55KRC Thursday Show - Warren Davidson, Rand Paul, Empower U, Jay Ratliff

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The talk station five o five at the five k
r C the talk station Buddy. Some say will.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
A vacation And that's the way the news goes it is,
isn't it?

Speaker 1 (00:37):
Happy Friday? E Brian Thomas here, host of the fifty
five Morning Show, Ay, early voting is open. Did I
mention that over the last couple of days. Yeah, at
a great event last night, got to introduce Christopher Smithman
and the beautiful home up in artof Mount Hope on
what side, and Uh, he's excited and the people in

(00:57):
the room very excited for Christopher smithment a lot of
praise for Christopher good Man. Just appreciate everything he's done
for the city and what he will do for the
city when he's re elected hopefully to CINCINNTI City Council.
Got an option there, and remember the advice from Christopher Smithman.
You got you can vote for nine, don't vote for
all nine spots. There aren't nine good candidates running for

(01:20):
since I City Council. Least that's my subjective opinion. You
draw your own conclusions. Just please do your research. Coming
up at the fifty five CARC Morning Show seven oh
five with Congressman Warren David said, yes, the government is
still shut down. Senate went through the whole motion again yesterday,
and of course the Democrats sticking to their guns saying
no to reopening the government. Is it breaking your heart?

(01:43):
And a little alarm alarm bell ringing for me. I
saw this headline in the Wall Street Journal. I read
the article Republicans cautioned White House on inflicting shutdown pain.
You know, Donald Trump had said the other day that
within four or five days, the Office of Management and
Budget would provide him with the list of all those
extra agencies and employees in government that really aren't necessary
and probably should have been fired a long time ago,

(02:05):
being unnecessary, and of course responsible for part of the
bloat in federal government. They're saying, hey, hey, hey, you
might not want to go down that road because it
might give the Democrats a leg up in the argument
over who is responsible for the shutdown. The suggestion being
if Donald Trump goes through and fudge a bunch of people,
then they're going to point to that and say, see,

(02:27):
here's the reason the government was shut down. Donald Trump
just wanted to be in a position where he could
shut and fire and close down various departments. Look, he's
at it. There's the revelation right there. They can try.
I mean, you'd have to throw that argument out in
the face of the repeated arguments from Democrats that they

(02:47):
want to continue the COVID nineteen era gift, which was
no premium for Obamacare. How can you get away from
the fact that it was a COVID nineteen related thing.
Was it necessary at the time? All right, Well, with
hindsight we might say no, wasn't necessary to shut the
entire economy down during COVID nineteen. Well, with hindsight you
might say no. Do we learn a lot of lessons

(03:08):
for the future about what we need to keep open
and shut down? Yeah? I think we did. As there
been a lot of litigation over the unconstitutional closing of businesses, churches,
free exercise of religion, right to free assembly, et cetera,
et cetera. Firing people for not getting COVID nineteen. Yeah,
a lot of them, and most of them went the
favor of the people who were subject to the abuse,

(03:30):
the people who lost their jobs because they wouldn't get
a COVID nineteen vaccine. You got your job back and
you got some back pay. So yeah, we learned a lot.
So all that was going on and all these abuses
of our rights were taking place, they thought it was
appropriate to give us relief on COVID night or on Obamacare.

(03:50):
Those days are over. The predicate doesn't exist anymore. So
who wins that argument? Well, if people out in the
world are actually paying attention and they walk through the motions,
they realize that, yes, it's the Democrats again. We're looking
at a cr that they rejected yesterday that keeps the
government funding at Biden era funding level. Schumer's got nothing

(04:11):
to complain about other than the far left of his
party who are insisting that you and I be well
permanently held hostage under a one size fits all, which
never fits everybody form of medical care from the government. Golly,
you know, I rail against the idea of, you know,
your life being dependent upon the government. I've always looked

(04:33):
at like, for example, moving over to pharmaceuticals, do you
want your life to be contingent on getting a drug
from a pharmaceutical company? I wouldn't. Nobody wants to be
in that position. But once you're there, you're kind of
on shaky ground. Is that company always going to be there?
Is regulation going to take the drug away from me?
Is some FDA going to say, oh my god, that
drug's no longer approved and you no longer have it.

(04:55):
Your life's impailed. Somebody is responsible for your life. That
would be you under a government medical program. Can you
sue the government for denying medical care? Probably not. They're
usually immune from liability. Can you sue an insurance company
for refusal to pay a claim that should be covered
under your policy. You're damn right you can. And you
can sue them for bad faith. That kind of litigation

(05:16):
goes on all the time. The rights are in your corner.
You have a contract, you're paying your premium. They have
obligations that they owe to you. It's a sort of
a free market concept out here in the real world
of medical care. You can just take that and flush
it down the toilet. I'm sorry, due to limitations on government.
We have a massive debt, we have debt service, we
have all these obligations. We're cutting back on your medical program.

(05:41):
That's the future and an a one size fits all
approach where government is that one size That is not
something I view positively at all. You draw your own conclusions,
Senator Ran Paul seven point thirty with the Senator shut
down Senates and uh, well peace in Israel. We do

(06:05):
have a glimmer of hope and it's a really beautiful
thing that happened yesterday. Get to that minute, pow are you.
Hunter Oswald is going to join the program at eight
too of five talking about the future of jen Z
Conservatism and yay the return of I heart me. The
aviation expert Jay Ratliff got some really good topics to
talk about him, including a batcrap insane idea from West Jet.
I'm not going to do a reveal on that one,

(06:26):
but Jay got in touching the yesterday and opened my
eyes to that one. Wow is all I can say.
So we'll hear from him at eight thirty five one three, seven, four,
nine to fifty five hundred, eight hundred and eighty two
to three talk pound five fifty on AT and T phones.
Will the protests end? Hmm? Well, Hamas has agreed to
the peace deal. Yes the one that Donald Trump pushed

(06:48):
in an effort to end the war in Gaza and
get the hostages return happened yesterday. Trump announced it yesterday.
I am very proud to announce that Israel and Hamas.
Israel and Hamas together have both our nov in the
first phase of our peace plan. This means that all
of the hostages we were released very soon in Israel
withdraw their troops to a integreeate uponline as the first

(07:09):
step towards a strong, durable and everlasting peace. All parties
will be treated fairly. This is a great day for
Arab in the Muslim world, Israel and all surrounding nations,
and the United States of America. We thank our mediators
from Cutter Egypt, Turkey who worked with us to make
this historic and unprecedented event happen. Blessed are the peacemakers.

Speaker 3 (07:29):
Hmm.

Speaker 1 (07:30):
John State expects the hostages to be released by Monday.
Now it's not sure whether he's going to go, but
net and Yahoo and did invite him to address Israeli's
parliament on Parliament on Sunday. Photos from the negotiation room
show senior officials embracing and shaking hands. Hamas leader Khalil

(07:51):
al Hayaya, as well as other senior Hamas officials appear
to be smiling, according to reporting from the meeting. Israel
Prime Minister net Yahoo, in a statement with God's help,
we will bring them all home. A great day for Israel. Tomorrow,
I'll convene the government to approve the agreement and bring

(08:12):
all of our dear hostages home. I thank the heroic
soldiers of the IDF and all the security forces. Thanks
to their courage and sacrifice, we reached this day. I
think from the bottom of my heart, President Trump and
his team were mobilizing the sacred mission of freeing our hostages.
Oh praise for Trump. There's one, Hamas announced in a statement.

(08:35):
After responsible and serious negotiations conducted by the movement and
the Palestinian resistance factions regarding President Trump's proposal with the
aim of ending the war of extermination against our Palestinian
people and the withdraw of the occupation from Gaza, strip
Hamas announces the reaching of an agreement that ends the
war on Gaza, provides for the withdrawal of the occupation,

(08:58):
allows the entry of aid, and implements a prisoner exchange
Hummas on board. They also said, we greatly appreciate the
efforts of the mediators in Cutter Egypt, Turkey, and oh
my god, here's another one. Thanks US President Donald Trump

(09:22):
for his efforts to bring about a final end of
the war, and they'll full withdraw the occupation from God's strip.
Oh my god, Amus in a statement praising Donald Trump
for his efforts on this Who among my listening audience
think the left is actually angry over this development? That
they're pissed off because Trump made some headway into getting

(09:43):
this ridiculous, bloody conflict resolved. Huh, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and Cutter announce that the agreement was reached tonight on
all terms. The mechanism for implementing the first phase of
the Gaza Seats fire agreement first phase, and that's an

(10:05):
important thing to note now. According to Israeli officials, the
living hostages are expected to be released in a single
phase that would take place, they say, within seventy two hours. However,
of the forty five or so hostages that are within
the control of the Hamas, apparently only about twenty are alive.
Hamas has reported that locating the bodies of the dead

(10:28):
hostages may prove to be a bit of a challenge
because they're not located in areas under its control, or
at least all of them are, and they've got bodies
strewn all over the place. I guess they lost track
or where they park them. The hostage families released a
statement say the hostage families wish to express deep gratitude too.

(10:48):
Oh there's another reference, US President Donald Trump and his
team for the leadership and determination that led to this
historic breakthrough, an end of the war, and a comprehensive
agreement to return all the hostages. Well, now there are
certain terms of the agreement remaining unclear. Now the hostage
part seems to be locked in. Israel's going to give

(11:09):
up the hostages it's holding and those that they have
sentenced to prison. Hamas is giving up the ones that
are alive, as well as returning the dead bodies. But
what else is going to happen now? Under the original agreement,
AMAS would have to completely disarm in exchange for the
operation to end the war. More humanitarian aid for the

(11:29):
Palestines would have to be pushed into the area, and
planning for the reconstruction of Gaza that is still to
be determined how and who's going to manage all of that?
But can you imagine the reconstruction of Gaza? Think of
like post World War II Europe bombed out, Yes, but
what emerged from the other side, with great assistance from
the United States, who perceived, hmm, the opportunity to build

(11:51):
a great block of trading partners and lo and behold,
welcome to the NATO Alliance and Western Europe join forces
with the rest of the Western world and bringing about
massive success, only to be undermined by the radical shift
of the left toward socialism. See the economies of Germany
and France right now. Anyway, Sorry to interject that Hamas

(12:17):
out of the original terms also to have been granted
amnesty for willingly giving up their arms, So no ramifications
for those who engage in hostilities against Israel. Specifics on
various aspects of the deal are ambiguous. The cord to
the reporting, including the international quote Board of Peace close

(12:38):
quote that apparently is going to be headed by Donald
Trump as well as former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Board of Peace. The question is what troops are going
to be supporting, you know, by way of the muscle
that this Board of Peace. You know, insofar as the terms, conditions,

(13:00):
the how things unfold in Gaza in the aftermath of
the ceasefire, So you're going to have to have something
there to provide this strength to move forward with this
board of pieces proposals, and so far as Palestinian statehood,
there's no indication of how that could be accomplished. There's

(13:22):
a big looming question mark out there, because of course
we all know that's one of the big demands, most
notably the protesters out looting and ransacking various cities in
our country included. Trump warned that if mass did not
agree to the deal, Israel would have had the full
backing of the United States to unleash a world of hurt.
So there's that peace through strength that Trump's been harping on.

(13:42):
Oh he's evil, he'd get us in the middle of
all these wars and conflict. He sometimes you gotta flex
your muscle. Donald Trump, well, basically gave free reign to
the Israelis to unleash a world of hurt. We're no
longer going to be holding back. I guess we're going
to give them arms. And you know it's going to
get worse than GAYSA if you don't sign this deal,
you think that may have helped bring them as to
the table. Something suggests to me, Yeah, but in the

(14:04):
final analysis, this is a good thing. It's a positive thing.
No more bloody death and Gaza. Hopefully Jay's on the phone.
You'll take your car just a minute, got to run.
It's five nineteen. This is fifty five KRC and iHeart
oh because Jay's on the line. Decided to hold over
the break. Welcome back, Jay, good to hear from me
this morning.

Speaker 4 (14:23):
Hey, good morning, Brian, Hey, welcome to day nine of freedom.

Speaker 5 (14:30):
I did the math.

Speaker 4 (14:31):
I did the math, and it's we are now up
to forty eight billion dollars of savings, which is, to
put adding into context, that is twenty percent of the
total DOGE savings. I think DOGE is up to two
hundred billion. And in nine short days of having twenty
percent of the government shut down, we're up to forty billions,
and which is fantastic. But what kills me as I

(14:54):
listened to Americans for Prosperity and I love those guys,
and listen to your segment earlier this morning here that
they're Republicans and the Conservatives are freaking out where we
got We have Americans for Prosperity and Senator Lankford trying
to pass Stop Government shut Down Act. Yeah, how about
we start bonusing them? How about we go the other way.

(15:16):
We start like million dollar bonuses for everybody. We we
know everybody and works in Washington, DC as a politician
is just a horror.

Speaker 1 (15:25):
We know they pay them extra to fulfill a core
function of their job, which is to pass twelve appropriations
bills annually.

Speaker 4 (15:33):
Yeah, well let's get that done. Well, when they can
shut government down.

Speaker 1 (15:38):
We're paying young people to not commit crimes. That's a
theory launched by the left.

Speaker 4 (15:44):
Yeah, yeah, well they're just a bunch of horrors. So
money talks, And just like corporate bonuses, if they can
shut the government down for fifty percent of the year
and put in save that money for the American people
and they go home, let's give them millions of dollars
to do it. It's the only thing that's going to
drive the behavior is money. And but for crying out loud, Republicans,

(16:07):
quit acting like it's a crisis when the government is
shut down. What they should be doing is sitting down
keeping their mouths shut, instead of trying to tell government.
To tell President Trump, this sounds like something right out
of Central Committee. The Central Committee is trying to tell Trump,
you better be careful, don't cut the size and cost
of government. We don't want to take the advantage of
cutting the bloat the first time we've had this opportunity

(16:29):
in a lifetime. You better not do that because we'd
rather we're we're more concerned about the optics than about
what the American people we're paying for. All this crowd
at the Republican Party.

Speaker 1 (16:41):
The concern about the optics of who's going to be
blamed for the what will ultimately be temporary shutdown.

Speaker 6 (16:49):
So you said, I get it.

Speaker 4 (16:50):
They're more concerned about that than cutting the size of
government and saving us money as we're looking at a
thirty seven trillion dollar deficit. That's where their priorities are.

Speaker 1 (16:59):
It is where they're focused, Isn't that Isn't that a
badge of honor? Jay? Yeah, okay, I'll take the blavors
shut of the government down because I got to accomplish
what we been wanting to do for blanket ever. We
reduced joyous But there you go. I like that message.

Speaker 4 (17:12):
That's what That's what I'm sharing. I want trying to
cheer this on, but I'm hearing American for Prosperity saying
we're behind this. Uh, you know, don't shut Government Down Act.
It's like, are you kidding me? Were any conservatives left out?

Speaker 2 (17:27):
No?

Speaker 1 (17:28):
No, no, no. That that I think is a good thing.
It takes all of the wind out of the whole
concept of government shutdowns. There's no harm with the government shutdown.
Things remain kind of status quo. This this contract, Yeah,
we contain.

Speaker 4 (17:41):
We continue to fund it at Biden's level. That's that's
the so little bit.

Speaker 1 (17:45):
There's no more hostage taking with this shutdown.

Speaker 7 (17:47):
I'll take it.

Speaker 4 (17:48):
Take the hostages, you know, I hear about I hear about, Well,
these poor people in the federal government. I mean they
have some uncertainty with their job. Now, isn't that true
for all of us?

Speaker 1 (18:00):
But the shutdowns are one of.

Speaker 4 (18:02):
Us out here in the rural world. We could be
fired today and we'd have to go figure it out.
These people in the federal government are coddled adult children
who don't work that hard. Usually federal union employees.

Speaker 3 (18:14):
Figure it out.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
I'll concede that point. Considering what's going on at our
heart media right now, all I'm gonna let it go
and I'm gonna leave it at that. Jay, close up
with your statement, because we're out of time.

Speaker 4 (18:24):
Yes, thank you, and any conclusion adult vote Rhino and
don't vote Democrat. I really appreciate you giving me the
last five of that.

Speaker 1 (18:31):
Thanks, Jay, appreciate it. That's five twenty seven. If I've
seen the station, now's the time you got to reach
out to cover since it's ownsman Warren Davidson, followed by
Senator Ran Paul. That'll take place at the seven o'clock
out Putter Oswald doing an a power You seminar on
the future of gen Z Conservatism and Jay Rattlift Love
Jay Ratliffe love having the conversation with him. We got

(18:52):
a particularly interesting and comical topic with Jay coming up
at eight thirty the mean time. Over to the phones, Tom,
thanks for calling this morning as always, welcome back.

Speaker 5 (19:00):
Yeah, good morning, and uh yeah love listening to Jay's
bone call.

Speaker 1 (19:04):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (19:05):
He needs he needs to be a little more passionate though,
I mean, I know you can't you can't really tell
how he feels about that. I appreciate Jake. Keep up
the good.

Speaker 7 (19:15):
Work, buddy. I'm looking at these two different stories. You
got the government shut down and then you got the
crap going on in the Middle East, and they have
some similarities and some distinct differences. Obviously, you got two
sides lobbing stuff at each other, and over in the
Middle East, actual literally people are dying, literally, I mean
people are getting killed literally. And over here you got

(19:38):
the Democrats saying people are going to die. So that's
a bit of a difference. But there's still things going
back and forth and and all that, and we wanted
we I mean, we generally want both of them to stop.
And so it's good thing that the fighting at least
the fighting is sot to stop. So if the if
you know, in over in the Middle East, if if

(19:58):
nobody's firing and bullets at each other, that's a good thing.
We we applaud that. Yes, thank you very much everyone
involved in that. But just like what the government shut down, though,
even when the government gets back together and it is
fully functioning again, what's really changed, What what's really gonna
be different? And I think that's the part that that

(20:22):
people get scared about and causes them to make a
decision to do something they didn't want to do because
they know if they don't like you brought up Trump's threat, Look,
you guys aren't gonna accept this plan. We're just gonna
start giving Israel more more weapons, and they're just gonna
demolish it. And and so maybe that's what moved them
the Masta finally go okay, okay, all right, all right,

(20:44):
let's talk let's talk serious here. And something like that
is probably going to make the left, the Democrats go,
you know what, Okay, enough's enough, because this is actually
now we're to the point where it's gonna hurt. I
don't know what that is. Because right now, if the
government we're to go back to get and start functioning,
a lot of these people, if not most of them,

(21:05):
are gonna get back pay. And so you know, Jay's
got figures that he's keep a track of how much
of those figures will still be in place once everybody
gets their back pay. I don't know if how much
of a savings it'll be. We actually paid people. We're
gonna pay people to not do anything. But seems to
be like a government way of the handling thing, not
just Democrats but Republicans. Do you know, I like, here,

(21:27):
here's some money to go do nothing, Like what what
what are we talking about here? I don't understand this
doesn't make any sense. I know that's not true In
my world and for for most of us who are
out there going to work every day. If I don't
do anything, I don't function and produce something. At least
show up for work and be there and try. I'm
not getting paid. Well, I think that's a great incentive

(21:50):
for people to have. We should make sure that that's
always there so that keeps people motivated. It'd be nice
if people were self motivated, but they're not. I mean,
you would just just be honest. It takes something to
drive us to do things. That's that's how we are.
So that's okay. The paper, Well, we got to have adults.
We got to have adults. Keep that there. You gotta
have parents to teach the children. There's consequences. Oh here's

(22:14):
some good things you'll get if you do this. You
got to hold them to it. People got to be
held accountable, period, and that's the only way to do it.
And there's too many people who don't want to be
held accountable. They want whatever they want, they want it
for nothing. They want their way, and they're going to
stalk their feet and thrash on the floor until they
get it like a five year old. That's said, and
that's on both sides of the aisle. Don't vote Rhino,

(22:37):
don't vote Democrat. Have a great game, Ryan.

Speaker 1 (22:39):
Thanks Tom, I appreciate your ing through the talk station
and a very happy Friday Eve. Stack is stupid calls
are welcome, but in the absence there, oh, we can
dive into the stack of stupid. It's been a while
since we've really gotten through a stack of stupid by
perk phone calls. Anyway, five one, two three talk. Let's
start with a typical fright story showing up on Friday Eve,

(23:05):
Florida well being booked. While being booked into a Florida
lock up on drug and trespassing charges, man named Walter
Fremeyer had to go through the X ray machine the
jailers used to well prevent attempts to smuggle contraband into
the jail. Fifty one year old Fremeyer not found to

(23:27):
established weapons or narcotics on his person, but they say
according to the Smoking Gun Funny website, he was still
packing and there's an X ray image. I guess it
was from him during the going through the X ray machine.
As senior. The adjacent image when Fremeer went through the
body scammer corrections workers spotted what they described as a

(23:48):
full size thermous inside the detainee's body. You hit the
nail on the head there, Joseph, I love the commentary
from the smoking gun. Sadly, police records did not include
the manufacturer or dimensions of the thermos which entered Fremeyer's

(24:09):
body a day earlier. The according to the Polk County
Sheriff Grady Judd, quote the exit ramp close quote phrasing. Farmar,
described as having a lengthy criminal record, busted Saturday evening
by for trespassing on an Amtrak property in winter Haven.
Frisk turned to a glass pipe with burned residue consisting

(24:32):
of methan fhetamine. It a note in the Affidavid that
the fremera reportedly admitted to using methan fetamine for the
last twenty eight years. What, while being taken a jail,
allegedly warned an officer quote if you arrest me, I
will find you and kill you close quote. What they

(24:54):
reminded him was illegal to make such a threat. He
then said, good, I'm going to kill you. So charge
meaning charge Meyer locked up in lieu of a twelve
thousand dollars bona two felony and two misdemeanor counts. The
thermos was removed from Freymeyer's ractum at a local hospital,
although he has not been charged with trying to smuggle
prohibited items into the jail. Is there reminded that South

(25:21):
Park episode Joe a couple of them. Okay, now you
draw your own conclusions on this. Does bad taste allow
people to allow police to prosecute you. We go to Kentucky, Stanton, Kentucky,
particularly where a guy's facing charges over his Halloween decorations. Stanton,

(25:45):
just outside of Lexington, where they say please say. Fifty
year old Stephen Markham displayed fake hanging body bags that
were labeled quote District judge close quote and another one
labeled simply mayor some head ropes around the next. Markham
charged with intimidation and terroristic threatening. I got a kick

(26:05):
out of this. His arraignment postponed after the judge recused himself,
and I wonder who the district judge was that he
was depicting in his front yard anyway. According to Eddie Barnes,
Powell County Judge Executive, if you're going to express yourself,
don't do it in a way that could be harmful

(26:25):
to others or threatening to others. Seeing by seeing those
hanging up and the representatives marked on them, it's somewhat alarming,
but is it ticket worthy. I'm not saying this is
done in good taste. But Markham, apparently in dispute with
the city over some zoning violations, found to hook up
legal utilities, creating what the city called potential fire, has THEIRS,

(26:48):
sanitations and health risk at his property, and last month
a judge find him two hundred and fifty bucks and
gave him thirty days to comply. Shortly after that is
when he put up the threatening Halloween decorations. I think,
while it is in bad taste, I wouldn't recommend anyone
doing something like that. I think it's protected. And I

(27:09):
made all this swirling anger against political parties back and
forth again going back to while it is a bad idea,
there may be repercussions. People might judge him based upon
the content of his speech and draw conclusions about the
content of his character because of what he did. He
may suffer as a consequence of what he did. The

(27:30):
public at large may reject him. But I don't think
what he did is criminal. By forty five fifty five KR.
See the talk station Jimmy Carey Fireplace a KRC the
talk station five fifty fifty five KR CED talk station.
It's FRIDAYE. You're going to go to the phones five
one three, seven fifty five eight hundred eighty two three
talk for a die back of the stackers too. But

(27:52):
I've got Karl on the line. Karl, Happy Friday, E.

Speaker 8 (27:54):
Welcome, Happy Friday Eve. Brian Say, on October sixth, you
had Judge Christopher McDowell on your radio show and he
was speaking about shenanigans at the courthouse. Yes, sir, he
was mentioning that a lot of important court cases have
been removed from the Clerk of Court's.

Speaker 1 (28:15):
Website, specifically felony murder cases, not all of them, just
some of them, leading him to question how some got
removed from the docket, therefore not available for folks like
you and I to see, but some didn't. So he's
still investigating that. He's issued some directives to find out
and uncover the reasons behind that.

Speaker 8 (28:35):
Yes, well, I performed my own independent investigation yesterday. I
went down to the courthouse and I sat in on
three cases, and none of the cases were listed in
the Court Index newspaper. And let me explain what the
Court Index newspaper is to your listeners. That is a
newspaper that gets printed daily down there that has all

(28:58):
of the activities, all of the cases that are being
heard in the courthouse. And there were some pretty interesting cases.
I would like to follow up on the cases at
some point and find out what the resolutions to these
cases are. The one case, Judge Peck had a failure
to stop after an accident and the defendant was found
not guilty in that case. Judge laid dank Locker had

(29:22):
a case where a pizza delivery driver was involved in
a fatal car accident. There were eight lawyers in the
room for that case. They are seeking a fairly high settlement.
Judge Virginia Talent, who happened to be the former assistant
city manager, was charging the jury in a felonious assault case. Now,
if there are any members of the media who are

(29:44):
listening to this this morning, they may want to start
covering the courthouse because there's a lot of interesting cases
that are occurring.

Speaker 3 (29:52):
Well, yeah, down at the courthouse.

Speaker 1 (29:54):
That was the judge's point. There are some really interesting cases.
The public might want to know about But how would
the media know about it if it's not in the
court docket. That's the boiled down point. I'm with you,
I'd like to know, But you know what, he just
revealed a story that mainstream media should or local media
should be reporting on. How in the hell is it
that cases are not listed on the docket, which is
the public record we're entitled to have. Let's start there

(30:16):
and then maybe we'll get some reporting on the actual
underlying cases themselves. Carl, appreciate it. Thanks for the call,
Beck over the stack is stupid. Apparently, minutes after vandalizing
seventeen cars in Missouri college parking lot, a nineteen year
old sophomore engaged in what they describe as a lengthy

(30:41):
chat GPT conversation during which he had confessed to the
crime and asked about the possibility of getting caught and wondered, quote,
is there any way they could know it was me?
He asked out of chat GPT This, according to the
probable cause statement issue by the police. The guy, Ryan Schaeffer, arrested,
charged with felony property damage and for a rampage Sunday

(31:02):
at the Missouri State University parking lot they led Schaeffer,
shattered car windows, ripped off side Meares Dennenhood's broke windshields
all around three am. When confronted with surveillance footage, Yeah yeah,
they have that as well as other evidence, Shaeffer said
that he could see the resemblance between the suspect and himself.
Will thank you, And at that point Schaeffer reportedly consented

(31:22):
to a search of his phone. That review of the
device revealed location data putting him at or near this
scene of the crime, as well as quote troubling dialogue exchanged.
This defendant seems to have had with artificial intelligence software
installed on the phone.

Speaker 2 (31:40):
Idiots doing idiot things because they're idiots.

Speaker 1 (31:43):
Heymen, brother. The chat ept conversation filled with typos, they
acknowledge open with Schaeffer asking how fworded am I? Separately
asking will I go to jail? He actually spelled a
quill I go to jail without the you, but will
I think is what he intended and after the AI

(32:04):
program quote gave tips about the potential outcome of getting
caught or being involved in this kind of behavior. Shaffer
type quote what if I smashed the S word out
of multiple cars. This is of course, all on his
cell phone that he gave to police. Cops say, Shaffer
began to become aggressive towards chat GP thing, saying I

(32:28):
will kill all u f orders. Upon return to the
Springfield apartment, Shaffer began to quote wind down a bit,
declaring I got away with it last year, and I
don't think there's any way they could know my face,
adding it felt really nice to f their s word up.

(32:50):
This guy should have been a playwright. His eloquence with
the English language and grammatical accuracy is just really mind numbing,
acknowledging that he warded up all those useless f warders cars,
writing also that the victims all deserve to get raped
and murdered. Class act. You dumbass, thank you bus out

(33:22):
of nowhere, Joe. I appreciate that when five efty six
efty five cares to the talk station Plenty to talk
about the six o'clock hour, calls are welcome. Then we'll
get the Congress from war david Son at seven oh five,
followed by Senator Ran Paul at seven thirty. I'm sure
who we can stick around for that today's tough headlines
got you're involved and all sides rather of the Ledger
that were involved, all the countries that help with negotiations,
Hamas Israel, all specifically mentioning and giving credit to Donald Trump,

(33:45):
as much as that really angers the left, and I'm
sure they are pulling their hair out success for Donald
Trump in so far as the Middle East piece is concerned,
continuing a tradition see the Abraham Accords. You know, I
don't put much value on a Nobel Peace Prize anymore,
considering Barack Obama got one for doing literally nothing, and

(34:05):
I'm sure he's not the only one. But can you
imagine how angry the Nobel Peace Prize committee would be
to have to consider even consider Donald Trump as worthy
as he might be for that. Anyway, two years of
war in Gazam may very well be coming to a halt.
We're going to find out, and you know, I, recognizing

(34:28):
who the parties in this agreement are Hamas terrorist organization
in Israel, I can certainly envision this thing falling apart.
But a huge positive step in the right direction yesterday
with the announcement of well both sides signing off on
phase one of this peace plans. Critical to that and
I didn't mention in the last hour. But I got

(34:49):
to get this in here because where the Palestinians were
going to go? Where are the residents of Gaza going
to go? They're all starving, They're in a war zone.
Nobody wanted to open their borders. No one wanted a
flood of refugees coming in. But apparently the crossing at
Rafa Rafa crossing with Egypt will be open for the
purpose of facilitating aid deliveries and allowing for the entry

(35:12):
and exit of Palestinians. So that pretty significant hurdle right there,
I think probably helped a long way to get this
UH Phase one process going. Phase two. Question mark Phase
three is profit though? Right? Joe five one, three, seven, four,
nine fifty five hundred, eight hundred and eighty two to
three talk found five fifty on AT and T phones
real quick here. We want to let you know Congressman
Warren Davidson's coming up at seven oh five talk about

(35:34):
the government shutdown. Yes, they voted again to keep the
government shutdown. Thank you Democrats in the Senate. Peace in Israel.
We'll talk about Congress with that. With Congressman Davidson, followed
by Senator Ran Paul on the shutdown, the spying going
on in the Senate. Talked about that yesterday with Judge Ednapolitano,
as well as peace in Israel with Senator Ran Paul.
At seven thirty Hunter Oswald, he's learning power Youse Seminar.

(35:56):
He's going to be talking about the future of jen
Z servatism at class I believe take place to ninth.
That's tonight at the Empower You Seminars showroom. There are
studios there at three hundred Great Oaks Drive in the
Great Oaks Campus or stream it online. It should be
a really good conversation with Hunter. We'll learn about that

(36:18):
at eight oh five, and of course Thursdays, last Friday
Eve I heart media aviation expert Jay Ratliffe. Some of
that else talking about with Judge Ennen of Poltano and
Congressman Thomas Massey. If I think we did talk about
with Massy. The subject has come up before, and it's
the subject that I agree completely with Napolitano about this
whole eminent threat thing about blowing up boats in the Caribbean,
thousands of miles away from the US border. We have

(36:40):
the authority to launch in wage war indiscriminately. I would argue,
the answer apparently is yes, at least as far as
the Senate was concerned. Yesterday they shot down a measure
that would have required President Trump to seek Congressional approval
before authorizing military action in the Caribbean. And I would argue,
as well as elsewhere, see your United States Constitution forty

(37:04):
eight in favor fifty one against obviously party lines, with
Lisa Murkowski and yes, Senator Ran Paul voting with the
Democrats in favor of the measure. Fetterman, Democrat from Pennsylvania.
He just sided with the Republicans, which he's been doing
a lot of late. Senator Ted Cruz didn't vote, took
a pass on it. So we've been launching the tax

(37:26):
on boats. Who have been four of them so far.
You've seen the video footage, I presume of it. Out
of nowhere, rocket blows a boat up. They're all dead.
And Donald Trump goes on television and the screen and
just praises the idea that our military blew people up
and claiming while he did designate them as a terrorist organization,
it's not an imminent threat under any circumstance. I would

(37:48):
argue anyway, the White House described the strikes as part
of its campaign against these Latin American groups for smuggling
fentanyl and cocaine to the US, which of course is deadly.
They designated the drug cartels and other groups as foreign
terrorist organizations and claiming that by labeling them as such,
they can use lethal force. Now, take it out of

(38:12):
the context of the United States government. Put in the
context to some other government. They label us a terrorist
organization and justify military force against the United States of
America or at least some of its people, the ones
that they identified. That's a dangerous road to go down,
particularly given modern military technology, which is readily available to
anybody who has an Amazon account. Anyway, the measure was

(38:36):
introduced by a couple of Democrats. Anyway, They cited the
nineteen seventy three War Powers Resolution that requires presidents to
obtain congressional authorization for hostilities abroad. Now, I would argue
that the War Powers Resolution itself is unconstitutional. If you're
going to wage war, you must declare war. There's no

(38:56):
authorizations for use of military force packed in our constitution.
That's sort of an overlooked over the years. But you know,
I tend to be a literalist and a traditionalist when
it comes to my views of the Constitution. Anyway, there
is the War Powers Resolution Act. It does require presidents
to obtain congressional authorization. That's the point I made yesterday.
At least go to Congress and get an authorization for
you some military force, because it legitimizes that. It doesn't

(39:18):
appear as if you're going it alone. You've got the
support of elected officials which represent the will of the
American people. Seems like a reasonable step to go through. Anyway.
This shot down proposal in the Senate would have barred
the United States forces from engaging in combat against non
state actors like drug smugglers unless formally approved by Congress.

(39:43):
Republicans in the debate yesterday said the measure would limit
the president's authority as commander in chief, wouldn't allow him
to take swift action if America was attacked by a
foreign enemy. I'm throwing a giant Barbara streisand flag on that.
He does have the power if we are under threat,
if someone is attacking us, the president does not have
to go to Congress and had a War Powers Resolution

(40:06):
authorization or a declaration of war. He's the commander in chief.
It requires immediate action. That's that concept of eminent threat.
What immediate threat do we face from the cartel boats
floating around two thousand or one thousand miles away from
US zero? Where is the boat going? I don't think
we really know. We can assume it's coming here. United

(40:28):
States is where the profits come from. But there's a
whole lot of islands and other opportunities for that boat
to pull over before they reach our international or our waters,
subject subjecting them to guess coast Guard law enforcement, and
prosecution in American court systems where they would not be
eligible for the death penalty. I might quickly interject. Democrats

(40:51):
made a point the Constitution clearly and intentionally places the
power to declare war in the hands of this body Congress. Yeah,
you know, I hate to have to I agree with
shift on anything. But Senator Tom Cotton, Republican said quote

(41:12):
the resolution prevents the president from taking offensive action, claiming
that Trump wouldn't be able to act quickly to protect
the US allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia. Is
that what this is about? Act quickly to protect Israel
and Saudi Arabia. Now, I don't know how that came
up in conversation. I guess they were considering the scope

(41:34):
and breadth of how this, if passed, piece of legislation,
would impact the President. But I'm wondering about this defense
obligation with Israel and Saudi Arabia neither a while both
of whom are considered I guess, on some level allies
in the United States, what would prevent us from engaging

(41:59):
militarily in those regions? And do we really have an
obligation to do that. More fundamentally, would an attack on
Israel or Saudi Arabia represent an eminent threat to the
United States of America? And there are many who would
argue no, those countries are thousands and thousands of miles
away from US, even though we're friends with them. It

(42:19):
isn't an imminent attack on the United States of America.
And I honestly do not understand or know whether we
have a mandatory defense obligation like we do with NATO
countries for Israel in Saudi Arabia, I tend to think
not so. Senator Paul, I'm sure we'll ch chime in
on this since he's one of the ones that voted
know on it, but he is, like Congressman Thomas Massey,

(42:42):
a believer in what the language of the Constitution says.
And go back to the fact that Donald Trump's not
going to be president forever. You've got to find that
amount of time. Will a Democrat ever get elected again?
Will someone that you disagree with get elected again? Will
someone you disagree with enter office with amazing and seemingly
unlimited powers of launching and waging war down the road,

(43:07):
you may feel differently about it. Six fifteen right now
five on three seven four nine fifty five hundred, eight
hundred and eighty two three Talk QC Kinetics. Get in
touch with QC Cannet. It's six twenty here fifty five
Garo City Talk Station, Happy Friday, Eve five on three
seven fifty five hundred, eight hundred eight two three Talk
War Pound five fifty on eighth and t phones over

(43:27):
to the phones, will go see what Cleveland Owl's got
this morning. Welcome back, sir, It's good to hear from you.

Speaker 5 (43:33):
Good morning, Brian. I just would like to comment on
the President doing his preemptive actions with these drug boats.
I can see his points. I think a lot of
what's going on here is pretty much gorilla warfare. With

(43:55):
the non shooting war. We're looking at one hundred thousand
citizens being killed by the drugs every year. So it
may not be an imminent threat these boats, but it
will result in many, many depths. If they'd make it
to the United States.

Speaker 1 (44:15):
It would and deliver their Well, was that boat headed?
Was that boat headed to the United States? Or there's
four boats? Were they headed to the United States?

Speaker 5 (44:23):
I think ultimately the drugs are going to make it
to the United States. Think where another They may be
going to the Bahamas, And.

Speaker 1 (44:32):
But you don't know.

Speaker 5 (44:33):
Yeah, you don't know for sure.

Speaker 1 (44:36):
There you go. That's the point. And no, that's the point.

Speaker 5 (44:39):
Yeah, this is a gorilla warfare though well.

Speaker 1 (44:42):
No, I mean, you can call it what you want.
You can call them narco terrorists, you can call them,
I don't know, people trying to make a living whatever.
They're two thousand miles away from us. This is not
something we should be able to just go ahead and
unilaterally decide to blow up. We don't know where those
people were going, and what if they got it wrong.
What if the boxes that are on that boat were
just like food supplies and they were headed to some
island nation of delivered aid or something. Whoops, Sorry, I

(45:07):
mean that's what the whole concept to do process about.
That's why we have a coastguard. If they get near
our waters and have drugs in the boat, it's illegal
to be ferrying narcotics in US waters. Arrest them for that,
lock them up, and throw away the key. I don't
have any problem with being harsh on drug dealers. They're
not subjected to the death penalty in the United States
of America. And I hate the idea of governments being

(45:28):
able to unilaterally decide who gets to live and who doesn't,
because there but for the grace of God go I.

Speaker 5 (45:37):
Absolutely well, I understand, And no, that's what debate's all about.
Amen as as always, don't democrat or rhino.

Speaker 1 (45:48):
That wonderful man, thanks al See, that's the idea of
the exchange. He doesn't have to agree with me. I
don't want to defend drug dealers. I hate them. But
every time we talk about drug dealers, I want to
turn back and say, who's creating the demand? You are

(46:15):
drugs are bad for you. They will kill you, They'll
ruin your life, they'll turn you against family members, they'll
turn family members against you. You'll end up homeless, out
on the street. You'll die a painful death. Look at
the faces of myth. You're guaranteed to look like one
of those images in about a couple of years. Maybe
if you're continuing to use math, it will kill you.
Isn't that enough of a deterrent. I'm not saying, you know,

(46:38):
I used to be let people do what they want.
I'm against criminalization of self abuse. But you know what,
I kind of turned around the corner on that little
while back, because this self abuse ends up rippling over
and impacting you and me. We end up paying the price.

(46:58):
Homeless encampments filled with just chronic drug abusers, defecating everywhere,
throwing garbage around. They don't care about keeping their space
clean and free to bere and nice looking. It detracts
from property values. It ruins cities that closes business, It
increases crime. The ripple effect is the problem. If this

(47:19):
boiled down to someone abusing themselves and then dying in
a corner on their own, yes we can have some
sympathy for him, Yes we can hopefully can can find
some resources they can get into rehab. But because you
and I ter up shouldering the burden for all the
downside that goes along with just letting people do whatever
the hell they want. No, I'm kind of against the
concept anymore. But this is bigger than that. This is

(47:47):
activity that could end up getting us into a literal
shooting war. I know Venezuela doesn't pose any existential threat
to America. Their military couldn't last five minutes against the
American military. We would bomb the living crap out of
them if they declare war on us, because we're declaring
war on their people. They want to go down that

(48:08):
road knocked themselves out, But that's the risk you run.
Do you want to jeopardize your son or daughter serving
the American military because some president at some future point
in time decides he's going to unilaterally drop a bomb
on a country that I don't know, may very well too,

(48:29):
if not unilaterally, with the help of their supporters, engage
in a coordinated effort to go back after us because
of something we did militarily. Venezuela is CosIng up with
the Russians. Venezuela is coosing up with the Chinese indirectly,
China's coosing up with the Russians. And all other quote
unquote adversaries in the world. What if they joined forces
and said, you know what, We're not going to stand

(48:49):
for that kind of thing anymore. Just a thought. That's
why the use of military forces should come after serious
contemplation and approval of at least so some of our
elected officials in Congress by way of a seventy three
War Powers Act Authorization for Use of Military Force, despite
how I feel about that particular Act six twenty six

(49:10):
to fifty five KERR CD talk Station Peter Sherik caller
Williams seven Hills Outstand talk Station at SIXOT thirty. Here
fifty five kr CD talk station Friday Eve time for
some local stories, although you can still feel free to call.
It's always five one, three, seven, four nine fifty five hundred,
eight hundred eighty two to three talk over the local stories. Tonight,

(49:32):
it's a big night. It's the debate afteb per of
All against Corey Bowman. Here we go, see it's going
to be live. It's at Zaber University, James and Caroline
Duff Banquet Center. Hours of debate eight pm to nine pm,
with doors opening at seven pm. Hosted by the Cincinni

(49:53):
Choir partnering with Zaver University and Ohio Debate Commission and
Cincinnati City Cable. So they're going to be answering questions
on issues regarding obviously downtown excuse me, Downtown Cincinnati. Of course,
election days fast in prosing. Of course, it's already early
voting period. So if you can get in there and
vote for Corey Bowman, I hope you can do that.

(50:15):
So again, Dorsa. But at seven Debate eight to nine pm,
A mission is free, but you need a ticket to
get in. First come, first served, as far as seating
is concerned. Debate moderated by Enquire Opinion and Engagement Editor
Kevin Aldridge. The questions will be asked by panelists Karl
Weisser and Enquire Politics editor rather Charles mc claire excuse me,

(50:39):
Claire Claire McKinney, and Xavier Newswire editor in chief. So
there's your panelists, and you know who the people answering
the questions are. So here's the rules. No backpacks, purses,
bags larger than six inch clutch style will be permitted.
Clear bags only prohibited items camera bags, cinch bags, brief cases,

(51:00):
computer backpacks, fanning packs luggage of any kind. Usual suspects there.
You can't bring political signs, you can't bring noisemakers. You
can't bring campaign materials into the Cintas Center outside different story,
I suspect no political flyers, campaign materials, or other signage
may be distributed or displayed outside. See the next sentence

(51:22):
answered my question. I was wrong on my presumption on that.
So you can't display anything outside Cintas Center or on
Xavier University property. Hmm. My constitutional free speech brain is
trying to contemplate that debate rules emphasizing mutual respect for
the candidates and the moderator. We'll wait and see how

(51:45):
that unfolds. Now, how to watch it? You have several options.
You can live stream at the Enquirer website, Cincinnati dot com,
or City Cable website. I guess they have a link
there on the Enquirer's reporting against Cincinnati for the details.
Local twelve is also going to simulcast it, but we
believe Joe and I believe since it's not currently on

(52:06):
the live television schedule that that's probably the Local twelve
website will be streaming it, which is Local twelve dot com.
So check out the debate tonight one hour time and
I wish Corey Bowman all the best. I got to
see him last night at the Smithaman fundraiser. He made
a brief appearance because he had to head off to
do debate prep. So he is prepping for it. Okay,

(52:30):
you can saygabaye who THHC gummies and drinks. Mike Dewines
imposed the ninety day ban on what they describe as
intoxicating hemp, including THHC infused gummies and beverages. Decision after
months of waiting around for lawmakers to impose their own restrictions,
so he went and went it alone. Executive order bands
of sales consumer products containing intoxicating hemp, including THHC infuse

(52:56):
beverages and gummies. Now my understanding of intoxicating hemp. Hemp's
legal like point three percent or or rather point zero
three percent of THC in it. It's some really low amount. Well,
they figured a way to concentrate that and turning into
a concentrated amount, so it's not under the current law,
it's sort of outside of it. So this, I guess,
is going to deal with that. We go back to

(53:18):
twenty eighteen, the Farm Bill legalized ham nationwide as long
as it has no more than point three percent of
delta nine THHC, which is what produces the high. So
we are allowed to have industrial hemp in CB and
have CBD oil which is derived from this hemp. CBD
oil and CBD products are not subject to this ban.

(53:39):
And I think the way it worked, and someone smarter
than me, I kind of drew a parallel to the
poppy plant. You know, from poppies, you got opium. From opium,
you got morphine. From morphine, you got heroin. You know,
you need a bigger high. So I think you boil
down that. What's the minimal amount of that DHC you
can find in them, concentrate that and woila you have

(53:59):
in time oxicating hemp, which is different than apparently THC
hemp from regular marijuana plants with a higher concentration. Bottom line,
as we have you this, they're continuing to work it
out here in the state of Ohio six thirty five,
and apparently a lot of people are getting high and
crashing cars. Is a new study out finding that more
than forty percent of drivers who died in car accidents

(54:22):
over the past six years had elevated risks of well
thh elevated levels of THHC in their blood. Right, it
cats you high, it impairs you. You're more likely to wreck.
Not rocket science folks. Six thirty six fifty five k
se de talk station. Uh, plumb type plumbing. It's always

(54:43):
plumbing done right. You are in wonderfully capable hands. When
it comes to Rick's forty year fifty five car see
detalk station five one three seven fifty eight hundred eighty
two to three talk Time five fifty on EH and
T phone after the top of the air news Congressman
Warren Davidson, Oh, Joe Strucker had a brilliant idea. I
want to elaborate on it for tonight's Bowman Purval debate

(55:06):
a drinking game. So every time someone says the word
it was Trump, correct a shot when Trump's name or
the maga word, that's one shot. Now, Joe did not
specify what type of beverages Joe's going to go with Shlivovitz.
You may choose something that's a little milder in terms

(55:28):
of alcohol content. Now, if anyone says the word he
utters jd Vance's name or says jd Vance's half brother
or brother or words to that effect. That is a
chug moment. So whatever's left in your glass you must
consume completely. Is there a requirement for the size of
glass we're talking about, Joe, your discretion? All right? Well,

(55:52):
shot glass would be no different than I mean, under
the rules of the game, chugging or taking a shot
will be the same. So I reckon at least a
six sounds class and that would be drunk by eight ten. Well,
I rarely stay awake after eight o'clock since I get
up at two thirty, Joes, so I'm not quite sure
I could make it, But if I did watch through

(56:12):
the whole debate, I would probably be a physical wreck
tomorrow morning. Anyway, if you've got other rules of the game,
feel free to chime in give me a call. Without
further ado, though I found this to be extraordinarily troubling,
related to really not much of anything we're talking about,
unless you want to consider the concept that Donald Trump
has labeled Antifah antifa if you prefer a domestic terrorist organization,

(56:35):
going back to my conversation earlier, if you label someone
a domestic terrorist organization, that's domestic. If you're able to
international terrorist organization. You can blow them up anywhere in
the four corners of the world. Now you're going to
be blowing up Antifa folks here in the United States.
What is the prerequisite for use of deadly force? If
you're on American soil and you're a citizen, you have
to have eminent apprehension of grievous bodily harm or death,

(56:58):
and it must be reasonable. I thought I was going
to die. This guy's lunging at it from me with
a deadly weapon. You can shoot him.

Speaker 2 (57:07):
Now.

Speaker 1 (57:07):
If ANTIVA is not engaged in eminent apprehension of bodily harmed,
they're just throwing molotov cocktails. That's a crime. If it's organized.
It could be a reco charge. If they're organizing amongst themselves,
and go after them and throw them in federal prisons
for a very long time. But you couldn't kill them.
Can you imagine the outrage if your favorite group was protesting.
Maybe they got a little out of control, maybe they

(57:28):
engaged in violent behavior, but they didn't threaten anybody's life,
and the authorities responded with deadly force. Say, oh, I
don't know, Kent State University, maybe that's not something we
embrace conceptually here in the United States. But this, in
spite of that reality, is extraordinarily troubling. You might want

(57:48):
to consider where you're sending your young people to college.
City University of New York Graduate Center is offering a course.
It's described as an English course. It's titled Global Antifa.
Accord to Washington Times reporting, the required coursework includes completion of,
in the words of the syllabus, research projects that contribute

(58:11):
to the work of global movements fighting fascism. A director
of an outfit called Defending Education, which is an organization
fighting for to avoid indoctrination and classrooms, Ryan Staley I,
said courses such as this have no place in American institutions.
A higher education put it up in similar militant co

(58:35):
research is actually showing up in k K through twelve
education as well. But the course offered by the City
University apparently has learning goals that include familiarizing and again
going back to the syllabus, students with contemporary theories of
fascism and anti fascism. Pause on that contemporary theory of

(59:00):
fascism and anti fascism. You know what that means. That
means a rewarding the definition of what fascism is, because
these idiots don't know what it is since they go
around accusing Donald Trump but being a fascist. But ah, yes,
I set it out loud again anyway, familiarizing students with
contemporary theories of fascism and anti fashion, as well as related
critical theories concerning racial capitalism, gender and sexuality, imperialism, et cetera.

(59:30):
That's core of the report from Defending Education. Given the
topic of the seminar to this class will explicitly interdisciplinary
will also oriented is also oriented towards militant co research,
and students will be encouraged to develop research projects that
contribute to the work of global movements fighting fascism. You're

(59:52):
gonna pay for this course. I'm sure there's some young
militant that will say out loud, yes, I will. The
course explodes quote ways in which the realm of esthetics
in general and more specifically particular domains such as literature
and visual culture relate to fascism and anti fashion fascism,
discussions of various research methodologies with a focus on histories

(01:00:14):
and examples of militant co research. Close quote. I have
no idea what that is psychobabble. You love this? The
professor teaching the class Global Anti Fall got a PhD
from Chlobe University, works in the fields of ready environmental
humanities and post colonial eco criticism. I swear they're making

(01:00:43):
this stuff up as they go along. Post colonial echo criticism.
That's a field. It's a bunch of people sitting around
a table in a drum circle, getting high and contemplating
their nabels and making up stuff. Now, can Trump launch

(01:01:04):
a drones strike into that classroom since they're anti file
folks and they're engaging in domestic terrorism by preaching their
anti file like like theories and ideology. Part of me
wants to say yeah. But practicularly speaking, the answer is no.
Six forty seven right now, Mike, hang on, I'm gonna
take your call. Just to the second I gonna mention no,
I don't have to. I want to mentioned Gate of

(01:01:25):
Heaven at six fifty one for the five KRC detalk
station five one three seven fifty two three talk pound
five fifty on AT and T phones. Congressman Warren Davidson
at the top of their name is followed by Senator
Ran Paul It's at seven thirty we're gonna hear from
Mike now. He Mike, thanks for holding over the brake.
Welcome to the program.

Speaker 6 (01:01:43):
Hi Ryan, about your drinking game for tonight? Are in
the debate?

Speaker 5 (01:01:47):
You get a ice?

Speaker 6 (01:01:49):
A illegal alien to that always?

Speaker 1 (01:01:52):
You know, speaking of that, we did have some illegal
alien problems here locally. Announcement of an arrest of some
organized criminals. Uh from gosh, where was it South America
or something like that. I just saw that local story. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:02:07):
And if they say illegally and you got to take
a shout at hose Clerba.

Speaker 1 (01:02:11):
Well, no, we can't paint with that kind of broad brush. Mike.
Someone might think you're being racist because not all illegal
immigrants come from areas that make tequila. Let's be firm
on that game, and remember that you can qualify your
comments along those lines. Don't you be painting with a
broad brush or casting dispersions on my South American friends
or Mexican friends. But tequila is the drink of course
for the drink or the drink of choice for the

(01:02:33):
drinking game there in the interest of fairness Medello, then, Joel,
does that make it better? Anybody see the report on
the guy that was arrested accusing of sparking the Palisades fire.

(01:02:55):
One dude, twenty nine year old kid named Jonathan Rinderknick,
charged with destruction and property by means of fire. Mandatory
minimum prison sentence five years if convicted. I you know,
it's it's early in the reporting, and I'm going to
acknowledge that up front, so I'm not going to draw conclusions,
but i will say that the conspiracy theory flag sort

(01:03:18):
of waving in my head. How did they know where
that fire started? They claimed they do know, and for
such a long time they blamed it on the utility
companies failed to maintain and up keep the utility lines,
and they sparked and they dropped to the ground and
they caused fires. And this particular case, they say they
know it's an incendiary fire and that the subject was

(01:03:42):
arrested started it. So what kind of evidentiary trail did
they follow from the path where they say this guy
had stopped his uber and got out and walked down
the path to the fire starting, And how did they
link him to it. I'm willing to just sort of
assume that they got the right guy and he was

(01:04:02):
this apparently left wing nutcase. He has his own manifesto,
I believe, as so many of these crazy people do.
So at least he wasn't some crazy right winger, providing
he left with a bunch of opportunities to say it's
his evil right wingers. When we have one string or
one crime after another, and one horrific murder or active
of violence after another, that is well attributed to left

(01:04:24):
wing nutcases, just food for thought. So keep your popcorn
out on that one anyway. Uh, I'm sure to think
there was anything else when we get oh real quick,
that unrelated to anything?

Speaker 3 (01:04:45):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (01:04:45):
Doctor marbre he's a professor at the Hadasha Hebrew University
Medical Center, lead author of a study saying, uh, you
may end up with a significantly higher risk of mood
disorders and suicidal thoughts and suicidal ideation if you're using
Propecia yep finesteride aka Propecia, the hair growing drug approved

(01:05:08):
by the US Food and Drug Administration back in the
nineteen ninety. Studies now have linked this drug to long
term brain inflammation and changes in the hippocampus. The Brain
Center for Learning, Memory, and Emotions FDA added depression as
a potential side effect of this drug back in twenty eleven.
Suicidal ideation and behavior added in twenty twenty two. So

(01:05:30):
this guy did some studies and finding out that, yeah,
this comes with a significant risk, So you might want
to factor that into the equation and just sort of
let nature take his course. I suppose six fifty five
at five kc DE talk station Warren Davidson after the
top of the ur News and then Senator Ran Paul
at seven point thirty. I hope you can stick.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
Around today's tough headlines coming up the talk station.

Speaker 1 (01:06:11):
Seven oh five at fifty five PARISD talk station, Happy Thursdays,
last Friday Eve looking forward to the return of I
Herbeedy aviation expert Jay Rally of eight thirty looking forward
to talking about Senator Ran Paul at the bottom of
this hour. And I am always excited and pleased to
welcome with the fifty five KRSEY Morning Show, Congressman Warren Davidson.
Welcome back, my friend. Pleasure having you on the show.

Speaker 2 (01:06:31):
Bryan, It's always an honor great to talk with you.

Speaker 1 (01:06:34):
Let us dive on into well, we're still in a shutdown,
said voted again, said no, Democrats are insisting that we
extend the COVID area era, basically premium supplements covering the
American taxpayers covering the cost of the Obamacare premiums, which
was successfully expanded the program. They doubled the size of
the Obamacare folks during COVID nineteen, but that was the

(01:06:56):
predicate for allowing these supplements. COVID nineteen. Oh my god,
We're all going to die. Businesses are shut down, people
need relief. Let's give them free insurance, which isn't really free. Well,
that period of time has gone yet the Democrats and
an obvious effort to get everyone under one size fits
all medically run government healthcare or government run medical care.

(01:07:16):
They're fighting and that looks like they're going to die
on this hill? Or are they? Congressman Davidson, what's your
assessment on this? I know you had some very strong
words about the Continuing Resolution which kept the Biden era
funding levels to try to get this through. So where
are we on this, Congressman Davidson, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:07:33):
I mean that's basically it. Democrats could have chosen to
just keep the funding level that they helped implement. I mean,
this isn't like a partisan funding bill. This was the
Republicans had the House, the Democrats had the Senate, Joe
Biden was the president, and this is the same policy,
same funding level the pass at that we haven't passed

(01:07:54):
a different funding bill. We've had lots of debates about it.
But that's the whole point is we could continue in
the debates and call the votes on other policy issues
with a government that's open, or we could have this shutdown.
And you know, Democrats decided that they were going to
hold their votes and not supply the seven that you
need in the Senate. We hit pass it out of

(01:08:14):
the House because we just need a majority, and a
majority of the Senate's passed it. You've got fifty six
senators that say yeah, let's keep the government open, so
that's bipartisan, but you need four more Democrats frankly, to
join and say let's keep it open. And realities, we
know we need less government, we need a budget that balances.
Democrats said, no, if you don't give us a one
and a half train dollars that we can spend on

(01:08:35):
our priorities, which includes he'll care for illegals, includes you know,
COVID plucks ups for Obamacare, which never worked in the
first place. It was failing in twenty twenty one, and
they used COVID as a pretext to flood it with
even more cash. And now it's expiring and they're like, oh, well,

(01:08:55):
maybe if we subsidy it more, it'll keep you know,
we'll reach this magic tipping point where somehow it'll be affordable.
And it's like, no, you know, I'm almost timpted to say,
you know what, you should triple them, because just to
prove the point, the subsidies aren't lowering the cost, not
helping people get lower health insurance. Now it benefits to

(01:09:16):
people who get the subsidy, for sure, but for the
broader average consumer, it's raising the premiums and the quality
of care. Since Obamacare hasn't done better. Health outcomes haven't
done better since Obamacare was worked. So when are we
going to finally concede that Obamacare didn't work? And Democrats
want to shut the government down over that and other

(01:09:36):
priorities they've got.

Speaker 1 (01:09:37):
Yes they do. And you know it's funny because the
premiums going basically going directly to healthcare providers like hospitals.
I mean, the American people aren't seeing any of that.
So it is it is continuing to support. But it's not.
They haven't gone away. I think that's a really critical
point here. It's not. It doesn't become free just because
the government says, well, now it's free. They're not providing

(01:09:58):
health care for nothing. The American taxpayers covering the nut
of the premium. That's your one point five trillion dollars
right there, basically, or maybe hundreds of millions of dollars,
billions of dollars anyway.

Speaker 2 (01:10:09):
Yeah, that portions hundreds of billions. They've got all kinds
of other stuff in there. They want to restore USAID funding,
which we intentionally turned off. They want to restore our
funding for NPR, which we intentionally told them to go
fund themselves. And you know, all these things they want
to relitigate that we've already had the votes on, and
they just want to use the government shutdown as extortion.

(01:10:29):
So yeah, I hope we put single things in there.
Like you know, right now, you know, we've got essential
people working, and you know that begs the question why
do we have non essential? But if you say, all right,
well these people are so important that they need to
keep working, why isn't the payroll clerk that pays them
so important that the payroll clerk keeps working, so we
can put some line at them bills on there so

(01:10:50):
that it's like, Okay, if you don't want to fund
the government all the way, could we at least fund
the payroll clerk so that our troops can get paid
this month.

Speaker 1 (01:10:59):
That's a good idea, Davidson. But now, what of the
concern that I have that Republicans now seem to be
maybe wavering a little bit headline Wall Street Journal, Republicans
cautioned White House on inflicting shut down pain, referring to
Donald Trump's comment earlier this week about the Officer Management
and Budget compiling a list of folks that will be

(01:11:19):
fired or departments that will be permanently closed. He did
suggest that was coming our way in a matter of
four or five days. Now we're down to maybe three
or four days for that. But isn't that something that
we kind of want out of this shut down? An
opportunity to reduce the size and scope of government, which
some of these wavering Republicans are saying, well, wait a second,
that'll give the Democrats a win in the who's responsible

(01:11:41):
for this shutdown? Argument? Aha, See the only pretext for
this is Republicans want to cut out the government and
oh my god, people are going to die or whatever,
but I don't care. I would think you could wear
that as a badge of honor. Yes, I did shut
the government down for the purposes of getting it smaller.
We campaigned on doing exactly that.

Speaker 2 (01:12:00):
Well that's the thing. Look, I voted for the CRS
so we could keep having this debate because frankly, I
want the outcome of a smaller government. So you know, okay,
if we're going to have a revote, and I can
take credit for helping get RUSS vote the power to
start aligning a budget with our priorities, well good, that's
exactly what we've been fighting to do. With the appropriations process,

(01:12:22):
it's broken, and so all you've really got left is
executive power. And you know, the administration put out a
budget earlier this year. I would be surprised if they
don't start doing basically what they said they believe the
budgets should look like, and they send over, you know, ideas,
and then Congress just well, yeah, but we can't do that,
and they never get around to doing it. So, you know,

(01:12:42):
Russ voted at officin management and budgets got the task
of saying, look, I have to follow the law. I
have to pay people that we're considering essential. You know,
the prisons guards at the federal prisons, they're going to
have to show up to work, keep the prisoners locked up.
The FAA is going to have to work and keep
the EA planes in the air, et cetera. But there
are agencies that they said, for example, we don't think

(01:13:05):
we need as many RS agents. So they're talking about
for a lowing or eliminating a substantial portion of the IRS.
I think forty six percent. I want the whole place closed.
But you know, it's a good start to get rid
of forty six percent of it.

Speaker 1 (01:13:19):
Couldn't agree more. It seems to me that you know,
a lot of jobs out in the world are threatened
by artificial intelligence. Congressman Davidson, isn't that sort of a
role that artificial intelligence may be able to fill quite nicely?
It is just dollars and cents and calculations based upon
an obscenely thick and fat tax code.

Speaker 2 (01:13:36):
Yeah, I mean, look, the tasticulously complex. That's why we
need a different way to tax people and get rid
of the income tax which also serves as a giant
surveillance tool. Pretty nosy all the things that you have
to disclose in it. But anyway, it is one hundred
percent right. For more automation and more tech and the
innovation that can happen there is going to eliminate a

(01:13:59):
lot of jobs terms of compliance. But in the meantime,
when we're operating the government, look, we've got tons of agencies.
I mean, if you look at HUD, for example, housing
an urban development, they had like forty four percent coming
into the office period, not like every day of the week,
but like coming into the office period. There's still This

(01:14:20):
is when I was talking with Secretary Fudge before the
current administration. You know, Marcia Fudge, a former remember of
Congress from Cleveland area here in Ohio, became secretary of
HUD and she's like, look, you can't get all these
people to come in. COVID is long since gone, and
they still couldn't get people to show up to work.
You've got the same dynamic and IRS, same dynamic and

(01:14:41):
Social Security administration. So a lot of these people that
haven't come into work. The Trump administration has already tried
dealing with them. They've offered buyouts. They've done all kinds
of things. There are lots of positions like that. We
can say, you know, maybe we just don't need all
these people.

Speaker 1 (01:14:56):
Congress and Warren Davids, one more question on this shutdown,
will dress before we take a break and bring it
back and talk about an amazing development yesterday regarding peace
in the Middle East, there was a floated around a
proposal which is widely described as bipartisan, extending these tax supplements,
these credits that were COVID nineteen era related for one year,

(01:15:18):
sort of as a way to kick the can down
the road, so we'd have a new expiration date for them.
But is that something that you would be willing to
go along with because I think it's a step in
the wrong direction.

Speaker 2 (01:15:27):
Personally, No, the status quo is completely broken, and I
don't think it's a good idea to extend them for
one month. Personally, I think we should have already repealed
Obamacare and gone on to a more market oriented approach.
But if we're going to do a dime for these
COVID era plus ups for Obamacare, I hope we triple them,

(01:15:47):
ten x them whatever. Proof Once and for all that
subsidies don't work, and it proved that, Okay, we can't
arrive at a crash site. People act like money is
irrelevant and we can just print it. Well, you don't.
Can you not connect the dots that the massive spending
causes inflation? And they're like, oh no, it's corporate greed,
And you're like, then the companies always want to make money.

(01:16:09):
But when you spend massively more money, it causes inflation.
And we're seeing that in the areas that you subsidize
the most, like education and healthcare, you get the most inflation.
And in the economy when you spend massively more two
trillion more then we generate in revenue. You're dumping two

(01:16:31):
trillion extra dollars into the economy every year. How do
you not have inflation? And for some reason people can't
do this cause effect relationship.

Speaker 1 (01:16:39):
It's mind blowing. That's a failure of the US education system.
I would argue. Anyhow, we'll continue the Congressman War and
Davidson peace in the Middle East. The concept within our
reach maybe seven sixteen fifty five KRCD TALX station US
A five KRCD talk station. Brian Thomas with Congressman Warren
Davidson follow by Senator Ran Paul Bottom of the hour,

(01:17:00):
Congressman Davidson, A wonderful revelation. Yesterday Hamas and Israel agreed
to Phase well, I guess they're calling it Phase one.
A lot of devil's devil in details, a lot of
things to be ironed out, but a remarkable advancement toward
peace between Israel and Hamas, the terrorist organization Israel's agreed
to withdraw. There's some question marks about where the lines

(01:17:20):
of withdraw are going to be drawn and who's going
to be providing sort of a peacekeeping force there. But
I guess the Egyptian border at Rafa is now open,
which allows Palestinians to exit the area and allows for
if food deliveries to be brought in. This seems to
be a huge accomplishment. Congressman Davidson, what's your perception of

(01:17:40):
where we are on this look?

Speaker 2 (01:17:42):
I think Donald Trump has been very clear that his
goal is peace. He wants people to stop dying. He's
been very active on the world stage, and what a
great use of America's influence around the world and Donald
Trump's personal role in it. And it's been amazing to watch.
He's been incredibly effective. No, I mean, no one really

(01:18:04):
believes there's going to be peace in the Middle East.
Whenever you starts working on it, you're like, well, okay,
why don't you have tilted some other windmill. This is
a very entrenched conflict and it's amazing to see that
he's brought the parties together to get to a point
where they're close to peace. They've agreed to do it.
Now let's see if they actually do it, and you know, exchange,

(01:18:24):
you got to give up the hostages. Yeah, and you've
got to stop you know, Hamas cannot govern Gaza. That's
the base thing for Israel and then for you know,
the people of Gaza. All right, if those things are met,
then Israel can start pulling troops out of the Gaza area.
And if it changes, well then okay, then it's all
back on. But hopefully peace we'll get there. I've spent

(01:18:48):
a lot of time praying for this peace and it's
just terrible to see what's going on. War is a
horrible thing.

Speaker 1 (01:18:54):
Well, in part of me wants to believe the Democrats
are actually quite upset about this, in spite of the
fact it's going to lead to maybe fewer and maybe
even a broader piece like the Abraham Accords we're bringing around.
Can you imagine that extending throughout the entire region. Hey,
let's live together independently, but play together nicely for the
purposes of everybody's economic benefit. And what an odd concept that.

(01:19:15):
But I thought it was wonderful that all of the
parties to these negotiations, from Hamas to Israel, to Cutter
to Egypt to Turkey, all much to the chagrin of Democrats,
giving Donald Trump specific praise for his efforts along these lines.
I mean, as much as I have no value in
the Nobel Peace Prize ever since Barack Obama got one
for doing literally nothing, but this makes Donald Trump really

(01:19:38):
quite eligible, if not well deserved, of a Nobel Peace Prize.

Speaker 2 (01:19:43):
Yeah, And that's what makes them lose their minds over it.
I mean, you've got people trying to overdose on talent
on just because Donald Trump pointed out that talent all themselves,
and Harvard did a study that said, hey, take in
talent all while you're pregnant could be bad for you.
Talk to your doctor. And so there are people that
are literally going to the ICU because well, to own Trump.

(01:20:04):
I have to do this. And so now you see
on the biggest world stage possible Donald Trump getting a win,
which is, you know, win after win after win in
all kinds of areas. They just can't stand it. And
even if it meant more war, they would be like, well,
but Trump can't succeed. I think one of the funniest

(01:20:24):
things I saw was, you know, kind of one of
those Babylon d type headlines, is federal judge rules that
Trump cannot does not have the authority to facilitate peace
in the Middle East. You know, this is the thing.
Anything to stop Trump is basically the only thing that
the Left stands.

Speaker 1 (01:20:40):
For these days, no question about it. Well, and the
other component of this that remains a mystery to me
because as we see all these pro Palestinian and pro
Hamas agitator agitators tearing up college campuses and overrunning cities.
I didn't see any reference to the question of a
Palestinian state. Is this have any open sort of least

(01:21:03):
wiggle room for that to be brought about. Is that
something that wasn't touch by this. I didn't hear any
I didn't really quite read anything which definitively answers that question,
Congressman Davids.

Speaker 2 (01:21:12):
Yeah, that was very intentionally not included in this because
there's just no way that there's going to be a
discussion about that that involves Hamas. And so the condition
is Hamas can't govern in Gaza, and then there's a
lot of rebuilding that needs to take place before that's
even ripe. And there are a lot of people that
are pushing for it, including some of the European Union, Democrats, radicals,

(01:21:36):
campus folks in particular that you're talking about, and you
know the ten seven massacre when Hamas you know, went
out and massacred innocent civilians in Israel. A lot of
what their demand was is a separate state. I mean,
you can't reward that massacred, the ten seven massacre with

(01:21:57):
talking about a separate Palconian state, but you can restore peace.
And so it looks like they're well underway towards that
and hopefully it continues.

Speaker 1 (01:22:06):
Amen to that, Congressman Warren Davidson, I certainly appreciate your
willingness to join my listeners of me and have a
discussion on these important issues, and I truly appreciate you
and your standing on these matters as an elected official.
We need more people like Congressman Warren Davidson, and I
want to thank all of your voters for putting you
at office and hopefully we'll have continued great relations with
you here on the fifty five Carise Morning. Should Congressman Davidson.

Speaker 2 (01:22:30):
Yeah, I always an honor. Thanks Brian God bless you
and all your listeners.

Speaker 1 (01:22:33):
Thank you. Right back at you. Coming up next, Senator
Ran Paul. God KRS the talk station seven thirty fifty
five krc DE Talk station, have e Friday. Even Brian
Thomas here, welcoming back. I've got some favorites in elected
office in DC. One of them Congressman Thomas mass You
can get the podcast in my conversation with Thomas Massey
from yesterday at my podcast page fifty five care Sea

(01:22:55):
dot com. And yes, my next guest, Senator Ran Paul.
Thank you to the residents of the Commonwealth can Ucky
for both of those men. Welcome back, Senator Paul. It's
a pleasure having you on the show today.

Speaker 9 (01:23:05):
Good morning, Brian, thanks for having me.

Speaker 1 (01:23:07):
Another bite at the Apple, another resolution shot down, Senate
said fifty four to forty five, No rejecting the proposal
to continuing resolution funding levels at Biden era level, which
passed in the House. You were one. I think you
were the only the lone Republican to vote against yesterday's measure.
My listeners are aware that this is all revolving around
the Democrats desire to continue COVID era tax credits, which

(01:23:30):
COVID's over This comes to a very expensive cost of
the American taxpayer and also allows illegal immigrants to get
hooked up to Obamacare. Now, with that in mind, explain
to my listeners your rationale for saying no yesterday and previously.

Speaker 9 (01:23:45):
You know, I'm against the Obamacare subsidies. I've voted against
every addition to Obamacare since the very beginning, and we'll
continue to oppose that. What we had before us, though,
is two different spending proposals. One is a Democrat proposal.
It has the obamacareb these in it, and it also
has about a trillion dollars more in spending for a
three trillion dollar deficit. So I'm impost of that package

(01:24:07):
as well. Now the Republican alternative, though, isn't a lot better.
The Republican alternative continues the Biden spending levels from last
December and it will lead to about a two trillion
dollar deficit. So basically, the Republicans we have this two
trillion in deficit, the Democrats three, and I'm not for
either of those, but I've put forward an alternative. My

(01:24:27):
alternative is called the Penny Plan, and they voted on
it about two weeks ago, and we had thirty six Republicans,
which is the most we've ever had before. Thirty six
Republicans supported the Penny Plan, which balances the budget within
five years, dramatically reduces the deficit in the first year,
and we lost sixteen big government Republicans you can probably

(01:24:49):
guess who they are, and then we lost all the Democrats.
So there aren't the numbers yet to do the right thing,
but there still has to be somebody up here we
as trying to do the right thing and votes against deficits,
whether they were Publican or Democrat.

Speaker 1 (01:25:01):
How do you see this playing out? Because Wall Street
Journal reported that some Republicans are saying, Eh, you might
want to watch what you're doing, Donald Trump, because you're
talking about laying off chunks of employees permanently and closing
certain offices of the government through the OMB reduction thing
that he's mentioned before. I guess I'm wondering what's your

(01:25:24):
take on that. Do you see Republicans capitulating it all?
I know there's one proposal out there that you would
never vote for, which extends these supplements for one year,
kicking the can down the road. But what of moving
forward with this quote unquote pain Donald Trump is planning
on inflicting via the OMB and the layoffs and firings.

Speaker 9 (01:25:44):
Yeah, well, when you look at this and you look
at the logic of how people are voting on this,
get every Democrat vote in December of last year for
these same spending levels, that's when they first became known
as the Biden spending levels. Every Democrat supported them. This
is the exact same bill. This is no different than
what they voted for, absolutely no difference. I think really

(01:26:06):
the pain is going to be on Democrats to explain
why they were for these spending levels before they were
against these spending levels, and so I think Republicans should
stay the course. I do think eventually the Republicans will capitulate,
not me, but the rest of them will probably capitulate
and give them the Obamacare subsidies people have to realize though. Also,
these are not the original subsidies from when Obamacare passed.

(01:26:30):
These were add on subsidies for richer people. So basically
a lot of people who don't live in poverty are
now getting Obamacare subsidies, significant subsidies only since twenty twenty three.
And the reason they're expiring now is not because Republicans
are making them expire. The Democrats designed them to expire because.

Speaker 3 (01:26:49):
Of the way the rules are written.

Speaker 9 (01:26:51):
The Democrats were spending so much money they had to
eventually let these things expire. But now they're playing a
game basically trying to blame it on Republicans, when in fact,
the Democrats actually wrote the rules such that these subjeties
would expire.

Speaker 1 (01:27:03):
Now, it's such a clear concept. The idea that the
concern about Donald Trump maybe moving forward with omb reductions
is going to provide the Democrats with an argument that, aha,
this is why the government shut down because Donald Trump
merely wanted to use it as an opportunity to reduce
the size and the scope of government. I think that's
kind of laughable. They're going to argue about who wins

(01:27:26):
the declaration of who's responsible for the government shutdown something
that really doesn't impact most Americans. I think that's kind
of childish to even focus on that one issue, the
winner loss.

Speaker 9 (01:27:38):
Yeah, I think the Democrats have trouble overcoming the fact
that they've already voted for these spending levels and now
they're going to vote against the same spending levels. Essentially,
they've moved the goalpost. So these Obamacare subsidies are not
part of the annual spending proposals. They're separate. So they're
trying to drag something in that's expiring. That's expiring because
they wrote to legislation to expire, and they're trying to

(01:27:59):
drag that into the spending debate. But the spending debate
is pretty clear cut. These are the Biden spending levels,
and the Democrats have all voted for them. The rumor
is that the Democrats are worried to death about their
left flank. They're worried about the socialist flank and the
party and the socialists are hot and heavy, you know,
for some of these incumbitents. So like there's rumors that

(01:28:21):
AOC wants to run against Chuck Schumer. Chuck Schumer is
afraid of his own shadow now and that he will
basically do whatever it takes to show them how strong
he is. And a lot of people think that there's
a big rally with the Socialists on the mall this
we can yeah, and they think that the Democrats have
to get through that rally, show the people all they
stood up to Republicans, and then they'll have to sort

(01:28:43):
of put forward something saying, oh, Republicans have agreed to
negotiate on these Obamacare subsidies, and I think the Republicans
are going to negotiate with them. I think they'll declare
victory and then the Democrats will allow the government to open.

Speaker 1 (01:28:55):
Back up fair enough and pivoting over to you perhaps
being spied on you among the senators who identified that.
Jack Smith launched an inquiry a couple three years after
the January first drunken fraternity parties. I like to refer
to it, but in twenty twenty three, he subpoenaed phone
records from eight senators and one House member, with no

(01:29:18):
reason to believe any of them were involved in criminal activity.
I mean, this is a profound civil rights violation from
my perspective. What's your reaction to this happening, Senator Paul.

Speaker 9 (01:29:29):
Absolutely and I think there's going to be repercussions in
the court system against his doing this. So there's a
famous couple famous cases, Riley versus California and Carpenter versus
the US. The Supreme Court decided, and in these cases,
they decided that certain of your records deserved for Amendment protections.

(01:29:49):
So subpoenas have a lower standard. You can get a
subpoena of people's banking records and phone records without saying
probable cause. What the Supreme Court said was that some
of your records are so private that you should have
for the Amendment protections. And among those records that are private,
or your geolocation. So if I call the phone company

(01:30:10):
and I want to where's Brian Thomas every moment of
the last week, I can tell a lot about your
life that's really none of my business or none of
the government's business. And I shouldn't be allowed to do
that unless I say, you're committing a crime. And that's
why we you know, we present evidence that you're committing
a crime. And so I think that he did this illegally.
I think he did it through a grand jury subpoena.

(01:30:31):
But the Carpenter case Supreme Court Justice Roberts actually wrote
that the subpoenas will still be able to get records,
but there will be certain records that have privacy interests
where they'll have to have probable calls and a Fourth
Amendment warrant to do it. And so I think that
absolutely he did something that the court's going to rule against.

(01:30:51):
And I think these representatives actually have standing against the
phone company because the phone company basically, unfortunately, the phone
company doesn't do a very good job at sending your
liberty for your records they want, and they just give
them to the government. In fact, the government can wink
at the phone company and they'll give you all your records.

Speaker 6 (01:31:09):
I mean, it's just disgusting.

Speaker 9 (01:31:11):
So I hope they do sue their phone companies. I
love business. I love successful business. I don't like a business.
It's turning over my private records to the government without
a fight.

Speaker 1 (01:31:21):
No, and they can fight. I mean, they've got lawyers
in their massive companies and legal teams that could you say, no,
we can't give you this because of the aforementioned case,
and we're not going to do it. Because we used
to have the battles when I was in House over
at Anthem, Blue Cross and Blue Shield. All the time
you get subpoenas, so you have an obligation, I think,
to perfect protect the interests of those individuals who are

(01:31:41):
working with your company, in this case, to get phone service.
Senator Rampaul in the remaining moments of our time together,
and I sure appreciate our time together. Your reaction to
the phase one of the Gaza deal. It looks like
Hamas has agreed to release the prisoners, Israel has agreed
to pull back its forces. It looks like we might
have some cease fire unfolding here. Devil's in the details

(01:32:03):
that need to be ironed out. But I viewed this
as a really positive step.

Speaker 9 (01:32:06):
Your reaction, absolutely, And if it's true and the hostages
are free in the next few days or a few hours,
I think everybody will rejoice. If the killing can be
discontinued in guys, that people will rejoice. And I think
this is something that Donald Trump deserves, if it's successful,
deserves a lot of credit for because the one thing

(01:32:26):
you can't discount about Donald Trump is he has this
force of presence, this this ability to be you know,
this sometimes a bully and a China shop, but sometimes
one that will stand up even into our allies like
Israel and say it's time to make a deal. And
I think he has gotten his room to make a deal,
whereas I think that Yahoo Uh struggles to make a

(01:32:48):
deal because he struggles against criticism at home for being
too soft, which I can't imagine how they can describe
him as too soft. But the thing is, I think
Trump inserting himself in this I think has hopefully pushed
it on. And you got to wonder why, Howmas wouldn't
you know, settle. I mean, they've been decimated, most of
their leaders have been killed, probably three fourths of their

(01:33:10):
soldiers or not soldiers, terrorists have been killed. And my
goodness is they could give up the hostages. You know, they're,
like I say, will rejoice and hopefully they will work
and end well.

Speaker 1 (01:33:22):
Wouldn't that be a wonderful thing? And wow, all in
Trump's first term, so much progress, Senator Rampaul in his
first year that it's amazing, it really is. This has
been a whirlwind of activity I've never seen the likes
of which in my entire life. Senator Rampaul, thank you
again for your time today. Keep up the great work
and I'll look forward to having you back on the

(01:33:42):
show real soon. Thanks Bron, Take care. Seven forty fifty
five car se De Talk Station. If you look at
for a world, it's seven fifty here fifty five k
Seed Talks dayton I hope you're having a great Friday, Eve,
great Friday for the empower Use Seminar. We're going to
hear from tonight's empower Use Seminar well speaker Hunter Oswald.

(01:34:06):
He's a writer for The American Spectator. He's gonna be
talking about gen Z conservatives and what makes them tick
and how gen Z conservatives differ from other generations. Also
be talking about the contemporary political crisis, including the meaning
of conservatism, and some other observations again American Spectators, Hunter Oswald.
He'll join the program at the top of the hour news.
Then we'll hear from iHeart Meeaty aviation expert Jay Rattliffe

(01:34:27):
at eight thirty. I love having Jay back on the show.
I missed him last Thursday. We've got some fun topics
to go over with Jay, which is always the case.
Time to talk if you want to interject a comment
or two five, one, three, seven, four, nine fifty five
eight hundred eighty two three talk er hight pound five
fifty on eight and T phones. And so we're playing
the drinking game tonight. Remember tonight's the debate between a
f toab pro Ball and Corey Bowman. It starts at

(01:34:49):
eight pm. Doors open at Xavier Universities James and Carolyn
Duff Banquet Center at seven. You must have a ticket.
The Inquirer sponsoring this along with Xavier at the Ohio
Debate Commission and Cincinnati City Cable. You can watch it
wherever City Cable is I've never even heard of it,
but also stream it on Local twelve's website, so there's

(01:35:11):
opportunities for you to watch it from the comfort of
your own home if you can't make it there. And
there's a whole bunch of rules on it, and I
will go. Cincinnati dot Com is The Enquirer's website. All
the details about what you can and can't bring. You're
not allowed to bring any signs or norse makers inside
the center, but you also can't bring political fires flyers,
campaign materials, or signage to distribute or display outside of

(01:35:34):
Cintas Center or on Xavier University property. So I kind
of question mark that on First Amendment grounds, but inside
the center nothing is allowed along those lines. There's decorum rules,
play nice together as bottom line on that which I
think is wholly appropriate in so far as the drinking
game is concerned. Anytime the word trump or maga, this
is Joe Strecker's rules, and you can feel free to

(01:35:55):
elaborate and make your own rules at home. One shot
for trump or maga reference. And if he mentioned, if
anybody mentions JD Vance that he is Jdvns's dances half brother,
you have to chug whatever is remaining in your glass.
How about sanctuary cities? Will that get mentioned? City is
a sanctuary city?

Speaker 3 (01:36:14):
Right?

Speaker 1 (01:36:15):
They have to have purval declared it. So as I
see that, oh, we have a problem with illegal immigrant
gangs in our areah. Going back to the inquirre Kevin
Grosser reporting three men from Columbia now been charging multiple
burglaries in Westchester Township, described as part of a sixth

(01:36:36):
and counting South American burglary gang known to have been
targeting area homes. Here burglaries that these guys committed or
gals of the case maybe happened between July thirty one
August twelfth, Surveillance cameras and licensed plate readers helped authorities
catch them all. Four suspects booked at the Butler County
Jail Garcia Suith forty six, Heraldo I guess a mononym

(01:36:59):
forty two, Rodriguez forty in the US illegally. Did you
hear that? In the US? Illegally? They say they burglarized
homes in Indian Hill, Montgomery, and Amberley Village. Task Force
score here in Ohio has already led to charges against
members of five separate theft gangs, who are reportedly mostly

(01:37:24):
made up of Chilean nationals, said they came to the
United States legally using tourist vie as these Chilean nationals,
and then they received training on how to burglarize homes.
One of the gangs charged with burglarizing Bengals quarterback Joe
Burrows home. You remember that December of last year. Another
separate gang targeted homes in Indian Hill, as well as

(01:37:47):
they say wealthy suburbs in Detroit and Indianapolis. Another separate
gang accused the committee more than eight burglaries and attempted
burglaries in Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, Wisconsin, between August of last
year in April of this year, stealing more than five
million dollars worth of people's property Westchester Township homes, Mason Homes.

(01:38:09):
According to the documents, a gang preyed on business owners
of Indian, Middle Eastern and Asian descent as well. So
isn't it nice that we have local law enforcement officers
picking up people who are responsible for committing crimes? And
I suspect given the venue of this law enforcement activity

(01:38:31):
Westchester Township notably that they will cooperate with Ice to
the extent they're in our country illegally, maybe saving the
American taxpayer the cost of imprisoning them in our prisons.
Perhaps just sending them back to their country of origin
will solve the problem. Just food for thought. Stick around on.

(01:38:53):
We're gonna hear from empower Youth Hunter Oswald the Future
agen Z Conservatism, followed by Jay Ratliffe in the next hour.
I sure he'll be and wait around to hear those conversations.
Thank you. I'm a shutdown. The events of the day.

Speaker 10 (01:39:04):
Portland's Chicago violent Crime, every Day, Israel's Peace fifty five KRC.

Speaker 1 (01:39:09):
The talk station to SIB eight O six here at
fifty five garrri Ce De Talk Station. A very happy
Thursday to everyone. My name is Brian Zamas. I'm hosting
the fifty five CARRIC Morning Show and I am pleased
to welcome to the fifty five KRC Morning Show man.
It's going to be speaking tonight. Empower You America dot
org is where you sign up for the Empower Youth
seminar series. Whether you show up in person, which you

(01:39:31):
can do tonight three hundred Great Oaks, drive at the
Empower Youth studios, or walked from the watch from the
comfort of your own home. You do that all at
empower You America dot org. Register in advance of seven
pm tonight, where you're first going to hear I think
first from Monty Lobb, who's the executive director of the
Christian Business Partnership which does some advocacy and education work
on celebrating the sacred idea of religious liberty and Christian

(01:39:54):
employers in their workplace. But you're the keynote speaker tonight,
Hunter Oswald, who's joined to me this morning or joining
us this morning Philmbeth Gazwick's development fellow and research fellow
with the American Spectator. You can find them online at
Spectator Dot or read what they have to say. You'll
be glad you did. He contributes articles there on the
ground and does some on the ground reporting. He's also

(01:40:15):
written for a variety of other outlets. In addition to writing,
he served as the Institute for Faith and Freedom Student
Fellow and Conservative Thought, where he researched religious terrorism and
insurgency across the world. That topic's not gone away and
the importance in addressing national security matters. Tonight an important conversation.
He'll be speaking about the future of gen Z conservatism.

(01:40:37):
Hunter Oswald, Welcome to the Morning Show. It's a pleasure
to have you on today.

Speaker 6 (01:40:41):
Thanks for having me on, Brian.

Speaker 1 (01:40:42):
All right, let's break down these Okay boomers are nineteen
forty six to sixty four. Welcome to me. I'm the
first year of jen X sixty five to eighty. The
millennials were born eighty one and ninety six, so gen
Z is nineteen ninety seven to twenty twelve, making the
folks that you're talking about thirteen to twenty eight years old.
This is the future of American politics, is it not?

Speaker 3 (01:41:05):
It is.

Speaker 6 (01:41:05):
In fact, gen Z has been really taken in American
politics since really the twenty twenty four election. I mean,
if you want to go even farther back to twenty twenty,
but twenty twenty four, this past election cycle, we really
saw major shifts in gen Z when it came to
who voted for who, because traditionally speaking, gen Z has
always been perceived as way more progressive that than people thought. Yes,

(01:41:29):
but when twenty twenty four, half twenty four, we saw
Trump game six percent of that vote compared to twenty twenty,
So we are definitely seeing gen Z as having a
major hold in American politics as of now.

Speaker 1 (01:41:43):
Well, you're following this quite closely. What do you hear
from the I'll call them converts. You know, he who
is not from the left as a youth has no heart,
He who is not from the right as an adult
has no brain. Obviously they're waking up at a much
younger age. What's driving this more conservative shift? Hunter?

Speaker 6 (01:42:01):
Yeah, So what is basically driving this shift is the
combination of stuff, and one of them is what we
are definitely seeing is somewhat of a religious revival in
America that is taking more a traditional approach to issues,
whether that's on abortion, transgenderism, all the more social issues
we are definitely seeing amongst gen Z. But also I

(01:42:23):
would say one of the things as a gen Z
individual myself is just the major skepticism of our institutions.
And people are like, okay, Hunter or gen Z, why
you say skeptical, Well, basically since the day we're born,
if you want to really get like you said nineteen
ninety seven and for me like two thousand and one,

(01:42:44):
gepticism is kind of part of our nature. Where you've
had politicians from say right and left or really Democrat
Republican that have told us, hey, if you do certain things,
we'll give you this and that, and we haven't seen anything.
We've been told everything, we've been promised everything, and none
of that's happened. So there is certainly a skepticism within

(01:43:04):
gen Z towards intutions like Congress, the presidency, and even
the Spring Court. And that has translated into a approach
that seeks, hey, why do we want to give more
power over to these institutions that have lied to us? Yes,
and that's also been a major driver towards conservative and

(01:43:24):
also just the simple desire for truth. We've been told
to think a certain way you know, not to question
our folks in the classroom, and then when we try
to actually have a discussion about issues, we are actually
diving in these issues way more than people anticipated. We
want the truth and we don't want these institutions to
say you're going to think a certain way or else.

Speaker 1 (01:43:46):
Well, that's interesting, and I suspect that, I know one
of the things you're going to be talking about, and
I in addition to the meaning of conservatism, talking about
what issues are really critical to this movement, but the
role of technology. I mean, I'm in that that that
generation hunter that if you really wanted to pay attention
to politics, you had to subscribe to magazines, you know,

(01:44:07):
like The New Republic or Atlantic, or you know, subscribe
to major newspapers. You had to get a copy of
the Wall Street Journal, you had to watch the McNeil
Lahirr News Hour on Sundays if you wanted any substantive conversation.
So it was easy to gloss over it. We have
the Internet, welcome to reality in this modern day and age.
And I suspect because kids spend young people, I would argue,

(01:44:28):
spend a lot of time on social media, they're actually
engaging in political discourse and following the issues that are
impacting them. It's created a wonderful opportunity for them to
educate themselves in spite of what the left wants to
how they want to control them precisely.

Speaker 6 (01:44:44):
Yeah, I mean one of the jokes we say about
gen Z as generation zoomer because we are the digital kids.
You know, you had your millennials prior that were like, Okay,
we're finally getting the Internet. But then now the gen
Z my group is now signed, we have so media.
We have way more platforms to engage people in ways
that I don't think many of us originally thought could

(01:45:06):
be even possible. And that's why you're seeing a lot
of people on social media, whether that's x, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok,
all those platforms right now are being used to spread
more information than I think anybody could imagine. I think
that's also where the rise of conservatives is, just the

(01:45:26):
fact that social media is offering an alternative to the mainstream. Indeed,
you can actually have you can actually have discourse without
major networks studying it down overnight and saying, well, if
you have the wrong opinion, you can't say this. Well, no,
we want a platform, and these alternative media is providing
that platform for gen Z.

Speaker 1 (01:45:46):
Yeah, unlimited amount of material, and we get to be
our own editor in terms of what material we choose
to consume and digest. We're not being dictated to by
some behind the scenes person and some probably left leaning
network who's picking and choosing what informa to feed us.
It's all out there for anybody who chooses to want
to go after it. I gotta hit on something, Hunter
as I want to ask you this directly because I

(01:46:08):
think it is probably, if not the one of the
primary mechanisms for this awakening young people are having, and
this rejection of leftist ideology. And you mentioned it before,
this idea that we need to accept someone's personal choice
on what gender they are. Now. I don't care personally
that there are transgenders in the world. You know. I

(01:46:28):
can live under that umbrella as long as you're not
forcing me to say out loud that yes, they are
indeed a sex that they're not born with. I'm a
purist when it comes to medicine, X and y X
and X determined your sex period, end of story. You
want to believe you're somebody else, Hey, go ahead, but
you can't force me to say you're a woman if
you're a guy, and you shouldn't be allowed in a
female locker room if you're a guy. There's a whole

(01:46:50):
lot of risk that goes along with that. Is that
as prominent a reason for this conservative shift as I'm
kind of perceiving it to be, because it's like the
biggest batcrap in s element out there, almost on the
left hand side of the ledger.

Speaker 6 (01:47:05):
Yeah, I don't think you're even wrong about that, because
even I agree, I would essentially, I would actually agree
with that, because what you're seeing is the left, especially
in our institutions, has hit so hard with these radical ideologies.
You know, like you said, you know, somehow a man
can become a woman and vice versa. Or if you
use the wrong pronoun or mischiender somebody like you see

(01:47:28):
in Colorado, you can actually be arrested or be denied
service from senior kids in court. You know, you have
all these radical proposals, and it's like, look, we don't
care if you're gay or lesbian or a transition. We
really don't care. Just don't impose your ideology on somebody

(01:47:50):
and force them into something they don't simply agree with,
right nobody. I would say gen Z in some ways
is kind of mix of conservatives but also libertarians.

Speaker 1 (01:47:59):
They're libertarians, that's me. I'm a little el litertarian hunter
with Oswald. I. I think we can all play nicely
under the under the under the banner of freedom, you know,
the right to control our own individual destinies without intruding
into someone else's life. Hell, yes, I'll go for that
all day, man.

Speaker 6 (01:48:16):
Yeah, oh yeah, but yeah, I mean it's kind of
And that's where I would describe gen Z in some
way as a fusion like we've heard this, you know
amongst conservaive fusionism between conservative ideas and groups with libertarians,
and that's been there for a long time, but I
think it's certainly growing again, and especially you're seeing that
in gen Z because like I've said and others have said,

(01:48:38):
is we don't care if you or this or that,
just don't impose your will or use the state for government.
How do you want to call them to put your
ideas on us and then say, if you don't follow
our rules, if you don't like what we you have,
we have for you to say then we're going to
shut you out. We're not going to give you these privileges,
we're not going to allow you to practice your fundamental

(01:49:00):
rights as a human being. Because I think at the
end of the day, what conservatism offers that the progressives
they don't, is giving an idea of what is human dignity,
what is being able to be free to do what
you'd want to do, so long as you're not infringing
on other people's right to be the same. And I

(01:49:21):
think that's where gen Z is finally realizing conservatism libertarianism
is offering that alternative, and it's always been there, it's
just our institutions haven't been willing to say, oh yeah,
they got a point, because progressism is a fundamentally denial
of what those ideals, those universal truths.

Speaker 1 (01:49:41):
Are indeed, and of course, when you're a Marxist, you
hate religion, the concept of something higher power than the government.
Of course, the Founding fathers were well aware of that.
That's why we have inalienable rights in the Bill of Rights.
They are God given rights. And if you don't believe
in God, you can still believe in that concept. Consider
the state of nature, as I point out, all the time.
If you're play down in the middle of field magically

(01:50:01):
by the flying spaghetti monster and born in as where
there is no one around you, you can literally do
anything you want. As soon as another human being lands
next to you, then you have to observe their rights
and freedoms. You can't harm them, They can't harm you.
But can you defend yourself? Yes, in natural law you can.
Can you go out and feed yourself, yes you can.
It's that whole idea of natural law, and that's you know,

(01:50:25):
it springs from sometimes a religious ideology. I guess I'm
just wondering. Like Turning Point, USA, Charlie Kirk, very religious guy.
His political message was cloaked in faith, but he wasn't
trying to force you to be a Christian. He was
trying to explain the value of it for you as
an individual. It's uplifting. It gives you hope, it gives
you freedom, it gives you I mean, there's a lot

(01:50:46):
of reasons that he encouraged Christianity, but he wasn't going
to force you to become Christian. Just say out loud,
Hunter that you're a Christian immediately results in this venomous
attack by the left is stupid. What do you believe in?
The in the philag spaghetti monster too, and they just
immediately attack you merely because you're a person of faith.

(01:51:08):
Is is it a reaction from young people to now
start turning to faith because of that response? I mean,
you know what, that's ridiculous, And I'm going to look
into this concept of faith and religion.

Speaker 6 (01:51:22):
Precisely.

Speaker 7 (01:51:23):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:51:23):
No, gen Z is definitely being a revival in faith,
especially towards Christianity. So me personally, I'm a Roman Catholic.
I've been a Roman Catholic since the day I was born.
I'm proud to be Roman Catholic. Now people would say, Hunter,
what about you know, the Catholic Church and stuff, because
that's one of the arguments today for young people who
are going towards to say, more traditional Masses or traditional

(01:51:48):
Christianity amongst gen Z And they like you said, all
you're superstitious, what do you believe in? It's like, look
what the Blest has done for the past few decades
is promote this idea of pure secularism that somehow faith
should be entirely separate from political even at more or
less even cultural life and they've been promoted in this

(01:52:11):
new idea called new atheism, which you hear people would say, like,
you're rich your Dawkins, you're Christopher Higginson's who are saying that,
you know, faith is not just useless, it's fundamentally dangerous
to society because it promotes quote, these superstitions that bring
us backwards and away from science. Well, it's like, look,
if you look at Christianity, it has been immensely impassible

(01:52:35):
for human dignity. It has promoted those universal truths that
have allowed us to enjoy the very freedoms we have today.
I mean, we see this as you know Thomas Aquinas
who argues that you know, reason and faith are one
and the same. The ability of reason is a gift
from God. So when you have young people today being
told that being religious or being a person of faith

(01:53:00):
is backwards, they fundamentally deny the fruits of what and
the very wisdom of Western civilization. They deny the very
principles that allow us to get to this very own place.
Whether and that's the best part about being a person
of faith is you see all this once you open
your eyes. Because another important thing is what new atheism failed.

(01:53:22):
That is driving gen Z towards faith is its failed
to give us purpose? Why are we here on this earth?
Why are we doing the things we're doing? What is
our ultimate goal in life? And religion has offers those answers.
New atheism failed to funamility address that question, which is
what purpose do we have in our lives?

Speaker 1 (01:53:44):
Under Oswald, It's going to be an amazing conversation. Empower
Youoamerica dot org for all the details, get registered before
seven pm the night. Show up in person at the
empower use some of our studios again, three hundred great
Oaks drive side annex entrances where you enter or watch
from home. Hunter, I can't thank you enough for what
you're doing. And maybe you just now stumbled upon the
reality of why they hate religion because that Christian faith

(01:54:07):
through Judeo Christian ethic built Western civilization. What are the
Marxists and leftists hate more than anything in the world
Western civilization period? End of story. So we got to
attack the root cause of it. Maybe that's one of
the reasons.

Speaker 6 (01:54:19):
Why absolutely, yeah, no, and and I hope to see
everybody there and we'll be having even more discussions about
what conservatives that means means today for gen Z, the
future of gen Z conservative as such, and what can
we learn especially to bridge the gap between order conservatives,
younger since conservatives and hopefully bring about even brighter future

(01:54:41):
for everybody.

Speaker 1 (01:54:42):
From boomers to millennials to the gen Zers. Get everybody
watching this seminar, Hunter Oswald to wish you the best
on to keep up the great work. Maybe you and
I can talk again sometime down the road here on
the fifty five KRC Morning Show.

Speaker 6 (01:54:54):
Would be more than what Hey, thank you again Brian
for having me on.

Speaker 1 (01:54:56):
My pleasure man. Enjoy the seminar tonight. It's eight twenty
one right now, folks. Jay Rattler C Detalk Station. It
is a very happy Thursday, as it always is at
this time because we get to talk to unless he's
on vacation like last week or out. I heart media
aviation expert Jay Ratliff. Welcome back, my friend. You know
I love talking with you.

Speaker 4 (01:55:14):
Man.

Speaker 10 (01:55:14):
You take one vacation in a blue moon. Somebody's smacking
your chopping could be back.

Speaker 1 (01:55:21):
I can't, Rick. I don't think we had anybody filling
in for this segment in the last week's show, So
you sort of leave me to my own devices, and
I'd much rather have a guest on. And I love
our conversations because again, they typically are light. But let's
start with one that's not so light. Oh my god,
we're all gonna die. According to the US Travel Association president,
a guy named Joff Freeman, who said US Travel Association,

(01:55:45):
this is costing US one billion dollars in counter week.
Travel is inovation longer, tsa lines, flight delays, airports reducing flights,
entire controlled covers going dark longer. This drags on the
worst cascade. The damage will be for local communities, for
small businesses, and for the country. His group claims US
economy lost one or is losing one billion dollars per
week because of those issues. Yet Willie Wallace, a director

(01:56:08):
and general airline lobby group the International Air Transportations Association,
said no, there's been no significant disruption. There has been
no stop in the recruitment of new air traffic controllers.
There were no significant impacts to date. So who's right
on this one? Jay?

Speaker 10 (01:56:23):
I'm assuming the former did not vote for Donald Trump's
just going out there on a limb. But it's the
last few days I've had several TV and radio interviews
where people are freaking out over the fact that the
Burbank Airport had no air traffic controllers and we had
to pivot and have another air traffic control center take

(01:56:45):
care of the arrivals and departures at that airport. It's
as though this guy is falling. It happened in Nashville
where we had a shortage, so and of course I've
got my referee shirt on the whistle and I'm balling
a time out trying to get these people to stop
so I can tell them that in the last nine months, Brian,
that's happened a thousand times, right.

Speaker 1 (01:57:04):
Well, and didn't Burbank close a bunch of times in
events of this as well?

Speaker 10 (01:57:07):
Because it does, it does, and we've got we've got redundancies,
we've got sistems in place, procedures in place, and it's like,
wait a minute, if this is such a big time issue,
now where were you the other thousand times it happened
in just the last nine months. So it's it's an
obvious to me and not surprisingly moved by people that

(01:57:30):
are trying to push back on the administration saying that
you know, this is endangering the lives of everybody who flies,
and it's it's it's a horrific time to fly, and
and all this is taking place, and I'm saying, no,
it's being brought upon because we have a shortage of
bear traffic controllers, period, and that's why all of those
thousand occurrences took place, and that's why it's happening now.

(01:57:51):
Now it's a little bit different now. And Brian, I
can certainly understand. You have a lot of men and
women who are going to get a partial paycheck on Tuesday,
the fourteenth, and then two weeks after that, on the
twenty eight they're going to get hit no paycheck. And
these air traffic controllers are being asked to show up
to work and their pay is to be delayed. And
some of them are saying, and I know this to

(01:58:12):
be the case. I've got bills to pay, I've got
to put food on the table, and I don't have
six weeks of income saved up. I do have a
secondary job. I can go do that. I'll get paid
right now. For so I'm gonna call in sick even
though I don't want to, and I'm going to go
work where I know I'm gonna get paid, so I've
got the money to survive on because that's what I'm

(01:58:32):
forced to do. So I'm certainly not gonna fault the
men and women if that's the route they've got to
go to. The air traffic controllers. They're already overworked, they're
being forced into overtime, they're morale is down, they're using
equipment that is just beyond archaic. So there's a lot
of things right there that I do understand.

Speaker 3 (01:58:51):
Now.

Speaker 10 (01:58:51):
I wish they wouldn't do it because that puts a
strain on the people that they're working with. But when
it comes down to should I be there for my
teammates I'm working with, or do I need to make
sure I've got food on the table for my kids,
I'm sorry, I know which way that that's going to
go each and every time. So the bottom line is,
we're six weeks away from the busiest travel week of

(01:59:11):
the year. We've got to get this resolved now so
that we don't get into November and start having an
issue with uh oh, having this type of a scenario
take place when it's the busiest travel time. That's when
we will.

Speaker 3 (01:59:25):
Have a problem.

Speaker 1 (01:59:26):
We'll continue with iHeartMedia aviation expert Jay Ratliff, including a
comment or two on West Jet figuring out yet another
way to anger its passengers. Eight thirty five Right Now
fifty five k c DE talk station. See eight thirty
seven fifty five car CD talk station. iHeart meaty aviation
expert Jay Ratliff definitely has. We are fortunate to have
them every week on the thirty five CASCE Morning Show

(01:59:48):
beginning at eight thirty through the end of the program.
And let's pivot over to cigarettes smuggling. Oh my god,
the Russians are shutting down airspace. It's the Chinese Communist
Party with a drone strike. Oh maybe it isn't. Maybe
it's people who don't want to pay taxes on cigarettes.
This is kind of crazy.

Speaker 7 (02:00:04):
Jay.

Speaker 1 (02:00:04):
I saw the reporting on this when it first came out,
a cigarette delay.

Speaker 10 (02:00:09):
You know, I'm trying to figure out what delay code
we could have used with this. But he had an
airport Lithuania shut down because of the fact that it
was unsafe for aircraft to approach the airport because they
had I think it was twenty five balloons, large ones
that had been lifted off that were in essence carrying cigarettes.
That were being smuggled, and it affected about thirty some

(02:00:31):
flights that were coming in. They said thousands of passengers
were impacted by this because the fact that they had
so many balloons in that airspace that represented a problem
for approaching aircraft. And it's you know, I think the
only other bizarre kind of story would be like if
you went back a gazillion years ago to the man
that put a bunch of balloons, healing balloons onto his

(02:00:54):
lunchair and lifted himself up. I remember that, and up
and up, Brian, I think he he got up to
like fifteen thousand feets.

Speaker 3 (02:01:02):
I'm crazy in a lawn chair a big Did he
have an.

Speaker 1 (02:01:05):
Air rifle with him to shoot the blue one of
the time?

Speaker 3 (02:01:08):
Way? That way he could come down. His wife's on
the radio, tell him to come down. And look.

Speaker 10 (02:01:13):
I was a skydiver for a bunch of years, but
I'm not a big fan of heights. So the thought
is going up in a lawn chair to any altitude
like that. I mean, I'm sorry, that's just crazy, But yes, this,
the cigarette smuggling balloon situation that shut down an airport
is certainly one of the reasons I'll never tell you

(02:01:35):
that that you know, I've seen it all because you
never underestimate people in what they're capable of doing.

Speaker 1 (02:01:42):
Ever, no doubt about it. And I guess it's kind
of funny that was an extraordinarily low budget smuggling effort
considering they just used helium balloons. If they had gotten
an actual drone, they probably would have been far more
successful getting the cigarettes to the location they wanted to
send them to.

Speaker 10 (02:01:58):
That's kind of hard to control where a balloon and
goes to somebody I know, yeah, and where they're going
to land and such. So I guess it's a crapshoot
which way things are going to go. But you know
who knows. You probably laugh at the people that were
doing it because they may not have had well, they
had enough intelligence to get the thing's airborn, so I
gotta give them credit for that.

Speaker 1 (02:02:17):
Okay, And you're how many? I hate to put you
on the spot, but I know how would you don't
have to say it?

Speaker 3 (02:02:22):
Let me a curve ball.

Speaker 1 (02:02:23):
How many decades have you been in the aviation business field? Expertise,
knowledge and that kind of thing. How long have you
been following closely aviation?

Speaker 10 (02:02:32):
Well, I started working in nineteen eighty one in October.

Speaker 3 (02:02:36):
Okay, so I've been I've been associated.

Speaker 10 (02:02:38):
With the airline industry going back to just after deregulation
took place in nineteen seventy eight.

Speaker 1 (02:02:43):
On planes, in planes, in management, and variety of different roles.
You've seen it all. So I guess that's the predicate
for my question.

Speaker 3 (02:02:50):
Not all, but yeah, Well, like.

Speaker 1 (02:02:53):
Cigarette smuggling balloons say down airports, every day is a
new day with that caveat. I see another article headline
drunk New Jersey's sisters arrested after meltdown for being kicked
off Frontier Airline's flight and attacking a worker. And this
is all on body camera footage. Now, this is one
among a seemingly endless number of incidents like this where

(02:03:16):
people get out of hand, they start getting all punching
and fighty and belligerent, and they get chucked off of
an airline. Is it just the Internet and pervasive ubiquitous
nature of cell phone cameras that we are aware of this?
Or this a newer phenomenon? Is this becoming far more
frequent because people getting kind of disrespectful of authority figures

(02:03:40):
and really not have any sense of ethics and morality
that is a common problem across the board that appears
to be growing. I'm just wondering, in so far as
airline incidents, is it a growing phenomenon.

Speaker 10 (02:03:51):
I think to a certain degree it is, but it's not.
I mean, we were dealing with it back in the eighties,
right in the nineties, because we would always have individuals
that had a disrespect for authority, didn't want to be
told what to do, and different types of things where
they were just absolute, very difficult people to work with.
And sadly, sometimes that took place when the aircraft was airborne.

(02:04:14):
A lot of times it was alcohol involved, and you
had a lot of situations that required us to kind of,
you know, pivot with regards to what was going on
with the aircraft, the operations, or.

Speaker 3 (02:04:25):
Things of this nature.

Speaker 10 (02:04:26):
It becomes much more of an issue now because with
the advent of everybody having the ability to record what's
happening and then post it immediately. Where a situation goes
viral not once it hits the mainstream press, but once
it hit social media and it's shared around the world,
it becomes much more of an issue that people are

(02:04:46):
aware of and Sadly, we're seeing, you know, more and
more examples of this front and center, where you've got
these individuals that are telling uniform flight attendant they're not
going to do what they're being told to do, which
is a federal offense. Are causing a situation where an
aircraft is delayed in departing, or creates a diversion, or
any of these other things. And Brian, it's when you

(02:05:08):
have individuals that attack passengers, shove flight attendants, rush the cockpit,
whatever it might happen to be. These people are clearly
in individuals that should not be flying on any US
carrier in the country. Sadly, these two individuals from Frontier
will be banned for life from flying Frontier, thank you.
They should be, but they're free to fly any other carrier.

(02:05:29):
And you and I've talked about this so many things.
Why are we going to allow knowingly these individuals to
fly on other carriers? And there needs to be some
sort of consequence if you act up, if it's an argument, you're.

Speaker 3 (02:05:43):
Having a bad day.

Speaker 10 (02:05:43):
Believe now, I don't want to ban you from flying,
but if I shove a flight attendant or I attack
a passenger, I should be you know, putting time out
fly wise for like three to five years. I don't
think that's anything that's outside the the you know, it
would be considered extreme here. But airlines won't do it
because it costs them money to track it, and that's

(02:06:04):
why they say that they refuse to do it.

Speaker 1 (02:06:06):
We got a no fly list, Jay ry Loo. If
if they can track no fly lists, which obviously are
bigger and contain people who don't deserve to be on
the no fly list because of errors in government, they
can have a list like this. Is this something the
FAA could mandate if they chose to do so.

Speaker 3 (02:06:20):
Oh they could, they could.

Speaker 10 (02:06:21):
The problem is the airlines tell the government what they're
going to do instead of the other way around. And
we're in a very presidential administration friendly environment here where
everybody gets along and everybody kind of can push things.
And this is not the administration, even though I'm a
big phantom of the Trump administration what he's doing. They're

(02:06:43):
not going to be held accountable and to be forced
to do this type of thing, even though they should.
And that's why when I see all these CEOs from
airlines talking about how much they care about their passengers,
and employees. I just want to throw up because I'm thinking,
stop it, because you're saying one thing and then doing
something completely different. If you really cared about your employees
and you really wanted to protect them, you would spend

(02:07:05):
whatever money it took to keep these individuals that have
been convicted of these types of actions off of your flight.
And if it happened on a Southwest flight, you're making
sure they don't fly you on American or Delta or
United or South South, trus whatever it is. But we're
not doing it. During the pandemic, the airlines were asked
early on to provide and track information and give it

(02:07:27):
to the government, and they said, well, we don't have
the main power to do it. And they said, well,
this could help us actually prevent the spread of COVID
if we could have this information. I'm sorry, we're not
going to be able to do it. Again, the airlines
telling the government what they're going to do instead of
the other way around.

Speaker 1 (02:07:44):
That's amazing. And to your point earlier, I don't care
how bad a day you're having, Nothing can justify you
assaulting or battering another human being that has no connection
with your bad day. Well, and more with you. We're
going to find out how many ways you can anger
a c We're west Jet creating a new way to
anger its air traffic passengers plus hub delays are going

(02:08:05):
to find out how good it is to travel today.
More with Jay Ratliffe after this brief word, These brief
words from Iffy five tar c DE talk station one
more time, I heart me. The aviation expert Jay Ryloff
intentionally held on the the goofiest and the dumbest for
the last Jay, you gave me a heads up on
this one yesterday. My reactions is like, you've got to
be kidding me. Tell them what west Jet's doing now, Well,

(02:08:30):
they have.

Speaker 10 (02:08:33):
They've decided to give passengers the opportunity to take advantage
of a premium seating option on their flights.

Speaker 1 (02:08:41):
Of course that's first class, right, that's first class premium seating.

Speaker 10 (02:08:45):
They kind of I think, redefine the word premium Brian
in essence, if you want to seat the reclines, they're
going to charge you more.

Speaker 3 (02:08:54):
Now. I mean, we we've talked about, oh.

Speaker 10 (02:08:57):
My gosh, what are your charges for oxygen? It used
to be you could take any seat you wanted, and
then they said you know, people will actually pay money
to get their seats assigned in advance. Okay, and then
they said, you know some people prefer window seats over
middle seats, so we can start charging them more for that.
You know, some people prefer aisle seats, and then they
decided let's give them a little bit more leg room.
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Now here's how this

(02:09:19):
is going to be sold to the American traveling public.
So many people, the airlines will say, are having fights
over reclining seats and it's really creating a customer service problem.
So us as the airline, we're going to make sure
that we can alleviate those problems. So we will make
every seat on the airplane incapable of reclining. We'll have

(02:09:40):
them all at this slight angle and everyone will have
the same and nobody can recline it. So that's how
we're going to take better care of our customer. Of course,
ps in behind closed doors, they can now put an
extra two rows on every aircraft so they can make
more revenue. Okay, that's the reason they do it. So
now they're going to say, we're going to give you
some premium seat in west Jet. I think it's twelve

(02:10:01):
seats per seven thirty seven that they're going to have
this on. You can actually pay for these seats for
the ability to recline, and that's going to be an
additional service. And it just you know, and you know,
congratulations to them for finding another way to squeeze more
money out of us, because from a business standpoint, it's like,

(02:10:23):
you know, we used to check bags and it didn't
cost us a penny. Now we have to pay for it.
We used to actually be able to carry bags on
an airplane. Now we got to pay for it. We
actually used to be able to sit in the seat
that had a little button that could push us let
our seat recline for free. No, now we're gonna have
to pay for it. Now you watch what's going to
happen here. West Jet is the first airline. Yep, the

(02:10:44):
dom the Leader brother, buckle up and brace for impact.

Speaker 1 (02:10:50):
This reminded me of the I think BMW been the
first automat auto manufacturer, but it's kind of become a
popular thing to equip the cars with all the technology
but then charge you to actually activate it.

Speaker 3 (02:11:03):
So out.

Speaker 1 (02:11:04):
Yeah, so like a heated seat it's in there, but
you got to pay fifty bucks a month or whatever
under some performance package to make it work. So my
question ins far as the seats are concerned. You mentioned
the button. Are they just going to disable the reclined
mechanism so that saves them having to replace the seats
so the technologies in there, it's just been blocked out,
or are they actually going to change the seats out

(02:11:26):
to be fixed.

Speaker 3 (02:11:27):
I don't think they change the seats out.

Speaker 10 (02:11:29):
I think that would make it because it would be
too expensive. But I'll tell you this, as future airplanes
are ordered, you will have airplanes with these seats with
the slight recline that there's no way they can be reclined.
And of course some people have these knee blocker type
devices that you can buy and I'm not advocating you
do this, and you can actually put it in the

(02:11:50):
seat in front of you that prevents the seat from reclining.
And yeah, the knee blockers or whatever they're called, if
flight attendants really get upset us when we use them,
because when somebody tries to recline a seat and can't
and it's found out what happened, you know, probably the
person before you put them on.

Speaker 3 (02:12:07):
They're not you.

Speaker 1 (02:12:07):
But right it comes, it becomes, it.

Speaker 10 (02:12:09):
Becomes I'm not suggesting you do this, but it's it's
Airlines are getting tired of, you know, some of the
stuff that flight attendants have to deal with, and certainly
flight attendants are getting tired of being the referee between
people that reclient seats, don't recline seats, and all this
and that, because there's a lot of arguments and a
lot of the low cost carriers have aircraft that again,
the seats don't recline, They've got a slight recline to them,

(02:12:32):
and they're not super comfortable seats, but you're not in
them for an extended period of time, and they're lightweight,
and they can also put more seats on the airplane.

Speaker 3 (02:12:40):
So that's the case.

Speaker 10 (02:12:42):
But when I when I saw that, I thought, oh,
you gotta be kidding me.

Speaker 3 (02:12:46):
One I thought, why didn't I think of that?

Speaker 10 (02:12:48):
Because you know it's something it's so ridiculous, Sure we're.

Speaker 3 (02:12:53):
Going to do it.

Speaker 1 (02:12:55):
There's a lot of explets I could use on that
was because you're not, say, a jerk, you didn't think
of that because you would find the concept to be
offensive to the consumer anyway.

Speaker 3 (02:13:07):
You and I are not wired dead way, brothers.

Speaker 1 (02:13:08):
No we are not. No, we are not as we
always Let's talk about hub delays. What's it looking like
out there today for travel, Jay Ratlift, This entire.

Speaker 10 (02:13:17):
Week has been a mess because especially with some weather
that's been coming in off the northeast. But today is difference,
and I'm thrilled to say the mess in the Northeast
is gone. Really, the if if I was getting paid
for delays, it would be it'd be a light day
because Seattle is about the only airport hub that's going
to be impacted because of weather. Everything else has been

(02:13:38):
pretty well cleared out. Even I think some of the
turbulent areas where we could be experienced turbulence have really subsided.
So if you pick the day, you get like a
triple gold star because it's just gonna be an incredible
day to fly. You pick the perfect perfect day to
take to this.

Speaker 1 (02:13:51):
Guys, love it. We can end on a positive note.
Typically the entire conversation is positive, Jay Ratliffe, love having
you on the show Man. Look forward to next Thursday
with an other air traffic or airline report or aviation
report and As always, I hope you and your better
half have a wonderful day and week.