In the first hour of today's edition of The Dan Caplis Show, Kristi Burton Brown fills in for Dan to discuss how the first 100 days of President Donald Trump's second term have gone.
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 Caplis 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.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
What is the Dan Capitalist Show today? I'm Christy Burton
Brown in for Dan as he is in a trial.
So we have so many things nationally and in the
States to cover today, especially with the state legislature sets
to close next.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
Wednesday, May seventh will be the final day.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
They still have a believe over two hundred bills yet
to get through. A number of business bills still the
labor bill with the unions in the business community that
is still on the table. Deals attempting to be made,
but well we'll see where that goes. There's an artificial
intelligence bill. Basically the legislature created a complete disaster for
companies using algorithms and AI tools last year, and Polis
(00:56):
actually issued a signing statement when he signed the bill,
as he often does, saying how much he disagreed with
the bill and how it wasn't really good and he
expected them to fix it in future sessions. My personal
recommendation would be like, don't sign the bill if it's
not a good bill. Anyway, he did sign it, issued
that statement this year. They didn't introduce all the fixes
until a couple days ago, fifty eight pages worth of fixes,
(01:19):
and that is definitely there under the gun to see
if they can actually get that done. A lot of
technology companies obviously think that the current law is unworkable.
It's not an effect that at the moment supposed to
go into effect, I believe next year.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
So when it speak of the business community.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
It's that labor bill and then this artificial intelligence bill
with potential fixes on the table to the big last
bills for that but a bill it's garnered a bunch
of attention, not only here in Colorado, but across the
nation on at possibly every TV station in the nation
has been HB twenty five, thirteen twelve. There were over
(01:57):
seven hundred people who went and down to the Capitol
last night. They didn't end the hearing until about one
thirty this morning. Now what that means is that the
chair of the committee actually limited testimony. They didn't hear
from anywhere near the seven hundred people who showed up.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Because this is what they do.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
They're like, oh my goodness, hundreds of people here to
be against our bills.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
We're gonna limit testimony.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
They limited it to eight hours, still at extremely long
testimony time, but nowhere near covering the people who would
have been willing to testify. It's my view that they
should not be allowed to limit testimony.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
I don't think they should be able to cut it off.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
There are so few bills during the legislative session where
hundreds of people show up to testify on one side
or the other that I genuinely think legislators should not
be allowed to limit time.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Like Brian, what do you think?
Speaker 4 (02:43):
Well, I just spoke with Aaron Lee about this.
Speaker 5 (02:45):
She was there, obviously, she testified, and it seemed to
be a conservative estimate three to one those testifying against
versus those testified four. However, they made sure to divvate
up fifty to fifty, so everyone that testified for it,
there was one or those for everyone that testified against.
My question would be kb be the following if the
numbers were the opposite. If three times as many had
(03:09):
shown up to testify in favor of this Democrat led
bill compared to one portion as much would they have
split it fifty to fifty.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Well, it is up to the chair, So the chair
is the one who gets to make the call. I'm
not sure who the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee
is offhand, I can't think of it, but it really
is up to them. So I think if they were
being fair and accurate, it would literally either be a
first come, first serve. Whoever signs up, whatever side you're on,
you show up, you get to testify in what order
you signed up. Either that is fair or yes, divide
(03:38):
it by number. If you're gonna live in a testimony, you
should divide it fairly based on the proportion of people.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
Who come on both sides to show up. And I
just just not what they do.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
They want to make it appear like, oh, what a
difficult bill. There's an equal number of people on both sides,
and then when they limit to eight hours.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
They can make it look like that.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
And so that's yet another reason Ryan that I think
they should not be allowed to limit testimony. If you
have hundreds of people show up, they are your constituents.
You are hired to listen to them. But whenever they
can be like, okay, got to sit here, through eight hours,
but then we're done. It really limits the effect that
these people's well thought out testimonies stories. I mean, not
ever from one of them are well thought out, but
(04:18):
by and large they are. These are people who took
off work to show up at one point thirty in
the afternoon on.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
A weekday to tell their legislators what they think.
Speaker 4 (04:26):
It's such a scam that they present. Ah, it's fifty
to fifty flip could go either way here.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
No, And I mean and I don't think there's a
single reporter out here in the state who would buy that.
Like literally, it's the Democrat chair of the committee who
wants to make it look like that.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
But everyone who's ware this bill is well aware. The Huges.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Hugest side on this bill is the opposition. Oh yeah,
like usually people are. I can't think of a time
when there's that many people who want a law to
pass and show up to support it. It's almost always
opposition that you see in these huge numbers on any
type of bill. Like think back to the vaccine mandate
bills that came down in Colorado and how many hundreds
of moms showed up to testify against that. This is
(05:02):
like a similar feel. Even though there's even hundreds more
people on this one. There are actually a lot of
pastors and churches that activated across the state on this.
I think here's what's important actually about thirteen twelve and
all the hundreds of people, even though they weren't all
given opportunity to testify, even though it was made to
look equal, even though it clearly wasn't. Here's what I
think really matters. The core piece of this bill that
(05:25):
would have taken away custody from parents who did not
want to let their child transition and become transgender, who
wanted to kind of, you know, pursue other solutions with
their child. As many mental health professionals say, that's exactly
what you should do. When you have a child thinking
that you know they have gender dysphoria, you go get
them help, You go get them counseling. You slow walk
(05:47):
them through the mental health process instead of rushing them
into surgery, rushing them into a public gender transition that
then becomes very difficult for a child or a teenager
to publicly walk back when they change their mind and
to detransition, which just happened to so many kids out
there who you know, basically change their mind at too
young of an age. A lot of these kids are
out there talking about it now, you know, in their
(06:07):
early twenties, saying this was all pushed on my parents,
It was pushed on me. It wasn't the solution I needed,
and those voices are drowned out and pushed to the side.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
What this bill would have done is if you're a.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
Parent who you know, sees that on the horizon, all
the d transitioners as they're called, all the kids who
are rushed into it, and are.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
Like, I don't want to rush my child.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
I'm not willing to just say, oh, sure, be whatever
gender you want. I'm going to keep the name I
gave you that you were bored with. I'm going to, like,
you know, keep you the biological gender that you actually are.
Speaker 3 (06:35):
What this bill would have.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
Done is taken away custody from those parents in a
custody battle. It were given the judge every single right
to call that coercive control and put it on the
on par with actual physical abuse of a child, to
treat it exactly the same and say, if you are.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
Not willing to basically submit to your child and say
you want a transition. Absolutely will do whatever you want
if you're not willing to do that.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
The state of Colorado was trying to gain the power
to take your child away from you. That is why
thirteen twelve got all this national tension, It's why it's
gotten so much attention here in Colorado. And the victory
last night, despite how the hearing was handled, is that
the entire section of the bill that dealt with the
custody issues and parental rights was stripped out of the bill,
so it did pass committee. There's still terrible things in
(07:19):
the bill. I don't agree with it. It doesn't treat
schools right. It still has some just bad language in it,
bad policies that a lot of conservatives are going to
disagree with. But the key portion of the bill that
would have taken kids away.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
From parents is gone. That is a huge victory.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
I could name a whole host of people who deserve
a lot of credit for fighting on this bill. Ryan,
you mentioned Aaron Lee, I know dev Flora has been
speaking out about it. Jarvis Caldwell, a representative, has been
absolutely key in the fight against this, and really I
could go down a list. I know that I am
not naming near the number of people who heavily engaged
on this.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
I'll say, as an evangelical myself.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
I was extremely happy to see the number of parrot
of pastors.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Actually sorry, who kind.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
Of woke up and are like, wow, this is a
huge cultural issue in Colorado, and often pastors are any
religious leaders are pushed to say this is political, you
can't speak out, leave politics to this side, And nothing
could be further from the truth. Why does anyone get
to say, oh, this issue is political, therefore you as
a religious leader have no right to talk about it.
(08:21):
Like issues have sort of invaded every era of our society.
If they're political, there's also a religious component, there's also
a cultural component. There's every piece of the issue, and
religious leaders need to speak out.
Speaker 5 (08:32):
More because KBB, as we know, this has a foundation
in atheist marxistm a separation of children from their parents
as wards of the state to garner power and control.
And therefore, KBB, to your point, this is the religion
of the less. Yeah, this trans ideology is part of
their faith, their religion, so of course those of faith,
(08:56):
like yourself, evangelical pastors should be speaking out against this.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
Lily, And to your point, Ryan, the U Supreme Court
has defined religious beliefs as sincerely held beliefs basically that
guide someone's life. But that's the phrase that you sincerely
held beliefs, and so people love to be like, oh, well, hey,
if you don't actually.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Believe in a god, it's not a religion, and it's no.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Sometimes they hold onto their beliefs just as strongly as
people with religion hold onto theirs, and they don't get
a pass. They don't be Oh, you can preach and
teach any elements of atheism and secularism in our public
schools and our politics, and that's not an establishment of religion.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
It's a dogma it.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Is, and it's the interpretation of how that's applied as
a constitution. Will trade myself, I feel like it's really
been messed over in our n issue. We need to
get back to the roots of what the First Amendment
actually means. So I'm very happy that there were a
lot of religious leaders, a lot of pastors who came
out spoke up, and huge win last night. Still not
a great bill, but we should take the win and
say sometimes when hundreds of people show up and hundreds
(09:52):
of people activates, thousands actually across the state who did
something good things happen and we at least limited the
damage to parental rights.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
I'm Christy Burton Brown in for Dan Kaplis today.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
He is in trial, whishes he could be with you
all when we come back on the other side of this.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
Break, We're going to talk to John Fabricatory about the.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
Dangerous sanctuary state policies still going on here in Colorado.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
Six thirty K how and iheartrate and now back to
the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
Burton Brown.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
One of the key issues that remains in the news
nearly every day, it seems, is the issue of Colorado's
sanctuary state status. A recent raid conducted in Colorado Springs
that discovered over one hundred illegal immigrants present, many of
whom members of the MS thirteen gang that the Trendiogua
gang from Venezuela. Just so many people getting arrested who
(10:48):
never should have been here in the first place, and
certainly shouldn't still be here with their criminal records. But
to talk about all the issues related to colorado sanctuary
state status, including a new bill going through the state
legislature right now, I'm going to bring on John fabricatory
in just a moment.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
He has quite the resume.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
If you haven't heard of him, you definitely should have,
and I'm sure going to hear a lot more about
him in the future. He did run for Congress in
CD six here in Colorado, but prior to that.
Speaker 3 (11:13):
He is a US Air Force veteran.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
He also, in his role with ICE, oversaw the rollout
of Operation Opioid Counter Strike. Just knows so insanely much
about this issue. True expert John, Welcome to the Dan
Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
Hey, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Christy Absolutely well, I'd love for you just to break
some of this down for our listeners. Why exactly are
we seeing all of these raids in Colorado right now?
I think there's a lot of attention from the federal
government on Colorado due to our sanctuary state status, But
they're finding people despite the claims of you know, some
of the elected liberals in the state who think we've
(11:51):
been doing a great job.
Speaker 6 (11:53):
Yeah, you know, absolutely, Look, Colorado is a sanctuary jurisdiction.
The governor can lie at it and say it's not.
You know, people on the left can say it's not,
but we.
Speaker 4 (12:04):
Know it is.
Speaker 7 (12:04):
We've been looking at all the.
Speaker 6 (12:05):
Legislation that some passed since twenty thirteen, we can identify
numerous laws that have gone through the state House, making
this a very very solid sanctuary jurisdiction. Because of that,
we have a lot of illegal foreign born entities that
wind up in this state because they know they can
operate because of the sanctuary status. But we have identified
(12:27):
two cartels that operate in the state of Colorado. We
know that there are multiple gangs like MS thirteen Trenderagenos.
We know these gangs around there, and we know that
they operate with impunity because this state has sailed the
United States citizens in this state by toddling illegal immigration
(12:49):
and allowing these criminal alliens to set up shop inside Colorado.
Speaker 7 (12:53):
And what we saw this last weekend with.
Speaker 6 (12:55):
Law enforcement finally being able to get together because of
the Trump ADMNST they were able to join forces multiple
federal jurisdictions and local jurisdictions and take down a very
large operation in a club in which there was prostitution,
sex trafficking, drug trafficking, guns that were that were found
on the property. And because of that operation, Colorado is
(13:18):
safer today.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
Yeah, absolutely, And I think this is what happens when
you get someone in office who actually cares about the
issue that people care about. I mean, immigration being the
number two issue in the presidential election, and Trump certainly
delivering on it, even in states like Colorado that you know,
it didn't have a majority of people vote for him,
but a majority of people who want violent criminals and
felons taken out of our state. And we're talking to
(13:40):
John Fabricatory, an expert on all issues sanctuary state, worked
for ICE, veteran of the US Air Force. John, I
want to ask you about the bill going through the
legislature right now. You and I kind of mentioned Colorado
already has three sanctuary state laws, but it's my understanding
the current law would extend the state requirements on law enforcement,
basically banning them from working with ICE, and extend it
(14:02):
to every single local jurisdiction in the state and then
sign them is they do decide to work with ICE
at all. What have you heard about this bill?
Speaker 6 (14:10):
Yeah, Christy, it's absolutely maddening. And you know I went
and testified against it when it was over at the Senate.
You know, the Democrats didn't even pay attention to one
thing that I had to say. You know, I've been
raising alarms on this for months that this was going
to happen, that the Democrats were going to double down
on sanctuary status inside Colorado. But to be honest with you,
(14:32):
I didn't even think it was going to be as
bad as it is. They went overboard with this bill
and trying to solidify how strongly they want Colorado to
be a sanctuary state, to even make it stronger with
probation and parole not being able to talk to Ice
about paroles and probationers that are being let out onto
(14:54):
the street. And you and I both know what does
it take for someone to get to probation and.
Speaker 7 (14:59):
Parole a conviction, right, Well, they just don't want.
Speaker 6 (15:02):
To stop convicted criminal illegal aliens from being deported. It's
sick what the Democrats are doing with this bill. They're
only solidifying making Colorado a total clamp down a sanctuary state.
And you know what, Donald Trump is going to withhold
money from this state. He's going to make sure that,
you know, the federal government still gets in here and
(15:23):
does the job that it needs to do.
Speaker 7 (15:25):
But really, we need to continue to push.
Speaker 6 (15:27):
Back against the Democrats and what they're trying to do
to this state.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
Yeah, knowing you're right.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
I mean, I think in many ways, Colorado's definitely in
the cross air, so to speak, of the Trump administration
because Phil Wiser's.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
Running for governor right now.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Mike Johnson, mayor of Denver, kind of making a career
out of like defying the Trump administration. Out of one
side of their mouth and then the other side of
their mouth, they're like, oh, don't cut our federal funds.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
Well, hey, is that how it works?
Speaker 2 (15:48):
If you defy a federal administration, you are going to
lose funds.
Speaker 3 (15:51):
And did I hear right, John?
Speaker 2 (15:52):
That Denver just lost was a twenty four million dollars
from the federal government.
Speaker 6 (15:56):
Yes, okay, between twenty four and thirty million dollars. We're
still trying to figure it out exactly what uh you
know that that that's.
Speaker 7 (16:04):
Going to be with the total loss.
Speaker 6 (16:06):
You know, I fort an article a few weeks ago
about a couple of million dollars that uh, Denver is
going to be losing out on in SCAP funds, which
are which are criminal allien funds from from criminal alliens
that are being held in local jurisdiction jails. The city
at Denver has neglected to even put that money forward
to try to get money for their SCAP funding for
over the last six years. But on top of that,
(16:28):
the federal government is going to have taken away anyway
from all jails within Colorado, so none of the jails
will be able to get reimbursed for criminal illegal aliens
that they hold. So who knows what this number is
actually going to look like at the end of the day.
But Colorado deserves it. They deserve it for what they're
trying to do.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
They deserve it.
Speaker 6 (16:45):
For forgetting about American citizens and only caring about illegal
aliens and criminal illegal alliance.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
On top of that, Yeah, and John.
Speaker 2 (16:53):
I think to your point, this a new bill that
who knows what's going to get through or not or
in the last less than a weekend session. But this
bill actually says any local jurisdiction that violates the provisions
of the bill, and you know, dares to coordinate with Ice,
even with a violent criminal riff he fellon drug dealer,
any of that, they will get.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
Fined fifty thousand dollars. And this fifty thousand dollars will
go into an immigrant and defense fund.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
So they're not even putting it in a fund that
would make Colorado safer. Instead, they're going to put yet
even more money into people who aren't supposed to be
here in the first place. I think that's hugely egregious
and no wonder Colorado's, you know, the third most dangerous
state in the nation according to you, has to do.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Wh's in a world report.
Speaker 6 (17:31):
I don't know what world that the left lives on,
this crazy, bonkers world where it's okay to be a
criminal illegal alien. But you know, and if an American
citizen notifies ICE about that criminal illegal alien, the American
citizen gets fined.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Right.
Speaker 6 (17:47):
It is incredible that we're even thinking about this and
that the Democrats want to get it past.
Speaker 3 (17:52):
It really is.
Speaker 6 (17:53):
John.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Thank you for coming on the show, Dan Kaplis's show
and breaking it down for us. Hope to have you
back another time. Thanks so much. Thanks all right, that
was John fabricatory expert on ICE the sanctuary state policies.
Speaker 3 (18:04):
He's against them.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
If she didn't figure it out, I'm Christy Burton Brown
here on the Dan Kaplis Show. You can call in
over the break eight five five four zero five eight
two five five or text your thoughts to five seven seven,
three nine.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
Start it with Dan.
Speaker 4 (18:25):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast of China.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Actually, I want to talk about China in this segment,
so as usual, you are on the right wavelength with
your music. I'm Christy Burton Brown here on the Dan
Kaplis Show, and certainly one of the biggest fights going
on right now is the US in China. Every day
there's another front in this battle. Of course, not an
actual military war yet and hopefully won't turn into that.
But an interesting thing released in the news today. Should
(18:50):
go see if you can find it online. The CIA
is not keeping in a secret that they are pushing
videos into China. You should go see if you can
find these videos actually pretty interesting that are trying to
recruit Chinese dissidents, ideally people who are actually involved in
the Chinese Communist Party the CCP, as well as Chinese
military Chinese government, which pretty much the CCP and the
(19:12):
government are one and the same, but trying to find
these Chinese dissidents and recruit them to come over and
spy for the United States. CIA saying that this exact
same effort. Of course, the videos look a little different,
but exact same effort has been successful recently in Russia.
They are now trying and I believe in North Korea
and China, saying that they're confident they are penetrating the
Great Firewall that China has erected on their Internet to
(19:35):
try and block messages from the US. But CIA believes
they will have good success with this, having inside spies
in the Chinese Communist Party. One of the reasons they're
pushing it right now is because Jijingping, the president of China,
has sort of done a purge and he's kind of
in the middle of it right now of specifically military
leaders who were thought to be loyal to him, were
(19:57):
somewhat well liked in the CCP ranks. He's getting rid
of them, including people who were known to have been
done doing at least in China's perspective, a good job,
and he's just getting rid of them.
Speaker 3 (20:09):
I'm not exactly sure where he's putting.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Them, what he's doing with them, if they're being executed,
hidden away since to labor camps, I'm not sure anyone
really knows at this point, or maybe just demoted, although
that's kind of overly positive thinking for China, but that's
what he's doing right now, and so the CIA is
predicting that there's going to be some level of disappointment
disillusionment with the government inside China.
Speaker 3 (20:28):
They're trying to capitalize on it.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
But CIA trying to recruit spies is only a very
small part of this sort of cold war with China
going on right now. I think I've been very interested
in it, looking into it, reading a lot about it.
The tariffs, of course, are top of mind for a
lot of people, but one of the areas they've actually
had good results in is in rare earths. I don't
(20:51):
know how many of you have heard of rare earths,
but I guarantee you you have heard of smartphones. Are
probably holding one in your hand right now or looking
at it as you drive, I hope not. But your smartphone,
your electric vehicle, the wind turbins we see up on
the Eastern Plains in Colorado, so many products that we
actually use or see on a daily basis. Combined that
with a lot of military technology, including drones. So they
(21:12):
use these things called permanent magnets. They are the strongest
magnets on Earth, and they are made from rare earth elements,
so rare elements.
Speaker 3 (21:21):
That's it getsy technical hair.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
But there are a set of seventeen elements or minerals
or metals that are found in the earth.
Speaker 3 (21:26):
They're not actually rare.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
They're actually they have greater abundance than gold and silver
actually on the Earth's crust, but they often are combined
with radioactive elements. They are hard to separate. That's partly
why they're called rare is because of how hard.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
It is to mine them.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
But when they were discovered a few decades ago or
at least, and the mining ability was created, it is
a very chemical intensive process.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Basically, you do pollute the earth to mine these minerals.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
And so nobody is surprised by the idea that China
jumped in and is like, well, we'll go ahead and
do it. And so there's these areas of China that
are actually periencing these landslides chemical erosion into one of
their main water supplies, the Yellow River actually is expected
to get polluted in the very near future with all
these chemicals.
Speaker 3 (22:08):
But what they're doing is they have been able.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
To process over seventy percent of the world's rare earth.
So the US is hugely reliant on China for the
production of these rare earth metals that are now essential
components in our electric vehicle batteries, in our smartphones, in
military technology, military communication systems, and all these really things
(22:30):
that are vital.
Speaker 3 (22:30):
To national security.
Speaker 2 (22:32):
So when Trump enacted the tariffs on China, China nearly
immediately said, fine, We're no longer going to export six
of these rare earth elements to the US anymore, go
find them yourselves, and so obviously attempting to put the
US in an early tough spot. But if you in
paying attention to the stock market, you will see that
there are a number of these rare earth companies that
are actually actually benefiting right now from this tariff, these tariffs,
(22:57):
because they are now growing, expanding, getting investors poorn money
into them so that we can prop up more processing facilities,
manufacturing plants here in the US. There's currently only one
rare earth mine in the United States that specific mine,
and the processing facility had been sending over fifty percent
of the rare earth to China for processing, because China
(23:18):
processes over seventy percent of the rare earths in the
world and we don't do as much here in the US.
As soon as the tariffs were enacted, that company made
an announcement and said, we are pulling back from China entirely.
Keep in mind this company also was getting ninety percent
of their revenue from China. You know, they're an American company.
As soon as the tariffs were enacted, they said, it's
no longer worth it for us to do business in China.
We're going to bring it all back home to the US.
(23:40):
We do have a processing plant I think in California.
Their mine is in Texas and they are sending it
all in house in the US. And then there's all
these other rare earth companies that have been starting and
now all these.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
Investments are just dumping into them.
Speaker 2 (23:52):
Some of them have recently become public, been put on
the stock market, the Stock and Market Exchange.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
So really good news, honestly for the US. It's going
to take a few years to up, I think. So
it's a good thing.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
Some of our allies have these rare earth mineral stores,
and we have other ways of getting them besides China.
But what the should drive home is the whole entire
point of Trump doing these tariffs, which would bring manufacturing
back to the United States when it comes to critical components.
We should not be relying on China to mine and process,
in manufacture permanent magnets that we need in aerospace technology
(24:25):
and national security, and also in the phones we hold
in the vehicles we drive every day. So I think
for all the talk about the tariffs, in my view,
Trump probably should not have handled it the way he
did with announcing tariffs on all these other nations. I
think you should have handled it differently with our allies.
But the real point being to bring manufacturing back home
to the United States, to end our absolute reliance on
(24:47):
China for so many components and materials. I think we're
going to see him be very successful in that pursuit,
and we're already seeing it in this really, really key
area of rare earth that affects national security in huge
ways or than most of us have ever heard. You
can definitely do a deep dive in rare earths out
there if you want to do it.
Speaker 3 (25:04):
I'm Christy Britton Brown. You're on the Dan Kaplis Show.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
Speaking of trump big change in his administration today removing
Mike Waltz from his position as National Security Advisor. Now
Trump is nominating him to serve as the UN ambassador.
Speaker 3 (25:19):
Some people theorizing it's.
Speaker 2 (25:21):
Because of all the signal leaks and all the stuff
that happened with the strikes on the who sees that
happened under Mike Walt.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
I of course have no personal.
Speaker 2 (25:28):
Knowledge of whose fault that actually was, but interesting, of course,
to the Trump administration did decide to make a move.
What I think, though, is even more interesting is that
Secretary of State Marco Rubio now will also be the
National Security Advisor. I think at this point we could
probably call him the second Assistant President. Jadie Vance coming
in there, of course as the first Assistant President most
(25:49):
commonly known as the Vice President, but Marco Rubio earning
a whole lot of trust in the Trump administration. I
think he is a solid, solid person with a good
diploma see skills.
Speaker 3 (26:00):
That that is something that not everyone in the Trump administration.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
Actually has, is diplomacy skills, especially on the international stage,
and Marco ru Rubio proving that he does have those skills.
He's solid under pressure, he knows how to respond to dictators,
to be strong for the United States, but also position
the United States in a way.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
Where our allies do want to work with us.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
To despite some of the push and pull I think
from from Trump and Rubio, there are a really good,
I think duo on the international stage. So I think
that's a great move of a lot of confidence in
Marco Rubio. I actually personally would love to see him
be the next president of the United States. Not sure
if that will happen, but I think he has the right,
the right, just the right components that we need in
(26:41):
a president after Trump, after Trump shakes up the system
in all the ways that that needs to happen.
Speaker 4 (26:45):
Love Rubio.
Speaker 5 (26:46):
I think he's shined in his role as Secretary of
State and has shown himself to be a steadfast proponent
and defender of Trump's foreign policy. It frustrates me about
this whole thing regarding Mike Waltz KBB is we never
see like in It'll bomba administration, a Biden administration, some
kind of inside candidate for National security advisor leaking to
(27:08):
conservative sources, and now we got Mike Waltz, whoever there
was ham or a subordinate signal chat leak to a
far left whack job from the Atlantic. Why does this
only happen in the one direction.
Speaker 3 (27:21):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (27:22):
I think that's the right question. That's something our people
should figure out. You're on the Dan Kepel Show. I've
got to take a break now. I'm Christy Burton Brown.
You can call in if you have thoughts about all
of this eight fy five four zero five eight two
fivey five or text Dan to five seven seven three nine.
Speaker 4 (27:42):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
First one hundred days in office. So, of course there
are polls out there showing that Americans approve him at
forty five percent rate and forty five percent don't approve him,
so approval disapproval rate.
Speaker 3 (27:59):
It equals out.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
What is particularly interesting about the poll is that a
majority of Americans, if given the choice again today, would
re elect him instead of Kamala Harris. I think that
is that's the key right there. You always in the
divided country. Apparently my voice is divided today too, and
I can't talk. But in the divided country that we
(28:22):
have today, you often will have half the country not
happy with the president, half the country happy with him.
Speaker 3 (28:26):
Approval disapproval rates.
Speaker 2 (28:28):
I mean, you're doing good if you're a president the
country is split on you. So I think the real
measure is one hundred days after he's elected. So you know,
the high has sort of gone down for a lot
of people who are really excited. You have anger from
people who really wanted to see Kamala also dissipated a
little bit. Where are Americans if they were given the choice,
who would you elect?
Speaker 3 (28:45):
If you could do a redo and.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Go back, and the majority of Americans said, we would
still elect Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (28:50):
That's pretty amazing.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
He should definitely ride on that for the rest of
his term. He has a mandate from the American people.
First Republican president in a while to get the popular vote,
and it remains true today.
Speaker 5 (29:00):
First time since two thousand and four when w defeated
John Kerrey and he came to the podium.
Speaker 4 (29:05):
I think I have a mandate. Okay, and he did.
He did in that time. It went downhill from there
in his second term.
Speaker 5 (29:12):
But to this Texter's point, KBB saying, I think Trump
is slowly setting up Rubio to be the next Potus. Now,
you and I are both big fans of Ruio, have
been from way back. I know Dan was in the
primary of twenty sixteen, that was my guy and that's
who I voted.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
Were you old enough to the next rooms.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
Okay, I held my breath there. You're not as young
as I thought you were. They got But who would
perform better in your mind? I want to ask Kelly
this and our listeners too. Of the three following choices,
which I do believe are the top three in twenty
twenty eight on the Republican side, Vice President j d Vance,
Governorn De Santis or Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who
performs better in the electoral college in the popular vote,
(29:51):
Who gives Republicans the strongest chance to win?
Speaker 4 (29:53):
And why?
Speaker 7 (29:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I mean, and I'd love her fone's answers to on this,
I think I don't know, and that's a terrible answer.
But the reason I'm going to say it is because
so much in the world can change from now till
that election, like if we if we're in a real
cold war with China. I think Marco Rubio has a
huge advantage because he's going to be the one who's
been dealing with him for the last several years, presuming
Americans think it's been handled well and that we want
(30:16):
some stability in that relationship. I think the more international
stage issues that exist at that point, the more benefits
Mark Rubio. The happier people are with Trump himself, the
more Vance goes to the top of the list, because
he is basically a Trump junior, and he's sort of
positioning himself that way, I think intentionally.
Speaker 3 (30:34):
But if Trump is kind of falling and.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
Not in favor, harder for Vance to distinguish himself for Trump.
Whereas Rubio can be like I've always been different. His
style is clearly different, even though he's carrying out Trump's policies.
Speaker 3 (30:45):
I think DeSantis is going to be in a rough spot.
I love him, but.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
I just think he's probably the least personable of the
three and more Trump like. But Vance has kind of
gotten over him being the vice Pleasant.
Speaker 5 (30:59):
Are in the inside right now the administration, and DeSantis
is on the outside.
Speaker 4 (31:03):
Will be on the outside, and he'll be two years.
Speaker 5 (31:05):
Out of office, right that's it after cycling out in
his second term.
Speaker 4 (31:08):
Kelly, who you got of those three and why.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
So?
Speaker 8 (31:12):
I think Marco Rubio and Ron DeSantis have the same problem.
They don't have a lot of personality Marco. Marco is
very straightforward and very smart.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
He definitely could do the job.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
I'm not.
Speaker 8 (31:29):
But the problem is that when you're coming off a
big personality like Donald Trump, and then to go to
a Marco Rubio, there's going to be a step down
from there, and I don't know if people are going
to go for that. So right now, I think JD.
Vance has a little bit of an egg.
Speaker 5 (31:45):
Do you think Vance has that charisma, that Trump like charisma?
Speaker 4 (31:48):
Yes, that's interesting.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
What about though?
Speaker 2 (31:50):
And I agree with you that Vance has a more obvious,
bigger personality than Rubio. I think DeSantis can seem kind
of like stunted and cold kind of again, he's very wooded,
fan of santistic when he's done. I love him, but yeah,
but it has a little trouble with his personality. I
actually agree. But Rubio to me comes off as very
like yeah, more I don't know, boring maybe than fans,
but also stabilizing in genuine sony.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
It could be good boring, right Like I wonder.
Speaker 2 (32:13):
Is that what the nation is gonna want? Okay, we've
been on this big high with Trump. Change the system,
wreck it all down, create it again? Now can you
bring us down to a plot distance trusting?
Speaker 5 (32:22):
Rubio is a guy that I think flew through the
Senate nomination process with a ninety nine nothing, vote relationship.
I believe people in the middle. This is where I'm
going with this whole analysis and argument. And it's not
necessarily that I put Rubio at the top of the list.
I love him, I'll vote for any one of those three.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
So let's just get that out of the way.
Speaker 5 (32:37):
But who appeals to the middle of America, the middle
of the political spectrum, soccer moms, you know, I think
Rubio scores very high in all of those categories.
Speaker 3 (32:48):
Yeah, And I mean, and he's getting a lot of FaceTime.
Speaker 2 (32:50):
Actually not all secretary of States do and do more
than many.
Speaker 4 (32:54):
He just looks polished and more mature. He looks so
much better now than he did in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Well, and he's doing better in my view than Christinome,
for example.
Speaker 3 (33:02):
Who like, you know whatever, Like love what her department
is doing.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
But I just I've heard enough comments about her where
people aren't getting the same impression like, Wow, she's matured,
she looks professional, We could trust her to run something.
People are more like, why is she running around with
the ice agents? Who are the actual ones making the
arrests and wearing.
Speaker 4 (33:20):
The hats and the uniform and the And.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
I don't know if that's a fair criticism or not.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
Probably not.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
I'm sure she actually is good at her job, but
I'm just say the public perception of her versus Marco Rubio,
like I think if you have you ran a poll,
and I don't think one has been done of approval
rating of different cabinet members, I think you Rubio very high.
Speaker 5 (33:40):
And I think that Christine Nome would be a distant
fourth for Kelly of the aforementioned candidates, even behind to Santis.
Speaker 4 (33:46):
Yes, probably probably.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
Well, if you aren't listening to it right now, to
the Dan Capla show, and you have thoughts or maybe
you thought of someone that's not on our current list,
you should call in eight five five four zero five
eight two five five or text your thoughts to five
seven seven three nine, start them with Dan. I think
one thing that's very clear, no matter where people come
down and what they think, Trump's first one hundred days
in office is a whole lot better than Biden's last
(34:11):
one hundred days in office.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
And when he when he was going out.
Speaker 2 (34:15):
You know, and one of my friends said today like
politics is all about contrast, and I think that's very true.
We were like, oh, why you're talking about the past president,
why don't we look at the you know, the president
look ahead to the future.
Speaker 3 (34:25):
You have to know what you're comparing it to.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
And I think when we look at Biden's approval rating
in his last months in office, he was negative seventeen,
Like people hugely disapproved of a president who hides in
a bunker and doesn't do anything, can barely communicate with
the American public. So I think, you know, Trump certainly
got an initial boost from just simply not being like that.
But now one hundred days in, I think he's actually
(34:49):
sustaining the popularity that he has among the American public
because he's actually doing things, and unlike a lot of politicians,
he's actually keeping his promises. A few of them may
be too eagerly and bypassing congres sometimes when you should
probably involve them in the decision, but you can't accuse
him of not doing something.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
I'm Christy Burton Brown. You're on the Dan Kapela show.
Speaker 2 (35:06):
Call in over the Break eight five five four zero
five eight two five five text Dan at five seven
seven three nine
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dan Caplis 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.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
What is the Dan Capitalist Show today? I'm Christy Burton
Brown in for Dan as he is in a trial.
So we have so many things nationally and in the
States to cover today, especially with the state legislature sets
to close next.
Speaker 3 (00:30):
Wednesday, May seventh will be the final day.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
They still have a believe over two hundred bills yet
to get through. A number of business bills still the
labor bill with the unions in the business community that
is still on the table. Deals attempting to be made,
but well we'll see where that goes. There's an artificial
intelligence bill. Basically the legislature created a complete disaster for
companies using algorithms and AI tools last year, and Polis
(00:56):
actually issued a signing statement when he signed the bill,
as he often does, saying how much he disagreed with
the bill and how it wasn't really good and he
expected them to fix it in future sessions. My personal
recommendation would be like, don't sign the bill if it's
not a good bill. Anyway, he did sign it, issued
that statement this year. They didn't introduce all the fixes
until a couple days ago, fifty eight pages worth of fixes,
(01:19):
and that is definitely there under the gun to see
if they can actually get that done. A lot of
technology companies obviously think that the current law is unworkable.
It's not an effect that at the moment supposed to
go into effect, I believe next year.
Speaker 3 (01:34):
So when it speak of the business community.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
It's that labor bill and then this artificial intelligence bill
with potential fixes on the table to the big last
bills for that but a bill it's garnered a bunch
of attention, not only here in Colorado, but across the
nation on at possibly every TV station in the nation
has been HB twenty five, thirteen twelve. There were over
(01:57):
seven hundred people who went and down to the Capitol
last night. They didn't end the hearing until about one
thirty this morning. Now what that means is that the
chair of the committee actually limited testimony. They didn't hear
from anywhere near the seven hundred people who showed up.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Because this is what they do.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
They're like, oh my goodness, hundreds of people here to
be against our bills.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
We're gonna limit testimony.
Speaker 2 (02:19):
They limited it to eight hours, still at extremely long
testimony time, but nowhere near covering the people who would
have been willing to testify. It's my view that they
should not be allowed to limit testimony.
Speaker 3 (02:31):
I don't think they should be able to cut it off.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
There are so few bills during the legislative session where
hundreds of people show up to testify on one side
or the other that I genuinely think legislators should not
be allowed to limit time.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
Like Brian, what do you think?
Speaker 4 (02:43):
Well, I just spoke with Aaron Lee about this.
Speaker 5 (02:45):
She was there, obviously, she testified, and it seemed to
be a conservative estimate three to one those testifying against
versus those testified four. However, they made sure to divvate
up fifty to fifty, so everyone that testified for it,
there was one or those for everyone that testified against.
My question would be kb be the following if the
numbers were the opposite. If three times as many had
(03:09):
shown up to testify in favor of this Democrat led
bill compared to one portion as much would they have
split it fifty to fifty.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Well, it is up to the chair, So the chair
is the one who gets to make the call. I'm
not sure who the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee
is offhand, I can't think of it, but it really
is up to them. So I think if they were
being fair and accurate, it would literally either be a
first come, first serve. Whoever signs up, whatever side you're on,
you show up, you get to testify in what order
you signed up. Either that is fair or yes, divide
(03:38):
it by number. If you're gonna live in a testimony, you
should divide it fairly based on the proportion of people.
Speaker 3 (03:44):
Who come on both sides to show up. And I
just just not what they do.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
They want to make it appear like, oh, what a
difficult bill. There's an equal number of people on both sides,
and then when they limit to eight hours.
Speaker 3 (03:55):
They can make it look like that.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
And so that's yet another reason Ryan that I think
they should not be allowed to limit testimony. If you
have hundreds of people show up, they are your constituents.
You are hired to listen to them. But whenever they
can be like, okay, got to sit here, through eight hours,
but then we're done. It really limits the effect that
these people's well thought out testimonies stories. I mean, not
ever from one of them are well thought out, but
(04:18):
by and large they are. These are people who took
off work to show up at one point thirty in
the afternoon on.
Speaker 3 (04:23):
A weekday to tell their legislators what they think.
Speaker 4 (04:26):
It's such a scam that they present. Ah, it's fifty
to fifty flip could go either way here.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
No, And I mean and I don't think there's a
single reporter out here in the state who would buy that.
Like literally, it's the Democrat chair of the committee who
wants to make it look like that.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
But everyone who's ware this bill is well aware. The Huges.
Speaker 2 (04:42):
Hugest side on this bill is the opposition. Oh yeah,
like usually people are. I can't think of a time
when there's that many people who want a law to
pass and show up to support it. It's almost always
opposition that you see in these huge numbers on any
type of bill. Like think back to the vaccine mandate
bills that came down in Colorado and how many hundreds
of moms showed up to testify against that. This is
(05:02):
like a similar feel. Even though there's even hundreds more
people on this one. There are actually a lot of
pastors and churches that activated across the state on this.
I think here's what's important actually about thirteen twelve and
all the hundreds of people, even though they weren't all
given opportunity to testify, even though it was made to
look equal, even though it clearly wasn't. Here's what I
think really matters. The core piece of this bill that
(05:25):
would have taken away custody from parents who did not
want to let their child transition and become transgender, who
wanted to kind of, you know, pursue other solutions with
their child. As many mental health professionals say, that's exactly
what you should do. When you have a child thinking
that you know they have gender dysphoria, you go get
them help, You go get them counseling. You slow walk
(05:47):
them through the mental health process instead of rushing them
into surgery, rushing them into a public gender transition that
then becomes very difficult for a child or a teenager
to publicly walk back when they change their mind and
to detransition, which just happened to so many kids out
there who you know, basically change their mind at too
young of an age. A lot of these kids are
out there talking about it now, you know, in their
(06:07):
early twenties, saying this was all pushed on my parents,
It was pushed on me. It wasn't the solution I needed,
and those voices are drowned out and pushed to the side.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
What this bill would have done is if you're a.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
Parent who you know, sees that on the horizon, all
the d transitioners as they're called, all the kids who
are rushed into it, and are.
Speaker 3 (06:23):
Like, I don't want to rush my child.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
I'm not willing to just say, oh, sure, be whatever
gender you want. I'm going to keep the name I
gave you that you were bored with. I'm going to, like,
you know, keep you the biological gender that you actually are.
Speaker 3 (06:35):
What this bill would have.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
Done is taken away custody from those parents in a
custody battle. It were given the judge every single right
to call that coercive control and put it on the
on par with actual physical abuse of a child, to
treat it exactly the same and say, if you are.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
Not willing to basically submit to your child and say
you want a transition. Absolutely will do whatever you want
if you're not willing to do that.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
The state of Colorado was trying to gain the power
to take your child away from you. That is why
thirteen twelve got all this national tension, It's why it's
gotten so much attention here in Colorado. And the victory
last night, despite how the hearing was handled, is that
the entire section of the bill that dealt with the
custody issues and parental rights was stripped out of the bill,
so it did pass committee. There's still terrible things in
(07:19):
the bill. I don't agree with it. It doesn't treat
schools right. It still has some just bad language in it,
bad policies that a lot of conservatives are going to
disagree with. But the key portion of the bill that
would have taken kids away.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
From parents is gone. That is a huge victory.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
I could name a whole host of people who deserve
a lot of credit for fighting on this bill. Ryan,
you mentioned Aaron Lee, I know dev Flora has been
speaking out about it. Jarvis Caldwell, a representative, has been
absolutely key in the fight against this, and really I
could go down a list. I know that I am
not naming near the number of people who heavily engaged
on this.
Speaker 3 (07:52):
I'll say, as an evangelical myself.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
I was extremely happy to see the number of parrot
of pastors.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Actually sorry, who kind.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
Of woke up and are like, wow, this is a
huge cultural issue in Colorado, and often pastors are any
religious leaders are pushed to say this is political, you
can't speak out, leave politics to this side, And nothing
could be further from the truth. Why does anyone get
to say, oh, this issue is political, therefore you as
a religious leader have no right to talk about it.
(08:21):
Like issues have sort of invaded every era of our society.
If they're political, there's also a religious component, there's also
a cultural component. There's every piece of the issue, and
religious leaders need to speak out.
Speaker 5 (08:32):
More because KBB, as we know, this has a foundation
in atheist marxistm a separation of children from their parents
as wards of the state to garner power and control.
And therefore, KBB, to your point, this is the religion
of the less. Yeah, this trans ideology is part of
their faith, their religion, so of course those of faith,
(08:56):
like yourself, evangelical pastors should be speaking out against this.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
Lily, And to your point, Ryan, the U Supreme Court
has defined religious beliefs as sincerely held beliefs basically that
guide someone's life. But that's the phrase that you sincerely
held beliefs, and so people love to be like, oh, well, hey,
if you don't actually.
Speaker 3 (09:11):
Believe in a god, it's not a religion, and it's no.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Sometimes they hold onto their beliefs just as strongly as
people with religion hold onto theirs, and they don't get
a pass. They don't be Oh, you can preach and
teach any elements of atheism and secularism in our public
schools and our politics, and that's not an establishment of religion.
Speaker 4 (09:28):
It's a dogma it.
Speaker 2 (09:30):
Is, and it's the interpretation of how that's applied as
a constitution. Will trade myself, I feel like it's really
been messed over in our n issue. We need to
get back to the roots of what the First Amendment
actually means. So I'm very happy that there were a
lot of religious leaders, a lot of pastors who came
out spoke up, and huge win last night. Still not
a great bill, but we should take the win and
say sometimes when hundreds of people show up and hundreds
(09:52):
of people activates, thousands actually across the state who did
something good things happen and we at least limited the
damage to parental rights.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
I'm Christy Burton Brown in for Dan Kaplis today.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
He is in trial, whishes he could be with you
all when we come back on the other side of this.
Speaker 3 (10:05):
Break, We're going to talk to John Fabricatory about the.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
Dangerous sanctuary state policies still going on here in Colorado.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
Six thirty K how and iheartrate and now back to
the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 3 (10:25):
Burton Brown.
Speaker 2 (10:25):
One of the key issues that remains in the news
nearly every day, it seems, is the issue of Colorado's
sanctuary state status. A recent raid conducted in Colorado Springs
that discovered over one hundred illegal immigrants present, many of
whom members of the MS thirteen gang that the Trendiogua
gang from Venezuela. Just so many people getting arrested who
(10:48):
never should have been here in the first place, and
certainly shouldn't still be here with their criminal records. But
to talk about all the issues related to colorado sanctuary
state status, including a new bill going through the state
legislature right now, I'm going to bring on John fabricatory
in just a moment.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
He has quite the resume.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
If you haven't heard of him, you definitely should have,
and I'm sure going to hear a lot more about
him in the future. He did run for Congress in
CD six here in Colorado, but prior to that.
Speaker 3 (11:13):
He is a US Air Force veteran.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
He also, in his role with ICE, oversaw the rollout
of Operation Opioid Counter Strike. Just knows so insanely much
about this issue. True expert John, Welcome to the Dan
Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (11:28):
Hey, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
Christy Absolutely well, I'd love for you just to break
some of this down for our listeners. Why exactly are
we seeing all of these raids in Colorado right now?
I think there's a lot of attention from the federal
government on Colorado due to our sanctuary state status, But
they're finding people despite the claims of you know, some
of the elected liberals in the state who think we've
(11:51):
been doing a great job.
Speaker 6 (11:53):
Yeah, you know, absolutely, Look, Colorado is a sanctuary jurisdiction.
The governor can lie at it and say it's not.
You know, people on the left can say it's not,
but we.
Speaker 4 (12:04):
Know it is.
Speaker 7 (12:04):
We've been looking at all the.
Speaker 6 (12:05):
Legislation that some passed since twenty thirteen, we can identify
numerous laws that have gone through the state House, making
this a very very solid sanctuary jurisdiction. Because of that,
we have a lot of illegal foreign born entities that
wind up in this state because they know they can
operate because of the sanctuary status. But we have identified
(12:27):
two cartels that operate in the state of Colorado. We
know that there are multiple gangs like MS thirteen Trenderagenos.
We know these gangs around there, and we know that
they operate with impunity because this state has sailed the
United States citizens in this state by toddling illegal immigration
(12:49):
and allowing these criminal alliens to set up shop inside Colorado.
Speaker 7 (12:53):
And what we saw this last weekend with.
Speaker 6 (12:55):
Law enforcement finally being able to get together because of
the Trump ADMNST they were able to join forces multiple
federal jurisdictions and local jurisdictions and take down a very
large operation in a club in which there was prostitution,
sex trafficking, drug trafficking, guns that were that were found
on the property. And because of that operation, Colorado is
(13:18):
safer today.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
Yeah, absolutely, And I think this is what happens when
you get someone in office who actually cares about the
issue that people care about. I mean, immigration being the
number two issue in the presidential election, and Trump certainly
delivering on it, even in states like Colorado that you know,
it didn't have a majority of people vote for him,
but a majority of people who want violent criminals and
felons taken out of our state. And we're talking to
(13:40):
John Fabricatory, an expert on all issues sanctuary state, worked
for ICE, veteran of the US Air Force. John, I
want to ask you about the bill going through the
legislature right now. You and I kind of mentioned Colorado
already has three sanctuary state laws, but it's my understanding
the current law would extend the state requirements on law enforcement,
basically banning them from working with ICE, and extend it
(14:02):
to every single local jurisdiction in the state and then
sign them is they do decide to work with ICE
at all. What have you heard about this bill?
Speaker 6 (14:10):
Yeah, Christy, it's absolutely maddening. And you know I went
and testified against it when it was over at the Senate.
You know, the Democrats didn't even pay attention to one
thing that I had to say. You know, I've been
raising alarms on this for months that this was going
to happen, that the Democrats were going to double down
on sanctuary status inside Colorado. But to be honest with you,
(14:32):
I didn't even think it was going to be as
bad as it is. They went overboard with this bill
and trying to solidify how strongly they want Colorado to
be a sanctuary state, to even make it stronger with
probation and parole not being able to talk to Ice
about paroles and probationers that are being let out onto
(14:54):
the street. And you and I both know what does
it take for someone to get to probation and.
Speaker 7 (14:59):
Parole a conviction, right, Well, they just don't want.
Speaker 6 (15:02):
To stop convicted criminal illegal aliens from being deported. It's
sick what the Democrats are doing with this bill. They're
only solidifying making Colorado a total clamp down a sanctuary state.
And you know what, Donald Trump is going to withhold
money from this state. He's going to make sure that,
you know, the federal government still gets in here and
(15:23):
does the job that it needs to do.
Speaker 7 (15:25):
But really, we need to continue to push.
Speaker 6 (15:27):
Back against the Democrats and what they're trying to do
to this state.
Speaker 3 (15:30):
Yeah, knowing you're right.
Speaker 2 (15:30):
I mean, I think in many ways, Colorado's definitely in
the cross air, so to speak, of the Trump administration
because Phil Wiser's.
Speaker 3 (15:37):
Running for governor right now.
Speaker 2 (15:38):
Mike Johnson, mayor of Denver, kind of making a career
out of like defying the Trump administration. Out of one
side of their mouth and then the other side of
their mouth, they're like, oh, don't cut our federal funds.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
Well, hey, is that how it works?
Speaker 2 (15:48):
If you defy a federal administration, you are going to
lose funds.
Speaker 3 (15:51):
And did I hear right, John?
Speaker 2 (15:52):
That Denver just lost was a twenty four million dollars
from the federal government.
Speaker 6 (15:56):
Yes, okay, between twenty four and thirty million dollars. We're
still trying to figure it out exactly what uh you
know that that that's.
Speaker 7 (16:04):
Going to be with the total loss.
Speaker 6 (16:06):
You know, I fort an article a few weeks ago
about a couple of million dollars that uh, Denver is
going to be losing out on in SCAP funds, which
are which are criminal allien funds from from criminal alliens
that are being held in local jurisdiction jails. The city
at Denver has neglected to even put that money forward
to try to get money for their SCAP funding for
over the last six years. But on top of that,
(16:28):
the federal government is going to have taken away anyway
from all jails within Colorado, so none of the jails
will be able to get reimbursed for criminal illegal aliens
that they hold. So who knows what this number is
actually going to look like at the end of the day.
But Colorado deserves it. They deserve it for what they're
trying to do.
Speaker 4 (16:44):
They deserve it.
Speaker 6 (16:45):
For forgetting about American citizens and only caring about illegal
aliens and criminal illegal alliance.
Speaker 3 (16:51):
On top of that, Yeah, and John.
Speaker 2 (16:53):
I think to your point, this a new bill that
who knows what's going to get through or not or
in the last less than a weekend session. But this
bill actually says any local jurisdiction that violates the provisions
of the bill, and you know, dares to coordinate with Ice,
even with a violent criminal riff he fellon drug dealer,
any of that, they will get.
Speaker 3 (17:10):
Fined fifty thousand dollars. And this fifty thousand dollars will
go into an immigrant and defense fund.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
So they're not even putting it in a fund that
would make Colorado safer. Instead, they're going to put yet
even more money into people who aren't supposed to be
here in the first place. I think that's hugely egregious
and no wonder Colorado's, you know, the third most dangerous
state in the nation according to you, has to do.
Speaker 3 (17:29):
Wh's in a world report.
Speaker 6 (17:31):
I don't know what world that the left lives on,
this crazy, bonkers world where it's okay to be a
criminal illegal alien. But you know, and if an American
citizen notifies ICE about that criminal illegal alien, the American
citizen gets fined.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
Right.
Speaker 6 (17:47):
It is incredible that we're even thinking about this and
that the Democrats want to get it past.
Speaker 3 (17:52):
It really is.
Speaker 6 (17:53):
John.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
Thank you for coming on the show, Dan Kaplis's show
and breaking it down for us. Hope to have you
back another time. Thanks so much. Thanks all right, that
was John fabricatory expert on ICE the sanctuary state policies.
Speaker 3 (18:04):
He's against them.
Speaker 2 (18:05):
If she didn't figure it out, I'm Christy Burton Brown
here on the Dan Kaplis Show. You can call in
over the break eight five five four zero five eight
two five five or text your thoughts to five seven seven,
three nine.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
Start it with Dan.
Speaker 4 (18:25):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast of China.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Actually, I want to talk about China in this segment,
so as usual, you are on the right wavelength with
your music. I'm Christy Burton Brown here on the Dan
Kaplis Show, and certainly one of the biggest fights going
on right now is the US in China. Every day
there's another front in this battle. Of course, not an
actual military war yet and hopefully won't turn into that.
But an interesting thing released in the news today. Should
(18:50):
go see if you can find it online. The CIA
is not keeping in a secret that they are pushing
videos into China. You should go see if you can
find these videos actually pretty interesting that are trying to
recruit Chinese dissidents, ideally people who are actually involved in
the Chinese Communist Party the CCP, as well as Chinese
military Chinese government, which pretty much the CCP and the
(19:12):
government are one and the same, but trying to find
these Chinese dissidents and recruit them to come over and
spy for the United States. CIA saying that this exact
same effort. Of course, the videos look a little different,
but exact same effort has been successful recently in Russia.
They are now trying and I believe in North Korea
and China, saying that they're confident they are penetrating the
Great Firewall that China has erected on their Internet to
(19:35):
try and block messages from the US. But CIA believes
they will have good success with this, having inside spies
in the Chinese Communist Party. One of the reasons they're
pushing it right now is because Jijingping, the president of China,
has sort of done a purge and he's kind of
in the middle of it right now of specifically military
leaders who were thought to be loyal to him, were
(19:57):
somewhat well liked in the CCP ranks. He's getting rid
of them, including people who were known to have been
done doing at least in China's perspective, a good job,
and he's just getting rid of them.
Speaker 3 (20:09):
I'm not exactly sure where he's putting.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Them, what he's doing with them, if they're being executed,
hidden away since to labor camps, I'm not sure anyone
really knows at this point, or maybe just demoted, although
that's kind of overly positive thinking for China, but that's
what he's doing right now, and so the CIA is
predicting that there's going to be some level of disappointment
disillusionment with the government inside China.
Speaker 3 (20:28):
They're trying to capitalize on it.
Speaker 2 (20:30):
But CIA trying to recruit spies is only a very
small part of this sort of cold war with China
going on right now. I think I've been very interested
in it, looking into it, reading a lot about it.
The tariffs, of course, are top of mind for a
lot of people, but one of the areas they've actually
had good results in is in rare earths. I don't
(20:51):
know how many of you have heard of rare earths,
but I guarantee you you have heard of smartphones. Are
probably holding one in your hand right now or looking
at it as you drive, I hope not. But your smartphone,
your electric vehicle, the wind turbins we see up on
the Eastern Plains in Colorado, so many products that we
actually use or see on a daily basis. Combined that
with a lot of military technology, including drones. So they
(21:12):
use these things called permanent magnets. They are the strongest
magnets on Earth, and they are made from rare earth elements,
so rare elements.
Speaker 3 (21:21):
That's it getsy technical hair.
Speaker 2 (21:22):
But there are a set of seventeen elements or minerals
or metals that are found in the earth.
Speaker 3 (21:26):
They're not actually rare.
Speaker 2 (21:27):
They're actually they have greater abundance than gold and silver
actually on the Earth's crust, but they often are combined
with radioactive elements. They are hard to separate. That's partly
why they're called rare is because of how hard.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
It is to mine them.
Speaker 2 (21:42):
But when they were discovered a few decades ago or
at least, and the mining ability was created, it is
a very chemical intensive process.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Basically, you do pollute the earth to mine these minerals.
Speaker 2 (21:52):
And so nobody is surprised by the idea that China
jumped in and is like, well, we'll go ahead and
do it. And so there's these areas of China that
are actually periencing these landslides chemical erosion into one of
their main water supplies, the Yellow River actually is expected
to get polluted in the very near future with all
these chemicals.
Speaker 3 (22:08):
But what they're doing is they have been able.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
To process over seventy percent of the world's rare earth.
So the US is hugely reliant on China for the
production of these rare earth metals that are now essential
components in our electric vehicle batteries, in our smartphones, in
military technology, military communication systems, and all these really things
(22:30):
that are vital.
Speaker 3 (22:30):
To national security.
Speaker 2 (22:32):
So when Trump enacted the tariffs on China, China nearly
immediately said, fine, We're no longer going to export six
of these rare earth elements to the US anymore, go
find them yourselves, and so obviously attempting to put the
US in an early tough spot. But if you in
paying attention to the stock market, you will see that
there are a number of these rare earth companies that
are actually actually benefiting right now from this tariff, these tariffs,
(22:57):
because they are now growing, expanding, getting investors poorn money
into them so that we can prop up more processing facilities,
manufacturing plants here in the US. There's currently only one
rare earth mine in the United States that specific mine,
and the processing facility had been sending over fifty percent
of the rare earth to China for processing, because China
(23:18):
processes over seventy percent of the rare earths in the
world and we don't do as much here in the US.
As soon as the tariffs were enacted, that company made
an announcement and said, we are pulling back from China entirely.
Keep in mind this company also was getting ninety percent
of their revenue from China. You know, they're an American company.
As soon as the tariffs were enacted, they said, it's
no longer worth it for us to do business in China.
We're going to bring it all back home to the US.
(23:40):
We do have a processing plant I think in California.
Their mine is in Texas and they are sending it
all in house in the US. And then there's all
these other rare earth companies that have been starting and
now all these.
Speaker 3 (23:51):
Investments are just dumping into them.
Speaker 2 (23:52):
Some of them have recently become public, been put on
the stock market, the Stock and Market Exchange.
Speaker 3 (23:56):
So really good news, honestly for the US. It's going
to take a few years to up, I think. So
it's a good thing.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
Some of our allies have these rare earth mineral stores,
and we have other ways of getting them besides China.
But what the should drive home is the whole entire
point of Trump doing these tariffs, which would bring manufacturing
back to the United States when it comes to critical components.
We should not be relying on China to mine and process,
in manufacture permanent magnets that we need in aerospace technology
(24:25):
and national security, and also in the phones we hold
in the vehicles we drive every day. So I think
for all the talk about the tariffs, in my view,
Trump probably should not have handled it the way he
did with announcing tariffs on all these other nations. I
think you should have handled it differently with our allies.
But the real point being to bring manufacturing back home
to the United States, to end our absolute reliance on
(24:47):
China for so many components and materials. I think we're
going to see him be very successful in that pursuit,
and we're already seeing it in this really, really key
area of rare earth that affects national security in huge
ways or than most of us have ever heard. You
can definitely do a deep dive in rare earths out
there if you want to do it.
Speaker 3 (25:04):
I'm Christy Britton Brown. You're on the Dan Kaplis Show.
Speaker 2 (25:07):
Speaking of trump big change in his administration today removing
Mike Waltz from his position as National Security Advisor. Now
Trump is nominating him to serve as the UN ambassador.
Speaker 3 (25:19):
Some people theorizing it's.
Speaker 2 (25:21):
Because of all the signal leaks and all the stuff
that happened with the strikes on the who sees that
happened under Mike Walt.
Speaker 3 (25:26):
I of course have no personal.
Speaker 2 (25:28):
Knowledge of whose fault that actually was, but interesting, of course,
to the Trump administration did decide to make a move.
What I think, though, is even more interesting is that
Secretary of State Marco Rubio now will also be the
National Security Advisor. I think at this point we could
probably call him the second Assistant President. Jadie Vance coming
in there, of course as the first Assistant President most
(25:49):
commonly known as the Vice President, but Marco Rubio earning
a whole lot of trust in the Trump administration. I
think he is a solid, solid person with a good
diploma see skills.
Speaker 3 (26:00):
That that is something that not everyone in the Trump administration.
Speaker 2 (26:03):
Actually has, is diplomacy skills, especially on the international stage,
and Marco ru Rubio proving that he does have those skills.
He's solid under pressure, he knows how to respond to dictators,
to be strong for the United States, but also position
the United States in a way.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
Where our allies do want to work with us.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
To despite some of the push and pull I think
from from Trump and Rubio, there are a really good,
I think duo on the international stage. So I think
that's a great move of a lot of confidence in
Marco Rubio. I actually personally would love to see him
be the next president of the United States. Not sure
if that will happen, but I think he has the right,
the right, just the right components that we need in
(26:41):
a president after Trump, after Trump shakes up the system
in all the ways that that needs to happen.
Speaker 4 (26:45):
Love Rubio.
Speaker 5 (26:46):
I think he's shined in his role as Secretary of
State and has shown himself to be a steadfast proponent
and defender of Trump's foreign policy. It frustrates me about
this whole thing regarding Mike Waltz KBB is we never
see like in It'll bomba administration, a Biden administration, some
kind of inside candidate for National security advisor leaking to
(27:08):
conservative sources, and now we got Mike Waltz, whoever there
was ham or a subordinate signal chat leak to a
far left whack job from the Atlantic. Why does this
only happen in the one direction.
Speaker 3 (27:21):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (27:22):
I think that's the right question. That's something our people
should figure out. You're on the Dan Kepel Show. I've
got to take a break now. I'm Christy Burton Brown.
You can call in if you have thoughts about all
of this eight fy five four zero five eight two
fivey five or text Dan to five seven seven three nine.
Speaker 4 (27:42):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 2 (27:46):
First one hundred days in office. So, of course there
are polls out there showing that Americans approve him at
forty five percent rate and forty five percent don't approve him,
so approval disapproval rate.
Speaker 3 (27:59):
It equals out.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
What is particularly interesting about the poll is that a
majority of Americans, if given the choice again today, would
re elect him instead of Kamala Harris. I think that
is that's the key right there. You always in the
divided country. Apparently my voice is divided today too, and
I can't talk. But in the divided country that we
(28:22):
have today, you often will have half the country not
happy with the president, half the country happy with him.
Speaker 3 (28:26):
Approval disapproval rates.
Speaker 2 (28:28):
I mean, you're doing good if you're a president the
country is split on you. So I think the real
measure is one hundred days after he's elected. So you know,
the high has sort of gone down for a lot
of people who are really excited. You have anger from
people who really wanted to see Kamala also dissipated a
little bit. Where are Americans if they were given the choice,
who would you elect?
Speaker 3 (28:45):
If you could do a redo and.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Go back, and the majority of Americans said, we would
still elect Donald Trump.
Speaker 3 (28:50):
That's pretty amazing.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
He should definitely ride on that for the rest of
his term. He has a mandate from the American people.
First Republican president in a while to get the popular vote,
and it remains true today.
Speaker 5 (29:00):
First time since two thousand and four when w defeated
John Kerrey and he came to the podium.
Speaker 4 (29:05):
I think I have a mandate. Okay, and he did.
He did in that time. It went downhill from there
in his second term.
Speaker 5 (29:12):
But to this Texter's point, KBB saying, I think Trump
is slowly setting up Rubio to be the next Potus. Now,
you and I are both big fans of Ruio, have
been from way back. I know Dan was in the
primary of twenty sixteen, that was my guy and that's
who I voted.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
Were you old enough to the next rooms.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
Okay, I held my breath there. You're not as young
as I thought you were. They got But who would
perform better in your mind? I want to ask Kelly
this and our listeners too. Of the three following choices,
which I do believe are the top three in twenty
twenty eight on the Republican side, Vice President j d Vance,
Governorn De Santis or Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who
performs better in the electoral college in the popular vote,
(29:51):
Who gives Republicans the strongest chance to win?
Speaker 4 (29:53):
And why?
Speaker 7 (29:54):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I mean, and I'd love her fone's answers to on this,
I think I don't know, and that's a terrible answer.
But the reason I'm going to say it is because
so much in the world can change from now till
that election, like if we if we're in a real
cold war with China. I think Marco Rubio has a
huge advantage because he's going to be the one who's
been dealing with him for the last several years, presuming
Americans think it's been handled well and that we want
(30:16):
some stability in that relationship. I think the more international
stage issues that exist at that point, the more benefits
Mark Rubio. The happier people are with Trump himself, the
more Vance goes to the top of the list, because
he is basically a Trump junior, and he's sort of
positioning himself that way, I think intentionally.
Speaker 3 (30:34):
But if Trump is kind of falling and.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
Not in favor, harder for Vance to distinguish himself for Trump.
Whereas Rubio can be like I've always been different. His
style is clearly different, even though he's carrying out Trump's policies.
Speaker 3 (30:45):
I think DeSantis is going to be in a rough spot.
I love him, but.
Speaker 2 (30:49):
I just think he's probably the least personable of the
three and more Trump like. But Vance has kind of
gotten over him being the vice Pleasant.
Speaker 5 (30:59):
Are in the inside right now the administration, and DeSantis
is on the outside.
Speaker 4 (31:03):
Will be on the outside, and he'll be two years.
Speaker 5 (31:05):
Out of office, right that's it after cycling out in
his second term.
Speaker 4 (31:08):
Kelly, who you got of those three and why.
Speaker 1 (31:12):
So?
Speaker 8 (31:12):
I think Marco Rubio and Ron DeSantis have the same problem.
They don't have a lot of personality Marco. Marco is
very straightforward and very smart.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
He definitely could do the job.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
I'm not.
Speaker 8 (31:29):
But the problem is that when you're coming off a
big personality like Donald Trump, and then to go to
a Marco Rubio, there's going to be a step down
from there, and I don't know if people are going
to go for that. So right now, I think JD.
Vance has a little bit of an egg.
Speaker 5 (31:45):
Do you think Vance has that charisma, that Trump like charisma?
Speaker 4 (31:48):
Yes, that's interesting.
Speaker 3 (31:49):
What about though?
Speaker 2 (31:50):
And I agree with you that Vance has a more obvious,
bigger personality than Rubio. I think DeSantis can seem kind
of like stunted and cold kind of again, he's very wooded,
fan of santistic when he's done. I love him, but yeah,
but it has a little trouble with his personality. I
actually agree. But Rubio to me comes off as very
like yeah, more I don't know, boring maybe than fans,
but also stabilizing in genuine sony.
Speaker 4 (32:11):
It could be good boring, right Like I wonder.
Speaker 2 (32:13):
Is that what the nation is gonna want? Okay, we've
been on this big high with Trump. Change the system,
wreck it all down, create it again? Now can you
bring us down to a plot distance trusting?
Speaker 5 (32:22):
Rubio is a guy that I think flew through the
Senate nomination process with a ninety nine nothing, vote relationship.
I believe people in the middle. This is where I'm
going with this whole analysis and argument. And it's not
necessarily that I put Rubio at the top of the list.
I love him, I'll vote for any one of those three.
Speaker 4 (32:35):
So let's just get that out of the way.
Speaker 5 (32:37):
But who appeals to the middle of America, the middle
of the political spectrum, soccer moms, you know, I think
Rubio scores very high in all of those categories.
Speaker 3 (32:48):
Yeah, And I mean, and he's getting a lot of FaceTime.
Speaker 2 (32:50):
Actually not all secretary of States do and do more
than many.
Speaker 4 (32:54):
He just looks polished and more mature. He looks so
much better now than he did in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
Well, and he's doing better in my view than Christinome,
for example.
Speaker 3 (33:02):
Who like, you know whatever, Like love what her department
is doing.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
But I just I've heard enough comments about her where
people aren't getting the same impression like, Wow, she's matured,
she looks professional, We could trust her to run something.
People are more like, why is she running around with
the ice agents? Who are the actual ones making the
arrests and wearing.
Speaker 4 (33:20):
The hats and the uniform and the And.
Speaker 3 (33:22):
I don't know if that's a fair criticism or not.
Speaker 4 (33:24):
Probably not.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
I'm sure she actually is good at her job, but
I'm just say the public perception of her versus Marco Rubio,
like I think if you have you ran a poll,
and I don't think one has been done of approval
rating of different cabinet members, I think you Rubio very high.
Speaker 5 (33:40):
And I think that Christine Nome would be a distant
fourth for Kelly of the aforementioned candidates, even behind to Santis.
Speaker 4 (33:46):
Yes, probably probably.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
Well, if you aren't listening to it right now, to
the Dan Capla show, and you have thoughts or maybe
you thought of someone that's not on our current list,
you should call in eight five five four zero five
eight two five five or text your thoughts to five
seven seven three nine, start them with Dan. I think
one thing that's very clear, no matter where people come
down and what they think, Trump's first one hundred days
in office is a whole lot better than Biden's last
(34:11):
one hundred days in office.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
And when he when he was going out.
Speaker 2 (34:15):
You know, and one of my friends said today like
politics is all about contrast, and I think that's very true.
We were like, oh, why you're talking about the past president,
why don't we look at the you know, the president
look ahead to the future.
Speaker 3 (34:25):
You have to know what you're comparing it to.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
And I think when we look at Biden's approval rating
in his last months in office, he was negative seventeen,
Like people hugely disapproved of a president who hides in
a bunker and doesn't do anything, can barely communicate with
the American public. So I think, you know, Trump certainly
got an initial boost from just simply not being like that.
But now one hundred days in, I think he's actually
(34:49):
sustaining the popularity that he has among the American public
because he's actually doing things, and unlike a lot of politicians,
he's actually keeping his promises. A few of them may
be too eagerly and bypassing congres sometimes when you should
probably involve them in the decision, but you can't accuse
him of not doing something.
Speaker 3 (35:04):
I'm Christy Burton Brown. You're on the Dan Kapela show.
Speaker 2 (35:06):
Call in over the Break eight five five four zero
five eight two five five text Dan at five seven
seven three nine
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!