Sheriff Steve Reams & DA George Brauchler React To Boulder Terror Attack

In the second hour of today's show, Sheriff Steve Reams talks with George Brauchler about the tragic terrorist attack in Boulder.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Capless 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 (00:14):
Well, Kenny Scharf, Steve Reims, if you were listening in
the first hour we had borders. Are Tom Homan on
with us at the start of the show and not
to be you know, I guess overshadowed. We have probably
our bigger guest of the of the show by a
lot of accounts, at least by his own. We have
George Brockler with us, the district attorney for the twenty

(00:34):
third Judicial District. And George and I we go back
at each back and forth at each other quite a bit,
so I have to take a shot whenever I get one.
So George, welcome to the show, and thanks for being
on with us.

Speaker 3 (00:44):
So good to be on. It feels a little uncomfortable
having you with control over the books, phones and the microphone,
but let's see where it goes.

Speaker 2 (00:51):
We have a dump button, so you know, don't say
anything too stupid, so which would be tough.

Speaker 4 (00:55):
For you Yeah, that will be good.

Speaker 2 (00:57):
Thank you, George. You know, we joker a lot with
each other, but there's a mutual respect that we have
for one another, especially when it comes to something like
what happened in Boulder yesterday. You know, you're that expert
when it comes to these big time prosecutions from a
little bit of your history with the Aurora theater shooting
and some other high profile cases. So I kind of
like to get your take on where does this case go?

(01:20):
What do you think how do you think this case
travels through the court system other than you know, he's
probably going to claim some kind of insanity defense. But
what does this look like? I mean, what's Michael Doherty
up against.

Speaker 3 (01:31):
I think there's a couple of things going on here.
You know, Dougherty has got to manage not only the
ongoing investigation, and that's going to include exactly what you said,
which is, how can we get as much evidence as
possible about a guy who's only been in the US
for two years that will help us Rebut the claims
that he's incompetent, that that will be the first line

(01:52):
of attack of competence, Yeah, and then follow it on
by insanity. But the other piece of this is what
role will the FEDS play? And I've been prepping for
a trial myself today, so I don't know much more
than guy got a ten million dollar bond, totally appropriate,
and that the FEDS are have an affidavit. That affidavit
tells me that there's a potential there for the Feds

(02:14):
to end up moving on this case. As you know,
the FEDS are most likely to indict if they're going
to do this. But I think that's got to be
the debate that Michael's having with DOJ right now is
who's going to get the most bang for their buck.
In the past, and I mean even with a roar theater,
there was an effort by the Obama Justice Department to
want to come take that case, and they wanted to
use the incendiary devices that the killer had in his

(02:36):
apartment as a vehicle to make their terrorism claims. We
had a great special agent in charge. I don't know
if you ever worked with this guy, Steve, but his
name was Jim Yacone. This guy was legit and no
one would know this about Jim. Jim was one of
the helicopter pilots in Blackhawk Down. He just would never
talk about this. Dude was legit. He went to bat
for us with DOJ and said, this is a local crime.

(02:59):
Let's let the locals handle this thing. Now Here though,
you know, despite a Pettitt policy, which is a policy
where the FEDS typically defer to the locals. With a
President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi and these
issues right terrorism, immigration, anti Semitism, I could see the
Fed saying you can have him when we're done.

Speaker 4 (03:20):
But we're doing our thing.

Speaker 2 (03:21):
So I mean, I think a simple question that a
lot of the caller listeners and callers are probably wanting
to ask, is where does he get the bigger penalty
through a federal prosecution or through a state prosecution.

Speaker 3 (03:33):
That's a great question. So what the biggest charge that
Michael will have, Dougherty will have is a temp murder
until and I hope this never happened, until someone passes away.
A temp murder is an F two punishable by a
sixteen to forty eight year range. And because we just
passed that great advanced Colorado backed initiative, you know, that

(03:53):
mandated eighty five that just took place this year, So
you're going to have to serve eighty five percent of
whatever that sentence is. The Feds also have an eighty
five percent sentence, but they have more tools in their toolbox,
I think, to go after this guy than the locals now,
I think, in my opinion, and I don't know what
conversations Michael's having with Bishop Gruel, the acting US Attorney,

(04:15):
but I imagine they're going to sit down and say
this is what we're going to get, and Michael's going
to say, this is what I think we're going to get,
and then they just have to have a conversation about
where best it could be that regardless of that, the
Pam BONDI, you know, leadership says we don't care, we
want to do this, yeah, end up having.

Speaker 2 (04:32):
I tend to believe you're probably on the right path there,
especially with the high profileness of this particular case and
just all the nexus with legal immigration and oh my gosh, Yeah,
I can't imagine that the that the FEDS hand this
over to the Boulder DA, which is he's a very
competent person, I think if legit. Yeah, I think despite
his political his political background, I think he is a

(04:55):
fantastic guy to prosecute this. As you probably would agree with.

Speaker 3 (05:00):
In fact, people ought to remember that peaceful, almost all
entirely white, upper middle class Boulder just went through a
horrible trial involving the mass murder of ten people at
a King Soopers just last September. Right, So and Do
already led that prosecution, and he's led a lot of
others that don't get a lot of attention. He is
a legit prosecutor. He is not one of these Soros

(05:22):
backed You know, I've never been inside a courtroom. I'll
manage the office from the campaign trail kind of guys.

Speaker 4 (05:28):
That's just not him.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
No, I agree with you. I think he's he's cut
his teeth in the court room and continues to stay
razor sharp on those particular things. Oh yeah, so you
mentioned you know, whether there would be a competency issue
or an insanity defense. What do those two things look
like as this thing moves forward? What kind of stall
tactics are we talking about? And I know that's a

(05:49):
pressure point for the public Defender's office is to try
to get everything stalled as long as they can. You know,
what's the likelihood of us seeing this trial in the
next year, year, two three?

Speaker 4 (06:00):
What do you think it depends.

Speaker 3 (06:03):
If you go with the Feds, I think it's much
more likely. If you go with the locals, I think
it's less likely. And you only have to look to
the King supers mass murder effect because remember he played
the competency card repeatedly with great success and delayed that
case for a long long time. And if you're the
public defenders, either at the federal or the state level,
you're looking at this as, hey, we just have to

(06:25):
survive the Trump administration, right Like, if the Feds are
going to go full bore on this thing, all we
have to do is survive him. Maybe we can get
someone in there who will come up with a better
outcome for us. So competency is that way of saying, hey,
my client doesn't understand what's going on. He can't actively
participate in his own defense the way the sixth Amendment
to the Constitution guarantees, because he just can't do it.

(06:47):
He's got some mental problem.

Speaker 2 (06:48):
In sanity's different.

Speaker 3 (06:50):
In sanity says you could know absolutely everything and be
totally aware right now, but at the time you committed
your heinous act, you lack the ability to know right
from wrong.

Speaker 4 (06:58):
Based on societal standards.

Speaker 3 (06:59):
And morale, and or you could not form the intent
to murder after deliberating on it. Sure, both of those things,
in my opinion, will be at play here. They were
both in play at the King Supers case, if you remember, though, interestingly,
on the King Supers one, the defense could not find
an expert to come in and say he was insane.
It didn't keep him from pleasing insanity, but did not

(07:20):
put on a single expert to say he was insane.

Speaker 2 (07:23):
Yeah, they could not find a friendly expert out there.
And you got to hope that's yeah, you got to
hope that's the same thing in this particular incident. I
don't know who wants to tie their name to someone
like this, Oh boy, switching gears just a little bit.
Chief Redfern over in Boulder. That name probably rings a
bell to you just from the Aurora Theater shooting. And
I know that he's catching a little bit of flack about,

(07:45):
you know, being the chief in Boulder and maybe not
saying this is a terrorist event right away. But I
have a lot of respect for Chief Redfern and I'd
like to get your take there of you know, is
Boulder in good hands with him? A percent?

Speaker 3 (08:00):
And Listen. What I think people don't appreciate too is
you're an elected official. I'm an elected official, Darren Weekley's
an elected official. When things happen in our jurisdiction, we
answer only to the voters. We get to stand up
and say bold things. He's not. He's an employee of
the Boulder City Council and the city manager, so what

(08:21):
he says matters and impacts him in his department. Differently,
if you add to that that this guy needs to
be cognizant of the fact that the things that he
say may not only set the community against him early
on and that's your jury pool, but also may run
a foul of the ethics rules that prosecutors have to
be bound by. People see you start to wonder, Okay,
I get it. I get why he's being cautious. The

(08:42):
other thing people probably don't know is this dude is
a hero.

Speaker 4 (08:45):
Of the Aurora Theater massacre.

Speaker 3 (08:47):
He was the sergeant behind theaterre number nine when the
fire trucks and the ambulances couldn't get there to deal
with all of these people. We have seventy injured, twelve
deceased that couldn't get there. He made the snap decision
to order all of those cruisers to be turned into
makeshift ambulances, and they saved dozens of otherwise mortally wounded

(09:08):
people by sending them off to three different hospitals in
police cars. Had he not done that, our death total
would have in my estimation just based on the indies,
would have been double or more. That's the guy that
made this decision. He's been there, done it, he gets it.
He's not a guy that's like week on crime or
soft on that. He's not a progressive do this guy's

(09:29):
legit law enforcement. I just think he's hamstrung by his situation.

Speaker 2 (09:34):
Yeah, And I wanted to point that out because, you know,
just because he's associated with the Boulder Police Department, I
think there's this fear that they're not going to do
the most competent investigation possible. There's you know, there's a
little bit of criticism for how the initial officers approached
the suspect, which Redfern couldn't have changed. But quite frankly,
I think, you know, his leadership in that agency couldn't

(09:54):
have come at a better time for this particular incident,
and especially with it being on a national stage. And
I think he deserves some credit for his past and
where he's at now, and I'm glad you. I'm glad
you had the positive comments about him.

Speaker 3 (10:08):
You know.

Speaker 2 (10:09):
I guess my final question to you will be, do
you what do you think the final outcome to this
looks like? I mean, what is when prosecution has done,
what does this guy get? There's no chance of a
death penalty conviction at this point from what I understand,
So what years does he get? Where does he go?

Speaker 3 (10:27):
Well, listen, if there's eight a tempt murder victims, if
that's where we go with just the injured that they've
identified so far, you can do the eight times forty eight,
which is the mac sentence on the state of temp
murder charge, and that puts you at a.

Speaker 4 (10:40):
Whole six eight.

Speaker 3 (10:42):
Yeah, I mean, the guy's looking at four hundred ish
years in the Department of Corrections. Keep in mind, I'm
not that awesome. I'm not that happy and awesome on
the sentencing that we have, not because of what we've done,
but because of the Department of Corrections and how they
calculate time, how they process parole. It's just not favorable

(11:03):
to think the outcome we want, which is this dude
never takes a free breath ever. Again, Fads, I think
he ends up in super Max or the equivalent for
eternity as well. I think the only thing I worry about,
and I don't know if you talk to Tom about this,
but we've started to see Ice get super proactive and aggressive,
and on a lot of cases I appreciate it. But
they're grabbing up people who otherwise might have pending prosecutions

(11:27):
in the Metro area and then shipping him back to Mexico.
And I'm like, hang on, hand on, please tell me
we're not thinking of sending this dude back there now.

Speaker 2 (11:34):
Be right. It'll be celebrated as a hero if he
goes back to his country. Yeah, that can't happen, and
I have to believe this administration understands that. But to
your point, they have dismischarges on some pretty bad folks,
so they could send him out of the country. The
only way I'm supportive of is that is that if
he ends up in the prison in El Salvador, and
I don't think that's likely with this particular one.

Speaker 3 (11:55):
Well, if we have to remove that other guy, there'll
be space.

Speaker 4 (11:58):
Well to work out.

Speaker 2 (12:00):
Yeah, Well, George. You know, it's always a pleasure to
talk with you. You know, like I said, we like
throwing shots back and forth at one another, but on
an incident like what's happened in Boulder, I think your
expertise in this was welcome.

Speaker 4 (12:15):
Listen.

Speaker 3 (12:16):
You know, you do a great job with all the
law enforcement share stuff. But you're impressing me on the radio.
And I'm just going to tell people in no way,
by the ways, that's a threat to Ryan or Dan
or anyone else. But the idea of the sheriff and
the DA show, I'm just saying it's out there. It's
a possibility. It could be magic. I'm just saying it.

Speaker 2 (12:34):
Could definitely be magic. It could also be a dumpster fire.

Speaker 3 (12:38):
Without its own kind of magic.

Speaker 2 (12:39):
Yeah, absolutely, George, again, thanks for coming on the show,
Thanks for educating us all, and we just appreciate the
work that you're doing down there in the great twenty
third Judicial District. Keep it up and stay in touch.

Speaker 4 (12:50):
Same thanks er, right, thank you.

Speaker 2 (12:53):
We'll go to break, but that'll open up some phone
lines and some text lines again. Text at five seven, seven,
three nine are calling it three or three seven three
eight two five five we'll get your reactions to George Brockler,
and we'll keep covering this case. Because I don't think
we can talk about it enough. We'll cut to break.
You listen to the Dan Caplas Show here with Well
Kenny Sheriff Steve Reims setting in as the guest host.

Speaker 5 (13:19):
And now back to the Dan Taplas Show podcast.

Speaker 2 (13:23):
Dan's off at court doing some important court battle stuff
that is way over my head. But today I get
to just be the guest host and talk about a
very unfortunate event that happened over the weekend. And I
shouldn't even call it an unfortunate event. It's a terrorist attack.
Calling it an unfortunate event isn't doing the victims of
this any justice, because, Uh, it was a heinous act

(13:45):
committed by a heinous perpetrator that hopefully we'll spend a
long time in a very small, confined space for whatever reason. Uh,
this individual will not ever be subject to the death
penalty from the way it looks at this point. And
that goes back to a text we got earlier. It says,

(14:05):
you know, our criminal justice system is basically failing, and
you have to compare us to some other countries. Where
we've made penalties for acts like this, I don't think
they're commensurate to the crime at hand. If you've set
eight people on fire, I think the death penalty should
totally be on the table for you because your intention
was to do just that to some other people. But

(14:26):
I guess that's for another day, in another time. I
can't change the world through the talk radio channels, but
i'd love to hear what you think of that particular issue.
You can always text in at five seven seven three nine,
start your text off with Dan or call in, which
I love going back and forth with the callers because
I love getting your perspective on something, especially as as
extreme as what we've just experienced here in the state

(14:48):
of Colorado. The number here is three O three seven
to one three eight two five five, and I welcome
you guys to call in about this or about anything
else that's on the agenda related. I mean, we've been
talking about illegal immigration and the effects of some of
our policies here in this state and how it's negatively
impacted the direction that Colorado's going in. When we had

(15:09):
Tom Holman on at the top of the show, I
mentioned the lawsuit that the Attorney General. The US Attorney
General had filed against the state of Colorado and the
litany of things that it outlines as to what is
wrong in this state. And you know, there's so many
bills that are listed, or so many Colorado bills or
what are now laws that are listed in this thing

(15:31):
that it's almost humorous because we have a governor who says, no,
we're not a sanctuary state. But just in this one lawsuit,
House built nineteen eleven twenty four is referenced, Senate Bill
twenty one one point thirty one is referenced, and many
others as well. They could add two seventy six for it,

(15:52):
house built twenty three eleven hundred, and municipal codes in Denver.
I mean, the list is pretty long, and they didn't
even get them all. They just went with the ones
that were most egregious. So when you're governor, and I
say you're governor, because sometimes I don't want to claim
him as my own. I certainly didn't vote for the
guy when he's out there making claims that no, Colorado's fine.

(16:14):
You know, we we love to work with the feds. Well,
it's going to be interesting to see how much you
know how much we love to work with the FEDS
on this particular incident, because we're going to need them,
and I think whether we want to work with the
Feds or not, they're going to be very involved in
what's what's happening in Boulder, and probably rightfully so the
next is for the FEDS to get involved in something
like what we just saw happen is is definitely there again.

(16:36):
Call in text in You can text Dan text start
your text with Dan at five seven seven three nine
or call in at three O three seven one three
eight two five five. I'd like to know do you
think the penalties that this individual can get are severe enough?
I mean, is life in prison enough for this guy?
Is life in supermax enough for this guy? And on
the flip side, as when we had George Brockler on

(17:00):
talking about how Ice has been pretty aggressive on some
of these folks, would you like to see this person
just deported and completely skip the entire court process. Is
deportation enough of a penalty for what he's done? I
tend to think not. I think this person needs to
spend some time in a in a very small, confined space.
If we can't put him to death. But there are

(17:20):
plenty of people who says, get him out of our
country unless avoid the costs. I'd like to know what
you think. Again, you can text in at five seven seven,
three nine or call in at three h three seven
one three eight two five five. I will tell you
ICE is definitely sending plenty of people out of the country.
And I think for some of those lower level crimes,
where it's you know, a simple assault, you know, a
small level theft DUI, Yeah, sending them back to their

(17:42):
home country is probably more of a penalty than letting
them set in a cell. But when a guy sets
eight people on fire, I have to believe that sending
him out of the country is not the correct answer.
I think we need to get our pound of flesh
from that individual before he ever has a chance to
go back home and be celebrated as a hero potentially.

(18:02):
So hopefully you guys will call in and we'll have
those discussions in the last half of the show here.
But again that numbers three oh three seven one three
eight two five five. Let's let's chop it up a
little bit and talk about what's happening over in Boulder.
If you're listening to Steve Reims filling in for Dan
Kaplis on the Dankplas Show here on six point thirty k.

Speaker 5 (18:31):
You're listening to the Dan Kapliss Show podcast.

Speaker 2 (18:35):
Trial or doing some kind of important court work. But
you know, we've got a huge topic that we've been
covering today, and that's this incident that happened in Boulder yesterday,
this terrorist attack, if you will. And when we went
to break, we were talking about, you know, what's the
right punishment for this crime? Should this person spend the
rest of their life in prison in the United States?
I think a lot of you agree that the death

(18:57):
penalty should should be in play, Unfortunately it is from
what I understand. Or should this person just be deported,
Should they be sent back home and save the taxpayers
a lot of money, but potentially let them be Let
this person be celebrated in their home country of Egypt.
We're talking about Mohammed sabriy Sulliman, the Egyptian terrorists that

(19:19):
was arrested yesterday after he set eight people a blaze,
and maybe a couple of others that have come forward
since that time. But we have Bob from Denver who's
on the line to talk with us a little bit
about what he thinks the punishment should be. Bob, what
are your comments?

Speaker 6 (19:33):
I would put this gentleman, and I used the term
very us. I hope so in prison for the rest
of his life and hopefully and probably he might have
a few accidents in there and only last about six months.

Speaker 2 (19:52):
Yeah, I have to believe. So there are some people
when they go to prison that are universally hated. That
tends to be people who commit bad acts towards women, rapes, assaults.

Speaker 6 (20:03):
It also child.

Speaker 2 (20:05):
Molesters and terrorists also fit in that same in that
same category. You know, that's that's not necessarily the cleanest
way to get justice, but it's cleaner than a lot
of things that have been texted in. So, Bob, I mean,
if this guy goes back to Egypt, don't you think
he's celebrated as a hero in many parts of that country?

Speaker 6 (20:27):
Probably? And I would say that the ones that you
just listed, the child molesters and that should get the
same punishment on terrible, terrible crimes like this. They have
no right to live.

Speaker 4 (20:41):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (20:42):
Again, when we were earlier talking about some of the
texts that were coming in about you know what's the
most appropriate thing for this person. Why doesn't our criminal
justice system work. I think oftentimes it's because the punishment
doesn't truly fit the crime, and in this particular incident,
we're seeing the effects of the punishment's not really severe
enough for the crime that was committed. When you set

(21:03):
eight people on fire, you have no purpose of remaining
on the face of the earth in my mind. But Bob,
I think you'd probably agree with that.

Speaker 6 (21:11):
I would agree totally with that. I would be very
happy to.

Speaker 2 (21:19):
Bob appreciate the call. Thanks for calling in, and I
really appreciate your perspective there. I think you probably mirror
what a lot of the listeners are thinking. Thanks for
calling in. Again. If anybody else wants to call in
and give their opinion, you can do that at three
oh three seven one three eight two five five. I
love to have those conversations. But you can also text
in it, Dan. You can text in with Dan five
seven seven three nine and keep it somewhat short because

(21:42):
I can't read a book on here. But several of
them came in through the break, One from a very
good friend says, I definitely think we should avoid the
cost of imprisoning this terrorist. But my answer isn't to
send him home. It's a little more direct. So I
think I know what that means. And if you're reading
between the lines, that that's probably around about way of

(22:03):
saying this person should just not be around anymore. Let's
see here number one. Another text here says number one,
this moron is not a United States citizen and he
committed an active terror. How can the death penalty not
be on the books. I scratched my head on that too.
You would think that that would be the case. But
obviously you remember some of the people that were involved

(22:24):
in the plotting of the nine to eleven terror attacks,
which I think should have been able to be put
to death too. Those people were and are still, from
what I understand, setting in Guantanamo Bay for some of
those issues, and again they can't be put to death,
or some of them that I think ended up in
Supermax here in Florence. But a quick Google search says
federal crimes that can be punished by the death penalty

(22:46):
include treason, espionage, and certain murder offenses. Again, we don't
want any of these individuals in Boulder to end up dying,
but I guess that might open up another avenue for
punishment on this individual. But I would never want to
trade the death of one of these victims so that
we could and we could look at how to deal

(23:07):
with this guy differently. I particularly like this text. It says,
call me medieval, but I'm for making the death penalty
fit the crime. By making the perpetrator die in the
same manner that his victims did, in this case, death
by fire. Maybe that would be a real deterrent rather
than decades in jail with three hots and a cot.
There are plenty of folks out there that become institutionalized

(23:28):
and completely love living in a prison environment. They figure
out how to how to make it. You know, they're
home away from home, and they're they're totally fine living
in that environment. And I don't want this person to
have that that feeling either. I can get behind the
death by fire, although this guy, by all accounts, it
looked like he tried to say, well, he did set

(23:50):
himself on fire while we were at break. I was
reading through some of the reports and it said while
he was attempting to throw one of the Molotov cocktails
of one of the two, that he actually he got off.
That's when he set himself on fire. I can't help
but believe he was probably soaked from the backpack full
of gasoline that he was wearing the weed spray full
of gasoline. That was probably a bad combo. It's too

(24:12):
bad that this guy didn't at least try to practice
this once before. Maybe he would have burned himself up
and not ever gotten this far. But regardless, you know,
the punishment that goes with this crime isn't near severe enough.
And the sheriff, yes, yes, Kelly, go ahead.

Speaker 7 (24:27):
Do you have a question, go for you? What do
you got because you probably are very versed on this.

Speaker 2 (24:33):
Probably not, but we can try.

Speaker 7 (24:34):
Aren't the taxpayers legally obligated to educate prisoners who are
in for life?

Speaker 2 (24:44):
Yes, to a degree. I mean we have to treat
him in a humane way. And there's always this concept
of whether or not they get, you know, they get
some kind of betterment. The federal rules are going to
be a lot different than the state rules. I can
tell you in the state prison they pretty mu been
over backwards for these guys. What did you have in mind?

Speaker 7 (25:03):
Well, I'm just asking because I've always understood, I mean,
working on The Martino Show, we get some people that
call in from prison, and a lot of them are
you know, have access to law lab law librairies for
their own good. And they actually have people that come

(25:26):
in and teach them. If they are not versed in
the English language, they have teachers that come in and
will teach them the English language.

Speaker 2 (25:38):
They'll teach them college courses. You have guys that exactly,
you have guys.

Speaker 7 (25:43):
Our taxpayer dollars. So for instance, when you're talking about
housing somebody in prison for life, that means we have
to also cover three meals a day and all of
that education.

Speaker 2 (25:59):
Correct, is not cheap to house a prisoner in any facility,
federal or state, state facility because of all those things,
I mean just the food cost alone and you know,
heating and cooling a prison, hiring guards. It'd be way
cheaper if we could put these people, for lack of
better terms down right.

Speaker 7 (26:19):
So this guy from Egypt who did this heinous crime,
we're going to go ahead and house him for his life.

Speaker 2 (26:30):
So the flip side of that is if you don't
want a housing for the rest of his life, and
figure out how to how to make him as miserable
as possible in a very very small, tiny confined space. Well,
you know, the other option is to deport him back
to his home country, where again he will see no punishment.
I think, uh, you know, when you're when you're considering
the lesser of two evils, and I hate to use

(26:52):
that term. I think this guy has to go to
prison and stay there the rest of his life until
some kind of reform happens in our criminal justice system
when we start actually handing out the punishment that has
deserved this guy has. He has no no purpose on
remaining on the face of the planet. In my mind. Now,
he'll get a trial, he'll go to court, and we'll
go through all those ups and downs and you know,

(27:14):
watch these things go back and forth for probably the
next couple of years. But ideally this person shouldn't be
with us on the planet anymore in my mind, so.

Speaker 7 (27:25):
He's not going to get any sort of The victims,
I should say, are not going to get any sort
of justice needed.

Speaker 2 (27:33):
No, I mean, the only justice they're going to get
is this guy doesn't walk among us amongst us anymore.
You have to wonder, you know, what situation are is
his family left in did he have other supporters that
were you know that are training for the next one.
There's just so many loose ends with this. And again
to one of the well this this text right here

(27:54):
says deportation was set a horrible precedent. How many other
terroists would believe they can come commit atrocities on US
soil and just go back home, just be deported. I mean,
I don't think that's the way we want to handle this.
And if there's ever been a time in our nation's
history to do some some justice reform, it's in increasing
the penalties for terrorist activities, you know, And a lot
of these a lot of these statutes were codified. We

(28:17):
didn't ever believe we'd be the victim of terrorist activities.
We didn't believe in nine to eleven would happen. We
didn't believe that someone would walk up to two innocent
people in Washington, D c. And shoot am execution style.
We didn't believe someone would would light people on fire
on the Pearl Street Mall in Boulder, walk into the
King Supers and randomly shoot people. But that's the world
we live in now, and we haven't adjusted our criminal
justice system to deal with that process. So we are

(28:41):
our own worst enemy in many ways. And you know,
I don't to one of the earlier conversations we were
having with a caller, are we really in a position
that we know how to deal with these folks if
they if they start to get active and go out
and do the things that this Muhammad saber soulomon, if
there's others out there waiting in the in the weeds

(29:02):
or waiting in the shadows, are we prepared to deal
with that? And I think the answer is no, But
I guess time will tell. I think what we'll do
now is we're going to take a quick break. We've
got a caller coming on the line. As soon as
we come back from break, we'll take that caller. We'll
finish out with our remaining texts, and we'll finish out
the show on hopefully a couple of high notes. But
text Dan five seven, seven, three nine. Start your text

(29:24):
with Dan, and then we'll probably have a time for
a couple more callers. If you want to call in
at three oh three seven, one, three eight, two five five,
we'll go to a quick break and we come back,
we'll clear off the call lines. You're listening to the
Dan Capless show here with well Kenny Shriff Steve Riams
filling in his guest host.

Speaker 5 (29:44):
And now back to the Dan Tapless Show podcast, The.

Speaker 2 (29:48):
Dan Capless Show here with well Kunny Shriff Steve Rings.
We're finishing out the show with a few phone calls here.
I just want to remind everybody we had borders are
Tom Homan on at the beginning of the show, and
then at the beginning of the second hour we had
George Brouckler. So if you want to talk about any
of those interviews, uh, those are definitely on the table
as well. But we'll go to the call screen here.
We got a cap from Lakewood commenting about the Boulder ansident.

Speaker 4 (30:09):
What do you have for us, Captain Hey, good evening, Steve.

Speaker 2 (30:13):
You bet, thanks for coming on.

Speaker 4 (30:16):
Yeah. First of all, I just want to tell you
and let's just say I appreciate your services. Thank you,
and these these are times that we need it, so
thank you. You know that. Yes, yeah, I was just
going to make a comment about Boulder situation that you know,
we had what was it two and a half years
ago at the supermarketing shooting there, and I would have

(30:38):
thought that would have been a pretty good wake up
call for the city. And my point is that I'm
going to make is about a gun. That guy I've
already seen something on YouTube about somebody posted that he
that he's not a citizen, and uh, you know that
may be why he didn't have a gun. You get
a gun, But just imagine it. Imagine if he would

(30:59):
have had a gun, how bad that would have been.
It's so that's my point. It's like, especially it's Pearl Street,
it's Pearl Street mall. The only person is probably gonna
have a gun might be a security guy well and
a long police officer nearby.

Speaker 2 (31:12):
But if I'm not mistaken, I think I think some
of the local laws there make Pearl Street a gun
free zone. So the law abiding citizens probably weren't carrying one.
And this terrorist comes down there with a flamethrower, But
you're right, it could have very well been a firearm.
And then then how much worse could this have been?
Or if you'd even practiced his plan, how much worse
could this have been? Yeah, it's scary. You think Boulder

(31:34):
would kind of turn the turn directions, but we just
keep going down the same path. Cat, thanks for the
phone calls.

Speaker 4 (31:40):
The first thing I thought it was Pearl Street. I
was like, wait a second, there's probably no guns on
Pearl Street.

Speaker 2 (31:44):
Absolutely, I think he's not.

Speaker 4 (31:45):
A gun in there. That could have been terrible because
it could have taken a long time. I agree with you,
actually get him, Yeah, I agree with you. Well, thanks
for the phone call. We want to make sure we
clear out the rest of them before the show's over.
Let's go to Doug and Frederick. He's got a comment
about Boulder as well.

Speaker 2 (31:59):
Doug.

Speaker 8 (32:00):
Yeah, how you doing, sir, Thanks for your service, you bet.

Speaker 2 (32:03):
Thank you?

Speaker 8 (32:04):
Yeah. Well, yeah, I live up Primwell County and Frederick,
so it might be open to Zoom King Superhero's real
nice and it might be a different story in there
because you probably have some people carrying well.

Speaker 2 (32:14):
If you want. If you live in my county, you
know that. A lot of times you'll see people open
carrying and it's pretty regular there.

Speaker 8 (32:21):
Yeah, real quick to wards due process. They keep screaming
about due process. Where this is getting us these open borders.
It's not just in Colorado and America, it's all over
the Western Europe. Everything's been about. It's really globalism against
national sovereignty. And that's the way what it comes down to.
And the due process is nothing but making a more
dangerous world and more dangerous country. We live in a

(32:44):
dangerous world. Got to quit playing politics with our national security.
The left that is.

Speaker 2 (32:49):
Yeah, and you know the due process coming in was skipped,
but we definitely have to afford him due process to
get them out of it. And none of it makes sense.
But Doug, I appreciate the phone call. In the comments,
thank you. You couldn't have been more right on that.
We'll clear out with a few of these texts. Here
says to quote Silverado, he will get a fair trial
followed by a first class hanging. You know, that's probably

(33:10):
the way it should be this one. If it's a
federal crime, could they seek the death penalty it's a
terrorist attack, I would think that should rise to the level.
You know, everything that I've researched says unless this person
is unless this suspect kills people in a particular way,
he's not ever going to be eligible for the death penalty.
And I think that's one of the things that makes

(33:31):
us all scratch our head. If you seriously maim people
or injure people by lighting them on fire, I think
you should probably be subjected to the death penalty. Another
one here, though, says the rob of that is that
these people want to be martyred, so if he is
killed for his actions, he'll still be looked at as
a as a hero in his own in his own country,

(33:52):
or by his family or whomever else supports this god
forsaken mess that this guy has committed on these innocent victims.
And then this one I'm not sure I can agree with,
but it says send him to Israel so they can
trade him for their hostages. Well, I think what they
believe in in Israel or Gaza now is that any
remaining hostages are probably not alive, and if that's the case,

(34:15):
I think they should trade him in the same in
the same condition. If they want to do a trade,
he should not be alive if he's not going to
receive live hostages back. You know, I don't know that
what the right answer is for this, and time will tell.
We're going to watch this thing play out, unfortunately for
the coming months and even years, as this mess goes

(34:36):
through trial. Despite the fact that it's happening in Boulder,
I am glad that there's a very good district attorney
there that will seek the right path, and you know
we have our federal partners that I think are going
to hammer this guy to the fullest extent possible. I
want to thank Kelly and Zach behind the glass for
making sure this show went off without a hitch despite

(34:56):
my ineptitude. But glad you got to join us, Kre,
Tom Holman, and George Brockler on the show, and I'll
be back tomorrow. We'll have a couple of more special
guests here on The Dan Kaplas Show with well Kenny
Sheriff Steve Rams as your guest host. Thanks a lot