,
even if they were rare, you know, any single nonsensant
(01:03:12):
voting cancels out the voice of an American who cats
a ballot on election day, and that's serious. Not only
is it unfair to US citizens, it's actually illegal under
federal law. So it's a problem that needs to be
addressed that states need to address on their own turf.
That's their constitutional duty to do so under the election's
(01:03:33):
clause of the Constitution. And if they fail to do so,
then there needs to be both federal action to correct
these problems.
Speaker 1 (01:03:41):
Mateo. Your organization Fair Today relates to report showing that
illegal migrant population is almost at nineteen million people in
this country as of today. I mean, we've got to
be kidding ourselves if some of those illegals in this country,
one or two or even a million of those nineteen
million aren't voting in our elections. I mean, let's be realistic.
(01:04:01):
Something's going on here, isn't.
Speaker 5 (01:04:05):
Absolutely you're absolutely right about that. I mean, the numbers
are just staggering. And then when you look at that
through the lens of these states that have these lax policies,
you know, then then the problem multiplies really because you know,
you've got states that are issuing non real ID compliant
(01:04:25):
licenses and ID cards that's going into the same you know,
pipeline at state DMVs that are processing you know, real
ID applications for people that are actually you know, US
citizens and can provide documentary proof. And then the reality
is there's no real safeguards. And to kind of get
(01:04:47):
back to your earlier question, you know, we we specifically
asked a lot of these states, hey, okay, you know
you have these policies, but you know what safeguards do
you have in place to make sure that you're not
violating federal while like the National Voter Registration Act and
keeping your voter rolls clean. Unfortunately, these states, instead of
providing answers and providing quality data, they just engaged in
(01:05:11):
massive stonewalling. I mean, I'll give you a just an
add a crazy example. The Colorado Secretary of State came
back in response to our public records requests and said
that it was going to take them one hundred and
eighty thousand man hours to process our request and that
it would cost fare six point two million dollars to
(01:05:32):
compel the disclosure of these documents. So that's just one example.
But you know other states you know, claimed exemptions, you know,
delayed and delayed to the point that we actually had
the file stuit against the District of Columbia DMV and
that litigation is ongoing. So yeah, you know, unfortunately this stonewalling.
What it does is it shook Pats a big question mark.
(01:05:57):
You know, if you did have safeguards in place, then
why not you know, disclose that to the American public.
Speaker 2 (01:06:02):
You know what you're saying sounds familiar. Sadly, in our state,
we had a bill that a great representative was running
that would just require them, upon receiving a ballot, to
be able to see the photo ID and be able
to scan it like you would have a borer club
that you'd walk in to scan the idea and if
the name and an address matches the ballot, you accept
it and that chain of custody becomes strong. They put
a fiscal note on that bill of ten million or
(01:06:24):
some number that what they knew would be high enough
that it would make it budget wise very difficult to pass.
Speaker 3 (01:06:31):
So what do we do?
Speaker 2 (01:06:33):
You're describing things we see and we confront an our
state in terms of election integrity, chane of custody, transparency,
Any any ideas watching this roll out in other states,
what our listeners should or could do to kind of
overcome this. It's not okay to just have a system
the way we do where we don't have these check
these safeguards in place. So looking for some guidance from you,
(01:06:55):
what should a state like Utah do in this regard.
Speaker 5 (01:07:00):
Absolutely so Prision Trump last their pasts and executive order
Executive Order fourteen two four eight, which expanded the utility
and access to the SAFE program, which is a database
program that run through the Department of Homeland Security and
made it freely accessible to states to use to cross
(01:07:21):
check their voter roles against federal immigration and citizenship data.
And several states have already been actively participating with the
federal government to use the SAVE program and have found,
you know, mass deficiencies and errors of non citizens being
on the voter rules. Texas, for example, found almost three
(01:07:44):
thousand non citizens flagged, Alabama had several hundred, Ohio had
nearly six hundred non citizens registered. So states like Utah
have these tools available to them to immediately conduct audit
can clean up their voter roles so that their compliance
with the nbr A. And you know, we we in
(01:08:06):
our report we also encourage other state officials to you know,
launch investigations into their state agencies like the d MBS,
making sure that they have state guards in place. And
then of course there's always the legislative fixed state. You know,
at the state legislature level, states can enact laws to
(01:08:27):
require proof of citizenships or you know, similar safeguards to
ensure that elections are being conducted properly and in accordance
to federal le.
Speaker 1 (01:08:38):
Mateo Forrero, he is a director of investigations with the
Federation for American Immigration Reform talking about, you know, voter
fraud again, great, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:08:47):
And I think that Executive Order fourteen four two eight
that's safe act where you can your your state can
cross uh just across what do you call it, analyze
your our voter roles with their crossed to them. I
think if we're not doing that that that was a
good pro tip to hear about that.
Speaker 1 (01:09:06):
It was we need to talk to talk to Abby
someday she is a country or her country, her home country.
The UK has some of the weirdest contests. Are you
ready for this one? To have and to hold? Took
a new meeting two dozen couples who put their relationship
to the test on a grassy hill in New England,
wives and girlfriends clung onto their deer for their dear
(01:09:29):
life as their partners carried them up and down a hillside.
Speaker 2 (01:09:33):
Oh well, I okay, okay, I can do that with
Queen Bee could nicely?
Speaker 3 (01:09:39):
I think I could hauler up the hill.
Speaker 1 (01:09:40):
And the finished payer who won the contest? Right, you
know what? They get a barrel of ale.
Speaker 3 (01:09:46):
But how did you bring Abby into this?
Speaker 6 (01:09:48):
Was?
Speaker 1 (01:09:48):
She's from the UK? This is a this is a
UK event?
Speaker 3 (01:09:51):
Oh I thought I thought you said this was here
in the UK.
Speaker 1 (01:09:55):
It's one of one of those weird hey.
Speaker 2 (01:09:58):
By the way, they sean da please share that ration.
I announced a ground stop by the FAA of four
airports in the DC area.
Speaker 3 (01:10:06):
That's the Reagan Airport, the.
Speaker 2 (01:10:07):
Washington Dulles Baltimore Washington International, and the Richmond International Airport.
All four of those those airports have been halted because
of strange smells. Maybe this would motivate the Democrats that
might maybe be serious about opening up Department of Homeland
Security and making sure that those things aren't threats.
Speaker 1 (01:10:29):
All right, that does it for us? Tonight? Head up,
shoulders back, May God bless you and your family. Everybody
have a great weekend. You'd be safe, mister Hughes, Hall
and Dave. Thanks for setting us up today. Been fun here.
Have a good weekend everybody. We'll be back on Monday.
The Rod & Greg Show News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Kingdom of Fraud
It’s the unlikeliest of criminal partnerships: a devout polygamist from an insular Utah sect joining forces with a shadowy Armenian tycoon from LA. The result - a billion dollar fraud conspiracy. In Kingdom of Fraud, investigative reporter Michele McPhee traces the origins of the extraordinary alliance between Jacob Kingston and Levon Termendzhyan. Together, the two men trigger the largest tax investigation in American history and weave around themselves a web of dirty cops, influential political relationships and transnational money laundering. All this is set against the backdrop of Jacob Kingston’s clan – The Order. A powerful and secretive polygamist organization in Salt Lake City. To whom Jacob is desperate to prove his worth. Kingdom of Fraud is produced by Novel for iHeart Podcasts. For more from Novel, visit https://novel.audio/. You can listen to new episodes of Kingdom of Fraud completely ad-free and 1 week early with an iHeart True Crime+ subscription, available exclusively on Apple Podcasts. Open your Apple Podcasts app, search for “iHeart True Crime+, and subscribe today!