12-06-24 FULL SHOW - Jimmy Sengenberger Fills in for Mandy

Episode Transcript

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 on Kola AM.

Speaker 1 (00:13):
Ninety four one FM.

Speaker 3 (00:15):
God ways through.

Speaker 4 (00:22):
Bandyconnell keeping sad thing. Oh, ladies and gentlemen.

Speaker 5 (00:28):
J.

Speaker 4 (00:42):
Let's get the same in burgering, trying to make a
stick a rod? What way to make myself into an intro?
Once again? Brother always fun? Who knows it's Friday. Maybe
we'll have a little harmonica time too. We had some

(01:03):
fun yesterday, didn't we. Oh yeah, yeah, there you go,
ladies and gentlemen. Jimmy Sangenberger in for the vacationing Mandy
Connell on this Friday, the sixth of December, the first
week of the month under wraps, which means we are
closer and closer to Christmas as well as Hanukkah, the overlap.

(01:27):
The overlap is literally in the day at the Honkah
starts on the twenty fifth, on Christmas Day. It's always
fun when the holidays overlap. So Merry Christmas, Happy Honkah,
and I hope you're enjoying the season so far. It's
good to be with you and if you want to
join into the festivities. Be sure to feel free to

(01:48):
text in on the kaa common Spirit health the text
line at five six six nine zero. That's the place
to go to make your voice heard right here on
the station. Appreciate the text so keep them coming throughout
the next few hours. We have so much to talk about.
And there's a really interesting conference that has been going on,

(02:13):
the New York Times Booked Summit of some kind book
deal summit. I'm not sure exactly what it's called, but
yesterday we had a clip, a couple clips of Jeff Besos,
CEO of Amazon, second richest man in the world, talking
about Elon Musk and so forth. Well, today making the

(02:34):
rounds have been clips from none other than Bill Clinton,
the former President of the United States, and an interesting
couple of subjects, one of which I want to kick
off the show discussing with his he's really trying to
make a distinction between the pardoning of Hunter Biden by

(02:55):
his father and Clinton's own family pardon from back in
the nineteen nineties. First Clinton was asked on stage about
his thoughts on the Hunter Biden pardon. Here's what he
had to say.

Speaker 5 (03:12):
Well, I think that the President did have reason to
believe that the nature of the offenses involved were likely
to produce far stronger adverse consequences for his son than
they would for any normal person under the same circumstances.

(03:38):
But I would urge all of you to just look
at the facts before you make adjacent and see what
they're talking about, what the context.

Speaker 4 (03:46):
Is, so you could see he's not too keen on
it necessarily. But he particularly wanted to make a distinction
on something because his brother, Roger Clinton, was pardoned by
Bill Clinton in January of two thousand and one, just

(04:09):
before Clinton left office, and he made a point to say, look,
there's a big difference here.

Speaker 5 (04:16):
I'm still reading somebody said, well, this is just like
when Bill Clinton pardoned his brother. Well it's not. My
brother did fourteen months in the federal prison for something
he did when he.

Speaker 6 (04:27):
Was twenty.

Speaker 5 (04:29):
And I supported it, and he testified, told the truth
about what he'd done when he had a drug problem
and helped to bring down a larger enterprise, and they
sent us to them, and then he served fourteen months
and he got out.

Speaker 4 (04:46):
Now, why would he make a point of distinguishing between
pardoning his brother Roger Clinton for nineteen eighty five cocaine
possession in drug trafficking conviction and Hunter Biden's case, where
he had a wide pardon for an eleven year time period,

(05:09):
covering the offenses that he was convicted of, but also
broader than that. Well, he wasn't prompted. Clinton wasn't prompted
on making a distinction between his pardon and Joe Biden's
family pardon. But he did. And I think that's because he,

(05:32):
like so many other Democrats, recognize, and a lot of
them are saying it, recognize that the fact of the
matter is that this pardon should never have happened, and
he wants to say, Look, I didn't do anything wrong
with my pardon of my brother for this reason. Now

(05:52):
do you buy that distinction? I do it a little bit.
I think there's a less of a controversial tinge to
it for Bill Clinton in that circumstance. Then with a
very specific pardon for specific offenses from what sixteen years prior,

(06:14):
that I get. I but the Hunter Biden parton covering
eleven years and not very specific a very different story.
And speaking of comparisons, John Fetterman was on the View
yesterday and he compared the Hunter Biden parton to the

(06:34):
idea that Trump should be pardoned for what he had experienced,
although I would I would say I believe that the
New York City case was specific to the state court,
so president can't pardon an individual for a state or

(06:55):
local crime. But this is what Fetterman had decis.

Speaker 7 (06:57):
I's said that about the j six people too, though, right,
that's what they're going to say on the other side.

Speaker 6 (07:02):
That is what I'm not.

Speaker 8 (07:03):
I'm not I'm not referring to that. I'm talking about
the New York trial. And now the Democrats on our
side were now there were sums that were gleeful calling
now he's a convicted felon and those things. And now
for our party, we were talking about criminal justice and
we're now talking about second chances. And now all of
a sudden, now you're like, well, he's a convicted felon

(07:24):
and all these things. And now clearly again both of
those trails the Hunter Biden won and the trial in
New York for Trump that was clearly those politically motivated,
and those kinds of charges would have never been brought
unless one side could they realize that they could weaponize that.

Speaker 4 (07:41):
He's saying, on the one hand that Trump should get
similar treatment to Hunter Biden. These are political cases, they've
been very politicized. On the other hand, he's saying, but
the the Hunter Biden pardon isn't isn't appropriate. He's trying,

(08:03):
he's been trying John Fetterman to sort of play it
on both sides a little bit. But I think really
getting at the point that you can't look at this
just from a partisan lens. When you're looking at Hunter Biden,
you're looking at Trump's case, what have you. There are
politics at play now. I think that the Hunter Biden
case was in fact much stronger than the case against

(08:26):
Trump in New York City, especially because you didn't have
to tie one law to another to make it happen,
because that's what they did in the Trump case. They
had to take this other law to say it was
broken because he broke this other this one law. The
bottom line, the politics cannot be avoided. And Clinton made

(08:49):
another point about criminalizing politics and how that needs to
stop an his well, I.

Speaker 5 (08:54):
Do think we should stop trying to criminalize politics.

Speaker 9 (08:58):
But on the other I think we should both of
us because well because obviously and the people don't like it,
and they're not going along with it.

Speaker 6 (09:14):
From right to left.

Speaker 5 (09:16):
On the other hand, you have to ask yourself, if
you do this blanket thing, is there anything a president
could do that he would or s someday would get
in trouble for see?

Speaker 4 (09:33):
And that's the distinction. He said this blanket thing because
the Hunter Biden pardon was a blanket one covering eleven
years versus anything specific. And he's raising a point that
isn't partisan. I appreciate that here, and he's looking at
it from the presidential lens. This sets a precedent for

(09:54):
the future. Where John Fetterman airs in his comparison, Oh,
you know Trump should get a part in is that
presumably the Trump pardon would be more specific. Maybe he's
thinking abroad, but it seems it would be more specific.
But Fetterman gets sort of misses the mark in the
comparison because the Biden one is so broad, but Clinton's

(10:20):
hitting It's something I think interesting too that he smites
over the idea of criminalizing politics because of how he
still looks at the impeachment proceedings that he went through
when he was impeached but not convicted back in the
nineteen nineties, and that's something that will stick with him,
I'm sure for a very long time. For the rest

(10:42):
of his life. He'll always be smiteen just a little
bit over that. But when a former president on the
Democrat side is somewhat critical of a Democrat president for
something like this and needs to make a distinction, that's
worth talking about. I found it really really interesting. Something

(11:03):
else that's going on has been the discussion and debate
over whether or not TikTok should be banned in the
United States of America. This from The Wall Street Journal
of Federal Appeals Court ruled Friday that TikTok can be
banned in the US over national security concerns, upholding a

(11:27):
federal law requiring the popular social media app to shed
its Chinese ownership to keep operating. A three judge panel
of the US Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit said Congress has the power to take action
against TikTok to protect US interests, and the ruling rejected

(11:47):
a First Amendment challenge brought by the app and several
of its star users, who argued the ban was an
unconstitutional infringement on free speech. Now this is a cell
Or law that President Biden signed into law in April
was passed with bipartisan support following classified briefings that lawmakers

(12:11):
got from the intelligence community about the ability that China
has to use TikTok to surveil Americans as well as
of course spread Chinese propaganda, and they outright dismissed First
Amendment claims, saying, look, this is justifiable as a national
security matter. The judge writing for the court is a

(12:33):
guy by the name of Douglas Ginsburg, saying, the First
Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States.
Here the government acted solely to protect that freedom from
a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary's ability
to gather data on people in the United States. Now,

(12:53):
there's a lot to be said here. I've been torn
on this issue of the band because I don't like
the all knowing, all powerful federal government, or any government
for that matter, just coming in and saying, well, we
don't want you to use this service because we have
this kind of concern about something in the marketplace when

(13:15):
there are so many different social media options, so many
different things, and consumers make their own decision as to
whether or not to use this app. And then, of
course there is a free speech vehicle to this, in
that you're able to express yourself on social media as
you see fit within the confines of the platform, what
the platform allows or doesn't allow as far as content

(13:39):
to an extent, of course, and then of course the
limited restrictions that the government has on particular speech. So
there's a First Amendment piece to this. But really, to me,
it comes down to, is the government justified in making
a decision that impacts millions and millions of Americans saying

(13:59):
you can't use this product that you love or enjoy
every day, or if you are making money off of
the platform, you are a star user, you have built
a following, maybe you have millions and millions of people
following you. That means your livelihood could be cut out

(14:21):
from under you because the government makes that decision. On
the other hand, there are deep concerns about China and
its ability to use TikTok for its own ends in
a way that is averse to American interests. To me,
it's a little bit unclear what those particular concerns are

(14:43):
that are beyond anything else that they could access through
other means, but nevertheless it exists. So where is that
in your mind in terms of justification? Is it appropriate
to go ahead and do this ban? The terms of
the band are supposed to take effect in mid January,

(15:06):
although that doesn't mean TikTok will just disappear. It'll go
to the Supreme Court. Maybe they will punt it and
say it's gonna be a little longer until we get
rid of it. But you know, I think the implications
of this if it doesn't get sold and it ends

(15:27):
up just being banned, which I kind of think is
more likely what the Chinese ownership company Byteedance will do,
is I think they'd rather have it banned, because then
you're gonna have a lot of ticked off Americans, not
just teenagers, who use TikTok on a regular basis. Maybe
they find really cool products on TikTok being advertised by

(15:51):
the users, or provide show hosts that regularly frequentness timeslot
with great content for a certain blog that certain listeners
like to look at on a daily basis, Mandy's blog
dot com, Mandy's blog dot com, Mandy's blog dot com
be a lot of TikTok videos and better that on
the daily and we're saying, so you got a really
cool product too, that was from from a TikTok. You know,

(16:12):
it's being sold on TikTok and whatnot, and people use
that all the time for so many different things. And
the impact that that will have socially and culturally if
there's a ban that's significant, and I don't think yes,
you will piss off a row, you will really take
him off and a lot of people, a lot of people.
And I don't know how it's going to go with

(16:34):
the fallout from there. How is it going to impact socially?
What could be the political implications? As people get upset,
they might look up their politicians and hold the grudge
against every member of Congress who voted for it, And
they might not care if you're a Republican or a Democrat,
because you're responsible for getting rid of TikTok, and you'll

(16:56):
have the TikTok influencers that are able to rebuild. There's
followings on other platforms will say, hey, we need to
oppose these people who ban TikTok from your phones. But
I worry about sort of the trajectory here, the slippery slope.
If you will on where things will go in terms

(17:23):
of other apps and what the implications could be. Is
this only narrowly tailored toward very specific concerns over China?
And that's the question listener texts coming in on the
KOA common Spirit health text line five sixty six nine zero.
The people of China don't get freedom of speech. Yes

(17:43):
they don't. That's denied from them. And yet write Edance
is using a free speech argument in court to try
and keep the apps in place. As it is, there
is a bit of irony in there, isn't it that

(18:06):
the country that obstructs free speech denies that right as
much as just about any other is arguing, oh, you're
going to violate free speech on this. So that argument,
I think is not a valid one in court. But
there are two sides to the coin. There are arguments

(18:28):
against it that are based on should government even have
this role be in the business of banning an app,
whether it's for national security or otherwise? Five six six
nine zero the text line, if you want to get
some thoughts in there, speaking of business. On the other side,
airline executives in the hot seat in Congress, shouldn't they

(18:49):
be We'll take up that question. On the other side,
I'm Jim Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell on KOA. This
is interesting. You just heard this in the news, breaking
news that Douglass County Commissioner Laura Thomas has resigned from
her pit position. This from our I'm reading from our
partners now at Fox thirty one. After she was reportedly

(19:12):
ordered out of her office early, citing continuous attacks, harassment,
and punishment from her colleagues as her reason for leaving.
Thomas announced her resignation on Friday, just over a month
before her second and final term ends on January fourteenth,
twenty twenty five, and Commissioner elect Kevin van Winkle takes

(19:36):
the seat. Thomas said her resignation, effective Friday, comes after
she was ordered to leave the county office space by
December ninth, six weeks before her term was over. Thomas
said Van Winkle knew and consented to this order. I
don't understand that why. I'd be curious what the motivation

(19:58):
is for saying you have to leave so soon from
your office. That doesn't seem right offhand. I'm a Douglas
County resident, but I have to be honest with you.
I have ignored so much of the drama that has
happened among the county commissioners because to me, there's been
so much of it that is a distraction from the

(20:20):
work that the people in Douglas County deserve to be
focused on. And I think it's been going on for
too long. And hopefully the new board or the new
boarder commissioners will change up their direction in that respect
when new leadership comes into play. But being told to

(20:47):
leave your office six weeks early, if that's true, that
seems rather odd to me. Tom is saying in a
press release quote after a four year onslaught of false accusation, slur, defamation,
harassing and baseless investigations, suppression, censorship, marginalization, and outright cancelation mouthful,

(21:09):
as a duly elected county commissioner, I am utterly unable
to any longer provide the level of effective representation which
I have striven to deliver to the people of Douglas
County these last eight years. Thomas said that she was
ordered out of her county office by the colleagues during
a meeting on December fourth. Commissioners George Keel and Abe

(21:32):
Layden allegedly said that Thomas should be evicted immediately, and
Thomas went on one last thing to note it is
it was completely unnecessary to force me out of my
office before my term. Just more petty, spiteful harassment from
Keel and Leyden's unfortunate that Kevin van Winkle has chosen

(21:57):
to begin his first term as Commissioner on such a
selfish and dishonorable note. Look, this reads more to me
just at first blush that it is frustration that has
been building. It is interpersonal stuff, and this is sort
of just the last straw, if you will, and to

(22:21):
make hay and get some attention directed at the reasoning here,
do it now before the term ends, Before term ends,
so put out that statement that well, we have a
statement from the board regarding this resignation, board saying it

(22:44):
is tragic that our censured colleague chose to repeatedly violate
our policy manual and then host a press conference when
the county was honoring the Kendrick Castile family. It is
entirely normal and customary after November election for boxes to
move and transitions to begin. We are thankful for the peace,
positivity and collaboration that Commissioner elect Kevin van Winkle will

(23:08):
bring to Douglas County. So again you read that, you
read her statement, it just sounds like, if you're an
average voter, an average person, this is petty infighting among
politicians that distracts, it bogs down from the time that
should be focused on real things, and that this is
what the county commissioners have sort of been known for

(23:31):
for a while. Hopefully that will change, but I think
this feels like Laura Thomas is trying to get this
out there in a way that will garner attention for
her issues of concern Because if she leaves and then says, well,
this is what I was concerned about. I didn't like it,
I didn't want to deal with this, so on and

(23:51):
so forth, nobody's going to listen. But you do it
leaving resigning beforehand, then people will pay attention and he
your words, and that, I think is what we are seeing. Now.
What are your thoughts though? Texting on the KOA Common
Spirit Health text line at five six six ' nine zero,

(24:14):
who ordered her out? Abe one text says well, according
to Thomas, it was a Teal and Leyden with the
consent of Kevin Van Winkle. That's what she is saying
at least then on the critical side of Teal and Leyden.

(24:37):
Time to go for both, says one text. And unfortunately
Tal and Leyden are bought and paid for, says another,
and then is critical about make some claims about Laura
Thomas that I'm not going to read because I don't
know what's true what's not. So, yeah, there there are
a lot of sort of personal issues coming up here,

(24:58):
and that often happens in a small board. You know,
you got three members of a board of commissioners, A
lot of times this can happen, or if it's five
members or seven, you can have some of that kind
of petty interpersonal infighting and it doesn't serve the people well.
So I don't know what good this resignation and statement

(25:21):
makes other than being able to just express some frustration
and getting the attention. And I don't know what's right
or wrong as far as what Til and Layden did.
Maybe they were wrong and said you got to be
completely out of your office and this is unlike normal.
Who knows, Maybe we will find the answer to that question. Meanwhile,

(25:43):
the labor market has bounced back a little bit last
month as workers who had been sidelined by the storms
got back on the job. Thousands of striking Boeing employees
as well returned to work. The Labor Department reporting that
the US had added as seasonally adjusted two hundred and

(26:05):
twenty seven thousand jobs in November, solid growth roughly in
line with expectations. Now, keep in mind this year we've
had multiple reports that have come out that had been
revised significantly down after the fact, so you never know.
We could see a downward revision of the jobs numbers

(26:28):
later on. You never really know. Stocks rose in morning training,
with all three major US indexes in green. According to
the Wall Street Journal S and P. Five hundred NAS
that Composite had been on pace to surpass the records
that they hit earlier this week. The report provided something

(26:51):
of a relief the general reports, confirming that October softening
was the result of storm and strike related distortions rather
than a more fundamental week. The general pictures the labor
market is slowed, but it is still doing well. We'll
see what happens, and we'll see what happens when the
Trump administration takes office and has a different direction. Will
we see tariffs that could adversely affect the American economy.

(27:15):
Will we see tax rate cuts, will we see the
removal of the tax on tips? And what kind of
implications will that have for people? So jobs numbers coming
in all right, new administration could have an impact on

(27:38):
that and we will see over the coming months and
years with Trump in office. Keep the text coming on
the KOA Common Spirit health text line at five sixty
six nine zero. I appreciate this text. I want to
read enjoying your show, Jimmy. I'm a Jeff Co resident,
but I feel for Laura. Mandy had had her on
the show, and it has been awful to hear what

(28:00):
and what she has put up with by these two
jerks and another saying bad optects for three men to
do this to a woman. I mean, the reality is
that you're right, there was a separate texture about the objects.
There's not good optics. At the least it might be

(28:21):
unethical jerkish behavior to pull from the other texture about
George Teele and Abe Leyden. Like I said, I haven't
paid as much attention. I have not spoken to Laura
as Mandy had, But I just wish that elected officials

(28:42):
local in particular would just not be so petty with
one another. Why can't we just at least get along
well enough and then disagree on the issues. So I
guess that's too much to ask in America Today. I'm
Jimmy Sangenberger filling in for Mandy Connell. Lots more up ahead,

(29:03):
keep it right here on KOA. Good to be with
the Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell here on this
Friday listener text on the KOA Common Spirit Health Hotline
at five sixty six nine zero, reacting to the news
that Laura Thomas, Douglas County Commissioner, has resigned just before

(29:24):
her term is up, saying that there has been an
onslaught of false accusation, slurs, defamation, harassing and baseless investigations,
surpresident censorship, marginalization and outright cancelation as a dually elected
county commissioner, and she is lamenting that she, according to

(29:45):
Laura Thomas, had been told by her colleagues George Teel
and Abe Laden, with the backing of incoming Commissioner Kevin
van Winkle, that she needed to vacate her office some
six weeks early, not sure all the details, and there
was a strong statement from the Board of County Commissioners
in response to that, but to the listener text, as

(30:08):
far as Douglas County, I am in my thirties, and
I can speak for a lot of people my age
that stuff like this really turns us off of politics.
As someone who myself is in my thirties, I would
agree with you that people, younger people especially are very
turned off from politics by this kind of stuff going on.

(30:29):
With the text, it's no wonder that younger people are
getting more and more tired and less and less involved
in politics. I used to campaign for the left pretty hard,
worked for the Obama campaign, etc. Recent events are pushing
me towards the right. And then I appreciate the compliment here,
thanks for being a reasonable voice. It is hard to
be a reasonable voice in this day and age, isn't it.

(30:53):
But look, if you want to get younger people to
pay attention in politics, to be engaged, this is not
the way to do it with petty personal stuff that
just comes up in polics case. Endpoint. In addition to
the County Commissioners in Douglas County, let's look at the
Colorado Republican Party under the disgraceful leadership of Dave Williams

(31:16):
and co. That have been nothing but insular, focused on
their own clique and enforcing some sort of rubric on
who qualifies as a true Republican or not. If you
don't meet the ever changing arbitrary determination, you will be

(31:41):
subject to the label of Rhino and might even end
up on the Rhino Watch Wall of Shame. And all
it is is interpersonal nonsense. And the only reason that
we even had the eighth Congressional district flip to Gabe Evans,

(32:04):
congressmen elect and three state legislative seats now flip is
in spite of the Colorado GOP that actually worked to
undermine Republican candidates running for office. And it's because it's
all about being in the club. Are you in the

(32:24):
club or are you not in the club. If you are,
it's great, You're welcome. If not, you're not, you need
to be purged, exposed and purged. And that is petty,
That is middle school level stuff, and that's politics in
Colorado today, particularly on the right in the Colorado GOP.

(32:46):
We're seeing it your play out a bit in the
Douglas County commissioners just get a grip people and start
acting like adults and start acting responsibly, because otherwise you're
not going to get support from a heck of a
lot of people who are looking for adults in the
room and young people, especially younger voters. Once again, I'm

(33:09):
Jimmy Sangenberger in from Mandy Connell. On the other side,
there's a lot of talk about President elect Trump's anticipated
mass deportation, his operation Aurora. But what can immigration and
Customs enforcement actually do? Will the hysterics turn into reality
or their blocks in place? We'll talk with John Fabricatory,

(33:32):
former Denver Ice Field Director on the other side. He
joins me in studio and we'll understand and take your
questions as we continue. Again Jimmy and for Mandy on KOA.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury Lawyers.

Speaker 2 (33:48):
No, it's Mandy Connell and John.

Speaker 1 (33:53):
On them.

Speaker 4 (33:58):
God can the nicety through three.

Speaker 2 (34:07):
Sad bab.

Speaker 4 (34:10):
They're rocking and rolling. Time now for the second hour.
Jimmy Sangenberger covering for the vacationing Mandy Connell today. Good
to be with you on ko A. You know, thirty
five years ago pro democracy students in Beijing's Tiananmen Square

(34:32):
stared down China's brutal communist regime, and untold thousands never
returned home. It's epitomized by the video of tank Man,
the only name for an unidentified individual, a protester alone,
protester who stood defiantly before a communist Chinese military tank,

(34:53):
and to this day, his action and then his disappearance
remain a symbol of resistance to tyranny and of course
the chilling reminder of the Tianeman Square massacre. Just a
couple of weeks ago, we all know that Denver Mayor
Mike Johnston made a comparison to the Tianeman Square massacre,

(35:17):
saying that he would deploy along the county line police
officers and have fifty thousand members of the public by
his side to basically obstruct justice. He dubbed it a
Tianamen Square moment, an absurd comparison between legitimate law enforcement

(35:37):
and communist oppression, and of course the backlash was fierce.
But even when he backpedaled, he's still affirmed he's willing
to be arrested and would oppose the Trump administration's actions.
But what can they actually do. Are the images of
FDR style and tournament camps this time of millions of

(35:58):
illegal immigrants going to become reality? John Fabricatory is a
long time former field director at the Denver Ice Office
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, long time law enforcement officer, himself
former candidate for Congress as well, and he joins me

(36:18):
in studio now to really break down the realities here, John,
good to see you. Brother. Hey, beautiful day. Thanks for
having me in studio. And by the way, if you
want to share some questions, please send them in at
the KOA Common Spirit Health hotline text line at five
six six nine zero. All right, John, let's just get
right to it. The pictures that he paints and others

(36:40):
are painting the historyonics, could they even realistically become reality? No,
look not at all.

Speaker 10 (36:47):
I mean this the picture he's trying to paint is
pure political theater. You know, he has further aspirations to
run for politics, and you know he's trying to, you know,
build some people up, get them on his side, and
he wants to be this guy in the media that's
pushing back against Trump. But the reality is that President
Trump just wants to enforce immigration law, the law that's

(37:10):
actually on the books, and the Immigration Nationality Act under
eight USC. And that's exactly what's gonna happen. And we're
not going to have these internment camps and trains running
down to the border with you know, people hanging off
and just kicking people.

Speaker 4 (37:24):
Out of the country. That can't happen.

Speaker 10 (37:27):
The I in a the Immigration Nationality Act, while it
gives us the enforcement of immigration law, it also allows
people who are here illegally to see an immigration judge
about their case.

Speaker 4 (37:38):
It's not so easy.

Speaker 10 (37:40):
To just arrest somebody that's here illegally and kick them
over the border, like a lot of people may be
thinking that you can.

Speaker 4 (37:47):
There's a huge process that's involved in order to remove
or deport somebody. Yeah, let's talk about that process a
little bit because even now there I think the total
of route one point seven million in illegal immigrants who've
had their cases adjudicated before a judge and even then
have not left the country and they went through this

(38:08):
long process where you go before a judge, you argue
your case. Yeah, and that's something people should look at.

Speaker 10 (38:14):
Look, you broke into this country, you came across the
border illegally, you had an opportunity to see an immigration judge.

Speaker 4 (38:21):
It probably took a couple of years.

Speaker 3 (38:23):
You probably worked illegally, you did a bunch of other
things illegally, and then you got the chance to see
an immigration judge and you pled your case in front
of that judge, and that judge still at that end
of that process, said no, you cannot remain in the
United States.

Speaker 4 (38:37):
You need to leave the United States.

Speaker 10 (38:40):
And they were given a final order which, as you
are ordered removed, you have to leave the United States
within a certain amount of days.

Speaker 4 (38:46):
And they failed to leave.

Speaker 10 (38:48):
So not only did they break our laws coming into
the country, and then probably a bunch of other laws
while they remained here, they continued to break the law
after they saw the immigration judge.

Speaker 4 (38:58):
And refused to leave.

Speaker 10 (39:00):
Like you said, that number itself is at one point
seven million that we could go after right away.

Speaker 4 (39:07):
John Fabricatory, former ICE field director, joining us in studio.
Let's talk about the criminal illegal immigrants who are here,
some six hundred thousand I think on what's called the
non detained docket. Explain that for you.

Speaker 10 (39:19):
Yeah, so you know, there are various dockets that immigration
officers have and they're looking at you've got a detained docket.
Those are who are in costody. You've got a fugitive docket.
Those are the ones who we are looking for. We
know their criminals are in the community, their fugitives.

Speaker 4 (39:35):
We're looking for them.

Speaker 10 (39:36):
Then you've got this non detained docket, and it's a
docket in which someone may have served criminal time here
in the US.

Speaker 4 (39:45):
They got out that we.

Speaker 10 (39:46):
Were not able to keep them in custody in order
to enforce their removal, so we had to release them.
And now they're non detained. They're not in custody. What
a lot of people don't realize is when someone gets
out of state custody, and sometimes what happens is the
state won't go through state or local won't go through.

Speaker 4 (40:04):
And actually give someone a full sentence.

Speaker 10 (40:07):
So say someone got arrested for robbery and they get
convicted for it and they're supposed to do five years,
but the state says, hey, well, this guy's an illegal alien.
ICE will take care of him. We're just going to
release them after a year. And they release them. Then
ICE tries to remove this person and they can't remove
them fast enough to their country. Supreme Court says that
we cannot hold somebody unless we know we can ultimately

(40:28):
remove them, and in a lot of cases sometimes that's
a longer process than they have to be let out.

Speaker 4 (40:34):
So those people go on this non detained docket.

Speaker 10 (40:36):
They can also be people who are long term in
custody of state and local so they could have been
convicted for murder, so they're sitting in a jail for
the next twenty years or so. And that docket has
already up to six hundred thousand people who are known,
convicted or have criminal charges on them right now.

Speaker 4 (40:55):
Can that group be deported? That's what has to happen.
Does it need to Is there another process of adjudication
or cold it happen today?

Speaker 10 (41:03):
No, those a lot of those, especially if they have
a felony conviction, they don't have the opportunity to see
the immigration judge. That's something that's actually in the immigration law.
So if they are convicted of certain felonies or crimes
involving morals turpitude, there's an opportunity where ice can just
do the removal process themselves, and these criminals don't get

(41:24):
to see an immigration judge because they they were convicted
of certain crimes in the US. But in order for
US to have access to them and start working on
these cases, we need to be.

Speaker 4 (41:35):
Able to work with local law enforcement.

Speaker 10 (41:37):
But we have situations like here in the state of
Colorado with nineteen Dash eleven twenty four, where the local
police departments and the local sheriffs cannot work with ICE
on these criminally convicted evil alliens.

Speaker 4 (41:51):
And the thing that gets me, John fabricatory, is we
have a mayor of Denver and Mike Johnston. We have
a governor in Jared Polis, we have so many others.
Congressman Jason Rowe, who you went up against in the
sixth congressional district race. They have not just their heads
in the sand, but they are fully denying and even
being willing to obstruct justice here when we have exactly

(42:16):
what you're describing in place where they're all good with it.
Oh yeah, sir, don't cooperate with ICE. You don't have to,
We don't want you to. You're not allowed to. Yeah.

Speaker 10 (42:24):
One of the cutoffs in eleven twenty four says that
Probation and Parole cannot contact ICE when a criminal convicted
ellegal aliens released to probation and parole.

Speaker 4 (42:35):
So this is an ellegal aliens has been convicted.

Speaker 10 (42:37):
Of a crime being released into the community on probation
or parole, and they can't let ice know your tax
dollars are paying for somebody to be on probation and
parole that should have been deported.

Speaker 4 (42:49):
From the United States. If you want to text in
any questions on the koa common Spirit health text line.
As we get a better understanding of the reality here,
shoot us a text that five six six nine zero
a job. When we look at the descriptions that you're
making in regards to those criminals on the non detained docket,
you've got one point seven million, that's like six hundred thousand.

(43:11):
You've got one point seven million people that have already
had their cases adjudicated, they have been judged for deportation.
It seems that the administration under Trump will will have
a clear cut roadmap for prioritization that it's not just
just round up people on the streets randomly. It's we
have these buckets that we want to focus on. Yeah.

Speaker 10 (43:33):
Absolutely, So they've already got these buckets that they can
you know, look at right away. You know, there are
red notices that they can go after and a red
notice is a person that's been convicted in another country
of a crime and now they've run away to the
United States and we know they're in the US, so
we could go.

Speaker 4 (43:49):
After those cases.

Speaker 10 (43:50):
There's there are probably you know, hundreds of those cases
at that we can continue to go after.

Speaker 4 (43:54):
There's lots of criminal.

Speaker 10 (43:55):
Alliens, gang members, national security cases. The Under the Biden
Harrison administration, we've had terrorists enter this country that have
come across the border, and it took Ice almost a
year to catch up with those terrorists because the vetting
was so bad at the border and we lost.

Speaker 4 (44:11):
Track of where these people went.

Speaker 10 (44:13):
So there's going to be enough work initially for the
Trump administration to come in clean up the streets, get
these criminals off the streets, and make our communities safer.

Speaker 4 (44:22):
You have told me the startling statistic that we only
have thirty seven thousand ice beds in this country, So
even trying to do some sort of mass camps or
something is not practical just from bedspace.

Speaker 10 (44:36):
Yeah, it's not so under President Trump. President Trump, when
he left office, we had about fifty two thousand beds,
and then the Biden administration took that down to about
thirty seven thousand beds, but they were only really using
about thirty two thousand of that because we had some
problems with some California detention space in which we had
to shut those jails down because the ACLU was suing

(44:57):
for a bunch of stuff. So really the Biden administration
had about thirty two thousand beds and they were releasing
tons of criminals to the streets, to the interior of
the US instead of putting them into custody.

Speaker 4 (45:07):
Listener text coming in five six six nine zero. How
will ice be able to find these people? They're not
specific in the text, but maybe we can talk about
those in the non detained docket or what have you.
When you don't have especially when you don't have cooperation
from local LA enforcement.

Speaker 10 (45:21):
So we use a lot of different indices, and you know,
because of operational things that we do operationally, I can't
get into some of those. But we have a good
intelligence apparatus. We have the ability to go through social
media to do a lot of different things, to be
able to go into.

Speaker 4 (45:44):
Record checks in the counties.

Speaker 10 (45:45):
There's a way for us that when we do what's
called the field operations worksheet, when we're going out to
make an arrest because our arrests are targeted arrests.

Speaker 4 (45:54):
We're not just going out and saying, well, we're just
looking for anybody.

Speaker 10 (45:57):
No, the rest that ICE does is targeted, and there's
a specific way that we approach an investigation when we're
looking for somebody.

Speaker 4 (46:06):
And you know, look, if someone's been here.

Speaker 10 (46:08):
For about a year, they've hit enough things that we're
going to be able to find them. They've they've rented cars,
they've rented a house, they've bought a car, they work
at certain places.

Speaker 4 (46:18):
So it is easier when we don't.

Speaker 10 (46:21):
Have sanctuary status because we're able to go into a
lot of the state databases and look into places so
that we can locate a criminal illegal allien states that
have sanctuary policies make that harder on ICE. It takes
more manpower, hours, more officers to be able to find
a single person than if we have a state that

(46:43):
actually cooperates and less us into some of those databases.

Speaker 4 (46:46):
Of course, John Fabricatory, one of the big issues and
challenges is for local law enforcement that do want to
engage and are allowed under state local laws to do so,
it's a costly process for them to hold people. So
there's the Transition Teams plan now for the Trump administration

(47:06):
to bring back a program that would provide essentially reimbursements
for local law enforcement costs. Yeah. So there's a couple
different programs. So there's a SCAP program.

Speaker 10 (47:16):
It's a criminal alien program where if a jail has
a criminal it has a criminal alien in their custody.

Speaker 4 (47:26):
After the first day.

Speaker 10 (47:27):
They can actually bill and start building the government for
that person being in their custody.

Speaker 4 (47:32):
They can use that program.

Speaker 10 (47:33):
There's also a program in a Governmental Service Agreement where
it's an IGSA where a jail gets with ICE and says, hey,
we know we're holding illegal aliens a lot for you guys,
we would like to become a kind of de facto
immigration jail, and we're going to put up a few
beds and ICE can use those beds, but we want
ICE to pay for those beds the whole time. So

(47:55):
they make a contract with ICE where ICE is able
to keep people in that custody of that county and
then pay that county for each day a daily rate
for that illegal alien to be in the custody of
that county sheriff.

Speaker 4 (48:11):
But here in the state of Colorado.

Speaker 10 (48:13):
In twenty twenty three, the Democrats push through a bill
twenty three toash eleven hundred, which keeps any of the
counties or any of the jails in the state of
Colorado from being able to do that.

Speaker 4 (48:24):
That is extraordinary. Going to a listener text on the
Kawa comment Spirit Health text nine five sixty six nine zero.
Can we vote to get sanctuary status out of Colorado? Now?
My understanding is either the state legislature would have to
repeal their existing lives or a ballot initiative could go forward.

Speaker 10 (48:42):
So great, great question, and you hit the nail on
the head, Jimmy, and I think the direction we need
to go is a ballot initiative because we're not going
to get it passed in the state House. I mean,
we've got some great Republicans that have been elected recently.
They're going to try to push some things through, but
it's not to get through. I mean, let's I mean,
you and I are looking at each other right now.

(49:02):
We know that there's too many Democrats down in the
state House. They're not going to allow that to go through.
So I think a ballot initiative would be the way
to do it. Let's put it on the ballot and
let's and let's get people to vote on it in
the state, and let's get it rescinded.

Speaker 4 (49:16):
God willing that would happen and be successful, that's for sure.
John Fabricatory wants you to respond to North Northern Colorado Dan.
I hope that Trump's law enforcement team can and does
legally go after all government officials who obstruct or impede
any type of law enforcement. Of course, Tom Homan, the
guy will be the borders are for President Trump has

(49:38):
said I'm willing to put Mayor Johnston in jail if
he wants to be. Are their legal consequences for government
officials who impede directly? Yeah?

Speaker 10 (49:47):
Absolutely so. Number One, I worked for Tom Homan. I
actually work for the guy. I know him personally.

Speaker 4 (49:53):
When Tom Holman says he's going to do something, he's
going to do it.

Speaker 10 (49:57):
I've known Tom long enough to know that when he's
when he puts his mind to something, he's serious. And
Tom has the law behind him. So you know one
law right away is eight USC. Thirteen twenty four, which
is an anti harboring law where you cannot harbor, hide,
impede i'ce from going after an illegal alien, so they
could definitely use thirteen twenty four on anybody that tries

(50:19):
to keep the federal government from being able to enforce
lawful immigration law.

Speaker 4 (50:24):
Since we're talking about home and maybe you can't answer this,
listener text, ask John if Hoeman has reached out to
make him the lead ICE agent for color. I talked
to Tom. I can't say if I'm coming back or not.

Speaker 10 (50:39):
We've got about a month and a half until President
Trump actually comes back and they can make some some hirings.
But you know, I would come back if they asked
to do the job. Look, I left during President Biden,
and I didn't have to. I was only fifty years
old when I retired. I had thirty years in a
government at fifty, so I was eligible to retire. And

(51:01):
I retired because I could not continue to do this
job and lie to my agents and make them do
things that I didn't believe in. And I left under Biden,
and I left, you know, kind of with a little
black cloud over me because I was angry when I left.

Speaker 4 (51:13):
So I would love to come back and.

Speaker 10 (51:15):
Do this job again because I love doing this job.
I love the men and women that work for ICE.
That the mission is something that I believe in, and
if the opportunity to came up to do the.

Speaker 4 (51:24):
Mission the right way, I would definitely come back. Shoot
texting in worked with John years ago under the twenty
two to eighty seven g program. That's one of the
ones we were talking about where local law enforcement can
help be reimbursed. So forth, solid dude, despite the politics
in this state, You've got many fine Americans behind you.
Keep up the good work, John, Thank you very much.
I just got a few minutes left, John Fabricatory, and

(51:45):
I want to ask you today. My column is entitled
Southern US Border a sieve for deadly drugs. The DEA's
Rocky Mountain Field Division has shattered last year's record. Now
they've seized two point seven million fentanyl pills just this
year so far, which is six hundred thousand more than

(52:05):
in twenty twenty three. Again the year not over your
three action. Yeah. Look, it's crazy.

Speaker 10 (52:10):
And you know I wouldn't arguing with some people on
X because I actually posted an article that came up
on that and I've got some on the left side.
Well they well they caught it. You know, you're just
you know, you're out there putting out you know, bad vibes.
You know, they actually caught it. And my thing is,
that's what we caught, that's not what came exactly. The
DEA is doing a great job. They're stopping a lot,

(52:31):
but they have not stopped at all.

Speaker 4 (52:33):
It's like the people at the southern border. You may
get a hold of a lot of them, they're a
heck of a lot more that have evaded detention or apprehension.
That's why we need to secure the border, because we need.

Speaker 10 (52:43):
To stop as much coming in as possible to make
the DEA's job even a better environment for them to
stop even more in the interior.

Speaker 4 (52:52):
It's just so deadly this drug two milligrams a single
pill can kill. And then now they have this new
cartena fill. Yeah, drug that's even more deadly. In two
hundred and fifty thousand pills of those. Yeah, we were.
And that's the thing, you know, I've.

Speaker 10 (53:08):
Marched with you know, some some parents who lost their
children to fentanyl, to opioid overdose.

Speaker 4 (53:16):
And many of those parents.

Speaker 10 (53:18):
That I talked to lost kids that were not drug addicts.
These were not kids who were using drugs all the time.
The one thing that you said, one pill can kill.
For many of these kids, they were in college, they
went to a party, maybe they thought they had riddle
in they were trying to start or after all, they're
trying to study for some exams and they got some

(53:38):
stuff off the dark web or the internet and died
and died, and you know, so you know, my my
heart breaks for many of them.

Speaker 4 (53:46):
You know, kids make mistakes.

Speaker 10 (53:48):
I'm a parent, you know, I talked to my kids
about the dangers of taking anything.

Speaker 4 (53:53):
But you know, kids are going to be kids. You know,
when you're at that age, you do things.

Speaker 10 (53:58):
You just hope you you you live through those things
because God, you know, one pill can kill.

Speaker 4 (54:04):
Keep your kids away from it. Have those conversations. One conversation,
could say thirty seconds. John Fabrigatory a final word on what.

Speaker 10 (54:12):
We may be expecting with the new administration. We look,
it's President Trump's going to enforce the law. That's the
bottom line. He tried to do it in his first administration.
The left sued him over seven hundred times. You know,
on immigration policy. They're going to try to do it again.
I think President Trump's coming in this time knowing that
that's going to happen. I think he's going to come
in with the type of policy and regulation that the

(54:33):
left is not going to be able to come after
because it's already been voted on by Congress in previous
a policy and we're going to get this done.

Speaker 4 (54:40):
John Fabricatory, brother, thank you for lending your expertise this afternoon.
Very informative and appreciate all your good work. Thank you.
Jamie Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell. We got to run
to a break. Keep it right here on KOA. Good
to have you along for the right and the texts
keep coming and the KOA Common Spirit Health text line

(55:03):
at five sixty six nine zero. We had John fabricatorian
studio in the last segment. Very interesting insights, a lot
of perspective and just breaking down reality. This is what's
actually happening on the ground and what's possible when it
comes to enforcing the law and illegal immigration texts coming in.

(55:24):
Why hasn't Governor Polis pulled in all the mayors and
discussed Colorado's stance. I hate to break it to you,
but there's one simple answer to that. He doesn't care.
He just he really doesn't care, doesn't care about this issue.

(55:45):
Doesn't think it's serious enough. Look, yesterday we were talking
about how the Attorney General's office is looking into the
apartment complexes that had the presence of TDA, trend Dee Aragua,
criminal elements that have taken over these complexes, and they're

(56:06):
looking into the management of those companies and not into
the issues specific to illegal immigration, to trende aar Agua,
so on and so forth. Now, maybe there is a
case to be made you should investigate those complexes because
there have been issues going back several years. They're fair. Okay,

(56:28):
you can make that point or that case. Well, what
about the significant focusing on what is most impactful for
people's lives, the dangers that they're facing right now because
of TDA and other gangs and cartels. But they don't

(56:48):
care enough to do that, whether it's Attorney General Phil Wiser,
Governor Jared Polis, Congressman Jason Crowe, you name it, or
Mayor Johnston. My column, by the way, on Tuesday, Denver's
mayor chooses hyperbole over reality, talks about a lot of
this and quotes John Fabricatory as we lay out some

(57:11):
of the practical realities of the situation. Now, Congress covers
a lot of different topics, very serious issues and sometimes
issues where you wonder should they be doing. This case
in point, airlines CEOs, including Frontier and Spirit going before

(57:33):
a US Senate committee yesterday and getting a lot of
heat thrown their way by Senator Josh Hawley, who grilled
the CEOs in particular of Spirit Airlines and Frontier Airlines.
I have to tell you last week, or rather earlier

(57:56):
this week, I returned from two weeks so more or
less back east and a couple weeks before that. Flying
out both times were Frontier Airlines, the budget airline. The
seat's uncomfortable. If you want a snack or you want
to drink, you gotta pay for it. And the bags

(58:19):
forty pounds max. And anything above it you are going
to be charged more seventy dollars sixty nine dollars a
bag for up to forty pounds, and that can be
a real pain to have to weigh the bags and
have all that sorted out. And then you might, as

(58:40):
we had to do, have to take something out of
one suitcase and put it into the other. It's amazing
how a hoodie can weigh like two pounds. Somehow, I
don't know how that happens, but it does needless to
say they're nikeling and diming you. While something that was
found out yesterday in these hearings is that there are

(59:02):
incentives provided to employees to actually single out bags that
go above the limit, even just a fraction of a pound,
just a little bit above forty pounds. Here's Josh Hawley
grilling misterrs Klein and Schroeder from Spirit and Frontier Airlines, respectively.

Speaker 11 (59:28):
So how much have you paid people to pull out
customers who are in line with a bag that's two
centimeters too big because a shorter.

Speaker 4 (59:36):
Well, we recognize this as a hard job, and so
therefore we incentivize them to do that. How much it's
ten dollars per bag? Wow? Ten dollars per bag.

Speaker 11 (59:45):
And I think mister Klein, you and mister Schroter, your
your airlines cumulatively have spent twenty six million dollars paying
gate agents between twenty twenty two and twenty twenty three
to catch passengers whose bags are a little bit too big.
Twenty six million dollars. I mean, if people want to
know why it's a terrible experience to fly, this is
news for them today, your airlines are paying millions of

(01:00:08):
dollars to your employees to harass people who've already paid.
They're there on line because they've already paid. It's unbelievable.

Speaker 4 (01:00:16):
I should clarify. I mixed them up that this was
about the size of your carry on versus the weight.
But it all goes hand in hand, because then what happened.
Your bag is pulled aside because it's two centimeters too
big and you have to pay seventy bucks to get
it checked. Outrageous, Okay, absolutely, And Josh Hawley is right

(01:00:38):
when he, in his grilling said the following.

Speaker 11 (01:00:42):
I'm slightly amazed by the general attitude of all of
you here. Flying on your airlines is horrible. It's terrible experience.
It's terrible. It's absolutely terrible. And your attitude here today
seems to be will devil make care, there's nothing we
can do about it.

Speaker 4 (01:00:58):
Well, I think we are going to do something about it.
A couple of things. One, I'm old enough to remember
when Frontier was a wonderful airline, when it really was comfortable.
It was like it seemed like the cream of the crop,
and it was Colorado Brown headquartered here, it was a
great airline and then boo downhill and very uncomfortable, all

(01:01:21):
these things. But you do know what you're gonna get
in choosing Frontier because the price has worked at the time.
You know, you know you're getting a difficult, uncomfortable experience
on the airline and you're paying for it. You're choosing
the budget option. But still, some of these things that

(01:01:45):
they are doing as a company, and Spirit Airlines is
doing as a company are ones where you scratch your
hand and go, really, you're paying ten bucks an hour
is a sort of bounty or a bag rather as
a sort of bounty for employees who pull out bags
that are slightly too big astonishing. But here's the second point.

(01:02:12):
Is this something where we should have this? Well, I
think we are going to do something about it. What
should Congress do? Seriously? I get it, it's kind of
fun watching these airline executives actually be held accountable or
have to answer questions. But at the same time, is

(01:02:35):
this something that Congress really should be dealing with? Is
this something that Congress should be addressing and passing laws
on or deciding, oh, we're going to go in and
fix the airlines because they've got this problem where they're

(01:02:58):
nickel and diming. You know, Congress has no business micro
managing charges for bags or what happens with your carry
on or whatever it is. Congress is no business, even
if it's a pain in the rear end to deal
with it, even if the experience of flying these airlines

(01:03:19):
is absolutely terrible. What are your thoughts? KOA Common Spirit
Health text line is five six six nine zero. Got
some texts coming in here on the program. We'll get
to them on the other side again. Jimmy Sangenberger in
for Mandy Connell on KOA. This coming Saturday, rather Sunday.
Sunday afternoon, from two to five, the Colorado Country Music

(01:03:44):
Hall of Fame will be having a jam session at
Dougie G's in Thornton. It's at the VFW Post there
and it is great establishment run by Dougie. He's just
a great guy. And I will be planning some harmonica
as part of this jam. Looks like my drummer Mike

(01:04:04):
Rossi from my Jimmy Junior Blues Band will be there,
I think hoping as well. It should be a lot
of fun. Ten dollars cover, but come on out Sunday
we'd love to meet you. And there's some really talented
musicians in this town looking forward to that coming up
on Sunday. So once again we had Josh Hawley, Senator,

(01:04:28):
grilling airline CEOs, and he said and he was, well,
he was really focusing on the nikoln diming aspects, that
kind of thing. It made this one.

Speaker 11 (01:04:42):
I'm slightly amazed by the general attitude of all of
you here. Flying on your airlines is horrible. It's terrible experience.
It's terrible. It's absolutely terrible. And your attitude here today
seems to be will devil make care, there's nothing we
can do about it.

Speaker 4 (01:04:58):
Well, I think we are going to do something about it.
I think you think it's terrible. I couldn't really tell
do something, do what. The texts have been absolutely crazy.
We've had a ton of texts coming in on the
koa common Spirit health text line. So I can't help
but talk about this a little bit more. A five
to six to six nine zero is the number one text.

(01:05:18):
Not no, not outrageous. Follow the damn rules. They can
set the rules. Know what you are flying? Another texter,
I think it is so funny that people have the
ability to find out what the rules are, and then
they get upset when they break the rules. It doesn't
matter if you're just two centimeters over or fifteen centimeters over,

(01:05:39):
you are over. Same with the weight. It doesn't matter
if you're one pound over or fifteen pounds over, you
are over. The standards are set, learn the standards, abide
by them, and good things happen. My favorite text, though,
is the one that just says you're wrong, You're wrong.

(01:06:00):
I don't know what I said that's wrong. I'm not
sure what's wrong, but I'm wrong in some respect. Clarification please, yes,
I would. I would welcome clarification. Here's my thing. Look,
I just flew on Frontier to and from back east.
I decided to make that choice, knowing about the limits

(01:06:22):
and all that, and abided by those limits. So for me,
I'm not complaining so much as saying, look, it's a
hassle to be here, but you get the price benefit.
That's why I flew Frontier. That's why we flew Frontier
because of the price benefit. But it is a hassle
in many different ways. The airlines here make it very unpleasant.

(01:06:48):
You know what you're doing. Congress, though, should not have
any roles should not get in the way in any way,
shape or form. As listeners in, nobody can screw up
a really good idea, quite like Congress, and a good
idea might be what this other texture put in. I

(01:07:11):
personally like being able to add what I want and
don't want on a flight. I find it very irritating
they're trying to take those options away from me. We
live in a capitalist country. If you want an all
inclusive fare, fly those airlines. Leave US budget airline fans alone,
absolutely fair. This is the problem for government getting its

(01:07:33):
grubby little hands involved, is that then you can end
up losing something that works for you, the choice to
choose that budget airline. At the same time, I don't
think it's inappropriate or wrong to acknowledge that it can
be a real pain and sometimes the price can add

(01:07:55):
up where you might as well have not chosen the
budget airline but chosen something else. I fly all over
the US for business at pleasure, and I have always
had a great experience a frontier. You just have to
know how to travel within the system. Nobody else even
touches their prices. I'm a Platinum Elite member and always
sit in the first rows because of how often I travel.

(01:08:18):
They treat me very well, so I disagree that it's
a horrible experience. Fair if it's what you're going for,
let them have it. Don't get in the way, government,
keep it coming. Five six, six nine zero is the
text line. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Conna. One
more hour up ahead on KOA.

Speaker 1 (01:08:36):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury Lawyers.

Speaker 2 (01:08:40):
No, it's Mandy Connell Manna On KAMA.

Speaker 4 (01:08:54):
They sad time is flying by. Final segment, Jimmy Sangenberger
in for the vacationing of Mandy Connell on this Friday,
the sixth of December. The year is flying by. And look,

(01:09:22):
you have a lot of machinations that have been going
on in the political world and a lot of areas,
of course, and internationally, a lot of things are changing.
You already have President elect Donald Trump meeting with world
leaders from Justin Trudeau of Canada to forget her last name, mcclaudia,

(01:09:43):
the new president of Mexico as well. And he's having
all these meetings with world leaders and taking phone calls
and axios has called it a shadow presidency. It's something critiqued,
by the way, by read over on MSNBC, who had
quite a description for Trump.

Speaker 7 (01:10:05):
Let's bring you back to the US and to our
local gangster Donald Trump. He's not even president yet and
he's already spending his time sitting in his golden palace
mar A Lago, muscling other countries like he's Tony Soprano
with a social media site, doing things like reportedly debating
whether or not to invade Mexico, threatening bricks countries Brazil, Russia, India, China,

(01:10:26):
and South Africa with one hundred percent tariffs if they
don't commit to trading in dollars and not their own currencies,
Demanding Hamas release all hostages being held in Gaza before
his inauguration or there will be quote all hell to
pay in the Middle East.

Speaker 4 (01:10:44):
God forbid that Trump would or any incoming president would
try to get Hamas to free hostages, would challenge Hamas
of all things, including invading Mexico on that list is absurd.
But the term is the our local gangster Donald Trump,

(01:11:11):
like Tony Soprano. Okay, you can have criticisms. I think
they're valid about an incoming president, being a shadow president
already establishing things and the trends and what's happening in
his administration now. But those kinds of descriptures descriptions rather crazy,

(01:11:34):
particularly the one about Hamas and putting presser on Hamas,
which leads me to Bill Clinton. Now, Bill Clinton, as
we talked about in the first hour, was that New
York Times. I think it's like book Deal Summit or

(01:11:55):
something like that. And he was asked a number of
questions and one of them was about the war with
Israel and Gaza and peace steals, and he recalled something
very important about Hamas and about the Palestinian Liberation Organization,

(01:12:16):
about the Palestinians and their willingness or lack thereof two
engage in a peace steal that would have even gotten
a state, a separate state for the Palestinians. And it's
an important lesson that Clinton laid out I think pretty clearly.

Speaker 5 (01:12:38):
Yeah, he walked away from a foal incident in state
with a capital in East Jerusalem ninety six percent of
the West Bank, four percent of Israel.

Speaker 6 (01:12:49):
To make up for the fourth percent that the settlers
occupy that were beyond the.

Speaker 5 (01:12:57):
Borders in the sixty seven war, and I go through
all the stuff that was in the deal, and they.

Speaker 6 (01:13:05):
Like, it's not on their radars.

Speaker 5 (01:13:08):
Me. They can't even imagine does that happen? And I
tell them, you know, the first and most famous victim
of an attempt to give the Palestinian in the state was.

Speaker 6 (01:13:21):
Prime Minister Rabine. I think loved this much. I loved
another man, and.

Speaker 4 (01:13:34):
So webbing.

Speaker 6 (01:13:38):
The guys and.

Speaker 5 (01:13:41):
Then shun Paris has defeated in the election, and the
way the rest of it is history.

Speaker 4 (01:13:49):
But so he was recalling his attempted negotiations between Yasir
Era fat As, the Palestini and leader and Israel back
in the nineteen nineties, and there was a peace deal
clearly laid out that would have given a Palestinian state,

(01:14:09):
and he didn't He being Arafat, didn't comply, didn't agree
with that sweeping opportunity, refused it because that's not the
goal of the PLO or Hamas. It is the eradication
of Israel, and they would not allow an acceptance of

(01:14:30):
Israel's existence, even if it means getting their own separate state.
This was a powerful little end to that point. In
an exchange with the moderator.

Speaker 5 (01:14:40):
We walk away from these once in a lifetime feace opportunities,
and you can't complain twenty five years later, when the
doors weren't all still open and all the possibilities weren't
still there. You can't do it.

Speaker 4 (01:14:54):
Your voice just cracked when you said that.

Speaker 6 (01:14:57):
Yeah, I'm an old guy. Help my regrets.

Speaker 5 (01:15:02):
That's one of them.

Speaker 4 (01:15:04):
I'm an old guy. I have my regrets. I bet
he's got plenty of regrets being Bill Clinton. But there
he says, this is one of them that he wasn't
able to secure a piece still, and as we see
what's been happening in Gaza, you can't forget that. You
can't ignore it. You can't act like this history did

(01:15:24):
not happen, because it did happen, and it has been
consistent ever since. If there were to be a kind
of deal Israel placed before the Palestinians today and said
you acknowledge our existence, you allow us just the things
like we saw in the nineteen nineties, and release the

(01:15:46):
hostages and we'll stop the bombardments. If that was some
sort of a piece deal, they wouldn't accept it, because
this isn't about for them about getting a second Palaceian
or a state specifically for the Palestinians. It is about
supplanting Israel, which is where from the river to the sea,

(01:16:11):
Palestine will be free. That chant that the Prohamas radicals
always yell at these protests, that's what they mean, replace Israel,
eradicate the Jewish state, and replace it with their own
in that same territory and so powerful. Hearing Bill Clinton

(01:16:36):
talk about this point, especially as a Democrat with a
lot of folks on the left who are championing the
idea that the United States needs to withdraw support for Israel,
that it is one of the seminal issues and moments
of our time is this, and it's anti Semitism. By

(01:17:00):
the way, our text line koa Common Spirit health text
line five six sixty nine. Zero Joy Reid is such
a miserable person. Can we get her canceled? Please? Oh?
I don't know. Just because she's a miserable person doesn't
mean she should be canceled. But yes, she doesn't. I

(01:17:20):
don't think she lends very much value to the discourse
from her style of cable news. But then again, how
many people on cable news really do lend value to
the discourse. I'll leave that to you. I'm Jimmy Sangenberger
covering from Mandy Connell today, keep it right here on KOA,
filling in for Mandy Connell. Right here on KOA. By

(01:17:44):
the way, just speaking of Christmas as I understand it,
today is the sixty if anniversary of Rudolph the Red
Nosed Reindeer being released on NBC broadcasts for the first
time sixty years ago. Today. Speaking of Hollywood and productions,

(01:18:05):
there as an independent film, a powerful one. I haven't
seen it yet, but I am looking forward to it.
It is now in theaters called The Order, written by
Zach Balin, directed by Justin Kurzel. It's based on the
nineteen eighty nine nonfiction book The Silent Brotherhood by Kevin

(01:18:26):
Flynn and Gary Gerhardt, revolving around an FBI agent who
goes after a white supremacist terrorist group known as The
Order that was active in the United States in the
nineteen eighties, including right here in Colorado. In fact, former
than legendary KOA radio host Alan Berg, a featured individual

(01:18:51):
in this film, was assassinated by the Order, and this
morning on Colorado's Morning News with Marty and Gina, they
interviewed the writer Zach Balin about this and in particular
the aspect is significant Mark Marin playing alan Berg. Take

(01:19:13):
a listen here to a snippet from that exclusive interview
this morning.

Speaker 10 (01:19:21):
From the history in Kowa's perspective, I'm curious in the
movie was that actually the final script of alan Berg's
final broadcast?

Speaker 4 (01:19:31):
Was it similar? Were their adaptations or things taken from it?

Speaker 1 (01:19:34):
Or was it.

Speaker 4 (01:19:34):
Completely different than just to play a different role in
the movie.

Speaker 12 (01:19:38):
The actual final broadcast. I believe it is amalgamated from
other broadcasts of his. You know, there was one piece
that I wrote because we wanted to get a very
specific thing across for it, like sort of story wise
for the film.

Speaker 4 (01:19:52):
But otherwise we listened to a lot.

Speaker 12 (01:19:54):
Of Alan's actual programming and tried to use as much
of it as we could in the in the film
because they think, you know, he was incredibly He was
obviously very provocative, but he was well ahead of his
time and was already speaking to a lot of the
issues that you know, I think we're facing today, and
so his words felt pretty timeless and we wanted to

(01:20:15):
use them.

Speaker 4 (01:20:15):
It was a phenomenal question for Gina. You know, when
we think about a Hollywood production that is adapting something
that happened in real life or various events happening in
real life, there's a little bit of creative license that
is going to come from that. So I love the
answer to that question, how you kind of bridge together
some of that creative stuff that you're going to do
as a screenwriter, like Zach Balin was saying, along with

(01:20:38):
everything that you can pull from what was actually said
on the radio, what was actually heard. But to me,
it's also just incredible to have this film that includes Koa.
The old Koa jingle at the time is in there
and to have that featured is remarkable. And it stars

(01:21:02):
Jude Law, major actor in Hollywood. Of course, he's also
now starring in Star Wars Skeleton Crew, which by the way,
is actually really good. The first two episodes that debuted
on Disney Plus this week off to a good start.
But so that shows you the calibert when you have
Jude Laws starring and Mark Marin playing Alan Berg, you

(01:21:26):
can just feel that you're in for a treat. You
know that something quality is going to be provided to
you and telling a very important story at a critical
moment and a story that just so happens to have
a very powerful and historic tie in to this radio
station right here on Kowa. The Order now in theaters

(01:21:51):
as of today. Zach Balin, screenwriter for The Order. On
earlier Colorado's Morning News, you can listen to do that
interview from the iHeartRadio app for Colorado Morning's New Morning News.
And you know, it's just to me, when you adapt

(01:22:12):
something from reality and you do it well, and you
do it right, that's what matters. And it seems like
there's a lot of that in this film. The Order fascinating.
I'm Jimmy saying in Burger Filian for Mandy Connell when
we come back. Pat Lynch is someone spent a lot
of time in South America and Central America and it's

(01:22:38):
got some really interesting insights. I've spoken with him before
on what's been happening in Argentina with Javier Milay, the
free market champion who's now the President of Argentina, has
been making a lot of changes and things have been
improving already quite a bit economically in Argentina. We will
talk with Pat Lynch about that, and we've got more

(01:23:00):
coming up as we head into the final half hour
of the show. Jimmy Sangenberger in for Mandy Connell here
on KOA. Good to be with you. Jimmy Sangenberger in
for Mandy Connell. Final segment of the show. You can
text in in the KOA Common Spirit Health text line
five six six nine zero.

Speaker 11 (01:23:18):
Now.

Speaker 4 (01:23:18):
A year ago, Javier Milat became President of Argentina. At
the time, the Central Bank for the country was twelve
billion dollars in debt. They had half the country in
poverty and seventy five hundred percent inflation, just astronomical in

(01:23:41):
ways that we couldn't even imagine. Now he has taken office,
been in office for a year. Taking a chain saw
to government. That's what he did during his campaign. I
want to take a chainsaw to government, and a lot
of things, including inflation, are much more under control. What's

(01:24:02):
happening here, what's really going on, Pat Lynch, is that
the Liberty Fund. He spent a lot of time in
Latin America, and he joins me now to dive into this. Pat,
good afternoon, and welcome.

Speaker 13 (01:24:17):
Give me. It's great to be back, happy to be here.

Speaker 4 (01:24:19):
Good to talk with you again. Sir. Hey, let's just
go right to painting a picture a year ago. When
Javier Milay took office, what was the state of affairs
like in Argentina.

Speaker 13 (01:24:31):
It was among one of the worst countries, if you'd
have to compare it to some places like Venezuela and
other horrible places to live during in the period during
in the region, I should say, you know, the inflation
numbers were, as you pointed out, horrible. They were essentially
a state of hyperinflation. What he took office, inflation was
about twenty five percent a month. So I want you

(01:24:52):
to think about that for a second. So every month
your bills are going up twenty five percent. The deficits
is you pointed out at Allso so the bountries and poverty,
and you've got a political system that really began under
the president's impert when everyone probably knows the movie A
Vita or the musical A Vida based on the life
of his wife, but Perone was a guy who idealized

(01:25:15):
Mussolini and took the country down a path of centralizing
the economy under government control, granting privileges to unions, and
creating an incredibly an efficient state that got into spending money.
And then once the presidents under the Paronis the label
began pursuing populous policies to spend money, to throw money

(01:25:38):
around that they simply didn't have, and strangled the free
market economy that had.

Speaker 14 (01:25:42):
Existed prior to that. The country fell into a spiral
of inflation and deficits and recessions that really just destroyed
the middle class and made the country a total basket case.

Speaker 4 (01:25:55):
Now, Hobby Amilae pat Lynch is someone really steeped in
the notion of free market economics, having studied Hayek and
von Misis and Milton Friedman, and the list goes on.
And that is the economic perspective as an economist that
he has come at this. When you are getting into
a situation as a president of a country that was

(01:26:17):
in the state of affairs that you just described, and
you have the political challenges before you because you're trying
to do something so dramatically different, there's a lot that's
involved in that. So let's talk for a moment about
what he has done before we get to how it's
turned out so far in this year. What are some

(01:26:37):
of the steps that Javier Malay has taken in Argentina.

Speaker 13 (01:26:42):
Absolutely that you know that what he's had to do.
I think the biggest step he's had to take, honestly,
is to get people to believe those ideas of what
those authors you just mentioned. You know, it's amazing to
me how exiled and ostracized the some of the Austrian
and free market economists that you mentioned, most of many
of them one Nobel prizes. I mean and I were
both in the both prize winners. And yet today mainstream

(01:27:03):
economics throughout the world, in the United States and Europe
and Latin America, they just completely rejected that approach, and
the belief is that the governments have to help. If
they don't help, the market will just destroy everything. But
what Nelay believed, what he came to believe through his studies,
and you're right, he's steeped heavily and a lot of economics,
is a very very smart guy. What he realized was

(01:27:24):
that the government had to get out of the way,
and that the government was the cause of all these problems.
The money printing was creating, the inflation, the stagnation was
the result of government regulation that was out of control
and just absolutely stifling any kind of innovation, or we
de offens people that he was right, and it got basically,
the situation had gotten so bad that there was a
door open for these kinds of ideas, which Bloomberg rejected,

(01:27:47):
which you know, the Wall Street Journal was skeptical about.
All these mainstreams sort of right wing periodicals and business
writers were saying all this stuff is crazy because they
even they themselves didn't believe it. So he had to
get people on board with it. And even though he
could get people on board with it, most of his
support actually was among young people. It still is among
young people who were facing this very dire future in Argentina.

(01:28:09):
They were his base support.

Speaker 4 (01:28:10):
They remain his.

Speaker 13 (01:28:11):
Base support, but just getting those convinced them. He still
entered a circumstance where the majority party of the Parentist Party,
his opposition, controlled most of the Congress, so he had
to work within the system of tremendous opposition, both within
the Congress and the unions themselves, which were receiving all
these benefits. And they took in the streets immediately and
tried to shut him down and tried to basically get

(01:28:32):
him impeached and take that out of office. They said
he was mentally unstable because he was walking around the
chains all the time, and so that model that he used,
and I think if you're going to make a Trump comparison,
and the Lake sometimes gets compared to Trump and the
mainstream press, it's because they both are so skilled at
using social media and getting attention and that then he
managed to Pernias to do that effectively. He get elected,
but the transition from being that figure to a governing

(01:28:55):
figure was very difficult. So that was the first big
thing that I think he needed to do. Got a
big reform bill pass that allowed him to cut the
size and scope of government pretty substantially, which is a
great lot of stuff. And they managed to shrink inflation
to two percent a month, which is still bad by
most of your European and certainly developed country standard. They

(01:29:17):
strunk the fiscal deficits substantially. And then the real key
thing what that's done is it's unleashed interest in foreign investment.
And so what you have now is you've got a big,
big potential boom in foreign investment in the energy sector.
And it turns out that Argentina has got one of
the largest zones available for fracking, one of the largest

(01:29:38):
basins for fracking in the world, and they're hopeful that
they're going to get foreign investment that's going to help
the economy take off along with agricultural prices, and our
contargent teams are very very big agricultural exporter. That's going
to combine together to give them an economic boom going
into the bits from elections in twenty twenty five. If
he can accomplish that and continue to shrink the size

(01:29:58):
of the state, get rid of a lot of the
woke stuff, which he's also been very effective at, re
energize the country and get young people back, you know,
keeping him on his side and getting them participating in
the economy. I think he's got the possibility to be
able to turn it around and be successful.

Speaker 4 (01:30:13):
That's fascinating a lot there, Pat Lynch. And the foreign
investment piece is key because if you have an economy
that is at seventy five hundred percent inflation a year,
twenty five percent a month, the idea of having foreign companies,
especially Western companies, the American and European nations for example,

(01:30:35):
investing in the companies going to Argentina a country like that,
it just doesn't exist. But now when you see some
renewed interest that just goes to show how just a
little bit of free market economics being put into practice
can actually make a remarkable difference.

Speaker 13 (01:30:54):
Back it's funny. I mean, I think the most obvious
example and I don't know with the situations in Colorado,
but you know, rent control is one of these things
that you're people talking about because prices are out of
control for apartments and houses throughout the country, and it's
a supply problem. And what Malay did. Argentina suffered from
a rent control situation where the rent share in renting

(01:31:17):
out apartments and so people chose not to rent and
there was no supply. Once he abolished rent controls, he
got the power to be able to do that. The
supply of available apartments to runt in Buenos Aires doubled
in a month, so double, like you say, when you've
just applied based if you market anonymous, when you abolish
the ideas which are obviously bad, even though they do
have a very very simple appeal, a simple sort of

(01:31:40):
populist appeal, they're wrong. And when you can put the
right ideas in place and you can allow markets to function,
it can create remarkable turnarounds.

Speaker 4 (01:31:48):
And that's what he's trying to do Pat Lynch again,
our guest, he's at Liberty. You find one thing you
said that I think was so striking and we got
a few minutes left, is young people. Here in the
United States, we think of young young people being more
left fleaning. They're reliable base generally for Democrats. It's remarkable
that we had Trump get as many young people backing

(01:32:09):
him this time as we did, much more than in
twenty twenty and in twenty sixteen. But here in Argentina
you actually have Can you hear me here?

Speaker 6 (01:32:22):
I can now?

Speaker 4 (01:32:23):
Yeah, okay, perfect. I was saying, it's remarkable that, unlike
the United States and Argentina and his young people that
have been driving his support, what's going on there?

Speaker 13 (01:32:34):
Well, I think what's going on is that these young
people saw that the parentis model of the state dominated
economic model was a failure. And if you're older and
you're receiving a pension from the government, you're receiving welfare
from the government, and you're used to this stuff, you know,
it's sort of like Stockholm syndrome. You know, you start
to say, well, this is the way the world is.
I'm going to accept it for what it is. Young

(01:32:56):
people were fleeing the country. They were leaving in large numbers,
and they didn't want to They wanted to stay with
their families. They wanted to be part of Argentina, the
country they grew up in, and they had pride in
the place, and they wanted to try to turn it around.
And so he provided an alternative. He provided a model
where people could see it. And I think the big
thing that he did was he talked about the ideas,
and those ideas began to have traction among young people.

(01:33:17):
People started to read those off the week earlier, and
those ideas suddenly became riot for folks. And then now
that they can see what's going on and they can
see the changes that are occurring, those ideas can have
even more traction and hopefully become more popular among young
people in that part of the world. You know, I
think the recent election in the US show that young
people are perhaps not as linked to the rest as

(01:33:39):
we might normally believe. You know, young people can be
rational given the opportunity. They all want to be a
little anti establishment, and if the establishment is going one way,
they can sort of pivot the other way. And in
Argentina it became very anti status yea, and it could
be that the last election in the US presented the
same opportunities.

Speaker 4 (01:33:55):
Yeah, I'm a millennial and I've always said that I
believe millennials are more right leaning than people give them
credit for. Pat I want to ask you one final
question before we let you go, and that is what
lessons can we in the United States learn and take
from what Javier Malay has been doing in Argentina over
the last year, and who knows what's to come in

(01:34:17):
the new next year.

Speaker 13 (01:34:20):
I think the big lesson is that we have to
focus on the fundamentals of free market economics if we
want the kind of growth results that we are going
to need in order to be able to pay for
the spending and the challenges we face. I mean, how
are we going to be able to grow the state
or grow the economy large large enough to be able
to pay for things like social security to do the
kinds of reforms that people want, We're going to have

(01:34:42):
to give. Malay is very committed to free trade, He's
committed to triggering the size of the state, growing the
free market, and I think if we take any lessons
away from what Argentina is doing, and you have to
fight the existing establishment which has in vested interests, whether
their labor unions or the government blob or whoever it
is to fight those folks, commit to free market principles

(01:35:02):
and follow through on them, and just.

Speaker 4 (01:35:04):
Real quick, this idea of the Department of Government Efficiency.
Elon Musk vive Gramaswami. Do you think that that is
sort of getting out one piece of what Milay was
able to accomplish in getting it government? Do you think
that it's a viable program that they seek to implement
when Trump takes office.

Speaker 13 (01:35:27):
I think it can be effective in the limited scope
of the kind of spending they can actually cut, but
the size and the scope of the US deficit is
really based in other more fundamental problems that they can't handle.
I think it would be great to cut a lot
of the agencies that they're talking about going after. I
think that would unleash a lot of creativity and give
a lot of freedom to citizens to do and pursue
their lives to things that in a very different way.

(01:35:48):
But the deficits we face are based on the size
of the government debt and other problems entitlement and things
that I don't think that these two are going to
be able to handle, but it would be a good start.

Speaker 4 (01:35:57):
Agreat Pat Land at the Liberty Fund really appreciate it.
Always great to get your take. Thanks for your perspective.

Speaker 13 (01:36:06):
Thank you, Jimmy.

Speaker 4 (01:36:07):
Once again, Patrick Lynch joining us on the program and
look about dose. It was interesting hearing John Fetterman, who
I gotta tell you increasingly. At first I was like,
oh my gosh, this is the guy who's showing up
in the United States Senate. He wears shorts and a hoodie,
almost never dresses up in a suit. He seemed very ideological,

(01:36:32):
left wing, not somebody who was going to be very
balanced in any way. Seemed like he wasn't going to
take things seriously. And lo and behold he has. He's
shown himself to be an independent thinker, somebody who is
willing to buck the Democratic Party establishment, buck Republicans, the media,
what have you, and is sort of calling balls and

(01:36:54):
strikes a lot of things on policy issues. I disagree
with him, but I gotta say I like the Again,
he is the senator from Pennsylvania, and he had this
to say when he was asked about Elon Musk and Doge.

Speaker 15 (01:37:13):
You see yourself ultimately working with folks like Elon Musk
and for fake Ramaswami who will do yeah again. I
admire mister Musk. He has been involved in very important
parts of American society, AI, SpaceX and other kinds of things. Yes,

(01:37:33):
he's on a different team, but that doesn't make me
an enemy. I don't be automatically going to become a critic.
It's like, hey, he has made you know, he's made
our economy and our nation better, and our politics are different,
and I don't agree with some of the things that
he might say, but that doesn't make him, like I said,

(01:37:54):
an enemy.

Speaker 4 (01:37:55):
Yeah, there are things I would be critical of, many
things regarding Elon Musk, and I have some concerns that
this DOGE office is going to be so beamified, as
in overdoing the memes online and playing into social media
and things going on in social media land a little

(01:38:18):
bit too much. I have concerns about that. But fundamentally
he's right that there's a lot that Musk is bringing,
and the fact that you can have somebody who's willing
to go out there and make a clear cut case
for a lot of things that DOGE would do. I

(01:38:40):
think is a big deal and is largely beneficial, and
Fetterman seemed pretty thoughtful in his assessment there, So we'll
see what actually transpires. I'm still wondering how this Department
of Government Efficiency is going to be set up. Will
Elon Musk Captain I think I mentioned this yesterday put
his investments into like a blind trust or something. Will

(01:39:02):
he have to remove himself as CEO? What have you?
I mean, there are a lot of questions to be
had in that regard, and we'll see how it all unfolds.
Another big question, will TikTok actually be banned? We touched
on this at the beginning of the show, but a
federal appeals court ruled today that TikTok can, in fact

(01:39:23):
the app social media app can in fact be banned
in the United States over national security concerns. Now, there's
a federal law that was passed by Congress bipartisan signed
into law by President Biden in April that requires the
popular social media app to shed its Chinese ownership in

(01:39:44):
order to keep operating well. The three judge US Court
of Appeals for the DC Circuit so that Congress does
have the power to take action against TikTok to protect
us interest. Now, the irony is that the case was premise,
the case against this law brought by byte Dance, the

(01:40:06):
parent company, and some of the Stars for TikTok, is
that free speech. This is a free speech issue under
the First Amendment. And the irony here is it's a
Chinese company. They want to send, they want to Congress
wants them to shed Chinese ownership. And in China, you

(01:40:26):
don't have a guaranteed freedom of speech. There's no First Amendment.
It's one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet,
especially under Shijin Ping as the ruler there, with the
Chinese Communist Party's boot constantly trampling upon individual rights. So
the irony here is you have a First Amendment argument

(01:40:48):
being made to defend Chinese ownership of a social media outlet.
But will it actually be banned, will they sell it?
Will it have American ownership? I don't know. I tend
to believe with the amount of money that comes from

(01:41:09):
TikTok and the Stars, and the support for it from
and the Star, and support for the Stars from young
people and for people who aren't this is an app
that is not just used by teenagers, people in their twenties, thirties,
forties are constantly using this app. I don't, but I

(01:41:31):
know a heck of a lot of people who do,
and the impact that it would have if you would
actually do some kind of a band. I just I
don't know that I can see it realistically happening. But
the laws in place, unless the Supreme Court overturns the law,

(01:41:53):
the prospect of it changing means it's hard to see
because the law as you sell or ban. So what's
going to happen, How is it going to happen, and
what are the ripple effects? Those are major major questions

(01:42:14):
that will be answered next year. And we have a
new administration coming in January twentieth and be fascinating to
watch it all unfold. Well that is it for me
today on this Friday, the sixth of December. I hope
you have a great weekend. To be sure to check
out my website. You can get all my huh podcast

(01:42:36):
link for filling in. I got my columns that I
write regularly Tuesdays and Fridays in the Denver is at
Jimmy Sangenburger dot com. Remember there's no AI or you
and sang in Berger. It's all ease all the time
once you know that sang in Burger is easy. So
have a great weekend my friends, and as I always

(01:42:56):
like to say, may God bless America.