Speaker 1: Seven hundred WLW twelve seven Dan Carroll till three this afternoon,
Speaker 1: seven hundred WLW Cincinnati. It's Hamilton County where the word
Speaker 1: has gone forth that we love crime. We re elect
Speaker 1: politicians who don't do anything about crime. The judges too,
Speaker 1: we re elect them. And now the word has gone
Speaker 1: forth that if you want to come to our city
Speaker 1: and you want to engage in criminal activity, if you
Speaker 1: want to engage in destruction of property, if you want
Speaker 1: to take a police barrier and smash it through the
Speaker 1: window of the Hamilton County Justice Center, you are going
Speaker 1: to get paid. You are in line for well, a
Speaker 1: nice chunk of change, let's put it that way, absolutely fantastic.
Speaker 1: The City of Cincinnati in Hamilton County settling a class
Speaker 1: action lawsuit filed in response to hundreds of arrest made
Speaker 1: during the protest in twenty twenty following the George Floyd
Speaker 1: incident in Minneapolis. It says the murder of George Floyd,
Speaker 1: but as we know, he died of a drug overdose.
Speaker 1: In the settlement, the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton County
Speaker 1: agree to pay more than one point I'm sorry eight
Speaker 1: point one million dollars to four hundred and seventy nine
Speaker 1: people arrested, two million dollars. More than two million dollars
Speaker 1: goes to the attorneys, and each of the individual was arrested.
Speaker 1: I believe the number is around twelve grand something like that. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: it is a great day to be an agitator of protester,
Speaker 1: especially if you're downtown Cincinnati. Absolutely fantastic. And so I
Speaker 1: was thinking about this, and I'm thinking, you know what,
Speaker 1: I know some people in the Hamilton County Sheriff's Department
Speaker 1: who were there when that was going on. I know
Speaker 1: people who were in the Cincinnati Police Department who were
Speaker 1: there when all this activity took place. And one of
Speaker 1: the guys who was there is the guy who was
Speaker 1: at the time the president of the FOP Our Buddy
Speaker 1: Dan Hills, and Dan Hills, thanks for being here as
Speaker 1: you are rocketing westward on I seventy four heading to
Speaker 1: Indianapolis for the Big Ten Championship game. Before you do anything,
Speaker 1: I want you to look down at your spinnometer and
Speaker 1: tell me what number your cruise control is set on
Speaker 1: right now. Don't lie.
Speaker 2: You know, I'm not a fan of cruise control really,
Speaker 2: I just like to drive. Yeah, and I'm home right
Speaker 2: around and let's say the mid seventies. I was going,
Speaker 2: it's always good to be not clear when you're when
Speaker 2: you're being paid.
Speaker 1: I was going to ask if that number started with
Speaker 1: an eight or a nine. No, no, no.
Speaker 2: No, we'll be out there early. And yeah, it's one
Speaker 2: of the campus get to I get to I get
Speaker 2: to break on my lovely wife because this is a gift,
Speaker 2: my Christmas gift is going to the Big Ten championship.
Speaker 2: That's a good woman right there.
Speaker 1: That is huge, that that congratulates. That's going to be
Speaker 1: a fun time tonight at the It's at uh it's
Speaker 1: at the big Lucas Oil Stadium, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's at Lucas Oil State. I don't I don't
Speaker 2: watch the football this time of year outside. Yeah, I'd
Speaker 2: rather I'd rather be on my I'd rather be on
Speaker 2: my sofa, be outside watching watching my Buckeyes. But no,
Speaker 2: this this game's indoors. That's that's gonna be awesome.
Speaker 1: So Dan Hills, as I recall and and hope, I'm
Speaker 1: hoping my memory serves me well. Here in in twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: in the summer of twenty twenty, after the events that
Speaker 1: happened in Minneapolis with George Floyd, and we saw you know,
Speaker 1: we all saw the video. We don't have to relitigate
Speaker 1: all that protests broke out across the city. I remember
Speaker 1: going home at those nights and I would tell my wife,
Speaker 1: you know what are we going to watch on TV tonight?
Speaker 1: And I would tell her, you know what, I'm going
Speaker 1: to watch the riots. Because the riots went on night
Speaker 1: after night after night, all in various cities across the country.
Speaker 1: And then it got to the point where eventually those
Speaker 1: activities came to Cincinnati, and I remember buying large talking
Speaker 1: about the great job that Cincinnati police did with the
Speaker 1: assistants or in conjunction with Hamilton County Sheriff's deputies, as
Speaker 1: you took to the streets downtown Cincinnati and prevented widespread damage.
Speaker 1: There was some damage that was done, but you prevented
Speaker 1: widespread damage by what, by doing what, by enforcing the law,
Speaker 1: allowing people to have their voices heard, to engage in
Speaker 1: First Amendment rights. But then when those things started going sideways,
Speaker 1: when there was actual violence or actual property damage that
Speaker 1: was occurring, that was the time when you moved it.
Speaker 1: That's my memory of how all this went down, you
Speaker 1: were out there. Give me, give me from your point
Speaker 1: of view, how all of this went down back in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: Well, like you said, there was the incident of George
Speaker 2: Floyd that we now know more and more about that
Speaker 2: was manufactured to get this, to get the country in
Speaker 2: this mode that it was. That was a demonstration slash
Speaker 2: rioting because some people were demonstrating, some people were doing
Speaker 2: it right, some people were doing it legal, and there
Speaker 2: are a lot of people.
Speaker 1: That were not.
Speaker 2: Now you're right, we were blessed. I was back in
Speaker 2: the riots that we had here in two thousand and one,
Speaker 2: and those things from Jump Street were very very violent,
Speaker 2: fire for being set property, all sorts of assaults. I
Speaker 2: remember coming across a gentleman that had been beaten three
Speaker 2: quarters of the way to the grave and and and
Speaker 2: luckily he did survive. So that was extremely violent, and
Speaker 2: you know, we figured we might be headed for the
Speaker 2: same things here. Uh but uh, Mayor Cranley, I don't
Speaker 2: know if you mentioned him or not yet, but he
Speaker 2: put that curfew out and then we were we were
Speaker 2: out there enforcing it. In this case, like you said,
Speaker 2: I was the union president, so I wasn't out there putting.
Speaker 3: Hands on or anything, but I was.
Speaker 2: I was had the freedom to go everywhere, So any
Speaker 2: hotspot that was picking up, I'd go and check it
Speaker 2: out and give support to my cops. I was bringing
Speaker 2: them water, datorades and all that sort of thing. And
Speaker 2: you're you are right again that Cincinnati was doing a
Speaker 2: lot better than a lot of the other towns. But
Speaker 2: there was Hey Drew that was criminal. There was objects
Speaker 2: being thrown, there was windows that got smashed. There were
Speaker 2: these things that then led you to as as a
Speaker 2: police department and police depart leadership, to realize that they
Speaker 2: are acting in a in concert as a group to
Speaker 2: do things that are dangerous for the average everyday citizen
Speaker 2: out there. And you had to respond to the group.
Speaker 2: And so that means, while we value individual rights, that's
Speaker 2: what this country has made on at times of civil
Speaker 2: unrest like this, you have to do what you have
Speaker 2: to do. And our police officers did what they had
Speaker 2: to do without any abuses of civil rights, without any
Speaker 2: unneeded violence. They locked people up, and they locked people
Speaker 2: up on that on that curfew, which again that's a
Speaker 2: that's a legal move to make. In these particular times,
Speaker 2: you can't just have a curfew just because you feel
Speaker 2: like it. You have to have a reason, and we
Speaker 2: had plenty of reasons, not only what was happening in Cincinnati.
Speaker 2: It was definitely part of the part of the case
Speaker 2: to be made is that things were happening all around
Speaker 2: the country that we did not want to happen here, right, Yeah,
Speaker 2: so so so acting quickly on this being progressive, progressive
Speaker 2: about getting ahead of this and letting people know that
Speaker 2: this here in Cincinnati is not one of these places
Speaker 2: for where you are going to let the riders control
Speaker 2: the narrative and and take the streets and on on
Speaker 2: on on a grade scale of house and say police
Speaker 2: handle back. I wish there was something above a plus
Speaker 2: because there should be, because our our offers, our leaders,
Speaker 2: everybody just just knocked it out of the park and
Speaker 2: again kept Cincinnati safe, and nothing like what eyewitnessed in
Speaker 2: two thousand and one came about there there. There there was,
Speaker 2: like you've already acknowledged, there was violence. There was stuff
Speaker 2: thrown at us. Hector was even a policeman that got shot.
Speaker 2: These these are all awful things, but they never got
Speaker 2: to they never got ahead of us to the point
Speaker 2: where you know, the city was being burned down, the
Speaker 2: city was threatened. And and for that, instead of instead
Speaker 2: of the council and the law departments standing by the
Speaker 2: actions that we took, they decided, like you said, to
Speaker 2: make everybody a little a little rapt present for being
Speaker 2: part of these crowds that did not disperse when they
Speaker 2: were told to disperse, did not stay home when they
Speaker 2: were told it was time to stay home. They could
Speaker 2: have peacefully protested during the day. They could have carried
Speaker 2: all their signs about George Floyd and and UH and
Speaker 2: and the racism and all these things that they believe in.
Speaker 2: They could have done all that during the day. They
Speaker 2: could have they could have spoke with their First Amendment rights,
Speaker 2: and then they could have went home when we said
Speaker 2: it was time to go home to keep the city safe.
Speaker 2: But they chose to stay and continue to press those buttons.
Speaker 2: And for that, now they are being rewarded for through
Speaker 2: breaking the law. They are being rewarded financially.
Speaker 1: You know, it's absolutely disgrace.
Speaker 2: If I was on my way to Andy right now,
Speaker 2: I'd be filling up some bottles with urines. I could
Speaker 2: go down there and throw them and and yeah, i'd
Speaker 2: have to protest about Selton. I I don't know, uh,
Speaker 2: maybe the maybe the Bengals season.
Speaker 1: And then and then then you go knock on, you
Speaker 1: go knock on the door of al Gerhardtstein and you
Speaker 1: just say, hey, I mean, I know, I need a
Speaker 1: little class action lawsuit here, and he'll take the case
Speaker 1: and in a few years you'll have your payout and
Speaker 1: it'll be fine and dandy. The this The Fox nineteen
Speaker 1: got a couple of quotes from Mayor John Cranley, and
Speaker 1: here's what John Cranley had to say about this. He
Speaker 1: John Cranley said that curfew and our police department saved
Speaker 1: our city when other cities were burning. Everything I saw
Speaker 1: was of the utmost professionalism and restraint. Their actions saved
Speaker 1: our city. I want the record to show they did
Speaker 1: a great job. So there's a mayor who is serious
Speaker 1: about protecting the city, who is serious about dealing with
Speaker 1: crime and criminal issues in a meaningful way. And after
Speaker 1: his administration left office, now we have a new city manager,
Speaker 1: we have a new mayor. And at the end of
Speaker 1: the Fox nineteen piece, they write the Cincinnati Council's Public
Speaker 1: Safety and Governance Committee is expected to approve the settlement
Speaker 1: in an ordinance on Tuesday, December ninth. So I would
Speaker 1: I would appeal to the members of the Public Safety
Speaker 1: and Governance Committee to reject this settlement, show some spine,
Speaker 1: show some backbone, and let the message go out that
Speaker 1: in the City of Cincinnati, we are not going to
Speaker 1: financially reward people who engage in criminal activity. Why is
Speaker 1: that so hard to do?
Speaker 2: Sam?
Speaker 1: Put this?
Speaker 2: Put this down. You might want to write it down.
Speaker 2: My cart sure is twelve nineteen pm that that Dan
Speaker 2: Hills is loving the statements of a democratic politician. Yeah,
Speaker 2: John Cranley, uh did a very good job. Uh and
Speaker 2: and and allowed us to do our job during those riots.
Speaker 2: And now he's telling the truth, and he's out there
Speaker 2: and and and they should listen to him. They should
Speaker 2: listen to a democratic politician. I know that's that that's
Speaker 2: something that both Dan Carroll Dan Hills rarely ever say,
Speaker 2: but in this particular case, he's right. We saved the city,
Speaker 2: and he made it possible for us to save the city.
Speaker 2: And then for these politicians now to to refute what happened,
Speaker 2: to to dismiss what happened and say, hey, you know
Speaker 2: those guys are reckless, and you know what a bunch
Speaker 2: of bull about. You know this changes in policy and
Speaker 2: procedure and all that stuff. There's nothing that's going to
Speaker 2: be different to next time there's rights. You know, the
Speaker 2: officers have to be tempted to say, you know, what
Speaker 2: the heck with this? It's it's all we're going to
Speaker 2: do is make rich people and be condemned for our actions.
Speaker 2: And maybe we should just sit back and watch it,
Speaker 2: watch it burn.
Speaker 1: But you know that this is part of the settlement.
Speaker 1: This is part of the settlement. A creation of a guidebook,
Speaker 1: Dan Hills, a creation of a guidebook which establishes formal
Speaker 1: standards for dealing with protests and similar events. So, I
Speaker 1: guess sharel Long with her vast knowledge of how to
Speaker 1: deal with events like this, when you're talking about riots,
Speaker 1: when you're talking about people who are doing criminal damaging,
Speaker 1: when you're talking about unruly crowds in the streets, I
Speaker 1: guess Sharyl Long, the city manager, is going to use
Speaker 1: her vast knowledge and experience experience to create a guidebook
Speaker 1: that is going to tell police exactly how they should
Speaker 1: behave in situations like this. How do you see that
Speaker 1: working out?
Speaker 2: About likely as good as I see as share along
Speaker 2: wearing a helmet and uh and and popping off rounds
Speaker 2: of pepper ball.
Speaker 1: How about how about that?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 1: How about that?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 2: A man of post. Why don't you catch one of
Speaker 2: those yellow fluid filled bottles that they were throwing at
Speaker 2: at at our coppers? Why don't Why don't you stand
Speaker 2: there wondering, you know, is instead of it being objects
Speaker 2: thrown at you, when is there going to be more
Speaker 2: shots fired at you? All these things you have to
Speaker 2: wonder when you're standing there dealing with a crowd that
Speaker 2: some are peaceful but some are not. And you know,
Speaker 2: one of the things we did very very well is
Speaker 2: they kept a really good monitor on the people that
Speaker 2: were coming from out of town that were coming here
Speaker 2: to stir up trouble. And I think that's that's another
Speaker 2: key of what happened, because we got on top of
Speaker 2: it so quick, The numbers of the police department got
Speaker 2: on top so quick. The word went out and whatever
Speaker 2: chat rooms or whatever these people talking is that you
Speaker 2: can't get You can't get a lot of headlines done
Speaker 2: here in Cincinnati. You'll just end up in jail. And
Speaker 2: so I guess, like the complaints were after I came
Speaker 2: here and tried to make uh, you know, anarchy occur.
Speaker 2: I had to wait too long to go to the
Speaker 2: potty while I was waiting to be processed as a pro.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what a huge violation of civil rights?
Speaker 2: What a huge I think my blooney sandwich in time,
Speaker 2: and I didn't get to go peepee because the officers
Speaker 2: had me sitting out in the sally port waiting to
Speaker 2: be processed. Well, I'm sorry. We don't have a system
Speaker 2: that it is always dealing with mass arrests. And you
Speaker 2: can't just snap your fingers and and and turn on
Speaker 2: that system. And so if you want to play this
Speaker 2: game and and that's professional rioting, you're going to have
Speaker 2: to realize that it's it's it's a big boy in
Speaker 2: big girls game. And sometimes you might not get a
Speaker 2: potty break when you won. You might not get your
Speaker 2: blowney standing right away, you might not get processed and
Speaker 2: get out ason as you want. And so they should
Speaker 2: learn to accept these things. And they should also learn
Speaker 2: to accept that if you try to monetize this, the
Speaker 2: city of Cincinnati is not the place where that's going
Speaker 2: to happen. Of course, it looks like justiff the opposite
Speaker 2: is going to happen. We're going to apologize all over
Speaker 2: ourselves for for you not getting a potty break, and
Speaker 2: so here we go. We're going to give you big,
Speaker 2: big dollars. I mean, I haven't done the math yet.
Speaker 1: Comes out to about twelve thousand, six hundred dollars per
Speaker 1: a little over twelve grady.
Speaker 2: That's not a that's not a bad payday. If I
Speaker 2: didn't have if I didn't have this great football game
Speaker 2: to go to, and uh, you know, I could find
Speaker 2: something to protest about.
Speaker 1: I should.
Speaker 2: I should be headed down to Cincinnati now hoping to
Speaker 2: get locked up for my money, baby, my peaceful money,
Speaker 2: and my peaceful protest.
Speaker 1: And here's the other thing. I was talking to a
Speaker 1: friend of mine on the way here, and she suggested
Speaker 1: to me that there's a strong likelihood that a lot
Speaker 1: of these agitators, who I think we learned subsequently we're
Speaker 1: not from here, came here from out of town. We're
Speaker 1: probably being paid already to show up in protest. So
Speaker 1: it's a it's a little bit of a for a
Speaker 1: lot of these people. There's probably some double dipping action
Speaker 1: going on there. I don't know that for a fact,
Speaker 1: but I think we've seen.
Speaker 2: In the past George in their pocket.
Speaker 1: But they very well could have, because we know that
Speaker 1: that's part of his history. In his past, he has
Speaker 1: paid people to show up and demonstrate. And uh and
Speaker 1: and we and we see a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of these people. When you'll see it,
Speaker 1: like these independent journalists will go out and ask them questions, Hey,
Speaker 1: why are you here? What are you protesting for? Well,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I'm just here. And of course they're
Speaker 1: they're collecting a paycheck to do that. But Dan Hills,
Speaker 1: we got to run. Thank you for taking the time
Speaker 1: as you are driving to Indianapolis to watch the Big
Speaker 1: ten champion hip game. Who do you like tonight, Indy
Speaker 1: or Ohio State?
Speaker 5: Oh?
Speaker 3: I'm all about Ohio State.
Speaker 4: All right, now, there you go, go, Bucks.
Speaker 1: Go Bucks.
Speaker 6: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Are are you rocking your Ohio State gear?
Speaker 2: You know it?
Speaker 5: Back?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm I'm scarletting gray all the way.
Speaker 1: All right, Dan Hills, have a great time tonight. Tell
Speaker 1: your wife I said hi, and we'll talk again soon.
Speaker 1: My friend appreciate it, you bet, Dan, no problem? All right,
Speaker 1: there you go. Dan Hills, the former president of the FOP.
Speaker 1: He was out there. He was there and if you
Speaker 1: remember this, why should these people be getting paid? Drew Western, Heidi,
Speaker 1: you let's open the phone lines five, one, three, seven, four, nine, seven,
Speaker 1: eight hundred, the big one if you want to weigh
Speaker 1: in on this eight million dollar settlement. And so the
Speaker 1: word is going forth that here in Cincinnati, we love crime.
Speaker 1: We pay criminals to engage in criminal activity. It's a
Speaker 1: beautiful thing. On seven hundred ww, City of Cincinnati is
Speaker 1: going to pay eight point one four million dollars. Sixty
Speaker 1: five thousand of that comes from Hamilton County because of
Speaker 1: this class action lawsuit stemming from from protests in twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: The mayor put a back then put a curfew in place,
Speaker 1: and I guess somehow that's a violation of people's civil rights.
Speaker 1: He had four hundred and seventy nine people in the lawsuit,
Speaker 1: so hundreds of arrests were made. Like Dan Hills was
Speaker 1: talking about, takes a little time to process that when
Speaker 1: you go to the when you go to the justice center,
Speaker 1: and maybe they didn't get to go potty right away
Speaker 1: and they had to sitting around. Maybe it'll be a
Speaker 1: little uncomfortable. The I've been to the Hamilton County Justice Center.
Speaker 1: Haven't ever been processed there, but I used to work.
Speaker 1: They're not the most comfortable building in the world, not
Speaker 1: the you know, not the most accommodating place if you're
Speaker 1: going to be spending some time there. But how about
Speaker 1: you don't commit crime. How about you don't get yourself arrested.
Speaker 1: How about you don't go and damage and break things?
Speaker 1: And so the protesters who were out there, but think
Speaker 1: about the message at this sense. If you were out there,
Speaker 1: and Dan Hills who was out there, and and I
Speaker 1: and again I've got other friends who were out there
Speaker 1: as well, in in service to the community because they're
Speaker 1: they're various formed of law enforces. And if you were
Speaker 1: out there and you were protesting and you didn't engage
Speaker 1: in criminal activity, you didn't break things, you didn't smash windows,
Speaker 1: you didn't shoot at police and firefighters, as I recall,
Speaker 1: and there was there was also an incident where it
Speaker 1: turned out that a I think there was some fire
Speaker 1: apparatus that they discovered had some were hit by bullets
Speaker 1: during all of this. So if you didn't engage in
Speaker 1: criminal activity and you were exercising your First Amendment rights,
Speaker 1: how do you feel Now, how do you feel? And
Speaker 1: you know you went out there, you demonstrated, you protested,
Speaker 1: you did it the right way. You exercised your first
Speaker 1: Amendment right, which I will say I will be here
Speaker 1: all day talking about your ability and your right to
Speaker 1: do that, and so will Dan Hills. But the minute
Speaker 1: you cross that line, that's a different story. But if
Speaker 1: you were one of probably the vast majority who went
Speaker 1: out there and demonstrated, did it the right way, exercised
Speaker 1: your first Amendment right, you didn't engage in criminal activity,
Speaker 1: didn't get arrested, and now you are seeing the people
Speaker 1: who did get arrested are getting paid twelve grand apiece?
Speaker 1: How do you feel about that? Who's the chump? Now?
Speaker 1: Damn it. I should have broke that window. I should
Speaker 1: have I should have flattened the tires on that car.
Speaker 1: I should have punched the police. I should have thrown
Speaker 1: a bottle with some urine in it. Then I'm in
Speaker 1: line for a paycheck? Ken in Cincinnati? What's going on? Five? One, three, seven?
Speaker 1: The big one of you? If you want to jump
Speaker 1: on board, Ken, am I making any sense at all?
Speaker 1: If Dan?
Speaker 7: You, Dan, you and the previous Dan are right one
Speaker 7: on it and as a taxpayer, I am one against this.
Speaker 7: Selling this behavior with our tax dollars. Selling it period
Speaker 7: is asinine. There the more you reward bad behavior, the
Speaker 7: more you're going to get it. And all of this
Speaker 7: is just an affront to all taxpayers and just to
Speaker 7: all their citizens. And if this council votes to sustain this,
Speaker 7: then I hope that we the citizens can somehow put
Speaker 7: this on a ballot and let the.
Speaker 2: City council members pay it out of their own pocket.
Speaker 4: This is where I draw the line.
Speaker 1: Let me here's ken. Here's the statement that city Manager
Speaker 1: Cheryl Long put out. She said, I'm glad to have
Speaker 1: reached a settlement, and I'm especially proud of our CPD
Speaker 1: officers and their willingness to continuously improve policies and procedures.
Speaker 1: While the incidents that led to this case predate the
Speaker 1: current administration, we as city leaders must do everything we
Speaker 1: can to address the issues passed on to us so
Speaker 1: that they can prevent or be prevented in the future.
Speaker 1: Thank you to solictener Werner the entire law department for
Speaker 1: their years of hard work to achieve this conclusion. What
Speaker 1: a bunch of crap, I would say, How about some
Speaker 1: hard work. How about you say, you know what, I'll
Speaker 1: see you in court. Four hundred and seventy nine protesters,
Speaker 1: I'll see you in court, al Gerhartstein, how about we
Speaker 1: didn't do anything wrong. The mayor has the power and
Speaker 1: the ability to put a curfew in place, and if
Speaker 1: you break the law, you get arrested, you don't get
Speaker 1: paid for that. I mean, if this is the message
Speaker 1: that we are sending out to ne'er do wells and
Speaker 1: malcontents and anyone that wants to come here and break.
Speaker 8: The law, yeah, and I'll tell you this sends that
Speaker 8: whole message of the defund the police and that entire
Speaker 8: arsenal of nonsense that they have. I hope the citizens
Speaker 8: will see this as a bridge too far, will stand
Speaker 8: up and let the city council and Sheryl Long pay
Speaker 8: it out of their own park. I didn't have her
Speaker 8: included at first, but let her pay it out of
Speaker 8: her own pocket.
Speaker 1: Well, these the city's public safety ken thank you very
Speaker 1: much for the call appreciation. According to Fox nineteen, the
Speaker 1: Cincinnati's Public Safety and Governance Committee expected to look at
Speaker 1: this settlement and to prove it with an ordinance on Tuesday.
Speaker 1: This coming Tuesday, I don't know if anyone will have
Speaker 1: an opportunity to speak in front of this committee to
Speaker 1: make their voices heard. What what if people show up
Speaker 1: to this committee meeting And I am not advocating violence
Speaker 1: of any kind, but let's just say. What if people
Speaker 1: show up to this committe meeting and they're upset and
Speaker 1: they start breaking things at city Hall? They smash the window,
Speaker 1: knock over some deaths, just to create a disturbance and
Speaker 1: destroy some proper pretty in the process. Are these council
Speaker 1: members going to stand up and say, yes, these people
Speaker 1: must be paid. We must pay them because they you know,
Speaker 1: our actions are making them upset. They might have to
Speaker 1: go to the Justice center and it's very uncomfortable there.
Speaker 1: We might have to pay them. Think about what you're doing.
Speaker 1: And of course this settlement was approved. It was approved
Speaker 1: before the election. This was in place before the election.
Speaker 1: It didn't come out before the election. Because to my
Speaker 1: way of thinking, any member of council should have this
Speaker 1: issue come out before the election. Every member of council
Speaker 1: should have had to answer the question, you get re
Speaker 1: elected to council, are you going to approve this settlement?
Speaker 1: You're going to be in favor of eight point one
Speaker 1: million dollars Melanie and Cincinnati, what say you? Then we
Speaker 1: got Pete.
Speaker 3: Mark.
Speaker 9: Hey, I just wanted to let you guys know that
Speaker 9: I'm trying really hard to help Americans stay free and alive.
Speaker 9: And I'm telling you that we've got a problem with
Speaker 9: certain aspects of Zionism. And I know you guys are
Speaker 9: really defensive of that and stuff that I understand, but
Speaker 9: I'm telling.
Speaker 1: You, well, what's one way Wait, hold on, Melanie, what's
Speaker 1: that got to do with this settlement that's going out
Speaker 1: to these to these agitators and punks and thugs who
Speaker 1: want to do damage and break things in the city
Speaker 1: of Cincinnati.
Speaker 3: Because if as.
Speaker 9: I've tried to explain to people there that I've called
Speaker 9: into before I came from the other side, I know
Speaker 9: their tactics. One of their great tactics is to cause
Speaker 9: as much trouble into bankrupt each city with like messing
Speaker 9: with the police. It's all it's all coming from a
Speaker 9: certain set of rabbis, and I'm Jewish, so I'm just
Speaker 9: here to help, all right, Well.
Speaker 1: That's great, to take that somewhere else, Pete in Blanchester.
Speaker 1: Then we got Mark, Pete, what's going on.
Speaker 10: Yeah again, I from what I know of, sheer long
Speaker 10: shitting manager. I don't think she has the ability to
Speaker 10: manage a Burger King, let alone manage the city of Cincinnati.
Speaker 1: No, I mean she's a Look, I mean, here's a
Speaker 1: multi million dollar settlement that's going to be paid out
Speaker 1: under her watch. The former police chief Mike Washington is
Speaker 1: in line for another multi million dollar settlement because of
Speaker 1: his wrongful termination one of the first actions that she
Speaker 1: took upon assuming office as a city manager. The police
Speaker 1: chief Teresa Fiji is most likely in line for a
Speaker 1: multi million dollar settlement because of the treatment at the
Speaker 1: hands of this city manager. So that's and who knows
Speaker 1: how many how many other many more millions this city
Speaker 1: manager is going to cost the city of Cincinnati before
Speaker 1: she's done. And you got to turn your beat. You
Speaker 1: got to turn your radio down, brother, you really you
Speaker 1: got to turn that turn that way then, because that
Speaker 1: is that is throwing you off. Okay, come on, Pete,
Speaker 1: get with the problem.
Speaker 6: I gotta turn down.
Speaker 1: All right, that's a little better. Go ahead.
Speaker 10: I think Teresa, I think she's nothing.
Speaker 6: But a wimp.
Speaker 10: We got a we got a dyne, a jar head, a.
Speaker 5: Leather nature in Blaantster for the police chief.
Speaker 10: He's he's uh, he knows how to write, he knows
Speaker 10: how to be.
Speaker 4: A police chief.
Speaker 5: Here Teresa is nothing but a wimp.
Speaker 1: All right, Well you can you can think that all
Speaker 1: you want, but uh, Teresa Thiji was simply doing try
Speaker 1: and and I've talked about this before. Teresa was trying
Speaker 1: to walk that fine line between doing what's right and
Speaker 1: doing what she was told by the city administration, by
Speaker 1: her bosses. And so on one hand, you've got Mike Washington,
Speaker 1: who wasn't going along with all the politically correct and
Speaker 1: the DEI nonsense, so he wound up getting fired. On
Speaker 1: the other hand, you've got a police chief who was
Speaker 1: trying to accommodate all the woke and DEI wishes of
Speaker 1: this administration, and she wound up being removed from her job.
Speaker 1: They both wound up in the same place. How does
Speaker 1: that happen? Where does the fault lie with that? You
Speaker 1: decide for yourself. Mark in Cincinnati, what's going on?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 5: Just listening to you getting a little more upset by
Speaker 5: the minute.
Speaker 1: Dan, Well, I'm sorry I'm making you upset, but you
Speaker 1: know what, I'm upset about this too. I don't live
Speaker 1: in the city. I do live in Hamilton County. So
Speaker 1: sixty five grand to this is coming from Hamilton County,
Speaker 1: so that that that hits me a little bit, doesn't
Speaker 1: hit me to the tune of, you know, eight million dollars.
Speaker 5: But still they have to do bonds right now to
Speaker 5: get the eight million. Where's that coming from?
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're going to have to issue Chris Mendelman was
Speaker 1: talking about that with Mike Allen earlier this morning, and
Speaker 1: the city's going to have to issue debt in order
Speaker 1: to pay this. Isn't that isn't that great? We're we're
Speaker 1: going to do another million in the hole so we
Speaker 1: can pay a bunch of thugs and agitators and UH
Speaker 1: and we can pay Gerhartstein and his crew as well.
Speaker 1: Two million dollars for the lawyers. That's great, It's just great.
Speaker 5: It was the estimate of the UH property damage for
Speaker 5: that whole thing.
Speaker 1: That's a good that's a good question. I know, I
Speaker 1: know that would.
Speaker 5: Be if you have a class action of the people
Speaker 5: that did all this and they're getting compensated. Now you
Speaker 5: have a fund to reimburse all the insurance companies for
Speaker 5: the money they paid out for the broken glass windows
Speaker 5: and everything else that happened, because they admittedly are the
Speaker 5: class that caused all the problems.
Speaker 1: Well Mark, if you remember, if you remember twenty there
Speaker 1: were there were various cities that were on TV every night.
Speaker 1: Why because buildings were burning, police cars were being overturned,
Speaker 1: stores were being looted, people were being shot and killed.
Speaker 1: It was murder, mayhem, teeth, haro and I all over
Speaker 1: the place. And when those demonstrators came to the city
Speaker 1: of Cincinnati, what did we do. We shut them down.
Speaker 1: We had minimal damage done. It stopped right there because
Speaker 1: the Mayor, John Cranley said, I'm not putting up with
Speaker 1: this crap. There's going to be a curfew. You're off
Speaker 1: the streets and if you violate it, guess what, You're
Speaker 1: going to get arrested. So the city of Cincinnati did
Speaker 1: not make national news that time because what because we
Speaker 1: dealt with this issue in a serious and meaningful way.
Speaker 1: And now we're talking about the people who were inconvenience
Speaker 1: by this, The people who broke the law, people who
Speaker 1: got themselves arrested because of their own criminal activity, are
Speaker 1: now getting the payout of over twelve thousand dollars. What
Speaker 1: kind of message is that it's absolutely sickening and disgusting.
Speaker 5: Right, But what I'm thinking is if all that damage
Speaker 5: didn't happen after the curfew, some of it happened before. Sure,
Speaker 5: So if there's the wherewith all the collect money. Now,
Speaker 5: if I'm a business that had to put it through
Speaker 5: my insurance and I'm there insure, say now we have
Speaker 5: eight million dollars of a fund to take back that
Speaker 5: twenty thousand dollars for the plate class window out of
Speaker 5: city gear on Race Street that I saw get broken,
Speaker 5: and all the looting that went on in the other
Speaker 5: three or four places on Race and all around town
Speaker 5: that were before ten o'clock. Because that's the four hundred
Speaker 5: and odd people that were the class that committed the
Speaker 5: problem and the crimes. So now you have the wherewithal
Speaker 5: the attached their money them.
Speaker 1: You make a good point. If I suffered a loss
Speaker 1: as a result of this tremblin activity, now do I
Speaker 1: have redress to go back to the city to be
Speaker 1: made whole? I think you have an excellent You have
Speaker 1: an excellent.
Speaker 5: Point, bat to take that settlement, put it an escrow
Speaker 5: and say, all right, if you had you know, you
Speaker 5: paid out of pocket for your window or a deductible,
Speaker 5: and your insurance company once here part back because now
Speaker 5: we have a resource to take it from you. Maybe
Speaker 5: the criminals at least give the people that incurred the
Speaker 5: expense the money back.
Speaker 1: Maybe your insurance rates rised as a result of this.
Speaker 1: Maybe you're paying more for insurance now. Maybe you can
Speaker 1: get compensated for that because of the because of these incidents. Mark,
Speaker 1: I appreciate Mark, how you're glad to see your thinking
Speaker 1: out there. I appreciate the appreciate the phone call.
Speaker 3: Glad to talk to you.
Speaker 1: All Right, Mark, good good work today. We got to
Speaker 1: get to a break. I got to take a breath.
Speaker 1: News coming up the top of the hour. After the
Speaker 1: top of the hour, my buddy Tom King, who was
Speaker 1: a great constitutional lawyer, is going to be here. You
Speaker 1: may have heard during the newscast today that the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court is going to hear arguments as it relates to
Speaker 1: birthright citizenship and the Fourteenth Amendment. There's something I've talked
Speaker 1: about many times before, but I think it's important to
Speaker 1: talk about it today because this is going to come
Speaker 1: to a head and we will talk about the constitutionality,
Speaker 1: what the Fourteenth Amendment actually says, and other issues about that.
Speaker 1: So stick around for that. Dan Carroll intil three this
Speaker 1: afternoon on seven hundred WW one O eight. I'm Dan Carroll.
Speaker 1: We rolled till three this afternoon. Drew wester Heide is
Speaker 1: running the big board in the seven hundred WW command Center. Hey, Drew,
Speaker 1: who's in it for me today? Who singh sterling is here?
Speaker 1: That'd be great? All right? So you've heard during the
Speaker 1: news most of the newscast today that the United States
Speaker 1: Supreme Court has decided to hear arguments about the constitutionality
Speaker 1: of President Trump's executive order. Then the title of this
Speaker 1: executive order, I'm looking at it right here, protecting the
Speaker 1: meaning and value of American citizens citizenship by the authority
Speaker 1: best in me as President, by the Constitution and laws
Speaker 1: of the United States. It's hereby ordered. The privilege of
Speaker 1: United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift. The
Speaker 1: Fourteenth Amendment states, and this is important, all persons born
Speaker 1: or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the
Speaker 1: United States and the state wherein they reside. But see
Speaker 1: that that's not the entire statement. There's a portion of
Speaker 1: that statement that gets left out all the time, and
Speaker 1: the portion is this all persons born or naturalized in
Speaker 1: the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are
Speaker 1: citizens of the United States. And that's a very very
Speaker 1: important line in that statement. Joining me now is Tom King,
Speaker 1: who is the Chief Council of the Republican Party and
Speaker 1: the Great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And Tom King, great to
Speaker 1: have you here today, my friend. How are you.
Speaker 4: Thank you very much, Dan, It's always great to be
Speaker 4: with you. Thanks.
Speaker 1: It isn't it interesting when you hear this debate on
Speaker 1: the news and this story reported on the news, that
Speaker 1: that section of the fourteenth Amendment is always left out
Speaker 1: about being subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Do you find
Speaker 1: that interesting?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 4: Yes, this is a this is a case. It's of
Speaker 4: great interest to lawyers and would be of great interest
Speaker 4: to historians and citizens generally, and so it leave it.
Speaker 4: If you leave that section out, then there is no case.
Speaker 4: But if you include the section as it's written in
Speaker 4: the Constitution, in the amendment, in the fourth Amendment to
Speaker 4: the Constitution, then it brings up a lot of interesting scenarios,
Speaker 4: including what it was intended for At least in part
Speaker 4: was to prevent, for example, diplomats coming to this country
Speaker 4: who are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,
Speaker 4: so their children would not be automatically US citizens. Neither
Speaker 4: would enemy combatants. And remember the fourteenth a menmal was
Speaker 4: adopted right after the Civil War, so enemy combatants who
Speaker 4: came here and had children here, those children would not
Speaker 4: be automatically US citizens. But it has a lot more
Speaker 4: meaning now in terms of what's happened during the Biden administration,
Speaker 4: the mass migration into this country, the mothers who are
Speaker 4: not US citizens and fathers who are not US citizens,
Speaker 4: And the question arises whether anyone born after February twenty fifth,
Speaker 4: twenty twenty five, when President Trump entered this executive order,
Speaker 4: is in fact a citizens. So it's an interesting case.
Speaker 4: It's out of the state of New Hampshire. It's a
Speaker 4: class action brought by essentially brought by the lawyers from
Speaker 4: the ACLU, and the US Supreme Court has agreed to
Speaker 4: take it up. So we're going to get an answer
Speaker 4: to this question, one way or the other.
Speaker 1: It's about time, if you ask me, and I hear
Speaker 1: so many people argue on the other side of the
Speaker 1: argument They say that this has been settled law for
Speaker 1: decades now, maybe longer than that. I don't know how
Speaker 1: long it goes back, but it goes back a long
Speaker 1: way that this has been settled law, that the likelihood
Speaker 1: that the Supreme Court is going to overturn law that
Speaker 1: has been I guess it's been settled. I don't know
Speaker 1: how how many times this has been argued in the
Speaker 1: in the Supreme Court, but the likelihood that this is
Speaker 1: going to be overturned is pretty slim and none. And
Speaker 1: they always talk about how this issue has been settled,
Speaker 1: and it's pretty cut and dry when you read it.
Speaker 1: But I just think the interpretation of this has been
Speaker 1: has been wrong for a long time.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 4: Well, I think I think the Court liked the case.
Speaker 4: There were two cases appealed to the Supreme Court, this
Speaker 4: Barbara case Barbara versus Trump, which is the case they're
Speaker 4: going to hear from New Hampshire, and there was Trump
Speaker 4: versus Washington. But the Barbara case deals specifically with Trump's
Speaker 4: executive order and February twenty fifth of this year, so
Speaker 4: it would seem that there's an opportunity to decide the
Speaker 4: law going forward. So what I think they will do
Speaker 4: is take a look at if in fact, there are
Speaker 4: five votes on the court, and that's yet to be seen.
Speaker 4: If there are five votes on the court, that anything
Speaker 4: that comes down will be prospective. In other words, after
Speaker 4: February twenty fifth, the Trump Order is what I think.
Speaker 4: But who knows, you know, if you try to lose
Speaker 4: your mind trying to second second guess the US Supreme.
Speaker 1: Court, especially with some of the some of the rulings
Speaker 1: that have come out from this Supreme Court, so going
Speaker 1: into this there's really I think it's a fool's errand
Speaker 1: to try and look at this and predict which way
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court is going to fall on this.
Speaker 4: Oh, I think that's right. You know, there's very little
Speaker 4: law on this. There are a couple of cas you know,
Speaker 4: this whole issue started with the horrendous decision from the
Speaker 4: US Supreme Court in dred Scott, the famous dread Scott decision,
Speaker 4: you know, enslave people being property, which was clearly a
Speaker 4: horrendous decision. But then in eighteen ninety eight there was
Speaker 4: a case called Arc Wong Kim Arc. And the eighteen
Speaker 4: ninety eight case was two Chinese parents of Chinese nationalists
Speaker 4: who Chinese national citizens who were in California and had
Speaker 4: a baby, and the US Supreme Court, and there was
Speaker 4: a split court. It was the vote was six to two,
Speaker 4: but Uh Kim Kim Wang Kim arc was was decreed
Speaker 4: to be a US citizen born of two foreign nationals
Speaker 4: in California. The descent was from the Chief Justice of
Speaker 4: the Supreme Court at that time, who said that that
Speaker 4: he didn't think that Wang Kim RK could be a
Speaker 4: US citizen because Wang Kim rk was not subject to
Speaker 4: the jurisdiction of the United States when when her parents
Speaker 4: were still loyal to the Emperor of Uh of China
Speaker 4: and and I had not renounced their Chinese citizenship. So
Speaker 4: it's it's funny how history repeats itself, you know, you
Speaker 4: come forward to to to to these cases today. This
Speaker 4: Barbara case one of the there are several people named
Speaker 4: in several children named in the in the in the
Speaker 4: Barbara case, it's it's going to be before the Supreme Court.
Speaker 4: One of them is a Honduran couple. Neither the father.
Speaker 4: The father was not a US citizen, the mother was
Speaker 4: here illegally, and so the question becomes whether the mother
Speaker 4: here illegally was subject to the jurisdiction of the United
Speaker 4: States government. And that's the clause you read in the
Speaker 4: very beginning. That's the part that's been left out. We've
Speaker 4: taught this historically in the United States. We've taught everybody
Speaker 4: to believe that anyone born here is automatically a citizen.
Speaker 4: And to some extent that's that's true, but to some
Speaker 4: extent it's not true. And so we're all going back
Speaker 4: and revisiting history, and the Supreme Court is going to
Speaker 4: have to do that too.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't know if our forefathers, the drafters of
Speaker 1: the Constitution, foresaw the advent of tourism, tourism babies as
Speaker 1: to create, or the notion of anchor babies and chain migration.
Speaker 1: I don't know if they foresaw that. So we've already
Speaker 1: had or have been down that road where individuals come
Speaker 1: to this country, they come in under whatever the circumstances are,
Speaker 1: and for the sake of argument, we'll say they come
Speaker 1: into the country illegally, they give birth to a baby
Speaker 1: in this country, and therefore that baby is granted citizenship.
Speaker 1: So we've got that that has been going on for
Speaker 1: a long time now. How much will that weigh on
Speaker 1: these arguments when the Supreme Court looks at that and
Speaker 1: you say, how do you unring that bell? If you're
Speaker 1: going to say any of these anchor babies who are
Speaker 1: born are no longer citizens, but we've already granted citizenship
Speaker 1: to x number of individuals who've been born under such circumstances.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think that's why, Dan. I think that's why,
Speaker 4: at least just from my humble opinion, I think that's
Speaker 4: why they took the Barbara case because Barbera can be
Speaker 4: dealt with going forward from February of twenty twenty five,
Speaker 4: as opposed to going back and looking at people born
Speaker 4: sixty seventy eighty years ago and deciding whether they're citizens
Speaker 4: or not. I think the Court has an opportunity here
Speaker 4: if it's inclined to decide in Trump's favor on this issue,
Speaker 4: I think it has an opportunity to rule on people
Speaker 4: born after February of twenty twenty five that are affected
Speaker 4: by his executive order. Because the challenge in this case
Speaker 4: is to the executive order. It's the ACLU saying that
Speaker 4: President Trump didn't have the authority to enter that order
Speaker 4: and that it's a settled fact that anyone born here
Speaker 4: is a citizen. I don't think it's that clear, but
Speaker 4: it all depends on what these justices think that that
Speaker 4: additional language that's in the Constitution that's never talked about
Speaker 4: as any meaning or not. So it's going to be
Speaker 4: an interesting split on the court. You know, you're going
Speaker 4: to you have strict constructionists that are going to be
Speaker 4: asked to uh, to decide whether whether and what it
Speaker 4: what it is that that means, what is the jurisdiction
Speaker 4: of the United States. So we know it, we know
Speaker 4: it doesn't include diplomat's children, and we know it doesn't
Speaker 4: include enemy combatants. So for example, these the people that
Speaker 4: have you know, this this horrible thing that took place
Speaker 4: in Washington, uh, you know, shoot, the shooting of the
Speaker 4: National guardsman in Washington, And so you know, is the
Speaker 4: person who did that an enemy combatant? And would his
Speaker 4: children who were born here be United States citizens? They
Speaker 4: may be?
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, good, good point. All right, Tom King. I
Speaker 1: appreciate you jumping in on short notice today, and you
Speaker 1: do it all the time, my friend, and such great insight,
Speaker 1: and I appreciate all my honor. Well, I appreciate you
Speaker 1: so much, and as always, I hope I can call
Speaker 1: on you again in the future. But if we don't
Speaker 1: talk before the end of the year, all the best
Speaker 1: to you and your family through what Christmas and the
Speaker 1: holidays and all the rest of it, and look forward
Speaker 1: to a Grade twenty twenty six.
Speaker 4: Merry Christmas and happy Holidays to you and you and
Speaker 4: your listeners. And thanks for having me. It's my honor
Speaker 4: to do so.
Speaker 3: All.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Tom King. All the best to you, my friend.
Speaker 1: I appreciate that. So there you go. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: you've got to look at the entire Amendment and this
Speaker 1: is going to be another opportunity for Katanji brack Brown
Speaker 1: Jackson to distinguish herself a sona sotomayor darn it. I
Speaker 1: wanted to ask him a question about if him and
Speaker 1: his lawyer buddies when these Supreme Court cases take place,
Speaker 1: if they sit around and listen to the audio and
Speaker 1: have some fun with that when they hear some of
Speaker 1: the ridiculous comments that are brought up by some of
Speaker 1: these Supreme Court judges. But Hans von Spokowski of the
Speaker 1: Heritage Foundation wrote a great piece on the fourteenth Amendment,
Speaker 1: and he writes this what the citizens what? What's the
Speaker 1: citizenship status of the children of illegal aliens? That question
Speaker 1: is spurred quite a debate over the Fourteenth Amendment with
Speaker 1: the news that several states, including Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia,
Speaker 1: South Carolina, may launch efforts to deny automatic citizenship to
Speaker 1: such children. Critics claim anyone born in the United States
Speaker 1: is automatically a US citizen, even if their parents are
Speaker 1: here illegally, But that ignores the text and the legislative
Speaker 1: history of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in eighteen
Speaker 1: sixty eight to extend citizenship to freed slaves and their children.
Speaker 1: The Fourteenth Amendment doesn't say all persons born in the
Speaker 1: US are citizens. It doesn't say that. It says all
Speaker 1: persons born or naturalized in the Union United States and
Speaker 1: subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens. That second critical
Speaker 1: conditional phrase is conveniently ignored or misinterpreted by advocates of
Speaker 1: birthright citizenship. Critics erroneously believe that anyone president in the
Speaker 1: United States has subjected himself or herself, or they or
Speaker 1: themselves to the jurisdiction of the United States, which would
Speaker 1: extend citizenship to the children of tourists, diplomats, and illegal
Speaker 1: aliens alike. But that is not what the qualifying phrase means.
Speaker 1: Its original meaning refers to the political allegiance of an
Speaker 1: individual and the jurisdiction that a foreign government has over
Speaker 1: that individual. The fact that a tourist or illegal alien
Speaker 1: is subject to our laws or our courts if they
Speaker 1: violate our law, does not place them within the political
Speaker 1: jurisdiction of the United States, and that phrase was defined
Speaker 1: by the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment. This amendment language
Speaker 1: was derived from the eighteen sixty six Civil Rights Act,
Speaker 1: which provided that all persons born in the United States
Speaker 1: and not subject to any foreign power would be considered citizens.
Speaker 1: Senator Lyman Trumbull, a key figure in the adoption of
Speaker 1: the Fourteenth Amendment, said the subject of the jurisdiction of
Speaker 1: the US included not owing allegiance to any other country.
Speaker 1: American Indians and their children did not become citizens until
Speaker 1: Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act of nineteen twenty four.
Speaker 1: There would have been no need to pass such legislation
Speaker 1: if the Fourteenth Amendment extended citizenship to every person born
Speaker 1: in America, no matter what the circumstance of their birth
Speaker 1: and no matter who their parents are. Even in US
Speaker 1: versus Walmkin arc. Which Tom King was just talking about,
Speaker 1: the case most cited by birthright supporters due to its
Speaker 1: overboard language, the court only held that a child born
Speaker 1: of unlaw or of lawful permanent residence of a US citizen.
Speaker 1: That is a far cry from saying that the child
Speaker 1: born of individuals who are here illegally must be considered
Speaker 1: a US citizen. So at least this show host is
Speaker 1: going to be watching with great interest and paying attention
Speaker 1: with great interest the arguments that the that will be
Speaker 1: brought before the Supreme Court as it relates to the
Speaker 1: Fourteenth Amendment and birthright citizenship. Drew Western, how do you
Speaker 1: let's go head and open the phone lines once again,
Speaker 1: five one, three, seven, four nine, seven hundred, the big
Speaker 1: one if you want to get on board and opine
Speaker 1: about any of this stuff we've been talking about today,
Speaker 1: Dan Carroll till three this afternoon on seven hundred ww
Speaker 1: it talked about the Minnesota stuff, and a New York
Speaker 1: Post put an article out about this dude who's got
Speaker 1: a long criminal history. His name is Ibrahim and he
Speaker 1: got arrested by Ice on Friday. And it turns out
Speaker 1: there's all kinds of pictures with this Ibrahim dude convicted
Speaker 1: of asylum welfare fraud. He's been I mean, this is
Speaker 1: Somali national busted for providing false information to police, driving
Speaker 1: without a valid license, twelve traffic citations, and I guess
Speaker 1: some other stuff too, and there's pictures. I mean, this
Speaker 1: guy is very politically active. Got him with his armor
Speaker 1: Elhan Omar there he is paling around with Tim Walls.
Speaker 1: There he is. He's paling around with this Omar f
Speaker 1: Teh who was the Minneapolis mayoral candidate, another Islamist. He lost,
Speaker 1: But this guy, I mean, you've got all these Somali
Speaker 1: nationals who are mixed up and in the Minnesota welfare scam,
Speaker 1: mit welfare fraud. And Fox News reported that the whistleblowers
Speaker 1: are saying that this is going to a billion dollars
Speaker 1: isn't enough, That it's going to get as high as
Speaker 1: eight billion dollars and maybe even higher before it's all
Speaker 1: said and done. What an absolute mess. I got some
Speaker 1: sound from Steven Miller on I'm gonna play that in
Speaker 1: a little bit. But in the meantime, well, you got
Speaker 1: phone calls to get to. So let's do that and
Speaker 1: go to Hamilton and say hey to Chris Chris seven
Speaker 1: hundred WLW than Susan and Covington. Good sir, what's going on? Yes, sir,
Speaker 1: I got you.
Speaker 2: Hey, I wanted to share a story with you regarding.
Speaker 3: The Birthright.
Speaker 11: Back in the early two thousands, my wife and I
Speaker 11: were one of many people who adopted a child from China.
Speaker 3: Uh, there's a huge thing at that time. Well, one
Speaker 3: of the.
Speaker 11: Deals was we worked through an adoption agency was that
Speaker 11: was out of Lexington, Kentucky even and they had an
Speaker 11: employee in China. Husband wife worked as you know, translators
Speaker 11: and stuff, and they had a child.
Speaker 3: All right.
Speaker 11: Well at that time, you know, China had their one
Speaker 11: child pologies, okay, and you actually had to get permission
Speaker 11: from the government basically.
Speaker 3: To have kids, okay, from them.
Speaker 11: Well, if you do not have that permission, then there
Speaker 11: was a mandatory mandatory abortion.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 11: Well, this husband and wife they got pregnant again, whether
Speaker 11: it's on purpose by accident, don't know, but so what
Speaker 11: they ended up since they had ties to the United
Speaker 11: States with this adoption agency. The man that ran the
Speaker 11: adoption agency. When when the lady was like three or
Speaker 11: four months pregnant, they moved to the United States, gave birth,
Speaker 11: gave birth to the child in the United States, so
Speaker 11: that child got dual citizenship.
Speaker 3: And you know, both of the both of the parents
Speaker 3: were both Chinese.
Speaker 11: If they would not have been able to do that,
Speaker 11: that lady would have been arrested and she would have
Speaker 11: been given a mandatory abortion.
Speaker 1: Well that's that's in China. But did they did they
Speaker 1: come here? Here's the thing. Did they come to the
Speaker 1: country legally? Did they come to the country.
Speaker 11: Yeah, he worked for he worked for a US company,
Speaker 11: So yeah, I think they got they got trouble visa.
Speaker 3: Sometimes I don't know the details.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that I mean, that's the thing is if
Speaker 1: if they're subject to the jurisdiction thereof then then that
Speaker 1: could get citizenship. So well, you know, you know then
Speaker 1: we we don't have time to go through all the
Speaker 1: machinations of that. But I appreciate that phone call. Let's
Speaker 1: go to coming to and say hey to Susan, Susan
Speaker 1: seven hundred wl w HI.
Speaker 12: There by Susan taking my call, I had I've been
Speaker 12: thinking for the last couple of months, and this upcoming
Speaker 12: trial with the Supreme Court has made me think even
Speaker 12: stronger that maybe they should also consider turning half the
Speaker 12: light on the stature of liberty and removing.
Speaker 13: The mlastorous polemn give me your tired report.
Speaker 1: Why would why would they? Why would they do that?
Speaker 2: Nation?
Speaker 1: Why would they do that? Susan?
Speaker 13: Because we're no longer we welcoming the homeless to and
Speaker 13: that's the purpose of this statue.
Speaker 1: You're welcome immigrants, well, Susan, if in your phone is
Speaker 1: making a lot of noise, but here in the United States,
Speaker 1: we welcome, we welcome immigrants. We welcome people who come
Speaker 1: into our country legally. We frowned, we frown on the
Speaker 1: notion of people coming into this country illegally. Do you
Speaker 1: understand that difference?
Speaker 13: Yeah, I understand.
Speaker 1: Well then then how then see, but you use the
Speaker 1: term immigrants and immigration and and and those terms get
Speaker 1: conflated a lot of time, and it When we talk
Speaker 1: about immigrants, we're talking about people who come into the
Speaker 1: country in a legal way, in a legal fashion. When
Speaker 1: we're talking about illegal immigrants, we're talking about people who
Speaker 1: are breaking the law again into this country. Do you
Speaker 1: understand that?
Speaker 5: Well?
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well, that's got nothing, that's got nothing to do
Speaker 1: with it, that's got nothing to do with the statue. Well,
Speaker 1: in in some cases that may be true, but in
Speaker 1: a lot of cases, they are coming here to live
Speaker 1: off the welfare system, They're coming here to commit further crimes.
Speaker 1: They're coming here for any number of nefarious reasons. Okay, okay, thanks, Susan.
Speaker 1: I appreciate the costs. There's no what's no difference.
Speaker 13: There's no difference in who ICE is going after.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, Susan, you see you're mistaken about that.
Speaker 1: There's a big difference in who I. ICE is not
Speaker 1: going after people who are in the country legally in
Speaker 1: a legal sentence. ICE is going after people who, in
Speaker 1: the vast majority of cases, have already been found to
Speaker 1: have committed crimes, who have already had their due process
Speaker 1: and have already received orders to get the hell out
Speaker 1: of the country. So, Susan, I don't know where you're
Speaker 1: getting your news, but you need to upgrade where you're
Speaker 1: getting your news, because you're saying a lot of things
Speaker 1: that you hear in the news that aren't necessarily true.
Speaker 1: Gary on a cell phone, Gary seven hundred WLW Hey
Speaker 1: Dan Susan seems like a very nice person. She's just
Speaker 1: mistaken and she's wrong. I mean, her information is not
Speaker 1: completely correct.
Speaker 14: Go ahead, are you familiar with the Chinese Exclusion Act
Speaker 14: of eighteen.
Speaker 1: Probably not? Probably not? Okay, thirty We don't need the
Speaker 1: whole history, and make it quick.
Speaker 14: The United States government passed the law saying specifically the
Speaker 14: people from China, the poor coolies were banned from this
Speaker 14: country in eighteen eighty two Exclusion Act, and it went
Speaker 14: to all the way to nineteen forty three when FBR
Speaker 14: realized that China was our ally in World War Two
Speaker 14: and China these people were here fighting in our military,
Speaker 14: and he decided at that time that US law should
Speaker 14: be banned.
Speaker 1: And my point.
Speaker 14: Is that the United States government makes laws foreign against things.
Speaker 14: We all know about wonkam Ark and how he was
Speaker 14: given his citizenship.
Speaker 1: All right, well, look we're not talking we're talking about
Speaker 1: the fourteenth Amendment. An amendment is different than a law.
Speaker 1: We on the same page there.
Speaker 14: Well, I'm just pointing out we can make laws back
Speaker 14: and forth constitutionally.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, Gary, I appreciate your insight on that.
Speaker 1: Let's go to Kevin in Cincinnati. Kevin seven hundred WLW.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I just got a question.
Speaker 15: If my ancestors, your ancestors are not from here, are
Speaker 15: we illegal immigrants who?
Speaker 8: No?
Speaker 1: You were you and you were born in the United States. Yes,
Speaker 1: your parents were most likely born in the United States.
Speaker 15: Yes, yes, yes, But my ancestors are not from the
Speaker 15: United States.
Speaker 1: Well, neither of mine. But when they but they came here,
Speaker 1: they immigrated. I don't know the exact time frame when
Speaker 1: my ancestors immigrated to the United States, but they came
Speaker 1: here from Ireland. They came here from Germany, and they
Speaker 1: immigrated in a legal way into the United States. And
Speaker 1: so the fourteenth Amendment, the fourteenth if it wasn't an amendment,
Speaker 1: for God's sake, we're talking about we're talking about illegal
Speaker 1: aliens who come into the United States and have babies.
Speaker 1: Those babies are called anchor babies because if you're in
Speaker 1: this country illegally, and the fourteenth Amendment has been misconstrued
Speaker 1: for so long now that if you're in this country
Speaker 1: illegally and you have a baby, then that baby gets citizenship. Well,
Speaker 1: then that baby gets to stay here, and that baby
Speaker 1: gets to stay here with their parents, and their parents
Speaker 1: get to say, well, I need I need the baby's
Speaker 1: sibling to be here, and then the sibling needs their
Speaker 1: mom or dad, and the sibling needs another sibling, and
Speaker 1: then the mom or dad who is staying, well, I
Speaker 1: need I need my mom to be here, I need
Speaker 1: my dad to be here. That's called chain migration, and
Speaker 1: that is what Trump is trying to stop. You know,
Speaker 1: we can sit here all day and get into the
Speaker 1: minutia of what's who's here illegally, who's here illegally, and
Speaker 1: all the rest of it. It's pretty simple concept. If
Speaker 1: you're in the country legally in a legal sense, we've
Speaker 1: got no problem with that. Trump has no problem with that.
Speaker 1: I have no problem with that. I think the vast
Speaker 1: majority of the American people have no problem with that whatsoever.
Speaker 1: You're doing things the right way. If you're in the
Speaker 1: country illegally, that's where we got to draw the line.
Speaker 1: It's it's a pretty basic concept. Let's go to Brian.
Speaker 1: Then we got Terry and Morrow, Brian, Brian and Mason
Speaker 1: seven hundred WLW.
Speaker 16: Hey, Dan actually enjoying the conversation. But I will say
Speaker 16: you made the comment before about the jurisdiction clause.
Speaker 1: The jurisdiction, Yes, yeah.
Speaker 16: Not being mentioned by liberal media. I actually heard on
Speaker 16: CNN this week, So there is being given coverage to it. Okay,
Speaker 16: on both sides, which is great to hear because we
Speaker 16: want both sides to be able to present their opinions,
Speaker 16: but do it factually, not what's made up facts?
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 1: Well, my point was is that those who want to
Speaker 1: argue the other side of this conveniently leave that section
Speaker 1: out on a regular basis, that that section is overlooked
Speaker 1: in a convenient way to make their argument that the
Speaker 1: fourteenth Amendment allows for birthright citizenship across the board, no
Speaker 1: questions that.
Speaker 16: But I think we need.
Speaker 3: To say both sides of the spectrum.
Speaker 16: Are guilty of things like that, and that really needs
Speaker 16: to stall. We need to be presenting facts to people
Speaker 16: instead of trying to plan everything, and the country is
Speaker 16: getting more and more bent on slanting the facts than
Speaker 16: actually presenting the fact and letting people have making foreign decisions.
Speaker 1: Well, you know you heard my caller and Brian, thank
Speaker 1: you very much for that phone call. Now you heard
Speaker 1: my caller earlier, Susan, who was trying to tell me
Speaker 1: that ICE is going after immigrants who are in the
Speaker 1: country legally and illegally and that there's no differentiation. There's
Speaker 1: no difference. Well, nothing could be further from the truth.
Speaker 1: Let's go tomorrow and we'll say hey to Terry. Then
Speaker 1: we got John and Norwood. He wants to talk about
Speaker 1: the fourteenth Amendment. Terry seven hundred WLW okay, thanks.
Speaker 17: For taking my call.
Speaker 1: Sure.
Speaker 17: I read meters for the gas and Electric company in
Speaker 17: Cincinnati in ninety one, and I saw. I paid very
Speaker 17: close attention, and I continued to see. Let's take Roselawn
Speaker 17: when people moved out the Jewish neighborhood. They started moving
Speaker 17: people and there'd be twelve fourteen people beds sleeping in
Speaker 17: the basement, none of them, none of them spoke English.
Speaker 17: But very quickly the I've got a book in my
Speaker 17: hand right now, Sharia law, radical Islam's threat to the
Speaker 17: US Constitution. Also, if you want to look up forty
Speaker 17: five goals to take down America and the naked communists
Speaker 17: number three, we're in a color revolution. It's Cloward and Piven.
Speaker 17: When they opened the borders, they flood the nations, they
Speaker 17: overwhelmed their welfare systems, and then they bring them down
Speaker 17: and then they rebuild them. Yes, we are a country
Speaker 17: of immigrants. I've got books that my customers would get
Speaker 17: of me when they gave they got a handbook. There
Speaker 17: was three of them, and they learned the Constitution, they
Speaker 17: learned the Declaration of Independence. They assimilated.
Speaker 1: Yeah, assimilation, that's a big thing. And Terry, I got
Speaker 1: to cut you off because I'm up against the clock.
Speaker 1: We got a run, but stay tuned because I've got
Speaker 1: a guest coming up at two thirty, Robert Spencer, and
Speaker 1: we touch on those issues. So stick around for that.
Speaker 1: It is one fifty two at seven hundred WLW LW
Speaker 1: one hour for me left Dan Carroll till three this afternoon.
Speaker 1: Then Sterling comes Rocking and Rolling at three this afternoon,
Speaker 1: so we'll all be listening to that together. Always great
Speaker 1: to hear Sterling on there. I got to see Mike
Speaker 1: Allen two before I started today. He was on his
Speaker 1: way out as on my way in. So always great
Speaker 1: to see Mike callend.
Speaker 8: You know.
Speaker 1: On my social media, I've been seeing an increasing number
Speaker 1: of individuals post about our former president Joseph Robin at Biden,
Speaker 1: who I guess miraculous. So he has been cured of cancer.
Speaker 1: I haven't really heard anything about this cancer diagnosis that
Speaker 1: he was announced right before he I believe it was
Speaker 1: right before he was getting ready to exit the office
Speaker 1: of presidency in the United States. But a number of
Speaker 1: people posting about Joe Biden how he sees fit, He's rested,
Speaker 1: he's ready, and they're suggesting that he maybe should make
Speaker 1: another run at the presidency in twenty twenty eight. And
Speaker 1: I think there's no better example of the fitness of
Speaker 1: Joseph Freett Robin at Biden. Then he was at an
Speaker 1: event a night or so ago, and it was an
Speaker 1: LGBTQ event where he was speaking quite forcefully about the
Speaker 1: greatness of this country, and it sounded a little something
Speaker 1: like this, could we hear cut number one? Please, we
Speaker 1: just have to get out.
Speaker 11: As long as we keep the faith, someone hope and
Speaker 11: get back up and remember who in the hell we are.
Speaker 5: We're the United States of Americana. That's who we are
Speaker 5: and us and there's nothing I mean.
Speaker 1: And what what what the United States?
Speaker 5: What?
Speaker 1: Let's let's hear let's hear that one more time, one
Speaker 1: more time, Drew. Let's let's hear. Let's hear Biden again.
Speaker 1: The United States can tell me.
Speaker 10: As far as we keep the faith, someone hope and
Speaker 10: get back up and remember who in the hell we are.
Speaker 3: We're the United.
Speaker 17: States of America.
Speaker 5: That's who we are.
Speaker 1: I think, you know, I think based on that, Biden
Speaker 1: is obviously Look, he's obviously in much better shape than Trump.
Speaker 1: Ready to go talking about the greatness of America.
Speaker 6: I'll say this, please, oh God. Nothing would get me
Speaker 6: great pleasure then to than to have Joe Biden back
Speaker 6: on the back on the campaign trail. Oh material, think
Speaker 6: about think about the ratings. I mean, we have non
Speaker 6: stop material.
Speaker 13: Unbelievable.
Speaker 1: Well, it was. It got to the point during the
Speaker 1: last election where it was almost unfair because Biden was
Speaker 1: putting out stuff like that on a daily basis, and
Speaker 1: I had it was it was an embarrassment of riches
Speaker 1: when it came to talking about the gaffs and the
Speaker 1: flubs and the you know, the mispronunciations and all the
Speaker 1: rest of it. On behalf of Biden.
Speaker 6: I miss his uh you know, for a second there
Speaker 6: it was kind of a combination. Not only could he
Speaker 6: not speak, but he also kind of had that creepy,
Speaker 6: creepy whisper that I've missed.
Speaker 1: You had a little bit of that going on there too.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, a little bit of that going on there.
Speaker 6: So I mean, I'm I don't know which one I
Speaker 6: miss more. I missed the guy, I really do. I
Speaker 6: missed the guy. And you raise a great point, deep insight,
Speaker 6: Dan Carroll on your part. You know when when when
Speaker 6: when mister watched his face was meeting the fan, mister whatever.
Speaker 6: I can't say, I don't want to get booted off
Speaker 6: the air, but when it was hitting a fan there
Speaker 6: at the end of his administration and his run for reelection,
Speaker 6: you know, they announce suddenly that he and trust me,
Speaker 6: I'm a cancer survivor. I have the utmost sympathy for
Speaker 6: anyone going through cancer treatment. Okay, but you know they're like,
Speaker 6: hey man, he's got stayed four cancer. You know that
Speaker 6: we don't expect him the last one. You know, all
Speaker 6: that came out right, and then plan well, I mean
Speaker 6: I haven't heard. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong.
Speaker 6: Now he's fit as a fiddle ready for You know,
Speaker 6: there actually been people discussing him coming back on the game.
Speaker 6: You know, we're gonna we're gonna resurrect Joe Biden, and
Speaker 6: he's going to be a viable candidate. You can't have
Speaker 6: it both ways here, So which one is it? Was
Speaker 6: he sick, did he recover? Or was that yet another
Speaker 6: Biden lie? I don't know. I mean, God knows. I
Speaker 6: don't put anything past the Democrat Party.
Speaker 1: Well, based on based on the fact that he's able
Speaker 1: to get dressed, put on a winter coat, and go
Speaker 1: shopping at some very high end retail specialty boutiques, they
Speaker 1: claim his health is outstanding and much better than that
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump.
Speaker 6: Then then shame on them for potentially lying during the
Speaker 6: last days of his campaign and or re election campaign
Speaker 6: and or administration. Shame on them, because you know what,
Speaker 6: Dan Carroll, there are a lot of people that are
Speaker 6: suffering every day. Cancer treatment takes a lot out of you,
Speaker 6: and that's not something for just to use as an
Speaker 6: excuse for your you know, because your polls might be lagging,
Speaker 6: you need some sympathy points. Shame on them, That's what
Speaker 6: I really have to say. Shame. Is there no level
Speaker 6: that a Democrat candidate and or party will not seek
Speaker 6: to seek to to to to try to barner votes.
Speaker 6: I don't think there is. And and and if they
Speaker 6: were maybe exaggerating his condition for the sake of sympathy points, well,
Speaker 6: you know what that's that's absolutely beyond the floorable. I
Speaker 6: don't even have a word for it. I thought I
Speaker 6: I thought I'd had every word for the Democrats, But
Speaker 6: I guess I really need.
Speaker 1: To if you've got a constantly expand your vocabulary for that.
Speaker 1: Adam Kinzinger is a reprehensible individual. And here's something that
Speaker 1: he put on his social media feed. And I wanted
Speaker 1: to run this by you and and and see, uh
Speaker 1: it gets your take on this. Adam Kinziger writes there
Speaker 1: will be a day soon where the name Trump is
Speaker 1: similar to Benedict Arnold. When that happens, there will be
Speaker 1: many Republicans who who will pretend they never really liked
Speaker 1: him and they weren't part of the American selloup. Don't
Speaker 1: let them. They all enabled this. So does does this
Speaker 1: ring true to you? That we will be saying Trump's
Speaker 1: name in the in the the same breath as Benedict Arnold?
Speaker 6: I can't see it, but let's be fair. I don't
Speaker 6: suffer from Trump derangement, Syndrame. I got to ask you,
Speaker 6: was Adam Kinsinger was kinsing or was he crying when
Speaker 6: he said that he's really good at crying. I did
Speaker 6: not was he was he, you know, bawling as he
Speaker 6: said that on the air though, Well, No, I think
Speaker 6: he was busy trying to to hang the the the
Speaker 6: false narrative of committing war crimes around the neck of
Speaker 6: Trump and Pete heeg seth.
Speaker 1: I think he was busy with that, So this was
Speaker 1: just an aside, you know, liked reference.
Speaker 6: I'm sure the TBS syndrome is so real and so pervasive. Listen,
Speaker 6: don't get me wrong. You and I have spoken often
Speaker 6: and we don't agree. Nobody would agree with everything someone does,
Speaker 6: and we don't agree with everything Trump does. However, the
Speaker 6: flip side here, the difference is is that the Democrat
Speaker 6: and or liberal side disagrees with everything Trump does. I
Speaker 6: mean absolutely everything. The man cannot breathe correctly. He is working. Listen,
Speaker 6: like him or dislike him. He has a workload that
Speaker 6: is enviable with somebody half his age. I mean, the
Speaker 6: man works twelve hour days, constantly working. I saw where
Speaker 6: he just received praise from an African leader for stopping
Speaker 6: the war in Africa that Joe Biden had no interest
Speaker 6: in stopping, had four years to do something. He went
Speaker 6: over and stopped a war in Africa, and the African
Speaker 6: leader praised him and said he came and with solutions.
Speaker 6: He listened, he didn't, you know, he was open minded
Speaker 6: and he came with solutions. I don't know if you
Speaker 6: saw that or not. It was quite telling. And you know,
Speaker 6: this is the stuff the media, just the media will
Speaker 6: not report. I'm kind of to my wits end. I
Speaker 6: don't know where we go from here, but this NonStop,
Speaker 6: terminal Trump derangement syndrome is going to be the end
Speaker 6: of this country. It really is going to be the
Speaker 6: end of this country because we used to have when
Speaker 6: you and I agree that the most rational Democrat in
Speaker 6: the United States is.
Speaker 1: Who John Fetterman? Ye who? And we did not see
Speaker 1: that coming. So I'm gonna be honest about that. I
Speaker 1: didn't see that coming at all. But the guy's out there,
Speaker 1: he's making me. He's making more sense than anyone with
Speaker 1: a D after the name than I can think of
Speaker 1: right now. The Somalia thing has been when I say Somalia,
Speaker 1: and I mean that in reference to what's happening in Minneapolis,
Speaker 1: Minnesota has been interesting. And the Stephen Miller, who was
Speaker 1: who was a national treasure in my opinion, was asked
Speaker 1: about this on the on on the Sean Hannity Show
Speaker 1: in the in the wake of the knowledge that this
Speaker 1: scandal is likely to be in excess of eight billion dollars.
Speaker 1: Now is what Fox News.
Speaker 6: We were discussing it yesterday in our eyebrows were raised
Speaker 6: when it.
Speaker 1: Was that one one billion.
Speaker 6: Now it appears. Now it appears it's eight times.
Speaker 1: Yeah, eight billion dollars. And Stephen Miller was asked about
Speaker 1: this on the Sean Hannity Show, and this is what
Speaker 1: he had to say. Let's hear cut number two, Drew.
Speaker 1: Let's hear cut number two.
Speaker 18: This scandal is going to rock the core of Minnesota
Speaker 18: politics and American politics.
Speaker 1: We are going to be able to show through whether
Speaker 1: it be.
Speaker 18: Wilful blindness, whether it be deliberately turning the other way,
Speaker 18: or whether it be direct knowledge. We are going to
Speaker 18: show how Democrat politicians, Democrat bureaucracies, Democrat political systems, and
Speaker 18: the Somali refugee population ripped off the American people, stole
Speaker 18: countless tax payer dollars, and engage in scams that boggle
Speaker 18: the mind, Scams that we can scarcely even conceive of
Speaker 18: or imagine in their brazenness. This truly underscores the extent
Speaker 18: to which the Democrat Party has used migration as a
Speaker 18: weapon against the American people to gain political power at
Speaker 18: the expense of American citizens, stealing their money, their votes,
Speaker 18: stealing their sovereignty.
Speaker 1: This is going to be.
Speaker 18: Case in point for the argument that President Trump has
Speaker 18: made about why we must stop mass th world migration
Speaker 18: into this country. It is a tool the Democrat Party
Speaker 18: has used to rob the American people blind.
Speaker 1: And so they're Steven Miller, the Andrew Pappis. There's no
Speaker 1: one who spells it out the way he does. I mean,
Speaker 1: the guy's an absolute treasure the way he's able to
Speaker 1: bring clarity the issues like this. And so when you
Speaker 1: look at what's happening with the Somalian population in Minnesota,
Speaker 1: and then you combine that with the issue that's really
Speaker 1: not all that sexy, but all this reapportionment and the
Speaker 1: redrawing of the congressional districts and the map and all
Speaker 1: that stuff. So my way of thinking, all this stuff
Speaker 1: sort of goes hand in hand. It all comes together
Speaker 1: because it's all about congressional seats. It's all about representation
Speaker 1: in Congress. It's all about controlling that portion of our
Speaker 1: lawmaking system, and it's all about the Democrats being in
Speaker 1: charge and advancing their agenda for as far as the
Speaker 1: I can see.
Speaker 6: Well, let me ask you a question, Dan, what is
Speaker 6: Elon who represents that district in Minnesota? What is Elon
Speaker 6: Omar's net worth?
Speaker 1: I believe it's an excess of forty million dollars.
Speaker 6: Now, well, it's a it's a big range. It's between
Speaker 6: six and thirty million.
Speaker 1: It's a lot of money.
Speaker 6: And that was his May of twenty twenty five, so
Speaker 6: it's now the end of the year. It could have
Speaker 6: jumped up since then. It is. Do you know what
Speaker 6: her net worth was when she came into Congress?
Speaker 1: It's probably been close to zero.
Speaker 6: It was a negative sixty thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: Negative sixty thousand. It's a beautiful It's a beautiful thing,
Speaker 1: isn't it.
Speaker 6: It makes you wonder given the number that we've just
Speaker 6: been quoted, eight billion dollars in fraud and waste, that
Speaker 6: is tied I believe to not only the Somali community there,
Speaker 6: but now I've heard accusations. I believe it is that
Speaker 6: the Attorney general in Minnesota that's tied up in this
Speaker 6: now for campaign contributions. It's it's a high ranking Minnesota
Speaker 6: state official that is now on tape of saying something
Speaker 6: along the lines of it. He turned his eye to
Speaker 6: something he expected to have contributions made, and those contributions
Speaker 6: did take place. So I am not surprised when we
Speaker 6: see that the home state of Jazz hands himself tim Uh.
Speaker 1: I want.
Speaker 6: I was about to say something else, so I caught myself.
Speaker 1: I hear you've been driving by his house too, yelling
Speaker 1: nasty words at him.
Speaker 6: Well, you know what, I don't want to make him
Speaker 6: cry any more than the gentleman has cried, because that's
Speaker 6: the biggest thing, you know, God forbid. My point on
Speaker 6: that is someone takes nothing about Tim Wallas and someone
Speaker 6: drive by and say a dirty, dirty word that he
Speaker 6: takes offense at, rather than what the Democrats do is
Speaker 6: label used labels on our candidates, that that instead of
Speaker 6: words being hurtled at, then bull hurdled at them. So,
Speaker 6: you know what, he is not the victim of anything
Speaker 6: other than his incompetence. And I have no I don't
Speaker 6: feel the least bit sorry for whatever might be happening
Speaker 6: to Tim Walls up in Minnesota.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the news broke last night that the City of Cincinnati,
Speaker 1: the city manager, wants to engage in a settlement with
Speaker 1: the protesters who were here in Cincinnati, about five hundred
Speaker 1: or so protesters who were rioting, who were causing damage
Speaker 1: in the city of Cincinnati, and for their efforts, they
Speaker 1: got arrested. And now they've agreed to a settlement to
Speaker 1: where these individuals are going to be paid a little
Speaker 1: over twelve thousand dollars each. The attorneys in this case
Speaker 1: are getting in excess of two million dollars. So what
Speaker 1: message is the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton County sending
Speaker 1: to thugs, punks, rioters, people like that who would come
Speaker 1: into the city demonstrate go well beyond their First Amendment
Speaker 1: rights and engage in criminal activity in the city of Cincinnati.
Speaker 1: What message are we sending them through this settlement?
Speaker 6: Two words very easy, crime.
Speaker 1: Pace, crime, pace, There you go now, and you know what, and.
Speaker 6: I my heart bleeds. My heart bleeds for the poor
Speaker 6: men and women of law enforcement that were as to
Speaker 6: force the law, a curfew that was imposed by the
Speaker 6: very city that is now seeking to compensate those criminals
Speaker 6: for breaking the law.
Speaker 1: A Democrat mayor, by the way, a Democrat mayor John Cranley,
Speaker 1: who who who saw the writing on the wall that
Speaker 1: this was going to call severe damage and gave our
Speaker 1: police additional tools to use to shut these riots down.
Speaker 1: And John Cranley, much to his credit, said that look,
Speaker 1: these police officers did a great job. And he stands.
Speaker 1: He says he you know, the they saved the city
Speaker 1: from burning down. We didn't make national news back then
Speaker 1: because our law enforcement shut it down. And now the
Speaker 1: city manager says, all these people need to get some money.
Speaker 1: They need about twelve thousand dollars.
Speaker 6: Could you imagine being a law enforcement officer and putting
Speaker 6: your life on the line every day when you go
Speaker 6: out in the public and you're and you're patrolling, your
Speaker 6: life is on the line. You're rest somebody that's breaking
Speaker 6: the law. You're saving businesses, people's property, people's people's personal lives.
Speaker 6: And here you come. Here's the administration that that says
Speaker 6: they support you, quote unquote comes along now and and
Speaker 6: and and gives each person there twelve thousand, approximately twelve thousand,
Speaker 6: five hundred dollars for for for breaking the law. I
Speaker 6: am sickened by it. I haven't heard our mayor, who's
Speaker 6: not particularly our financial wiz. From what I understand, I
Speaker 6: have not heard our mayor comment on this, but I
Speaker 6: just don't understand how how someone doesn't look at this
Speaker 6: and absolutely want to be sick to their summit.
Speaker 1: It was funny. I passed the guy up who looked
Speaker 1: just like a tab Purvoll with his thumb out. He's
Speaker 1: hitching a ride, so it's you know, it's his card.
Speaker 1: His car got repossessed.
Speaker 6: Well that's not Dan, you know that was that was
Speaker 6: simply a drafting error. For several months, this thing's happened. Yeah,
Speaker 6: we're back in nineteen seventy where banks didn't have your
Speaker 6: cell phone and your email and app your phone for
Speaker 6: to communicate to among us.
Speaker 1: Hasn't been laid on a payment. You know, it can happen.
Speaker 6: I mean, I mean, do you have to pay do
Speaker 6: you have to pay for your car to keep your car?
Speaker 6: I mean I don't, I don't know. I mean maybe
Speaker 6: I've been doing it rolling all this year.
Speaker 1: All right, Papas, we got to run as always. Man,
Speaker 1: great to have you on and we'll be talking next time.
Speaker 6: Dan, Carol, I appreciate you know. Next time we can
Speaker 6: talk about my new book.
Speaker 1: That I just wrote. Yeah, what's that? What's what's the
Speaker 1: title of it.
Speaker 6: It's called Making Friends and Influencing People by Me?
Speaker 1: Thank you, Papas. I'll see you buddy. There you go
Speaker 1: the one and know the former Anderson Township trust the
Speaker 1: Rys always great to have mine coming up. I've I've
Speaker 1: got another guest, Robert Spencer, and he's got a great
Speaker 1: book out. We're going to talk about Islamism on the
Speaker 1: move in the United States and it's a little bit
Speaker 1: of a wake up call, so stick around for that
Speaker 1: two twenty five at the Home of the Red seven
Speaker 1: hundred WLW. He real call free this afternoon on this
Speaker 1: beautiful Saturday, and great to welcome in my next guest,
Speaker 1: Robert Spencer of Jihati Watch. He is also the author
Speaker 1: of a brand new book and the book is entitled
Speaker 1: Holy Hell Islam's Abuse of Women and the Infidels who
Speaker 1: enable it. And Robert Spencer, welcome again to seven hundred WLW.
Speaker 1: How are you great to talk to again?
Speaker 4: Dan?
Speaker 1: Thank you. We talked a couple of weeks ago about
Speaker 1: Zorahan Mandani. It actually was before the election, but now
Speaker 1: that Zorhan Mondani has been elected, in New York City?
Speaker 1: What what are New Yorkers in for? And let me
Speaker 1: ask you this, what did you make of the meeting
Speaker 1: that Zorahan Mondani had with President Trump there in the
Speaker 1: Oval Office.
Speaker 19: Same to me that Trump was trying to make it
Speaker 19: impossible for mom Donnie to blame him when everything goes wrong,
Speaker 19: as it inevitably will. Mom Donnie is a Marxist. Although
Speaker 19: he denies it, it's very clear from his record and
Speaker 19: his statements, and he's going to try to implement various
Speaker 19: socialist policies in New York which are going to likely
Speaker 19: bankrupt the city, and then he'll blame Trump. And now,
Speaker 19: with Trump on record being friendly and talking him up
Speaker 19: and saying he's rooting for him, it's going to be
Speaker 19: harder for Mom Donnie to displace the blame in that.
Speaker 3: And so I think that it could.
Speaker 19: Have been it was very likely was a very canny
Speaker 19: move on the part of the President to try to
Speaker 19: take away one of Mam Donnie's primary strategies, which is
Speaker 19: to execute his plans and then when they don't work,
Speaker 19: try to blame Trump for everything.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I looked at that, and I see it as Trump
Speaker 1: really throwing a curveball to the base of Mondanni, because
Speaker 1: much of his base is simply people who hate Trump.
Speaker 1: And I think a large portion of his campaign, aside
Speaker 1: from the free buses and the rent controls and the
Speaker 1: free grocery stores, a large portion of his campaign were
Speaker 1: supported by people who simply hate Trump and for no
Speaker 1: other reason wanted to vote for Mondnni because of that.
Speaker 1: And I think Mondanni needs Trump a lot more than
Speaker 1: Trump needs him. And I think that is that this
Speaker 1: was more of a positioning move for Trump because he
Speaker 1: knows in the future at some point Mondnnie's gonna have
Speaker 1: to come knocking on his door exactly.
Speaker 19: And see, this is the way that it worked out.
Speaker 19: The historical precedent that we have for this is when
Speaker 19: New York City went bankrupt back in the seventies and
Speaker 19: they asked President Gerald Ford for a handout and to
Speaker 19: bail them out, and he refused. And Ford was the
Speaker 19: one got the blame, not the leaders of New York
Speaker 19: City who had run it into the ground economically. And
Speaker 19: now Trump has kind of checkmated Mamdani and made it
Speaker 19: virtually impossible for him to make the same maneuver.
Speaker 1: You and I have not spoken since it came to
Speaker 1: light all the corruption and the fraud going on in
Speaker 1: Minnesota as it relates to the Somalian community there, and
Speaker 1: the fraud that surrounds Feeding the Hungry program, another program
Speaker 1: for autistic children, another program that is supposed to provide
Speaker 1: housing for seniors and at risk individuals, and more than
Speaker 1: it looks like more than a billion dollars has been
Speaker 1: embezzled from these programs, and probably a lot more. Are
Speaker 1: you surprised by any of this that so much has
Speaker 1: gone on and so much of this is connected to
Speaker 1: this particular community and the way that this whole thing
Speaker 1: has been rolled out.
Speaker 19: I'll tell you, Dan, the only thing that surprises me
Speaker 19: about it, is it anybody it'd surprised because I could
Speaker 19: have told you this was coming for ever since there
Speaker 19: were Somalis in Minneapolis. Really because the Koran, the Holy
Speaker 19: Book of Islam, teaches that it's the responsibility of the
Speaker 19: Infidels to pay for the Muslims, to pay taxes to
Speaker 19: the Muslims and provide for their upkeep. Now that being
Speaker 19: the case, if they're not doing that, there have been
Speaker 19: any moms who have told Muslims you can steal from
Speaker 19: the Infidel and it's perfectly okay because their money belongs
Speaker 19: to you anyway, and you're entitled to what they have,
Speaker 19: and so we should expect communities of believing Muslims to
Speaker 19: be stealing from us. It's surprising here, again, surprising that
Speaker 19: anybody was surprised.
Speaker 1: The New York Post wrote a piece about Ihan Omar
Speaker 1: and how she is connected to so many of these
Speaker 1: individuals who are either tan gently or directly connected to
Speaker 1: a lot of the fraud that's been going on there,
Speaker 1: and the Post is asking some serious questions about how
Speaker 1: much she knew about this. She had events at some
Speaker 1: of these restaurants where these feeding the Kids program was
Speaker 1: supposed to go on. She's got pictures with a lot
Speaker 1: of the individuals, some of them who've already been convicted
Speaker 1: in some of these fraud schemes. So do you have
Speaker 1: any doubt at all that Ilhan Omar knew exactly what
Speaker 1: was going on with all this fraud and deception there?
Speaker 19: None whatsoever. This was something that I expected, It's the
Speaker 19: full story of it. Were known that she would be
Speaker 19: implicated in it in a very high to a very
Speaker 19: high degree, maybe even helping the people do things so
Speaker 19: that they wouldn't get caught here. Again, this is not
Speaker 19: really even something that she would have thought of as unethical.
Speaker 19: It's just the natural order of things. The non Muslims
Speaker 19: are supposed to be paying money to the Muslims.
Speaker 3: Oh, this is money, this is all.
Speaker 19: This was something that the Somali community was completely entitled to,
Speaker 19: you know.
Speaker 1: So as I look at this, look at what happened
Speaker 1: in Minnesota, I look at this individual from Afghanistan that
Speaker 1: was shouting a La wakbar as he shot the two
Speaker 1: members of the National Guard in DC, I keep thinking
Speaker 1: of what condo Lee's the Rice talked about after she
Speaker 1: did her evaluation and analysis of September eleventh, and she
Speaker 1: said that our enemies were on a war footing and
Speaker 1: we are not. And I think that, and I think
Speaker 1: we've we've sort of fallen back into that, at least
Speaker 1: under the previous administration. But I listened to what Marco
Speaker 1: Rubio said a day or so ago, and I want
Speaker 1: to play that cut right now, because when I hear
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio talk like this, it makes me think that
Speaker 1: at least parts of our administration, the Trump administration, have
Speaker 1: their eyes open to this. Drew, could we please hear
Speaker 1: cut number four.
Speaker 20: Ultimately, all radical Islamic movements in the world identify the
Speaker 20: West writ large, but the United States in particular, as
Speaker 20: the greatest evil on the earth. And every chance to
Speaker 20: have the notion that somehow Radical Islam would be comfortable
Speaker 20: with simply controlling some province in Iraq or Syria, it's
Speaker 20: just not borne out by history. Radical Islam has shown
Speaker 20: that their desire is not simply to occupy one part
Speaker 20: of the world and be happy with their own little caliphate.
Speaker 20: They want to expand. It is a revolutionary in its nature.
Speaker 20: It seeks to expand and control more territories and more people.
Speaker 20: And Radical Islam has designs openly on the West, on
Speaker 20: the United States, on Europe. We've seen that progress there
Speaker 20: as well, and they're prepared to conduct acts of terrorism
Speaker 20: in the case of Iran nation, state actions, assassinations, murderers,
Speaker 20: you name it, whatever it takes for them to gain
Speaker 20: their influence and ultimately their domination of different cultures and societies.
Speaker 20: That's a clear and imminent threat to the world, to
Speaker 20: the broader West, but especially to the United States, who
Speaker 20: they identify as the chief chief source of evil on
Speaker 20: the planet. The reason why they hate the Kingdom of
Speaker 20: Saudi Arabia, the leadership of the UAE of Bahrain is
Speaker 20: because they've allowed the United States to partner with them.
Speaker 3: That's why they hate them. They consider them infidels for it.
Speaker 20: They hate Israel, but they also hate America, and they
Speaker 20: hate anywhere in the world that we have influenced. They
Speaker 20: seek to attack it, including here in the homeland. If
Speaker 20: you look at the domestic terrorists that the attacks have
Speaker 20: happened here domestically, the overwhelming majority of them have been
Speaker 20: inspired by radical Islamic viewpoints, and that includes the shooting
Speaker 20: in the Poults night club in Orlando, Florida. That includes
Speaker 20: the Saudi Pilot in Pensacola, my home state, two attacks.
Speaker 1: So, Robert Spencer, when you hear Marco Rubio talk like that,
Speaker 1: I know when I hear him speak like that, it
Speaker 1: tells me that at least part of this administration hares
Speaker 1: their eyes open to this. And Marco Rubio, I think,
Speaker 1: does a fantastic job, and he's able to lay it
Speaker 1: out in plain language that just about anyone is able
Speaker 1: to understand.
Speaker 3: Yes, that was very good.
Speaker 19: It is unusual and rare from a high level public
Speaker 19: official and so it's refreshing to hear just a couple things, though,
Speaker 19: if you don't mind, maybe I'm looking at the glass
Speaker 19: half full and half empty that is, instead of half full.
Speaker 19: But it seems to me in the first place, it's
Speaker 19: not radical. It is mainstream, ordinary Islam that seeks conquest
Speaker 19: and domination of the infidels, and that needs to be
Speaker 19: recognized so that we don't keep on thinking that this
Speaker 19: is some aberration, but understand that it can just appear
Speaker 19: anywhere where there might be Muslims. That's not to say
Speaker 19: that every Muslim is a terrorist or a radical or
Speaker 19: something like that, but that this is far more widespread
Speaker 19: than I think most people want to believe. And also
Speaker 19: when he talks about Saudi Arabia and Cutter not being
Speaker 19: on this program, I think, unfortunately that's not the case.
Speaker 19: They are very much still part of it. They are
Speaker 19: just pursuing their own short term pragmatic interests.
Speaker 3: When those interests.
Speaker 19: Change, when they shift, then it'll be clear once again
Speaker 19: that those are Ghati entities like the others.
Speaker 3: You know.
Speaker 1: Going back to Mandani and the people that voted for him,
Speaker 1: it's one thing to have young people like this who
Speaker 1: really know nothing of socialism. They were failed by the
Speaker 1: educational system in this country to realize the failure that
Speaker 1: comes along with socialism and how wherever it's been tried
Speaker 1: it has never worked. The other part of it is,
Speaker 1: and this is what your book is about, Islam's abuse
Speaker 1: of women and the infidels who enable it. I think
Speaker 1: by and large, the women who voted for this guy
Speaker 1: have absolutely no clue of the way women are treated
Speaker 1: within Islam. That's right, Dan.
Speaker 19: I mean, consider the fact that Mandanni has said that
Speaker 19: he's going to stop having police respond to domestic violence cases,
Speaker 19: that he's going to send social workers. Now, if he
Speaker 19: got some violent guy with a knife startning to kill
Speaker 19: his wife, a social worker is not going to help.
Speaker 19: And it's just appalling that he would say this. But
Speaker 19: coincidentally or not coincidentally, it coincides exactly with the Islamic
Speaker 19: Holy books that care on, which says that if you
Speaker 19: have a woman from whom you fear disobedience, then beat them.
Speaker 19: And it's it's not a police matter, it's something that's
Speaker 19: completely justified. And so Mom, Donnie just happens to be
Speaker 19: endorsing a procedure that will aid and a bet that.
Speaker 1: Well well, we'll see how this is going to manifest
Speaker 1: itself over time. I think he takes office right after
Speaker 1: the beginning of the first of the year, so we'll
Speaker 1: see what happens. And you've also got another piece up
Speaker 1: at Front Page magazine and you right, I hate to
Speaker 1: say I told you so, but not that much. And
Speaker 1: you talk about recommention recommendations that you made back in
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight that would have prevented us from
Speaker 1: being in the situation that we find ourselves in. Now,
Speaker 1: what what were some of those recommendations that you made
Speaker 1: back in two thouandy.
Speaker 19: One of them was stopping immigration from Muslim countries. Now,
Speaker 19: this is something that I got a lot of heat
Speaker 19: for and people were saying, oh, see this is racist
Speaker 19: and so on exactly, But it was never a racial
Speaker 19: thing to start with. It's about an ideology that is supremacist,
Speaker 19: violent and expansionist and that people are bringing in. It's
Speaker 19: just actually what the president has just been talking about
Speaker 19: when he was speaking about how he was going to
Speaker 19: end immigration from third world countries. Now that's a good start,
Speaker 19: but the fact is this is not even really a
Speaker 19: third world problem.
Speaker 3: This is an Islamic problem.
Speaker 4: And the longer we ignore that.
Speaker 3: The more the problem is going to keep.
Speaker 19: On growing and coming at us from.
Speaker 3: Areas where we don't expect.
Speaker 19: So if the President were to say I'm going to
Speaker 19: end immigration from Muslim countries, he also would get a
Speaker 19: lot of heat for being a racist islamophobe. But he
Speaker 19: could actually do it if he wanted to, and he
Speaker 19: could base it on the teachings of Islam that call
Speaker 19: for violent conquest of unbelievers, and those things are not
Speaker 19: hard to find. So it's a good step that he's taking. Certainly,
Speaker 19: he will keep a lot of Jihat terrorists out of
Speaker 19: the country, and that's also the good The thing about
Speaker 19: immigration is you know where nation of immigrants, and all
Speaker 19: of us have immigrant backgrounds if you go back far enough.
Speaker 19: And so a lot of people think it's a terrible
Speaker 19: Unamerican thing to restrict immigration, But there are national security
Speaker 19: issues involved. They're readily demonstrable, and I commend the President
Speaker 19: for taking notice of them.
Speaker 1: But I've heard so many people make the argument that
Speaker 1: that Islam is more than just a religion, it's also
Speaker 1: a political movement as well. And so when there's no
Speaker 1: doubt about that, when when you when you combine those two.
Speaker 1: The political side of what Islam wants to bring to
Speaker 1: this country is certainly not compatible with our constitution, our
Speaker 1: way of life, our culture. And what is it going
Speaker 1: to take for people to finally recognize that and say, look,
Speaker 1: practicing your religion is one thing, but trying to change
Speaker 1: the entire culture and the way that the United States
Speaker 1: of America works and what it was founded on is
Speaker 1: another thing. And we've got to draw the line somewhere. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: I couldn't agree more.
Speaker 19: And this is what I've been saying for years, that
Speaker 19: we have to understand that Islam has this political aspect,
Speaker 19: and that that aspect of Islam is completely at odds
Speaker 19: with the American Constitution, and so there's nothing wrong with
Speaker 19: our taking measures to protect ourselves from that. And this
Speaker 19: has been obscured all these years by these charges of
Speaker 19: Islamophobia and so on, and so here again I commend
Speaker 19: the President and the people around him for not being
Speaker 19: afraid to grasp that metal and to do what's necessary
Speaker 19: to protect the American people. I only hope that they
Speaker 19: don't get stopped again by leftist judges or somebody who say,
Speaker 19: you can't can't limit immigration and you have to let
Speaker 19: everybody in, no matter how dangerous they are, and so on.
Speaker 1: Yeah, how do you find time to write thirty two books?
Speaker 3: I don't do anything else.
Speaker 1: I'll do anything else. All right, well, Robert Spencer, always great.
Speaker 1: I appreciate the time. I'll look forward to the next
Speaker 1: time we get a chance to talk again. You may
Speaker 1: have four or five more books out by then, but
Speaker 1: we will see that. All right, keep up the great work,
Speaker 1: and all the best to you, and take care of yourself,
Speaker 1: you too. All right, there you go, Robert Spencer on
Speaker 1: seven hundred WLW