Dan Carroll in for Brian Thomas

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:03):
It's Tuesday morning. Joe Strecker is rolling out the Van Halen.
I just let this soak in for a little bit
good stuff at five o'clock in the morning. How are
you doing this morning? Good morning. I'm Dan Jerrold and
for Brian Thomas, and we are rolling till nine o'clock

(00:28):
this morning. Yeah, I was thinking about I get to
sit here and talk to the great audience that is
the fifty five KRC Morning Show. Been a little while
since I've been here, but always glad to be sitting in,
especially when Joe Strecker's running the board. And what am
I going to talk about today? What am I gonna
tell you I've got? And I was thinking today probably

(00:50):
going to be a show with a lot of leftovers.
And what do I mean by that is I when
I when I'm preparing for shows, You when you do this,
you overprepare because you never know what's going to happen.
And when you're staring three or in this case four
hours a dead air in the face, you got to
have stuff ready to go. So there's I do these

(01:12):
shows and we get on a subject and we talk
about it, and there's a lot of stuff that never
winds up making the air, and so I'm thinking, well,
I've got a lot of that stuff. I'm just going
to kind of rely on that. Joe's got lined up
a couple of guests for us a little bit later
on this morning. Andrew Pappas is going to be here,

(01:33):
and that's going to be in the seven o'clock hour,
and we'll talk about some local things, probably talk about
mostly about the city settlement that is going to go
to protesters from the summer of twenty twenty, which I
think is just one of the poorest decisions that the

(01:54):
city could possibly make. And then citizen watch dog Todd
Zenzer will be here in the eight o'clock hour. I've
had taught on my shows. I've spoken with him on
the phone, I've texted him many times. I have never
met him in person. So today he will be here
in studio in the eight o'clock hour, and I will

(02:15):
meet him in person. So I'm looking forward to that.
In the meantime, I'm looking forward to talking with you.
Five one, three, seven, four, nine fifty five hundred, and
I'll have to get the eight hundred number from Joe
in a minute. I don't have anything to write it
down much. I should have a pencil here, but he
Joe put in front of me with the Inquirer has
had a look at the at the settlement agreement. I

(02:38):
had this yesterday and I haven't had time to read
it all. But the Inquirer did did a breakdown of
who gets some of the eight point one million dollars
in the settlement against Cincinnati and the protesters who will
get some of the eight point one million dollars were

(02:58):
not charged with felonies or damaging property according to the
Racial Justice Protest, and the Racial Justice Protest is that
I didn't realize that it had a name, Joe, did
you realize that it had a formal title? The Inquirer
calls this the racial Justice Protest in the summer of

(03:20):
twenty twenty. Would anyone from the Inquirer care to explain
that how are those and what was the racial injustice
that was being that was being demonstrated against? I would
like to know. In any case, the Inquirer got a

(03:45):
hold of the riot settlement. Let's see, let's see, let's
see what they get there, who is getting the money
and how much the attorneys will get about two million
million dollars in legal fees eight point one million dollars
of the eight point one two million out of the

(04:07):
eight point one million, and then I think I saw
where there's another five thousand for expenses. I wonder if
that was right now. I have to go back and
look at that. According to the city and attorneys for
the plainiffs, there were four hundred and seventy nine plaintiffs.
The settlement names the eleven lead plaintiffs. The plaintiffs get

(04:29):
to divvy up five thousand, twenty do I'm sorry, five million,
twenty nine thousand, five hundred dollars, which comes out to
ten thousand, five hundred per person. Those in the settlement
who were detained for a period of more than five
hours in association with their arrest could be eligible for

(04:50):
up to another two thousand dollars. So let's see, you're
detained for five hours and you get two thousand dollars
for that. It's my way of thinking that comes out
to about two hundred bucks an hour. Protesting pays. Well, Joe,

(05:14):
you're knocking down two hundred bucks an hour here at
the at the station pretty close to that, Yes, sir,
let's see the eleven lead plaintiffs receive an additional five
thousand dollars apiece for their role in representing all the plaintiffs.

(05:39):
And isn't that just andy? I mean, this just reads
like an unbelievable grift. So how how do you? How
do you go out and protest, defy a lawful curfew,
defy police, wind up getting arrested, and then wind up

(06:03):
being a lead plaintiff? And and the I believe the
lawsuit was filed a couple of years after the fact.
This was twenty twenty. We are now approaching twenty twenty six.
So all these years later, you're the You're the lead
plain if I'm the lead guy, and I'm getting an

(06:24):
extra five grand because because of what? Because of your
according to the inquirer, their role in representing all the
all the plaintiffs. How are they represented? What? What do you?

(06:49):
I mean? It's such a joke just on the face
of it. Let me see what do we got. We've
got a couple of more minutes here to talk about this.
Let's see the plaintiffs. So, okay, the planeffs are going
to divvy up five million dollars five thousand apiece for
those for the leadership role that the eleven lead planis
had an additional three hundred thousand be sent aside for

(07:11):
planets who submit claims for uncompensated injury during the arrest.
So the arrest was made in twenty twenty. This is
twenty twenty five, going on twenty twenty six. If you
if you haven't discovered your uncompensated injury by now, when

(07:35):
will that happen? But there's three hundred grand out there
for the taking, So I suspect those individuals are meeting
with attorneys and medical professionals, professionals as we speak, to
figure out how to get their fingers in that pie.

(07:56):
So we'll get into more of some of this breakdown
as we move on with the big eight point one
million dollar settlement. It's five point fifteen. We got to
get to a little bit of a break Dan Carroll
and for Brian Thomas on fifty five KRCV toald On
once a second. It is twenty one at fifty five KRCV.
He talks to I remember when I was on the air.

(08:34):
It was earlier this year. I want to say it
was a couple of months ago, a couple three months ago,
and the news came that the guy who wrote this
song had passed away. Joe, did you know that the
guy who wrote this song for Golden Earring he passed away?
I mean, really, one of the greatest rock songs of
all time. If he asked me a little Radar love?

(08:56):
And the name of that guy escapes me at the moment. Sorry,
I I don't remember that. I don't remember the dude's name.
But still it's a great song, Radar Love. All right,
Let's see, we're talking about the the what the Inquirer
put out about the settlement. Let's see, the four hundred

(09:17):
and seventy nine planeufs in the lawsuit were charged with
misconduct at an emergency, a misdemeanor related to violating the
city's curfew, said Jacqueline Green, an attorney for the planeoffs.
The full settlement agreement attained by the Inquirer doesn't include
the exhibits that list all of the beneficiaries. The Inquirer

(09:38):
has requested a full list of people receiving money from
the city, and I would I would think that there
should be a full list. You're gonna get money from
the city, we should know where that money is going,
should we not? Seems pretty straightforward to me. Let's see,

(10:00):
the city eventually dismissed the charges related to the curfew.
So it wasn't you know, it wasn't enough that these
individuals went out there and there was damage done the
first couple of nights of the of the protests, and
then you know, the mayor put the curfew in place.

(10:25):
It wasn't enough that they you get, you get arrested
for violating the curfew. H But now you have to
go and sue after your case was dropped and you
you wound up facing no charges whatsoever. You know, why

(10:47):
can't why can't you just take a deep breath after
that and say, man, dodge the bullet on that one.
No charges or the case has been dismissed. I had
some charges, got arrested, okay, but not gonna have to
do any time, not gonna pay a fine. Everything gets
kind of washed away. Why can't that be good enough? No,

(11:08):
you gotta you gotta go find some lawyers that will
take the case, get some money out of It's it's
never enough. And again, although the way this this whole
thing is being set, it just it just invites more
of this, does it?

Speaker 2 (11:29):
Not?

Speaker 1 (11:30):
Am I read? Am I wrong? Am I? Reading this wrong,
am I is my view on this so out of place?
But I see all this money that's gonna be doled
out city bending over backwards, there's gonna be there's gonna
be new police training. I was. I was scrolling through

(11:52):
this during the break, trying to get to the part
where where they talk about the police training that's going
to take place, and now they're gonna come up with
these new these new guidelines for police. No, I've got
a pretty good idea that our police know what they're doing.

(12:17):
Our police have a pretty good idea of how to
handle these these these malcontents. But no, no, not good.
You know, our city manager and Iris Rolie, they're gonna
they're gonna have they have more training for our Cincinnati
police how to do things the right way. So we
don't I don't know, Maybe maybe we can just maybe

(12:39):
we can just skip all the all the legal wranglings
and just maybe give what do you think about this, Joe,
Maybe when we when police go out there to calm
down rioters and protesters and protect property, maybe they can
just go out with a giant sack of one hundred
dollars bills and pass those out. Would you please, would

(13:01):
you please go home? Now? Here's here's five or six
hundred bucks for your trouble. Would that work? Will that'd
be just you know, maybe we can save the attorney's fees,
save the idea, just just cut cut the legal process out.

(13:23):
Maybe that's maybe we need to have a big pot
of money and and and you know, schedule our protests
the railroad money. Take some of that railroad money and
just have a giant stack of it somewhere at city
Hall or maybe at police headquarters that we've got a

(13:46):
protest tonight. All the cops on second shifts, come on,
come on in. Well you got we got your sack
full of you know, each one of you is going
to have about ten grand, and see if you can
see if you can talk him into accepting you know,
you know, three four hundred bucks apiece to go away.

(14:09):
Take your money, now, go away, Maybe we'll see you
tomorrow night. Let's cut cut al Gerhardstein out of the process.
I'm sure he wouldn't he wouldn't like that one bit,
ah man, But there's a council committee. What do let
me see, I had a Fox nineteen story.

Speaker 3 (14:30):
On this.

Speaker 1 (14:32):
Talks They named that council. It's it's I think it's
the council that used to be a law in public safety.
But they have a meeting today and they are going
to the council committee is going to either say yay
or nay on this settlement. Oh yeah, that Joe says
nay is out of the question. But I would strongly

(14:55):
encourage any members of council who may be listening right
now to I say no, be bold, stand up and
say we will see you in court. Take it to court.
Take it to court. We lose in court, I think
I I in may Cobb wind up costing more money,

(15:18):
but I think I'd be better off with that. Look,
it's not my money. I don't live in the city.
I don't vote in the city. I don't I don't
think I paid tax. I'm sure something. Maybe some of
my tax dollars go to the city. Take it to court.
Be bold five twenty six fifty five KRC. The talk
states you're one stop for advertising. Call eight four to four,
eight five twenty nine. On this Tuesday morning, Dan Carroll

(15:48):
in for Brian Thomas, And the first thing I saw
that was put in front of me this morning is
he inquired did a breakdown of who was getting the
settlement money. Were the protests violent? The protests were largely peaceful,
but on the night on one night May thirtieth, twenty twenty,

(16:10):
windows were broken at various locations downtown, over the Rhine
and the University of Cincinnati. Multiple businesses reported theft of merchandise.
And according to the settlement, you know, those really bad
people who broke the windows, the people who stole the merchandise,

(16:34):
did all those bad things. They apparently, we are told
that they are not getting any money at all. Nope,
no money for you, apparently. And I guess that's that's
in the settlement. And I'm scrolling through this thing. Let's see,
here we go. Excluded excluded from class definitions. Excluded from

(16:58):
the settlement class are this is I guess point number
sixty six A. Persons who executed a release of waiver
of claims in favor of the City of Cincinnati in
connection with a plea agreement disposing of any criminal charges
that arose between May thirtieth and June eighth of twenty twenty.

(17:18):
Persons who were charged with any accompanying felony or offense
of violence or property damage who were alleged to have
committed any such actions in connection with a criminal charge.
So how many of those people are there? How many

(17:39):
of those people who actually damaged property were only wound
up to be charged with a misdemeanor effense. How do
you go in and break all that down. It's one
thing to say that, yeah, the people who broke the windows,
who damaged property, who stole things, it's easy to say

(18:00):
that they're not going to get any money. But so
far removed from this entire process, how do we know
that that is what is actually taking place? How do
we know that they were actually charged with those offenses
instead of just being lumped in with everyone else on

(18:21):
these misdemeanor charges. How do we know? I don't know. Well,
let's see person's not listed in Exhibit A who brought
claims against the city alleging constitutional rights violations relating to
their arrest, detention, or prosecution in association with their presence
in the area of a protest between May thirty and

(18:46):
twenty twenty and June eighth, except for Kathleen Burbage or Burberage.
I don't know why Kathleen Burbridge gets an exemption here.
So this is a yeah, So these are the the
people who I guess there's some people who got arrested

(19:06):
that they're saying, don't get any money. I don't know
if I'm buying into that. Jay, what's going on today?

Speaker 4 (19:13):
Hey, good morning. I think that I think your idea
is brilliant. I was thinking about this yesterday, that these
protesters are just paid whoores anyhow, right, So so if
George Stros or somebody like that is paying them to
go to these towns and tear them to pieces, and
what we probably ought to do is have somebody with

(19:34):
the brains in the connections and intelligence like Iris Rawley
to get in the middle of this and for a
small fee, I think she could facilitate like an eBay
auction where the town is, you know, town of Cincinnati
is going to have to outbid George Soros and she
will get just a small cut her and her LLC
maybe like fifty seven percent to facilitate this.

Speaker 1 (19:58):
I always not going to do anything unless unless she's
getting a cut. I think we're all well aware of that.

Speaker 4 (20:05):
Well well correct, but I mean it's just it's just
the track record of being able to facilitate extortion that
I think she's highly qualified, maybe uniquely qualified, and with
her connections in the city. That that's how the town
after they have UH, you know, make poor choices with
an election, get your wallets out or other George Soros's people,

(20:28):
we are going to burn your place down, which is odd.
Whenever you have a communists on communist violence, that is
that's unfortunate, to say the least.

Speaker 1 (20:36):
Yeah, yeah, that was left.

Speaker 4 (20:38):
Bluetown gets hard gets attacked by hard left protesters.

Speaker 1 (20:42):
The day I learned of this settlement, I was talking
to some friends of mine who are in the Hamilton
County Sheriff's department and they and they were out there
those nights assisting or working alongside Cincinnati police. And it
was suggested to me that many of these people who
were out there engaging in this activity, we're already being

(21:03):
paid up front through a Soros organization. So this is
this is a nice double dip for them. You know,
I don't know, I don't know how much you get
paid up front, but on the back end, you're going
to collect between ten and twelve grand. And if you're
a leader, if you're you know, one of those who
jumped on UH, and you're a lead plaintiff in this

(21:24):
for your role in representing the other planets, you get
an additional five grand. It's it's like the Wheel of fortune.
It's better the wheel.

Speaker 5 (21:33):
I think it's like the right days of the mafia.

Speaker 4 (21:37):
It's the glory days of the mafia.

Speaker 5 (21:38):
May's high tech.

Speaker 4 (21:40):
It's extortion money. We're just going to pay quote protection money.
If the town can get their wallets out and pay
these protesters more than the Soros is paying them, well
then they'll go away.

Speaker 1 (21:50):
But doesn't this sent me? Does it send a message?
Does it send a message to people who want to
engage in this activity in the few? You know, they're
not going to do it now because it's cold outside,
But when things warm up a little bit, let's get
some more protests going. Because we know that the city
of Cincinnati likes to pay out.

Speaker 4 (22:08):
Well, what is the con there's a comment about with government,
whatever you subsidize, you're going to get more of.

Speaker 1 (22:13):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think whatever subsize you get more of. Yeah,
that's that's fact. Jay. I appreciate the call this morning.
Good stuff man, there you go. I appreciate jb in there.
Got to get to a break five thirty six, five, one, three, seven,
fifty five hundred, Dan Carroll and for Brian Thomas on
fifty five KRC, the talk stations Waynam going up Ran

(22:36):
Chuhn Ingram fifty five k r C, the talk station
fifty five KRC, the talk station Dan Carroll and for
Brian Thomas. During the protests in late Man and early
June of twenty twenty, while many of the demonstrations were peaceful,

(23:01):
certain events did take place that devolved into vandalism, such
as looting in the downtown areas and over the Rhine
and Clifton. The C three CDC Corporation estimates approximately eighty
businesses sustained a total of about two hundred and seventy
five thousand dollars in damage. Small businesses had their windows smashed,

(23:23):
planters were upturned, dumpsters were set on fire, general vandalism.
The Hamilton County Justice Center had windows broken out, American
flags were taken down. I think there was even some
shots fired at police. Most of the damage occurred during
the first two nights of unrest, and in response, the

(23:47):
city implemented a curfew that lasted from May thirtieth through
June eighth, and so my memory of this is that,
and these riots were going on across the country. I
was almost on a nightly basis, turning on the TV

(24:09):
and saying, I'm gonna watch the riots tonight. See what
cities are Burnie, see what mayhem is going on in
different cities across the country. And then when things started
to pick up here in Cincinnati, and the riots that
could have occurred, the craziness that could have occurred here

(24:31):
in Cincinnati was largely short circuited because of what police did,
because of what the mayor did. And I remember thinking
that this is a good thing, that Cincinnati should be
a model for the rest of them. This is how
you you stop this thing from getting way, way out
of hand. And now we've got to pay these people.

(25:00):
I mean, it really takes the wind out, at least
for me. It takes the wind out of the sales. Jeff,
what say you this morning?

Speaker 6 (25:07):
Well, I just wanted to say good morning. And I'm
wondering if you ever wondering if you ever go to sleep.
I hope they pay you by the.

Speaker 1 (25:14):
R No I got, I got, I got some sleep
last night. I'm good man. I appreciate that.

Speaker 5 (25:22):
Well.

Speaker 6 (25:22):
Two questions Number one, does the City of Cincinnati have
a line item regarding you know, their budget regarding non
governmental organizations and contributions to you know whatever they call themselves,
and then where what they do with their money? And

(25:43):
then question number two is, you know, I'm thinking I
could use a job to supplement my NFL five dollars
a week gambling monkey all my back, and I was
wondering if if you got any ideas they asked to
where I could apply for a job as a protester.
But I need some things. I need to know if
they comply with the American Disabilities Act, because I really

(26:06):
would prefer to just get a little one of them
carts with a basket in the front and put a
cooler in the front, and then I'm going to need
a couple bodyguards too, because I've been told that I'm opinionated,
and I was kind of hoping you could just check
that out and get back to me on that.

Speaker 1 (26:23):
Yeah, I'm scrolling time. I'm just I'm scrolling through the
I'm scrolling through the settlement agreement, and I don't see
anything where it talks about compliance with the ADA, So
maybe maybe that needs to be went in there.

Speaker 6 (26:36):
You know, maybe you need to do more research because
I'm not coming back up there until it gets a
lot warmer, you know. I mean I'm not you know,
I may be, I may be easy, but I'm not cheap.

Speaker 1 (26:49):
Yeah. The you know, look, the demonstrators, the protesters, they're
they're pretty dedicated as long as it's you know, the
temperature is in the seventies, eighties, When you when you
get into the twenties like we have now, they're they're
not it's dedication sort of protest. Yeah, absolutely, Yeah.

Speaker 6 (27:10):
I can send bad vibes to whoever you want me
to if the money is right. So you know, that's
that's my protest. Other than that, stay warm, old Bud.

Speaker 1 (27:18):
Jeff, Well do what we can. Brother, appreciate the phone
call on that. So there you go. And uh, it's
almost a whole hour talking about the settlement. But good
work by the Inquirer breaking all this down. Let me
see if I missed anything else. I think pretty much
gone on all of this. Yeah. The ordinances, the ordinance

(27:40):
to approve the settlement will go before the City's Public
Safety and Governance Committee on December ninth, that is today,
So I don't know. Sometimes when they have the committee
meetings down there, people can go and they can speak
before the committee's I don't know if that is going
to happened today with this committee, but it certainly will

(28:05):
be interesting if some folks go down there and maybe
make their voices heard on whether or not this settlement
should be approved. I'm sure there's plenty of people out
there who think the settlement is a great idea. The
the the resolution that they're going to pass, you know,

(28:31):
it talks about how, you know, this is the best
way forward, and you know, all the parties involved have
decided that, you know, we'll play this nominal sum which
we have to issue debt for. And Smitherman was talking
about that the other day and that does not sit

(28:52):
well with him. None of this sits well with and
it really it shouldn't sit well with anyone. Five forty
six stand Carroll for Brian Thomas fifty five krc DE
talks to the Claremont County Veterans Service Commission. Wishes all
veterans in their families a joyous holiday season. In twenty
twenty five weeks of station Man Joe Strecker's rocking out

(29:20):
this morning, Little Detroit rock City. Good stuff right there,
I remember the un Maybe I tell this maybe I
tell this story every time you play this song. But
this one, that was the first song that I ever
heard by Kiss. Buddy of mine who lived down the street,

(29:43):
had just got a brand new Gto convertible, and I
mean that it was. Man, that was a very slick,
a very cool looking car. And I think I was
I don't know, thirteen, maybe fourteen at the time, and
he says, oh, man, let's take it out for a ride.
So he put the convertible down and he says, you

(30:05):
ever heard a Kiss? I said no, and he slapped
that eight track in there and this song came on.
I was like, man, I have never heard anything like
that before. Good stuff, Detroit Rock City. What a great song. Oh,
Alex Stravinsky heard my side. I joonases sound like I'm

(30:28):
saying that guy's name, right, Travinsky. Yeah, the he was
in court yesterday and he, of course he of the
the brawl that happened in downtown Cincinnati. See, that was
one of the things I was talking about the other
See when when this happened, When this beatdown happened on

(30:52):
the streets of Cincinnati, what was it Back in July
we were in Cincinnati was on the national news every morning,
every night, every day for days weeks on it. I
remember doing radio shows and not in this studio because
there's TVs. Don't work in this studio. Although there's five

(31:17):
beautiful big screen TVs in here, not on one of
them shows anything that you can watch on TV. But
in any case, I was inside the other studio down
the hall, and I'm doing the radio show. And that
was a great topic of discussion, the beatdown in Cincinnati.
And I can't tell you how many times I've got

(31:38):
Fox News on there on one I got CNN on
the other one, and up there's the video again. I
mean it played again and again and again. And so
Cincinnati made the national news for that. But the one
thing we didn't make the national news for was what
the George Floyd ryants. And why didn't we make the

(32:01):
national news because we shut it down. The professionals who
were in charge of the city back then said, nah,
bah bah nah, we are not going to let this happen.
We are shutting it down. And if the mayor had
to step up and put a curfew in place, that

(32:24):
was it used the tools at his disposal to shut
it down, and God blessed John Cranley for what he did.
And this this notion that we are going to pay
these people eight million dollars just it. It's a slap

(32:49):
in the face. But Travinsky, who's accused of slapping another
person during the downtown brawl, that trial has been postponed
now to January twelfth due to the introduction of what
defense attorney Douglas Brandon called a surprise witness by the prosecution.

(33:12):
So I don't know that much, and this article doesn't
really get into who the surprise witness might be, but
it's hard to imagine, Joe. We've seen pretty much a
lot of the video that's associated with that. We saw
the video that came from the street camp. And that's
the thing. There are cameras all over downtown Cincinnati. They

(33:37):
did most just about every square block of downtown Cincinnati
is monitored or can be monitored by the command center
where they've got they've got the I don't know what
they call it, but it's the riot respond not the
riot response, but they've got the response team watching all that. So, yeah,

(34:00):
we knew the videos were out there, but I think
we've pretty much seen all the video on this, but
the surprise witness has come up, so we'll that trial
is going to be delayed till January, so we don't
get to have fun with that until January, so we'll
see what happens. I got to get to a break
news coming up top of the hour, and then we

(34:20):
will carry on until nine. This morning, Dan Carroll in
for Brian Thomas on fifty five KRCV Talk station.

Speaker 5 (34:28):
Today's top headlines coming up.

Speaker 1 (34:30):
At the CD talk station six o five on this
Tuesday morning. Good morning, just getting up, got your radio
tune of fifty five KRCV Talk station. I'm Dan Carroll,

(34:52):
Brian Thomas taking the day off. Brian back tomorrow, Joe,
Brian is back tomorrow, So only want one more day
without Brian Thomas, and always my pleasure to sit in.
Joe Strecker is the executive producer running the big board
there in the command center. So when you call in,
make sure you say hello to Joe and he might

(35:14):
he might let you on the air. The twenty twenty
five Reagan National Defense Survey is out, a national public
opinion poll that measures how we the American people understand
key defense and national security issues and always some interesting
findings in this as if you need a survey to

(35:38):
tell you the obvious. The mood of the country, and
Alan Pfeiffer wrote a piece on this an American thinker.
The mood of the country remained circumspect, with only thirty
eight percent of Americans believing that we are on the
right track versus fifty eight percent who feel that we

(35:59):
are on the wrong track. This is buttressed by the
fact that about fifty percent believe our foreign policy and
national defense are effective. Seventy five percent don't think that
we're on the right track with our economy the single
highest number of interests. Other areas are concerned for most
people include healthcare, political polarization, border and crime. Seventy seven

(36:27):
percent of US have confidence in the military. Forty four
percent have confidence in President Trump. I think these numbers,
I mean, these are the numbers from the survey. I
would think that that more people right now would believe

(36:48):
that the country is on the right track. Thirty eight
seems like a little bit of a low number to me,
and fifty eight percent think we're on the wrong track. Now,
there's always going to be, you know, be people who
hate Trump that will say the country is on the
wrong track no matter what. So there's always going to
be a baseline number there. But do you does fifty

(37:14):
eight percent of this audience. I feel like the country
is on the wrong track right now. I don't know, Bobby,
what's going on this morning? Dan?

Speaker 7 (37:23):
A special thank you can't express our true feelings or
appreciation you carrying that torture freedom every day.

Speaker 1 (37:31):
Hey, brother, we do what we can. We do what
we can we and we appreciate, we appreciate you and
those like you who are such loyal listeners to this program.

Speaker 7 (37:44):
I tell you what, Porkopolis, They just keep feeding the pig.

Speaker 1 (37:47):
Don't they. I I the more I read about this settlement,
the more I just don't know. How do you how
do you draw uh any other conclusion other than we
are inviting more of this in the future. How do
you do that?

Speaker 5 (38:06):
Well?

Speaker 7 (38:07):
I see it's greed and gratuities. I mean, they've got
to they've gott to spread the money around and take the.

Speaker 5 (38:13):
Attention all things. You know.

Speaker 7 (38:15):
It's my opinion, and I think we've discussed it. Take
it to court. Take it to court, That's what I say.

Speaker 1 (38:21):
Decide, Take it to court. Please stand up, spend, spend
a couple of million dollars taking it to court. I
think I think that a jury would look at this
and say, no, we are not, we are not. These
people are not in line because they had to spend

(38:43):
the night waiting to get processed into the justice center.
And then these claims about not having access to to
bathrooms or not having a blanky, or not getting a
bottle of water. I think those claims can be disputed
as well.

Speaker 7 (39:00):
It was all legal and it's nothing now but appeasement
that we need to take it to court. Go ahead
and don't rubber stamp it. But yeah, we know what
the counts was going to do. Rubber stamp it.

Speaker 1 (39:11):
What what does history say about appeasement?

Speaker 5 (39:14):
That's exactly correct it.

Speaker 7 (39:15):
Cisco will come back and bites you in the backside.

Speaker 1 (39:19):
Bobby, thanks for the phone call, brother, Thank you. You
have the great work man.

Speaker 5 (39:23):
I like that.

Speaker 1 (39:24):
I love that guy. Let's see, seventy seven percent of
us have confidence in the military, forty four percent in
President Trump, thirty percent have confidence in Congress. Joe, I
think that number is a little bit high. Do you
think thirty percent of the American people have great confidence
in Congress, Joseph is three times, do you h, I'm

(39:51):
not yeah, I'm not sure if that that number is accurate.
Let's see, uh, forty seven percent have confidence in our
Supreme Court. I would say that is that seems about right.
Probably should be a little bit lower. Here's a number
that's way off. Listen to this, Joe, forty two percent

(40:16):
of the American people in the Reagant National Defense Survey,
forty two percent have confidence in the news media. That
number is way too high. I'm looking. I don't see
a dicimale point. Yeah, four point two percent would be

(40:37):
I think it would be more accurate. I'm going to
have to look at the methodology on this. Forty forty
two percent that that number, if that number is accurate,
that is absolutely stunning that forty two percent of the
American people. Because I know I've talked about a different surveys,

(41:00):
it be done. I talked to Curtis Hawk from NewsBusters
all the time, and there is no way that forty
two percent of the American people have confidence in our
news media. I just I don't know how that's true.
Seventy one percent of Americans have confidence in our police,

(41:24):
So I think That is a good number. I wish
that number was a little bit higher. Eighty one percent
of the American people believe that our military will keep
us safe. That's a pretty good number. I think that
could be a little bit higher. Seventy eight percent think

(41:44):
that we can win a foreign war. I certainly hope
we don't have a foreign war, but the vast majority
of American people think that we can win a war.
When's the last time we won a war. The American
public is less concerned about DEI in the military. Only

(42:08):
twenty five percent believe it is a significant problem. Well,
DEI in the military, that day has come and gone,
and it's it's about time. So it will no longer
be an issue under the auspices of Pete hag Seth
and Donald Trump. So DEI in the military, that's a

(42:32):
that soon that will not even be a subject for discussion.
But then, of course, if you get a Gavin Newsom
and I saw was it yesterday? I guess it was
yesterday that I get.

Speaker 5 (42:46):
You know.

Speaker 1 (42:47):
The polling, of course, is being done for twenty twenty
eight and right now Gavin Newsom is the considered to
be the front runner on the Democrat side. Of things.
I mean, how how sick is that? How disgusting is that.
Let's see, say elimination of DEI from the military is

(43:11):
a good idea. Well, there's a lot of uninformed people
out there. One you know, I'll say the number should
be closer to one hundred percent. That's a elimination of
DEI from the military is a good thing of American

(43:32):
support restoring the warrior ethos to our military, which I
know is one of the main topics that Pete Hegseth
talks about all the time, restoring that warrior ethos. Sixty
one percent agree with sending troops to the border to
deter illegal immigration, fifty support sending the guard to crime

(43:57):
ridden cities to store order in safety. That is a
that that is a little bit of a gray area
for me. I have asked different people that I've talked to,
with varying degrees of legal expertise, how solid of constitutional

(44:20):
footing that Trump is on when he does that, and
those opinions very greatly so. Not sure I'm part of
that fifty five percent six fifteen Dan Carroll and for
Brian Thomas fifty five KRC the talk station from the
Demented mind of Evan Ratliffe, Talk Station six twenty. On

(44:49):
this Tuesday morning, fifty five KRC the talk station five
one three, seven four nine fifty five hundred eight hundred
eighty two three talk ALKA, which comes out to a
two five five talking about the results of the most
recent Reagan survey, the Reagan National Defense Survey. They call

(45:11):
it Reagan National Defense Survey. And let's see where do
we leave off that fifty five percent support sending the
Guard to crime ridden areas to restore order in safety.
I think it's been working though in the city's where
it's been tried. I think the man the crime rate

(45:31):
in Chicago, the murder rate has come way down. I
remember when the debate was going on a week or
so ago about DC, after the Guard troops got shot there.
The one was killed, the other one still fighting for
his life. People were talking about people who who work
in DC talk about walking around the city all the time.

(45:54):
What a difference that it has made for for them
to have those Guard members in uniform standing on the
street corners. So overall, I think it has been a
pretty good thing. Again, the constitutionality of that needs to
be adhered to. Let's see, let's see, let's see. Sixty

(46:19):
two of US are in favor of continuing to strike
drug traffickers in South America and the Caribbean. Blow those
boats out of the water. There's a big debate now
about whether to release the video of the strike. That

(46:40):
it was in question right with the survivors, whether or
not they were according to a bunch of Democrats who
looked at the video, oh, they were signaling for help.
They were, Oh, we're we're in the water. We need
waving at the own to come rescue us. Now the

(47:04):
Tom Cotton Trump heg Seth says, no, they were still
in the fight. They were trying to get back on
what was left of their vessel, radio other boats in
the area radio for help. Continue to on with their mission.
So the next strike occurred, and there's some debate now

(47:26):
about whether or not that I release let it out there.
Let's see what's going on. Joe, how do you feel
about that? Should we let that video out? Let it out,
put it out there. Trump said the other day he'll
leave it up to Hegseth about whether or not he
puts it out there. So I'm fine with that. Put
it out there and let the chips fall with. I mean,
that's all that stuff. Thank god. I'm so glad we're

(47:49):
not talking about the Epstein stuff anymore. When it comes
to the Epstein stuff, the people who are guilty, the
people who who abuse these girls, they need to be
brought to justice. They need to be held accountable for
their actions. I don't care who they are. And if

(48:11):
the paperwork that they have, the files, the black books, whatever,
the video, if there's videos, if that puts the finger
on someone guilty as committing these crimes, then let justice
take a course. Why is that so difficult? So let

(48:33):
let the videos come out and let's just see what
the heck is going on. What else do we have?
Let's see the drug traffickers. There we go. Fifty fifty
percent of the American people reject trans people in the military.

(48:54):
I think that number ought to be a little bit higher.
And there was so much, so much information coming out
on this though. The one thing that I think more
than anything else when you talk about individuals who want
to transition while they're in the military, was the piece
that I read that if if you're in the you know,

(49:16):
with the army, for example, and you are transitioning and
you are beginning your transition process, and you are you know,
maybe you've had your first surgery. Let's say your unit
gets called up to active duty and you have to
your unit was going to be in harm's way. Well,

(49:38):
if you're in the beginning of your trans your trans process,
then you don't have to go. No, you look, you're
in a delicate state having the surgery, becoming a a
man to a woman or a woman to a man. No,
you're you're, you're, you're. Fellow soldiers get to go it

(50:01):
out and be at harms way, but you sit back.
You just you rest and recuperate. Catch up with them
in about a year. I remember when I read that,
I was just incensed by that. That's just one of
the policies that needed to be done away with. Six
twenty five. We got to get to a break. Dan
Carroll for Brian Thomas on fifty five KRCV Talk Stations,

(50:22):
Prestige Interiors has been proving the way five KRC the
Talk Station fifty five KRC the Talk Station five one, three, seven,
four nine, fifty five hundred eight hundred eight two three

(50:43):
talk taking a look at the results of the Reagan
National Defense survey and all kinds of good stuff in here.
A lot of conversation starters. I like this piece a lot.
Let's see. Let's see, let's see fifty rejecting trans people
in the military. We talked, We touched on that one.

Speaker 5 (51:04):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (51:05):
Sixty two percent of Americans believe that standards for men
and women should be equal and not reduced for the
primary purpose of advancing women. Sixty two percent. I think
that number ought to be a little bit higher. No,
the standards should not be reduced. If you're a woman,

(51:31):
and and can we Joe, have we advanced the state
yet to where we can we can all agree, we
can stipulate that men and women are different. Have have
we advanced that far yet in our conversation? You sound
a little iffy on that. Yeah, Now for the purposes

(51:58):
of my conversation, Yes, men and women are different. Men
and women are not the same. You want to argue
with me on that, you're more than welcome to call it.
But no, the standards for men and women should not
be changed or reduced just for the primary purpose of
women being able to advance in the military. And I

(52:19):
don't really know how much of advancing in the military
is based on a woman being able to perform physically
the same as a man. Let's see, fifty nine percent
of us would encourage someone we love or care about
to join the military. I know I have done it

(52:40):
in my life. I have encouraged others to join the military.
I joined the military myself when I was younger. All
these important metrics are noticeably higher since President Trump was elected.
So I think some of those numbers could be a
lot higher, especially the right track wrong track. I would

(53:00):
think that way more than thirty eight percent of Americans
believe that we're on the right track. The Mega movement
preaches America first and no foreign entanglements. Our president has
threaded a needle on this and is using different levers
of power that previous leaders, using the levers of power

(53:26):
more than previous leaders to accomplish were the international goals.
But there's a limit to how hands off we can
be while protecting our national interest. Yeah. So I would
think most of us agree that. And this whole idea
that Trump is an isolationist I think has been completely
wrong from the very beginning. I think, really all you

(53:49):
have to do is look at his policies, look at
how he's negotiated the end to different conflicts around the globe.
That is, to my way of thinking, the exact opposite
of being a globalist. I'm sorry, the exact opposite of
being an isolationist. But I think we're engaging with And

(54:14):
I had a guest on the radio show I was
doing yesterday that the Trump doctrine is based on finding
peace because peace is good for business. Trump is a businessman.
He is a business person, and he knows that war

(54:35):
is bad for business. Now, there are some sectors of
the economy the war is obviously good for, But in
a larger sense, by and large, peace and prosperity go together,
and there can be far more prosperity when you are
conducting peace or conducting business under peaceful circumstances, then and

(55:01):
then circumstances that are not peaceful. I think that is
a basic philosophy of Trump, and I think it really
has a lot to do with what the Trump doctrine
is when it comes to dealing with other countries because
every piece and the guest I had on yesterday was
really terrific, and we were talking about every piece negotiation

(55:27):
that Trump has inserted himself into. There is always an
economic component, and the economic component is really the main
component of these different peace agreements. And Trump has gone
in and found ways to craft win win situations for
all the parties involved. Get a little win for the
United States, get a little win for whatever nation that

(55:54):
he is dealing with on both sides of the conflict.
And I think that's where the real genie is. And then,
of course, Joe, how often do you guys talk about
the view on this show? I mean, what what a
bunch of idiots they are, Sonny Houston and look, I

(56:14):
gotta get to a break. I'll talk about this on
the other side. But hey, I was I normally don't
talk about the view, but Sonny Hostin is such an
just an imbeciling idiot. And then she was ranting yesterday
about Trump and the Nobel Peace Prize. Mean, what a
moron she is. And all, I mean, all this stuff

(56:38):
about the you know, from the Reagan National Defense Survey
is just jogging all this stuff in my mind. It's great.
Five point three, five hundred MIC is on the line.
We'll get to this call on the other side of this.
Dan Carroll for Brian Thomas fifty five KRCD Talk station. Hey,
good morning. You're heading the airport right.

Speaker 4 (56:55):
Yeah, thanks for checking. I like the car.

Speaker 1 (56:57):
He talked station a great rock and Roll continues to
roll out. Joe Strucker getting it done, Dan Carroll and
for Brian Thomas. This morning, fifty five k r C

(57:19):
the talk station talking about the takeaways from the twenty
twenty five National Defense Survey, the Reagan National Defense Survey,
annual public opinion poll that measures America's feelings about key
defense and national security issues and the whole The notion
of foreign entanglements came up. And I saw a clip

(57:42):
yesterday from The View, and the View is typically and look,
I know the View is out there almost on a
daily basis. These women on the View are saying something
so idiotic, so stupid that it it turns out to
be jaw dropping. I decided a long time ago that

(58:02):
I need to challenge myself more than that I could.
I could play a clip of the View almost every
single day and just say, listen to how stupid this this?
But what's the challenge in that? There's really not a
challenge in that, because they do it every single day.
And so I saw a clip yesterday of Sonny hostin
and they were talking about Trump. They got on the

(58:23):
subject of Trump, and he did the the drawing for
the soccer tournament, the World I guess the World Cup,
soccer tournament it's coming to America. And Joe, are you
into that at all? The FIFA the World Cup. So
the FIFA, the the the organization that uh I you know,
sponsors the World Cup or it happens under their under

(58:45):
their auspices, they created a World Peace Prize and they
gave it to Trump for helping to bring peace around
the world. And so Sonny Hostin was belittling this, talking
about how, of course the great Barack Hussein Obama got
a Nobel Peace Prize, but Trump, the chump, only got
this little dinky piece prize from FISA or from FIFA.

(59:08):
And then she goes on to say about how I
feel he's not worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize because
you know, he really just really hasn't you know when
it comes to peace, just really hasn't done anything. Well.
I would ask Sonny host In this and did did
Barack Houssein Obama do anything worthy or equal to the

(59:30):
Abraham Accords, the most significant diplomatic achievement normalizing relations between
Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco, Saudi Arabia,
the Abraham Acquad Did Barrack Houssein ever do anything along

(59:54):
those lines? And then the list of the peace agreements
and ceasefire agreements that Trump has worked on Armenia and Azerbaijan.
They actually started doing this back in October of twenty twenty.
More formal agreement was reached in August of twenty five

(01:00:15):
Democrat Republic of the Congo and Rwanda Peace Agreement there
bringing an end to a long running conflict, focusing on
regional stability and access to critical minerals. So there's the
economic part, the economic development prosperity part of that agreement.

(01:00:37):
Indian Pakistan seasfire ending a escalation intensions between these two
nuclear powers. Cambodia and Thailand ceasefire agreement July of twenty
twenty five. This followed a few days of deadly border clashes.
Trump threatened to stall some trade deals that were in

(01:00:59):
the works. Said, look, you know, you guys want to
have trade, you want to have prosperity, you want to
have the stuff going on. Stop fighting, And they did.
Israel and Iran ceasefire. Twelve day war between Israel and
Iran ended in June of twenty twenty five. Sonny Austin
though she knows, she knows that Trump is not worthy

(01:01:21):
of a Nobel Peace Prize, and now all her viewers
on the view know that as well. Mike, what's going
on this morning?

Speaker 8 (01:01:30):
Hey, Dan, I've thought about the transgenders in the military. Yeah,
you're talking about transitioning while they're there. First of all,
American tax dollars should be paying for that.

Speaker 1 (01:01:42):
I agree.

Speaker 8 (01:01:44):
And also it's a non essential voluntary surgery. You can
do that when you get out.

Speaker 1 (01:01:49):
I agree.

Speaker 8 (01:01:50):
Because somebody who wanted to get them, say some upper
general thought he wanted to get a facelift, he'd have
to pay for that out of his own pocket. They're
not gonna and said he was. He's like, I'm getting
held up back out there on the battlefield. They wouldn't
let him.

Speaker 1 (01:02:05):
Wait, Well, I can't. I can't tell you how many
videos I saw of individuals in uniform who, once Trump
got elected, were all bent out of shape because they
knew that he was going to end all this nonsense
with the people transitioning in the military, and they and
they and they've flat outset the reason they joined the

(01:02:27):
military was so they could get their transition shows transition
I can't even say it transition surgery. Try saying that
three times fans that But there were there, there were
far too many people who were more concerned about that
than doing the job that they are required to do

(01:02:51):
when they're in uniform. So Pete Hesath is right to
look at all that and say we don't need that
kind of stuff in the military. Get it out of there.
Six forty six, Dan Carrell for Brian Thomas, fifty five
KRCV Talk Station. Not every Chimney system is the same
at the Chimney careten fifty five KRC the Talk Station,

(01:03:15):
Dan Carroll and for Brian Thomas, Joe Struker rolling out
all his favorite hits for the Bumper music this morning.
I love it, long Ago Classics, eazy Top. We'll let
it get to that good part here in a second.

(01:03:37):
Gotta love this. Five one, three, seven, four, nine, fifty
five hundred. That's the number to call if you want
to get on board. Talking about the the Reagan National
Defense Survey. Uh, they are all kinds of interesting findings

(01:03:59):
in all kinds let's see two thirds. Sixty five percent
of Americans believe we should have strict limits on advanced
AI chip sales to China. AI chip sales to China.
Isn't China making their own AI chips? I would think

(01:04:20):
they are. Why do we need to sell chips to China?
I mean, I guess that's a good thing. But when
it comes to selling stuff to China or giving anything
in China, you're not giving I was selling? Uh Nearly
nine in ten, eighty eight percent of Americans believe the

(01:04:41):
United States needs greater manufacturing capacity and when especially when
it comes to ship building, which is a good idea
better ship building. China is just smoking us when it
comes to building ships that see a strong majority. Sixty

(01:05:03):
two percent want Ukraine to prevail and it's war with Russia.
Sixty four percent support sending US weapons. That is up
nine points from last year with bipartisan gains. Fifty nine
percent of Republicans seventy five percent of Democrats. Sixty two

(01:05:24):
percent support using military force against suspected drug traffickers. I
think I touched on that one already. NATO favorability has
reached its highest level ever sixty eight percent have strong
bipartisan support for Article five commitments, and of course that

(01:05:46):
means if a NATO ally is attacked, then we all respond.
All the NATO allies are obligated to respond to that.
What else do we have? What else do we have?

(01:06:10):
Believe that the military should be able to fight two
peer enemies simultaneously. We've not had that capability for a
generation or for a generation, which might lead them to
think that our leadership has been derelict in its primary
mission of protecting America. Sixty eight percent believe that we
are at risk and support the Golden Dome concept recently

(01:06:37):
unveiled by President Trump. So a lot of interesting stuff.
And then this goes on for about another four or
five paragraphs, this piece, with all the all the findings
in here. Uh, let's see top threat to America. Let's

(01:06:57):
see China. Is that forty eight rush is a twenty
six per tent as the top threats to the country.
Two percent, though, thought Israel was the top threat to America.
I think some of those people call this radio station
on a regular base. And three percent say that we
are our own worst threat. And there are some people

(01:07:17):
who have a pretty good finger on the way things
are moving or tend to move, yeah, or our own
In a lot of cases, we are our own worst threat.

Speaker 6 (01:07:29):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (01:07:30):
Andrew Pappus is going to join us after the news
the top of the hour and we'll kick some local
issues around with him. So hope you can stick around
for that. Dan Carroll for Brian Thomas, fifty five KRCV
Talk Station, Today's top headlines coming up, Trouda in Minnesota.
Fix this in sixty days.

Speaker 5 (01:07:47):
Hand omark on Face the Nation.

Speaker 1 (01:07:48):
That is a they e lest the Marjorie Taylor Green
on sixty minutes. I got check in after threads fifty
five krc the Talk station fifty five krc DE Talks
Station seven O six This Tuesday morning, December of the ninth,

(01:08:15):
Christmas is done, Barroway, Dan Carroll and for Brian Thomas
joined a couple of days off. Brian Thomas is back
tomorrow and our buddy Joe Strucker was able to talk
to Andrew Pappis and get him to get up early
in the morning. Papas who is currently convalescing from a
serious illness. You don't have you don't have the wu hon,

(01:08:38):
Do you.

Speaker 2 (01:08:40):
Explain something to Dan Carroll If this was if you
were suffering the ailment that I am suffering, it would
be you'd be laying in a hospital with so many
tubes in you they wouldn't be able to see you. Okay,
So let's have a little bit of compassion for those
of us that are not only suffering but are still
getting up every day and contributing to society.

Speaker 5 (01:09:03):
Two meetings.

Speaker 1 (01:09:04):
It's fantastic. That is great. Let me ask you have
a little hypothetical question for you.

Speaker 5 (01:09:09):
I love your hypotheticals.

Speaker 1 (01:09:11):
Yeah, there is a going to be a meeting today
of a committee in Cincinnati City Hall.

Speaker 2 (01:09:19):
It is the.

Speaker 1 (01:09:20):
Public Safety and Governance Committee. And if you Andrew Pappas
were a member of said committee, it never happened. And
the ordinate I know it would never happen. That's why
it's hypothetical. And an ordinance came before you that was
a settlement of eight point one million dollars and you said, look,
we need you to sign off on this because we

(01:09:42):
want to pay two million dollars to the lawyers and
four hundred and seventy nine plaintiffs upwards of ten thousand
dollars apiece over because they were they were rioting and
disobeying curfew orders and disobeying police on the streets of
Cincinnati in the summer of the spring of twenty twenty.

(01:10:05):
Would you go along with in and fix your signature
to such an ordinance?

Speaker 2 (01:10:12):
You know, I'm glad you asked that question. First of all,
to answer your questions is simply, there's no way in
hell I would ever sign that agreement, and nor should
anyone that has taken the oath to protect public sign
that oath. Okay, But secondly, I have I spoke to
a police officer yesterday and I posted about this on Facebook,

(01:10:34):
and I didn't know that I would be speaking to
a Cincinnati police officer yesterday, And I said, let me
ask you a question, because this officer was in the
meeting where this settlement was announced and he got to
ask some questions about it.

Speaker 1 (01:10:46):
How about that and how about.

Speaker 5 (01:10:49):
That breaking news? And so.

Speaker 2 (01:10:53):
I said, how does it make you feel as a
police officer that city the city passes an ordinance asks
you to enforce it, and literally every encounter that you
have with the public of this nature is risks your
life because you never know how anything's going to go.
I mean, a traffic stuff, an officer risks their lives
because you don't know how it's going to go. And

(01:11:15):
I said, how does it make you feel? He said,
it's not only is it infuriating. On one hand, you're
just consumed.

Speaker 5 (01:11:26):
With how can this happen?

Speaker 2 (01:11:28):
Because the very people that we were asked to keep
the city safe from burning. If you remember the Summer
of Love of twenty twenty protests, you remember seeing a
reporter standing in front of a building going up like
an inferno, and he's telling you don't pay attention to

(01:11:48):
the flames behind him. A lot of these people are peaceful. Okay, great,
that's fantastic. A lot of them aren't mostly peaceful yet.
Yet are our men and women in law enforcement put
their lives on the line to protect businesses, protect residents, residences,
to protect the residence of Cincinnati from the same absolute

(01:12:11):
carnage we saw in other cities.

Speaker 5 (01:12:12):
And what did they get for it?

Speaker 2 (01:12:14):
They got kicked in the teeth. And you know what
he said to me, He said, let me tell you
what that does to me. First of all, I'm marking
the clock when i'm when my time is up, I'm
out of here, says I am out of here. I'm
not working for this any longer. But he's not going
to walk away from his pension right now. That would
be you know, that'd be foolish on his part. Secondly,
because human, they you know human, we have to keep

(01:12:35):
our families. You know, it's do it right by our
families first. Secondly, he said, and the next time that
they ask us to do something like this, that there's
you know, widespread civil unrest and they call the police
to come out and quell it, he said, We're not
going to do it.

Speaker 5 (01:12:54):
I mean, we'll show up. We're not arresting anybody. What's
the point.

Speaker 1 (01:12:58):
What's the point.

Speaker 5 (01:12:59):
What is the point?

Speaker 1 (01:13:00):
Well, I suggested, I suggested earlier this morning that they
just armed police officer with giant sacks of cash and
pass out money, you know, maybe four or five hundred
bucks per protester and say you would you please go
on and come back tomorrow night. We'll have another four
or five hundred bucks for you and just go on.
You cut out the middleman, and just the.

Speaker 2 (01:13:20):
Middle man, which is this is the attorney. So you
saved the attorney.

Speaker 1 (01:13:24):
Fees, justice furs money directly to individuals who want to,
you know, disobey curfews and police orders and all the
rest of it.

Speaker 5 (01:13:32):
Just now what he told me.

Speaker 2 (01:13:33):
What he told me also was this was the result
of the law department charging these people under a incorrect
either statute or whatever. And I don't speak legally.

Speaker 5 (01:13:46):
That's above my pay grade. I'm not you know me, well, Dan, I'm.

Speaker 2 (01:13:49):
Not the smartest you know person in the room, and
I like to people know that I'm not the smartest.
But let me say this. I'll fool you, right. I
want you to underestimate me, which is great, But I
will tell you this if that's true, I want you
to understand the logic here. So the law department and
with the city, passes an ordinance and this and the

(01:14:10):
police enforce the ordinance, and then the law department makes
mistake and charges these these people that were arrested under
either the wrong statute or something of legally's nature. And
I'm not sure what the He mentioned something called M
one versus M four. I don't know what that means
because I'm not usually down at the Justice center, and
forgive me, I'm not. I just don't hang out there,

(01:14:32):
nor am I called down there.

Speaker 5 (01:14:34):
But I will tell you this, if that's true.

Speaker 2 (01:14:38):
Complete the circle so the law all this stems apparently
from the law departments ineptness and incompetence. So they made
the mistake, and now the city is going to turn around.
They're going to reward the very people that were causing
the crime because of a law department's mistake. And you know,
a class action lawsuit brought about. And you know, I'm

(01:15:01):
I don't understand. Given everything we just had, what was
it two nights ago, I thought that crime was supposed
to slow down in the city. From what I've heard,
there were more shootings, there was a couple of street takeovers,
and it was cold outside, which I thought that.

Speaker 5 (01:15:14):
Wasn't supposed to happen.

Speaker 2 (01:15:16):
But we have a problem in the city of Cincinnati,
and all something like this does, in my very humble opinion,
is it exacerbates the situation because the criminals, I mean,
imagine being a criminal.

Speaker 5 (01:15:26):
You're laughing, you are laughing. What are they gonna do
arrest us or pay us?

Speaker 1 (01:15:30):
How does any reasonable person reach any other conclusion than
we are inviting more of this in the future. You know,
the Inquirer has done a deep dive on this, and
they assure us in the settlement that if you were
a person charged with any accompanying felony or offense of

(01:15:52):
violence or property damage, then you're not part of this settlement.
Do you believe that for one second that individuals who
were observed by police engaging in property violence or damage,
or knocking planners over, breaking windows, engaging in maybe some theft.
Do you believe for one minute that those people aren't
going to get part of this payoff?

Speaker 5 (01:16:14):
No? Do you know?

Speaker 1 (01:16:17):
Absolutely not. It may say that in the settlement, but
these all these cases were dismissed. So it has the
city gone in, Has the city law department gone in
and examined individual by individual and case by case to
make sure that anyone who engaged in any violent activity
is not going to be part of this settlement. What

(01:16:41):
assurances do we have that that that's taken place?

Speaker 5 (01:16:44):
None? None? They you know, I the very same.

Speaker 2 (01:16:51):
Listen, this is this is ultimately what the voters have
voted for. I mean, let's be sure the voters, the
voter who don't care, the voters don't.

Speaker 1 (01:17:00):
What's eight million dollar. I don't live I'm like you,
I don't live in the city. I don't I don't
vote a bit, but I don't want to see things
like this happened. I don't want I don't want the
city of Cincinnati to be on national Look, we were
on national television plenty when we had the beatdown that
took place in the streets of Cincinnati. You know what

(01:17:21):
we did, you know when we didn't make national television
is when the George Soros sponsored UH agitators came to
our city and and our police force, our law enforcement,
the Hamilton County Sheriffs, and the Cincinnati police shut them down.
The mayor. The mayor took the proper steps, issued the
UH the the UH the ordinance to have the curfew,

(01:17:45):
and we shut it down. And guess what we weren't
on national TV then, why Because we didn't have buildings
that were burning, we didn't have police cars that were overturned,
we didn't have UH you know, the the complete street
takeovers like they had in other cities.

Speaker 5 (01:18:00):
No question.

Speaker 2 (01:18:01):
And you know, you just sit there, Imagine that you
owned a business downtown and I'm thinking of all the
small business owners that are getting up this morning driving
to work downtown or somewhere within the city limits. Okay,
it doesn't have to be downtown. The city encompasses a
lot of neighborhoods, and you sit there and you're struggling,
and you're working, and your business is you know, owning

(01:18:22):
a small business, which is the backbone of America, is
a tough thing. And you sit there and see, you know,
not only do you have to keep your business running
your customers safe, but you know, you see every day
your neighborhood and you see what's going on in the
neighborhood that you're doing business. And and here the city
comes along and the great people that are a drain

(01:18:43):
on your neighborhood by being soaking up all the resources
and or causing problems, whether it's you know, petty crime
or major crime, whatever the case might be. You see
these people getting rewarded where and yet you get up
every day, go to work, pay your taxes.

Speaker 6 (01:19:00):
Where's your where's your.

Speaker 2 (01:19:02):
Olive branch from the city of Cincinnati, I mean.

Speaker 6 (01:19:05):
Where's that?

Speaker 2 (01:19:05):
Where's your thank you for thank you? Without you small
business owner, we wouldn't have places for the people in
this neighborhood to work, because like it or not, not
everybody works in a in a huge building Downtown. Most
of it is still still to a large degree, most
of Americans are employed by small business in this country.
And this is a not only a kick in the

(01:19:28):
teeth to the taxpayers, the law abiding taxpayers in Cincinnati.
Whether you live in Cincinnati or just outside Cincinnati, you
are affected by what happens in Cincinnati when and and
and you get up every day and go to work,
and they're just they just you are taken for granted.
And what they are doing is actually, I believe you know,

(01:19:50):
paying the inmates that are now running the asylum.

Speaker 1 (01:19:53):
All right, Andrews, stay right there. We got to get
to a break, pay a couple of bills, and we'll
be right back with our buddy, Andrew Pappus on fifty
five kr CV talk stations since two thousand and eight,
center of hopus K the talk station fifty five krc
DE talk station. Dan Carolyn for Brian Thomas, continuing our

(01:20:14):
conversation with Andrew Pappas and Papas The The Inquirer did
a deep dive into how the settlement breaks down, and
here's here's my favorite part. For those who were detained
for a period of more than five hours in association
with their arrest, they could be eligible up for for
up to another two thousand dollars. So I talked about

(01:20:37):
this earlier this morning, and and my math was an air.
I said that comes out to two hundred dollars an hour.
I'm wrong about that. That's four hundred dollars an hour.
Four hundred dollars an hour be a protested pace, pretty good.
The eleven lead plaintiffs in the case receive an additional
five thousand dollars for their role Andrew and representing their

(01:20:59):
fellow play us. Isn't that.

Speaker 5 (01:21:03):
It's outstanding.

Speaker 2 (01:21:04):
First of all, I don't blame you because I've heard
you utter many times the phrase math is hard.

Speaker 1 (01:21:09):
Math is hard, unforgiving. I do not claim to be
a genius at math.

Speaker 2 (01:21:14):
But you know, you know it's funny because during the
break I heard something that I thought it was very
apropos and I'll let you look at up really quick
to see what it means. But the point of the
matter is is that I think counsel. I think counsel
and everyone affiliated with this decision should take a session
at the Lindener Center that advertises for mental health because it's.

Speaker 1 (01:21:37):
Praisy should avail themselves with those services.

Speaker 6 (01:21:40):
Absolutely, they should have that.

Speaker 2 (01:21:41):
They should be listening to fifty five krs. And they
should call the sponsors that are advertisers on this program
because anyone that would anyone that would agree with this
just I mean, I just did. But does it surprise you?
I mean, at the end of the day, does it
surprise you we had this city of Cincinnati continuing their

(01:22:03):
contract with Iris the virus, and we have we have
the mayor then running, you know, the mayor of Cincinnati
who apparently understands the phrase math is hard because he
can't make his car payment. And we all know that,
you know, especially especially, let's be fair, especially in this

(01:22:24):
age of instant communication and apps on your phone and
being able to see your banking records at any time
twenty four to seven, it's hard to remember if you've
paid your car roll. It's very very difficult, very hard.
But you know, after all of this, what happens. They
get they get re elected eighty percent. I mean, so
you know you're gonna you're gonna go to.

Speaker 5 (01:22:46):
The squeaky wheel.

Speaker 2 (01:22:47):
You're going to go to the people that are causing
the problems, and you're gonna say.

Speaker 5 (01:22:50):
Hey, what can I do to make you just be cool.

Speaker 2 (01:22:52):
For a little while so I can get re elected.

Speaker 5 (01:22:54):
And that's who your basis.

Speaker 2 (01:22:56):
Because the rest of the public is so fractured and
splinter it doesn't really matter. And they've got their heads down,
going to work every day, living their lives, paying their bills,
paying their car payments.

Speaker 5 (01:23:07):
Excuse me, mister mayor.

Speaker 2 (01:23:09):
And you know at the nothing there are no repercussions
for all these bad decisions.

Speaker 5 (01:23:14):
That's my point.

Speaker 1 (01:23:15):
Well, you know, I thought Iris Rollie had carved out
a pretty good gig for her son when it was
learned that he was down there on Fountain Square, passed
in Fountain Square, but Government Square, passing out some informational
flyers to the tune of about fifty eight dollars an hour.
I thought that was a pretty good gig. But if
I can begin, you know, if I can be detained

(01:23:36):
by Cincinnati police and hang around the Hamilton County Justice
Center or the Transit center underneath Fort Washington Way to
the tune of about four hundred bucks an hour, I
think I know which way I'm going to go.

Speaker 2 (01:23:48):
I know some attorneys that don't make four hundred dollars
an hour.

Speaker 1 (01:23:53):
That's pretty good deal. So Kevin Aldrich, who is the
opinion editor, We've only got about a minute here at
UH an engagement editor at the Inquiry took the mayor
to task for his story not really not really holding
water when it comes to this story, does does does
aftab Purval need to come correct on this? Does he
need to just own just own whatever happened with the

(01:24:16):
repossessions and say look here's the deal and get this.
He cannot allow this to drag on and keep and
keep dogging him.

Speaker 2 (01:24:25):
Here's what I have Tad Preval is gonna He's going
to ignore this. The press is going to get tired
of it. No one's going to remember it. It's just
going to fade away, and a tab Purval will be
propped up by the Democrats as the next uh you know,
promised child of the Democrat party because he's a you know,
he's he's he's a nice looking, clean cut young man
that they will run for the next higher office. He's never,

(01:24:48):
in my opinion, he's never really had a he's never
really had an interest in serving in any office other
than the next office he.

Speaker 5 (01:24:54):
Was going to.

Speaker 2 (01:24:55):
So look, I'm just.

Speaker 5 (01:24:56):
Telling you what's going to happen.

Speaker 2 (01:24:58):
They're going to do nothing, and let's Pharaoh good that
one reporter at the inquiry chose to do a quote
unquote deep dive and said, we wait, we have read
the document here that says that's not true. You know,
because the news media couldn't seem to hold him to
task while he was sitting in front of the camera.
They just said, oh, okay, that's a great excuse. You know,
your auto pay got messed up for not one month,

(01:25:21):
not two months, not three months. Plus all the emails
you must have it, plus the text messages, plus the
phone calls.

Speaker 1 (01:25:27):
You didn't even notice that hasn't had a car repossessed.
I mean, come on, it happens.

Speaker 2 (01:25:32):
I think it's a boat. I think it's in today's
were all the politics. I think some sort of crime,
whether it's embezzling billions of dollars in Minnesota or missing
a few car payments. I mean that gives you street
cred and that makes you you know, now, the base
is like, you know what, he understands what I'm going through.

Speaker 5 (01:25:48):
So I'm going to support that man.

Speaker 2 (01:25:49):
Rather than saying, this is the guy that's involved.

Speaker 5 (01:25:51):
This is the guy that's.

Speaker 2 (01:25:52):
Handling our public trust and our public money, our public treasure,
and he can't freaking make a car payment or no way,
it's in his bank account. I'm sorry, no disrespect, listen.
I'm empathetic as the next person, but public officials should
be held to a higher standard.

Speaker 1 (01:26:08):
All right, Well with that, Andrew, we'll let you go always.

Speaker 5 (01:26:12):
Dan Carroll, I'm cont yes, sir.

Speaker 2 (01:26:16):
The government is called and they want to make a
antibody out of my blood because I've conquered the man called.

Speaker 1 (01:26:22):
You're here. You're a real humanitarian, doing it for the better,
the betterment.

Speaker 5 (01:26:27):
Of doing it for the people, Dan Carroll, the people.

Speaker 1 (01:26:30):
Papas have a great day on Facebook, man, all right,
see you fifty five KRCD talk station. Ran Thomas taking
a day off, Dan Carroll hanging around. I want to
thank Papus for getting up early and checking in. Good
stuff there. It was fun. It's not going to be

(01:26:53):
on the podcast. Joe A conversation with Pappas. He was
in pretty good form this morning. That's pretty good stuff
right there. Oh, what else is going on? I just
had this piece in front of me and what did
I do with it? What did I do with it?
Hold on? Here we go. Justice Department is on track

(01:27:13):
to compel more than half the states in America to
clean up their voter rolls and believe sloppiness that left
dead people and non citizens in a position to vote
in Democrat run states is intentional. The sloppiness of the
elections in blue states is no accident. It's on purpose.
It's a feature, not a bug, set Assistant Attorney General

(01:27:37):
for Civil Rights har Meat Dylan. The goal is to
cram as many people on there and to make voters
who are not particularly engaged make it easy for someone
else to help them fill out their ballot and return
it for them when they didn't care enough to do
it themselves. What we can do at the federal government

(01:27:57):
level is ensure our federal election laws are observed, and
that includes each state's requirement to keep clean voter rolls.
That is a fundamental basic and of course, as we
have discussed for many years now, when the notion of
cleaning up your voter rolls, getting dead people off the rolls,

(01:28:19):
getting people who vote outside of where they're supposed to vote,
whether they be in another state or another precinct or
another district, that has been referred to as voter suppression
and data is way past time that we got beyond

(01:28:40):
that idiotic notion. Dylan spoke today after her division filed
a lawsuit against six Democrat run states Maryland, Delaware, Rhode Island,
New Mexico, Washington, and Vermont, seeking to compel them to
turn over their voter roles to be inspected by the
DoD for abnormal abnormalities, outdated names, or non compliant names.

(01:29:06):
She also struck a deal last week with North Carolina
to force it to review over one hundred thousand voter
names on rolls that were added without complying with state law. So,
in a state like North Carolina, is one hundred thousand
votes going to make a difference in in their elections

(01:29:28):
and statewide elections? I would think so, Jim, how are
you doing this morning?

Speaker 6 (01:29:35):
Good?

Speaker 1 (01:29:36):
What's up?

Speaker 5 (01:29:36):
Jim?

Speaker 3 (01:29:38):
Just like you like to know that out here in
West Claremont, we like to just select it for the
third time. A school board member that has two personal
bankruptcies in the house, couldn't take her couldn't take care
of his house. His house was taken from him.

Speaker 1 (01:29:54):
Well, he doesn't it doesn't have a house. Where does
where does he live? Does he live at a school
board office? Or what?

Speaker 3 (01:30:00):
They'll probably enter bridge somewhere.

Speaker 1 (01:30:03):
Nobody shows up for the school board meeting. Yeah, that's dedication,
that's dedication. That's that's the voters. Jim, I appreciate the call.
I don't know why you would look West Claremont school board.
I have do not I don't live far away from there,
but I do not have great familiarity with the the

(01:30:27):
comings and goings of the West Claremont School Board. And
if you elected someone who was homeless or has had
judgments against their their property, maybe you need to rethink.

Speaker 5 (01:30:37):
Your vote there.

Speaker 1 (01:30:40):
Uh, let's see. Harmey Dillon said the Department of Justice
is checking records from all states and it has found
some states, like California, are particularly loosey goosey. She said,
the sort of problems are being uncovered in red and
blue states alike. There are definitely people on the voter
rolls of every state who don't belong there. They're dead,

(01:31:02):
they moved, they're registered multiple times. There have been reports
of instances of people, because of these insecure, double or
extraneous registrations, going to the polls and having their vote
recorded before they got there. How many times have we
heard that story? Someone goes to the polls to go vote,

(01:31:24):
and they look at them and they say, well, you've
already been here. How the heck can that happen? It happens,
So at least the Justice Department is saying harmeat. Dylon
is on it, and she is one of the very
few that I have confidence in when you talk about
a Yeah, she's not really a bureaucrat, but she's she's

(01:31:50):
in the Justice Department. So hopefully that something will come
in that It is seven thirty six. Got to get
to a break, Dan Carroll for Ryan Thomas fifty five
k r C the talk station. Hey is Brian Thomas
with Steve from USA Insulation. If I do only a
lot of USA and Deep talk station fifty five krc

(01:32:12):
DE talk station. I was looking at my phone during
the break and I Joe, I got this message on
my phone that says my software is going to update tonight.
Will my phone work after that? I always asked Dave
Hatter about that kind of stuff. I think last time
that happened, he said, just let it happen, It'll be
all right. So I hope, I hope that's a I mean,

(01:32:35):
I'm never sure about it. I still ye, are you
like me, do you send out emails and then you
wonder if people got them. I sent them out. I
sent them out to the different producers because you know,
I worked different shifts, so you know, down the hall
and I sent it. So I'm sending my emails to
different producers. The first thing I do when I get
in the building, did you get my email? Because I

(01:32:57):
just I just don't don't have that sense that it
got through. Yeah, but Joe Strecker is the same way.
You're never a hundred when you hit that send button,
even though you go. I always look at my scent file.
It's okay, it says I sent it, but I'm still

(01:33:18):
just not one hundred percent sure. A widely cited twenty
twenty four study, the Claim to forecast climate change and
the Dire Economic impact globally, has been retracted happened last week,
but the withdrawal comes far too late, as the paper
had already shaped analysis by the United States the Congressional

(01:33:38):
Budget Office. Influenced policy work at the World Bank had
been adopted by the Network for the Greening and Financial System,
a global coalition of central banks, as a key tool
for stress testing financial portfolios. Under European climate risk rules.
The study claim the global economic output would plunge by

(01:34:01):
sixty two percent by twenty one hundred if high carbon
emissions continued. Here's what the Wall Street Journal said. The
study examined historical data from some sixteen hundred regions worldwide
over the past four decades to project how change in
temperature and precipitation would affect economic growth, including factors like

(01:34:24):
agricultural yields, labor productivity, and infrastructure. However, after the study
was published, other researchers found that economic data from one country, Uzbekistan,
during a short time from nineteen ninety five to nineteen
ninety nine, had skewed the results. Without Uzbekistan, the twenty

(01:34:44):
one hundred damage forecast fell to twenty three percent, not
sixty two percent. So Uzbekistan's data how much, how much
industry and how much pollution causing industry is there in Uzbekistan?

(01:35:07):
And their data over a four year time period nineteen
ninety five to nineteen ninety nine had skewed the results
that much. I mean, are they pumping out that much
pollution in Uzbekistan? I would imagine that the manufacturing standards
there are a far cry from what we have in
the United States, Canada certainly maybe even China, for God's sake,

(01:35:32):
who knows. But without Uzbekistan, the twenty one hundred damage
forecast fell to twenty three percent, not sixty two percent.
We broadly agree with the issues raised and have made
corrections to the underlying economic data and to our methodology
to address them. The studies author set the changes are

(01:35:54):
too substantial for a correction of the original article in Nation,
but significant damage has already been done with major financial
institutions relying on the study to assess climate related risks.
That's why whenever Rush Limbaugh used to talk about these

(01:36:17):
environmental issues, I mean, he always called them kooks. I mean,
imagine relying on and just blindly relying on a study
like this. I've talked to so many people who are
experts in this field, and all these predictions of doom
and gloom as they relate to the environment all come

(01:36:39):
from computer models. And if the information that goes into
the computer model is not good, then the result is
going to be flawed, and in this case severely flawed,
and in this case policy decisions affecting God knows how
many billions of dollars have already been made based on
these flawed models. And this is not the first time

(01:37:01):
that major studies or major predictions like this have been
found to be inaccurate and wrong. And I don't know
if this was done on purpose, but I know other ones.
I know there have been other scientists who have come
out and said that they were influenced to provide incorrect

(01:37:26):
data for these studies so a desired result could be achieved.
I mean, the whole man, the whole environmental movement is
an absolute scam. And now you've got another judge out
there who is trying to shut down Trump when it
comes to getting rid of windmills. And I'll tell you

(01:37:46):
about that. On the other side of this seven forty
five Dan Carroll for Brian Thomas, fifty five KRCV talk
station Life is.

Speaker 9 (01:37:53):
Better with less financial stress.

Speaker 1 (01:37:55):
See the talk station Little sum against wine Shelter fifty
five krc DE talk station, Great song selection thereby Judge Strecker.

(01:38:19):
I think I teased this before the last break. Another
Clinton appointed judge, Another Clinton Well, it's another judge. This
one happens to be appointed by Clinton. Then his latest
ruling issued Monday, a Clinton appointed judge decided that Trump
has not explained himself enough and failed to justify his
decision to put a halt to win project madness that

(01:38:42):
has swept the country. A federal judge Monday ruled that
President Trump's administration had failed to justify its decision to
suspend issue issuing leases and permits for new WIN projects.
US District Judge Patty Saris of Boston sided with a
group a seven teen Democrat led states and the District

(01:39:03):
of Columbia, and finding that agencies had failed to sufficiently
explain why they had indefinitely paused all federal approval approvals
of wind energy project projects. How About because they don't work?
How About because the record shows that these things fail
at an alarming rate, that they never produce the electricity

(01:39:26):
that they are projected to produce, and they cannot be
kept online for an appreciable amount of time. That the
ability to recoup the cost of constructing these wind turbines,
whether they be on the ocean or on land, that
the ability to recoop those costs is almost non existent.

(01:39:50):
It is an absolute crapshoot that the payoff that you
get in terms of clean energy, when you talk about
the carbon footprint necessary just to install one of these,
the carbon footprint that's necessary to create the components and
build the components of these giant wind turbines. But no,

(01:40:13):
this federal judge Patty Sarus s A Ris of Boston,
and I just scrolled up the article and the picture
of this individual appeared. I mean, you talk about a
way to ruin your day. On Trump's first day in office,

(01:40:35):
he issued an executive order titled Temporary Withdrawal of all
areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing
and review of the Federal Government's lease and permitting practices
for WIN Projects. That is a long title for an
executive order, but apparently this judge knows better. The policy

(01:40:58):
constitutes a change of course from decades of agencies issuing
or denying permits related to WIN projects. She said, the
agencies never provided a reason explaining the adoption or adopting
for adopting the change. I mean, how how how dense

(01:41:19):
does this judge need to be? There is ample of it,
and look I can I can find I find it
all the time. One project, just do just to a
quick Google search. How many of these WIN projects have
gone bankrupt? How many of these win projects at the

(01:41:43):
at the notion that a government subsidy was no longer
going to be available, whether they shut it down, because
that is the only thing that keeps a lot of
these projects going. I mean all the all the reports
are out there about the the subsidies for the electric cars.

(01:42:04):
The electric I've got an article on that somewhere, But
I mean the electric car, I think I think sales
were off sixty three percent last month. I'm gonna have
to find that. But no, when the subsidies dry up,
when the government money goes away for wind projects, for
electric for solar panels, all that stuff, it doesn't exist anymore.

(01:42:29):
These things need to be driven by market forces and
the days of government propping up. Look, they found this
out in Germany, they're finding us out in Australia. They
found this out in all parts of the world where
they went all in on building building solar farms and

(01:42:50):
building these wind these windmills and the wind turbines. They
just don't work. There's no enomy of scale, the price
is too high, and from a commercial standpoint, they're just
not worth the expense. And you've got the giant, the

(01:43:14):
giant solar towers out there in California that they're being
shut down. The ones Joe you make, you know those
ones with the You got the giant tower in the middle,
it's got a giant mirror on it. Then you get
all these these mirrors around and it directs all the
sunlight into this into this giant tower, and there's a
turbine in there creates it, and you've got water and
to create steam, and you make electricity. And when the

(01:43:36):
birds fly through the rays of the sun being directed
at these towers, they're incinerated instantly and they fall to
the ground. They're called streamers because poof, they go up
in a in a ball of flame, and then the
smoke trails to the ground, and the locals out there
call them streamers. Never mind that environmental damage seven fifty five.

(01:43:59):
You got to get to a B. And then todds Endzer,
Citizen Watchdog, is going to be in studio and we
have plenty to kick around with him in the eight
o'clock hours, so I encourage you to stick around for that.
Dan Carroll in for Brian Thomas on fifty five krc
DE Talk stas today's top headlines coming up at the
top of the hour.

Speaker 5 (01:44:19):
At the Eastern Nation.

Speaker 9 (01:44:19):
That is a feeling of the FBI.

Speaker 1 (01:44:21):
Marjorie Taylor Green on sixty minutes, I got shack, give
you five KRC the talk station fifty five KRC DE
Talk station eight o six, Tuesday, December ninth, Brian Thomas

(01:44:45):
taking the day off. He is back tomorrow. I am
told Joe Strecker's rolling out the Van Hallen Music. Got
a love every minute of it. I'm Dan Carroll and
for Brian Thomas, and my great pleasure to welcome into
the studio a guy that I I've talked to on
the phone. I've texted him and we've exchanged some emails

(01:45:05):
back and forth, but my first time meeting him in person,
and it is the Citizen Watchdog Todd Zenzer and Todd
is It's great to see you this morning.

Speaker 9 (01:45:14):
Great to see you, Dan.

Speaker 1 (01:45:15):
You got stuck in traffic on the way here, Yeah,
I was.

Speaker 9 (01:45:17):
I don't know a lot of Chuck Ingram. I was
waiting to hear Chuck Ingram. I didn't hear him.

Speaker 1 (01:45:24):
But you made it here. Nonetheless, I did. Are you
quickly becoming one of the most hated men at City Hall?

Speaker 9 (01:45:30):
I think there are probably a few that would rather
not have me around.

Speaker 1 (01:45:37):
I mean, what tell me for for those who don't know,
and and and I've never met you in person before,
but I know you what You were an inspector general? Yes,
at at which which government agency?

Speaker 3 (01:45:48):
Well?

Speaker 9 (01:45:48):
Two agencies. I was the Inspector General at Commerce Department
and that includes Noah, the Census Bureau. You know, I'm
gapping right now, but a collection of agencies. Patent and
Trademark Office was a big one. And then before that
I worked for the Transportation Inspector General for sixteen years.

(01:46:10):
I left there to go to Commerce. I was the
deputy IG when I left Transportation IG.

Speaker 1 (01:46:17):
Okay, So within the federal government are inspector generals? Are
you sort of frowned upon by the people that work
there or do they welcome what you do to to
audit and oversee and report on your finding.

Speaker 9 (01:46:34):
I think the rank and file appreciate the IG. I
don't think the management. Does you know? For example, if
I ever went into an office to meet you know,
the management or whatever, people would yell out IG in
the house.

Speaker 1 (01:46:49):
You know things like that, Yeah, like internal affairs of
the Police Department.

Speaker 9 (01:46:53):
Right exactly?

Speaker 1 (01:46:55):
Wait, are you from Cincinnati.

Speaker 9 (01:46:57):
Originally I am up grew up in price when I
held Okay, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:47:02):
So that's why that's why you're you're back in or
I guess have you lived in Cincinnati the whole time? Uh?

Speaker 5 (01:47:07):
No?

Speaker 9 (01:47:08):
I was transferred from Cincinnati to New Haven, Connecticut, and
then to New York City and then to Washington, d C.
And I finished up in Washington.

Speaker 1 (01:47:17):
But glad to be back in Cincinnati. Oh yeah, and
now you turn your attention to city hall, I have, yes.
Did that happen? Was that was that part of the
plan to come back and do that or did you
just sort of fall into that or someone said, hey,
look at this is interesting, take a look at this,
or how did that happen?

Speaker 3 (01:47:35):
Well?

Speaker 9 (01:47:36):
When I came back, the big reason was to spend
some time with my mother and her final years. And
I wound up working for a inventor, helping him with
some litigation against the patent office. And it came to
be twenty twenty three all of a sudden, and I
hear that the city wants to sell this railroad. Yes, yeah,

(01:47:58):
and that that triggered me.

Speaker 1 (01:48:00):
So that I got a little red flag went up there.

Speaker 9 (01:48:03):
Huh yes, and I started a political action committee called
Citizens for a Transparent Railroad Vote and did did whatever
I could to speak out against the sale. Unfortunately, we lost,
and so that that really gave me a lot of
insight about how the city was operating. They were very
very dishonest about that deal, uh, and they sprung it

(01:48:26):
on the citizens that their first statements were that, well,
we can't really get involved in you know, politics here,
so we're not going to give you any information in
the in the trust or the board. The railroad board
said the same thing, and it's like, that's outrageous.

Speaker 6 (01:48:42):
This.

Speaker 9 (01:48:43):
The people need to know what's going on here before
we vote on anything. So that's that's what triggered me.
And part of me doing this is to try to
keep track of what they're doing with that money.

Speaker 1 (01:48:54):
Yeah, the I mean, I had note about the Cincinnati
owning that railroad for for a long time, and I
think most people in Cincinnati had no idea that the
city actually owned a railroad and derived a very nice
revenue stream from from that railroad. When when you look
at all the assurances that were made, Charli I remember

(01:49:17):
Charlie Lucan doing multiple interviews on this talking about Hey,
all these guardrails are going to be up, but state
legislature got involved and all that. In the wake of
all that, are you satisfied with all the guardrails and
the you know that have been put in place to
make sure that this money is being used in the
right way or doled out in the right way. No, No,

(01:49:38):
you're shaking your head. None, not at all. Early on,
what's your major issue with the with the deal the
way it's it's structured.

Speaker 9 (01:49:45):
Well, after we lost the vote, I did propose four
or five different things that the city should do. For example,
they need to take what they spent on capital in
twenty twenty three and use that as the floor. We
do not go below that, all right, and then whatever
the railroad money is you put on top of that.

(01:50:07):
So that's the only way to get ahead of the
spending that's required. But my big concern is that the
city doesn't have the capacity to spend all that extra
money in a timely way. And that's why they tell people, oh,
this is going to take ten years, and they actually
give money back or they have unspent money. And just

(01:50:31):
this Monday in the budget committee, they went through what
they call the carryover they have a carryover, and they
have a capital sunset, and these are moneys that the
city has not been able to spend the way they
told the public they would be spending it, and so
they have these carryover dollars and then they just go
to town and spend it.

Speaker 1 (01:50:53):
So I see, I figured there was going to be
a way that this money was gonna was going to
be to get back into the general fund. But we
were we were assured that that there there was only
certain budget items that this could be spending. Largely, it's
it's infrastructure, infrastructure project, right right, right. And it seems

(01:51:15):
on one hand, it seems silly to limit yourself to
that sort of thing. On the other hand, it seems
sort of silly to let a third party have control
over that money. And uh and and look, I'm not
that I am advocating that I trust city council to
be in charge of such a large sum, right because
I never really thought that was a good idea.

Speaker 9 (01:51:36):
Right, So they set up this Rube Goldberg process about
what you can spend it on and and how the
money is distributed and things like that and what. When
this first passed, I was actually working with Jeff crammertine
on extra safeguards, and they actually put a motion forward,

(01:51:58):
and I just remember in back and forth with mister Cramerdy,
they proposed this motion to get the administration to report
back on these guardrail proposals, and I says, well, you
should put a deadline on it, thirty days, sixty days,
whatever it is. They didn't do that, so it took

(01:52:19):
them a year to address that. And the way they
addressed it is they buried it in another motion or
addressing another motion. And what I think they should do
is take They had a list they claimed to have
a list of four hundred million dollars of deferred maintenance.
It was four hundred, it was five hundred. I only

(01:52:40):
saw a list of two hundred, and I saw a
list of two hundred and fifty million dollar estimate. Well,
they should take that list and go down the list
one by one and fix those things that they said
had been deferred.

Speaker 1 (01:52:52):
It seems to me that would be a sensible approach.

Speaker 9 (01:52:55):
Yeah, they're not doing that.

Speaker 1 (01:52:57):
For crying out loud, I could I could spend all
day asking you questions about the railroad project. I am
told that subsequently that in review of this deal, that
the purchase price is far less than what the value
of that railroad is.

Speaker 9 (01:53:16):
Yeah, they never put it out to bid, you know,
they just negotiated with Norfolk Southern. Yeah, so, I mean
Norfolk Southern had first DIBs if they wanted to sell it.

Speaker 1 (01:53:27):
And what what was it? What was the final number?

Speaker 9 (01:53:29):
Six point one one point six.

Speaker 1 (01:53:31):
One point six billion? Yeah, And that money doesn't all
come at one time. It's that that money's paid out
over a period of time, is that right?

Speaker 5 (01:53:37):
Right?

Speaker 9 (01:53:38):
They get an annual they set an annual amount that
they're going to disperse to the city, and then that
is paid to the city and quarterly amounts. And what
I've what I've asked the Trust board to do is
track whether or not they've actually been able to spend
the money from quarter one before they give them money
for quarter two.

Speaker 1 (01:53:58):
But weren't we told that that the interest on that
money has already exceeded what their projection was going to be.
And there for that's a wonderful thing, because now we
have even more money than we thought we were going
to have.

Speaker 9 (01:54:09):
Well, it has, the trust balance has gone up, but
so has inflation, and inflation is going to be here
for a long time, so you don't know what the
impact of inflation is on that balance. It probably buys
much much less than it did in twenty twenty three,
to be honest.

Speaker 1 (01:54:27):
So I've had so many people ask me how are
things going with the railroad money? And when people ask
you that question, what's your general response to that?

Speaker 9 (01:54:38):
Well, it's the first year that they are actually spending
the money. The biggest chunk that I've seen is five
million going to the Western Hills Viydoc. I think it
was five or five point seven or something like that
going to the Western Hills Viydoc. But the rest of
the spending is spread out to rec centers and parks

(01:54:59):
and things like that. That's really not the way I
would do it, but that's the way they're doing it.
And then you have members of city council proposing motions
to spend the money in different ways, Like they wanted
to set up a Rising fifteen railroad fund that would
take ten percent of the annual disbursement and put it

(01:55:22):
in another fund to be spent by Rising fifteen neighborhoods,
and we commented on that, And then they also wanted
to use the railroad money to fix everybody sidewalks, which
would be great, but the sidewalks wasn't part of that
four hundred million dollar deferred maintenance. So what they would

(01:55:43):
be doing is taking on more deferred maintenance instead of
dealing with the ones that we had when we made
the deal.

Speaker 1 (01:55:51):
All right, well, Todd zens, we got to take a break,
and we will continue with some more recent activities, okay,
that you've been looking at. Because it never ends, no,
it does. It does not end, So we'll continue with
Todd's endser Citizen Watchdog on fifty five KRC, the talk stations.
Zimmer Heating and Cooling has been insuring Cincinnati homes five KRC,

(01:56:12):
the talk station fifty five KRC, the talk station eight
twenty one, Dan Carroll for Brian Thomas. Todd Zinzer is
here and you know him as Citizen Watchdog. You do
you do a regular segment with Brian Thomas? Do you not?

Speaker 9 (01:56:32):
Not regularly?

Speaker 1 (01:56:34):
Regularly? But I know you've been here, but this is
not your first trip here to this day.

Speaker 9 (01:56:37):
Once a month probably.

Speaker 1 (01:56:38):
Okay, that's cool. Well, I'm glad today is today, yes,
and I'm glad. I'm glad you here. We were texting
and emailing a couple of days ago when it was
announced this settlement came out, and you wanted to have
a look at the at the original complaint, the settlement
agreement and all that, and we were able to find
that and have a look at it. And as you

(01:57:01):
review this complaint in the settlement agreement, what sticks out
to you? And then look, I went, Todd is not
a lawyer, We're not looking at this from a legal sense.
But I mean over your years of being an inspector
general and looking into things, there are things that jump
out to you that did you find interesting? And so
so that's the point of the question here. What did

(01:57:23):
you as you look at this settlement agreement and then
the related documents, what did you find interesting about these things?

Speaker 9 (01:57:30):
Well, the first the first thing that that I thought
was where has this case been and what has the
public been told about this case? Absolutely before this came up.
And this is typical of this of this city administration,
of the city compt.

Speaker 1 (01:57:45):
Because when the news broke on this literally I like
to think. Look, probably one of the faults I have
as a radio show host is I tend to I
tend to focus more on the national political scene and
and the you know, every you know, when a big
story breaks locally, I liked, I like to get on that.
But when when this story came out, the news of

(01:58:05):
this settlement came out, I think it was late Friday,
I was like, wow, what is this? Yeah, Wall, where
is this coming from? Right? And just like you said that,
this is not something that had been followed regularly by
any of our local news.

Speaker 9 (01:58:19):
Outlets, right, Well, if you go on the city's website,
they they do put memos online about the settlements that
they've reached, but they don't put online the pending litigation
as far as they they may report it to the
city council at some point, but it's not well known
what other cases are out there right now. I don't know,

(01:58:41):
So that's kind of my first my first complaint. The
problem that I saw was there's nothing in the complaint
or the settlement that is really evidentiary value. There's nothing,
there's nothing that we see yet about the the efficacy

(01:59:03):
of these allegations. Complaints can make all kinds of allegations,
but what what is their evidence? And we're not the
public is not getting access to that.

Speaker 1 (01:59:12):
Well, there's not there's not any evidence. I I don't
see any any hard finding of facts that this is
why the city ought to settle this case the city.
I guess my point on this is I don't see
anything that says, you know, these plainest uh state that
that X, Y, and Z happened to them, and because

(01:59:35):
of these these specific complaints and the finding of facts
that go along with this, we feel it's best to
settle this. I'm not finding that level of specifics that's right,
and that's what should go on. Maybe maybe that exists somewhere.
I don't know if it does well, but it's it's
it's not evident in the documents that I've seen.

Speaker 9 (01:59:53):
So you're right, and what should happened today is that
the city council should.

Speaker 1 (01:59:58):
Should demand that if if you want me to goin
off on this, I know if I was on that
committee that's going to look at this, that's exactly what
I would be saying. That's right.

Speaker 9 (02:00:07):
The council needs to carry out their due diligence on
this settlement because you're talking eight million dollars of city funds.
They have a fiduciary responsibility to make sure that that
settlement is in the best interests of the city. And
what have they done. For example, there's no executive session
on the agenda today for the Public Safety Committee. They

(02:00:31):
should be going in the executive session and getting briefed
by the Solicitor's office. We should know exactly what went
on in terms of making this decision. My guess is
that the mayor called in, the solicitor, called in the
city manager, maybe a couple of lawyers, and they set
around the table and decided, no, we're going to settle.

(02:00:52):
So we should know exactly how they reach their decision,
and then we should know what due diligence the city
else is going to be carrying out.

Speaker 1 (02:01:01):
You see, you know, you say, you say, you're you're
speculating at the mayor sat in on meetings on this.
I have a sense that Mayor Purvall wasn't involved in
this whatsoever. I think he wants plausible deniability. Well they
have anything to do when you know, when this thing
crosses his desk, he put his signature on it, unfortunately.
But other than that, I don't, I don't I don't see.

(02:01:22):
I don't see Purvoll's hand on in this at all.

Speaker 9 (02:01:25):
Unfortunately. I think you might be right then.

Speaker 1 (02:01:28):
I just I just think that's the way he conducts
business well a city hall. I know, if I was
the mayor, I would There's no way I would sign this,
There's no I would just me. I would say, we're
going I'm taking this to court.

Speaker 5 (02:01:40):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:01:41):
Well, I would direct my law department to to bone
up on this and let's take it to court, because
I just think it sends a terrible message. Yeah, while
others who would engage in such activity.

Speaker 9 (02:01:53):
I don't want to be overly critical, but I'm not
sure the law department is up to it.

Speaker 7 (02:01:58):
Uh.

Speaker 9 (02:01:59):
You know, they've they've been involved in other cases where
you shake your head about settlements. They they folded on
a litigation that they made. They made a big deal
out of of suing Wenebrook Homes for the lousy property
management that Winebrook carried out. Uh, they made a big

(02:02:21):
deal about going after them and suing them, and they
folded like a cheap suit, and you have to shake
your head, like, what what's the deal? And and what's
worse is the settlement in that case. It made it
look like the city was at fault and the city
agreed to all these reforms and they're doing the same thing.
They're doing the same thing on this.

Speaker 1 (02:02:41):
Yeah, it's that's what the the the ordance says. There's
no you know, there's no finding or an admission of
guilt on the on the city's part. But yet they're
acquiescing to Oh, we're going to have additional training and
a new guidebook for for Cincinnati police about how to
how to handle such claims.

Speaker 9 (02:02:56):
Yeah, and you put more more constraints on the police,
more rules that they might not be able to follow.

Speaker 1 (02:03:03):
And in the case of a ride, well, these new
guidelines have to meet the approval of Iris Roling.

Speaker 9 (02:03:08):
Well, if you if you look, if you look at
her contracts, I would say I would say it probably
it probably would.

Speaker 1 (02:03:15):
Well, let's get into that on the other side of
this as we take another quick break here eight twenty seven,
little late for a break on fifty five KRC the
Talk Stations.

Speaker 4 (02:03:23):
The Simply Money Minute is sponsored by Sheerfax Christ.

Speaker 1 (02:03:26):
Fifty five KRC the Talk Station, fifty five KRCD Talk Station,
continuing now with Todd Zinzer, also known as a Citizen Watchdog.
You're doing a podcast now with Joe Strucker, aren't I am?
How's that one? How is it working? With Joe on
on on the podcast.

Speaker 9 (02:03:45):
It's easy, It's very easy. He's a he's a great guy.

Speaker 1 (02:03:49):
Yeah. Yes, someoneoud told you five or ten years ago,
you're going to be doing a podcast every What are
you doing like like every couple of weeks or I
try to do one a week, one a week. Yeah.
Would you have believe them that you were going to
be no, you know, podcasting or doing on a regular.

Speaker 9 (02:04:05):
It's actually Joe's fault. He's the one to suggest it.

Speaker 1 (02:04:09):
He's very persuasive. Yes, those Joe, we love Joe strecord.
I mean without him, I mean a lot of this
stuff would not be happening. All right. I mentioned Iris
Rolli before he went to the last break, and you have.
I thought you did great work talking about her contract
when it was discovered that I guess she had her

(02:04:32):
son working down on Government Square passing out some information,
getting paid roughly fifty eight dollars an hour, which is,
to my way of thinking, is a pretty I know
a lot of people that would like to earn fifty
eight dollars an hour, Yes, passing out some leaflets down
down at Government Square. Yeah, but you have some additional

(02:04:52):
information regarding the contract that she has with the city. Right, Well,
she's carved out a pretty good gig for herself, has
she not? Yes, she has tell me about it well
before the election and all the controversies we had this summer.
Uh and when uh the FOP file to complain about
miss Rolli allegedly interfering with police policemen on the street.

(02:05:18):
I think we saw some video to that effected.

Speaker 9 (02:05:20):
We know, yeah, you saw a couple of clips videos
And that's really what got me uh paying attention to
to miss Rolli. Well, something they must have put her
on on the They must have benched her for a
period of time. And then the next thing you know,
the mayor is on with uh Lincoln Ware saying that

(02:05:44):
they've negotiated a new contract with with Iris Roli. And
I thought that was going to be kind of They're
going to fix all those kind of fast and lose
provisions in the contract. Yes, yes, so when when I
when I seem to make sense? So when I heard that,
I said, well, I'm going to ask for a copy

(02:06:05):
of the new contract book document right right. It took
me a little while to get it, but it's very
very unusual you have a you have a soul source
contract that was issued in twenty twenty three, that I
don't think is really justified. But then you have three
amendments since then. And the original value of the of

(02:06:31):
the twenty three contract was about two hundred and ten
thousand dollars. That was a total value of the contract.
Now fast forward to the third amendment, which is what
this new contract is called. The value of the contract
is now six hundred and forty one thousand dollars, and
that goes through when that goes through twenty seven.

Speaker 1 (02:06:50):
Through twenty twenty seven. Yeah, and that that's only that
that's only two years through the end of twenty seven.

Speaker 5 (02:06:56):
Right.

Speaker 1 (02:06:56):
Well, the the so six hundred thousand dollars, right, value of.

Speaker 9 (02:07:00):
The contract goes from now until twenty seven, and it
includes other things.

Speaker 1 (02:07:06):
That six hundred grand.

Speaker 9 (02:07:08):
Yeah, that's the total value.

Speaker 1 (02:07:10):
Is what she's pulling down from the city.

Speaker 9 (02:07:12):
If if she completes all years of the.

Speaker 1 (02:07:16):
Comment, I would say she's got a pretty good incentive
to do that.

Speaker 9 (02:07:18):
I think she does.

Speaker 1 (02:07:20):
But for what and what type of services is Misroly providing, Well,
there's very important. There's two categories. I'd say one is
she was originally contracted to consult and it has to
do with the collaborative Agreement and sustaining that she's an

(02:07:40):
expert in. Those are.

Speaker 9 (02:07:43):
The management Advisory group that she's involved in.

Speaker 1 (02:07:46):
But then the.

Speaker 9 (02:07:50):
Second and third or the first, second and third amendments
have added what I view as program responsibilities. One is
called the Government Square initial and that's where the city
is paying her a lump sum like seventy five thousand
dollars to carry out I don't know if you'd call

(02:08:12):
it community engagement or what the official term would be,
but they're down at these transit hubs to kind of
chaperone the kids when they exchange buses or get off
the buses, and they.

Speaker 1 (02:08:24):
Help providing information too, which is very very important.

Speaker 9 (02:08:28):
They are they're providing snacks and things like that. So
that's called the Government Square Initiative. And what happened is
that the contract ended when the school year ended. The
Government Square Initiative ended when the school year ended, and
it wasn't going to start up until the fall, so
there was this summer period. There was a gap. Iris

(02:08:50):
Roley didn't have authorization to spend any money during that period.
So the third Amendment fixed that by home me so,
but the program wasn't the Government Square initiative because the
kids aren't in scholar Now it's called that period, it's
called summer in the city.

Speaker 1 (02:09:08):
Some are in the city.

Speaker 9 (02:09:10):
So those programs have absolutely increased the contract value and
and they should actually be bid out a separate contracts.

Speaker 1 (02:09:21):
Does the contract spell out her her area of areas
of expertise and and her background in the different areas,
you know, consulting backgrounds, and you know, maybe I don't
know miss if she's got a legal background or a
criminal justice background, or well the the background in you know,

(02:09:43):
social work or something like that.

Speaker 9 (02:09:46):
My main issue with what's going on is these non
competitive contracts that the city Procurement rules say very clearly
non competitive contracts, soul source contracts should be extremely rare
and they require a justification. So the justification for Miss

(02:10:07):
ROLI's it's at one page, basically one paragraph, and it
cites her a work in the civil rights movement, and
it cites her involvement with the original Collaborative Agreement and
all of those things. But my point, and I've made
this to the city, is that before COVID, they actually

(02:10:28):
had a city employee on staff doing the things that
they've contracted Iris Roli to do and my thing is
my thing is if if they were able to hire
a city employee to do the work. I don't think
that you can say that miss Roli is uniquely qualified

(02:10:49):
or that her qualifications are the only ones that can
do the work.

Speaker 1 (02:10:53):
And she continues her role on the Citizens Complain of forty,
does she not?

Speaker 9 (02:10:57):
Yes, she's not on the authority, but well, I'll have
to check that. I think I think she interacts with
them based on her consulting role. Oh but I don't
know if she's still on the on the commission or
committee itself.

Speaker 1 (02:11:14):
There's there's not very many that can carry out duties
like that.

Speaker 9 (02:11:19):
Yes see. One of the things I thought was that
if she's going around telling people, you know, they should
be filing complaints against police officers they interact with, all
that does is add to the backlog for the Citizens
Complain Authority that's already through the roof.

Speaker 1 (02:11:35):
So she's out there drumming up work.

Speaker 9 (02:11:38):
That's the way it looked at me.

Speaker 1 (02:11:40):
All right, Joe, do I got to get to a
break here, my late I'm late for a break. I'm
late for a break. Let's go ahead and do that
now and we'll continue with Todd Zinzer on fifty five
k r C. The talk stays this season, make the
holiday an unforgotten see the talk station. I'm late whatever
Joe Stucker tells you. That's the voice that god zins

(02:12:00):
or Citizen Watchdog. Great to have Men's studio this morning,
so much stuff to talk about. You showed me a
a document a little while ago about that is a
financial disclosure from our mayor, and I mean he is
he is very well invested. He's he's got an extensive portfolio,
so that that is very nice to see. And when

(02:12:22):
it comes to the repossession of his vehicles, was was
he supposed to report that to the state of Ohio
or what's what's the deal on it?

Speaker 9 (02:12:34):
Well, if if you carry debt, if you have creditors,
you have you have to report that on your financial disclosure. Unfortunately,
the forms that Ohio uses.

Speaker 1 (02:12:43):
You've had a look at those forms, have you not have? Yeah?
They don't. What did you find there?

Speaker 9 (02:12:47):
Well, they don't require really any information in terms of,
you know, the debt. They just make make the official
list his creditors. And he's done that for three creditors. Uh,
but there's no information about how far in debt the

(02:13:08):
mayor is, so that's not extremely useful.

Speaker 1 (02:13:12):
There's one.

Speaker 9 (02:13:14):
There's three creditors, American Express, Lincoln National, which must be
alone on an insurance policy or something, or Lincoln Financial.
I'm sorry, but the third one is an outfit called
ACS ACS, and you don't know what ACS really stands for.
There's a lot of acs is, but I will say

(02:13:34):
that there are ACS's that are collection agencies. So it
would just take more information to know whether or not
that has anything to do with his repossession of his cars.

Speaker 1 (02:13:46):
For for most people, dealing with a collection agency is
a one time thing. You know, you've you've missed a
payment for whatever reason, or you've got something that you
overlooked in you deal with that, you get it squared away.
And I would not think to put a collection agency
on my list of creditors. If I had to fill

(02:14:09):
out such a financial disclosure. Well, his last night, I
don't have to do that here at iHeart meeting. You know,
I might not be beyond his microphone very long.

Speaker 9 (02:14:19):
His last three disclosure reports twenty two, twenty three, twenty four,
twenty five not doing until next year. They all list
the same three creditors. Yeah, so whatever the debts are
to those creditors, they've been long standing. Yeah, okay, so
it's the financial statement reports weren't very helpful in terms

(02:14:43):
of figuring out what the truth is about his repossessed
vehicles or vehicle whatever, but it did show that he
doesn't seem to have a lot of financial problems.

Speaker 1 (02:14:54):
Oh yeah, I mean, but the thing is, it's it
seems so silly that you just don't get in front
of this thing, come clean about it. It's it's gonna
go Look, a car getting repossessed is not the worst
thing that can happen financially, but just own it, put
it in the rear view mirror. And but the if

(02:15:16):
he continues the stonewall on this, the truth is out
there and eventually when that gets found out, it's going
to drag him down. Just get it, get it, get
it over with, man. I mean that to me, it
seems that that would be the prudent thing to do.

Speaker 9 (02:15:28):
That's right, get in front of it, because what happens
is if if people think that you're not being forthcoming,
they're going to wonder, well, what else is going on?
Why why wouldn't he be forthcoming about this because he
doesn't want to be embarrassed. Well, he's already in that category.
But what else is going on that he would not
be forthcoming about this?

Speaker 1 (02:15:48):
I mean, you know, Kevin Aldrich from The Inquirer wrote
a you know, a little column on this, and you know,
talking about how trust is the most important currency at city.
Haulling just come on, mister mayor, well af in front
of it.

Speaker 9 (02:16:03):
After the railroad vote, both he and Reggie Harris were
on TV saying, yeah, we need to rebuild the trust
of the people in city Hall. And then they turn
around and within a year they do connected communities, right,
which majority, if not all, the neighborhood councils opposed. And

(02:16:24):
then they did they did these zoning laws for development
that the citizens opposed. Well, they haven't done anything to
build trust back.

Speaker 1 (02:16:35):
I'm looking at your website right now and your podcast
from November twenty fifth talks about the city's lead pipe scandal.
I want to touch on that before we before we
call it a morning. So one more break to get
in here, and then we'll continue on with todds In's
or Citizen Watchdog on fifty five KRCV. Talk station.

Speaker 2 (02:16:51):
Hey, Gary Salvan here, Oder exits a lit.

Speaker 1 (02:16:58):
Tuesday Morning, Dan Carroll, Ryan Thomas Todds Inzer the Citizen
Watchdog is here And you did a podcast back on
November twenty fifth. I have not listened to it, but
you talk about the city's lead pipe scandal. Yes, and
give me a thumbnail of that.

Speaker 9 (02:17:14):
Well, the city wound up the water works, I should
say wound up conducting an investigation based on an audit,
an internal audit that was conducted that found that there
were members of the lead crew, or at least one
member of the lead crew, that was stealing the scrap

(02:17:35):
lead and instead of processing it for recycling, was selling
it on the street to these scrappers.

Speaker 1 (02:17:42):
And there was they probably sold it for recycling.

Speaker 9 (02:17:46):
Well you hope so, but there's no you know, the
trail goes cold. Nobody is, which is my big problem.

Speaker 1 (02:17:52):
So there's a bunch of missing lead.

Speaker 9 (02:17:54):
Well, the program pipes, the program's been going on five
or six years and the recycler never got any scrap leads.
So what happened to it? And the issue for me
is whether that whether the city did what they call
a hazardous waste determination to see whether those lead pipes
constitute at hazardous waste. So I do have a request
in for that documentation. I haven't gotten it yet, but

(02:18:16):
if they didn't do it hazardous waste determination, they could
they could run into trouble with the state EPA and
the federally FEDERALPA.

Speaker 1 (02:18:25):
Yeah, and I would imagine that if in that part
of the contract, if you don't follow certain regulations that
are laid on and I'm sure there's got to be
alone when it comes to dealing with lead pipes and
things like that. There's got to be a long list
of environmental regulations, even under the Trump administration. Yeah, if
you do not adhere to those, you could be in

(02:18:45):
line for some significant finds, could you not.

Speaker 9 (02:18:48):
Right, there's a federal there's a federal law called the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RICRA, and it has civil
and criminal provisions. But the civil provisions are some of
these finds can go up to like tens of thousands
of dollars a day, and it's a very serious statute.
And I just have to believe that the waterworks did

(02:19:09):
their due diligence, did the hazardous waste determination, and we
don't have to be concerned about lead pipe scrap lead
pipe leaking into our waterworks or water system.

Speaker 1 (02:19:19):
But I mean it's got to be that's I mean,
the lead pipes that were in and around Cincinnati, which
by the way, has a great reputation is having one
of the absolute best water filtration systems right the entire country.

Speaker 9 (02:19:33):
Right, And the Cincinnati Futures Commission recommends get we sell
it or regionalize it and lose control of it.

Speaker 1 (02:19:38):
Oh, for God's sake, all right, Well, let's let's recap
because we only got about a minute and a half
left here. So Iris Rolli's getting has a contract that's
worth about six hundred grand. Yes, so that that that's
great for her. The settlement that's going to pay eight
point one million dollars to these rioters and people that

(02:20:00):
we're engaging in misbehavior in downtown Cincinnati is very light
on specificity. Right.

Speaker 9 (02:20:07):
We really don't know whether it was a good case,
a bad case in between, or why they're settling.

Speaker 1 (02:20:12):
And your recommendation to the members of the committee that
are going to look at this today would be to what.

Speaker 9 (02:20:18):
I A well, I'd call an executive session and bring
make sure that we look at what the Solicitor's office
has come up with there should be an absolute risk
assessment written provided to the city Council that at least
they could deliberate. But the way it's going to work
is they're going to propose the ordinance that the chairman

(02:20:39):
of the committee is going to say, we got this ordinance,
and then they'll go around to each member and each
member will pontificate about why this is such a great deal.

Speaker 1 (02:20:48):
I wonder if they're going to take public comment at
this at this committee meeting.

Speaker 9 (02:20:52):
They will at the beginning of every committee meeting and
the council full council, they give people two minutes.

Speaker 1 (02:20:59):
Could be an entertaining it could be and the and
the mayor is very well invested and should not let
this repossession thing drag him down.

Speaker 9 (02:21:09):
Well, yeah, I think he needs to tell the truth
about what was going on with these repossessions.

Speaker 1 (02:21:15):
Todds Zen's aer a great meeting in person, man, thank
you so much for coming in. And now I know
you've got a high level meeting that you have to
go to with Joe Strecker, So you do. That's going
to be the highlight of your day right there. Todd
Zen's are all the best to you man. All right,
all right, we'll see you down the road and that's
it for me. Glenn Beck is coming up next. Thanks
for listening.