March 26, 2025 • 34 mins
In the second hour of today's edition of The Dan Caplis Show, Dan takes a look at the Signal Scandal and why it's being overblown by a democratic party desperate to pounce on Trump.
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. Yeah, and truth
and justice are the American way, right, They're inseparable, and
that's why it's so important that this signal mistake be
(00:24):
approached that way, be approached with truth and be approached
with real justice for whoever made the mistake, because it
was a big mistake that could have could have gotten
a really critical mission that was beautifully executed canceled, and
in a worst case scenario, could have caused the mission
to go south and get innocent people killed. So it
(00:46):
is a big deal. But the key starting point in
my mind is we've got to tell the truth about
what happened. So let's have that conversation three or three
someone three eight two five to five the number text
d an five seven th nine. My quick take before
we go to the phone lines and text. And by
the way, we're getting some tremendous text from people, including
(01:07):
law enforcement in response to the last segment we just
did so I'll set that up more fully when we
read those texts in a second. But when it comes
to Signal, first of all, I wish every American, every
single American, could read the full text exchange, which never
should have happened on this open source Signal app.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
Right.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
And you probably know that Signal is an encrypted app,
and it's an app that's often used to try to
make sure conversations are more secure. But when you're talking
about government officials at our highest level talking about the
specific details of a critical upcoming attack on terrorists, yeah,
those can't occur on an app like that. And we've
(01:49):
heard that, wait a second, that the last administration was
doing it. It was automatically loaded into these computers and
communication devices, and it's important to know that background. But
we know this can't continue going forward. Right, But here's
the deal, if every American could see the actual text exchange.
The full text exchange has now been released by the
(02:11):
reporter at The Atlantic, who, in my view, he's not
one of the good guys. You know, he's a lefty
who I think is at times dishonest. And so none
of this is about praising the reporter, Jeffrey Goldberg, except
for one thing that when he improperly stayed in this communication,
he should have gotten out as soon as he realized
(02:32):
he wasn't supposed to be there. But after he improperly
stayed and obtained these critical operational details, he did not
share them with the public, And thank god for that.
He made a good decision there that should be commended.
On the other hand, he shouldn't have been around that long.
You should have immediately gotten out. But if everybody could
read the full text string that he has now reported,
(02:54):
they would be so impressed with the Trump administration. They'd
be so impressed with hegsa Waltz, Kadie Vance, everybody involved
in the planning and discussion of this mission. This is
what you want. This is what you want at the
very top, this is what you wanted to look like.
This is the outcome you want. So Americans would be
(03:15):
very impressed with that. Would Americans say, wow, you can't
accidentally invite a reporter in. You shouldn't be communicating an
app like this. Of course they would, but that would
be far outweighed with how impressed they are at how
the administration is functioning. But I think where the administration
missed the boat and some have done this, but as
(03:36):
a whole, it should have immediately just stepped up and said, Okay,
we made a mistake. We did a great job read
the text, we did a great job planning this mission.
We carried it out, our troops carried it out flawlessly.
We served American in the world. But yeah, that should
not have happened, and we'll fix it. At that point,
the Trump administration only gains because we are all wired, right.
(03:58):
I don't know as an Americans, it's in our DNA
that when somebody steps up and admits a mistake and
takes responsibility for it, almost no matter how big a
mistake it is, people respond very positively to that. And
so between being very impressed with these communications, the substance,
the intelligence, the planning, and then being impressed with the
(04:21):
administration just admitting the mistake and taking responsibility, it's a total,
a total plus for the Trump administration. But here and again,
you know, I literally think, God, Donald Trump has this
second term, and I think overall he's handled it pretty well.
But I think trying to say this wasn't classified information,
(04:42):
give me a break and listen. I get it. I
get the Democrats are total hypocrites on this, all the
same Democrats who are defending Hillary Clinton, who jeopardized our
national security literally one hundred thousand times more than this
tech string. Did I get their hypocrisy? But please, this
is profound truth moment, the profound truth. The reality right
(05:05):
now is the Democrats are irrelevant. Nobody is listening to them.
They are irrelevant. So their criticism they're cackling, they're screaming
like smashed cats, doesn't matter at all. They are irrelevant.
All that matters now is how we perform. All that
(05:26):
matters now is how the Trump administration performs. All that
matters now is how the Republican Party performs. That's all
that matters. That Democrats are irrelevant, So everybody's human. This
administration has been so very good it can't be perfect.
I just wish here they had acknowledged mistake. It'll never
(05:47):
happen again. But read the text and see how great
we handle this. But if anybody has a doubt that
there was classified information in here, here's one of the
texts that was released today by Goldberg, and again hardcore.
I think the reason he didn't release the full text
exchange earlier is that it makes the Trump administration look
so good. I think that's why he held it back.
(06:10):
He's only releasing it now because the Trump administration claimed
there was no classified material, and he wants to show
that's not accurate. But this is obviously classified material.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Listen to this, and the Trump administration is not claiming
that these texts are forged or inaccurate. Time now eleven
forty four Eastern Weather's favorable just confirmed with Sentcom. We
are a go for mission launch twelve fifteen et F
eighteen's launch First Strike Package thirteen forty five I meaning
(06:43):
one forty five trigger based F eighteen first strike windows
starts target terrorist is at his known location. Show should
be on time. Also, strike drones launch fourteen ten more
F eighteen's launch second Strike Package fourteen fifty fifteen strike
drones on target. This is when the first bombs will
(07:04):
definitely drop, all in caps. Somebody going to try to
argue that's not classified. If that's not classified, what is classified?
So listen, we're all human. Mistakes get made. No harm
was done here. The team acted so impressively as you
(07:24):
can see in these texts. Just admit the mistake and
move on. Let's go to Mason and Aurora. You're on
the Dan Kaplis Show. Welcome.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Yeah, this is Nathan.
Speaker 5 (07:32):
I was in the intelligence community for twenty years.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
Wonderful.
Speaker 5 (07:36):
Yeah, and I want to give you some information. When
I was in they had a machine that I worked
on that would prevent anybody that wasn't authorized to be
on a on a com communication.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
So it would if they were if we.
Speaker 5 (07:51):
Had recognized this whatever's name something Gilbert, that journalist from
the Omanic magazine, the CEO or whatever, it would have
would not have allowed him to even enter into that conversation.
And I'm surprised that not just this president, but all
the presidents before that or the administrations are allowing this
(08:14):
kind of craziness in the new era of text messaging
and all that. Sure it's encrypted, but if somebody can
piggyback on top of me and I screw up and
I left this guy into a top secret communications, that's crazy.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Amen, so beautifully said, and thank you for your service,
my friend. And that goes to the magnitude of the mistake.
But does that mean Trump should fire Waltz or whoever
was responsible. No, because unless it was shown it was
intentional and Obviously Waltz wouldn't intentionally do that. Who knows.
Maybe in theory there could have been some staffer, some
(08:50):
holdover from the Biden administration whatever, who invited Goldberg in
an unbeknownst to Walts. Who knows, But we need to know, right,
We've got to get that bottom line. But my point is,
short of it being intentional on somebody's part or such
absolute reckless incompetence, the person just can't be allowed to stay. No,
I don't think anybody should be fired over this, and
(09:11):
I'm very happy to see President Trump just in the
last twenty minutes strongly defending his team, saying nobody's going
to get fired, because when you read those text you're
going to be glad those guys and gals are on
that wall. You're going to be glad those guys and
gals are protecting America and the world. You're going to
be impressed with how they acted. The fact that communication
(09:33):
occurred on a signal app which was automatically installed in
their systems. They didn't have anything to do with choosing
to install it. Yeah, that's got to be fixed.
Speaker 4 (09:42):
But no, I.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Wouldn't want anybody who I saw on that text exchange
fired those people performed at a very high level. Three
or three someone three eight two five five text DA
five seven seven three nine want to Quebec? When I
get to some text we're getting from law enforcement responding
to a we had just before the top of the hour,
and some audio we had of another case where a
(10:05):
child now seventeen year old is now living with some
adults after declaring that she's really a boy and her
parents want to get her home. And you heard the
tape of the officer going in to do a quote
wellness check, and we have others from law enforcement responding
to that. You're on the Dan Capla Show.
Speaker 4 (10:31):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (10:36):
Telsey Gabbert, Director Gabbert, you are the security executive and
set access guidelines for classified information.
Speaker 5 (10:44):
Did you.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Contact the Defense Secretary or others after the specific military
planning was put out and say, hey, we should be
doing this on a skiff? There was no classified material
that was shared in that, there's no classifying import I'm
sorry there was, and I'm so glad we have this administration.
(11:07):
You read those texts now, which the reporter had to
put out the whole string. The reason he didn't in
the beginning is it makes the Trump administration and everybody
on that tech string looks so good. The only thing
that makes them look bad is that they were using
an open source app, the Signal app, which is encrypted,
by the way, and was apparently automatically installed by their systems,
(11:27):
and the past administration used it. But it makes them
look so good. And that's why Goldberg didn't put out
the full string to begin with. They only put it
out now because the administration was denying there was classified
information on there. And I read some of it just
before the break. It's obviously classified. It's talking about when
(11:47):
they're going to strike, where they're going to strike, how
they're going to strike, that the terrorist target is home
right now, by the way. Yeah, it's obviously classified. So
all I'm saying is you're doing a great job. Democrats
are irrelevant, Tony, and worry about their criticism. Just you know,
acknowledge the mistake and move on. And then hey, got
to get to the bottom of it, find out how
it happened, and then see if somebody needs to be fired.
(12:10):
But I sure wouldn't be firing Mike Waltz over this
or any of those top guys and gals, because you
read that text string they did great and it was
a very successful mission. Dan, I understand how you feel
about Goldberg and Waltz situation, but please talk about Biden's
horrible mistake in Afghanistan when thirteen were killed. My goodness,
we have talked about that so much on this show,
and we should, and we did and we will, and
(12:34):
it's a very big part of why Joe Biden lost. Remember,
before that horror in Afghanistan, Biden was on average, day
in and day out about six seven points higher in
the polls. And then after that massive failed surrender in Afghanistan,
you know, he dropped, He dropped a bunch and he
(12:54):
never got back because Americans were so horrified by that.
Believe me, yes, we have talked about that. The point
here isn't that, oh I wish we had Biden or
Democrats instead of Trump, my lord. I mean, anybody who
listens to this show knows it's the polar opposite with me.
The point is that we have to be honest. We
have to be honest. We have to be honest about
(13:15):
our political opponents, even when they try to cancel us,
even when they try to harm us because we're honest
about them. We have to be fearlessly honest about our opponents.
We also have to be honest about our own mistakes,
because first of all, that's the only way to live right. Second,
that's the only way to be credible. So we just
(13:36):
need to be honest about the mistakes that were made here,
and we certainly don't need to be claiming there was
no classified information. Dan Regarding the officer who wouldn't do
anything for the parent of the minor child, he is
in the embodiment of current lazing apathetic culture in which
we now live. Communists have stealthily gotten to this officer
(13:56):
to help destroy families. He's unaware, but a useful idiot.
Spletely disagree with that text, and we'll try to play
that sound again. Completely disagree, and this is sound we heard,
and you can see the video of the officer going
into a home where the minor child seventeen years old,
parents outside wants the child back. Child now says she
(14:18):
thinks she's a boy, though she's really a girl, and
the officer goes into do a wellness check. And I
agree with with the interpretation that there's not much done
when he's in there. But to reach those harsh conclusions
about the officer I think is unfair for a couple
of reasons. One is just globally and listen, do I
think the officer should have done more there? From the
(14:40):
little I know right now, which is basically the tape, Yeah,
if that's my child, I would have wanted to see
the officer take that child outside for a minute, talk
to the child outside the presence of the adults in
the home, and do that kind of check with the child.
But I think, just glow speaking, we need to understand
(15:02):
that the left, particularly here in Colorado other leftist controlled states,
has been so anti law enforcement and has so undermined
law enforcement now making them personally liable civilly if something
goes wrong on the job. That you have a lot
of tremendous officers who don't feel like they can lean
forward because you know that they don't want to end
(15:24):
up in that next viral video. You know, they don't
want to end up being personally sued, et cetera. I'm
not saying that's what was going on here. I'm just
saying it's something that's generally undermining law enforcement, which I
think is the intention of the left, right. But then
beyond that, you know, I just don't agree with that. Texter.
I do think from the litle live scene that yeah,
(15:45):
more should have been done there, but I think that's
way too harsh a conclusion. I want to get to this, Dan,
I'm a cop of twenty two years and a parent
of sixteen years. I like, you give the benefit of
the doubt to my brothers and sisters. However, I can't
exactly do that in this situation. I think what I
would have done if that person did not give back
the child would be to immediately submit a runaway report,
(16:06):
have it entered into the system. Then tell that former
teacher she would be under arrest for harboring a runaway
if she did not immediately give up the child. Thank
you for that, And I'd love to hear from others
in law enforcement, right because my dad a cop for
thirty years, I'm very open about the fact I give
the big benefit of the doubt to law enforcement. You know, underappreciated,
they're undersupported, and I give the benefit of the doubt.
(16:30):
But no question in this situation, I mean, why not
just take the child out on the porch and have
a conversation privately, Dan, that's awful. The deputy should have
pulled the child aside and asked open ended questions. The
cop basically didn't give the child a chance. Horrible policing.
Then laughing about it, says another Texter. And we'll invite
(16:50):
the officer. I'm sure there are probably department rules that
would have prevented it, but we'll invite the officer on, Ryan,
can you do that? And then the other woman mentioned
in the story, Joanne and smotherman we're told is an
adult at the home where the child was will invite
her on as well and get her side of that story.
But but yeah, no, I would have liked to have
(17:13):
seen more done there. Wait on these other calls until
we get back from the break. The most recent on
the controversy over the use of the signal app as
President Trump with and I think about the last half
hour just coming out, and I'm glad to see him
do it, very strongly supporting his team. Nobody's going to
get fired. The team did a great job here with
(17:34):
this mission, and I think all of that is correct.
I just think the administration needs to avoid any suggestion
that this was not classified information. There's clearly classified information,
and just acknowledge the mistake was made to include the journalist.
We'll get to the bottom of how it happened. We'll
see why the prior administration was using this signal app
(17:55):
and see if that's something that can be continued. Boy,
you would think there'd be a better way, wouldn't you?
Love your thoughts on all this? Three or three someone
three eight two five five text d A N five
seven seven three nine. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (18:21):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
It's important sound we've ever heard that we cannot understand. Wow,
(18:51):
think about that these are people in Gaza marching through
the streets channing Hamas is a terrorist organation. That there
are so many things that should give us hope right now,
right but that should really give us hope, really give
us hope. It reminds me. I think it was two
(19:13):
thousand and eight, two thousand and nine, I can't remember,
but remember when the people of Iran took to the
streets and they wanted to overthrow those evil rulers. Obama
help us, I mean that was their chant, Obama, help
us Obama help us, and he abandoned them. He abandoned
them to their captors. Yeah, very very encouraging to see
(19:34):
those people in the streets and again today I understand.
So yeah, yeah, all righty, let's go. Oh, Colonel Kurt
kind enough to join us. Colonel kurk Dale a tremendous
American hero and he's been on the show to talk
with us before, honored by the Nuggets at one of
those games for his military heroism. Colonel welcome back to
(19:54):
the show.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Well, thank you very much to take a McCall. My
wanted to tell you. I'll try to make a very
quick story, but to me, it shows that not every
kerfuffle about classified material has to be punished. You need
to learn from it. I was a deputy commander in
(20:19):
the Atmos missiles in Shy and launch control officer in
nineteen sixty to sixty four. For a given day, my
next door neighbor, who was also a crew commander, came
home from the site and as he started to get
ready to take a shower, he realized that he had
(20:41):
not handed his envelope to the officer that he replaced
on the muscle site. That was the emergency war order
envelope that was of course, I had to be. You
had to be carrying a weapon anytime you had it
on you and your counterpart, the other crew commander or
(21:03):
two also had his card. All that information was the
same thing popsic of crypto, and it also was exactly
the same code that the President would have in the football.
He realized that, you know, this was a terrible thing
because he was off the site, unarmed and had what
(21:24):
was needed in order to launch if the emergency war
order came in. He immediately got on the phone called
the missile site and his counterpart, he said, stuck around
your neck. Of course, the man fact he did not
have his envelope around his neck. Jim my neighbor said,
(21:48):
I will be there as quickly as I can. He
jumps in his silly little car and he heads for
a missile site is probably fifty miles away, he told him,
so letting me in. Don't ask any questions, just have
the guards to let me through the gate. He went
through the gate, went downstairs into the launch control center
(22:12):
underground and just took off the envelope and handed it
to his counterpart. Problem solved. But of course they had
just there was purely a just a glitch in the
changeover process which was very formal, but they had messed
(22:32):
up that information, of course filtered through the system. Nobody
was ever funny for anything else, but I'll tell you
that it made enough concern within our squadron that we
never had any further difficulties with that. Fortunately, these people
(22:57):
both ended up retiring. It was i was purely a glitch,
and nobody needed to be punished. They just needed to learn,
and we all did.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Colonel, what a great story makes such a tremendous point.
And the distinction you're pointing out between that just a
one time mistake that nobody saw coming and what we saw,
for example, with Hillary Clinton, premeditated, deliberate, ongoing undermining of
our national security. These are night and day different.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
Absolutely, absolutely, there were things that came out. Of course,
I was in the first two weeks. I was on
launch control officer duty, in the first two weeks that
we had any us CBM's lord, and that was Shy
and Atlas. And we went for almost two years before
(23:54):
SATs Creative Care Command suddenly realized that we had no
human reliability reliability program to check to make sure that
people that we had as launch control officers were really
mentally stable.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
My internal this story you just killed was I think
you said in nineteen sixty to sixty four is when
you were there, right, I mean that's when there was
a very real chance of nuclear war obviously during the
Cuban missile crisis.
Speaker 2 (24:29):
Oh yes, I was on duty at Fie Warren when
that's took place. I was on duty at the mouth
of Tutter Canyon on the alternate command post for Atlas
on the morning that President Kennedy was shot. They go
back a bit in history.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
Man, we've made a lot of history.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
Different story.
Speaker 1 (24:52):
Well, in a minute and a half we have before
this break, can you tell us what it was like
to be on du at launch control the nation's nuclear
weapons during the height of the Cuban missile crisis, when
there was a real chance you might be called on
at any moment to launch those nuclear weapons.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
Well, I can't address any differently than I would any
other day that I was in that really just and
the ancillary I was also in the seventy cent through it.
I was a lot of control officer and then moved
on up in the three is trying, but I had
(25:35):
to decide the first time I went on alert that
if the code came through that I had to make it.
I had to be already decided that I was going
to hit the button. We did have a button, and
we didn't have a need. And the same thing for
my croup matter. We had to agree. We had to
(25:57):
do the coffee decote, authenticate, verify between ourselves that we
were supposed to launch and we had no further authorization.
They did not have a system to destroy the missle
or anything else. He and I decided that we were
going to launch. That was it.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
Now later on that that got corrected. As you can
see the first this is a growing thing still when
you're talking about nuclear weapons. I can only imagine what
Goldrone is going to do.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Oh my lord.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Well, but the story the realizations, I think the realization
that I was going to be one of the people
that if we ever had to defend itation, I was
going to be able to through my part by hitting
the button. I would have to do it.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
Oh man, what a responsibility. Well, colonel, let's get you
back in studio for another hour sometime and just talk
some more history, because you were right in the middle
of a lot of it. Okay, well, thank you, sir,
care very much so, Colonel Kirkdale, what a treasure? Three
or three someone three eight two five five text d
(27:08):
A N five seven seventh three nine. We have more
texts coming in from the great men and women of
law enforcement responding to that story. Earlier in the audio
we had on air about whether an officer did an
adequate wellness check on a seventeen year old who was
now living with some adults after declaring that she was
really a boy. And so we'll get to some of
(27:30):
that feedback as well as the latest on the signal controversy.
You're on the Dankpla Show.
Speaker 4 (27:41):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (27:44):
Talk about this signal story. I think has been so
important in so many different ways. And my quick rap
if you weren't with us earlier, is I wish every
American could read the whole text string. Obviously, Jeffrey Goldberg
from the Atlantic did not want to publish the whole
ex string because it makes the administration look so good.
And yes they are discussing war plans, and yes it
(28:07):
is classified information. It was a mistake to invite a
reporter into the group. But the discussion is so high leveled,
there's so much competence that Americans would be very very impressed.
And glad those men and women are on the wall.
And the mission, by the way, a critical mission, was
a great success. And yeah, just find out where the
mistake occurred, fix it and move on. Let's go to
(28:28):
Jack and Cheyenne. You're on the dan Kaplis show.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Welcome Danny. It's been a while since I've talked how
you do One of the things.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
That wanted to mention as I was absolutely shocked to
find out that those two ass are notts that have
been up there for supposed to be eight days turned
out to be eight months. That Elon Musk offered Biden
six months ago to go up there and bring him back,
and he refused to let him do it. Yeah, yeah,
And my question is that two people that were up
(28:57):
there that length of time obviously don't need to put together.
There are a damage claim that they certainly have one.
And is Biden able to be criminal I mean, civilly
liable for that or is there a governmental community you
can hide behind or does she have some kind of
an affirmative defense? I mean, how the hell, can you
(29:19):
escape that? Or maybe those two people just don't want
to get involved with suing them if I always want
to count on a TP in court right now, Well.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Jack, appreciate the call. Great question, my friend. And to
answer Jack's question, this principle of governmental immunity, and that's
a term most often used at the state level, but
there is a federal version of it as well. But
at the state level, say here in Colorado, of course,
the people at the power of the people in government
to get together in the past these laws that say,
(29:47):
oh yeah, no, we can screw up in a thousand
different ways and you can't sue us. Now, there are
some exceptions to that, and the Colorado governmental immunity creates
some exceptions to that, such as you know, motor v
go crash stuff, et cetera. But then there's a cap
on the amount that can be recovered. So, yeah, people
in power protecting themselves against being held fully accountable for
(30:11):
the harm they cause. Wrong, very very wrong. And I
understand the public policy considerations of the government has to
remain solve and financially right, but you know what, you
can buy insurance and if you're going to go out
there and you're going to kill somebody, you're going to
maim somebody, you're going to cause their family financial hardship
for life. You should be responsible just like everybody else.
(30:33):
But yeah, you have this governmental immunity standing in the
way because the powerfuls make law to protect the powerful,
and then you have a similar concept at the federal level,
just works differently. Now there are exceptions. Please understand, there
are exceptions, and there can be some things that state
officials do to harm a person that then create a
(30:55):
federal claim and then the State Governmental Immunity Act does
not apply because it's a claim. So very complicated area
of law, but a lot of really horrific injustice done
because of the powerful protecting themselves through these laws. So Jack,
thank you for that call. A lot of textures, it
seems to be the consensus of our law enforcement textures,
(31:17):
and we're blessed with so many law enforcement in our
audience that from what they heard on that audio we
played earlier that the officer should have done more in
doing a wellness check. But the reason we were talking
about that story is another one of these scenarios where
you've got a miner, in this case seventeen who now
is living with adults, and the miner believes she's a girl,
(31:41):
but believe she's a boy. The parents want the daughter back,
and they asked the police to go in. And then
everybody could hear at least the portion of the audio
that's public. You know what appeared to be the officer
not taking the child aside and talking to the child separately.
It appears to be why don't you say, Ryan, kind
of the overwhelming consensus of our law enforcement Texters that
(32:04):
you got to take that child aside and have a
separate conversation.
Speaker 6 (32:09):
Right because somebody that's been brainwashed or indoctrinated, whatever the
assumption might be.
Speaker 4 (32:14):
And you don't jump to a conclusion.
Speaker 6 (32:16):
But I think you hit the nail on the head
earlier when you said, when this person is being harbored,
she is unlikely to state her actual feelings thoughts in
that instance without the influence and input of the people
that are right there with her.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
And again, this particular situation, as I said before, I
don't know enough about it to have any idea you know,
what that child would have said if she was taken outside,
or whether she was in danger, any of that I'm
not drawing any conclusions on that. I'm talking about normal protocol,
and that's why we opened it up to our law
enforcement community and our audience. Is would the normal protocol
(32:50):
be to just have a separate conversation with the child?
And you know, me, my dad a great comfort thirty years.
I give tremendous deference to law enforcement, and they deserve
the benefit of the doubt and more. But if you're
going to be pro cop, then you have to be
honest and you have to address the fair questions when
they arrived and one of the techs fairness to all cops.
Speaker 6 (33:09):
One of the Texters made the same point that Sheriff
Steve Riems did earlier with me today, Dan, and that
is it reminded Sheriff Riems a lot of the Gabby
Patito encounter. You may have seen that video, which there
was clear there were clear signs of distress and abuse
and they just kind of let them go their separate ways.
They put him I think in a domestic abuse hotel
or it was just beyond bizarre. But that there were
(33:30):
several mistakes and the laws in Utah changed after that incident.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Yeah, and this other point, it's not meant to explain
anything that happened here. But we also need to be
aware that the left in Colorado and some other lefty states,
and Joe Biden in his administration, they've gone so far
out of their way to undermine law enforcement, including here
the left in Colorado passing these laws at law enforcement
(33:55):
liable money, damages, out of pocket if something goes wrong
that you've got so many good men and women in
law enforcement, excuse me, who who are not able to
lean forward as much as they used to because they're
so concerned that the politicians will make them a human sacrifice,
(34:17):
won't have their back. They can end up personally liable.
I'm just talking generally speaking. I'm not making any excuses
for anything that happened or didn't happen in this case,
but we need to be aware that's a real issue
in Colorado, and we've got to have some fundamental structural
changes if we want to keep the great officers we
have and attract more. We'll talk about that in another
show as well. Thank you, Kelly, You're great work. Ryan,
(34:38):
you are absolutely the best. Hope you join us tomorrow
on The Dan capt Show.
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. Yeah, and truth
and justice are the American way, right, They're inseparable, and
that's why it's so important that this signal mistake be
(00:24):
approached that way, be approached with truth and be approached
with real justice for whoever made the mistake, because it
was a big mistake that could have could have gotten
a really critical mission that was beautifully executed canceled, and
in a worst case scenario, could have caused the mission
to go south and get innocent people killed. So it
(00:46):
is a big deal. But the key starting point in
my mind is we've got to tell the truth about
what happened. So let's have that conversation three or three
someone three eight two five to five the number text
d an five seven th nine. My quick take before
we go to the phone lines and text. And by
the way, we're getting some tremendous text from people, including
(01:07):
law enforcement in response to the last segment we just
did so I'll set that up more fully when we
read those texts in a second. But when it comes
to Signal, first of all, I wish every American, every
single American, could read the full text exchange, which never
should have happened on this open source Signal app.
Speaker 2 (01:27):
Right.
Speaker 1 (01:27):
And you probably know that Signal is an encrypted app,
and it's an app that's often used to try to
make sure conversations are more secure. But when you're talking
about government officials at our highest level talking about the
specific details of a critical upcoming attack on terrorists, yeah,
those can't occur on an app like that. And we've
(01:49):
heard that, wait a second, that the last administration was
doing it. It was automatically loaded into these computers and
communication devices, and it's important to know that background. But
we know this can't continue going forward. Right, But here's
the deal, if every American could see the actual text exchange.
The full text exchange has now been released by the
(02:11):
reporter at The Atlantic, who, in my view, he's not
one of the good guys. You know, he's a lefty
who I think is at times dishonest. And so none
of this is about praising the reporter, Jeffrey Goldberg, except
for one thing that when he improperly stayed in this communication,
he should have gotten out as soon as he realized
(02:32):
he wasn't supposed to be there. But after he improperly
stayed and obtained these critical operational details, he did not
share them with the public, And thank god for that.
He made a good decision there that should be commended.
On the other hand, he shouldn't have been around that long.
You should have immediately gotten out. But if everybody could
read the full text string that he has now reported,
(02:54):
they would be so impressed with the Trump administration. They'd
be so impressed with hegsa Waltz, Kadie Vance, everybody involved
in the planning and discussion of this mission. This is
what you want. This is what you want at the
very top, this is what you wanted to look like.
This is the outcome you want. So Americans would be
(03:15):
very impressed with that. Would Americans say, wow, you can't
accidentally invite a reporter in. You shouldn't be communicating an
app like this. Of course they would, but that would
be far outweighed with how impressed they are at how
the administration is functioning. But I think where the administration
missed the boat and some have done this, but as
(03:36):
a whole, it should have immediately just stepped up and said, Okay,
we made a mistake. We did a great job read
the text, we did a great job planning this mission.
We carried it out, our troops carried it out flawlessly.
We served American in the world. But yeah, that should
not have happened, and we'll fix it. At that point,
the Trump administration only gains because we are all wired, right.
(03:58):
I don't know as an Americans, it's in our DNA
that when somebody steps up and admits a mistake and
takes responsibility for it, almost no matter how big a
mistake it is, people respond very positively to that. And
so between being very impressed with these communications, the substance,
the intelligence, the planning, and then being impressed with the
(04:21):
administration just admitting the mistake and taking responsibility, it's a total,
a total plus for the Trump administration. But here and again,
you know, I literally think, God, Donald Trump has this
second term, and I think overall he's handled it pretty well.
But I think trying to say this wasn't classified information,
(04:42):
give me a break and listen. I get it. I
get the Democrats are total hypocrites on this, all the
same Democrats who are defending Hillary Clinton, who jeopardized our
national security literally one hundred thousand times more than this
tech string. Did I get their hypocrisy? But please, this
is profound truth moment, the profound truth. The reality right
(05:05):
now is the Democrats are irrelevant. Nobody is listening to them.
They are irrelevant. So their criticism they're cackling, they're screaming
like smashed cats, doesn't matter at all. They are irrelevant.
All that matters now is how we perform. All that
(05:26):
matters now is how the Trump administration performs. All that
matters now is how the Republican Party performs. That's all
that matters. That Democrats are irrelevant, So everybody's human. This
administration has been so very good it can't be perfect.
I just wish here they had acknowledged mistake. It'll never
(05:47):
happen again. But read the text and see how great
we handle this. But if anybody has a doubt that
there was classified information in here, here's one of the
texts that was released today by Goldberg, and again hardcore.
I think the reason he didn't release the full text
exchange earlier is that it makes the Trump administration look
so good. I think that's why he held it back.
(06:10):
He's only releasing it now because the Trump administration claimed
there was no classified material, and he wants to show
that's not accurate. But this is obviously classified material.
Speaker 3 (06:22):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Listen to this, and the Trump administration is not claiming
that these texts are forged or inaccurate. Time now eleven
forty four Eastern Weather's favorable just confirmed with Sentcom. We
are a go for mission launch twelve fifteen et F
eighteen's launch First Strike Package thirteen forty five I meaning
(06:43):
one forty five trigger based F eighteen first strike windows
starts target terrorist is at his known location. Show should
be on time. Also, strike drones launch fourteen ten more
F eighteen's launch second Strike Package fourteen fifty fifteen strike
drones on target. This is when the first bombs will
(07:04):
definitely drop, all in caps. Somebody going to try to
argue that's not classified. If that's not classified, what is classified?
So listen, we're all human. Mistakes get made. No harm
was done here. The team acted so impressively as you
(07:24):
can see in these texts. Just admit the mistake and
move on. Let's go to Mason and Aurora. You're on
the Dan Kaplis Show. Welcome.
Speaker 4 (07:31):
Yeah, this is Nathan.
Speaker 5 (07:32):
I was in the intelligence community for twenty years.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
Wonderful.
Speaker 5 (07:36):
Yeah, and I want to give you some information. When
I was in they had a machine that I worked
on that would prevent anybody that wasn't authorized to be
on a on a com communication.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
So it would if they were if we.
Speaker 5 (07:51):
Had recognized this whatever's name something Gilbert, that journalist from
the Omanic magazine, the CEO or whatever, it would have
would not have allowed him to even enter into that conversation.
And I'm surprised that not just this president, but all
the presidents before that or the administrations are allowing this
(08:14):
kind of craziness in the new era of text messaging
and all that. Sure it's encrypted, but if somebody can
piggyback on top of me and I screw up and
I left this guy into a top secret communications, that's crazy.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Yep.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Amen, so beautifully said, and thank you for your service,
my friend. And that goes to the magnitude of the mistake.
But does that mean Trump should fire Waltz or whoever
was responsible. No, because unless it was shown it was
intentional and Obviously Waltz wouldn't intentionally do that. Who knows.
Maybe in theory there could have been some staffer, some
(08:50):
holdover from the Biden administration whatever, who invited Goldberg in
an unbeknownst to Walts. Who knows, But we need to know, right,
We've got to get that bottom line. But my point is,
short of it being intentional on somebody's part or such
absolute reckless incompetence, the person just can't be allowed to stay. No,
I don't think anybody should be fired over this, and
(09:11):
I'm very happy to see President Trump just in the
last twenty minutes strongly defending his team, saying nobody's going
to get fired, because when you read those text you're
going to be glad those guys and gals are on
that wall. You're going to be glad those guys and
gals are protecting America and the world. You're going to
be impressed with how they acted. The fact that communication
(09:33):
occurred on a signal app which was automatically installed in
their systems. They didn't have anything to do with choosing
to install it. Yeah, that's got to be fixed.
Speaker 4 (09:42):
But no, I.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Wouldn't want anybody who I saw on that text exchange
fired those people performed at a very high level. Three
or three someone three eight two five five text DA
five seven seven three nine want to Quebec? When I
get to some text we're getting from law enforcement responding
to a we had just before the top of the hour,
and some audio we had of another case where a
(10:05):
child now seventeen year old is now living with some
adults after declaring that she's really a boy and her
parents want to get her home. And you heard the
tape of the officer going in to do a quote
wellness check, and we have others from law enforcement responding
to that. You're on the Dan Capla Show.
Speaker 4 (10:31):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (10:36):
Telsey Gabbert, Director Gabbert, you are the security executive and
set access guidelines for classified information.
Speaker 5 (10:44):
Did you.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Contact the Defense Secretary or others after the specific military
planning was put out and say, hey, we should be
doing this on a skiff? There was no classified material
that was shared in that, there's no classifying import I'm
sorry there was, and I'm so glad we have this administration.
(11:07):
You read those texts now, which the reporter had to
put out the whole string. The reason he didn't in
the beginning is it makes the Trump administration and everybody
on that tech string looks so good. The only thing
that makes them look bad is that they were using
an open source app, the Signal app, which is encrypted,
by the way, and was apparently automatically installed by their systems,
(11:27):
and the past administration used it. But it makes them
look so good. And that's why Goldberg didn't put out
the full string to begin with. They only put it
out now because the administration was denying there was classified
information on there. And I read some of it just
before the break. It's obviously classified. It's talking about when
(11:47):
they're going to strike, where they're going to strike, how
they're going to strike, that the terrorist target is home
right now, by the way. Yeah, it's obviously classified. So
all I'm saying is you're doing a great job. Democrats
are irrelevant, Tony, and worry about their criticism. Just you know,
acknowledge the mistake and move on. And then hey, got
to get to the bottom of it, find out how
it happened, and then see if somebody needs to be fired.
(12:10):
But I sure wouldn't be firing Mike Waltz over this
or any of those top guys and gals, because you
read that text string they did great and it was
a very successful mission. Dan, I understand how you feel
about Goldberg and Waltz situation, but please talk about Biden's
horrible mistake in Afghanistan when thirteen were killed. My goodness,
we have talked about that so much on this show,
and we should, and we did and we will, and
(12:34):
it's a very big part of why Joe Biden lost. Remember,
before that horror in Afghanistan, Biden was on average, day
in and day out about six seven points higher in
the polls. And then after that massive failed surrender in Afghanistan,
you know, he dropped, He dropped a bunch and he
(12:54):
never got back because Americans were so horrified by that.
Believe me, yes, we have talked about that. The point
here isn't that, oh I wish we had Biden or
Democrats instead of Trump, my lord. I mean, anybody who
listens to this show knows it's the polar opposite with me.
The point is that we have to be honest. We
have to be honest. We have to be honest about
(13:15):
our political opponents, even when they try to cancel us,
even when they try to harm us because we're honest
about them. We have to be fearlessly honest about our opponents.
We also have to be honest about our own mistakes,
because first of all, that's the only way to live right. Second,
that's the only way to be credible. So we just
(13:36):
need to be honest about the mistakes that were made here,
and we certainly don't need to be claiming there was
no classified information. Dan Regarding the officer who wouldn't do
anything for the parent of the minor child, he is
in the embodiment of current lazing apathetic culture in which
we now live. Communists have stealthily gotten to this officer
(13:56):
to help destroy families. He's unaware, but a useful idiot.
Spletely disagree with that text, and we'll try to play
that sound again. Completely disagree, and this is sound we heard,
and you can see the video of the officer going
into a home where the minor child seventeen years old,
parents outside wants the child back. Child now says she
(14:18):
thinks she's a boy, though she's really a girl, and
the officer goes into do a wellness check. And I
agree with with the interpretation that there's not much done
when he's in there. But to reach those harsh conclusions
about the officer I think is unfair for a couple
of reasons. One is just globally and listen, do I
think the officer should have done more there? From the
(14:40):
little I know right now, which is basically the tape, Yeah,
if that's my child, I would have wanted to see
the officer take that child outside for a minute, talk
to the child outside the presence of the adults in
the home, and do that kind of check with the child.
But I think, just glow speaking, we need to understand
(15:02):
that the left, particularly here in Colorado other leftist controlled states,
has been so anti law enforcement and has so undermined
law enforcement now making them personally liable civilly if something
goes wrong on the job. That you have a lot
of tremendous officers who don't feel like they can lean
forward because you know that they don't want to end
(15:24):
up in that next viral video. You know, they don't
want to end up being personally sued, et cetera. I'm
not saying that's what was going on here. I'm just
saying it's something that's generally undermining law enforcement, which I
think is the intention of the left, right. But then
beyond that, you know, I just don't agree with that. Texter.
I do think from the litle live scene that yeah,
(15:45):
more should have been done there, but I think that's
way too harsh a conclusion. I want to get to this, Dan,
I'm a cop of twenty two years and a parent
of sixteen years. I like, you give the benefit of
the doubt to my brothers and sisters. However, I can't
exactly do that in this situation. I think what I
would have done if that person did not give back
the child would be to immediately submit a runaway report,
(16:06):
have it entered into the system. Then tell that former
teacher she would be under arrest for harboring a runaway
if she did not immediately give up the child. Thank
you for that, And I'd love to hear from others
in law enforcement, right because my dad a cop for
thirty years, I'm very open about the fact I give
the big benefit of the doubt to law enforcement. You know, underappreciated,
they're undersupported, and I give the benefit of the doubt.
(16:30):
But no question in this situation, I mean, why not
just take the child out on the porch and have
a conversation privately, Dan, that's awful. The deputy should have
pulled the child aside and asked open ended questions. The
cop basically didn't give the child a chance. Horrible policing.
Then laughing about it, says another Texter. And we'll invite
(16:50):
the officer. I'm sure there are probably department rules that
would have prevented it, but we'll invite the officer on, Ryan,
can you do that? And then the other woman mentioned
in the story, Joanne and smotherman we're told is an
adult at the home where the child was will invite
her on as well and get her side of that story.
But but yeah, no, I would have liked to have
(17:13):
seen more done there. Wait on these other calls until
we get back from the break. The most recent on
the controversy over the use of the signal app as
President Trump with and I think about the last half
hour just coming out, and I'm glad to see him
do it, very strongly supporting his team. Nobody's going to
get fired. The team did a great job here with
(17:34):
this mission, and I think all of that is correct.
I just think the administration needs to avoid any suggestion
that this was not classified information. There's clearly classified information,
and just acknowledge the mistake was made to include the journalist.
We'll get to the bottom of how it happened. We'll
see why the prior administration was using this signal app
(17:55):
and see if that's something that can be continued. Boy,
you would think there'd be a better way, wouldn't you?
Love your thoughts on all this? Three or three someone
three eight two five five text d A N five
seven seven three nine. You're on the Dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 4 (18:21):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
It's important sound we've ever heard that we cannot understand. Wow,
(18:51):
think about that these are people in Gaza marching through
the streets channing Hamas is a terrorist organation. That there
are so many things that should give us hope right now,
right but that should really give us hope, really give
us hope. It reminds me. I think it was two
(19:13):
thousand and eight, two thousand and nine, I can't remember,
but remember when the people of Iran took to the
streets and they wanted to overthrow those evil rulers. Obama
help us, I mean that was their chant, Obama, help
us Obama help us, and he abandoned them. He abandoned
them to their captors. Yeah, very very encouraging to see
(19:34):
those people in the streets and again today I understand.
So yeah, yeah, all righty, let's go. Oh, Colonel Kurt
kind enough to join us. Colonel kurk Dale a tremendous
American hero and he's been on the show to talk
with us before, honored by the Nuggets at one of
those games for his military heroism. Colonel welcome back to
(19:54):
the show.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Well, thank you very much to take a McCall. My
wanted to tell you. I'll try to make a very
quick story, but to me, it shows that not every
kerfuffle about classified material has to be punished. You need
to learn from it. I was a deputy commander in
(20:19):
the Atmos missiles in Shy and launch control officer in
nineteen sixty to sixty four. For a given day, my
next door neighbor, who was also a crew commander, came
home from the site and as he started to get
ready to take a shower, he realized that he had
(20:41):
not handed his envelope to the officer that he replaced
on the muscle site. That was the emergency war order
envelope that was of course, I had to be. You
had to be carrying a weapon anytime you had it
on you and your counterpart, the other crew commander or
(21:03):
two also had his card. All that information was the
same thing popsic of crypto, and it also was exactly
the same code that the President would have in the football.
He realized that, you know, this was a terrible thing
because he was off the site, unarmed and had what
(21:24):
was needed in order to launch if the emergency war
order came in. He immediately got on the phone called
the missile site and his counterpart, he said, stuck around
your neck. Of course, the man fact he did not
have his envelope around his neck. Jim my neighbor said,
(21:48):
I will be there as quickly as I can. He
jumps in his silly little car and he heads for
a missile site is probably fifty miles away, he told him,
so letting me in. Don't ask any questions, just have
the guards to let me through the gate. He went
through the gate, went downstairs into the launch control center
(22:12):
underground and just took off the envelope and handed it
to his counterpart. Problem solved. But of course they had
just there was purely a just a glitch in the
changeover process which was very formal, but they had messed
(22:32):
up that information, of course filtered through the system. Nobody
was ever funny for anything else, but I'll tell you
that it made enough concern within our squadron that we
never had any further difficulties with that. Fortunately, these people
(22:57):
both ended up retiring. It was i was purely a glitch,
and nobody needed to be punished. They just needed to learn,
and we all did.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Colonel, what a great story makes such a tremendous point.
And the distinction you're pointing out between that just a
one time mistake that nobody saw coming and what we saw,
for example, with Hillary Clinton, premeditated, deliberate, ongoing undermining of
our national security. These are night and day different.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
Absolutely, absolutely, there were things that came out. Of course,
I was in the first two weeks. I was on
launch control officer duty, in the first two weeks that
we had any us CBM's lord, and that was Shy
and Atlas. And we went for almost two years before
(23:54):
SATs Creative Care Command suddenly realized that we had no
human reliability reliability program to check to make sure that
people that we had as launch control officers were really
mentally stable.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
My internal this story you just killed was I think
you said in nineteen sixty to sixty four is when
you were there, right, I mean that's when there was
a very real chance of nuclear war obviously during the
Cuban missile crisis.
Speaker 2 (24:29):
Oh yes, I was on duty at Fie Warren when
that's took place. I was on duty at the mouth
of Tutter Canyon on the alternate command post for Atlas
on the morning that President Kennedy was shot. They go
back a bit in history.
Speaker 1 (24:49):
Man, we've made a lot of history.
Speaker 2 (24:51):
Different story.
Speaker 1 (24:52):
Well, in a minute and a half we have before
this break, can you tell us what it was like
to be on du at launch control the nation's nuclear
weapons during the height of the Cuban missile crisis, when
there was a real chance you might be called on
at any moment to launch those nuclear weapons.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
Well, I can't address any differently than I would any
other day that I was in that really just and
the ancillary I was also in the seventy cent through it.
I was a lot of control officer and then moved
on up in the three is trying, but I had
(25:35):
to decide the first time I went on alert that
if the code came through that I had to make it.
I had to be already decided that I was going
to hit the button. We did have a button, and
we didn't have a need. And the same thing for
my croup matter. We had to agree. We had to
(25:57):
do the coffee decote, authenticate, verify between ourselves that we
were supposed to launch and we had no further authorization.
They did not have a system to destroy the missle
or anything else. He and I decided that we were
going to launch. That was it.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (26:19):
Now later on that that got corrected. As you can
see the first this is a growing thing still when
you're talking about nuclear weapons. I can only imagine what
Goldrone is going to do.
Speaker 1 (26:31):
Oh my lord.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Well, but the story the realizations, I think the realization
that I was going to be one of the people
that if we ever had to defend itation, I was
going to be able to through my part by hitting
the button. I would have to do it.
Speaker 1 (26:47):
Oh man, what a responsibility. Well, colonel, let's get you
back in studio for another hour sometime and just talk
some more history, because you were right in the middle
of a lot of it. Okay, well, thank you, sir,
care very much so, Colonel Kirkdale, what a treasure? Three
or three someone three eight two five five text d
(27:08):
A N five seven seventh three nine. We have more
texts coming in from the great men and women of
law enforcement responding to that story. Earlier in the audio
we had on air about whether an officer did an
adequate wellness check on a seventeen year old who was
now living with some adults after declaring that she was
really a boy. And so we'll get to some of
(27:30):
that feedback as well as the latest on the signal controversy.
You're on the Dankpla Show.
Speaker 4 (27:41):
And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (27:44):
Talk about this signal story. I think has been so
important in so many different ways. And my quick rap
if you weren't with us earlier, is I wish every
American could read the whole text string. Obviously, Jeffrey Goldberg
from the Atlantic did not want to publish the whole
ex string because it makes the administration look so good.
And yes they are discussing war plans, and yes it
(28:07):
is classified information. It was a mistake to invite a
reporter into the group. But the discussion is so high leveled,
there's so much competence that Americans would be very very impressed.
And glad those men and women are on the wall.
And the mission, by the way, a critical mission, was
a great success. And yeah, just find out where the
mistake occurred, fix it and move on. Let's go to
(28:28):
Jack and Cheyenne. You're on the dan Kaplis show.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Welcome Danny. It's been a while since I've talked how
you do One of the things.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
That wanted to mention as I was absolutely shocked to
find out that those two ass are notts that have
been up there for supposed to be eight days turned
out to be eight months. That Elon Musk offered Biden
six months ago to go up there and bring him back,
and he refused to let him do it. Yeah, yeah,
And my question is that two people that were up
(28:57):
there that length of time obviously don't need to put together.
There are a damage claim that they certainly have one.
And is Biden able to be criminal I mean, civilly
liable for that or is there a governmental community you
can hide behind or does she have some kind of
an affirmative defense? I mean, how the hell, can you
(29:19):
escape that? Or maybe those two people just don't want
to get involved with suing them if I always want
to count on a TP in court right now, Well.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Jack, appreciate the call. Great question, my friend. And to
answer Jack's question, this principle of governmental immunity, and that's
a term most often used at the state level, but
there is a federal version of it as well. But
at the state level, say here in Colorado, of course,
the people at the power of the people in government
to get together in the past these laws that say,
(29:47):
oh yeah, no, we can screw up in a thousand
different ways and you can't sue us. Now, there are
some exceptions to that, and the Colorado governmental immunity creates
some exceptions to that, such as you know, motor v
go crash stuff, et cetera. But then there's a cap
on the amount that can be recovered. So, yeah, people
in power protecting themselves against being held fully accountable for
(30:11):
the harm they cause. Wrong, very very wrong. And I
understand the public policy considerations of the government has to
remain solve and financially right, but you know what, you
can buy insurance and if you're going to go out
there and you're going to kill somebody, you're going to
maim somebody, you're going to cause their family financial hardship
for life. You should be responsible just like everybody else.
(30:33):
But yeah, you have this governmental immunity standing in the
way because the powerfuls make law to protect the powerful,
and then you have a similar concept at the federal level,
just works differently. Now there are exceptions. Please understand, there
are exceptions, and there can be some things that state
officials do to harm a person that then create a
(30:55):
federal claim and then the State Governmental Immunity Act does
not apply because it's a claim. So very complicated area
of law, but a lot of really horrific injustice done
because of the powerful protecting themselves through these laws. So Jack,
thank you for that call. A lot of textures, it
seems to be the consensus of our law enforcement textures,
(31:17):
and we're blessed with so many law enforcement in our
audience that from what they heard on that audio we
played earlier that the officer should have done more in
doing a wellness check. But the reason we were talking
about that story is another one of these scenarios where
you've got a miner, in this case seventeen who now
is living with adults, and the miner believes she's a girl,
(31:41):
but believe she's a boy. The parents want the daughter back,
and they asked the police to go in. And then
everybody could hear at least the portion of the audio
that's public. You know what appeared to be the officer
not taking the child aside and talking to the child separately.
It appears to be why don't you say, Ryan, kind
of the overwhelming consensus of our law enforcement Texters that
(32:04):
you got to take that child aside and have a
separate conversation.
Speaker 6 (32:09):
Right because somebody that's been brainwashed or indoctrinated, whatever the
assumption might be.
Speaker 4 (32:14):
And you don't jump to a conclusion.
Speaker 6 (32:16):
But I think you hit the nail on the head
earlier when you said, when this person is being harbored,
she is unlikely to state her actual feelings thoughts in
that instance without the influence and input of the people
that are right there with her.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
And again, this particular situation, as I said before, I
don't know enough about it to have any idea you know,
what that child would have said if she was taken outside,
or whether she was in danger, any of that I'm
not drawing any conclusions on that. I'm talking about normal protocol,
and that's why we opened it up to our law
enforcement community and our audience. Is would the normal protocol
(32:50):
be to just have a separate conversation with the child?
And you know, me, my dad a great comfort thirty years.
I give tremendous deference to law enforcement, and they deserve
the benefit of the doubt and more. But if you're
going to be pro cop, then you have to be
honest and you have to address the fair questions when
they arrived and one of the techs fairness to all cops.
Speaker 6 (33:09):
One of the Texters made the same point that Sheriff
Steve Riems did earlier with me today, Dan, and that
is it reminded Sheriff Riems a lot of the Gabby
Patito encounter. You may have seen that video, which there
was clear there were clear signs of distress and abuse
and they just kind of let them go their separate ways.
They put him I think in a domestic abuse hotel
or it was just beyond bizarre. But that there were
(33:30):
several mistakes and the laws in Utah changed after that incident.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Yeah, and this other point, it's not meant to explain
anything that happened here. But we also need to be
aware that the left in Colorado and some other lefty states,
and Joe Biden in his administration, they've gone so far
out of their way to undermine law enforcement, including here
the left in Colorado passing these laws at law enforcement
(33:55):
liable money, damages, out of pocket if something goes wrong
that you've got so many good men and women in
law enforcement, excuse me, who who are not able to
lean forward as much as they used to because they're
so concerned that the politicians will make them a human sacrifice,
(34:17):
won't have their back. They can end up personally liable.
I'm just talking generally speaking. I'm not making any excuses
for anything that happened or didn't happen in this case,
but we need to be aware that's a real issue
in Colorado, and we've got to have some fundamental structural
changes if we want to keep the great officers we
have and attract more. We'll talk about that in another
show as well. Thank you, Kelly, You're great work. Ryan,
(34:38):
you are absolutely the best. Hope you join us tomorrow
on The Dan capt Show.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.