07-24-25 - *FULL SHOW* Judge spikes Epstein info; Suppressors law; Obama crimes? + Hulk Hogan Passes Away - The Ross Kaminsky Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
There's a light on the wall just outside the KOA
studio door, and it says on air. And it's actually
a fairly large, maybe eight or ten inches tall eight
inches wide kind of plastic thing with a light bulb
behind it. So when the light bulb goes on, you
can see the glowing, clear plastic thing that says I

(00:23):
think it says on air. Is that what it says
Shannon to say on air? And what's supposed to happen
is when someone in the studio, like let's say Marty
and Gina or maybe even me hits this microphone button
so that you can hear me talking right now, that
light just outside the studio door is supposed to go on,
and it's an indicator to somebody who may be thinking
about coming into the studio either not to come in

(00:45):
or to be very quiet if they come in, unless
they want to be heard, you know, all over the
world on KOA. And I noticed when I came in
just now, when Marty and Gina were on the air,
that that light wasn't on. So I just spent the
last ninety seconds putting in a so called trouble ticket
so that I didn't have to ask producer Shannon to
do so, because that's not his favorite part of the job,

(01:08):
right Shannon, is that or what?

Speaker 2 (01:11):
Fortunately, I have recently lost access to the ability to
submit a trouble ticket. Oh wow, lucky you. How did
you arrange that, producer, Shannon. Okay, anyway, let's keep moving.

Speaker 1 (01:27):
You just heard in our in our so silly. You
just heard in our news broadcast that Todd Blant is
going to prison. And that was a funny headline the
way the way Pat Woodard did it.

Speaker 2 (01:40):
But he is.

Speaker 1 (01:40):
He is literally going to a prison. He's not going
to serve a prison sentence, but rather he is going
to talk with Gallaine Maxwell, who is serving a twenty
year federal prison sentence for sexually trafficking underage girls for
the use slash abuse of Jeffrey Epstein, and perhaps others.

(02:02):
We don't know about others for sure, but for sure
Jeffrey Epstein, who's dead now.

Speaker 2 (02:08):
And this is an interesting thing.

Speaker 1 (02:10):
So there's a lot of things going on right now,
and I'm going to talk about a lot of this
stuff over the course of the show. There's a lot
of national news Trump stuff, Epstein's stuff. There's headlines going
around today that CNN.

Speaker 2 (02:23):
Is very very happy to talk about that.

Speaker 1 (02:26):
Ag Pam Bondi told Donald Trump that his name is
in the Epstein files.

Speaker 2 (02:31):
That actually was a Wall Street General report.

Speaker 1 (02:34):
That came out yesterday that said she Bondi told Trump
that back in May that his name is in the
so called Epstein files. And there's just a lot to
talk about there, and I promise I will get to it,
but let's just stick with this Todd Blanche thing. So
he's he's gonna go talk with Gallaine Maxwell, who is
literally Jeffrey Epstein's partner in crime. Sometimes we use that

(02:57):
term kind of figuratively and kind of a fun way,
you know. I'll say producer Shannon is my partner in
crime here as we do the show, even though we
are certainly not committing any crime, so we use it
in kind of a fun way. But with her, it's
really literally his partner in crime. So why are they
doing this. They're doing this because the magabase won't let

(03:20):
go of the Epstein story. I'll get into that more later,
but just let's just stipulate to that right now.

Speaker 2 (03:25):
The megabase will not let go of the Epstein.

Speaker 1 (03:27):
Story, and Democrats are pushing it now. Because they see
that this Epstein thing that they never had interest in
before is dividing Republicans. So now they're pushing it as well.
And I think this is another thing I'll talk about
more later, but this is the first time I have
ever seen Donald Trump lose control of his base on

(03:48):
an issue. His base is splitting with him about fifty
to fifty on the issue. And normally President Trump has
absolute control over his base, and when he tells them
to care about something, they do. When he tells them
not to care about something, they don't, but not on this.
So Trump tried to make it go away. It's not
going away.

Speaker 2 (04:07):
So now they're.

Speaker 1 (04:08):
Trying to think of ways to I think, handle it
in a way that is as undistracting but also offers
as little potential damage to Trump as possible. By the way,
I don't think very much damage to Trump is possible
in this story. Everybody knows that he and Epstein were
friends a long time ago before the first sex trafficking

(04:34):
and sex with minors charges came out against Epstein, and
and it seems pretty clear that when Trump found out
that Epstein was accused of being involved in that stuff,
was involved in that stuff, but just even accused at
the time, Trump kicked Epstein out of the Marra A
Lago course and abandoned him. And you know, Trump maybe

(04:55):
a lot of things, and he may have, you know,
a history of enjoying Space company with lots of beautiful
and younger women, but not children, not children, And so
I think Trump didn't have any use for that and dependons.
So I don't think Trump really has very much risk here.
And actually probably his base thinks he doesn't have much
risk here either, which is probably.

Speaker 2 (05:16):
Part of the reason they're so all over this thing.

Speaker 1 (05:18):
They think it'll hurt you know, some unnamed Democrats anyway,
So they're fishing around. The Trump administration is fishing around
how to handle this thing in a way that simultaneously
will will satisfy the base but also allow it to
go away. And I think they're going to have a
very hard time with that. So Todd Blanche who was

(05:41):
who is Donald Trump's personal attorney and now is working
for the government, is going to talk with Gallaine Maxwell.
Now just think about this from her perspective, right, Gallaine.

Speaker 2 (05:49):
Maxwell has always said she didn't do anything wrong and
all this and she's you know, she's convicted, but she's
never admitted to anything, and.

Speaker 1 (05:59):
What would be her in sane and if to admit
to something, now, what would be her incentive to tell
Todd Blanche anything other than dude, go pound sand Right,
That's what I would say to him if I were
in her place, unless he had something to offer, Right,
can you get my sentence reduced? I doubt there's very

(06:20):
much else she cares about other than getting her sentence reduced.
I think she'd be like in her seventies when she
gets out of prison or something like that. So I
don't think there's anything she cares about. I think she's
already if you're gonna be in federal prison, I already
think she's not in a prison that's a very brutal place.
So I don't think she's gonna care a lot about

(06:40):
getting moved to a different prison, as some prisoners might.

Speaker 2 (06:43):
But I don't think she will.

Speaker 1 (06:44):
She's gonna want a reduced sentence in order to say
anything to Todd Blanche.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
Now, think about the politics of all this.

Speaker 1 (06:51):
You've got a magabase that is convinced that there is
at least smoke and probably fire around this concept of
an elite ring of pedophiles, trafficking in children and doing
unspeakable things to young girls. And if Todd Blanche wants
to get anything out of Gallaine Maxwell, can he actually

(07:17):
offer somebody who seems to have been the kingpin, the
queen pin in terms of the actual orchestration. He was
the one who would go to like a day spas
or gym's and find these girls and then gotten in
into a high school somehow, apparently through one of these

(07:37):
girls and recruiting, you know, ninth graders from high school
or whatever. How would the Trump administration get away with
offering such a person even a small reduction in sentence
for talking about whatever? I think the Trump administration right

(08:01):
now is the dog that caught the car, right? The dog,
you know, the dog chases the car down the street.
The car is always going thirty miles an hour, and
the dog runs seventeen miles an hour, and the dog
never catches the car. But every once in a while
the car has to stop for something. In this case,
the car stopped for something. These people are the dog
chasing the car, barking, snarling.

Speaker 2 (08:20):
Right, It's like, yeah, pedophiles.

Speaker 1 (08:22):
We got to get them, and now they caught the car,
and they got no idea what to do with it,
and the car is about to back up right over them.
We are partnering with Flatirons Fire to give away this
gorgeous square shape little over a yard square outdoor fire pit.
And it's some upscale company I don't remember the name.

(08:44):
The thing retails for over four thousand dollars. It's kind
of a hand finished concrete with electronic ignition, so you
don't need a lighter to light it.

Speaker 2 (08:53):
Anyway.

Speaker 1 (08:54):
We have been giving away entries each Friday for the
last three Fridays. The last three entries we're gonna be
doing tomorrow.

Speaker 2 (09:01):
One will be on the air, two will be on.

Speaker 1 (09:04):
Social media, and you should go check those.

Speaker 2 (09:06):
Out right now. So you can enter if you.

Speaker 1 (09:09):
Go to x dot com, slash koa Colorado, Instagram dot
com slash koa Colorado.

Speaker 2 (09:14):
And you can do both, all right, you can do both.

Speaker 1 (09:17):
Try to win and any way you can win an
entry and you will be entered to win, and we
will have a random drawing of one of the only
twelve entries. So if you win an entry, you got
a one out of twelve chance of winning this over
four thousand dollars beautiful outdoor fire pit. All right, So
we'll be doing the on air, we'll be doing all
of them, choosing them tomorrow. But you could do your

(09:39):
part on the social media thing today. X dot com
slash koa Colorado, Instagram dot com slash koa Colorado and
for all your fireplace needs flatironsfire dot com. Let me
do a very in the weeds national politics story here
and then I'm gonna talk just for a couple minutes
about my alma mater. So, North Carolina is a very

(10:03):
interesting state politically, right, North Carolina is a swing state.
You tend to think of it as a Republican state,
but in recent years it has drifted more toward purple. Right,
they'll have a democratic governor for example, Republican senators and
so on. It's almost like what Colorado was twenty years ago.
Is kind of purple. And part of the reason that

(10:24):
it's getting bluer. It's not so much Californians, the way
those folks have come in and wrecked Colorado like a
plague of locusts.

Speaker 2 (10:32):
It's not quite like that. But it is Charlotte.

Speaker 1 (10:35):
And if you've ever been to Charlotte, it will remind
you a fair bit of Denver in the east, and
it's kind of growing like that, and you've got a
lot of people moving there, and younger people move in there,
and you're getting some folks who are somewhat less conservative
moving there, even if not necessarily from California. Maybe they're
East Coast liberals instead of West Coast liberals.

Speaker 2 (10:54):
So Tom Tillis, US Senator.

Speaker 1 (10:58):
Has announced that he's not going to run for reelection,
and Chuck Schilmer, the head of the Democrats in the
United States Senate, has been trying to get Roy Cooper,
who's a fairly popular former governor of North Carolina, a Democrat,
to run in that race.

Speaker 2 (11:17):
And it was reported yesterday that Cooper is going to
do that, and that means.

Speaker 1 (11:24):
That and we don't know who the Republican is gonna
be yet. There's actually a chance it might be Laura Trump.
There's some talk about her. There's this guy Wattley, who
is currently chairman of the National Republican Committee.

Speaker 2 (11:35):
He might run.

Speaker 1 (11:36):
It's a state where you'd have to give a small
edge to Republicans, But if there's any Democrat who would
have a chance to win, would probably be this guy,
this guy Roy Cooper.

Speaker 2 (11:47):
The other thing to keep in mind.

Speaker 1 (11:48):
Is last time around, Donald Trump endorsed a guy named
Mark Robinson. And Mark Robinson is one of the worst
candidate you could imagine. And it was found out that
he had like all these weird online fetishes and and
you know, he's he runs this incredibly socially conservative, you know,

(12:10):
kind of anti gay, aggressively anti trans stuff. He's a
black guy, former politician. I forget what his job was,
Lieutenant governor maybe, uh, but then it turned out online
that he was he.

Speaker 2 (12:22):
Was fantasizing about having sex.

Speaker 1 (12:24):
With a transgender person and all this really and he
got destroyed.

Speaker 2 (12:28):
He got it.

Speaker 1 (12:29):
He should have gotten out of the race and let
someone else run, but he didn't. So anyway, the point is,
candidate quality matters. Trump has actually gotten much better in
endorsing higher quality candidates in recent years than he did
in his first time as president, when he would endorse
almost anyone who would endorse him. He's much more selective
now and that's good. Republicans need to choose a good

(12:50):
candidate this time around, because Roy Cooper will be a challenge.

Speaker 2 (12:55):
All Right.

Speaker 1 (12:55):
The other thing that I want to talk about for
just one minute, here's a headline from the New York Times,
Columbia agrees to two hundred million dollar fine to settle
fight with Trump. The subhead the White House had canceled
more than four hundred million dollars in research funding to
the university, saying it had failed to protect Jewish students
from harassment. And by the way, as you read a
little more, it seems like there was actually a lot

(13:17):
more than four hundred million dollars at risk. The New
York Times reports that Columbia receives about one point three
billion dollars in federal research grants annually, and the university
said it would all have been at risk if it
had remained on the White House's black list. So here's
here's my take. Colombia has been a terrible place for
a long time. It was fairly bad when I went there,

(13:41):
but it got much worse after that. My dad also
went to Columbia, and I've been telling my dad for
twenty five years at least, not to give Columbia any money.
He did eventually stop after he finally believed me that
Columbia is a bad place. Columbia deserves to have to
pay a massive fine because they definitely did not do

(14:02):
enough to stop the harassment of Jewish students and generally
to stop pro terrorist people from interrupting the educational opportunities
that students had paid lots of money to get at
that college. Colombia deserves punishment. This also, though, feels a
bit like a mafia guy coming to your store and saying,

(14:23):
you know, nice shop you got here, would be a
shame if something happened to it, And you know, a
two hundred million dollars fine is at the right amount.

Speaker 2 (14:32):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (14:32):
Part of me feels like it's protection money to the mafia,
but part of me also feels.

Speaker 2 (14:38):
Like, you know, in the classic mafia.

Speaker 1 (14:40):
Sense of protection money, it's it's money from a store
owner who didn't do anything wrong. It just happens to
be located in that mafiosa's territory. In this case, Columbia
really did do a bunch of things wrong and deserves
to be punished. So in this situation, I've got no
sympathy for either side.

Speaker 2 (14:57):
This here's a Rockies radio netw.

Speaker 1 (15:00):
Roy Cooper, the former Democratic governor of North Carolina going
to run for Senate there, And then I mentioned Laura
Trump as a potential Republican candidate. Actually, I had brought
Laura Trump up a few weeks ago, and I said,
I thought that she would not be the strongest candidate,
even though I like her. As Trump family members go,
she's probably my favorite of the ones who are at

(15:21):
least a little involved in politics. I've talked to her
one or two times on the radio, and yeah, she
does what she has to do to promote the family.
But mostly I thought she was pretty honest and good,
as you know, as those people go. But the Trump
name can only help you so far. It can help
you a lot in the primary, but I don't think
it helps you in the general election. I think it's

(15:41):
a negative in the general election in a swing state
like North Carolina. And I did not think she would
necessarily be the strongest candidate, and it would be very,
very difficult, which is an understatement.

Speaker 2 (15:55):
It would be impossible for.

Speaker 1 (15:58):
Laura Trump to be able to manage the inevitable criticisms
if she were to run for office, that there is
no possible way she could be independent in terms of
her decision making process of her father in law. Right,
So I think she would actually be a fairly weak candidate.

(16:22):
In a general election, and my friend Scott texted me
and said, hey, Ross checked the news. There was news
just in the past hour or so. And yes, just
in the past hour or so. It has been reported well.
Laura Trump herself posted on x and I quote, after
much consideration and heartfelt discussions with my family, friends and supporters,

(16:47):
I've decided not to pursue the United States Senate seat
in North Carolina at this time, she said. While I'm
not running in this election, my passion for making America
great again burns brightly, and I look forward to the
future where that leads. I would also note Laura Trump
has a pretty good gig on Fox News, and I
assume she's making quite a bit more on Fox News

(17:08):
and having more fun than she would make or the
amount of fun she would have if she were in
the US Senate. Although that does seem like sort of
a fun gig. It seems like more fun than the
house anyway. But anyway, Laura Trump is not running, and
that means Michael Wattley will almost certainly be the Republican

(17:29):
candidate in North Carolina. He's currently the chairman of the
Republican National Committee, and Donald Trump has told Wattley that
Trump would support Whatlee if he ran for.

Speaker 2 (17:43):
The seat, and that's gonna be that.

Speaker 1 (17:46):
So this race, you know, with ninety percent, so well
that's high, but at least eighty percent, I'll say, is
gonna be what Lee versus Cooper. And it's gonna be
a very interesting race. And it will be. It'll be
one of the most expensive Senate races of all time.
So obviously it's not for you know, quite some time.

(18:07):
The heavy campaigning probably won't begin until close to a
year from now, but anyway, so at least you'll be
ahead of the curve in knowing what's coming there in
North Carolina. Now, let me follow up on something from yesterday.
I got a little bit of disappointing news. So yesterday
was National ice Cream Day, National Vanilla ice Cream Day,

(18:29):
and it was also National Sprinkles Day. And as producer
Dragon and I talked about yesterday, sprinkles do improve vanilla
ice cream, but they don't improve it enough to make
it good. There's a reason, by the way, there's a
reason that if you're talking about a boring version of

(18:50):
something out there in the world, you call it the
plain vanilla version. Right, plain Vanilla's like eh, like, okay,
I guess it's better than nothing, but can't you do better?
That's how That's how I feel about Vanilla. You know,
Shannon is giving me a funny look which makes me
think you like vanilla?

Speaker 2 (19:10):
Or what's that look? No, it just works. I mean
picking on Vanilla for being playing.

Speaker 1 (19:17):
We need to come up with something else that's playing
that Jane Plain Rocky Road mm hmm, or it's the
plane Jane version. I feel bad for people named Jane.
I feel bad for people named Karen for a whole
different reason. How did they all get tagged with that?
But anyway, you gov did a poll during National ice
Cream Month and they asked a thousand adult Americans to

(19:42):
choose two things flavors they like, so you could choose
more than one of those, and what's their favorite? And
the percentage of people who said they like a flavor?
The number one was vanilla, and I find that very disappointing.
Fifty nine percent of people said they like vanilla. Only

(20:04):
fifty one percent said they like chocolate. Next two, we're
tied at forty three. Strawberry ew. I like strawberries, just
not strawberry ice cream cookie is in cream, then chocolate chip, butter, pecan,
chocolate chip, cookie dough, mint chocolate chip.

Speaker 2 (20:22):
Should I keep going, I'll go through them real fast.

Speaker 1 (20:25):
Going down the rest of the list, Carmel was a third, Neapolitan,
Rocky Road, chocolate, peanut butter, Yum coffee, gross pistachio, cherry peach,
peanut butter, Birthday cake, raspberry butterscotch cake batter, and then other.

Speaker 2 (20:38):
And then they asked what's your favorite?

Speaker 1 (20:41):
And number one by a narrow margin, but still number
one was vanilla at eleven percent, that's the favorite. Number
two at ten percent was chocolate. Number three. Now this
is an interesting one just as a matter of pure
data nerdery. If you were going, if you were ranking
in order of how what percent of people said they

(21:04):
like a particular flavor of ice cream, mint chocolate chip
came in eighth at thirty three percent. But mint chocolate
chip came in third in terms of favorite flavor. And
I get that because mint chocolate chip is pretty good,
really good. In fact, yesterday, yesterday, on National Vanilla ice

(21:27):
Cream Day, I made a very specific point of not
having vanilla ice cream, which I wouldn't have anyway, and
I did in fact, have mint chocolate chip.

Speaker 2 (21:36):
It is definitely one of my favorites. But what I
would also like to say is, isn't that disappointing. Isn't
that disappointing that the most.

Speaker 1 (21:46):
Favorite flavor and the most liked flavor in the country
is vanilla?

Speaker 2 (21:52):
Really? Come on now?

Speaker 1 (21:56):
They also did this regionally in terms of their analysis,
and the play where vanilla is very very popular. Most
popular is the West, which would include US, I guess.
And the place where chocolate is most popular is the Northeast.
And the place where chocolate is the least popular is
here in the West.

Speaker 2 (22:16):
That's disappointing too.

Speaker 1 (22:18):
Chocolate peanut butter extremely unpopular in the West, where we
are quite popular in the Northeast. Maybe I just have
more like Northeastern tastes in ice cream. I was born
in the Northeast. I didn't live there a lot. Well,
I did live there in college as a kid. I
didn't live there very much. But maybe I just have
more Northeastern flavor, you know, taste buds in ice cream.

(22:42):
I just I don't know.

Speaker 2 (22:45):
I don't know. But as I said, it's disappointing, it's disappointing.

Speaker 1 (22:50):
It makes me have just a little bit less faith
in the United States of America to realize that the
favorite ice cream flavor in the country is vanilla. There's
a reason, like I said that, we say that's plain vanilla.
I'm sorry. You can tell me whatever you want about this.
You can text me at five six six nine zero.
I think I've wasted enough of your time with it, though,

(23:12):
But you can text me at five six six nine
zero with any reaction you want to the ice cream thing.
And I will just say, if you're gonna have vanilla
ice cream, the very least you can do is put
some hot fudge or something chocolate on it. See only
like even a McDonald's hot fu I'll have a McDonald's
hot fudge Sunday. But and it's vanilla. And I don't

(23:33):
know that you'd really call that stuff ice cream. It's
some kind of frozen product. But that vanilla or whatever
it is is really only there as a vehicle to
allow me to.

Speaker 2 (23:44):
Eat hot fudge.

Speaker 1 (23:45):
And if that plastic can see through container, you know how,
it's like ninety percent whatever that white stuff is that
they call vanilla ice cream and then ten percent fudge.
If it were reversed, if it were ninety percent fudge
and ten percent ice cream. I would vanilla ice cream
in particular, I would like that a lot better. Shannon,
you look like you just have a lot of things

(24:06):
on your mind about this. No, nothing, All right, let's
do something different. Very pleased to welcome back to the show.
Mark Baisley, State senator here in Colorado, Republican candidate for governor.
As well, Mark's professional background before making a big mistake
of ruining his life with politics, which he wants to.

Speaker 2 (24:28):
Do even more of.

Speaker 1 (24:29):
Apparently, he was a former technology executive, especially national defense
related technology and stuff like that. So Mark is a
very smart dude, and I think too smart to be
in politics, but he keeps wanting to bash his head
against the wall. So he's running for governor. Hi, Mark,
you with me?

Speaker 2 (24:48):
Shannon? Has he potted up?

Speaker 3 (24:50):
Oh?

Speaker 2 (24:51):
Ross, I'm sorry? All right now, don't mute. You're supposed
to be a tech guy and you mute yourself.

Speaker 4 (24:56):
Dude, you're so righting. I have such a important things
to say about ice cream.

Speaker 2 (25:02):
Go ahead, well, well.

Speaker 4 (25:05):
Rocky Road, I mean that's a don't start with the
base of vanilla. You're right, it's it's it's neutral and
that accepts all different toppings and mixes and all that. Okay,
But you know, if you start with Rocky Road and
you go ahead and add some more more nuts in
there of your liking, and maybe even some peanut butter,

(25:26):
because you know, peanut butter and chocolate has a mix.
That's a man that came from the same god as
the one that created manna for folks to live on.

Speaker 1 (25:33):
Indeed, in this list of America's favorite flavors, or the
or the half of the list, flavors that people like,
Rocky Road and chocolate peanut butter are right next to
each other, but they are in.

Speaker 2 (25:44):
The middle of the list.

Speaker 1 (25:45):
Neither one of them is near the top of the list,
which I think is a which I think is a
big mistake. Oh look at this. David Kale just walked
in and handed me this this thing. Mark TMZ reports
that WWE legend Hulk Hogan and is dead at the
age of seventy one.

Speaker 2 (26:02):
Oh my god, no, no, the Hulkster.

Speaker 3 (26:06):
Wow.

Speaker 5 (26:06):
I was in the same room with him just this
time last year and only once in my whole life,
and that was at the National Convention where we nominated
Donald Trump for president. Thought, wow, that's a shame.

Speaker 4 (26:18):
What a loss.

Speaker 2 (26:18):
Did you chat with him a little bit?

Speaker 4 (26:21):
No, No, they don't let me on stage of people
like that.

Speaker 1 (26:25):
They all right, So I want to just talk to
you for a moment about special session. So I talked
to one person whose name I won't use on the radio,
but he's a colleague of yours in the State Senate.
And this was maybe a week ago, and he said
he thought there is a decent chance of a special session.

Speaker 2 (26:46):
Next month in August.

Speaker 1 (26:47):
And then I was talking with somebody else who is
kind of involved in the decision making process, and that
person said, I don't know for sure that there will.

Speaker 2 (26:57):
Be a special session.

Speaker 1 (26:59):
There is some stuff that could be done, but really
a lot of the talk had been about a special
session regarding impacts to the state budget from the big
beautiful bills medicaid provisions. But the medicaid provisions aren't going
to impact the state budget very much for a few years.
So what are you hearing? What are you expecting regarding
a special session?

Speaker 4 (27:21):
Yeah, so our lead leader in the State Senate, Senator
Cleeve Simpson, the best information that he's been able to
squeeze out of the Governor's office for us is a
likely August eighteen start, but since that rumored date has
gone on for like over a week now, I'm suspecting
it's going to get pushed out to even later, maybe

(27:43):
even September. But there are two reasons that are driving
us to have a special session. The very one that
you described, which is, yeah, the changes in the big
beautiful bill to Medicaid.

Speaker 6 (27:53):
Which impacts a lot of funding areas.

Speaker 4 (27:55):
For Colorado, but specifically in the medical area for Colorado
mental health. I got a call yesterday from Zoom really
from one of the mental health folks within my district
in Jefferson County, and yeah, they're having to lay people off,
so it's it's it's an impact. But the other one
is artificial intelligence. So there was a terrible bill signed

(28:20):
under duress by Governor Poulis last year that would regulate
artificial intelligence development and the use of it, and really
really an awful bill, and the governor signed it into law.

Speaker 6 (28:33):
Excuse me with the agreement because.

Speaker 4 (28:36):
It was his favorite bill was being held hostage by
the Majority leader who created that bill. That ai terrible bill. Anyway,
the deal that they cut was both both the governor's
favorite bill and the AI bill regulation bill would both
get signed into law, but we would have twenty twenty
five session to fix the AI bill. Well, that came

(29:00):
up four days before the end of the session. The
Democrats got in a big internal intramural fight and that
bill got killed. So we still have this big problem
with regulating AI and that that's going to go into
effect in February if we don't at least push the
data out. So that is a reason all by itself

(29:21):
to have a special session because otherwise.

Speaker 6 (29:24):
We're going to have AI companies move out.

Speaker 4 (29:26):
Of the state. Literally, that's their threatened. I'm sure they'll
do it too if we so.

Speaker 1 (29:31):
Mark, and for those just shooting, we're talking with Mark Baisley,
the state Senator from Jefferson County and a Republican candidate
for governor. So just elaborate briefly, and then I want
to switch topics, but just elaborate briefly on what's so
bad about this bill and why AI companies are threatening
to leave the state if the bill isn't changed.

Speaker 4 (29:53):
The concern being addressed by the bill is that AI
might discriminate against protected classes, people, minorities, and so on,
and discriminate against them in things like housing and college
admissions and that sort of thing. So what the bill
does says, we want to regulate the development of AI
software all the way to the point of requiring that

(30:15):
those developers send their software, their code, their source code
to the Attorney General's office so that he can have
his staff, like they would be qualified to pour over
the software and make sure it can't discriminate against the
protected classes. What a horrible approach. So my bill that
I'm introducing at the special session, if we have that opportunity,

(30:39):
is to say, hey.

Speaker 6 (30:40):
You know all those protections we have for special.

Speaker 4 (30:42):
Classes to prevent them from being discriminated against, Well, you
can't do.

Speaker 6 (30:45):
That with technology either and not regulate.

Speaker 4 (30:48):
The technology development itself. So we can do a better
job with this. But that's the.

Speaker 1 (30:53):
Whole rub What else do you think might be addressed
in a special session?

Speaker 4 (30:58):
It will just be retooling our budget because Medicaid in particular,
there are restrictions coming out of the big beautiful bill
that does uh that people in the country illegally cannot
take advantage of of things like mental health treatments and

(31:19):
stuff like that. So so there's there's a whole lot
of cutbacks there. There's also cutbacks on some special programs
for education, teacher training and that sort of thing. And
so it's you know, it's upsetting a lot of people
across the state, and it doesn't upset me a whole
lot should be frank, but uh, but other others are
being upset, and so we have to kind of retool

(31:41):
the budget.

Speaker 2 (31:42):
Okay, so just one more minute on this.

Speaker 1 (31:45):
So if there is a negative budget impact, which is
to say, in this case, less revenue to the government,
which by the way, that's generally a good thing, right,
but anyway from for from the government's perspective, it's bad
or at least difficult when they have less money. So
in order to get a balanced budget, which state budget

(32:05):
has to be They, when I say they, the legislature,
meaning you and your colleagues, can either raise taxes or
cut other spending. Now you, being a Republican, are going
to be much more interested in cutting other spending. They
meaning the Democrats, are going to be much more interested
in raising taxes or fees that are taxes that they.

Speaker 2 (32:26):
Will call fees. They don't have to put them in
front of tabor.

Speaker 1 (32:29):
What do you expect to happen in the special session
in particular along any of those lines.

Speaker 4 (32:35):
Yeah, we'll have to cut back on spending. And we
don't have a choice. And I appreciate that we don't
have a choice, and that's because taxpayers Bill Wrights requires
that the people that we go to the people.

Speaker 6 (32:46):
If we want to raise taxes, we have to go ask.

Speaker 4 (32:49):
Their permission first, and that's going to take a whole
election cycle for them to vote on that. So now
we'll have to cut back. What if they put in
a fee, Well, yeah.

Speaker 6 (32:59):
The fee is that's the sneaky bypass, but it.

Speaker 4 (33:02):
Really has to be a fee, a fee for something specific,
like a license to operate your barbershop or something. But
now you won't be able to get away with that
as a tax raiser revenue generator. Okay, we're gonna have
to cut back, but I have no problem in finding
places to cut back. Let me tell you that.

Speaker 2 (33:19):
I'm sure that's true.

Speaker 1 (33:20):
Mark Baisley is current state senator, former state rep.

Speaker 2 (33:24):
As well. Is that right?

Speaker 4 (33:26):
Yes, I serve four hours four to four hours, four
four hours every day. I serve four years in the
State House. Before I'm in my third year in the
state Senate now.

Speaker 1 (33:35):
And Mark Baisley is also Republican candidate for governor here
in the state of Colorado.

Speaker 2 (33:40):
The website if you want to learn more, Mark Baisley
B A. I.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
S L. E. Y dot com. Mark Baisley dot com. Mark,
thanks for your time, really good insights. We will keep
in touch.

Speaker 4 (33:51):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (33:51):
Ros figure out you too. All right, good stuff there,
We'll see, we'll see if.

Speaker 1 (33:55):
There's a special session.

Speaker 2 (33:57):
All right, you still got a ton of stuff to do.

Speaker 1 (33:59):
I can't believe an hour has already gone on today's show,
and I guess more importantly, I can't believe that Hulk
Hogan is gone. We'll take a quick break. We'll be
right back on Kowa. I say dude a little more
often than I say brother. But brother is very very
common these days, guys talking to each other, see you later, brother,
or yeah that's right, brother or whatever. Right, And it's
become a very common thing. Hulk Hogan was doing that

(34:20):
before anybody. Hulk Hogan's been doing that for decades, calling
people brother, and actually I always thought it was pretty good.
It's just become more common now. Now I have to say.
Producer A Rod who joins me now is a little
more broken up about this than I am.

Speaker 2 (34:37):
I'm not happy about it.

Speaker 1 (34:38):
I was just never a big wrestling guy, and you
seem pretty down, pretty broken up by this, so I
would just like to open up to you to offer
any any comments.

Speaker 2 (34:48):
Yeah, brother, I've.

Speaker 7 (34:49):
Been a Hulk Hogans fan since I was ever born.
Every time I loved wrestling, brother, it was always starting
with Hulk Hogan. My brother was a macho man Randy
Savage fan. I was a whole ful fan. I had
the big, giant, stretchy wrestler Hulk Hogan thing. Every time
I liked wrestling, I'll started with Hulk.

Speaker 2 (35:05):
It began with Hulk, it ended with Hulk. Brother, I'm
hurt today. That really stings. I love Hulk so much.
He is my wrestler.

Speaker 7 (35:13):
Every time I've always been into WWE, dating back to
when I got into it always started with Hulk, ended
with Hulk. And I was just telling Chad, like, getting
that big for that long obviously probably isn't good for
the body in the ways that you probably have to
do it. So I'm glad he lasts as long as
he did. But yeah, man, hear that montage. Cheer me
up a little bit. Wow, I bet you.

Speaker 1 (35:33):
I bet it's already too late to go find like
a half decent price on Hulk Hogan memorabilia on eBay,
even though this news just came out in the last
twenty minutes or something. I bet, I bet it's all
gone already, Like maybe there was one of those stretchy
things available on where do you go look see if
there's one of those stretchy things.

Speaker 2 (35:51):
Available on eBay.

Speaker 1 (35:52):
Fox News right now is playing this kind of montage
of or it's not really a montage, but it's this
it's Ulk Hogan and that's Andre the Giant, and they're like,
you know, wrestling, whatever you want to call that, whatever
you want to call that form of that form of theater.

Speaker 2 (36:13):
If you're a Hull Cogan fan, I would like.

Speaker 1 (36:16):
You to text me and especially producer A Rod at
five six six nine zero, with any thoughts or memories
of Hulk Hogan in your life. I don't necessarily mean
you met him, but why he was important or what
you remember of him or anything like that. I'm sure
there are literally thousands of Hulk Hogan fans hearing my
voice right now. So text us at five six six

(36:37):
nine zero. So we can share some of your texts
about what you remember from Hull Kogan. Any story you
want to tell now, I will tell you as I am.
I'm not and I've never been a fan of professional wrestling,
just never something I got into. Everybody's got their own
stuff they follow, and I just didn't follow that.

Speaker 2 (36:59):
Obviously, everybody in the world knew who Hulk Hogan was.

Speaker 1 (37:02):
He's probably, especially back in the day, like what eighties, nineties,
like one of the most famous people, one of the
most recognizable people in the entire world. And of course,
of course I knew who he was and I knew
what he did, but I just didn't really follow wrestling
very much. So, because I'm a nerd of a different sort,
I would just like to mention to you what I like.

(37:25):
One of the very first things that comes into my
mind when I think about Hulk Hogan.

Speaker 2 (37:30):
And again I admit.

Speaker 1 (37:31):
Right up front that this just shows how much of
a nerd I am, but I'm gonna say it anyway,
And that is the lawsuit.

Speaker 2 (37:37):
Do you remember the lawsuit?

Speaker 1 (37:39):
Its official name was Balaya Versus Gawker, Right, Terry Boleya.
That's Hulk Hogan's real name, all right, so Gawker was
a pretty well known kind of in the early days
of online media, splashy kind of website, and at some point,

(38:01):
at some point.

Speaker 2 (38:03):
Hulk Hogan made a.

Speaker 1 (38:07):
Sex tape with a woman named Heather Clem who at
the time that the sex tape was made, Heather Clem
was the wife of a radio guy who goes by
the name Bubba the Love Sponge, and Gawker published the tape.

(38:28):
Don't know where they got it, but Gawker got the
tape and published it. And Hulk Hogan sued Gawker for
one hundred million dollars for invasion of privacy, intentional infliction
of emotional distress, and infringement of what are called personality

(38:50):
rights and quoting from Wikipedia, the source of all knowledge.
Prior to trial, Balaya's lawyers said the privacy of many
Americans was at Stakewall Gawker's lawyer said that the case
could hurt freedom of the press in the United States
of America. Now, one of the interesting things about this
case is the way it was funded.

Speaker 2 (39:10):
Do you remember this eight rides? Do you remember this
a little bit?

Speaker 1 (39:15):
The lawsuit so one of the few very big time
public sort of politically active in public tech bros who
doesn't lean left is Peter Teel and he is a
co founder of PayPal. He used to be on the
board of Facebook. Very very rich dude. He's gay, he's

(39:40):
conservative to libertarian, and he's very active politically.

Speaker 2 (39:44):
And he did not.

Speaker 1 (39:45):
Like Gawker and bringing these lawsuits, especially bringing a lawsuit
against a firm that's got at least a moderate amount
of money to spend on lawyers, which Gawker definitely did,
is expensive. So Peter tele pay some millions of dollars
to fund the lawsuit against Gawker, and when asked about

(40:08):
it at some point he called it one of my
greater philanthropic things that I've done.

Speaker 2 (40:16):
And and Teal was mad.

Speaker 1 (40:19):
At Gawker because a couple of years earlier, back in
two thousand and seven, because the Hull Cogan lawsuit was
twenty thirteen. Back in two thousand and seven, Gawker had
published an article outing Peter Teal as gay, which at
that time at least he didn't necessarily want to be

(40:39):
known in public. So he hated Gawker, so he funded
the lawsuit for Hull Cogan suit sue Gawker and Hogan
real name again, Bulea bo ll Ea asked for one
hundred million dollars. The jury found Gawker liable and awarded

(41:02):
Hulk Hogan one hundred and fifteen million dollars in compensatory
damages and another twenty five million dollars in punitive damages.
And three months later Gawker filed for Chapter eleven bankruptcy
and and and was and was put out of business,
And apparently they reached a thirty one million dollars settlement

(41:23):
with Bolea. At some point they couldn't get out of
doing something with him, but they did so.

Speaker 2 (41:29):
In any case, I know.

Speaker 1 (41:30):
It makes me a super nerd, but that's what I
remember about Hulk Hogan. Hulcamania will live on, brother. That's
a listener text ross. They say death comes in threes.

Speaker 2 (41:40):
You know what.

Speaker 1 (41:40):
A bunch of listeners have texted in about death coming
in threes.

Speaker 2 (41:44):
And A Rod said that when.

Speaker 1 (41:45):
He walked into the control room as well, and A
Rod and I were thinking Ozzy Hulk Hogan and maybe
Malcolm Jamal Warner, even though he's not, you know, quite
the a lister that those guys were. But another person
who's probably a little bit older than me and a
Rod said Ozzie, Hulk Hogan and Connie Francis last week.

Speaker 2 (42:05):
But it is a.

Speaker 1 (42:06):
Funny thing, actually death coming in threes. I don't think
it actually does come in threes. It's just our brains
working a way where we associate these things together.

Speaker 2 (42:16):
Wasn't Hulk Hogan at Trump's inauguration?

Speaker 4 (42:18):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (42:19):
He was ross I'm despondent, Hulk.

Speaker 3 (42:22):
No.

Speaker 2 (42:24):
Yeah. When I was eight years old, I met Hulk
Hogan was at Logan Airport. I lived in.

Speaker 1 (42:29):
Massachusetts at the time. In a piece of paper, I
wrote down my name, address and phone number. I told
him to come over to dinner next time he's here.

Speaker 2 (42:37):
I never heard from him. All right, all right, very good.
One more.

Speaker 1 (42:43):
I remember when hul Cogan started with the AWA, the
American Wrestling Association with Greg ganya g A NYA and
jumping Jim Brunzell. Then he went big time to the WWE,
and that's where he took off. Seemed like a great guy,
always in enjoyed watching him and was a big fan.

Speaker 2 (43:04):
I'll do a couple more.

Speaker 1 (43:05):
Actually been a hulk of maniac since the time when
wrestling was real and the iron cheek needed to be
shown the American way.

Speaker 2 (43:13):
This news hits hard.

Speaker 1 (43:15):
Rest in peace, brother, ps train whatever that means, say
your prayers, oh train like go, do your training, say
your prayers, and eat your vitamins.

Speaker 2 (43:26):
And one more.

Speaker 1 (43:28):
My dad took my brother and me to see Hulk
Hogan on Kamala the Ugandan Giant in Denver. To see
Hulk Hogan take on Kamala the Ugandan Giant in Denver
in the mid nineteen eighties. It was at the old
McNichols Arena. At ten years old, the WWE was awesome entertainment.

(43:52):
As I grew older, I lost interest in professional wrestling,
but I will never forget seeing the Hulkster body slam
Kamala in Denver. That would be interesting if it were
the newer Kamala rather than that one. I also have
to say, even though wrestling is as fake as a
thing could be, you'd have to think that getting body
slammed by Hulk Hogan, even on a relatively pliable floor,

(44:16):
can't feel that great, you know, Or having Andre the
Giant land on you, even if he's bracing himself a
little bit so, not all of his seven hundred pounds
or whatever. The dude weighed. He's long gone as well,
but you know that that stuff had had to hurt
a little bit ross. It's pronounced gun ya okay, Greg

(44:38):
gun Greg Guy, Okay, I got you, I got you.

Speaker 2 (44:42):
So let me tell you.

Speaker 1 (44:43):
Let me tell you what we're gonna do in the
next segment of the show. So you know that I am.
I'm not quite a gun nut, but I do enjoy
my firearms, and I probably have I don't know, between
twenty five and thirty firearms, let's say. So, there are
lots of people have a lot more I do, and
there's lots of people who have a lot less than
I do. I also enjoy suppressors that some people call silencers.

Speaker 2 (45:07):
And when I go shooting, especially when I go shooting.

Speaker 1 (45:09):
Indoors, if somebody is shooting let's say, in AR fifteen
or something larger than that near me, I always think
to myself, that's really rude of you to not have
a suppressor, because all they are hearing protection devices.

Speaker 2 (45:22):
People think it turns into some kind of James Bond assassin.

Speaker 1 (45:25):
No, there was supposed to be a particular thing in
the big beautiful bill about them. There ended up being
a different thing in the big, beautiful bill about them.
And now Dave Matheny, who is founder and CEO of
Silencer Shop, is going to tell us about those differences,
but also he's going to tell us why he's suing

(45:46):
the federal government about all of it. It's going to
be a very interesting conversation even if you are not
a gun nut.

Speaker 7 (45:53):
My mom hunted down a picture of the action figure
that I referenced that I had as a kid.

Speaker 2 (45:57):
She still has mine and my brothers. It's a stretchy
Hulk Hogan figure.

Speaker 1 (46:03):
Yeah, it's like a stretchy Hulk Hogan figure wearing camo.

Speaker 2 (46:06):
Wearing camo. It is nWo.

Speaker 1 (46:08):
Unbelievable, man, unbelievab All right, so I'm very pleased to
welcome back to the show. Is second time on with me,
although I think probably the first time on Kawa because
the previous time I was on our sister station across
the hall.

Speaker 2 (46:24):
Dave Metheni is founder and CEO of Silencer Shop.

Speaker 1 (46:28):
And if you are in the firearms at all, even
if you've never bought a suppressor that some people call silencers,
although I prefer the term suppressor myself, you will be
aware of Silencer Shop because if you've even ever thought
about buying one. The easiest and best way is to
use their services, whether you are buying the suppressor from them,

(46:52):
or whether you use their services for certain kinds of paperwork,
and then and then buy the suppressor.

Speaker 2 (46:57):
At at a gun store or whatever.

Speaker 1 (47:00):
But we have a lot to talk about, so David,
it's very good to have you on the show.

Speaker 2 (47:03):
Thanks for being here.

Speaker 3 (47:06):
Yeah, thanks for having me on again.

Speaker 1 (47:08):
So before we get to all the legal stuff, just
as I'm not quite a gun nut, but.

Speaker 2 (47:14):
I'm in that direction, right.

Speaker 1 (47:16):
I was telling my listeners before. I have somewhere between
twenty five and thirty firearms, you know, lots of different kinds,
and I enjoy them all, and I really love I
really love suppressors, right, I really love you know ones
I have to put on. I've got a couple that
are integrated into the firearms. But I haven't been in
the market for a suppressor for quite a while. And

(47:37):
as I'm looking at your website, it seems like there's
a lot of really cool new stuff. There's brands I
haven't heard of before, maybe even some new technology. So
just give us a little bit about what's going on
in the world. Of suppressors separate from law, yeah.

Speaker 8 (47:54):
You go right now, there's so many advances happening, so
many new brands. D printing is kind of changing how
people look at silencers, right, the better performance, lower blowback,
you know less, I mean everything about it is better.
They're smaller, lighter, quieter than they used to be. It's

(48:14):
really really impressive. And some companies are even going with
hybrid you know, traditional manufacturing and the three D printed
like Silencer Co. So they're easier to warranty, but you
get all the benefits of three D printing. I mean,
it's it's impressive.

Speaker 3 (48:28):
What's happening right now?

Speaker 1 (48:31):
Do tell me like one new technology in the past
few years separate from style of more, let's say, in
the way they're being designed rather than three D printing
versus traditional manufacturing. That makes a difference in the performance
of the of the suppressor.

Speaker 8 (48:50):
You know, it really does well kind of down to
three D printing. So in the even when you talk
about features, they can do things with baffle geometry that
just were not possible.

Speaker 3 (49:00):
Right when you start talking about flow.

Speaker 8 (49:02):
Through designs where the gases tend to flow through instead
of being just you know, held up at each bavel,
and you're getting the point where you can with those
advanced geometries in the baffles, you can actually get the
same sound levels that you used to be able to get
with a traditional manufacturing, or even better but with less flowback.

Speaker 3 (49:21):
I guess it really, Like I said, three D printing,
is that is the key to all these changes?

Speaker 2 (49:26):
Yeah, that's fascinating. Just does that flow through it all?

Speaker 1 (49:30):
If I can use if I can make a double
entendra on the term flow through, does.

Speaker 2 (49:34):
That flow through it all?

Speaker 1 (49:35):
To the to the pricing of suppressors or three D
printed suppressors any less expensive or more expensive than traditionally manufactured.

Speaker 3 (49:44):
Yeah, they're more expensive for the average consumer.

Speaker 8 (49:47):
Flow through or sorry, the three D printed stuff just
hasn't gotten to the price where it makes sense yet.
You know it'll get there, but it's a few years
out right now for most customers, they are probably still
going to be looking at traditional can just because of
the price of one said they can be half the costs.

Speaker 1 (50:04):
Interesting, So, okay, is these days for a let's say
a suppressor you might use on an AR fifteen two
two three. I mean there's a huge range, but I'm
thinking average is probably in the neighborhood of seven or
eight hundred bucks for the traditional manufacturing is or at
least it was last time I was looking. Is that's
still about right? And then are you saying the three

(50:25):
D printed ones might be fifteen hundred right now?

Speaker 3 (50:29):
Yeah, that's about right.

Speaker 8 (50:30):
Usually you're looking at about five to eight hundred for
a traditional five five six km mm hm. When you
get into three D printing, you're really looking at twelve
hundred to you know, fifteen hundred.

Speaker 3 (50:42):
That's about Riley.

Speaker 2 (50:43):
Got it? Okay?

Speaker 1 (50:45):
One other question, what's the biggest misconception about silencers slash suppressors.

Speaker 8 (50:53):
You know, I think it comes from the name, and
it comes from movies for decades, but people think they're silent,
and they're just not. They can be super comfortable to shoot,
they're hearing safe in most cases, but they are not
even close to silent.

Speaker 1 (51:09):
What I tell my listeners is the only time you
get even vaguely, slightly almost close to silence to silent
would be twenty two caliber with obviously a suppressor and
subsonic AMMO and other and even that's not silent, but

(51:30):
it's as quiet as you're going to get.

Speaker 2 (51:32):
But it also has very limited uses.

Speaker 3 (51:35):
That's right, Yeah, that's exactly right.

Speaker 8 (51:38):
I will say though, as far as comfort of shooting,
you can take like a heavy boar rifle like a
three hundred wind mag or a three thirty eight Lapua,
even out of a bolt gun with good suppresser, and
it is comfortable to shoot with no hearing protection, completely
hearing safe, but not silent.

Speaker 3 (51:56):
Rightby around you is going to know you shot again.
It's just comfortable to shoot.

Speaker 4 (52:00):
Right.

Speaker 1 (52:00):
We're talking with Dave Mathenie, founder and CEO of Silencer Shop.
Silencershop dot com is the website. Well, one more on
this and then we'll talk about the law I did
not I did not realize when I first got involved
with suppressors that they had a noticeable.

Speaker 2 (52:17):
Impact on recoil.

Speaker 1 (52:19):
I always thought of them only as a hearing protection thing.
But just tell us a little bit about the impact
on recoil and maybe just a hint of the physics
of why that works.

Speaker 3 (52:36):
You know, people don't realize that.

Speaker 8 (52:39):
You know, the getting quieter is obvious, but with silencers
you have less recoil, you have more velocity, measurably higher
velocity and better accuracy in most cases, and as far
as the recoil goes.

Speaker 3 (52:53):
Think of it. You look at a traditional muzzle.

Speaker 8 (52:55):
Break where you're shooting essentially through the essentially through.

Speaker 3 (53:00):
Baffles, but without an AD or two.

Speaker 8 (53:01):
But muscle break is designed just like a silencer in
a lot of ways. It's just the can is containing
the gases that it's holding back.

Speaker 3 (53:10):
Does that make sense. It's a It's actually pretty impressive.

Speaker 8 (53:14):
They're just as effective as a muscle break up to
a certain point, like when you get through really heavy calibers,
muscle breaks are better. But on the traditional guns most
people are shooting, silencers are just as good as.

Speaker 3 (53:25):
A muzzle break.

Speaker 2 (53:26):
I did not know.

Speaker 1 (53:27):
The other thing that you said about higher velocity is
that is that because it functions like a longer barrel,
that keeps the gas pressure behind the projectile for longer.

Speaker 3 (53:39):
Yep, yep. So you wind up with the now you
don't have.

Speaker 8 (53:42):
The constriction of the barrel, but you still have the
gases building it behind it, and we'll measure ten percent
higher velocity in some cases.

Speaker 3 (53:49):
Wow, it's a It can be meaningful.

Speaker 8 (53:53):
Obviously, that depends on the length of the can and
the design of the can, but it's always higher velocity.

Speaker 1 (53:58):
Right, And for those new to the conversation, can is
slang for a suppressor or silencer. So does that mean, Dave,
that if you have a rifle sited in at three
hundred yards that you would have to make some adjustments
if you put a suppressor on it, because the round

(54:18):
will not have fallen as much at three hundred yards
if you've got the can on it.

Speaker 8 (54:24):
Yeah, that's one hundred percent rye Is. You'll have a
point of impact will almost always shift with a suppressor
on there, but your accuracy will improve. So your group
sizes will shrink, but they'll just move to a different
place and it's completely repeatable.

Speaker 3 (54:39):
Wow, So you do want to have to sit it
on differently with the suppressor.

Speaker 1 (54:43):
Okay, so let's start talking about the law a little bit.
One of my great frustrations and yours, i'm sure, with
suppressors has been that whenever you buy one, you have
to go through this ridiculous NFA process that's basically the
same thing you would have to do if you were
buying a machine gun, and it involves annoying paperwork, a

(55:06):
two hundred dollars tax stamp for every suppressor. If you
were going to buy three all at once, every single
one of them wouldn't need a two hundred dollars tax stamp.
And then you have to wait different amounts of time.
But for me, the longest I ever had to wait
was thirteen months to get permission to take that suppressor

(55:27):
out of the shop. I think the waight time is
down a lot now, but still so with that as context, Dave,
what was supposed to be in the Big Beautiful Bill
and what ended up being in the Big Beautiful Bill?

Speaker 2 (55:38):
About this, you know, the original.

Speaker 8 (55:43):
Goal, going back to December January last year, was to
get a full deregulation of saluncers into the Big Beautiful Bill.

Speaker 3 (55:51):
It's a. We started seeing signs in January.

Speaker 8 (55:54):
February that the that this wasn't going to pass the process, right,
I mean, most people probably don't really understand the intricacies
of this budget bill staff.

Speaker 3 (56:05):
So the goal was get HPA.

Speaker 8 (56:08):
But if it didn't go in to have a backup,
and I tell you that GOA was super instrumental in
making sure that stuff went through, right, It's a.

Speaker 3 (56:18):
So we wound up with a win, but just not
the win we want it.

Speaker 1 (56:22):
So what is the state of the law right now,
if someone's going to go buy a suppressor, what what's
different or or what what's the process?

Speaker 8 (56:34):
Well, first of all, wait times have dropped too, days
instead of months. So I think our median weight right
now is like four days.

Speaker 3 (56:41):
Last time. I look, you buy a souncer, you get
it four days later. That's gigantic.

Speaker 8 (56:46):
And then starting in January, there will be no more
two hundred dollars tacks.

Speaker 3 (56:49):
So that's that's also big. So the main thing is
you still have to go through the registration, and that's
the part we still need to kill.

Speaker 1 (56:58):
Okay, so you still you still have to do the paperwork.
You don't have to pay the tax, do you know? Okay,
So here's a very annoying thing. And I'm gonna ask
you my question for you, Dave will be has this
change but.

Speaker 2 (57:10):
Just for listeners.

Speaker 1 (57:11):
So you you pay two hundred dollars, you submit your paperwork,
you get this, You get it back with a literal
stamp tax on it, a two hundred dollars. It looks
like a postage stamp. And you are supposed to have
this thing, not a copy the original, on your person,
you know, or with you whenever you are out of

(57:31):
your house with the suppressor, you go hunting, you got
a suppressor on your rifle, you go to the gun
range with the sup pressor on. You're supposed to have
this piece of paper with you, the original again, So
if you lose it, you're you're pretty hosed. You gotta
go spend another two hundred dollars, I guess, but before
this change, So do you know if that part of
it is gonna is gonna change? Dave Like, there's no
there's gonna be no tax, but I am. I still

(57:53):
gonna have to have that piece of paper with me.

Speaker 2 (57:55):
All the time.

Speaker 8 (57:57):
Yeah, And they do allow a copy, so that's that's
kind of a misconception. A copy is fine and actually preferred.
The gun store told me, what's that? The gun store
told me it had to be the original. So I
just learned something. Thank you for that. Yeah, it's it
does not And and the ATF if you lose it
they will actually send you a certified copy.

Speaker 3 (58:17):
Of the original again, so you don't have to pay
another two hundred dollar tacks if you lose it.

Speaker 2 (58:21):
Okay, good, I was misinformed.

Speaker 8 (58:23):
But regardless of keep that you're safe. Keep a coffee
with you that and going back to your question, that
will not change. So under starting in January, there's no
two hundred dollars tax. Once again, the wait time is
just you know, three or four days now, but you
still have to register it and you stop to keep
that piece of paper with you.

Speaker 3 (58:42):
You know, to prove that it's that it's registered to you.

Speaker 2 (58:45):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (58:46):
A listener wants to know if you have to tell
the ATF if you move when you buy a suppressor.

Speaker 8 (58:54):
You know, that's a weird rule because then and it's
super confusing because with silencers you do not have to
tell them, but with SDRs you do. So that's a
there's some weird inconsistency and how this stuff is oh regulating.

Speaker 1 (59:08):
So give us twenty nine seconds defining an SBR and
what happened with SBRs in this bill.

Speaker 3 (59:16):
Basically SBR shorten rifle. Any any rifle with a.

Speaker 8 (59:20):
Barrel length under sixteen inches, that's an SBR. And they
also the tax also dropped a zero on them, the
same exact change as with silencers rspressers.

Speaker 1 (59:29):
Okay, and that's a that's a really stupid category. But
I think it goes back to like sought off shotguns.

Speaker 2 (59:36):
From the al capone days or something.

Speaker 1 (59:38):
But it's a really moronic category that shouldn't exist at all.

Speaker 2 (59:41):
Am I missing something they shouldn't.

Speaker 8 (59:43):
Oh no, this the entire NFA is domb There's there's
really not a whole lot of sense in that law.
That's why just getting it unwind is getting it unwound.

Speaker 3 (59:54):
Is our top priority.

Speaker 1 (59:56):
Okay, thanks, right, So let's get to that now in
the in the few minutes we have left, I'm looking
at a filing in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Texas where the lead plaintiff, not
the only plaintiff, but the lead plaintiff is Silencer Shop Foundation,
and the lead defendant is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,

(01:00:18):
and Explosives. So you are suing the federal government. What
exactly is your claim? What exactly are you trying to
get done?

Speaker 3 (01:00:29):
You know, the only reason the NFA, which.

Speaker 8 (01:00:31):
Is how these things are all regulated, has held up
in court, this registration scheme that they created in the
nineteen thirties. The only reason this is held up in
court is because it's a tax right, and Supreme Court
is ruled over and over again, including with Obamacare. You
can regulate almost anything with tax, but they've also said
you cannot regulate anything with a tax that does not.

Speaker 3 (01:00:52):
Collect any revenue.

Speaker 8 (01:00:53):
So as soon as that tax drop the zero that
opens us up for a whole lawsuit where we can
actually remove these items from the NFA through the courts
based on their own rules.

Speaker 3 (01:01:06):
I mean, this is actually that zero doll attacks is
a bigger.

Speaker 8 (01:01:08):
Win than most people realize. That's super close option.

Speaker 1 (01:01:12):
That's very clever. Did you already know this? Did you
think of this?

Speaker 3 (01:01:16):
Who?

Speaker 2 (01:01:17):
I mean, that's that's really smart.

Speaker 1 (01:01:19):
So in a sense, you know, having it still in
the NFA, but a zero dollar tax, if it plays
out the way you the way you think it will,
that's a critical and absolutely critical step that well, as
you just said, is potentially a much bigger win than
most people, including I had had thought. Was that your idea?
Where did that come from?

Speaker 3 (01:01:40):
It was our idea within Silencer Shop. It was not
my idea personally.

Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
Yeah yeah, yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:01:46):
So it's a and I tell you what this is.

Speaker 8 (01:01:49):
The zero doll attacks opens up two options that most
people don't realize. One is in the courts, which we
filed on July fourth, and I think we've got.

Speaker 3 (01:01:57):
A good shot with this lawsuit.

Speaker 8 (01:01:59):
The second thing is every time you pass any budget bill,
you have to come up with an offset. So if
you're collecting ten billion dollars less than taxes, you have
to come up with ten billion.

Speaker 3 (01:02:08):
Dollars more than you're going to collect somewhere else.

Speaker 8 (01:02:11):
Now this tax is dropped to zero, it makes deregulation
through another bill a lot simpler because we no longer
get an offset.

Speaker 3 (01:02:20):
So it opens up two opportunities for deregulation that we
could get during you know, by.

Speaker 9 (01:02:26):
The end of Trump's term, hopefully veral we're shooting more,
very very clever.

Speaker 2 (01:02:30):
All right, last quick question. So one of the things
that I did thanks to.

Speaker 1 (01:02:34):
You guys, is I put my suppressors in a trust.
Do you if you win the lawsuit, would that mean
the need to have that kind of trust owning your
suppressors goes away?

Speaker 3 (01:02:49):
Oh?

Speaker 8 (01:02:50):
Yes, trust become not a thing again for now, though seriously,
I recommend to pretty much everybody put yourselarser in a trust.

Speaker 3 (01:02:58):
It makes more sense just for possession.

Speaker 9 (01:03:01):
Right after we win this, Yeah, trust you could trust
go away, And folks, if you want to learn more
about these trusts and how easy and cheap they are,
because I know firsthand because I did this with silencer Shop.

Speaker 2 (01:03:13):
You can go to silencershop dot com. All right, one
of the last very quick questions.

Speaker 1 (01:03:17):
For you, Dave, and we're talking with Dave Matheenie, who's
founder and CEO of silencer Shop. It seems to me
like you are in a very admirable way working out
of principle here to get this stuff removed from NFA,
because it seems to me, well, it's a double edged sword.
It seems to me that doing this in a way

(01:03:40):
could hurt your business because people won't need a lot
of paperwork that they need now that you help them with.
On the other hand, if the two hundred dollars tax
stamp and just the brain damage of all of it
goes away, a lot more people might buy a lot
more suppressors, so you could make more money that way.
But from a business perspective, give me just a few
seconds on how you're thinking about it.

Speaker 8 (01:04:03):
You know, if you look at the gun industry there
and we're just going off of Knicks checks, the FBI
check when people buy a gun, they are two million
per month. If you look at the silencer industry, there's
last year there were seven hundred and fifty thousand, not
quite seven hundred and fifty thousand for the entire year.
The reality is there should be and I'm going to

(01:04:25):
make up a number here, there should be a silencer
sold every maybe two silencers sold every three guns. That
should be the ratio that we see.

Speaker 3 (01:04:34):
The silencer market should be dramatically bigger than it is,
and the.

Speaker 8 (01:04:37):
Paperwork and the registration are what absolutely kill the market.

Speaker 3 (01:04:41):
I mean, it's.

Speaker 8 (01:04:42):
The right thing to do to get silences out of
the NFA, but also this market can't grow without that.
We've reached a point where we need them out of
the NFA.

Speaker 3 (01:04:50):
We really do.

Speaker 1 (01:04:52):
Dave Metheni is founder and CEO of Silencer Shop. I
am a repeat customer and just love how they make
it as easy as anybody can to deal with what
has been a very difficult process. And maybe between the
big beautiful bill and Dave's new lawsuit against the federal government, maybe.

Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
It'll get much easier.

Speaker 1 (01:05:12):
You can learn more at silencershop dot com. Dave, thanks
for being back on the show. I appreciate it. Thanks
for having me.

Speaker 2 (01:05:19):
Glad too. We're going to take a quick break folks,
We'll be right back on Kowa.

Speaker 1 (01:05:23):
David Kale, who keeps walking in to the studio handing
me pieces of paper saying somebody died, just walked into
the studio and handed me a piece of paper saying
that Chuck Mangioni is dead at the age of eighty four.
He died at some point this week at his home
in New York of natural causes. So rest in peace,
Chuck Mangeotian, of course, rest in peace, Hulk Hogan. I

(01:05:45):
might be getting a guest on the show to talk
about Hulk Hogan.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
Well, we'll see.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
I got to go check my email on that when
I have a minute.

Speaker 2 (01:05:54):
A listener noted.

Speaker 1 (01:05:55):
That Colorado itself supparate from federal law. Colorado does have
some its own laws about suppressors, and they call suppressors
a dangerous weapon. Now typically in Colorado, if you have
gone through the federal process to get a suppressor, then
you're fine as far as Colorado goes. I don't know

(01:06:17):
what's going to happen as far as whether the state
of Colorado will make it more difficult to get a
suppressor than.

Speaker 2 (01:06:26):
It might be in other places.

Speaker 1 (01:06:28):
If at some point suppressors are removed from the NFA.
So I'm going to try to learn a little bit
more about that.

Speaker 2 (01:06:37):
And I will and I will let you know.

Speaker 1 (01:06:40):
I will let you know when I when I find
more information. Ross maybe you said, but I didn't understand
what a trust accomplishes for suppressor ownership. A trust accomplishes
the ability for you to, among other things, at least
the ability for you to transfer ownership of your suppressor

(01:07:01):
after you pass away or right or are you and
let's see, you put your kid in it with you,
You put your kid in the trust with you, or
you name a beneficiary to the trust, and then when
you pass away, your suppressor can go to that next person.

Speaker 2 (01:07:15):
Otherwise it's it.

Speaker 1 (01:07:16):
Has been extremely difficult to transfer a suppressor from one
person to another, and you have to go through all
of this crazy stuff and it almost never happens because
it's just so difficult.

Speaker 2 (01:07:31):
So anyway, enough on, enough on all that for now.

Speaker 1 (01:07:35):
Again, I am trying to find out whether I'm going
to be able to get a particular guest on the
show talking about Oh yeah, all right, I will have
a I will have a guest at one thirty three
talking to them. We'll talk about Hulk Hogan and politics.
Actually eleven thirty three are time, sorry, one thirty three
Eastern time the dudes in the Eastern time zone.

Speaker 2 (01:07:54):
So let's see. What else do I want to do? Oh?

Speaker 1 (01:07:57):
Let me let me see if I can get this.
Let me see if I can get this going. Here,
I'm gonna try to play a little video. Don't put
my audio up just yet, a rod, because I want
to make sure I don't mess this up. All right,
go ahead and do that now. So what I want
to share with you here, I'm just gonna do this
in a couple of minutes. Yesterday on the show, we

(01:08:18):
dropped in for a moment or two on the sentencing
hearing for the guy whose name I will not use,
although you.

Speaker 2 (01:08:25):
May hear it in the recording.

Speaker 1 (01:08:26):
I'm gonna play who murdered these four young college students
in Idaho. He pled guilty in order to get out
of getting the death penalties. Some people are very upset
about that he never explained why. And one of the
things I said on the show yesterday, while giving the
very very strong caveat that I cannot and do not

(01:08:53):
want to really be able to put myself in the
minds of those families whose life ones were murdered.

Speaker 2 (01:09:01):
I can't do it.

Speaker 1 (01:09:03):
It would be stupid of me to pretend that I
could do it, and I don't want to be able
to do it.

Speaker 2 (01:09:10):
Actually, a friend.

Speaker 1 (01:09:11):
Of mine who I was texting with this morning, his
father and brother were murdered some years ago. And I
don't want to be able to, you know, relive that
moment because I don't ever want to be related to
someone who was murdered. I don't want to have a
good friend who was I don't want to. But these
are things that happened in the world, and I, as
a radio host, I'm thinking about them and one and

(01:09:34):
what I said yesterday was, while not putting myself in
their mindset, I said, I can I can imagine.

Speaker 2 (01:09:43):
That some part of me would like to know why
it happened.

Speaker 1 (01:09:47):
I can imagine that if I mean, even with my
own brother, who was not.

Speaker 2 (01:09:51):
Murdered but died in an accident.

Speaker 1 (01:09:56):
I probably do wish little that I had a slightly
better understanding of just why it happened. I don't need
the how exactly, I don't need to know just you know,
but why.

Speaker 2 (01:10:11):
And I wondered aloud about.

Speaker 1 (01:10:13):
That and Throughout this process, the killer has never said why,
and the judge did not ask him to explain why
during the sentencing or the pre sentencing stuff where they
were agreeing to the plea deal. But I did mention
this yesterday and then the judge brought it up, and

(01:10:36):
so I wanted to share this with you. This is
from the actual sentencing, and he was sentenced to multiple,
multiple sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole,
so he'll never be out of prison. But I wanted
to share this with you, and let's just hope I
can get this working.

Speaker 10 (01:10:54):
We are now certain who commit as we sit here today,
this case is ending, and we are now certain who
committed these unspeakable acts of evil, but we don't know,
and we what we may never.

Speaker 2 (01:11:06):
Know is why.

Speaker 10 (01:11:10):
I share the desire expressed by others to understand the why.
But upon reflection, it seems to me, and this is
just my own opinion, that by continuing to focus on why,
we continue to give mister Coburger relevance, we give him agency,
and we give him power. In my view, the time
has now come to in mister Coberger's fifteen minutes of fame,

(01:11:32):
it's time that he'd be consigned to the ignomity and
isolation of perpetual incarceration.

Speaker 2 (01:11:39):
Wow, I think he's I think he's right at this point.

Speaker 3 (01:11:45):
You know.

Speaker 1 (01:11:46):
I just thought it was interesting that the one thing
that I was kind of wondering was why, and then
the judge made that correct an interesting point, you know,
by continuing to wonder why we continue to get of
him the power to torture even not torturing me, but
the families, and to the extent that the families want

(01:12:08):
to know why, and he refuses to say why. The
families are giving him the power to continue to hurt
them and he should not have that power, right, he
should not have that power. And I think that was
a very subtle but important point from the judge, and

(01:12:30):
I'm glad he made it. And it was so on
point with what I was wondering aloud with you on
the show yesterday that I thought I would mention it.
We'll take a quick break, We'll be right back on Kowa.
I've had this story for a couple of days and
I just wanted to mention it work in some little
kind of local stuff on a day that has a
lot of national things going on and there was a

(01:12:52):
very interesting piece over at Axios a little less than
a week ago, and the headline is ICE arrests of
non criminals spike in Colorado under Trump.

Speaker 2 (01:13:08):
And they show.

Speaker 1 (01:13:10):
This chart, and let's see, this is on a monthly
basis the number of arrests by illegal of illegal aliens
by ICE within the Denver Field Office region. Now, going
back to the very beginning of the year, and at
that point, right that Trump policies really hadn't taken place yet, right,

(01:13:33):
Trump wasn't even inaugurated until well into January, so this
is kind of pre Trump. And there are three categories
here of people arrested by ICE. One no criminal charges
or convictions. Number two is at least one charge but
no convictions. Number three is at least one conviction. Okay,

(01:13:57):
So when you go back to pre Trump out of
the Denver Field Office, there's somewhere around seventy to seventy
five people arrested in the month of January who had
no criminal charges, another seventy to seventy five who had
at least one, and then about one hundred and twenty
who had at least one conviction. Now in I'm just

(01:14:19):
going to kind of skip ahead and go to the
most recent data available, which is for June. And in
June there were arrests of one hundred and seventeen people,
so almost double who had at least one charge but
no conviction.

Speaker 2 (01:14:37):
One hundred and seventy three.

Speaker 1 (01:14:39):
Arrests of people who had at least one conviction, So
that's up about fifty percent from around one hundred and
twenty at the beginning of the year.

Speaker 2 (01:14:48):
And then now this is the key, This is the key.

Speaker 1 (01:14:50):
So at the beginning of the year, remember I told
you that somewhere around seventy five people a month arrested
by the Denver Ice Field Office with no charge of convictions,
and in June it was two hundred and fifty four.
So there were more arrests by the Denver Field Office
of people with no criminal charges than there were of

(01:15:14):
people who've been convicted of something, or then there were
of people who were charged with something but not convicted.
In fact, the number is close. The number of people
who were arrested with no charges or convictions is just
a little bit less than the combined number of people
arrested who have at least one charge and the number
of people who have at least one conviction, and that's

(01:15:36):
a very interesting dynamic. And I continue to believe that
while many people in the Trump base would say, yes,
I voted for that, I want them all out, I
don't think that's what most Americans want, And I don't
think it's very good politics, and I don't think that
it's going to be sustainable. Actually, I think that Trump

(01:15:57):
administration is going to be forced to focus more on
deporting people who have been convicted of crimes, may be
charged with crimes, it's a borderline one, but okay, and
less on people who they just happen to contact are
here illegally. Now.

Speaker 2 (01:16:13):
The other side of that coin, and I.

Speaker 1 (01:16:15):
Want to be really clear about this, The other side
of that coin is you don't want to create a
situation like we've had for so many years where people
feel like they can come here illegally and absolutely positively
have no risk of being kicked out.

Speaker 2 (01:16:32):
That is, in fact, amnesty.

Speaker 1 (01:16:35):
And it's not so much that I have an objection
to any one particular illegal alien being able to stay here,
especially someone who's been here ten years or twenty years
or thirty years and never committed a crime and is
working hard and.

Speaker 2 (01:16:48):
All that stuff, But it's the incentives. It's the incentives.

Speaker 1 (01:16:52):
And when you set out a situation where people know
that once they get in, as long as they don't
commit a crime, they'll be able to stay, you create
a massive incentive for people to come in. And again,
I'm glad it'll be for people who come in and
don't intend to commit a crime. It's for people who
come in and intend to get a job, and that
you know, I'm not saying they're bad people, but I

(01:17:14):
don't like that incentive. And so it's a very tough
spot because when you just start deporting people who haven't
committed a crime and who are working in the community,
you really do have a significant chance of damaging the
local economy in addition to it being pretty bad politics.

Speaker 2 (01:17:31):
I think.

Speaker 1 (01:17:33):
And on the other hand, you can't say we're not
going to deport anyone.

Speaker 2 (01:17:39):
So we'll we'll see the other thing.

Speaker 1 (01:17:41):
And we're gonna try to talk about this next week
a little bit more with Representative Gabe Evans, who's traveling today.
I couldn't get them on today, and I'm broadcasting from
training camp tomorrow, so I probably.

Speaker 2 (01:17:50):
Won't invite him for tomorrow. We'll see.

Speaker 1 (01:17:53):
But Gabe Evans is signing on to a bill that
would allow so certain like temporary legal residency but not
a past to citizenship for.

Speaker 2 (01:18:06):
A lot of illegal aliens.

Speaker 1 (01:18:08):
Lauren Bolbert, another Colorado Republican, is against it, So we
will see how it all plays out. But I just
wanted you to be aware of that statistic that because
ICE has been told they have a numerical quota of
people they are supposed to deport every every week or
every month, or whatever the quota is, they are going
for the easy pickens. And the easy pickens are you know,

(01:18:28):
might be the guy cutting your lawn, might be the
guy you know working some job somewhere who hasn't done
anything wrong other than come into the country illegally. And
I just don't think that that is going to be sustainable.
But we will see. Let's do something completely different. My
next guest is a dude who I've actually wanted to
talk to for quite some time, because, as you as

(01:18:50):
listeners to this show, no I have over the course
of the past year plus become a dedicated watcher of news,
not least because my good friend Leland Viddert is over
a NewsNation, but my wife and I watch News Nation
more than any other cable news network now, and I

(01:19:11):
see Kurt Bardella there all the time. And Kurt seems
like a really interesting dude, and I wanted to talk
to him for quite some time, and I've heard him
once in a while mention wrestling, but I didn't know
until just an hour ago when I got an email
from a gal over there who emailed saying, well, if

(01:19:32):
you need someone to talk about Hulk Hogan and wrestling,
Kurt's your guy. He really knows this stuff. He's an expert,
he's a wrestling historian. And so I finally get Kurt
Bardella on the show, but to talk about wrestling. Maybe
we'll get to some politics too. Anyway, Kurt, it's really
good to have you, and I mean it, I've wanted
to talk to you for quite some time.

Speaker 2 (01:19:50):
So thanks for doing this.

Speaker 11 (01:19:52):
Oh, thank you so much for having me on.

Speaker 1 (01:19:54):
So tell us what you know and like why you
know it about wrestling, and then I want to get
into Hulk Hogan stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:20:04):
Yeah.

Speaker 11 (01:20:04):
You know, I have been a lifelong fan of professional wrestling,
going back to when I was a kid, you know,
in the eighties, Like so many of us who obviously,
uh you know, you know, no Hulk Cogan from that era.
And over time, I've had the opportunity to, you know,
spend a lot of time with the WWE world. I've

(01:20:25):
been to the last four or five WrestleManias. I have
been to so many Monday Night raws and smackdowns, and
have written about the impact that I believe that ww
has had on our culture, on our politics, and you know,
the only times fill it up, Inquirer, you know it is.
I think I've always said, anyone who doesn't understand well

(01:20:49):
Donald Trump happened, forget about whether you like them or
disliked him, But anyone who just doesn't understand needs to
go and watch Monday Night row in person. And if
you do that, it will make more sense to you.

Speaker 1 (01:21:01):
So I'm curious how many times did you, or if ever,
did you chat with Hulk Hogan, meet with Hulk Hogan,
or body slam Hulk Hogan.

Speaker 11 (01:21:13):
I certainly have never been body slammed BYO.

Speaker 6 (01:21:15):
You know I was.

Speaker 1 (01:21:16):
I asked if you body slammed him, not if he
body slammed you.

Speaker 11 (01:21:21):
You know, I would take either or frankly to be
able to crack about you know. The last time I
saw him was the thirtieth anniversary of Monday Night Raw,
which I think they held in Philly in January, I
want to say twenty twenty four, which was I think
one of the last appearances he had, you know, in
w W e Land. You know, there's nothing like that

(01:21:44):
moment when his iconic I Am a real American theme
song it's and you are immediately transported to you know,
that that six seven eight year old version of yourself
and the you know, saying your purrs and eating your
vitamine brother and what you're gotta do, and it is.
There are very few figures, I think, who can evote

(01:22:04):
that level of nostalgia just by walking through a curtain
and having a theme song play.

Speaker 1 (01:22:12):
I think you're right, and I feel almost the same,
even though.

Speaker 2 (01:22:15):
I'm not a wrestling fan.

Speaker 1 (01:22:17):
But every once in a while, someone comes along who
transcends a sport, or maybe even bigger than transcending a sport,
if there could be something bigger, is to is to
make the sport appeal to an order or two orders
of magnitude more than it ever appealed before.

Speaker 2 (01:22:37):
And I wonder I'll give you.

Speaker 1 (01:22:39):
An example because Kurt, I am president of the Bad
Analogy Club, and I'm going to.

Speaker 2 (01:22:42):
Give you a fairly bad one, right.

Speaker 1 (01:22:44):
But I think, for example, that Caitlin Clark has made
a lot more people interested in the WNBA than ever
we're interested before, right, and maybe even me a little bit,
although I'm still mostly not interested. But did you put
Hulk Hogan in that category as a guy who wasn't

(01:23:04):
just a big name in the sport, but but brought
it to another level?

Speaker 11 (01:23:11):
That is absolutely true. There's just no doubt about that.
If you've never watched a single second you know of
WWE or back in the day WCW, you still know
the name Hulk Hogan. And that's really a test of
it to the impact that he said, if there is
a mount rushmore sports entertainment, Pulk Hogan is the very

(01:23:34):
first name, the very first faith that that should be
on that monument. Wrestling today being the global sensation that
it is. Hemp largest YouTube channel in the world is
WWE deals with Netflix all over, selling out stadiums all
around the world, events everywhere you can think of. None
of that happens if not.

Speaker 4 (01:23:54):
For Hulk Hogan.

Speaker 11 (01:23:55):
You have to remember where we were culturally when he
came on the scene and exploded. The marriage between wrestling
and MTV is one of the most transformational things that
ever happened in sports entertainment in music was called a
rock and wrestling right when MTV was launching, and it
provided this larger than life platform for for wrestling to
become mainstream, to become part of pop culture, which which

(01:24:19):
which paved the way for the very first WrestleMania that fulkgan,
the very first WrestleMania by the way, that had appearances
from Muhammad Ali as a special guest referee, that had
Levarachi uh dancing with the rock guests in the middle
of the ring. You know that would lead to wrestling
getting a prime time spot on NBC back in the
day when there were only three channels. The broadcast channels

(01:24:41):
is all we had. And when SNL went on at
summer Hiatus Saturday Night made event headlined by Paul Cogan,
what was beaming on your TV?

Speaker 4 (01:24:49):
Hulk.

Speaker 11 (01:24:50):
Cogan was the very first to end up on Johnny Carson,
the very first to be in a feature film Rocky three,
the very first to have his own TV show on TNT.
Founder Paradise, Dwayne the Rock Johnson doesn't exist the way
that we know him. If Hulk Hogan didn't pave the way.

Speaker 1 (01:25:07):
What do you think Hulk Hogan figured out that allowed
him to do that and be that.

Speaker 11 (01:25:14):
I think it was the power of charisma, storytelling, and
a bit of that superhero field. Hulk Hogan's really the
very first superhero of wrestling in the same way that
kids today idolizing ol Batman or Superman or Iron Man
at Marvel DC Comic Hulk Hogan was that brought to
life and it was tangible in a way that it

(01:25:36):
isn't for film or TV because you could go to
an arena somewhere in the United States of America, buy
a ticket and see him written in front of you,
the twenty four inch Pythons body slamming me Andre the
Giant in front of the largest indoor crowd in the
history of mankind at that time at the Ponam Silverdome.

(01:25:57):
It was accessible superhero, which.

Speaker 4 (01:25:59):
Is something that was new.

Speaker 11 (01:26:00):
We had never seen that before, and I think Hulk
was able to understand what's frankly the help of Vince
McMahon to have a bigger vision for wrestling. All those
people out there who who I've seen it on social
media day are like all that fake stuff. It's like
you're missing the point. You're you're totally not getting. It
wasn't about whether it was script or not real or not.

(01:26:21):
It was something that would capture your imagination and it
was bigger than anything that you could just imagine for yourself,
embodied in this superstar that just jumped off your TV
screen every Saturday morning. I mean, you know, I was
one of those guys who grew up watching wrestling on
Saturday morning, and Hulk Hogan was the main attraction of that.

Speaker 1 (01:26:44):
We're talking with News Nation contributor Kurt Bardella. He usually
talks politics, but he's also a wrestling historian and expert.
I do want to talk a little politics with you,
but one more thing on wrestling before we do some
of that. Do you think do you think that does
wrestling actually know?

Speaker 2 (01:27:03):
I got two things for you.

Speaker 1 (01:27:05):
First, does wrestling have anybody now who is even close
to what Hulk Hogan has meant to that sport?

Speaker 11 (01:27:14):
I think the answer is yes, And that I think
what if someone like obviously Dwayne the Rock Johnson comes
to mind, who I think is the biggest box office
drawing all of Hollywood at this point, putting out billion
dollar grossing films left and right. You know, he is
also while being an actor. You know, he's on the
board of directors of ww wef TKO's parent company, and

(01:27:35):
it has been a part of many storylines. I think
of John Cena, you know John Cena right now in
the final run of his career, his farewell tour, playing
playing the bad guy the heel for the first time,
which by the way, is a not the Hulk. Cogan
who had the single biggest heel turned in the history
of wrestling in the nineties with w CW forming the nWo.
I think if people like Cody Roach, Roman Reigns, who

(01:27:57):
are also making that transition, who are both cast in
the In the Street Farmer movie that that's going to
be coming out next year. You know, it's so different
now because we have this multi media machine in WWE
that is able to promote these characters and build them
up and get some exposure in ways that weren't available

(01:28:18):
in the eighties nine. That's what makes Paul Coogan, I think,
the goat in that way because he did it when
there wasn't social media. He did it when there's no
such thing as going viral in five seconds and pulling
up on your cell phone.

Speaker 3 (01:28:28):
There was no cell phones right.

Speaker 11 (01:28:30):
Able to transcend his ecosystem into mainstream pop culture without
the tools of the twenty first century.

Speaker 1 (01:28:36):
Okay, last wrestling question for you, Kurt, and I want
to go back to something you mentioned a moment ago.
You said, you know, if you if you talk about
well it's scripted or it's fake, you're missing the point.
And it was interesting to hear you say that because
half an hour ago when I first started talking about this,
or an hour ago, I got an email from a
friend of mine who frequently goes to WrestleMania, and he

(01:28:58):
said I should go with him to rest Sania next year.
And I said, man, I don't know. I said I
don't I said I don't really care. I don't know wrestling.
And he said, you're missing the point. So please explain
to me, as someone who is pretty broadly a sportsman
but never got into wrestling, what the point is that
I'm missing and why I should go to WrestleMania.

Speaker 11 (01:29:22):
What WrestleMania is is the ultimate spectacle that fuses sports
and entertainment. There's a reason why every athlete known to
man is a WW fan. Why in the midst of
one of the greatest runs in NBA history, Tarre's Halliburton's
also hanging out, you know, Monday Night Raw. There's a
reason why in the nineties event in between NBA Finals games,

(01:29:46):
Dennis Robin would show up WW Monday nightro much to
the bewilderman vs coach Phil Jackson. As we learned in
the Last Dance documentary, it is unlike anything you will
ever experience, and it yeah, it is storyline driven. You know,
it is scripted, but there is no other type of
entertainment that allows you to be literally up close and

(01:30:10):
to have a voice in it. The fans helped dictate
the storyline just as much as the writers do, and
they have to make decisions all the time on the
fly based on crowd reaction of whether something is working
or not working.

Speaker 3 (01:30:24):
And anyone who.

Speaker 11 (01:30:25):
Thinks it's fit quote fake, I think that that is
a very narrow minded way to look at it, because
you look at these these athletes, and they are athletes,
and what they put their body through and the toll
and effect that it has on them. I dare anyone
who thinks wrestling is quote fake. To go into the
ring and take a bump and see what that actually
looks and feels like, and you'll get a real attitude

(01:30:47):
adjustment about it. But I also think that it's a
reflection of our society. You look at the storylines of
professional wrestling over the years, and it very much reflects
what we are dealing with politically and culturally. It times
and again, there is no President Donald Trump if not
for professional wrestling. This the guy who hosted WrestleMania four
and five trimp Hotel Atlantic City headline by hul Covid.

(01:31:10):
This the guy who participated in the the Billionaire storyline
for WrestleMania twenty five, shaving distant land head in the
middle of the ring ness to stone called Steve Austin's.
This is the guy who's so much of his presentation
as a candidate for president and then president derives exactly
from what you see in WWE every single Monday and
Friday night on TV.

Speaker 2 (01:31:30):
Wow love it.

Speaker 1 (01:31:32):
We're talking with Kirk Bardella News Nation contributor Kurt. I
want to do a few minutes of politics with you
and and and for those who don't know Kurt, former
Republican now democrat. If I could describe Kurt, I would
describe him as rational and moderate, not staking out you know,

(01:31:53):
the mom Donnie.

Speaker 2 (01:31:55):
Or AOC or whatever wing.

Speaker 1 (01:31:57):
And I always appreciate your analysis even when I don't
agree with you, although we agree a fair bit, because
I'm kind of a libertarian minded, unaffiliated voter myself, just
so you know where I'm coming from, Kurtin so, I
never cared very much about the Epstein story. I did
have some real concerns about why the first time around

(01:32:20):
he got that unbelievable sweetheart deal that I don't think
anybody else would have gotten, and I do.

Speaker 2 (01:32:25):
Have questions about that.

Speaker 1 (01:32:27):
Mostly I haven't cared, but the politics of it right
now are really fascinating.

Speaker 2 (01:32:33):
And I think particularly.

Speaker 1 (01:32:34):
Interesting to ask you a dude who used to be
a Republican now a Democrat. I think it's super clever
for Democrats to have figured out that they should now
be the ones pushing for the release of the so
called Epstein files, which might not even really exist. Can
you talk about how Democrats are thinking about the Epstein situation?

Speaker 11 (01:32:56):
Well, I think that in a lot of ways, Republicans
kind of set the stage for this by spending so
much oxygen talking about over the last couple of years
and creating this expectation within their own base that once
we get back into power, we're going to expose the
truth behind everything that happened in involve of Jeffrey Epstein,

(01:33:18):
and that when that didn't happen, it created this opening
for Democrats to look at the playing field there they're like, yeah,
we never really cared about this, We've never really spent
a lot of time talking about this.

Speaker 4 (01:33:27):
You go back a couple of years, you.

Speaker 11 (01:33:29):
Don't see Rachel Maddow pining about this every night on
her show on MSNBC. You don't see AOC talking about
it on the house floor. Ever, this was really only
a narrative that was taking shape on the Republican Mago
wing of the spectrum, and so they kind of kept
their powder dry back then, so that now they can
kind of come in and go, well, I mean, we

(01:33:51):
agree with you, Maga Land, we agree with you. Charlie
Kirk and Megan Kelly, we agree with you.

Speaker 6 (01:33:56):
JD.

Speaker 11 (01:33:56):
Vance and Dan Vongina. This is something that should come
out upper shut up. It's the classic case of expectations.
Will I think poorly mismanaged at the very least.

Speaker 1 (01:34:07):
Yeah. I mean, look, I think the Magabase and not
so much Trump, because Trump never said he cared a
lot about this, and when he was asked, you know,
will you declassify this or whatever about Epstein, he was
always like, eh, I guess, but I don't really care.
It was It was really Bongino and Patel and Bondi

(01:34:27):
to a slightly lesser degree. But I feel like these
folks and and the mega base who has this weird
obsession with like elite pedophiles in basements of pizza restaurants.
They're the dog that caught the car right, and the
car's about to run them over. And Democrats have figured

(01:34:48):
out that this is the first thing that at least
I can think of where Trump has lost control of
the base, and Democrats are just you know, they see
the wedge and they've grabbed the hammer and they're just
pounding the wedge further in right.

Speaker 11 (01:35:03):
That's exactly what's happening, uh, to the point, and they're
doing it very effectively using the tools and instruments of Congress,
you know where like last night, the Oversight Committee, which
is again controlled by Republicans, they were they issued us
a pena for all of the Epstein uh documents, information
and all the all the all the investigational material.

Speaker 3 (01:35:25):
Uh.

Speaker 11 (01:35:26):
And that's something that Repus Democrats teamed up and did together.

Speaker 6 (01:35:28):
Uh.

Speaker 11 (01:35:29):
You know, you're seeing you know, odd political best fellows
here of you know, people like Republican Tom Massey and
Democrat you know from California and Rocanna teaming up to
try to you know, get all this information to light.
You know, I don't understand why at this point the
administration wouldn't just make everything as transparent as possible just

(01:35:50):
to move on with this, because it's clearly not going anywhere.
It has legs. Every day some new tidbit of information
he's opping up that that that drives the story. I
don't think the spectrum of Donald Trump's suing Murrock are
going to make the story.

Speaker 6 (01:36:03):
Go away anytime, say either.

Speaker 11 (01:36:04):
So I don't know how this necessarily ends. But I
think that's the challenge of when you play in the
sandbox of conspiracy theory so often, eventually once for the
couple rounds to bite you in the button. That's kind
of what's happening right now.

Speaker 1 (01:36:20):
Yeah, I agree with you completely, and I feel like
the Republicans are kind of in a no win situation here,
right If the information doesn't come out, some kind of
significant information, the base will be pissed off and then
they won't show up in the next election cycle or two,
and Republicans are going to get hurt real bad. And
if information does come out, my guess is that it

(01:36:41):
won't be enough information to satisfy the base, and they'll
end up in the same place and they'll just keep saying, oh,
there's more, and you're protecting the pedophiles and whatever. And
really Trump's been right trying to tell the base to
drop it, but they won't and they think they're helping Trump,
but they're not. I'll give you the last seventeen seconds
because I like prime numbers.

Speaker 11 (01:37:00):
Yeah, well, I think that again, the challenge for Trump
is if you don't list up to the expectation, then
they're going to wonder, oh, are you just one of
the elites too, like we've been sold to Bill of Goods. Yes,
And I think that's the danger right now for Trump
is You've got to find a way to give them
something so that they still have a rationale to believe
in him.

Speaker 1 (01:37:20):
Yeah, And I didn't mention on the show yet today,
but some one of the news yesterday was a judge,
federal judge in Florida refused to unseal grand jury information
that Pam Bondi had asked for. And yeah, this story
is not going away, and Democrats, very cleverly now are
going to be the ones to not let it go away.
Working with strange bedfellows. As Kurt mentioned, Kurt Bardella is

(01:37:43):
a News Nation contributor usually talks politics Bud. He's also
a wrestling historian and expert. That was a really fun conversation, Kurt.
Very glad to have you on the show for the
first time. Hope to have you back.

Speaker 3 (01:37:54):
Wow.

Speaker 11 (01:37:55):
Likewise, I hope you have me back on to That
was a lot of fun.

Speaker 2 (01:37:57):
All Right, thank you, Kurt.

Speaker 1 (01:37:59):
All Right, that's all I've got for you today. Enjoy
the rest of your Thursday. Mandy condle up next and
that's it. Talk to you tomorrow. Oh, I'll be broadcasting
from training camp, so that'll be fun too.

All Episodes

07-24-25 - FULL SHOW Judge spikes Epstein info; Suppressors law; Obama crimes? + Hulk Hogan Passes Away

Episode Transcript

The Ross Kaminsky Show News

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

The Breakfast Club

Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}07-24-25 - *FULL SHOW* Judge spikes Epstein info; Suppressors law; Obama crimes? + Hulk Hogan Passes Away

Episode Transcript

The Ross Kaminsky Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Dateline NBC

The Breakfast Club

Crime Junkie

All Episodes