06-16-25 FULL SHOW - Jimmy Sengenberger Fills In

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Bill and Pollock
Accident and Injury Lawyers.

Speaker 2 (00:05):
Well, no, it's Mandy Connell Mann.

Speaker 3 (00:15):
M got Way to study.

Speaker 4 (00:18):
Can then Nicey Throdrey, Bendy, Toronald Keith, who is sad Bay.

Speaker 5 (00:29):
Good afternoon. It is Monday, the sixteenth of June. I
hope all you father's had a great Father's Day weekend.
Jimmy Sangenberger covering from Mandy Connell today, tomorrow and on Wednesday,
And it is such a pleasure and a privilege to
be back with you today, although I think we're really

(00:52):
struggling with figuring out one or two topics to discuss.
There's just been no news and it's been dull. What
do we even talk about? Okay, I can't even say
that with a street face. It's just the ongoing influx
so much so, and we have so much to talk
about that this is a free and clear show.

Speaker 2 (01:14):
We don't have any guests.

Speaker 5 (01:15):
We're going to be talking about the mountain of issues
and stories that have been going on over the past
few days alone since we left this show on Friday,
in particular blending in a little bit, of course with
Friday's events we had the strike, Israel's strike on Iran

(01:40):
that has rocked the world and bb Net and Yahoo.
Yesterday speaking on Fox News in an exclusive live interview,
where he made several things very clear, whether it would.

Speaker 6 (01:56):
Be six months or twelve months or thirteen months as
im material. Once they go that route, it's too late
and we will not have a second Holocaust, a nuclear holocaust.
We already had one in the previous century. The Jewish
state is not going to have the Holocaust made it
on the Jewish people.

Speaker 5 (02:12):
It's not going to happen.

Speaker 6 (02:13):
It's never again is now, and we have to act now.

Speaker 5 (02:16):
Never again is now, and we have to act now.
And he discussed the need to remove two particular threats
without unlike Iran, without bombing civilian populations.

Speaker 6 (02:32):
You know, we're geared to do whatever is necessary to
achieve our dual aim to remove two existential threats, two
existential threats, the nuclear threat and the ballistic missile threat.
And we're doing that as we speak now in Tehran.
But we're not bombing the population. We're telling the population
leave so when we hit the targets embedded in civilian areas,

(02:54):
you won't be hurt. And there is now mass migration
from Tehran right now, that's what's happening. So because we're
giving them forwarding.

Speaker 2 (03:02):
I think that's the critical piece.

Speaker 5 (03:04):
Whether it's the war in Gaza or in Iran right now,
or any other engagement that Israel does. They know, Bibi Netanya,
who's whods him, everybody knows that whatever they do is
going to be put under the microscope. And so that
adds all the more reason why it is essential for

(03:26):
the Israeli defense forces to be as precise as possible
Number one and number two to give warnings to civilians. Hey,
these are targets that we are going to hit. Please
leave those locations as soon as possible so you don't
get caught in the crossfire or in the direct blast.

(03:49):
That is always what the Israelis have done over the decades.
Now is it perfect? Absolutely not. Do civilians end up debt, Yes,
that is the tragedy of war and oftentimes an extraordinary tragedy.
But the key difference between Israel and say hamas a

(04:11):
proxy of Iran or Iran itself is that they will
do their level best to avoid.

Speaker 2 (04:17):
Hurting, injuring killing civilians.

Speaker 5 (04:22):
Now, this attack though from Israel on Iran has raised
the number of questions about coordination. Remember Thursday night, almost immediately,
Secretary of State Marco Rubio puts out a statement that
the media categorize as distancing the United States from israel.

Speaker 2 (04:39):
Strike, which I didn't read it that way.

Speaker 5 (04:43):
I read it as Israel made this decision and has
moved forward unilaterally with the attack.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
Yes, we're not involved. Don't attack us because we didn't
attack you.

Speaker 5 (04:55):
Don't attack our military installations, don't attack our embassies, so
on and so for it.

Speaker 2 (05:03):
And that was the message being sent by Rubio.

Speaker 5 (05:08):
But of course the United States has helped to shoot
down missiles and shoot down drones, and guess who else
has golf. Arab countries like Saudi Arabia have also done
that because they need those missiles to go over those
countries in order to reach Israel. And make no mistake,

(05:32):
they're kind of joyful about this, that Israel's taking the
initiative to defend the region from Iran and the prospect
of Iran getting a nuclear weapon. When Saudi Arabia the
Kingdom put out a statement on Friday or thereabouts saying, oh,
we condemn this attack, I don't think they could do
it with a straight face, because Israel's basically the friend

(05:59):
in the equation, the enemy of my enemy is my friend,
and Israel is taking on the burden of addressing this
threat to Iran, a threat that has brought golf Arab
countries to peace with Israel in the Abraham Accords, largely
because of the threat of Iran. When the Trump administration

(06:21):
took off, as one of the earliest things that they did,
and I'm talking about the first administration, was to end
the Iranian nuclear Deal, to pull the United States out
because it was a very bad deal. And they did
this unequivocally and in part because there had been and

(06:46):
they understood this backchannel conversations going on between Israel and
golf Arab countries up to and including Saudi Arabia.

Speaker 2 (06:55):
They weren't publicly.

Speaker 5 (06:56):
Known officially the relations between those countries were. There were
no relations actually on any official way. There still aren't
official relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. But the first
Trump administration came in and said, Okay, we see the

(07:17):
dynamics here. Why don't we play into this and work
with the golf Arab countries to bring about peace with
Israel and send a clear message to Iran taking advantage
in a very positive way of the misgivings, fears, and
concerns that all of those countries had about Iran obtaining
a nuclear weapon. Number one and number two Iran's malignant activity,

(07:39):
which includes Yemen, where Saudi Arabia and Iran have been
engaged in a proxy war, with the Saudis supporting the
government there and the Iranians backing the Huti rebels. So

(08:00):
if that was a brilliant move by the Trump administration
that brought about the Abraham Accords, and then the Biden
administration built on that a little bit even as they
tried to pursue a renewed nuclear deal with her Ron,
which of course never came about in any real way,
then you've had the last sixty plus days where the

(08:22):
Trump administration was trying to engage in negotiations, and it's
almost as if the Trump teams were providing sort of
cover for Israel to then follow through on the warning
that Trump gave Iran. You got sixty days to get
tracked together, basically, and if you don't, there'll be real consequences.

(08:43):
And well, Israel strike was the real consequence. But in
so far as coordination between the Trump administration and the
US and the net Yahoo administration.

Speaker 2 (08:56):
In Israel is concerned.

Speaker 5 (08:58):
Here is what maybe Netnaho himself said yesterday on Fox
So you.

Speaker 7 (09:02):
Were closely coordinating with the US throughout this process.

Speaker 6 (09:06):
Look, we're fully coordinated. But understand that America under President
Trump will make President Trump will make the decisions that
are best for America. And that's the way it is.
He understands that I, as the Prime Minister of Israel,
the one and only Jewish state, Mut's make the decisions
that are important for the survival of my country, and
he will do what is best for America. That is

(09:27):
a relationship of mutual respect and mutual confidence.

Speaker 5 (09:31):
Now thatur coordination, I think is significant and it is real.
It's really interesting watching as some of President Trump's critics
we're acting like, oh my gosh, look, Trump said, don't
do it, but Israel did it anyway, as though Israel
and Trump were not aligned. And it's another example of

(09:54):
a foreign country, Israel in particular, disrespecting the United States
under Trump, and yet by no means is that the
reality of the situation. It is very clear that Israel
would not have done that if Trump said no, I
really don't want you to do this, I think you

(10:15):
got to winken a nod from the President and he
said we'll support you in the United States has provided
some assistance.

Speaker 2 (10:23):
Now will this escalate? That, of course, is the big question.
Could this end up in.

Speaker 5 (10:30):
A war for regime change one with American troops on
the ground. I'll say, I don't see a situation where
the United States or even Israel, but especially the United
States has military forces on the ground in an invasion.

(10:51):
I don't see that as a likely eventuality in any circumstance.
I mean, is it possible, anything's possible?

Speaker 2 (11:00):
Is it likely?

Speaker 5 (11:01):
Very very unlikely? And I think that's in part because
it's not going to be necessary. It seems to be
that way number one. Number two, the objective is to
take out particular military and other leaders, nuclear scientists, and
so forth of the people running the regime that overlap,

(11:24):
and to take out the nuclear capabilities and the ICBM
missiles like those are very clear objectives. And I can't
see President Trump being a person to say, yeah, We're
going to get into a regime change war, Nor do
I think that's necessary or fitting with what the objectives are.
But here's BBO on that question.

Speaker 2 (11:44):
Is regime change part of the effort here could.

Speaker 6 (11:49):
Certainly be the result because they're on the regime is
very weak. I think it's basically left with two things.
Its plans to have atomic bombs and ballistic missiles. That's
basically what Iran has. They certainly don't have the people
eighty percent of the people will throw these theological thugs out.
I mean they murder them, they oppress them for forty
six years, they've yearned for freedom. I mean they shoot

(12:12):
women because their hair is uncovered, they shoot students, They
just suck the oxygen from this brave and gifted people.
The Iranian people, and you know, the Persian people and
the Jewish people have had an ancient friendship goes back
to the times of Cyrus the Great. That could happen again,
but again, the decision to act to rise up this

(12:33):
time is the decision of the Iranian people.

Speaker 2 (12:36):
And I think that's how it should stay.

Speaker 5 (12:38):
Will the Iranian people rise up and fight for regime
change themselves, the resistance take on their own positions in
that respect, I think time will tell. But they're the
ones who need to.

Speaker 2 (12:54):
Step up now. Then you look on the home front.

Speaker 5 (12:57):
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina noted Warhawk, I have
seen many jokes about how excited and ecstatic he was,
how to have been about Israel striking Iran, something he
has wanted for a very long time, it seems. And
he was asked on CBS Face the Nation about the

(13:17):
prospect of regime change.

Speaker 7 (13:19):
I would love for their regime to fall.

Speaker 8 (13:21):
If you don't, if you want this regime to stay
in power, you're wanting people to oppress the Iranian people.

Speaker 7 (13:28):
You want people to threaten their neighbors to be.

Speaker 8 (13:32):
The largest states who wants the largest state sponsor of
terrorism to stay in place. But regime change is not
the policy of the United States. It is not the
purpose of this attack yet. But if there's one attack
on an American anywhere in the Mid East by Iran,
then you'll get regime change.

Speaker 7 (13:50):
So what are we dealing with. We're dealing with a
non negotiable part of the deal.

Speaker 8 (13:55):
They can't have a nuclear program that can make a
bomb diplomas he's preferred, as Dick says, but force.

Speaker 7 (14:02):
May be the only option. And I've said as clearly.

Speaker 8 (14:05):
As I can say if the diplomacy fails.

Speaker 7 (14:08):
Mister President President Trump, you've been great. Help Israel.

Speaker 8 (14:11):
Finish the job, give them bombs, fly with them if necessary.
I cannot stress to you how if you want to
get Russia right, you want to make China be better,
you want to convince international terrorism, we mean business, You've.

Speaker 7 (14:24):
Got to finish the job with Irun.

Speaker 2 (14:26):
Finish the job with Iran.

Speaker 5 (14:27):
Fair enough regime change yet, he says, and I do
think that if an American dies from Iran or because
of Iran, then there will be some kind of strike back,
if it'll go to what he wants, which is the
United States involved in a regime change war.

Speaker 2 (14:49):
I again think that isn't very likely.

Speaker 5 (14:52):
And I certainly am not among those who would like
to see American forces on the ground over seeing a
regime change.

Speaker 2 (15:01):
Again.

Speaker 5 (15:01):
I mean, I was in middle school when we invaded
I rock, I was in middle school when we invaded Afghanistan.

Speaker 2 (15:09):
I'm in favor.

Speaker 5 (15:10):
Of Israel's strike and supporting them, but having another on
the ground war, I mean, there's the scenario in which
it becomes necessary. I don't see that right now, and
I think we need to avert that. The greatest extent possible,
and I do think it is unlikely. Now could peace
come about? Iran is saying it would just take one

(15:34):
phone call from Trump to get diplomacy back on track.
I feel like that is stalling for time. That is
sort of the classic tactic from Iran, a stalling tactic
to buy time. But does the United States have the
moral authority to lead such an incursion or not incursion

(15:58):
rather but a peace process. Well, if you ask the
vice presidential nominee for Kamala Harris, the governor of Minnesota, well,
a different country might be the only country that has
the moral authority.

Speaker 2 (16:17):
To help broker peace.

Speaker 9 (16:18):
Here we are with the Middle East laws fire in
a way that has now expanded with I don't Iran
has to retaliate in their mind, I'm sure. And now,
who is the voice in the world that can negotiate
some type of agreement in this Who holds the moral authority,
who holds.

Speaker 7 (16:38):
The ability to do that?

Speaker 9 (16:40):
Because we are not seen as a neutral actor, I
mean consistently, over and over again, we're going to have
to face the reality. It might be the Chinese, and
that goes against everything they say they're trying to do
in terms of the bounce of powers.

Speaker 5 (16:55):
Are you serious, Tim Walls?

Speaker 9 (16:58):
Consistently, over and over again, We're going to have to
face the reality. It might be the Chinese.

Speaker 2 (17:04):
It might be the Chinese.

Speaker 5 (17:06):
The Chinese Communist Party, chief adversary to the United States, has,
as I understand, it provided support to the Iranian regime,
but all across the globe is engaging in subversive activities
to promote its agenda into the detriment of country after country,
especially democratic countries. They are a brutal regime that oppresses

(17:33):
their own people. Xijing Ping is no friend of freedom,
democracy or moral virtue, to say the least. And yet
this guy Tim Walls says, Hey, yeah, China might be
that country that has moral authority here.

Speaker 2 (17:54):
I mean, can you believe this stuff? It's absolute, not
to put.

Speaker 5 (18:01):
It just very nicely, is nonsense to think that the
Chinese Communist Party is the moral of haus on the
global stage that can bring about peace between Israel and
Iran and broke a peace in the Middle East. Not
only is that a moronic thing to say, quite frankly,

(18:27):
but it also hurts American interests to sede that kind
of negotiating position to China.

Speaker 2 (18:37):
There is talk as well from some folks that I heard.

Speaker 5 (18:41):
You know, maybe the Trump administration is contemplating Putin being
the source of the negotiated peace, which I can't imagine
that would be the case. That is possibly the only
one that's even more absurd than China negotiating that piece. Now,
I don't see that the United States is in the

(19:02):
position to actually bring it about. Yes, we have clearly
supported Israel. We are not a neutral party. Well, we
are the one party that can say, all right, we're
gonna help push the brakes on this. I mean it
was Trump who vetoed a strike on coming a the

(19:22):
Supreme leader of Iran over the weekend. Israel was primed
to do a strike to assassinate him, and Trump pulled
the plug and said, Nope, no way, we're gonna We're
not gonna do that. And look, it has not happened.
Has It doesn't mean Israel might not in some circumstance,
but pretty darn clearly, there's every incentive for BBNT and

(19:42):
Yahoo to keep Trump on his side and to work
closely with him so that they can approach ending this
in the way that is something Israel can accept for
the long term. A lot of movie parts, a lot
of different elements to this. What are your thoughts? Five

(20:04):
six six nine zero is our koa common spirit health
text line. So much to talk about in thees, the
texture saying a moral authority, China, what a fool? My
sentiments exactly, keep it here, Just getting started, Jimmy and
Formandy on KOA. Look, I just saw video and I

(20:28):
didn't notice this before we went live, but Israel struck
Iranian State TV. There was a woman broadcasting live and
then the video stream has the green screen or whatever
it is backdrop disappear as the building is shaking. She

(20:50):
turns around and then boom, everything goes off and they's
cut to a different feed. Pretty wild, especially when you
can see things like that happen around the globe. We
are in that time of the world. Five six six
nine zero is our koa common spirit health text line.

(21:15):
If you want to join into the festivities, Alexa texting in,
I gosh, has it really been ten years to this day?
Happy ten year anniversary of Trump coming down the escalator
and announcing running for president. Thank god he ran in
one great day to play the clip of all the
Dems like Pelosi and Obama, along with Hollywood elite like

(21:40):
Tom Hanks and teleprompter readers like Rachel Maddow saying Trump
would never be president. So when do you want to
start that video or that tape, because I'm on the
record in twenty fifteen on multiple occasions saying that too,
not once he got dovidation.

Speaker 2 (22:00):
In fact it Alexai, I think you'll recall this.

Speaker 5 (22:03):
I on my old radio show another station I endorsed,
said I would vote for Trump a month before the
Republican National Convention in twenty sixteen, and I said there
were two reasons that I would vote for him, even
though I was strongly supportive of Ted Cruz and I
was going to the RNC at the time as an
alternate delegate for Cruise. I think it was one of

(22:26):
the first people in the media who was on the
right to say, you know what, I'm going to support
and vote for Trump. And that was because one Hillary Clinton.
I was just like, no, we cannot have Hillary.

Speaker 2 (22:39):
Number two.

Speaker 5 (22:41):
The Supreme Court, and boy do I feel vindicated on
the Supreme Court. Not just the Supreme Court though most especially,
but the courts.

Speaker 2 (22:50):
And there you go.

Speaker 5 (22:52):
So I voted. I voted for Trump. In that and
quite honestly, I voted for Trump all three times he
ran in the primary this go around, but in the
general when he got the nomination again I did. I
could not, in no way could I support Kamala Harris.
But I understand people who do, including those engaging in

(23:13):
or did rather engaging in the.

Speaker 2 (23:16):
No Kings protest.

Speaker 5 (23:17):
I get it. I get it. You really don't like
a lot of the things that President Trump is doing,
to the point where there's galvanized opposition, millions of people
out there protesting, but still a fraction of the millions
and tens and tens of millions of people who voted

(23:38):
for Trump. And when you look at the polling data
is looking really good for the president. But even more
than that, And we played this on Friday, I feel
compelled after the protests of Saturday to play it again
from Lion King, no.

Speaker 10 (24:01):
King, idiots, I will be a king, will be king,
no King, No, I will be king.

Speaker 2 (24:12):
That's it.

Speaker 5 (24:14):
They want to be the people who want House Trump
and bring in a different agenda, one of big government,
one of cancel culture, and of greater control.

Speaker 2 (24:26):
They want their own brand of a king. I'm sorry,
I don't have sympathy for people who want to.

Speaker 5 (24:33):
Install other people in the office or elect what I'm
saying installed because of the fervor here, the extent of
the fervor that I think is a bit much in
some respects for sure. And look again, I'm the guy
who has been on these airways talking about how unconstitutional.

Speaker 2 (24:54):
Trump's tariffs move is.

Speaker 5 (24:57):
I ticked off Trumpster's land last week when I said
that his election order, while I agreed with it in principle,
was unconstitutional, and I agreed with the court that struck
it down. And guess what, it's kind of hard to
have a king when you have courts that keep striking
down things that the king has done.

Speaker 2 (25:21):
And I do have to say I found it rather entertaining.

Speaker 5 (25:24):
Did you see this the truth social posts that Trump
put out earlier? I think it was this morning, maybe
it was last night. That was last night, All caps
a huge thank you to the No King's protesters. Yesterday
I was very concerned a king was trying to take

(25:44):
my place, but thanks to your tireless efforts, I am
all caps still your president. Great job, all USA Flack.

Speaker 2 (25:56):
See to me, that's how you handle it. There's a
great sense of Hubert.

Speaker 5 (26:00):
And that's how you handle something like this, Rather than
attacking the protesters who oppose you, you make a joke
about it because you're not a king.

Speaker 2 (26:09):
You know you're not a king.

Speaker 5 (26:10):
In fact, Donald Trump, the President, even talked about that
last week.

Speaker 2 (26:16):
What are your thoughts on those what they got?

Speaker 6 (26:18):
No king?

Speaker 2 (26:18):
No kings. I don't feel like a king. I have
to go through hell to get stuff. A pro the
king would say, I'm.

Speaker 6 (26:24):
Not gonna get this.

Speaker 5 (26:26):
The king would have never had the California mandate even
be talking to him. He wouldn't have to call up
Mike Johnson and Thune and say, fellas, you got to
pull this off, and after.

Speaker 2 (26:35):
Years we get it done.

Speaker 7 (26:36):
No, no, we're not a king.

Speaker 2 (26:38):
We're not a king at all, thank you very much.

Speaker 5 (26:40):
So with that in mind, I think that this was
the perfect post to put out on social media.

Speaker 2 (26:47):
I was very concerned that a king was trying to
take my place.

Speaker 5 (26:50):
But thanks to your retireless efforts, I'm still your president,
say I've got the king, And I was worried somebody
was gonna commit and becoming I Really that's the sense
of humor, and that's how you respond to protesters like that.

Speaker 2 (27:09):
Very brilliant. Now, I think the heightened.

Speaker 5 (27:12):
Discourse, though, is something very concerning. That's why I view
myself as a guy who calls balls and strikes that
if Trump does something good, I'm gonna praise it over
and over again. If it's something he does bad, I'm

(27:32):
gonna highlight that and I'm gonna make a point of
bringing it out there, or if I disagree, And that's
what I think people should be whether you voted for
the guy or not, it's a good thing to look
at and be like, Okay, there are some things that
he's done that are not great.

Speaker 2 (27:48):
If you're a fan or if you're opposed to him, Okay, well,
actually he's doing a couple of good things.

Speaker 5 (27:52):
That's a fair way to look at it, especially if
you are in his camp. But the heightened the political
moment that we have today is deeply distressing in many respects.

Speaker 2 (28:05):
Of course, we had.

Speaker 5 (28:07):
A couple of political leaders assassinated in Minnesota on Saturday,
the same day of the No Kings protest, and the
suspect has been arrested. Let me say very clearly, very unequivocally,

(28:27):
there is no place for violence in America's political debates. Discourse, discussions, elections, whatever,
violence is patently unacceptable, it is inexcusable, and it must
be punished. And as heightened as this moment is, as

(28:49):
fearful as people are, as frustrated, or as eager to
save the country as you may be, there is no
place for hurting others to get your views across, or
to have retribution against people you disagree with. Very terrifying

(29:14):
situation that we have this happening in the United States
of America, and we've had violence on both sides of
the aisle, and it is unacceptable. And I do want
to add that of Representative Horton.

Speaker 4 (29:35):
And the.

Speaker 5 (29:39):
Melissa Horton and oh goodness, mister Hoffman, whose first name
I apologize escapes me. In another story. Right in front
of me had a Senator John Hoffman, John Hofton. There
we go, who I guess, Well, Hoffman was was wounded.

(30:00):
That's right, that's right, Okay, I was.

Speaker 2 (30:02):
Verifying for a second.

Speaker 5 (30:03):
I was misremembered Melissa Horton had died and State Senator
John Hoffman wounded. He is undergoing surgery as well as
his hospital or his wife at the hospital as of yesterday.
I wanted to make sure I got that right. Tragic, unacceptable,

(30:26):
terrifying thoughts in prayers with Representative Representative Ortman's family and
the family as well of John Hoffman, him and his wife.
I'm Jimmy sanging Berger in from Andy Connell. We'll pick
it up on the other side on Kai. Of course,
I'm a big blues officionado, but I also love Southern rock.

(30:49):
That's right up there. And one fun thing about that
tune The South is Going to do it again is
that you have Charlie Daniels singing about a bunch of
other Southern rock guys, which is so funny.

Speaker 2 (31:01):
It just shows you the community.

Speaker 5 (31:02):
Molly Hatchett had a song as well, similar in that way,
calling out others. It's just so fun. You know what
also may or may not be fun. Trump Mobile? What
do you mean, Jimmy trump Mobile? Well, I will let

(31:25):
Don Junior tell us what I mean by Trump Mobile,
because this was not on my bingo card for June
of twenty twenty five.

Speaker 11 (31:36):
As day, we're here to introduce Trump Mobile. We've partnered
with some of the greatest people in the industry to
make sure that real Americans can get true value from
their mobile carriers. A big part of what we've done
right now the world has been focused on technology for
people who've been underserved, whether that's getting crypto or anything else.
But one of the places where we felt.

Speaker 3 (31:56):
There was a lack of luster performance was.

Speaker 6 (31:57):
In the mobile industry.

Speaker 11 (31:58):
And so with trump O, we're going to be introducing
an entire package of products that people can come. They
can get telemedicine on their phone for one flat monthly
see growth side assistance in their cars, unlimited texting to
one hundred countries around the world, and we've partnered this
a little the best to really bring something unique to
the American people.

Speaker 5 (32:18):
I don't know, is that like something you're going to
rush to do is switch your phone service to Trump
Mobile all excitedly and trust that it's going to be
everything that you want. Or are you going to look
at it and say, well, I remember Trump University, Trump Steaks.

Speaker 2 (32:36):
I don't know about Trump Mobile.

Speaker 5 (32:38):
Do I want to go in that direction or not?
I don't know. I don't know.

Speaker 2 (32:42):
It sounds like they've got some good deals.

Speaker 5 (32:43):
It's really interesting the idea of including telehealth services for
a monthly fee old into their texting to over a
hundred countries and apparently they're bringing together AT and T,
Verizon Mobile and networks.

Speaker 2 (33:03):
Maybe it's a great deal, maybe not. I don't know.
It was just really weird when I came across that.

Speaker 5 (33:10):
Donald Trump Junior had made an announcement for Trump Mobile
being a thing. Oh my gosh, I don't know. What
do you think? Five six, six to nine zero. Are
you gonna rush to do that? You can also call
into the show. We're gonna open the phones for the
next two hours. Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell three
oh three, seven to one, three eighty five eighty five.

(33:33):
Three oh three, seven one, three eighty five eighty five.
If you feel so inclined to talk about any of
the topics, we're gonna be diving into things that happened
over the weekend.

Speaker 2 (33:43):
Give us a call.

Speaker 5 (33:44):
Text into the show KOA Commic Spirit Health Line and
Comma Spirit Health text line as we continue, text line
and hotline as we continue. Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy
Connell on KOA.

Speaker 1 (34:00):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury Lawyers.

Speaker 2 (34:05):
No, it's Mandy Connell.

Speaker 5 (34:10):
On KOA.

Speaker 12 (34:13):
Ninetem got way.

Speaker 4 (34:18):
Kevin Nicey through three many Connell keeping no sad thing time.

Speaker 5 (34:28):
Now for the second hour, Jimmy sangen Berger in for Mandy,
who returns next week. As I understand it from her travels.

Speaker 2 (34:41):
Good to be with you.

Speaker 5 (34:43):
With just I mean at first hour flew by, We've
got lots more to go. Five six sixty nine zero
is the KOA Common Spirit Health text line.

Speaker 2 (34:52):
If you want to join.

Speaker 5 (34:53):
I've also opened up the phones or asked Grant behind
the glass to do so for today. I figure that
might as well. Right, a couple hours to go, no guess,
but much to talk about. Three O three seven to one,
three eighty five eighty five if you want to call in,
if you'll feel so inclined. Three O three seven one
three eighty five eighty five. Now I did get a

(35:19):
listener text that I feel compelled to read because we
were just talking about the announcement from Donald Trump Junior
about launching Trump Mobile in the last segment, and he
goes or she text in, Jimmy, be honest. The Trump's
have zero decision making control over Trump Mobile. It's a

(35:39):
simple licensing deal. Yeah, they're probably licensing it all together
in a white label way, packaging it and calling it
trump Mobile.

Speaker 2 (35:48):
Okay, but will you subscribe? Does it seem appealing?

Speaker 5 (35:53):
Will people just hear it and out think about a
licensing deal and say let's.

Speaker 2 (35:57):
Go all in on Trump Mobile. I don't know.

Speaker 5 (36:02):
I kind of think that it's not going to be
a very lucrative endeavor for them, but we shall definitely
see what happens. Of course, we have the no King's
protests over the weekend. I don't see the point of
the no kings protests. Listener text comes in. We have
that every year in July fourth, Independence Day. Yes, that

(36:30):
is very true. Independence Day, July fourth is our celebration
of ridding the country of the king.

Speaker 2 (36:41):
But I think the point of this protest.

Speaker 5 (36:45):
Was Trump fancies himself a king, is doing.

Speaker 2 (36:48):
All these things that he believes.

Speaker 5 (36:51):
He has the power to do, and we want to
tell them, no king, no king, no kings whatsover?

Speaker 2 (37:00):
Trump, you are not a king. And then Trump comes
back and says, well.

Speaker 5 (37:03):
I keep getting stopped by the courts, I keep getting
held back by Congress.

Speaker 2 (37:10):
Am I really a king? In fairness? No, it's absurd
to suggest that.

Speaker 5 (37:17):
But to the extent that he's assumed more powers as president. Well,
let's talk about every president of the United States for
years and years that has continually assumed more and more power.

Speaker 2 (37:34):
Trump is just the latest and he's doing it.

Speaker 5 (37:38):
In spectacular fashion because that's.

Speaker 2 (37:42):
What Trump does. Everything has to be big, the.

Speaker 5 (37:46):
Big beautiful bill, even a massive spending bill in Congress,
has to be called big and beautiful. So I think
it's just sort of an emotional response more than anything.
It is an emotional response and not really grounded in

(38:15):
anything that's actually happening. Now that doesn't mean that he's
not overstepping his presidents have done in the past.

Speaker 2 (38:20):
But I think this is just a galvanizing call. No kings.

Speaker 5 (38:28):
Oh, I love this text just came in five sixty
six nine zero, except the no kings people support all
the countries with tyrannical governments Palestine, Mos.

Speaker 2 (38:39):
Yeah, isn't that rather interesting?

Speaker 6 (38:42):
You have.

Speaker 5 (38:45):
Tim Walls, the governor of Minnesota, who of course was
the nominee for Vice President for the Democrats, saying that China,
the Chinese Communist Party in effect, when he says the
Chinese have the moral authority to be the peace brokers
in the Middle East, not the United States. No, no, no,

(39:05):
we're too closely identified with Israel. But China, they've got
that moral authority from that to Iran to Hamas. Isn't
it notable? I do think that's a fair point five
six six nine zero if you agree or disagree, and
it is.

Speaker 3 (39:25):
Yes.

Speaker 5 (39:26):
I've got multiple texts about the way that they're branding things,
especially with the the the Trump mobile element to this.
It all it's all branding, Yes, it is, And in fact,

(39:46):
you're right, Mint Mobile is also a branding of T mobile.

Speaker 2 (39:54):
That is so true.

Speaker 5 (39:55):
So much of that isn't a good idea, though, to
stake your claim I'm on a business venture like this
in this way associated with the president of the United States.
I mean, I guess it really is nice someone talking
about and I see this criticism all over about how
the White House the presidency's sort of like an online
merch store. That's a bad look for US president. I

(40:20):
don't like it either. I don't think that we should
have this quite as much, but quite as much, if
at all. Like during the campaign, it's one thing, oh
Trump coins to donating support the campaign, but that's it.

Speaker 2 (40:36):
That's about what you should do. I agree.

Speaker 5 (40:38):
I don't lie. I do think it's a bit unseemly.
What do you think? Five six six nine zero is
the KOA Common Spirit Health text line three zero three
seven to one three eighty five eighty five is our
telephone number if you want to join into the festivities
as well as we have opened lines we have is
it Doug in Frederick joining us? Now?

Speaker 2 (40:58):
You're on with Jimmy in for me and good afternoon.

Speaker 3 (41:02):
Hey Jimmy, thanks for taking the calls. Good to hear
your voice again.

Speaker 2 (41:04):
Hey, thank you, sir. I appreciate it. What's on your mind?

Speaker 3 (41:07):
Yeah, a couple of things up well, and then the
preposely with this. I'm old school, so I like to
talk to people. So thanks for taking the calls. Most
people want text nowadays.

Speaker 2 (41:16):
Yeah, yeah, you know what. I'm wide open. I love
to take a few calls when we get some great
what's up done?

Speaker 3 (41:22):
Yeah, even sports radio does that now. But anyway, the
points that I wanted to make up I wanted to
say I don't understand. I mean, obviously, all this is stage.
There's pallets being set with concrete blocks everywhere, and all
these protests they're getting to the bottom of some of it.
But we need to find out, you know, where the
financing is coming from when we need to go out

(41:43):
after them with everything we got.

Speaker 5 (41:44):
See, here's the thing, Dog. I see posts, and I'm
glad you mentioned this. I see posts all the time
about bricks showing up and protests. But a lot of
the times, what I noticed and when people actually look
into it, is that they are pictures from say twenty
twenty and past protests, and that they aren't happening now.
Now may in some instances maybe they are, but I

(42:08):
do think we need a little bit of skepticism in
that respect, because there's a lot of stuff showing up
from from the past that isn't happening today.

Speaker 6 (42:16):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (42:16):
And I think that was a great assault, big grain assault.
I believe there's showing up. They even arrested a few guys.
I mean, if we're following the news, we can see it.

Speaker 2 (42:26):
Thirty five arrest in Denver. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (42:28):
Yeah. The other point is, uh, politically, what are the
Democrats think they're going to gain from this? I mean,
whether you're I mean, say you're an independent, I mean
I vote I voted for it's some three times now
I'll say that, but I would vote for someone else possibly, sure,
I'm not closed minded. I'd vote for somebody like a Dasanis.

(42:49):
But what do they think they're going to gain from
this politically, Jimmy, I don't get this.

Speaker 2 (42:53):
It's just hurting now.

Speaker 5 (42:54):
I think in a lot of respects this is I
talked a few minutes ago about it being an emotional response,
and I think that's very much what it is. Is
people are fired up and filled up with so much
angst that they want to get out and let it
out and protest, and that for the average person, they're
just really getting with their friends and speaking their mind
and thinking they're doing something bigger. And then he got

(43:15):
some bad actors in the mix that may be committing
crimes or violence real quick.

Speaker 3 (43:20):
I mean, let me say this, I feel bad for
a lot of the Hispanic people. I don't want anybody
here illegally. I want people to be here legally. I
know that they are some of the hardest working people
in our country, and I see it because I'm not
here in the working world, but they're amazing workers. But
with that said, they've got to be legal. But I
think that flag is being used, the Mexican flag, to
divide us and a lot of people are holding that

(43:42):
Mexican flag are not Mexicans. I really believe that, and
I think they're paid protesters. I think Soros and a
lot of them have the brand on this, and it's
like they didn't blood the BLM movement and it'll all
come out in a wash. I just think that it's
a shame and one thing we've to do, no matter
what we stand politically, we can't let them provide us

(44:04):
as a nation. That's the last thing we need to do.
Most people are good people. Yeah, jug a lot of
these people protest it. Need to go get a job.

Speaker 2 (44:13):
But thank you, Jimmy, I agree. I gotta let you run.
But thank you for the call.

Speaker 5 (44:17):
I do appreciate it, especially because look, this is You're right.
We need to do our best as a society to
not be so deeply divided and to give some recognize,
to recognize that people can agree to disagree. And most
of the people out protesting again, they're firing up they

(44:41):
You may disagree with them, you may think they're wrong.

Speaker 2 (44:43):
I tend to disagree with them and think that they're wrong.

Speaker 5 (44:47):
And I think that a lot of them would like
to have kings of a different stripe and that they
just don't like this guy being the idea that he's king.
But you know, let them protest if they're doing it peaceful,
it's worth getting your voice out there and being heard.
I remember in twenty ten all the Tea Party protests,

(45:07):
not violent, didn't have that kind of thing, but people
really were getting out there in nine twenty ten speak
in their mind taxed enough, already pushing back against what
was happening with Obama. And in many respects that was
almost like a no King's because you're saying taxed.

Speaker 2 (45:28):
Enough, already calling back to the Tea Party.

Speaker 5 (45:33):
And the revolutionary mindset of smaller government, of no kings,
no royalties, taxation with representation, not without fair enough right,
Let people do it as long as they're honest and open.

(45:55):
Now I did mention terrorists. This is one area where
I think Trump is vastly overstepped. I'm glad that the
courts are working through the process to adjudicate that. I
think pretty clearly the case is really strong that his
Liberation Day tariffs are unconstitutional. But we are seeing some

(46:17):
of the data and inflation that looks not that bad,
only point one percent increase in the month of May. Overall,
of course, that doesn't include food, and food has been rising.

Speaker 2 (46:31):
We all feel it and see it.

Speaker 5 (46:33):
You go to the grocery store, you can experience how
much you are being saddled with additional costs. And that's
what's showing up in some additional data. This is from
last week, but Fox Business noted the BD eight Capital
Partners their CIO, Barbara Dorin, was looking at the impact

(46:54):
of the tariffs and had real consideration of some things
that included the Federal Reserve Bank of New York recently
releasing a survey that found businesses are passing some or
all of the cost of higher tariffs onto consumers through
higher prices. The New York Fed conducted its survey of

(47:17):
businesses in the New York and Northern New Jersey region
from May second through ninth and found that most businesses
passed on at least some of the higher tariffs to
their customers through higher prices. Now, this is especially significant
among small business owners. Keep that in mind, they're squeezed.
They're being squeezed, especially because a lot of them, because

(47:39):
they're small businesses, they need to find an affordable place
to manufacture products and that is overseas, whether it's China
or some other place. And I don't think we should
begrudge a small business that when they're trying to grow
and make ends meet and succeed. It found that this
would be The New York Fed found that about ninety

(48:01):
percent of manufacturers and roughly three quarters of service firms
import some goods, with the average share of imported inputs
at about thirty percent for all firms. Notice that in
the United States, for manufacturing, the average percentage of the

(48:24):
inputs that go into making a product here in the
United States is around thirty percent for all firms. That
is a substantial sum because remember the tariff's impact companies
that are here in the United States manufacturing as well
as outside of the country. Manufacturers estimated the average tariff

(48:50):
rate that they paid on their imports was about thirty
five percent, an increase of about twenty five percentage points
from six months ago. Service firms reported an average teriff
rate of twenty six percent, up seventeen points in the
last six months. Most of those firms have raised prices

(49:11):
on customers by passing through some or all of the
cost of higher tariffs. It is impacting real world people.
When you raise teriffs for whatever reason, Oh, you want
to shift manufacturing here, you want to raise revenue to

(49:32):
the federal government, because that's a real conservative idea. Let's
raise money for the federal government. We want to increase
the federal budget. Oh okay, fair enough. You say this
would ideally replace the income tax with tariffs, and that's

(49:55):
where we get the money. Well, guess what, folks, you
increase tariffs, the income.

Speaker 2 (50:01):
Tax ain't going anywhere.

Speaker 5 (50:03):
It's not going anywhere, So then you end up having
higher taxes and the products coming in in addition to
income taxes still being there and still being too high,
so it becomes a double whammy.

Speaker 2 (50:20):
Or whatever other reason there is.

Speaker 5 (50:22):
It is impacting real people, and it is without question
beyond the purview of the president to unilaterally put teriffs
like this.

Speaker 2 (50:32):
In place and to have this kind of an economic effect.

Speaker 5 (50:37):
The case on this is still working its way through
the court system. There's a stay, so the tariffs are
still in effect. But I'm cautiously optimistic that the appeals courts,
ultimately the Supreme Court will do the right thing and
rule alongside the US Court of International Trade which said

(50:58):
these tariffs are unn constitutional five sixty six nine zero
is the koa common Spirit health text line.

Speaker 2 (51:11):
There is a note as you look at.

Speaker 5 (51:14):
The protests, the no Kings protest, whether it's hey, you're
throwing the tariffs into the mix, the election order, those
things that I agree are unconstitutional, and guess what the
courts are adjudicating that at The courts have been interfering
time after time.

Speaker 2 (51:32):
But you can agree on various things.

Speaker 5 (51:34):
And as a listener text in this is beyond a
legal protests, give examples of legal protests versus riots around
the country. Fair enough, in Los Angeles and Portland, Oregon,
we have seen riots, we have seen violence, we have
seen law enforcement attacked. Without a doubt, you have riots

(51:55):
going on the mostly peaceful protests, So you have that,
and then in Denver you had thirty five arrests and
what have you.

Speaker 2 (52:06):
But when we look at.

Speaker 5 (52:07):
Yesterday, or rather Saturday and the sheer number of protests
and people around the country, a lot of them, if
you looked at the images.

Speaker 2 (52:17):
Were older people above the age of sixty.

Speaker 5 (52:23):
Who just saw it as an opportunity to you know,
maybe if they were back in the day love to
do protests.

Speaker 2 (52:31):
Well, then they get to go out and do protests.

Speaker 5 (52:33):
Again, I think most people pretty clearly are doing it peacefully, Okay,
But to the text point, you cannot deny or shove
under the rug or anything. The fact that you have violence,
especially at night, that is coming about and riots that

(52:54):
are coming about after the protests are over, and those
who perpetrates jacks need to be held accountable, arrested, taken
to court, proceed in every way, shape or form.

Speaker 2 (53:09):
Necessary to enforce the law on that regard.

Speaker 5 (53:15):
But when you get to various towns and whatnot, I
don't see evidence that you have a lot of these
places engaging in violence. But then you have some where
you need the National Guard in Los Angeles. I wouldn't
be surprised if Trump sends it to Portland. He's within
his rights, and I think there's some justification there. Now

(53:37):
trade barriers on the tariff piece goods made in the
United States. This is an argument that we hear all
the time. Texts coming in tariffs also provide an incentive
to return manufacturing to the US. Hear nothing about tariffs
on US goods in the previous administration. We also have choice,

(54:00):
is a choice not to purchase imported goods.

Speaker 2 (54:03):
Or an alternative.

Speaker 5 (54:04):
Well, guess what, a lot of those choices are more expensive,
and for people who are struggling to get buy that
makes all the difference to just say, oh, well, in
the long run, we're going to bring back manufacturing to
the United States, so you should endure a few years
of pain. And I'm not saying that's what you're saying,
but that's the implication of a lot of people on

(54:25):
this is.

Speaker 2 (54:27):
Oh, just you're going to have to suffer through it all.
Just deal with it.

Speaker 5 (54:31):
Well, we get this idea that we're going to have
massive manufacturing returns to the United States in place, which,
by the way, I don't.

Speaker 2 (54:39):
Buy certainly not in a few years.

Speaker 5 (54:44):
For a lot of these companies that are overseas, to
just up and move back to the United States is
not feasible, literally not feasible. And for a lot of
small businesses, they rely on other countries, importing from other countries,
and that's it's not a bad thing for them. That
is the good thing that makes it possible for them
to start their businesses and to grow their businesses. And

(55:12):
to just say, oh, you need to suck it up
and make the sacrifice so that we can possibly have
manufacturing return. I don't agree with that mindset five six
six nine zero. The text line threeho three seven one
three eighty five eighty five. If you want to call
into the show as well, I'm Jimmy Sangenberger filling in
for Mandy Connell on this Monday right here on KOA.

(55:36):
I have been following and you'll remember if you heard
me over the last number of months talking about Wanda James,
the CU regent in Denver, of course, University of Colorado regent,
who is also a pop pioneer, that is to say,

(55:58):
she founded the first co founded along with her husband,
co founded the first black owned legal marijuana dispensary several
years ago in Colorado, of course, and Colorado being the
first state to legalize pot in twenty fourteen for recreational use.

(56:25):
So Wanda James, who is really a prominent and politically
connected pawna entrepreneur and also has called herself a pothead,
her dispensary is simply pure. She months ago declared war
on the Colorado School of Public Health's program called t

(56:47):
on THHC. It's a campaign which she criticized first in
January that was created by the legislature and funded by
marijuana taxes, drawing from sixty six thousand scientific articles to
educate parents and the public about high potency risks of THC,

(57:08):
or rather the risks of high potency THHC, which is
substantially substantially stronger than it used to be ten years ago,
twenty years ago, thirty years ago especially, and the campaign
is oriented towards youth under the age of twenty five
and pregnant women and designed by the Public Benefit Corporation

(57:33):
and Nichem Health in concert with Colorado's School of Public Health.

Speaker 2 (57:39):
The campaign's won awards, by the way, so you would
think that such.

Speaker 5 (57:44):
Distinction for CU would be a point of pride for
a regent like Wanda James, but that's not the case.
James insisted, in fact that t ONTC dot org, the
website for this campaign and a great resource te on
THC dot org dot org, be taken down immediately for

(58:10):
racist illustrations of black children in uterow and older, despite
by the way, identical images.

Speaker 2 (58:17):
Being published of white children.

Speaker 5 (58:20):
The illustrations themselves were removed shortly after James brought about
her criticisms. By the way, when I talked earlier about
politically well connected. Not only is she a CU regent,
she ran Governor Jaredpolis's first campaign for Congress, and she

(58:40):
helped both Governors Jaredpolis and John Hickenlooper's shape marijuana regulations
governing businesses like her own. So even after the illustrations
were removed, she continued targeting the awareness campaign. January thirtieth,
she spoke with the cannabis advisor for Polics, and the

(59:00):
next day his budget director sent a letter in part
requesting that the Legislature's Joint Budget Committee defund the campaign entirely. Now,
as I understand it, they didn't do that. But the
fact that she tried to pull strings and got the
governor's office to do this, at least that's what it
appears to be, says a lot and is at the

(59:22):
very least unethical, and it triggered concerns from the chair
of the Board of Regents, Kelly Rennisson, who's a Democrat
from Boulder, and the board vice president or rather vice chair,
Ken Montera. I've interviewed him on the station about the story.
He's a Republican from Colorado Springs. And so they launched
an independent probe into whether James, who is a Democrat,

(59:45):
misused her position for a personal gain and it's grown
from there. An attorney for the university had analyzed this
and found that she may have implicated or that multiple
policy violations and possible legal violations may be implicated in
her actions. Well. Needless to say, the CU Board of

(01:00:10):
Regents a couple months ago voted to move forward with
an actual investigation into these allegations, as well as other
allegations that they sort of concluded weren't worth pursuing further
into Cali Renaissan, the chair of the Board of Regents,
that's a separate issue. But they did look into it

(01:00:33):
and came out with their report, and the report said
she could have handled a couple of things better, but
there was no problem here. But they have not released
the report, the preliminary report on Wanda James, because they're
moving forward. The news from Friday morning and a special
meeting of the CU Board of Regents reads as follows,

(01:00:57):
and this was pasted. The Board of Regions is a
self governing body, and Regent Policy two point M describes
the authority of the Board of Regions to central a
regent who has breached a regent duty as defined by
a quote specific statute, board law, or Board policy. The

(01:01:19):
Board of Regents has received credible information that Regent James
may have breached this such a duty resolved. The Board
of Regents designated outside independent legal counsel to investigate this
matter consistent with the procedures outlined in Regent Policy two
point m including notice and an opportunity to review the

(01:01:43):
evidence and respond in writing, and they moved forward with
the process to censure. Potentially it was a six to
one vote. Regent Wanda James recused herself and then there
was one member whose name escapes me, who voted no
on proceeding. But here's the bottom line. Where there's pot smoke,

(01:02:09):
maybe there's a fire, because here you had a regent
get these images taken down and then continue to persist
to try to defund it the entire campaign and made
a big public stink about it all over the place,

(01:02:35):
and true in it was a month two months ago,
drew in a lot of the public to public comment
at a board meeting before they were even to the
stage of looking at censuring, and to cry foul about,
oh my gosh, how dare you censure one to James,
this is racism, so on and so forth. How is
it racism to hold somebody genuinely accountable on a bipartisan

(01:02:59):
basis in a process initiated in part by the Democrat
chair of the Board of Regions.

Speaker 2 (01:03:09):
How is it racist to have that accountability.

Speaker 5 (01:03:15):
To proceed with that process when there seriously and genuinely
is a question of impropriety here.

Speaker 2 (01:03:25):
Without a doubt.

Speaker 5 (01:03:26):
And I have written extensively about this in the Denver Gazette,
where I'm of course twice weekly columnists. Go check out
my most recent column April fifteenth that was written Sorry
Wanda t on THHC is on target. Which reminds me
then that the public comment I mentioned where people were
crying foul about censure being a possibility very prematurely, was

(01:03:50):
in April of this year. No, this is not about racism.
This is an attempt by Wanda James to discredit hard
science that jeopardizes James' pot sales. Now, maybe it's unsurprising
for somebody like James, who happened to fail an underage
compliance check at her dispensary in twenty nineteen and at

(01:04:12):
that time called racism, cried foul about racism and got
off with a slap on the wrists. I mean, this
really is as I wrote in that column, same playbook,
different day. Now there's accountability and I think it's justified.
We'll see what happens. Keep tabs on this story. There

(01:04:33):
certainly is more to come. I'm Jimmy sangen Berger filling
in for Mandy Connell. We'll keep the conversation going on
the other side as we continue on KOA. It always
is a Red Rocks a Joe Bonamasa show kicks ass.
I mean it is fantastic. The acoustics obviously are phenomenal
for this we are talking about Red Rocks. No better

(01:04:57):
place for a concert. And I Jimmy Sangenberger in for
Mandy Connell today on KOA AM.

Speaker 2 (01:05:05):
They're almost every.

Speaker 5 (01:05:06):
Year for Bonamasa concert.

Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
And it is always a blast to be there and
to see the music.

Speaker 5 (01:05:14):
But and especially because Rhys Winen's from Stevie Ray Vaughan
in Double Trouble is on the keys.

Speaker 2 (01:05:18):
He's the keyboard player.

Speaker 5 (01:05:22):
Joe Bonamasa also is one of those blues rock musicians
that consistently pays homage or homage to the legends that
came before that brought about the blues the genre. And

(01:05:42):
yet somehow, for some reason, and it's only gotten like
one hundred and thirty six signatures, but I feel burning
a yearning to talk about it.

Speaker 2 (01:05:51):
There's a change dot org petition.

Speaker 5 (01:05:55):
Entitled band Joe Bonamassa from playing Blues.

Speaker 2 (01:06:00):
There are a lot of stupid.

Speaker 5 (01:06:03):
Petitions that show up on change dot org, but this
has to be the dumbest I've ever seen the issue.
Joe Bonamasa, an affluent and entitled white musician, makes millions
playing the blues music, an art form rooted in the
struggles and triumphs of Black American pioneers. His presence in

(01:06:27):
the blue genre not only overshadows the legacy of its
true originators, but also dilutes its essence on a fundamental level.
This is a complaint that people had about the likes
of Stevie Rayvaughan back in the eighties. Oh my gosh,
look at this white guitarist who is taking the thunder.

(01:06:51):
But here's the thing.

Speaker 2 (01:06:53):
Stevie Rayvaughn, consistently all.

Speaker 5 (01:06:55):
The time would show respected admiration and appreciation for the
likes of Albert King, one of his icons, who we
did a whole show up in Canada with his Great
Music Live TV show or BB King.

Speaker 2 (01:07:11):
Albert Collins.

Speaker 5 (01:07:12):
Heck, when he played at one of the nineteen eighty
eight celebrations for the inauguration or nineteen eighty nine for
inauguration of George H. W.

Speaker 2 (01:07:21):
Bush, it was Jimmy and Stevie.

Speaker 5 (01:07:23):
Ray Vaughn, Stevie and Jimmy, and they brought Albert Collins
Joe Bonamasa. Similarly, this is a guy who has a
foundation called Keeping the Blues Alive, doing everything to keep
that teach kids to the blues and about the history
of the blues. His first Red Rocks concert ever was
called Muddy Wolf and it was a special show tributing

(01:07:44):
Muddy Waters and Howland Wolf to of the great originators
of Chicago blues. He also had a show the Three
King Store, tributing and playing the music of b B King,
Albert King and friend ing. And yet there are people
complaining all his performances and influences have cultivated a fan

(01:08:08):
base largely consisting of well off individuals who fail.

Speaker 2 (01:08:11):
To understand or appreciate the rich history and.

Speaker 5 (01:08:13):
Significance of blues music, complaining of status, symbol is and more,
and how many of his fans are unaware of the
fact that many Western guitarists like Eric Clapton drew heavily
from Black blues legends like Otis Rush.

Speaker 2 (01:08:31):
Well, guess what Joe Bonamasa has.

Speaker 5 (01:08:33):
Done more than just about any contemporary white blues musician
to spotlight the amazing history of the blues that is
rooted in black culture and the black experience and its
influence on American music written large and and I know
I got to run to a break. Same thing with
Eric Clapton, who has done so much tributing Robert Johnson

(01:08:55):
and others. He did an album with BB King, helping
to bring him back into prominence in the year two thousand.
It's just so stupid and the exact opposite of reality.
These guys are highlighting exactly what should be highlighted, recognizing
the forebears of the blues and American music.

Speaker 2 (01:09:17):
And good for von and Massa doing what he does
and others like him. It's just so silly.

Speaker 5 (01:09:25):
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Mandy Connell. We'll pick
it up on the other side one more hour up
ahead and Kowa.

Speaker 1 (01:09:33):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury Lawyers.

Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
No, it's Mandy Connell.

Speaker 12 (01:09:46):
Nmtay Connell, sad BAB.

Speaker 5 (01:10:02):
Final Hour Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell today, Tomorrow
and Wednesday. Want to get in touch with yours truly
twenty four seven, three sixty five. Follow my columns for
the Denver Gazette, my guest hosting here on Koway as
well as occasionally our sister station Khowe as well. Check

(01:10:25):
out my website Jimmy Sangenburger dot com. Keep in mind
there's no a I or you in Sangenburger. It's all ease,
all the time. Once you know that Sangenberger is easy,
and gosh, it was so easy if you're just joining us.

(01:10:45):
Top of the Last Hour and of the Last Hour
I talked about this ridiculous petition to ban blues rock
guitarist icon Joe Bonamasa from playing blues. This is a
guy who has a foundation called Keeping the Blues Live.
It's phenomenal musician spotlighting the history of the blues, getting

(01:11:07):
young people involved all over the country. Help him with
instruments and music lessons. All kinds of stuff, and he's
spotlighted the greats the forebears of the blues. Did a
Muddy Wolf show, Muddy Waters and Howland Wolf. He celebrated
at Red Rocks, first time he ever played at Red Rocks.

(01:11:27):
That's what he chose to do, was a show all
music until the encore, all music from Muddy Waters and
Helen Wolf. He did a Three Kings tour Freddie King,
Albert King, bb King until the encore, all music from
those three. And yet this guy needs to be banned

(01:11:48):
from playing the blues because he's a white guy engaging
in cultural appropriation and as a cultivated fan base that
doesn't understand or appreciate the rich historygnificance of blues music. Now,
that in and of itself is absurd, because if anybody,
any music audience understands the rich culture and significance of

(01:12:09):
blues music and the black forebears who brought it from
their struggles and their trials and tribulations, it is Joe Bonamas.
He shares that and Joe Bonamas's audience like truly, But
what I got from texts five sixty six nine zero
and the koa Common Spirit Health text line is people

(01:12:32):
calling it exactly as it was that Joe Bonamas is
a white musician that's successful, who cares, he makes awesome
music and made his mark.

Speaker 2 (01:12:43):
Yes, it doesn't matter. Race doesn't matter the Blues.

Speaker 5 (01:12:46):
It's like Albert King said, and I'm slightly paraphrasing here,
but it's if you don't love the Blues, you got
a hole in your soul.

Speaker 2 (01:12:57):
So it doesn't matter.

Speaker 5 (01:12:58):
Bb King talked about how race doesn't matter in this,
and yet it shows the moment that we are in
politics writ large, who.

Speaker 2 (01:13:11):
Really? Who really? We're in this moment where you have
to nitpick.

Speaker 5 (01:13:18):
You don't like somebody, so you find some excuse to
accuse them of cultural appropriation or being a biggot, or
being hateful or being whatever the term is, a fascist,
what have you. And that's supposed to just dismiss it
and justify you getting your way on some sort of criticism.

Speaker 3 (01:13:41):
I mean.

Speaker 6 (01:13:43):
It is.

Speaker 2 (01:13:45):
Representative.

Speaker 5 (01:13:46):
This little tiny change dot org petition is representative of
something much bigger going on in our society where you
just want to nitpick and find something and say, well,
this justifies us US and canceling this person, being done
with them, despising them, calling them out as somebody who
shouldn't be engaging with it all because they're evil or

(01:14:08):
diabolical or whatever the term is. It is ridiculous and
I'm wrong, but that is a commentary on society today
all too often. Earlier, we had a listener call in
FREEO three seven one three eighty five eighty five. Who's
got the phone lines open today? FREEO three seven one
three eighty five eighty five, and Doug made the point

(01:14:30):
that look, we just we need to have less division.
And he's right, but any little thing is going to
find that kind of separation. Let's just dismiss people we
disagree with. No, not not right here, that's for darn short.
Now here's something for you. I hope you had a

(01:14:52):
good Father's Day yesterday. If you are a dad, I
know that Goliath, the five hundred and sevent teen pound
Galapagos tortoise and the oldest animal at Zoo Miami, sure did,
because not only did he celebrate his one hundred and
thirty fifth birthday, he celebrated his very first Father's Day

(01:15:16):
again at the ripe young age of one hundred thirty five.
This from Newsweek, Zoo Miami officials said they submitted an
application to Guinness World Records to recognize Goliath as the
world's oldest first time father and for Goliathan Sweet Peet,
his lovely wife, or at least the woman in his life,

(01:15:38):
as the oldest first time parents. Their combined ages total
more than two hundred years. Not only is this the
first offspring for Goliath, but it is also the first
time in history in the history of Zoo Miami, that
a Galapagos tortoise has hatched, making this an historic event

(01:16:00):
on multiple levels. The Galapagos tortoise, Newsweek reports, is listed
as endangered, with population numbers once drastically reduced by direct
exploitation and habitat disruption. Then they talk about modern threats
of climate change and ongoing habitat loss contributing to conservation urgency,

(01:16:23):
and they're found natively in Ecuador's Galapagos Islands.

Speaker 2 (01:16:28):
Now.

Speaker 5 (01:16:28):
Goliath hatched on Santa Cruz Island in the Galapagos sometime
between eighteen eighty five and eighteen ninety according to various
official records, has resided in the US since nineteen twenty
nine and at Zoo Miami since nineteen eighty one.

Speaker 2 (01:16:45):
Although he is bred with several females.

Speaker 5 (01:16:48):
This is his first confirmed offspring in at least four
decades of attempts. According to Zoo Miami, a hash thing
born June fourth, after one hundred twenty eight days of incubation,
the first of its species to be bred and hatched
at the South FLOORIA Zoo, marking a milestone moment for

(01:17:08):
conservation and the institution's history. According to the post, Sweet Pea,
the mother is between eighty five and one hundred years
old at Zoo Miami since nineteen sixty. So for a
long time, Goliath tried, he tried and tried, couldn't get
a kid. Finally, with Sweet Pea is a dad at

(01:17:31):
one hundred and thirty five years old. Happy Father's Day.
Goliath int five hundred and seventeen pounds. There's a picture
I saw of Goliath, and right up front was the
little baby.

Speaker 2 (01:17:46):
Just the size difference was crazy.

Speaker 5 (01:17:51):
A reminder that human beings are quite young by comparison
to some species on this planet. And just think how
old will the little baby get in its lifetime? That

(01:18:12):
is the real question. I think it could be around
in that, you know, twenty two hundred's right, maybe.

Speaker 2 (01:18:26):
Pretty remarkable.

Speaker 5 (01:18:28):
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Mandy Connell, bring in
the most fascinating issues of our time, including a first
Father's Day for a one hundred and thirty five year
old tortoise. Keep it here, We'll keep it going on koa.

Speaker 2 (01:18:44):
This texture.

Speaker 5 (01:18:46):
So this guy can't play blues anymore, then Eminem cannot
rapp and Darius Rucker cannot play country.

Speaker 2 (01:18:52):
I guess that's the case. But can Jimmy Junior still
play harmonica?

Speaker 3 (01:19:20):
I think so.

Speaker 5 (01:19:21):
I'm not going to stop. I'm sure not going to stop.
By the way, my Jimmy Junior Blues Band has a
gig coming up July fifth at in the Zone in
Golden We will be out on the patio. It is
a great bar and grill on July fifth, seven to
eleven pm. Come celebrate Independence Day weekend with us. We

(01:19:45):
will be live there July twenty seventh, also at the
Genesee Bar and Grill out in Genesee. And we've got
October third at Dakota Tavern in Parker and more coming
up as well. The Jimmy Junior Blues Band Like us
on Facebook as well. Jimmy Junior Blues Band Search there

(01:20:07):
Facebook dot Com slash Jimmy Junior music God love, I
love the Blues. Just don't don't take that away from me.

Speaker 2 (01:20:16):
Because of.

Speaker 5 (01:20:19):
Politicized nonsense, because of cancel culture. Nor should you be
mean to Goliath just because he's one hundred and thirty
five and the mother of his child is eighty five
years older?

Speaker 2 (01:20:35):
Thereabout its Come on, it starts reporting Goliath questionable age difference.

Speaker 5 (01:20:42):
Hmmm, yes, yes, okay, Goliath, you dog you wait, he
is a tortoise, but I guess that's how some people
are looking at him. We are watching closely for a
verdict in the case of Mike Lindell, Eric Komer's former

(01:21:05):
vice president of Dominion.

Speaker 2 (01:21:07):
His lawsuit is before the jury.

Speaker 5 (01:21:10):
In the case, and the jury has come out a
couple of times today apparently asking questions. This from It's
just a facts coming from Kyle Clark on nine News
here on Twitter. Jurors in my pillow guy Mike Lindell's
election rigging defamation trial in Denver appear to be considering damages.

(01:21:36):
A question from the jury asked if they could defer
the damages amount to the judge. The judge told him no.
The planeff is asking for sixty two million dollars in damages.
More on this case as we await a verdict in
the defamation trial of Mike Lindell. I've got it. I've
been in the courtroom quite a bit throughout this trial.

(01:21:58):
We'll pick it up there on that conversational topic and
more as we continue on KOA Jimmy in for Mandy
Blues in the twenty first Century really a great song.
Check it out because it has fantastic, very pointed and
poignant commentary on the world today in the COVID and

(01:22:22):
post COVID era. As you will recall the past couple
of weeks that I have been sitting in for Mandy,
I've also been in the courtroom five different days. I
was at the Federal courthouse in downtown Denver covering in person.
The Mike Lindell trial brought a defamation case brought by

(01:22:46):
Eric Coomer, former vice president of Dominion, who had been
called Dominion Voting Systems, who had been called by my
pillow guy Mike Lindell a trader and a criminal and
more related to the twenty twenty election, and so Komer

(01:23:07):
has brought this defamation case against Mike Lindell. And his companies,
my pillow and Frank speech. We've talked about this a
good bit on Friday as the trial wrapped and the
jury began deliberations. But this is a fascinating case because

(01:23:30):
there are so many different aspects and layers.

Speaker 6 (01:23:34):
To it.

Speaker 2 (01:23:36):
There's the twenty twenty election piece.

Speaker 5 (01:23:40):
That is all about the claims from Lindell and others,
many of whom have been sued as well by Eric
Komer or by Dominion voting systems about the election being
stolen in twenty twenty, false claims, disproven claims, repeatedly debunked.
A discussion topic for another time in that regard, But

(01:24:03):
now juries the jury is in deliberations. That came back
seven o'clock this morning, and nine News has a very
helpful update because.

Speaker 2 (01:24:14):
The jurors have come out and asked four.

Speaker 5 (01:24:17):
Different questions as of twelve thirty pm today. First, jurors
wanted to know about a particular exhibit Exhibit to twelve,
and whether or not that had been broadcast on the
website Frank's speech. It is a clip of former Masa
County Clerk Tina Peters. The court said, we can't explain

(01:24:40):
evidence to you.

Speaker 2 (01:24:43):
They also asked a.

Speaker 5 (01:24:43):
Question about civil conspiracy, which was mentioned, and they wonder
if that has to pertain to doctor Kumer could be
related to others. Civil conspiracy claim based on unlawful means,
as when two or more more people agree to commit
unlawful acts that cause damage to another party. Defamation is

(01:25:05):
by legal definition and unlawful mean well as nine news reports.
Instead of explicitly telling the jury that answer, the court
referred them to a jury instruction on what unlawful means means,
and they also asked about a definition of a civil conspiracy. Hey,

(01:25:28):
go look at jury instruction number forty one. But the
final question is one that tells us a lot. Can
the jury defer the damages that are awarded to the
plaintiff who was seeking sixty two million dollars total in
damages among the free defendants Mike Lindell, My Pillow and
Frank Speech, Can they defer that to the judge because

(01:25:52):
they lack experience.

Speaker 2 (01:25:56):
Or evidence? In short, the answer is no.

Speaker 5 (01:26:00):
The jury cannot let the judge decide damages for them.
Judge Nita Wong said, quote. The determination of the amount
of damages, if any, is part of the jury's fact
finding function. She then referred them to instructions forty five
through fifty one, which are meant to help them determine
the amount of damages awarded, if any. That is a

(01:26:25):
very pivotal question because if they are asking whether or
not the judge can determine the damages for them, that
gives us an indication that they may have come to
a decision or at least they're nearly there on whether
or not Mike Lindell is in fact liable in this case.

(01:26:50):
Because they asked about civil conspiracy, that means that they
are still considering about my pillow and frank speech and
whether that claim by Umer's legal team fits in with
civil conspiracy, and considering if damages need to be applied

(01:27:12):
to my pillow and Frank's speech as a result. So
there's discussion that has been had and I've thought this too,
that there could be a separation. They might hold Mike
Lindell liable but possibly not my pillow and Frank's speech,
even though they are directly owned by him.

Speaker 2 (01:27:29):
It's possible that that could be the case.

Speaker 5 (01:27:32):
But the fact that they are asking about damages and
whether or not the judge can decide that indicates to
me that they are very close to reaching a verdict
that is not in favor of Lindell. There's no guarantee
in that, of course, but it is a clear indication.

(01:27:56):
Now I find this interesting, particularly given and I pull
this analysis Friday evening on x formerly Twitter. I'm saying
center saying with an E, not an a center on
that platform. Really, you saw the case boiled down to
two things, a blame game or reckless attacks. Lindell's team

(01:28:21):
pointed to other figures like the guy who originated the
notion that Eric Komer was involved in this, involved in
rigging the twenty twenty election and what have you. The
false story about Dominion and the false story about Coomer.

Speaker 2 (01:28:36):
Was Joe Oltman. So they looked at Joe Oltman and others.

Speaker 5 (01:28:40):
They're the ones who drove the narrative that Koomer rigged
the twenty twenty election, and they tried to distance him
from Tina Peters and others. But Tina Peters notable because
there are a couple of key players in Lindell's operation,
such as an attorney named Kurt Olsen and a hacker
name Couter. Hacker named Conan Hayes that were very involved

(01:29:02):
with Mike Lindell and also deeply involved in the whole
election security breach in Mason County by former clerk Tina Peters.
You recall that happened to twenty twenty one, and Tina
Peters was sentenced to nine years behind bars in October
for this case.

Speaker 2 (01:29:23):
So Lindell's team.

Speaker 5 (01:29:24):
Says most of the comments that he made about Eric
Komer came after he was sued in this case, after
he was served on the Capitol steps in Colorado. Interestingly
enough in twenty twenty two, not before, when Lyndell had
barely mentioned it by name, but Coomer's lawyer said, look,
this guy recklessly deployed his attax on Coomer without doing

(01:29:46):
basic comark about elections. They platformed conspiracy theorists like Joe
Oltman and Tina Peters. They personally escalated it. He personally
did these things. Rather Lindell did and personally escalated it
by calling Kumer a trader and a criminal, resulting in
death threats, forcing Kumer into hiding, ruining his reputation, crippling

(01:30:08):
his career. I have been saying that Komer's case may
have been hampered by the fact that well it's like
death by a thousand details.

Speaker 2 (01:30:22):
Eight days of testimony was like a.

Speaker 5 (01:30:24):
Fire hose of information to the jury, and a lot
of times they went into the weeds and Coomer's legal team.
That's where Komer's team stumbled, and they did an effective
job at laying things.

Speaker 2 (01:30:36):
Out, but that's not all that's necessary.

Speaker 5 (01:30:40):
You need to tell a compelling story that drives home
the point for a jury that they can follow along.
And I have contended that they went a bit too
much in the weeds, allowed the trial to drag on
too long, got into technical specifics a bit too much,
so on and so forth.

Speaker 2 (01:31:02):
Whereas Mike Lindell had his own set of problems.

Speaker 5 (01:31:05):
His testimony, which I saw most of it, was often winding, unfocused, rambling.
It wasn't great what he did, and that probably means
the fact that his testimony came later in the trial
last week, second week of the trial.

Speaker 2 (01:31:24):
Is probably a good thing for Eric Coomer. Then he
had a.

Speaker 5 (01:31:32):
Very interesting circular argument. I talked about this on Friday.
He called Eric Kuomer a trader and a criminal because
he was blocking him. He said Coomer was blocking Lindell
from sharing the evidence, primarily through a deal with Newsmax,
that Newsmax as CEO denied this deal happened, but also

(01:31:57):
that blocking and doing this going after in this lawsuit
rather damaged my Pillow in its employees. By Coomer suing
Lindell and my Pillow, it hurt my Pillow, the company,
and its employees.

Speaker 2 (01:32:10):
And so Komer was a trader and a criminal.

Speaker 5 (01:32:13):
Because he supposedly blocked sharing the evidence and damaged a
company and employees. But what evidence are we talking about
that Lindell was prevented from sharing that the twenty twenty
election was stolen. Voting machines are corrupt and we need
to go back to, as he says, paper ballots hand counted.
But he also says, but this case has nothing to

(01:32:34):
do with the twenty twenty election or voting machines. Yet
at the same time, Eric Kumer was blocking information about
the twenty twenty election and voting machines, and that's why
Coomer's a trader.

Speaker 2 (01:32:49):
Such circular reasoning is like an achilles heel.

Speaker 3 (01:32:52):
For the case.

Speaker 5 (01:32:53):
He had the golden opportunity to share all kinds of
bombshell evidence.

Speaker 2 (01:32:58):
In court and bring experts.

Speaker 5 (01:32:59):
He had thirty five people, he claimed experts he didn't
bring a single expert into the case. He didn't present
evidence about twenty twenty, but the plaintiff side, Eric Komer's side,
had an expert named Alex Halderman, a computer scientist who

(01:33:19):
Lindell even touted. Said I respect his opinion and that
it was this Halderman guy who was one of two
people who inspired Mike Lindell about voting machines in the
first place. He was the first guy. Was this Halderman
guy and this Harry Hirsty guy who were in an

(01:33:41):
HBO documentary that got Mike Lindell going, well, maybe there's
something wrong with the machines. But Halderman refuted Lindell very strongly,
saying that his film misrepresented his views, that Lindell's documentaries
he made about the election misrepresents the things that he said.

(01:34:03):
That Alderman said totally undercutting the one and only admitted
expert on elections, totally undercut Mike Lindell's narrative. So it
comes down to two things in this trial, the jury
instructions and how the jury assesses reckless disregard and unlawful

(01:34:25):
means according to the law, And then which side told
the most compelling story. Well, it looks like the most
compelling story to them may have been the plaintiff's narrative
saying this was defamation. You need to hold him liable. Now,

(01:34:46):
the jury asking a question to the judge a couple
of hours ago, saying, what do we do? How do
we look at defamation? Can you do it? And the
judge said, nope, that's the job of the jury. It
is not my job is a judge to tackle this.

Speaker 2 (01:35:03):
Still waiting for a verdict.

Speaker 5 (01:35:06):
It seems like the verdict will be coming at any time,
but maybe, just maybe not while we are live right now,
But who knows. Maybe they're listening and the jury's aware.
You need to get word out in six minutes so
that we could talk about it before the show ends.
Of course, I'll be back in tomorrow. If we have

(01:35:28):
a verdict, we'll break it down and what the decision
is and all that. Bring it to you on Tuesday.
But it's a really fascinating trial now. This from Axios,
as shared by the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition.

Speaker 2 (01:35:43):
In the wake of the.

Speaker 5 (01:35:47):
Assassination of a state legislator in Minnesota and her husband
and the injuries of another legislator, and his wife. The
Colorado Secretary of State temporary removed its public campaign finance
database from the Internet on Saturday, amid concerns that it

(01:36:07):
could reveal home addresses and other personal information about state
lawmakers and other officials.

Speaker 2 (01:36:17):
Took down the entire website.

Speaker 5 (01:36:21):
Now, candidates can redact their home addresses for pretty much
any reason under state law meant to protect judges and
district attorneys in particular.

Speaker 2 (01:36:34):
I just look taking down the site like this, I
get it.

Speaker 5 (01:36:40):
I don't like that. I think that as a breach
of transparency. The whole idea is to provide an opportunity
to access campaign finance records. And while I understand the
desire to protect people, this is not I don't like this.

Speaker 2 (01:37:02):
I don't think it's appropriate. I don't think.

Speaker 5 (01:37:06):
It's something that the Colorado Secretary of State's officer do
is completely take down the transparency vehicle.

Speaker 3 (01:37:13):
Now.

Speaker 2 (01:37:13):
I also have some issues with for candidates.

Speaker 5 (01:37:18):
For office making it so that we just have to
rely in the public or in the media, rely on
their claim that they're eligible to run for office in
a particular jurisdiction.

Speaker 2 (01:37:32):
Because there have.

Speaker 5 (01:37:34):
Been instances where legislator candidates for office have run claiming
they live in a jurisdiction, but they are not actually
eligible because they are not living in that area. And
how are we supposed to find that out if you
have a mass redacting of candidate addresses. This is where

(01:37:56):
public protection of individuals and transparent currency collide.

Speaker 3 (01:38:06):
Is that.

Speaker 5 (01:38:09):
An instance where we should let transparency run the show
or allow any candidate to just say, well, I'm worried
about public safety because of what happened in Minnesota, or
my safety because of what happened in Minnesota. Therefore I
want to hide it. I want to keep my address information.
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:38:28):
It's a tricky situation.

Speaker 5 (01:38:32):
Then there's the fact that one of the big issues
with ICE agents is that I think this was happening
in Los Angeles, that happened elsewhere, that the pictures, names,
and addresses of ICE agents were being publicly posted around
the city.

Speaker 2 (01:38:48):
And that's why you.

Speaker 5 (01:38:49):
Have ICE agents who have been docks now wearing masks.
I don't like the idea of anybody arresting anybody wearing masks,
but this is an instance where you know they're actively
enforcing the law, and their names, their identities, their addresses
are all being put on publicly for people to see

(01:39:14):
around the city as as the isn't that a threat?
But that's different from a public transparency website where the
whole idea is to give the public information about candidates
for office, their campaign finance, spending, their verification of where

(01:39:35):
they live, that they're eligible, so on and so forth.
That's different from a very intentional that's publicly post these
agents that are doing arrest because we want to send
a message. That's that's terrifying that people are doing that
to send a message. But now, in the wake of Minnesota,

(01:39:56):
where are we at on this? There's a lot to
talk about this. This is always a question of transparency
and safety. It comes up time after time after time
on issue after issue in government. By and large, I
think we need to air on the side of transparency.
But of course there's a lot more to it than

(01:40:19):
just that. Looks like we will not have a verdict
in what Mike Lindell calls the trial of the Century,
which I think is a rather grandiose terms.

Speaker 2 (01:40:32):
This is about the First Amendment. It is about election systems.

Speaker 5 (01:40:37):
Yet he didn't want to talk about election systems and
bringing evidence about it in his trial. I think this
is about a lot more. A guy's life was turned
upside down, threatened, and more. You had election officials that
were adversely affected as well. There's a really strong case.
I think the odds are in Eric Coomer's favor in

(01:40:58):
the Mike Lindell my Pillow loss, but we will find out.
I expect later today to be able to talk about
it tomorrow as they are now considering damages and how
to assess those damages.

Speaker 2 (01:41:13):
Well, that is it for me today.

Speaker 5 (01:41:14):
Back in again Tuesday and Wednesday for Mandy Connell who
will be returning next week. I hope you'll tune in
over the next couple of days, look forward to joining me,
and then have a great one and as always, may
God bless America.