July 16, 2026 • 36 mins
The Dan Caplis Show is back with a lively discussion on the latest news and controversies in Colorado politics. This episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in staying up-to-date on the state's gubernatorial election and the upcoming presidential address.
The conversation starts with a heated debate over Victor Marx's claim of receiving the endorsement of former Governor Bill Owens. Marx's campaign says he got a call from someone saying Owens intends to endorse him, but Owens himself has denied any involvement. The discussion raises questions about the truthfulness of Marx's statement and the implications for his campaign. The hosts also delve into the recent news about Governor Owens' potential endorsement and what it could mean for the election.
The episode also touches on the upcoming presidential address, where President Trump is expected to discuss election integrity and alleged foreign interference in the 2020 election. The hosts discuss the potential impact of this speech on the election and the media's role in covering it. They also explore the idea that the President's claims of election fraud may be difficult to prove, and the challenges of investigating such claims.
If you're interested in staying informed about the latest developments in Colorado politics and the presidential address, tune in to this episode of The Dan Kaplis Show to hear the lively discussion and expert analysis.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Kaplis Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. It's three all
three seven one three eight two five five d A
N five seven seven three nine Fire out. Will hey
(00:21):
want to come right out of the gate with I
think unfairness toward Victor Marx from Kyle Clark at KUSA.
See if you agree. But then within this, within this
some very very interesting news about Governor Owens, so I
want to kick both around with you.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Of course, we're going.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
To be talking about the President's address to the Nation tonight.
As you know, we're starting to get some advance from
the White House as to what's going to be in there,
including alleged Chinese meddling in the twenty twenty election.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
So we'll we'll deepdive that.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
Some wire reports that Tina Peters will be present with
the President before that speech tonight, among others I've read
there will be various cabinet members there as well. We
do want to talk about Denver, the horrific murder committed
by a twelve and a fourteen year old and get
into those details and lessons to be learned from that,
(01:13):
and much more ahead in the show today. So here
is a KUSA reporting on GOP nominee for Governor, Victor Marx.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Republican gubernatorial candidate Victor Marx suggested today that he's getting
the endorsement of former Governor Bill Owens, the only Republican
governor Colorado's elected in the last fifty five years. That
could go a long way to help unify the divided
Colorado Republican Party.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
Except it doesn't appear to be true.
Speaker 5 (01:37):
You talk about Bill Owens the state of sayday, it's
interesting he was a Republican governor who used common sense.
I got a call yesterday that he's endorsing me.
Speaker 3 (01:48):
Former Governor Bill Owens told me today he has not
made a decision on whether he will endorse Victor Marx
for governor. Owens actually endorsed Marx's Republican primary opponent, Barb Kirkmeyer,
who called Marx a fraud, says he doesn't tell the truth.
Speaker 4 (02:03):
She says she won't support him in the general.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
Owens told me he wants to wait and see how
Marx campaigns, how he handles himself before he makes a decision.
Speaker 4 (02:13):
This actually is not the first time that.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Victor Marx has faced questions about whether he.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
Tells the truth about Bill Owens' endorsement.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Longtime Denver Post publisher Dean Singleton, power player in state politics,
has said publicly that Marx falsely claimed to him in
private during the primary that he had Owens's backing. Marx's
campaign told me today that Marx did not lie if
you listen to the literal meaning of his words.
Speaker 4 (02:39):
So let's play it back.
Speaker 5 (02:40):
You talk about Bill Owens. I got a call yesterday
that he's endorsing me.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
The Marx campaign says that's true, that Victor Marx got
a phone call yesterday from someone saying that former Governor
Owens intends to endorse him. The campaign acknowledges that former
Governor Owens is not currently endorsing Victor mar That's one of.
Speaker 2 (03:01):
The cheapest shots I've ever seen in the media. If
this is.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Not even a close call to try to imply, especially,
I don't care if it's you know, somebody doing a
podcast for people who you're listened to, but for a
major a major network affiliate television station. That I try
to imply that the GOP nominee for governor is lying
about an endorsement from Victor Marx. That's outrageous. No reasonable
(03:25):
person would interpret that that way. That Victor Marx did
not say I got a call from Bill Owens saying
he's endorsing me for governor. He said, I got a
call saying he's endorsing me for governor. Obviously, if Victor
Marks got that call from bill Owens, the first thing
he would say is I.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Got a call from Bill Owens. He never said that.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
This is a in my view, a completely unfair shot
and and just goes to show the complete.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Lack of any kind of balance.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
Or objectivity or fairness when it comes to Kyle over
there at KUSA, and we've been documenting that in so
many different ways. I mean, completely in the tank for
the Democrats here, and it's a real to service to
the state because he has built up a lot of
credibility because he's very skilled and including as a debate moderator,
(04:17):
but he uses those skills to protect Democrats. But here, listen,
there are very legitimate questions out there about Victor and
I on this show have been very honest and open
and talking about those which is hard right because I'm
a registered Republican. I want to support the GOP nominee.
I hope eventually I can support Victor. But here you
(04:40):
just have a bald face cheap shot. How in the
world would anybody, anybody take from what he said that
he was claiming Owens called him, no, U believe me.
That would be the first thing Victor would have said is, oh, yeah,
bill Owens called me and said he's endor They they'd
(05:01):
be turning that into headlines everywhere. So, in my opinion,
very very cheap shot. What do you think three or
three seven, one, three eight, two five five, five seven,
seven three nine.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Zach, what do you think, my friend?
Speaker 6 (05:14):
I think I'm on the other side of this one. Honestly,
it seems you know, I think you're right. It's he
didn't say that he got a call from bill Owens.
I think he was certainly trying to portray that he
had bill owens endorsement, and it seems like that is very,
very far from the truth. And so if that was
(05:36):
the one time he had maybe been he had maybe
stubbed his toe in this manner, I would be more
inclined to overlook it. But considering his panner a pattern,
excuse me of embellishing some of these stories. To me,
it's like, oh, here goes Victor Marx again. Here's another
thing that And I think Kyle Clark's maybe being harsher
(05:58):
than he should, but I do think I think he
was trying to give the listener the view that he
has the bill Owens' endorsement, and that's not the case.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Well, a couple of questions, Sarah, if he had the
bill Owens endorsement, if that call had come from bill Owens,
don't you think you would have said, I got a
call from bill Owens that he's endorsing me to me
when the words are got a call that he's endorsing me.
(06:28):
That just suggests, I don't know any other way to
read it, that somebody in Owen's orbit, or who claims
to be in Owen's orbit, called Victor to say Owens
was endorsing him.
Speaker 6 (06:39):
Agreed, But I think that when put in contrast with
Kusa reaching out and bill Owen saying no, I'm not
endorsing him yet, I actually need to see how his
campaign plays out. A little bit before I make a
decision on that. Meanwhile, you have Mark saying, again, even
if it's someone in his circle, someone called me, and
(06:59):
the way it doesn't sound like.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
Some rando on the street.
Speaker 6 (07:02):
It seems like he's at least implying it's from a
well informed place that he's getting the bill Owens endorsement,
and it seems and maybe Owens just wants to save
that and make that announcement himself, But the way Owens
responded to Kusa seems like that's very far off.
Speaker 1 (07:18):
Yeah, which leads us to the other question I want
to get to, which is do you think Bill Owens
will endorse Victor Marx? But that aside for a second,
to me, it is just so very plausible, and I
don't doubt it for a second that somebody called Victor
Marx and said, hey, bill Owens is going to endorse you.
I mean, there are so many politically active people out there,
(07:39):
so many who claim access they don't have, so many
who have half access, and so many who just choose
to misrepresent things. I don't doubt for a second that
Victor Marks got that call. I just think that if
you're going to be on a major station. You don't
take the position that the candidate is telling the public
(08:02):
that bill Owens has called him to endorse him based
on what we heard there. Yeah, I just think it's unfair.
Let's play it again. Let's play that again.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
Republican gubernatorial candidate Victor Mark suggested today that he's getting
the endorsement of former Governor Bill Owens, the only Republican
governor Colorado's elected in the last fifty five years. That
could go a long way to help unify the divided
Colorado Republican Party, except it doesn't appear to be true.
Speaker 5 (08:28):
You talk about Bill Owens the state and sayday, it's
interesting he was a Republican governor who used common sense.
I got a call yesterday that he's endorsing me.
Speaker 1 (08:39):
For I got a call yesterday that he's endorsing me. Right,
So I think we agree. Victor Marx is in no way,
shape or form suggesting that he got a call from
Bill Owens.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
Agreed.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
Yeah, and he doesn't identify who he got the call from.
So hey, I got a call from Owen's right hand Woeganner.
I got a call from Owen's chief of staff or
anything like that.
Speaker 6 (09:00):
But if I were to call Victor Marx and say, hey,
I think Bill Owens is endorsing you. I don't know
if he would report that, you know, because hey, what
does that kid know? I the fact that he's reporting
it to me makes it seem like it's coming from
a well informed place or something like he's heard this
is coming down the pike. And again it doesn't quite
(09:22):
align with that. I honestly think part of our divide
here is my benefit of the doubt with Victor Marx
is just kind of spent at this point. I need
him to start producing bonafides for these claims. And when
this is another claim that once again can't be verified,
I just kind of roll my eyes and I'm like,
here he goes.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
And I get that, Zach, And you're among many many
people I respect who just don't trust Victor Marx, right,
So I get that, and I appreciate you saying that.
My point is that if there's going to be a
main anchor at a major TV station taking the position
that Victor Marx is lying that, and the way I
(10:00):
heard that report, maybe you heard it different, but the
way I heard that report was Kyle Clark taking the
position that Victor Marx was claiming he got a call
from Bill Owens. Do you think I'm interpreting that report wrong?
Let me know, but I don't think there's anything in
what Victor Mark said that that would support a claim
(10:21):
that he was trying to imply that he got a
call from Bill Owens himself. Three or three someone three
eight two five five. Here's what I want to do, though,
da n five seven seven three nine. I want to
come back and talk about the other half of that,
which is, do you think Governor Owens will endorse Victor Marx?
Do you think that he should? If he does, what
difference do you think that's going to make? After all,
(10:42):
he is the only Republican elected governor in the state
of Colorado in the last fifty five years, and he
had two very successful terms. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 7 (10:57):
Now back to the Dan Kapler Show podcast.
Speaker 8 (11:00):
So I want to bring in Colorado Secretary of State
Jennick Griswolds. Thank you for taking the time. I just
want to start with we don't know exactly what President
Trump will say, but as we've been talking about, he
is expected to discuss what he will frame as new
information on foreign efforts to influence US elections, alleged vulnerabilities,
and election infrastructure, including voting machines. You are a state
elections official, what is your reaction to that?
Speaker 9 (11:23):
Well, firstaf thanks for having me on, and my reaction
is the same as the US senator. Trump is a
sore loser embracing a sore loser strategy. Let me be
very clear, the twenty twenty election was free and fair.
After Trump's lies about the twenty twenty election, over sixty
lawsuits were filed challenging the results. Every single one of
(11:44):
them was lost.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
They were unsuccessful acceptable.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
But what Jenna Chriswold fails to mention is she supported
a Supreme Court lawsuit in fact a lie. Didn't claim
she argued it to the Supreme Court. But she's supported
an action all the way to the Supreme Court to
try to keep Trump off the ballot in Colorado for
(12:11):
contesting the twenty twenty results, and she lost nine zip
saw that says somehow she fails to mention that, and
the host fails to mention that. Remarkable, isn't it? But
but how funny that she would refer to it to
Trump as a sore loser he's won the presidency twice.
(12:33):
How do you put that in the sore loser category?
When in America you're only allowed to win the presidency twice.
He's won the presidency twice. Very few people in American
history have won the presidency twice. What kind of numskull
comment is it to say he's a sore loser. It's remarkable, truly,
(12:53):
especially given her nine zip defeat at the United States
Supreme Court, whereas a guardian of democracy, she was trying
to deprive the people of Colorado of the choice of
voting for the GOP nominee.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
So yeah, but.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Nothing new from Jenna Griswold. There, Robin Lakewood, you're on
the Dan Kaplis Show.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Welcome, Hey, Dan, thank you.
Speaker 10 (13:17):
I just want to thank you right up front for
setting a bar for my call. So lo with having
that more onuogenic Jenna Griswold on talking about fraud and
all that stuff. They never mentioned Hillary and Stacy Abrams
and all the other nonsense of election denying and Trump
actually had some legitimate concerns that were raised. But that's
(13:37):
besides the point I'm calling about. Victor Marx and I
would advise Republicans, which I am one to consider the
rationale that I have given people that I know are Democrats.
I said, I don't have a problem with your registration.
You are accountable for how you vote, and if you're
going to vote for a communist or a socialist, that
(13:59):
is on you. You can be a Democrat, but get involved
and try to make the party better. But supporting the
candidacy of these idiot leftists that come along and drag
the rest of us down in our state down and
make us like California, that's inexcusable. Now to the point,
Republicans that are supporting Victor Marx up to this good
(14:19):
day are doing the same thing. Are supporting a flawed candidate.
I don't think he's as bad as a socialist or Democrat,
but he's definitely flawed. And I was on the wrong
side of the twenty ten election with Dan Mays, and
Dan was a good guy, likable guy, a political novice
and rather naive and got himself in over his head.
(14:41):
And I think Victor Marx is in the same boat.
But he has done some things. In listening to your
good past colleague Ryan Schuling, he has done some terrible
things to people that have had interactions, business dealings, acquaintances
and all that, and he doesn't come out and address
it in Republican audiences and says, look at my website,
(15:02):
and I won't go to forums, and like in Douglas County,
I won't go there because Greg Lopez, who I'm supporting
because he's good and knows what's going on, and he's
qualified for the job and he can help conservatives, not
just our part rap.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Can I ask you a quick question, and that is
I think you'd agree with me that we should never
reject a GOP nominee just because he or she is flawed, right,
because all of our nominees, including those who've been the best,
all of our.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Nominees are flawed. Right.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
So to me, the key distinction here is between flawed,
which I am absolutely fine with because I am, and
fraud and this question of whether Victor Marks is.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
A fraud, and I'm closer to that right And I
understand then it sounds like you're one of them.
Speaker 1 (15:50):
I understand that a lot of people have concluded he's
a fraud, and a lot of people have concluded he's
not a fraud. I am still trying to gather all
of the evidence, including from Victor.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
To be able to make my own determination.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
And so I think that's this strange space we find
ourselves in.
Speaker 10 (16:09):
Correct, Correct, he hasn't done anything to dissuade that, and
to find people, some of my friends in the party
that support him are sick to fantic in their support.
They don't want to know the facts, They don't want
to know the basic ethical concerns that we as Republicans have.
We didn't vet this character, and he comes out of
the blue.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Fact.
Speaker 10 (16:29):
I don't know where his involvement with the party, if
he's done anything with the party, But all of a
sudden he's running for governor, like twenty two others that
thought they could do the job, but some of them
didn't even show after they put their hat in the ring,
didn't even show that assembly Well, and.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
Rob, let me jump in for one secondly, because we're
up against the end of it. I think it's a
very unusual race for two reasons. One what we just discussed.
The other is I think the question is still unanswered
as to whether Victor is going to compete state one
wide for the governor's office. And it will be very
(17:06):
very helpful once we get an answer to that question,
it won't resolve the other issues, but it will be
very encouraging to me if we actually see not just words,
but if we actually see action that tells us that
Victor is in fact going to compete statewide for the
governor's office. Because I think one thing that for sure
the Republican Party is entitled to and the people of
(17:28):
the state deserve, is whoever our nominee for whatever office,
they better work there. You know what's off statewide every
day running for that office, no matter what the odds are,
how steep the climb is. It is a sacred obligation
if you're going to decide I want to be the
nominee for treasurer or attorney general or governor of a
(17:50):
major political party, and you win that nomination, which is
campaign brilliantly. Did I believe there's a sacred obligation to
get out there and campaign everywhere, pain hard, and start
fast and finish strong and do not let up until
the final votes counted. Can we all agree on that
we are entitled to that, and we darn well better
(18:13):
see it. I haven't seen it yet. Maybe it's coming.
But what I don't understand is they brilliantly win this campaign.
They've got four or five days notice delay before it's
official to plan. They've got the glow of victory around
Victor when he wins and then he turtles up. Should
(18:36):
have been on every TV station, every radio station, everywhere
at once, taking advantage of the victory.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
That concerns me.
Speaker 7 (18:47):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 3 (18:51):
A political issue, and this is an issue for the
people you cover in the press.
Speaker 11 (18:56):
Yeah, people are talking about this each tonight. We talked
about this, loads of diarrhea cases all across the country,
that it's gross, that it's ugly, that it's bad, that
it shouldn't be going on, that should be stopped.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
But the speech is going forward.
Speaker 11 (19:10):
So the major networks in this country have a really
tough decision to make tonight about how to cover the speech,
whether to show it live, whether to interrupt if the
lies become so serious. I think we just start from
the premise that most Americans disapprove of Trump and don't
believe his election lies, and so it's an environment that
is that is not positive for him. And yet he
(19:33):
has used his government to threaten networks, especially the broadcast
networks and NBC. They're open active investigations into those networks.
Speaker 2 (19:42):
So these broadcasters are I.
Speaker 11 (19:43):
Mean, honestly, right now, Dana, there are hours long meetings
going on at ABC, at NBC, at CBS about what
to do tonight, and none of the networks, not CNN,
none of the networks have commented on how they're going
to handle the speech.
Speaker 1 (19:54):
Well, Brian Stelter, right, we know now, right, and everybody knows,
you cannot trust these networks.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
You can't trust them to be remotely fair.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
I mean, look at the way the networks rig the
twenty twenty election. And I'm not talking about election integrity.
I'm talking about the networks censoring a true, explosive story
that would have changed the outcome, which is obviously the
Hunter Biden laptop story. That's how the networks rig the
twenty twenty election. I think very very likely that if
(20:26):
there's true broad reporting on that true story, which would
have been the case, if it would have been harmful
to the Republican candidate, the outcome.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
Of that election changes. I think that's what's likely to happen.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
So of course, these networks are going to do everything
they possibly can to disadvantage Trump, and then this business
about Stelter about Americans disapprove of Trump, etc. I don't
think you can read anything conclusive at all into popular
polling on President Trump. He has defied it repeatedly. What
Stelter leaves out is he's a two term president, right,
(21:02):
He's just like Jenna Griswold. That bizarre national media clip
I played earlier in the show where she's calling Trump
a loser.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
Trump's been elected president twice.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
How many people in world history have been That's not
the definition of loser. He happens to be in the
middle of his second term.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
Now.
Speaker 1 (21:19):
The definition of loser is Jenna Griswold trying to deprive
Coloradins of their democratic rights and their franchise by going
to the Supreme Court backing a case that would have
kept Trump off the ballot, would have deprived Coloradins of
even the ability to vote for Trump. And she got
beaten nine zip, even just as Jackson was against her.
Speaker 2 (21:41):
I think that's the definition.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Of loser right there, not because she lost nine zip
but the US Supreme Court though.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
That's a tough loss, right, And why is that?
Speaker 1 (21:52):
Can you explain to me if she's gonna lie and
lie about arguing a case before the US Supreme Court,
which you apparently did lie about that she never has.
Why would you lie and say you argued a case
that was lost nine zip.
Speaker 10 (22:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (22:10):
It's like you get a line in saying, uh, yeah,
you know, I used to be a D one college athlete.
You know I lost played in one game, lost seventy
seven to nothing, and.
Speaker 2 (22:18):
That was it, right right? Right?
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Yeah? Or lying and say you played D one at
Slippery Rock when it went oh to fourteen, right exactly?
Speaker 7 (22:25):
You might as well embellish a little if you're got mbellish.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (22:28):
But in authors, obviously in America has figured it out.
Whether they you love or hate Trump or you're somewhere
in between, America's figured out that that the media overall,
and certainly the major networks are not going to be
fair to the president. They're going to be dishonest about him.
It doesn't mean everything they report about him is dishonest,
but they are very very often dishonest about him. So
(22:50):
we'll find out together. You know what the new evidence
is that the President presents tonight. I can't wait to
see it, can't wait to talk about it tomorrow let's go.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Down to jail in the valley. You're on the Dan
Kaplis Show. Welcome Jay, Hello Dan. I appreciate listening to you.
Speaker 12 (23:07):
I'm being able to listen to you a while. I
don't really know all the laws about Colorado, but I was.
I started out encouraged against our for Victor, but he
seems to be hiding behind the curtain too much and
not coming through and the you know, the innuendos of life.
So I'm just really disappointed. And so I just wondered,
(23:28):
I know it would be a hard, hard time, but
is it possible to get a right in candidate?
Speaker 1 (23:37):
And I'll hang out, But well, Chay, thank you, and
CREATI have you back. No, no writings have no chance.
Independents have no chance. It's that simple. So it's a
matter now of the GOP nominee and whether you're going
to back him if you happen to be a member
of the GOP starting point question, and it would be
(24:01):
so unusual I think for somebody who happens to be
a registered Republican to not back the nominee. Is Victor
won Farren square in that primary, I think it would
take something really big at least for me, But I
would imagine most people to not back the party's nominee.
(24:21):
And at least that's the way I think it should be.
It should take something really big. Do we have something
really big here that would justify that. I'm still trying
to figure that out now. I do think that one
broader problem we've had in the GOP has been that
historically you get some pretty significant blocks of folks who
(24:42):
do not back the nominee if the nominee wasn't their choice.
So right off the bat and whatever race that is
that the GOP has already lost because mathematically the only
chance the GOP has to win statewide is to have
a near fully unified GOP. But yeah, that's the situation
right here. And then the other issue with Victor is
(25:04):
if he is the bad thing some people claim, then
it could do a lot of damage to the ticket
up and down. So yeah, that's the very unusual place
we find ourselves. And then we open the show with
that fascinating story that Bill Owens, Governor Owens, who had
those great two terms in office, only Republican governor in
the last fifty five years, that Governor Owens has said
(25:28):
Jerry's out. He's he's waiting to determine whether he's going
to back Victor, you know, and he wants to see
how Victor campaigns and how his campaign rolls out before
he makes that decision. So that's fascinating, and i'd love
your take on what impact do you think it would
have on the race if Governor Owens did endorse Victor
three all three seven, one three eight two five five
(25:48):
d An five seven seven.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Three nine Listen.
Speaker 1 (25:51):
I don't think it's Governor Owens' responsibility to make an
endorsement or not. I don't think that burdens on him,
but I think that if he does, it's going to
matter a lot in GOP circles, and I think it'll
matter to a fair number of unaffiliateds. I think Bill
Owens respected across party lines for very good reason, so
(26:13):
it'll be interesting to see what he does there.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
I do want to get to some of these texts.
They are explosive today.
Speaker 1 (26:19):
Dan, isn't the jury still out on whether Victor Marx
ever tells the truth? You, Dan, are still trying to
make sense of this joke called Victor Marx. Hey, that's
my job. And whether I was on air or not,
I know I'd be doing the same thing. I'd be
trying to figure out, Hey, are the allegations true or not,
because we either have and I think this is one
(26:41):
of the most interesting things I've ever seen in politics.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
We either have one of the most.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
Admirable people to ever enter Colorado politics, or we have
a fraud. I don't think there's a lot of gray area,
and I think people are innocent until proven guilty. But
I think when somebody chooses to run for governor and
there are facts out there that raise these fair questions,
(27:05):
I think it's incumbent on the candidate to come forward
and address those head on, put out, make the best
case the candidate can make that these accusations are false,
provide as much information as possible, and then let the
people decide. And I understand, listen to a candidate who
has won a major party nomination. That's a big deal,
(27:28):
and that candidate has a right to say, no, I'm
not going to do that.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
I'm not going to address those allegations.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
And if in this case, Victor decides to go that route,
what's any reasonable person going to conclude? Three out three
seven to one, three eight two five five d an
five seven seven three nine. I hope he does address him.
I hope he addresses him successfully. I hope we can
all back him full throated. We know that it's going
to be a tough race anyway, but you'd sure like
(27:56):
to mount the very.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Best effort possible.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
Which brings me back to an earlier point of mine,
and this is really starting to concern me. Is Victor
going to compete for the governor's office? Is he going
to compete statewide for the governor's office. I'm concerned that
we didn't see an explosive out of the gate effort
every TV station, every radio show that would take him
(28:20):
when he won the primary, which was very impressive, very
odd to me that he didn't take advantage of that
and wasn't everywhere at once, because in an uphill climb
like Colorado, for any Republican, you need every bit of
exposure you can get to the voters, particularly free exposure.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Welcome back.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
There are a ton of email and that. I also
want to talk about the President's speech tonight. Some of
the previews on that we're starting to hear have some
very interesting sound about a Florida woman very angry about
a sexual type license plate she was randomly issued and
see if that would get you upset here on the
Dan Kapla.
Speaker 7 (28:59):
Show and now back to the Dan Kapler Show podcast.
Speaker 10 (29:08):
We don't believe that the gunman, Thomas Crooks, didn't act alone.
Speaker 13 (29:12):
I don't believe there was another shooter there, but I
believe that he was working with somebody. I believe it
was inside. It was an inside job inside the government somewhere.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
And this was political.
Speaker 13 (29:30):
Oh yeah, politically absolutely, yep, yep.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
Have you seen evidence to that?
Speaker 3 (29:38):
Oh?
Speaker 13 (29:38):
I've been told things, but I've had something that happened
with me that just afterwards and you're starting to put
the pieces together, it just made total sense.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
It had to be, right, didn't that one have to
be an inside job?
Speaker 1 (29:59):
Is there any any other explanation for it?
Speaker 2 (30:03):
To me?
Speaker 1 (30:03):
It remains one of the most baffling things in my lifetime,
is why we haven't heard more about that even after
President Trump than won his second term. And I trust
Trump completely on this, but just logically looking at this,
there's no way Crooks can get in that position without
somebody helping him on the inside.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
Right, got different theory? Let me know?
Speaker 1 (30:28):
Three O three seven one three eight two five five
D five seven, seven three nine one things for sure,
though I think he was almost certing to win anyway.
President Trump won the election in that Butler field that afternoon,
in the way that he handled being shot and the chaos.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
Of the moment.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
I mean, very very very few people would have been
able to handle it that way, and it's said an
awful lot, I think to all Americans, including those who
hate him, when he did so. He won the election
that afternoon, and beyond that, I think he won credibility
and important influence worldwide that I think is helping him
in a second term. It doesn't make all the problems
(31:05):
go away or cause Hitler esque type evil in Iran
to just say okay, whatever you want, but I think
it helps in lots of different ways. So we're going
to keep previewing the President's addressed to the nation tonight
on election integrity. There'll be a mention of Iran and
other things, but focus is going to be election integrity.
Early reports are seeing the President's going to present evidence
(31:28):
of China interfering in the twenty twenty election, which can
mean a lot of different things, right from buying social
media to actually they taking tangible steps to affect the.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Integrity of Volk counting.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
I have no idea what the President's evidence is going
to be on that, but all indications area it's going
to have something to do with China. I don't think
there's one sane person on the face of the earth
who would doubt that the Communist Party of China would
fix our election if they could. I don't expect the
President to and evidence tonight that they did, but they
(32:02):
would if they could, and they, sure heck would have
fixed it against Donald J. Trump because if you're the
Communist Party of China, obviously you want Joe Biden rather
than Donald Trump. But that does not mean the Communist
Party of China was able to rig that election.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
Zach Man, do you think.
Speaker 6 (32:20):
This means that the all the war knock and asoff
speculation was for nothing or do you think that will
be a part of this, because I remember early on
week it seemed like a lot of the buzz was Georgia,
expecting it would be about this, not just Georgia even,
but those specific races in Georgia.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Yeah, you know, it may be a cornucopia, It may
be a bunch of different things. To me, what I'm
looking for, like everybody else, is evidence, not theories. Evidence
and the strength of the evidence. Yeah, but I wouldn't
be surprised if if there were different components to this.
Speaker 6 (32:55):
Yeah, that makes sense, especially with how much he's hyping
it up. This is a topic he's touched on before,
so for this to be a special unveiling, I keep
thinking there has to be some extra wrinkle, some new evidence.
There has to be something to justify all the fanfare, and.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
I think that's good logical thinking.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
I would disagree with that, though, because I think we
do have precedent with this president of over promising when
it comes to certain things, you know, particularly on this topic,
and then we just get more series rather than concrete
evidence because he truly believes, he truly believes to the
(33:34):
core of his soul, that that election was stolen. Now,
at other times we have President Trump hypes something really
big and he delivers, and he delivers more than expected.
Speaker 2 (33:45):
So I just know which. I don't know which it's
going to be tonight, true mystery box. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Yeah, I think I'd err on the side of it
being underwhelming tonight. For this reason that I think election fraud,
which happens. I haven't seen proof it happen on the
scale to change the outcome of the election, but it happens.
I think election fraud is one of the hardest things
on the face of the earth to prove.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
Crimes are easy to prove. How do you prove election fraud.
Speaker 7 (34:18):
Because there's the two steps of it.
Speaker 6 (34:19):
It's like, Okay, it's one thing if there's some funky ballots,
and like you said, that's concerning.
Speaker 2 (34:24):
There should be zero election fraud ideally.
Speaker 6 (34:26):
But it's one thing if there's you know, a hundred
ballots in an election that are funny. It's a different
thing if it swung the election, And I think that's
the thing that's.
Speaker 1 (34:36):
Harder to prove. Or let's say that it was I'm
just talking theoretically. Let's say that it was occurring on
a large scale, and this example with mal in ballots
that had been you know, stolen or counterfeited and then completed.
If the criminal or the criminal enterprise or the foreign
(34:58):
state whatever is smart enough to do that and smart
enough to disperse them throughout a state, how do you
prove it? How do you identify it? Then how do
you prove the link? Yeah, they and I'm not saying
the absence of proof means the election was stolen, not
at all. I'm just saying that it's got to be
one of the toughest things to prove.
Speaker 6 (35:20):
It reminds me that I do a lot of the
sports stuff over on KOA. It reminds me of the
story with Russell Wilson, and there were these emails between
owners that seemed like they were maybe colluding to limit
how big these quarterback contracts were getting or how much
guaranteed money they were getting. And they had the records
of all the communications, but they couldn't prove collusion because
(35:42):
you have to not only prove the communication happened, but
that the communication and collusion was the reason they behaved
the way they did. It's kind of that's what this
election thing makes me think of. It's that second step.
Speaker 1 (35:52):
And I'll tell you how you prove stuff like that,
because I've spent forty two years of my life in
my real job as a lawyer victims LAK.
Speaker 2 (36:00):
I'll tell you you prove that the way we prove it.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
You get people under oaths, you bring in document examiners,
you bring in forensic experts, you devote enormous amounts of
time and money, but you've got the power to get
people under oath. When you're investigating an election fraud like this,
it's very hard to get that kind of power, and
I'll expand on that
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Kaplis Show. Please be sure to
give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. It's three all
three seven one three eight two five five d A
N five seven seven three nine Fire out. Will hey
(00:21):
want to come right out of the gate with I
think unfairness toward Victor Marx from Kyle Clark at KUSA.
See if you agree. But then within this, within this
some very very interesting news about Governor Owens, so I
want to kick both around with you.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
Of course, we're going.
Speaker 1 (00:38):
To be talking about the President's address to the Nation tonight.
As you know, we're starting to get some advance from
the White House as to what's going to be in there,
including alleged Chinese meddling in the twenty twenty election.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
So we'll we'll deepdive that.
Speaker 1 (00:52):
Some wire reports that Tina Peters will be present with
the President before that speech tonight, among others I've read
there will be various cabinet members there as well. We
do want to talk about Denver, the horrific murder committed
by a twelve and a fourteen year old and get
into those details and lessons to be learned from that,
(01:13):
and much more ahead in the show today. So here
is a KUSA reporting on GOP nominee for Governor, Victor Marx.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
Republican gubernatorial candidate Victor Marx suggested today that he's getting
the endorsement of former Governor Bill Owens, the only Republican
governor Colorado's elected in the last fifty five years. That
could go a long way to help unify the divided
Colorado Republican Party.
Speaker 4 (01:35):
Except it doesn't appear to be true.
Speaker 5 (01:37):
You talk about Bill Owens the state of sayday, it's
interesting he was a Republican governor who used common sense.
I got a call yesterday that he's endorsing me.
Speaker 3 (01:48):
Former Governor Bill Owens told me today he has not
made a decision on whether he will endorse Victor Marx
for governor. Owens actually endorsed Marx's Republican primary opponent, Barb Kirkmeyer,
who called Marx a fraud, says he doesn't tell the truth.
Speaker 4 (02:03):
She says she won't support him in the general.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
Owens told me he wants to wait and see how
Marx campaigns, how he handles himself before he makes a decision.
Speaker 4 (02:13):
This actually is not the first time that.
Speaker 3 (02:14):
Victor Marx has faced questions about whether he.
Speaker 4 (02:17):
Tells the truth about Bill Owens' endorsement.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
Longtime Denver Post publisher Dean Singleton, power player in state politics,
has said publicly that Marx falsely claimed to him in
private during the primary that he had Owens's backing. Marx's
campaign told me today that Marx did not lie if
you listen to the literal meaning of his words.
Speaker 4 (02:39):
So let's play it back.
Speaker 5 (02:40):
You talk about Bill Owens. I got a call yesterday
that he's endorsing me.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
The Marx campaign says that's true, that Victor Marx got
a phone call yesterday from someone saying that former Governor
Owens intends to endorse him. The campaign acknowledges that former
Governor Owens is not currently endorsing Victor mar That's one of.
Speaker 2 (03:01):
The cheapest shots I've ever seen in the media. If
this is.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Not even a close call to try to imply, especially,
I don't care if it's you know, somebody doing a
podcast for people who you're listened to, but for a
major a major network affiliate television station. That I try
to imply that the GOP nominee for governor is lying
about an endorsement from Victor Marx. That's outrageous. No reasonable
(03:25):
person would interpret that that way. That Victor Marx did
not say I got a call from Bill Owens saying
he's endorsing me for governor. He said, I got a
call saying he's endorsing me for governor. Obviously, if Victor
Marks got that call from bill Owens, the first thing
he would say is I.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Got a call from Bill Owens. He never said that.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
This is a in my view, a completely unfair shot
and and just goes to show the complete.
Speaker 2 (03:55):
Lack of any kind of balance.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
Or objectivity or fairness when it comes to Kyle over
there at KUSA, and we've been documenting that in so
many different ways. I mean, completely in the tank for
the Democrats here, and it's a real to service to
the state because he has built up a lot of
credibility because he's very skilled and including as a debate moderator,
(04:17):
but he uses those skills to protect Democrats. But here, listen,
there are very legitimate questions out there about Victor and
I on this show have been very honest and open
and talking about those which is hard right because I'm
a registered Republican. I want to support the GOP nominee.
I hope eventually I can support Victor. But here you
(04:40):
just have a bald face cheap shot. How in the
world would anybody, anybody take from what he said that
he was claiming Owens called him, no, U believe me.
That would be the first thing Victor would have said is, oh, yeah,
bill Owens called me and said he's endor They they'd
(05:01):
be turning that into headlines everywhere. So, in my opinion,
very very cheap shot. What do you think three or
three seven, one, three eight, two five five, five seven,
seven three nine.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Zach, what do you think, my friend?
Speaker 6 (05:14):
I think I'm on the other side of this one. Honestly,
it seems you know, I think you're right. It's he
didn't say that he got a call from bill Owens.
I think he was certainly trying to portray that he
had bill owens endorsement, and it seems like that is very,
very far from the truth. And so if that was
(05:36):
the one time he had maybe been he had maybe
stubbed his toe in this manner, I would be more
inclined to overlook it. But considering his panner a pattern,
excuse me of embellishing some of these stories. To me,
it's like, oh, here goes Victor Marx again. Here's another
thing that And I think Kyle Clark's maybe being harsher
(05:58):
than he should, but I do think I think he
was trying to give the listener the view that he
has the bill Owens' endorsement, and that's not the case.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Well, a couple of questions, Sarah, if he had the
bill Owens endorsement, if that call had come from bill Owens,
don't you think you would have said, I got a
call from bill Owens that he's endorsing me to me
when the words are got a call that he's endorsing me.
(06:28):
That just suggests, I don't know any other way to
read it, that somebody in Owen's orbit, or who claims
to be in Owen's orbit, called Victor to say Owens
was endorsing him.
Speaker 6 (06:39):
Agreed, But I think that when put in contrast with
Kusa reaching out and bill Owen saying no, I'm not
endorsing him yet, I actually need to see how his
campaign plays out. A little bit before I make a
decision on that. Meanwhile, you have Mark saying, again, even
if it's someone in his circle, someone called me, and
(06:59):
the way it doesn't sound like.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
Some rando on the street.
Speaker 6 (07:02):
It seems like he's at least implying it's from a
well informed place that he's getting the bill Owens endorsement,
and it seems and maybe Owens just wants to save
that and make that announcement himself, But the way Owens
responded to Kusa seems like that's very far off.
Speaker 1 (07:18):
Yeah, which leads us to the other question I want
to get to, which is do you think Bill Owens
will endorse Victor Marx? But that aside for a second,
to me, it is just so very plausible, and I
don't doubt it for a second that somebody called Victor
Marx and said, hey, bill Owens is going to endorse you.
I mean, there are so many politically active people out there,
(07:39):
so many who claim access they don't have, so many
who have half access, and so many who just choose
to misrepresent things. I don't doubt for a second that
Victor Marks got that call. I just think that if
you're going to be on a major station. You don't
take the position that the candidate is telling the public
(08:02):
that bill Owens has called him to endorse him based
on what we heard there. Yeah, I just think it's unfair.
Let's play it again. Let's play that again.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
Republican gubernatorial candidate Victor Mark suggested today that he's getting
the endorsement of former Governor Bill Owens, the only Republican
governor Colorado's elected in the last fifty five years. That
could go a long way to help unify the divided
Colorado Republican Party, except it doesn't appear to be true.
Speaker 5 (08:28):
You talk about Bill Owens the state and sayday, it's
interesting he was a Republican governor who used common sense.
I got a call yesterday that he's endorsing me.
Speaker 1 (08:39):
For I got a call yesterday that he's endorsing me. Right,
So I think we agree. Victor Marx is in no way,
shape or form suggesting that he got a call from
Bill Owens.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
Agreed.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
Yeah, and he doesn't identify who he got the call from.
So hey, I got a call from Owen's right hand Woeganner.
I got a call from Owen's chief of staff or
anything like that.
Speaker 6 (09:00):
But if I were to call Victor Marx and say, hey,
I think Bill Owens is endorsing you. I don't know
if he would report that, you know, because hey, what
does that kid know? I the fact that he's reporting
it to me makes it seem like it's coming from
a well informed place or something like he's heard this
is coming down the pike. And again it doesn't quite
(09:22):
align with that. I honestly think part of our divide
here is my benefit of the doubt with Victor Marx
is just kind of spent at this point. I need
him to start producing bonafides for these claims. And when
this is another claim that once again can't be verified,
I just kind of roll my eyes and I'm like,
here he goes.
Speaker 1 (09:40):
And I get that, Zach, And you're among many many
people I respect who just don't trust Victor Marx, right,
So I get that, and I appreciate you saying that.
My point is that if there's going to be a
main anchor at a major TV station taking the position
that Victor Marx is lying that, and the way I
(10:00):
heard that report, maybe you heard it different, but the
way I heard that report was Kyle Clark taking the
position that Victor Marx was claiming he got a call
from Bill Owens. Do you think I'm interpreting that report wrong?
Let me know, but I don't think there's anything in
what Victor Mark said that that would support a claim
(10:21):
that he was trying to imply that he got a
call from Bill Owens himself. Three or three someone three
eight two five five. Here's what I want to do, though,
da n five seven seven three nine. I want to
come back and talk about the other half of that,
which is, do you think Governor Owens will endorse Victor Marx?
Do you think that he should? If he does, what
difference do you think that's going to make? After all,
(10:42):
he is the only Republican elected governor in the state
of Colorado in the last fifty five years, and he
had two very successful terms. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 7 (10:57):
Now back to the Dan Kapler Show podcast.
Speaker 8 (11:00):
So I want to bring in Colorado Secretary of State
Jennick Griswolds. Thank you for taking the time. I just
want to start with we don't know exactly what President
Trump will say, but as we've been talking about, he
is expected to discuss what he will frame as new
information on foreign efforts to influence US elections, alleged vulnerabilities,
and election infrastructure, including voting machines. You are a state
elections official, what is your reaction to that?
Speaker 9 (11:23):
Well, firstaf thanks for having me on, and my reaction
is the same as the US senator. Trump is a
sore loser embracing a sore loser strategy. Let me be
very clear, the twenty twenty election was free and fair.
After Trump's lies about the twenty twenty election, over sixty
lawsuits were filed challenging the results. Every single one of
(11:44):
them was lost.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
They were unsuccessful acceptable.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
But what Jenna Chriswold fails to mention is she supported
a Supreme Court lawsuit in fact a lie. Didn't claim
she argued it to the Supreme Court. But she's supported
an action all the way to the Supreme Court to
try to keep Trump off the ballot in Colorado for
(12:11):
contesting the twenty twenty results, and she lost nine zip
saw that says somehow she fails to mention that, and
the host fails to mention that. Remarkable, isn't it? But
but how funny that she would refer to it to
Trump as a sore loser he's won the presidency twice.
(12:33):
How do you put that in the sore loser category?
When in America you're only allowed to win the presidency twice.
He's won the presidency twice. Very few people in American
history have won the presidency twice. What kind of numskull
comment is it to say he's a sore loser. It's remarkable, truly,
(12:53):
especially given her nine zip defeat at the United States
Supreme Court, whereas a guardian of democracy, she was trying
to deprive the people of Colorado of the choice of
voting for the GOP nominee.
Speaker 2 (13:07):
So yeah, but.
Speaker 1 (13:09):
Nothing new from Jenna Griswold. There, Robin Lakewood, you're on
the Dan Kaplis Show.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
Welcome, Hey, Dan, thank you.
Speaker 10 (13:17):
I just want to thank you right up front for
setting a bar for my call. So lo with having
that more onuogenic Jenna Griswold on talking about fraud and
all that stuff. They never mentioned Hillary and Stacy Abrams
and all the other nonsense of election denying and Trump
actually had some legitimate concerns that were raised. But that's
(13:37):
besides the point I'm calling about. Victor Marx and I
would advise Republicans, which I am one to consider the
rationale that I have given people that I know are Democrats.
I said, I don't have a problem with your registration.
You are accountable for how you vote, and if you're
going to vote for a communist or a socialist, that
(13:59):
is on you. You can be a Democrat, but get involved
and try to make the party better. But supporting the
candidacy of these idiot leftists that come along and drag
the rest of us down in our state down and
make us like California, that's inexcusable. Now to the point,
Republicans that are supporting Victor Marx up to this good
(14:19):
day are doing the same thing. Are supporting a flawed candidate.
I don't think he's as bad as a socialist or Democrat,
but he's definitely flawed. And I was on the wrong
side of the twenty ten election with Dan Mays, and
Dan was a good guy, likable guy, a political novice
and rather naive and got himself in over his head.
(14:41):
And I think Victor Marx is in the same boat.
But he has done some things. In listening to your
good past colleague Ryan Schuling, he has done some terrible
things to people that have had interactions, business dealings, acquaintances
and all that, and he doesn't come out and address
it in Republican audiences and says, look at my website,
(15:02):
and I won't go to forums, and like in Douglas County,
I won't go there because Greg Lopez, who I'm supporting
because he's good and knows what's going on, and he's
qualified for the job and he can help conservatives, not
just our part rap.
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Can I ask you a quick question, and that is
I think you'd agree with me that we should never
reject a GOP nominee just because he or she is flawed, right,
because all of our nominees, including those who've been the best,
all of our.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
Nominees are flawed. Right.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
So to me, the key distinction here is between flawed,
which I am absolutely fine with because I am, and
fraud and this question of whether Victor Marks is.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
A fraud, and I'm closer to that right And I
understand then it sounds like you're one of them.
Speaker 1 (15:50):
I understand that a lot of people have concluded he's
a fraud, and a lot of people have concluded he's
not a fraud. I am still trying to gather all
of the evidence, including from Victor.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
To be able to make my own determination.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
And so I think that's this strange space we find
ourselves in.
Speaker 10 (16:09):
Correct, Correct, he hasn't done anything to dissuade that, and
to find people, some of my friends in the party
that support him are sick to fantic in their support.
They don't want to know the facts, They don't want
to know the basic ethical concerns that we as Republicans have.
We didn't vet this character, and he comes out of
the blue.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
Fact.
Speaker 10 (16:29):
I don't know where his involvement with the party, if
he's done anything with the party, But all of a
sudden he's running for governor, like twenty two others that
thought they could do the job, but some of them
didn't even show after they put their hat in the ring,
didn't even show that assembly Well, and.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
Rob, let me jump in for one secondly, because we're
up against the end of it. I think it's a
very unusual race for two reasons. One what we just discussed.
The other is I think the question is still unanswered
as to whether Victor is going to compete state one
wide for the governor's office. And it will be very
(17:06):
very helpful once we get an answer to that question,
it won't resolve the other issues, but it will be
very encouraging to me if we actually see not just words,
but if we actually see action that tells us that
Victor is in fact going to compete statewide for the
governor's office. Because I think one thing that for sure
the Republican Party is entitled to and the people of
(17:28):
the state deserve, is whoever our nominee for whatever office,
they better work there. You know what's off statewide every
day running for that office, no matter what the odds are,
how steep the climb is. It is a sacred obligation
if you're going to decide I want to be the
nominee for treasurer or attorney general or governor of a
(17:50):
major political party, and you win that nomination, which is
campaign brilliantly. Did I believe there's a sacred obligation to
get out there and campaign everywhere, pain hard, and start
fast and finish strong and do not let up until
the final votes counted. Can we all agree on that
we are entitled to that, and we darn well better
(18:13):
see it. I haven't seen it yet. Maybe it's coming.
But what I don't understand is they brilliantly win this campaign.
They've got four or five days notice delay before it's
official to plan. They've got the glow of victory around
Victor when he wins and then he turtles up. Should
(18:36):
have been on every TV station, every radio station, everywhere
at once, taking advantage of the victory.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
That concerns me.
Speaker 7 (18:47):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 3 (18:51):
A political issue, and this is an issue for the
people you cover in the press.
Speaker 11 (18:56):
Yeah, people are talking about this each tonight. We talked
about this, loads of diarrhea cases all across the country,
that it's gross, that it's ugly, that it's bad, that
it shouldn't be going on, that should be stopped.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
But the speech is going forward.
Speaker 11 (19:10):
So the major networks in this country have a really
tough decision to make tonight about how to cover the speech,
whether to show it live, whether to interrupt if the
lies become so serious. I think we just start from
the premise that most Americans disapprove of Trump and don't
believe his election lies, and so it's an environment that
is that is not positive for him. And yet he
(19:33):
has used his government to threaten networks, especially the broadcast
networks and NBC. They're open active investigations into those networks.
Speaker 2 (19:42):
So these broadcasters are I.
Speaker 11 (19:43):
Mean, honestly, right now, Dana, there are hours long meetings
going on at ABC, at NBC, at CBS about what
to do tonight, and none of the networks, not CNN,
none of the networks have commented on how they're going
to handle the speech.
Speaker 1 (19:54):
Well, Brian Stelter, right, we know now, right, and everybody knows,
you cannot trust these networks.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
You can't trust them to be remotely fair.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
I mean, look at the way the networks rig the
twenty twenty election. And I'm not talking about election integrity.
I'm talking about the networks censoring a true, explosive story
that would have changed the outcome, which is obviously the
Hunter Biden laptop story. That's how the networks rig the
twenty twenty election. I think very very likely that if
(20:26):
there's true broad reporting on that true story, which would
have been the case, if it would have been harmful
to the Republican candidate, the outcome.
Speaker 2 (20:35):
Of that election changes. I think that's what's likely to happen.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
So of course, these networks are going to do everything
they possibly can to disadvantage Trump, and then this business
about Stelter about Americans disapprove of Trump, etc. I don't
think you can read anything conclusive at all into popular
polling on President Trump. He has defied it repeatedly. What
Stelter leaves out is he's a two term president, right,
(21:02):
He's just like Jenna Griswold. That bizarre national media clip
I played earlier in the show where she's calling Trump
a loser.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
Trump's been elected president twice.
Speaker 1 (21:12):
How many people in world history have been That's not
the definition of loser. He happens to be in the
middle of his second term.
Speaker 2 (21:19):
Now.
Speaker 1 (21:19):
The definition of loser is Jenna Griswold trying to deprive
Coloradins of their democratic rights and their franchise by going
to the Supreme Court backing a case that would have
kept Trump off the ballot, would have deprived Coloradins of
even the ability to vote for Trump. And she got
beaten nine zip, even just as Jackson was against her.
Speaker 2 (21:41):
I think that's the definition.
Speaker 1 (21:43):
Of loser right there, not because she lost nine zip
but the US Supreme Court though.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
That's a tough loss, right, And why is that?
Speaker 1 (21:52):
Can you explain to me if she's gonna lie and
lie about arguing a case before the US Supreme Court,
which you apparently did lie about that she never has.
Why would you lie and say you argued a case
that was lost nine zip.
Speaker 10 (22:10):
Yeah.
Speaker 6 (22:10):
It's like you get a line in saying, uh, yeah,
you know, I used to be a D one college athlete.
You know I lost played in one game, lost seventy
seven to nothing, and.
Speaker 2 (22:18):
That was it, right right? Right?
Speaker 1 (22:20):
Yeah? Or lying and say you played D one at
Slippery Rock when it went oh to fourteen, right exactly?
Speaker 7 (22:25):
You might as well embellish a little if you're got mbellish.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (22:28):
But in authors, obviously in America has figured it out.
Whether they you love or hate Trump or you're somewhere
in between, America's figured out that that the media overall,
and certainly the major networks are not going to be
fair to the president. They're going to be dishonest about him.
It doesn't mean everything they report about him is dishonest,
but they are very very often dishonest about him. So
(22:50):
we'll find out together. You know what the new evidence
is that the President presents tonight. I can't wait to
see it, can't wait to talk about it tomorrow let's go.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Down to jail in the valley. You're on the Dan
Kaplis Show. Welcome Jay, Hello Dan. I appreciate listening to you.
Speaker 12 (23:07):
I'm being able to listen to you a while. I
don't really know all the laws about Colorado, but I was.
I started out encouraged against our for Victor, but he
seems to be hiding behind the curtain too much and
not coming through and the you know, the innuendos of life.
So I'm just really disappointed. And so I just wondered,
(23:28):
I know it would be a hard, hard time, but
is it possible to get a right in candidate?
Speaker 1 (23:37):
And I'll hang out, But well, Chay, thank you, and
CREATI have you back. No, no writings have no chance.
Independents have no chance. It's that simple. So it's a
matter now of the GOP nominee and whether you're going
to back him if you happen to be a member
of the GOP starting point question, and it would be
(24:01):
so unusual I think for somebody who happens to be
a registered Republican to not back the nominee. Is Victor
won Farren square in that primary, I think it would
take something really big at least for me, But I
would imagine most people to not back the party's nominee.
(24:21):
And at least that's the way I think it should be.
It should take something really big. Do we have something
really big here that would justify that. I'm still trying
to figure that out now. I do think that one
broader problem we've had in the GOP has been that
historically you get some pretty significant blocks of folks who
(24:42):
do not back the nominee if the nominee wasn't their choice.
So right off the bat and whatever race that is
that the GOP has already lost because mathematically the only
chance the GOP has to win statewide is to have
a near fully unified GOP. But yeah, that's the situation
right here. And then the other issue with Victor is
(25:04):
if he is the bad thing some people claim, then
it could do a lot of damage to the ticket
up and down. So yeah, that's the very unusual place
we find ourselves. And then we open the show with
that fascinating story that Bill Owens, Governor Owens, who had
those great two terms in office, only Republican governor in
the last fifty five years, that Governor Owens has said
(25:28):
Jerry's out. He's he's waiting to determine whether he's going
to back Victor, you know, and he wants to see
how Victor campaigns and how his campaign rolls out before
he makes that decision. So that's fascinating, and i'd love
your take on what impact do you think it would
have on the race if Governor Owens did endorse Victor
three all three seven, one three eight two five five
(25:48):
d An five seven seven.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Three nine Listen.
Speaker 1 (25:51):
I don't think it's Governor Owens' responsibility to make an
endorsement or not. I don't think that burdens on him,
but I think that if he does, it's going to
matter a lot in GOP circles, and I think it'll
matter to a fair number of unaffiliateds. I think Bill
Owens respected across party lines for very good reason, so
(26:13):
it'll be interesting to see what he does there.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
I do want to get to some of these texts.
They are explosive today.
Speaker 1 (26:19):
Dan, isn't the jury still out on whether Victor Marx
ever tells the truth? You, Dan, are still trying to
make sense of this joke called Victor Marx. Hey, that's
my job. And whether I was on air or not,
I know I'd be doing the same thing. I'd be
trying to figure out, Hey, are the allegations true or not,
because we either have and I think this is one
(26:41):
of the most interesting things I've ever seen in politics.
Speaker 2 (26:44):
We either have one of the most.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
Admirable people to ever enter Colorado politics, or we have
a fraud. I don't think there's a lot of gray area,
and I think people are innocent until proven guilty. But
I think when somebody chooses to run for governor and
there are facts out there that raise these fair questions,
(27:05):
I think it's incumbent on the candidate to come forward
and address those head on, put out, make the best
case the candidate can make that these accusations are false,
provide as much information as possible, and then let the
people decide. And I understand, listen to a candidate who
has won a major party nomination. That's a big deal,
(27:28):
and that candidate has a right to say, no, I'm
not going to do that.
Speaker 2 (27:32):
I'm not going to address those allegations.
Speaker 1 (27:35):
And if in this case, Victor decides to go that route,
what's any reasonable person going to conclude? Three out three
seven to one, three eight two five five d an
five seven seven three nine. I hope he does address him.
I hope he addresses him successfully. I hope we can
all back him full throated. We know that it's going
to be a tough race anyway, but you'd sure like
(27:56):
to mount the very.
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Best effort possible.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
Which brings me back to an earlier point of mine,
and this is really starting to concern me. Is Victor
going to compete for the governor's office? Is he going
to compete statewide for the governor's office. I'm concerned that
we didn't see an explosive out of the gate effort
every TV station, every radio show that would take him
(28:20):
when he won the primary, which was very impressive, very
odd to me that he didn't take advantage of that
and wasn't everywhere at once, because in an uphill climb
like Colorado, for any Republican, you need every bit of
exposure you can get to the voters, particularly free exposure.
Speaker 2 (28:39):
Welcome back.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
There are a ton of email and that. I also
want to talk about the President's speech tonight. Some of
the previews on that we're starting to hear have some
very interesting sound about a Florida woman very angry about
a sexual type license plate she was randomly issued and
see if that would get you upset here on the
Dan Kapla.
Speaker 7 (28:59):
Show and now back to the Dan Kapler Show podcast.
Speaker 10 (29:08):
We don't believe that the gunman, Thomas Crooks, didn't act alone.
Speaker 13 (29:12):
I don't believe there was another shooter there, but I
believe that he was working with somebody. I believe it
was inside. It was an inside job inside the government somewhere.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
And this was political.
Speaker 13 (29:30):
Oh yeah, politically absolutely, yep, yep.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
Have you seen evidence to that?
Speaker 3 (29:38):
Oh?
Speaker 13 (29:38):
I've been told things, but I've had something that happened
with me that just afterwards and you're starting to put
the pieces together, it just made total sense.
Speaker 2 (29:53):
It had to be, right, didn't that one have to
be an inside job?
Speaker 1 (29:59):
Is there any any other explanation for it?
Speaker 2 (30:03):
To me?
Speaker 1 (30:03):
It remains one of the most baffling things in my lifetime,
is why we haven't heard more about that even after
President Trump than won his second term. And I trust
Trump completely on this, but just logically looking at this,
there's no way Crooks can get in that position without
somebody helping him on the inside.
Speaker 2 (30:24):
Right, got different theory? Let me know?
Speaker 1 (30:28):
Three O three seven one three eight two five five
D five seven, seven three nine one things for sure,
though I think he was almost certing to win anyway.
President Trump won the election in that Butler field that afternoon,
in the way that he handled being shot and the chaos.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
Of the moment.
Speaker 1 (30:44):
I mean, very very very few people would have been
able to handle it that way, and it's said an
awful lot, I think to all Americans, including those who
hate him, when he did so. He won the election
that afternoon, and beyond that, I think he won credibility
and important influence worldwide that I think is helping him
in a second term. It doesn't make all the problems
(31:05):
go away or cause Hitler esque type evil in Iran
to just say okay, whatever you want, but I think
it helps in lots of different ways. So we're going
to keep previewing the President's addressed to the nation tonight
on election integrity. There'll be a mention of Iran and
other things, but focus is going to be election integrity.
Early reports are seeing the President's going to present evidence
(31:28):
of China interfering in the twenty twenty election, which can
mean a lot of different things, right from buying social
media to actually they taking tangible steps to affect the.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Integrity of Volk counting.
Speaker 1 (31:42):
I have no idea what the President's evidence is going
to be on that, but all indications area it's going
to have something to do with China. I don't think
there's one sane person on the face of the earth
who would doubt that the Communist Party of China would
fix our election if they could. I don't expect the
President to and evidence tonight that they did, but they
(32:02):
would if they could, and they, sure heck would have
fixed it against Donald J. Trump because if you're the
Communist Party of China, obviously you want Joe Biden rather
than Donald Trump. But that does not mean the Communist
Party of China was able to rig that election.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
Zach Man, do you think.
Speaker 6 (32:20):
This means that the all the war knock and asoff
speculation was for nothing or do you think that will
be a part of this, because I remember early on
week it seemed like a lot of the buzz was Georgia,
expecting it would be about this, not just Georgia even,
but those specific races in Georgia.
Speaker 1 (32:36):
Yeah, you know, it may be a cornucopia, It may
be a bunch of different things. To me, what I'm
looking for, like everybody else, is evidence, not theories. Evidence
and the strength of the evidence. Yeah, but I wouldn't
be surprised if if there were different components to this.
Speaker 6 (32:55):
Yeah, that makes sense, especially with how much he's hyping
it up. This is a topic he's touched on before,
so for this to be a special unveiling, I keep
thinking there has to be some extra wrinkle, some new evidence.
There has to be something to justify all the fanfare, and.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
I think that's good logical thinking.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
I would disagree with that, though, because I think we
do have precedent with this president of over promising when
it comes to certain things, you know, particularly on this topic,
and then we just get more series rather than concrete
evidence because he truly believes, he truly believes to the
(33:34):
core of his soul, that that election was stolen. Now,
at other times we have President Trump hypes something really
big and he delivers, and he delivers more than expected.
Speaker 2 (33:45):
So I just know which. I don't know which it's
going to be tonight, true mystery box. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Yeah, I think I'd err on the side of it
being underwhelming tonight. For this reason that I think election fraud,
which happens. I haven't seen proof it happen on the
scale to change the outcome of the election, but it happens.
I think election fraud is one of the hardest things
on the face of the earth to prove.
Speaker 2 (34:14):
Crimes are easy to prove. How do you prove election fraud.
Speaker 7 (34:18):
Because there's the two steps of it.
Speaker 6 (34:19):
It's like, Okay, it's one thing if there's some funky ballots,
and like you said, that's concerning.
Speaker 2 (34:24):
There should be zero election fraud ideally.
Speaker 6 (34:26):
But it's one thing if there's you know, a hundred
ballots in an election that are funny. It's a different
thing if it swung the election, And I think that's
the thing that's.
Speaker 1 (34:36):
Harder to prove. Or let's say that it was I'm
just talking theoretically. Let's say that it was occurring on
a large scale, and this example with mal in ballots
that had been you know, stolen or counterfeited and then completed.
If the criminal or the criminal enterprise or the foreign
(34:58):
state whatever is smart enough to do that and smart
enough to disperse them throughout a state, how do you
prove it? How do you identify it? Then how do
you prove the link? Yeah, they and I'm not saying
the absence of proof means the election was stolen, not
at all. I'm just saying that it's got to be
one of the toughest things to prove.
Speaker 6 (35:20):
It reminds me that I do a lot of the
sports stuff over on KOA. It reminds me of the
story with Russell Wilson, and there were these emails between
owners that seemed like they were maybe colluding to limit
how big these quarterback contracts were getting or how much
guaranteed money they were getting. And they had the records
of all the communications, but they couldn't prove collusion because
(35:42):
you have to not only prove the communication happened, but
that the communication and collusion was the reason they behaved
the way they did. It's kind of that's what this
election thing makes me think of. It's that second step.
Speaker 1 (35:52):
And I'll tell you how you prove stuff like that,
because I've spent forty two years of my life in
my real job as a lawyer victims LAK.
Speaker 2 (36:00):
I'll tell you you prove that the way we prove it.
Speaker 1 (36:03):
You get people under oaths, you bring in document examiners,
you bring in forensic experts, you devote enormous amounts of
time and money, but you've got the power to get
people under oath. When you're investigating an election fraud like this,
it's very hard to get that kind of power, and
I'll expand on that
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
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