Melat Kiros says ICE is taking people to concentration camps

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
Oh, another beautiful day to fight for the American way.
What makes it even more beautiful? Actually a little bit
of rain in Denver right now. We're doing the show
out of six 30 kitsch W Denver. George Brockler will
be kind enough to join us within the next couple

(00:27):
of minutes. Very grateful for that, um, George is great
on everything, but he's got a tremendous column right now
in the Gazette that I want to make sure everybody
gets a look at. 303-713-8255, the number D-A-N-5-7-7-3-9. And then
we'll get back to, we've got some sound from Mayor
Mike Johnston and Malat Kiro, separate sound, different occasions, but

(00:51):
both with very, very dangerous messages. So we'll do a
who wore it worst between the two of them. So,
All of that ahead. In the meantime, while we wait
for our good friend George, in the meantime, some good
news from Woody Page, who's been kind of an iconic
sports guy and Denver sports writer. You probably remember from

(01:14):
ESPN Around the Horn as well. Woody says he has
it from multiple sources that the majority interest in the
Colorado Rockies will be sold to the current Bronco ownership.
currently has 40% of the Rockies, but we'll get majority
control of the Rockies sometime in 2027 after the expected

(01:35):
strike at this point is over. So that would just be,
you know, fantastic, I think, for the community in so
many different ways, just transformative for Lodo, et cetera. You know,
once we get back to having a contender here regularly,
I think that'll be phenomenal. And listen, in the meantime, hey,
we're season ticket holders. We love going down there. Appreciate

(01:56):
the good things the Montforts have done. I just think
we need that, you know, billionaire level ownership for this
team to now go to the next level. And the
Montforts have spent a lot of money over the years
as well. There have been times where they've gone big
on some contracts that just haven't worked out, but they've
made the big swing. But I do think the modern

(02:17):
sports ownership era, you've just, You've got to have people
who don't care if it's a net loser, at least
in terms of annual operating income, which it probably never
will be. But, you know, it's all going to be
all about legacy and then the money eventually in the sale,
in the equity, in the franchise. So George Brockler, one

(02:38):
of the busiest guys in Colorado, kind enough to join us.
He has a tremendous piece in the Denver Gazette. regarding
Jenna Griswold, including did Griswold enlist the help of the CBI, FBI,
district attorneys from across the state who prosecuted cases involving
the victims, victims of her office. So, George, appreciate the

(03:01):
time today, my friend. Welcome back to the Dan Kaplan Show.

Speaker 2 (03:04):
Hey, thanks for having me on, and go Buffs, baby.

Speaker 1 (03:07):
Oh, man, wasn't that great? Oh, my.

Speaker 2 (03:10):
Well, it didn't need to be as hard. are attack
inducing as it was because you know what 42 seconds
left you're like game's over we pulled it out great
win all we got to do is keep these guys
from getting past the 50 first play as you know
well and they drive down the field goal range and
you're like what are we doing yeah what.

Speaker 1 (03:27):
Are we doing well and it made it more exciting
in the end but but also george don't you think
and this is where i was okay with it but
as you saw cu decided to go after the georgia
tech quarterback on that first play that led to the
big game that put him in field goal range. And
I'm okay with that, right? Because so often you see
teams just kind of back up on defense and then

(03:49):
two or three plays later they're in. But if they
had gotten to the quarterback on that play, then it's
probably game over right there. But I'd rather see them
keep pedaling to the metal through the whole season.

Speaker 2 (04:03):
I'm excited to see what comes next. Hopefully they'll have
more control a lot earlier in the game.

Speaker 1 (04:09):
Yeah, well, I'm so optimistic. Even if they had lost,
I'd be very optimistic for the season because of all
the good things we saw. And then CSU, you know,
with Jim Mora. I don't know if you watched any
of that game, but holy cow. I mean, first, Mora
always wins. Oh, you didn't see any? I'm telling you,
their quarterback looks like Baker Mayfield. I think he's in

(04:31):
Oklahoma State transfer. But he looks like Baker Mayfield. Wow.

Speaker 3 (04:37):
Yeah, I think.

Speaker 1 (04:38):
Future's bright there, too. But I know that's why you called,
my friend.

Speaker 3 (04:42):
It is. It is.

Speaker 2 (04:46):
I love talking football with you.

Speaker 3 (04:48):
I do, too.

Speaker 1 (04:48):
But I'm so glad you wrote this piece in the
Gazette about Griswold, because I'm very concerned, obviously, about the
two-tier system of justice here. You know, is justice applied
equally when the left's involved? But then also that they
claim this concern. for the people and for victims, but
what about the victims of her office?

Speaker 2 (05:12):
Yeah, Dan, this was one that, again, I'm not going
to say we're in a zero defect environment. We're not.
People can make mistakes. But if you look at her mistakes,
in and of themselves, they suggest incompetence. But her response
to them is what really calls into question her character
and unfitness for any other office, including the one she holds.

(05:34):
So she finds out that, oh, my gosh, for weeks
we've exposed the confidential addresses of real-life domestic violence and
sex assault victims as well as law enforcement and prosecutors.
And her reaction for two days is to keep that
secret while they tried to figure out if they could
keep that secret. And it's appalling.

Speaker 1 (05:55):
Yeah, George, and I'm really glad you mentioned the fact
that you have so many crime victims among those who
don't have their address published. So why wasn't there the
kind of investigation that you'd expect there?

Speaker 2 (06:14):
Well, you already know the answer to that, man. This area,
do not lend it.

Speaker 1 (06:24):
George, I think we're losing the connection here. I know
we've lost the connection here.

Speaker 2 (06:30):
Not. How about now? Better.

Speaker 3 (06:33):
Uh-oh.

Speaker 1 (06:35):
I know it's tough to drive with your head out
the window, but anything else?

Speaker 2 (06:38):
Connection. Tell me if you lose me again. I was
just saying, I think that we're long past thinking that
the media and public officials are partisan free enough to
just pursue the truth and justice in all matters. It's
interesting to me that Jenna's go-to response after spending two

(07:00):
days of having her staff try to figure out if
this was a no harm, no foul violation of of
the rules to simply turn to the Denver DA. And
I like John Walsh. John's a Democrat. And then turning
to CBI, not to CBI, but to CSP, a great,
great law enforcement agency that just isn't built for this.

(07:20):
This is like saying, hey, I think I might have cancer.
Let's go see my friend, the podiatrist in some ways.
Great for your feet, great for your feet, but not
for this issue. And the media has just really kind
of treated it as a big nothing burger, which is amazing.

Speaker 1 (07:35):
Well, and again, my suspicion is because she's a Democrat, right?
And this would be very harmful to her and the Democrats,
especially in the middle of her run for attorney general, right?
When you're releasing all this confidential information, including regarding crime victims,
on top of, of course, everybody knows about the Biles
passwords that were up on the website for months. But George,

(07:56):
my understanding from the Gazette piece is you, as the
DA in the 23rd, you requested information regarding the list
of 59, presumably, so you could see if any of
the crime victims in your jurisdiction, you know, had been
publicly exposed. And how did Griswold's office respond to that?

Speaker 2 (08:18):
Yeah, they said no. There's a provision in the confidential
voter statute that says that if there's a member of
law enforcement who in the performance of their duties and
the scope of their duties request the information, it must
be turned over, not you can decide if you think
it's a good idea or not. So I did that. immediately.
I was super concerned for the victims of cases that
we have had. Hell, I'm on that list, Dan. I'm

(08:41):
a confidential voter. You know who else is? Jenna's political
opponent in this race, Michael Allen. He was one of
the 59. So when I found out this was going on,
I thought, this isn't something you sit back and wait on.
You go and aggressively try to prevent something horrible from happening.
And so I reached out and they said, you know what?
We've given all this information to Colorado State Patrol. You

(09:03):
should contact them. Wow. Wow.

Speaker 1 (09:06):
And like you say, no bigger fan of CSP than me,
but that's not their wheelhouse.

Speaker 3 (09:15):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (09:15):
They do some elected official protection at the state level.
They provide protection, I think, for— Jenna and Jared and
the rest of them. But this just isn't their thing.
It's not fair to them to put them in this position.
They should have immediately turned it over to the district
attorneys who are the only ones that have the database

(09:35):
that say whether these victims were a part of this
case and all this other stuff. Hell, one that we
identified had been the victim of nine separate domestic violence cases. Nine. Nine.
And so your thought is haste must matter here, right?
You do not want to put someone in the position,
especially when they can't tell you who searched their records.
To this day, they can't tell you who searched Michael

(09:57):
Allen's personal home address. They can't. tell you because they
don't know all they have is an ip address and
they put in their release well based on our ip
analysis we feel.

Speaker 1 (10:06):
Like what what ip analysis yeah yeah so where can
you go with this does the secretary of state.

Speaker 2 (10:14):
Have yeah exactly well And obviously, it's all about a
deep dive as much.

Speaker 3 (10:19):
As we can.

Speaker 1 (10:22):
George, I think I lost you there again. And, you know,
everybody can talk about this piece. No problem. I was
just reminding people this piece is in the Gazette. But
but I think, yeah, what we're obviously seeing once again
is my opinion. And I think it's clear Griswold doesn't
care at all about the victims. It's just all about
protecting Griswold politically. But then, yeah, with the media. Can

(10:46):
you imagine if it had been a conservative responsible or
Republican responsible for this? It would have been the headline
story every single day until that person either resigned or
was just couldn't possibly win in whatever office they were
running for.

Speaker 2 (11:02):
That's 100 percent true. Where are the questions of will
you resign now? You know, this is your third such fiasco.
Will you resign now? Not a single question of it.
People just kind of shrug because maybe that's it, Dan.
She's been so incompetent for so long. Gong show Griswold
has become white noise to voters. They're like, oh, what'd
she do this time?

Speaker 1 (11:22):
You know, I don't know, George. I think in the
media side, it's just protecting her. And there are some
noble exceptions to that. Sean Boyd's one of them. But
but in general, it's just the media protecting her as
a Democrat. And so, yeah, we've just got to find
a way to keep letting people know the truth about her.
But appreciate your efforts and hope everybody sees your piece

(11:44):
in the Denver Gazette. Well, thank you, my friend, and
I'm sorry for the tough sell, but but really appreciate
the time today. Yeah, thank you, George. Jenna Griswold, and
hopefully between now and Election Day, more and more people
will come to know the truth. But I think a
big part of that is going to be, can Michael Allen,
who is a great candidate for Attorney General, can he

(12:06):
raise the money necessary to get the word out to
the people? You're on the Dan Kaplan Show. 5.23 on
this pretty afternoon. Glad you're here. Hope you had a great,
long Labor Day weekend. Hope you got that holiday off.
There's just, you know, it's kind of a reminder, isn't it?

Speaker 2 (12:25):
It is.

Speaker 1 (12:26):
At least it is to me, you get these three-day
weekends and there's such a rush, right? And so much
joy leading up to it and joy during it. And
then you get to the end, okay, it's back to work,
but you just stop and think, wait a second, you know,
life's short. Why are our lives structured in such a

(12:47):
way that we get a handful of these during a year?
You know what I mean? It goes back to what
I've always believed is I don't think anybody's ever been
laying there on their deathbed saying, boy, I wish I'd
spent more time at the office, right? 303-713-8255, D-A-N-57739. Hey,
if you just joined us, thank you. We're doing a

(13:09):
who wore it worst thing between two of the leading
Democrats in the state of Colorado. You've got Mayor Mike
Johnston appearing to glorify fentanyl while sending a very, very
dangerous message. Appears to glorify it in the context of
the homeless and sends a very dangerous message which, by
the way, he's actually absolutely backwards on the medical effect,

(13:29):
but we'll get to that. And then you've got Malat Karos,
who's now the voice in the face of the Democrat
Party in Colorado, a vowed socialist, campaigned repeatedly with Hassan Piker,
the known American hater and Jew hater. And she just
seems to get a pass for that from the Colorado media.
But in any case, she makes statements, which in my opinion,

(13:52):
clearly are A, false, and B, could easily incite violence.
So who wore it worse? We'll start with Mayor Mike Johnston.

Speaker 4 (14:02):
Doctors who will say, if I were to design a
perfect drug to help you survive homelessness, you need something
who helps you stay up all night and be alert
in case you're going to get jumped. It helps you
be immune to cold and helps you go long stretches
without eating. That is essentially what fentanyl does. It is
a homelessness survival drug.

Speaker 1 (14:18):
Truly, I don't mean this in the pejorative, one of
the most ignorant statements ever made. I mean, ignorant of
the facts, ignorant of his responsibility as mayor, ignorant to
public safety. First of all, I think he's mixing it
up with another mass killer, which is meth. Meth is
another mass killer in Colorado, which should not be credited

(14:38):
or praised in any way. But you do sometimes hear
misguided experts refer to meth as a survival drug for
the homeless for some of the reasons that Johnston mentioned.
Fentanyl is a mass murderer, and it has been a
mass murderer in Colorado for years. It is a chemical
attack on this nation and state. And his statement that,

(15:03):
you know, fentanyl helps you stay up all night, helps
the homeless stay up all night, It's exactly backwards. How
can anybody in a position of public responsibility be that ignorant?
I mean, they give you fentanyl when you're getting surgery.
They don't give you the fentanyl so you stay awake

(15:24):
during the surgery. Unless it's a really bad hospital. They
give you the fentanyl so you go to sleep. So
why do you think he did that? I've got my
own theory. And then you get Malakiros. So she's got
all of these You know, young impressionable kids who walked
out of school in Denver and a bunch of them
are gathered in this park and she's speaking to them

(15:47):
as a real authority figure because, hey, she just won
a very impressive race, knocked off like a hundred year incumbent,
beat her by 14 points. And she is now the
Democrat in Colorado. So what does she decide to do
to these kids? She decides to lie to them and
tell them a lie that she could must be able
to easily see. could cause one or more of these

(16:10):
kids to go off and commit acts of violence. Now,
is her lie, is her irresponsible statement responsible for some
of the violence that occurred that day? I have no idea.
Let's assume it isn't. It doesn't make it any less dangerous,
any less irresponsible, any less.

Speaker 2 (16:26):
Of a lie.

Speaker 4 (16:27):
Doctors who will say, if I were to design a
perfect drug to help you survive homelessness, you need something
that helps you.

Speaker 1 (16:33):
Yeah, can't get enough of that, right? It tells you
so much about Mike Johnston. But here is Malak Kiros.

Speaker 5 (16:39):
To every single person that is here right now, thank you.
I know a lot of you were faced with the
threat of suspension, expulsion, getting harassed online.

Speaker 1 (16:51):
And so you chose to show.

Speaker 6 (16:53):
Up today and stand up for your immigrant neighbors that
are being terrorized by this fascist administration and this rogue
agency that's kidnapping our neighbors and throwing them into concentration camps.

Speaker 1 (17:06):
Okay, so you have the most prominent Democrat in Colorado
telling these kids that the government is kidnapping their neighbors
and throwing them into concentration camps. It would never even
dawn on Kiros that that might cause some kid to
go out and commit horrific violence against the government, against
ICE agents, against people who support ICE. That would never

(17:29):
even occur.

Speaker 7 (17:30):
To her, right?

Speaker 2 (17:31):
Wow.

Speaker 1 (17:32):
But again, it's history. Look at the history of socialism.
Look at the history of the left. Look at the
close relationship to violence. And I don't know whether she
was intending to provoke violence or not. I know what
she said is not even remotely prosecutable. It's not a crime.
It's political speech that unless you link it to a

(17:53):
clear call for instant violence is probably never going to
be prosecuted. But it doesn't mean that it isn't profoundly irresponsible,
and dangerous and dishonest. But she keeps getting the pass
from the same political media who would be chasing a
Republican down every day until they run out of office,

(18:15):
as they should be. But it's a Democrat? No, she
gets a pass. I'll tell you why I think they
both did it. You're on the Dan Kaplan Show.

Speaker 4 (18:30):
Doctors who will say, if I were to design a
perfect drug to help you survive homelessness. You need something
that helps you stay up all night and be alert
in case you're going to get jumped, that helps you
be immune to cold, and helps you go long stretches
without eating. That is essentially what fentanyl does. It is
a homelessness survival drug.

Speaker 1 (18:45):
That's just nutty. I mean, it is nutty. If it
was a drunk on a corner bar stool saying that,
you know, you'd move to the other end of the bar,
that is the mayor of Denver. First, just fundamentally wrong
on the medicine. I'll get to that in a second.
But even if he was right, so irresponsible and so

(19:06):
dangerous to say something like that, to say anything that
can be read in a positive light about fentanyl? Fentanyl
is a mass murderer in Colorado. It has been for years.
It murders the homeless. It murders the children of CEOs.
It murders everybody in between. It's an equal opportunity destroyer.
How can he ever talk about it in any kind

(19:29):
of positive light? And then he gets the medicine backwards.
And we'll get to why he did it. But then
he gets the medicine backwards. No, fentanyl doesn't let you
stay up all night so you can protect yourself. Fentanyl
puts you to sleep. That's why they often give it
to you at the start of surgery, not so you

(19:49):
can stay awake and watch them cut into you. So
he's got it backwards. But what he appears to be doing,
he appears to be mixing it up with meth. And
meth is also a killer and should never talk about
it in anything that can be read as a positive context.
But There are, for example, I did some research on

(20:11):
it after these weird and dangerous statements of Johnston's. And
there is, in fact, for, let's see, it's a 2009
publication from Health Resources and Services Administration. And this is
back during the Obama presidency. And in one of the reports,

(20:32):
they said for homeless use, meth is their survival drug.
And it went on to explain that meth allows homeless
youth to stay awake and feel safer on the street
at night and suppress hunger and thirst. So first of all,
I object to referring to meth as any kind of
survival drug. It's a killer. It undermines survival. But that's

(20:53):
apparently what happened here, is Johnston is profoundly ignorant of
something that's killing so many Coloradans that he would say fentanyl?
is a homeless survival drug. And that brings you to
why would he even be motivated to put fentanyl in
a positive light? And I think it's because he must know,

(21:18):
you know, when he's of clear mind, he must know
that he and his fellow Democrats are responsible for a
lot of the fentanyl mass killing in Colorado because of
their policies. So just trying to distance himself from the
responsibilities For this mass killing, I'm guessing that was probably

(21:39):
the motive for something so bizarre. Yeah. 303-713-8255, D-A-N-5-7-7-3-9. If
you haven't heard it already, the Milat Kiros, the dangerous
lies from her. So who wore it worse? Which is
more dangerous? Here's Kiros on Friday during that student walkout.

Speaker 5 (21:59):
Every single person that is here right now, thank you.
I know a lot of you were faced with the
threat of suspension, expulsion, getting harassed online, and.

Speaker 1 (22:10):
Still you chose to.

Speaker 6 (22:12):
Show up today and stand up for your immigrant neighbors
that are being terrorized.

Speaker 5 (22:17):
By this fascist administration and.

Speaker 6 (22:19):
This rogue agency that's kidnapping our neighbors and throwing them
into concentration camps.

Speaker 1 (22:27):
Kidnapping our neighbors and throwing them into concentration camps. She
stands there as the leading Democrat in Colorado and tells
those lies to impressionable youth. I think it never crossed
her mind that that might provoke somebody to violence. You know,
I don't know whether it did cross her mind. I'm

(22:49):
not saying she's trying to incite violence, but any reasonable
person of even modest intelligence, and she has a lot
of intelligence, she just uses it to do bad things,
would have to see that saying that to anybody, any
large group, let alone a group of kids, could easily
lead to violence, but just the immorality of lying to

(23:10):
kids that way. I mean, you've got some of these
kids thinking, oh, we have concentration camps, and these people
right here, these ICE people, they're kidnapping our neighbors and
putting them in concentration. Oh, no, nothing bad could ever
come from that, right? Just like Chuck Schumer standing on
the steps of the Supreme Court naming Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

(23:31):
You won't know what hit you. And then what happens?
Of course, somebody goes off and tries to kill Justice Kavanaugh.
These Democrats know exactly what they're doing. I think certainly
Schumer knew exactly what he was doing. Scott, in Boulder,
you're on the Dan Kaplan Show.

Speaker 2 (23:46):
Welcome.

Speaker 3 (23:47):
Hey, Dan.

Speaker 7 (23:48):
How are you?

Speaker 1 (23:48):
Living the dream, my friend. How about you?

Speaker 3 (23:51):
Oh, not too bad. I just wanted to touch base
on a couple of things you're talking about.

Speaker 2 (23:54):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (23:55):
It was the most dangerous thing over the weekend.

Speaker 2 (23:57):
But did you talk about Patrick Kavos?

Speaker 3 (23:59):
No.

Speaker 7 (24:01):
You know, the assassination attempt on the Ohio Democrat, hopefully
Amy Acton.

Speaker 1 (24:06):
Yeah, I'm not familiar with it. Tell me about it.

Speaker 3 (24:10):
Oh, yeah.

Speaker 7 (24:11):
She was doing a speech and.

Speaker 3 (24:13):
You know, he had guns and weapons and then knocked
over a couple elderly people that went to the hospital.

Speaker 1 (24:19):
Okay.

Speaker 3 (24:19):
And, you know, he was going to kill her.

Speaker 2 (24:21):
Okay.

Speaker 7 (24:21):
So, you know, I'm surprised you didn't talk.

Speaker 1 (24:23):
Well, I'm not surprised you didn't talk. I didn't know
about it. And who is this person? Who is this
person who was the target?

Speaker 3 (24:29):
His name is Patrick Havas.

Speaker 1 (24:31):
And what's he running for?

Speaker 3 (24:32):
He's not. He was the criminal trying to kill Amy Acton.

Speaker 2 (24:40):
Anyway.

Speaker 3 (24:41):
And then you talk about how.

Speaker 7 (24:43):
Dems can't win because of, you know, bias and common
morality and all these curious lies and how she started
all this crap. But look at Trump will not stop
talking about losing the 2020 election. And that's just nonstop violent.
Look what happened there, you know.

Speaker 3 (25:01):
So, you know, that's a whole other subject.

Speaker 1 (25:05):
No, no, no. I mean, let's talk about that. Let's
talk about that.

Speaker 3 (25:10):
The major thing is, I wanted to get across was
you're completely lying about Mayor Johnson because you didn't finish
playing the video or the audio. He clearly states that
that drug is, yes, the way he worded it, but
that's why we need to get people off the street
and in housing so we can get them off of

(25:32):
that drug. You completely failed to, you know, and I
can post that video on 630k, how, but since nobody
goes there to the Facebook page, there are people, I
don't know where to put it, where people can actually listen.

Speaker 1 (25:44):
Yeah, no, let's talk about it. Let's talk about it
on this show because, hold on a second. We're going
to have a back and forth, right? Okay, we're going
to have a back and forth. And I'm glad you called.
And first of all, what you say about the rest
of what Johnston had to say doesn't change the context
of this whatsoever. Not one little bit. First of all,

(26:05):
You've got to acknowledge Johnston had it backwards. He had
it wrong. He had the medicine wrong. Fentanyl is not a, quote,
survival drug for the homeless. It kills the homeless. Fentanyl
puts you to sleep. It does not keep you awake
all night. It doesn't protect you against the cold unless,
of course, it kills you before you can get cold.
You'll acknowledge that, right? He was simply either grossly, negligently ignorant,

(26:30):
or he was lying, right?

Speaker 3 (26:32):
Well, no, because studies do show that at first you
get the euphoria of being high with adrenaline, and then yes,
comes the other.

Speaker 1 (26:41):
No, you've got to show me that one, partner, because
I've been researching the medicine all afternoon since I saw
his comments, and I haven't found one single article or
piece or anything that suggests what you do. But what
I have found is what I just quoted on air.
What I have found is back in the Obama administration—
a government publication saying almost verbatim what Johnston said, but

(27:04):
saying it about meth. So you're really going to try
to defend his comments as accurate?

Speaker 2 (27:10):
No.

Speaker 3 (27:11):
Well, no. I'm saying that what you're saying is very
inaccurate because what you're– you're going back to saying– that
he misled people about the effects of fentanyl, but you
keep saying that it's dangerous, he's trying to make this
some great drug, whatever, but you didn't play the rest
of the video where he clearly said that's why we

(27:31):
need to get these people off the streets and into housing.

Speaker 2 (27:34):
You do that all the time.

Speaker 1 (27:35):
Oh, really? A, give me, no, no, no, you made
your point, I'm going to respond. Give me another example
of that, because I pride myself on including any relevant context,
and what you're talking about is not relevant context. When
he comes out.

Speaker 7 (27:49):
And— It's not relevant.

Speaker 2 (27:49):
You can say it.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
Well, listen, I understand you think it's relevant. That's fine.
Knock yourself out. But I'm explaining why it isn't, because
it's a standalone proclamation that is provably false medically and
extremely dangerous. When he comes out and he says that
fentanyl is a survival drug for the homeless— because it

(28:11):
helps you stay up all night, it protects you from
the cold. That is provably false and irresponsible. The fact
that he goes on to say, so that's why we
have to get people off the streets, is irrelevant to
the dangerousness and inaccuracy of his statement. And if you
don't want to accept that, that's fine. I don't care.

Speaker 3 (28:29):
So you're the one not to. You're the one not to.
Why don't you just continue playing the tape? Why don't
you play the whole video? And then let's see if
you can accept what he was trying to say.

Speaker 1 (28:38):
Well, because it's irrelevant. OK, we're getting circular now. I understand. Listen,
if I was trying to keep that information from my audience,
I wouldn't let you on air to say it. So
you think it's relevant. I don't. The audience can decide. So.
But I want to get to some of your other points,
because right now, Scott, you're just getting circular and boring.

(29:00):
You made your point. I made my point. The audience
can decide. But let's come back and let's get to
your other claim, that somehow President Trump is doing the
same thing. No, he's not. You're on the Dan Kaplan Show.

Speaker 4 (29:19):
Doctors will say, if I were to design a perfect
drug to help you survive homelessness... You need something that
helps you stay up all night and be alert in
case you're going to get jumped, that helps you be
immune to cold, and helps you go long stretches without eating.
That is essentially what fentanyl does. It is a homelessness
survival drug.

Speaker 1 (29:34):
It's crazy. It's provably false. It's backwards.

Speaker 3 (29:39):
It's incredible.

Speaker 1 (29:40):
Reckless and irresponsible. To be glorifying fentanyl in any context,
causing it a homeless, calling it a homelessness survival drug.
Why would the mayor of Denver be saying such a thing?
And let's start with the fact he's just provably wrong.
about the medical piece of this. So why is he

(30:03):
doing that? We have a caller, and I'll bring him
back up, who says, oh, you didn't play the rest
of it, where he says, that's why it's so important
to get homeless off the street. No, because that's irrelevant.
What's relevant is the standalone declaration he just made, which
is false and dangerous and irresponsible. The fact that he
links it to another reason why we should continue to

(30:25):
support his insane, completely unaffordable approach to homelessness, which is
to warehouse them in hotels every night on the taxpayer
dime when the homeless, they're not getting better in there.
There's no incentive to get better. He said it in
his inaugural, come to Denver, we'll get you a home.

(30:46):
He's spending more on that now than the entire police budget.
But his justification is this lie that now homeless will
do less fentanyl because they had to do fentanyl when
they were on the streets to survive. It's bizarre and preposterous.
Best case scenario for him is gross ignorance. He appears

(31:07):
to be mixing up what some people have said about meth,
which is another mass killer and shouldn't be praised in
any context. But for example, and this came up in
the research I did when I was trying to figure
out what in the world Johnston was doing there. There
was a Rocky Mountain PBS article that was published a

(31:28):
while back with the title, Stimulants and Survival, Unhoused Coloradans
Turn to Meth as a Form of Protection. And then
within that piece, they quoted some medical people as saying
that meth keeps people awake at night, homeless people awake
at night, and helps them avoid freezing, and how meth

(31:52):
was being used by some homeless as a survival drug. So,
Best case scenario for Johnston, he's mixing up meth with fentanyl,
which would be gross malpractice. Fentanyl is a mass killer
in Colorado. So the mayor of Denver has just made
all these dangerous, untrue statements about fentanyl. How many Coloradans

(32:17):
has fentanyl killed? Yeah, so that's what's going on here.
So why do you think he did it? I mean,
this is crazy stuff. But Scott from Boulder says no.
As long as Johnston says this to support warehousing homeless people,
then it's all good.

Speaker 3 (32:37):
Right, Scott? That's not what I said. No, I'm just
making the point that you weren't telling the whole story.
I mean, do you condemn Trump for lying every day
about the 2020 election and And all the.

Speaker 2 (32:55):
Horror that goes around.

Speaker 1 (32:57):
That's the difference between us, Scott. That's a difference between us,
is when President Trump does something wrong.

Speaker 7 (33:05):
Lies about the election.

Speaker 1 (33:06):
Come on, this is an adult show. If you want
to do playground stuff, go over to some elementary school
on weekends and play on the swings. Hey, listen, I'm
going to put him on hold because he has no
interest in a conversation. Here's the difference, okay? When President
Trump does something wrong, I call him on it on air.
because I'm devoted to the truth. You know, I'm not

(33:28):
going to build a prison for myself. I'm not on
this planet to be the tool of the left wing
or the right wing or some political party. You know,
I have a relentless search for the truth. And hey,
I come on air every day and I put it
all out there. And if I've got something wrong, anybody
can call me on it. And I'm not wrong on

(33:49):
this one. Johnston made a standalone declarative statement about fentanyl
that was provably wrong and dangerous. And nothing else he
said in those comments changes that. It only makes it
worse for Johnston. But I'm very proud of the fact
that it can be any Republican. It can be Trump.
It can be any other Republican. It can be myself.

(34:10):
If I'm wrong about something, I acknowledge it. Same for Trump, whatever.
But here's the difference. When Trump deserves praise, I give
it to him. When a Democrat deserves praise, I give
it to her. And that's the difference, right? These people
on the left, like this caller Scott, where do you

(34:31):
ever find the intellectual honesty? You know, I remember doing
the show with Craig for years, and there you saw
some real intellectual honesty. I mean, Craig and I disagreed,
and if you listened to the show back then, disagreed
intensely on many, many things. But Craig, to his everlasting credit,

(34:52):
there were some things where he would say, eventually he
would come around and say, you know what, that's right.
That's exactly right. And he deserves tremendous respect for that.
And people say, wow, Dan, you know, you convinced Craig.
And I'd always tell him, no, it's the opposite. You know,
he deserves all the credit. He said it in spite
of me. I mean, it had to be very hard

(35:14):
to eventually agree on some things because we were such
intense competitors. But But there was one of the few
people who often took leftist positions who would then be
intellectually honest on some points. And that was refreshing. Thank you,
Shannon Scott.