11-12-25 Scott Sloan Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Don't want to be an American idiot.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
It's a Scott Flung show on seven hundred WLW. We're
going to jump right into this one. This it took
me and I think a lot of people by surprise.
So remember that new intoxicating Hemp law that the state
went through, and it was taking the THHC and condensing
it and putting it in things like well adult beverages,
and okay, that was good. And then the wine comes

(00:23):
in ninety day ban he shuts it down to protect
the children, and then it's back on again following a
court injunction. Then a finally new legislation comes down from
the Ohio General Assembly. It fixes the issue. And then
news broke literally just the other day of a day
or two ago, that it's now in jeopardy becoming illegal
because of Congress in Ohio's new intoxicating hemp laws and

(00:45):
jeopardy after the Senate block ran Paul's amendment. And you
heard some of that audio there and news helping makes
sense of it this morning. Is the architect of Ohio's
law in this and that would be State Senator Steve
Hoffman from Tip City.

Speaker 3 (00:56):
Welcome, good morning, Good morning. I hope you're doing well.

Speaker 2 (01:00):
I'd be doing better if we had an answer to this.
Were you caught off guard by this as well?

Speaker 3 (01:06):
Yeah, I mean we were, you know, the House after
the injunction and you know, the House acted on the
Lady six. We didn't agree on some things. So we
were preparing for conference committee and you know named the
chairman of the Conference Committee, and we're setting you know,
some times to get together and all of a sudden

(01:27):
this came down that caught us by surprise, and we
got to deal with it now.

Speaker 2 (01:33):
Yeah, and THHU, THC and fused beverages are the fastest
growing segment when it comes to adult drinks. I mean
the craft beer movement. I just saw the Business Curves
headline the other day about it's over for craft beer
and now it's all THC product. People go, adults going
to bars and buying this stuff. And then we had
Dwin's ban and that was in Jeffary. The court steps
in and fortunately you led legislation to fix this thing

(01:56):
to allow that to be sold and it seems to
be working pretty well and there's no hiccup there. And
now the United States government's getting often they want to
go back to the way it was before and completely
banning this stuff. And it's all behind Mitch McConnell, who
is leading the restrictions on this one. What why now,
you know?

Speaker 3 (02:15):
I think going back to twenty eighteen to the Farm
Bill that legalized HAMP and then with my bill in Ohio,
we followed very quickly on HAMP and we were all
looking at industrial hemp on what you could do with
it with clothing and straws in industrial use. We weren't
looking at this. We knew that it was a very

(02:35):
small part, but didn't know that it would take off
like this. And I think, you know, Mitch McConnell, who
you know, it's a big industry in Kentucky, was pushing
for it, and he realizes that there's some bad actors
and we should have done things differently in twenty eighteen.
I'm not going to say we shouldn't have outlawed it.
We should have put some regulations in to start with.

Speaker 4 (02:58):
We didn't.

Speaker 3 (02:59):
And now I think it's kind of going to the
extreme at this point.

Speaker 2 (03:05):
Yeah, because the hemp industry is saying that this basically
would eliminate ninety five percent of what is now almost
a thirty billion dollar industry and some three hundred thousand jobs.
And that twenty eight billion is just a tip of
the iceberg that's going to increase tenfold in the next
number of years because people are liking the thh in
fuse drinks more than just traditional alcohol with you know,
it has the same effect. And I'm not sure what's

(03:27):
driving Mitch McConnell on this one, because he's worried about
the children. But we're back to that argument again that
Governor DeWine used in order to put leverage on the
General Assembly, which I understood the politics of that. I
hate when politicians use it to protect the children. But
Mitch McConnell's doing that again. Is this headed the same way.
Eventually we'll come up with a compromise here and this
will not be as bad as we are guessing it

(03:48):
is right now.

Speaker 3 (03:49):
You know, I can't tell you for sure now. I mean,
in the state of Ohio, we looked at it. The
industry said, hey, look, we know that there's bad actors,
we know that bad stuff go on, but we're the
good guys people that were doing it.

Speaker 4 (04:03):
You know, keep it.

Speaker 3 (04:04):
Twenty one and over and things like that said, highly
regulate us, you know, and it's not very often an
industry comes to government says, we want more regulations on us.
And that was the path that we were going down
in Ohio, trying to get into some a good position,
and all of a sudden this came up. So I think,

(04:24):
if there's a path to good regulations that the industry
is asking for, it can still be a viable business.

Speaker 2 (04:33):
The legislation, would you know, Ohio's legs, the one you
propose is five milligrams TC beverage and barsarus five milligrams.
A new federal structure of KAMMA wants is point four
and so that would eliminate the entire sector before it
even launches. And at this point, you know, what do
you tell I don't know, manufacturers, what do you tell consumers?

Speaker 3 (04:54):
You're right? I mean it would devastate the industry. I mean,
so you know, if you have derive your THHD from hemp,
it would get rid of that.

Speaker 4 (05:04):
You know.

Speaker 3 (05:05):
Will the industry instead turn to legal marijuana processors and
get their THHD to infuse their beverages with THD for marijuana.
And that then makes a whole bunch of other regulations,
because now it's marijuana which legally, and this is we've

(05:25):
talked before, this is stupid. You can't take that across
state lines because it's an illegal scheduled one drug. But
it's okay that the Feds just turn a blind high
to it in every state. Right, So, I mean that's
the possibility for the industry.

Speaker 2 (05:40):
Should the President just get in and fix this? I
know he at times. I mean it's hard to tell
what Trump is thinking or what he's actually going to do,
because he's pretty good at talking out of both sides
of his mouth a lot of times where he stands
with this, couldn't he just say, hey, this is dumb,
knock it off.

Speaker 3 (05:57):
I guess through the FDA he could do something. You
know he's talked about, Yes, you know marijuana, you know,
moving it from scheduled one, and that would do a
lot not but for the marijuana industry.

Speaker 4 (06:13):
It would give us the ability to do.

Speaker 3 (06:15):
Research and different things like that. So you're right, it's
hard to tell what he's thinking then what direction he's
going to go in, but I think probably with the
FDA he could do something.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
You see, there's all these new businesses going in right
from distribution, and that would be you know, THHG shops
and things like that, and distributors, and of course the
beverage industry itself is blown up, and all of these
micro brewers are starting to put efforts into THC and
fuse drinks. Is that's what the public wants. They like it,
and they want more of it, and you give the
people what they want and you regulate it. And that's

(06:47):
how it works in America. Least it should anyway. But
at this point, because we're still relatively new at this
whole process, Steve Hoffman, why would any business invest in
the whole process of licensing and compliance and testing and
inventory worry when federal law could make ninety five percent
of the stuff illegal. It's just going to kill business,
isn't it.

Speaker 3 (07:07):
It seems that way, you know that my understanding. You know,
if the House and the Senate finally passed this that
you know, at the end of the day, though, which
looks like it it gives a one year ramp, maybe
it won't be illegal for one year. So you know, basically,
you need to sell whatever product you have so that

(07:27):
you can kind of catch your losses. But yeah, you're
not going to keep making more and more knowing that
at some point soon you're you're not going.

Speaker 2 (07:38):
To be able to Yeah, it seems like Mitch McConnell
and maybe other leadership in the GOP seem to talk
again both sides of your mouth is they want states
rights and should leave it up to the states, except
for something like this, Why not just say, hey, plenty
of states have an acted regulation Ohio included to regulate
this stuff. Why don't we just defer to them.

Speaker 3 (08:01):
You know, that's certainly a possibility. I mean, we've done that.
You know with marijuana. There's a you know a lot
of states with medical, there's there's many of them with recreational,
like Ohio, and there's still some like Utah that hey,
we just don't want.

Speaker 4 (08:17):
This at all.

Speaker 3 (08:17):
So yeah, you could leave it up to the state.
But if you you know, you look at the Rand
Paul Amendment the other the other night. You know, he
was trying to save the industry in Kentucky in particular,
that was voted down about seventy five twenty five. So
there's a large group in the US Senate. You know,

(08:40):
maybe maybe the US House doesn't concur or at least
has to say so in this and you know, there's
still some hope that it doesn't.

Speaker 2 (08:50):
He's Ohio Senator Steve Hoffman out of justice, Tip City.
It's it's we're back to this again. So we have
our new intoxicating HEMP law, and that's the beverages that
we enjoy edibles and cheers and smoke and stuff like that.
Ape but largely this is about the THHD and fused
drinks that are sweeping the state, if not the country
right now. There's a huge demand for these products and
there were legal to sell. Then it became briefly legal,

(09:12):
we had a ninety day moratorium, the court stepped in,
and finally the Legislature General suddenly their Steve's guidance fixed
this and so you can enjoy those beverages now in
salom and it's great for industry, it's great for consumers
and everyone, and we're keeping out of the hands of
kids as well it should be. But now the federal
government stepped in under the auspices of Mitch McConnell Kentucky,
who said that using the the wine argument, this is

(09:33):
hurting children because the Farm bill screwed this up, and
we're selling intoxicating products and it may undermine all the
stuff we've done in Ohio and at the same time,
you know, I think it was Senate Bill fifty six
we're talking about here that you implemented. So should you
delay implementing this stuff and should we just put this
on hold till the FED sorted out or we just
continue forward?

Speaker 3 (09:53):
Well, I think here in Ohio, knowing the governor, of
the President and the Speaker, they want something done about
the bad stuff. They wanted it done, you know, before
summer break. Now it's for Thanksgiving. So I think we're
going to more than likely act in the next few
weeks against the bad things that we know they're out

(10:16):
there in the gas stations and selling the kids. How
far we go I think is still to be determined.

Speaker 2 (10:23):
Yeah. Do you also think that this is maybe some
I don't know, some sort of power struggle here, because well,
the opposing forces here are both Kentucky senators. You've got
McConnell versus Paul, and we know their positions on this thing.
Is the rest of the country in Ohio just getting
caught up in this? Do you think there's something like
behind the scenes going on here or is it just
coincidental they're both from Kentucky.

Speaker 3 (10:44):
I think it's probably quincident all. I think it's also
part that Mitch mcconnald lamed up on his way out,
and you know, maybe this is, you know, one of
his legacy things he's trying to get fixed before he leaves.
I think there's a lot of stuff like that in there,
but probably coincidental that the two are from the same state.

Speaker 2 (11:07):
Yeah, I'll be honest with you. I mean, you know,
we question, and rightly so, the power of Biden's auto
pen and how many of these edicts, decisions, executive ours
and like he made were done without his knowledge. I
probably could say the same thing about Mitch McConnell. We've
seen people behind the scenes, aids and assistants that dictate policy.
We've seen this with Diane Feinstein and others. I would
think it works with Mitch McConnell's even know what the

(11:29):
hell this is at this point.

Speaker 3 (11:32):
Well, I'm certainly not in the position the past judgment
on that, but he's had a very very honorable career
in the state aid of Kentucky and what he's done
in the US Senate.

Speaker 2 (11:46):
So let's talk a little bit about the propersonality of
this too. Is you know, the wine was concerned about
child poisonings in the executive order, And I wonder how
much Mitch McConnell really believes in this. Did did the
federal approach and eliminating the industry does that actually?

Speaker 4 (12:03):
Does it?

Speaker 2 (12:03):
Does all this match the scale the ban? And does
it match the scale of the child safety problem? Because
I just I don't see that. Certainly there's a danger.
You're a physician, you tell me. You see overdoses and
kids present to emergency rooms, emergency departments, poison control centers
because they ingested an edible or maybe drank something they shouldn't.
We've seen that with alcohol and prescription drugs for that matter.

(12:24):
But is the remedy here worse than the illness?

Speaker 3 (12:26):
Well, that's always the question, right Scott. You know, what's
the balance, the balance of protecting people balance for people's liberties?
And now it appears that, you know to me, and
I thank you, the federal government is making it unbalanced
to those liberties that people should have, rather than than

(12:47):
going overboard on the safety.

Speaker 2 (12:50):
So yeah, and the whole industry hangs in the balance here,
it really does. And I guess we're just going to
continue on when they sort this thing out, and do
you have hope that. I'm really rooting for Ran Polock
quite honestly, because I think he made a great impassion
plea as a libertarian, which I thoroughly love. I know
why this stuff should be continuing on the path. It

(13:12):
is of legality and you know, regulate it like anything else. Absolutely,
it's an intoxicating product, can't fall in the wrong hands.
But to simply shut the whole sector down because of
the twenty eighteen Farm Bill and we're protecting children is
a mindless exercise. Do we have hope that this thing
is going to simply get squashed?

Speaker 3 (13:30):
I think the hope is the one year.

Speaker 4 (13:35):
That is given.

Speaker 3 (13:36):
To fix this in a different way, so the band
wouldn't happen for a year on a federal level. Maybe
they come back and you know, give the state's the
ability to do it. Maybe they legalized drinks, so I
think that was what the thought process.

Speaker 2 (13:56):
There was, or maybe looked like states like Ohio go well,
they seem to be doing it right. That is the
Petri dish of experimentation.

Speaker 4 (14:02):
Is it not?

Speaker 2 (14:02):
That we have fifty states, and of course in each state,
multiple counties and jurisdictions, and somebody eventually is going to
come up with a good idea that we can copy
and use as a national model. But the posturing here
is rather confusion, especial at the time when we just
had this protracted the longest government shutdown in history, and
now the news that's coming out as they're messing with
your THHD and few drinks, just when you need the most, Steve,

(14:24):
with the holidays coming up and the headache we have
with government shutdowns.

Speaker 3 (14:29):
You know, sometimes you just scratch your head, don't you really?

Speaker 2 (14:32):
Do You really do other stuff to worry about. All right,
I know you're optimistic about this thing, that the cooler
heads will prevail, someone will get the MCCONLLM go. This
is a bad idea. Just look at Ohio. Hopefully that
is going to happen because people enjoy this stuff. It's
a legal product, and people argue it's better for you
and feel better than drinking traditional alcohol. So you know,

(14:53):
I pick your poison, as it were. But this is
a silly, silly exercise in what government does it which
is the worst, and that is picking winners and losers.
All the best, Steve, thanks for joining.

Speaker 3 (15:04):
You take care, have a good day.

Speaker 2 (15:05):
You too, Take care State Center or Steve Huffman on
the Scotslan Show this morning on seven hundred W. They'vet
all worked up about this because it's just stupid.

Speaker 1 (15:12):
You know.

Speaker 2 (15:12):
I've tried the tht beverages. I like him better than
like an energy drink, for example, which, by the way,
I just saw a story of study about energy drinks
and long term heart issues and brain issues and stuff
like that. I don't know if it's true or not.
I've tried energy drinks before. I just don't like the
taste of them. I have to find one I really like.
But plenty of people enjoy energy drinks, you know, the
same thing should. Young kids are getting caffeine. They're going

(15:35):
on the Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts McDonald's. Kids enjoy coffee. When
you're a little kid, you always hated coffee, right you try,
How could you drink that? It's terrible? And then your
taste buds changes. You get already love coffee. Now, young people,
largely because it's loaded with sugar, will drink caffeinated drinks,
and a lot of them for that matter, too, and
that causes problems. Why aren't we cracking down on that stuff,
and we should. Is what I'm saying is you know

(15:57):
there are harmful effects, and no matter what you know,
too much sugar is going to be bad for you
as a result of that. And in this case, if
you're an adult and you want a legal beverage that
should be legal for that matter, you get the same
effect as alcohol. You're not picking winners and losers, and
you're of course you're parsing over whether or not it's
bad for kid. Well, it's all bad for kids. Everything
we put in our bodies, generally, outside of maybe water,

(16:18):
and if you live in Flint maybe not so much either.
Then water's bad for you. Right, You can actually die
from drinking too much water. So I don't know. If
it's poison, it's one thing. But if it's something that's intoxicating,
God knows. We need it today more than ever because
the nonsense the government continues to pull. I need more alcohol,
I need more intoxicating things, not less, as a grown

(16:39):
asked man. Scott's Sloan seven hundred WW. Here we go,
and this midweek morning, Scott's Sloan here seven hundred WLW
starting to warm back up a little bit day to
winter there I didn't do for you, probably not so good.
But no feels good outside this morning. And we're halfway
through at this point, still trying to figure out what's

(17:02):
going on with the drop of the Epstein files. And
now we're gonna lease some and it's got Trump's name
in it, but there's some weird coded messages, and I
just I don't know what to make of this whole thing.
I can't wait to see what comes at well. I
guess more to come out too. But you know something
about the loudest barking dog, It's like it's almost cryptic
fortune cookie kind of stuff. Let's get to the let's

(17:22):
get to it all right, pitter patter, let's get at her,
drop all the files, let's find out what's going on.
Let's go, let's go, let's go. Last night, did you
see any of the Northern lights? My wife is absolutely fascinated.
That could be one of the next bucket list trips
we do is to go watch the Northern Lights. She's
fascinating with it. Soh yeah, okay, that's your thing. Let's go.
Let's do it. The report last night because we had

(17:43):
the I think it's ranked like G one through five,
and last night was a G four and pretty bright anyway,
and I recall the one last year was one of
the best ones ever. You could even see the lights
as far south as Florida Northern lights. Last night was
pretty wrong as well. Reports of being able to see
the lights in and around Cincinnati. And when my wife

(18:05):
friend is last night at sunset, she's like, walks through
the window the new house goes, I don't see anything. Well,
that's because your facing south. I was hard hard time
with people who don't get directions, and I don't know why.
That's an interesting phenomenon that some people are really really
good with direction, Like to me, it just comes naturally,
like I know where north southeast west is or direct

(18:26):
I'm not as good with. I'm more of a landmark guy,
Like you tell me the name of Astraia, go where's
that again? But I, oh, it's here. Oh yeah, okay,
I can And you showed me once I can get
there and I can get back. It's not a problem.
But I realized that some people, man, no matter how
hard they try, God bless them, they struggle with directions.
Some people you could write it down and they'll still
get lost. I guess, so, thank God for ways in

(18:47):
the apps out there. But last night in the northern lights,
as long as you're looking north, you might have been
able to see them south. Maybe not so much, maybe
not so much. But we all of our things, don't we?
We sure do. This is interesting in Tennessee, got guy
on death row there and he's I guess in Tennessee,
either way they do. You can choose how you want
to die. How do you want to die.

Speaker 4 (19:09):
In there?

Speaker 2 (19:10):
It's electrocution or lethal injection. To me, that doesn't seem
like much of a choice, Like I'm one hundred percent
with lethal injection.

Speaker 4 (19:20):
I know that.

Speaker 2 (19:20):
Well, you know you still between the drugs and you
can still feel something, and you know we're splitting hairs
when you talk to it. In this case, a guy
who by the way, raped and murdered a student at
Chaganu State University in nineteen ninety at that point and
you're convicted that you know, I hope you feel a
little pain. Quite honestly, this whole cruel and unusual punishment.

(19:43):
Then unusual punishment and cruelty is one thing. And as
much as we would want some sense of retribution for
those kind of crimes where you really want them to suffer.
I get that the constitution prohibits that, but we have
I somehow come to interpret cruel and unusual as if
you feel any pain whatsoever, if you're even the most
at least been uncomfortable, got a little ogita over the

(20:05):
fact that you're gonna be executed. Yeah, I'm sorry, this
should be a little bit, just a little bit of
pain involved there. I don't understand that. Okay, you get
a drug to knock you out, make you not feel anything,
another drug to calm you down, Another one that's gonna
slow your heart, another one's gonna stap your breathing. In
this whole cocktail of dry you can't make it any
nicer to take someone's life than that. And yet there

(20:27):
are still issues with well, well, here's what we think
is going on in their brain. We're getting some brain function.
And uh, honestly, I think we got way too nice
about all this stuff. It seems to me. You know,
we have these thirty ton presses that can bend iron
and steel in the blank of an eye, very dangerous
equipment and factories people around all the time. But somebody's

(20:48):
head in that I mean an industrial press that would
take the problem rather quickly. I'd be rather it'd be messy,
but you know, you got pressure washes, maybe some birds
picking at the stem, and that'd be like the way
to do It's like, okay, here's this giant press, like
a guillotine. Well, the quillotine can be you know. Okay,

(21:11):
back then it was run by gravity, you know, French Revolution.
We're going to be head people and sometimes it did
miss and it's not good. Now we've got hydraulics. Man,
get some get some heavy equipment involved, you know me,
I like construction. Get some heavy equipment involved in here.
Take care of the problem. And part of the problem
here though again with the death penalty. Nineteen ninety is

(21:31):
when he was convicted. It's twenty twenty five. That's the
problem with all of this. But yeah, I definitely would
go in lethal injection, our extracution. I think, yeah, you
heard some stories look back in the day where they
really didn't go quietly and there may be some suffering.
They may still be alive afterwards. Okay, but we have

(21:51):
better technology now, that's the best we had at the time.
Old sparky LEAVELD injection seems to be the best way
to do. But now we even steal full pain. Okay, fine,
I say hydraulic press, thirty ton high product, the stuff
that they make, you know, car panels out of punches,
the metal done that, something like that. And if you're
in that industry, you know you're probably far stronger things

(22:13):
out there you could do to someone to take them out.
We have a lot of options available for us. It's like,
how just how nasty do we want to get though? Yeah,
the idea squashing somebody's head like a like a grape
probably left to appealing to a lot of folks. Quite honest,
I think that would be the way to go. You're
not gonna feel anything after that. It's good. We're just
smashing you down like a used car. Kind of gross,

(22:36):
I know. But if we're worried about pain and suffering
and the constitution cruel and unusual, it may be unusual,
but that is not cruel. That is a quick way
to end somebody right there who has it coming? In
this case, that's it coming. Now we're getting choices on
they want to go. I don't get it. This is
a uh you know, Supreme Court has a lot going on.
Later on the show. This morning. By the way, it's

(22:57):
the Skotis v. Potus battle, and the Supreme Court is
debating Trump's tariffs and whether or not they are indeed attacks.
And as you may recall from grade school, that only
Congress can lovy attacks. That is the only branch of
government that can enact attacks would be Congress. And so
how do terrorists work? Is it attack? Well, Trump's the

(23:19):
solictener General as a matter of fact admitted that it's
an attack, so kind of underminds the argument, and Cavanaugh
and Coby Barrett said that it seemed to indicate that
some questions about that and seem to lean towards it
and read the tea leaves at these things. And sometimes
it's true sometimes that I love how everyone says, well,
they're just going to rule straight with Trump, or they're
gonna res straight with Biden. Then they never do. They
wind up doing their own thing, and confound even the

(23:42):
people who appointed them. Sometimes is the case, because you
never know which way the whole court's going to go.
So this will be interesting, you know, whether or not
the tariffs are actually legal or not. And if you
undo them, what does that look like? So it's a
whole thing anyway, we'll get into that at eleven oh
six today and what that actually means. But in the
case of the Supreme Court hearing Kim Davis's petition, she
remember Kim David being in Kentucky. So in twenty fifteen

(24:04):
was the same sex marriage issue. And this is the
woman and as I believe the clerk of court, she
was refused to issue a marriage license to a gay
couple in Kentucky saying it violates your religious beliefs. And
that led the lawsuits and I think the couple got
like one hundred thousand dollars and the Circuit Court upheld
it and now it's been kicked up to the Supreme Court.
That the argument, her argument is that it has no

(24:25):
constitual basis and it conflicted with her religious beliefs. And
you know, I always look at that and go, I
don't know, if there's something that conflicts with your personal beliefs,
then maybe it's time to either get someone else to
do that or just step aside and go I can
no longer do this job. And there's nothing there's nothing
wrong with that. You admire someone for standing by their
deeply held religious beliefs, But how much is reasonable accommodation

(24:48):
for someone like that. And I know, if you're on
the far right, if you're goods and conservative, do you
think this is the most important case of all time.
But you know, then you look at and go, okay, well,
she's these are her deeply held religious beliefs. But she's
been married what at the time anyway, four times to
three husbands, as I recall, and three of them mented
a divorce, and she had two daughters from the first
one got remarried and there was a chain of divorces there.

(25:11):
And you know, the argument is that gay marriage undermines
traditional marriage. And why there's an argument right there. I'm
sure there's someone who's more conservative Christian than she is
that doesn't like Kim Davis because she has been married
so many times, married and divorced, which in the eyes
of many Christians is a no go Catholics, for example.

(25:32):
So you know, if you're a Catholic that worked with her,
I just don't understand how you couldn't be offended by that.
And what about their religious beliefs. I don't know where
does it end. The Saint is sainct dear marriage thing,
I mean, marriage has become it's getting stronger. I think
the numbers are maybe starting to go the other way,
but as people wait to get married much later in
life than previously. But your whole sanctity of marriage argument

(25:54):
is arguable. What does that actually mean? But you know
the other element of this thing two is that we
had what there's a pretty good fact pattern here since
and it's something like three hundred thousand same sex couples
were married after this and have been married after this.
And you know, you look at the boost to local
economies just making life easier for people. Basically, same sex

(26:16):
households and states of legal marriage have higher earnings, hire
its to home ownership, sexual ent hate crimes and employment
destrication against people like that are have declined. STD rates
are down. And so yeah, I mean, if you look
at the studies over the last twenty years since we've
done this, there's no evident, there's no reliable evidence, let's
put it that way, that there's somehow harm to the

(26:38):
general population, which was laughable to begin with. There's just
there's no ada. I'm sure you can do some studies
that may be biased, and someone likes, well, what about
the Look, what are the negative effects on marriage rates
of different sex couples and there isn't any And the
fact of the matter is like seven of the ten
Americans have no problem with it, largely good for sight.

(27:00):
Why because it's consenting adults doing consenting adult things. There's
no victimization of children or animals or anything like that.
And people have tried to throw that red hairiring out there,
and it's a bad comparison. It's like, no, there are
two people who happen to be the same sex if
they want to be together in marriage. I think this
church shouldn't recognize that that's no business with chair, unless
you find a church that does. But by the state, absolutely,

(27:21):
it's just better for the economics and the machineer or
of the United States for that to occur. And Kim
Davis being offended that she has to issue a license
and find someone else to do it or just step aside.
It's like when pharmacists wouldn't issue certain prescriptions, like well
then you okay, have someone else in the office do it,
or maybe maybe the terms of the job have changed

(27:42):
and you can't do it anymore. And that's not just
true for pharmacists and clerks of courts, but any job now,
I mean, look at AI and there are many people
who have been hanging on and doing jobs for a
long time and don't understand all this technology. And if
you can't, you just to go, oh, I can't send
people that refuse to send emails. Now I'm still say
faxes like it's you know, twenty ten, and you're still

(28:03):
twenty fifteen, twenty twenty, You're still doing this Like either learn,
you adapt, or you got to move on. That's just
how it is. Hate being the adult in a room,
but that's the way it is. At five, one, three, seven, four, nine,
seven thousand and eight on the Big One talk Back
iHeartRadio app to South Lebanon and Aubrey on the Scotsland
show High There.

Speaker 5 (28:19):
Hey, I was listening to your show earlier about talking
about the hemp products and the politicians lobbying to and
I'm thinking about how much money is being spent by
the alcohol industry. And I did a little research when
I got home, and I'm looking at the list of
our alcohol industry lobbyists that have spent money in the
last quarter to get cannabis products, cannabis drinks off the shelves,

(28:43):
and I'm just going to read them out to you.
Anheuser Busch, Bacardi Beer Institute, Desill Spirits Council, Moat Hennessy,
National Beer Wholesalers Association, Wine and Spirits Wholesalers of America.
So there's a lot of money, deep pockets, old money
in the US that's fighting to keep these products off

(29:03):
the shelves, and I think it's going straight into the
politician's pockets. This is about money. This has nothing to
do with safety for children. This is crocodile tears. They
don't care about the safety of the youth. If they cared,
they'd be more worried about getting beer out of the
hands of sixteen year olds.

Speaker 2 (29:19):
But well, I also, I mean, and that's a understanding.
I'm with you on that. It's like, Okay, do we
want our kids having these products? No, whether it's an
edible or a eight product that's harmful to them, that
has taching now and no one wants that. We should
go after the illegal sellers and the straw purchases and
all as well. We should, But you know, if you're
a law abiding adult, I know plenty of people, not myself.
I'm I can't say I've had enough of them. To

(29:41):
get a good sample size of what I like and
don't like. But people seem to really enjoy the THHD
infused products. And now we have senators that are debating
whether or not that should simply go away because of
what happened on a farm bill and protecting children and
the sanctimony of it all. And I will say, though,
on the other hand, I mean, I'm sure that Rand
Paul is influenced by that kind of money too, when
he seems to be very resistant to this whole thing.

(30:03):
I don't know, it's just Mitch McConnell.

Speaker 5 (30:05):
Well, I think I know why Rand Paul isn't influence
I think he's more of a libertarian.

Speaker 4 (30:09):
Yep.

Speaker 5 (30:10):
I think Mitch McConnell is an old school Republican and
Ran Taull comes from the Iron Rand school of thought,
where you you more individual rights and less influenced by
the old school you know, government, government, nanny state.

Speaker 2 (30:23):
But anyway, well, this isn't this isn't much different than
I was just talking about. I mentioned the you know,
the filler here about Kim Davis in gay marriage. I
just never understood the how this, how this hurts a
traditional marriage. You know, I've been in a traditional marriage
for thirty five years, and I've never once been threatened
because two gay people of each other and want to
be tied in in matrimony and maybe not recognize the

(30:46):
eyes of the church, which we shouldn't force churches to
do that, certainly, but you can go to the government.
Government should be the arbitrator that And the twenty years
plus we've had this, it's been better for society, not
worse like the people that Kim Davis claim it's going
to be. And so I government being an outside arbitrator
these things going now, it's a sense of adulthood and
fairness and propriety. And if it's something that is not

(31:08):
overly harmful, and everything we do is harmful of course
to us or harming others, is there not a victim
in it, you should be allowed.

Speaker 6 (31:14):
To do it.

Speaker 5 (31:16):
Well, you know, I don't want to get entangled in
the religion because of my religious beliefs about the marriage issues.
But I will point out my husband and I were
just having breakfast. Shame on Mitch McConnell for wanting the
federal government to step in over States rights. Right when
Trump in, you know, we edded the federal ban on
abortion and allowed states to division whether they were going

(31:39):
to permit it. Why don't we just keep it the
way it is? Why do we have to have a
federal ban on a product? Why don't we keep allow
the states rights? The states have determination on whether they
want a product on the shelves. Why have to have
big the big government determining what we permit.

Speaker 2 (31:56):
But that's all I appreciate it. That well, thanks again
Aubrey for listening to show then South elevenon this morning
A five one, three, seven, four nine, seven thousand. Well,
it's it's part of the hypocrisy of politics. I mean,
at least I'm consistent with a lot of this stuff
is that, you know, I just I just want less government,
stay out of our lives. And we're in a new age,
and I understand that there's a you know, the new conservative,
new liberal movements that are going to make things worse,

(32:18):
not better in that regard. And at some point you
think we'd move away from that going you know, we
just need more civil libertarianism. Then we need people telling
us how to live our lives. You know, stat of
the way, let's make money, be an arbiter, be a referee.
But you know, that's a dreamline. I realize it's a
pipe dream and probably is. I don't know as fictitious
a belief as how liberals believe in utopia and that

(32:40):
can never exist, or conservatives believe that how things were
fifty or eighty years ago was a perfect world and
things are worse today. That's not true either. The reality
is that it seems to work better where we have
a divided government and a government just looks at stays
out our way. But of course we have everything from
jerrymandering to campaign finance that we're just talking about it

(33:00):
more that cloud that And look at it this way.
If if we had that perfect world, like a libertarian
world where adults can do adult things, provided there's no
victims in it other than yourself or the person you're
doing adult things with, and you're not harming the rest
of society, then it seems like, you know, that should

(33:21):
be the way to go. But unfortunately that takes away
the base, and it takes away the authority of politicians.
You know, we all bitch and moan about what our
favorite thing that would be carve outs and pork and
you know, loading up bills with I mean, look, at
look at to open the government. Look at some of
the stuff they've included in there. It has nothing to
do with keeping the government open. But that's how they

(33:42):
ingratiate themselves, and that's why you have set asides and
carve outs for their particular constituents, and which is why
it is a maze of law that makes no sense.
If you got to rid of all that stuff, and
that is the essence of what Doze was supposed to do,
you would have less need to elect these people. But
that takes away their base, their power, and their authority.
And it's about them, not us, regardless of what political

(34:05):
belief you have. Anyway, let me get to a news
update and more to follow after ten oh six here
on the Scott Sloan Show on seven hundred w do
to a council member Mark Jefferies one reelection and we
now have new curfews coming. So now they want to
lockdown the area on Short Vine like they did Fountain Square.
We have different times. It's this makes no sense at all,
another senseless move, and we'll try to make sense of

(34:25):
it after this on seven hundred w WT Cincinnati.

Speaker 1 (34:27):
Do you want to be an American?

Speaker 2 (34:30):
Scott slumback on seven hundred WLW with a shooting caught
on video what just last week the other week near
UC and students of course, the victims of crime there.
There After, pure Vall has paused his proposed six o'clock
fountains where a juvenile curfew to focus now on Shorten
Vine near you see, near the campus, and now wants
to stop juveniles. I don't know what age, but after

(34:54):
nine o'clock, and that's obviously tougher than the eleven o'clock
curfew city what and so we've got these conflicting curfews,
and the question is does it make sense. Mark Jefferies,
council member re elect and also sits on law in
public safety. Welcome back, Congratulations on your win.

Speaker 7 (35:10):
By the way, thank you, Scott, appreciate the opportunity here.

Speaker 2 (35:15):
I don't know first blush of this, I look at
it and go, well, number one would be it seems
like we've got a whole bunch of different times when
the curfew is I you need like a curfew app,
like a parking app, to tell you exactly what areas
you can be in at what age at this point.

Speaker 6 (35:28):
Yeah, look, I've said this all along you know, I
spent seventeen years of TMG and marketing, and the one
the one thing you learn at marketing is having.

Speaker 7 (35:36):
A consistent message.

Speaker 6 (35:38):
And so if it's nine o'clock or eleven or six,
and which block? I mean, even in this one short
flying it's two blocks. So that's one concern. The other concern,
honestly is like, what you know, this is a problem
for business owners there. I've gone up to folks on
shortvind I met with a bunch of the businesses there.

(35:59):
We have issues. The question that I have is what.

Speaker 7 (36:02):
Exactly are we solving for?

Speaker 6 (36:03):
Because when we look at a lot of the incidents,
you know, there's one in August tenth, which was twelve
forty five, There's one at September thirteenth, which was one
thirty six people attacking three people for pizza. The one
on November first, first, who references, happened at two forty
nine am.

Speaker 7 (36:19):
A lot of those are outside of even the eleven
pm curfew.

Speaker 6 (36:22):
And so the first question I'm going to have today
is are we enforcing the eleven pm curfew which is
citywide there? Because those three incidents I just referenced are
happening after that. You know, so, you know, I think
we start there, you know, are we enforcing the current one,
what's working, what's not working? And then assessed from there

(36:43):
like what exactly are what sort of especially non violent
activity or what kind of activity are we trying to
prevent from nine to eleven?

Speaker 7 (36:50):
So a lot of questions.

Speaker 2 (36:52):
Yeah, I think the other consideration is the fact, well,
are aren't the bulk of college students teenagers? And therefore
how do you discern which one should be there and
which one shouldn't? But simply by just looking at them,
they're all teenagers.

Speaker 6 (37:03):
Yeah, I mean presumably it's under eighteen, and you know
a lot of college kids are above eighteen. But you know,
I mean that's where it gets very complicated, right, you know,
you know.

Speaker 7 (37:13):
They're they this is a big problem. I mean, there
are kids who are gathering there.

Speaker 4 (37:18):
I mean.

Speaker 6 (37:18):
Part of my concern though is also, and I've said
this so along, is Okay, you have it downtown over
the Rhine, and then you push it up to short mind, Well,
what what happens now? It's going to go over to
clips in there, go over to Sire, Yeah, I go
to you know, Westwood, Like where are they going to go?

Speaker 4 (37:32):
Yep.

Speaker 7 (37:33):
And you know you're in.

Speaker 6 (37:34):
A whack a mole situation. So how are we thinking
about that? And you know, so a lot of questions
and I want to understand what the what the thought
process is, and what the rest.

Speaker 2 (37:44):
I think, Mark, and that's a great point is that
you you know, we've seen this before. We'll do the
prostitution stings right and shut down a whole neighbor. They'll
just go to the corner up the way and do
it there because there's a market forarder in list kids,
juvenile delinquents want to be the link win and they
want to cause problems for everyone else. I get. So
it seems to me again we're back to that thing
you have no control over, would which would be the

(38:05):
judicial branch, right, and that would be judges getting tough
and cracking down on repeat offenders and especially those with
gun crimes, sending a message it's not going to be tolerated.

Speaker 7 (38:14):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (38:14):
You know.

Speaker 2 (38:14):
The other element here too, is is what the idea,
ideal curfew policy would look like for the city. Any idea?

Speaker 6 (38:21):
Yeah, I mean I think we need to look. First
of all, I think it is a consistent policy and.

Speaker 7 (38:25):
You know, look now that it's getting colder.

Speaker 6 (38:28):
You know, typically these activities reside and colder, you know,
they're not as much during cold months. I think now
is the time to take a step back, and I've
asked the administration to have you know, interim chief any
come forward and you know, say, hey, look what has worked.
How many kids have we have we actually enforced the
curfew on? What does that look like? You know, where

(38:50):
has it been effective? Where has it not been effective.
Let's start there, and especially let's play it for next
spring and summer when the warmer months you know, typically you.

Speaker 7 (39:00):
Know, spike these kinds of events. So I think let's
start there.

Speaker 6 (39:03):
Let's let's you know, look at this as like end
of year, you know, before we figure out what the
next plan is.

Speaker 7 (39:09):
Let's figure out.

Speaker 6 (39:10):
What's working and what has been effective, and just honest
assessment of you know, of you know, what we've done
and things have worked.

Speaker 7 (39:18):
Then let's pivot and do something different.

Speaker 2 (39:20):
Mark Jeffries, the summer curfew district has been going on
for a while now, and you know, kids going back
to school. It's getting cold. I understand that, but what
about the feedback from that relative to this and if
it makes sense or not. I mean, do we have
facts that actually improves safety or reduce the number of
incidences along journals and Fountain Square.

Speaker 7 (39:38):
I don't know. And that's part of what exactly my point.
We haven't had any data.

Speaker 6 (39:43):
I mean, we're finally getting to data on the food truck,
you know band that they've put in place, which frankly
shows no real effect. And so I want to understand
the same thing on curfews. Okay, let's start with what's
been done. Is it being effective and and not? And
you know, we're we talked about being data driven, so

(40:03):
I think, you know, let's see what.

Speaker 4 (40:05):
The data does.

Speaker 2 (40:05):
I'll be honestly, I think the food truck idea is
the dumbest thing to come down that no one will
take credit for. I don't know who started or why
they thought it was a good idea. It makes absolutely
no sense, the first and foremost being that the number
one issue downtown or at least you know where we're
talking about where short fine is too anywhere around the
city's stuff from cars. What food trucks have no role

(40:25):
in this is like and especially I feel for the
vendors because they just want to make money, you know.
Closing them down at eleven o'clock and then on a
college area. And when I was in college and you
were in college, Hell, you're up till three four in
the morning, right, and so who want to get some
food from a taco truck or a Burger truck or
pizza at two or three in the morning. It seems
like it's a great opportunity for the entrepreneur and the

(40:46):
student as well. But you've got knuckleheads out there doing
this kind of stuff, so we, of course we punished
the good people.

Speaker 4 (40:51):
Again.

Speaker 2 (40:52):
I think it's the dumbest policy ever quite honestly.

Speaker 7 (40:54):
Yeah, I've never been a fan of it. I mean
I can see a case for you know, making food
truck zones or something like that. Hey, these are the
areas where food strucks can gather, where.

Speaker 6 (41:04):
People can you know, come and then CPD can monitor
at that's fine whatever. I think the focus needs to
be on really pushing and we're starting to do some
mon garages, but around security around parking lots. You know, look,
sixty percent of guns are stolen out of cars and
a lot of that is happening in parking lots, so
we should we need to have better lighting, better security,

(41:25):
better signage to sell people lock of your gun if
you have it in your car. You know, that is
how you keep these illegal guns off the street. So
I want to see a lot of emphasis in that.

Speaker 2 (41:36):
I think that's fair too. I think it may be
again it's punishing good people, but I get the impetus
here is you shouldn't be leaving your gun unlocked a car.
It needs to be in a box, in a safe
box or something like that. A console, a glove box
under the seat is not good enough. That's that's driving
the demand for people to break into cars. And of
course the element then is attracted around there, and so
they're going to hang out and do bad stuff when

(41:56):
they're not breaking in the cars.

Speaker 6 (41:58):
Yeah, and I wouldn't even say punish to the people
because you know, I mean, look, I'm a gun owner.
You can have your gun just if you have it
in your car. Lock it up and put it in
a secure stake or you know, lock it somehow to
make sure that if your car.

Speaker 7 (42:11):
Hopefully it's not broken in.

Speaker 6 (42:13):
You know, if we have security and we have lighting
and we have cameras, you know, that tends to deter
a lot of nefarious behavior. And so the more we
can do there to prevent people from getting these illegal
guns in the first place is a huge start.

Speaker 2 (42:27):
Okay, he is council member Mark Jeffrey's Law Public Safety Committee,
among others, And of course we had a rash of
crimes on Short find Now the mayor is going to
talk to council just a little bit here as a
matter of fact, regarding shifting priorities when it comes to
juvenile curfews from Fountain Square to Short Vine or you see,
and making it maybe as early as nine o'clock for

(42:48):
unsupervised juveniles. But the problem, of course is that most
of the people around college campuses tend to be in
that particular age group. I don't know how you a
police officer to be able to discern a I don't
know a seventeen year old from an eighteen year old,
unless say, asking everybody for IDs or if this is
even feasible for this point, and I get the effort
we're trying to do here, but again, it's a much

(43:09):
much bigger issue than just putting curfuws, John, especially when
we don't have evidence that the previous curfews worked at all. Anyway,
have you had any input or are you going to
get input from UC and especifically the students or the
businesses on Short Vine or anyone in Coryville for that matter.

Speaker 1 (43:22):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (43:23):
No, I've met with students.

Speaker 6 (43:24):
I've met with I had a meeting with a bunch
of the businesses there and went up to Short Fine
and sat down with them.

Speaker 7 (43:31):
And you know, look, CBD has a justice of parking.

Speaker 6 (43:34):
They're trying to make it easy, you know, harder for
you know, folks to come in and park there and
you know, and party along Short Vine. So they're they're
you know, I don't know how effective of those measures are,
but you know, these business owners are They're like, look,
this is the worst that's been in thirty years, and
so we have to do something. And that's where I

(43:55):
think the first question is, given that a lot of
these instances have happened at twelve forty five thirty two
thirty in the morning, is are we enforcing the eleven
pm curfew that we have in.

Speaker 7 (44:05):
Place right now?

Speaker 4 (44:06):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (44:06):
Yeah, And that's that's where we start. And let's see,
you know what, you know what, whether that's been affected.

Speaker 4 (44:13):
Should we not?

Speaker 2 (44:14):
Why should we be reading into this politically and a
political sense Mark jeffres In that okay, so you can
chief thg that's up in the air. Mayor wins re
election quite handily as you did in other members of council,
and now we go, Hey, you know, I forget about
Fountain Square even though okay, I get it's colder, but
you're still going to have a lot of people at
Fountain Square because of the holidays and the festivities of
the ice rink and all that stuff. So now we're

(44:34):
going to take our focus with from Fountain Square and
put it on Short Vine. Is the timing that's kind
of a concern.

Speaker 7 (44:41):
No, I don't think there's a political thing there.

Speaker 6 (44:43):
I mean, look's if you know, because I do not
think that we can take our eye off the ball
on a Fountain Square and downtown and over the Rhine,
you know, because to your point, people are going to
be coming down. The Convention Center can be open in January.
We've got that new plaza where they're going to have
to rain. You're going to have a Christmas festival on

(45:04):
Fountain Square, like, we have to have a safety during
that time over Now, that has to be our priority.
That's our front yard, you know, and obviously priority in
the neighborhoods as well. But you know, when people come
down to downtown, they you know, we need them to
feel and and beast states so that they hang out

(45:25):
and spend money and you know, and contribute to the
vibrancy of our not just our city, but our region.

Speaker 2 (45:30):
You've got Red Fast, You've got that, the Ice Frank
as you mentioned, you've got Halidi Festt, Fountain Square, you've
got Santa, you got all the stuff going on in downtown.
And now we're going, hey, forget about Fountain Square and
I are going to focus on Sure. Why can't we
do both?

Speaker 6 (45:42):
I think no, and I think we need to do both.
I was ever a big fan of a six pm
curfew on Fountain Square, so still the nine pm still exists.
Six pm I just thought was a little too early,
and then it does create confusion around what's six, what's nine,
what's eleven? So I do think, you know, I've talked

(46:02):
to Interim Chief Enny, and he's still very focused on
in and around downtown, and you know, and as I
think he should be, all.

Speaker 2 (46:13):
Right, yeah and focus on those doing the act and
making sure because typically when you arrest these individuals, there's
previous either wants and warrants out for them, or they've
done something in the past and they've got a history
of causing problems. I think we need to really lean
on And I don't know why it's so tough to
ask judges to know, be better what they're doing here
to make sure that those who are repeat offenders, ratchet

(46:36):
up the punishment for them, to set a message that
that's not going to be tolerated behavior and it's not
gonna make it go away, because there's always going to
be someone else out there doing bad stuff. I get that,
but I think it does have a chilling effect when
you start getting tougher on sentences and punishments for people
who are doing this kind of stuff.

Speaker 7 (46:54):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (46:54):
Look, I mean, I've got four kids. If you have
rules and you don't enforce the rules and there's no
real consequence, you really don't have rules. And so I think,
you know, we've got to we have to do what
we can do here in the city Hall, which is
make sure that we're you know, we're catching the back
guys and then you know, once to get the judicial system,
you know, continue to push forward, making sure that you

(47:15):
know the consequences of the actions of these individuals, especially
repeat defenders, are you know, material and prevent them from
you know, continuing to do it again?

Speaker 4 (47:25):
All right?

Speaker 2 (47:26):
Finally, because I know you got to get in there.
Mark Jeffries is up. What are you going to look
for with the mayor's presentation of the city's presentation relative
to your vote and how they should go? What questions
you still need to answer? It kind of sum it
up here.

Speaker 7 (47:37):
Yeah, A lot of questions. Are we enforcing the current
care few?

Speaker 4 (47:41):
What's worked?

Speaker 6 (47:41):
What hasn't worked on to our fine in particular, you know,
what kind of non violent activity is happening between nine
and eleven?

Speaker 7 (47:49):
Like what's going on?

Speaker 4 (47:51):
You know?

Speaker 6 (47:51):
And uh, you know and and specifically you know what
you know, what would the path be forward if you
know kids go to clips in the North.

Speaker 7 (48:01):
Side or another neighborhood.

Speaker 6 (48:02):
So a lot of these questions that I think we
need answered before we figure out whether this is the
right next step or not.

Speaker 2 (48:09):
Also find out about the jihat on food trucks too.
That is just that is just sill.

Speaker 7 (48:15):
I'm going to ask about that too. I'm not I'm
not you know, look at me.

Speaker 6 (48:19):
From the data that they present presentation that they shared
ahead of time, like, it's not making any material impact.

Speaker 7 (48:26):
So if it's not, then why are we doing it?

Speaker 2 (48:28):
Yeah, that would be Yeah, we've got speeders on the road,
so we close the road. It's uh, everyone else wants
to use it too. So and by and largest, ninety
nine point nine percent of the people who are buying a
hamburger or a slice of pizza or a taco are
law abiding people. Let's deal with the point one percent
that's caused the problems rather than shutting it down for
everybody else. It's insane, is with that is Mark Jefferies.

(48:50):
Glad to have you back on council and thanks again
for joining the show.

Speaker 4 (48:54):
Go get him.

Speaker 2 (48:55):
Thanks, I appreciate takes care you too, you as well
enjoy Yeah, he's got to get in there because they're
about to fire this thing up to Yeah, just so
many questions with us, like all right, Fountain Square, how
did that work? Well, we don't know, we have the data,
so now we're gonna do it on short vine. Like
I legitimately know how people in my family, my nephew
was looking at U see and was concerned about the crime.

(49:15):
So he was somewhere else you wonder if this kind
of behavior continues to keep up, how many people, how
attractive the University of Cincinnati becomes, because I know, you know,
I think it's like top five, top ten when it
comes to dangerous campuses. That's not a good look for
the city of Cincinnati. And you know when you get
these videos of gunfire on short vine and people getting
jacked over pizza and break ins, and you know, and

(49:38):
again it's does that happen in urban campuses? Absolutely, that's
part of it. But you know, this is Cincinnati, we
live here, and universites, you see, is a great institution.
I think these students and certainly those parents who send
their kids there from wherever it might be, even here
in Cincinnati and beyond, deserve better than that. And you know,
we need to take that seriously. And that's not just

(49:59):
CPD University of Cincinnati police as well and our courts.
We'll get a news update in and when a return.
It's duly on the job career Wednesday. Here on the
Scott Sloan Show seven hundred WLW, Julie Balki getting some
well deserved time off. She's on a boat somewhere son
in her cheeks so today we're going to talk about

(50:20):
scams and looking for jobs. Something like over nine to
ten gen zers and millennials are actively looking for a job.
Francisco Javier Toben is from LinkedIn and that site, of course,
like the Facebook of jobs if you will, scams are prevalent.
We're going to talk about this morning. Welcome to the show.

Speaker 8 (50:38):
How are you hi, Good morning, Thank you for having me.

Speaker 2 (50:40):
Yeah, so there been on scams have been around since,
you know, since the dawn of times and certainly before
the dawn of the Internet. We are seeing more some
sophisticated ones now. The one I've heard that that's pretty
common is, you know, you'll you'll put your you know,
be looking for a job somewhere online and maybe respond
to something and it's a fishing scam, and that person,
oh yeah, you're just the right person with the job,

(51:01):
and give you all sorts of hope, because sometimes job
seekers are pretty desperate if the job search goes on
for a long time, and so they get their trust
and they have them doing things. The next thing you
don't involve, I don't know, sending them Apple gift cards
or something like that. You know what I'm talking about.

Speaker 8 (51:16):
Absolutely absolutely. I think scams are you know, they've been
around forever, and scammers are continuously evolving, becoming more sophisticated.
They're they're using new technology, infusing it into their tactics
and their ways and their strategies. So even and like
you said, you know, job seekers need to be even

(51:38):
extra vigilant, especially given that we have a more competitive
job market. We're just seeing one opening for every two
applicants on LinkedIn.

Speaker 4 (51:47):
So this is a big shift.

Speaker 8 (51:48):
From twenty twenty one, in twenty twenty two, when we
saw two jobs open for every applicant. So, but that said,
we know scammers are increasingly looking to take advantage of
these job seekers and why that's why it's even more
important to be aware and that LinkedIn Uh, this is
a top priority for us. We're investing into the tools,
into the systems, and in the teachers to be able

(52:11):
to support authentic experiences so that job speakers can feel great, uh,
feel confident to move forward, uh and in their jobs
seeking experience.

Speaker 2 (52:21):
Yeah, and if you're not familiar me, it seems like
everyone's on LinkedIn, not just you know, job minded career
minded folks, but everybody almost have to have a LinkedIn
profile these days, even if you're not looking for a job,
just to have one, just to have a profile up there,
and it's the social media job search. Of course, most
people think about job boards, and there's a lot of
them out there too, But there's one thing in common,
and that are the fraudulent job opportunities out there. So

(52:41):
give me some red flags to look out for, Francisco.
Relative to that, what are some of the warning signs?

Speaker 8 (52:48):
Yeah, absolutely, there are some a few red sizes that
professionals should keep in mind when they're searching for their
next role. Well, first things first, we want to we
want to make sure that job speakers trust their instinct.
If something feels off, this sounds too good to be true,
it likely is. Be mindful of hirers asking for payment.

(53:08):
So when somebody asks for money or for payment up front,
your eyebrows up. You should never give out your credit
card private information because your social security number, banking information,
et cetera. Also, be wary of roles that move you
very quickly through the interview process. So if you get

(53:28):
a job offer after just one remote interview, it's rarely legitimate. Normally,
you have several rounds of interviews with the recruiter. Then
you'll speak to the man, the hiring manager, and then
in many cases you'll get a third round in this
interview where you speak to many different stakeholders so that
you can get the green lights. Other red flags, bad

(53:49):
grammar spelling, bad punctuation. It's usually indicative of a fraudulent
ex sense or if somebody or recruiter looks to move
the conversation off to another platform, which is usually indicative
also of somebody looking to scam you. So if you
encounter members of people that encounter anything that feels off

(54:11):
on our platform, we want to make sure that they
report it to us directly so they can click at
the top right of the job or the message and
other stuff that we can investigate and take action.

Speaker 2 (54:21):
You know, if I get an email phishing attempt and
hear at iHeart my god. We spend a lot of
time making sure everyone knows what to look for, what
the warning signs are having to be fooled and tricked.
And we have people catfishing us in the company, sending
us fake emails to see if we click out and
go aha. So you shouldn't be clicking on this stuff.
So we just delete everything that's we're coming at it. So,

(54:42):
but if I'm looking for a job now and you're
telling me, and I think that maybe we bury the
leader a little bit, Francisco. Is that you're saying, just
a year ago or so, you know, we had two
openings for every worker. Now it's foot flopped, it's got
advantages back to in the game of career tennis. The
advantage is now back to the employer. So you're saying,
they're two job seekers for every job opportunity now, and

(55:03):
so we're back to the way it's been for most
of my life. If you are unemployed, let's say you
lose your job or search job after a period of time,
after three, four or five six months, you start getting desperate,
and desperation is just right for being taken advantage of
it. And I think that's the key difference when you talk
about fishers and scammers and spear fishers and the like

(55:24):
out in the real world on your phone with texts
or phone calls or DMS or certainly emails, different than
what you're actively looking for a job, because now you
want something and you want to hope that somebody thinks
you're valuable and therefore kind of like a you know,
a love triangle or a bad relationship. That way, it's
setting up for you to become a victim when it
comes to looking for a job. That's a I think

(55:46):
the psychological side of it.

Speaker 8 (55:48):
Now, let me tell you broke that down absolutely perfectly.
It's it's it's a wild wild west out there.

Speaker 4 (55:53):
Yep.

Speaker 8 (55:54):
With increasing use of the Internet, new platforms and schools,
like I said that new new technologies is like generative AI.
You know, this is going to keep going, and scammers
are not going to stop. They're going to continue to evolve.
They're going to continue to find clever ways to trick people.

(56:14):
So that's why we need to when we when we
encounter something that feels off, just take just take a
moment and pause, right, you know, pause and think. Sometimes
we were very eager to move forward in the process,
but you know, just giving the new realities that we're
seeing and the data that we're seeing, is it's just
important to be a little slower, be a little minafle,

(56:36):
and and trust your instincts.

Speaker 2 (56:38):
As I said, yeah, I think also it's probably important
to maybe have someone or a friend circle, a colleague circle,
your network something like somebody you could take and go, hey, look,
kick the tires on this for me? Am I crazy?
Am I not seeing? Because sometimes you get into the
you know, you're inside the aquarium and you can't see
so good. You need somebody from the outside to go, hey, man,

(56:58):
that looks like a scam to me, A better be
careful and maybe you need somebody in the outside for
wakel well, whether it's a spouse or a relative or
someone along my line.

Speaker 8 (57:06):
Yeah, absolutely lean on your network, being on the people
that you know, that that care about you, that that
that want to see you succeed. I think these people
are gonna give you an honest feedback, you know, and
maybe let you know, hey, this feels off. So I
always say, you know, go for a second opinion, go
for a third opinion. It's going to help you ground
yourself right. And if and if it still feels off,

(57:28):
you know you can. You can also do a Google
search to see what type of trends, what type of
skins are happening mm hm. More often not many of
these scams are reported through the Better Business Bureau. There's
information and warnings out there that go a little bit
deeper into what these scams are and in the different
taxic tactics they use. So there's information out there. Lean

(57:52):
on the people that you know, and lean on the
information on the Internet as well.

Speaker 2 (57:55):
Francisco Javier Tobaan is a career expert at LinkedIn and
LinkedIn is the well the social media of job recruiters
and searchers and the like. That's where you go. Make
sure you have a presence on LinkedIn if you're looking
for a job or you're in the you know, you're
in your working years and that's important to have that.
But new survey comes out eighty five percent of workers
here in the United States are thinking about changing jobs

(58:16):
this year. That's a twenty seven percent increase from the
previous year. And that number is nine and ten among
gen zers, which is damn you're close to almost all
of them looking for a job this year, and millennials
too is pretty high above nine and ten. And with
that comes scammers. Because we're starting to see the number
of jobs dwindle. We're also seeing the number of employees
go Okay, now it's I'm not I don't have my

(58:37):
pick of the litter anymore, and it's now starting to
become more like we've seen in previous years where you
have more people looking for jobs and actual jobs out there,
So that then comes with desperation and looking for a
job and trying to dance yourself, and that means you're
setting yourself up a scam possibly. But the whole thing
with generative AI, as you mentioned Francisco, that's absolutely frightening

(58:59):
right there and what we've seen just so far in
its infancy. What are you prepared for in the future here?
As you sure you guys are looking months or years ahead.
So where you think generative AI is going on, how
it's going to affect the job market and job seekers
and that dance. But specifically when it comes to scammers,
what do you think is going to happen?

Speaker 8 (59:17):
Yeah, well, we're using generative AI to infuse it into
our products to make our members more productive and successful
in their job experience. But we're also using generative AI
in different new technologies to evolve our AI defenses so
that we can better detect fraudulent attempts. We can better
detect seak accounts that bad actors are using in order

(59:41):
to attack or seek out vulnerable job seekers. So this
is something that we're constantly looking to infuse into our
defenses as we know it's going to be help us
be more effective along the way. Another way that we're
using technology is through verification. So we offer free verification

(01:00:05):
to all US to most US members if they qualify.
It's a free service. Members can easily go on LinkedIn,
dot com, slash verify, verify their own account. But as
their job searching, they can look out for the great
shield next to a person's name. That means that person
has verified at least one element of their profile to

(01:00:27):
be their identity, to be their workplace verification. Or if
they see a job with a shield, it means that
job has been verified, that recruiter has been verified.

Speaker 2 (01:00:35):
Oh cool.

Speaker 8 (01:00:36):
So it's an extra people of confidence so that people
can move forward with ease and they can go forward
with their job searching experience with confidence as well.

Speaker 2 (01:00:45):
Exactly imagine most people don't have the time to research
whether or not a company and that represent as legitimate.
I'm sure the scammers are pretty smart about that that
they'll steal the identity of a company and attach themselves
to it and make it look like an internal email
or whatever it is, when when not actually doing that
and so those are some of the warning signs. What
are the real quick here, because I know we've got
to get going. Most popular scams you're seeing today when

(01:01:07):
it comes to job searches.

Speaker 8 (01:01:10):
Yeah, of course, aside from like financial requests, we're also
seeing cryptocurrency scams where scammers ask them to down those
specific types of software. As you also hint it hinted out.
We've also seen gift cards, gift card requests or receep
alone a prize or different types of winnings. But most

(01:01:32):
indicative and specifically on LinkedIn. Romantic messages or gestures with
which are inappropriate, they're not allowed on LinkedIn. So normally
many of these scammers, they use bots as well, automated
generative AI bots that use to uh to to charm

(01:01:52):
potential victims over a long period of time. They call
these pig butchering scams where they gain trust so for
months and months, and then sooner or later, you know
they have enough trust equity with that person for these
to be able to hand over the keys to a
cryptocurrency account, et cetera. So you know it's something as

(01:02:15):
I said, you know, most of most of the time
these things can be prevented and we're doing the job
in the work in order to be able to surface
more of these authenticity signals to our members so that
they can make educated decisions as they navigate their job
search experience.

Speaker 2 (01:02:30):
Yeah, I think by now the whole gift card scam
that people would go man when they start asking for
an iTunes gift card, it's I'm looking for a job.
Why am I giving you something. I'm the one who
needs the job. I want to be hired, and you
give me money. I shouldn't be giving you anything in
that regarding you have. People do it all the time.
It's the damnedest thing.

Speaker 8 (01:02:48):
It's so funny. And they also want one other thing.
And I want to make sure to call this out.
Sometimes they send you a check like a check. Pay
here's a right send new money, so buy that and
then that check founts back. We want to make sure
that you know, and you're going to be in charge
of you're going to be in debt with the bank
to pay that to pay that back. So I'd just

(01:03:08):
be very mindful of those.

Speaker 2 (01:03:10):
Yeah, yeah, you see, it's it's and there are a
lot of smart people that get pulled in by this trap.
Believe it or not, so just start to look out
for again. Francisco Javier toob On with LinkedIn, Thanks so
much for the info.

Speaker 4 (01:03:21):
Appreciate it absolutely.

Speaker 8 (01:03:22):
Thanks thanks for having me. Have a great day.

Speaker 2 (01:03:24):
News on the way in just a couple of minutes
on seven hundred W Dow Scott Sloan show, of course
the very Latest and What's happening in the world today
earlier If you missed it, it'll be in the podcast
following the show at noon today via the iHeart Radio app.
And that was Ohio Senator Steve Huffman on the show.
I'm sure you heard this news today if you enjoy
those THHD infused beverages. Remember we had that big battle
over intoxicating hemp laws and what wound up happening was

(01:03:47):
we had a ninety day stay by the Governor of
band and we'll allegedly we're going to be able to
sell this stuff. And we had companies like fifty West
on the show talking about how much money they're going
to lose because the craft beer movement is kind of fading.
While it's fading bad, but THHC infused products are taking
its place. People like the buzz better than they do alcohol.
They don't feel as bad the next day after drinking

(01:04:07):
a few of these, and the end result is it
seems to work pretty well. Of course, there was a
little poll with Hempen there and a whole bunch of
the thing in long story short as any way, it
was the THC adult beverage ban that was good, and
then the ninety day ban that was back on again
with a court order, new legislation company fix the issue
great In today we find out, according to Steve Hoffman,
that the lawmakers Mitch McConnell and Ran Paul are fighting

(01:04:29):
over this in the Senate. And I thought the government
was closed, but apparently they can get together and discuss
things that screw up our lives. And now we may
be back to square one on this whole thing, because
the government may come in and Mitch McColl's going, you know,
this stuff could be bad for kids. We've got to
ban it, just like Mike DeWine said, that precipitated our legislation. Unfortunately,
as you know, federal law overrides day law. And if

(01:04:50):
the Feds ban that the THHC infused drink products, that
kills literally a thirty billion dollar industry and growing in Ohio,
Kentucky and Indiana. A great discussion with him at nine
oh six this morning. Again catch on the podcast following
the show. Just ahead, speaking of Supreme Court related stuff,
there's a battle brewing over Trump's tariffs, namely and his

(01:05:12):
solicitor generally even admitted this and saying that, well, a
tariff is kind of like a tax. The only problem
with that is, according to the Constitution, only Congress can
lovey taxes. No other branch of government executive, judicial, can
do that. So what happens to the tariffs? And some
Supreme Court watchers believe that indications are there that they
may actually strike the tariffs down sometime soon. What does

(01:05:33):
this mean? I've got a guy and to talk about that.
I got a guy for that. He'll explain it, why
it makes sense to you and also what the bottom
line is for you. Coming up next on the show
after news on the Home of the Best Bengals coverage
seven hundred WW since now.

Speaker 1 (01:05:45):
Want to American, He's got.

Speaker 2 (01:05:48):
Flown on seven hundred W and l will be many
things happening. The Supreme Court has been busy. They're hearing
arguments on the constitutionality President Trump's tariffs, and the early
indication at least is a few days ago, it seems
to be in jeopardy the tariffs. So some of the
conservative justice even seem skeptical that Trump has the power
to impose these far reaching tariffs and a ruling could

(01:06:10):
certainly hurt, if not kill, his signature second term priority
on that with analysis is the director of Constitutional Studies
at the Manhattan Institute, Elias Shapiro. Welcome, good morning, Good morning, Scott.

Speaker 9 (01:06:24):
Yeah, not quite sure what theory they're going to rest on,
but a majority of the justicees definitely seemed skeptical that
at least under this particular statute, which has never been
used for tariffs, that the president could do what he's doing.

Speaker 2 (01:06:37):
Yeah, the bottom line here, So we saw that at
least two of the likely swing by the Conservatives, it'd
be John Roberts and Justice Barrick Camy Comme. Barrett indicated
that maybe they're not inclined to see Trump's side of
this thing. Roberts quote was, the vehicle is in position
of taxes on Americans, and that's always been the core
power of Congress. Even one of Trump's attorney's admit, I

(01:06:59):
believe it was attorney admitted that this was a tax
the fact of text. Does this undermine the whole thing?

Speaker 9 (01:07:04):
Yeah, the Congress cannot delegate its power to tax, and
presumably that includes the power to tariff, although other statutes
that are more narrower have not been challenged in the past,
and presidents going back, you know, decades.

Speaker 4 (01:07:21):
Have used it.

Speaker 9 (01:07:21):
In fact, the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessett later said, well,
the Supreme.

Speaker 4 (01:07:26):
Court and validate this.

Speaker 9 (01:07:27):
We have other ways of accomplishing pretty much the same thing,
and that is more.

Speaker 4 (01:07:32):
Or less correct.

Speaker 9 (01:07:33):
If the tariffs are more targeted, you know, China for
national security reasons, other countries for retaliation, or whatever the
case might be.

Speaker 4 (01:07:40):
There are ways of running.

Speaker 9 (01:07:42):
A tariff re dream through the Executive Office, but probably
not this particular statute.

Speaker 2 (01:07:47):
The Solicitor General Souer read a letter from James Madison
that it felt like, as I mentioned, undermined their argument
in saying that, well, a tariff is attacks. Has that
been overblown that quote or is that something that is
going to weigh in the minds of the justices.

Speaker 9 (01:08:03):
Well, it's all part of the same puzzle. So the
first level analysis is the text of this statutet the
International Economic Emergency Prevention Act ii EPA as it's called,
and which lists a whole bunch of things that the
president can do in an emergency block embargo, do various,

(01:08:23):
but the tax is not listed. And so lawyers, there's
a tool of interpretation that says, if you have a
big long list and what you want to do is
not included, well that's a pretty good indication that that
there's no authority for that particular thing. So that's especially
what Justice Barrett was skeptical about. And then beyond that
is this constitutional delegation of taxing authority that we just

(01:08:47):
discussed that for example, Justice Gorsich was particularly skeptical about,
and Chief Justice Roberts he just thought of as as
you just mentioned, this is a major question of economic significance,
and unless Congress speaks explicitly, he's going to be doubtful
that the executive can just assume that power.

Speaker 2 (01:09:08):
Ellie Shapiro Manhattan instued one of the legal framework questions
you're going to hear thrown around during this decision. It's
a big one too, because this is a lovely cornerstone
of his second administration, the tariffs, and I's struck down
by the Court that's certainly going to have implications to
the markets and everything else. It's called the Major Questions Doctrine,
which I understand is a relatively new piece of judicial framework.

(01:09:29):
Can you explain what it is and how they developed
it and whyde applies here?

Speaker 9 (01:09:34):
Apparently I got way ahead of you, because that's what
I was describing that that you know, that's I was
trying to kind of break it down.

Speaker 1 (01:09:43):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:09:44):
Developed.

Speaker 9 (01:09:45):
This is especially the developed in the last decade or so.
When there's a question of of major political social economics significance,
unless Congress has specified it, they're not going to defer
to the executive branch about that. At Chief Justice Roberts,
the middle of the court, Roberts Barrett Cavanaugh are especially

(01:10:07):
concerned about that, although in this case Cavanaugh, who's thought
as a median vote, seemed to be more towards the
government side, more deferential to executive power.

Speaker 2 (01:10:17):
Okay, got it. This sounds like jeopardy there. The answer
was a question Ellie Sapiro at Manhattan Institute on the
show this Morning on seven hundred WLW is it tough
to read the tea leaves? And saying, well, you know,
Justice Amy Coney Barrett said this, and Justice John Roberts
said this, And you go and you start to how
often does that turned out to be true? Because their

(01:10:39):
job is to ask probing questions. Is it presumptuous to
kind of read into that like we're doing right now?

Speaker 9 (01:10:45):
Well, I mean, my prediction is worth what you're paying
for it. And you know, I have a quote unquote expertise.

Speaker 4 (01:10:53):
I followed the court. I filed briefs myself.

Speaker 9 (01:10:55):
I have written a book about the Supreme Court, Supreme disorder,
about judicial nomination and the politics thereof you do your
best and the justices in the end can surprise. Oral
argument is the tip of the iceberg. It's it's what
we see. But uh, you know, the briefs are important,
and the justices discussions and the drafts of the opinions

(01:11:15):
going back and forth. So nobody's ever going to give
you one hundred percent certainty.

Speaker 4 (01:11:19):
Right.

Speaker 2 (01:11:21):
It wasn't long ago that the Court struck down Biden's
student loan forgiveness, And does that factor into this is
a shadow the upcoming decision?

Speaker 4 (01:11:31):
I think it does.

Speaker 9 (01:11:32):
I think it does, And a lot of commentators have
compared it to that and other ways in which the
court has gone against the executive brands the last couple
of presidencies.

Speaker 1 (01:11:44):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (01:11:45):
You know, they're they're deferential to a point.

Speaker 1 (01:11:48):
Uh.

Speaker 9 (01:11:48):
And you know that's why the Solsier General, the government's lawyer,
kept pressing about that this is a foreign policy issue
because the president typically gets more difference from courts on
foreign policy national security.

Speaker 4 (01:11:59):
But there's this important statute involved.

Speaker 8 (01:12:02):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (01:12:02):
And you know, just like Biden's.

Speaker 9 (01:12:05):
Reading, his administration's reading of the relevant statute for student
loans or for the vaccine mandate for private employers. The
court said that that was stretching the statute, reading into
it things that weren't there. It seems to be that's
where they're going here.

Speaker 2 (01:12:21):
Yeah, we mentioned the Slicitor General tried to distinguish the
terrorists and taxes, but you know, the economists and apparently
several justices see them as is the same thing. And
how does that how does that work with this court
and constitutional interpretation and also looking at well economic reality
because the market's obviously watching this very very closely.

Speaker 9 (01:12:42):
The I mean, the president himself sort of undermines his
own case because he brags about all the revenue that's
being brought in by the tariffs, and the legal definition
of a tax is a a legislative action that that
raises revenue. So, uh, you know, I'm even less of
a good predictor of the markets. Otherwise I'd be something

(01:13:04):
other than a prostitutional lawyer. Right, But it seems like
large employers have already large large manufacturers, producers, companies have
already priced in the cost of the tariffs and passed
them along to consumers. That's why these cases have been
brought by small businesses. And so how the markets will react,

(01:13:24):
I don't know. Is all of this already priced in.
Will getting rid of the tariff, the uncertainty over that,
will that harm the markets versus not having this extra
tax to liberate the attax liberate the markets.

Speaker 4 (01:13:35):
That's not clear. Plus there's the remedial points.

Speaker 9 (01:13:37):
So it's not just that the Supreme Court rules the
tariff is invalid and all of a sudden everybody instantly
gets a refund. There's a whole big question of how
you would you reverse that. Does each company that's paid
a tariff have to make a new claim? Do the
lower courts have power? And almost certainly the Supreme Court
is not going to enter a remedial order. They're going
to leave that remand that back to the lower court

(01:14:00):
to figure out.

Speaker 2 (01:14:00):
Well, even bigger than that, do justices look at the
after effects of the decision in that you know, the
businesses have already paid these tariffs, What does that what's
the refrunt process look like? Or do we keep their
money or do they get to the nuances of that
or they just rule on this decision and let everyone
else sort that out after.

Speaker 9 (01:14:17):
Yeah, it's a it's a it's a separate issue. There's
the issue of remedies and there are you know, the
government when when it was asking for a stay of
the lower court rule and blocking the tariffs, said oh, well,
if we turn out to be wrong, we can always
refund the money.

Speaker 4 (01:14:31):
So they kind of hurt.

Speaker 9 (01:14:33):
Their own long term interest by by arguing that in
the in the short term and theory, in this digital age,
everyone has records of who paid what, and you should
be able to if there's a court order to for
all the customs inspectors and whatnot to just reverse the
charge and you know, make the make the wire go
in the other direction that that should be done. I mean,
it might be more complicated than certain other things, but

(01:14:56):
it's not an impossible task.

Speaker 2 (01:14:57):
Hilly Shapiro, Manhattan Institute. The Supreme Court weighing Trump's tariffs
right now, and it is. It's hanging in the balance.

Speaker 4 (01:15:06):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:15:06):
The early indication seemed that at least a couple of
more conservative members of the panel are leaning towards knocking
this thing down. But we'll see again as they contemplate this.
And there's also the precedent here too. If the court
rules against Trump, what does that mean for future presidents
or parties or who want to use that executive authority
on economic policies.

Speaker 9 (01:15:28):
That question came up that if we allow this, would
a future president be able to declare an international emergency
for climate change and therefore tax car companies and other
you know, manufacturers that contribute to climate change. And the
Solcier General said potentially yes. So I don't think that's

(01:15:48):
going to sit very well.

Speaker 2 (01:15:50):
Yeah, we'll see how it plays out here too. It's
certainly interesting. And the timeline on this, because we never
know when they're going to make a ruling on this.
How long could this go?

Speaker 4 (01:15:59):
Well, they could.

Speaker 9 (01:16:01):
Have a decision by Christmas. It shouldn't take long to
figure out if they want to get it out quick.
But there's another case that's going to be argued next
month on the president's power to remove the heads of
independent agencies the National Labor Relations Board, the Federal Trade Commission,
other alphabet agencies as they're called. And it looks like

(01:16:22):
that case is going to go for the president for
the administration, So they might want to pair those two
if they're going to invalidate the if they're going to
block the tariff, they might want to pair it with that,
And so you have one win, one loss for the administration,
in which case it would spill into January February.

Speaker 2 (01:16:39):
Yeah, it seems like they were I mean in the first
three here is that they're uncomfortable with giving him carte
blanche to apply tariffs whenever he wants. It seems like
they pull that back someone at the very least.

Speaker 9 (01:16:49):
Again, that's the conventional wisdom as we've been discussing, and
there are I think polymarket or there's some way you
can bet on court opinions it might be off or
or something like that. So you know, that's not not
a bad way of checking what the wisdom of clouds
might be.

Speaker 4 (01:17:06):
But uh, you know, there just like.

Speaker 9 (01:17:09):
In the NFL. The reason you know, any given Sunday,
anything can happen. And so that's why the reason we
play these games is you know, they could they could
take it in a completely different.

Speaker 2 (01:17:17):
Direction, all due respect, but you know, we we often
defer to the pundit class, like for example, Trump is
going to you know, ext remember, is going to strike
down gay marriage, and of course they went, now, we're not,
We're not doing that, and was at a pleasant surprise,
Not really, it wasn't a surprise at all that that
would that would be almost impossible to onto us side
of your scope of what we're talking about here. But
I think that applies to some degree as well. They're

(01:17:38):
not going to go there. You know, the idea that
somehow they're just going to do everything Trump wants to
do is it's rather silly.

Speaker 4 (01:17:45):
Yeah, that's absolutely right.

Speaker 9 (01:17:46):
And and there's all these media narratives gended up that
this is Trump's court and that's just not true. What
they've been ruling is to allow the the president to
reorganize the executive branch.

Speaker 4 (01:17:58):
He's the head of the executive branch, he controls it.

Speaker 9 (01:18:00):
When he steps over into violating individual rights or stepping
into legislative territory. That's when the administration has taken its
losses and they've been strategic about which case is to
bring up to the Supreme Court, which is why they
have a very high win rate thus far in the
first ten months of the second Trump administration.

Speaker 2 (01:18:22):
Yeah, I'll be interesting. We're all following this case because
this is the cornerstone of a second administration, is the tariffs.
And as we said, it's going to take a long time.
But if the court strikes us down, it also gives
him cover, I think too, politically speaking, if the Supreme
Court tries to pull back on his what he's trying
to do here, he has now a little bit of
cover and excuse going. Well, it would have worked if
it wasn't for the damn meddling Supreme Court.

Speaker 4 (01:18:44):
Like scooby doo, that's right, that's right.

Speaker 9 (01:18:47):
And it also there's two economists are correct that the
tariff has hurt our economy, hurt consumers. Then you know,
then the markets will be up, things will be better economically,
while he still gets to to rail against these enemies
and to help them politically. So even if he might
not like it, it might be beneficial, especially ahead of the terms.

Speaker 2 (01:19:09):
Director of Concertial Studies and Senior failty in Manhattan Institute,
Ilia Shapiro on this great analysis. I appreciate it. Have
a wonderful day, my pleasure, Scott. Yeah, you wonder if
Republicans and this would be the leadership in the House
and the Senate and maybe to some degree of those
around Trump, maybe not Trump himself, but are kind of
hoping for the Supreme Court to step in and kind

(01:19:29):
of curb the tear if things some water, strike them down,
simply because it gives you cover. Now saying, guy, you
know we could have done this, I would have been well,
it was all working up until the Supreme Court got involved,
and now they screwed it back up. And it's the
deep state, and this is why you've got to vote
for well, name your next candidate. But you know Trump
has been claiming we get these emails every day from
the White House about you know, policies and saying when

(01:19:52):
Trump is saying every price is down, everything is way down,
down down, and prices are down down down. Everyone knows
that it's less expensive than it was under Joe Biden.
Not true, because you know, you can tell people that
and put it on true social and claim it to be.
But you know, the bottom line is, unlike other policies,
we don't see and feel directly. You know, when you
go to the grocery store and you see the price
of beef, and you see that the consumer price index

(01:20:14):
is up from where it's been. There's been inflation in
every month of the term, and of products have gotten
cost or costs more instead of getting cheaper. And you
know what inflation is, it's still a sticky three percent.
But yeah, I don't think we all feel it too.
Gas of the pump is not near two dollars a gallon.
It's the well above two dollars a gallon, at least
the last time I got it. And while it's certainly

(01:20:36):
not you know, three four five dollars a gallon, certainly
everything feels like it costs more. It's not just beef,
it's dozens of products have gotten way more expensive. And
when he says groceries are down, other than beef, everything's down, down, down.
We've had much lower prices like he can wish it.
I don't think he's in the grocery store like like
we always got out there doing his shopping like President
Bush forty one no idea what a cost of a

(01:20:59):
gall of milk cost? Trump does either. But you can
keep talking about how the prices are done. But if
that were true, even if you're the most diehard MAGA
person saying that you're I'm the part of the media
lives or whatever, Hey, great, have at it. But I
know when I grow the grocery stort craps more expensive,
and it is for you too. But even that test
is okay. If the prices are down as he's climbing,

(01:21:20):
why does he want to give all of us a
two thousand dollars check? If the prices are down, you
don't need a two thousand dollars check. That seems like
to be the easiest, most basic test for all of us. Now,
you may be a huge Trump fan and flying the
flag and all that, know, your freak flag and all
that stuff. Hey have at it, But you know, I
think you can even admits like, yeah, this is not
working out as expected. It's going to take a lot

(01:21:41):
longer to see the effects of tariffs. And if the
Supreme Court strikes it down, then I think that gives
a mample cover. For sure, we'll get a news update
in check the traffic, weather and all that going on
in the world, and then want a return. Sarah's here
a little sports laughing through her nose. It's the Snort
Report aka Snorts of all sorts of share release, the
bank and Joe Burrow at a crossroads here will he

(01:22:03):
play or won't he?

Speaker 1 (01:22:03):
When?

Speaker 2 (01:22:04):
Will he play? Should he play? Should he not play?
What the hell is going on down there? She's next
on the show. It's a Snort Report with Sarah Lease
on the Home of the Best Bengals coverage, seven hundred
w st face.

Speaker 10 (01:22:31):
Good morning, I am happy today?

Speaker 2 (01:22:35):
Is that I'm a snort? That the cracking of Burrow's toe?
That just you?

Speaker 10 (01:22:43):
Did you listen to that pressor on Monday?

Speaker 2 (01:22:46):
Sarah's Snort Report? Hi, good morning, what's going on, sporty?

Speaker 10 (01:22:50):
I'm feeling optimistic, Not because the Bengals got a new defense.

Speaker 1 (01:22:56):
I just like.

Speaker 2 (01:22:59):
In the bye week we got hold.

Speaker 10 (01:23:00):
Yeah, we got a whole new defense.

Speaker 2 (01:23:02):
I went under Jeff Wiler.

Speaker 10 (01:23:03):
And the things that money can buy.

Speaker 2 (01:23:07):
So it's too you're such a dead god.

Speaker 10 (01:23:14):
But I do like how I do like how tough
of a guy that Joe Burrow is. He wasn't supposed
to be back until like mid December. I was shocked.
It was like seeing somebody come back from the dead.
I'm like, who's this guy? You know that nobody was
expecting him to walk through those doors on Monday afternoon
and shock the world.

Speaker 2 (01:23:36):
All I know is I had a complete tendon rupture
in my foot, and I'm thirty years older and I
went out there playing football eight I was back in five.

Speaker 10 (01:23:44):
Oh way. You don't do anything physical like Joe Burrow,
I am, what a throwing.

Speaker 2 (01:23:50):
A footballing up the worst, climbing up ladders?

Speaker 10 (01:23:54):
Yeah, but are you getting knocked down like Joe?

Speaker 2 (01:23:56):
I am? You got to turn the circuit off, you know.

Speaker 10 (01:24:00):
But on Monday, during that press conference, he had talked
more about his injury. The Bengals media had asked about
that day. I'm like, why are we going back to
that day? But yeah, week two, he goes, look my
toe gout. Listen to us. He said, my toe got
stuck in the turf and then it got bent way
too far back.

Speaker 2 (01:24:17):
You well, what do you think is going to happen?

Speaker 10 (01:24:20):
That's turf though, I know, I know, but just hearing
and talking about it and then really thinking about it.
I was there in the end zone at that game
and I watched him get, you know, picked up by
the two dudes. Right, I'm like, okay, yeah, that's pretty bad.

Speaker 2 (01:24:32):
Your whole foot laying like that.

Speaker 10 (01:24:34):
Yes, it's such a small body part, but such a
big pain. Correct, But it is incredible that not even
sixty days later, he's able to come back to practice.
Granted it's limited, He's not going to be starting this weekend.
Coach Taylor did confirm that. But in your opinion, I.

Speaker 2 (01:24:54):
Know, I think you are you going to go to
the playoffs. This season is a playoffield is not a.

Speaker 10 (01:24:58):
Playoff team, This is not a play off defense.

Speaker 2 (01:25:00):
Why would you risk? I know, well, people buy tickets
and the bus to look if you're serious about winning
much I don't know they talk about it, but are
you that serious about winning a championship?

Speaker 10 (01:25:08):
The offensive?

Speaker 2 (01:25:09):
How do you protect? You know, you got to protect
your your franchise quarterback. You build around him. The defense
is way too bad.

Speaker 10 (01:25:15):
To his butt. They've been doing just fine with Joff Laco.
Do you think that even if Joe Burrow, because it's
just a rumor that he could potentially come back for
that Thanksgiving primetime game in Baltimore against the Raven idea.
You think it's bad.

Speaker 2 (01:25:33):
I think it's a bad idea.

Speaker 10 (01:25:35):
This is not a playoff team, So why bring your
guide back? Now? Granted, I think Joe Burrow has a
lot of power over the that's the problem over the
front office.

Speaker 2 (01:25:45):
Is there anyone there that has the stones to tell
Joe Burrow now?

Speaker 10 (01:25:49):
I don't think so. I think he's the most powerful
person with this organization. And that's going to look really
sexy too. You got Joe Burrow versus Lamar Jackson. Two
guys have been banged up pretty much the entirety of
the season, right, and that looks really good on Thanksgiving nights?

Speaker 2 (01:26:04):
Yeah, I mean I could see a slam dunk game
something like that. You come back, but what's the rush
at this point?

Speaker 10 (01:26:09):
But do you need to get the revenge right now? Like,
just give it the rest.

Speaker 2 (01:26:12):
Of this doing the off season at this point or
give him a couple now? Again, We'll see what happens
with this thing. I just I think it's well. The
other issue too, is Trey Hendrickson too?

Speaker 10 (01:26:22):
Is Trey Hendrickson? I guess According to U Zach Taylor,
he's likely not going to play this weekend. Mike Tomlin
with the Steelers, he said, well, we're going to prepare
like Trey Hendrickson as playing, so I guess it's not
definite that he's not. But I mean, hey, the last
time they played the Steelers, they didn't have Trey Hendrickson

(01:26:42):
and they were able to beat them. So what are
the chances of them getting it done again this weekend?

Speaker 2 (01:26:47):
No, I think you have a better sample size with
Flacco and what he's doing. For Tomlin, but he don't
trust the Steelers either. It's I don't know.

Speaker 10 (01:26:55):
They looked pretty bad over the week.

Speaker 2 (01:26:57):
They really really did.

Speaker 10 (01:26:58):
They didn't look like the first place Steelers that we've
seen for the past few weeks.

Speaker 2 (01:27:02):
Soly nine wins gets it done in the division. But
do the Bengals have nine wins in I think it's legitimate,
even with Burrow in there.

Speaker 10 (01:27:07):
Yeah, going into this weekend after the bye, they're at
three and six, and if they can beat the Steelers,
they'll be three and zero in the division and they
still have a chance to win the AFC North. There
are still eight games left in the season, plenty of
opportunities now, granted, I want to stay optimistic, but the
schedule is a little tough. But hey, you can go
and beat the Steelers, and then you got the Patriots

(01:27:28):
at home. And then this is where I get a
little nervous. You got that primetime game against the Ravens.
You got to play the Bills, you got to come
back and play the Ravens. I don't know, It's all
up in the air, and I think every weekend this
team continues to surprise me. You just really never know
what you're gonna get. You really don't.

Speaker 2 (01:27:45):
I'm good.

Speaker 10 (01:27:46):
Like you look at the wins that they've gotten, like, okay,
they've I'm sorry, they've gotten the losses with you know,
scoring thirty three points, thirty eight points, forty one points,
you would think, oh, those are clearly winning points right there.

Speaker 4 (01:27:57):
Yep.

Speaker 10 (01:27:58):
It just goes to show you how important a really
great defense is. And they didn't do anything. They didn't
do anything with the defense.

Speaker 2 (01:28:06):
You think they tag Hendrickson and probably see I'm going
Trey Hendrickson.

Speaker 10 (01:28:10):
I'm tired of the Trey Hendrickson drama. I'm so tired
of it. Thirty one he SAIDs more than he plays too.
I'm just sick of it. It's like, Okay, he's a
really nice guy. That's great.

Speaker 2 (01:28:20):
He's not helping any nice guys the Bengals need. We've
had like a litany of nice guys. John Kittings such
a nice guy. He rings you got with John Kittens always.

Speaker 10 (01:28:29):
The nice guys.

Speaker 2 (01:28:30):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:28:30):
I like that.

Speaker 10 (01:28:31):
We're seeing some of these guys get pissed off too.
I mean, after that loss last weekend, before the bye,
you know, Jamar Chase is like, come on, man, I
just want to stop. Let's go get fired up. I
want to see a fired up Zach Taylor.

Speaker 2 (01:28:45):
I don't know. I I had no idea what to
expect on Sunday. I really don't. It's a coin.

Speaker 10 (01:28:49):
Toss, no idea. My dad texts me the other day,
he goes, what do you think is gonna happen on Sunday?

Speaker 5 (01:28:53):
I don't know.

Speaker 10 (01:28:53):
I don't no clue. He's like, you have a score prediction? Nope,
sure don't.

Speaker 2 (01:28:57):
Couldn't tell you, Nope, couldn't tell you what. No team
shows up, what defense shows about that.

Speaker 10 (01:29:01):
They could score fifty five points, fifty six fifty five.
It's a little bit different feels again, I really really
want to be optimistic. I feel like if they can
go and beat the Steelers this weekend, they really can
do it. This would turn things around.

Speaker 2 (01:29:14):
Don't you think that would make Joe's to feel a
lot better.

Speaker 10 (01:29:17):
Joe's like, hmmmm, well, And it's really interesting to hear
Joe Burrow talk about Joe Flacco and kind of learning
from this guy. I mean, he's been in the locker room,
he's been at the practices, he's been at the meetings,
and he goes. I'm really entertained by Joe Flacco. I
like watching him play. I'm learning a lot from him.
He's a really nice guy and knows this stuff. So
Joe's got a lot of respect for Joe. I got

(01:29:38):
two good jos that we're working with here.

Speaker 4 (01:29:39):
Good.

Speaker 10 (01:29:40):
I think he's your backup too, Jo, Joe Burrow is, yes,
And I think Joe Flacco is a really good fit
with this town too. He's out in the city like,
he's mingling with people. He's really likable.

Speaker 2 (01:29:53):
I don't care if you're I don't care if you're
Aaron Rodgers. As long as you're winning football games. I
don't care if you're a nice guy.

Speaker 10 (01:29:58):
What I love most about him is that he connecting
with Jamar and he's connecting with Tea and he's getting
stuff done. He's getting stuff done for the offense.

Speaker 2 (01:30:05):
The defense, that's.

Speaker 10 (01:30:06):
Your issue, and it's the same defense every year.

Speaker 2 (01:30:09):
Just rest show. There's no reason to bring Burrow back
into this mess.

Speaker 10 (01:30:12):
I I just have a feeling he's hard headed and
he's gonna want to get out there on Thanksgiving night
and get the revenge because we know what happened the
last time that he.

Speaker 2 (01:30:19):
Was in Well, I want to see who runs the team.
At some point, you gotta go, look, guess, is this
not in anyone's best interest to jeopardize that?

Speaker 10 (01:30:24):
And you're probably if you're the Bengals, what happened to Washington?
If you're yeah, And if you're the Bengals, you're sitting
there like, look, we're paying you half a billion dollars.
Why don't you just take it easy and let Joe
Flacco take us one.

Speaker 2 (01:30:35):
Lu's see till we get some Yeah, what else you got?
But we got?

Speaker 10 (01:30:38):
Yeah? The next few weeks will be obviously very very telling.
Let's see what else do we have. I don't know
they're going to get back to practice today. They'll be
on the road on Saturday. Let's switch to Reds. Just
one hundred and thirty four days until Red's opening.

Speaker 2 (01:30:53):
Cotten a Tonner Reds open. How about Tito second place?

Speaker 4 (01:30:57):
For Man?

Speaker 10 (01:30:58):
That's ridiculous, stupid Brewers. I think it's fixed. You should
have gotten the first place.

Speaker 2 (01:31:04):
I mean, when's the last time that has been Brea
considered for Cincinnati Reds fans?

Speaker 10 (01:31:08):
Ever, I don't think that's ever happened. Actually, I'm a
Tito stan I love this dude.

Speaker 2 (01:31:12):
Doesn't mean I mean he got the most out of
this team you could get.

Speaker 10 (01:31:15):
He still got into the playoffs. He said, look, you
got a sample of the champagne. Think of that moment,
think of that feeling. Taste the champagne again, and let's
go a lot further with it.

Speaker 2 (01:31:25):
Well, and it's a lot on that front. That's a
lot of Nikkral more than there's anybody else.

Speaker 10 (01:31:29):
Absolutely, it is lots of pressure there. What do you
think about the rumors with trading Hunter Green? That's been
like the biggest where these come from from beat writers
got nothing better? They like the clicks.

Speaker 2 (01:31:42):
It's like the NFL network, right, NFL Network, What do
you do after the Super Bowl? We have, we go
to lists, we make a list immediately content and that's
that's the game.

Speaker 10 (01:31:51):
And you know what's trending. And obviously Hunter Green not
able to get it done in the playoffs and people
are like, well, should we just trade him because he
can't handle postseason baseball and he melts down on the mound.

Speaker 2 (01:32:03):
It was a very small sample to get one game,
and I was like, damn against the Dodgers the World Series,
champing brain surgery here.

Speaker 10 (01:32:13):
I'm still glad that the Dodgers got it done.

Speaker 2 (01:32:17):
Yeah, I wanted the Jason, but that's I know.

Speaker 10 (01:32:19):
But it's like, if you're gonna lose, you know, like
I said, I'm a salty Reds fan. I'm like, hey,
if you're gonna lose, it might as well be to
the World Series.

Speaker 2 (01:32:24):
Chance say this, there's something good news coming is the
fact that a Reds Fest is back.

Speaker 10 (01:32:28):
That's what I was just going to talk about. Is
Reds Fest officially back at the brand new Are we
calling it the Duke Energy? You can go you can
still Duke Energy. Okay, this is going to be the
first event happening at this big convention center, not in
December though usually this is like a first weekend of
December sort of thing, Friday January sixteenth and then Saturday

(01:32:51):
January seventeenth, So they've got all the details on reds
dot com slash Reds Fest took last year off, so
that way, that way they could get this whole thing
done and reconstructed. But yeah, I'm excited about this. I
love this event.

Speaker 2 (01:33:05):
Yeah, yeah, it's always fun to see, especially if the
year off it's like a little and then new convention.

Speaker 10 (01:33:09):
Yeah, it kind of gets too excited. It's going to
be the month before pitchers and catchers report, which music
to my ears, I mean just a month out from that.
Really once you're.

Speaker 2 (01:33:19):
Quickly looking for we just turned the clocks last weekend
and now we're already looking forward to to turn it
back to where they were.

Speaker 10 (01:33:25):
Dude, I've already started blanning my trip to Arizona. I'm like,
let's go.

Speaker 2 (01:33:29):
The best time with your.

Speaker 10 (01:33:30):
Baseball season is absolutely the best.

Speaker 2 (01:33:32):
Yeah, rubber than Joe's toe at this point.

Speaker 10 (01:33:36):
Oh what, it's always a toe something that we should
be really excited about. F C Cincinnati Hell is very
real for the Columbus crew. That match on Saturday night
was awesome. The last thirty minutes.

Speaker 2 (01:33:48):
The best act in town right now when it comes
to playoff championship level. I mean, they shook the monkey
after back was great, amazing. I've talked to Tommy G.

Speaker 10 (01:33:58):
You did a great His call was awesome. That's all
over social media. That was trending, and I love that
he adds those videos.

Speaker 2 (01:34:05):
The Spanish call good yeah, which is a thriller inside. Nah.
But I mean, you know, if you're not into that stuff,
at least maybe try to watch a playoff game somewhere.
I think you kind of get into because at the
pace of the game, it was incredible. It was a
nail bite, it was a very exciting.

Speaker 10 (01:34:17):
It was so good. Lots of defense for that first half.
But yeah, the last thirty minutes gave us everything that
we needed. And hey, if you want to get like
your sports, your since e sports Phil in one day.
The next Bengals home game is going to be against
the Patriots at one o'clock. Then you've got FC Cincinnati
hosting Miami at five o'clock, and it's a blue out,

(01:34:38):
so you're going to go from orange and black to blue.
This could be a really great day for Cincinnati, and
I want to believe that it's going to be awesome.
I want to believe we can go to and O
that day on the twenty third. All right, good, so yeah,
lots of good stuff to look for.

Speaker 2 (01:34:52):
It's a great look for somebody get shot.

Speaker 10 (01:34:54):
Well, no, why would you say that. I wasn't even
thinking about that. You are now, you know I go
to these games. I'm like, that is the last thing
that's on my mind. Worried about these guys scoring points,
the defense doing their job. I don't want to defend
myself from a bullet.

Speaker 2 (01:35:13):
Well, they try to downplay that too, a little bitter
and some of the.

Speaker 10 (01:35:16):
Crimes, you're ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (01:35:17):
Also going on, like Willie because he's coming up in
a few minutes. Heirs know. That's like Gona, It's like
going to Venezuela.

Speaker 10 (01:35:28):
Also going on this weekend. On Friday night. On Friday Night,
go downtown and support your Cincinnati Cyclones. Puck drop at
seven thirty. It's military Appreciation night. So they're doing like
a really cool camo hat giveaway. It's five to one,
three nights. So you got five dollars craft drafts, one
dollar popcorns, three dollar burgers. Well, they have to do

(01:35:48):
it because that's the next home game that they have.
They're out of town. They actually have a they had
a road game today at ten thirty in the morning.
It's like their kids field trip day.

Speaker 2 (01:35:58):
Oh, kids day, kids day.

Speaker 10 (01:36:00):
Yeah, on the road they do the kids field trip
day here next Tuesday.

Speaker 2 (01:36:04):
Yeah. I love that when they do like the little
day game for the kids.

Speaker 10 (01:36:06):
It's pretty cool. It's fun. They got like fun activities
up on the new uh scoreboard sound right right?

Speaker 2 (01:36:11):
And dollar beer's too, fith kids, So.

Speaker 10 (01:36:13):
It's good dollar everyone's having fun.

Speaker 2 (01:36:15):
Yes, good time. Sarah Lisa's snort reported things sports related.
You're caught up in this a midweek she is on
the kid Christial Mornings on one O two seven e
b N.

Speaker 10 (01:36:24):
Of course, I think I got everything out.

Speaker 2 (01:36:25):
You got everything in there, Joe fcc jo.

Speaker 10 (01:36:29):
Cyclones one hundred and thirty four days still opening day.

Speaker 2 (01:36:32):
What a time you get cringey about toes that I noticed.

Speaker 10 (01:36:34):
Yeah, I don't like the tones.

Speaker 1 (01:36:36):
You do too.

Speaker 2 (01:36:37):
Yeah, how much money you make that up for your
only fans? I was, I was, she gets all these perverse.

Speaker 10 (01:36:42):
Picks right now.

Speaker 2 (01:36:43):
If you can give Lisa money.

Speaker 10 (01:36:46):
To actually need a bed, A picture how are you
get turned on by that freak? I don't understand these
feet freaks. Yeah, but for Joe's toe, we're very invested. Yeah,
I don't want to look at it, but I'm still
invested a topic. We need one hundred percent chot on
the toe.

Speaker 2 (01:37:02):
Toe Burrow then asked hairy toeh, thanks again, appreciate it.
Willie's on the way. Coming up next. Seven hundred W. Dow, Cincinnati,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}11-12-25 Scott Sloan Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

All Episodes

11-12-25 Scott Sloan Show

On Purpose with Jay Shetty