Speaker 1: Up next out Loud with Joanno called Wall part of
Speaker 1: the beginning with School Switch Network. Welcome back to Outline
Speaker 1: with Gianno Caldwell. I have to tell you that I'm
Speaker 1: really looking forward to today's show. My guest has become
Speaker 1: a household name as the central law enforcement figure in
Speaker 1: the Brianna Taylor case. He is Daniel Cameron, the Attorney
Speaker 1: General Kentucky. Cameron is the first Republican elected as Kentucky
Speaker 1: a g and more than seven decades, and the first
Speaker 1: Black American independently elected to statewide office in Kentucky history.
Speaker 1: He's a rising star in the Republican Party, and I
Speaker 1: have a feeling Americans will be seeing a lot more
Speaker 1: of him in the years to come. Before we get
Speaker 1: to Daniel Cameron, I want to play an audio clip
Speaker 1: from a press conference you're here. Tamika Mollery, a prominent
Speaker 1: activist who was one of the organizers of the seventeen
Speaker 1: US Women's March. Following the decision by gran jury not
Speaker 1: to directly charge the officers involved in the shooting of
Speaker 1: Brianna Taylor. Her comments were then echoed by a number
Speaker 1: of celebrities across the country. Take a lesson Daniel Cameron
Speaker 1: is no different than to sell out negroes that sold
Speaker 1: our people into slavery and help white men to capture
Speaker 1: our people, to abuse them and to traffic them while
Speaker 1: our women were raped, while our men were raped by savages.
Speaker 1: That is who you are, Daniel Caron. You are a coward,
Speaker 1: You are a sellout, and you were used by the
Speaker 1: system to harm your own mama, your own black mama.
Speaker 1: We have no respect for you, no respect for your
Speaker 1: black skin, because all of our skin folks ain't our tendfolk,
Speaker 1: and you do not belong to black people at all. Well,
Speaker 1: Daniel Cameron, thank you so much for your time. You've
Speaker 1: been a friend of mine for many years. I've known
Speaker 1: you before you ever decide to run for office and
Speaker 1: on Capitol Hill many years. And you know, it's good
Speaker 1: to be with you. We got a lot to talk
Speaker 1: about today, but thank you for joining. I allow with you.
Speaker 1: I don't called well man. I am so honored to
Speaker 1: be on here with you, and I really want to
Speaker 1: just congratulate you on this show and all the multitude
Speaker 1: of success that you've had, and you are a living
Speaker 1: testament to what hard work in person variance is. And
Speaker 1: I'm grateful to be your friend and grateful to be
Speaker 1: on here bro. Thank you and faith and God more important. Amen. Amen,
Speaker 1: I appreciate that and interesting that we're talking about faith
Speaker 1: in God because on November thirty of you filed an
Speaker 1: emergency application with the U. S. Supreme Court in the
Speaker 1: case of Danville Christian Academy versus but Share. The case
Speaker 1: involves religious schools that want to keep their in person
Speaker 1: classes going after the Kentucky Governor Andy but Share, a Democrat,
Speaker 1: issued an executive order saying all schools need to stop
Speaker 1: in person classes and go back to virtual distance or
Speaker 1: distance learning because of COVID nineteen and the application, you
Speaker 1: asked the nation's highest court to allow ruling by the
Speaker 1: district court judge stopping the enforcement of the order to
Speaker 1: take effect. In the US Court of Appeals for the
Speaker 1: Sixth Circuit, disagree with the district court inside with the
Speaker 1: governor leading you to file this application. Can you tell
Speaker 1: us more about this case and why it's so important. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: I it's You've summed it up pretty well in terms
Speaker 1: of what's at stake here. The governor, in a recent
Speaker 1: executive order shut down religiously affiliated schools and as the
Speaker 1: Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. It's my responsibility
Speaker 1: to defend the constitutional rights of our citizens, and in
Speaker 1: particular in this case, that's the First Amendment and the
Speaker 1: free exercise of faith. UH. And so look, I've said
Speaker 1: repeatedly from the beginning, whether you're the president, governor, or
Speaker 1: local officials here in the Commonwealth, I understand the responsibility
Speaker 1: to keep people safe uh and protect people during this
Speaker 1: prolonged or protracted pandemic. But we have an equally important
Speaker 1: respon WUNSI ability and Gno. You'll know this from hearing
Speaker 1: Attorney General bar say it, or Justice course in his
Speaker 1: own way say it as well, that even in the
Speaker 1: midst of a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be suspended. I
Speaker 1: wholeheartily agree with that sentiment. I think most Kentuckians agree
Speaker 1: with it, and I dare say the majority of the
Speaker 1: country agrees with making sure that we are standing up
Speaker 1: for the constitutional rights that we hold so dear and
Speaker 1: that we value. And again, the responsibility of this office
Speaker 1: is to be vigilant and protect those rights. And so
Speaker 1: when a governor says that a religiously affiliated school has
Speaker 1: to shutter its doors, when faith is at the core
Speaker 1: of a religiously affiliated schools curriculum. Therefore, confronting and attacking
Speaker 1: the First Amendment, it's our responsibility to defend. And so
Speaker 1: we've taken this case all the way to the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: We got to the right ruling in our judgment at
Speaker 1: the Federal District Court that said a governor cannot in
Speaker 1: fringi on our First Amendment rights the Court of Appeals.
Speaker 1: We're obviously disappointed by that decision, but we have applied
Speaker 1: for immediate review by our circuit judge, which is just
Speaker 1: as Kavanaugh, he's now in the position of determining what
Speaker 1: happens next in this case. He's already asked for a
Speaker 1: response from governor Butscher's team and we'll see what happens
Speaker 1: from there. But again, this is a pretty simple question
Speaker 1: in our view, which is Canada governor, in an executive
Speaker 1: order infringe upon the First Amendment right of parents across
Speaker 1: the Commonwealth to send their their children for in person
Speaker 1: instruction that that religiously affiliated schools, and it certainly would have,
Speaker 1: especially if it comes out in your favor, to have
Speaker 1: an impact across the country. So we'll continue to monitor
Speaker 1: that and see what happens there. Now let's turn to
Speaker 1: the death of Brianna Taylor and it's aftermath. And I
Speaker 1: know it's been one that's impacted us all, especially as
Speaker 1: African Americans across the countrymen, women, I know that, uh,
Speaker 1: there's been a lot of hate directed towards you. If
Speaker 1: people go to their Instagram, they'll see thousands of comments
Speaker 1: people calling you a sell out of Uncle Tom. You
Speaker 1: got Rappers, Magotea, Stallion, and many many others who have
Speaker 1: personally attacked you, and they've sent a lot of hate
Speaker 1: your way. And me knowing you for many many years
Speaker 1: and us having these conversations over dinner or or just
Speaker 1: being together and having conversations, I know that you have
Speaker 1: a great care for the black community, and you've you've
Speaker 1: mentioned on air that you know, we got to care
Speaker 1: about our black women. You've you've made those comments. Now,
Speaker 1: this seemingly isn't enough for a lot of the critics
Speaker 1: that have come out after you. And I'm just really
Speaker 1: intrigued to know after the death threat you receive, your
Speaker 1: wife has had to have security, how are you doing
Speaker 1: on a personal level when it comes to all of that. Well, now,
Speaker 1: thanks for the question. Look, Uh, it has been a
Speaker 1: difficult period and I never want to sort of look
Speaker 1: at it. Um you know my perspective, and I think
Speaker 1: you've framed this appropriately. A young lady in the prime
Speaker 1: of her life, Brianna Taylor lost lost her life, and
Speaker 1: as I've said repeatedly, that is a a tragedy, and
Speaker 1: make no mistake about it, it is hurt and had
Speaker 1: ripples throughout the Black community here in the Commonwealth and
Speaker 1: just the entire nation. I mean, this has been an
Speaker 1: important case and I am been pained by just how
Speaker 1: difficult it has been. And whether it's Tonka Palmer, Brianna's mother,
Speaker 1: or family members or folks in the community, I mean,
Speaker 1: this is a heart wrenching story. And what I've said
Speaker 1: is that in the midst of this tragedy, sometimes the
Speaker 1: criminal justice system is inadequate to respond to a tragedy.
Speaker 1: And what I've meant by that is that there is
Speaker 1: great pain and sorrow connected with this woman who's was,
Speaker 1: in many ways the glue in her family, was a
Speaker 1: strong pillar, was moving forward in her professional career. But
Speaker 1: at the same time the role of the Attorney General
Speaker 1: is to look at the facts as they are and
Speaker 1: not try to pick out specific facts, are certain facts
Speaker 1: to meet a narrative. That is not the role of
Speaker 1: the Attorney General, nor should it be. The responsibility of
Speaker 1: this office is to follow the facts and marry the
Speaker 1: facts with the law. And what happened in the early
Speaker 1: morning hours of March thirteenth is officers were attempting to
Speaker 1: execute a search warrant and when they attempted to enter
Speaker 1: Kenneth Walker, miss Taylor's boyfriend UH fired at the officers,
Speaker 1: and the officers then were justified in returning fire. Again,
Speaker 1: the tragedy here is that Miss Taylor was hit in
Speaker 1: that return fire. And again I cannot fully understand the
Speaker 1: pain and so or I've I've spoken candidly about you know,
Speaker 1: I know how much time and energy that my parents,
Speaker 1: my mother specifically have invested in me UH, and if
Speaker 1: something was to happen to me, I could I understand
Speaker 1: how how challenging and difficult it would be. But again,
Speaker 1: the officers were justified in returning fire. And as a
Speaker 1: prosecuting office, and I and I want to make sure
Speaker 1: that people understand that it's not me making these decisions
Speaker 1: in a vacuum. So I have a team of of
Speaker 1: prosecutors UH and investing gators with over two hundred years
Speaker 1: of combined experience. We took this case because we had
Speaker 1: the resources and the the the breath of expertise and
Speaker 1: experience to handle this matter as as opposed to farming
Speaker 1: it out to another commonwealth attorney. You'll recall that the
Speaker 1: initial prosecutor on this case was conflicted out, and so
Speaker 1: it came to our office to make a decision about
Speaker 1: whether to keep it or to give it to somebody else.
Speaker 1: But because of the resources in the relationship that we
Speaker 1: have with our federal law enforcement community, we were able
Speaker 1: to handle this case appropriately and have a meticulous and
Speaker 1: thorough investigation, and at the end of that investigation, we concluded,
Speaker 1: in terms of a recommendation to the grand jury, it
Speaker 1: was appropriate to recommend UH an indictment as it relates
Speaker 1: to another officer that was at the scene, but not
Speaker 1: to the two officers that fired in the doorway, if
Speaker 1: you will, Miles Cosgrove in Jonathan Mattingly again, because they
Speaker 1: were justified in returning fire. Again, I fully said from
Speaker 1: the beginning that sometimes the criminal system is inadequate to
Speaker 1: respond to a tragedy, and that's certainly the case here,
Speaker 1: But that doesn't mean that I cannot dispense with my
Speaker 1: responsibility and role as the chief law enforcement officer. And
Speaker 1: I hope people over time recognize that and understand that
Speaker 1: our job was to the law and of the facts
Speaker 1: in this case, and we tried to dispense with that
Speaker 1: responsibility appropriately. I'm completely confident in the process that we
Speaker 1: had here and in the prosecutors and investigators that we
Speaker 1: had working on this case. And UH, it's it's important
Speaker 1: for people to understand that, UH, and it's important for
Speaker 1: us to continue to prosecute this, uh, the sub this
Speaker 1: other officer that was at the scene. And I also
Speaker 1: remind people that the FBI continues to lead an investigation
Speaker 1: into this matter as well. And so I tell folks
Speaker 1: to to stay tuned because the case as it relates
Speaker 1: to the two officers that were in the doorway is concluded,
Speaker 1: but there are other things that are at play here,
Speaker 1: and the FBI continues to lead the way on that
Speaker 1: part of the investigation. So what would justice for Brianna
Speaker 1: Taylor's family even look like. Well, I think that you know, obviously,
Speaker 1: they have had a pretty large settlement with the city
Speaker 1: of Louisville. But again, my responsibility is to the facts
Speaker 1: and the law, and UH, this is a very hard
Speaker 1: and challenging case. And as we look at the landscape
Speaker 1: related to warrants in that process, I think there continues
Speaker 1: to be very healthy conversations, very candid conversations about the
Speaker 1: execution of warrants, UH, the implementation and the process that
Speaker 1: goes into those warrants. And again, the FBI continues its
Speaker 1: investigation to any potential civil rights violations, and so we
Speaker 1: continue to have these ongoing conversations about, you know, how
Speaker 1: can we honor her legacy and how can we best
Speaker 1: move forward. But it's it's a tough it is a
Speaker 1: tough and challenging situation, and I again I understand those
Speaker 1: that are hurting and who take issue with our office's decision,
Speaker 1: But my responsibility is to the facts in the law,
Speaker 1: and we dispensed with that responsibility appropriate, you know, Attorney General,
Speaker 1: I think that's such an important point that people need
Speaker 1: to recognize. I want to pick up from there after
Speaker 1: we take a quick break. Something Grand juris in the
Speaker 1: case I've said, you didn't give them the option to
Speaker 1: indict the officers directly for cars and Taylor's death. Because
Speaker 1: you never actually presented them with the homicide charges against
Speaker 1: the officers, they accuse you of lying and misleading the
Speaker 1: public about the grand jury deliberations. How do you respond
Speaker 1: to such accusations. Well, I'm fully confident in the process
Speaker 1: that we put forth, and I've I've said that from
Speaker 1: the beginning. It is our responsibility to present the all
Speaker 1: the evidence to the grand jury, all the facts to
Speaker 1: the grand jury, which we did, but we also had
Speaker 1: a responsibility to put forth an appropriate recommendation. And that
Speaker 1: recommendation was to this third officer who was at the
Speaker 1: scene of the the incident, Detective Hankinson. And and and I
Speaker 1: won't say anything further about him because there is ongoing
Speaker 1: criminal prosecution against him. But at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: what I've laid it out to you, as it relates
Speaker 1: to the justification for the return fire by Mattingly and Cosgrove,
Speaker 1: it was not appropriate to put forth a recommendation for
Speaker 1: any murder charges against them. Part of being a prosecutor
Speaker 1: requires that not only we have sufficient information at the
Speaker 1: indictment stage, but also something that we can actually pursue
Speaker 1: in the criminal jury system. And again, as a prosecutor.
Speaker 1: You have to look at your responsibility on that angle,
Speaker 1: and that's from that perspective. Uh, and we just there
Speaker 1: was not evidence sufficient to bring forth a recommendation for
Speaker 1: an indictment for murder for either John Mattingly or Miles Cosgrowth.
Speaker 1: I'm just very intrigued by your opinion on this, because
Speaker 1: there appears to be, especially in the African American community,
Speaker 1: the very real truth that officers in some cases don't
Speaker 1: be brought to justice for murdering black folks, and in
Speaker 1: cases unjustly. Is what I want to say. I think
Speaker 1: back to instances of police officers pulling up I've seen
Speaker 1: viral videos of the police officers asking in African American
Speaker 1: men for their driver's license, and they go in to
Speaker 1: get their driver's license and then they're shooting a car.
Speaker 1: Or I see Caucasian individuals who literally attacked the police
Speaker 1: and they don't seem to die. Do you think that
Speaker 1: we need to reform the system of policing so there
Speaker 1: is greater justice. And LK was cleared in justice anywhere
Speaker 1: as a threat of justice everywhere, and a lot of
Speaker 1: African Americans do feel that they're under attack. I'm concerned
Speaker 1: when I get pulled over by a police officer, of
Speaker 1: ensuring that I leave this safely, I do whatever they
Speaker 1: tell me to do. But there's a very real concern
Speaker 1: in fear among our African Americans brothers and sisters that
Speaker 1: they can legitimately die from an interaction with the police.
Speaker 1: And it doesn't seem as though there's much justice when
Speaker 1: it comes to um them actually being held to account
Speaker 1: when they do something wrong. Do you think we need
Speaker 1: to reform that? Well, what I don't say is that
Speaker 1: I think it's completely appropriate to have these very important
Speaker 1: conversations about our criminal justice system and equality within our country.
Speaker 1: I I don't know anybody that disputes that we need to,
Speaker 1: in order to form a more perfect union, continually have
Speaker 1: these conversations. We want to be a part in the
Speaker 1: a g. S Office of that dialogue. As a black man,
Speaker 1: I want to be a part of that dialogue. Again,
Speaker 1: I don't know anybody who comes to these conversations in
Speaker 1: good faith that doesn't want to have a significant and
Speaker 1: substantial conversation about equality in the pursuit of equality in
Speaker 1: this country, regardless of what the industry or profession is.
Speaker 1: I think it's always healthy to have that conversation. What
Speaker 1: I have tried to be very clear that in the
Speaker 1: midst of having that conversation, it's important that we not
Speaker 1: conflate situations or what happens in one particular instance, say,
Speaker 1: for instance, what occurred in Minnesota, or what occurred and
Speaker 1: other All of these cases are very fact specific and
Speaker 1: very fact intensive, and so the responsibility of a prosecutor
Speaker 1: in a prosecuting office is to make sure that we're
Speaker 1: looking at the specific facts of a particular case. And
Speaker 1: for me in this office, it was what happened in
Speaker 1: the early morning hours of March thirteen in the June
Speaker 1: of Miss Taylor. That was what our scope, and that
Speaker 1: was what our analysis was about. I couldn't look at
Speaker 1: what happened in Minnesota, or I couldn't look at what
Speaker 1: happened in Georgia to inform the decision making process and
Speaker 1: the investigative process here in this case, I think that
Speaker 1: would would not be appropriate. Again, as in my responsibility
Speaker 1: as a prosecutor, and I know that my prosecutors and
Speaker 1: investigators that were handling this case knew that they had
Speaker 1: to shut out everything else but the facts specific to
Speaker 1: this case. So, but to your original question, I mean
Speaker 1: the conversation around justice. It is always This country has
Speaker 1: had a long history of of protests to bring forth
Speaker 1: grievances or concerns or to highlight issues in society. And
Speaker 1: so I've said as a as a advocate of our
Speaker 1: First Amendment principles and foundation, and obviously as we continue
Speaker 1: to fight for those principles here in Kentucky, protests is okay.
Speaker 1: Peaceful protest is appropriate. Where you don't want to go
Speaker 1: is And where some of these peaceful protests can be
Speaker 1: undermined is when violence starts to bleed into those But
Speaker 1: I know the majority of people that have been involved
Speaker 1: in this process as it relates to justice and equality
Speaker 1: in our country have sincere, sincerely held beliefs. And I
Speaker 1: think it's again healthy to be a part of open
Speaker 1: and honest conversations about peace, justice and equality here in
Speaker 1: the country. And I want to be a meaningful contributor
Speaker 1: to that conversation. Even with the fact that we've we've
Speaker 1: had this this really heart wrenching ace here in Kentucky.
Speaker 1: That's one that is a stroke fear across the nation
Speaker 1: of what could happen to another person next. If you
Speaker 1: can be in your home safely with without maybe dying. UM.
Speaker 1: So I can understand that. And I know you're talking
Speaker 1: about honesty and transparency. And I want to ask you
Speaker 1: a question about um, something uh that's been in the
Speaker 1: news recently, or rather it happen in the news. And
Speaker 1: it's about the release of the recordings and the transcripts
Speaker 1: of the deliberations earlier this year. And I know you
Speaker 1: didn't want to release them. I'm not sure if you've
Speaker 1: released them yet or if it were it was a
Speaker 1: court order for you to release them. Why did you
Speaker 1: want to keep them? Well, this has nothing to do
Speaker 1: with whether we wanted to keep them or not. There
Speaker 1: is a process whenever grand jury proceedings occur, those are
Speaker 1: held in secret and in confidentiality so that frank and
Speaker 1: honest conversations and questions can be asked. Uh. And it's
Speaker 1: to protect the grand jurys themselves. It's and so that
Speaker 1: here and in cont hockey. As soon as this became
Speaker 1: apparent that there would be an open conversation in court
Speaker 1: about whether to release this information, the Kentucky prosecutors wrote
Speaker 1: a letter encouraging us and in part of the litigation,
Speaker 1: asking the judge not to hold this information or not
Speaker 1: to disclose this information to the public because of the
Speaker 1: dangerous president that it would set in opening up grand
Speaker 1: jury proceedings. That was our only interests. I have no
Speaker 1: qualms with grand jurors speaking of about the case. Again,
Speaker 1: this was all because of the history and the precedent
Speaker 1: that would be established. Grand jury proceedings since the beginning
Speaker 1: have been held in secret, again, to protect grand jurors,
Speaker 1: to protect the information that is shared during that process. Uh.
Speaker 1: And so that was our only interest, was to to
Speaker 1: make sure that we were consistent with precedent. Uh. This
Speaker 1: judge in Lolibile had a different view of that, and
Speaker 1: that's okay. And I don't know what this means for
Speaker 1: other cases in the future, other high profile cases. I'm
Speaker 1: not entirely sure. But if you talk to any prosecutor
Speaker 1: involved in the criminal justice system, it is it is
Speaker 1: without question that forever these proceedings have been secret and closed.
Speaker 1: And so that was our only interests was to keep
Speaker 1: with that precedent as opposed to allowing that information. All
Speaker 1: of the information is out there now and and uh,
Speaker 1: and that is fine. And grand jeurs obviously are are
Speaker 1: allowed to speak now, which is fine as well. But
Speaker 1: the fact of the matter is is that what the
Speaker 1: grandeurs we're going to say, what's not and what was
Speaker 1: going to be released was not an issue for us.
Speaker 1: It was the process itself. Again, grand juries have been secret,
Speaker 1: and so too. Do away with that policy or that
Speaker 1: process is pretty remarkable and unprecedented, and I don't know
Speaker 1: ultimately what the ramifications of that will be, but I
Speaker 1: know we had prosecutors not only in this office, but
Speaker 1: prosecutors across the commonalth that didn't want to see that happen. Again,
Speaker 1: the judge made their decision. We respect that decision, and
Speaker 1: all the information is out there, but it is it
Speaker 1: was certainly consistent with the role of a prosecutor to
Speaker 1: protect the secrecy of the Grandjuri proceedings, but the judge
Speaker 1: decided otherwise. You know, Greg Fisher, the mayor and the
Speaker 1: city that Brianna Taylor was killed back in March, declared
Speaker 1: when we recently declared racism a public health crisis and
Speaker 1: announced a plan to advance racial equality for those who
Speaker 1: live in the city of the African Americans that live
Speaker 1: in the city. This plan includes steps to reform the
Speaker 1: city's police department, which got me to thinking would you
Speaker 1: support a federal consent decree on the police department there
Speaker 1: to have a federal monitor watch over what's going on
Speaker 1: in that police department. Well, I don't want to, you know,
Speaker 1: think about hypotheticals. I don't think it's appropriate. That is
Speaker 1: a process that is um is all handled at the
Speaker 1: at the federal level with federal U S Attorneys in
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice. And if that was to be undertaken,
Speaker 1: and again I don't have any knowledge of that process,
Speaker 1: we would obviously again we would have no real involvement
Speaker 1: in the Department of Justice decision. But if they were
Speaker 1: to make that decision, um, you know, obviously the lm
Speaker 1: p D I mean Louisville would be required to follow it.
Speaker 1: But that is a completely separate process from the state
Speaker 1: attorney Attorney General's office. But uh, and again I have
Speaker 1: no knowledge of any potential consent process that might be underway.
Speaker 1: Do you do you think that there should be some
Speaker 1: monitoring of the police department there? I know, consider to
Speaker 1: create I know what they do. I understand that it's
Speaker 1: a contractual piece where attorneys kind of review the operations
Speaker 1: of the police department. For those who don't know, but
Speaker 1: do you think there's any need for any form of reform,
Speaker 1: as the Mayor say that he believes that there should
Speaker 1: be well, again that is uh. I think it's healthy
Speaker 1: to have this conversation. And I know even at the
Speaker 1: state level, there's an ongoing conversation about the warrant process
Speaker 1: and what that should look like going forward, and we
Speaker 1: need to have these conversations. And as I've talked about,
Speaker 1: it's important for regardless of whether it's the law process
Speaker 1: or other policies and procedures that are in place, it's
Speaker 1: always healthy to have those conversations. And so I I
Speaker 1: don't know specifically what the Mayor has in mind, and
Speaker 1: again I don't know anything specific about any consent decree
Speaker 1: process that might occur out of the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: But we are obviously interested in seeing these conversations, whether
Speaker 1: if it's the lord process or other things continue to
Speaker 1: happen here in Kentucky and on the state level. Obviously
Speaker 1: we would you know, our session begins in January. To
Speaker 1: the extent we can be helpful in that process, we
Speaker 1: will do so. And you know, I was a lobbyist
Speaker 1: in the state of Illinois, and we work with the
Speaker 1: Attorney General's office and the Attorney General's office sent out
Speaker 1: bills in our state capital in Springfield all the time
Speaker 1: to reform things processes that that was involved in their
Speaker 1: office and other offices as well. And you mentioned your
Speaker 1: legislation legislative session is in January next month. Do you
Speaker 1: have any policy or any bills you're gonna send down
Speaker 1: there to improve what's going on with, whether it be
Speaker 1: police departments and law enforcements anything like that. Well, I
Speaker 1: think you know we've we've begunned those conversations. And one
Speaker 1: of the things that you know, I've talked a little
Speaker 1: bit about is the need for us to to review
Speaker 1: and consider our wark processes across the common if not
Speaker 1: just lowals specifically, and so we will continue to be
Speaker 1: engaged in that dialogue and see whether there are things
Speaker 1: that need to be changed or should be changed. There's
Speaker 1: obviously a lot of different views and perspectives on uh
Speaker 1: no knock warrants or just other types of warrant processes
Speaker 1: that are that are that exists, and so will be
Speaker 1: a productive member of those conversations. I know some bills
Speaker 1: have already been pre filed by members of the legislature,
Speaker 1: and we will continue to monitor that and continue to
Speaker 1: you know, have our own sort of piece of the pie,
Speaker 1: if you will, in terms of the warrant process and
Speaker 1: looking at ways, if necessary, to reform it. Okay, So
Speaker 1: if I'm hearing you, clearly, you're saying that you're going
Speaker 1: to work with legislators and perhaps offer up some policy
Speaker 1: for them to um introduce and sponsor that can change
Speaker 1: the dynamic and some of the things we're seeing in
Speaker 1: terms of law enforcement. Is that, right? Yeah, we've been
Speaker 1: talking about here, and I don't want to get into
Speaker 1: the specific jet about a assembling a group of folks
Speaker 1: that would be led by this office to look at
Speaker 1: the war process across the Commonwealth, again not singling out
Speaker 1: any particular department, but just as part of a healthy
Speaker 1: and ongoing conversation we've been looking at, specifically in AG's office.
Speaker 1: Is how we can be a part of that conversation
Speaker 1: and bringing in other stakeholders to help inform those conversations. Okay, Now,
Speaker 1: switching gears just a little bit, because we know the
Speaker 1: Brianna Taylor cases one chapter in a larger story, we
Speaker 1: see calls to defund the police, rioting threatening law enforcement,
Speaker 1: and certain politicians supporting the chaos and cities across the country.
Speaker 1: We also see citizens who aren't extremists and don't engage
Speaker 1: in violence, but are still concerned about the police in
Speaker 1: this environment. What do you say to those individuals who
Speaker 1: are looking to take the law in their own hands.
Speaker 1: We've seen the protests, of course with Brianna Taylor and
Speaker 1: just African Americans like George Floyd in general. But people
Speaker 1: are going out damaging property and they're trying to take
Speaker 1: the law in their on hand because they don't believe
Speaker 1: that the elected officials who have been appointed to these
Speaker 1: positions are doing their job properly to keep people say,
Speaker 1: what do you say these things? Well, I say violence
Speaker 1: is never the answer. And again I've I've said repeatedly
Speaker 1: that peaceful protests is a part of our republican form
Speaker 1: of government or democracy, and so we should always be
Speaker 1: sensitive to those who expressed themselves in in peaceful protests.
Speaker 1: But whether you're from the right or left, violence should
Speaker 1: never be accepted as a part of these conversations. And
Speaker 1: so I know President Trump was very strong, strongly opposed
Speaker 1: to any violence, and I also know Joe Biden was
Speaker 1: opposed to violence as well, and anyone. Eventually he was yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: he didn't. He didn't mention any NC like, we got
Speaker 1: to be clear about that. Eventually they started talking about
Speaker 1: it after they saw the poll numbers dip. I'm talking
Speaker 1: about Joe Biden. Then they started speaking up. So he
Speaker 1: wasn't No, you're initially saying much of anything. Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: again bailing out those who were rioting and looting. They
Speaker 1: had her folks on her staff, had a whole fund
Speaker 1: that they were um encouraging people that contribute, contribute there
Speaker 1: there in my in my view of part of the problem. Well,
Speaker 1: they I agree with you. I think they came to
Speaker 1: the party late. I think they recognized that you cannot
Speaker 1: have a message that calls for the dismantling and defunding
Speaker 1: of our police departments. Look, the folks that you know
Speaker 1: have the loud largest and loudest sort of microphones aren't
Speaker 1: representative of all of our communities or the thought process
Speaker 1: in our respective communities. And the fact of the matter
Speaker 1: is that a lot of folks appreciate you don't hear
Speaker 1: these voices as much, but appreciate our law enforcement community,
Speaker 1: and they're they're sacrifices that they make to to keep
Speaker 1: us safe. And again, I understand that we have to
Speaker 1: have open and honest conversations about there are bad apples
Speaker 1: in in in our communities or in the law enforcement
Speaker 1: community or any industry. Then you need to get those
Speaker 1: folks out. By by and large, I think most respect.
Speaker 1: And yet you are exactly right that Joe Biden was
Speaker 1: late to the party and eventually recognized that he had
Speaker 1: to speak out. Again, President Trump was very strong on
Speaker 1: this particular issue, and I think it's why it resonated
Speaker 1: with so many so many people because of the fact
Speaker 1: that you know, we cannot just disparage a whole group
Speaker 1: of citizens that day in and day out make sacrifices
Speaker 1: to keep our families home, to make sure that we
Speaker 1: can can sleep at night sadly at our homes. And
Speaker 1: so I'm in this role as as chief law enforcement officer.
Speaker 1: You obviously you know I have to to play it
Speaker 1: down the middle in terms of any investigation that you
Speaker 1: conduct and any prosecutions that you might pursue. And the
Speaker 1: idea that you would defund the police is just beyond
Speaker 1: me and I we cannot have a society police are
Speaker 1: not present and that police are not respected, and I
Speaker 1: think it's it's sad when you see, you know, folks
Speaker 1: on the on the left side of the aisle that
Speaker 1: are calling for this sort of this sort of idea,
Speaker 1: because again, we have to have the rule of law
Speaker 1: and we have to protect our communities and the men
Speaker 1: and women of the thin Blue line. I have to
Speaker 1: do that daily and they should be a blotted for it.
Speaker 1: And you know what's interesting, President Obama recently said that
Speaker 1: the idea of defunding the police is basically lose your
Speaker 1: audience once you say that. And you've got people like
Speaker 1: AOC Alixander Cosco Cortez and is very much in favor
Speaker 1: of defunding the police. And when Democrats have tried to
Speaker 1: explain it and said, no, we mean to take some
Speaker 1: of the law enforcement department funding and put it in
Speaker 1: community and programs, Kamala Hare said, let's reimagine the police,
Speaker 1: and she's pushed back and she said, no, I mean
Speaker 1: defund the police. Exactly what that means, So putting millions
Speaker 1: of people in danger, putting people on the South Side
Speaker 1: of Chicago and other payer areas where it's extraordinarily dangerous,
Speaker 1: putting them in the been more danger and making them
Speaker 1: potentially victims. What do you say to somebody like alc Well,
Speaker 1: it's scary when President Obama when he comes out and
Speaker 1: makes a statement of we can't you know, have these
Speaker 1: you know, grand slogans a defund the police, and he
Speaker 1: gets attacked by his own members of his own party.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's that is, in my judgment, a sign
Speaker 1: of of in many ways how far left the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party has gone, in particular as it relates to to
Speaker 1: AOC and some of the folks that subscribe to the
Speaker 1: same value set and belief systems that she has. And
Speaker 1: and again it is I think that is part of
Speaker 1: of President Trump's the reason that he resonated with folks
Speaker 1: is that he stood and stands for the rule of law.
Speaker 1: And uh, I'm hopeful that people, regardless of of of
Speaker 1: what the ultimate outcome of the election is, and I
Speaker 1: know there's a lot of different pieces that are involved
Speaker 1: in that, that men and women across this country will
Speaker 1: continue to respect the men and women of our thin
Speaker 1: blue line and the sacrifices that they make in protecting
Speaker 1: our communities is as you so so well stated it.
Speaker 1: I mean, again, the people that have the largest microphones,
Speaker 1: they sometimes drown out the voices of the folks that
Speaker 1: are are getting up and going to work every day
Speaker 1: and coming home, and I want to make sure that
Speaker 1: their streets are safe and and don't want folks dying
Speaker 1: in their streets and and being murdered. They want to
Speaker 1: help help the police. And so I'm hopeful that you know,
Speaker 1: even as we move into this this next year, that
Speaker 1: folks will continue to see that really our law enforcement
Speaker 1: community is of bright spot in our society. And they again,
Speaker 1: you can have bad apples in in any industry, in
Speaker 1: any profession. Like the folks that I know of the
Speaker 1: thin blue line, they want to keep community safe and
Speaker 1: and they risk their lives to do so. Absolutely, I
Speaker 1: totally agree. I want to dig into that further after
Speaker 1: work from our sponsor m h and And one would
Speaker 1: argue because there's been a number of police departments that
Speaker 1: have been defunded, they've lost funding Los Angeles and a
Speaker 1: number of other New York City, a number of other
Speaker 1: large police departments, and there's been people who have been
Speaker 1: murdered because there's not been as much police presidents in areas.
Speaker 1: So I mean, I would say that these folks blood
Speaker 1: is on aoc hands you've been leading the movement, I mean,
Speaker 1: is that something you would agree with? Well, look, I um,
Speaker 1: I certainly think that anybody who is calling for the
Speaker 1: for defunding of the police is setting a very dangerous
Speaker 1: perspective and viewpoint that can have long term ramifications and
Speaker 1: it actually hurts and hinders success and upward mobility in
Speaker 1: those communities they think they're trying to help. And so
Speaker 1: I am completely opposed to that idea or that viewpoint
Speaker 1: that says we need a defund police because the very
Speaker 1: same communities that you know, AOC or or her folks
Speaker 1: say that they are trying to trying to help. It
Speaker 1: really is, it's counter productive and counterintuitive because these communities
Speaker 1: are some some of the communities that need this help
Speaker 1: the most. Yeah, what can be done to build more
Speaker 1: trust between police in the black community. Well, I think
Speaker 1: that you've got to on the front end before you
Speaker 1: have these you know, high profile or very sensitive incidences.
Speaker 1: You've got to establish relationships before on the on the
Speaker 1: front end so that you can have the tough and
Speaker 1: difficult conversations when it comes to these specific cases or
Speaker 1: just how to better focus the police efforts in these
Speaker 1: particular communities. Obviously, I think recruitment is incredibly important folks
Speaker 1: that look like the communities that they're serving. Having them
Speaker 1: in the positions of authority is important to helping establish
Speaker 1: the credibility and building stronger those relationships. But it's a
Speaker 1: you know, it is a labor of love. I think
Speaker 1: it's the best way to put it that there has
Speaker 1: to be real, real interest in establishing and investing in
Speaker 1: those relationships and not just showing up to pull somebody over,
Speaker 1: but also developing those community ties that can help even
Speaker 1: when there are very significant and difficult situations. Well, let
Speaker 1: me ask you this this question, because I know there's
Speaker 1: been a lot of talk from activists all over, most
Speaker 1: active activists on the left people have say that they
Speaker 1: believe that America systematically racism and broken and can't be fixed.
Speaker 1: What do you say to that America is certainly the
Speaker 1: land of opportunity and uh, you know, I'm grateful for
Speaker 1: this country and general your story and and and so
Speaker 1: many other folks story is one of upward mobility, and
Speaker 1: I hold on to belief in this is the greatest
Speaker 1: nation on the face of the planet. And you know,
Speaker 1: they are always going to be challenges. That's regardless of
Speaker 1: if you live here in any place, but this is
Speaker 1: the best place on earth. And the idea that you
Speaker 1: know that we we we've obviously got a ways to go.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that's always going to be true.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're always trying to perfect this union, Um,
Speaker 1: and there will always be more that we can do
Speaker 1: to to be sensitive and to be good to our neighbors,
Speaker 1: and good in our communities and good to our families.
Speaker 1: But you know this, I whole heart to believe that
Speaker 1: this is the greatest nation on earth, and that upward
Speaker 1: mobility can occur here, can happen here as long as
Speaker 1: that as we have the we remove the barriers in
Speaker 1: our society allow people to do that. But I continue
Speaker 1: to believe that if you want to do something in
Speaker 1: this country, you can uh if you you know, have
Speaker 1: faith in the Lord, and if you you put your
Speaker 1: best foot forward and you persevere and show grit and determination,
Speaker 1: you can do whatever you set your mind too. And
Speaker 1: and I believe that when partnering with God, it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter what the obstacle is, you will win when you're
Speaker 1: a true partnership with God. And I appreciate that, Um,
Speaker 1: your response and certainly, although I'm not gonna say the
Speaker 1: country is systematically racist, I would say the ninety four
Speaker 1: crime bill pushed by Joe Biden absolutely was systematically So
Speaker 1: I mean, that's that's my point of view, and I
Speaker 1: know I don't have much time with you, so I
Speaker 1: want to ask my last question because there's been a
Speaker 1: lot of conversation about your political future. You spoke at
Speaker 1: the Republican National Committee. There's been a lot of talk
Speaker 1: about you possibly being a future president, which is something
Speaker 1: I'm sure you're you're excited to hear somebody who's a
Speaker 1: first term in the office you're in. What is the
Speaker 1: future like for you? Because people say you might replace
Speaker 1: the Senator McConnell and the Senate, maybe run for governor.
Speaker 1: And I know your response is gonna be, well, I'm
Speaker 1: focused on my job, but what with those that's the
Speaker 1: typical politicians. But as my friend get about the microphone
Speaker 1: and what are your thoughts? Well, Jeah, look, I I'll
Speaker 1: be honest with you. You know, I'm here my my
Speaker 1: first year. It has been a eventful and busy year,
Speaker 1: and so thinking beyond at this point seems overwhelming. I'm
Speaker 1: honestly very h you know, obviously very grateful for the
Speaker 1: opportunity to have to speak at the Republican National Convention,
Speaker 1: and yeah, what I what I hope it did was
Speaker 1: a couple of things. One that if you look like me,
Speaker 1: and I know Representative Electric Powen's and others would Senator
Speaker 1: Scott others would say this as well, that if you
Speaker 1: look like me, I hope you recognize that there is
Speaker 1: there is room for you in the Republican Party, and
Speaker 1: that you recognize that this party was founded for the
Speaker 1: very um for the very reason of ending slavery in
Speaker 1: this country. And so yeah, and so I hope people
Speaker 1: that look like me recognize that at least be open
Speaker 1: to the idea of of the Republican Party. And then
Speaker 1: the other thing I am grateful that it gave me
Speaker 1: an opportunity to do is just to say really thank
Speaker 1: you to you know, my my parents who raised me
Speaker 1: to talk about the common values in our communities and
Speaker 1: the role in importance of faith in our communities, and
Speaker 1: that grateful for the work that President Trump has done
Speaker 1: over the last four years. Too. We talk about upward
Speaker 1: mobility and how important that is. And so I again
Speaker 1: I was thankful for the opportunity to speak there and
Speaker 1: to to share my perspective on on what the Republican
Speaker 1: Party means to me and what it is and and
Speaker 1: it's future. And again, UH, at this point, I'm just
Speaker 1: focused on getting out of and and in getting to
Speaker 1: one in terms of the A. G. S off us
Speaker 1: in this space. And and we're doing some really good
Speaker 1: and meaningful work here. Obviously, we've had some pro high
Speaker 1: profile matters as it relates to COVID nineteam and and
Speaker 1: Brianna Taylor investigation. But we've also established really for the
Speaker 1: first time, a new child abuse prosecutorial tool kit to
Speaker 1: help our prosecutors across the Commonwealth fight child abuse. And
Speaker 1: we've taken some very meaningful steps in fighting human trafficking
Speaker 1: here in Kentucky as well. And so there's a lot
Speaker 1: of great work that's left to be done here. Unfortunate
Speaker 1: and honored to be the first African American independently elected
Speaker 1: to statewide office here in Kentucky and to be the
Speaker 1: fifty first Attorney in general UH and to fight and
Speaker 1: stand up for folks rites. So it is this is
Speaker 1: an incredibly important office, a lot of important decisions as
Speaker 1: evidence by UH some of the stuff that's happened over
Speaker 1: the last year come across this desk, uh and I'm
Speaker 1: just grateful to serve in this capacity. And we'll see
Speaker 1: ultimately what the Lord has in store down the road.
Speaker 1: But but my my my focus is on is on
Speaker 1: and the rest of this year and then seeing what
Speaker 1: exciting things we can do in the A G. S
Speaker 1: Office in Kentucky. Come one, Well, I thank you for
Speaker 1: your time today. I know this wasn't a softball interview
Speaker 1: because people really want to know what's going on with
Speaker 1: the case and it is handled fairly. They want to
Speaker 1: make sure that justice is done and actually know that
Speaker 1: there's a federal investigation still ongoing, so we'll wait for
Speaker 1: the details on that. But thank you again for spending
Speaker 1: time with me here at out Allowed with Giano Caldwell,
Speaker 1: and we'll continue to monitor what's going on with you.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. All right, thanks brother. I want
Speaker 1: to thank Daniel Cameron for coming on and speaking with
Speaker 1: us about the Brianna Taylor case. If you're enjoying the show,
Speaker 1: please leave us a review and rate us with five
Speaker 1: stars on Apple Podcast. If you have any questions for me,
Speaker 1: please email me at out Loud at Ginger Street sixty
Speaker 1: dot com and I'll try to answer them in future episodes.
Speaker 1: You can also find me on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and
Speaker 1: parlor at Giano Caldwell. If you're interested in learning more
Speaker 1: about my story, please pick up a copy of my
Speaker 1: bestselling book titled Taken for Granted, How Conservatism Can Win
Speaker 1: Back to the Americans Deliberalism Failed. Special thanks to our
Speaker 1: producer Stephen Calabria, researcher Aaron Kleinman, and executive producers Debbie
Speaker 1: Myers and speaker New Gingrich, all part of the Ginger
Speaker 1: Street sixty Network, part of the Gainer of Street sixty Network.