The devil's advocates radio show is broadcast under a time brokerage agreement between devil radio and civic media ink.
Some portions of this program may be pre-recorded.
Warning!
You're about to listen to the greatest radio show ever.
And due to contractual obligations and to shield our airwaves and corporate licensees for many semblance of liability,
responsibility and gullibility, we must tell you the views represented on this show are not necessarily those of this station or its management.
This radio show contains differing points of view on current political topics.
And due to the nature of its contents, it should be heard by everyone.
Thank you for listening.
Now live from the civic media studios in Madison, Wisconsin, where the political party is just beginning.
Welcome to the devil's advocates radio show.
Friends proving it's never personal only politics.
And now here's your host, Dom and crew.
Welcome back to the devil's advocates radio show.
The Thursday edition that makes it Friday Eve getting towards the end of our strenuous 15 hour work week.
No overtime for you fella.
It's all the prep work that it really takes time.
Well, there is a little bit of that.
Dom, we got to find guest.
You know, winning doubt called James and tell former US attorney friend of ours invited him on the big show and put a quarter of them and sit back and relax.
Jim, welcome back to the big show IT's IT's we're going to we're going to be engaged always always delighted to have your quarters and more, my friends.
So going to be with you.
There's all you get, Jim.
There will be no overtime.
Jim, we got some breaking news.
My understanding, I lean cannon in the classified document case of the former president.
Has ruled against his motion to dismiss.
This is the baseline for not seeking her impeachment from the bench, Jim.
I mean, this doesn't exaggerate her in any way, shape or form, but at least she didn't dismiss, right?
Absolutely.
And your right to be pleased because once again, justice is done in Florida and a federal district court there.
I lean cannon, as you said, taking a look at three frivolous or near frivolous arguments.
Once again, from Donald Trump and his attorneys, what is he maintaining?
This is, of course, the Mar-o-Lago documents case.
He says basically three things to I lean cannon in what our free trial motions before we get to the trial.
These petitions have certain things done in the case.
He says, first of all, the leader of attorney general had no authority to appoint Jack Smith in the first place.
Unfounded appointment to begin with.
Second, that all by the way, these records, those are my personal records, not subject to federal oversight or all the statutes that are invoked.
And all beyond that, there's this thing called executive immunity.
You may have heard of the Supreme Court in that opportunity.
And that too prevents you from going ahead.
I lean cannon again, just very lately, entertaining argument today about all of those things.
As she should, as a part of the process, to give every defendant, including Donald Trump, his day in court, says no to each of them.
It is a good, if entirely predictable result.
Had she gone in the direction on the other direction on any of those, we would have our hair a bit on fire right now.
Jim, the other ball, there's lots of breaking news today.
Alvin Bragg, the Trump lawyers sought at least a 90 day continuance in the Manhattan criminal case against Donald Trump, got to keep him straight.
And Alvin Bragg said, well, we would grant at least 30 days in deference to a lot of documents, new evidence that has been presented in the case out of abundance of caution.
Now, I wouldn't be that cautious, Jim. I want to see this trial. I want it now, daddy. I'd like for Rook assault over here.
Jim, does this bring new angst to you because any delay can turn into multiplying delays.
Absolutely, that is the bottom line takeaway that the more you delay, the more you postpone, as the three of us have talked at nauseam in the past, every time you delay, more things can happen.
There are sometimes predictable, sometimes unpredictable, sometimes what's called discovery.
And so where are we coming from here in every single criminal case, including the federal system, the state system as well, that defendant, in this case, Donald Trump, has the right to all the information the government is going to present.
All the witness statements, all the photographic evidence, all the tapes, all those kinds of things. It's called Brady. It's called Janks. It's got all kinds of names in the federal system.
Basically, it's our due process to ensure the defendant has a right to know what he's charged with and what the government's going to present.
And so what happens in this case is, of course, Alvin Bragg, after the indictment of body year ago, turns over all kinds of things that he has.
And oh, by the way, he also says, I'm going to look up the street and I recall that the United States Department of Justice also looked at this same event.
We recall that well, Southern District of New York, US Attorney's Office, and they may have some documents that are also relevant to this prosecution, including focus on a felony Michael Cohen, who is one of the principal witnesses, of course, in this case.
Alvin Bragg appropriately says, please send me federal government, those documents that you have in your presumably now closed case.
And the US Attorney's Office apparently sends him something back in the summer time of last year. Alvin Bragg dutifully returns, turns those over to Donald Trump.
And then we move to January, January, Donald Trump's attorneys, while their own subpoena to the US Attorney's Office saying, give us all the material that you've got.
Anticipating, Alvin Bragg is that, of course, he's already got everything. There's nothing more to be disclosed here and turns out that just recently, last recent days, including this week, the US Attorney's Office, the Department of Justice says, oh, we've got more.
We've got about 100,000 documents or so that may or may not be relevant, but nonetheless, have to be turned over as a part of discovery in this case.
And that brings us today to today. And you have to believe that Alvin Bragg and others there in New York, other places, are melting down right now.
Because this is the last thing you want in criminal prosecutions, but going on for a year to come within days of the start of the trial.
And so you know what? We've got all kinds of things that we have never disclosed to the defendant. Here it is. Take a look at it.
So what is the remedy? Well, the remedy is, you're probably really clear, we can't go to trial because now you're going to be depriving the defendant of the right to look through all this material and figure out what he wants to use.
And so the trumpet attorneys, as you just indicated, say, we need 90 days. We need three months to look at that.
And Alvin Bragg says, well, now we think it's going to be 30 days. And now it's up to Juan Mershon, who is the judge on this case to say, OK, number one, what happened here? This is not good.
I've got this on my calendar. It's been there a long time. And he's probably compelled now to postpone this trial from March 25 to sometime down the road.
Could be 30 days. I have to tell you as much as this surprises me and shocks me and frankly disappoints me in terms of the entire system here.
U.S. Department of Justice, maybe a Donald Trump, getting these materials late, asking for them late, also Alvin Bragg's office, not being on top of this.
A lot of blame to be a part of bending about here. The reality is that a judge merchant probably has no choice, but to delay this trial once again, to give the defendant Donald Trump the opportunity that he's got under the Constitution to look through all this.
And so we're probably talking months before this starts again.
Juan Mershon could very well say, no, I'm sticking to March 25, in which case he hands Donald Trump an appellate issue, if in feet, if indeed he's convicted, because it comes back to the appeals court and says, wait, I got all this material late.
I couldn't properly defend myself, overturn the conviction. So it's a difficult situation to be and the judge is not happy. Alvin Bragg is not happy.
No one is happy here. And I think there's some responsibility inside the U.S. Department of Justice for why somehow these large amounts of materials were not produced to Alvin Bragg sooner than just recently.
I'm actually listening to the devil's advocates radio show James Santel, former U.S. Attorney host of Monika Nollies here on the civic media network on Saturday's gym.
Jim SD and why man, come on, how's Alvin Bragg say, hey, give me all your Trump stuff. They give them the stuff. And then Trump's attorney say, hey, give me your Trump stuff. And there's also more stuff and isn't this also then are we to assume that Alvin Bragg has not reviewed this material either.
So there could be more charges coming.
Absolutely. I mean, if Alvin Bragg again, probably with his hair on fire right now, have not seen this. If he has seen it before and he hasn't turned it over, he's in trouble.
I'm going to assume he has not seen it. And therefore he's got this also electronically. It's not in boxes necessarily. But he's got people not going through it because he's still got a trial date right now. Mark 25 got to figure out what is in here. And most of it apparently is about Michael Cohen.
It's probably suggesting that the reasons why the SCV and why Department of Justice did not did not go ahead with the prosecution, presumably because of concerns about Michael Cohen's legitimacy and his credibility.
Is that relevant to Donald Trump's defense? You bet it is. This is going to be a major figure. So this is not just a spurious frivolous kind of thing that's going on here from the Trump campaign.
Again, Alvin Bragg is probably looking at through it as well. He is anticipating, presumably not going ahead. And it is a problem. It is a problem. Once again, another trial delayed.
I said tell, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, let's real quick. During the Trump administration, didn't he purge the SDNY and stick it with a bunch of Republican conservative type folks? Was that something? And do you think there is actually some sandbagging going on on the federal level to, you know, throw an assist, throw a wrench in the game for Donald Trump? And if that would be the case, who investigates that?
We would call well that the US attorney who was appointed there was not friends with, with the former Attorney General Bill Barr. And frankly, we're rather welcome about this, notorious about this.
But again, I hate to say this about my own agency and I'm hoping it is not true. But if there were some people, we still haven't ever got the bottom of why it is that Department of Justice, the federal Department of Justice never charged this in a federal system in that court.
Never got a real good answer for that decision made under under the former Attorney General, obviously repeated here in the President Attorney General of who investigates what happened here.
I would anticipate that as a group called the, the obviously inspector general inside the US Department of Justice, with the look of this and say, wait a minute, you're producing materials in a pending state case doing this very late. What happened here?
And again, defensive on what the Attorney General wants to do, but he's going to be under some fire here in the next few hours and days. That's one of the things he can say, I'm going to send this off to the inspector general to figure out what's been going on and why this late production happens that arguably could compromise the delivery of justice in our nation.
James, until our fine guest, hope you're sticking around Jim, because I want to ask you about the Robert her report and the testimony and the recent resignation. And why would he do that? And is it okay if I call him been her?
I got lots of questions for you. Jim, come back with us. We are the devil's advocates radio show.
Jim, will we have a trial before the election?
A trial of Trump. I'm not going to, I'm not going to bet you more than lunch on that right now.
I'll take that action, Cody.
I'm hungry. I would take lunch right now. Come back for devil's advocates, more James, and tell what the morning can only or can only is depending on whether you're a grammarian or not.
Send wires, kinds of money.
Oh!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Yeah!
Grass fed locally raised 100% organic. The devil's advocates.
Yeah, the devil's advocates.
The devil's advocates radio show our friend and colleague in the radio industry. James, Santa.
Former US attorney, sticking around for another segment, Jim always a pleasure.
Thank you for coming in.
The testimony given Bob her, Robert her, Ben her. I know we always get the name wrong.
Yeah, I thought this was beyond the content of it.
He's designed from the Department of Justice and he was going to testify as the citizen above and beyond whether or not he actually wants to spend time with his family.
Why would someone do that?
So the answer is, I believe that he was given this special assignment. He plainly is a holdover, if you will, from the prior administration.
The general president of the general says I want you to continue. I'm going to assign this responsibility to you to do this special task.
And I'm going to have you investigate particularly whether or not Joe Biden is responsible, criminally responsible for the retention, use, possession of these documents.
And so I don't find his resignation following his report and his report to Congress, his testimony, all of that unusual, mostly because he is sort of done now with the Department of Justice and his tenure, even as US attorney is pretty much coming to an end.
Typically, as you know, the US attorneys, although I've whistle when someone says their political appointments, they're appointed by the president for the term of the presidency.
This fellow has some other US attorneys have also remained in place.
Rod Rosenstein was one during the Obama administration was a friend of mine, a colleague, and he did that as well. And then there comes a time when you leave because you've got a new administration with which you may or may not be all that affiliated.
So I don't find that part of this unusual. Some of the comments he made in testimony, those I think are deserving a bit more scrutiny, absolutely.
He asked you, counselor, there are a lot of contradictions between the Robert don't call him been her and the transcript when you look at what his report said and you look at what the transcript of the actual interviews with Joe Biden, and he claimed, well, you know, this guy can't remember the date of his son,
both death, or he remembered the day, if not the year, very specifically, and this is not how he was characterized. So contrary to your opinion, counselor, I would ask you think this Robert her is a partisan hack, or does he have a declining memory, sir.
Right. So again, his assignment to determine whether or not there is a proof beyond a reasonable doubt to char, it actually probably causing issue, but ultimately beyond a reasonable doubt to find that Joe Biden will fully, purposefully intentionally took these documents.
And here's why part company with him, he says during the course of his testimony that he did not exonerate the president.
And the answer is he did, he did. Why? Because he found that there was no willful intent, there was no purpose here, that's a key element of any prosecution, and what you are finding, therefore, is that a crime did not occur.
And so this notion, well, I'm not giving a blanket excuse for all this. No, that's exactly what you found. And so the description of it strikes me as inconsistent with your support.
I also find that this language, which we all focused on in support about the president not being able to remember things and perhaps an adult old man with a failing memory, not necessarily consistent with this transcript.
Joe Biden is telling lots and lots of stories from his past, including times in his vice president and stories about being out there at various places around America.
It went over a five hour period and not to remember specific things. And even from time to time to forget about a year, doesn't strike me as somebody who is failing in memory.
Any one of us, frankly, examine under those circumstances will get some dates and maybe even some even more significant things wrong.
I find the entire report appropriate, a good result, absolutely no crime here, but the additional language unsupported by the transcript.
By the way, I think inconsistent with the Department of Justice's policy, which is you describe what it is you have found.
You don't need to take these side shots to talk about how you would appear, if you will, in a trial.
He says that's relevant. It is implicit, if you will, in his statement that there is no crime here and a jury would not find Joe Biden guilty.
Again, it falls in the same category with Mike Pence. Likewise, no, no showing up intent. He's got those documents in Indiana, but nothing to suggest that there's crime there.
These cases now are done and we should put them to bed as they should be Jim sent out Hunter Biden now has a federal trial pending.
I believe a June trial date and the firearms and this seems unusual to me and that they were on the brink of a negotiated settlement.
A plea deal, if you will, it is my understanding that to charge someone who basically lied on an application about drug use is a very unusual crime, let's just say to prosecute.
And Jim, you know, to hear the right tell it, the only reason why Hunter's not under the prison right now is because he's Joe Biden's kid.
You know, so no matter how they slice it, the right still doesn't believe he's getting a fair, a fair prosecution because, you know, his old man's the head of the executive branch and he's just going to pardon him anyways.
And the, I think a proper assessment of this is, yeah, he's facing those firearm charges. He's also facing those tax charges.
This is a Department of Justice that is not backing off from prosecuting the current president's son. And to your point about the firearms charge arguably even the tax charge, people can debate reasonable people reasonable prosecutors can help with different results.
But when it comes to checking a box on the ATF form before you purchase a firearm, I don't want to condone anybody who lies on that, but it is all too frequent regrettably.
And what we typically focused on are those people who engage in that conduct and then go and commit violent acts, people who are in possession of weapons, possession of weapons who should not have them.
But the focus of the Department of Justice, when I was U.S. Attorney and before that was, we want to interest safety and security. The reason for that form is to keep us safe and secure.
This is not at the top of the list. Is it arguably a, a, a convictable crime? Yes. Did he do this? Yes. Probably so. But it is not in the mainstream set of cases that give me concern when it comes to the safety of America.
Jamie Santel, former U.S. Attorney, last and 90 seconds. Jim, I mean, I could say walk up and admit, hey, you know, I shot Kennedy. Doesn't mean I did it. I mean, they have, they don't have a drug, they don't have a blood test from him at the time.
I think I may get some pictures of circumstantial evidence because to say I'm lying the whole thing. How could you actually prove proof prove that he was actually on drug short of him saying he was.
Right. It is. It will be fascinating to see. It's part of the discovery. I'm sure it's been disclosed what it is. You're going to show that it's kind of like the perjury charge. I'm talking about that. It's difficult to show, believe it or not, in court that someone knowingly and purposely lied about something that they knew to be not true.
And so you're absolutely right, Dom, that they've got to come forward. That is a department of justice. U.S. Attorney's Office got to come forward and say, this is what the facts are. And maybe they have some of that information. Maybe it is admissions that he's also made other things to support that, but they've got to prove that again. The other is more doubtful jury and that he knowingly lied and did this for that purpose.
Jim Santel, would we forget to ask you?
All sorts of significant things are going on out there, including, including, of course, the continuing review by the United States Supreme Court of two major faces that are going to impact the January 6 insurrection and
interference base. Those are coming up for decision in June. No time before that. That trial likewise effectively off the boards.
Well, Jim Santel, you got to give people a reason to tune in Saturday morning, stand to 11. The morning can only see how he did it.
Jim, thank you so much for joining us. And thank you so much for telling us all the things we didn't ask you in an intelligent fashion.
You're so gracious, cult sir. More devils.
The devil's advocates, political commentary from the back of the class.
Look back to the devils, advocates, radio showy, happier, happy hour at the Thursday edition.
Thank you to our most recent guest to find one friend of ours, James Santel, always great when Jim comes round.
And you can chase him to Saturday mornings. Don't forget his fine program, live 9 to 11 on Saturday mornings replaying.
I'm not clear if it replays anymore. I know we got the music of the stars on the Sunday and many of the civic media network station.
So anyways, check your local listings, 9 to 11, Saturday. It's worth a listen.
It's excellent.
Right, right down. Don't leave me hanging most excellent. Most excellent. Yeah, I mean, Jim's a great guy. Very insightful and detailed man.
So make sure you check him out. We always appreciate when Jim comes around. I'm a little more optimistic. I mean, Jim was suggesting that perhaps with the delay in the album break case in New York, the criminal case.
Trump's attorney is asking for 90 days, Alvin Bragg agreeing to 30. What does the judge do?
Jim said months months. Well, I mean, if it's delayed a month and you got a six week trial, I guess it could be months until a conclusion.
But my greater question and concern is who sandbagged down with the SDNY and Manhattan.
Alvin Bragg asked for information and all the papers give me what you got on the case and he give him a stack and then Trump's folks come in and say, hey, give me what you got and all of a sudden there's hundreds of thousands of pages.
What that that seems there's something missing there, at least in the story and my I got a knowledge gap here.
And I'm very concerned about that part of it. Well.
So because you often have knowledge gaps and I would say, well, if we found out some reporting demonstrated or what do you say?
Not inspector general, but some oversight report later tells us there was a purposeful delay here.
Well, then you're on to something, but I don't think that accusation's been level. That's just your suspicions at this point.
Well, yeah, because if two people asked for the same thing and one person gets something more than the other from the same source, there's, you know, there's there's an obvious gap there.
I'm not sure what you're describing the gap there, meaning that Alvin Bragg, the federal government gave it to Alvin Bragg, right?
And Alvin Bragg is liable to hand over all discovery, all the information you intend to prosecute with to the defendant.
So I'm not sure what, what part do you feel like spend unequal in this?
Based on a conversation with Jim, Alvin Bragg requested this information along a year ago, right?
And then Trump's hospital is also requested information. Trump is requested this information separately and as well.
And they received more there's more information now than was originally received from Alvin Bragg's office.
So now Alvin Bragg not only does Trump have to go through tens of thousands of pages, Alvin Bragg has to go through tens of thousands of pages.
And the implication that I thought I heard you making is that one of them, and in this case, I thought the implication was Alvin Bragg had somehow received documents not handed over to the defense, but effectively they've all got copious reams of electronic documents to review, right?
I'm not sure where the conspiracy here is the hour or the year in transmitting the documents over, maybe that's scandalous. I have no idea.
But the place we find ourselves at when you've got thousands of documents and both sides have now got fresh docs to review.
It didn't seem like it was being held back from anyone. I guess that's my only point. I don't mean to quibble with you.
I know, maybe that's not the most important.
Why is there additional information?
You know what I'm saying? Why is there more now?
Because the bureaucracy moves slow. There's been lots of federal investigations of Donald Trump.
If some of this is related to his alleged fraud and the case in the New York state, is it regards stormy Daniels Michael Cohen and the, you know, perhaps the paying off of a porn star through fraudulent means and then, you know, committing tax fraud.
Trying to cover it up. Well, maybe some of this discovery has come from some of the multitude of other cases, the Donald Trump faces in the federal courts.
I'm just saying, I don't, I don't see the conspiracy yet. Could be there. We might find it, but I don't see it yet.
844-967-2789. Jeff from Madison. Welcome, Jeff. What do you got for us?
Hi, Jeff. Hi, guys. Hi, guys. I don't mean to go back to your prior subject. I know you kind of kind of phased away from that about the 32 hour.
No, no problem. What do you got?
But I can speak from being a union or retired now, union carpenter union trades. And I have no idea how they could implement that without the buck being passed somehow down the line to the contractor.
It was a collective bargaining every four years with all the union tradesmen, you know, as far as I be trade, not just carpenters.
And I'm not sure how they would implement it, whether to have to wait to those four years up.
And I'd love to make a 32 hour straight pay and then eight hours of overtime every week. I would have loved to have done that. I feel I made a good, fair wage.
It was collectively bargained through my union to all the various union contractors. I have no idea how that could ever be implemented without a buck being passed somehow.
Just like my brother has a small business impact. He advertises on your fine radio station. Nice.
And I and I'm not sure he would he would have to pass the cost onto the consumer, you know, that he do, you know, in higher, higher hourly labor.
Yeah, there's only so many so many ways to work, right? The math only works either you pass along the cost, your products, your services are more, or you take the hit and you absorb the expense and it hits the bottom line or certainly a combination thereof.
They couldn't absorb the hit. They would have to pass it on to the consumer period. They would have to.
And then a third example is my ex, my ex. She used to be work for the state collective bargaining, well, the state bargaining in the act 10 came along, it pissed her off.
It pissed her off just like that prior call you had. Piss her off to know. And she ended up quitting working for the state, going and working for a private consulting firm on a salary.
I said she was crazy with all the pennies that she was getting for the state, even taking a hit on some of your pennies having to make self payments and blah, blah, blah.
But she said, no, no, no, I'm going to make more in the private sector. And she did. She made a higher salary than she ever made working for the DNR.
But she worked over twice as many hours to do it. She was bringing work home and there was no end in sight. I said, you're crazy. If you figure this out by an hourly rate, you are making, you're working for less money now for the amount of time you're putting it on.
Jeff all working 80 hours a week for myself to not go work 40 hours a week for the man.
But I don't know how the unions it would be. It could ever be made to work with the building trades unions and how you're dealing with all these different contractors.
They have different margins for their profit. I'd love to see the fat cats have to take a cut and give it to the workers. I mean, in this fantasy of a perfect world.
Yeah, it would be great. But I just don't see it happening. I just I don't see it happening not in this country. I don't see it happening.
I'm curious. So well, thank you, Jeff. Appreciate the call.
A practical man like myself, Jeff is the same argument being made on from going from 44 hours a week to 40 hours a week.
And we have greater efficiencies at this point. So how is it acceptable for us to assume this because well, it's been 40 hours since 1940.
It's just used to it. That's just how it is. Well, I mean, everything. I mean, this is not the same economy as it was in 1940. Certainly.
The minimum wage is nearly the same.
Um, eight for four, nine, six, seven, two, seven, eight, nine, I just throw numbers at you in case you want to call me.
I know you particularly. And I also take Lee when bad stuff happens to bad people.
And the retirement of Ken Buck, Colorado congressman, I don't know if you realize the ripple effect, the butterfly effect.
This is having, and one of your favorites, the Lauren Bulbert.
Oh, the groper.
It's, it's nice when you're referencing a groper. And it's not the former president. But yes, she.
She's also a Republican.
There, there, there was some, some friendliness going on at the Beetlejuice live show apparently one night with her date.
And, uh, so many ways, apparently some personal embarrassment for Bulbert.
And so she's carpet bagging a different congressional district. In fact, she was going to move over and running Ken Buck's district. Right.
And Ken Buck decided to retire effective immediately, which will trigger a special election, which Lauren Bulbert would only be eligible to run in if she resigned her current congressional seat.
And she has the benefit of incompancy, even if it's in a different district, she's still Congresswoman Bulbert. She has the fundraising apparatus in place.
And, uh, I'm finding this exquisite down. I mean, I want to get the popcorn out and just watch how this one plays out because she's not going to run in the special election.
So she will have to run against in this carpet bagger decision she's made against an incumbent US Congressperson who ain't her.
It's going to get harder and harder all the time down. And potentially the district she said now is going to flip blue.
Because if any district in America deserves to flip blue, it's the one Lauren Bulbert just got done represented, right?
But, you know, the, the flight of Republicans out of the house is really something to behold. I mean, really apparently speaker mega Mike Johnson was blindsided by the fact that Buck was going to, of course, he's going to leave.
He gave notice, but so that and then to change the end date to like next week, I'm out.
Shut the lights off suckers. You guys are crazy and Buck as most Republicans do on the way out the door.
You know, all of a sudden, they're very forthright and truthful. And I would say this. I mean, Buck has been over the course of the last couple of months.
A little Bucky, a little Bucky, you know, the whole Biden impeachment, which is just absolutely imploded, which he was, he was calling out against them against that issue for quite some time.
I heard a quote from him today saying, well, you know, speaker Johnson has about as much chance to get me to change my mind to stay in Congress as he does to have me vote for an unconstitutional impeachment against Joe Biden says the Republican conservative
Ken Buck. I mean, that that and as he's obviously he's not the first and he probably will not be the last.
I mean, this got came in on the tea party, man. And when the tea party goes cats are going, man, you Megas are crazy. I'm outies.
You know, what does that say about the Megas?
Well, I don't know down, but I know Lauren Bobert. She's agonizing a bit. She said this.
I will not further and peril the already very slim House Republican majority by resigning my current seat and will continue to deliver on my constituents priorities while also working hard to earn the votes of people in Colorado's fourth
district because she doesn't live there. She's carpet bagging into Ken Buck's former district who have made clear that they are hungry for a real conservative.
Well, Poked maybe Ken Buck on his way out the door. You know, he did this, just screw her figuratively.
So that's got her. Buck's seat went for Trump by more than 18 points, making whichever Republican wins the special election in June.
And apparently it's going to be scheduled for about June 25.
Whoever wins in June is the heavy favorite to represent the seat start in January and a nod to the high stakes.
Bobert announced Wednesday on, actually on the former Twitter that she would hold a live digital fundraiser on rumble.
I don't even know what the rumble is. The only reason I know what rumble is by point of reference.
The Trump team is accused of monetizing the rumble platform by putting their campaign videos together with pro Hitler Nazi sentiment on the rumble plant.
And I didn't know that the Nazis had a channel on the rumble, but I don't think it's a good luck. You know, it's a candidate who's been accused of being a little too authoritarian and it's such to, you know, put one's campaign up on the pro Nazi website.
You know, they kind of already know you're on the team, Trump. You don't have to hit them.
They're going to vote for you already. They blame the algorithm of the video platform rumble for you know what an algorithm is.
monetize the pro Nazi constant in order to a new report from the rolling stone. I mean, I don't know, man, those algorithms that work pretty well.
Like if you look for a toaster and Amazon, you know, you go to your whatever new speed. I was a toaster pop up.
Oh, crazy.
I'm sure he's listening right now. You know, I'm going to end up with toasters on my Facebook feed all night long.
Come back for devil's F gets more for your phone calls. That list now 844-967-2789.
The devil's advocates may not agree on much, but funny years funny.
And we're next.
So our last statement of the day, right?
Yes. Okay. We have something to say to us up 844-967-2789. Stick around the busted pencil.
So I'm going up next.
You're just confirming what you had forgotten yesterday. Pick three.
We're super cooler now by 50%.
Twoness and three o'clock central time on the WM DX 92.7.
And if you can't hear that signal in your local market, go to the civic media app. That's one of the many ways to listen to the greatest radio show ever.
But I'm going to ask you a little cap times editorial today on the evil clown that is the congressman from the third CD, Derek van Norton.
And you know, I would wonder where where on the scale of evil clown does he fall somewhere between, you know, like Pennywise.
You know, is he as bad as John Wayne Casey? I don't think he's that evil a clown.
But for sure, is he? I think he's worse than crusty, man.
I used to have a crust to the clown tie. It was one of my favorites for many, many years.
Yeah. Van Norton man. He's nutty.
He's not an evil clown. Did you see any of that article? They're greatest contention is, you know, the newest.
Who'd nanny tried to have it the state of the union event interrupting the president during the course of his speech.
I mean, the guy's got a bad track record. I've talked about the fact I.
I suspect he's an angry drunk, but that's just my opinion.
They say his behavior is devolved into evil clown territory.
But do you take him seriously then? Unfortunately, he is in Congress. He can vote on laws.
I mean, that's that's pretty scary.
And I'm not sure what the the gentleman's redeeming factor is other than he's got an R behind his name and those that have the R behind the name are, you know,
that happen to get the votes from Republicans who, you know, want to be rich someday and don't want to be taxed to the vote for a guy like Van Norton.
I mean, for real. I mean, his actual physical behavior, the carrying of a loaded handgun through the security checkpoint in Iowa.
My first question is, oh, how did you buy it in Iowa? Did you bring it with you there the first time and they didn't get caught with it?
You know, or lighten up, you know, what, teenage librarians, because he didn't like the LGBTQ plus display of books.
Yeah, really don't forget. Oh, yeah, swearing at him.
Where in hell? Get the F out of here. I don't care who you are.
If that's not the work for an angry drunk or a man with anger issues, really quite frankly.
And even if it's just attributable to the the beers or the tequila or whatever it is, the congressman likes to over indulge in the deeper problem.
Don't blame the alcohol. Well, if you can't get drunk without getting all ordinary and salty and stuff, you got a drink and problem, right?
Nobody minds a happy drunk. Well, but you could still have a drinking problem and be a happy drunk.
Those things are not mutually exclusive. I mean, you could have a problem and still be in a really good mood about it.
Or you could just be an A-hole and also have a drinking problem and perhaps that exacerbates that behavior.
But regardless of it, it is, it's more of the mega man.
It's just that in your face, the bober, it's the Marjorie Taylor greens.
I mean, the decorum, which I can't believe I'm talking about it, because I am not one for all that.
But when I look at people like that, even I got to say, damn man, get your stuff together.
Remember when we used to award the D-bag of the day around here.
And then, you know, CJ kept getting dominated every day.
You know, I got a little tedious awarding the D-bag of the day to CJ each and every day.
But perhaps the evil clown dumb.
And if we're talking about evil clowns, I got at least one more for your consideration.
Former Packer, quarterback, Aaron Rogers.
He's starting to devolve into that evil clown category.
He's being described as broken down Aaron Rogers, trashed on the morning Joe for a Cindy Hook conspiracy lies.
Now Rogers is out publicly today saying something about I was immunized.
He purses this down, but do you have his quote because he very much purses the statement.
Like I said it, but I never said it didn't happen.
I just said it was a false flag operation and federal employees.
Well, we can let people listen to the distinction.
Yes, here is the specific quote from Rogers on Twitter.
I am not and have never been of the opinion that the events did not take place.
Again, I hope that we learn from this and other tragedies to identify the signs that will allow us to prevent unnecessary loss of life.
My thoughts and prayers continue to remain with the families affected along with the entire Sandy Hook community.
I gotta tell you red flags are going off right now for me, Aaron Rogers.
I don't think you should possess firearms, you know, for a period of time for your own safety and that of the community.
I don't think that this is a denial.
I think this is a parsing.
He split the infinitive here.
He believed this.
He exposed this.
I don't believe the journalism brown journalist brown from pardon me CNN made this up about him.
You know, there's too much on the line.
Her whole career rests on the veracity of the allegations she's making against him.
He didn't say I've been immunized, which we all thought that he had been vaccinated.
But of course, he was parsing.
He was splitting the infinitive.
He was lying to us time.
And I suspect he's lying now.
He's splitting that infinitive.
He did believe he saw Alex Jones lose a billion dollars in the defamation lawsuit.
And he said, I've changed my opinion.
He just didn't express it so clearly.
I have never been of the opinion that the events did not take place.
What events did not take place?
You aren't at all being clear on this one because events like dead people.
You express to multiple different sources that you thought it was conspiracy and a false flag in the government.
It's for crisis actors.
You were espousing the lies of Alex Jones.
But when you phrase it the way you do, it almost sounds like maybe it didn't.
Almost like you got vaccinated instead of took vitamin C and got immunized.
I think you'll make a fine politician.
No, Robert F. Kennedy junior picks.
Yeah, I don't like that kind of.
That's pretty terrible.
I'm all down for Jordan love though.
Yeah, yes or a new quarterback in Green Bay.
Oh, given all this.
What do you think?
Definitely vice president or candidate for Kennedy right?
Absolutely.
He's got a political future.
Do you see how he splits that infinitive?
Newtial Mike Clement sports reporter pro day here in Madison for the badgers.
We're going to have a packer update.
And maybe even get his pin enough.
Hey, Rod.
Don's screwed up.
Hey, Rod.
Thank you all for listening.
Thank you James Santel.
Stick around.
Busted pencils is next and then the nightlife.
Nightlight with peach mama.
Do it in my memory.
Give me a break here.
I work hard like 15 hours a week.
Thank you.
