Speaker 1: You don't want to be an American flony back on
Speaker 1: seven hundred WLW. There's nothing like a sleep when it's
Speaker 1: pouring rain outside, so it just makes you sleep more.
Speaker 1: The only problem with that is you got to get
Speaker 1: you gotta get up right, and it was a slow
Speaker 1: move today for me. Might be with you as well.
Speaker 1: We have horrible news, of course with the fire we'll
Speaker 1: get more than that'll bit later on in Warren County,
Speaker 1: but also the follow up from the mass shooting at
Speaker 1: Riverfront Live over the weekend. Nine people shot, hundreds traumatized,
Speaker 1: and the man now accused of pulling the trigger could
Speaker 1: walk free on a fifty thousand dollars bond. He's climbing
Speaker 1: self defense and the mayor is furious. The question, though,
Speaker 1: is why didn't prosecutors asked to keep him locked up
Speaker 1: in the first place? On that is attorney defense attorney,
Speaker 1: constitutional expert and all around decent guy, Steve Gooden, Steve,
Speaker 1: how you doing, buddy, A good good boyd SUSU. So
Speaker 1: we got the case of Frenny Cobb. He's twenty four
Speaker 1: years old, arrested on a single felonious assault charge in
Speaker 1: connection with the shooting nine people twenty injured in the stampede.
Speaker 1: The judge set bonded fifty thousand dollars. Cobb is a
Speaker 1: convicted fellow illegally barred from having a firearm. He was
Speaker 1: just in jail, got out of prison and picked up
Speaker 1: a gun and went and shot an individual in the
Speaker 1: crowd at this event on Saturday. He's had two prior
Speaker 1: weapon under disability convictions before the shooting, including one just
Speaker 1: a year ago, and only served twelve months before his release. Steve,
Speaker 1: at what point does the systems repeated leniency in this
Speaker 1: whole restorative justice thing and bail reform towards an armed
Speaker 1: repeat offender across judicial discretion into just absolute negligence Because
Speaker 1: it feels like this is negligent to me.
Speaker 2: Well, look, this was a complete failure of the system
Speaker 2: on multiple levels. And there's a lot to unpack here,
Speaker 2: but one thing I do want to make clear, thank god,
Speaker 2: that looks as of the US Attorney's Office has stepped
Speaker 2: in with federal charges. They slapped what's called a federal
Speaker 2: holder on these two gentlemen, both of whom I guess
Speaker 2: there was a straight up gun battle the you, and
Speaker 2: it looks as though that they're not going anywhere thanks
Speaker 2: to the intervention of the FBI and the US Attorney's office,
Speaker 2: so that at least, you know, they have rectified the situation,
Speaker 2: at least from the moment they are facing federal weapons
Speaker 2: churages now that they could carry up to fifteen years each.
Speaker 2: So that's good news. The bad news is, you're right,
Speaker 2: there's no way either of these guys should have been
Speaker 2: getting out on any kind of a low bond. And
Speaker 2: you know, the saying is, you know, a success as
Speaker 2: many fathers, but failures and orphans. Here the failure has
Speaker 2: many many fathers. It looks as though the prosecutors and
Speaker 2: the police officers look forward with a single count of
Speaker 2: coolonious assault. It looks clear to me that at this
Speaker 2: point they know there was a gun battle, but there
Speaker 2: seems to be a no nine people shot, twenty others injured,
Speaker 2: but there seems to be a lack of clarity at
Speaker 2: this point in the investigation as to who shot whom.
Speaker 2: So it looks as though they threw this kind of
Speaker 2: placeholder charge out. That was mistake number one. You know,
Speaker 2: it didn't carry the gravity or really communicate the gravity
Speaker 2: of what happened. And then number two we do have judges,
Speaker 2: and I've dealt with this judge before, Bernard Monday. He's
Speaker 2: actually overall a really good judge. But there are a
Speaker 2: lot of judges in this courthouse right now that have
Speaker 2: this ideological bent. They don't believe in cash bond. They
Speaker 2: think it's unfair that people like you and I who
Speaker 2: have means, if we are accused of a crime, that
Speaker 2: we can go get a put our house up, or
Speaker 2: have access sell stock and post a bond. They think
Speaker 2: it's fundamentally unfair that people who don't have means are
Speaker 2: being held in jail. It's an ideological thing that has
Speaker 2: nothing to do whatsoever with the facts of a case.
Speaker 2: And it got so bad in Hamilton County. If you
Speaker 2: recall about three or four years ago, Judge Megan Shanahan,
Speaker 2: he's now in the High Supreme Court, actually put forward
Speaker 2: a statewide issue requiring judges to consider public safety is
Speaker 2: an issue in the posting or setting of cash bonds
Speaker 2: in addition to their ability to pay, which is like
Speaker 2: sort of the progressive democratic focus. It's always the ability
Speaker 2: to pay, not public safety. So there's a requirement these
Speaker 2: judges have. It's in the Ohio Constitution. Now imposed by
Speaker 2: the voters that they should look at public safety above
Speaker 2: all else, and that clearly just didn't happen here. So
Speaker 2: a fifty thousand dollars bond conceivably posted, you know, a
Speaker 2: ten percent, which is the standard I thing here. So
Speaker 2: someone could post five thousand dollars cash of walk out
Speaker 2: on some sort of an ankle bracelet. You know, that's
Speaker 2: a really bad, bad thing. And you know, back when
Speaker 2: I was a prosecutor, we viewed this very very differently
Speaker 2: twenty years ago. Not only were you trying to protect
Speaker 2: the public, but you also wanted to protect the defendant
Speaker 2: because you know, in the in the immediate aftermath of
Speaker 2: some big public shooting like this, you know, there tends
Speaker 2: to be victims' families looking for them too. It's in
Speaker 2: society's interests. They were interested everyone for them to sit. Look,
Speaker 2: if there's something flawed about this case and it turns
Speaker 2: out that got the wrong guys, you know, this will
Speaker 2: be presented at the grand jury within ten days.
Speaker 3: Anyway, they'll be out of the worl thing.
Speaker 2: That happens here is that someone who is credibly accused
Speaker 2: of a mass shooting sits in jail for ten days
Speaker 2: while the authority sorted out that's something that is not
Speaker 2: offensive to our system, or to society or anything of
Speaker 2: the sort. And it's just common sense. And this is
Speaker 2: the kind of stuff again that makes people look at
Speaker 2: this and shake their head. And it's fascinating to me
Speaker 2: that even the mayor. Wait, and the mayor is out there.
Speaker 2: The mayor was somebody who was really really bragged about
Speaker 2: remaking the carhouse and pushing these things and then attacked
Speaker 2: cash bonds and look.
Speaker 1: I remember that that isn't that irony. I don't want
Speaker 1: to say delicious, because you know this is such a
Speaker 1: serious crime. Steve Gooden, But here's a guy who campaigned
Speaker 1: on restorative justice bond reform. We've got to be better,
Speaker 1: a gentler. We can't punch down, we've got to treat
Speaker 1: people better. Okay, great, And now he's in the podium saying,
Speaker 1: how the hell could this person get out in the
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars buck It's because you and I said
Speaker 1: progressive push for this, That's all.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's absolutely read. I read this quote, Diomas.
Speaker 2: You know, I think I still have a cell phone
Speaker 2: here somewhere else. Was going to text it it welcome
Speaker 2: to the party now, like we will have been saying
Speaker 2: this for years, and look, this is just in This
Speaker 2: is one of those things that's been out there for
Speaker 2: about ten to fifteen years on the progress among progressive
Speaker 2: politicians that drives people, not just one of these things.
Speaker 2: It's an article of faith on that side.
Speaker 3: And you know, like the way I try to explain.
Speaker 2: It to my my democratic friends is like this, and
Speaker 2: like you know how in seeing some people feel when
Speaker 2: you talk to a hardcore conservative and say, guys, look,
Speaker 2: we believe in gun rights, but we don't you think
Speaker 2: we should have some gun control. Maybe you shouldn't be
Speaker 2: able to carry an A forty seven out in public
Speaker 2: or AK forty seven in public, and they say, no, no, no, no,
Speaker 2: it's got to be it's all or nothing. That's how
Speaker 2: Democrats sound when you win common sense. People talk about
Speaker 2: balbell or form. Well, it's just fundamentally unfair that rich
Speaker 2: people can postpond and well, no, actually, when you look
Speaker 2: at the facts of the matter, when someone commits a
Speaker 2: violent offense, there ought to be an ability to hold
Speaker 2: on to them. And frankly, in the federal system there
Speaker 2: is no cash bond. You have what's called a detention
Speaker 2: hearing where a magistrate, a federal magistrate, looks at the
Speaker 2: facts of the case and if you're caught with a
Speaker 2: bunch of drugs or guns.
Speaker 4: You're going nowhere.
Speaker 2: You have no opportunity to postpond. It's been like that
Speaker 2: in this country for two hundred and thirty four years
Speaker 2: in the federal system, and the country hasn't fallen apart,
Speaker 2: and it's not some grave injustice. So the idea that
Speaker 2: we're even we're just playing with ourselves in state courts
Speaker 2: over this stuff. Ideologically, at all they're doing is they're
Speaker 2: cycling more people out to hurt others get killed, and
Speaker 2: it's just bad.
Speaker 1: Well it's a good here, but it's really bad here.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And there's some judges out there I mentioned names Silverstein,
Speaker 1: ordation and order, banning objections, doring bond rulings, which is
Speaker 1: just absolutely I don't even know if that's legally permissible.
Speaker 1: The mont Is Merriweather thing. We bonded out on a
Speaker 1: weapon's disability charge and participated in the downtown brawl. The
Speaker 1: Chiefs of Police Association wants to have roundtables. The judges
Speaker 1: refuse to participate in that. They feel the bold and
Speaker 1: to continue this pattern that puts the public in serious,
Speaker 1: serious jeopardy. And that's back, of course by people like
Speaker 1: mayor Pirival who now wants to undo this and go, well,
Speaker 1: maybe this was a bad decision. With admitting it was
Speaker 1: a bad decision. The judge judge in this case you mentioned,
Speaker 1: Judge Mundy said a bond Steve good than fifty thousand
Speaker 1: dollars in a single full on a's assault charge to
Speaker 1: the shooting on Saturday at Riverfront Live. He said, look,
Speaker 1: my hands are tied by the charging decision, says that's
Speaker 1: the max. That's all I can do. Did you have
Speaker 1: any more discretion, broader discretion, or you just chose not
Speaker 1: to exercise it.
Speaker 2: Well, I it's arguable I would say that I think,
Speaker 2: But I think he did. I mean, look, I mean
Speaker 2: he is checked. He is correct. They put forward a
Speaker 2: single case of a flows assault, not the nine charges
Speaker 2: or however many this guy hit. They didn't also charge
Speaker 2: him with any of the gun offenses for whatever reason,
Speaker 2: which would have justified a higher bond. So they did
Speaker 2: put the judge here in a kind of a bad place.
Speaker 2: Why they made those decisions at this early stage, I
Speaker 2: don't know. Maybe they're waiting on additional ballistic evidence. I
Speaker 2: don't know, but it sounds pretty clear to me they
Speaker 2: were able to put a gun on this guy's hand
Speaker 2: and that there should have been charges put there. So
Speaker 2: that's correct. But I want to zone back in on
Speaker 2: this public safety piece and if the judge could have,
Speaker 2: in my view, argued and found that because of the
Speaker 2: nature of the overall incident, that there was a true
Speaker 2: public safety issue and that that justified a higher bond.
Speaker 2: And what's going on in that arrangement room all the time?
Speaker 2: We're having judges who are deviating from this public safety requirement.
Speaker 2: And because the bond issue is usually washed through the
Speaker 2: system so quickly, because we have what we call a
Speaker 2: rapidan divement grand ury system. When all the felonies and
Speaker 2: serious charges are dealt with in about ten days and
Speaker 2: you have a new judge and it takes over, there
Speaker 2: really is no effective way for the state to appeal
Speaker 2: these bad decisions. And frankly, now we have a situation
Speaker 2: where you have the prosecutor's office and all the judges
Speaker 2: who were sort of on the same page it seems
Speaker 2: ideologically anyway, But if the prosecutor wanted to appeal. Effectively,
Speaker 2: they're not really going to have time. These judges are
Speaker 2: smart enough to know that, so they're really not posting
Speaker 2: these high bonds for their ideological reasons, it seems to me.
Speaker 2: I mean, again, I don't know, but I mean we're
Speaker 2: seeing you know, they're campaigning on these sorts of things
Speaker 2: that made public statements.
Speaker 4: To this effect.
Speaker 2: So you're right. I mean, Bernard Muddy was put in
Speaker 2: a very bad position, I think by the charging decision,
Speaker 2: but he could have deviated, as I understand it, under
Speaker 2: Ohio law and put a really high bond on this
Speaker 2: because there are clearly more charges coming, no question. And
Speaker 2: again the Feds didn't mess around with it. And I
Speaker 2: think that is the other really interesting thing here because traditionally,
Speaker 2: but the US Attorney's Office would work with the state
Speaker 2: attorney's office citing which case is to take, and here
Speaker 2: it looks as though from everything I have heard, that
Speaker 2: the US Attorney's Office and the FBI at HTF just
Speaker 2: came in unilaterally and said, no, we're taking we're taking
Speaker 2: this away because this isn't right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he is an attorney. Former prosecutor Defenser Steve Good
Speaker 1: on the show on seven hundred WLWD news yesterday that
Speaker 1: the individual, one of the individuals responsible for the mass
Speaker 1: shooting at Riverfront Live on Saturday, or left nine people
Speaker 1: shot and hundreds traumatized, could walk f in a fifty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars bond that was posted yesterday by Judge Munday
Speaker 1: in his court and said, listen, that's all I can do.
Speaker 1: Even have avs had pureval and other Democrats backpedaling on
Speaker 1: the issue of restorative justice, because this is what it
Speaker 1: looks like. You know, it's one thing to cite someone
Speaker 1: or penalize someone and set a high bond because they've
Speaker 1: got a bag of weed. But when you hire a
Speaker 1: violent predatory criminal with a track record, that person needs
Speaker 1: to be locked up and knocked up sooner rather than later.
Speaker 1: In that regard, there's kind of an I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's a loophole or not. Steven, Maybe this supplies
Speaker 1: with our standard ground law. Not sure, but take me
Speaker 1: through the fact that the shooter on Fountain Square, we
Speaker 1: sim shoot the two individuals at Citybird Chicken on Fountain Square.
Speaker 1: That person was let out because the claimed it was
Speaker 1: self defense at the two inside the store, and the
Speaker 1: video inside City Bird backed up that the I think
Speaker 1: the seventeen and eighteen year old, if im not miss,
Speaker 1: their nineteen year old pulled guns out and we're going
Speaker 1: to shoot him through the glass while they were sitting
Speaker 1: having chicken at a restaurant, and Fountain Square with a
Speaker 1: bunch of people around, said it was self defense. This
Speaker 1: guy was prohibited from having a weapon because he is
Speaker 1: already convicted in this case. You've got individuals here who
Speaker 1: both had a jacket on them that prevented them from
Speaker 1: having a weapon, and yet they get around to turn
Speaker 1: around and claim self defense. Do we kind of like
Speaker 1: have a pattern of a loophole here?
Speaker 2: What a little bit now, I think frankly, I heard
Speaker 2: this too. I saw this on the news, and I
Speaker 2: actually watched a club of the video. This guy's lawyer,
Speaker 2: the Urpront Live shooter, he is going to claim self defense,
Speaker 2: but of course, as you point out, he is legally
Speaker 2: barred from having a firearm, and it is exactly like
Speaker 2: what happened to Fountain Square. Now it looks as though
Speaker 2: on Fountain Square they are still pursuing at least felony
Speaker 2: charges against the individual for having the firearm to begin with,
Speaker 2: even though it looks as though he did establish a
Speaker 2: right to self defense, and some of that, you know,
Speaker 2: you're a standard ground in Ohio, actually make self defense
Speaker 2: claims easier to assert, I guess because you don't have
Speaker 2: a duty to retreat anymore. That's really all the change,
Speaker 2: and it's very fact specific to every case. But here
Speaker 2: in the Riverfront Live situation, I mean, the idea that
Speaker 2: this guy that there were multiple individuals going into this
Speaker 2: what I'm told was a private party with five or
Speaker 2: six hundred people getting in there with firearms, both of
Speaker 2: whom were legally barred from owning the firearms and having
Speaker 2: them on their body. I mean, that's unfortunately that doesn't
Speaker 2: under a highalog go to self defense piece that they
Speaker 2: will both base some charges. And it looks as though
Speaker 2: the federal prosecuted US attorney is focusing on the weapons aspect,
Speaker 2: at least initially in the charges that he is bringing
Speaker 2: in federal courts. So it looks as though at least
Speaker 2: the system is correcting itself in this instance on this
Speaker 2: But that is like that is the heart of the
Speaker 2: problem that we're seeing in Cincinnati, which is convicted felons
Speaker 2: carrying guns with impunity and it not being taken very seriously,
Speaker 2: in the state courts, we.
Speaker 1: Spent like six million on what they call targeted community
Speaker 1: alternatives to prison. It's a program, another program, more programs,
Speaker 1: I swear to God, but and it's designed to divert
Speaker 1: follow the offenders away from incarceration. Someone with the Cobbs
Speaker 1: record cocaine trafficking, two weapons under disability convictions is I
Speaker 1: don't understand how you're a candidate for diversion of that
Speaker 1: guy who decides why he would be eligible for diversion.
Speaker 1: How does that work?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, typically it's a it's a judicial decision
Speaker 2: where the prosecutor's office does sign off and they what
Speaker 2: they look at or non violent offenses, and for better
Speaker 2: or worse, by and large, under Ohio law, merely possessing
Speaker 2: the gun but not using the gun is considered, you know,
Speaker 2: non violent. I mean they're looking at they're looking as
Speaker 2: someone who actually has pulled the gun on someone or
Speaker 2: who has attacked someone. And and the kind of drift
Speaker 2: of where the system is right now, not just in
Speaker 2: Cincinnati but statewide is to look at drug offenses in
Speaker 2: sort of a more forgiving way. And I mean there's
Speaker 2: there's certainly an argument to that effect. But what the
Speaker 2: way I always looked at it, and the way we
Speaker 2: looked at it back in the day when I worked
Speaker 2: in the Prosecutor's office under very different administrations, is we
Speaker 2: looked at drug users and addicts in a very different
Speaker 2: light than we looked at drug dealers, because we saw
Speaker 2: drug dealers as folks who tended to be armed, who
Speaker 2: were capable of violence, whether they had committed violence in
Speaker 2: the offense or not, and that they were profiting off
Speaker 2: the misery and addiction of others. So we always looked
Speaker 2: at those folks very differently, and I think that has
Speaker 2: eroded over time, and now just drug offenses generally are
Speaker 2: looked at by a lot of the judges and a
Speaker 2: lot of the prosecutors, not just here but statewide. It's
Speaker 2: just being well, it's just part of the overall drug problem,
Speaker 2: quote unquote, And I think we would all be better
Speaker 2: served as society to look at if you had the
Speaker 2: way we looked at it at Grand Jury, is drugs
Speaker 2: and you're using and drugs in your system, you know,
Speaker 2: maybe that's somebody that does need to be diverted into
Speaker 2: a treatment scenario and not have their lives ruined. Drugs
Speaker 2: plus a gun and the drugs are packaged in a
Speaker 2: certain way, that's the guy that that's the guy that
Speaker 2: deserves to go to prison because he's profiting from it.
Speaker 2: And that kind of common sense sort of analysis is
Speaker 2: sort of followed by the wayside over the years.
Speaker 1: From what I yeah, no question, Sarah Heringer, Patrick's widow
Speaker 1: is pushing a law that would require real time ankle
Speaker 1: monitor data and making cutting one off an automatic felony.
Speaker 1: And it hasn't passed. But if that had been on
Speaker 1: the book with his murder, Mordecai Black want to say,
Speaker 1: Patrick Herringer, does the same logic apply to supervision of
Speaker 1: repeat gun defenders post release like this?
Speaker 2: You know it should. And I'll tell you I think,
Speaker 2: you know what, if if we had a probation officer
Speaker 2: here on the phone with us and he was given
Speaker 2: some truth surm, I think they would tell you that
Speaker 2: the technology and the funds just aren't there at the
Speaker 2: county level to really monitor these ropes. And I got
Speaker 2: to know Sarah unfortunately pretty well through all this, and
Speaker 2: I can tell you that you know that there were
Speaker 2: many many failures. There There were personal failures, but there
Speaker 2: was a system's failure. There's a technology failure. We have
Speaker 2: the ability to to do real time I'm monitoring both
Speaker 2: on probation and then hurt the situation. Unfortunately, with Mortecai
Speaker 2: Black on parole, a's just we don't as a society
Speaker 2: spend the money there, we don't staff these things the
Speaker 2: right way, and we just have not made it a priority.
Speaker 2: And that's a shame because if we are going to
Speaker 2: let people out and have these ankle monitors, they ought.
Speaker 4: To be able to work.
Speaker 2: And really it's the same technology they've had since the
Speaker 2: mid nineties.
Speaker 3: And you're right, you can.
Speaker 2: Take a kitchen knife and cut one of them off.
Speaker 2: You were so sure, So it's no way to do that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the idea that we don't have the technicians to say,
Speaker 1: I mean, I've got an Apple watch right now and
Speaker 1: it'll sell you know, it'll wear it at night. You know,
Speaker 1: it'll tell you your quality sleep, will tell you how
Speaker 1: much you're sleeping, You'll tell you if you're snoring, if
Speaker 1: you tell if you're an a FIB, give you an
Speaker 1: EKG and do all these amazing things. You need to
Speaker 1: tell me that the technology doesn't exist to go, hey, listen,
Speaker 1: if you cut this thing off instant alarm bells go off,
Speaker 1: or in the case of a gunfelm like this, maybe
Speaker 1: they need one that uses that technology that would sense
Speaker 1: if that individual shoots a firearm and it autumn adically
Speaker 1: goes off, and said, this person who is prohibited from
Speaker 1: having a firearm just shot one off, you go and
Speaker 1: arrest the guy. How hard is that? I don't think
Speaker 1: it's that hard. But we've got to have the political
Speaker 1: will power, of course, to do these things. He is
Speaker 1: Steve Gooden, attorney at law, former prosecutor around Defense. Steve
Speaker 1: all the best, Thanks again for coming on the show anytime.
Speaker 1: Scott take care always got great legal analysis for us.
Speaker 1: Here it's it's mindless and you know, to show you
Speaker 1: the problem that I have with politics as a no nonsense, straightforward,
Speaker 1: common sense kind of guy, a political if you will,
Speaker 1: that this is a great example of progressives and Democrats
Speaker 1: talking out of both sides of their mouth that you
Speaker 1: know you have afted Pureval and other progressives who ran
Speaker 1: on the whole doctrine of restorative justice and bond reform. Well,
Speaker 1: this is what it looks like. These are the effects
Speaker 1: of that that these guys get out and just commit
Speaker 1: crime after crime. Because some people you can't reform. Actually
Speaker 1: a lot of people you can't reform. Why give them
Speaker 1: a second, third, or fourth chance. It's to throwing lives.
Speaker 1: The blood is on their hands, on their hands. I'll
Speaker 1: switch up in a second here, and there's another speaking
Speaker 1: of politics in the Square Guard. The same thing is
Speaker 1: kind of happening. You know, in an election, there was
Speaker 1: a lot made about you know, transgender people in bathrooms,
Speaker 1: in that stuff. There's not enough of them to cause
Speaker 1: the problems that were indicated during the election. But I
Speaker 1: got an example of, you know, turning the tables around
Speaker 1: here of that happening actually in Warren County in a
Speaker 1: very very serious, disgusting case that had this been someone
Speaker 1: that fit that category, you would hear more about it.
Speaker 1: But instead it's just a sad case. It faded away.
Speaker 1: You know what I'm talking about. If you don't, I'll
Speaker 1: explain next seven hundred W slony on seven hundred WLW rainy, rainy,
Speaker 1: rainy rain never gonna end. I don't think so so
Speaker 1: much going on in the world today, of course, And
Speaker 1: just had Steve Gooden on Great Attorney and when it
Speaker 1: comes to you know, constitutional issues and those big questions
Speaker 1: he's fantastic at that stuff. Always enjoy talking to him
Speaker 1: and learning a little bit more as I I often
Speaker 1: do every time to talk to somebody smarter than I am,
Speaker 1: which is maybe ninety nine point nine percent of the time.
Speaker 1: I've talked about and we've talked about the shooting, of
Speaker 1: course at Riverfront Live or yeah, Riverfront Life over the weekend,
Speaker 1: and the fact that you know, those in the progressive
Speaker 1: community and my progressive friends really wanted balan bond reform.
Speaker 1: And I get where that came from back in the day,
Speaker 1: because you know, before the people took over and added
Speaker 1: some common sense to marijuana. Where we are now will
Speaker 1: common sense legislation. We've you know, we've reduced the number
Speaker 1: of people are getting locked up for that kind of stuff,
Speaker 1: and I think we should. I think that their offenses
Speaker 1: and most defenses out there, if you thinking are things
Speaker 1: are like, okay, what can we set a reasonable bond
Speaker 1: here for someone? I don't have a problem with reasonableness, right,
Speaker 1: I'm a pretty reasonable guy. But I'm sorry, but when
Speaker 1: you pick up a gun or a knife, but particularly
Speaker 1: a gun, I think that really narrows your your options.
Speaker 1: I don't think it should be as much as they
Speaker 1: talked about how bad mandatory were that totally took away
Speaker 1: judicial discretion, the pendulum, as always does in America, has
Speaker 1: swung the other way, where you almost are your hands
Speaker 1: are tied in a sense that you can't do anything
Speaker 1: but offer a slap on the wrist, as opposed to
Speaker 1: real punitive outcomes for people who commit gun crimes. I mean,
Speaker 1: explain me. You do it once, you take someone's word
Speaker 1: at it, going okay, I'm gonna let you out, but
Speaker 1: you promise not to do it again. Yeah, you promise, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, yeah, pinky promise. And then they go and
Speaker 1: do it again. And then you go on and you
Speaker 1: promise this time, it's not going to three four times.
Speaker 1: It just it doesn't make any sense. And so you're
Speaker 1: married to this whole ideological notion that people are inherently good,
Speaker 1: and I think I think in a lot of cases
Speaker 1: that's true. But you've got to judge on an individual basis.
Speaker 1: If you decide you're going to pick up a gun
Speaker 1: and commission of a fellow me, and you look at
Speaker 1: the scope of why they did that to get money
Speaker 1: to settle some sort of wacky street beef, you slapping
Speaker 1: them on the wrist is not going to change them.
Speaker 1: That's not a wake up call for them because they
Speaker 1: simply don't care. And it's not ninety nine percent of
Speaker 1: the population. It's one percent of the population or less
Speaker 1: that does this. So why can't we get why can't
Speaker 1: we admit, like, yeah, bail and bond reform when it
Speaker 1: comes to offenses, like this is a bad idea, and
Speaker 1: everyone Steve Gooden, who ran for offs many others, told
Speaker 1: people it's a bad idea, and yet voters decided to
Speaker 1: go with the status quo. And now you've got after
Speaker 1: have Pureval, who really pushed the idea of this when
Speaker 1: he was campaigning and being progressive, is now going this,
Speaker 1: this is not good. So he's admitting it without admitting it,
Speaker 1: if you will. Now I did mention too not to
Speaker 1: belabor that this topic we've been talking about, because it's
Speaker 1: just so just so incendiary to think that these people
Speaker 1: could be out and committing these crimes again in the
Speaker 1: blood literally is on the hands of the judges and
Speaker 1: the individuals who push these policies. But I will point
Speaker 1: out something else that just happened because politics, as I've
Speaker 1: been talking about, and this is why I hate politics.
Speaker 1: It's all about exploiting someone for votes. It doesn't matter
Speaker 1: if it's true or not. So how's the ideal of
Speaker 1: ball reform and restorative justice working out? Not good? Well,
Speaker 1: then there's this on the other side, And ask yourself
Speaker 1: if this person were transgender or an illegal alien, but
Speaker 1: mainly transgender, would this have been a much much bigger story?
Speaker 5: Yes?
Speaker 1: Or no? Here's the story. The guy's name is Robert Dewis.
Speaker 1: He's thirty seven years old. He's been indicted on charges
Speaker 1: of rape, growth, sexual and position, abduction, and kidnapping in
Speaker 1: Warren County by David Fornshaw, an excellent prosecutor. By the way,
Speaker 1: he sexually assaulted a girl thirteen year old girl in
Speaker 1: the bathroom of a five below store in South lebanon
Speaker 1: February six. He was released from prison seventy two hours
Speaker 1: before he committed this awful, despicable crime. So the story
Speaker 1: of the narratives. The child's mom is in the store.
Speaker 1: They're shopping. She sends to the changing room. I guess
Speaker 1: to go try some clothes on. She left to grab
Speaker 1: a different pair of pants. The mother had locked the
Speaker 1: bathroom and arranged a special knock, so she knew it
Speaker 1: was mom and not someone else. Well, Deuise was standing
Speaker 1: there and heard what the knock was, and then as
Speaker 1: she turned her back, he went and knocked on the door,
Speaker 1: and so he went in there, and the girl screamed,
Speaker 1: which they called the lions War, which I did not
Speaker 1: know what that was, so I looked it up. It's
Speaker 1: the way they're teaching kids to react in a situation
Speaker 1: like this is to scream. Deuise flees. He was later
Speaker 1: arrested at a relative's home. He had already the grand
Speaker 1: jariy doesn't he made a sexually violent predator because the
Speaker 1: victim was thirteen years old and there's a prior conviction
Speaker 1: five years ago in Fairfield County for the sexual assault
Speaker 1: of a childhooder thirteen. The judge, how about this in
Speaker 1: Warren County held him. He's being held on a seven
Speaker 1: hundred two thousand dollars cash only bond. He's got to
Speaker 1: put up seven hundred, two thousand dollars and he's being
Speaker 1: arraigned today as a matter of fact, seven hundred. If
Speaker 1: this or Hamlin County judge, he'd probably be it'd be
Speaker 1: an a war bahn, right, he'd be on his own recognity.
Speaker 1: You promise not to do this again. Oh yeah, yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: go ahead, here you go when I will give you
Speaker 1: an ankle monitor, but we know you'll cut it off. Here,
Speaker 1: here's pair of scissors. Good, good luck with that. If
Speaker 1: that were Hamlin County, Warren County, f around and find out.
Speaker 1: But I'm gonn getting off in the weeds here, as
Speaker 1: I often often do, had this if so the story
Speaker 1: it was a big story of people like, oh, that's awful,
Speaker 1: But it wasn't a big story. It was a horrible
Speaker 1: story that has already been bumped from the headlines.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 1: I asked at the beginning, you know, if you're a conservative,
Speaker 1: ask yourself if this person were transgender, would be a
Speaker 1: much bigger story. And the answer is absolutely it would.
Speaker 1: Because it would absolutely it'd validate everything we heard in
Speaker 1: the last election cycle. And I think that's the problem
Speaker 1: I have with politics, is you will twist the truth,
Speaker 1: you'll take things out of context. Look, you know, to me,
Speaker 1: I don't if you're transgender, I don't want. I don't
Speaker 1: think it's right for you to play on if you're
Speaker 1: a man playing out a women's sports team, it's unfair Okay,
Speaker 1: if it's a a locker room, I think that's probably
Speaker 1: more weird for the trans person than it is for
Speaker 1: the individuals in there. But I can see a point
Speaker 1: there when it comes as a bathroom, everybody has the
Speaker 1: poop and pee, Like you don't have a choice. You
Speaker 1: have a choice to play sports, right, you have a
Speaker 1: choice to play being a locker room, you don't have
Speaker 1: a choice to go to the bath Everyone goes to
Speaker 1: the bathroom regardless of what kind of plumbing you handed
Speaker 1: either God gave you. And if you think that God
Speaker 1: and only God, and that's fine, it's that's your core belief.
Speaker 1: I respect that, I fight for that. I'm with you,
Speaker 1: But clearly your core belief is not someone else's. And
Speaker 1: that's the problem that you know, I've been going to
Speaker 1: a public restroom now for most of my adult life.
Speaker 1: I don't I have never, ever, ever known the sexual
Speaker 1: orientation of the person next to be in the urnal
Speaker 1: Like you don't check, you know, meet, I'm not about
Speaker 1: to meet gaze in a public restaurant. If you want
Speaker 1: to be a meat gazer, that's on you. If you're
Speaker 1: a woman, you're in a stall, how would you know
Speaker 1: if you're in a stall. What the genders of the
Speaker 1: person that you don't know? And the idea is that
Speaker 1: well they're you know, they get in the restroom and
Speaker 1: then this is what happened. If this again were a
Speaker 1: transgender individual who rape this girl at the five below
Speaker 1: in Lebanon, it would be a national talking part, right,
Speaker 1: it would be Fox News, News, Mats, all the conservative
Speaker 1: right leaning platforms would be all over this thing. But
Speaker 1: this is like, oh, it's what a horrible story. I
Speaker 1: hope they and this sob This bastard should get wh
Speaker 1: he gets in prison. I think the inmates take care
Speaker 1: of this guy as well. He should.
Speaker 6: And we know that.
Speaker 1: You know, the crime data and research about sexual assaults
Speaker 1: and restrooms, which is extremely rare, or public spaces for
Speaker 1: that matter, the vast majority are sis gender men, right,
Speaker 1: those are straight men. If you look at the FBI
Speaker 1: crime data over the years, over ninety nine percent of
Speaker 1: all convicted sexual offenders in the US fall into this category.
Speaker 1: Documented cases of restroom sexual assault most commonly involved cisgender
Speaker 1: male perpetrators targeting women or children, voyeurism, hidden cameras, stuff
Speaker 1: like that. It's generally straight men. I mean, it's not
Speaker 1: generally it is pretty much all straight men. So and
Speaker 1: actually the exact obbet is true. Sexual violence committed by
Speaker 1: someone known as the victim is more likely, but transgender
Speaker 1: people more likely be the victims of these types of
Speaker 1: assaults as opposed to the perpetrators of them. Like you know,
Speaker 1: as someone who is close to being libertarian than anything
Speaker 1: on the station, Like, I don't really care if you're
Speaker 1: happy to being that person. It doesn't hurt me at all.
Speaker 1: It doesn't threaten my masculinity, doesn't.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 1: It's America, God bless America. It's a country where you
Speaker 1: can be what you want to be. Oh my god,
Speaker 1: the morals and you have no morality. It's like morality
Speaker 1: is relative, right, I mean, look at look at the
Speaker 1: twisting that Christians have done and compromised values or core beliefs,
Speaker 1: and just in the last five years alone. So you know,
Speaker 1: you can twist if you could twist anything to fit
Speaker 1: your own belief narrative. So in this case, like I
Speaker 1: just I simply don't care if you're happy being that
Speaker 1: good for you. The world is a miserable place, not all,
Speaker 1: but it feels that way, right, So I look at
Speaker 1: it and go, Okay, you're happy being you. I have
Speaker 1: a lot of questions. I don't understand it, but I
Speaker 1: support you. As long as there's no one is being victimized,
Speaker 1: that's all I care about. There's no victims in that
Speaker 1: if you decide to do that to you. And I
Speaker 1: think the other thing is true with children. I you know,
Speaker 1: not a lot of young young people are having these
Speaker 1: types of surgeries, nor should they because I think, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe by the time you're fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, if
Speaker 1: it's pretty clear that's who you are. But again, at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, it's up to the parents.
Speaker 1: That the state takes over and tells the parents and
Speaker 1: doctors what to do. I don't again, we have the
Speaker 1: writers Americans to screw our kids up. There's no shortage
Speaker 1: of of wacky adults because parenting is an imperfect science. Well,
Speaker 1: you're maiming and new Well, okay, if you're maiming them,
Speaker 1: I mean we have we have medical boards that oversee that.
Speaker 1: And I would say, oh, well, isn't circumcision doing that then?
Speaker 1: I mean, if you're going to split hairs, is there
Speaker 1: any medical reason for circumcising boys?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 1: So why do we continue doing that, that's general mudulation.
Speaker 1: To me, it's the same thing as long as you're
Speaker 1: not abusing your kid and trying to make that abuse
Speaker 1: when it's a thought out decision, a different story entirely.
Speaker 1: It's between you and your physician. Like people screw their
Speaker 1: kids up all the time, we we do a really
Speaker 1: good job at screwing our kids up. I don't know
Speaker 1: if that screws them up or not. I don't know,
Speaker 1: but that doesn't harm me, and I guess in this case,
Speaker 1: I look at it going, well, here's after that Pure
Speaker 1: Vault and other progressives in Cincinnati that have fought for
Speaker 1: better reform and in particular what they call restorative justice,
Speaker 1: and it's led to while the shooting at Riverfront Live
Speaker 1: shouldn't have happened, nine people are are shot today because
Speaker 1: the policies are well, we got to be kinder to criminals,
Speaker 1: to criminals, okay, these are violent, predatory criminals. No, we
Speaker 1: still have to you cut your ankle, mon or off.
Speaker 1: It's fine. And look at the bloody history here, whether
Speaker 1: it's Mordecai Black with Patrick Harringer, the shooting in front
Speaker 1: of City Bird on Fountain Square, the downtown brawl now
Speaker 1: we have Riverfront Live and it's on and on and on,
Speaker 1: and we just treat these perpetrators, these predators with kid gloves.
Speaker 1: On the other side, we have this straight man who
Speaker 1: raped a girl in a in a store changing or
Speaker 1: a bathroom, I guess it were. And had that been,
Speaker 1: you know, one of these parties we're talking about, it'd
Speaker 1: be a different story. In time to be national news.
Speaker 1: A crisis, we have to pass laws, but it doesn't
Speaker 1: fit in there, and that it probably happens every day, sadly.
Speaker 1: But that's what I hate about poultice. The exploitative nature
Speaker 1: of it is that you have to essentially what's your
Speaker 1: core beliefs around and say you have core beliefs when
Speaker 1: you don't to fit what the expectation pattern is. If
Speaker 1: who has efforts you're trying to get to vote for you.
Speaker 1: That's why politics is like, just stay out of my way,
Speaker 1: because it's just it's kind of icky right on both sides.
Speaker 1: And that's where we are. Anyway, slowly here seven hundred
Speaker 1: WW got news coming up at about ten minutes now,
Speaker 1: about eight minutes from now. My math is bad. I apologize.
Speaker 1: There's issues involving people over the age of sixty. If
Speaker 1: you or someone you love is sixty or older, we
Speaker 1: have a ration new crime. Speaking to crimes, we'll get
Speaker 1: into that with Dennison Keller coming up in just a
Speaker 1: few minutes. If you're older in sixty, we have a
Speaker 1: disturbing pattern now that's developed over the last few years
Speaker 1: with of course those types of crimes. The latest on
Speaker 1: what's going on in Iran, more missiles launched, our embassies
Speaker 1: and consulates under siege as it were, and now we
Speaker 1: have to come up with the strategy. As often in America,
Speaker 1: the case is we go and we blow something up,
Speaker 1: and we don't have an exit strategy. No love laws.
Speaker 1: For Komani, as a small child in seventy nine, I
Speaker 1: recall the hostages, I recall the crisis. I recall those things,
Speaker 1: and that has been true now for forty six years.
Speaker 1: And so I look at this and go, all right,
Speaker 1: Am I sad that they overthrow him they killed him? No,
Speaker 1: not at all. Now I'm a little concerned because his
Speaker 1: son is now the new leader of whatever it is,
Speaker 1: the total Terian state over there in Iran, and I
Speaker 1: think we got to probably go after him. But him
Speaker 1: dying and getting taken out by US missiles and Israelis.
Speaker 1: I'm fine with that. The problem is, though we have
Speaker 1: to have Congress involved, We have to decide on the
Speaker 1: War Powers Act. There's a lot of decisions have to
Speaker 1: be made here in the next month or two in
Speaker 1: order to facilitate this, because you just simply can't have
Speaker 1: another conflict. We're engaging with no end in sight whatsoever.
Speaker 1: I don't want to hear four or five weeks or
Speaker 1: four or five months, or four or five years. What
Speaker 1: are we trying to do over there? What's the mission?
Speaker 1: And countless presidents, whether it's a Republican, whether it's a Democrat,
Speaker 1: an Obama launched missiles, I look at the same thing.
Speaker 1: It's like, it's time for Congress now to actually step
Speaker 1: up and do their jobs and intervene on this thing. Otherwise,
Speaker 1: I mean, what is the point of having these branches
Speaker 1: of government if they're not going to be engaged. Constitution's
Speaker 1: very specific in what each body should be doing. We
Speaker 1: just simply can't allow it to the executive branch and
Speaker 1: the president, whoever that might be, to make all these
Speaker 1: decisions with no checks in place from Congress. It's time
Speaker 1: for them to step up. What are we doing over there?
Speaker 1: What's the point? When does it end? How do we
Speaker 1: get out? We need some answers, we need some diplomacy,
Speaker 1: We need a little bit of leadership, if you will.
Speaker 1: So I mentioned that's the problem of politics, where they
Speaker 1: campaign all all this stuff, all this noise, and then
Speaker 1: you elect them and they're mia. You want to talk
Speaker 1: about negligence, The body of Congress right now, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: is negligent. They don't do anything. They don't have Basically,
Speaker 1: all you guys do is vote to shut down government
Speaker 1: or not vote to shut down government. The case may be,
Speaker 1: what is the point of all these elections and sending
Speaker 1: you to Washington if you're not doing anything? News is
Speaker 1: coming up in five here Sloany, seven hundred ww Cincinnati.
Speaker 1: You want to be an American? It's a Scott Sloan
Speaker 1: show back on seven hundred WILDW. The good news for
Speaker 1: people over eight sixty five, and every day we get
Speaker 1: closer to that. If you're inside that number, congrats you
Speaker 1: made it. Good news is you're less likely to be
Speaker 1: victims of violent crime than your children and grandchildren. The
Speaker 1: bad news is older Americans are highly likely much more
Speaker 1: likely to fall victim to financial crimes. It is the
Speaker 1: fastest growing sector. If you're over sixty, you're talking about
Speaker 1: twenty eight billion and lost money's FBI said year over
Speaker 1: year over year, worried about fifteen to twenty five percent
Speaker 1: increases every single year for these scams. Dennison Keller is
Speaker 1: a reform journalist locally as a reform journalist and now
Speaker 1: a practicing attorney. Is an elder law attorney here in Cincinnati.
Speaker 1: Dennison Keller, welcome back.
Speaker 3: Are you thank you so much for having me on again.
Speaker 3: It's good to hear your boy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, how many years he been practicing law? Now
Speaker 1: from if you may remember Dennison on TV.
Speaker 3: You know it's nineteen years now, so not gonna twenty
Speaker 3: so I believe it or not. I have been an
Speaker 3: elder law attorney longer than I was a journalist, but
Speaker 3: I still bear the scar.
Speaker 1: Yeah right right, yeah, smart guy, Dennison is something like
Speaker 1: one in six people six year older were subjected to
Speaker 1: some form of abuse. I mean, we can talk about
Speaker 1: that too, But the biggest, the fastest growing. The FBI
Speaker 1: just pointed this out is financial crimes. So let's get
Speaker 1: into that. I'm guessing that probably investment scams were the biggest,
Speaker 1: like I'd be probably the costliest.
Speaker 3: Right, Well, it's just a little bit of everything, Scott.
Speaker 3: And you know you mentioned my career as a journalist
Speaker 3: and not to get too much into it, but it's
Speaker 3: stuff like this, frankly that halfway inspired me to get
Speaker 3: into elder law. I mean, I remember doing stories for
Speaker 3: Channel twelve on the old They called them pigeon drop
Speaker 3: schemes where a person would have approached an elderly person
Speaker 3: on the parking lot of a bank and then convince
Speaker 3: them that hey, I've got this access to this major
Speaker 3: reward that I get, but I can't get it because
Speaker 3: I don't have a driver's license, and if you give
Speaker 3: me money, I'll share it with you. And of course
Speaker 3: the elderly person gives them the money, and then the
Speaker 3: person takes off and then runs away. I remember doing
Speaker 3: a story a number of years ago, and as social
Speaker 3: media was kind of stepping up, where some scammer got
Speaker 3: onto an elderly persons social media page impersonated the in
Speaker 3: person and themselves as that person's grandchild that they're in
Speaker 3: jail and you got to send me bail money. So
Speaker 3: I remember doing it back then and It's just it's
Speaker 3: so frustrating because, man, the government institutions are trying so hard.
Speaker 3: I mean, Ohio has its Elder Justice Union, Kentucky has
Speaker 3: its Office of Senior Protection, the FBI has this World
Speaker 3: Abuse Awareness Month, and yet the problem just keeps getting
Speaker 3: worse and worse and worse. And I think there are
Speaker 3: multiple factors would go into that. You know, one is
Speaker 3: that just the demographics of it. We're getting older and
Speaker 3: older and older, particularly in America. And then and then secondly,
Speaker 3: you know, our population of senior citizens is very, very wealthy. Uh.
Speaker 3: And then thirdly, the technology is just so good for
Speaker 3: scammers h and they keep finding ways to exploit it,
Speaker 3: and they always seem to be two or three steps
Speaker 3: ahead of both law enforcement and unfortunately the senior citizens
Speaker 3: and their.
Speaker 1: Families typically in the cases you've seen or heard anyway,
Speaker 1: Dennison Keller, are they are these offshore enterprises as opposed
Speaker 1: to being here in the United States.
Speaker 3: You know, not necessarily. My own father was scammed, Scott,
Speaker 3: and it's one of the classic ones. You see somebody
Speaker 3: hacking to his computer and because I'm sure he clicked
Speaker 3: on some sort of link and the scammers would lock
Speaker 3: up his computer and the only way he could unlock
Speaker 3: is be kept paying them service fees. And unfortunately, the
Speaker 3: nation or that scam was not such that they got
Speaker 3: into his financial information. Maybe they tried, I don't know,
Speaker 3: but the bottom line was they kept extracting more and
Speaker 3: more money from him to fix their computer. And of
Speaker 3: course they say were for Microsoft and were licensed and
Speaker 3: et cetera, et cetera. And he kept telling us that
Speaker 3: this was happening, and I kept telling him, Dad, this
Speaker 3: is a scam. Trust me on this. And that's part
Speaker 3: of the frustration as well, is you know, a lot
Speaker 3: of times elders just don't want to admit that they've
Speaker 3: been taken, you know. And here you think you have
Speaker 3: a really smart guy. He owned his own business. This
Speaker 3: is before he passed away, and he has a son
Speaker 3: who's an elderlaw attorney who's saying, Dad, this is a scam.
Speaker 3: You have to stop this. But he would not believe me.
Speaker 3: He believed them, and he got to the point where
Speaker 3: he was so nervous he wouldn't open his computer in
Speaker 3: his own home. He was driving twelve miles away to
Speaker 3: my sisters who sits across the border in Mainsbook, Kentucky,
Speaker 3: and that's where he would get online to do his
Speaker 3: banking and such, because he was so nervous about it.
Speaker 3: And it was only about a year or two after
Speaker 3: he died, and he died four years ago that I
Speaker 3: got a letter from the New York Attorney General that
Speaker 3: they had copied people and they were looking for victims
Speaker 3: statements and things like that. And we did not participate
Speaker 3: in that because he had passed away. But that was
Speaker 3: a New York operation. So yeah, I can be all
Speaker 3: seed all shore overseas, but a lot of times they're
Speaker 3: right hearing out of states as well.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And the hard part about it is and where our
Speaker 1: fastball gets slower and slower with every passing day, as
Speaker 1: we know, and as we approach that age of sixty
Speaker 1: sixty five seventy, it's also difficult to keep up with
Speaker 1: evolving technology and how these scammers work because it's an
Speaker 1: ever evolving enterprise and so you do have to put
Speaker 1: your hubris aside. You have to go, hey, listen, I
Speaker 1: don't know everything was supposed to be, you know, older
Speaker 1: and wiser, Well, keeping up with technology is really really hard.
Speaker 1: Trust me, I get that. I see it all the
Speaker 1: time AI is coming into fruition. Now that that is
Speaker 1: a game changer, and so it's going to get harder
Speaker 1: and harder and harder to detect these financial crimes, especially
Speaker 1: against the elderly.
Speaker 3: It is, it's not just against the elderly. You know,
Speaker 3: I was on a law conference last week in Seattle
Speaker 3: and my associate attorney was was with me, and you know,
Speaker 3: she had taken a couple ubers using the corporate card,
Speaker 3: and of course I get this alert, Hey, somebody who
Speaker 3: is using an uber in Seattle? Is this legit? And
Speaker 3: this is from American Express? And they American Express asked
Speaker 3: you to click and verify Yes, this is a legitimate extent.
Speaker 3: And I really had to think because I'm like, whoa
Speaker 3: is this from American Express? Because I don't want out
Speaker 3: this to be a trojan horse. And so I went
Speaker 3: and looked from two different vantage points, you know, did
Speaker 3: a search and called American Express, hey are you actually
Speaker 3: emailing me? And you know you made fun of me
Speaker 3: as a journalist and right leak. So but if there
Speaker 3: really are some good principles and journalism that you can apply,
Speaker 3: I think too elderly scams or financial exploitation and that
Speaker 3: golden rule is check your sources. Check your sources. Don't
Speaker 3: just take the person or the email at base value.
Speaker 3: Get come two different other sources. Whether you get a
Speaker 3: call saying, hey, you want a lottery and give me
Speaker 3: your credit card and I'll give you your lottery earnings,
Speaker 3: or getting an email that they asking you to click
Speaker 3: on something, Open up a different browser, type in Hey,
Speaker 3: is this a scam? Or does this actually happen? Call
Speaker 3: on a couple of different look for a couple of
Speaker 3: different phone numbers, Call your family, does this sound Legit
Speaker 3: is my grandchild actually in jail? And try to verify
Speaker 3: that way. And then the other golden role is God,
Speaker 3: just just do not give out your personal information. If
Speaker 3: you think raw, why on earth would anybody be calling
Speaker 3: you to get your solid security number or your bank information?
Speaker 3: Right right, It's gonna be a scam. Yeah, period. Yeah,
Speaker 3: So when in doubt, get out, or the you.
Speaker 1: Know, the one we get all the time is like, hey,
Speaker 1: I'm a recruiter from and I saw your resumes, Like, well,
Speaker 1: I don't have a resume out there, and that's an
Speaker 1: easily dismissed once, or the you know, the hello text
Speaker 1: that we get from some unknown number. You know, that's
Speaker 1: kind of a fishing scan. But the sad part about it.
Speaker 1: And Dennison Cutter, by the way, elder law attorney here
Speaker 1: in Cincinnati. Uh, as we talk about the fastest rising
Speaker 1: crime that the FBI is alert a sound, and that
Speaker 1: is elder financial crimes here in the United States. You know,
Speaker 1: you get those messages, it's like, Okay, who do I trust? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know you mentioned the journalism thing too. I'll point
Speaker 1: out it struck me as there's a you know, back
Speaker 1: in the glory days of the AP, I suppose there
Speaker 1: was a sign in their room that said, hey, if
Speaker 1: your mother says she loves you, check it out, which
Speaker 1: is kind of funny, but it's true.
Speaker 3: Right, That's that's a great at a great antidote, it
Speaker 3: really is. You just got to check it out, check
Speaker 3: your sources. And you know, the thing is, we're always
Speaker 3: bombarded with it, you know, back in nineteen eighty four.
Speaker 3: And it sounds like it's going to good off topic,
Speaker 3: but it is kind of related. I think you know,
Speaker 3: the Irish Republican Army tried to assassinate Margaret Thatcher with
Speaker 3: a bombing to the Brighton Hotel and it was a
Speaker 3: foiled plot. It did not work, thank god. But they
Speaker 3: said after that, Okay, we were unlucky today, but remember
Speaker 3: we only have to be lucky once. You have to
Speaker 3: be lucky always. And it was an intimous quote from
Speaker 3: the nurch and Public Army, and I think that applies here.
Speaker 3: You just cannot let your guard down. I just was
Speaker 3: working on our employee manual for our law firm and
Speaker 3: had a long segment about particularly using the computer and
Speaker 3: being aware of phishing scams and malware and ransom and
Speaker 3: all of it. And I kept putting the same line
Speaker 3: at the end of the ten do not open it.
Speaker 3: Do not open it, verify it. And you know the
Speaker 3: thing is, Unfortunately a lot of legitimate companies aren't thinking
Speaker 3: about that either. It drives me crazy. My insurance carrier
Speaker 3: will send me each year an email with my new policy,
Speaker 3: and all in it says is a one line a
Speaker 3: tax is a copy of your new professional liability policy.
Speaker 3: That's it, you know, And I mean that was like
Speaker 3: that to be a damn right. You're going to call
Speaker 3: the insurance carrier like you actually send this, so you
Speaker 3: can't just shortcut on the steps. Unfortunately, you just have
Speaker 3: to be vigilant again, check your sources. Like you said,
Speaker 3: if your mom, if your mom says she loves you,
Speaker 3: check it out.
Speaker 4: That that's a great I've.
Speaker 1: Heard that I love. I love deleting everything. It's like
Speaker 1: if it's coming at me, and eventually, if it's important,
Speaker 1: they'll continue to age up to me in other forms.
Speaker 1: So I you know, I have a very small and
Speaker 1: tight circle. But I get it if you're older, and
Speaker 1: especially as we live longer, and you see it Denison Keller,
Speaker 1: and that would be we wind up with things like
Speaker 1: Alzheimer's and dementia and the like, and not all that
Speaker 1: we're isolated. Our friends are dying off, maybe our family
Speaker 1: is halfway across the country, maybe we lost a spouse.
Speaker 1: And your lonely. So I get the predatory nature of
Speaker 1: what would trigger someone who would suspend their wilful disbelief
Speaker 1: at a romance scam or a financial scam, because people
Speaker 1: are lonely, and no matter how much you tell them, hey,
Speaker 1: it's a scam, it's a romance scam. They want to
Speaker 1: believe that there's a human connection out there for them.
Speaker 1: And it's so tragic that people exploit that.
Speaker 3: It really is and it's just the worst kind of
Speaker 3: evil I think. I mean, here you have individuals who
Speaker 3: have lived a life and raised children and worked a career,
Speaker 3: and they enjoy they should be able to enjoy the
Speaker 3: fruits of that life well lived, and yet they are
Speaker 3: the ones who are targeted more than others because they
Speaker 3: might not be a tech savvy or they might be
Speaker 3: to or whatever.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 3: The the High Department of Aging has a great website.
Speaker 3: If you just google, I'm gonna give you a whole link.
Speaker 3: But if you just google the High Department of Aging
Speaker 3: scams and they actually have a list of all of
Speaker 3: the most curtinent or prevalent scams that are going on
Speaker 3: right now, and there are links to that, and the
Speaker 3: links go to ARP articles, which also doesn't even deeper
Speaker 3: dive into those scams. And you know, to be honest
Speaker 3: with you, Scott, in preparation of his call, I look
Speaker 3: back to that situation with my own father and I
Speaker 3: thought myself, dang, you know, I should have Nott with
Speaker 3: him and shown him this website, right because he's never
Speaker 3: gonna believe me because he changed my diapers. It's just
Speaker 3: you just never get over it. To the parent, you
Speaker 3: always have a degree of father knows best, mother knows best.
Speaker 3: But if it comes from an ultimate source who's not child, well,
Speaker 3: then a lot of times they're more apt to believe that. Yeah,
Speaker 3: and we see that as an elder law firm all
Speaker 3: the time. Sure, not necessarily with scams, but with all things,
Speaker 3: the sense of, hey, you know, maybe it is time
Speaker 3: to move outside of the house, Maybe you should get
Speaker 3: a home health care agency'd give you a better chance
Speaker 3: to stay inside of out. There's coming from the kids.
Speaker 3: The parents just don't listen to it.
Speaker 1: So, yeah, if it comes from somebody in a lab
Speaker 1: code or an official or the government in this case,
Speaker 1: they're they're more apt to believe it because of the
Speaker 1: authoritary nature of it. They ain't gonna listen to you
Speaker 1: because you're the kid.
Speaker 3: That's exactly right. You know, a lot of those authoritative figures,
Speaker 3: most of those authoritative figures are required by law now,
Speaker 3: and the attorneys are one of them to report if
Speaker 3: they reasonably suspect some sort of elder abuse, whether it's
Speaker 3: physical or financial or sexual or whatever it is. So
Speaker 3: we have to do that. And so you have an
Speaker 3: ally right there, and you know that's part of as well,
Speaker 3: is a lot of elders do have a great team
Speaker 3: that they just utilize that team. You know, they've got
Speaker 3: a loving daughter, they've got a loving son, they've got
Speaker 3: close friends, they've got care givers who are good, and
Speaker 3: relying on them to help protect them can be a
Speaker 3: huge advantage in the situation. Not everybody's blessed with that,
Speaker 3: and you certainly recognize that. But the ones that are,
Speaker 3: you should utilize those people as long as you trust them,
Speaker 3: you know. And a financial power of attorney is also
Speaker 3: a very big tool. Got to help elders prevent themselves
Speaker 3: from good interviews in the sense. And now you've got
Speaker 3: somebody who can look at that bank account, who can
Speaker 3: see these transactions that are going on, who can intervene
Speaker 3: or as the authority to intervene on your behalf, and
Speaker 3: then perhaps that person can help protect you against the
Speaker 3: scam as well. Obviously, you only choose somebody that you
Speaker 3: can trust.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 3: We always ask when we're doing financial powers of attorney,
Speaker 3: you know, well, Scott, you trust your son? Well, you know,
Speaker 3: Jim is the oldest. That wasn't the question, do you
Speaker 3: trust your son? But he's good with money? And I'm like,
Speaker 3: that's worse, you can't trust them, and he's good with money.
Speaker 3: But really, I mean you, if you do have that
Speaker 3: person you can trust, you know, use them because they
Speaker 3: can offer a tremendous buffer against scams that we've been
Speaker 3: talking about this morning.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, my parents are both passed, but when we're
Speaker 1: to look at their will, they made my middle brother
Speaker 1: executor and like, I don't really care. That's fine. And
Speaker 1: you know I mentioned to my mom and she's like, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's because you know, he's good with paperwork. He's smarter
Speaker 1: than you. It's the greatest thing ever. He's like, that's
Speaker 1: what he does. Yeah, listen, we need something fixed or talking.
Speaker 1: You don't do that. This is what he does. So
Speaker 1: it was it was really a funny, my laugh outload moment.
Speaker 1: He's Dennison Keller. He's a local elder law attorney. And
Speaker 1: uh again, if you are dealing with these issues or
Speaker 1: anything related maybe to your parents or yourself, definitely gon
Speaker 1: need to reach out because he's great. Dennis and all
Speaker 1: the best. Thanks for jumping on this morning.
Speaker 3: Oh thanks for always having me out. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 3: S very conversation.
Speaker 1: The word of the day is moisture. Moisture. Dang, it
Speaker 1: was raining this morning. Continue to rain. I will the
Speaker 1: rain ever end? We'll have that question to answered for you.
Speaker 1: Here about five minutes a full weather, traffic and news update,
Speaker 1: and then we returned to the show. It's Julie on
Speaker 1: the Job on seven hundred at.
Speaker 6: Giving you a vocational leg up on everyone else. Here's
Speaker 6: our career, Julie Balki.
Speaker 1: Yeah, lots to talk about today, some of it lighter,
Speaker 1: some of it heavier. Julie's got you all covered this morning.
Speaker 1: It's Julie on the Job. Welcome friend, how are you?
Speaker 1: Haw's lying?
Speaker 5: Good morning for I am fine and yourself.
Speaker 1: You don't care anyway, let's I so much?
Speaker 3: So much?
Speaker 1: Your hrre You don't you know? It's probably I'm probably
Speaker 1: talking to you, probably talking to some sort of I
Speaker 1: don't know. Are you a bot? Are you? I don't know.
Speaker 1: It could be AI. I have no idea. We have
Speaker 1: a case again acting badly in the workplace. Seems like
Speaker 1: we talk about this frequent. This one is rather interesting
Speaker 1: in in New York City where a woman who was
Speaker 1: giving I know she's doing some sort of roundtable or something.
Speaker 1: They had a microphone on. Careful of the live mic.
Speaker 1: That's that. Being in the business that I'm in, I
Speaker 1: understand the power of the live microphone. What happened here?
Speaker 5: Yeah, So there was a sort of a discussion going
Speaker 5: on on Zoom of whether or not a certain school
Speaker 5: should be closed, and a professor at Hunter College in
Speaker 5: New York was a New York City Community Education Council meeting.
Speaker 5: She made she made an extremely racist comment and I
Speaker 5: don't know. The thing is like, I don't know who
Speaker 5: she thought she was talking to. So there's several people
Speaker 5: on this call, and she she makes this horrible comment.
Speaker 5: Everybody can hear her, and a person jumps in and
Speaker 5: says her name and says, what you're saying is absolutely hearrible. Now,
Speaker 5: in other word, f T f U stop. And it
Speaker 5: was it was so clear that what she was saying,
Speaker 5: when what she was saying about the topic in hand,
Speaker 5: she clearly was not the right person to be making
Speaker 5: this decision. It was extremely racist, and she's been suspended.
Speaker 1: And well what did she say, Jolan?
Speaker 4: Why?
Speaker 5: What?
Speaker 6: Whoa?
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 1: What was so racist? Why did you all right, I'm
Speaker 1: kidding you were going to do it?
Speaker 5: No, No, it wasn't like she didn't use a Flur.
Speaker 5: It was what she said about call a group of
Speaker 5: people dumb and they're too dumb to blah blah blah
Speaker 5: and yeah, and so everybody, I'm like, whoa, if you
Speaker 5: really feel that way, you should not be in this group.
Speaker 5: Should you even have your job. It's just it made me.
Speaker 5: It's taking my hand, like have we I mean, I
Speaker 5: don't know we would talk back in twenty twenty twenty
Speaker 5: twenty one, when everything was on zoom, everybody had a
Speaker 5: story someone forgetting their camera was on and like going
Speaker 5: to the bathroom or changing clothes.
Speaker 1: The guy who was the guy was pleasuring himself. And
Speaker 1: then we had the the CNN guy right, Yeah, I
Speaker 1: look at that.
Speaker 5: And I think, okay, and he's back. And I don't
Speaker 5: think if I got caught doing something really embarrassing on
Speaker 5: live TV like that the whole world saw, I don't
Speaker 5: think I could ever crawl back out from under my rock.
Speaker 5: But I guess sometimes you've just got.
Speaker 3: To get back O.
Speaker 1: We live in an error where people don't care. I mean,
Speaker 1: just you know, it's all about you anyway. There's no
Speaker 1: sense of shame anymore.
Speaker 5: Oh, it's just like yeah, I guess.
Speaker 3: And also on top of that. Everybody's memory is so short.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, because it happens with the.
Speaker 5: Yeah. And if we said seeing and guy think that's
Speaker 5: actually Jeffrey Tubman, most people are like, don't, I don't
Speaker 5: remember that because our our attention spans are short. We've
Speaker 5: got a thousand things on our mind. They are more
Speaker 5: important than what something done did on TV No offended
Speaker 5: and uh, you know, and so it's it's I guess
Speaker 5: you think I gotta get back on it. If you
Speaker 5: look at Matt Lower trying to come back from what
Speaker 5: some of the stuff he did, and it's not it's
Speaker 5: not going well for him. I think was he was
Speaker 5: so bad that people like, no, you're not coming back.
Speaker 1: Yeah, But those are actual I mean physical sexual assault
Speaker 1: victims versus a slur you know. I mean again, are
Speaker 1: they both things you shouldn't do or both? Yeah, one
Speaker 1: hundred percent. But you know, the the sexual assault is
Speaker 1: also being in the position to force women to do that,
Speaker 1: like we saw with uh, you know what happened with
Speaker 1: with Fox, same thing. Uh, it's that that's a much
Speaker 1: that's a much more a graver crime. Now in this
Speaker 1: day and age, it's interesting people elevate the racial thing
Speaker 1: to that, and it shouldn't be. I mean again, it's atrocious,
Speaker 1: it's abominable, it's inexcusable. But you know when when someone
Speaker 1: is actually physically victimized sexually, that it's a whole different level.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And so the question then becomes and we see it,
Speaker 5: I mean we see it locally, We see it, you know,
Speaker 5: in all kinds of situations, and where someone says or
Speaker 5: does something. There's something going on right now with Crossroads
Speaker 5: that it was something that was done allegedly ten years ago.
Speaker 5: So you think, okay, you know, how do we And
Speaker 5: I don't have the answer, but it's how do how
Speaker 5: do we decide? Everybody says and does things in private
Speaker 5: that they would never do in public. We jokingly say,
Speaker 5: when I die, please delete all my text chain text chains,
Speaker 5: because we all do that that we everybody has something
Speaker 5: they've done or said in the past that they would
Speaker 5: not want, as our grandma always says, on the front
Speaker 5: page of the newspaper. And so the question then is
Speaker 5: how how do we respond to this? How much how
Speaker 5: much forgiveness do we have here? Does it depend on
Speaker 5: what it is? Does it depend It's It's a fascinating
Speaker 5: fascinating thing. Though she's clearly going to be she suspended,
Speaker 5: but my guess is will either be let go from
Speaker 5: her job and definitely shall be not on that commission anymore. Okay,
Speaker 5: so when somebody brought something off Mike, you know it's
Speaker 5: I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, we live in a society where there's
Speaker 1: mikes and cameras all over the place, and so you
Speaker 1: have to be on alert all the time or you
Speaker 1: actually have to change your core beliefs. But I think
Speaker 1: in this case, this woman was part of the over
Speaker 1: educated class, but she was trying to either draw something
Speaker 1: from Martin Luther King Junior, and it just came out, well,
Speaker 1: it came out horribly. I still don't understand the context
Speaker 1: or what it was said. But you know you mentioned
Speaker 1: Brian Tom the pastor of Crossroad Church. Okay, this story
Speaker 1: with the open mic just happened. The tone thing happened
Speaker 1: ten years ago, and then on top of it, they
Speaker 1: had an investigation and said, hey, listen, don't it would
Speaker 1: it involved a I guess a riding cropped it on
Speaker 1: his desk and somebody asked what it was, and he
Speaker 1: showed him by saying yeah, it's for your horse, but
Speaker 1: also people use it for well bedroom behavior and simulated
Speaker 1: it on them and touching their butt with it, I guess,
Speaker 1: or rubbing their crotchest if they liked it. It's a
Speaker 1: kind of cringey, right, But you know the fact that
Speaker 1: this happened ten years ago, and also they said, hey,
Speaker 1: just okay, don't, don't do it again. That's a bad look.
Speaker 1: You're the senior pastor. Shit in't Then he admitted it,
Speaker 1: and now we're bringing it back up again. At what
Speaker 1: point do you go, it's settled. Why do we keep
Speaker 1: rehashing things like this?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 5: I always I always keep some room to think we
Speaker 5: don't know the whole story. There could be more to
Speaker 5: it than that. And then again, I mean, when you
Speaker 5: take something and you touch someone's crouch with it, that's
Speaker 5: wrong on so many levels that you think. I think
Speaker 5: of that, and I think the thought would never cross
Speaker 5: my mind to do something like that, and I think, okay.
Speaker 1: So funny, I do that all the time.
Speaker 5: I think, I know that's what David told me right
Speaker 5: before I went on there. So we need to talk
Speaker 5: about that out there, right, But yeah, it's it's I
Speaker 5: have no answer, but I always think, Okay, we only
Speaker 5: know part of the story. We only know what's being
Speaker 5: we don't know what the what the full story is.
Speaker 5: So I always tell myself there's there's a really good
Speaker 5: chance we don't know the whole story, so let it,
Speaker 5: you know, let it evolve.
Speaker 3: But nobody can do that.
Speaker 1: I don't know. But maybe at the same time, I
Speaker 1: think there's just some some people are offended by everything
Speaker 1: that they will not let it go. I think that's
Speaker 1: also true today because everyone has a voice in a platform,
Speaker 1: and so they feel like, and I went on a
Speaker 1: second thought, I know, we investigate this, but it's still
Speaker 1: not good enough. Let's reopen this whole thing again. I
Speaker 1: think that's also true Julie.
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, and that can be. And it's it's like
Speaker 5: a continuum or spectrum. There are people I.
Speaker 1: Know people always agree you are.
Speaker 5: Extremely offended by the F word, and I know other
Speaker 5: people who say it every other word. Yeah, and so
Speaker 5: who's right, you know, So.
Speaker 1: It's it's well, as someone who uses the F bomb
Speaker 1: with impunity, I'm right, okay, yes, yeah, if you're if
Speaker 1: you're offended by it, I'm like, well, sorry, you're offended.
Speaker 1: But that sounds like a U problem, not a new problem.
Speaker 5: Yeah yeah, yeah. I had an old, old leader who
Speaker 5: a women leader, who would just lose her mind anytime
Speaker 5: anybody used the F word and she see, I think
Speaker 5: she really hurt herself by being so reactive. And I
Speaker 5: get it she.
Speaker 3: Didn't like it.
Speaker 5: But to to huff and puff and stump away is
Speaker 5: probably not especially when your work in a corporate environment.
Speaker 5: Should it be said? Yeah, probably not if we want
Speaker 5: to if we want an environment, but but if we
Speaker 5: want an environment where people feel comfortable. But that can
Speaker 5: go too far too so who's to say? You know,
Speaker 5: I'm not offended by it, some people are. I respect that,
Speaker 5: But then where does that when that gets into the
Speaker 5: public public sphere? What should be if a if a
Speaker 5: public official drops several F bombs on a hot mic,
Speaker 5: yeah yeah, that's not the same as saying great things
Speaker 5: on a hot mite. But again that's just my opinion.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't know. There's things that bother me all
Speaker 1: the time in real life that I'm like, okay, it's
Speaker 1: I'll try to avoid it or get away from it.
Speaker 1: But it's like I'm not going to force you to
Speaker 1: conduct yourself. Is to not defend me it's like you know,
Speaker 1: and I think it's different. There's kids around things like that,
Speaker 1: and certainly there are conversations where you don't want that
Speaker 1: coming out. You gotta also read the room. You can't
Speaker 1: do it all the time. I want to pivot a
Speaker 1: second here, Julie to something something that this is not
Speaker 1: my circle, but I'm around people who use this all
Speaker 1: the time, and I kind of roll my eyes. And it,
Speaker 1: of course is the age old topic of and the
Speaker 1: Wall Street Channel, by the way, the Wall Street chernel
Speaker 1: does a great job of this, using and breaking down
Speaker 1: work jargon in business and tech industries, and people got
Speaker 1: a chance to sound off on the terms that get
Speaker 1: them the most riled up. So the biggest defenders for
Speaker 1: the cultural touchstones are put a pin in it. Let's
Speaker 1: unpack that. Let's take a ten thousand foot view. Are
Speaker 1: some of the ones that made the cut. I would
Speaker 1: throw move the needle and thought leadership and words like
Speaker 1: those to me are like, man, I hear those all
Speaker 1: the time and they just sound so business cringey.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and here's some more circle let's circle back.
Speaker 1: I use circle back though, and I don't think that
Speaker 1: was like a big corporate buzzword. Now, I got to
Speaker 1: stop using it.
Speaker 5: Now, you're right thought leadership stakeholders. Yeah, and it's it's
Speaker 5: there is always corporate jargon. So one of my pet
Speaker 5: peeves is something that it just makes me, makes someone unlistenable.
Speaker 5: It's when they put the word right at the end
Speaker 5: of that every sentence.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I do.
Speaker 5: I was walking down the street right and I on
Speaker 5: a coffee shop right, and I went in right, and
Speaker 5: people do it. I was going to call one time
Speaker 5: that I have to make for an excuse to get
Speaker 5: off this call because my ears are screaming. And we
Speaker 5: do all you know, I mean, there's all the like
Speaker 5: and you know, and I certainly do plenty, but we
Speaker 5: all have our things. But yeah, it's funny because it's
Speaker 5: it's you're going to catch yourself, put a pin in it.
Speaker 5: Let's unpack that, in other words, explains me what you mean.
Speaker 5: Every single one of those phrases actually mean something. Who
Speaker 5: let's unpack that, which means tell me more about that.
Speaker 5: So they all mean something. And so certain companies, there
Speaker 5: are certain companies that will have company specific jargon, Like
Speaker 5: if you're a new person coming into that company, you
Speaker 5: are like, what does that mean? Because you've never heard
Speaker 5: it before, and so you almost inside cultures, inside companies,
Speaker 5: inside departments, there's always specific language or acronym. Let's, uh,
Speaker 5: let's take the ABC on that and come back and
Speaker 5: do an X Y Z. And you're thinking, I'm entering
Speaker 5: a foreign land here. I don't know what these people
Speaker 5: are saying, and so we all do it, we all
Speaker 5: laugh at it, and it's just it's never going away.
Speaker 1: But well, here's the thing in business, right if Julie balk,
Speaker 1: if you have an NBA, let's say, okay, there are
Speaker 1: there are things that you use to describe certain things,
Speaker 1: and Biness, you go, what the hell does that mean?
Speaker 1: Explain that in common terms, and you do. And it's like, okay, well,
Speaker 1: why don't you just say that? But but I think
Speaker 1: there's a couple of things going on here, and tell
Speaker 1: me if I'm right or wrong on this one.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: Number one is virtue signaling. So if you it's kind
Speaker 1: of like, uh, you know, teenagers, they have their own
Speaker 1: language and every generation or every few years, new you know,
Speaker 1: six seven comes into play and we're not supposed to
Speaker 1: know what that means. If you watch, you know, remember
Speaker 1: kids cartoons in the morning, all the commercials make fun
Speaker 1: of you know, dumb dad. Dad doesn't know, Mom doesn't know.
Speaker 1: It's kind of like a secret club because you know,
Speaker 1: we don't have agency yet, we're kids, and this is
Speaker 1: a way to stick it back to the man. And
Speaker 1: so it's punching up and that whole that that whole narrative,
Speaker 1: and so I think, but virtually signaling here is like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, these are the terms you use in business,
Speaker 1: and if you're not part of our group, you don't
Speaker 1: know what these terms mean. But every culture has it,
Speaker 1: and I don't think businesses is a culture unlike any
Speaker 1: look like other cultures out there that use their own
Speaker 1: jargon and language, as it were. So there's that signaling
Speaker 1: to show you're a part of that thing. At the
Speaker 1: same time, I'll be honest with you, I've had bosses
Speaker 1: in the past that have used language like this, the
Speaker 1: buzz or corporate buzzwords of the day, and quite honestly,
Speaker 1: I think it is to cover up for incompetence or
Speaker 1: lack of confidence and throwing the catch raises out there
Speaker 1: that you really don't know what they're doing makes you're
Speaker 1: using them to try and sound smarter than you really are,
Speaker 1: and then you use them inappropriately in different situations to
Speaker 1: kind of mask who you really are. Like, yeah, you
Speaker 1: know you're using these big words in corporate buzzwords and
Speaker 1: it sounds good, but you know when you scratch the surface,
Speaker 1: you literally are skinned. You know there's nothing there. You
Speaker 1: know what I'm saying. I don't know how to word it,
Speaker 1: is like I just feel like you're using that language
Speaker 1: and mask some sort of incompetence or your self esteem.
Speaker 1: And the more you use that, I think, the more reflective.
Speaker 1: Is Am I right wrong about that?
Speaker 3: Yeah?
Speaker 5: No, I have heard I have heard statements. You know,
Speaker 5: someone that you work with or on TV or wherever,
Speaker 5: and they they say some time, I even think you
Speaker 5: know what you just said, And it is sometimes it
Speaker 5: is a bunch of works out to cover up lack
Speaker 5: of knowledge. But if you're inside of corporation and you're
Speaker 5: the guy or woman, the man or woman you report
Speaker 5: to uses the words circle back a lot, or put
Speaker 5: a pin in it, or let's wipeboard it or let
Speaker 5: parking out, put it in the parking lot, you probably
Speaker 5: will start to use those words because that's their language
Speaker 5: and you want them to be able to understand what.
Speaker 3: You say, and vice versa.
Speaker 5: So there is sort of a you've got to I've
Speaker 5: got to be speaking the same language as you, and
Speaker 5: we just take it on really naturally a lot of
Speaker 5: times because we want the person we're reporting to to
Speaker 5: see that we understand what they're saying, and we want
Speaker 5: them to understand us, and so it's easy to fall
Speaker 5: into that. Here's how this company H. Here's how this
Speaker 5: company H follows up. We don't follow up by text,
Speaker 5: We follow up by emails, or we follow up by
Speaker 5: phone some of it, but some of it's just how
Speaker 5: we get stuff done. And it can be annoying, Yeah,
Speaker 5: especially when you know the people who said it. I
Speaker 5: don't really think you was it Princess Bride. I do
Speaker 5: not think that means what you think it means, Montoya
Speaker 5: or something like that.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's pretty it's pretty obvious that some of these
Speaker 1: people is like, you don't know, I actually had someone
Speaker 1: I was working for it once a long, long time ago,
Speaker 1: and I think I want to say the buzzword then
Speaker 1: was kaizen the whole Japanese principle? Right? And then me,
Speaker 1: do you use that with impunity? The point I start,
Speaker 1: I actually started like had a message or something. I
Speaker 1: showed a few people, like what the what are they
Speaker 1: talking about here? And they're like, I have no idea
Speaker 1: what this means, And so I decided to respond to
Speaker 1: them in fortune cookie. So when we got to the Chinese,
Speaker 1: I'd saved the fortune cookie fortunes and then put those
Speaker 1: in sentences and it'd be a bunch of non sequorters,
Speaker 1: made no sense whatsoever. So anytime they asked me something,
Speaker 1: I put that in there and then they respond, Wow,
Speaker 1: that is that's a really good thought provoking statement. I
Speaker 1: couldn't agree more like it's total I'm just making this up,
Speaker 1: goofing on them, and they had no idea. We just
Speaker 1: call them fortune cookies. I'm gonna I'm gonna send another
Speaker 1: fortune cookie. See what happens.
Speaker 5: I remind me to never go to Chinese lest you,
Speaker 5: because you'll do that to me.
Speaker 1: But I'll on I'm collecting. I'm collecting to give me
Speaker 1: those those those bad fortunes. I'm gonna so I can
Speaker 1: email someone and like, what are you talking about? Just
Speaker 1: talk like a normal person. Man throw an F bomb
Speaker 1: in once in a while. It's fine. I'd rather have
Speaker 1: someone in a meeting like that drop an F bomb
Speaker 1: and talk like in regular language and throw a rite
Speaker 1: or alike in there every once in a while, as opposed
Speaker 1: to talking in haikus.
Speaker 5: Yeah hikus, yeah noik I don't think haiku would be
Speaker 5: a good look for you.
Speaker 1: No, no, I'm not that guy. Just tell me what
Speaker 1: I need to know. Quit throwing all these big words
Speaker 1: at me. I'm not I'm street smart. I'm not not
Speaker 1: business smart. She's Julie Bouki, our career shirp on the
Speaker 1: Scotsland Show here on seven hundred w l W joins
Speaker 1: the show every Wednesday. Julie on the job. You can
Speaker 1: find her at the Balki Group. That's b a uk
Speaker 1: E career coach consultant. She is the job whisper. She'll
Speaker 1: take care of you if you're at a crossroad or
Speaker 1: maybe pivoting or putting pins and things in chill, chill,
Speaker 1: light out for you. All the best and I'll talk
Speaker 1: to you next week. Thanks again.
Speaker 5: We'll circle back.
Speaker 1: We'll circle back. Let's circle back next week. I'm gonna
Speaker 1: circle back down the drain. How's that? I'm right, I'll
Speaker 1: see you later. There you go. News coming up in
Speaker 1: five here on seven hundred ww Scott Sloan Show, Jeff
Speaker 1: Crossman jumps and Jeff is the today was like lawyer show.
Speaker 1: Today it's like a lawyer a round table. Jeff Crossman
Speaker 1: is his name. He is the lead council in this
Speaker 1: lawsuit to stop Ohio from using unclaimed funds for pay
Speaker 1: Corps and now TQ. Well, now, if you had a
Speaker 1: pile of cash Bengals, reds FC Cincinnati and you were
Speaker 1: running those organizations and the state said, hey, we have
Speaker 1: this big pot of cash so you can improve your facilities,
Speaker 1: feel free to tap into that, you'd be lining up right.
Speaker 1: I don't fault them for it. I also think that
Speaker 1: quite honestly, when it comes to unclaimed funds after ten years,
Speaker 1: do you have a duty to know that they're on
Speaker 1: CLEM funds out there and here's the website and just
Speaker 1: go look it up. I think that's probably true, right,
Speaker 1: It's like I would assume after ten years you don't
Speaker 1: know what's there, or maybe you know after certainly after
Speaker 1: a longer period, and maybe that person has moved or
Speaker 1: they're dead. We don't know. But I will say it's
Speaker 1: interesting how when you owe the state money or the
Speaker 1: government money, They're pretty good at finding you, aren't they.
Speaker 3: You know?
Speaker 1: So I go back to I don't know twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: and I filed my taxes in five six years later.
Speaker 1: Go hey, by the way, five years ago, you didn't
Speaker 1: claim this is a and yo US fifty four cents.
Speaker 1: Pay up with the penalty though it's five hundred and
Speaker 1: forty dollars, so they can find out when like, you're
Speaker 1: screwing them tax wise. But have I got money coming
Speaker 1: to me? That's different. That's I think that's a good
Speaker 1: argument that he has here for. And meanwhile, it's all
Speaker 1: tied up in the court right now on whether or
Speaker 1: not that we should be using unclaimed fund money to
Speaker 1: build stadiums. Legit question, this is your money eventually, I mean,
Speaker 1: maybe you have maybe you have money in the books
Speaker 1: right maybe you know the unclaimed fund thing. Maybe you had.
Speaker 1: I got a few hundred dollars back not long ago
Speaker 1: since I was talking about this story. But here's something else.
Speaker 1: So let's say they take this money and they give
Speaker 1: it to I don't know, the Bengals, FC, the Reds, whomever,
Speaker 1: well they were doing it for the Browns, and they
Speaker 1: start using this money to kick Okay, well, what happens
Speaker 1: to the court rules and says, well, you can't give
Speaker 1: them money away. Do we have a whole nother level
Speaker 1: Ohio version of the terri free funds? I mean, think
Speaker 1: about how how hard that's going to be. Now it's
Speaker 1: on the state level. We'll get to that next. Jeff Crossman,
Speaker 1: I said, he is the lead counsel in this case.
Speaker 1: Really interesting guy. We'll chat about that next. Seven hundred
Speaker 1: WWN Cincinnati, Do.
Speaker 6: You want to be an American scot.
Speaker 1: Plumb steel back on seven hundred w OLW. As you know,
Speaker 1: Ohio is rating billions and unclaimed funds. That means your
Speaker 1: old bank accounts, on cash, refund checks, forgotten deposits, it's
Speaker 1: all in there, and they're going to use that money
Speaker 1: to build and renovate stadiums across the Buckeye State for
Speaker 1: pro team. So we know that the former Ohio Attorney
Speaker 1: General Mark Dan's law firm is suing to stop it.
Speaker 1: And we've kind of got a new wrinkle here is
Speaker 1: FC Cincinnati has been the latest team to apply for
Speaker 1: some money. Here. Jeff Crossman is lead counsel in this
Speaker 1: laws who joins the show now once again, Jeff, how you.
Speaker 4: Been, I'm well, how are you?
Speaker 1: I'm well, thanks, counselor. So, they created this billion dollar
Speaker 1: sports facility grant program last year and in the budget,
Speaker 1: I'm funded by unclaimed property. The states year mark six
Speaker 1: hundred million for the Browns Stadium. F C Cincinnati has
Speaker 1: just applied for one hundred and almost one hundred and
Speaker 1: forty million of the remaining four hundred million dollar pool.
Speaker 1: Everyone's got their hand out at this point, the Bengals
Speaker 1: f C Cincinnati. So before we get in, that is
Speaker 1: kind of the basic give me a reset here, What
Speaker 1: exactly is the state of Hive doing with this unclaimed
Speaker 1: money that you believe is unconstitutional.
Speaker 4: Well, there's four point eight billion dollars in the unclaimed
Speaker 4: funds account, which the suportible Ohio and a unanimous decision
Speaker 4: probably in two thousand and nine of they it was
Speaker 4: and I don't know how many times there's ever been
Speaker 4: a unanimous decision on the HoFH Spreme Court, but they
Speaker 4: all agreed that the only funds represent private property for
Speaker 4: individuals in Ohio and even outside of Ohio, and what
Speaker 4: the State of Ohio is doing is appropriating, in a
Speaker 4: sense m in domain taking for those those funds those
Speaker 4: properties and using it to give to private developers to
Speaker 4: build their stadius. At least that's the argument in the
Speaker 4: case that we have perfectly depending because the only case
Speaker 4: for the only grant that they had acknowledged was six
Speaker 4: hundred million dollars in the Browns.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and now, of course set us off down here
Speaker 1: in Cincinnati because we don't like that. We don't like that.
Speaker 1: So you've got that war between cities going on that
Speaker 1: that brotherly competition, if you will. The state argues that
Speaker 1: laws governing abandoned property have existed for entries, and that's true.
Speaker 1: Supreme Court is upheld them. Do you have a counter
Speaker 1: to that or why is this different?
Speaker 4: Well, there's two argues. One is the taking in itself
Speaker 4: is improper. You can't just take private property and give
Speaker 4: it to another private owner. That's just unconstitutional and in
Speaker 4: domain under the taking clause both in the state and
Speaker 4: the federal constitutions required to be a public purpose. So
Speaker 4: that's the first argument. The second argument is they're just
Speaker 4: not giving anybody any kind of new process here. There's
Speaker 4: no notice individual lives notice in anybody that has property
Speaker 4: in the end plant, there's many many people in that
Speaker 4: account who are completely unaware that their property is being
Speaker 4: appropriated for this purpose.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but there also is I mean, this has been
Speaker 1: law for a long time. There's a dormancy period of it.
Speaker 1: You know, after ten years, it's kind of looked at
Speaker 1: is permanently abandoned. And I'm sure that there's a lot
Speaker 1: of this money out and I can't say all of
Speaker 1: it for sure, But after ten years, we assume that
Speaker 1: person doesn't care or they have died, what do you
Speaker 1: do with that money just to sit in this account
Speaker 1: for perpetuity?
Speaker 4: Those are valid public policy discussion points. I think if
Speaker 4: the legislature had had gone through that process and had
Speaker 4: public discussion about it, then maybe there'd be a policy
Speaker 4: position you could land on that everybody could agree to.
Speaker 4: But that's not what happened here. They just passed this
Speaker 4: and basis basically a backward deal. That and night kind
Speaker 4: of thing where you folks did have no opportunity to
Speaker 4: really abject or put a counterproposal on the table that
Speaker 4: people could live with. And again, you can't abandon property
Speaker 4: you're not aware of it. The state's not telling you
Speaker 4: you have property at the unplanted fund's account, Then how
Speaker 4: are you supposed to abandon something you're not even sure
Speaker 4: is there is there.
Speaker 1: A process for due diligence for people who are owed
Speaker 1: this money, and that you also have to I guess
Speaker 1: be responsible on your part. That there's it's kind of
Speaker 1: like I don't know tax or have you got to
Speaker 1: you got to get the tax refund and figure out
Speaker 1: what what the government owes you to get your money back.
Speaker 1: I know it's kind of a bad comparison, but you know,
Speaker 1: tax season, we'll use that to go with right now.
Speaker 1: In that you know, there's notifications, public notifications, there's public
Speaker 1: service announcements. Hey, here's the unclaimed funds website. They try
Speaker 1: to do I guess as much as they can public leaning,
Speaker 1: public public facing, to try and get the word out
Speaker 1: to check your your unclaimed funds. How did you battle
Speaker 1: against that?
Speaker 4: Well, the US Supreme Court is at time and time
Speaker 4: again when it comes to cry on property, it's up
Speaker 4: to the government to provide notice to the owner to
Speaker 4: demonstrate ownership. So you know, the government's responsibility if they're
Speaker 4: going to take your property to give you notice in
Speaker 4: an opportunity to object, and it's not happening here.
Speaker 1: I think using the tax example, Jeff Crossman. You know,
Speaker 1: I if I'm I don't know my taxes are off
Speaker 1: by like twelve dollars in twenty ten. You know, somehow
Speaker 1: they'll find me and go, hey, you know this plus
Speaker 1: the penalties. They're really good when we know them money.
Speaker 1: But when it's your money, it's a different story. Like
Speaker 1: they'll find you if you owe a tax money.
Speaker 4: If you if you owe a parking ticket or tax dollars,
Speaker 4: they are going to track you down to the ends
Speaker 4: of your find you. Hey. So you know, what we
Speaker 4: would propose is that the government do something else here
Speaker 4: to provide notice to people and give them an opportunity to,
Speaker 4: you know, a legitimate opportunity to claim their funds. And
Speaker 4: this can be done over different ways, through a discount
Speaker 4: on your taxes or your vehicle registrations. There's there's got
Speaker 4: to be a better process than what they've engaged in here.
Speaker 1: So a judge in Franklin County blocked the transfer with
Speaker 1: a temporary restraining order, then allowed it to proceed. The
Speaker 1: lawsuits kept alive by your firm, Jeff Crossman, what does
Speaker 1: that mixed sigan'll tell you about where this case has
Speaker 1: had a where it stands right now, is everything is
Speaker 1: still in limbo? Are they going to start distributing the
Speaker 1: money or is this disorder still in place?
Speaker 4: The order is still in place. There was a temporary
Speaker 4: restraining order entered and at the end of the year
Speaker 4: last year we came back to the court. In January,
Speaker 4: we had another hearing on whether or not the court
Speaker 4: extend that temporary temporary restraining order to what they call
Speaker 4: a preliminarium junction, which would hold everything in place until
Speaker 4: the litigation has included. That decision hasn't reach We're waiting
Speaker 4: on them.
Speaker 1: Okay, Now there's a chance they could go, yeah, you
Speaker 1: know what, it's illegal, go ahead and hand the money out.
Speaker 1: If that happens, Is this like the tariff issue in
Speaker 1: that we collected all these tariffs and the Supreme Court says, no,
Speaker 1: you can't do that, and now we're faced with probably
Speaker 1: having to give the money back because everyone's lining up
Speaker 1: in court to be first in line, first on the bus,
Speaker 1: gets paid. Is it a similar situation here in Ohio?
Speaker 4: If that happens, well, if the funds go out the door,
Speaker 4: the state's already admitted. Once the funds leave the uncleaned
Speaker 4: funds account, there's really no way to recover those funds.
Speaker 4: And in fact, what our argument was, because anybody that
Speaker 4: has had their funds transfer out of the accounts and
Speaker 4: still make the claim, but they're paying those claims with
Speaker 4: other people's proper to any of the newer accounts that
Speaker 4: they've taken over. So in a sense that it's a
Speaker 4: bit of a Ponzie scheme in our view. And so, yeah,
Speaker 4: so it could be that we get this, we don't
Speaker 4: get the injunction. The court allows the state to distribute
Speaker 4: these money, and then we ultimately prevail in the end
Speaker 4: of the day in the lawsuit, and then they have
Speaker 4: to come back and find a way to recover all
Speaker 4: that money, which is going to require the states either
Speaker 4: raising taxes or doing other things to recover that, you know,
Speaker 4: nearly two billion dollars they've taken from.
Speaker 1: Yeah, to coin a phrase, it's a damn mess.
Speaker 4: Isn't it correct? Yeah, definitely complicates.
Speaker 1: He's Jeff Crossman, lead council in the case involving unclaimed
Speaker 1: funds in Ohio. You know, your bank accounts on class
Speaker 1: on cash refund checks goes into to the unclaimed funds account.
Speaker 1: As we know now after ten years, that money the
Speaker 1: plan is to take that money and give it to
Speaker 1: local municipalities and cities to build stadiums pro stadiums. As
Speaker 1: a matter of fact, FC just came out and said, hey,
Speaker 1: we need some money for this thing. We could use
Speaker 1: some cash here. One hundred and thirty six million dollars
Speaker 1: Hamlet County apply for a two hundred and thirty four million
Speaker 1: dollars pay course stadium give back for renovations. That project
Speaker 1: is almost at a billion dollars now at this point too,
Speaker 1: So we're waiting for the reds now to go, Hey
Speaker 1: what about us. Brown's got six hundred million and it
Speaker 1: started this whole thing. You're now looking at a situation
Speaker 1: where FC and Emmily and County are applying for hundreds
Speaker 1: of millions. So when these teams lineup, does that expansion
Speaker 1: of the program strengthen your legal case or complicated?
Speaker 4: Well, I don't know that it has any impact. I mean,
Speaker 4: I think at the end of the day, we have
Speaker 4: to determine whether or not what they've done here is constitutional.
Speaker 4: If it's not constitutional, then none of these applications submitted
Speaker 4: are compete. There's not any money available to any of
Speaker 4: these applications. So you know, that's the first step, and
Speaker 4: then after that we'll evaluate it. But there's been by
Speaker 4: last count, I would take twenty two applications, you know,
Speaker 4: from the Guardians to the Cavaliers, to the Bengals, to
Speaker 4: FC Cincinnati to a group kind of put a clean
Speaker 4: soccer team together. So there's been the Toledo mud Hends.
Speaker 4: I mean, there's been a number of applications submitted and
Speaker 4: anticipations funds might be available, but you know, the court
Speaker 4: needs to make its decision first.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, the Browns got six hundred million directly appropriated,
Speaker 1: no application, no competition. These other teams you mentioned, including
Speaker 1: FC Cincinnati, the Bengals had to apply for what's left
Speaker 1: the crumbs? Does that dispare treatment have any legal impactor?
Speaker 4: That's that's out of the scope of our case. But
Speaker 4: I'm sure there's people there that will take a look
Speaker 4: at that question.
Speaker 1: Sure it will, because one thing we like in Ohio
Speaker 1: is Cincinnati and Cleveland fighting each other. That's for damn sure.
Speaker 1: So how many how many Ohios does this potentially effect,
Speaker 1: by the way, is and how large is the class
Speaker 1: you're representing?
Speaker 4: Well, there are hundreds of thousands of individual accounts. It's
Speaker 4: not just people in Ohio. There's people outside of states,
Speaker 4: outside of the United States that have funds in this account.
Speaker 4: You know, JP Mortgage j uh you know they have
Speaker 4: accounts everywhere that everywhere in the world. People have accounts
Speaker 4: a little all over the world. JP Mortgage Chase is
Speaker 4: one example of a company that's depositing unclaim funds in
Speaker 4: Ohio's account, even though those folks may not have any
Speaker 4: relationship with the state of Ohio. This is what I'm
Speaker 4: talking about. If you're taking people's property, they may not
Speaker 4: be aware that their funds are in Ohio's account, even
Speaker 4: though they might live in New York or Tokyo.
Speaker 1: Do you have an idea what the average dollar amount
Speaker 1: would be what people have at stake.
Speaker 4: I think that's a good question. I think it varies.
Speaker 4: We've heard anywhere from ten bucks to ten thousand bucks,
Speaker 4: even more. I mean there was the Animal Protective League
Speaker 4: League in an acron had over one hundred eight thousand
Speaker 4: dollars in the accounts that they were run aware of.
Speaker 1: Wow, yeah, I went and got I think it was
Speaker 1: last year. I did it and got a couple hundred
Speaker 1: dollars back from something, So I was pretty happy By
Speaker 1: that because I didn't want the Browns to get my
Speaker 1: money and squander it on ruining another quarterback. I can't
Speaker 1: have that blood on my hands, Jeff, I can't have
Speaker 1: that blood on my hands.
Speaker 4: I think a lot of people in Cleveland would SIMPERVISEE.
Speaker 1: We got our own problems here. So the performance grant
Speaker 1: program requires that the revenue generated by the stadium district's
Speaker 1: payback the grant over sixteen years. This may also be
Speaker 1: outside of your scope. But if the economics don't work
Speaker 1: out there and the teams can't cover the shortfall, then
Speaker 1: are tax PARI still on the hook? Who covers that?
Speaker 4: Well? I think if they give it, if it's a
Speaker 4: grant money, the inflication is that that money not kind
Speaker 4: of peper payment. It's really murky whether or not that
Speaker 4: there is an obligation to be pay if we haven't
Speaker 4: guide it into a detail.
Speaker 2: Bum.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a grant not alone, right.
Speaker 4: That's what they're claiming it is.
Speaker 1: Huh. If this succeeds, what happens to the money? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, the money's kind of like in limbo right now.
Speaker 1: We're never going to be able to claw that back,
Speaker 1: is kind of what you pointed out. And that's a
Speaker 1: disturbing part because I'd imagine that would just you'd have
Speaker 1: a flood of lawsuits going back and forth the state
Speaker 1: would It'd be in chaos if they had to pay
Speaker 1: it back, it'd have to come to the general fund.
Speaker 1: You're talking money from schools and everything else. There's a
Speaker 1: local municipality here, I forget where the same thing happened. Guy
Speaker 1: was I think falsely charged and arrested, and they sued
Speaker 1: them in won and they don't have any money to
Speaker 1: pay him back. They don't know what to do. They
Speaker 1: might have to start selling assets at this small community
Speaker 1: to pay this guy's forty two million dollar claim. Could
Speaker 1: that happen in Ohio?
Speaker 4: I think anything's possible. And I think the general sense
Speaker 4: that I've received up here in Northeast Ohio is the
Speaker 4: people are outraged that they're being to give billionaires millionaires
Speaker 4: and billionaires additional millions the construct facilities that really they
Speaker 4: benefit from. Its socializing the cost of everything. You know,
Speaker 4: all these billionaires hate socialism, but they love it when
Speaker 4: they can socialize the cost of something as long as
Speaker 4: they can capitalize on the benefits of it. Yeah, and
Speaker 4: that's what's happening here, and that's the reason why people
Speaker 4: are so ugrly.
Speaker 1: Right, Jeff Crossman, I think you've have mentioned when I
Speaker 1: had you on last on the show. I think you said, Hey,
Speaker 1: if we got to take this all the way to
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, we'll do that. There's no time on that, obviously,
Speaker 1: But is there a particular to legal theory, because you're
Speaker 1: always planning ahead for these things too. A legal theory
Speaker 1: in particular gives your best shot at getting the court
Speaker 1: to take the case. Have you thought that far ahead?
Speaker 4: We have one case that's currently spending in the six
Speaker 4: Circuit Court of Appeals right there at Cincinnati. We had
Speaker 4: followed one case in federal court and the other cases
Speaker 4: spending court. So we're constantly evaluating our case and legal theories,
Speaker 4: and you know we're going to take the best packboard
Speaker 4: until we win.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what is the timeline here? What's the next step
Speaker 1: from the court.
Speaker 4: We're waiting on the court to make a decision. I
Speaker 4: think it's any day that the Court's going to come
Speaker 4: out with an opinion on these junctions should last through
Speaker 4: the conclusion of the case. If that's the case, then
Speaker 4: we'll continue litigating this and we're you know, state has
Speaker 4: the option of we're evaluating a position.
Speaker 1: I know what you're hoping for, but what what do
Speaker 1: you think actually happens there?
Speaker 4: Any You know, I'm practicing law too long that it's
Speaker 4: the day to enter a prediction. Uh, you know, you
Speaker 4: know human beings aren't computer formulas rights right?
Speaker 1: Well, this day and age, though, you know, we have
Speaker 1: these ancillary betting markets where we can go and bet
Speaker 1: on anything. How long this conversation is going to go
Speaker 1: someone maybe betting on that they can maybe make some
Speaker 1: money off it too. So it's interesting we kind of
Speaker 1: have that wager going on. But I would think that
Speaker 1: they're you know, obviously very very smart people in the court. Look,
Speaker 1: and I going, well, if we just release this money
Speaker 1: and it gets shot down by the Supreme Court, then
Speaker 1: we are literally opening up a Pandora's box. It's like
Speaker 1: the tariff thing all over again, and that should scare
Speaker 1: anyone listening.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Look, we've made the best argument we think we
Speaker 4: can to justify our position, and we think the safe
Speaker 4: of that here is to just hold everything in place.
Speaker 4: Let's continue to litigate this and get to the meat
Speaker 4: of it and see where we landed.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you're thinking any day.
Speaker 4: And look, I mean to your point, I mean, people
Speaker 4: are basically brought that. The Browns started digging Monday, so
Speaker 4: you know, ground had broken on the stadium construction. We
Speaker 4: think that the stadium is going to get regardless of
Speaker 4: what the state jack. Six hundred million dollars. People can
Speaker 4: claiming fun right.
Speaker 1: Right, Well, I mean, you know, taking this thing back.
Speaker 1: We wouldn't even be having this discussion if they just
Speaker 1: would have said, you know what, we're going to add
Speaker 1: just a little bit more tax to online wagering, e
Speaker 1: gaming and the like. It's like a slam donkey. Yet
Speaker 1: they didn't want to do that. Doing this is way
Speaker 1: more perilous legally speaking than.
Speaker 4: That raising taxes or using the box the state bonding capacity.
Speaker 4: Those are public policy determinations where you know, folks like
Speaker 4: me wouldn't have been really any reason to challenge that
Speaker 4: process where you're implicating constitutional concern you're taking people's property
Speaker 4: without any due process, any right to object, you know,
Speaker 4: without any public purpose. That's where it opens the door
Speaker 4: for people like me to just file legal challenges. And
Speaker 4: the governor was aware that when he signed it, was
Speaker 4: disappointed that he would even put the state of that position.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it seems like it's a much harder road what
Speaker 1: we're doing here than it would have been going after
Speaker 1: the gaming, taxing them another half a percent or whatever
Speaker 1: it was, and other states are taxing much more. So
Speaker 1: it's this is the least effects offensive tax I would guess,
Speaker 1: in my opinion, would be the gaming thing, as opposed
Speaker 1: to going after unclaimed funds. He's Jeff Crossman. He's a
Speaker 1: lead counsel in this case involving unclaimed funds in Ohio.
Speaker 1: So if you have money in that account, you probably
Speaker 1: get online and check and make sure you don't. Otherwise
Speaker 1: it could very well be in the hands of the Browns,
Speaker 1: the Bengals, FC, the Reds, the mud Hens, and whatever
Speaker 1: other team wants a stadium built with your your cash. Jeff,
Speaker 1: all the best, buddy, Thanks for coming on the show again.
Speaker 1: Be Welser. My pleas take care of the latest traffic, weather,
Speaker 1: and war news. Of course, war news. We're at war,
Speaker 1: you know, is about five minutes away. With that, and
Speaker 1: then when we return, Sarah Least jumps in. We've got
Speaker 1: Trey Henderson to talk about, We've got Reds to talk about,
Speaker 1: We've got Miami going for perfection to talk about that
Speaker 1: and more. Sarah Lease and the Snort Report. Next seven
Speaker 1: hundred WLW does S three up some more money for
Speaker 1: the Bengals. We got Miami being perfect, we got Reds
Speaker 1: baseball lots to do. Sarah Lease and the Snort Report?
Speaker 1: Next seven hundred W.
Speaker 2: All the.
Speaker 1: Do you feel snorty today? Because I got the sense
Speaker 1: you're not gonna snort.
Speaker 6: Really, I'm a little fired up today. Up, I'm excited
Speaker 6: about my Miami Redhocks. I guess that's what we're gonna
Speaker 6: start with again today.
Speaker 1: I thought they lost last night.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 6: Seventy four to seventy two was the final over Toledo
Speaker 6: for that final home game.
Speaker 1: I thought, for sure, with the front running bandwagon, remember
Speaker 1: that you are, you'd be wearing Miami gear. But you
Speaker 1: got all Reds gear on today. So I thought they lost. Well,
Speaker 1: I was, so you jump back on the Reds band.
Speaker 6: I was so excited about them beating the Cubs the
Speaker 6: other day, so it's carrying over. I mean, there's only
Speaker 6: so much that I can show every day between Miami
Speaker 6: and Reds and all my excited.
Speaker 1: About beating the Cousins. You know, it's a screamager.
Speaker 6: I'm aware. I almost brought in my diploma for you today,
Speaker 6: just to prove to you that I am a red Hawk. Look,
Speaker 6: did graduate in twenty ten. My dad made this beautiful
Speaker 6: frame for me. Okay, it's got the little tassel hanging
Speaker 6: up there.
Speaker 1: It's a Max School relaxed. I don't see me very
Speaker 1: my bowling green diploma here, do we should?
Speaker 6: We should all bring the diploma cent and just stack
Speaker 6: them up.
Speaker 1: It's on an et just sketch. Anyway, I've taken your
Speaker 1: word for it. This wrote you a letter congratulate. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: right exactly. It's on parchment.
Speaker 6: Oh yeah. Now the red Hawks are thirty and oh
Speaker 6: and of course making history. Uh yeah, and they'll wrap
Speaker 6: it up Friday night, nine o'clock against oh year years
Speaker 6: and then.
Speaker 1: By the way, Sara at least from one oh two
Speaker 1: seven e BN, she does Mornings with Kid Chris is
Speaker 1: the Kid Chris Show. She pops in and does snorts
Speaker 1: of all sorts. It's sports slash social media on this
Speaker 1: Wednesday morning. Good time to get ready for the weekend
Speaker 1: upcoming here, sports, sports and more sports.
Speaker 6: Ready for the going on.
Speaker 1: You know, it's entirely possible I'm not saying this is
Speaker 1: going to happen, but if Miami loses this final game
Speaker 1: and they lose the tournament, they will not be in
Speaker 1: the dance.
Speaker 6: Well they should, they should, they absolutely should.
Speaker 1: They have earned it if they win the tournament there
Speaker 1: and so you're you're in any way. But let's say
Speaker 1: they went out and losing the tournament, there's there's a
Speaker 1: chance they don't make the trim. That would be egregious
Speaker 1: because it's store absolutely.
Speaker 6: And I feel like a lot of the country is
Speaker 6: rooting for this underdog, and it's really cool to see
Speaker 6: like all the national people giving them the recognition that
Speaker 6: they deserve.
Speaker 1: If they'd be a nine seed right now, I thought
Speaker 1: I saw it, yeah, or the case now.
Speaker 6: They're ranked at what nineteen? But if they their last.
Speaker 1: Rank, they lose a final game and and go and
Speaker 1: win the tournament, you think, well that that's gotta be
Speaker 1: good for like a fourteen seed, right twelve fourteen seeds.
Speaker 6: And I would like to see them play better on
Speaker 6: Friday than what they did last. But you knows, a
Speaker 6: little tough last.
Speaker 1: You're not going to run the table unless you're the
Speaker 1: US Women's Olympic ice Hockey team. You're not going to
Speaker 1: run the table, correct, Yeah. Not every game can be
Speaker 1: flawless like that. So so yeah, they'll wrap it up then.
Speaker 6: And Travis Steel said on Selection Sunday, if they are
Speaker 6: still undefeated, that man is planning on wearing a speedo.
Speaker 1: Do we want to see that?
Speaker 6: He's like, I've never worn one before. He's like, I'm
Speaker 6: gonna have my wife pick it out. But yeah, I
Speaker 6: want to see them go undefeated. Just for the Travis
Speaker 6: speedo situation.
Speaker 1: It's like Jill Domin where he takes his shirt off
Speaker 1: at the at the West the Waste Management out in Phoenix.
Speaker 1: He's running around caause he had a whole of one. Sure, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what I mean.
Speaker 6: I think he's so fired up. I mean he's like
Speaker 6: punching speakers and wearing speedos. It's crazy. So yeah, he
Speaker 6: did get that twenty five hundred dollars fine after that
Speaker 6: Friday night game when he took out the DJ speaker
Speaker 6: and he said he'll replace the equipment. There is a
Speaker 6: go fund me on social media if you want to
Speaker 6: contribute to Travis Steele's twenty five hundred dollars fine, which
Speaker 6: is absolutely ridiculous.
Speaker 1: Somebody's going to pick that up.
Speaker 6: So there's already been like three hundred dollars donated to it.
Speaker 6: I'm like, mister's already paid it up. Yeah, I'm like,
Speaker 6: twenty five hundred dollars is not so big. It's not
Speaker 6: as much as I was. I was thinking he was
Speaker 6: going to get like a twenty thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: Fine, what happens if your other alma mater?
Speaker 6: You see, Oh my god, you see they looked to
Speaker 6: God last night to they really turned it around over
Speaker 6: the past three weeks. They got the win and it
Speaker 6: was a late night though I didn't get to see
Speaker 6: much of it. Yeah, nine to fifteen.
Speaker 1: Tip off for that I was talking about was having
Speaker 1: dinner or some UC friends of mine and they're like, Yeah, secretly,
Speaker 1: it's like, I'm kind of know with west It's like
Speaker 1: could if they wind up losing out, they'll make the
Speaker 1: tournament they get rid of west Mill. Not that they're
Speaker 1: going to, but I don't think they will. I don't
Speaker 1: think they should either, because they're they're he's turning it around. Yes,
Speaker 1: they would go after Travis Steele, the ultimate f unbelievable.
Speaker 1: That'd be unbelievable.
Speaker 6: Travis said that he wants to stay with Miami. That's
Speaker 6: what he said.
Speaker 1: I think there's something to be said for them. He
Speaker 1: was a good size program and and it's hathing to
Speaker 1: be said about being a big fish in a small pond. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: Enrico Blasi, Miami's hockey head coach.
Speaker 2: He was at.
Speaker 1: I mean, he made incredible money, took him to the
Speaker 1: like literally a couple of plates away from win in
Speaker 1: the national title. Uh, it didn't work out in the
Speaker 1: long term, but you know again, it's like there's somebody
Speaker 1: said about that.
Speaker 6: Yeah, he said that he and his wife and the family,
Speaker 6: they're all very happy there and he does not see
Speaker 6: himself going anywhere else.
Speaker 1: And the kids go to school locally here, so they'll
Speaker 1: go to uh.
Speaker 6: Yeah family, Yeah, why not? And I do too. I
Speaker 6: liked seeing him fired up on Friday night. Unpopular opinion,
Speaker 6: but I appreciated his little crash out. I'm like, look,
Speaker 6: I get it, dude. He doesn't want to lose. He
Speaker 6: takes the job serious. And to celebrate the win last night.
Speaker 6: Since they are now thirty and oh, our friends at
Speaker 6: Cynthy's shirts have a big sale going on right now.
Speaker 6: So if you do want to hop on, get on
Speaker 6: the bandwagon celebrate Miami. All of their Miami gear is
Speaker 6: thirty percent off. I just wanted to throw that plug
Speaker 6: out there at Sincy' shirts. Yeah, I love justinuys over there.
Speaker 1: This is not a plug in. What's the website? If
Speaker 1: I were interested in getting your.
Speaker 6: Sincy shirts, you'll figure it out. I was there yesterday,
Speaker 6: sopped up on some red skier. Great group over there.
Speaker 1: Are you're working a plug in? Is that what this was?
Speaker 1: Because that was just shameless?
Speaker 2: You know what?
Speaker 6: Yeah, I have no problem plugging my friends.
Speaker 2: Call you.
Speaker 1: Cry well absolutely.
Speaker 6: Speaking of our Cincinnati Reds, they had the day off yesterday,
Speaker 6: but they are back at it today for that exhibition
Speaker 6: game against.
Speaker 1: Cuba, Copa Cuba, Cuba.
Speaker 6: Here on these airwaves at three oh five. First pitch.
Speaker 6: Not sure who's pitching today, that has not yet been
Speaker 6: But are we looking I think we're looking pretty good.
Speaker 6: We're looking really good. Matt's back, Matt McLean is back
Speaker 6: like a five seventy one. He's eight for fourteen, absolutely
Speaker 6: crushing the ball. And this is the kind of turnaround
Speaker 6: that we were praying to see, especially in the off season,
Speaker 6: hoping that Matt would get it together and look, I
Speaker 6: believe in Maddie. I'm excited for what I've seen so far.
Speaker 6: I mean, I know we're only two weeks into spring training,
Speaker 6: but it's really cool. And I feel like Tito Francona
Speaker 6: has a lot of faith in this kid, which is
Speaker 6: something that you want. I'm going to give you the confidence.
Speaker 6: If you have a manager it's giving you a hard time.
Speaker 6: It's like, well, why would I want to go out
Speaker 6: there and do good things for this team?
Speaker 1: I look pretty deep right now. It's cool.
Speaker 6: Yeah, So Tito Francona the other day, he was on
Speaker 6: a podcast and he was like, look, I know that
Speaker 6: we've got a really young team here, but this ain't
Speaker 6: our first rodeo. We've got a few years under our
Speaker 6: belt together. We went to the playoffs last year. He's like,
Speaker 6: we are ready to compete this year against all the
Speaker 6: serious teams and we're looking to go back to the
Speaker 6: playoffs again and go even further.
Speaker 1: So I love that.
Speaker 6: I absolutely love that Tito's fired up about this team,
Speaker 6: and so am I. And I think, you know, bringing
Speaker 6: Ahano Suarez and looking at the adjustments that Ellie has
Speaker 6: made and he's healthy, and I mean, look at our
Speaker 6: rotation alone, that's excited to south. Stewart's down thirty pounds
Speaker 6: and he's raking as well. He had a couple bombs
Speaker 6: the other day, and I mean, damn, I'm excited about
Speaker 6: the offense. But of course the rotation. You've got Hunter
Speaker 6: Green and Andrew Abbott and oh my gosh, why can
Speaker 6: I not think right now Brady's singer and they're obviously
Speaker 6: fighting for that fist spot? Is it going to be
Speaker 6: Chase Burns? Is going to be Rehet Louder?
Speaker 1: Who do you think it's gonna because Rehet Louder is
Speaker 1: I think I probably not any he pitched the gem,
Speaker 1: but he.
Speaker 6: Looked great the other day. I think it's going to
Speaker 6: be Rhett.
Speaker 1: What a good fight.
Speaker 6: Yeah, he looked really really good. Why can't I think
Speaker 6: of the other end the rotations? And we've got Hunter
Speaker 6: Green Andrew Rabbit, Brady singer, and I'm missing somebody else
Speaker 6: in that fourth spot? My brain? Yeah, because fighting for
Speaker 6: that fifth is either Chase or Rhett.
Speaker 1: It'll come back because we're thinking that totally come back
Speaker 1: to us.
Speaker 6: Yeah, right now they are totally screaming at us. Please
Speaker 6: allow us some grace here, But I think it's gonna
Speaker 6: be red. I was really impressed by him, and you know,
Speaker 6: listening to Cowboy the other day, he was hyping him up.
Speaker 6: He's like, this is the best pitching performance that we
Speaker 6: have seen all Springs so far. And I could not
Speaker 6: agree more with that. Yeah, Nick Lodolo, dol dolo, there
Speaker 6: we go, guy, Yeah, Nick Lodolo, so excited about the rotation,
Speaker 6: excited about a lot of stuff. Something trending on social media.
Speaker 6: These all you can eat seats at Bush Stadium, our
Speaker 6: divisional friends here in Saint Louis.
Speaker 1: I think Bush Stadium, Yeah, I think people.
Speaker 6: Forgot that we do have those here in Cincinnati. I'm
Speaker 6: just here to remind you we do have an all
Speaker 6: you can eat stand for twenty six bucks.
Speaker 1: Why is that? Why is what sant listing? Is that trending?
Speaker 6: It is trending. They've got these all you can eat
Speaker 6: seats in the Big Macland for twenty nine bucks. You're
Speaker 6: getting Coca Cola, chicken tenders, hot dogs, brought s, Nacho's
Speaker 6: fat fries, popcorn, Pedat's kettle chips, ice cream. So it's
Speaker 6: like a big deal and people are like, like, we
Speaker 6: have nothing like this in Cincinnati. We absolutely do for
Speaker 6: twenty six bucks. You can do all you can eat
Speaker 6: Papa and peanuts.
Speaker 1: To a game or hot smart report exactly. I'm here
Speaker 1: to tell you that what about the chicken tenders? Your
Speaker 1: chicken tenders likes not a part of the right there.
Speaker 6: The chicken tenders right now, that's really the selling point.
Speaker 6: I think, what this one? People love chicken tenders, which
Speaker 6: they also sell them at the ballpark, but these are
Speaker 6: at section one forty four, the sun Moon deck. That's
Speaker 6: it right there, and I see them every.
Speaker 1: Single time done all you can eat seats.
Speaker 6: I've done them one time.
Speaker 1: What did you what about you? Did you regret it?
Speaker 5: No?
Speaker 6: I know no regrets, no regrets. I never regret ball.
Speaker 1: I did not do the all you can eat seats.
Speaker 1: What do you get when you go to the ballpark?
Speaker 6: You a hot dog?
Speaker 1: Definitely getting hot dog? Okay, I would get a met
Speaker 1: and then maybe later a hot dog.
Speaker 6: But see if I'm getting I'm not getting the met brought.
Speaker 6: I need it to be burnt. I need you to
Speaker 6: burn it on that grill.
Speaker 1: Always going to be black all around, is always going
Speaker 1: to be a dog. Like I can get skyline, I
Speaker 1: can get pizza, I don't sky at the ballpark, right,
Speaker 1: I can get that elsewhere. I don't.
Speaker 6: It's not even that it's just skyline. I want to
Speaker 6: be like sitting down inside the parlor. That's for that's
Speaker 6: for my space with it. I guess it's for the
Speaker 6: away team fans, right, it's like, oh, I get to
Speaker 6: try it exactly. It's their chance to get it. Really
Speaker 6: is good for I'm just gonna hit.
Speaker 1: I'm going. I'm going beer and I'm going out.
Speaker 6: I like a hobbit Sunday.
Speaker 1: Don't need it now, don't need the ice.
Speaker 6: Do you like the Cheetos popcorn? That is really good?
Speaker 6: It's like a cheesy popcorn with like the little Cheetos.
Speaker 1: Yeah, ready for some ballpark better. Whether it's opening day
Speaker 1: or the first game you go to and it's still
Speaker 1: like it's great, miserable outside and you walk into the
Speaker 1: ballpark and that it's just that sea of the smell.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, it's the best. It is the best
Speaker 1: sensation it is.
Speaker 6: It's it's the smell of the baseball and I just
Speaker 6: want to bottle it up and put it like in
Speaker 6: a candle.
Speaker 1: It's so the first glimpse of green grass is just
Speaker 1: it's amazing.
Speaker 6: That first beer.
Speaker 1: That first beer, so sex, all right, what else you
Speaker 1: got real quick?
Speaker 6: Also trending in Bengals World, Trey Hendrickson.
Speaker 1: We talked about this while you're bearing the lead.
Speaker 6: Because Miami University is thirty and zero and we know
Speaker 6: that we know that Trey Hendrickson is not coming back.
Speaker 6: They did not tag him, so of course he went
Speaker 6: on to Instagram like all the athletes do, and he
Speaker 6: listed all of the things that he's thankful for. You know,
Speaker 6: he think the fans, the coaches, his teammates, and he said, look,
Speaker 6: Cincinnati is home now and forever, God bless and who day.
Speaker 6: It is a very long statement that he put out there,
Speaker 6: So that's just a way to wrap.
Speaker 1: It up right.
Speaker 6: And of course on Monday we got the big news
Speaker 6: that Dalton Reisner is coming back. I don't think anyone
Speaker 6: loves Cincinnati as much as Dalton Reisner and his wife
Speaker 6: big fans. He said that Zach Taylor is the biggest
Speaker 6: reason that he's coming back.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's a big.
Speaker 6: Zach Taylor fan. Loves playing for Joe Burrow, loves blocking
Speaker 6: for Joe Burrow. He also talked about his friendship with
Speaker 6: Ted Carris. He's like, if there's anybody that I look
Speaker 6: up to, it's definitely Ted. So it sounds like Ted
Speaker 6: has been kind of like a leader adult life. I
Speaker 6: really like that. And he said that he's never felt
Speaker 6: more at home than how he does in Cincinnati and
Speaker 6: like very accepted here.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 6: So he also gave a shout out to Skyland, Chilly
Speaker 6: and Jeff Ruby, saying, my wife and I love the
Speaker 6: food here too.
Speaker 1: That's awesome. Great, not just block, do.
Speaker 6: Your job, don't care ye, do your job.
Speaker 1: I'm I mean, I think it's awesome that they lean
Speaker 1: into the city. And I'm not throwing shade at all,
Speaker 1: but it's like just block, Yeah, your job, don't get hurt. Great,
Speaker 1: let's let's let's go get hurt.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: You know his stature, don't be such a nice guy.
Speaker 1: I don't hear that. I want to hear excellence. That's
Speaker 1: what I want to hear. And it's Hendricks. And I mean,
Speaker 1: I know the national media's beating the hell of the
Speaker 1: Bengals and the Bengals being the Bengals, and I think
Speaker 1: there's some truth to that too. Is like, you know,
Speaker 1: you French are are not going to franchise tag him
Speaker 1: and the contract thing and you allowed them walk and
Speaker 1: you could have got something.
Speaker 6: Was Trey Hendrickson doing for us last season? He was
Speaker 6: hurt for most of it, correct and the games that
Speaker 6: he wasn't in we won. Yeah, all right, so it's
Speaker 6: okay to move on everybody. We'll fine, It'll be fine.
Speaker 6: But of course off season workouts start next month on
Speaker 6: the twentieth. At all I'll be here before you know it,
Speaker 6: all right?
Speaker 1: Is that every think?
Speaker 6: That's everything? Pups and pups this weekend since night cyclones,
Speaker 6: bring your dog out on Saturday night and ever Sincinnati's.
Speaker 1: How did the dogs do it in the hockey arena?
Speaker 6: By the way, they're awesome. They all hang out together
Speaker 6: in one section. They put them on the upper bowl together.
Speaker 6: It's fun.
Speaker 1: You ever have dogfight a dog fight?
Speaker 6: No, I feel like they're pretty chill. I've always had
Speaker 6: a really good experience there.
Speaker 1: Knucklehead would bring like they're like atiler. Yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: that there would be dog fights.
Speaker 6: I think it's I think it's pretty chill. So yeah,
Speaker 6: seven thirty on Saturday night for that.
Speaker 1: Or something like that.
Speaker 6: No, I don't think you should.
Speaker 1: No, I think that'd be good for you make a
Speaker 1: lot of money inside a little dog fighting ring in
Speaker 1: the kind of.
Speaker 6: I think that's the last thing we need to get into.
Speaker 1: Call Michael Vick not my wiener dog, well not your
Speaker 1: wiener dog by Real Dog Fight fifteen the mascot. The
Speaker 1: mascot gets torn apart like it's a big squishy toy.
Speaker 6: Oh my god, not pup Chop.
Speaker 1: Punk Chop getting attacked by dogs would be great video.
Speaker 1: Poor punk Chop, I thought it was a toy. Who
Speaker 1: thought it was a squeaky he's so fluffy, look had
Speaker 1: a squeaker and any even better?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 6: You know what they did get? They gave out this
Speaker 6: like puck Chop key chain on Sunday, and I feel
Speaker 6: like it that you need to put a little squeaker.
Speaker 1: And know what I'm gonna do. I'm gonna go to
Speaker 1: the game and I'm gonna follow puck Chop around with
Speaker 1: the squeaker ball to stand behind him, and then the
Speaker 1: dog will think that's the dodg drop biting him.
Speaker 6: I will not tolerate puck Chops slander away.
Speaker 1: Gonna rub some bacon grease on his back. How you
Speaker 1: doing is do it on his back? And then smoker
Speaker 1: squeak and that'd be awesome.
Speaker 6: Like well, puck chop sure is poppy?
Speaker 5: Wow?
Speaker 1: What does all there's fluff all over the place. It's
Speaker 1: it's okay manity. Sarah Relea Snort Report Morning's with Kid
Speaker 1: Chris at one of two seven e B and her
Speaker 1: social handle is Sarah a.
Speaker 6: Leasee went to it and sorry, I tried to squeeze
Speaker 6: everything and I forgot who Nicolodola was. Please forgive me
Speaker 1: The big So it's fine news next seven hundred WWT
Speaker 1: since that