Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and Injury Lawyers.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
No, it's Mandy Connell and Don.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
On KOA.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
Ninety four one FM.
Speaker 4 (00:15):
Song Guy, you want to say, Kenny's through three many.
Speaker 5 (00:22):
Connell sad base. You hear it, you hear it, you
hear it.
Speaker 6 (00:40):
The Harmonica is a play in which means Jimmy Sagenberger's
in the house filling in for Mandy Connell here on
ko A today, And.
Speaker 7 (00:53):
The question for a rod behind the glasses? Will the
sangon be burgering?
Speaker 5 (00:58):
Brother?
Speaker 3 (00:59):
I hope so.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
I'm saying it will.
Speaker 3 (01:05):
Burgering it is?
Speaker 7 (01:08):
You must Yes, why are we? And thank you for
doing that? A rod bringing in a little Yoda or
Lord Vada?
Speaker 3 (01:18):
Will you come to the seed?
Speaker 2 (01:21):
I have you now?
Speaker 7 (01:22):
Star Wars Voices is because later on in the program
we will have someone crossing over from the land of YouTube. Wow,
I'm looking forward to even more. There's now jar Jar Binks,
who obviously is an underrated.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Character, Darth jar Jar.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Darth jar Jar. He really is the guy behind everything.
Speaker 7 (01:47):
But Star Wars Theory, at more than three point three
million subscribers, is the number one most subscribed YouTube channel,
and he also has a lely successful saber company.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
There are a number of them.
Speaker 7 (02:03):
If you go to Fan Expo Denver, like I did
this past summer. That's why Mandy and I had none
other than Captain Kirk himself William Shatner on the program.
But if you go to Fanexpo or a comic con,
all of these booths with lightsabers that are really cool,
(02:23):
top notch are there selling sabers.
Speaker 3 (02:26):
Well, Theory Sabers is one of those examples.
Speaker 7 (02:30):
And he's also producing fan films that are pretty high
budget and more.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
And he's going to join us at the end.
Speaker 7 (02:38):
Of the show two thirty Live from Canada. He's a
Canadian YouTuber and we're looking forward to this conversation. We'll
talk to some Star Wars, we'll talk new media and
Ai Krim a lot.
Speaker 3 (02:52):
There's a lot to discuss.
Speaker 7 (02:54):
We're gonna cram it into a twenty minute conversation with
Star Wars Theory and get his take on things, including
some of the politics of Hollywood.
Speaker 3 (03:05):
That have in many minds.
Speaker 7 (03:08):
Sullied some of Star Wars. Is that really a big deal.
We'll talk a bit about that with Star Wars Theory
later on. We'll also be joined in studio by former
State Senate President Kevin Grantham, who is a Republican candidate
announced for state treasurer. A good guy, really knows his stuff,
(03:32):
good for the position. Maybe he'll have a shot in
this environment. He'll join us in studio coming up later
on in the program, and we may five six six
nine zero koa common Spirit Health text line. We may
give this listener who just texted in what he or
she wants of more harmonica. You never know, it is
(03:54):
entirely possible that the harmonica will come in while the
saying in is bergeran. And you never know how many
Star Wars voices you will get in the show either,
And I love it that way.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
That's exactly what we need. H more entertainment.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Do we must do? We must?
Speaker 3 (04:17):
What does that do?
Speaker 2 (04:19):
We must? We must have? Yes?
Speaker 7 (04:24):
Anyway, five six six nine zero KOA comment Spirit Health
text slide if you want to join in to the festivities.
So this is really interesting. Latissa James have gone after
President Trump as Attorney General of New York.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
And made a big.
Speaker 7 (04:48):
Deal out of this case that just really was over exaggerated.
It was drivel. In my opinion, well, now she has
had what one could say is turn about turn about
is fair play, where she has been indicted on allegations
(05:15):
of mortgage fraud. Now one could brush this off and
just say this is President Trump going after his political opponents,
and that's pure and simple what it is.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
But I would suggest that you should consider.
Speaker 7 (05:32):
Something different, a different perspective, maybe from the likes of
Michael Cohen, President Trump's former lawyer and fixer, who notably
broke with the President during the first term, has testified
against him, criticized him bigly, and he was just on
(05:52):
MSNBC in the last couple of days talking about this case,
and I found it really interesting to hear some of
what he had to say.
Speaker 8 (06:01):
Does want to see accountability, There's no doubt about that.
Do I believe, for example, that Tis James will be
held accountable? Absolutely? I said it on your show last time.
Do I think James Calemy will be held accountable?
Speaker 2 (06:14):
Absolutely?
Speaker 8 (06:15):
And I know everybody attacks Lindsey Halligan or she's a
former beauty queen and she doesn't have prosecutorial experience, it
doesn't matter. She has the power of government, you see,
remember something.
Speaker 9 (06:29):
But she doesn't even seem to have the backing of
career prosecutors who are still.
Speaker 3 (06:33):
Working alongside her. Is it not a little concerning to you.
Speaker 8 (06:36):
That they don't want to appear with her put their
names next to this stuff?
Speaker 2 (06:39):
Not the slightest.
Speaker 8 (06:40):
The documents will speak for themselves, and I'm certain that
they have the documents that they need. I said it
on them on a different show, in a different program,
that I believe a first year law student can actually
take these cases to full trial and be successful. Just
think about Tiss James for a second. When you guys
had asked me why I believed to James's next and
(07:03):
why I.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Believe she'll be held accountable.
Speaker 8 (07:06):
She's the chief law enforcement agent here in the state
of New York. And what did she do? She went
after Trump for what for? Misstatements to a bank and
banking fraud? Well, isn't that exactly what they're charging her now?
Speaker 10 (07:25):
With ex.
Speaker 7 (07:30):
I'm sorry, she is very similar, very similar, And yes
it sounds like there has been evidence. But here's the thing,
And it was fascinating hearing Cohen say that you didn't
expect that, and he is a lawyer and he has
a massive grudge against Trump, and there he went with
those comments. But he talked a little bit more about
(07:53):
the prosecutor in this case out of Virginia, replacing one
who refused to pursue a couple of these cases. And
she's also, of course, the US attorney who indicted James Comey,
the former FBI director.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
It's Lindsay Halligan.
Speaker 8 (08:14):
Well, and they will have a case against her once
Lindsay Halligan brings it to a trial. That's the point
I'm trying to make again. Republicans are screaming, yay, go Trump, accountability. Democrats,
of course we're all screaming, Oh, this is political retribution,
this is a political revenge tour. I understand that, but
(08:35):
this is exactly she opened up a Pandora's box if
you think about it, about bringing cases against people for
business flud.
Speaker 7 (08:44):
And the case against Trump was fairly unprecedented.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
Turn about fair play.
Speaker 7 (08:51):
Okay, they found something here that looks like it was
the case.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
Let's pursue it.
Speaker 5 (09:01):
Well.
Speaker 7 (09:01):
Lindsay Halligan was a classmate of mine at Regis University.
We were both students Regius circa Gus. I remember being
in classes with her in twenty ten studying politics. I
think she also studied broadcast journalism, if I recall correctly,
(09:26):
And one of.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
The classes that we had was on the US Supreme
Court and.
Speaker 7 (09:32):
Regis University a very small school, Jesuit liberal arts school,
so it was entirely possible, and indeed it happened that
you could be in a class with just two students,
including yourself. That was us, me and Lindsay Halligan, the
US attorney now prosecuting James Comey and Letitia James. And
(09:57):
it's fascinating to see this unfold, especially when I see
those sexist attacks.
Speaker 3 (10:04):
She was the former beauty pageant contestant.
Speaker 7 (10:06):
In fact, funny little story that I didn't know this
because I didn't know Erica Kirk. It is entirely possible
that at the time she was at Regis we had
classes together. I don't know, I don't remember her, but
there was a time where Lindsay Halligan, Erica now Kirk,
(10:27):
and I were all at Regis University at the same time,
and both of them completed the Miss Colorado I think
it was a Miss Colorado pageant and were within a
couple of rankings of each other in the results. Kind
of fascinating small world going on there. Well, you see
(10:51):
all these sexist attacks against Lindsay Halligan. Oh she's beautiful,
she was a beauty pageant contest and basically she's got
no brains because she didn't He's too good looking or something.
And I think even going back to the days when
we were at Regis that was there was a mentality
of underestimating Lindsay Halligan for those reasons, and especially now
(11:19):
since she is a Republican woman, she's going to be
even more susceptible to sexist attacks that aren't based on
the case itself, but on oh she's too pretty, she
was a beauty pageant contestant.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
What is she doing there?
Speaker 7 (11:35):
She's just there because Trump likes beauty pageant people. And
I think for what fifteen years, in the fifteen years.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
Since I knew her, she's always.
Speaker 7 (11:51):
Been underestimated on some level, and the left would.
Speaker 3 (11:56):
I don't know how.
Speaker 7 (11:57):
Well these cases will pan out, especially the case of
James Comy. That one you really have to have buttoned up.
The Letitia James one looks like, I agree with Michael Cohen,
looks like it has real potential for traction.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
I don't know about James Comy.
Speaker 7 (12:18):
We'll see, but I think that Democrats, and many folks
in the media would be in deep error to underestimate
Lindsay Halligan.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
She was very bright. We had really interesting.
Speaker 7 (12:40):
Discussions on topics related to the courts and the US
Supreme Court and so forth in the particular class where
it was just the two of us and the professor
who ironically would go on to become a big time
never Trump, who was a Republican but went on to
(13:02):
become a big time never Trumper. And I think it's
going to be fascinating to watch all of this pan out.
We'll see what happens. We'll see what happens as time progresses.
But underestimate Lindsey Halligan at your own risk. Let me
(13:23):
tell you, very smart, very savvy, and sharp, and I
think she can be really successful at this role as
US Attorney. Now, speaking of controversies about the President allegedly
overstepping the Insurrection Act, is a possible implementation point for Trump.
(13:48):
He may move forward with implementing the Insurrection Act.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
To address.
Speaker 7 (13:56):
The crime in Chica. I go in Portland, maybe elsewhere.
And this is from a few days ago. It's an
interesting clip of a former Trump administration DOJ official. It
was also critical of trumpet times, Sarah Isker sort of
(14:17):
taking George Stephanopolis to task about the Insurrection Act.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
Listen to this, there have thirty seconds left.
Speaker 11 (14:22):
Do you think it's going to get that far? Is
the president going to invoke the Insurrection Act?
Speaker 9 (14:25):
Nearly half of US presidents have invoked the Insurrection Act
during their terms, some more than once. Donald Trump said
he would do it during his first note.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Over the objections of governors.
Speaker 5 (14:33):
Absolutely.
Speaker 9 (14:34):
Think about Eisenhower and Little Rock. It was absolutely over
the objection of the governor to desegregate the schools the
Insurrection Act. For years, lawyers have been saying this is
far too broad. They warned about it at the beginning
of the Buiden administration. This is the time to change
the Insurrection Act. We missed the opportunity then, And here
we are.
Speaker 3 (14:51):
And here we are. Yeah, she's right.
Speaker 7 (14:55):
It has been used over the objection of governors in
the past, Little Rock being one prime example of how
it was invoked in order to enforce integration.
Speaker 3 (15:08):
In the nineteen fifties.
Speaker 7 (15:11):
At the same time, well, actually, she makes another.
Speaker 3 (15:16):
Very important point.
Speaker 7 (15:17):
It's not just that governors have had their wishes overridden
by the president. In the case of invoking the Insurrection Act.
But she points out that scholars have criticized the Insurrection
(15:38):
Act for being overly broad for a very long time.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
And there's a reason why they would be critical.
Speaker 7 (15:49):
Because it has a great deal of latitude extended to
the president to address emergent circumstances, and so he has
more latitude.
Speaker 3 (16:02):
And that's what should be concerning.
Speaker 7 (16:04):
Is there's a really good chance that this won't be
struck down in court depending on the facts. And at
the same time, I worry deeply, and I talked about
this yesterday filling in for Ross. I worry deeply about
a president deciding, no matter who he is, to take
it upon himself to bring in the National Guard from
(16:27):
another state to help enforce the law in a city
and state that rejects that force, and the idea of
a president trampling upon a state's sovereignty to that extent,
(16:48):
and that way does concern me. But it's not as simple,
is simple and clear cut as some would like to say, Oh,
well this is this is just absurd and there's no
grounds for him to go ahead with the Insurrection Act. Well,
(17:13):
there is latitude there, whether we like it or not.
Now Obama, though, the former president did have some interesting
thoughts in a podcast interview where he sort of mocked
this idea about crime and the insurrection and it's impact
(17:35):
on democracy, and he did so with an example of
if he were president.
Speaker 10 (17:40):
I mean, it's almost too easy of a thought experiment.
If I had sent in the National Guard into Texas
and just said, you know what, a lot of problems
in Dallas. Yeah, I have a lot of crime there,
and I don't don't care what Governor Abbott says. I'm
(18:04):
going to kind of take over law enforcement because I
think things are out of control.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
It is mind boggling to me.
Speaker 10 (18:10):
How oh yeah, Fox News would have responded, Yeah, you know.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
What, He's got a point.
Speaker 7 (18:17):
If the shoe were on the other foot, Republicans would
be going hair on fire.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
What in the world.
Speaker 7 (18:22):
This is an extraordinary breach of presidential authority.
Speaker 3 (18:26):
He's taking this too far.
Speaker 7 (18:28):
And indeed, there were many instances where we cried foul
folks on the right about President Obama going beyond the
powers of the president and being an imperial president, and
rightly so. But it's sort of like this recognition is important.
(18:49):
This is key as we go to the break key.
Every president for decades has in some form of fact
expanded the authority of the president, and the president after
them is building on that. Trump is just more brazen
and vocal about the ways in which he is pushing
(19:12):
the envelope and pushing the limits. But that doesn't mean
that Republicans, if the shoe were on the other foot,
wouldn't be crying foul. And guess what with the next
Democrat president, Republicans will be crying voul.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
So we should be.
Speaker 7 (19:27):
Skeptical no matter where you are about what the president
is doing on a variety of issues. And this is
one example that he may or may not have some
legal ground on, but it deserves a real close look
from whether you're a Trump fan or not as to
whether or not he should do this right.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
Five six six nine zero is.
Speaker 7 (19:47):
The KOA Common Spirit Health text line if you want
to join into the festivities. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for
Mandy Connell, just getting started on KOA. You know what,
I think it's a great day because we we'll talk
Star Wars later and that's always a lot of fun.
(20:08):
Five six six nine zero KAA Common Spirit Health text line.
We are getting a heck of a lot of texts
have been coming in.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
Including this one.
Speaker 7 (20:26):
Pritzker and Walls, that's the governor of Minnesota, are pushing
the envelope. The Democrat Party is pushing the envelope. The
Biden Harris administration pushed the envelope. My orkis push the envelope.
And legal aliens, foreign nationals are pushing the envelope. I
don't disagree with you. You're right they are. They have been.
(20:47):
The question is whether or not having federal troops go
in to help with law enforcement in a city is
the right move, and I am torn on it. I
support it. Here's the thing, and I got.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
The question that came in.
Speaker 7 (21:05):
Is Trump taking over law enforcement or just protecting federal employees,
ice agents, and buildings. That's what was done in Los Angeles,
which was struck down by a judge. Now, he didn't
invoke the Insurrection Act as his authority for this, but
(21:25):
he exercised the power of the president, and the court said, no,
you don't actually have this power.
Speaker 3 (21:33):
It's legal. You got to stop it. But all he
was doing.
Speaker 7 (21:36):
There in Los Angeles was sending National Guard to protect
federal buildings fundamentally and employees outside those buildings.
Speaker 3 (21:48):
And I supported it right here on KOA. I talked
about it.
Speaker 7 (21:54):
How important it was for Trump to be involved there,
but that was in part because the chaos was so real.
It was really bad and intense earlier this.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
Year, and you needed it.
Speaker 7 (22:10):
And in fact I wrote about it in a column
I said this was sensible. But in this case, I
don't see the chaos being the same as it was
in Los Angeles at that time. And my understanding, and
I could be mistaken here, but my understanding is that
he's talking about using the military to actually help with
(22:33):
law enforcement. For yes, federal law enforcement like ice, but
still if they're involved in law enforcement, which is what
you would invoke the Insurrection Act for, that's a different
level from what happened in Los Angeles. And again I'm
not saying that he affirmatively shouldn't do it. What I'm
(22:57):
saying is we need to be really reserved and careful
of this. The idea of sending in the National Guard,
especially from another state to a city and state that
don't want it. Good reminder from a listener as well,
ike being Dwight Eisenhower went into Little Rock to enforce
the Supreme Court order. Trump said he'll go into Chicago
(23:18):
to punish democrats. See the difference. So it's not just
about punishing democrats. In fact, I wouldn't even say that.
It is that it is about addressing crime in some
of these cities where it is extraordinarily bad.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
And we know that's the case in Chicago.
Speaker 7 (23:35):
It has been for a long time and hasn't been
resolved by the feckless leadership there. So there is cause
for saying we need to address this in a much
more vigorous way. The question is should Trump take it
upon himself to do it using the Insurrection Act? And
(23:57):
I guess this morning over on our sister station, KHUM
Michael Brown talked about this and addressed, according to a listener,
all the title ten statutes applicable to what President Trump
is doing. There's no doubt regarding Trump's legality and the
application of the law is the executive.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Based on your discussion, I.
Speaker 7 (24:15):
Think you're not well informed and simply addressing media and
Democrat talking points. Yes, yes, I'm just I'm I'm one
to spew Democrat talking points and that's it.
Speaker 3 (24:26):
That's that's me. That's that's to be saging. Very goot.
Speaker 7 (24:31):
No, see, I think and that's part of the point
from Sarah Isker and what she said in Schooling Stephanopolis, you.
Speaker 12 (24:39):
Were focused on a bogus excuse.
Speaker 7 (24:42):
Me, that's the wrong Stephanopolis clip. Let me here we go.
Speaker 3 (24:48):
I have thirty seconds left.
Speaker 11 (24:49):
Do you think it's going to get that far as
the president in the insurrection of.
Speaker 9 (24:52):
Nearly half of US presidents have in both the Insurrection
Act during their terms, some more than once. Donald Trump
said he would do it during.
Speaker 11 (24:58):
His first note over the objections of governor.
Speaker 5 (25:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 9 (25:00):
Absolutely, think about Eisenhower and Little Rock. It was absolutely
over the objection of the governor to desegregate the schools
the Insurrection Act. For years, lawyers have been saying this
is far too broad. They warned about it at the
beginning of the Buying administration. This is the time to
change the Insurrection Act. We missed the opportunity then, and
here we are.
Speaker 7 (25:17):
That gets to the point of presidential authority that under
the Insurrection Act, Trump likely has this authority.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
I'm not disputing that.
Speaker 7 (25:28):
What I'm focusing on here is whether or not it
should be done.
Speaker 3 (25:35):
Is it wise? Is it the right call to do this?
Speaker 7 (25:39):
And I'm skeptical as a conservative who is wary of
the all knowing, all powerful federal government trampling upon local
estate governments, and I think we should be wary of that.
Speaker 3 (25:58):
Obama had a point when.
Speaker 7 (26:00):
He said, imagine if I did this now, He never
would have done that. He didn't care about addressing crime
in the same way. But nevertheless he had a point.
Republicans would have gone apoplectic if Obama had said, I'm
going to send in the National Guard over the objections
of the Republican governor of Texas and the national Guard,
(26:24):
and one from say New York, the New York National
Guard is.
Speaker 3 (26:27):
Going to go into Dallas.
Speaker 7 (26:31):
As if you are a Republican, you should be very
wary about what the president does, whether he's Trump or Biden,
or Trump or Obama, Bush, Clinton, on on and on
back into history, because it will come back to bite you.
Speaker 3 (26:55):
And by the way, same thing for Congress. Congress is
now they're all it.
Speaker 7 (27:00):
Gosh, look at how much power Trump has taken.
Speaker 3 (27:03):
Look at the tariffs, look at this or that.
Speaker 7 (27:05):
Well, even if Congress had authorized Trump to do these
things with tariffs, that he's done this unconstitutional. Congress cannot
delegate it's called the non delegation doctrine. They cannot delegate
a power given to Congress, which is regarding tariffs full
bore to the president. It's an Article one, section eight.
(27:29):
It's among the powers of the Congress is to impose tariffs.
And even if Congress did say, hey, you can do this,
that would be a breach of the Constitution. And Trump
has not gotten much of the extent of the authority
(27:51):
that he claims to put in place the tariffs that
he has unilaterally. He claims it's a national emergency, he claims, sir,
powers to do this. He doesn't actually have that power,
but he does have some. What he did in the
first term was a lot, and even then Democrats and
(28:12):
some Republicans were pushing back and saying, hey, wait a second,
this is wrong.
Speaker 3 (28:16):
Why are we allowing Trump to do this?
Speaker 7 (28:18):
And then the entire time that Biden was president, they
never tried to rein that in so while Trump is
going beyond what Congress authorized him to do regarding tariffs,
it'd certainly beyond the Constitution.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
They never reigned in.
Speaker 7 (28:32):
Those aspects of tariffs that the president does have the
authority to put in place.
Speaker 3 (28:39):
And that's Congress's fault. Time and time again.
Speaker 7 (28:42):
It's Congress's fault, and they've allowed an imperial presidency to grow.
Whether they're Republican or Democrat, And I'm just saying, you're
a Republican, be careful because the next Democrat president might
just try and do some of the things that Trump
is doing now and kick you the heck off.
Speaker 3 (29:05):
And you know what, you should be ticked off at
that point in time.
Speaker 7 (29:08):
We should also remember what you said and did to
allow that expansion of power in the first place. I'm
Jimmy Sangenberger covering for Mandy Connell today. We'll pick it
up in a bit on KOA. We are getting various texts.
Five sixty six nine zero is the KOA Common Spirit
Health text line.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
I get your point about conservatives being wary.
Speaker 7 (29:28):
My first vote was for Ford and seventy six, Reagan twice,
Trump twice, et cetera.
Speaker 3 (29:34):
I agree with you.
Speaker 7 (29:35):
My However, we will as a country insist on a
dictator after Trump leaves office of this problem is not fixed.
I absolutely do not want a dictator. So don't misunderstand
what I am trying to say. I get what you
are saying, and I appreciate that. I wouldn't go that
(29:55):
far to say that the United States after Trump is gonna.
Speaker 3 (29:58):
Say, well, after four you years of Trump.
Speaker 7 (30:00):
Exercising all kinds of presidential power, we want to have
a dictator take over the country.
Speaker 3 (30:07):
I would go there. I don't think that's what'll happen.
Speaker 7 (30:12):
But the wariness, I mean, Jimmy, after four years of
Democrat law fare, you're tell every Republicans to be careful.
I dare you to say this on air, Republicans, be careful.
I'm sorry I took your dare. And that's not to
say that there isn't a place for it. That's why
I did not say that Trump shouldn't categorically exercise invoke
(30:33):
the Insurrection Act, but that we should be very wary
about that. Maybe there are times where it is called for.
Again in LA I support it at the time, the
use of the military in their limited role to protect
federal buildings because things were going to fill in the
blank with a four letter word. This is a time
(30:54):
where we may and may be called for in certain circumstances.
I don't know, but I'm telling you you need to
be careful because it will in fact come back to
bite you as it already has from the Democrats. This
is why I thank god they haven't gotten rid of
(31:15):
the filibuster, because both.
Speaker 3 (31:19):
Sides are recognized.
Speaker 7 (31:20):
We need that because when we're in the minority, it's critical.
We can't just get rid of it, so we can
ram things through Congress, and thank goodness for that. So
much going on in the world today, including elections, and
I'm not just talking about what's happening over the next
(31:40):
few weeks with the local elections, but the primaries are
underway and that includes a race for state treasurer on
the other side, he's already here. We'll be joined in
studio by former State Senate President Kevin Grantham, who's running
for state treasurer. Keep it here, lots more up ahead,
only one hour under wraps. Two more to go on KOA,
(32:03):
Jimmy and for Mandy.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and Injury Lawyers.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
No, it's Mandy connellyn.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
On KOA.
Speaker 1 (32:18):
Ninety four one FM.
Speaker 5 (32:19):
So God wait.
Speaker 4 (32:23):
Theny three by Connell keeping sad.
Speaker 5 (32:44):
Time.
Speaker 7 (32:45):
Now for the second hour, Jimmy Sanging Burger in for
Mandy Connell, the saying is Burger and his a Rod says,
and the harmonica is a blowing Which is that signal?
But I think man, and he's like, it's the bat
signal for sure. There we go and now here in studio.
(33:08):
He's the former president of the Colorado State Senate and
now a glunding for punt.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
No, he's doing the right thing.
Speaker 7 (33:16):
He's stepping up at a running for treasurer for the
Republican nomination for state treasurer. Kevin Grantham joins me here
in studio because he happens to be in the area.
Speaker 2 (33:26):
Welcome, sir, Well, thank you, Jimmy. Good to be here.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
I'm glad this could work out.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
Good to have you here. Good to be here.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
So let's just start right from the tap. Who is
Kevin Grantham?
Speaker 7 (33:36):
And why in the world this crazy environment we're in
do you want to be state treasurer?
Speaker 13 (33:41):
Well, let me start with that one. Why do I
want to do this? To be perfectly honest, Jimmy, I
we need good candidates. We need good, solid candidates running
for these positions, regardless of what has happened in prior cycles.
And I'm a great candidate, Honestly, I bring the know
how to this job. I bring the background to this job.
(34:04):
I've sat in those seats in the legislature. I sat
on the JBC, sat in the President's chair, and was
in the state Senate for eight years, city council for
three years. I've been a county commissioner for five years now. Hey,
I bring a lot of know how to this job
when it comes to budgeting and to money.
Speaker 3 (34:23):
Talk to us for a moment then about the role
of the treasurer.
Speaker 7 (34:28):
What that entails from your experience being a central piece
to why you're that candidate that should be in the
role come twenty twenty six or twenty twenty seven, I'll.
Speaker 13 (34:41):
Tell you what that experience, you know, leading it into
the treasure's race. You know, we're talking about the treasury,
the taxpayer dollars of the state of Colorado, all the taxpayers,
what they pay in every year going into the treasury,
how that is invested, how that is we're looking for
the best bang for the buck for the taxpayers of Colorado,
(35:04):
and how that money is invested. It's not to be
used as your own little playhouse for dealing money out
to your buddies in their companies. This is to be
an objective criteria of how we invest our dollars, and
I think my experience gives me the best experience to
(35:24):
do that.
Speaker 7 (35:25):
With the Joint Budget Committee and having served on that
committee and understanding the ins and outs of the budgeting role,
what insights does that give you to understanding the machinations
of jay to day accounts and so forth, And also
potentially in terms of being a bully pulpit, especially when
(35:49):
quite frankly, the Democrats are going to continue to run
the legislature, very good chance that they'll still have the
Democrat wills a Democrat is governor with that environment, how
import would it be to have a Republican with that?
Know how, from the experience of the JBC, I'd like
to talk to you to talk about as a treasure.
Speaker 2 (36:07):
No, I think that's a great point, Jimmy.
Speaker 13 (36:09):
I having that experience sitting in the JBC, sitting in
the President's chair, in fact, both of those give great
weight to the bully pulpit that is the treasure's office.
Of course, the Democrats, the current Democrat and they want
to be Democrats to go into that position. None of
(36:30):
them will take on the governor, None of them will
take on the legislature. I have to know how I
have the experience to be able to stand up in
that pulpit and tell people how it is, and using
that experience of state budgeting, using that experience of running
the Senate as a Senate president, being able to stand
(36:53):
in that pulpit and actually speak out against the overspending,
the mismanagement of the state by the current governor and
the current legislature and probably, as you said, the future legislature.
Speaker 7 (37:06):
Yeah, Kevin Grantham joining us here in studio, candidate for
State Treasurer in the Republican nomination. Let's talk for a
moment about the office in its size, because look, when
we look at government, we like to have it, especially
if you're on the smaller government side, lean and me
(37:27):
in which means you don't need to have an extensive
staff in an office like the state Treasurer's office.
Speaker 3 (37:34):
So how.
Speaker 7 (37:37):
Has that office changed since we had a Republican in
the treasurer's seat.
Speaker 2 (37:44):
So just a little background on that.
Speaker 13 (37:45):
Walker Stapleton was the treasurer from twenty eleven through twenty eighteen.
In those eight years, Walker's office grew from thirty one
full time equivalent employees to thirty two, a opping one
employee increase. Over the last seven years, the current treasure
(38:06):
has increased his office from thirty two to sixty one.
That's a ninety four percent increase in that office. And
just some anecdotal notes on this, I actually just had
this conversation with this lady at lunch where she actually
has called three separate times to the Treasure's office for
(38:27):
her unclaimed property Trust Fund money and she can't even
get a callback. Now, you would think with an increase
of ninety four percent employees that you would get a
callback after three calls. There is not the additional service
certainly that you're seeing from that office. So the real
question is what in the world are you doing with
sixty two employees instead of thirty two employees?
Speaker 7 (38:51):
Nothing? The answer is nothing. It really doesn't make sense.
That's nearly double, nearly double, and that's in six years. Jimmy,
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but yeah, that's six years.
Last year he asked for another eight and a half employees,
but was denied by the JBC because they were trying
to cut back in all the departments. To their credit,
would you advocate then scaling back that number being like,
(39:16):
I understand I don't like letting people go, but this
office is much bigger than it needs to be. I'm
going to do an audit in the first handful of
months figure out who, what positions are needed, and which
ones that have been.
Speaker 3 (39:29):
Added since Stapleton was in office can go.
Speaker 13 (39:34):
I mean, that's the that's the simple, down and dirty
of exactly how things would go.
Speaker 10 (39:39):
What you go.
Speaker 13 (39:39):
What you don't want to do is go into an
office and and just take the hatchet to it. You
want to you want to look at it carefully, see
what job, what positions are necessary, and start scaling back
from there. Perhaps there's folks that are ready to retire,
Perhaps there's folks that are looking for a political reason
to get out, and maybe that happened. Not going to
(40:01):
go in with a hatchet, but we are going to
be looking to streamline that office much like it used
to be.
Speaker 7 (40:08):
Kevin Grantham running for State Treasurer joining us here in studio.
Let's talk for a moment about the budget itself and
how it has grown dramatically in the past several years.
Of course, we've seen population increase in Colorado, although that
rate has slowed more recently, But it is outrageous to
(40:29):
me how much money they have been spending, how many
new programs and initiatives on the state level, and they
constantly are pleading poverty. Oh my gosh, we got undue
tabor so that we can be able to afford all
the new things that we put in place. As someone who,
as you talked about, would use the bully pulpit of
the Treasurer's office to talk about fiscal responsibility, how do
(40:51):
you look at that growth and spending in the state.
Speaker 13 (40:54):
Well, one of the things I would point out, just
like in this last session, the mantra was there was
a one point two billion dollar shortfall. If you hadn't heard,
there's a one point two billion dollar shortfall. Oh yeah,
And if you hadn't heard, there's a one point two
billion dollar shortfall, that was the mantra.
Speaker 10 (41:11):
Right.
Speaker 13 (41:11):
Yes, The reality is the state budget from two years
ago went from forty billion to forty four billion. They
increased the budget by four billion dollars. Actually it was
a little bit under four billion, but point being made,
the the budget increased almost four times what they said.
(41:36):
There was a shortfall of and so we're talking about
government math we deal with this on the federal level,
we deal with this on the state level, and in
almost every level. They're talking about the the increases they
wanted to have. If they had the increases they wanted,
they would have had a forty five point two billion
dollar budget instead of forty four. There was no real
(41:57):
cuts there that had to be made. They were still
increasing the budget. People need to remember that while they
were crying about cuts, about having to go into this
austerity measures and things like that, it's it's poppycock. The
reality is the budget still grew significantly. Four billion dollars, Jimmy,
(42:21):
four billion dollars.
Speaker 3 (42:22):
It is absolutely astonishing.
Speaker 7 (42:24):
Let's talk about one of the ways in which the
state has tried to claim more money, and that's by
going in and dipping into the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund.
So this fund where you have your unclaimed property.
Speaker 1 (42:38):
You may go.
Speaker 7 (42:39):
Online, you can see, oh, that's mine, I'm going to
go claim that and say it's mine, And they have
dipped into that. Talk about this because most people aren't
aware of a lot of people aren't even aware of
the Unclaimed Property Fund. But let alone this aspect of
the legislature saying, oh, you know, what that's sort of
a money pot we can dip into a fuel.
Speaker 13 (43:00):
So this is one of the responsibilities of the State
treasure They are to be the overseer there, to be
the caretaker, the trustee of this Unclaimed Property Trust fund.
This is money that has been lost by people, maybe
unknowingly they've left a deposit at a bank or something,
(43:23):
an account that closed that ended up having money still
left over in it, but then it can't be traced
back to the individual. That's what makes up all this
Unclaimed Property Trust Fund. And so it's a significant amount
of money, to the tune of well hundreds of millions
of dollars billions of dollars. It's a large, large fund.
So people can go and find that money. You go
(43:47):
on the website, you go in, put your name and
it'll tell you whether or not your name is listed
there as one of the owners of this money. Well,
that is, like you said, a big pot of money,
which is when they're talking about trying to make up
a shortage of one point two billion dollars, you know
they're going to go after big chunks of money to
try to shorten that stack. And what they do is
(44:10):
they go in and they make a loan. The Treasure
makes a loan to the legislature of millions of dollars,
but it's interest free. Meanwhile, the Treasure is paying interest
on that money to that property owner. So the legislature
gets a zero percent interest rate loan on money that
(44:30):
we are paying interest on.
Speaker 2 (44:33):
That doesn't make sense.
Speaker 13 (44:35):
Well, the bottom line is it's called a raid, the
raid of the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund, and that is
money that doesn't belong to the legislature, doesn't belong to
the governor, doesn't belong to the state. It belongs to
the people, and that is a raid of private Wait.
Speaker 7 (44:50):
A second, Kevin Grantham, Come on, now, the General Assembly
doesn't care about what money belongs to the people and
what does. If they did, they would say, we never
want to touch tabor, We want to keep it exactly
as it is. But that's not the case there, just
as it's not the case here with the Unclaimed Property Fund.
Speaker 2 (45:10):
And they wouldn't want to touch any of the cash
funds as well.
Speaker 13 (45:12):
That money again that comes from fees, come from licensures
and things like that. They wouldn't touch those either, but
they do because they're not looking to cut expenses. They're
looking to find cash windfalls in order to give the
short term budget balancing.
Speaker 7 (45:30):
Now, a listener texting in, that's the great Colorado payback.
It is right right, Okay, thank you for asking that,
because that's how a lot of people would and honestly, it's.
Speaker 2 (45:40):
A great thing to know about.
Speaker 13 (45:42):
It the Missing Money dot Com or you can text
or google that what you just said, the Unclaim Property
Trust Fund and you can go on there and find it.
Speaker 2 (45:53):
And you should miss money, your money. This is your money, exactly.
Speaker 3 (45:58):
Kevin Grantham joining us here in studio.
Speaker 7 (46:00):
One of the rows of the State Treasurer is overseeing
the state's investments and this is critical for a variety
of reasons. I think they're pretty self explanatory as well
as to what those reasons would be why it's important,
but talk to us about prudence in the investments that
the state makes.
Speaker 3 (46:19):
So there's a.
Speaker 13 (46:22):
It's one of those things that you would expect, you know,
the public to know. You know, I always tell folks,
I bet you didn't wake up this morning wondering what
the state treasure was doing with your money. Nobody thinks
about the State treasure right, but one of the things
that they do. That is so critical for us is
all that money that you're paying in taxes, all that
(46:42):
money that comes into the state, that big ball of
money is what's being used and invested by the treasury
in order to get the best bang for the buck
for the tax payer and that return on money. Where
we find a current dan right now is that there
are some of the candidates that are talking about using
(47:05):
this money as their own personal little playground in order
to help the buddies out here and help their buddies
out there, instead of looking at the objective use of
that money and investments.
Speaker 2 (47:17):
In order to get the best bang for the buck.
Speaker 7 (47:22):
And so, how do you really assess the way in
which the investments have been made and how that's been
overseen in recent years, for example by state Treasury devion.
Speaker 13 (47:33):
Sure much of that is driven by state statute. I mean,
the legislature can come in and say you will do this,
and the treasure has to comply with that. Currently, some
of the things being proposed are not in statute, and
so there would have to be this effort by the
treasury in that situation to direct him to give it
(47:55):
to their cronies here and hither and yon and not
looking at the best investments right now, they're directed to
look at the best objective investments for the state, and
you get the best experts that can can look at
those things and examine those things and find the best
places to get that return on the investment.
Speaker 7 (48:17):
The public pension program, it just got a few minutes
left with our guest in studio, Republican candidate for State Treasurer,
Kevin Grantham. The Public Pension Program PARA, speaking of investments,
has had so many problems, Like financially, it is not
in good shape, and there's always band aids that get
put on by the legislature to just sort of be
(48:39):
able to kick the can down the road. While at
some point there will be an issue that flares up
and it's not going to be something you can just
put a band aid on. You need to have something
more significant, at least that's my view. How do you
look at and maybe you can talk a little bit
about where you see PARA at this moment and what
may or may not need to be fixed changed in
(49:00):
the future.
Speaker 2 (49:01):
That is, that's one of the toughest issues in the States.
Want something we.
Speaker 13 (49:05):
Dealt with over and over again, year over year. When
I was in the legislature, we made significant progress on that.
Back in twenty eighteen, my last year as president, Senator
Jack Tate ran a piece of legislation that ever reformed. Yeah,
and I got to tell you that that was a
that was a great effort in moving the ball forward
(49:25):
on I don't want to say saving PARA, but pretty
close to that. There's still a lot of work to do.
And I think when we start looking at the the
you know, the contributions of current employees. The one thing
I should back up one thing that want to make
very clear the promises that we made to our retirees.
(49:49):
And this is close to my heart because we have
all those doc employees down there in Canyon City and
all the teachers and everybody else that relied on the
promises made for PARA. Keep those promises we need, but
we in order to do that, we need to make
sure there is a pension there at the end of
the day so that they can receive that promise from
(50:12):
the Colorado State taxpayer. But there's got to be more
accountability on how much goes in by the current employees
to make sure that there's that system and system in
place at the end of their employee life. And we
also have to make sure that there's enough buy in
from the state, and that's a tough thing to sell. Yeah,
(50:35):
but it's going to take some some people backing off
of their current positions in order to get to the
point where we can save that.
Speaker 3 (50:44):
I understand that.
Speaker 7 (50:45):
But Kevin Grantham, with the Democrats in charge of the legislature,
how is it even possible to get there? I mean,
is it going to take pressure from the public that says, hey,
we need to address this, requires an outspoken treasurer in
that respect, or.
Speaker 3 (51:02):
How do you accomplish that?
Speaker 8 (51:04):
Well?
Speaker 13 (51:04):
I mean that is going to be one of the
roles of the treasure in that bully pulpit. They are
a member of the paraboard the car to State treasure
is a member of that board, and so there is
that bully pulpit there to hold those folks accountable for
the decisions that they make. Plus the bully pulp on
on the outside, just like you were talking about. Unfortunately,
in order to turn public far enough in order to
(51:27):
drive the legislature in a particular direction would require something
that may be catastrophic with the fund and we need
to fix it before we.
Speaker 3 (51:39):
Get there without a doubt.
Speaker 7 (51:40):
Kevin Grantham, candidate for State Treasurer in studio.
Speaker 3 (51:44):
We are at a time.
Speaker 7 (51:45):
Let me ask you for any final thoughts and also
please let folks know where can we go to learn
more about you and your campaign.
Speaker 13 (51:53):
Kevin Grantham dot com. Simple website Kevin Grantham dot com.
A little bit about me, just real quick. I'm a
real estate appraiser. I'm also a I grew up in
southeast Colorado in Ordway, Crowley County. Grew up as a
hog farmer, so that's why I know how to cut
pork beautiful. Now we want to stay treasurer who can
(52:13):
cut pork properly.
Speaker 2 (52:14):
There we go.
Speaker 13 (52:16):
And tell you what, folks, I care about my state.
I want the state back that I grew up in.
I'm a native Colorado and I want that for my kids.
I want that for my kids' kids and everybody else's
children and grandchildren. I want our state back. I want
it stable. And the financial outlook on our state right
now is kind of bleak, and we need some serious
(52:38):
people in these roles that are willing to make serious,
tough decisions and I'm that guy.
Speaker 3 (52:44):
Kevin Grantham, thanks so much for joining us on KOA,
glad to have you in studio.
Speaker 2 (52:48):
Thank you, sir. We're going to take a break more.
Speaker 3 (52:50):
On the other side.
Speaker 7 (52:51):
Jimmy sangen Berger in for Andy Connell and KOA. Sometimes.
I bet, hey, Kenon, we just had Kevin Grantham in
studio for the last half hour.
Speaker 3 (53:00):
I bet that if you.
Speaker 7 (53:06):
Run for office in this state and you're a Republican
running statewide, especially, sometimes it feels like you've been tied
to the whipping post, doesn't it. I wish he was
still here and I could ask him about that very
question again. Jimmy in for Mandy and I don't get it. Earlier,
listener texted Allman Brothers not even the top twenty five?
Speaker 3 (53:29):
Are you kidding me?
Speaker 7 (53:32):
The Allman Brothers consistently had some of the best quality,
top notch musicians, from Dwayne and Greg Alman and Dicky
Betts in the early days on through in their last incarnation,
Derek Trucks.
Speaker 3 (53:53):
And Warren Haynes. I don't get it. How can you
say that?
Speaker 7 (54:00):
And not only that, they had some phenomenal songs that
will forever live in the pantheon of blues, classic rock,
Southern rock, tremendously influential. Heck, I have two cousins who
are the Sangenburger Family's massive my dad's number nine of
(54:21):
ten kids, and I have a cousin Jessica and a
cousin Melissa, and both of them named after the Alman
Brothers songs of those names many A, Jessica and Many
and Melissa and Many and and Elizabeth have been named
after Almen Brothers song. So there you go again, Jimmy
in for Mandy on Koa Stirring the Pot and check
(54:47):
out the live version from seventy one at the film
More of Women post if you haven't gotta love it.
So we are in one of those crazy environments where
you never know what will happen, and that includes how
the media is going to be treated over the weekend.
On Sunday, George Stephanopolis shut down Vice President JD. Vance
(55:15):
at the end of their interview where he spent several
minutes that's what seemed like several minutes talking about Tom Homan,
the President's czar, a border zar, and allegations that he
had accepted a bribe of fifty thousand dollars from the
(55:35):
FBI that was trying to entrap him. There's no criminal proceedings.
There's no indication that he actually violated the law. Anything
of that sort may have been unethical. I don't have
enough details about it, but apparently not illegal. Needless to say,
here is how that interview ended.
Speaker 3 (55:53):
You were focused on a bogus story.
Speaker 12 (55:55):
You're insinuating criminal wrongdoing against a guy who has done
nothing wrong, instead of focusing on the fact that our
country is struggling because our government's shut down. Let's talk
about the real issues, George. I think the American people
would benefit much more from that than from you going
down some weird left wing rabbit hole where the facts
clearly show that Tom Holman didn't engage in any criminal wrongdoing.
Speaker 11 (56:18):
It's not a weird left wing rabbit hole. I didn't
insinuate anything. I asked you whether Tom Holman accepted fifty
thousand dollars, as was heard on an audio tape recorded
by the FBI in September twenty twenty four, and you
did not answer the question.
Speaker 3 (56:30):
Thank you for your time this morning till I said that.
Speaker 2 (56:33):
I don't up next We'll be right.
Speaker 7 (56:34):
So he ended with a dig No, I'm going to
clarify this, and then the Vice President of the United
States is there trying to jump in and provide a
defense slash clarification of what he was saying, and boom,
it was just ended.
Speaker 3 (56:50):
Well, that is ruffled feathers.
Speaker 7 (56:51):
Including from the President of the United States, who yesterday
did this.
Speaker 8 (56:56):
First of all, congratulations takes questions from ABC fact just
what you did with Stephanopoulos to the Vice President of
the United States.
Speaker 11 (57:04):
I don't take questions from ABC fakes Brian, go ahead, yes.
Speaker 7 (57:09):
No longer taking questions from ABC fake news.
Speaker 3 (57:13):
We'll see how long that lasts.
Speaker 7 (57:16):
I don't think Trump should hold that exchange with Stephanopolis
against every reporter at ABC News.
Speaker 3 (57:24):
But what are you gonna do. It's Trump.
Speaker 7 (57:27):
It's the way he is with the media, the way
he feels toward the media. But here's the instance of
chastising or restricting or doing something against the media that
I think is well, it's beyond the pale.
Speaker 3 (57:47):
I don't get it. Washington Examiner.
Speaker 7 (57:50):
President Donald Trump on Tuesday floated moving the White House
press corps across the street after the media largely rejected
the Pentagon's new restrictions the President noted to reporters that
the press used to be located across the street years ago,
when news outlets had less access to the White House.
(58:11):
He then pivoted to defending War Secretary Pete Hegseth's restrictions.
Speaker 3 (58:16):
Now, what are these restrictions well, Also from.
Speaker 7 (58:19):
The Examiner, an overwhelming majority of reporters who cover the
Pentagon are set to hand in their credentials on either
Tuesday or Wednesday instead of signing a new mandated policy
that outlets argue is inconsistent with freedom of the press.
The Washington Examiner is among more than thirty five media
(58:42):
outlets that have publicly said they will not sign the pledge.
The reporters from those outlets will continue to cover the
Department of War, but will do so from afar now.
One America News Network is the only media outlet to
publicly say they will sign it. We do not plan
to sign the Pentagon document. The Washington Examiner does not
(59:05):
sign agreements with people we cover in our reporting in
any other area, and we do not plan to make
an exception in this case. The Department of War will
set its rules, and we will continue to provide our
readers with strong independent news reporting. Washington Examiner editor in
chief Hugo Gerdon said in a statement. The War Secretary
(59:26):
Pete Hegseth argued on social media Monday that the policy
will no longer allow reporters to quote Rome free in
the Pentagon, will require the press to wear a visible badge,
and credentialed press is no longer permitted to solicit criminal acts.
Speaker 3 (59:44):
The policy notes that any solicitation.
Speaker 7 (59:46):
Of DOW personnel to commit criminal acts would not be
considered protected activity under the First Amendment. In other words,
the press has been able to get unauthorized tips on
things from people. I mean, it's the same thing with
the War Department now or other departments. And heck Steth
(01:00:08):
is cracking down on that, and the way that he's
gone about it has gotten opposition from Fox News, from Newsmax,
from the Washington Examiner. Trump threatening to kick out reporters
as a result of their pushback, and don't do this.
Speaker 3 (01:00:29):
This is wrong.
Speaker 7 (01:00:29):
This is trampling upon the freedom of the press. And
there's a reason why One American News is the only
one in the White House Press Corps that is signing
this and contributing or willing to go along with it,
and it stands to reason that they would be because
they won't challenge Trump on anything, and you needed a challenge,
whether you agree with him or not. I voted for
(01:00:51):
the guy three times. I'll challenge him. You hear it,
And I've been doing that already on the show today.
But this is not except very disappointing in this regard.
Shulmy sangen Berger in for Mandy Connell, don't go anywhere.
It's KOA Tomorrow. Ryan Schuling will be filling in for
(01:01:11):
Ross Kiminski and at ten forty five he'll have an
exclusive interview with Texas Senator Ted Cruz ten forty five
tomorrow right here on KOA amid the government shutdown and more.
That should be a great conversation Ryan Schooling in for
Ross Kiminski with Senator Ted Kruz.
Speaker 3 (01:01:32):
Now, I want to go back to this freedom of
the press story.
Speaker 7 (01:01:36):
That Fox News, the Washington Examiner, Newsmax, every outlet of
thirty five but one American News has said we're not
going to sign a pledge that the Secretary of War
has asked and that the President is underscoring and saying
(01:01:57):
I'm going to enforce that would strict to the press's
ability to report on the Pentagon. Only authorized stories, only
authorized information. All of that can be provided to the press,
and you must agree to it in essence, is what
it comes down to.
Speaker 3 (01:02:14):
And here is.
Speaker 7 (01:02:19):
Something A listener texted at five six sixty nine zero
koa common spirit health text line back to putting the
shoe on the other foot. Obama allowed to spy on
the media. I agree with the Pentagon taking its position
after repeated leaks and fake news. Get over it, Jimmy,
the MSM is a joke. Foxes in the pot too. Well,
(01:02:40):
guess what let's speak about MSN. You're a MSM.
Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
You're right.
Speaker 7 (01:02:45):
Mainstream media has failed time and time again, without a doubt,
they continue to fail, They continue to lie.
Speaker 3 (01:02:53):
In mislead and all of that.
Speaker 7 (01:02:55):
That doesn't mean that government gets to say we are
now the arbiters of truth and if you don't allow
us to, if you don't follow our restrictions on what
you can report, then we got a problem with you. No,
that's unacceptable, no matter where you are. And guess what
when Obama spied on the media, specifically James Rosen, the
former Fox News reporter, it was resoundingly condemned by the
(01:03:22):
White House Press Corps, and the New York Times editorial
board even published an editorial criticizing this. The Washington Posts
and a columnist Fox News commentator brid Hume the Freedom
of the Press Foundation.
Speaker 2 (01:03:39):
On and on it went.
Speaker 7 (01:03:41):
There was a unified front that that was unacceptable and
wrong from the press, and even the left wing mainstream
media joined in on the condemnation and pushed back. So
here the shoe is on the other foot, and kudos
to them left and right. The Press Corps is standing
(01:04:03):
by what journalism is about, which is reporting on what
is happening and not reporting only on the things pre
screened by the all knowing, all powerful federal government or
any other government entity. You think I'm going to get
a story for my columns in the Denver Gazette and
(01:04:26):
in the next hour, we're gonna start it off by
talking about today's column Jeffco Teachers' Union failed to vet
its cleanup crew. Do you think I'm gonna go to
Jeffco Schools, or to Denver Public Schools, or to the
City of Lakewood or the governor or any other entity
(01:04:47):
and say, hey, is this an approved story? And then
I'm going to cover it.
Speaker 3 (01:04:53):
Hell no, absolutely not. That's not journalism.
Speaker 7 (01:04:57):
That's something creeing favor with whatever, for government agency or
entity you're trying to report on.
Speaker 3 (01:05:06):
It's unacceptable.
Speaker 7 (01:05:07):
And kudos to a United Frontier, as with James Rosen
circa twenty thirteen when the press corps pushed back on
the Obama administration's spine, which, by the way, I think
Obama would like you to forget about that when he
talks about freedom of the press.
Speaker 3 (01:05:23):
That's for darn shore.
Speaker 7 (01:05:25):
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell, our number three
up ahead as we continue on KOA.
Speaker 1 (01:05:31):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury lawyers.
Speaker 2 (01:05:36):
No, it's Mandy Connell.
Speaker 5 (01:05:41):
On KOAM ninety four one FM.
Speaker 4 (01:05:46):
God can the ninety three many Connell keeping sad thing.
Speaker 5 (01:06:13):
Lay in final hour?
Speaker 7 (01:06:15):
Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell. If you couldn't tell
from the harmonica playing there, Good to be with you,
good to have a rod behind the glass as always,
And look I'm here for three days. I was in
for Ross the last couple of days. Now I'm in
(01:06:35):
for Mandy today through Friday. Very glad to have you
along for the ride. Be sure, by the way to
check out my website. You are one stop shop for
all of the content, including my columns like today's column,
which we'll get to in just a moment in the
Denver Gazette at Jimmy Singenberger dot com. Keep in mind,
(01:06:57):
there's no AI or you in so it's all ease
all the time. Once you know that, sang in Berger
is easy. So the school board and teachers Union blues, Oh,
it happens all over the place, especially in Colorado. They're
(01:07:18):
playing the blues and they might not even realize it,
but they probably do over the course of the last
several days in Jeffco schools because in August, the Jefferson
County Education Association the JCEEA, that's the union there, endorsed
Peter Gibbons, Tina Mouenian if I pronounced that right, and
(01:07:45):
Michael Yoakum for Jeffco's school board in this falls election,
proudly branding them the cleanup crew. It was a curious
label because every member of the current board was and
is already union backed, So cleaning up who's mess exactly?
(01:08:10):
It turns out that they have a mess of their own.
Last week, it was revealed that Yoakum and Michael Yoakum,
twenty six, has a sealed juvenile record for sexual offenses.
Speaker 3 (01:08:35):
Committed at age twelve.
Speaker 7 (01:08:39):
This revelation has hit a district that has already been
reeling from more than thirty different sexual misconduct scandals, including
your recall.
Speaker 2 (01:08:49):
Beginning of the year.
Speaker 3 (01:08:51):
I remember talking with Mandy about this quite a bit.
Speaker 7 (01:08:55):
When the chief of Schools, who I believe is the
number three position in Jeffco, David Weiss, was investigated for
child pornography before taking his own life over New Year's
And that's just one of many instances you've heard about
it here on KOA that have been going on in
Jeffco schools. So enter the union's latest vetted candidate. On Monday,
(01:09:20):
union leadership withdrew their endorsement. They said that they had
no idea about Yoakam's sealed court record until it became public. Quote,
this issue did not come up in the questionnaire, interview
or the vetting process, the union stated, adding that the
information was quote not disclosed to JCA during the recommendation process. Really,
(01:09:48):
so Paragroup jeffco Kids first blew the whistle last week
on This was the first to.
Speaker 3 (01:09:55):
Call attention to it, and in their response they.
Speaker 7 (01:09:57):
Called the withdrawal of vital step forward, but slammed the
union for blaming an omission during the vetting process.
Speaker 3 (01:10:05):
Now, Yolkum was recorded in a conversation at a.
Speaker 7 (01:10:08):
Candidate forum late last month, I think on the twenty
ninth of September or he acknowledged, quote to be perfectly honest,
when I was twelve years old, there was a deferred
adjudication that removed everything. They called it a mistake that
helped him learn and grow, and he was very young
at the time, of course, But when asked about the
(01:10:30):
issue days later at a forum, he claimed that there
is quote nothing that would preclude me from running.
Speaker 3 (01:10:37):
In this race.
Speaker 7 (01:10:40):
He also claimed that he had spoken with the victims
and that they were okay with his run. But a
verified close family friend with detailed knowledge of the incidents,
who I spoke with and asked for anonymity, disputed the account,
and this family friend added quote, I believe in rehabilitation
he could very well be an upstanding citizen, but I
(01:11:04):
don't think that he should be in a position of
authority with our kids. I can't help but wonder why
he would want such close contact with so many Maybe
not individual contexts, but the ability to do so, to
be in the position of trust.
Speaker 3 (01:11:20):
This has to do with kids now.
Speaker 7 (01:11:24):
Yoakam was on an advisory committee at Warren Tech at
Jeff Coast School. Apparently he's been removed from that advisory committee,
but a constituent he'd emailed Yokum urging him to quietly
drop out of the race on September thirtieth, of course,
is not even now, and then afterwards had alerted his
(01:11:49):
campaign manager, Yoakam's campaign manager, Katie Winner, the next day.
Speaker 3 (01:11:53):
Now, Katie Winner.
Speaker 7 (01:11:57):
Is an important name because she manages all the Union
back Jeff Co campaigns and as the designated filing agent
for candidates Gibbons and Moullenian from August fourteenth until the thirteenth,
just a couple of days ago, when the Union finally
pulled its support from Yokum, she was the designated agent.
Speaker 3 (01:12:20):
So two weeks that's how long it took.
Speaker 7 (01:12:24):
After campaign manager Katie Winner was tipped for the Union
to withdraw support two weeks later, they would withdraw support
after the issue went public and scrutiny intensified. Now when
the union put out their statement, they didn't say if
they were going to seek refunds of the eight thousand
dollars that the JCEA had donated to Yoakam or the
(01:12:45):
additional three thousand plus that the Colorado Education Association contributed.
I had emailed questions to Yoakum and copied Winner and
also the union over the weekend, and I got no response.
Now I have to let you know that this is
not the first rodeo for affiliated unions with the Colorado
(01:13:09):
Education Association. In June of twenty twenty one, the Denver
Union the Denver Classroom Teachers Association admitted that it knew
of sexual assault allegations against then board member Tay Anderson
when it endorsed him in twenty nineteen, DCTA, the Denver Union,
and the Colorado Education Association still poured sixty five thousand
(01:13:34):
dollars into his race. Now that warning had come from
an anonymous letter from a former member of Anderson's youth
group Never Again, Colorado Union leaders had asserted that they
couldn't verify it and backed him anyway. Two years later,
following more complaints, a DPS investigation found that Tay Anderson
(01:13:58):
had coercively pursued relation with underage students, and he also
admitted to inappropriate behavior at Never Again Colorado. Now Here
is the CEA's Jeff Co affiliate in a strikingly similar
spot in backing a candidate with issues of accusations and
so forth of sexual offenses and claiming ignorance until public
(01:14:21):
pressure mounted. Yet even as they withdrew support, union bosses
couldn't resist taking political potshots, blaming political extremists quote trying
to use a complicated and traumatic event from over a
decade ago to achieve their own political outcomes.
Speaker 3 (01:14:39):
I mean owned deaf much.
Speaker 7 (01:14:42):
Lindsay Dadko, the founder of jeffco Kids, first told me
this is not about politics.
Speaker 3 (01:14:47):
It's about the safety of our children.
Speaker 7 (01:14:50):
And she called this smear a feeble attempt to sidestep
the gravity of a candidate's admitted history of sexual offenses
against children. We got to go to a break, But
I want to be clear about something. Years of sexual
misconduct scandals have truly shattered parents trust.
Speaker 3 (01:15:08):
We have been talking about this now for a couple
of years with Jeff Cup. So is it really that
hard to grasp the.
Speaker 7 (01:15:15):
Sensitivity here without branding concerned parents as extremists. Then again,
of course, this is a union that claims to represent
jeff Coast teachers when barely thirty percent are members.
Speaker 3 (01:15:28):
No wonder they're out of touch. And here's the thing.
Redemption is real.
Speaker 7 (01:15:34):
Wisdom is too, And as I write in today's column
in the Denver Gazette Denvergazette dot com, Michael Yoakum deserves
his chance at redemption, but a school board run doesn't
show wisdom. He must step aside, and union bosses should
own their failure to vet the cleanup crew. Jimmy Sangenberger
(01:15:57):
in for Mandy Connor will pick it up on the
other side here on KOA, are you excited to hear
a little bit of Star Wars talk coming up? With
Star Wars theory? YouTuber Extraordinary. I've been following him for years.
I've interviewed him twice when I was at Fan Expo
Denver this year and last year. A great guy and
(01:16:17):
of course he, like many people in YouTube and new
media and whatnot, courts controversy at times, but for the
right reasons, pushing back a little bit, sometimes complaining about
sometimes often complaining about things that Disney does as the
ownership of Lucasfilm and Disney Star Wars products.
Speaker 3 (01:16:42):
And he's not.
Speaker 7 (01:16:45):
Very pleased with a lot of the ways in which
politics have been injected. So I'm looking forward to talking
with him in just a few minutes. By the way,
I don't have time to get into the details more
than this, but let me share something for the jeffco
Teachers Union failed to edits clean up crew. I call
him today and the Denver Gazette I noted that jeff
(01:17:08):
Co's teachers the union claims Teachers' Union there claims to
represent jeff COO's teachers when barely thirty percent are members. Well,
in May, a letter was sent from the Associate HR Chief,
Scott Barnes, to the school.
Speaker 3 (01:17:23):
Board and he said, and it's excoriating.
Speaker 7 (01:17:25):
He says, in part part, the district bargains with a
minority voice. The majority sixty five to seventy percent of
our employees have consciously opted out of the union. Why
do we act as if they represent a majority voice
when clearly they do not.
Speaker 3 (01:17:45):
Great question deserves some answers.
Speaker 7 (01:17:48):
Jimmy Sangenberger infram Andy Connell here on koa Star Wars Theory,
talking new media, AI, Star Wars and more on the
other side.
Speaker 3 (01:17:57):
Keep it here.
Speaker 7 (01:17:58):
We have been teasing this interview through out the show.
Speaker 3 (01:18:00):
I'm very excited.
Speaker 7 (01:18:01):
In fact, let's let count Dook who say the words
I've been lucky quote to this. I have indeed been
looking forward to this. I've seen him at a couple
of fan expo denvers this summer and last summer. He
is all over the place online, especially YouTube, where he
has the single largest YouTube channel with over three point
(01:18:23):
three million subscribers. He's been at this on YouTube since
twenty sixteen. He is Star Wars Theory joining me live
from Canada over the US airwaves.
Speaker 3 (01:18:36):
Sarah, Welcome to American radio and it's good to talk
with you.
Speaker 2 (01:18:41):
Good to be here. Thank you so much for the invite.
Speaker 7 (01:18:43):
It's great to have you here, brother, I appreciate it.
Talk to me for a moment about how you got
started in YouTube and even tracing back a little bit,
how Star Wars became such a big deal for you
as a person that you were like, you know what,
I'm going to start something on a channel and it
became what it became.
Speaker 2 (01:19:05):
It never really started out that way, kind of as
life would have it.
Speaker 14 (01:19:08):
But for me, like many others back in the nineties,
my parents introduced me to Star Wars and I was
in love right away, you know, from the age of
five or six, back in ninety five or ninety six.
I'm dating myself here, but it was just a beautiful
story that meant a lot to me. And I got
to connect with my parents and some other friends and
(01:19:30):
then online friends as well, and over the years just
found myself engulfed in the love of Star Wars, in
this universe that George Lucas created. And so you know,
flash forward to twenty sixteen, where the new Star Wars
movies were coming out from Disney, and I had a
theory and I created a channel called Star Wars Theory,
(01:19:53):
and I made one video on my phone just for fun.
I remember I had a pretty bad cold at home
and I was just kind of bored.
Speaker 2 (01:20:00):
I'm like, well, I kind of.
Speaker 14 (01:20:00):
Have this idea, and I figured I just put it
out there into the ether and forgot about it for
three weeks. Checked back and there were a few hundred
views and some comments, and I thought it was amazing
and I was able to connect with other Star Wars
fans around the world, and so I just kept going
from there, and well, nine years later, here we are
one of these.
Speaker 7 (01:20:19):
The story short absolutely and you and I were the
same age and where we were about the same age
when we both were introduced to Star Wars and fell
in love with it, And there's just something so special
about the story. And you talk about this a lot,
especially in the context of Disney purchasing Star Wars over
ten years ago or was it twenty twelve, twenty thirteen
(01:20:39):
thereabouts and twenty twelve, how important the storytelling of Star
Wars really is. That it is about the story, which
in your mind, and I tend to agree Disney has
largely forgotten as it's overseen. Lucasfilm talk to us a
bit about the story dynamic in Star Wars.
Speaker 2 (01:21:00):
Well, the story dynamic is very simple.
Speaker 14 (01:21:02):
It's something that George Lucas created because he just wanted
to see this story play out. And it's a space
opera mainly about family dramas. If you think about it,
you know you have Luke, you have his father, Vader Anakin,
and then you got a sister and then everything else
that ties in there as well. But it's mainly just
about the hero's journey, and that's really what George wanted
(01:21:24):
to tell, which was a farm boy who didn't know
where he belonged. And George says that his favorite scene
in all of Star Wars was when Luke was looking
out to the Twin Suns and wondering where his next
journey was going to be.
Speaker 2 (01:21:36):
Where does he belong? What is his path? What is
his destiny?
Speaker 14 (01:21:40):
And eventually over the trilogy, he finds that path and
he fails a few times along the way, and that's
very realistic to life and storytelling in general, and that's
one reason why it resonated so well with so many
of us. And I feel like today's storytelling through Disney,
they've forgotten that way and they're overcome implicating it and
(01:22:01):
they're just need to make it a little more simple
to what George had it as as, which was just
telling the hero's journey. Now there are some listening.
Speaker 7 (01:22:08):
Who might go, but George Lucas also had the prequel trilogy,
and you and I love the prequel trilogy, A Rod
behind the Glass, same thing. He's also a prequel trilogy fan.
And the three of us grew up in that era
when they came out as kids and teenagers. So what
is your take on the prequel hate that I think
is kind of turning away at least in so far
(01:22:31):
as you have the younger generation at the time that
is up and coming now in age is changing the
narrative and showing a lot more love towards the prequels
and towards hating. Christiansen who played Anakin Skywalker, and you
and McGregor who played Obi Wan, Kenoby and the rest.
Speaker 2 (01:22:51):
You know, we're all aging now.
Speaker 14 (01:22:52):
So the kids that grew up with Jar Jar, you know,
we're now in our thirties and we're now writing the
articles in charge of the narrative. And it's nice to
see because those films I feel like, Wow, they may
not be for everybody, and that's totally fine. They still
were part of George's story and ultimately they were how
George originally thought of Star Wars, which was the fight
(01:23:14):
between Anakin and Obi Wan. It's just he didn't have
the money nor the technology to be able to create
that scene. So I think the prequel trilogy, while it
is quite different from the originals, offers a complete different
stylistic approach to Star Wars and really the overall themes
of Anakin Skywalker, which we didn't get to dive into
(01:23:36):
too much with the original trilogy. I think Vader got
maybe ten or fifteen minutes of screen time in the
entire original trilogy, whereas in the prequels you get to
see Anakin as a boy and going through the different
beats of his life, with what he went through and
why he turned out the way he did from all
the neglect and pressure that was on him.
Speaker 7 (01:23:57):
Star Wars Theory, our guest, he has the large just
YouTube channel four Star Wars content. Just search Star Wars
Theory and it'll come up right there. I want to
ask you one more thing regarding prequels because there is
a lot of criticism and I guess really this goes
back even to the original trilogy of the acting, and
there's especially Hayden Christiansen and how he is in the
(01:24:20):
second and.
Speaker 3 (01:24:21):
Third episodes of Star Wars.
Speaker 7 (01:24:23):
How do you view the acting, because I think most
people haven't heard your take, especially on Hayden Christiansen as
Anakin Skywalker.
Speaker 2 (01:24:34):
So I created this video several years ago, five years
ago or so.
Speaker 14 (01:24:38):
It has a few million views now and it's titled
why Hayden Christensen played Anakin perfectly. I will prove it
to you, And it's quite a long video. It goes
through all of the reasons why he actually played him
quite well and why he actually seems so monotone on purpose,
and this was actually by design. So when I met Hayden,
he actually thanked me for that video personally, because it
(01:24:59):
really he did expose all of the truths as to
his acting and why so many people say it was
so monotone. So George wanted him to speak like this
because it's supposed to be exactly how Vader's cadence is
later on. So the reason Anakin, for example, is supposed
to say yes, my Master, is because Vader says it
(01:25:20):
that way too.
Speaker 2 (01:25:21):
He's a very pressured, confused boy.
Speaker 14 (01:25:25):
The child was a slave and then lost his mother,
and the Jedi said, don't worry about it. Essentially, and
I'm running through about, you know, twenty years of his life.
And he was also known as the poster boy of
the Clone Wars. He was extremely powerful, extremely gifted. They
called him the Chosen One, yet they denied him all
of the abilities and the respect that he should have
(01:25:47):
been given and so this really put a lot of
pressure on him. And whenever he had questions or doubts
from the attachments that he originally had as a slave,
which no other Jedi grew up with, they kind of
just ignored it and said, well, just deal with it.
And so eventually this pressure really started to build over him,
and he broke once he found that father figure, that
(01:26:10):
uncle figure in Palpatine. And so the way Hayden was
acting was to really show that he can't show emotion,
because that is what the Jedi really tried to instill
within him, that he is very volatile, very emotional, but
he can't show any of that. So I feel like
once people see that video, they'll kind of understand a
(01:26:31):
little bit.
Speaker 7 (01:26:32):
Oh yeah, it definitely gives a lot of context and
understanding into what was going on there for George Lucas
as a director and hating Christensen as an actor against
Star Wars theory. Our guest, let's fast forward now to
the Disney era of Star Wars, and as you look
at this and we talked about story and how you
(01:26:52):
feel that the storytelling focus has been deemphasized, I want
to ask you why you think think Disney has approached
Star Wars in the way they have. I mean, to
an extent, they have certainly gone in a direction that
is more political, one might say woke, focused on things.
Speaker 3 (01:27:10):
Like DEI or gender ideology and so forth.
Speaker 7 (01:27:13):
Do you think that they've gone too far into politics
because they have an agenda there or they've lost touch
with where the core fandom is at. How do you
view sort of the motivations behind some of what Disney
has done since they bought Star Wars for what four
billion dollars from George Lucas, Yeah, four.
Speaker 14 (01:27:34):
Billion dollars in some stock options. I believe not a
bad deal for George, but I wish you would have
held on to it. And originally when he signed the
agreement with Bob Iger, which is at all written in
Bob Biger's book, CEO of Disney closed down Disney Parks
and all that, and yeah, Bob Iger owns Disney. And
you know, George gave his treatment for the sequel trilogy
(01:27:57):
and the direction he wanted everything to go Disney. I
had to do something completely the other way. And while
Star Wars, Star Wars has always been political inside itself,
in the world of Star Wars, there isn't any real
world politics in terms of today's politics, you know, politics
that aren't timeless. Everything in Star Wars is timeless. For example,
(01:28:19):
is the good guy versus the big bad guy. You know,
it's the massive empire versus the little rebels, and that
is supposed to be a timeless sort of feat, whereas
today Disney has really radicalized it divided the fandom and
really turned it super political in today's world, which I
(01:28:41):
don't think will last as long as you know, George's
timeless stories of just you know, the big guy versus
little guy kind of thing.
Speaker 2 (01:28:50):
I don't know why they've done that.
Speaker 14 (01:28:51):
It's unfortunate, but I hope that they go back to
the storytelling ways and just focus on the hero's journey.
Speaker 3 (01:28:57):
It is interesting to see these moments.
Speaker 7 (01:29:00):
I don't really want to get so much into politics,
except in so far as a massive corporation where you
have the CEO of Lucasfilm, Kathleen Kennedy the number of
years back saying the force is female and making it.
And I think and you do as well, that women
are and always have been such an integral part of
Star Wars. But that and the fandom my fiance is
(01:29:22):
a massive Star Wars fan. It's one of the things
that we love and share and have in common. And
yet that doesn't mean that you should go into as
some of the shows have done some of these things
with such a focus that's much more on, Like even
in the sequel trilogy with the character of Ray I'm
not even going to say the last name they gave
her at the edge of the third movie in that
(01:29:44):
but where they didn't develop certain aspects of the character
because they were more focused on emphasizing the gender.
Speaker 14 (01:29:51):
And I just don't get that. I don't get that either,
you know. And George said this better than any of
us just a few years ago at an interview. You
can find this on YouTube as well. Just type in
George Lucas talks about girls or women in Star Wars
and he says, you know, it's ludicrous that people say that.
You know, I didn't put women in power in Star Wars.
He said the original trilogy is the main character is
(01:30:14):
mainly Leah.
Speaker 2 (01:30:15):
I mean, she's the one who's leading the whole thing.
She's in charge of the rebellion.
Speaker 14 (01:30:18):
This dopey boy Luke and then this jerk Han solo
essentially and she's the only one with the brains. And
he says, and I think he's nodding, in my opinion
towards what Disney's done or what storytelling today is doing.
That you can't just have a woman in a movie
or in Star Wars and automatically she is everything. She
(01:30:41):
is super powerful. You can't just put a woman in
soup pants and all of a sudden she is the
most powerful being in the story. Women have brains, they
can be ladies, they can wear dresses, they can do
all of these things that they've done traditionally over years.
But they can also be extremely powerful in their own way.
(01:31:01):
They can be extremely intelligent. There's so much more to
a woman than just their gender and throwing them into
a story and expecting them to be the hero. And
George said it perfectly, and I fully believe that when
you articulate a character, male or female, perfectly, and you
give them the hero's journey of trial and error, you
(01:31:21):
will have an audience that is in love with that character.
Whether they are black, white man, woman, alien, robot, it
doesn't matter. If you're able to resonate with that character
and that growth, then you're going to have a successful
IP and unfortunately, I don't think that's being done today.
Speaker 7 (01:31:39):
I want to shift gears here in a second Star
Wars theory. But first, what Star Wars projects? Just real
quickly that Disney has put out do you think have
been either top notch or that you've really enjoyed.
Speaker 14 (01:31:54):
I've really enjoyed. So for the Disney ones, I really
enjoyed Tales of the Jedi. It was an animated film,
animated show which focused on Douku's younger years. I thought
that was really well done. I really enjoyed Mandalorian season
one and two. However they lost me on to the
third one. Besides that, I don't think they've done the
best that they could at all, and I'm hoping that
(01:32:16):
they will definitely take a page from George's books going forwards.
Speaker 7 (01:32:19):
How about Rogue one? And I know you did like
the last six episodes of Andor right. I did enjoy
Rogue one.
Speaker 14 (01:32:28):
But when it comes to Star Wars, I truly do
believe that what makes it extremely exciting is, of course,
you know, the good storytelling, you have to have that,
but it's the force, it's lightsabers, it's action. So you know,
all the other ones are cool and all like Rogue
one and all that, great story, great acting and or
great acting, great story.
Speaker 2 (01:32:48):
Great dialogue.
Speaker 14 (01:32:49):
But when it comes to the heart of it, I
want to see the Jedi. I want to see the Sith.
I want to see lightsabers, I want to see the Force.
And that to me is well one thing that makes
Star Wars very special. It's just a space show, but
done differently than The Acolyte.
Speaker 3 (01:33:03):
But we'll leave that there.
Speaker 7 (01:33:04):
I do want to talk to you Star Wars theory
in a remaining minutes about two quick things.
Speaker 3 (01:33:09):
One is new media.
Speaker 7 (01:33:11):
So I think that when talk radio came to the
fore in the late nineteen eighties here in the USA,
especially with Rush Limbaugh, that was more political and conservative talk,
that was one of the early forms of new media
in the sense that people could access something differently from
the mainstream or the major TV or cable news outlets
(01:33:31):
and what have you, and gave a voice to something
different and in fact, for so many years Rush Limbaugh's
show broadcast right here on KOA. Well, now we have
the rise of YouTube and podcasts and so many other
mediums that are really changing the game, both in terms
of commentary, interviews and discussions about things, but also in
(01:33:51):
terms of video content and fan fictions, where you have
amazing videos of shows and movies that fans create themselves.
You yourself have a project in the works that's a
sequel to your first piece of content that you did
called Vader. Talk to us about why you view new
(01:34:12):
media and its influenced now?
Speaker 14 (01:34:17):
H Well, I mean YouTube and the Internet today, it's
completely changed.
Speaker 3 (01:34:21):
You can have a ten year old that makes the
story on his phone. You know, it's stop action.
Speaker 14 (01:34:30):
Toys, uh, stop stop motion toys, and it's it's quite
revolutionary because you can have anyone now be a director
or exercise that and then get real time feedback from
their audience. So with YouTube, I mean, you could put
up a fan film and get so many people seeing
it and giving you feedback and telling you, hey, like
(01:34:50):
I love this or you know you should change that,
and you might have the next Spielberg from that.
Speaker 2 (01:34:55):
You never know.
Speaker 14 (01:34:57):
So I think today's world, especially with the advancement of AI,
I mean, if you look at YouTube now, there is
so much going on with fan films, and most of
these guys are just teenagers. They're just knowing how to
use the system. This new technology of how to do
prompts and make images and then turn it into some
sort of animation. And quite frankly, it's looking really good,
(01:35:22):
really really good, and you can see the comments underneath.
It doesn't matter what Disney creates anymore, it doesn't matter
what studios create anymore. AI is here and now it's
in the hands of the fans, and so regardless what
you think about it, some of the stuff is actually
more entertaining than.
Speaker 2 (01:35:40):
What's in theaters today.
Speaker 7 (01:35:42):
There are some fascinating examples, and maybe we'll have a
minute where we can get back to AI, but since
we're almost out of time, I want to talk with
you about one other thing that you have done in
the past couple of years Star Wars theory, and that's
what you call theory sabers. So if you go to
like Fan Expo Denver in the summer, you will see
a number of different lightsaber stores, saber shops that get
(01:36:05):
their booths and they're selling their lightsabers. And this year,
for the first time, you had your own for theory
sabers with some really unique lines of lightsabers, including one
by the creator of the lightsaber, the original designer, Roger
Christian and another with the guy Nick Gillard, who was
the choreographer for all of the Lightsaber fights in the
(01:36:27):
prequel trilogy of episode one through three. You've partnered with
him on that too, So talk to us a bit
about sabers and theory sabers.
Speaker 14 (01:36:38):
Well, I mean, yeah, I mean it's first of all,
it's been a huge honor to be able to work
with Roger Christian and Nick Gillard. And we're headed to
San Antonio next week for Space con to do to
do that convention, and we're bringing Nick out with us,
which is going to be the first time that he
gets to meet fans, and we have a saber coming
out with him as well. But it's been it's been
a really amazing journey. I have to say, you know,
(01:37:00):
I was reviewing so many companies sabers for years and
eventually started my own company after doing the due diligence
that I needed to do to make something that was
worthy of putting my brand on it.
Speaker 2 (01:37:13):
And it's been a real great experience so far.
Speaker 14 (01:37:15):
I've really loved going out to conventions, meeting you, meeting
so many other people, and just seeing what we can
do in the saber community and in that world and
what we can offer has been really fulfilling for me
in so many ways. So and it all goes back to,
you know, paying for the fan film, which is I'm
very excited for. It should be out in the next
(01:37:35):
few months.
Speaker 3 (01:37:36):
Here that's Vader Part two. Vader Part two.
Speaker 14 (01:37:39):
The first one got over thirty million views and the
second one is well on the way.
Speaker 7 (01:37:44):
It's going to be amazing if you're looking for unique
and fun Christmas gifts as the holidays come near. What's
the way The website's theory sabers dot com Correct Theoriesabers
dot com.
Speaker 14 (01:37:53):
Yes, we have, in my opinion, the best on the market,
and this comes from a fan who has reviewed pretty
much everyone out there. We have exclusives nobody else has,
and like I said, and we're endorsed by Roger Christian,
the creator himself that worked with George beautiful.
Speaker 7 (01:38:11):
Thank the maker, right. May the Force be with you
Star Wars Theory. We're out of time, but I hope
you'll come back down the line.
Speaker 2 (01:38:17):
Brother. I'd love to.
Speaker 14 (01:38:19):
It's always a pleasure speaking with you, and I hope
you have a great day and may the Force be
with you all.
Speaker 3 (01:38:23):
Thank you all.
Speaker 7 (01:38:24):
Right back at you once again, Star Wars Theory purveyor
of the largest Star Wars YouTube channel with over three
point three million subscribers, joining us here on KOA. I'm
back in the saddle the next couple of days for
Mandy Connell from noon to three, so be sure to
tune in then Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Mandy Connell,
and have a great one.
Speaker 3 (01:38:46):
May God bless America.
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and Injury Lawyers.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
No, it's Mandy Connell and Don.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
On KOA.
Speaker 1 (00:13):
Ninety four one FM.
Speaker 4 (00:15):
Song Guy, you want to say, Kenny's through three many.
Speaker 5 (00:22):
Connell sad base. You hear it, you hear it, you
hear it.
Speaker 6 (00:40):
The Harmonica is a play in which means Jimmy Sagenberger's
in the house filling in for Mandy Connell here on
ko A today, And.
Speaker 7 (00:53):
The question for a rod behind the glasses? Will the
sangon be burgering?
Speaker 5 (00:58):
Brother?
Speaker 3 (00:59):
I hope so.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
I'm saying it will.
Speaker 3 (01:05):
Burgering it is?
Speaker 7 (01:08):
You must Yes, why are we? And thank you for
doing that? A rod bringing in a little Yoda or
Lord Vada?
Speaker 3 (01:18):
Will you come to the seed?
Speaker 2 (01:21):
I have you now?
Speaker 7 (01:22):
Star Wars Voices is because later on in the program
we will have someone crossing over from the land of YouTube. Wow,
I'm looking forward to even more. There's now jar Jar Binks,
who obviously is an underrated.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Character, Darth jar Jar.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Darth jar Jar. He really is the guy behind everything.
Speaker 7 (01:47):
But Star Wars Theory, at more than three point three
million subscribers, is the number one most subscribed YouTube channel,
and he also has a lely successful saber company.
Speaker 3 (02:02):
There are a number of them.
Speaker 7 (02:03):
If you go to Fan Expo Denver, like I did
this past summer. That's why Mandy and I had none
other than Captain Kirk himself William Shatner on the program.
But if you go to Fanexpo or a comic con,
all of these booths with lightsabers that are really cool,
(02:23):
top notch are there selling sabers.
Speaker 3 (02:26):
Well, Theory Sabers is one of those examples.
Speaker 7 (02:30):
And he's also producing fan films that are pretty high
budget and more.
Speaker 3 (02:36):
And he's going to join us at the end.
Speaker 7 (02:38):
Of the show two thirty Live from Canada. He's a
Canadian YouTuber and we're looking forward to this conversation. We'll
talk to some Star Wars, we'll talk new media and
Ai Krim a lot.
Speaker 3 (02:52):
There's a lot to discuss.
Speaker 7 (02:54):
We're gonna cram it into a twenty minute conversation with
Star Wars Theory and get his take on things, including
some of the politics of Hollywood.
Speaker 3 (03:05):
That have in many minds.
Speaker 7 (03:08):
Sullied some of Star Wars. Is that really a big deal.
We'll talk a bit about that with Star Wars Theory
later on. We'll also be joined in studio by former
State Senate President Kevin Grantham, who is a Republican candidate
announced for state treasurer. A good guy, really knows his stuff,
(03:32):
good for the position. Maybe he'll have a shot in
this environment. He'll join us in studio coming up later
on in the program, and we may five six six
nine zero koa common Spirit Health text line. We may
give this listener who just texted in what he or
she wants of more harmonica. You never know, it is
(03:54):
entirely possible that the harmonica will come in while the
saying in is bergeran. And you never know how many
Star Wars voices you will get in the show either,
And I love it that way.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
That's exactly what we need. H more entertainment.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
Do we must do? We must?
Speaker 3 (04:17):
What does that do?
Speaker 2 (04:19):
We must? We must have? Yes?
Speaker 7 (04:24):
Anyway, five six six nine zero KOA comment Spirit Health
text slide if you want to join in to the festivities.
So this is really interesting. Latissa James have gone after
President Trump as Attorney General of New York.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
And made a big.
Speaker 7 (04:48):
Deal out of this case that just really was over exaggerated.
It was drivel. In my opinion, well, now she has
had what one could say is turn about turn about
is fair play, where she has been indicted on allegations
(05:15):
of mortgage fraud. Now one could brush this off and
just say this is President Trump going after his political opponents,
and that's pure and simple what it is.
Speaker 3 (05:28):
But I would suggest that you should consider.
Speaker 7 (05:32):
Something different, a different perspective, maybe from the likes of
Michael Cohen, President Trump's former lawyer and fixer, who notably
broke with the President during the first term, has testified
against him, criticized him bigly, and he was just on
(05:52):
MSNBC in the last couple of days talking about this case,
and I found it really interesting to hear some of
what he had to say.
Speaker 8 (06:01):
Does want to see accountability, There's no doubt about that.
Do I believe, for example, that Tis James will be
held accountable? Absolutely? I said it on your show last time.
Do I think James Calemy will be held accountable?
Speaker 2 (06:14):
Absolutely?
Speaker 8 (06:15):
And I know everybody attacks Lindsey Halligan or she's a
former beauty queen and she doesn't have prosecutorial experience, it
doesn't matter. She has the power of government, you see,
remember something.
Speaker 9 (06:29):
But she doesn't even seem to have the backing of
career prosecutors who are still.
Speaker 3 (06:33):
Working alongside her. Is it not a little concerning to you.
Speaker 8 (06:36):
That they don't want to appear with her put their
names next to this stuff?
Speaker 2 (06:39):
Not the slightest.
Speaker 8 (06:40):
The documents will speak for themselves, and I'm certain that
they have the documents that they need. I said it
on them on a different show, in a different program,
that I believe a first year law student can actually
take these cases to full trial and be successful. Just
think about Tiss James for a second. When you guys
had asked me why I believed to James's next and
(07:03):
why I.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Believe she'll be held accountable.
Speaker 8 (07:06):
She's the chief law enforcement agent here in the state
of New York. And what did she do? She went
after Trump for what for? Misstatements to a bank and
banking fraud? Well, isn't that exactly what they're charging her now?
Speaker 10 (07:25):
With ex.
Speaker 7 (07:30):
I'm sorry, she is very similar, very similar, And yes
it sounds like there has been evidence. But here's the thing,
And it was fascinating hearing Cohen say that you didn't
expect that, and he is a lawyer and he has
a massive grudge against Trump, and there he went with
those comments. But he talked a little bit more about
(07:53):
the prosecutor in this case out of Virginia, replacing one
who refused to pursue a couple of these cases. And
she's also, of course, the US attorney who indicted James Comey,
the former FBI director.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
It's Lindsay Halligan.
Speaker 8 (08:14):
Well, and they will have a case against her once
Lindsay Halligan brings it to a trial. That's the point
I'm trying to make again. Republicans are screaming, yay, go Trump, accountability. Democrats,
of course we're all screaming, Oh, this is political retribution,
this is a political revenge tour. I understand that, but
(08:35):
this is exactly she opened up a Pandora's box if
you think about it, about bringing cases against people for
business flud.
Speaker 7 (08:44):
And the case against Trump was fairly unprecedented.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
Turn about fair play.
Speaker 7 (08:51):
Okay, they found something here that looks like it was
the case.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
Let's pursue it.
Speaker 5 (09:01):
Well.
Speaker 7 (09:01):
Lindsay Halligan was a classmate of mine at Regis University.
We were both students Regius circa Gus. I remember being
in classes with her in twenty ten studying politics. I
think she also studied broadcast journalism, if I recall correctly,
(09:26):
And one of.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
The classes that we had was on the US Supreme
Court and.
Speaker 7 (09:32):
Regis University a very small school, Jesuit liberal arts school,
so it was entirely possible, and indeed it happened that
you could be in a class with just two students,
including yourself. That was us, me and Lindsay Halligan, the
US attorney now prosecuting James Comey and Letitia James. And
(09:57):
it's fascinating to see this unfold, especially when I see
those sexist attacks.
Speaker 3 (10:04):
She was the former beauty pageant contestant.
Speaker 7 (10:06):
In fact, funny little story that I didn't know this
because I didn't know Erica Kirk. It is entirely possible
that at the time she was at Regis we had
classes together. I don't know, I don't remember her, but
there was a time where Lindsay Halligan, Erica now Kirk,
(10:27):
and I were all at Regis University at the same time,
and both of them completed the Miss Colorado I think
it was a Miss Colorado pageant and were within a
couple of rankings of each other in the results. Kind
of fascinating small world going on there. Well, you see
(10:51):
all these sexist attacks against Lindsay Halligan. Oh she's beautiful,
she was a beauty pageant contest and basically she's got
no brains because she didn't He's too good looking or something.
And I think even going back to the days when
we were at Regis that was there was a mentality
of underestimating Lindsay Halligan for those reasons, and especially now
(11:19):
since she is a Republican woman, she's going to be
even more susceptible to sexist attacks that aren't based on
the case itself, but on oh she's too pretty, she
was a beauty pageant contestant.
Speaker 3 (11:33):
What is she doing there?
Speaker 7 (11:35):
She's just there because Trump likes beauty pageant people. And
I think for what fifteen years, in the fifteen years.
Speaker 3 (11:46):
Since I knew her, she's always.
Speaker 7 (11:51):
Been underestimated on some level, and the left would.
Speaker 3 (11:56):
I don't know how.
Speaker 7 (11:57):
Well these cases will pan out, especially the case of
James Comy. That one you really have to have buttoned up.
The Letitia James one looks like, I agree with Michael Cohen,
looks like it has real potential for traction.
Speaker 3 (12:16):
I don't know about James Comy.
Speaker 7 (12:18):
We'll see, but I think that Democrats, and many folks
in the media would be in deep error to underestimate
Lindsay Halligan.
Speaker 3 (12:35):
She was very bright. We had really interesting.
Speaker 7 (12:40):
Discussions on topics related to the courts and the US
Supreme Court and so forth in the particular class where
it was just the two of us and the professor
who ironically would go on to become a big time
never Trump, who was a Republican but went on to
(13:02):
become a big time never Trumper. And I think it's
going to be fascinating to watch all of this pan out.
We'll see what happens. We'll see what happens as time progresses.
But underestimate Lindsey Halligan at your own risk. Let me
(13:23):
tell you, very smart, very savvy, and sharp, and I
think she can be really successful at this role as
US Attorney. Now, speaking of controversies about the President allegedly
overstepping the Insurrection Act, is a possible implementation point for Trump.
(13:48):
He may move forward with implementing the Insurrection Act.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
To address.
Speaker 7 (13:56):
The crime in Chica. I go in Portland, maybe elsewhere.
And this is from a few days ago. It's an
interesting clip of a former Trump administration DOJ official. It
was also critical of trumpet times, Sarah Isker sort of
(14:17):
taking George Stephanopolis to task about the Insurrection Act.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
Listen to this, there have thirty seconds left.
Speaker 11 (14:22):
Do you think it's going to get that far? Is
the president going to invoke the Insurrection Act?
Speaker 9 (14:25):
Nearly half of US presidents have invoked the Insurrection Act
during their terms, some more than once. Donald Trump said
he would do it during his first note.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Over the objections of governors.
Speaker 5 (14:33):
Absolutely.
Speaker 9 (14:34):
Think about Eisenhower and Little Rock. It was absolutely over
the objection of the governor to desegregate the schools the
Insurrection Act. For years, lawyers have been saying this is
far too broad. They warned about it at the beginning
of the Buiden administration. This is the time to change
the Insurrection Act. We missed the opportunity then, And here
we are.
Speaker 3 (14:51):
And here we are. Yeah, she's right.
Speaker 7 (14:55):
It has been used over the objection of governors in
the past, Little Rock being one prime example of how
it was invoked in order to enforce integration.
Speaker 3 (15:08):
In the nineteen fifties.
Speaker 7 (15:11):
At the same time, well, actually, she makes another.
Speaker 3 (15:16):
Very important point.
Speaker 7 (15:17):
It's not just that governors have had their wishes overridden
by the president. In the case of invoking the Insurrection Act.
But she points out that scholars have criticized the Insurrection
(15:38):
Act for being overly broad for a very long time.
Speaker 3 (15:45):
And there's a reason why they would be critical.
Speaker 7 (15:49):
Because it has a great deal of latitude extended to
the president to address emergent circumstances, and so he has
more latitude.
Speaker 3 (16:02):
And that's what should be concerning.
Speaker 7 (16:04):
Is there's a really good chance that this won't be
struck down in court depending on the facts. And at
the same time, I worry deeply, and I talked about
this yesterday filling in for Ross. I worry deeply about
a president deciding, no matter who he is, to take
it upon himself to bring in the National Guard from
(16:27):
another state to help enforce the law in a city
and state that rejects that force, and the idea of
a president trampling upon a state's sovereignty to that extent,
(16:48):
and that way does concern me. But it's not as simple,
is simple and clear cut as some would like to say, Oh,
well this is this is just absurd and there's no
grounds for him to go ahead with the Insurrection Act. Well,
(17:13):
there is latitude there, whether we like it or not.
Now Obama, though, the former president did have some interesting
thoughts in a podcast interview where he sort of mocked
this idea about crime and the insurrection and it's impact
(17:35):
on democracy, and he did so with an example of
if he were president.
Speaker 10 (17:40):
I mean, it's almost too easy of a thought experiment.
If I had sent in the National Guard into Texas
and just said, you know what, a lot of problems
in Dallas. Yeah, I have a lot of crime there,
and I don't don't care what Governor Abbott says. I'm
(18:04):
going to kind of take over law enforcement because I
think things are out of control.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
It is mind boggling to me.
Speaker 10 (18:10):
How oh yeah, Fox News would have responded, Yeah, you know.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
What, He's got a point.
Speaker 7 (18:17):
If the shoe were on the other foot, Republicans would
be going hair on fire.
Speaker 3 (18:21):
What in the world.
Speaker 7 (18:22):
This is an extraordinary breach of presidential authority.
Speaker 3 (18:26):
He's taking this too far.
Speaker 7 (18:28):
And indeed, there were many instances where we cried foul
folks on the right about President Obama going beyond the
powers of the president and being an imperial president, and
rightly so. But it's sort of like this recognition is important.
(18:49):
This is key as we go to the break key.
Every president for decades has in some form of fact
expanded the authority of the president, and the president after
them is building on that. Trump is just more brazen
and vocal about the ways in which he is pushing
(19:12):
the envelope and pushing the limits. But that doesn't mean
that Republicans, if the shoe were on the other foot,
wouldn't be crying foul. And guess what with the next
Democrat president, Republicans will be crying voul.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
So we should be.
Speaker 7 (19:27):
Skeptical no matter where you are about what the president
is doing on a variety of issues. And this is
one example that he may or may not have some
legal ground on, but it deserves a real close look
from whether you're a Trump fan or not as to
whether or not he should do this right.
Speaker 3 (19:45):
Five six six nine zero is.
Speaker 7 (19:47):
The KOA Common Spirit Health text line if you want
to join into the festivities. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for
Mandy Connell, just getting started on KOA. You know what,
I think it's a great day because we we'll talk
Star Wars later and that's always a lot of fun.
(20:08):
Five six six nine zero KAA Common Spirit Health text line.
We are getting a heck of a lot of texts
have been coming in.
Speaker 3 (20:24):
Including this one.
Speaker 7 (20:26):
Pritzker and Walls, that's the governor of Minnesota, are pushing
the envelope. The Democrat Party is pushing the envelope. The
Biden Harris administration pushed the envelope. My orkis push the envelope.
And legal aliens, foreign nationals are pushing the envelope. I
don't disagree with you. You're right they are. They have been.
(20:47):
The question is whether or not having federal troops go
in to help with law enforcement in a city is
the right move, and I am torn on it. I
support it. Here's the thing, and I got.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
The question that came in.
Speaker 7 (21:05):
Is Trump taking over law enforcement or just protecting federal employees,
ice agents, and buildings. That's what was done in Los Angeles,
which was struck down by a judge. Now, he didn't
invoke the Insurrection Act as his authority for this, but
(21:25):
he exercised the power of the president, and the court said, no,
you don't actually have this power.
Speaker 3 (21:33):
It's legal. You got to stop it. But all he
was doing.
Speaker 7 (21:36):
There in Los Angeles was sending National Guard to protect
federal buildings fundamentally and employees outside those buildings.
Speaker 3 (21:48):
And I supported it right here on KOA. I talked
about it.
Speaker 7 (21:54):
How important it was for Trump to be involved there,
but that was in part because the chaos was so real.
It was really bad and intense earlier this.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
Year, and you needed it.
Speaker 7 (22:10):
And in fact I wrote about it in a column
I said this was sensible. But in this case, I
don't see the chaos being the same as it was
in Los Angeles at that time. And my understanding, and
I could be mistaken here, but my understanding is that
he's talking about using the military to actually help with
(22:33):
law enforcement. For yes, federal law enforcement like ice, but
still if they're involved in law enforcement, which is what
you would invoke the Insurrection Act for, that's a different
level from what happened in Los Angeles. And again I'm
not saying that he affirmatively shouldn't do it. What I'm
(22:57):
saying is we need to be really reserved and careful
of this. The idea of sending in the National Guard,
especially from another state to a city and state that
don't want it. Good reminder from a listener as well,
ike being Dwight Eisenhower went into Little Rock to enforce
the Supreme Court order. Trump said he'll go into Chicago
(23:18):
to punish democrats. See the difference. So it's not just
about punishing democrats. In fact, I wouldn't even say that.
It is that it is about addressing crime in some
of these cities where it is extraordinarily bad.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
And we know that's the case in Chicago.
Speaker 7 (23:35):
It has been for a long time and hasn't been
resolved by the feckless leadership there. So there is cause
for saying we need to address this in a much
more vigorous way. The question is should Trump take it
upon himself to do it using the Insurrection Act? And
(23:57):
I guess this morning over on our sister station, KHUM
Michael Brown talked about this and addressed, according to a listener,
all the title ten statutes applicable to what President Trump
is doing. There's no doubt regarding Trump's legality and the
application of the law is the executive.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Based on your discussion, I.
Speaker 7 (24:15):
Think you're not well informed and simply addressing media and
Democrat talking points. Yes, yes, I'm just I'm I'm one
to spew Democrat talking points and that's it.
Speaker 3 (24:26):
That's that's me. That's that's to be saging. Very goot.
Speaker 7 (24:31):
No, see, I think and that's part of the point
from Sarah Isker and what she said in Schooling Stephanopolis, you.
Speaker 12 (24:39):
Were focused on a bogus excuse.
Speaker 7 (24:42):
Me, that's the wrong Stephanopolis clip. Let me here we go.
Speaker 3 (24:48):
I have thirty seconds left.
Speaker 11 (24:49):
Do you think it's going to get that far as
the president in the insurrection of.
Speaker 9 (24:52):
Nearly half of US presidents have in both the Insurrection
Act during their terms, some more than once. Donald Trump
said he would do it during.
Speaker 11 (24:58):
His first note over the objections of governor.
Speaker 5 (25:00):
Yeah.
Speaker 9 (25:00):
Absolutely, think about Eisenhower and Little Rock. It was absolutely
over the objection of the governor to desegregate the schools
the Insurrection Act. For years, lawyers have been saying this
is far too broad. They warned about it at the
beginning of the Buying administration. This is the time to
change the Insurrection Act. We missed the opportunity then, and
here we are.
Speaker 7 (25:17):
That gets to the point of presidential authority that under
the Insurrection Act, Trump likely has this authority.
Speaker 3 (25:24):
I'm not disputing that.
Speaker 7 (25:28):
What I'm focusing on here is whether or not it
should be done.
Speaker 3 (25:35):
Is it wise? Is it the right call to do this?
Speaker 7 (25:39):
And I'm skeptical as a conservative who is wary of
the all knowing, all powerful federal government trampling upon local
estate governments, and I think we should be wary of that.
Speaker 3 (25:58):
Obama had a point when.
Speaker 7 (26:00):
He said, imagine if I did this now, He never
would have done that. He didn't care about addressing crime
in the same way. But nevertheless he had a point.
Republicans would have gone apoplectic if Obama had said, I'm
going to send in the National Guard over the objections
of the Republican governor of Texas and the national Guard,
(26:24):
and one from say New York, the New York National
Guard is.
Speaker 3 (26:27):
Going to go into Dallas.
Speaker 7 (26:31):
As if you are a Republican, you should be very
wary about what the president does, whether he's Trump or Biden,
or Trump or Obama, Bush, Clinton, on on and on
back into history, because it will come back to bite you.
Speaker 3 (26:55):
And by the way, same thing for Congress. Congress is
now they're all it.
Speaker 7 (27:00):
Gosh, look at how much power Trump has taken.
Speaker 3 (27:03):
Look at the tariffs, look at this or that.
Speaker 7 (27:05):
Well, even if Congress had authorized Trump to do these
things with tariffs, that he's done this unconstitutional. Congress cannot
delegate it's called the non delegation doctrine. They cannot delegate
a power given to Congress, which is regarding tariffs full
bore to the president. It's an Article one, section eight.
(27:29):
It's among the powers of the Congress is to impose tariffs.
And even if Congress did say, hey, you can do this,
that would be a breach of the Constitution. And Trump
has not gotten much of the extent of the authority
(27:51):
that he claims to put in place the tariffs that
he has unilaterally. He claims it's a national emergency, he claims, sir,
powers to do this. He doesn't actually have that power,
but he does have some. What he did in the
first term was a lot, and even then Democrats and
(28:12):
some Republicans were pushing back and saying, hey, wait a second,
this is wrong.
Speaker 3 (28:16):
Why are we allowing Trump to do this?
Speaker 7 (28:18):
And then the entire time that Biden was president, they
never tried to rein that in so while Trump is
going beyond what Congress authorized him to do regarding tariffs,
it'd certainly beyond the Constitution.
Speaker 3 (28:30):
They never reigned in.
Speaker 7 (28:32):
Those aspects of tariffs that the president does have the
authority to put in place.
Speaker 3 (28:39):
And that's Congress's fault. Time and time again.
Speaker 7 (28:42):
It's Congress's fault, and they've allowed an imperial presidency to grow.
Whether they're Republican or Democrat, And I'm just saying, you're
a Republican, be careful because the next Democrat president might
just try and do some of the things that Trump
is doing now and kick you the heck off.
Speaker 3 (29:05):
And you know what, you should be ticked off at
that point in time.
Speaker 7 (29:08):
We should also remember what you said and did to
allow that expansion of power in the first place. I'm
Jimmy Sangenberger covering for Mandy Connell today. We'll pick it
up in a bit on KOA. We are getting various texts.
Five sixty six nine zero is the KOA Common Spirit
Health text line.
Speaker 3 (29:26):
I get your point about conservatives being wary.
Speaker 7 (29:28):
My first vote was for Ford and seventy six, Reagan twice,
Trump twice, et cetera.
Speaker 3 (29:34):
I agree with you.
Speaker 7 (29:35):
My However, we will as a country insist on a
dictator after Trump leaves office of this problem is not fixed.
I absolutely do not want a dictator. So don't misunderstand
what I am trying to say. I get what you
are saying, and I appreciate that. I wouldn't go that
(29:55):
far to say that the United States after Trump is gonna.
Speaker 3 (29:58):
Say, well, after four you years of Trump.
Speaker 7 (30:00):
Exercising all kinds of presidential power, we want to have
a dictator take over the country.
Speaker 3 (30:07):
I would go there. I don't think that's what'll happen.
Speaker 7 (30:12):
But the wariness, I mean, Jimmy, after four years of
Democrat law fare, you're tell every Republicans to be careful.
I dare you to say this on air, Republicans, be careful.
I'm sorry I took your dare. And that's not to
say that there isn't a place for it. That's why
I did not say that Trump shouldn't categorically exercise invoke
(30:33):
the Insurrection Act, but that we should be very wary
about that. Maybe there are times where it is called for.
Again in LA I support it at the time, the
use of the military in their limited role to protect
federal buildings because things were going to fill in the
blank with a four letter word. This is a time
(30:54):
where we may and may be called for in certain circumstances.
I don't know, but I'm telling you you need to
be careful because it will in fact come back to
bite you as it already has from the Democrats. This
is why I thank god they haven't gotten rid of
(31:15):
the filibuster, because both.
Speaker 3 (31:19):
Sides are recognized.
Speaker 7 (31:20):
We need that because when we're in the minority, it's critical.
We can't just get rid of it, so we can
ram things through Congress, and thank goodness for that. So
much going on in the world today, including elections, and
I'm not just talking about what's happening over the next
(31:40):
few weeks with the local elections, but the primaries are
underway and that includes a race for state treasurer on
the other side, he's already here. We'll be joined in
studio by former State Senate President Kevin Grantham, who's running
for state treasurer. Keep it here, lots more up ahead,
only one hour under wraps. Two more to go on KOA,
(32:03):
Jimmy and for Mandy.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and Injury Lawyers.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
No, it's Mandy connellyn.
Speaker 3 (32:15):
On KOA.
Speaker 1 (32:18):
Ninety four one FM.
Speaker 5 (32:19):
So God wait.
Speaker 4 (32:23):
Theny three by Connell keeping sad.
Speaker 5 (32:44):
Time.
Speaker 7 (32:45):
Now for the second hour, Jimmy Sanging Burger in for
Mandy Connell, the saying is Burger and his a Rod says,
and the harmonica is a blowing Which is that signal?
But I think man, and he's like, it's the bat
signal for sure. There we go and now here in studio.
(33:08):
He's the former president of the Colorado State Senate and
now a glunding for punt.
Speaker 2 (33:14):
No, he's doing the right thing.
Speaker 7 (33:16):
He's stepping up at a running for treasurer for the
Republican nomination for state treasurer. Kevin Grantham joins me here
in studio because he happens to be in the area.
Speaker 2 (33:26):
Welcome, sir, Well, thank you, Jimmy. Good to be here.
Speaker 3 (33:28):
I'm glad this could work out.
Speaker 2 (33:30):
Good to have you here. Good to be here.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
So let's just start right from the tap. Who is
Kevin Grantham?
Speaker 7 (33:36):
And why in the world this crazy environment we're in
do you want to be state treasurer?
Speaker 13 (33:41):
Well, let me start with that one. Why do I
want to do this? To be perfectly honest, Jimmy, I
we need good candidates. We need good, solid candidates running
for these positions, regardless of what has happened in prior cycles.
And I'm a great candidate, Honestly, I bring the know
how to this job. I bring the background to this job.
(34:04):
I've sat in those seats in the legislature. I sat
on the JBC, sat in the President's chair, and was
in the state Senate for eight years, city council for
three years. I've been a county commissioner for five years now. Hey,
I bring a lot of know how to this job
when it comes to budgeting and to money.
Speaker 3 (34:23):
Talk to us for a moment then about the role
of the treasurer.
Speaker 7 (34:28):
What that entails from your experience being a central piece
to why you're that candidate that should be in the
role come twenty twenty six or twenty twenty seven, I'll.
Speaker 13 (34:41):
Tell you what that experience, you know, leading it into
the treasure's race. You know, we're talking about the treasury,
the taxpayer dollars of the state of Colorado, all the taxpayers,
what they pay in every year going into the treasury,
how that is invested, how that is we're looking for
the best bang for the buck for the taxpayers of Colorado,
(35:04):
and how that money is invested. It's not to be
used as your own little playhouse for dealing money out
to your buddies in their companies. This is to be
an objective criteria of how we invest our dollars, and
I think my experience gives me the best experience to
(35:24):
do that.
Speaker 7 (35:25):
With the Joint Budget Committee and having served on that
committee and understanding the ins and outs of the budgeting role,
what insights does that give you to understanding the machinations
of jay to day accounts and so forth, And also
potentially in terms of being a bully pulpit, especially when
(35:49):
quite frankly, the Democrats are going to continue to run
the legislature, very good chance that they'll still have the
Democrat wills a Democrat is governor with that environment, how
import would it be to have a Republican with that?
Know how, from the experience of the JBC, I'd like
to talk to you to talk about as a treasure.
Speaker 2 (36:07):
No, I think that's a great point, Jimmy.
Speaker 13 (36:09):
I having that experience sitting in the JBC, sitting in
the President's chair, in fact, both of those give great
weight to the bully pulpit that is the treasure's office.
Of course, the Democrats, the current Democrat and they want
to be Democrats to go into that position. None of
(36:30):
them will take on the governor, None of them will
take on the legislature. I have to know how I
have the experience to be able to stand up in
that pulpit and tell people how it is, and using
that experience of state budgeting, using that experience of running
the Senate as a Senate president, being able to stand
(36:53):
in that pulpit and actually speak out against the overspending,
the mismanagement of the state by the current governor and
the current legislature and probably, as you said, the future legislature.
Speaker 7 (37:06):
Yeah, Kevin Grantham joining us here in studio, candidate for
State Treasurer in the Republican nomination. Let's talk for a
moment about the office in its size, because look, when
we look at government, we like to have it, especially
if you're on the smaller government side, lean and me
(37:27):
in which means you don't need to have an extensive
staff in an office like the state Treasurer's office.
Speaker 3 (37:34):
So how.
Speaker 7 (37:37):
Has that office changed since we had a Republican in
the treasurer's seat.
Speaker 2 (37:44):
So just a little background on that.
Speaker 13 (37:45):
Walker Stapleton was the treasurer from twenty eleven through twenty eighteen.
In those eight years, Walker's office grew from thirty one
full time equivalent employees to thirty two, a opping one
employee increase. Over the last seven years, the current treasure
(38:06):
has increased his office from thirty two to sixty one.
That's a ninety four percent increase in that office. And
just some anecdotal notes on this, I actually just had
this conversation with this lady at lunch where she actually
has called three separate times to the Treasure's office for
(38:27):
her unclaimed property Trust Fund money and she can't even
get a callback. Now, you would think with an increase
of ninety four percent employees that you would get a
callback after three calls. There is not the additional service
certainly that you're seeing from that office. So the real
question is what in the world are you doing with
sixty two employees instead of thirty two employees?
Speaker 7 (38:51):
Nothing? The answer is nothing. It really doesn't make sense.
That's nearly double, nearly double, and that's in six years. Jimmy,
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but yeah, that's six years.
Last year he asked for another eight and a half employees,
but was denied by the JBC because they were trying
to cut back in all the departments. To their credit,
would you advocate then scaling back that number being like,
(39:16):
I understand I don't like letting people go, but this
office is much bigger than it needs to be. I'm
going to do an audit in the first handful of
months figure out who, what positions are needed, and which
ones that have been.
Speaker 3 (39:29):
Added since Stapleton was in office can go.
Speaker 13 (39:34):
I mean, that's the that's the simple, down and dirty
of exactly how things would go.
Speaker 10 (39:39):
What you go.
Speaker 13 (39:39):
What you don't want to do is go into an
office and and just take the hatchet to it. You
want to you want to look at it carefully, see
what job, what positions are necessary, and start scaling back
from there. Perhaps there's folks that are ready to retire,
Perhaps there's folks that are looking for a political reason
to get out, and maybe that happened. Not going to
(40:01):
go in with a hatchet, but we are going to
be looking to streamline that office much like it used
to be.
Speaker 7 (40:08):
Kevin Grantham running for State Treasurer joining us here in studio.
Let's talk for a moment about the budget itself and
how it has grown dramatically in the past several years.
Of course, we've seen population increase in Colorado, although that
rate has slowed more recently, But it is outrageous to
(40:29):
me how much money they have been spending, how many
new programs and initiatives on the state level, and they
constantly are pleading poverty. Oh my gosh, we got undue
tabor so that we can be able to afford all
the new things that we put in place. As someone who,
as you talked about, would use the bully pulpit of
the Treasurer's office to talk about fiscal responsibility, how do
(40:51):
you look at that growth and spending in the state.
Speaker 13 (40:54):
Well, one of the things I would point out, just
like in this last session, the mantra was there was
a one point two billion dollar shortfall. If you hadn't heard,
there's a one point two billion dollar shortfall. Oh yeah,
And if you hadn't heard, there's a one point two
billion dollar shortfall, that was the mantra.
Speaker 10 (41:11):
Right.
Speaker 13 (41:11):
Yes, The reality is the state budget from two years
ago went from forty billion to forty four billion. They
increased the budget by four billion dollars. Actually it was
a little bit under four billion, but point being made,
the the budget increased almost four times what they said.
(41:36):
There was a shortfall of and so we're talking about
government math we deal with this on the federal level,
we deal with this on the state level, and in
almost every level. They're talking about the the increases they
wanted to have. If they had the increases they wanted,
they would have had a forty five point two billion
dollar budget instead of forty four. There was no real
(41:57):
cuts there that had to be made. They were still
increasing the budget. People need to remember that while they
were crying about cuts, about having to go into this
austerity measures and things like that, it's it's poppycock. The
reality is the budget still grew significantly. Four billion dollars, Jimmy,
(42:21):
four billion dollars.
Speaker 3 (42:22):
It is absolutely astonishing.
Speaker 7 (42:24):
Let's talk about one of the ways in which the
state has tried to claim more money, and that's by
going in and dipping into the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund.
So this fund where you have your unclaimed property.
Speaker 1 (42:38):
You may go.
Speaker 7 (42:39):
Online, you can see, oh, that's mine, I'm going to
go claim that and say it's mine, And they have
dipped into that. Talk about this because most people aren't
aware of a lot of people aren't even aware of
the Unclaimed Property Fund. But let alone this aspect of
the legislature saying, oh, you know, what that's sort of
a money pot we can dip into a fuel.
Speaker 13 (43:00):
So this is one of the responsibilities of the State
treasure They are to be the overseer there, to be
the caretaker, the trustee of this Unclaimed Property Trust fund.
This is money that has been lost by people, maybe
unknowingly they've left a deposit at a bank or something,
(43:23):
an account that closed that ended up having money still
left over in it, but then it can't be traced
back to the individual. That's what makes up all this
Unclaimed Property Trust Fund. And so it's a significant amount
of money, to the tune of well hundreds of millions
of dollars billions of dollars. It's a large, large fund.
So people can go and find that money. You go
(43:47):
on the website, you go in, put your name and
it'll tell you whether or not your name is listed
there as one of the owners of this money. Well,
that is, like you said, a big pot of money,
which is when they're talking about trying to make up
a shortage of one point two billion dollars, you know
they're going to go after big chunks of money to
try to shorten that stack. And what they do is
(44:10):
they go in and they make a loan. The Treasure
makes a loan to the legislature of millions of dollars,
but it's interest free. Meanwhile, the Treasure is paying interest
on that money to that property owner. So the legislature
gets a zero percent interest rate loan on money that
(44:30):
we are paying interest on.
Speaker 2 (44:33):
That doesn't make sense.
Speaker 13 (44:35):
Well, the bottom line is it's called a raid, the
raid of the Unclaimed Property Trust Fund, and that is
money that doesn't belong to the legislature, doesn't belong to
the governor, doesn't belong to the state. It belongs to
the people, and that is a raid of private Wait.
Speaker 7 (44:50):
A second, Kevin Grantham, Come on, now, the General Assembly
doesn't care about what money belongs to the people and
what does. If they did, they would say, we never
want to touch tabor, We want to keep it exactly
as it is. But that's not the case there, just
as it's not the case here with the Unclaimed Property Fund.
Speaker 2 (45:10):
And they wouldn't want to touch any of the cash
funds as well.
Speaker 13 (45:12):
That money again that comes from fees, come from licensures
and things like that. They wouldn't touch those either, but
they do because they're not looking to cut expenses. They're
looking to find cash windfalls in order to give the
short term budget balancing.
Speaker 7 (45:30):
Now, a listener texting in, that's the great Colorado payback.
It is right right, Okay, thank you for asking that,
because that's how a lot of people would and honestly, it's.
Speaker 2 (45:40):
A great thing to know about.
Speaker 13 (45:42):
It the Missing Money dot Com or you can text
or google that what you just said, the Unclaim Property
Trust Fund and you can go on there and find it.
Speaker 2 (45:53):
And you should miss money, your money. This is your money, exactly.
Speaker 3 (45:58):
Kevin Grantham joining us here in studio.
Speaker 7 (46:00):
One of the rows of the State Treasurer is overseeing
the state's investments and this is critical for a variety
of reasons. I think they're pretty self explanatory as well
as to what those reasons would be why it's important,
but talk to us about prudence in the investments that
the state makes.
Speaker 3 (46:19):
So there's a.
Speaker 13 (46:22):
It's one of those things that you would expect, you know,
the public to know. You know, I always tell folks,
I bet you didn't wake up this morning wondering what
the state treasure was doing with your money. Nobody thinks
about the State treasure right, but one of the things
that they do. That is so critical for us is
all that money that you're paying in taxes, all that
(46:42):
money that comes into the state, that big ball of
money is what's being used and invested by the treasury
in order to get the best bang for the buck
for the tax payer and that return on money. Where
we find a current dan right now is that there
are some of the candidates that are talking about using
(47:05):
this money as their own personal little playground in order
to help the buddies out here and help their buddies
out there, instead of looking at the objective use of
that money and investments.
Speaker 2 (47:17):
In order to get the best bang for the buck.
Speaker 7 (47:22):
And so, how do you really assess the way in
which the investments have been made and how that's been
overseen in recent years, for example by state Treasury devion.
Speaker 13 (47:33):
Sure much of that is driven by state statute. I mean,
the legislature can come in and say you will do this,
and the treasure has to comply with that. Currently, some
of the things being proposed are not in statute, and
so there would have to be this effort by the
treasury in that situation to direct him to give it
(47:55):
to their cronies here and hither and yon and not
looking at the best investments right now, they're directed to
look at the best objective investments for the state, and
you get the best experts that can can look at
those things and examine those things and find the best
places to get that return on the investment.
Speaker 7 (48:17):
The public pension program, it just got a few minutes
left with our guest in studio, Republican candidate for State Treasurer,
Kevin Grantham. The Public Pension Program PARA, speaking of investments,
has had so many problems, Like financially, it is not
in good shape, and there's always band aids that get
put on by the legislature to just sort of be
(48:39):
able to kick the can down the road. While at
some point there will be an issue that flares up
and it's not going to be something you can just
put a band aid on. You need to have something
more significant, at least that's my view. How do you
look at and maybe you can talk a little bit
about where you see PARA at this moment and what
may or may not need to be fixed changed in
(49:00):
the future.
Speaker 2 (49:01):
That is, that's one of the toughest issues in the States.
Want something we.
Speaker 13 (49:05):
Dealt with over and over again, year over year. When
I was in the legislature, we made significant progress on that.
Back in twenty eighteen, my last year as president, Senator
Jack Tate ran a piece of legislation that ever reformed. Yeah,
and I got to tell you that that was a
that was a great effort in moving the ball forward
(49:25):
on I don't want to say saving PARA, but pretty
close to that. There's still a lot of work to do.
And I think when we start looking at the the
you know, the contributions of current employees. The one thing
I should back up one thing that want to make
very clear the promises that we made to our retirees.
(49:49):
And this is close to my heart because we have
all those doc employees down there in Canyon City and
all the teachers and everybody else that relied on the
promises made for PARA. Keep those promises we need, but
we in order to do that, we need to make
sure there is a pension there at the end of
the day so that they can receive that promise from
(50:12):
the Colorado State taxpayer. But there's got to be more
accountability on how much goes in by the current employees
to make sure that there's that system and system in
place at the end of their employee life. And we
also have to make sure that there's enough buy in
from the state, and that's a tough thing to sell. Yeah,
(50:35):
but it's going to take some some people backing off
of their current positions in order to get to the
point where we can save that.
Speaker 3 (50:44):
I understand that.
Speaker 7 (50:45):
But Kevin Grantham, with the Democrats in charge of the legislature,
how is it even possible to get there? I mean,
is it going to take pressure from the public that says, hey,
we need to address this, requires an outspoken treasurer in
that respect, or.
Speaker 3 (51:02):
How do you accomplish that?
Speaker 8 (51:04):
Well?
Speaker 13 (51:04):
I mean that is going to be one of the
roles of the treasure in that bully pulpit. They are
a member of the paraboard the car to State treasure
is a member of that board, and so there is
that bully pulpit there to hold those folks accountable for
the decisions that they make. Plus the bully pulp on
on the outside, just like you were talking about. Unfortunately,
in order to turn public far enough in order to
(51:27):
drive the legislature in a particular direction would require something
that may be catastrophic with the fund and we need
to fix it before we.
Speaker 3 (51:39):
Get there without a doubt.
Speaker 7 (51:40):
Kevin Grantham, candidate for State Treasurer in studio.
Speaker 3 (51:44):
We are at a time.
Speaker 7 (51:45):
Let me ask you for any final thoughts and also
please let folks know where can we go to learn
more about you and your campaign.
Speaker 13 (51:53):
Kevin Grantham dot com. Simple website Kevin Grantham dot com.
A little bit about me, just real quick. I'm a
real estate appraiser. I'm also a I grew up in
southeast Colorado in Ordway, Crowley County. Grew up as a
hog farmer, so that's why I know how to cut
pork beautiful. Now we want to stay treasurer who can
(52:13):
cut pork properly.
Speaker 2 (52:14):
There we go.
Speaker 13 (52:16):
And tell you what, folks, I care about my state.
I want the state back that I grew up in.
I'm a native Colorado and I want that for my kids.
I want that for my kids' kids and everybody else's
children and grandchildren. I want our state back. I want
it stable. And the financial outlook on our state right
now is kind of bleak, and we need some serious
(52:38):
people in these roles that are willing to make serious,
tough decisions and I'm that guy.
Speaker 3 (52:44):
Kevin Grantham, thanks so much for joining us on KOA,
glad to have you in studio.
Speaker 2 (52:48):
Thank you, sir. We're going to take a break more.
Speaker 3 (52:50):
On the other side.
Speaker 7 (52:51):
Jimmy sangen Berger in for Andy Connell and KOA. Sometimes.
I bet, hey, Kenon, we just had Kevin Grantham in
studio for the last half hour.
Speaker 3 (53:00):
I bet that if you.
Speaker 7 (53:06):
Run for office in this state and you're a Republican
running statewide, especially, sometimes it feels like you've been tied
to the whipping post, doesn't it. I wish he was
still here and I could ask him about that very
question again. Jimmy in for Mandy and I don't get it. Earlier,
listener texted Allman Brothers not even the top twenty five?
Speaker 3 (53:29):
Are you kidding me?
Speaker 7 (53:32):
The Allman Brothers consistently had some of the best quality,
top notch musicians, from Dwayne and Greg Alman and Dicky
Betts in the early days on through in their last incarnation,
Derek Trucks.
Speaker 3 (53:53):
And Warren Haynes. I don't get it. How can you
say that?
Speaker 7 (54:00):
And not only that, they had some phenomenal songs that
will forever live in the pantheon of blues, classic rock,
Southern rock, tremendously influential. Heck, I have two cousins who
are the Sangenburger Family's massive my dad's number nine of
(54:21):
ten kids, and I have a cousin Jessica and a
cousin Melissa, and both of them named after the Alman
Brothers songs of those names many A, Jessica and Many
and Melissa and Many and and Elizabeth have been named
after Almen Brothers song. So there you go again, Jimmy
in for Mandy on Koa Stirring the Pot and check
(54:47):
out the live version from seventy one at the film
More of Women post if you haven't gotta love it.
So we are in one of those crazy environments where
you never know what will happen, and that includes how
the media is going to be treated over the weekend.
On Sunday, George Stephanopolis shut down Vice President JD. Vance
(55:15):
at the end of their interview where he spent several
minutes that's what seemed like several minutes talking about Tom Homan,
the President's czar, a border zar, and allegations that he
had accepted a bribe of fifty thousand dollars from the
(55:35):
FBI that was trying to entrap him. There's no criminal proceedings.
There's no indication that he actually violated the law. Anything
of that sort may have been unethical. I don't have
enough details about it, but apparently not illegal. Needless to say,
here is how that interview ended.
Speaker 3 (55:53):
You were focused on a bogus story.
Speaker 12 (55:55):
You're insinuating criminal wrongdoing against a guy who has done
nothing wrong, instead of focusing on the fact that our
country is struggling because our government's shut down. Let's talk
about the real issues, George. I think the American people
would benefit much more from that than from you going
down some weird left wing rabbit hole where the facts
clearly show that Tom Holman didn't engage in any criminal wrongdoing.
Speaker 11 (56:18):
It's not a weird left wing rabbit hole. I didn't
insinuate anything. I asked you whether Tom Holman accepted fifty
thousand dollars, as was heard on an audio tape recorded
by the FBI in September twenty twenty four, and you
did not answer the question.
Speaker 3 (56:30):
Thank you for your time this morning till I said that.
Speaker 2 (56:33):
I don't up next We'll be right.
Speaker 7 (56:34):
So he ended with a dig No, I'm going to
clarify this, and then the Vice President of the United
States is there trying to jump in and provide a
defense slash clarification of what he was saying, and boom,
it was just ended.
Speaker 3 (56:50):
Well, that is ruffled feathers.
Speaker 7 (56:51):
Including from the President of the United States, who yesterday
did this.
Speaker 8 (56:56):
First of all, congratulations takes questions from ABC fact just
what you did with Stephanopoulos to the Vice President of
the United States.
Speaker 11 (57:04):
I don't take questions from ABC fakes Brian, go ahead, yes.
Speaker 7 (57:09):
No longer taking questions from ABC fake news.
Speaker 3 (57:13):
We'll see how long that lasts.
Speaker 7 (57:16):
I don't think Trump should hold that exchange with Stephanopolis
against every reporter at ABC News.
Speaker 3 (57:24):
But what are you gonna do. It's Trump.
Speaker 7 (57:27):
It's the way he is with the media, the way
he feels toward the media. But here's the instance of
chastising or restricting or doing something against the media that
I think is well, it's beyond the pale.
Speaker 3 (57:47):
I don't get it. Washington Examiner.
Speaker 7 (57:50):
President Donald Trump on Tuesday floated moving the White House
press corps across the street after the media largely rejected
the Pentagon's new restrictions the President noted to reporters that
the press used to be located across the street years ago,
when news outlets had less access to the White House.
(58:11):
He then pivoted to defending War Secretary Pete Hegseth's restrictions.
Speaker 3 (58:16):
Now, what are these restrictions well, Also from.
Speaker 7 (58:19):
The Examiner, an overwhelming majority of reporters who cover the
Pentagon are set to hand in their credentials on either
Tuesday or Wednesday instead of signing a new mandated policy
that outlets argue is inconsistent with freedom of the press.
The Washington Examiner is among more than thirty five media
(58:42):
outlets that have publicly said they will not sign the pledge.
The reporters from those outlets will continue to cover the
Department of War, but will do so from afar now.
One America News Network is the only media outlet to
publicly say they will sign it. We do not plan
to sign the Pentagon document. The Washington Examiner does not
(59:05):
sign agreements with people we cover in our reporting in
any other area, and we do not plan to make
an exception in this case. The Department of War will
set its rules, and we will continue to provide our
readers with strong independent news reporting. Washington Examiner editor in
chief Hugo Gerdon said in a statement. The War Secretary
(59:26):
Pete Hegseth argued on social media Monday that the policy
will no longer allow reporters to quote Rome free in
the Pentagon, will require the press to wear a visible badge,
and credentialed press is no longer permitted to solicit criminal acts.
Speaker 3 (59:44):
The policy notes that any solicitation.
Speaker 7 (59:46):
Of DOW personnel to commit criminal acts would not be
considered protected activity under the First Amendment. In other words,
the press has been able to get unauthorized tips on
things from people. I mean, it's the same thing with
the War Department now or other departments. And heck Steth
(01:00:08):
is cracking down on that, and the way that he's
gone about it has gotten opposition from Fox News, from Newsmax,
from the Washington Examiner. Trump threatening to kick out reporters
as a result of their pushback, and don't do this.
Speaker 3 (01:00:29):
This is wrong.
Speaker 7 (01:00:29):
This is trampling upon the freedom of the press. And
there's a reason why One American News is the only
one in the White House Press Corps that is signing
this and contributing or willing to go along with it,
and it stands to reason that they would be because
they won't challenge Trump on anything, and you needed a challenge,
whether you agree with him or not. I voted for
(01:00:51):
the guy three times. I'll challenge him. You hear it,
And I've been doing that already on the show today.
But this is not except very disappointing in this regard.
Shulmy sangen Berger in for Mandy Connell, don't go anywhere.
It's KOA Tomorrow. Ryan Schuling will be filling in for
(01:01:11):
Ross Kiminski and at ten forty five he'll have an
exclusive interview with Texas Senator Ted Cruz ten forty five
tomorrow right here on KOA amid the government shutdown and more.
That should be a great conversation Ryan Schooling in for
Ross Kiminski with Senator Ted Kruz.
Speaker 3 (01:01:32):
Now, I want to go back to this freedom of
the press story.
Speaker 7 (01:01:36):
That Fox News, the Washington Examiner, Newsmax, every outlet of
thirty five but one American News has said we're not
going to sign a pledge that the Secretary of War
has asked and that the President is underscoring and saying
(01:01:57):
I'm going to enforce that would strict to the press's
ability to report on the Pentagon. Only authorized stories, only
authorized information. All of that can be provided to the press,
and you must agree to it in essence, is what
it comes down to.
Speaker 3 (01:02:14):
And here is.
Speaker 7 (01:02:19):
Something A listener texted at five six sixty nine zero
koa common spirit health text line back to putting the
shoe on the other foot. Obama allowed to spy on
the media. I agree with the Pentagon taking its position
after repeated leaks and fake news. Get over it, Jimmy,
the MSM is a joke. Foxes in the pot too. Well,
(01:02:40):
guess what let's speak about MSN. You're a MSM.
Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
You're right.
Speaker 7 (01:02:45):
Mainstream media has failed time and time again, without a doubt,
they continue to fail, They continue to lie.
Speaker 3 (01:02:53):
In mislead and all of that.
Speaker 7 (01:02:55):
That doesn't mean that government gets to say we are
now the arbiters of truth and if you don't allow
us to, if you don't follow our restrictions on what
you can report, then we got a problem with you. No,
that's unacceptable, no matter where you are. And guess what
when Obama spied on the media, specifically James Rosen, the
former Fox News reporter, it was resoundingly condemned by the
(01:03:22):
White House Press Corps, and the New York Times editorial
board even published an editorial criticizing this. The Washington Posts
and a columnist Fox News commentator brid Hume the Freedom
of the Press Foundation.
Speaker 2 (01:03:39):
On and on it went.
Speaker 7 (01:03:41):
There was a unified front that that was unacceptable and
wrong from the press, and even the left wing mainstream
media joined in on the condemnation and pushed back. So
here the shoe is on the other foot, and kudos
to them left and right. The Press Corps is standing
(01:04:03):
by what journalism is about, which is reporting on what
is happening and not reporting only on the things pre
screened by the all knowing, all powerful federal government or
any other government entity. You think I'm going to get
a story for my columns in the Denver Gazette and
(01:04:26):
in the next hour, we're gonna start it off by
talking about today's column Jeffco Teachers' Union failed to vet
its cleanup crew. Do you think I'm gonna go to
Jeffco Schools, or to Denver Public Schools, or to the
City of Lakewood or the governor or any other entity
(01:04:47):
and say, hey, is this an approved story? And then
I'm going to cover it.
Speaker 3 (01:04:53):
Hell no, absolutely not. That's not journalism.
Speaker 7 (01:04:57):
That's something creeing favor with whatever, for government agency or
entity you're trying to report on.
Speaker 3 (01:05:06):
It's unacceptable.
Speaker 7 (01:05:07):
And kudos to a United Frontier, as with James Rosen
circa twenty thirteen when the press corps pushed back on
the Obama administration's spine, which, by the way, I think
Obama would like you to forget about that when he
talks about freedom of the press.
Speaker 3 (01:05:23):
That's for darn shore.
Speaker 7 (01:05:25):
I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell, our number three
up ahead as we continue on KOA.
Speaker 1 (01:05:31):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury lawyers.
Speaker 2 (01:05:36):
No, it's Mandy Connell.
Speaker 5 (01:05:41):
On KOAM ninety four one FM.
Speaker 4 (01:05:46):
God can the ninety three many Connell keeping sad thing.
Speaker 5 (01:06:13):
Lay in final hour?
Speaker 7 (01:06:15):
Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell. If you couldn't tell
from the harmonica playing there, Good to be with you,
good to have a rod behind the glass as always,
And look I'm here for three days. I was in
for Ross the last couple of days. Now I'm in
(01:06:35):
for Mandy today through Friday. Very glad to have you
along for the ride. Be sure, by the way to
check out my website. You are one stop shop for
all of the content, including my columns like today's column,
which we'll get to in just a moment in the
Denver Gazette at Jimmy Singenberger dot com. Keep in mind,
(01:06:57):
there's no AI or you in so it's all ease
all the time. Once you know that, sang in Berger
is easy. So the school board and teachers Union blues, Oh,
it happens all over the place, especially in Colorado. They're
(01:07:18):
playing the blues and they might not even realize it,
but they probably do over the course of the last
several days in Jeffco schools because in August, the Jefferson
County Education Association the JCEEA, that's the union there, endorsed
Peter Gibbons, Tina Mouenian if I pronounced that right, and
(01:07:45):
Michael Yoakum for Jeffco's school board in this falls election,
proudly branding them the cleanup crew. It was a curious
label because every member of the current board was and
is already union backed, So cleaning up who's mess exactly?
(01:08:10):
It turns out that they have a mess of their own.
Last week, it was revealed that Yoakum and Michael Yoakum,
twenty six, has a sealed juvenile record for sexual offenses.
Speaker 3 (01:08:35):
Committed at age twelve.
Speaker 7 (01:08:39):
This revelation has hit a district that has already been
reeling from more than thirty different sexual misconduct scandals, including
your recall.
Speaker 2 (01:08:49):
Beginning of the year.
Speaker 3 (01:08:51):
I remember talking with Mandy about this quite a bit.
Speaker 7 (01:08:55):
When the chief of Schools, who I believe is the
number three position in Jeffco, David Weiss, was investigated for
child pornography before taking his own life over New Year's
And that's just one of many instances you've heard about
it here on KOA that have been going on in
Jeffco schools. So enter the union's latest vetted candidate. On Monday,
(01:09:20):
union leadership withdrew their endorsement. They said that they had
no idea about Yoakam's sealed court record until it became public. Quote,
this issue did not come up in the questionnaire, interview
or the vetting process, the union stated, adding that the
information was quote not disclosed to JCA during the recommendation process. Really,
(01:09:48):
so Paragroup jeffco Kids first blew the whistle last week
on This was the first to.
Speaker 3 (01:09:55):
Call attention to it, and in their response they.
Speaker 7 (01:09:57):
Called the withdrawal of vital step forward, but slammed the
union for blaming an omission during the vetting process.
Speaker 3 (01:10:05):
Now, Yolkum was recorded in a conversation at a.
Speaker 7 (01:10:08):
Candidate forum late last month, I think on the twenty
ninth of September or he acknowledged, quote to be perfectly honest,
when I was twelve years old, there was a deferred
adjudication that removed everything. They called it a mistake that
helped him learn and grow, and he was very young
at the time, of course, But when asked about the
(01:10:30):
issue days later at a forum, he claimed that there
is quote nothing that would preclude me from running.
Speaker 3 (01:10:37):
In this race.
Speaker 7 (01:10:40):
He also claimed that he had spoken with the victims
and that they were okay with his run. But a
verified close family friend with detailed knowledge of the incidents,
who I spoke with and asked for anonymity, disputed the account,
and this family friend added quote, I believe in rehabilitation
he could very well be an upstanding citizen, but I
(01:11:04):
don't think that he should be in a position of
authority with our kids. I can't help but wonder why
he would want such close contact with so many Maybe
not individual contexts, but the ability to do so, to
be in the position of trust.
Speaker 3 (01:11:20):
This has to do with kids now.
Speaker 7 (01:11:24):
Yoakam was on an advisory committee at Warren Tech at
Jeff Coast School. Apparently he's been removed from that advisory committee,
but a constituent he'd emailed Yokum urging him to quietly
drop out of the race on September thirtieth, of course,
is not even now, and then afterwards had alerted his
(01:11:49):
campaign manager, Yoakam's campaign manager, Katie Winner, the next day.
Speaker 3 (01:11:53):
Now, Katie Winner.
Speaker 7 (01:11:57):
Is an important name because she manages all the Union
back Jeff Co campaigns and as the designated filing agent
for candidates Gibbons and Moullenian from August fourteenth until the thirteenth,
just a couple of days ago, when the Union finally
pulled its support from Yokum, she was the designated agent.
Speaker 3 (01:12:20):
So two weeks that's how long it took.
Speaker 7 (01:12:24):
After campaign manager Katie Winner was tipped for the Union
to withdraw support two weeks later, they would withdraw support
after the issue went public and scrutiny intensified. Now when
the union put out their statement, they didn't say if
they were going to seek refunds of the eight thousand
dollars that the JCEA had donated to Yoakam or the
(01:12:45):
additional three thousand plus that the Colorado Education Association contributed.
I had emailed questions to Yoakum and copied Winner and
also the union over the weekend, and I got no response.
Now I have to let you know that this is
not the first rodeo for affiliated unions with the Colorado
(01:13:09):
Education Association. In June of twenty twenty one, the Denver
Union the Denver Classroom Teachers Association admitted that it knew
of sexual assault allegations against then board member Tay Anderson
when it endorsed him in twenty nineteen, DCTA, the Denver Union,
and the Colorado Education Association still poured sixty five thousand
(01:13:34):
dollars into his race. Now that warning had come from
an anonymous letter from a former member of Anderson's youth
group Never Again, Colorado Union leaders had asserted that they
couldn't verify it and backed him anyway. Two years later,
following more complaints, a DPS investigation found that Tay Anderson
(01:13:58):
had coercively pursued relation with underage students, and he also
admitted to inappropriate behavior at Never Again Colorado. Now Here
is the CEA's Jeff Co affiliate in a strikingly similar
spot in backing a candidate with issues of accusations and
so forth of sexual offenses and claiming ignorance until public
(01:14:21):
pressure mounted. Yet even as they withdrew support, union bosses
couldn't resist taking political potshots, blaming political extremists quote trying
to use a complicated and traumatic event from over a
decade ago to achieve their own political outcomes.
Speaker 3 (01:14:39):
I mean owned deaf much.
Speaker 7 (01:14:42):
Lindsay Dadko, the founder of jeffco Kids, first told me
this is not about politics.
Speaker 3 (01:14:47):
It's about the safety of our children.
Speaker 7 (01:14:50):
And she called this smear a feeble attempt to sidestep
the gravity of a candidate's admitted history of sexual offenses
against children. We got to go to a break, But
I want to be clear about something. Years of sexual
misconduct scandals have truly shattered parents trust.
Speaker 3 (01:15:08):
We have been talking about this now for a couple
of years with Jeff Cup. So is it really that
hard to grasp the.
Speaker 7 (01:15:15):
Sensitivity here without branding concerned parents as extremists. Then again,
of course, this is a union that claims to represent
jeff Coast teachers when barely thirty percent are members.
Speaker 3 (01:15:28):
No wonder they're out of touch. And here's the thing.
Redemption is real.
Speaker 7 (01:15:34):
Wisdom is too, And as I write in today's column
in the Denver Gazette Denvergazette dot com, Michael Yoakum deserves
his chance at redemption, but a school board run doesn't
show wisdom. He must step aside, and union bosses should
own their failure to vet the cleanup crew. Jimmy Sangenberger
(01:15:57):
in for Mandy Connor will pick it up on the
other side here on KOA, are you excited to hear
a little bit of Star Wars talk coming up? With
Star Wars theory? YouTuber Extraordinary. I've been following him for years.
I've interviewed him twice when I was at Fan Expo
Denver this year and last year. A great guy and
(01:16:17):
of course he, like many people in YouTube and new
media and whatnot, courts controversy at times, but for the
right reasons, pushing back a little bit, sometimes complaining about
sometimes often complaining about things that Disney does as the
ownership of Lucasfilm and Disney Star Wars products.
Speaker 3 (01:16:42):
And he's not.
Speaker 7 (01:16:45):
Very pleased with a lot of the ways in which
politics have been injected. So I'm looking forward to talking
with him in just a few minutes. By the way,
I don't have time to get into the details more
than this, but let me share something for the jeffco
Teachers Union failed to edits clean up crew. I call
him today and the Denver Gazette I noted that jeff
(01:17:08):
Co's teachers the union claims Teachers' Union there claims to
represent jeff COO's teachers when barely thirty percent are members. Well,
in May, a letter was sent from the Associate HR Chief,
Scott Barnes, to the school.
Speaker 3 (01:17:23):
Board and he said, and it's excoriating.
Speaker 7 (01:17:25):
He says, in part part, the district bargains with a
minority voice. The majority sixty five to seventy percent of
our employees have consciously opted out of the union. Why
do we act as if they represent a majority voice
when clearly they do not.
Speaker 3 (01:17:45):
Great question deserves some answers.
Speaker 7 (01:17:48):
Jimmy Sangenberger infram Andy Connell here on koa Star Wars Theory,
talking new media, AI, Star Wars and more on the
other side.
Speaker 3 (01:17:57):
Keep it here.
Speaker 7 (01:17:58):
We have been teasing this interview through out the show.
Speaker 3 (01:18:00):
I'm very excited.
Speaker 7 (01:18:01):
In fact, let's let count Dook who say the words
I've been lucky quote to this. I have indeed been
looking forward to this. I've seen him at a couple
of fan expo denvers this summer and last summer. He
is all over the place online, especially YouTube, where he
has the single largest YouTube channel with over three point
(01:18:23):
three million subscribers. He's been at this on YouTube since
twenty sixteen. He is Star Wars Theory joining me live
from Canada over the US airwaves.
Speaker 3 (01:18:36):
Sarah, Welcome to American radio and it's good to talk
with you.
Speaker 2 (01:18:41):
Good to be here. Thank you so much for the invite.
Speaker 7 (01:18:43):
It's great to have you here, brother, I appreciate it.
Talk to me for a moment about how you got
started in YouTube and even tracing back a little bit,
how Star Wars became such a big deal for you
as a person that you were like, you know what,
I'm going to start something on a channel and it
became what it became.
Speaker 2 (01:19:05):
It never really started out that way, kind of as
life would have it.
Speaker 14 (01:19:08):
But for me, like many others back in the nineties,
my parents introduced me to Star Wars and I was
in love right away, you know, from the age of
five or six, back in ninety five or ninety six.
I'm dating myself here, but it was just a beautiful
story that meant a lot to me. And I got
to connect with my parents and some other friends and
(01:19:30):
then online friends as well, and over the years just
found myself engulfed in the love of Star Wars, in
this universe that George Lucas created. And so you know,
flash forward to twenty sixteen, where the new Star Wars
movies were coming out from Disney, and I had a
theory and I created a channel called Star Wars Theory,
(01:19:53):
and I made one video on my phone just for fun.
I remember I had a pretty bad cold at home
and I was just kind of bored.
Speaker 2 (01:20:00):
I'm like, well, I kind of.
Speaker 14 (01:20:00):
Have this idea, and I figured I just put it
out there into the ether and forgot about it for
three weeks. Checked back and there were a few hundred
views and some comments, and I thought it was amazing
and I was able to connect with other Star Wars
fans around the world, and so I just kept going
from there, and well, nine years later, here we are
one of these.
Speaker 7 (01:20:19):
The story short absolutely and you and I were the
same age and where we were about the same age
when we both were introduced to Star Wars and fell
in love with it, And there's just something so special
about the story. And you talk about this a lot,
especially in the context of Disney purchasing Star Wars over
ten years ago or was it twenty twelve, twenty thirteen
(01:20:39):
thereabouts and twenty twelve, how important the storytelling of Star
Wars really is. That it is about the story, which
in your mind, and I tend to agree Disney has
largely forgotten as it's overseen. Lucasfilm talk to us a
bit about the story dynamic in Star Wars.
Speaker 2 (01:21:00):
Well, the story dynamic is very simple.
Speaker 14 (01:21:02):
It's something that George Lucas created because he just wanted
to see this story play out. And it's a space
opera mainly about family dramas. If you think about it,
you know you have Luke, you have his father, Vader Anakin,
and then you got a sister and then everything else
that ties in there as well. But it's mainly just
about the hero's journey, and that's really what George wanted
(01:21:24):
to tell, which was a farm boy who didn't know
where he belonged. And George says that his favorite scene
in all of Star Wars was when Luke was looking
out to the Twin Suns and wondering where his next
journey was going to be.
Speaker 2 (01:21:36):
Where does he belong? What is his path? What is
his destiny?
Speaker 14 (01:21:40):
And eventually over the trilogy, he finds that path and
he fails a few times along the way, and that's
very realistic to life and storytelling in general, and that's
one reason why it resonated so well with so many
of us. And I feel like today's storytelling through Disney,
they've forgotten that way and they're overcome implicating it and
(01:22:01):
they're just need to make it a little more simple
to what George had it as as, which was just
telling the hero's journey. Now there are some listening.
Speaker 7 (01:22:08):
Who might go, but George Lucas also had the prequel trilogy,
and you and I love the prequel trilogy, A Rod
behind the Glass, same thing. He's also a prequel trilogy fan.
And the three of us grew up in that era
when they came out as kids and teenagers. So what
is your take on the prequel hate that I think
is kind of turning away at least in so far
(01:22:31):
as you have the younger generation at the time that
is up and coming now in age is changing the
narrative and showing a lot more love towards the prequels
and towards hating. Christiansen who played Anakin Skywalker, and you
and McGregor who played Obi Wan, Kenoby and the rest.
Speaker 2 (01:22:51):
You know, we're all aging now.
Speaker 14 (01:22:52):
So the kids that grew up with Jar Jar, you know,
we're now in our thirties and we're now writing the
articles in charge of the narrative. And it's nice to
see because those films I feel like, Wow, they may
not be for everybody, and that's totally fine. They still
were part of George's story and ultimately they were how
George originally thought of Star Wars, which was the fight
(01:23:14):
between Anakin and Obi Wan. It's just he didn't have
the money nor the technology to be able to create
that scene. So I think the prequel trilogy, while it
is quite different from the originals, offers a complete different
stylistic approach to Star Wars and really the overall themes
of Anakin Skywalker, which we didn't get to dive into
(01:23:36):
too much with the original trilogy. I think Vader got
maybe ten or fifteen minutes of screen time in the
entire original trilogy, whereas in the prequels you get to
see Anakin as a boy and going through the different
beats of his life, with what he went through and
why he turned out the way he did from all
the neglect and pressure that was on him.
Speaker 7 (01:23:57):
Star Wars Theory, our guest, he has the large just
YouTube channel four Star Wars content. Just search Star Wars
Theory and it'll come up right there. I want to
ask you one more thing regarding prequels because there is
a lot of criticism and I guess really this goes
back even to the original trilogy of the acting, and
there's especially Hayden Christiansen and how he is in the
(01:24:20):
second and.
Speaker 3 (01:24:21):
Third episodes of Star Wars.
Speaker 7 (01:24:23):
How do you view the acting, because I think most
people haven't heard your take, especially on Hayden Christiansen as
Anakin Skywalker.
Speaker 2 (01:24:34):
So I created this video several years ago, five years
ago or so.
Speaker 14 (01:24:38):
It has a few million views now and it's titled
why Hayden Christensen played Anakin perfectly. I will prove it
to you, And it's quite a long video. It goes
through all of the reasons why he actually played him
quite well and why he actually seems so monotone on purpose,
and this was actually by design. So when I met Hayden,
he actually thanked me for that video personally, because it
(01:24:59):
really he did expose all of the truths as to
his acting and why so many people say it was
so monotone. So George wanted him to speak like this
because it's supposed to be exactly how Vader's cadence is
later on. So the reason Anakin, for example, is supposed
to say yes, my Master, is because Vader says it
(01:25:20):
that way too.
Speaker 2 (01:25:21):
He's a very pressured, confused boy.
Speaker 14 (01:25:25):
The child was a slave and then lost his mother,
and the Jedi said, don't worry about it. Essentially, and
I'm running through about, you know, twenty years of his life.
And he was also known as the poster boy of
the Clone Wars. He was extremely powerful, extremely gifted. They
called him the Chosen One, yet they denied him all
of the abilities and the respect that he should have
(01:25:47):
been given and so this really put a lot of
pressure on him. And whenever he had questions or doubts
from the attachments that he originally had as a slave,
which no other Jedi grew up with, they kind of
just ignored it and said, well, just deal with it.
And so eventually this pressure really started to build over him,
and he broke once he found that father figure, that
(01:26:10):
uncle figure in Palpatine. And so the way Hayden was
acting was to really show that he can't show emotion,
because that is what the Jedi really tried to instill
within him, that he is very volatile, very emotional, but
he can't show any of that. So I feel like
once people see that video, they'll kind of understand a
(01:26:31):
little bit.
Speaker 7 (01:26:32):
Oh yeah, it definitely gives a lot of context and
understanding into what was going on there for George Lucas
as a director and hating Christensen as an actor against
Star Wars theory. Our guest, let's fast forward now to
the Disney era of Star Wars, and as you look
at this and we talked about story and how you
(01:26:52):
feel that the storytelling focus has been deemphasized, I want
to ask you why you think think Disney has approached
Star Wars in the way they have. I mean, to
an extent, they have certainly gone in a direction that
is more political, one might say woke, focused on things.
Speaker 3 (01:27:10):
Like DEI or gender ideology and so forth.
Speaker 7 (01:27:13):
Do you think that they've gone too far into politics
because they have an agenda there or they've lost touch
with where the core fandom is at. How do you
view sort of the motivations behind some of what Disney
has done since they bought Star Wars for what four
billion dollars from George Lucas, Yeah, four.
Speaker 14 (01:27:34):
Billion dollars in some stock options. I believe not a
bad deal for George, but I wish you would have
held on to it. And originally when he signed the
agreement with Bob Iger, which is at all written in
Bob Biger's book, CEO of Disney closed down Disney Parks
and all that, and yeah, Bob Iger owns Disney. And
you know, George gave his treatment for the sequel trilogy
(01:27:57):
and the direction he wanted everything to go Disney. I
had to do something completely the other way. And while
Star Wars, Star Wars has always been political inside itself,
in the world of Star Wars, there isn't any real
world politics in terms of today's politics, you know, politics
that aren't timeless. Everything in Star Wars is timeless. For example,
(01:28:19):
is the good guy versus the big bad guy. You know,
it's the massive empire versus the little rebels, and that
is supposed to be a timeless sort of feat, whereas
today Disney has really radicalized it divided the fandom and
really turned it super political in today's world, which I
(01:28:41):
don't think will last as long as you know, George's
timeless stories of just you know, the big guy versus
little guy kind of thing.
Speaker 2 (01:28:50):
I don't know why they've done that.
Speaker 14 (01:28:51):
It's unfortunate, but I hope that they go back to
the storytelling ways and just focus on the hero's journey.
Speaker 3 (01:28:57):
It is interesting to see these moments.
Speaker 7 (01:29:00):
I don't really want to get so much into politics,
except in so far as a massive corporation where you
have the CEO of Lucasfilm, Kathleen Kennedy the number of
years back saying the force is female and making it.
And I think and you do as well, that women
are and always have been such an integral part of
Star Wars. But that and the fandom my fiance is
(01:29:22):
a massive Star Wars fan. It's one of the things
that we love and share and have in common. And
yet that doesn't mean that you should go into as
some of the shows have done some of these things
with such a focus that's much more on, Like even
in the sequel trilogy with the character of Ray I'm
not even going to say the last name they gave
her at the edge of the third movie in that
(01:29:44):
but where they didn't develop certain aspects of the character
because they were more focused on emphasizing the gender.
Speaker 14 (01:29:51):
And I just don't get that. I don't get that either,
you know. And George said this better than any of
us just a few years ago at an interview. You
can find this on YouTube as well. Just type in
George Lucas talks about girls or women in Star Wars
and he says, you know, it's ludicrous that people say that.
You know, I didn't put women in power in Star Wars.
He said the original trilogy is the main character is
(01:30:14):
mainly Leah.
Speaker 2 (01:30:15):
I mean, she's the one who's leading the whole thing.
She's in charge of the rebellion.
Speaker 14 (01:30:18):
This dopey boy Luke and then this jerk Han solo
essentially and she's the only one with the brains. And
he says, and I think he's nodding, in my opinion
towards what Disney's done or what storytelling today is doing.
That you can't just have a woman in a movie
or in Star Wars and automatically she is everything. She
(01:30:41):
is super powerful. You can't just put a woman in
soup pants and all of a sudden she is the
most powerful being in the story. Women have brains, they
can be ladies, they can wear dresses, they can do
all of these things that they've done traditionally over years.
But they can also be extremely powerful in their own way.
(01:31:01):
They can be extremely intelligent. There's so much more to
a woman than just their gender and throwing them into
a story and expecting them to be the hero. And
George said it perfectly, and I fully believe that when
you articulate a character, male or female, perfectly, and you
give them the hero's journey of trial and error, you
(01:31:21):
will have an audience that is in love with that character.
Whether they are black, white man, woman, alien, robot, it
doesn't matter. If you're able to resonate with that character
and that growth, then you're going to have a successful
IP and unfortunately, I don't think that's being done today.
Speaker 7 (01:31:39):
I want to shift gears here in a second Star
Wars theory. But first, what Star Wars projects? Just real
quickly that Disney has put out do you think have
been either top notch or that you've really enjoyed.
Speaker 14 (01:31:54):
I've really enjoyed. So for the Disney ones, I really
enjoyed Tales of the Jedi. It was an animated film,
animated show which focused on Douku's younger years. I thought
that was really well done. I really enjoyed Mandalorian season
one and two. However they lost me on to the
third one. Besides that, I don't think they've done the
best that they could at all, and I'm hoping that
(01:32:16):
they will definitely take a page from George's books going forwards.
Speaker 7 (01:32:19):
How about Rogue one? And I know you did like
the last six episodes of Andor right. I did enjoy
Rogue one.
Speaker 14 (01:32:28):
But when it comes to Star Wars, I truly do
believe that what makes it extremely exciting is, of course,
you know, the good storytelling, you have to have that,
but it's the force, it's lightsabers, it's action. So you know,
all the other ones are cool and all like Rogue
one and all that, great story, great acting and or
great acting, great story.
Speaker 2 (01:32:48):
Great dialogue.
Speaker 14 (01:32:49):
But when it comes to the heart of it, I
want to see the Jedi. I want to see the Sith.
I want to see lightsabers, I want to see the Force.
And that to me is well one thing that makes
Star Wars very special. It's just a space show, but
done differently than The Acolyte.
Speaker 3 (01:33:03):
But we'll leave that there.
Speaker 7 (01:33:04):
I do want to talk to you Star Wars theory
in a remaining minutes about two quick things.
Speaker 3 (01:33:09):
One is new media.
Speaker 7 (01:33:11):
So I think that when talk radio came to the
fore in the late nineteen eighties here in the USA,
especially with Rush Limbaugh, that was more political and conservative talk,
that was one of the early forms of new media
in the sense that people could access something differently from
the mainstream or the major TV or cable news outlets
(01:33:31):
and what have you, and gave a voice to something
different and in fact, for so many years Rush Limbaugh's
show broadcast right here on KOA. Well, now we have
the rise of YouTube and podcasts and so many other
mediums that are really changing the game, both in terms
of commentary, interviews and discussions about things, but also in
(01:33:51):
terms of video content and fan fictions, where you have
amazing videos of shows and movies that fans create themselves.
You yourself have a project in the works that's a
sequel to your first piece of content that you did
called Vader. Talk to us about why you view new
(01:34:12):
media and its influenced now?
Speaker 14 (01:34:17):
H Well, I mean YouTube and the Internet today, it's
completely changed.
Speaker 3 (01:34:21):
You can have a ten year old that makes the
story on his phone. You know, it's stop action.
Speaker 14 (01:34:30):
Toys, uh, stop stop motion toys, and it's it's quite
revolutionary because you can have anyone now be a director
or exercise that and then get real time feedback from
their audience. So with YouTube, I mean, you could put
up a fan film and get so many people seeing
it and giving you feedback and telling you, hey, like
(01:34:50):
I love this or you know you should change that,
and you might have the next Spielberg from that.
Speaker 2 (01:34:55):
You never know.
Speaker 14 (01:34:57):
So I think today's world, especially with the advancement of AI,
I mean, if you look at YouTube now, there is
so much going on with fan films, and most of
these guys are just teenagers. They're just knowing how to
use the system. This new technology of how to do
prompts and make images and then turn it into some
sort of animation. And quite frankly, it's looking really good,
(01:35:22):
really really good, and you can see the comments underneath.
It doesn't matter what Disney creates anymore, it doesn't matter
what studios create anymore. AI is here and now it's
in the hands of the fans, and so regardless what
you think about it, some of the stuff is actually
more entertaining than.
Speaker 2 (01:35:40):
What's in theaters today.
Speaker 7 (01:35:42):
There are some fascinating examples, and maybe we'll have a
minute where we can get back to AI, but since
we're almost out of time, I want to talk with
you about one other thing that you have done in
the past couple of years Star Wars theory, and that's
what you call theory sabers. So if you go to
like Fan Expo Denver in the summer, you will see
a number of different lightsaber stores, saber shops that get
(01:36:05):
their booths and they're selling their lightsabers. And this year,
for the first time, you had your own for theory
sabers with some really unique lines of lightsabers, including one
by the creator of the lightsaber, the original designer, Roger
Christian and another with the guy Nick Gillard, who was
the choreographer for all of the Lightsaber fights in the
(01:36:27):
prequel trilogy of episode one through three. You've partnered with
him on that too, So talk to us a bit
about sabers and theory sabers.
Speaker 14 (01:36:38):
Well, I mean, yeah, I mean it's first of all,
it's been a huge honor to be able to work
with Roger Christian and Nick Gillard. And we're headed to
San Antonio next week for Space con to do to
do that convention, and we're bringing Nick out with us,
which is going to be the first time that he
gets to meet fans, and we have a saber coming
out with him as well. But it's been it's been
a really amazing journey. I have to say, you know,
(01:37:00):
I was reviewing so many companies sabers for years and
eventually started my own company after doing the due diligence
that I needed to do to make something that was
worthy of putting my brand on it.
Speaker 2 (01:37:13):
And it's been a real great experience so far.
Speaker 14 (01:37:15):
I've really loved going out to conventions, meeting you, meeting
so many other people, and just seeing what we can
do in the saber community and in that world and
what we can offer has been really fulfilling for me
in so many ways. So and it all goes back to,
you know, paying for the fan film, which is I'm
very excited for. It should be out in the next
(01:37:35):
few months.
Speaker 3 (01:37:36):
Here that's Vader Part two. Vader Part two.
Speaker 14 (01:37:39):
The first one got over thirty million views and the
second one is well on the way.
Speaker 7 (01:37:44):
It's going to be amazing if you're looking for unique
and fun Christmas gifts as the holidays come near. What's
the way The website's theory sabers dot com Correct Theoriesabers
dot com.
Speaker 14 (01:37:53):
Yes, we have, in my opinion, the best on the market,
and this comes from a fan who has reviewed pretty
much everyone out there. We have exclusives nobody else has,
and like I said, and we're endorsed by Roger Christian,
the creator himself that worked with George beautiful.
Speaker 7 (01:38:11):
Thank the maker, right. May the Force be with you
Star Wars Theory. We're out of time, but I hope
you'll come back down the line.
Speaker 2 (01:38:17):
Brother. I'd love to.
Speaker 14 (01:38:19):
It's always a pleasure speaking with you, and I hope
you have a great day and may the Force be
with you all.
Speaker 3 (01:38:23):
Thank you all.
Speaker 7 (01:38:24):
Right back at you once again, Star Wars Theory purveyor
of the largest Star Wars YouTube channel with over three
point three million subscribers, joining us here on KOA. I'm
back in the saddle the next couple of days for
Mandy Connell from noon to three, so be sure to
tune in then Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Mandy Connell,
and have a great one.
Speaker 3 (01:38:46):
May God bless America.
The Mandy Connell Podcast News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com