Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael, don't ever feed the family taco bill on a
road trip. You know why happy day? Why? Well, we
were running out of wind, so I mean, that's right,
certainly help, it would help exactly.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
You just need to somehow be able to funnel all
of that methane into the tank to run run your
car on a Yeah, nothing but methane creates climate change,
which you just makes.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
It's all you were all just do. It's the good
wind though. There's a good wind and bad wind.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
So this is Oh so next time I follow on
the elevator, I'll just and somebody gets hold to say,
don't worry about it. It's a good wind. Right there
you go, it's a good wind.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Have you ever thought.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
About I'm sorry, this is the way my brain works.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Uh huh. Have you ever thought about why it is?
Or why where in our b.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Does body these bodies that we have have we decided
that something smell bad and some things don't. Does something
smell good and something smell bad? Who makes that decision?
Who decided for me that you know smelling a In fact,
somebody out here in the in the in that pit
last week had some did you see it? They had
(01:21):
a bouquet of yellow roses. I stopped and smelled the roses.
They smelled really nice. Well, it's just like with foods,
because there are some people that seem to think sour
cream is terrible, while some people seem to think soa
cream I'm talking about smells not taste.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Bucko, same thing.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Okay, well then who decided who decided that? Well, so
it doesn't. Does everybody think that farts smell bad bad?
Speaker 1 (01:47):
There might be a few out there that long for
the whiff huh. And of course everybody knows they smell
their own farts. True, everybody does it, but nobody talks
about it. What he who smelt it and dealt it?
That's right, That's exactly right.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Don't things does your mind never just wonder? Don't you
just think about things?
Speaker 1 (02:16):
I mean, it's never happened.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
No, I just said, there's just always like going back
to like who is the very first person that decided that?
Oh you know what on these morning programs we ought
to give we have to give a national weather report,
which is a totally meaningless report. I mean, if if
(02:40):
you're if you're a business traveler and you're you're you
know you've checked into the into the Super eight because
you're a high class business traveler. So you've checked into
the Super eight and you've got to you know, you've
got to go meet a client, and you're wondering what
the weather is, so you turn into the Today Show
so that Al Roker can tell you that generally speak
(03:00):
somewhere within a five thousand mile radius of where you're sitting,
the tempers will be maybe in the seventies, and there
might be a there might be a chance range. Is
that what you Is that what you want to hear
or do you want to hear the local guy tell
you where you are right now? Here's what it's going
to do. I just and and then that becomes a thing.
(03:22):
How do things become things? All right, let's go back
to the assassination culture that we live in.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
Real quickly. Just to give you the.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
Top line, thirty one percent of respondents think that there
is somewhat justification to murder Elng Musk, and thirty eight
percent believe there's at least somewhat justification to murder Donald Trump.
That is, considering those numbers and those and those on
(03:57):
the left are a higher percentage of those overall, but
still when you just take overall, we're still talking about
on average, about a third of respondents to this survey.
And by the way, this is a legitimate organization. Their
methodology is good, so it's not like they just went
out and picked you know, gang bangers and said or
(04:20):
you know, Trump haiters. They know these are just ordinary people,
except they're not ordinary if they think this. And then
you take out from all respondents who average about a
third saying that it's justified to murder one of those two,
(04:41):
and then you take those that are left of center,
and the numbers start equally about on average fifty. Who
are those people? Well, let's think about that for a moment.
Do you remember Saturday we had the the hands off protests,
(05:01):
And again, to give you a local example, I don't know.
I don't know what happened in your in your town,
but in our town, every channel, and I don't know,
I shouldn't say every channel, but the channels I looked at, UH,
Fox thirty one, nine and the CBS affiliate I think.
(05:26):
I don't think I looked at channel seven, but they
all had coverage of it, as did n PR. Colorado
Public Radio covered it. I'm sure I don't.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Know because I don't listen, so I don't.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
Really know, but I assume our newsroom on either Saturday
or sometime, you know, yesterday covered it. I just wasn't
paying the attention. And of course they talked about, you know,
they had they somebody had an aerial view from a
drone or a helicopter or something, and there were thousands,
they said at the Colorado State Capitol, all protesting, Hands off,
(06:00):
Who are those people?
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Who are they?
Speaker 2 (06:06):
As soon as those reports began appearing, the usual right
wing canards began to pop up as well, doctored photos,
overstated crowds, and of course the theory about professionally paid protesters.
And then if you started going through X there were
(06:28):
all of the uh there. There was tweet after tweet
that showed craiglist ads different organizations in Geo's offering people
up to two hundred dollars for anybody who'd be willing
to stand around. Hey, we'll provide you with a really
nice placard, a really really nice protest signed. Go stand around.
We'll pay you two hundred dollars and just stand around
(06:50):
for a couple of hours. Now, I don't think that
any of us can really argue that there is a
professional protest infrastructure in this country. And I believe that
if you follow the money, trail, follow the money, you'll
trace that funding back to all kinds of NGOs that
(07:11):
right now, the two guys that everybody that not everybody,
but a majority of those of the left want to
murder that they're busy trying to defund and shut those down.
The sinister hand of the Soros family. Forget George, you know,
we kind of need to forget about George Soros. Started
thinking about Alex Soros. They're probably dipping in there somewhere,
(07:34):
you know, that somewhere that it might be two or
three hands removed, but somewhere they're dipping into it, and
they're funding it too. But I'm beginning to think that
while indeed, don't get me wrong, I think that there
are paid protesters, but I'm also beginning to think that
it might be ludicrous to it to think that that
(07:58):
all of these people are spending all of that money
and they're all paid protesters because they don't need to.
And I think this study shows us this. I think
this study about the number of people willing or think
it's justified to murder Musk or Trump. Do you think
(08:19):
those same people now, if you offer them money, of
course they're gonna take it. But if you offered no
money but said, hey, we're going to go protest Musk
and Trump and it's going to be at noon on
Saturday on the grounds of the state Capitol, they'll show up.
It's hard to believe, but sit down. I think there
(08:43):
are a lot of Americans don't really like Donald Trump.
I think there are a lot of Americans that don't
really like Elon Musk, and they're absolutely desperate to find
any way to voice that dislike, including up to including murder.
Answering a survey that says, yeah, I think it's justified
to murder of those two. So I think that for
(09:04):
those of us on the right to keep saying that
this is not normal, I'm beginning to wonder is it
not normal?
Speaker 1 (09:13):
Now?
Speaker 2 (09:13):
I don't think it's Let's let's be very careful about
our language here. I don't think it's wrong. I think
it's immoral, but normal in the.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
Sense of.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Uh often occurring, seems to be prevalent, seems to be
accepted by many people. That's what I mean by normal.
So over the weekend, millions of people all over the
country made this good trouble as these foot soldiers in
(09:49):
this so called I guess the pseudo revolutions they've got
going on now that I don't think the protests are
effective at all. I don't think they're at all. I
don't think they mean much of anything because they don't
and I don't think they represent the wealth of the
majority of Americans, which I don't think that's true at all.
(10:11):
But if you just again are glued to the television
or glued to the top of the hour news on
this program, and if you look at for example, if
you're on X now, I know that I try to
keep the people that I don't want to hear from
(10:34):
off my timeline, so I put them on lists so
I have to go look at them, as opposed to
the algorithm just feeding me that the people that I follow,
the people that I follow just get fed to me.
But the people that I think are the craziest, I
put over here on a list so I can go
look at them when I feel like looking at the crazies.
(11:01):
It's not normal to post on X or Facebook or
Instagram that it's not normal what they're doing because I'm
beginning to think that it is normal again, not right,
not moral, but just normal. So it's certainly become it's
become accepted. I'm gleaning. I'm gleaning from my demographics, which
(11:30):
I was just going to say. I can go into
my account and I can look at the demographic demographic
information of all of you, not you individually, but generically
of people that follow me on X. Now I'm beginning
to glean from but not I shouldn't say my social
media feed, but from my social media lists, that vast
(11:54):
majority of people who were clogging, you know, downtown Denver
or any other place across the country. And you look
at the photos. They're over the age of forty, they're older,
they're white, they're colleage educated. And it's as though, speaking
of Colorado Public Radio, it's as though in PR had
(12:17):
somehow manifested itself into human form, and it was in
PR that showed up on these protests. In fact, I
would guess that it's probably in PR listeners that are
on this survey. They're like, yeah, it's justified to go
kill these people. And I think they're probably predominantly white,
(12:41):
middle class, upper middle class college educated over the age
of forty.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
That's kind of scary, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
It's also kind of hopeful because it means that it's
probably not those under the age of forty, that those
under the age of forty or maybe still kind of
wondering around trying to figure out they're trying to get
their moorings, they're trying to get their sea legs, they're
trying to figure out exactly what do I believe.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
It not believe.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
So there's at least still some hope for them. But
for those that are over forty, I'm beginning you want
if there's any hope for you at all. It's kind
of like, you know, speaking of NPR, So they get
these people that show up, get you know, a pre
printed sign. They may or may not get paid, but
you know what that pre printed sign is like. It's
(13:29):
like when they It's like when the NPR does their
or public television does their campaigns, and if you donate
so much money, you get a free tote bag, or
you get a CD, or you get you know whatever
you get. Uh So, now, hey, that same crowd show
up and because they like free stuff, will give you
a free placard show up for the free placard. It
(13:51):
doesn't make any difference what the protest is. It doesn't
make any difference what you believe. Show up and get
a pre placard. Hey, honey, what do you do? What
are you gonna do this weekend? As they said around
sipping their you know, their lattes or whatever. Well, let's
go downtown. We've got placards. It's nice weather. Let's go
out and protest. What is the protest?
Speaker 1 (14:07):
Well, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
Let's get outside and go do it. Okay, Oh my gosh.
And that's the Democrat Party. Those same people that are
older involved in the step in the stock market, they're
they're scared to death. They're gonna lose their nest eggs
because they don't understand the long term ramifications of the
stock market and the current economic and political landscape, and
(14:31):
what Trump's trying to do is simply beyond their imagination. Meanwhile,
the cabal is constantly cons that they constantly consume has
convinced them that the Third Reich is imminent. As I
was driving in this morning, somebody on Fox News said
they had some you know, sound bite from somebody talking
(14:51):
about how Trump and you know, all the Nazis were
out again, and somebody finally just said. One of the
hosts says, some of the fact, can we can we
just stop with with the Nazi references?
Speaker 1 (15:04):
It really is trite and overused.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
But I think that those people that are showing up,
those white liberal educated morons, do believe that there's some
new forthright.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
This eminent.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
Funny thing is they'll be the first up against the wall,
they'll be the first to be stuck into the ovens.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
And they're all deluded that everybody's gonna get deported.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
They somehow believe that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement is showing
up on the playgrounds. They're showing up in the churches,
they're showing up and just you know, you're at a
food bank and they're showing up with food banks, and
if your skin is brown, they're just rounding you up,
throwing you into that proverbial paddy wagging paddy waggon and
hauling you off to Al Passo so they can ship
(15:48):
you off to Al Salvador. I think that's really it's
they're delusional, they're crazy. Maybe the Tesla takedowns carry them
a certain free shawn of danger where a tossed Molotov
cocktail is at least a possibility. It's within the realm
(16:12):
of their believing that that's perfectly acceptable to do. So
the PBS telethon and the giveaways and the hands off rallies,
I think are kind of beginning to appear they're all
the same people. Someone else equally condescendingly said that people
(16:33):
of color aren't at the protests because they're out there
busy working two or three jobs, or maybe they just
had something better to do on a Saturday afternoon, which
reinforces my belief that this is the NPR crowd that's
showing up, white, liberal educated, you know, boomers and millennials
(16:54):
that have nothing else to do, or they don't care.
They're just coast blame and it's just it's it's a
it's a day. It's really weird, except it's also really
dangerous when you're justifying murder.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
All to get a tote.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Bag, Hey, murder Elon Musker, Donald Trump and get a
free CD and we'll throw on a tote bag too.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
Michael, you recently just used the word cannard, which is
a good word. We'll say cannard is the word of
the day, you knew what canard means In French, it
means the duck. I did not know that duck.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Let's let's see what the canard an unfounded rumor or
story number one it's a now uh second definition, a
small wing like projection attached to an aircraft forward of
the main wing, to provide extra stability or controls, sometimes
(18:02):
replacing the tail. Well, let's see origin mid nineteenth century
from French literally duck, also hoax from old French kiner
to quack m How it became, how became the modern
(18:24):
usage of a unfounded rumor or story. Hmm, now I see,
Now I gotta go figure that out. Uh. Let's see,
social security is in the news, and uh, Chuck Grassley
has something to say about that. But uh, Congressman Rocanna,
(18:47):
I've got a crap from Rocanna has been all over
the cable news channels bitching and moaning about social security.
We're gonna cut social security. We're gonna we're gonna kill grandma.
They're not gonna get their checks. We're gonna cut back
on their benefits.
Speaker 1 (18:59):
Those just doing it all. Elon Musk wants to get
rid of it.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Saponzi scheme YadA, YadA, YadA, YadA, YadA.
Speaker 3 (19:04):
Fraud, waste, and abuse is probably the biggest bipartisan a
thing that we have that it's not specific to what
my policies are, what my politics are.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
If it's being.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
Levied by the federal government, it probably is inefficient because
there's no reason for it not to be.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
Well, there's certain things that are not inefficient.
Speaker 3 (19:29):
Medicare, social Security, large parts of many not Come on,
are you out of your mind?
Speaker 1 (19:36):
Medicare?
Speaker 3 (19:37):
And I'm not saying it's Medicare's fault necessarily, there are
are in Look around and look at the way Medicare
is gained out by the people that benefit from it
or Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
I find that short forty seconds hilarious. Here's a United
States congressman you think we know better that claims that
Medicare and Social Security? Are you efficient? You know, devoid
of fraud?
Speaker 1 (20:03):
Really? Have you have you paid it? Are you awake?
Have you paid any attention at all?
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Scissor Chuck Grassley Republic got a Viola is actually turning
the heat up on the Social Security Administration because he
now wants some answers and he wants action over verification failures.
That led to Now, remember ro Conna says that Social Security.
Forget Medicaid for Medicare for a moment, let's just focus
on Social Security. He says that it's efficient. Well, Chuck
(20:36):
Grassley wants to know, Hey, how did you fail to
do some verification that led to an estimated seven hundred
and eighteen million dollars in wrongful Supplemental Security Income payments
SSI payments. That's almost a billion dollars. Now that's a
(20:59):
lot of money, but that's just a fraction. These these
payments are just a fraction of the one point four
billion dollars in over payments that we have data for
from twenty twenty one, almost four years ago. Now that
might have been in fended off if you'd just taken
(21:20):
action against it. So Grassley's pretty well known for being
a watchdog. He might be an old farm but he's
been a good watch dog. And he's still coherent. He
gets around a lot better than some other people his age.
He's eighty some years old. Maybe he might be. He's
pretty damn old right now. Well, he's been watching the
(21:41):
Social Security Administration on its efficiency and its verification failures
for over twenty years. In fact, he's a senior member
and he's the former chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
He now chairs the sub Committee on Social Security, Pensions
and Family Policy. Now what's caused all of this, Well,
(22:04):
it's caused by the Social Security Administration's sluggish use of
the Access to Financial Institutions tool. That's a secure technology
that cross checks bank account balances to ensure that the
Supplemental Security Income recipients and the applicants actually qualify for benefits.
(22:31):
In other words, you've got to provide your bank account information,
which I find kind of interesting because I wonder how
many people get it, are unbanked, or maybe it's actually
a requirement that you actually have a bank account because
they only make direct deposits.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
So that must be the reason why.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
But go back to September of last year, the Inspector
General Pegg the seven hundred and eighteen million dollars figure
to more than one hundred and ninety eight thousand recipients
who were hiding their financial assets. And that's just based
on sample data that's not going through every single one.
(23:08):
So Grassley's argument is pretty simple that if you would
actually use the AFI, the Access to Financial institutions technology,
you could stop those over payments in their tracks, and
that would save the taxpayers millions, if not billions of dollars.
So why do Democrats oppose Doze? And why don't the
(23:31):
Democrats oppose Chuck Grassley? I did when I found the
sound bite over from CNBC of Rokana. I started and
I didn't dig very deep. I just did it really
quick search trying to find all the sound bites from
all the Democrats all bitching about how you know, uh
(23:52):
that Doze and Musk and Trump all wants, you know,
eliminate Social Security. We want to cut Social Security, we
want to do all that. No, well, here's grass pointing
out some real figures that just on a sample basis,
get three quarters of the way to a billion dollars
from people who are committing fraud by hiding their financial assets. Now,
(24:16):
the Inspector General has long pushed Social Security to expand
their access to financial institutions checks just beyond the initial claims,
and then they do these kind of sporadic random redeterminations,
which is really just a review of non medical eligibility.
(24:37):
But the problem with that is that can lag anywhere
from one to six years for most recipients. So go
back to twenty eighteen. In twenty eighteen, the IG not
the same one, but the same office revealed that Social
Security had not reassessed more than a million recipients in
(24:58):
more than ten years. And they estimated back in twenty
eighteen that one point four billion dollars in overpayments could
have been avoided in twenty twenty alone if they'd just
done regular AFI scans. Now the Social Security Administration keeps
(25:18):
dragging its feet. Why, well, because they started to study.
If you don't want to really find the answer to
a problem in the federal government, start a study, and
then you just well, we're not done with the study yet.
We're not done with the study yet. Oh, we need
(25:39):
some more money for the study. We got to go
back to Congress and get some more money to continue
the study because we can't finish the study without more money.
And until we finish the study, we can't tell you
what the study says. So we got to study, study, study, study, study,
This is what the federal government does. And yet when
Dosee comes in and says, look, we're finding all these
(26:01):
people that are at a certain age that you know,
we're going to determine whether actually getting checks or not.
But even if they're not getting checks, what kind of system?
How can you have confidence in a system that has
people over the age of one hundred and twenty five
years old in your system? I mean, just you don't
have to be you don't have to be Dick Tracy,
(26:23):
you don't have to be you know, Sherlock Holmes to
figure out that, oh, you know what, there might be
a little fraud going on here.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Now. To make it even worse, Grassley's.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
Frustration about the failure to use these AFI, these Access
to Financial Institutions verifications. They skip those for anyone reporting
less than four hundred dollars in liquid ascents, reports less
than four hundred dollars in liquid assets. So if you
(27:00):
know that you've got liquid assets, you've got a checking account,
savings account, a brokerage account, and you got four hundred
thousand dollars in there, but you're frauding the system. And
if you know that, they skip verifications if you report
less than four hundred dollars in liquid assets, that would
(27:21):
be the equivalent of the IRS saying, oh, if you
report income of less than four hundred dollars, we're not
going to audit you. Okay, well, guess how much money
I made last year. I made three hundred ninety nine dollars.
That's what Social Security is doing.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
The loophole.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
Just to prove my point, relies on self reported data.
So the IG decided, you know what, let's do our job.
Let's gohead, let's do a sample. So they did a
sample of one hundred and forty unverified cases, and they
found twenty seven recipients wrongly pocketed more than one hundred
(28:02):
and thirty thousand dollars. I could use an next one
hundred and thirty thousand dollars just for the fun of it,
with every misspent dollar robbing legitimate beneficiaries, the greatest Grassley's
bomb that he just lobbed into the Social Security Administration.
(28:26):
Do you think it's going to encourage them to ramp
up their AFI use and curb the hemorrhaging of taxpayer funds.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
Probably not.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
So he's sent some questions. He's asked the acting director
to list to provide answers to a list of specific
questions about these lost taxpayer dollars with regard to the
expansion of AFI usage between the initial benefit approval and
subsequent redeterminations. Who's conducting that study, what's the status of
(29:00):
the study? Describe the method and the scope used for
the study, including new informations you've gotten that wasn't known
from previous studies. Give me a timeline for completion of
the study, to include the description and dates of your
milestones and your metrics, and the steps that you're going
to take to ensure that the study is actually completed
on time. And then how will the study be used
(29:21):
to make changes to the AFI usage? And then provide
me a complete copy of the study. Oh, serious questions.
But it's been going on for god knows how long.
We know, we've got reports going back to at least
twenty eighteen for at least seven years, so it's probably
(29:42):
tripled that. It's probably been going on for decades. And
yet Democrats all they have is to bitch and moan
that somehow we want to kill social Security. No, there's
probably enough money to be found in fraud, waste and
abuse to actually fund it and keep it solving for
a while.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
Using the word of the day, canard in a sentence,
I can hardly make sense to what you're saying, sir,
I canard, care I just Dinard care.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
If you I you know, I love Grand Central Station.
It's a great place to people watch. And downstairs in
the in the lower level is a place that's been
there for decades called the Oyster Bar. It's a seafood
restaurant and it's and it's really good. It's uh and
(30:39):
typical New York jammed busy waiters and waitresses are a
little surly. Uh, you know, when you want to eat,
you know, hurry up, place your order. I don't have
all day up tables here. And it's just a it's
a hustle and bustle, but it's good food and it's
it's great New York City ambiance.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
And and I.
Speaker 2 (30:58):
Think Grand Central Station two has been kind of an
iconic symbol of American civilization, which makes what's going on
right now pretty despicable and I think probably emblematic of
the war from within this being waged against American civilization.
(31:19):
We are in a war anti Israel. Protests shut down
New York City's Grand Central Station yesterday. According to the
demonstration organizer, Within our Lifetime, Jews were actually worn to
avoid what is probably the crucial transit hub because of
masked and armed Islamic terror supporters.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
Now when I read that.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
In the Jerusalem it's in the Jerusalem Post, I thought
to myself, well, wait a minute, it's New York City.
I'm scared to death of even trying to attempt to
conceal carry, let alone open carry or do anything in
New York City, because I don't want to spend the
rest of my life.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
On Rockers Island. So how did.
Speaker 2 (32:07):
How did mask and armed Islamic terror supporters get into
the Grand Central Station.
Speaker 1 (32:13):
Again?
Speaker 2 (32:14):
According to Jerusalem Post, activists wearing caveas entered the American landmark,
waving Palestinian flags, banging drums and response to a global
strike called for by Palestinians over the ongoing warn Gaza.
According to the Within Our Lifetime leader Nordine Kaswani, according
to a social media post, Americans were locked out or
(32:39):
trapped inside during rush hour. So when you enter Grand
Central Station from uh from the street level, there's these
big glass doors, wooden frames, and you push open the door.
Half the time they're just they're laws. But someone took
(33:02):
the police barricades that sometimes they used to direct traffic,
or they got an area closed off and they used
handcuffs to prevent the deal. They handcuffed the rails between
the doors and then handcuffed the rails to the police barricades,
and so now people are trapped inside and trapped from
(33:24):
the outside. As for the police maintaining law and order,
now you can forget about that.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
They held public state.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Anyway, Mayor Adams, I thought you were going to fix
the city.
Speaker 1 (33:41):
Why do you allow that to go off.
Michael, don't ever feed the family taco bill on a
road trip. You know why happy day? Why? Well, we
were running out of wind, so I mean, that's right,
certainly help, it would help exactly.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
You just need to somehow be able to funnel all
of that methane into the tank to run run your
car on a Yeah, nothing but methane creates climate change,
which you just makes.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
It's all you were all just do. It's the good
wind though. There's a good wind and bad wind.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
So this is Oh so next time I follow on
the elevator, I'll just and somebody gets hold to say,
don't worry about it. It's a good wind. Right there
you go, it's a good wind.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
Have you ever thought.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
About I'm sorry, this is the way my brain works.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Uh huh. Have you ever thought about why it is?
Or why where in our b.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Does body these bodies that we have have we decided
that something smell bad and some things don't. Does something
smell good and something smell bad? Who makes that decision?
Who decided for me that you know smelling a In fact,
somebody out here in the in the in that pit
last week had some did you see it? They had
(01:21):
a bouquet of yellow roses. I stopped and smelled the roses.
They smelled really nice. Well, it's just like with foods,
because there are some people that seem to think sour
cream is terrible, while some people seem to think soa
cream I'm talking about smells not taste.
Speaker 1 (01:35):
Bucko, same thing.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Okay, well then who decided who decided that? Well, so
it doesn't. Does everybody think that farts smell bad bad?
Speaker 1 (01:47):
There might be a few out there that long for
the whiff huh. And of course everybody knows they smell
their own farts. True, everybody does it, but nobody talks
about it. What he who smelt it and dealt it?
That's right, That's exactly right.
Speaker 2 (02:11):
Don't things does your mind never just wonder? Don't you
just think about things?
Speaker 1 (02:16):
I mean, it's never happened.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
No, I just said, there's just always like going back
to like who is the very first person that decided that?
Oh you know what on these morning programs we ought
to give we have to give a national weather report,
which is a totally meaningless report. I mean, if if
(02:40):
you're if you're a business traveler and you're you're you
know you've checked into the into the Super eight because
you're a high class business traveler. So you've checked into
the Super eight and you've got to you know, you've
got to go meet a client, and you're wondering what
the weather is, so you turn into the Today Show
so that Al Roker can tell you that generally speak
(03:00):
somewhere within a five thousand mile radius of where you're sitting,
the tempers will be maybe in the seventies, and there
might be a there might be a chance range. Is
that what you Is that what you want to hear
or do you want to hear the local guy tell
you where you are right now? Here's what it's going
to do. I just and and then that becomes a thing.
(03:22):
How do things become things? All right, let's go back
to the assassination culture that we live in.
Speaker 1 (03:32):
Real quickly. Just to give you the.
Speaker 2 (03:34):
Top line, thirty one percent of respondents think that there
is somewhat justification to murder Elng Musk, and thirty eight
percent believe there's at least somewhat justification to murder Donald Trump.
That is, considering those numbers and those and those on
(03:57):
the left are a higher percentage of those overall, but
still when you just take overall, we're still talking about
on average, about a third of respondents to this survey.
And by the way, this is a legitimate organization. Their
methodology is good, so it's not like they just went
out and picked you know, gang bangers and said or
(04:20):
you know, Trump haiters. They know these are just ordinary people,
except they're not ordinary if they think this. And then
you take out from all respondents who average about a
third saying that it's justified to murder one of those two,
(04:41):
and then you take those that are left of center,
and the numbers start equally about on average fifty. Who
are those people? Well, let's think about that for a moment.
Do you remember Saturday we had the the hands off protests,
(05:01):
And again, to give you a local example, I don't know.
I don't know what happened in your in your town,
but in our town, every channel, and I don't know,
I shouldn't say every channel, but the channels I looked at, UH,
Fox thirty one, nine and the CBS affiliate I think.
(05:26):
I don't think I looked at channel seven, but they
all had coverage of it, as did n PR. Colorado
Public Radio covered it. I'm sure I don't.
Speaker 1 (05:36):
Know because I don't listen, so I don't.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
Really know, but I assume our newsroom on either Saturday
or sometime, you know, yesterday covered it. I just wasn't
paying the attention. And of course they talked about, you know,
they had they somebody had an aerial view from a
drone or a helicopter or something, and there were thousands,
they said at the Colorado State Capitol, all protesting, Hands off,
(06:00):
Who are those people?
Speaker 1 (06:02):
Who are they?
Speaker 2 (06:06):
As soon as those reports began appearing, the usual right
wing canards began to pop up as well, doctored photos,
overstated crowds, and of course the theory about professionally paid protesters.
And then if you started going through X there were
(06:28):
all of the uh there. There was tweet after tweet
that showed craiglist ads different organizations in Geo's offering people
up to two hundred dollars for anybody who'd be willing
to stand around. Hey, we'll provide you with a really
nice placard, a really really nice protest signed. Go stand around.
We'll pay you two hundred dollars and just stand around
(06:50):
for a couple of hours. Now, I don't think that
any of us can really argue that there is a
professional protest infrastructure in this country. And I believe that
if you follow the money, trail, follow the money, you'll
trace that funding back to all kinds of NGOs that
(07:11):
right now, the two guys that everybody that not everybody,
but a majority of those of the left want to
murder that they're busy trying to defund and shut those down.
The sinister hand of the Soros family. Forget George, you know,
we kind of need to forget about George Soros. Started
thinking about Alex Soros. They're probably dipping in there somewhere,
(07:34):
you know, that somewhere that it might be two or
three hands removed, but somewhere they're dipping into it, and
they're funding it too. But I'm beginning to think that
while indeed, don't get me wrong, I think that there
are paid protesters, but I'm also beginning to think that
it might be ludicrous to it to think that that
(07:58):
all of these people are spending all of that money
and they're all paid protesters because they don't need to.
And I think this study shows us this. I think
this study about the number of people willing or think
it's justified to murder Musk or Trump. Do you think
(08:19):
those same people now, if you offer them money, of
course they're gonna take it. But if you offered no
money but said, hey, we're going to go protest Musk
and Trump and it's going to be at noon on
Saturday on the grounds of the state Capitol, they'll show up.
It's hard to believe, but sit down. I think there
(08:43):
are a lot of Americans don't really like Donald Trump.
I think there are a lot of Americans that don't
really like Elon Musk, and they're absolutely desperate to find
any way to voice that dislike, including up to including murder.
Answering a survey that says, yeah, I think it's justified
to murder of those two. So I think that for
(09:04):
those of us on the right to keep saying that
this is not normal, I'm beginning to wonder is it
not normal?
Speaker 1 (09:13):
Now?
Speaker 2 (09:13):
I don't think it's Let's let's be very careful about
our language here. I don't think it's wrong. I think
it's immoral, but normal in the.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
Sense of.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Uh often occurring, seems to be prevalent, seems to be
accepted by many people. That's what I mean by normal.
So over the weekend, millions of people all over the
country made this good trouble as these foot soldiers in
(09:49):
this so called I guess the pseudo revolutions they've got
going on now that I don't think the protests are
effective at all. I don't think they're at all. I
don't think they mean much of anything because they don't
and I don't think they represent the wealth of the
majority of Americans, which I don't think that's true at all.
(10:11):
But if you just again are glued to the television
or glued to the top of the hour news on
this program, and if you look at for example, if
you're on X now, I know that I try to
keep the people that I don't want to hear from
(10:34):
off my timeline, so I put them on lists so
I have to go look at them, as opposed to
the algorithm just feeding me that the people that I follow,
the people that I follow just get fed to me.
But the people that I think are the craziest, I
put over here on a list so I can go
look at them when I feel like looking at the crazies.
(11:01):
It's not normal to post on X or Facebook or
Instagram that it's not normal what they're doing because I'm
beginning to think that it is normal again, not right,
not moral, but just normal. So it's certainly become it's
become accepted. I'm gleaning. I'm gleaning from my demographics, which
(11:30):
I was just going to say. I can go into
my account and I can look at the demographic demographic
information of all of you, not you individually, but generically
of people that follow me on X. Now I'm beginning
to glean from but not I shouldn't say my social
media feed, but from my social media lists, that vast
(11:54):
majority of people who were clogging, you know, downtown Denver
or any other place across the country. And you look
at the photos. They're over the age of forty, they're older,
they're white, they're colleage educated. And it's as though, speaking
of Colorado Public Radio, it's as though in PR had
(12:17):
somehow manifested itself into human form, and it was in
PR that showed up on these protests. In fact, I
would guess that it's probably in PR listeners that are
on this survey. They're like, yeah, it's justified to go
kill these people. And I think they're probably predominantly white,
(12:41):
middle class, upper middle class college educated over the age
of forty.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
That's kind of scary, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
It's also kind of hopeful because it means that it's
probably not those under the age of forty, that those
under the age of forty or maybe still kind of
wondering around trying to figure out they're trying to get
their moorings, they're trying to get their sea legs, they're
trying to figure out exactly what do I believe.
Speaker 1 (13:06):
It not believe.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
So there's at least still some hope for them. But
for those that are over forty, I'm beginning you want
if there's any hope for you at all. It's kind
of like, you know, speaking of NPR, So they get
these people that show up, get you know, a pre
printed sign. They may or may not get paid, but
you know what that pre printed sign is like. It's
(13:29):
like when they It's like when the NPR does their
or public television does their campaigns, and if you donate
so much money, you get a free tote bag, or
you get a CD, or you get you know whatever
you get. Uh So, now, hey, that same crowd show
up and because they like free stuff, will give you
a free placard show up for the free placard. It
(13:51):
doesn't make any difference what the protest is. It doesn't
make any difference what you believe. Show up and get
a pre placard. Hey, honey, what do you do? What
are you gonna do this weekend? As they said around
sipping their you know, their lattes or whatever. Well, let's
go downtown. We've got placards. It's nice weather. Let's go
out and protest. What is the protest?
Speaker 1 (14:07):
Well, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (14:08):
Let's get outside and go do it. Okay, Oh my gosh.
And that's the Democrat Party. Those same people that are
older involved in the step in the stock market, they're
they're scared to death. They're gonna lose their nest eggs
because they don't understand the long term ramifications of the
stock market and the current economic and political landscape, and
(14:31):
what Trump's trying to do is simply beyond their imagination. Meanwhile,
the cabal is constantly cons that they constantly consume has
convinced them that the Third Reich is imminent. As I
was driving in this morning, somebody on Fox News said
they had some you know, sound bite from somebody talking
(14:51):
about how Trump and you know, all the Nazis were
out again, and somebody finally just said. One of the
hosts says, some of the fact, can we can we
just stop with with the Nazi references?
Speaker 1 (15:04):
It really is trite and overused.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
But I think that those people that are showing up,
those white liberal educated morons, do believe that there's some
new forthright.
Speaker 1 (15:15):
This eminent.
Speaker 2 (15:18):
Funny thing is they'll be the first up against the wall,
they'll be the first to be stuck into the ovens.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
And they're all deluded that everybody's gonna get deported.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
They somehow believe that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement is showing
up on the playgrounds. They're showing up in the churches,
they're showing up and just you know, you're at a
food bank and they're showing up with food banks, and
if your skin is brown, they're just rounding you up,
throwing you into that proverbial paddy wagging paddy waggon and
hauling you off to Al Passo so they can ship
(15:48):
you off to Al Salvador. I think that's really it's
they're delusional, they're crazy. Maybe the Tesla takedowns carry them
a certain free shawn of danger where a tossed Molotov
cocktail is at least a possibility. It's within the realm
(16:12):
of their believing that that's perfectly acceptable to do. So
the PBS telethon and the giveaways and the hands off rallies,
I think are kind of beginning to appear they're all
the same people. Someone else equally condescendingly said that people
(16:33):
of color aren't at the protests because they're out there
busy working two or three jobs, or maybe they just
had something better to do on a Saturday afternoon, which
reinforces my belief that this is the NPR crowd that's
showing up, white, liberal educated, you know, boomers and millennials
(16:54):
that have nothing else to do, or they don't care.
They're just coast blame and it's just it's it's a
it's a day. It's really weird, except it's also really
dangerous when you're justifying murder.
Speaker 1 (17:15):
All to get a tote.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Bag, Hey, murder Elon Musker, Donald Trump and get a
free CD and we'll throw on a tote bag too.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
Michael, you recently just used the word cannard, which is
a good word. We'll say cannard is the word of
the day, you knew what canard means In French, it
means the duck. I did not know that duck.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Let's let's see what the canard an unfounded rumor or
story number one it's a now uh second definition, a
small wing like projection attached to an aircraft forward of
the main wing, to provide extra stability or controls, sometimes
(18:02):
replacing the tail. Well, let's see origin mid nineteenth century
from French literally duck, also hoax from old French kiner
to quack m How it became, how became the modern
(18:24):
usage of a unfounded rumor or story. Hmm, now I see,
Now I gotta go figure that out. Uh. Let's see,
social security is in the news, and uh, Chuck Grassley
has something to say about that. But uh, Congressman Rocanna,
(18:47):
I've got a crap from Rocanna has been all over
the cable news channels bitching and moaning about social security.
We're gonna cut social security. We're gonna we're gonna kill grandma.
They're not gonna get their checks. We're gonna cut back
on their benefits.
Speaker 1 (18:59):
Those just doing it all. Elon Musk wants to get
rid of it.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Saponzi scheme YadA, YadA, YadA, YadA, YadA.
Speaker 3 (19:04):
Fraud, waste, and abuse is probably the biggest bipartisan a
thing that we have that it's not specific to what
my policies are, what my politics are.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
If it's being.
Speaker 3 (19:18):
Levied by the federal government, it probably is inefficient because
there's no reason for it not to be.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
Well, there's certain things that are not inefficient.
Speaker 3 (19:29):
Medicare, social Security, large parts of many not Come on,
are you out of your mind?
Speaker 1 (19:36):
Medicare?
Speaker 3 (19:37):
And I'm not saying it's Medicare's fault necessarily, there are
are in Look around and look at the way Medicare
is gained out by the people that benefit from it
or Medicaid.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
I find that short forty seconds hilarious. Here's a United
States congressman you think we know better that claims that
Medicare and Social Security? Are you efficient? You know, devoid
of fraud?
Speaker 1 (20:03):
Really? Have you have you paid it? Are you awake?
Have you paid any attention at all?
Speaker 2 (20:12):
Scissor Chuck Grassley Republic got a Viola is actually turning
the heat up on the Social Security Administration because he
now wants some answers and he wants action over verification failures.
That led to Now, remember ro Conna says that Social Security.
Forget Medicaid for Medicare for a moment, let's just focus
on Social Security. He says that it's efficient. Well, Chuck
(20:36):
Grassley wants to know, Hey, how did you fail to
do some verification that led to an estimated seven hundred
and eighteen million dollars in wrongful Supplemental Security Income payments
SSI payments. That's almost a billion dollars. Now that's a
(20:59):
lot of money, but that's just a fraction. These these
payments are just a fraction of the one point four
billion dollars in over payments that we have data for
from twenty twenty one, almost four years ago. Now that
might have been in fended off if you'd just taken
(21:20):
action against it. So Grassley's pretty well known for being
a watchdog. He might be an old farm but he's
been a good watch dog. And he's still coherent. He
gets around a lot better than some other people his age.
He's eighty some years old. Maybe he might be. He's
pretty damn old right now. Well, he's been watching the
(21:41):
Social Security Administration on its efficiency and its verification failures
for over twenty years. In fact, he's a senior member
and he's the former chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.
He now chairs the sub Committee on Social Security, Pensions
and Family Policy. Now what's caused all of this, Well,
(22:04):
it's caused by the Social Security Administration's sluggish use of
the Access to Financial Institutions tool. That's a secure technology
that cross checks bank account balances to ensure that the
Supplemental Security Income recipients and the applicants actually qualify for benefits.
(22:31):
In other words, you've got to provide your bank account information,
which I find kind of interesting because I wonder how
many people get it, are unbanked, or maybe it's actually
a requirement that you actually have a bank account because
they only make direct deposits.
Speaker 1 (22:44):
So that must be the reason why.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
But go back to September of last year, the Inspector
General Pegg the seven hundred and eighteen million dollars figure
to more than one hundred and ninety eight thousand recipients
who were hiding their financial assets. And that's just based
on sample data that's not going through every single one.
(23:08):
So Grassley's argument is pretty simple that if you would
actually use the AFI, the Access to Financial institutions technology,
you could stop those over payments in their tracks, and
that would save the taxpayers millions, if not billions of dollars.
So why do Democrats oppose Doze? And why don't the
(23:31):
Democrats oppose Chuck Grassley? I did when I found the
sound bite over from CNBC of Rokana. I started and
I didn't dig very deep. I just did it really
quick search trying to find all the sound bites from
all the Democrats all bitching about how you know, uh
(23:52):
that Doze and Musk and Trump all wants, you know,
eliminate Social Security. We want to cut Social Security, we
want to do all that. No, well, here's grass pointing
out some real figures that just on a sample basis,
get three quarters of the way to a billion dollars
from people who are committing fraud by hiding their financial assets. Now,
(24:16):
the Inspector General has long pushed Social Security to expand
their access to financial institutions checks just beyond the initial claims,
and then they do these kind of sporadic random redeterminations,
which is really just a review of non medical eligibility.
(24:37):
But the problem with that is that can lag anywhere
from one to six years for most recipients. So go
back to twenty eighteen. In twenty eighteen, the IG not
the same one, but the same office revealed that Social
Security had not reassessed more than a million recipients in
(24:58):
more than ten years. And they estimated back in twenty
eighteen that one point four billion dollars in overpayments could
have been avoided in twenty twenty alone if they'd just
done regular AFI scans. Now the Social Security Administration keeps
(25:18):
dragging its feet. Why, well, because they started to study.
If you don't want to really find the answer to
a problem in the federal government, start a study, and
then you just well, we're not done with the study yet.
We're not done with the study yet. Oh, we need
(25:39):
some more money for the study. We got to go
back to Congress and get some more money to continue
the study because we can't finish the study without more money.
And until we finish the study, we can't tell you
what the study says. So we got to study, study, study, study, study,
This is what the federal government does. And yet when
Dosee comes in and says, look, we're finding all these
(26:01):
people that are at a certain age that you know,
we're going to determine whether actually getting checks or not.
But even if they're not getting checks, what kind of system?
How can you have confidence in a system that has
people over the age of one hundred and twenty five
years old in your system? I mean, just you don't
have to be you don't have to be Dick Tracy,
(26:23):
you don't have to be you know, Sherlock Holmes to
figure out that, oh, you know what, there might be
a little fraud going on here.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Now. To make it even worse, Grassley's.
Speaker 2 (26:36):
Frustration about the failure to use these AFI, these Access
to Financial Institutions verifications. They skip those for anyone reporting
less than four hundred dollars in liquid ascents, reports less
than four hundred dollars in liquid assets. So if you
(27:00):
know that you've got liquid assets, you've got a checking account,
savings account, a brokerage account, and you got four hundred
thousand dollars in there, but you're frauding the system. And
if you know that, they skip verifications if you report
less than four hundred dollars in liquid assets, that would
(27:21):
be the equivalent of the IRS saying, oh, if you
report income of less than four hundred dollars, we're not
going to audit you. Okay, well, guess how much money
I made last year. I made three hundred ninety nine dollars.
That's what Social Security is doing.
Speaker 1 (27:38):
The loophole.
Speaker 2 (27:40):
Just to prove my point, relies on self reported data.
So the IG decided, you know what, let's do our job.
Let's gohead, let's do a sample. So they did a
sample of one hundred and forty unverified cases, and they
found twenty seven recipients wrongly pocketed more than one hundred
(28:02):
and thirty thousand dollars. I could use an next one
hundred and thirty thousand dollars just for the fun of it,
with every misspent dollar robbing legitimate beneficiaries, the greatest Grassley's
bomb that he just lobbed into the Social Security Administration.
(28:26):
Do you think it's going to encourage them to ramp
up their AFI use and curb the hemorrhaging of taxpayer funds.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
Probably not.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
So he's sent some questions. He's asked the acting director
to list to provide answers to a list of specific
questions about these lost taxpayer dollars with regard to the
expansion of AFI usage between the initial benefit approval and
subsequent redeterminations. Who's conducting that study, what's the status of
(29:00):
the study? Describe the method and the scope used for
the study, including new informations you've gotten that wasn't known
from previous studies. Give me a timeline for completion of
the study, to include the description and dates of your
milestones and your metrics, and the steps that you're going
to take to ensure that the study is actually completed
on time. And then how will the study be used
(29:21):
to make changes to the AFI usage? And then provide
me a complete copy of the study. Oh, serious questions.
But it's been going on for god knows how long.
We know, we've got reports going back to at least
twenty eighteen for at least seven years, so it's probably
(29:42):
tripled that. It's probably been going on for decades. And
yet Democrats all they have is to bitch and moan
that somehow we want to kill social Security. No, there's
probably enough money to be found in fraud, waste and
abuse to actually fund it and keep it solving for
a while.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
Using the word of the day, canard in a sentence,
I can hardly make sense to what you're saying, sir,
I canard, care I just Dinard care.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
If you I you know, I love Grand Central Station.
It's a great place to people watch. And downstairs in
the in the lower level is a place that's been
there for decades called the Oyster Bar. It's a seafood
restaurant and it's and it's really good. It's uh and
(30:39):
typical New York jammed busy waiters and waitresses are a
little surly. Uh, you know, when you want to eat,
you know, hurry up, place your order. I don't have
all day up tables here. And it's just a it's
a hustle and bustle, but it's good food and it's
it's great New York City ambiance.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
And and I.
Speaker 2 (30:58):
Think Grand Central Station two has been kind of an
iconic symbol of American civilization, which makes what's going on
right now pretty despicable and I think probably emblematic of
the war from within this being waged against American civilization.
(31:19):
We are in a war anti Israel. Protests shut down
New York City's Grand Central Station yesterday. According to the
demonstration organizer, Within our Lifetime, Jews were actually worn to
avoid what is probably the crucial transit hub because of
masked and armed Islamic terror supporters.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
Now when I read that.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
In the Jerusalem it's in the Jerusalem Post, I thought
to myself, well, wait a minute, it's New York City.
I'm scared to death of even trying to attempt to
conceal carry, let alone open carry or do anything in
New York City, because I don't want to spend the
rest of my life.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
On Rockers Island. So how did.
Speaker 2 (32:07):
How did mask and armed Islamic terror supporters get into
the Grand Central Station.
Speaker 1 (32:13):
Again?
Speaker 2 (32:14):
According to Jerusalem Post, activists wearing caveas entered the American landmark,
waving Palestinian flags, banging drums and response to a global
strike called for by Palestinians over the ongoing warn Gaza.
According to the Within Our Lifetime leader Nordine Kaswani, according
to a social media post, Americans were locked out or
(32:39):
trapped inside during rush hour. So when you enter Grand
Central Station from uh from the street level, there's these
big glass doors, wooden frames, and you push open the door.
Half the time they're just they're laws. But someone took
(33:02):
the police barricades that sometimes they used to direct traffic,
or they got an area closed off and they used
handcuffs to prevent the deal. They handcuffed the rails between
the doors and then handcuffed the rails to the police barricades,
and so now people are trapped inside and trapped from
(33:24):
the outside. As for the police maintaining law and order,
now you can forget about that.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
They held public state.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Anyway, Mayor Adams, I thought you were going to fix
the city.
Speaker 1 (33:41):
Why do you allow that to go off.
Popular Podcasts
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
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.
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.