Speaker 1: Andre w l W nine eight.
Speaker 2: Dan Carroll in for Scott Sloan Sloaney taking the day
Speaker 2: off as he basks in the in the aftermath and
Speaker 2: the glory of a great Buffalo Bill's victory over the
Speaker 2: Cincinnati the hapless Cincinnati Bengals. Austin Elmore will be here
Speaker 2: in the eleven o'clock hour, will break down some of
Speaker 2: what happened yesterday. And I was really I love Austin Elmore.
Speaker 2: I think his analysis on football is great. I was
Speaker 2: really debating on whether or not they have him on
Speaker 2: we can finally put in the rear view mirror this
Speaker 2: season and just to forget about the notion that the
Speaker 2: Bengals are going going to be involved in postseason play.
Speaker 2: So that's coming up in eleven o'clock hour. Also, Chris
Speaker 2: Mindaman will be here in the eleven o'clock hour away
Speaker 2: in what's going on in the city of Cincinnati there.
Speaker 2: It is amazing the way the stories broke over the weekend.
Speaker 2: And let me read to you the words of Kevin Aldrich,
Speaker 2: who is the opinion and Engagement editor at the Cincinnati
Speaker 2: enquire because I think he really does a great job here.
Speaker 2: And this is what he wrote over the weekend. Pervoll
Speaker 2: isn't just any he's talking about our mayor have to
Speaker 2: have Purvoll. By the way, Purvall isn't just any borrower
Speaker 2: trying to make ends meet. He's the mayor of a
Speaker 2: major American city responsible for overseeing a multi billion dollar budget.
Speaker 2: That job comes with higher expectations of financial responsibility and
Speaker 2: just as importantly, transparency. When something goes wrong and the
Speaker 2: story the mayor offered up doesn't add up, my auto
Speaker 2: pay wasn't working, explanation glosses over the fact that he
Speaker 2: would not, or that he would have had to miss
Speaker 2: at least three months worth of payments. Most repossessions don't
Speaker 2: happen until around ninety days after the first mispayment. By
Speaker 2: that point, lenders have called emails, have got out, texted
Speaker 2: and mailed letters. They've warned borrowers over and over before
Speaker 2: they go to the nuclear option of repossessing a vehicle.
Speaker 2: And the man who wrote those words is my guest
Speaker 2: this morning, Kevin Aldridge. It's great to have you on
Speaker 2: this morning. How the heck are you?
Speaker 3: Damn?
Speaker 4: I'm doing good. I'd be doing better if those Bengals
Speaker 4: you just talked about at the top had actually not
Speaker 4: folded at the end of the game, So we move on.
Speaker 2: I was joking with you over the weekend, I was
Speaker 2: going to have you on to break down the Bengals game.
Speaker 2: I think that was before we knew the outcome of
Speaker 2: the game. I was hoping it was going to be
Speaker 2: a Bengals victory, but I go ahead.
Speaker 5: No, it was looking like it was.
Speaker 4: I mean, and then there's like forty five seconds where
Speaker 4: the wheels just came.
Speaker 1: Off and that was it. That was it.
Speaker 2: Then the play, I think really sums up the Bengals
Speaker 2: season was at the very end of the game, third
Speaker 2: and fifteen, time is running out, and apparently no one
Speaker 2: affiliated with the Cincinnati Bengals could entertain the notion that
Speaker 2: the Buffalo Bills quarterback might run the ball situation, and
Speaker 2: there was no no scheme devised at all to prevent
Speaker 2: that from happening.
Speaker 4: Yeah, if I'm the Bengals, I'm thinking one of two things.
Speaker 4: Guard the tight end and don't let Josh Allen run.
Speaker 4: Anything else from there is okay to let happen because
Speaker 4: they're probably not going to get fifteen yards. But you know,
Speaker 4: for some reason, our coaching staff is smarter than the
Speaker 4: average fan like you and I watching the game in
Speaker 4: terms of what's obvious, and as you said, it explains
Speaker 4: why you know the Bengals are are four and ten
Speaker 4: or whatever we are in the year is over and
Speaker 4: now we can all move on and start talking about
Speaker 4: the draft and how we're going to fix this, fix
Speaker 4: this thing next year.
Speaker 2: How dare we how dare we applying on professional sports?
Speaker 1: We know nothing of it? You and I? We did
Speaker 1: We did not play the game.
Speaker 2: So let's talk about what's going on with our mayor
Speaker 2: And the question that I think everyone is asking. Was
Speaker 2: this information kept under wraps and did not see the
Speaker 2: light of day until after the election? Was this done
Speaker 2: in a purposeful way to keep this from having any
Speaker 2: influence on voters who voted for this mayor in this
Speaker 2: city council?
Speaker 4: So so, who are you? Who are you asking? Kept
Speaker 4: it under wrest Well? Was there an effort made by
Speaker 4: the mayor? Was there an effort made by people who
Speaker 4: support him? Was there an effort made by anyone to
Speaker 4: keep that And that's the question. I don't know the
Speaker 4: answer to that question. It was that was there? In
Speaker 4: your opinion?
Speaker 2: Was there an effort made to keep this information from
Speaker 2: seeing the light of day before the election.
Speaker 4: Well, yeah, I mean certainly one would. One would have
Speaker 4: to say that this is something that the mayor wouldn't
Speaker 4: want the mayor wouldn't want out or wouldn't wouldn't want
Speaker 4: to be publicized because quite frankly, it is an embarrassing
Speaker 4: situation to be the mayor of a you know, major city.
Speaker 4: And and I don't say that because these sorts of
Speaker 4: things don't happen to people, right. I mean, I myself
Speaker 4: in my early youth of my twenties had a car repossessed.
Speaker 4: So these things happen to people, particularly when you you know,
Speaker 4: may not be the best financial manager, or you know,
Speaker 4: the economy is tough and it's tough to make ends meet.
Speaker 4: These things happen. That's not the point. But I think
Speaker 4: the mayor recognized that, you know, this is probably something
Speaker 4: that you're not going to you know, openly report or
Speaker 4: reveal unless it's necessary. And I think the interesting thing
Speaker 4: for me is how this how this information did get
Speaker 4: out because most car repossessions are not in the public domain,
Speaker 4: like unless not unless it's it's it's taken the court
Speaker 4: and there's some sort of lawsuit involved. So the interesting
Speaker 4: thing to me was who, to me is who leaked
Speaker 4: this and how did it get out? I mean, I
Speaker 4: think we know the site's signal ninety nine. I think
Speaker 4: was the one who reported it. But I think what's
Speaker 4: more interesting is is how did they get a document
Speaker 4: that's not typically in the public domain. So I think
Speaker 4: that's a that's an interesting question in terms of how
Speaker 4: it got out, I don't I don't think it's possible
Speaker 4: for anybody outside of those who might have known the mayor,
Speaker 4: the loan company, anybody who might have saw the car
Speaker 4: get repossessed when or when or wherever that was. The
Speaker 4: mayor hasn't said if he confide it in anybody in
Speaker 4: it they might have known, So I think, you know,
Speaker 4: this notion of it being a broader cover up outside
Speaker 4: of the mayor himself not saying anything, or people who
Speaker 4: were in a position to know, I don't necessarily know that.
Speaker 4: I would conclude that just because that's the type of
Speaker 4: information that's not readily out there in the public domain
Speaker 4: where media could do a public records request or something
Speaker 4: like that, short of you know, somebody in the know
Speaker 4: telling the media about it, well, and.
Speaker 2: They you know, and I look at what you just
Speaker 2: said right there, and I can respect that opinion completely.
Speaker 2: There's another issue that may involve the covering up of information.
Speaker 2: We're going to get to that in a minute. But
Speaker 2: I think you make some good points here as you
Speaker 2: take Mayor purvol to task that this notion about his
Speaker 2: auto pay wasn't working, that we need to hold people
Speaker 2: like the mayor of Cincinnati to a higher standard, that
Speaker 2: we need to have trust in the people that are
Speaker 2: in the administration and people that are in charge of
Speaker 2: spending money at city Hall. And it raises the question
Speaker 2: that if he can't control his own finances to the
Speaker 2: point where something like this happens, and again, the people
Speaker 2: make mistakes, there are oversight see these things happen, but
Speaker 2: the reality of how a repossession comes to actually take
Speaker 2: place doesn't really wash with the story that the mayor
Speaker 2: is offering up.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and that's why I said, you know, he's this
Speaker 4: could be let's just take for let's just take that
Speaker 4: what he says is actually true, that the auto pay
Speaker 4: wasn't working. Okay, then just the simple explanation of hey
Speaker 4: I wasn't I wasn't paying attention, or hey I got
Speaker 4: these notices, and my intention was to take care of it,
Speaker 4: and it just kept slipping my mind, Like you know,
Speaker 4: some sort of explanation that helps people understand how you
Speaker 4: can overlook something like maybe, hey, I don't manage my finances,
Speaker 4: I got somebody else who does it. For whatever. The
Speaker 4: explanation is, just clarify it, you know, and put it
Speaker 4: to bed. And people are generally sympathetic to the fact that, Hey,
Speaker 4: these sorts of things happen. We've all missed bills, we've
Speaker 4: all had some situations that occur. It doesn't look good,
Speaker 4: but you give the full story and you move on.
Speaker 4: People forget about it. This would have been, you know,
Speaker 4: probably a one day thing. Yeah, the mayor of a
Speaker 4: major American city got his car repossessed. It's an embarrassment.
Speaker 5: Hey, we move on.
Speaker 4: We talk about other things that probably are much more
Speaker 4: significant to the daily residence. But when you don't tell
Speaker 4: the whole story, when it doesn't add up and it
Speaker 4: doesn't pass the smell test, then people start to question
Speaker 4: what is it that you're not telling us. And if
Speaker 4: you're not telling us something about something as maybe as
Speaker 4: simple as this, what else.
Speaker 1: Are you not telling us the truth about?
Speaker 4: And that was the point of my column about the mayor,
Speaker 4: is is that this thing that could have been something
Speaker 4: he could have quickly moved past. Now you've got people
Speaker 4: asking additional questions and it's unnecessary. And I think even
Speaker 4: the fact that he won't say where the car got repossessed.
Speaker 4: I mean, look, it can either be one or two places.
Speaker 4: It's either at your home or it's a city hall.
Speaker 4: That's where most REPO people look for the vehicles, where
Speaker 4: you work and where you live. Now, if it's with
Speaker 4: someplace different than that, why is that such proprietary information
Speaker 4: that the mayor can say? Again, these are the questions
Speaker 4: that when you're looking at it and you're thinking about it,
Speaker 4: you're saying, what's the big deal that we can't get
Speaker 4: all of the information? And I think you know that
Speaker 4: was that was my overall point, all right.
Speaker 2: The other issue, of course, that looks like it could
Speaker 2: have been there was an effort made to keep the
Speaker 2: information under wraps and not let's see the light of
Speaker 2: day until well after the election. Is the issue of
Speaker 2: the City of Cincinnati paying out eight point one million
Speaker 2: dollars to settle a lawsuit that was brought by about
Speaker 2: four hundred individuals who were protesting and in many cases,
Speaker 2: not every case, but in many cases causing severe damage
Speaker 2: to businesses and property in downtown Cincinnati. Do you believe
Speaker 2: that there was an effort made to keep this under
Speaker 2: wraps until after the election.
Speaker 6: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Wow, you know, Dan, I don't know that. I can't.
Speaker 1: We don't. No, we don't.
Speaker 2: Obviously we don't. We don't know that for sure. But
Speaker 2: is that at least a question to your way of thinking,
Speaker 2: Kevin Aldridge, that is that is worth looking into?
Speaker 6: Sure?
Speaker 4: I mean sure, it's worth looking into. I mean all
Speaker 4: of it's worth looking into. In terms of anytime we
Speaker 4: think that, you know, city officials or our politicians are
Speaker 4: holding back information that you know could be readily released
Speaker 4: to the public earlier, or whatsoever. I think those questions
Speaker 4: are always always worth asking. And if there is some
Speaker 4: truth to that that that this was, you know, intentionally
Speaker 4: held back for political reasons, yeah, I would say I
Speaker 4: would say that that is a problem. I think that
Speaker 4: the city settlement, though I don't know if it would
Speaker 4: have made any kind of significant difference in in any
Speaker 4: of the election results. I think, and we talked about this.
Speaker 2: Last problem, you're probably right about that.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and I think that's why I'm not so inclined
Speaker 4: to say, hey, you know, they wanted to hold this
Speaker 4: until afterwards, because I think, you know, quite frankly, many
Speaker 4: of the people who would have supported the Democrats in
Speaker 4: this election anyway, which they want overwhelmingly, probably don't have
Speaker 4: a problem with the city's payout here. They look at
Speaker 4: it as I mean, if you remember back into those
Speaker 4: back at that time, you know a lot of people
Speaker 4: felt like the police and the tactics that they used
Speaker 4: during the protests were inappropriate, were excessive in many cases.
Speaker 4: And so this wasn't necessarily a defense of people who
Speaker 4: looted or destroyed businesses or did property damage. This was
Speaker 4: more of a question of some four hundred or so nonviolent,
Speaker 4: peaceful protesters who were subjected to tear gas being bag
Speaker 4: pellets being shot at them, being held and detained, and
Speaker 4: inhumane conditions, as I think the lawsuit said, and some
Speaker 4: other things. So I think it's important to differentiate. And
Speaker 4: I don't know who among these.
Speaker 7: Four hundred.
Speaker 4: Complainants in this lawsuit are, but my estimation is is
Speaker 4: that most of these are probably the non violent protesters
Speaker 4: who felt like their civil rights or their first Amendment
Speaker 4: rights were violated were violated in this case, and not
Speaker 4: necessarily those who were responsible for the property damage or
Speaker 4: looting or the destruction of property. And I think that's
Speaker 4: an important distinction because it's easy to say, well, you know,
Speaker 4: here the city is paying out criminals, and crime pays.
Speaker 4: I think, as the FOP president said, but that takes
Speaker 4: away from the fact of who are the folks who
Speaker 4: are actually the complainants in this lawsuit and who will
Speaker 4: be receiving that And if they're mostly the non violent protesters,
Speaker 4: then that's not a fair statement to make that you
Speaker 4: know pays, because we don't criminalize peaceful protests, no matter
Speaker 4: what you might think about it. Now those who again,
Speaker 4: I'm more open to that statement. If you're talking about
Speaker 4: people who broke into stores, did property damage, did violent
Speaker 4: acts are part of those who will be receiving this
Speaker 4: settlement payment, then that's a different conversation. I don't know
Speaker 4: that to be the case. I don't know who the
Speaker 4: complainants are, but I think we all should know that
Speaker 4: before we make statements like that, because I don't think
Speaker 4: we want to take the position of criminalizing peaceful protests.
Speaker 2: Well, and I don't think I don't think Cincinnati police
Speaker 2: make it a habit to arrest people who are engaging
Speaker 2: in peaceful protests, who are doing nothing more than exercising
Speaker 2: their First Amendment rights, which we fully support around here.
Speaker 2: But when you look at small businesses that had their
Speaker 2: windows smashed, when you had planners upturned, dumpster fires, shots
Speaker 2: were fired, all these things, and you've got Cincinnati police,
Speaker 2: you've got Hamilton County Shriff's deputies who were out on
Speaker 2: the street and they witness these acts take place. Those
Speaker 2: are the people who got arrested. Four hundred and I
Speaker 2: believe the number is four hundred and seventy nine got arrested,
Speaker 2: sent to the Justice Center processed. They complained about, well,
Speaker 2: they didn't get their potty break, they didn't get food
Speaker 2: and water, they didn't get medicine. People were taking their
Speaker 2: masks down during the height of the Wuhan. They were
Speaker 2: down there at the Transit center while they were waiting
Speaker 2: to be processed, and so they weren't processed in a
Speaker 2: timely manner. So therefore they're allowed to sue. So I
Speaker 2: look at this Kevin Aldridge, and I see, well, look
Speaker 2: if I was on the street and I didn't get
Speaker 2: arrested and someone right next to me was committing that
Speaker 2: crime and they became part of this lawsuit and I
Speaker 2: didn't commit any crime and I wasn't part of the lawsuit. Well,
Speaker 2: now I see these individuals getting a payout in excess
Speaker 2: of twelve thousand dollars. So how do I reconcile that
Speaker 2: if I'm someone who didn't get arrested, didn't cause any problem, didn't,
Speaker 2: you know, have any reason for police to put cuffs
Speaker 2: on me? How do I reconcile that? How do I
Speaker 2: escape that notion that we are paying we are giving
Speaker 2: people money because they engaged in activity that sent them
Speaker 2: to the justice center. We've got about thirty seconds left
Speaker 2: and I'm sorry our time is flying by.
Speaker 4: Yeah, no, it's it's all good. And again, Dan, I
Speaker 4: think I would need to look at this at these
Speaker 4: case by these on a case by case basis, because
Speaker 4: I'm assuming that all of these individuals had their due process,
Speaker 4: had their day in court, and I think you.
Speaker 2: Have dismissed later on they a lot of them were
Speaker 2: dismissed by and you know, and what the judges do
Speaker 2: in the legal system do after the arrest and the
Speaker 2: booking and the processing takes place to my way of
Speaker 2: thinking that that's another matter.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, and it's probably way more than we'll have
Speaker 4: an opportunity to get into. Maybe we can, maybe you
Speaker 4: can have me back on sometime next time you're on
Speaker 4: when we have a little bit more time, and we
Speaker 4: can we can dissect exactly what you just said, because
Speaker 4: you said a lot of good things there and and
Speaker 4: and I know I can't adequately respond to it in
Speaker 4: the time that we have left here, but but I definitely,
Speaker 4: I definitely think it matters again in looking at things
Speaker 4: on a case by case basis, in terms of who
Speaker 4: are these complainants, who's getting paid out what they actually did,
Speaker 4: because I can tell you for a fact, I know
Speaker 4: that there were some people, even some journalists, who were
Speaker 4: arrested for simply doing their jobs by Cincinnati police and
Speaker 4: who were probably in that number of nonviolent So I'm
Speaker 4: not going to sit here and say that everybody who
Speaker 4: got arrested did something wrong. And I just don't. And
Speaker 4: I think that's part of the problem here with the
Speaker 4: case that the police have is I think they want
Speaker 4: to make they want to make the case and the
Speaker 4: fact that everybody that they arrested had done something out
Speaker 4: of order. But when you have journalists who are being
Speaker 4: arrested for simply being there and reporting on what that,
Speaker 4: that in and of itself tells you that not everybody.
Speaker 2: Arrested the original complaints jests that the curfew that was
Speaker 2: issued by the mayor was out of order as well.
Speaker 2: But Kevin Alders, we're gonna have to leave it right there.
Speaker 2: As always, man, I appreciate the time, great stuff today,
Speaker 2: and we will I will definitely be calling on you
Speaker 2: again and we will discuss this down the road. But
Speaker 2: thanks for the time today. I really appreciate it, all right,
Speaker 2: Thanks Dan.
Speaker 1: All right there you.
Speaker 2: Kevin Aldrids of the Cincinnati Inquirer. So are we sending
Speaker 2: that message? Is that the message that the City of
Speaker 2: Cincinnati is putting out that we pay, we pay people
Speaker 2: who engage in criminal criminal activity? Is that what we
Speaker 2: are doing? I want to get your thoughts on this,
Speaker 2: Sean McMahon, let's open the phone lines five, one, three, seven, four, nine,
Speaker 2: eight hundred the big one, Dan Carroll for Scott's loan
Speaker 2: late for a break here and I apologize for that.
Speaker 2: On seven hundred WLW. So it was in May of
Speaker 2: twenty twenty May thirtieth of twenty twenty, when then Mayor
Speaker 2: John Cranley imposed a city wide curfew of eight pm,
Speaker 2: and these demonstrators were out there in violation of that
Speaker 2: curfew and found themselves under arrest. And the intake at
Speaker 2: Hamilton County Justice Center is not set up to handle
Speaker 2: one hundred or two hundred, or three hundred or four
Speaker 2: hundred people at one time, so that processing takes time.
Speaker 2: And so while these people sat around in the parking lot,
Speaker 2: or as the lawsuit indicates the original complaint, down at
Speaker 2: the transit center, waiting for their turn to process, well,
Speaker 2: maybe they were a little uncomfortable. Maybe they didn't get
Speaker 2: a bottle of water, maybe they didn't get a.
Speaker 1: Bathroom break.
Speaker 2: Sources tell me that that's all complete garbage, But in
Speaker 2: any case, that's what the lawsuit is about. So tomorrow
Speaker 2: there is a committee of Council that is going to
Speaker 2: approve this settlement, and then the money will start flowing.
Speaker 2: Over two million dollars to al Gerhartstein and his cohorts,
Speaker 2: and then twelve grande about twelve five hundred dollars to
Speaker 2: the four hundred and seventy nine plaintiffs in the case.
Speaker 2: It's a beautiful thing. So crime pays in the City
Speaker 2: of Cincinnati. That is what the committee that is going
Speaker 2: to look at this tomorrow is going to vote on.
Speaker 2: And here's the I say, I've got to copy the ordinance.
Speaker 2: Where what did I do with it? Hold on one second.
Speaker 1: Here it is.
Speaker 2: Authorizing here's the emergency ordinance authorizing the city Manager and
Speaker 2: the City Solicitor to execute a settlement agreement in a
Speaker 2: class action lawsuit the captioned Kenny at All versus the
Speaker 2: City of Cincinnati. Whereas in May of June twenty twenty,
Speaker 2: there was a swell of protests across the country and
Speaker 2: within the City of Cincinnati in response to the murder
Speaker 2: of George Floyd. We know subsequently that George Floyd was
Speaker 2: not murdered, that he had an overdose of drugs in
Speaker 2: his system that played a major role in ending his life.
Speaker 2: And it goes on and on, and it talks about
Speaker 2: several of the plaintists on behalf of the class and
Speaker 2: the city, the defendants, and the planets engage in an
Speaker 2: extensive settlement negotiations. The city and defendants now desire to
Speaker 2: resolve the issue. Now I say, go to court, go
Speaker 2: to court. Do not send the message out that crime pays,
Speaker 2: that you can come into the city of Cincinnati, ignore
Speaker 2: the orders, the lawful orders of the Mayor of Cincinnati,
Speaker 2: engage in whatever activity you like, and then eventually wind
Speaker 2: up getting paid for it. Dave, what say you, David Cincinnati,
Speaker 2: what's going on? Then we got Lawrence and then Bobby J.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 8: I was calling about the I'm paying if you remember correctly,
Speaker 8: a few years ago when the girl was stealing from
Speaker 8: the Kroger's and the all duty police officer tried to
Speaker 8: stop her and it was late at night. They wind
Speaker 8: up paying her a bunch of money.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, we can't. We can't have people. You know,
Speaker 2: what kind of city are we're going to live in.
Speaker 2: If we're going to have people being held responsible for
Speaker 2: crimes they commit, how can we possibly like them.
Speaker 8: Didn't they propose something if you were a criminal with
Speaker 8: a gun or something, that they would pay you not
Speaker 8: to commit crime.
Speaker 2: Uh? I know ideas like that have been floated out there,
Speaker 2: and I don't think those are very good ideas. Lawrence
Speaker 2: here on seven hundred WLW. Lawrence, Yes, can you hear me?
Speaker 1: Lawrence?
Speaker 6: Okay, thanks for taking my car?
Speaker 3: All right?
Speaker 5: Thanks?
Speaker 3: Thanks for having me on.
Speaker 9: I just wanted to bring up you and Kevin talked
Speaker 9: about as far as the mayor's car being repoked. I remember,
Speaker 9: I remember back in twenty nineteen there was an article
Speaker 9: written by Sharon Coolis's in The Inquirer regarded Tomaya Dnard
Speaker 9: having her car repose.
Speaker 3: Do you remember that?
Speaker 1: I do not remember that in specifically.
Speaker 3: Okay, well, you can check it out on some free time.
Speaker 10: In twenty nineteen, Sharon Coolish wrote an article about tom
Speaker 10: de Nord having her car repossessed, and so it was
Speaker 10: found out that she did not disclose that on her
Speaker 10: financial disclosures to YOHI at this commission, which subjected her
Speaker 10: to six months in jail or a thousand dollars fine
Speaker 10: as a misdemeanor. Now, I wonder if the media will
Speaker 10: do his job and get those financial disclosures of the
Speaker 10: mayor during his time and offices mayor and see if
Speaker 10: he reported this deb.
Speaker 2: Well, Lawrence, it would be it would be my hope
Speaker 2: that there are reporters who are looking into that right
Speaker 2: now to see if that in for if that information
Speaker 2: is required to be disclosed, if it has indeed been disclosed.
Speaker 2: So I would certainly hope there are reporters out there
Speaker 2: who are looking at that at this very moment. Bobby
Speaker 2: j seven hundred WLW damn.
Speaker 11: Good morning to you, and thanks for taking my call.
Speaker 11: And I think do as quick as possible, take the
Speaker 11: issue to court.
Speaker 1: You know yourself.
Speaker 11: We've got a democratic mayor, democratic counsel. The individuals who
Speaker 11: made these decisions and making the recommendations, they're all Democrats.
Speaker 11: They'll hand the money out to anybody that's got their
Speaker 11: hand out.
Speaker 1: Take it to court.
Speaker 11: Take it to court because there's no federal violations at all.
Speaker 11: There's no civil rights violation. You don't see civil rights
Speaker 11: people coming down out of Washington complaining about civil rights violations.
Speaker 11: The mayor was exactly correct when he issued what he
Speaker 11: did for the unrests and everything curfew. We got juvenile curfews. Now,
Speaker 11: now what they're going to do, and the juveniles don't
Speaker 11: go ahead and comply with the curfew, it doesn't end.
Speaker 6: It's real simple.
Speaker 1: Take it to.
Speaker 11: Court, stand your ground and go ahead and let these
Speaker 11: people know that we're not putting up with this crap.
Speaker 2: Well you go, Bobby Jackie, I thank you very much
Speaker 2: for that opinion. Take it to court. But the city
Speaker 2: administration is going to tell members of council that this
Speaker 2: is the best way forward. It is best to settle
Speaker 2: this for eight point one million dollars to issue debt
Speaker 2: in order to make this payment happen. Here's the ordinance
Speaker 2: right here. The city intends to fund this settlement by
Speaker 2: issuing judgment bonds pursuing to RC one thirty three point
Speaker 2: one four upon court approval of the settlement agreement, which
Speaker 2: will require passage of another ordinance issuing these bonds at
Speaker 2: a point in the future. So this, this Council committee
Speaker 2: tomorrow is going to be looking at this and probably
Speaker 2: us go ahead and.
Speaker 1: Rubber stamp it.
Speaker 2: So yeah, let's go ahead and and we send the
Speaker 2: message out that if you commit crime in the City
Speaker 2: of Cincinnati, you are in line for a payment. Dick
Speaker 2: from Dayton, It's been a while since I've had a
Speaker 2: chance to talk to you.
Speaker 1: How are you.
Speaker 3: I'm doing good, Dan?
Speaker 4: How about you?
Speaker 1: All right? What you got for me today?
Speaker 3: I was just listening. I like what the guy did say.
Speaker 7: He may have to take this to court to get
Speaker 7: good resolved.
Speaker 1: Take it to court.
Speaker 2: Let's let's see what uh, let's see what what Jurors
Speaker 2: federal jurors who are going to be drawn from Hamilton County,
Speaker 2: from Claremont County, from Brown County. Let's let's hear what
Speaker 2: these jurors think about this. When you've got individuals who
Speaker 2: are out violating the curfew, damaging property, breaking windows, some
Speaker 2: in some instances there were shots that were fired at
Speaker 2: first responders. Let's see how how a jury of our
Speaker 2: peers and their peers I think that, well, you know
Speaker 2: that they should be paid for their trouble because they
Speaker 2: had to because they had to spend a night in
Speaker 2: the in the custody of the sheriff, and uh and
Speaker 2: and you know, maybe they weren't all that comfortable while
Speaker 2: they were while they while they were being detained.
Speaker 3: Were good to talk to you, Dan.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Dick. I appreciate the call. Let's go to Columbus.
Speaker 2: This is Eddie, Eddie seven hundred w l W Hey, damn.
Speaker 12: This is just another example of the cities willing to
Speaker 12: anything to prevent a riot or or or bad press,
Speaker 12: you know, riots or bad news. Tell I think they'd
Speaker 12: rather bury a policeman than then defend him in court
Speaker 12: or or take this matter to court.
Speaker 2: The the notion that You're going to pay out eight
Speaker 2: point one million dollars from the city the size of
Speaker 2: Cincinnati to a bunch of thugs, to a bunch of agitators,
Speaker 2: to a bunch of people who were crossing about an
Speaker 2: issue that didn't even happen in the city of Cincinnati.
Speaker 2: The notion that you're going to pay them eight point
Speaker 2: one million dollars to me sends out the exact wrong message.
Speaker 12: Absolutely, it's outrage, Dan, it's out rage.
Speaker 2: And to your way of thinking, does this invite more
Speaker 2: of this activity to happen in the city of Cincinnati.
Speaker 2: I mean, al Gerhardstein is sitting there thinking, Yeah, let's go,
Speaker 2: let's get some more protests going on, Let's have another curfew,
Speaker 2: let's get another class action lawsuit. Him and him and
Speaker 2: his co counsel is going to rake into over two
Speaker 2: million dollars on this.
Speaker 12: Yeah, I'd love to see the addresses of the individuals.
Speaker 12: There's four hundred or I think it's four hundred and something.
Speaker 12: I'd like to see their addresses, their real addresses. I
Speaker 12: bet they're professional protesters bust in here.
Speaker 2: Well, we'll see about that. I Actually, I've got the
Speaker 2: original complaint here and some of them are listed. All
Speaker 2: have to all have to go and look that up.
Speaker 2: But Eddie, I appreciate that phone call. All right, there
Speaker 2: you go, Eddie, you have a great day. Eight point
Speaker 2: one million dollars. Let me see what I do with
Speaker 2: this ordinance again, we're not sure we've got Let's see.
Speaker 2: Be it ordained by the Council of Cincinnati, State of Ohio,
Speaker 2: Section one, that the City Manager and City Solicitor are
Speaker 2: authorized to execute a settlement agreement with Maurice Kenney, Quinn Moore,
Speaker 2: wild of Ziser, Paula Bennett, Arianna Hicks, Andrew Armine, Susan Lockhart,
Speaker 2: Kimberly Galloway, Zoe Keller, William Todd Butler, Administrator of the Estate.
Speaker 1: Boh, blah blah.
Speaker 2: This Ordinance shall be an emergency measure necessary for the
Speaker 2: preservation of public peace, health, safety, and the general welfare,
Speaker 2: and shall subject the terms of Article two, Section six
Speaker 2: of the Charter, or be subject to the terms of
Speaker 2: that and be effective immediately.
Speaker 1: That is fantastic.
Speaker 2: Got to preserve the peace, Got to preserve the peace,
Speaker 2: Gotta preserve the well being of the City of Cincinnati,
Speaker 2: because because what because people complained, they violated the curfew
Speaker 2: Cincinnati police said, look, we've got a job to do.
Speaker 2: You violate the curfew, you're under arrest. It's it's pretty simple.
Speaker 2: It's a it's a misdemeanor. It's a misdemeanor. Thousand dollars fine,
Speaker 2: maybe a little bit of time behind bars. Most of
Speaker 2: those cases were dismissed in the aftermath. But no, we've
Speaker 2: got we've got a city manager and we've got a
Speaker 2: law department that says spending two one point eight million
Speaker 2: dollars is the way to go.
Speaker 1: Back.
Speaker 2: In twenty twenty, the City Development Corporation three CDC estimated
Speaker 2: that approximately eighty businesses in the urban core sustained damage
Speaker 2: in excess of two hundred and seventy five thousand dollars.
Speaker 2: You had windows that were smashed, planners that were overturned,
Speaker 2: dumpsters that were set on fire, general vandalism. You may recall,
Speaker 2: as I recalled on over the weekend, saw the video
Speaker 2: of a police barricade being smashed into the window of
Speaker 2: the Hamilton County Justice Center. The window was busted out.
Speaker 2: People were there posing in front of it taking picture
Speaker 2: like like it was a trophy, or like they had
Speaker 2: caught a giant tuna and they were taking pictures with it.
Speaker 2: Several businesses later filed a class action lawsuit against individuals arrested,
Speaker 2: trying to seek restitution for the damages. I have no
Speaker 2: idea if those businesses were ever made whole in any
Speaker 2: sort of way. But if you were out there on
Speaker 2: the streets at that time, back in twenty twenty and
Speaker 2: you didn't get arrested, or you weren't part of this lawsuit,
Speaker 2: no twelve thousand dollars for you. Not people who got arrested,
Speaker 2: people who complain, people who want to agitate and cause problem.
Speaker 2: Here you go, cutting you a check for twelve five
Speaker 2: hundred dollars. Mark and Amelia, what say you?
Speaker 13: I would say, we need to have a peaceful protest
Speaker 13: for against paying out to the criminals that were arrested
Speaker 13: while committing damage to our city.
Speaker 1: Sounds like a perfectly reasonable idea.
Speaker 13: And I think you know, we ought a set of time,
Speaker 13: a place, and the real people should show up and
Speaker 13: peacefully pro tasks. But make sure that this mayor and
Speaker 13: this city council understand that we won't put up with this.
Speaker 2: Well, the City council Public Safety and Governance Committee is
Speaker 2: going to meet tomorrow and we'll see if they give
Speaker 2: final approval to this. And Mark and Emilia thank you
Speaker 2: very much for your call. So that's where we stand today.
Speaker 2: Chris Smitherman is going to be here at eleven thirty
Speaker 2: and he'll weigh in on this as well. In between times,
Speaker 2: I've got Craig Banister coming up. He is the managing
Speaker 2: editor editor of CNS News. And then a guy named
Speaker 2: Gentry Beach with an organization called America First Global, and
Speaker 2: we are going to talk about the new way or
Speaker 2: the way that we are engaged right now of trying
Speaker 2: to bring peace around the world. And it's pretty much
Speaker 2: the art of the deal. And he's an interesting guy
Speaker 2: and I hope you can stick around for that. So
Speaker 2: we'll see what happens between now and then. But it's
Speaker 2: Dan Carroll and for Scott's Loan on seven hundred WLW
Speaker 2: and Carroll.
Speaker 1: For Scott's Loan On this Monday.
Speaker 2: After the Bengals eliminated pretty much Lea, someone told me
Speaker 2: there was a one percent chance of Engles can still
Speaker 2: make the playoffs this year. I'm not really holding on
Speaker 2: to that, but we will break that down with Austin
Speaker 2: Elmore in one hour from now in the meantime, though,
Speaker 2: you know, I have people ask me all the time,
Speaker 2: where do you find all this information? The stuff you
Speaker 2: talk about. One of the things I do is because
Speaker 2: of the time that I spent in television, news media
Speaker 2: is I love to come to this microphone and sort
Speaker 2: of reveal how these things work. And I've been talking
Speaker 2: about bias in news coverage for years now. And one
Speaker 2: of the great websites that I look at at CNS
Speaker 2: News under the umbrella of the Media Research Center, and
Speaker 2: Craig Banister is joining us this morning. He is the
Speaker 2: managing editor for CNS News and Craig Banister, it's great
Speaker 2: to have you on today on seven hundred WLW.
Speaker 5: Good morning, Good morning. How are things going on?
Speaker 2: Well, things aside from the Bengals stinking up the field yesterday,
Speaker 2: Well they didn't really stink it up, but they just
Speaker 2: kind of let things get away from them late in
Speaker 2: the game, and so we're all kind of down on
Speaker 2: the dumps. But I think one of the interesting stories
Speaker 2: that continues to carry on is the story about the
Speaker 2: way the Trump administration is blowing these drug boats out
Speaker 2: of the water in the Caribbean. And it was interesting
Speaker 2: over the course of last week, how the narrative was
Speaker 2: spun up and then died quickly. This whole notion that
Speaker 2: Pete hag Seth and some of the admirals and Donald
Speaker 2: Trump were committing war crimes, and that was such a
Speaker 2: flimsy foundation for that notion. That narrative died, and now
Speaker 2: we're back to the narrative that, well, these are just
Speaker 2: poor fishermen. That and I heard on the news today
Speaker 2: that Donald Trump is blowing up these drug boats and
Speaker 2: not presenting any evidence whatsoever that there are drugs on
Speaker 2: these boats and just blowing them out of the water.
Speaker 2: It's amazing to me how this story just continues to breathe.
Speaker 3: Well.
Speaker 5: And part of the problem is the media will get
Speaker 5: that false narrative out there. They will hype it and
Speaker 5: hype it and hype it, and as you said, then
Speaker 5: it dies down. But dying down isn't the same as
Speaker 5: retracting it or actually giving the same amount of coverage
Speaker 5: to telling the viewers or readers that they were wrong.
Speaker 5: I have the damage is done.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: And they said that's something they'd never do is go
Speaker 2: back and say, look, we were wrong about this. I
Speaker 2: can probably count and I can't think of any examples
Speaker 2: that come to mind, but I think there was maybe
Speaker 2: one or maybe two times in the last several years
Speaker 2: that the media might have admitted they were they were
Speaker 2: wrong or mistaken about something. But I've been saying ever
Speaker 2: since this he first came to light, since they first
Speaker 2: started blowing these drug boats out of the water, and
Speaker 2: I think they're up to what twenty five or twenty
Speaker 2: six now that if if there were indeed, if these
Speaker 2: were just fishermen, just people out there going out for
Speaker 2: a joy ride, just minding their own business, not transporting drugs.
Speaker 2: I have speculated that CBS, NBC, ABC, The New York Times,
Speaker 2: the Post, they all have they all have reporters in
Speaker 2: South America right now looking for that one story that
Speaker 2: one family that says, yes, you know, our provider went
Speaker 2: out on his fishing boat one day and never came
Speaker 2: back because Donald Trump blew his boat out of the water.
Speaker 2: Do you think they've got reporters there right now who
Speaker 2: are looking and just begging to find that story and
Speaker 2: be able to bring that story to light.
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 5: Absolutely, And if they can't find them, they'll continue doing
Speaker 5: what they've been doing is citing unnamed sources. So you know, uh,
Speaker 5: you really have to wonder about that. If these sources
Speaker 5: were so credible, why won't they come forward? So yes,
Speaker 5: they are. The media are hungry to find that one
Speaker 5: family that that that was accidentally blown up by this effort.
Speaker 5: But again you also have to wonder. I mean, yes,
Speaker 5: people need, you know, to feed their families. But also
Speaker 5: I think there's some onus on people to say, well,
Speaker 5: this is a part of the waterfare. Boats are being
Speaker 5: blown up, maybe I should I should go fishing somewhere,
Speaker 5: or or an a joy ride somewhere else.
Speaker 2: It's there's not a longevity in that line of work anymore.
Speaker 2: And at some point I'm thinking these drug runners are
Speaker 2: going to get the message that it's probably not a
Speaker 2: good idea to engage in that. But you talk about
Speaker 2: the unnamed sources, and that's another that's another aspect of
Speaker 2: this that just bothers me to know, when how many
Speaker 2: times have we been lectured by sixty Minutes or NBC
Speaker 2: News that look, we've got these journalistic ethics and standards
Speaker 2: and we can't just willy nilly report on anything that
Speaker 2: we haven't been able to independently verify. But yet the
Speaker 2: Washington Post story where this whole narrative started about the
Speaker 2: war crimes being committed, and all the rest of this
Speaker 2: was based on what one anonymous source who told The
Speaker 2: Washington Post that hey, Pete Hexsas said to kill them all.
Speaker 1: And so, without.
Speaker 2: Any hesitation, every major news outlet in the country jumped
Speaker 2: on that story. Could not wait to get it out there.
Speaker 2: How much time did they spend verifying this, tracking down
Speaker 2: this stores and making sure that this story was accurate
Speaker 2: before they went ahead and put it out there.
Speaker 5: Absolutely, And the other danger or problem here is, I
Speaker 5: don't know if you remember the old game where people
Speaker 5: would sit around in a circle. You'd have a story
Speaker 5: and they'd whisper it into each other's ears all the
Speaker 5: way around, and when it got to the end, it
Speaker 5: was a completely different story than it started out being. Absolutely,
Speaker 5: and you see that you see this in the media.
Speaker 5: Where As you said, the Post puts something out, the
Speaker 5: next media outlet puts it out without questioning and embellishes
Speaker 5: it or exaggerates it, if nothing else, paints it into
Speaker 5: broader strokes, which has the same effect. And that keeps happening,
Speaker 5: and the story gets worse and worse. But as you said,
Speaker 5: it's been like so many of these other hoax is
Speaker 5: thoroughly debunked. There was actually a JAG officer, a lawyer
Speaker 5: in the room at the time when the orders were given,
Speaker 5: UH signing off on on on that second strike. And
Speaker 5: you know who wasn't in the room is Pete eggscept
Speaker 5: So so much of the of the narrative is a
Speaker 5: skewed and as UH a media research center, it has
Speaker 5: constantly been pointing out it's not just news that is misreported,
Speaker 5: but that is reported dishonestly and in some cases, as
Speaker 5: in the case of the attractions, that goes unreported. So
Speaker 5: there's there's fake news, there's dishonest news, and then there's
Speaker 5: new important news that that is just being being ignored
Speaker 5: in UH what referred to as the legacy media, the
Speaker 5: the old the old Guard, which now is largely being
Speaker 5: replaced by my other sources. As you know that that
Speaker 5: polls are showing trust in the media is after near
Speaker 5: an all time low.
Speaker 1: Well sure, it's it's at an all time low.
Speaker 2: And then I hear I hear these different individuals complain
Speaker 2: about it, like Brian Stelter comes to mind from CNN
Speaker 2: talking about how it's it's just an absolute shame that
Speaker 2: and and somehow it's it's the Trump administration's fault that
Speaker 2: people have this distrust of the media. And and I
Speaker 2: and I keep repeating the same phrase in my head
Speaker 2: over and over and over, is that you brought this
Speaker 2: upon yourself. We've we've had a pattern of this for
Speaker 2: years now, where the bias is is just as plain
Speaker 2: as the nose on your face. And even in some
Speaker 2: in some instances, the the the the notion that we're
Speaker 2: not trying to be biased anymore is completely out the window.
Speaker 2: But then on the other hand, you get people out
Speaker 2: there who try to act as if they, the CNNs
Speaker 2: of the world, are the arbiters of fair and balanced.
Speaker 5: Information, and they presume that they're the arbiters of truth.
Speaker 5: Yea that by saying it it makes it right. Uh
Speaker 5: And and for a long time and Bosley today, they
Speaker 5: also have have the presumption of information monopoly. No one,
Speaker 5: no one's going to chant challenge and certainly no one
Speaker 5: with gravitas because they controlled all the outlets of UH
Speaker 5: of information and news. And that's that's becoming less and
Speaker 5: less the case as more and more sources of media
Speaker 5: UH they come out there and gain gain popularity, So
Speaker 5: I think they still haven't gotten the message that when
Speaker 5: they put out a false narrative, uh, it can be debunked.
Speaker 5: Now you have some true believers who will believe whatever
Speaker 5: MSNBC tells them unquestioningly. But are there also more and
Speaker 5: more people.
Speaker 3: These days who are who.
Speaker 5: Are also being being told the facts And that's leading
Speaker 5: to to the lack of lack of trust in the
Speaker 5: media as people are seen how they how they've been,
Speaker 5: and how they are being manipulated well, and I think
Speaker 5: a lot of that is it happens in stories that
Speaker 5: are not covered as well.
Speaker 2: And I'm thinking of the story about the just the
Speaker 2: the jaw dropping fraud that has been taking place in
Speaker 2: Minneapolis within and much of it within the Somalian community there,
Speaker 2: and the way that story has been underreported on the news.
Speaker 2: I think NBC gave about fifty six seconds to it.
Speaker 2: And then the way that ABC and CBS covered it
Speaker 2: was they took the remarks of Donald Trump at that
Speaker 2: cabinet meeting talking about how they know this is garbage
Speaker 2: and these people are garbage and we don't want them
Speaker 2: in our country and they're ripping off the country. And
Speaker 2: he was talking about the individuals who were engaging in
Speaker 2: this fraud that is in excess of a billion dollars now,
Speaker 2: and they took those comments completely out of context as
Speaker 2: and suggested that, well, he just made these comments out
Speaker 2: of the blue, and that Tim Homan is going to
Speaker 2: go in there with ice and help round up even
Speaker 2: more illegal aliens, and not one word about all this
Speaker 2: fraud that when it's you know, when you're supposed to
Speaker 2: be feeding the hungry, or help autistic children, or helping
Speaker 2: seniors and disabled veterans find housing and things like that,
Speaker 2: under all these things that are siphoning money from the
Speaker 2: public treasury, the treasury of Minnesota and the treasury of
Speaker 2: the United States, in excess of a billion dollars. And
Speaker 2: this gets next to no coverage, less than a minute's
Speaker 2: worth of coverage. And so there's millions of Americans right now,
Speaker 2: Craig Banister who have no knowledge of this story whatsoever.
Speaker 2: And that is just it is just one of the
Speaker 2: most glaring examples I can think of how poorly served
Speaker 2: the American people are by the media establishment in this country.
Speaker 5: Absolutely, as you know, President Trump is hyperbolic. I mean,
Speaker 5: that's that's just a fact. But the media as you said,
Speaker 5: instead of focusing on this almost unprecedented fraud, is trying
Speaker 5: to spin Trump's condemnation of the fraud into racism. To
Speaker 5: your point, you know, CNS news is up on the
Speaker 5: NewsBusters website the Research Center today a piece up there
Speaker 5: by Clay waters As titled TBS creeps up to Minnesota
Speaker 5: Somali fraud scandal fixes on zenophobia Trump xenophobic Trumps, it
Speaker 5: says here. Friday's News Hour segment by the Minnesota based
Speaker 5: special correspondent Fred the Sam Lazaro finally acknowledged the incredible,
Speaker 5: slow emerging scandal of taxpayer fraud, but the segment ran
Speaker 5: over seven minutes and only thirty five percent was devoted
Speaker 5: to the fraud itself. He said, the focus was on
Speaker 5: President Trump's verbal fireworks and response and ice raads. Uh. So,
Speaker 5: as you said, even if they do acknowledge the theft
Speaker 5: of a two billion dollars that was supposed to feed
Speaker 5: children during the COVID crisis, they have to they have
Speaker 5: they have to spin it as well. But to punish
Speaker 5: these people or to actually uh report on this crime,
Speaker 5: we have to we have to spin it as as
Speaker 5: racism to to to prosecute these folks. Uh, and you
Speaker 5: see that across the board when needed, regardless of what
Speaker 5: the what the topic is. But but yes, there's always
Speaker 5: this effort to to to to divert the focus to
Speaker 5: something that that they can pin Trump on.
Speaker 2: But Craig Banister, weren't we assured by the CEO of
Speaker 2: Public Broadcasting and the CEOs of NPR that there was
Speaker 2: they didn't see any bias when it came to there
Speaker 2: when it came to their news coverage, whether we're talking
Speaker 2: about cutting congressional Congress was talking about cutting federal funding
Speaker 2: for these these these news outlets, And weren't we assured
Speaker 2: by these these these leaders of these organizations that look,
Speaker 2: this whole notion about bias, especially when it comes to
Speaker 2: public radio or public television was was way overblown.
Speaker 5: Well again, and yes, uh, that's that's what they say.
Speaker 5: I don't know how much of it is willful ignorance
Speaker 5: or just being in a bubble, or or just downright dishonesty,
Speaker 5: but you can especially I mean there's some shameless self
Speaker 5: promotion here, but especially if you go to NewsBusters, you'll
Speaker 5: see over the past several is study after study after
Speaker 5: study outing the bias at n P r uh and
Speaker 5: p B s Uh. It's it's blatant. And if you
Speaker 5: look at the at the staff, also look at their
Speaker 5: bona fides, you'll see ties to UH, to liberal activism.
Speaker 5: But again, part of it may just be hubris made
Speaker 5: believing that that no one can, no one will question them,
Speaker 5: certainly no one else in the media.
Speaker 9: UH.
Speaker 5: But but part of it may just be that that
Speaker 5: that they're in a bubble and to them it isn't uh,
Speaker 5: it isn't biased. Uh. But luckily UH, the the the
Speaker 5: Recision bill passed UH to to claw back some of
Speaker 5: this money UH that was going to them. And as
Speaker 5: Plump and others have said, why is the American taxpayer
Speaker 5: having to pay for bias news?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Actually excellent question.
Speaker 2: And they You've got all these other outlets out there
Speaker 2: that manage to do it and manage to get plenty
Speaker 2: of commercial activity on their outlets. So just let them
Speaker 2: fight the battle the same way. But of course that's
Speaker 2: never going to happen. Hey, Craig Banister, our time is gone.
Speaker 2: We got to run. But as always, I appreciate you,
Speaker 2: and I appreciate everything that MRC does and NewsBusters and
Speaker 2: CNS News all great websites and keep up the great
Speaker 2: work there, and I certainly hope we get a.
Speaker 1: Chance to talk on down the road.
Speaker 5: Thanks a lot.
Speaker 2: All right, there you go, Craig Banaster from CNS News
Speaker 2: Managing Editor. Always great to hear those guys. Way In
Speaker 2: ten twenty six Dan Carrol for Scoonsland on seven hundred
Speaker 2: WW seven hundred don't we u LW ten thirty nine
Speaker 2: Dan Carroll in for Scott Sloan and this next segment.
Speaker 2: I've been thinking about this next segment for I know
Speaker 2: two or three days now, and you know, when you
Speaker 2: have a guest on, you want to give a good
Speaker 2: intro and then think about some clever way to introduce
Speaker 2: the next guest. And over the last couple of days,
Speaker 2: I've thought about I don't know, eight or nine or
Speaker 2: ten different ways to try and introduce my next guest.
Speaker 2: So I decided I'm just going to go with what
Speaker 2: it says on his website, America First Global Gentry. Beach
Speaker 2: is the founder. He's an American investor and entrepreneur, a
Speaker 2: strategist dedicated to advancing prosperity through principled capitalism. And I
Speaker 2: could go on and on and on, but Gentry Beach.
Speaker 2: It's great to have you on seven hundred WLW. Thanks
Speaker 2: for being here. How are you today, you know, thank
Speaker 2: you so.
Speaker 7: Much for having me on your wonderful program. I'm actually
Speaker 7: coming to you live from Oman today.
Speaker 1: Oman.
Speaker 2: We're working on the transaction over here. So very nice
Speaker 2: to be with you. Oh my god, that's absolutely amazing.
Speaker 2: But you have spent time working on the Trump campaign.
Speaker 2: I also read that you are I guess you went
Speaker 2: to college with and you are our friends with Donald
Speaker 2: Trump Junior. Tell me about that relationship a little bit.
Speaker 7: Well, yeah, we've been we've been social friends for a
Speaker 7: long time. We don't do any business together whatsoever, but
Speaker 7: we do like the hunt and fish together and do
Speaker 7: other things. He's a he's a great guy, and you know,
Speaker 7: has done an incredible amount to get his dad elected
Speaker 7: and really support support him in embass He's a very
Speaker 7: impressive guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: The one thing that I have said about President Trump
Speaker 2: over and over and over again is that he is
Speaker 2: he is a businessman, and Trump knows that when it
Speaker 2: comes to business, that peace is good for business. And
Speaker 2: I think that is why. I think that's a major
Speaker 2: component of why he is so dedicated to peaceful negotiations
Speaker 2: around the world. And when you look at all these
Speaker 2: different places where he's negotiated, either peace agreements or ceasefires,
Speaker 2: there's always a component of all these agreements. When you
Speaker 2: talk about the Abraham Accords, when you look at what
Speaker 2: happened with the Republic of Congo and Rwanda, when you
Speaker 2: look at India and Pakistan and all these other places
Speaker 2: around the world, there's always a component of economic development
Speaker 2: that is a major element of that peace proposal plan.
Speaker 2: And I think that's just a part of what Donald
Speaker 2: Trump is really all about and the way he sees
Speaker 2: things working in the world that if you're a country
Speaker 2: and you are busy more consumed with economic prosperity and
Speaker 2: what's best for your people, then you're going to be
Speaker 2: too busy with that to worry about fighting wars.
Speaker 1: Am I reading that right?
Speaker 6: You couldn't be more right.
Speaker 7: I'll selly you as a business guy and I don't
Speaker 7: do any politics. I'm purely a business guy kind of
Speaker 7: all over the world, and we've been everywhere from Pakistan
Speaker 7: and to you know, you name it internationally. We've been
Speaker 7: to a lot of locations in the last twelve months.
Speaker 6: I mean everywhere we go.
Speaker 7: You know, people look at President Trump as not the
Speaker 7: president of United States, but the leader of the free world,
Speaker 7: someone who stands for peace and prosperity. I will tell
Speaker 7: you we were at the very beginning our team was
Speaker 7: of the Rwanda DRC peace Agreement and being involved in
Speaker 7: that from a business perspective, obviously, the government does what
Speaker 7: they do, and we were very focused on it from
Speaker 7: how do we start saving lives? You know, hundreds of
Speaker 7: people were dying, thousands of people were dying, and you know,
Speaker 7: our focus was to bring prosperity in business to a
Speaker 7: region that's been fighting for a long time and it's
Speaker 7: starting to work. And I think if America really steps
Speaker 7: into that opportunity and gets on the ground there, which
Speaker 7: is what we hope. From a business perspective, you know.
Speaker 6: You can really what President Trump wants.
Speaker 7: To do is he wants to solve conflicts and problems
Speaker 7: with a pin, with smart business, not with bullets. Bullets
Speaker 7: are the easy way, and they don't ever work because
Speaker 7: there's always a reaction to every action. So if you
Speaker 7: can solve those things all around the world, I think
Speaker 7: you're going to see the same thing happen soon in
Speaker 7: the Russia Ukraine conflict that's going on right now. Piece
Speaker 7: is coming, Piece is coming, and it's going to be
Speaker 7: good for everybody, and it's going to be good for
Speaker 7: American companies.
Speaker 2: Well, let's talk about Russia for a little bit, because
Speaker 2: some of the criticism that a lot of the criticism
Speaker 2: that I'm hearing about Trump right now as it relates
Speaker 2: to his relationship with Russia and Vladimir Putin, is that
Speaker 2: Trump is somehow seeking to make Russia an ally of
Speaker 2: the United States again, because there's this Russia piece through
Speaker 2: business plan that is being worked on right now. And
Speaker 2: I have looked at this over the years. Even when
Speaker 2: Trump has said complimentary things about Vladimir Putin, I don't
Speaker 2: see that as him acquiescing to Putin. I see that
Speaker 2: as him manipulating pieces on the checks on the chessboard,
Speaker 2: because you are you know, you catch more flies with
Speaker 2: honey than vinegar, is the old saying. And if Trump
Speaker 2: can put put in a position to where he's praising
Speaker 2: him on one level, it's going to facilitate a deal
Speaker 2: down the road that is going to lead to what
Speaker 2: Trump wants or the administration wants ultimately, and the deal,
Speaker 2: you know, again, you get back to Trump's business active,
Speaker 2: and the deal is a deal that winds up being
Speaker 2: good for all the parties involved. Even though he likes
Speaker 2: to come out and say America first, there's obviously a
Speaker 2: component of that that's going to make America better off.
Speaker 2: But it's a good deal for everyone if everyone comes
Speaker 2: out ahead at the end. And I see the way
Speaker 2: he deals with Russia, to my way of thinking, is
Speaker 2: positioning himself in the United States to be able to
Speaker 2: cut a deal like that that's going to lead to
Speaker 2: the ultimate goal of ending all this war between Russia
Speaker 2: and Ukraine.
Speaker 7: President Trump is playing four dimensional chess.
Speaker 6: He is winning. He knows how to win. He is
Speaker 6: a winner.
Speaker 7: His team with Witkoff and Marco Rubio as well as
Speaker 7: even Jared and other people who are helping out tremendously.
Speaker 7: I mean, these guys are putting together a great plan.
Speaker 7: And what I would tell you is there'll be a
Speaker 7: tough on both sides. I think there's no reason why
Speaker 7: we shouldn't be close with both sides. I think the
Speaker 7: reality is, you know, you and I grew up in
Speaker 7: an age of if you remember the movie Red Dawn,
Speaker 7: where you know Wolverine, we were worried about the Russians
Speaker 7: invading and all this stuff. All that stuff's over. Russia
Speaker 7: should be our ally and posts all this. I believe
Speaker 7: you're going to see Russia in the US become very
Speaker 7: close allies. And I think we'll do a lot of
Speaker 7: work with Ukraine too. And I think there's gonna be
Speaker 7: huge opportunities from a business perspective on all sides of
Speaker 7: this that I'm personally very excited about. And I think
Speaker 7: I think there are huge opportunities. To let me give
Speaker 7: you an example. Take the technology that some really really
Speaker 7: bright Russian companies have, like a company like Novatech. They
Speaker 7: have the best modular LNG technology in the world. It's
Speaker 7: the only technology, for example, that we could use as
Speaker 7: a country to unlock stranded natural gas reserves in northern Alaska.
Speaker 7: We can take that technology, which we already have in
Speaker 7: our hands and use it for the benefit of the
Speaker 7: Alaskan people, the people of America, and to export democracy
Speaker 7: all around the world.
Speaker 6: It's an incredible opportunity.
Speaker 7: That's just one small idea, but that small idea can
Speaker 7: increase the GDP of Alaska by more than twenty five
Speaker 7: percent in a very short period of time. So That's
Speaker 7: one kind of example of how I think American partnerships
Speaker 7: can make sense. But there's a long, long list of
Speaker 7: them that I think are coming post piece, and I
Speaker 7: think there's huge opportunities to rebuild Ukraine and do really
Speaker 7: good things with the Ukrainians as well.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I t lot with Daniel Turner, who's the founder
Speaker 2: of Power of the Future. I don't know if you're
Speaker 2: familiar that much with him at all, but he spends
Speaker 2: a lot of time on energy policy, especially as it
Speaker 2: relates to Alaska. And the one thing that we talked
Speaker 2: about before the re election of Trump or Trump, you know,
Speaker 2: Trump forty seven was that if there is going to
Speaker 2: be an economic resurgence in the United States of America,
Speaker 2: that energy policy is going to be on the forefront
Speaker 2: of that. And everything that I'm hearing right now and
Speaker 2: everything that I'm seeing right now, is that we really
Speaker 2: are on the cusp on the verge of economic policy
Speaker 2: that is just going to store driven largely by what
Speaker 2: happens in the energy sect.
Speaker 6: You're already seeing that.
Speaker 7: I mean, look, just last week they passed some new
Speaker 7: federal legislation to unlocked drilling and unlocked development off the
Speaker 7: coast of California. There's a there's a great group headed
Speaker 7: by Jim Floyes who's doing a tremendous amount of good
Speaker 7: work out there off the coast of California, doing things
Speaker 7: in a smart environmental way, basically redeveloping the old Exxon
Speaker 7: fiells out there. But you're right, Look, the days of
Speaker 7: windmills and solar panels is over. Okay, not that there's
Speaker 7: not certain applications for solar makes a ton of sense,
Speaker 7: But we are in an environment where energy density matters
Speaker 7: and it's a reality. And they can make you believe
Speaker 7: whatever you want with subsidies and all these things, but
Speaker 7: at the end of the day, those things do not
Speaker 7: work from an economic standpoint, and we are going to
Speaker 7: get back to rational common sense. Coal is a great
Speaker 7: baseload power. It's not going anywhere. In fact, it might
Speaker 7: even increase in a lot of different markets. They can
Speaker 7: do it cleaner and better than they've done it in
Speaker 7: a long time. Natural gas fantastic.
Speaker 6: Look up.
Speaker 7: President Trump's done recently allowing many of these incredible LNG
Speaker 7: producers on the Gulf Coast and other places.
Speaker 6: To export their products all over the world.
Speaker 7: The huge deals there was just a big deal in
Speaker 7: Turkey res where we're now taking huge amounts of American
Speaker 7: powers to over to Turkey in Europe anyway, it's incredible
Speaker 7: if you think about what the Administration's accomplished on energy
Speaker 7: and some of the leadership groups behind that, it's it's
Speaker 7: really it's a it's a great time in American history,
Speaker 7: maybe a once in a generation type situation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you mentioned solar powers and solar power, solar panels
Speaker 2: and windmills and things like that, and I want to
Speaker 2: ask you about that. So much of that, what was
Speaker 2: going on with the you know, the Green Energy deal
Speaker 2: and all the rest of that. When you have the
Speaker 2: solar power things and the windmills and all that, all
Speaker 2: that was being driven by government subsidies, and a lot
Speaker 2: of that that we have right now would not exist
Speaker 2: but for those government subsidies. There may come a time
Speaker 2: when windmills and solar panels do have a place in
Speaker 2: the energy sector, but it doesn't that need to come
Speaker 2: along at its own pace. Doesn't that the industries that
Speaker 2: want to develop that don't. They need to be able
Speaker 2: to find that niche on their own and find that
Speaker 2: sweet spot to where they can produce these things and
Speaker 2: then have a rate of return on that that is
Speaker 2: reasonable and that is driven by you know, market demand
Speaker 2: and prices and just reasonableness instead of government mandate and
Speaker 2: government subsidies. I think you were better off, yeah, doing
Speaker 2: it that way then having someone in Washington saying, you know,
Speaker 2: this has to be done by this amount of time
Speaker 2: and get it done and paying out all this money
Speaker 2: for it for things that don't work.
Speaker 6: You're one hundred percent right. Uh.
Speaker 7: It's fine at times to get businesses going and help
Speaker 7: start businesses like we did well for the electric cars
Speaker 7: and other things, but at some point these things have
Speaker 7: to stand on their own two feet without subsidies. You
Speaker 7: can't steal from one to give it to the other.
Speaker 7: You know, it doesn't make any sense and it sends
Speaker 7: the wrong message.
Speaker 6: And uh, I think.
Speaker 7: We're at a point where these businesses need stand on
Speaker 7: their own. And the truth of the matter is, in
Speaker 7: certain applications, there are some applications that work for solar
Speaker 7: in certain environments, but most of that, like you said,
Speaker 7: only benefited due to subsidies. So I would tell you
Speaker 7: very clearly, I think the green energy revolution is over
Speaker 7: for the time being.
Speaker 6: And I think in my opinion.
Speaker 7: It's you know, there are some applications of certain technologies
Speaker 7: that help in one way or another that do stand
Speaker 7: on their own, but most of them do not. So anyway,
Speaker 7: we're We're excited about what's happening from a natural clean,
Speaker 7: natural gas perspective, and I'm really happy to see President
Speaker 7: Trump and the administration also helping baseload coal, which is
Speaker 7: such an important driver for America from a baseload power standpoint.
Speaker 7: I also think, you know, we're starting to look at
Speaker 7: nuclear power again, which is, you know, some of the
Speaker 7: least expensive power in the world and makes a ton
Speaker 7: of sense. So all of these things can be big winners,
Speaker 7: and we.
Speaker 6: Meet all of them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, genter Beach before alright, I let you go.
Speaker 2: I'm looking at your website, America First Global, and I'm
Speaker 2: thinking about signing up for your newsletter. Tell me about
Speaker 2: America First Global. And if I signed up for your newsletter,
Speaker 2: what am I going to get?
Speaker 7: Well, Look, at the end of the day, our job
Speaker 7: is economic diplomacy. Our job is to do good things
Speaker 7: around the world and create value in the right American way.
Speaker 7: So you'll see consistent messaging from US and consistent opportunities
Speaker 7: out there right now. We have several large projects we're
Speaker 7: working on that we're very excited about, everything from Alaska
Speaker 7: to some international coal opportunities. So we're very focused on
Speaker 7: doing what's best for America and creating a lot of
Speaker 7: jobs and creating a lot of opportunities for companies here.
Speaker 7: So thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 2: All right, Jenifery beachs great talking to you. Keep up
Speaker 2: the great work, and I certainly hope we get a
Speaker 2: chance to talk on down the road. But happy holidays
Speaker 2: and Merry Christmas and New Year and all that, and
Speaker 2: keep up the great work.
Speaker 7: God bless you and your listeners, and thank you so much.
Speaker 7: It's the most exciting time, I think in American history.
Speaker 6: So let's go make it happen.
Speaker 2: This is the first time I've had a guest joined
Speaker 2: me from Oman, so I'm very excited about that. I'm
Speaker 2: gonna I'm gonna write that down in my note.
Speaker 6: Wonderful. Well, it's a blessing being with y'all.
Speaker 1: Thank you, all right, Gentry be thank you, thank you
Speaker 1: so much. So there you go.
Speaker 2: Uh, there's there's a rich guy who's all involved in
Speaker 2: energy policy and energy policy in his countries. Is is
Speaker 2: really it's it's going to be on the verge, and
Speaker 2: I think it's going to make economics in this country
Speaker 2: really take off and uh and and probably be something
Speaker 2: like most of us have never seen before. Uh, something
Speaker 2: that we have seen before. Are the Bengals coming up short?
Speaker 2: And I'm looking at the highlights right now on ESPN,
Speaker 2: they're showing the Bengals Bills highlights from yesterday. Sean McMahon,
Speaker 2: are were you upset yesterday watching the Bengals and.
Speaker 1: The Bills do what they did? Not hardly? He wasn't upset.
Speaker 2: To say, couldn't someone figure out that Josh Allen might
Speaker 2: run the ball? Couldn't anyone affiliated with the Bengals figure
Speaker 2: that out that that may happen. We'll talk to Austin
Speaker 2: Elmore about that coming up. What they're talking about is
Speaker 2: Josh Allen good enough to overcome the Bill's bad defense?
Speaker 2: Do the Bills really have bad defense? I don't know,
Speaker 2: but it was better than the Bengals defense. I know that,
Speaker 2: and the Bengals won the game. So we'll do a
Speaker 2: little breakdown of that as we continue on. Then an
Speaker 2: eleven thirty Chris Smitheman is going to weigh in on
Speaker 2: all this stuff going on in Cincinnati with the eight
Speaker 2: point one million dollar settlement that's going out the mayor
Speaker 2: and his is he being truthful about his car being
Speaker 2: repossessed and all the rest of that. So we will
Speaker 2: see how those things develop on down the road. We
Speaker 2: got to get to a break right now. Little news
Speaker 2: coming up at the top of the hour, and we
Speaker 2: will continue on. Dan Carroll in for Scott's loan on
Speaker 2: seven hundred W seven hundred wow, Dan Carroll for Scott's
Speaker 2: loan and Sean mcmanhn go ahead and hit that play.
Speaker 14: Allan touching his rib area. That's a signal to the
Speaker 14: receiver out to the left, Alan back to throw pump fakes.
Speaker 14: Begin scrambling the middle of the field. He is close
Speaker 14: to the first down, He's got it. Then Buffalo is
Speaker 14: going to win the game. Josh Allen on third and
Speaker 14: fifteen scrambles for a seventeen yard game.
Speaker 2: Austin Olmore, You heard Dave Lapham. Yeah, when it looked
Speaker 2: like Josh Allen was going to run, he could see
Speaker 2: it from the booth. There was no one within fifteen
Speaker 2: yards in Yeah, and I think that play in a
Speaker 2: nutshell pretty much sums up the Bengals season. Man, I mean, coming,
Speaker 2: come on, did anyone affiliated with the Cincinnati Bengals think
Speaker 2: that there was a possibility Josh Allen might run the ball?
Speaker 2: Do we not know this is what he does? I mean,
Speaker 2: is there any conceivable way they might have schemed to
Speaker 2: prevent these sort of things from happening? Because he ran
Speaker 2: the ball multiple times in that game for a lot
Speaker 2: of yard.
Speaker 1: I don't know how many charges. He had seventy eight
Speaker 1: yards on the ground. Yeah, he had his season high
Speaker 1: on the ground this year was forty nine. We know
Speaker 1: that he is maybe the most prolific running quarterback of
Speaker 1: all time, up there with Lamar Jackson. The rules of
Speaker 1: engagement for dealing with Josh Allen are not hard to find,
Speaker 1: especially this season where his high was forty nine yards
Speaker 1: on the ground. And yet the Bengals were undisciplined on
Speaker 1: the edge. They didn't set a spy, they couldn't tackle.
Speaker 1: They blitzed the hell out of him for some reason.
Speaker 1: He's one of those quarterbacks you can't blitz. They ran
Speaker 1: a ton of man coverage which allowed him, you know,
Speaker 1: to see defenders with their back turn to him and
Speaker 1: take off and on top of that, he's just a
Speaker 1: really good player, and they didn't do enough to take
Speaker 1: away the biggest strength of Buffalo, which is Josh Allen's
Speaker 1: ability to run the ball. It was as in that
Speaker 1: saw didn't occur to them during the course of their
Speaker 1: preparation for this game that they if they were going
Speaker 1: to have any chance, any chance in hell of getting
Speaker 1: to the postseason, they had to win this game. And
Speaker 1: when Buffalo there was a situation early on where Buffalo
Speaker 1: had a four I think it was fourth and four
Speaker 1: and then a fourth and fourth, yeah, and then they
Speaker 1: didn't hesitate at all to go on fourth down and
Speaker 1: wound up I think on a couple of those plays
Speaker 1: what they gained seventeen yards on one and maybe twenty
Speaker 1: or thirty on another one. It was this, I knew
Speaker 1: we were struggling to find the world. I knew we
Speaker 1: were in trouble last week when the defense played a
Speaker 1: pretty good game against Baltimore. And all we heard this
Speaker 1: past week was, Hey, the defense has woken up. We've
Speaker 1: got some serious players there. They're really gonna, you know,
Speaker 1: turn things around. And then we go to the Bengals,
Speaker 1: go to Buffalo, almost said we the Bengals go to
Speaker 1: Buffalo and then lay an egg on the defensive side
Speaker 1: of the ball was just embarrassing. Yeah, I mean, I
Speaker 1: think you know, the point that I've tried to make
Speaker 1: at times this year is that you can't allow the
Speaker 1: previous three games to let you forget about the first eleven,
Speaker 1: which is, you know, just how bad this Bengals defense
Speaker 1: has been. And I think sometimes we fall into that trap. Now, Buffalo,
Speaker 1: specifically from a matchup standpoint, their play action, their tight ends,
Speaker 1: those crossing routes, getting those linebackers in conflict, that's their
Speaker 1: bread and butter. It is what they're off is built around.
Speaker 1: It is the Bengals' biggest weakness. Now, some of these
Speaker 1: teams that the Bengals have played in recent weeks, that's
Speaker 1: not what they do, that's not what they're found upon,
Speaker 1: and the Bengals were just a better schematic fit for
Speaker 1: those teams. This game was always going to be difficult,
Speaker 1: just because Buffalo does what it does, and they do
Speaker 1: it really well, and the Bengals players aren't good enough
Speaker 1: to consistently get off the field. That being said, they
Speaker 1: had multiple fourth and force where Buffalo converted. There was
Speaker 1: one where Josh Allen was just Josh Allen. He's gonna
Speaker 1: be in the Hall of Fame. One day he threw
Speaker 1: a ball through one defender's hands and over the shoulder
Speaker 1: pad of another, right into a perfect spot. Nothing you
Speaker 1: can do. The Bengals also dropped two interceptions. Jordan Battle
Speaker 1: dropped one. DJ Turner dropped one. Bengals win the game
Speaker 1: if that happens, Like the margin for error is so
Speaker 1: unbelievably thin that if Joe Burrow has the ball slip
Speaker 1: out of his hands as he's trying to push it
Speaker 1: to Jamar Chase, you can't cover from that. Or a
Speaker 1: batted ball that happens constantly across the NFL falls right
Speaker 1: into the hands of another defender. It's just you said
Speaker 1: it earlier. Yesterday's game kind of epitomizes the entire season.
Speaker 1: All of it happened in one game.
Speaker 2: Because you can't rely on the defense for any Didn't
Speaker 2: Buffalo punt yesterday?
Speaker 1: They did not. There's one punt in the game. It
Speaker 1: was by the bank. Yes, they didn't punt a single time.
Speaker 1: Didn't punt. Now they turned it over inside that one again.
Speaker 1: Apparently the Bengals are the best defense in the history
Speaker 1: of the NFL inside the one yard line, if you
Speaker 1: remember that Patriots game and then the Ravens last week
Speaker 1: and then again this week. But yeah, didn't force a punt,
Speaker 1: didn't get off the field, didn't have that big play
Speaker 1: to give yourself a chance. And the other thing too,
Speaker 1: is you know, it's just down down the hall talking
Speaker 1: with Tony Pike on the forty yard touchdown run by
Speaker 1: Josh Allen that brings it to twenty four to seventeen
Speaker 1: I think, or whatever it was, forty one left in
Speaker 1: the game, something along those lines. If you make them
Speaker 1: use two more minutes, three more minutes, different plan on offense,
Speaker 1: different execution, probably a different result. But because you give
Speaker 1: up a touchdown like that in two plays sixty yards,
Speaker 1: because they can't just force a team to chew clock
Speaker 1: or make them work for it, we get this result.
Speaker 2: Are we done entertaining the notion now that the Bengals
Speaker 2: will see postseason play?
Speaker 1: I'm not, and I'll tell you why. Eight and listen.
Speaker 1: I know it sounds ridiculous. Do Pittsburgh and Baltimore scare
Speaker 1: you at all? Baltimore? Baltimore? I think is done at Baltimore.
Speaker 2: I was surprised how bad Baltimore looked yesterday.
Speaker 1: Baltimore, I think is done and the Bengals can finish
Speaker 1: them off this week at home. I wouldn't be surprised
Speaker 1: at off the Bengals beat them again. So that's number one.
Speaker 1: Number two Pittsburgh. They have to go play Miami in
Speaker 1: Miami on a on a Monday night, not easy to
Speaker 1: travel on the road in primetime, and Miami is playing
Speaker 1: awesome football.
Speaker 2: Aaron Rodgers yesterday looked like a completely different guy. That's
Speaker 2: that's a fair point. He was having fun. I mean,
Speaker 2: but Josh, Josh, Aaron Rodgers that we saw yesterday completely different.
Speaker 1: But Pittsburgh still has to play Miami, who's playing really well,
Speaker 1: the Detroit Lions, who are fighting for their playoff lives, Cleveland,
Speaker 1: who has as good of a defense as there is
Speaker 1: in the NFL yesterday notwithstanding, and Baltimore again. So it's
Speaker 1: not out of the realm of possibility. I'm just saying,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's nuts. It's not nuts. If the
Speaker 1: Bengals are to win out, and I know that is
Speaker 1: a massive if, and there is nothing to really stand
Speaker 1: on other than they could and the Steelers maybe come
Speaker 1: down a little bit from the way they played. They
Speaker 1: almost blew that game yesterday, by the way then and
Speaker 1: without a bad call by the officials, they probably do
Speaker 1: lose that.
Speaker 2: You think they think that was a touchdown by likely
Speaker 2: should have been a touchdown.
Speaker 1: You think, so that's touchdown. But either way, I mean,
Speaker 1: if Baltimore can beat them, you never know in that
Speaker 1: rivalry over the last thirty games fifteen and fifteen between
Speaker 1: Harball and Tomlin. So now that Tomlin won one, Hardball's due.
Speaker 1: I'm just saying it's not crazy for the Bengals to
Speaker 1: win the AFC North if Pittsburgh falters in any of
Speaker 1: those games against teams that you know they're evenly matched with,
Speaker 1: to say the least. The Bengals went out and Baltimore
Speaker 1: has to play New England and Green Bay, both of
Speaker 1: those on the road. Those teams are both pretty good,
Speaker 1: and if the Bengals beat them, they're done. Wow. Well, no,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it's going to happen. You guys got
Speaker 1: a lot to talk about down in the hall day,
Speaker 1: Oh we do. Yeah, I mean this is we haven't
Speaker 1: even got into the college football playoff yet, which is
Speaker 1: fascinating in and of itself complete dumpster fire.
Speaker 2: So you are not ready to to write off the season?
Speaker 2: Why should I?
Speaker 1: Joe Burrow played awesome yesterday and the level of opponent
Speaker 1: is not going to match that at all the rest
Speaker 1: of the year.
Speaker 11: Three.
Speaker 1: How do you explain the back to back under three
Speaker 1: of the last four are at home? How do I
Speaker 1: explain just dumb? It was the right call, it was
Speaker 1: the right read. I think the ball slipped out of
Speaker 1: his hands and he kind of pushed it and Benford
Speaker 1: made a great play, and then the second one was
Speaker 1: just unlucky. I know everybody wants to blame Joe Burrow
Speaker 1: and people are getting mad about that. I thought Jamar
Speaker 1: Chase was going to catch him. Yeah, that was I
Speaker 1: thought Burrow was going to tackle him and didn't. He
Speaker 1: didn't really wrap that up. Didn't wrap him up though.
Speaker 1: He's got a bad risk, I guess, But yeah, I
Speaker 1: know it's uh. I don't put all of it on Joe,
Speaker 1: Like I was yelling, come on, Jamar Chase. Yeah, if
Speaker 1: he would have had like a better grip on that ball,
Speaker 1: maybe he can change the arm angle, maybe he floats
Speaker 1: it over. It's not going to go for a touchdown.
Speaker 1: But it would have been a completion for yards. Keep
Speaker 1: it moving. It was the right read. And if you
Speaker 1: look at it, it's a run pass option. On the
Speaker 1: other end, let's say he hands it off, it was
Speaker 1: probably gonna be a tackle for a loss because the
Speaker 1: offensive line got destroyed. So it was the right, right decision.
Speaker 1: Bad execution by the Bengals, great execution by Benford, made
Speaker 1: a great play.
Speaker 2: You know, the one and one of the storylines that
Speaker 2: has cropped up in a lot of these games this
Speaker 2: year is that the end result has overshadowed so many
Speaker 2: really good performances. The way Flacco played against against the Jets,
Speaker 2: the way he played against the Bears, all that totally overlooked,
Speaker 2: totally forgotten. Yeah, some of the catches that were made
Speaker 2: yesterday by especially T Higgins. Yeah, just I mean, unbelievable
Speaker 2: and and all that, all that is forgotten now. It's
Speaker 2: so it's it's all dust in the wind. Very very
Speaker 2: similar to last season.
Speaker 1: And that big old l up there, Yeah, very similar
Speaker 1: to last season. Burrow had the best season in the
Speaker 1: history of this franchise and was certainly could have and
Speaker 1: maybe should have won the MVP Award. Jamar Chase triple
Speaker 1: crown doesn't matter. They didn't make the playoffs, and now,
Speaker 1: for the first time since twenty twenty, they're gonna finish
Speaker 1: the season with the losing record, which is kind of
Speaker 1: hard to believe that they haven't had a losing record
Speaker 1: considering some of the situations they've been in. But since
Speaker 1: they lost the AFC Championship game in January of twenty three,
Speaker 1: so that twenty twenty two season, since they lost that game,
Speaker 1: they're twenty two and twenty five. It's not good. It's
Speaker 1: not good. And their defense in those three seasons has
Speaker 1: been among the worst in the history of the National
Speaker 1: Football League.
Speaker 2: So you will wait till after next week or one
Speaker 2: more loss for the Bengals, were until they're mathematically eliminated
Speaker 2: to talk about what should happen in the postseason.
Speaker 1: No, no, they talk about all that stuff. No, yeah,
Speaker 1: of course, yeah, when this season is still alive, it is.
Speaker 1: It doesn't change. That's the point though. That's the point though,
Speaker 1: is you can't allow what happens between yesterday and the
Speaker 1: end of this season to change what you've already seen
Speaker 1: for the first fourteen weeks.
Speaker 2: Now, I don't want to be upset by this, but
Speaker 2: I am what are you upset about? Because it's just
Speaker 2: it is so much is there for the taking? Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: for sure? And to let these opportunities? What is this
Speaker 2: Joe Burrows six or seventh year in the league season, Yeah,
Speaker 2: sixth The guy is in the prime of his NFL career.
Speaker 2: And that window, I mean, we can see we can
Speaker 2: see that, you know that windows starting to and and
Speaker 2: I'm not saying it's closing, but I mean, is this
Speaker 2: something And I think I heard Tony Pike talking about
Speaker 2: this a couple of days ago. Is this the sort
Speaker 2: of situation you can fix in one off season or
Speaker 2: two off seasons? Or do we need a couple more
Speaker 2: rounds where we nail we nail some draft picks.
Speaker 1: The these are supposed to be the golden years of
Speaker 1: being football and Duke Tobin and the front office have
Speaker 1: failed Joe Burrow, Jamar Chase and t Higgins because they
Speaker 1: have not given them a good enough defense to keep
Speaker 1: them in games. Again, you don't need the defense to
Speaker 1: be the number one defense in the NFL. You don't
Speaker 1: need them to be number ten. You could survive on
Speaker 1: seventeenth if they had the seventeenth best defense in the NFL.
Speaker 1: This year, they'd probably be the number two seed in
Speaker 1: the afc' that's how thin the margin is. To answer
Speaker 1: your question, though, I do believe it can be fixed
Speaker 1: sooner rather than later. Number one. Again, we're not trying
Speaker 1: to go from thirty two to one. You're trying to
Speaker 1: go from thirty two to twenty. Can you get the twentieth?
Speaker 1: I know that's a low bar, but going into next year,
Speaker 1: they already have sixty four million dollars in cap space.
Speaker 1: That's a lot. You're not gonna bring back Trey Hendrickson,
Speaker 1: You're gonna let him walk, and you can probably bring
Speaker 1: back Joe's of OSI or Miles Murphy on team friendly deals,
Speaker 1: and that's still going to provide a lot of space
Speaker 1: for you to bring in players on defense. And you
Speaker 1: haven't even restructured Joe Burrow's contract.
Speaker 2: Getting if getting a stop on on third and fifteen
Speaker 2: is asking too much for this group, it is. I
Speaker 2: think these things are asking too much.
Speaker 1: For them to get better players. Yeah, okay, I mean
Speaker 1: they certainly have failed in the draft, but they have tried.
Speaker 1: Now trying, it doesn't matter if you don't execute. But
Speaker 1: I don't think it's like, Okay, we have to strip
Speaker 1: this thing down and rebuild it. I think they can
Speaker 1: be competitive again next year.
Speaker 2: The AutoZone Liberty Bowl January two, Memphis, Tennessee.
Speaker 1: How does that sit with UC fans? M I don't
Speaker 1: know that anyone that cares.
Speaker 2: I would rather them have gone to the Snoop Dog Bowl.
Speaker 1: I want to.
Speaker 2: I want to see what the idea, what the Snoop
Speaker 2: Dog Bowl is all about?
Speaker 1: It just I think I think it pretty much sums
Speaker 1: it up. Snoop dog He doesn't get enough time on television.
Speaker 1: I think, so, yeah, does he? Yeah? Well, I think
Speaker 1: does it do the national anthem and everything? Yeah? Could
Speaker 1: you imagine Snoop Dogg singing the national anthem?
Speaker 4: He's not.
Speaker 2: He's not really a good say. Can you see? Because
Speaker 2: I watched Snoop do O double G. I watched his
Speaker 2: voice a little bit, and he's the he sings from time.
Speaker 2: He seems like a girly guy. I mean, he's like
Speaker 2: an awesome vibe. Personality wise, he's fantastic. I don't know
Speaker 2: that I need the Snoop Dog Bowl.
Speaker 1: I think seventy five percent of the bowl games these
Speaker 1: days are pointless.
Speaker 2: Miami University is going to be in that we should
Speaker 2: we should put that broadcast.
Speaker 1: Are there is Miami going to the Snoop dogg Bawl?
Speaker 1: I think I think I saw that. Good for Universo.
Speaker 1: I think that's two years in a row they're in
Speaker 1: the Snoop Dog Bowl. That's big for them. I guess
Speaker 1: that's fantastic. Gosh, I don't get I don't care at
Speaker 1: all about these bowl games that are not playoff games.
Speaker 1: Don't you think they're a little oversaturated?
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, it's well, I mean someone's making money on him,
Speaker 2: so they're gonna happen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, of course I'll get it.
Speaker 2: But if you don't make, if you don't make the
Speaker 2: playoff games, then yeah, and good.
Speaker 1: The players don't want to.
Speaker 2: Play good for play I mean a lot of these
Speaker 2: guys for UC are they gonna Nobody knows.
Speaker 1: I mean, I can't imagine that Brendan Soresby would play
Speaker 1: if the reports out there are true that he's being
Speaker 1: offered four million dollars what allegedly play quarterback? Uh, we
Speaker 1: don't know. I mean, I know, I know last year
Speaker 1: he got a pretty good offer from from Notre Dame.
Speaker 1: I think he's upset he left Indiana now, man, I
Speaker 1: bet Kurt Signette's happy left he found somebody.
Speaker 2: But uh wow, by the way, how about that game
Speaker 2: that that was all of the football game?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean the way that the Indiana I mean
Speaker 1: that game was just it was theater in the trenches.
Speaker 1: The way that those two teams play each other, especially
Speaker 1: on defense, I mean that was it was.
Speaker 2: It was like the throwback to what Big Ten football. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it used to be exactly right. A lot of pots.
Speaker 2: That was a dirt field. It was a lot of
Speaker 2: three It really was.
Speaker 1: It was. I wouldn't say it from my perspective as
Speaker 1: an Ohio State fan that it was fun to watch,
Speaker 1: but it was interesting and I think it was good
Speaker 1: for Ohio State to kind of get punched in them
Speaker 1: Mount States. Bigger fish to fry they do. There are
Speaker 1: there are bigger goals for Ohio State than the Big
Speaker 1: Ten championship.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Still pretty big though. But yeah, I'm glad the committee
Speaker 1: did the right thing by not like moving them down
Speaker 1: to three or four. A three point loss in Indianapolis
Speaker 1: against Indiana, you probably could have at least tied it
Speaker 1: except chip shot field goal was missed. They only knocked
Speaker 1: them down one spot. I thought that was a good
Speaker 1: thing in Indianapolis. No, it's in there every it's there
Speaker 1: every year. Yeah, yeah, okay, that's where they're headquartered. So
Speaker 1: couldn't get better. The hoois all right, what are you
Speaker 1: guys talking about? On fifteen thirty two, We're going to
Speaker 1: be talking a lot about the Bengals, to Tony's chagrin.
Speaker 1: We will talk about the Crosstown shootout because Xavier won again,
Speaker 1: which I think is that it was a great game.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about that find out if I'm to say,
Speaker 1: it looks kind of like you is that your son?
Speaker 1: I wish he wish he was. All right, we will
Speaker 1: talk about that a lot of a lot of Bengals
Speaker 1: and uh, I'm sure Tony has given up and I'll
Speaker 1: do what we just did and chart the past. Uh
Speaker 1: and that'll be fun. But yeah, Monday shows are great,
Speaker 1: a lot to talk.
Speaker 2: I also saw war Skyline has a pizza now, Oh really, yes, okay,
Speaker 2: you you have not event I have not tried that.
Speaker 1: If some shows up here at the station, then you'll oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: I've made a Skyline pizza myself in the past. It's sensation.
Speaker 1: You were obviously ahead of the car. Yeah, absolutely, it's
Speaker 1: a great great for Super Bowl Sunday skyline. Maybe we'll
Speaker 1: be watching the Bengals Austin. We'll see you later on
Speaker 1: seven hundred W l W.
Speaker 2: Tiger on the Big One, seven hundred W l W
Speaker 2: eleven thirty nine, coming down the home stretch. Dan Carroll
Speaker 2: in for or Scottsloan, Bill Cunningham, The Great American is
Speaker 2: coming up at twelve noon, so you want to be
Speaker 2: here for that. When I saw this story over the
Speaker 2: weekend about the eight point one million dollars that the
Speaker 2: City of Cincinnati is going to pay out to people
Speaker 2: who were rioting in the streets of downtown Cincinnati, I
Speaker 2: wrote this Cincinnati where criminals do no time, where punks
Speaker 2: and agitators can riot and get paid, and the politicians
Speaker 2: and judges who allow it to happen get re elected
Speaker 2: on a regular basis. Of course, we couldn't let this
Speaker 2: story pass without having our buddy Chris Smithman, the one
Speaker 2: time Vice mayor of the City of Cincinnati, the head
Speaker 2: of the Law and Public Safety Committee, weigh in on
Speaker 2: this as well. Chris Smitheman, great to have you here.
Speaker 2: Is that a fair statement that I wrote that punks
Speaker 2: and agitators can riot and get paid by the city
Speaker 2: of Cincinnati. Are is that the message that we are
Speaker 2: going to send when this settlement gets approved?
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, you know when you think about this, And
Speaker 3: I said this publicly and I'll say it again here,
Speaker 3: the city did not have to settle Dan Care. The
Speaker 3: city could have fought this and said I'm going to
Speaker 3: go to a jury trial. I'm going to present evidence,
Speaker 3: and I'm going to allow a jury to make the decision.
Speaker 8: Right.
Speaker 3: They knew before the election that we just had which
Speaker 3: is another problem, that they were moving or had probably
Speaker 3: already disettled this case. So this is all gamesmanship from
Speaker 3: the elected officials downtown. You know, I heard the beginning,
Speaker 3: which I just think is riveting. You're the lawyer for
Speaker 3: the gentleman who was viciously attacked in downtown, who city
Speaker 3: call called a white racist, who said council members said,
Speaker 3: I've got one in the chamber, and you got forty
Speaker 3: eight hours to arrest somebody white. You heard that lawyer say,
Speaker 3: I'm not gonna settle, I'm gonna go to a jury trial.
Speaker 3: Now what he's saying here is that a city you
Speaker 3: are better be prepared to come into a court and
Speaker 3: explain your actions, not just from the public, but specifically
Speaker 3: the members of council, the President pro Tien who said
Speaker 3: that Holly, who was almost, in my estimation, was almost
Speaker 3: murdered when she hit the ground, You're gonna have to
Speaker 3: come in the court and explain your words to us.
Speaker 3: And you know what's going to happen, Dan Carroll. At
Speaker 3: the end of that trial, they're gonna say this man
Speaker 3: did not start the fight. Because we've seen the videos.
Speaker 3: We now know that he didn't start the fight, and
Speaker 3: so we know that the city's gonna have to settle
Speaker 3: the case. Now, if we just gave this these group
Speaker 3: of people eight or ten million, because the lawyers are
Speaker 3: gonna get two million, know that they're gonna there's gonna
Speaker 3: be another level of judgment bombs in the next couple
Speaker 3: of years for this case that we're talking about, where
Speaker 3: at the music festival we had a group of people
Speaker 3: that were viciously attacked and ambushed and clearly we can
Speaker 3: see that they didn't start the fight. We also have
Speaker 3: Chief Washington, this administration fired him wrongly. A judge has
Speaker 3: already said you all fired him wrongly. It was appealed.
Speaker 3: They lost. They're in settlements case. They're in settlement talks
Speaker 3: right now, but there was a trial at least there
Speaker 3: was there was discussion, and ultimately the judge looked at
Speaker 3: them and said, you're going to lose. Now we got
Speaker 3: Chief Fiji, our police chief, who's now negotiating. So this
Speaker 3: isn't just the ten million that I believe. It is
Speaker 3: a two million to the lawyers in eight point one
Speaker 3: million in settlement too, as you've indicated, twelve thousand or
Speaker 3: so per person. When you put all these cases together,
Speaker 3: you're probably talking about twenty million dollars or north of that.
Speaker 3: Because we don't know what this gentleman is going to
Speaker 3: get from downtown. He might get ten or fifteen million
Speaker 3: dollars himself because you called him a racist on the
Speaker 3: national stage. How does he repair How does that man
Speaker 3: repair his reputation when you have the President pro tien,
Speaker 3: the Chair of Law and Public Safety, members of council
Speaker 3: saying go arrest somebody white. So when you when you
Speaker 3: talk about this to me, it's the context, Dan Carroll,
Speaker 3: of all of that together, and this is the most
Speaker 3: outrageous thing that you would see because in the future,
Speaker 3: what's gonna happen is we have some incident that's that's
Speaker 3: five hundred miles away from the city of Cincinnati, and
Speaker 3: which we had nothing to do with George Floyd, meaning
Speaker 3: our officers did not suffocate George Floyd. We have nothing
Speaker 3: to do with it. But people decided they were going
Speaker 3: to come down and block our highways and set things
Speaker 3: on fire and break into businesses. And one officer was shot.
Speaker 3: He had a helmet on, so his ballistic helmet stopped him.
Speaker 3: If not, we would have one of our officers killed
Speaker 3: in down town. You're gonna you're gonna pay out eight
Speaker 3: point one million dollars. And I want the president of
Speaker 3: the FOP to understand that the position here from the
Speaker 3: city is the problem is the city should have fought
Speaker 3: the case and said we're going to go to trial.
Speaker 3: We're gonna put we're gonna put everybody on trial and
Speaker 3: figure it out, not get in a room and settle
Speaker 3: the case and make the taxpayers pay that kind of money.
Speaker 2: So part of this settlement includes the creation of a
Speaker 2: guidebook that establishes former standard formal standards for dealing with
Speaker 2: protests and similar events, a standard for dispersal orders that
Speaker 2: police used during civil unrest, and updated procedures for mass
Speaker 2: arrests at the Hamilton County Municipal Court.
Speaker 1: So, Chris Smitheman, we are you know.
Speaker 2: They they talk about how well the settlement doesn't you know,
Speaker 2: accepts no blame or it doesn't it doesn't find fault
Speaker 2: with the City of Cincinnati. But now we have to
Speaker 2: go back and say our police officers need additional training.
Speaker 2: Is IRA really going to be in charge of the
Speaker 2: training now? Is are we going to hear from some
Speaker 2: community organizers on how police ought to deal with these issues?
Speaker 1: Now?
Speaker 2: Are we going to say that the mayor is powerless
Speaker 2: to issue an emergency order for a curfew when there
Speaker 2: is damage and and vandalism being committed on the streets
Speaker 2: of Cincinnati, that we have to refer now to this
Speaker 2: guidebook in order to see how to deal with that,
Speaker 2: that the mayor can't exercise his proper his or her
Speaker 2: proper powers to deal with these situations in the future.
Speaker 2: And then, Chris Smitheman, what if you're one of the
Speaker 2: ones who are out there and did not get arrested,
Speaker 2: did not spend the night. And I'm told by people
Speaker 2: who are close to the situation that this notion that
Speaker 2: there weren't bathrooms available, a water or a blanket because
Speaker 2: they might have spent the night waiting to be processed
Speaker 2: into the justice center. What about the people who didn't
Speaker 2: get arrested, who didn't spend the night out there? How
Speaker 2: do you reconcile that If someone right next to you
Speaker 2: who did get arrested winds up getting a twelve thousand
Speaker 2: dollars payday and you're sitting there with nothing, how do
Speaker 2: you how do you deal with that if you're one
Speaker 2: of those people?
Speaker 3: I don't I don't think you reconcile it, Dan Carrol.
Speaker 3: But at the heart of it is the problem here
Speaker 3: is that the city didn't fight the nonsense. Right they
Speaker 3: surrender to it.
Speaker 1: Go to court.
Speaker 3: That's the whole part. Court, that's the whole that. Let's
Speaker 3: go to court.
Speaker 1: Come on, how committed are you to direct that's it.
Speaker 3: Let's go, let's rock and roll. I'm gonna I'm going
Speaker 3: to bring my best to the table, even if I
Speaker 3: have to hire outside council and pay them a million
Speaker 3: dollars to fight you because of the implication of losing
Speaker 3: control of the the strong mayor to make decisions like
Speaker 3: a curfew here. I mean, you're neutering the mayor. When
Speaker 3: you do these kinds of things, this is a horrific
Speaker 3: decision of public policy. And the money that they're paying out,
Speaker 3: it's just it's just completely out rapist. Let me also
Speaker 3: say that John Cranley, if he's listening, if his father
Speaker 3: and mother are listening, you know, if his wife is listening,
Speaker 3: his son is listening. John Cranley, you are a great mayor.
Speaker 3: You made the right decision at the right time. You
Speaker 3: saved our city from being put on fire. Right, this
Speaker 3: is this is where you have the blue dog Democrats
Speaker 3: like the John Cranleys, the Tom Lukens, the Charlie Lucins,
Speaker 3: who really don't exist anymore. They've been marginalized by this
Speaker 3: very liberal left part of the Democratic Party. And and
Speaker 3: anybody who doesn't believe that the left has taken over
Speaker 3: the city of Cincinnati. These are the kinds of decisions
Speaker 3: because because our mayor, our city manager, nor the city
Speaker 3: solicitor had to settle this case, they made the decision
Speaker 3: we're gonna settle the case. I believe that this thing
Speaker 3: would have gone to trial. They wouldn't have found a
Speaker 3: jury in our in our county, in our state. Even
Speaker 3: if they had moved venue, they wouldn't have found anybody
Speaker 3: that would have said that our Mayor John Cranley and
Speaker 3: facing that what was happening with George Floyd, with highways
Speaker 3: and streets being blocked, things set on fire, businesses being robbed,
Speaker 3: an officer being shocked, that we're gonna sit back and
Speaker 3: pay eight point one million dollars out to anybody. Now,
Speaker 3: the peaceful protesters, you and I aren't discussing. I don't
Speaker 3: you know. I can engage in a peaceful protest. That's
Speaker 3: that's not the issue. And so the people who protested peacefully,
Speaker 3: I don't have a beef with that. That's why I
Speaker 3: love this country. My first Amendment right, my second Amendment right,
Speaker 3: there's no issue with that.
Speaker 6: Visu here is that.
Speaker 3: Every everybody wasn't doing that if and there wouldn't have
Speaker 3: been fires, streets blocked, businesses robbed and broken into. So
Speaker 3: everybody wasn't peaceful, and so you're rewarding that bad behavior,
Speaker 3: Dan Carroll, And that's what you're worried about. And at
Speaker 3: the backdrop of it, and I'm gonna say this publicly,
Speaker 3: is that this is a way that people try to
Speaker 3: say racism. This is about racism. This is about white
Speaker 3: people doing stuff to African Americans, African Americans, and not
Speaker 3: that everybody that was arrested with African American. That's not
Speaker 3: what I'm saying. It's this notion that our institution in
Speaker 3: itself is racist and that we weren't out there doing
Speaker 3: our job the city that we're governed to protect, we're
Speaker 3: sworn to protect. And you're gonna see that come out
Speaker 3: in the trial of the white guy who was beat
Speaker 3: up and ambushed in downtown. His lawyer is taking the
Speaker 3: right position that our city solicitors should have taken. Let's
Speaker 3: take this thing to court. I'm not gonna settle. We're
Speaker 3: gonna I want a trial. I want you to dismiss
Speaker 3: all of the all of the dog one charges against
Speaker 3: my client, because when that's all over, you know what's
Speaker 3: gonna happen. He's gonna sue the city of Cincinnati and win.
Speaker 1: Well, Chris smitheman.
Speaker 2: When I look back and I remember those times in May,
Speaker 2: in late May, in the beginning of June and twenty twenty,
Speaker 2: I remember telling my wife, what are we going to
Speaker 2: watch on TV tonight?
Speaker 1: Well, I'm going to turn the riots on.
Speaker 2: There are riots happening all across the country, city after
Speaker 2: city where there were police cars being overturned, businesses on fire,
Speaker 2: there were demonstrations and fights going on out in the streets.
Speaker 2: And then these individuals tried to bring the same thing
Speaker 2: to the city of Cincinnati. And guess what, it didn't
Speaker 2: happen in the city of Cincinnati because of the actions
Speaker 2: they were taken by our law enforcement and by Mayor
Speaker 2: John Cramley. I had my differences with John Cranley over
Speaker 2: the years, but I think in this instance he did
Speaker 2: the exact right thing. Put the curfew in place, shut
Speaker 2: it down, limited the damage, and did what was right
Speaker 2: for the people of Cincinnati. And he said, he commented
Speaker 2: on the Fox nineteen piece that was put out over
Speaker 2: the weekend, he said that curfew in our police department
Speaker 2: saved our city when other cities were burning. Everything I
Speaker 2: saw was of the utmost profe essonalism and restraint, and
Speaker 2: their actions saved our city. I want the record to
Speaker 2: show that they did a great job. And so now
Speaker 2: we have to for all these protesters who were out
Speaker 2: there and and claimed about you that, you know, they
Speaker 2: they might have been a little uncomfortable when they were
Speaker 2: getting booked into the Hamilton County Justice Center. That we're
Speaker 2: going to cough up eight point one million dollars to
Speaker 2: satisfy them and make this go away, and then set
Speaker 2: ourselves up for future protesters to do the exact same thing.
Speaker 2: To me, is just despicable and there's no way this
Speaker 2: should be happening.
Speaker 3: Well, let me tell you something that happened to me.
Speaker 3: I parked when I was parking at City Hall. You're
Speaker 3: the parking lot is across from Plumb and I walked
Speaker 3: across the street and this young white Nile as I
Speaker 3: was crossing the street, demanded that I kneel to him.
Speaker 3: Hear what I said. I demanded that I'm going into
Speaker 3: city Hall. This is doing these riots during this craziness.
Speaker 3: I looked at this young white dude and I said, dude,
Speaker 3: have you lost your mind? If you think that I'm
Speaker 3: going to be somebody that's gonna kneel to you, you
Speaker 3: have lost your total mind. Now. My problem was, unfortunately,
Speaker 3: and this needs to change, I had to leave my
Speaker 3: weapon in my car every time I got out, and
Speaker 3: I'm looking at this craziness happening around City Hall. Because
Speaker 3: we had our swat team in the basement. They're all
Speaker 3: lined up prepared because they're all surrounding City Hall as
Speaker 3: we're going in, right, I'm saying when I got into
Speaker 3: that basement, from the door all the way down that hallway,
Speaker 3: we had to have our swat teams out there. These
Speaker 3: dudes that are big as big as elephants. Man, they're
Speaker 3: just bative dudes like linemen, and they're down there in
Speaker 3: all of that. I shook everybody's hand as I went
Speaker 3: down that hallway, but I had had some guy outside
Speaker 3: as I'm walking in tell me that I needed to kneel.
Speaker 3: And I'm an African American. This is a white dude
Speaker 3: telling me I need to kneel. Kneel for what?
Speaker 6: Brother?
Speaker 12: What?
Speaker 3: What the heck are you talking about? That is how
Speaker 3: crazy it was down there during that period of time
Speaker 3: right where people are trying to make us feel uncomfortable
Speaker 3: as we're trying to do the business of the city.
Speaker 3: It is unbelievable. And I'm going to emphasize here John
Speaker 3: Cranley did a great job if he had not made
Speaker 3: the decisions he made. And by the way I was
Speaker 3: on and off the phone with John, I was the
Speaker 3: vice mayor at the time, as he was trying to
Speaker 3: sort it all out and make the decisions he was
Speaker 3: making so John Cranley, and I don't want to detach
Speaker 3: from the mayor here. He was making very good decisions,
Speaker 3: and I was doing the very best I could at
Speaker 3: his vice mayor to advise him on how to make
Speaker 3: good decisions to protect the city of Cincinnati. But they
Speaker 3: were his decisions to make, and I am glad he
Speaker 3: made him. If he hadn't done it, as you indicated,
Speaker 3: Dan Carroll, Downtown would have been on fire.
Speaker 2: Well, Chris Mithaman. Tomorrow, Tuesday, December ninth, the City of
Speaker 2: Cincinnati's Public Council or I'm sorry, Public Safety and Governance
Speaker 2: Committee is expected to look at this settlement, review it,
Speaker 2: and approve it. I would urge the members of that
Speaker 2: committee to say no. I would urge the members of
Speaker 2: that committee to say, we need to take this to court.
Speaker 2: We need to stand up as a city for what's
Speaker 2: right and send the message that you cannot come into
Speaker 2: our city and agitate and do property damage and ignore
Speaker 2: lawful orders of the Mayor of the City of Cincinnati
Speaker 2: and Cincinnati Police and not expect to be paid for
Speaker 2: We've got one minute, let's right.
Speaker 3: And all I will say is that you and I
Speaker 3: agree that peaceful protests in this country are fine all day.
Speaker 3: Maybe you're coming here and it's all days. It's what
Speaker 3: makes the United States the United States. We are the
Speaker 3: greatest experiment on the globe. It's when you come and
Speaker 3: you start destroying things that you and I are talking about.
Speaker 3: And by the way, I'm very sympathetic to what happened
Speaker 3: to George Floyd. In my opinion, it shouldn't have happened.
Speaker 3: It was bad policing, but it had nothing to do
Speaker 3: with the city of Cincinnati. That's the most important part
Speaker 3: of here. We've gone through the collaborative agreement, we've had
Speaker 3: federal oversight. Saul Green has given us the green light.
Speaker 3: This is the greatest Cincinnati Police department. People come from
Speaker 3: all over the world to see how we do policing
Speaker 3: in the city of Cincinnati. This is a flap in
Speaker 3: the face. Obviously, counsel will rubber stamp this tomorrow. I
Speaker 3: don't have anything that they'll do anything different.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much, brother, all Right, you're the best
Speaker 2: press we got to run, and thank you so much
Speaker 2: for that. Bill Cunningham is coming up next on seven
Speaker 2: hundred wlw