Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
There is.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Your Channel nine weather forecast. It's gotta be dry un
till around five pm. We've might get some spotty showers,
maybe even some storms. Seventy two for the high chances
storms ends around midnight, sixty one overnight low seventy seven
of you are high tomorrow with storms and showers afternoon
and evening hours. Scattered storms still possible. Overnight. It'll be
fifty nine low and a high of sixty nine on Friday,
(00:27):
with chances spotty showers.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Fifty eight degrees. Right now, let's go to travel. I
up the big chuck Ingram from the UCLP Traffic Center. UC
Health wake Well Center offers comprehensive obesity care and advanced
searching OH expertise.
Speaker 4 (00:39):
Call five one three nine three nine two two sixty three.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
That's nine three nine twenty two sixty three stap bound
seventy one. There's an accident of Smith then where it's
the left. Two lanes are blocked off. Traffic is already
heavy from above two seventy five and you're over a
half hour deblay thanks to a wreck east found two
seventy five near Taylor Mill right hand inside traffic back
to Dixie coming up next, our guest is actually a
(01:04):
great horse picking expert, So just in time for the
Kentucky Derby, our guest is going to go with rendered
judgment to win, American promised to place and journalism to show. Yes,
those are actually names of horses in this week's Kentucky Derby.
But it's almost like the judge had the inside track.
(01:27):
Chuck Ingramont fifty five krs the talk station, five cars
the talk station. I thought it's creative, Yes, very creative.
Speaker 5 (01:38):
He never ceases to amaze, never.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
I know.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
So do you have a racing form there? Judge of PAULA. Tada,
Welcome back to the Vity five Jacy Warning Show.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
My friend, I didn't even know that Kentucky Derby was
this weekend.
Speaker 5 (01:52):
It's really not something that's on.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
My rate screen, understood Thomas Massey or ran Paul.
Speaker 5 (01:58):
But it's not something.
Speaker 4 (02:00):
I follow understood.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
And I mentioned congressomassing the lead up to the segment
because as I told you yesterday when I got your column,
which is always brilliant and is always on point, that
I said, you know, sometimes my listeners disagree with you,
and I suggested that probably they would disagree with you
because your position relative to Judge Dugan, who was scheduled
to preside over hearing against the Mexican national Eduardo Flores Ruiz,
(02:25):
who had been charged with criminal batteries. So he's in
her courtroom and the immigration officials show up armed with
and arrest. Weren't that an immigration official had issued? And
I think this is where your argument hinges on that
the Fourth Amendment in your mind, in the mind of
the judge disagrees and says, this is not an official warrant.
(02:48):
This is not something that is constitutional on its face.
Er go, she's not obstructing anything because the immigration official
doesn't have the actual constitutional authority to issue and arrest
warrant himself.
Speaker 4 (03:01):
Have I got that basic right?
Speaker 5 (03:04):
Yes, you do have that right. And this is a
good faith.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
And from my perspective, and I presume hers widely held
judicial view of the Fourth Amendment, that these administrative warrants
are unconstitutional and government officials are not obligated to comply
with them. Hey, judge, there's a guy in the hallway
that wants to arrest a person in your courtroom.
Speaker 5 (03:33):
What should we do? Does he have an arrest warrant? No?
Speaker 1 (03:36):
Okay, tell him to go take a hike. Let me
see what he has. This isn't an arrest warrant. I'm
not going to honor it.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
And for that she gets arrested.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
Well, and here's me.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
This is where I think that the confusion perhaps comes
in or the immediate actions. You know, she should have
been arrested because she's obstructing administrative law or the the
the the immigration law. A federal magistrate found probable cause
for her arrest in basically this act of quote unquote obstruction.
(04:07):
So is this one of those analysis like you and
I have, that the federal government is violating our Fourth
Amendment rights to be free of unreasonable searches, their Fifth
Man rights to be free on unreasonable surchies and seizures
that they do all the time. But it's never been
tested in court kind of arguments. I mean, this is
the law on the books, right.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
Well, if if evidence were obtained from an administrative warrant,
it can't be used in court.
Speaker 5 (04:34):
So to that.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
Extent, it's been tested because it's obviously in violation of
the Fourth Amendment. But this is also in violation of
the concept of federalism. I cited the recent Supreme Court
cases reminding everybody that the states are sovereign, and one
an instrument of sovereignty is the state court system, and
the FEDS can't interfere with it. I remember case. It
(04:59):
wasn't a s to me but one of my colleagues,
and that was on the bench. I don't have an
FBI agent who was stopped on the Garden State Parkway,
which is.
Speaker 5 (05:08):
The main highway that goes along.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
The spine of New Jersey north to south, going eighty
five miles an hour, and he actually came into Gordon
said well, I work for the FBI.
Speaker 5 (05:19):
I'm not bound by New Jersey law. They locked him up.
It took his gun and his shield and locked him up.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
And nobody gets locked up for speeding, but you do
get locked up for interfering with the sovereignty of a state.
That's probably And it wasn't, as I said, it wasn't
I who locked him up. It was one of my colleagues.
You don't toy with the concept of sovereignty. You respect
the court. You don't show up with something that is
(05:48):
arguably not even a warrant and expect a judge to
stop what she's doing to comply with what you want.
So I know this is an unpopped popular view. Most
people viewing this and probably most people listening to us
now are scratching their heads saying, well, who wants to
(06:09):
get into the constitutional weeds. Trump's job is to get
illegals off the streets. I understand that argument, and I
even respect the argument. I don't always agree with it,
but I understand it. But Trump has an obligation. I
don't personalize this to the president. He wasn't making these
decisions himself to follow the Constitution, which means respect the
(06:32):
sovereignty of the States, and follow the Fourth Amendment and
follow due process, none.
Speaker 5 (06:38):
Of which was done in this case.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
Now, to make matters worse, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
Speaker 4 (06:43):
Suspended the judge yesterday.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
I mean, it's basically a month long vacation. She has
all of her perks and she gets paid, but she
does not have to come to work. That would upset me,
but a lot of people would say, well, this is great,
I'm going Italy form.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
But I guess the two fold component of this is
the federal magistrate found probable cause for the arrestaurant of
the judge based upon her conduct, and now the Wisconsin
Supreme Court has relieved her of our official duties, at
least temporarily. Doesn't that sort of I mean, flying the
face of the argument that you're making, which is that
this she had no obligation because this was not a
(07:24):
judicial arrest warrant.
Speaker 5 (07:27):
It does not in my view.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
I'm sorry to tell you this dark and dirty secret,
but every federal magistrate wants to become a federal judge,
and if they don't find probable cause, the FBI will
block their ascendants. That is well known in the judiciary.
The federal magistrate finding probable cause is the moral equivalent
of a grand jury in dighting a ham sandwich.
Speaker 4 (07:53):
That's seventy times over the years.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
By the way, these analogies are not original to me.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
No, I've even used the ham Sandwench analysis a grand jury.
A prosecutor can get a jury, a grand jury to
indict a ham sandwich. It's easy to do. You select
what evidence they hear and they see. You don't have
to provide it with all the facts and information.
Speaker 4 (08:14):
Ergo.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Same thing when you're trying to get an arrest warrant
or a search warrant from a magistrate.
Speaker 5 (08:22):
So an Article three judge that's different.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
So put your defense attorney hat on. What is her
next step given with the current situation she finds herself in,
is that going to court?
Speaker 1 (08:32):
She should move she should move to Well, she hasn't
been indicted yet, which is another crazy thing. They shouldn't
have removed her from the bench until there's an indictment,
because maybe there won't be an indictment.
Speaker 5 (08:45):
Maybe she'll testify before the grand jury. You know, she
is a former defense lawyer herself.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
But her next step would be, once indicted, to move
to dismiss the indictment. First Amendment, fourth Amendment, Amendment, and
even tenth Amendment, which is the residue of state sovereignty grounds.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
All right, Well, I would.
Speaker 5 (09:10):
Also throw in there.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
A statement from the president's press secretary that he would
not hesitate to arrest Supreme Court justices if he felt
it was appropriate. Man, you talk about an inappropriate statement,
an intimidating statement, a statement that will backfire.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
That was it, well, and that certainly fuels what I
can only characterize is this sort of unhinged anger that's
coming from the left over a lot of times really
absolutely nothing, but this is the attack on the judicial system.
This fuels the fire of those arguments and those claims
by the left against the Trump administration writ large right.
Speaker 1 (09:53):
Right, I mean those who are rejoicing in Judge Dougan's arrest.
Flip the switch and think of a liberal president and
DJ arresting a conservative judge and how would you feel.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Yeah, Or arresting parents who show up at school board
meetings professing their anger over policy.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Right right, there you go, Yeah, there you go. That's
an even better analogy because it actually.
Speaker 4 (10:22):
Happened in spite of the First Amendment.
Speaker 5 (10:26):
Yes, I mean the.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
Same FBI, which, by the way, could have said, Judge Dugan,
we have a warned for your arrest.
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Can you surrender with your lawyer? Here's where you should go,
and here's the.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Time when you can do it, Like when the mayor
of New York was indicted. Instead, rather than telling her
they were coming for her, they told the press yeah,
and then they showed up when she got out of
her car in the parking lot of the courthouse and
handcuffed to behind her back, which is the way you
handcuff dangerous people obviously meant to intimidate.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Like when CNN was alerted ahead of time that they
were going to be rating Donald Trump's House for Privileged Documents, correct.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Or when they rated when Bob Muller rated the Roger
Stones House, and CNN just happened to be there at
five thirty.
Speaker 5 (11:15):
In the morning.
Speaker 4 (11:19):
All right, they talked to you.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
I wrote a piece called an American Nightmare, and these
things happen and they shouldn't.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Well food for thought, and I'm glad you're able to
break this down. And I excellent explanation. I understand exactly
where you're coming from. And I know you provided my
listeners with at least a clear eyed perspective on the situation,
and Popcorn will remain out well.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
I think your listeners. I think your listeners are smart people.
Speaker 4 (11:45):
Oh yeah, enjoy.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
Hearing an argument which is not one they're familiar with
here accustomed to hearing.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
That's exactly what we all need. Don't live in an
echo chamber. Listen to someone different, different perspective. You don't
have have to ultimately side with them, but it's a
it's a refreshing thing to have a great you know,
sort of I don't want to say intellectual, like I'm
patting myself on the back, but that's exactly what we
get an involved, you know, fact based, law based driven discussion.
That's the point of this segment. That's why I love
(12:14):
having you on the show every week. God love you,
my man, Judge Ennitapolitana. I'll talk next week with you
and I help you have a wonderful, wonderful.
Speaker 4 (12:21):
Week, My friend, all the best friends. Thank you, Thank you, sir.
It's a forty fifty five KRC the talk station, be
right back, fifty five KRC. Thinking about buying your first
home now with third federal
There is.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Your Channel nine weather forecast. It's gotta be dry un
till around five pm. We've might get some spotty showers,
maybe even some storms. Seventy two for the high chances
storms ends around midnight, sixty one overnight low seventy seven
of you are high tomorrow with storms and showers afternoon
and evening hours. Scattered storms still possible. Overnight. It'll be
fifty nine low and a high of sixty nine on Friday,
(00:27):
with chances spotty showers.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Fifty eight degrees. Right now, let's go to travel. I
up the big chuck Ingram from the UCLP Traffic Center. UC
Health wake Well Center offers comprehensive obesity care and advanced
searching OH expertise.
Speaker 4 (00:39):
Call five one three nine three nine two two sixty three.
Speaker 3 (00:42):
That's nine three nine twenty two sixty three stap bound
seventy one. There's an accident of Smith then where it's
the left. Two lanes are blocked off. Traffic is already
heavy from above two seventy five and you're over a
half hour deblay thanks to a wreck east found two
seventy five near Taylor Mill right hand inside traffic back
to Dixie coming up next, our guest is actually a
(01:04):
great horse picking expert, So just in time for the
Kentucky Derby, our guest is going to go with rendered
judgment to win, American promised to place and journalism to show. Yes,
those are actually names of horses in this week's Kentucky Derby.
But it's almost like the judge had the inside track.
(01:27):
Chuck Ingramont fifty five krs the talk station, five cars
the talk station. I thought it's creative, Yes, very creative.
Speaker 5 (01:38):
He never ceases to amaze, never.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
I know.
Speaker 2 (01:42):
So do you have a racing form there? Judge of PAULA. Tada,
Welcome back to the Vity five Jacy Warning Show.
Speaker 1 (01:47):
My friend, I didn't even know that Kentucky Derby was
this weekend.
Speaker 5 (01:52):
It's really not something that's on.
Speaker 1 (01:53):
My rate screen, understood Thomas Massey or ran Paul.
Speaker 5 (01:58):
But it's not something.
Speaker 4 (02:00):
I follow understood.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
And I mentioned congressomassing the lead up to the segment
because as I told you yesterday when I got your column,
which is always brilliant and is always on point, that
I said, you know, sometimes my listeners disagree with you,
and I suggested that probably they would disagree with you
because your position relative to Judge Dugan, who was scheduled
to preside over hearing against the Mexican national Eduardo Flores Ruiz,
(02:25):
who had been charged with criminal batteries. So he's in
her courtroom and the immigration officials show up armed with
and arrest. Weren't that an immigration official had issued? And
I think this is where your argument hinges on that
the Fourth Amendment in your mind, in the mind of
the judge disagrees and says, this is not an official warrant.
(02:48):
This is not something that is constitutional on its face.
Er go, she's not obstructing anything because the immigration official
doesn't have the actual constitutional authority to issue and arrest
warrant himself.
Speaker 4 (03:01):
Have I got that basic right?
Speaker 5 (03:04):
Yes, you do have that right. And this is a
good faith.
Speaker 1 (03:09):
And from my perspective, and I presume hers widely held
judicial view of the Fourth Amendment, that these administrative warrants
are unconstitutional and government officials are not obligated to comply
with them. Hey, judge, there's a guy in the hallway
that wants to arrest a person in your courtroom.
Speaker 5 (03:33):
What should we do? Does he have an arrest warrant? No?
Speaker 1 (03:36):
Okay, tell him to go take a hike. Let me
see what he has. This isn't an arrest warrant. I'm
not going to honor it.
Speaker 5 (03:41):
And for that she gets arrested.
Speaker 4 (03:44):
Well, and here's me.
Speaker 2 (03:45):
This is where I think that the confusion perhaps comes
in or the immediate actions. You know, she should have
been arrested because she's obstructing administrative law or the the
the the immigration law. A federal magistrate found probable cause
for her arrest in basically this act of quote unquote obstruction.
(04:07):
So is this one of those analysis like you and
I have, that the federal government is violating our Fourth
Amendment rights to be free of unreasonable searches, their Fifth
Man rights to be free on unreasonable surchies and seizures
that they do all the time. But it's never been
tested in court kind of arguments. I mean, this is
the law on the books, right.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
Well, if if evidence were obtained from an administrative warrant,
it can't be used in court.
Speaker 5 (04:34):
So to that.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
Extent, it's been tested because it's obviously in violation of
the Fourth Amendment. But this is also in violation of
the concept of federalism. I cited the recent Supreme Court
cases reminding everybody that the states are sovereign, and one
an instrument of sovereignty is the state court system, and
the FEDS can't interfere with it. I remember case. It
(04:59):
wasn't a s to me but one of my colleagues,
and that was on the bench. I don't have an
FBI agent who was stopped on the Garden State Parkway,
which is.
Speaker 5 (05:08):
The main highway that goes along.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
The spine of New Jersey north to south, going eighty
five miles an hour, and he actually came into Gordon
said well, I work for the FBI.
Speaker 5 (05:19):
I'm not bound by New Jersey law. They locked him up.
It took his gun and his shield and locked him up.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
And nobody gets locked up for speeding, but you do
get locked up for interfering with the sovereignty of a state.
That's probably And it wasn't, as I said, it wasn't
I who locked him up. It was one of my colleagues.
You don't toy with the concept of sovereignty. You respect
the court. You don't show up with something that is
(05:48):
arguably not even a warrant and expect a judge to
stop what she's doing to comply with what you want.
So I know this is an unpopped popular view. Most
people viewing this and probably most people listening to us
now are scratching their heads saying, well, who wants to
(06:09):
get into the constitutional weeds. Trump's job is to get
illegals off the streets. I understand that argument, and I
even respect the argument. I don't always agree with it,
but I understand it. But Trump has an obligation. I
don't personalize this to the president. He wasn't making these
decisions himself to follow the Constitution, which means respect the
(06:32):
sovereignty of the States, and follow the Fourth Amendment and
follow due process, none.
Speaker 5 (06:38):
Of which was done in this case.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
Now, to make matters worse, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
Speaker 4 (06:43):
Suspended the judge yesterday.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
I mean, it's basically a month long vacation. She has
all of her perks and she gets paid, but she
does not have to come to work. That would upset me,
but a lot of people would say, well, this is great,
I'm going Italy form.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
But I guess the two fold component of this is
the federal magistrate found probable cause for the arrestaurant of
the judge based upon her conduct, and now the Wisconsin
Supreme Court has relieved her of our official duties, at
least temporarily. Doesn't that sort of I mean, flying the
face of the argument that you're making, which is that
this she had no obligation because this was not a
(07:24):
judicial arrest warrant.
Speaker 5 (07:27):
It does not in my view.
Speaker 1 (07:29):
I'm sorry to tell you this dark and dirty secret,
but every federal magistrate wants to become a federal judge,
and if they don't find probable cause, the FBI will
block their ascendants. That is well known in the judiciary.
The federal magistrate finding probable cause is the moral equivalent
of a grand jury in dighting a ham sandwich.
Speaker 4 (07:53):
That's seventy times over the years.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
By the way, these analogies are not original to me.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
No, I've even used the ham Sandwench analysis a grand jury.
A prosecutor can get a jury, a grand jury to
indict a ham sandwich. It's easy to do. You select
what evidence they hear and they see. You don't have
to provide it with all the facts and information.
Speaker 4 (08:14):
Ergo.
Speaker 1 (08:15):
Same thing when you're trying to get an arrest warrant
or a search warrant from a magistrate.
Speaker 5 (08:22):
So an Article three judge that's different.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
So put your defense attorney hat on. What is her
next step given with the current situation she finds herself in,
is that going to court?
Speaker 1 (08:32):
She should move she should move to Well, she hasn't
been indicted yet, which is another crazy thing. They shouldn't
have removed her from the bench until there's an indictment,
because maybe there won't be an indictment.
Speaker 5 (08:45):
Maybe she'll testify before the grand jury. You know, she
is a former defense lawyer herself.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
But her next step would be, once indicted, to move
to dismiss the indictment. First Amendment, fourth Amendment, Amendment, and
even tenth Amendment, which is the residue of state sovereignty grounds.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
All right, Well, I would.
Speaker 5 (09:10):
Also throw in there.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
A statement from the president's press secretary that he would
not hesitate to arrest Supreme Court justices if he felt
it was appropriate. Man, you talk about an inappropriate statement,
an intimidating statement, a statement that will backfire.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
That was it, well, and that certainly fuels what I
can only characterize is this sort of unhinged anger that's
coming from the left over a lot of times really
absolutely nothing, but this is the attack on the judicial system.
This fuels the fire of those arguments and those claims
by the left against the Trump administration writ large right.
Speaker 1 (09:53):
Right, I mean those who are rejoicing in Judge Dougan's arrest.
Flip the switch and think of a liberal president and
DJ arresting a conservative judge and how would you feel.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Yeah, Or arresting parents who show up at school board
meetings professing their anger over policy.
Speaker 1 (10:17):
Right right, there you go, Yeah, there you go. That's
an even better analogy because it actually.
Speaker 4 (10:22):
Happened in spite of the First Amendment.
Speaker 5 (10:26):
Yes, I mean the.
Speaker 1 (10:27):
Same FBI, which, by the way, could have said, Judge Dugan,
we have a warned for your arrest.
Speaker 5 (10:35):
Can you surrender with your lawyer? Here's where you should go,
and here's the.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Time when you can do it, Like when the mayor
of New York was indicted. Instead, rather than telling her
they were coming for her, they told the press yeah,
and then they showed up when she got out of
her car in the parking lot of the courthouse and
handcuffed to behind her back, which is the way you
handcuff dangerous people obviously meant to intimidate.
Speaker 2 (11:02):
Like when CNN was alerted ahead of time that they
were going to be rating Donald Trump's House for Privileged Documents, correct.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Or when they rated when Bob Muller rated the Roger
Stones House, and CNN just happened to be there at
five thirty.
Speaker 5 (11:15):
In the morning.
Speaker 4 (11:19):
All right, they talked to you.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
I wrote a piece called an American Nightmare, and these
things happen and they shouldn't.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Well food for thought, and I'm glad you're able to
break this down. And I excellent explanation. I understand exactly
where you're coming from. And I know you provided my
listeners with at least a clear eyed perspective on the situation,
and Popcorn will remain out well.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
I think your listeners. I think your listeners are smart people.
Speaker 4 (11:45):
Oh yeah, enjoy.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
Hearing an argument which is not one they're familiar with
here accustomed to hearing.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
That's exactly what we all need. Don't live in an
echo chamber. Listen to someone different, different perspective. You don't
have have to ultimately side with them, but it's a
it's a refreshing thing to have a great you know,
sort of I don't want to say intellectual, like I'm
patting myself on the back, but that's exactly what we
get an involved, you know, fact based, law based driven discussion.
That's the point of this segment. That's why I love
(12:14):
having you on the show every week. God love you,
my man, Judge Ennitapolitana. I'll talk next week with you
and I help you have a wonderful, wonderful.
Speaker 4 (12:21):
Week, My friend, all the best friends. Thank you, Thank you, sir.
It's a forty fifty five KRC the talk station, be
right back, fifty five KRC. Thinking about buying your first
home now with third federal
Brian Thomas News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!