S*#t You Need To Know: Your Water, Not Your Ballroom

It's a wake-up call in more ways than one.

Time for some shit you need to know.

Starting things off, Mandela Barnes proposes blocking use of AI to boost consumer prices.

Democratic candidate for Governor Mandela Barnes is proposing to seek measures, if elected, to bar companies from using artificial intelligence to drive up prices or limit access to services for consumers.

The former Lieutenant Governor's proposal includes measures to ban companies like Instacart and Walmart from using AI to implement dynamic pricing, prevent health insurers from using the technology to deny insurance claims, and fine companies like Meta for enabling e-commerce scammers according to a proposal shared by his campaign.

The proposal read billionaires and greedy corporations are using AI to rip off Wisconsin families.

Insurers are using AI to deny health care claims and raise premiums.

Large grocers like Walmart are setting different prices for the same goods based on your internet history.

How would he implement such rules?

Well, that's still unclear.

A campaign spokesman said Barnes would work with the legislature to pass the AI regulations, which would be enforced by the State Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection in cooperation with the State Department of Justice.

I hate dynamic pricing.

Yes.

I would especially hate it on my groceries, so that makes sense.

I also think too many people are getting denied for health care claims, just like if you're trying to get a job.

people never see your healthcare claim.

It's fed into a computer and there we go.

So I love these kinds of plans.

I'm always skeptical.

I'm excited to see

more.

Right.

I

want to know how it's actually going to work.

Because on paper right now, I'm like,

listen,

that sounds pretty good.

Yeah, of course.

We're good.

I do love that as you know, the

Democratic gubernatorial candidates start rolling out more plans as we get closer and closer to a primary actual election.

I love that they're actually thinking about the fairness and the economics of it all, trying to make it better for all Wisconsinites, right?

They really are starting to lay out plans that is all about the fairness and making sure that corporations are not taking advantage of people right here in Wisconsin.

So I am excited to see more from all of them as the primary season progresses.

Yes,

because it's obvious they've been listening, they

see

what the real issues are, and instead of spending their time just attacking the other side, they're saying, okay, this is what we want to do.

Now we just need a few more specifics on some of these details and we'll be good to go.

I will say too, the one thing that I've been impressed about before we get to this next story is the fact that no matter who you're supporting in this primary season on the Democratic side, if you are supporting any of them or you're still trying to make up your mind, they are doing the real work and they are getting out.

Every single one of them is doing work all across the state going into communities talking with real voters.

So I can appreciate that as well.

Yeah, go ahead.

part of me is like,

Well, that's what they're supposed to

do.

It is.

It is.

But you know, there's a lot of lip service that goes into election season.

So I love the fact that they are doing the real work of it all too.

But you're right.

Yes.

They shouldn't be praised for it, but we don't see it enough in this election.

We've got to celebrate that

low bar being cleared.

That's right.

Yay, you for doing what you're supposed

to.

Yay for politicking well.

Anyway, we do have more stuff you need to know.

Officials with the village of Hobart.

That is a area

just west of Green Bay, have filed an appeal of a judge's decision against the village in its ongoing dispute with the Oneida Nation.

The action is the latest in the more than 20 year feud between the village and the tribal nation.

Nearly the entire non-tribal village of Hobart lies within Oneida Reservation Boundaries.

As the tribal nation buys land in the village, it's moving to transfer it to a federal trust, meaning that it can't be taxed nor policed by the village, which

is a common designation for more than the 500 federally recognized tribal nations within the United States.

This latest case, though, centers on 21 parcels that totals about 500 acres.

It was about to be moved into a federal trust for the benefit of the Oneida Nation by the U.S.

Department of Interior.

The move was challenged, though, in court by the village back in 2023.

In a December 2, 2025,

ruling the U.S.

District Judge William C. Greysbach for the Eastern District of Wisconsin and Green Bay said he sympathized with Hobart's concerns, but only Congress could change the situation.

So the appeal process could take several more months.

Growing up in South Dakota, a good

good chunk of the state is reservation for the Sioux nation.

And so these were the types of battles that I saw all the time.

And it was so funny because of the tribal boundaries, just what we're saying here about policing and basically being sovereign nation, there was only so much that the other communities could do.

And they literally would get to a line and be like, hey, we can't cross.

There's nothing we can do here unless you invite us in.

And so I've seen these types of

arguments a lot in my life over the last few years.

Well, there's been one going on up in the Northwoods.

And I can't remember the time for years about a road and some, you know, the road and the shoulder on the road and going through the nation.

It's all very, it's always very complicated when you get

into

tribal tribal

disputes, right?

You want to respect the land and the heritage and all of that.

But it does make it

complicated.

It just there's more.

There's enough bureaucracy when you're

dealing

with just regular municipalities when you throw in

federally protected tribal lands and all of that, it becomes even more.

So I'm like, all right, you guys, my name's Paul, that's between y'all.

You guys handle

it

yourselves and good luck to everybody involved.

I don't quite understand.

There were always arguments in South Dakota about taxes and who should get what and the roads and the schools because they are sovereign, but they're still part of it.

It is complicated and for brains, much, much better and bigger than mine.

We'll put it like that.

Ditto.

All right, this is the big story.

Law enforcement officers who protected the U.S.

Capitol on January 6, 2021 sued the Trump administration yesterday to block implementation of a newly created $1.8 billion fund for allies of President Trump, who they say were unfairly investigated by previous administrations.

Hold on while I cry one big tear for the insurrections.

The lawsuit was brought in federal court by Harry Dunn, a former member of the US Capitol Police, and Daniel Hodges, a current member of the Washington DC Metropolitan Police Department.

The lawsuit claims that the new fund runs afoul of the US Constitution and federal law.

Now, the men say the fund will potentially be used to pay individuals who participated in the attack and finance various paramilitary organizations in the country if allowed to make...

allowed to begin making payments.

The fund will directly finance the violent operations of rioters, paramilitaries, and their supporters who threatened plaintiffs' lives that day and continue to do so, according to lawyers for Dun and Hodges.

That was part of their 29-page suit.

It went on to say, militias like the Proud Boys will use money from the fund to arm and equip themselves.

The fund will grant their past acts of violence legal imprimatur, the lawsuit claims.

Wow.

This is yeah, we talked about this a little from the other side

about

us being taxpayers, but imagine I'm glad this lawsuit has been filed.

Yeah, it needs now How far will it go?

We don't know We know that if it if it were to make its way up to the Supreme Court Who knows how it would play out because of past things but just

On a very basic level and I know we've said this before but sometimes we just have to keep hammering something on a very basic common-sense level Paying these criminals is itself criminal, right?

This is not this these are not people who these are not reparations being paid to African-Americans or Native Americans or another oppressed people These are people who were taken to court for good reason

If you go in and you defile the desk of the speaker or someone in the Senate or you're carrying a Confederate flag through the rotunda after you broke a window, you're trying to break down the doors of the Senate chamber.

You don't deserve reparations.

You deserve jail time.

You didn't deserve to be pardoned.

You didn't deserve your weak sauce defenses.

None of that.

So I'm glad this lawsuit has been filed.

Has this administration or anybody who supports it thought about the precedent that it sends?

Because here's the thing though, right?

I mean, there is a lot of what aboutism that happens in this country.

And you know, you go all the way back to the Black Lives Batters protest after we watched George Floyd be killed.

And there were so many people across this country who were appalled by those people protesting.

And yes, there were times it got violent, right?

There were times in some cities, Minneapolis is a great case of that.

It did get violent, but then there were people who were appalled by that, but then there were people who thought that these were just tourists and that what they did that day was okay.

So think about the precedent that this is sending.

If you were not okay with the protests of George Floyd, but you're okay with the protesters or the insurrectionists from January 6th, and now you're okay with using taxpayer money to pay these off, think about what happens when there's another president in office.

is this the precedent that we're going to set?

Because if you're not okay with one, you shouldn't be okay with the other.

And if we're going to set that type of precedent, we're gonna say, it's okay to attack police officers, but please don't scream about defunding the police.

These are all things that you have to think about in your argument when we're talking about this, right?

Because one thing is not like the other, and you can't say one is okay, but the other is okay.

That's not how this works.

Well, it's also ironic that this is coming from the back of the blue group, but there's one big difference between the two protests that you're talking

about,

Jamie, and it has to do with pigmentation.

So, you know, and I don't like to play that.

I hate when people play the race card and I'm not trying to play the race card because, quite frankly,

white guy, I can't play the race.

It's hard when you're just a white person, right?

But I'm just, I'm

looking at this, I'm looking at this going, well, the, the sea of people on January 6th all look the same.

Uh, and the sea of people protesting the black lives matter.

It was very, there were a lot of people

of all different

races and very diverse, but we focused on the

the black lives matter.

Yeah.

Does everybody's lives matter?

That's not the point.

So back to this lawsuit, they're saying that this this decision to set up this slush fund

violated federal rulemaking laws, and that law is the Administrative Procedure Act, and that allows individuals to challenge some government decision-making.

The lawyers for Don and Hodges say the officials violated it by not following a different provision of federal law that says the government can only settle lawsuits after the Attorney General agrees that such payment, quote, is in the interest of the United States, and they are arguing that it is not.

I would support their argument.

This payment

is extortion from the administration, in my opinion, to make sure I'll drop this lawsuit against my own government, but you still gotta pay me.

And it is, come on.

If you don't think this is, a majority of this is going to he and his cronies and not, you know, Johnny Yahoo, who was screaming and yelling on January 6th, you haven't been paying attention.

No, we can never accept what happened in our past.

Not with things like the insurrection, not with any sort of political violence.

It's not acceptable.

And then to basically say that the police don't matter at that point.

What are we doing?

It's a wake-up call in more ways than one.

Time for some sh** you need to know.

Well, this is a sad story.

Barney Frank, the longtime Democratic congressman and leading liberal who brought new visibility to gay rights and crafted the most significant reforms to the financial system in a generation, died yesterday.

He was 86.

He died, I'm sorry, he died late Tuesday, according to Jim Sengle, Frank's former campaign manager and close friend, after representing broad swaths of Boston suburbs in Congress for 32 years.

Frank and his husband moved to Maine.

He entered hospice there in April with congestive heart failure.

He's best known as a pioneer for LGBT.

rights.

After decades of grappling with his sexuality, he publicly came out as gay in 1987, the first member of Congress to do so voluntarily.

With his 2012 marriage to a reedy, he became the first incumbent lawmaker on Capitol Hill to marry someone of the same sex.

So Barney Frank activist, he said, though, that he wanted to be remembered more for all the financial stuff that he did and not be solely identified for his personal life, which makes

sense.

I understand that, but truly a political trailblazer because he did do a lot of work with the economics and things.

And he was just a great mind.

He was a really great mind.

I spent some time over the years and in college studying some of the career of Barney Frank.

So yeah, that was sad yesterday.

I love though that it's also a tale of how political...

politics can evolve, right?

Yes, that's

true.

Yeah, because he's like that telltale story of that from the beginning all the way to, again, being one of the first LGBTQ members of Congress to be open about it.

So it's how politics evolves, and it played out in real life, so that's pretty

cool.

And especially from Boston, you know, where it's like, you would think, oh, that might be a little...

dangerous politically.

And I'm glad he was true to himself and went on to fight for all the things he fought for.

So, Barney Frank, like you said, a true trailblazer.

Yes.

186.

In other stuff you need to know, Brian, we're going to bring it closer to home because it turns out that fluoride, speaking of our drinking water, is going to once again be added to deforest water supply.

That's after trustees voted four to two Tuesday to reintroduce that mineral as recommended by numerous dentists.

until in public health associations.

Weird how the doctors in the science always get it right.

The board's vote follows in April 7th election, which saw the ouster, a former trustee, who previously voted against the fluoridization.

The engineering firm estimates that it's gonna cost about $327,000 for deforestation, though, to add fluoride to the water that's pumped through the four village wells.

includes the cost of improvements recommended by state officials for the village's water infrastructure.

Now some of those costs though could be covered by the Wisconsin Department of Health Services through a grant.

It could also be several months before water has fluoride in it once again and it's flowing through the deforest pipes.

Village officials have elected to pursue a phased approach.

They expect that this is gonna take between four to six months to bring fluoride to at least one of the wells.

Some of the other wells will take a bit longer, and it could be as long as 14 months before fluoridated water, that's a word you don't say every day, is being pumped through all four of the wells.

Now, in February of last year, de Forest Trustees voted four to three to stop adding fluoride to the village's water.

Since then, the village board has seen a series of shake-ups.

One anti-fluoride trustee was ousted in a September recall election.

Another anti-fluoride board member resigned for personal reasons.

That's

a

that's a hill to die on being an anti-fluorite.

Yeah.

You were on the wrong side of history, my friend.

It is.

I remember it was a couple of years ago when this whole thing started in villages and towns across the state.

We're saying we're getting rid of floor.

You can't put these chemicals in our bodies.

We don't need fluoride.

And every you mentioned it at the top of the story, every dental group in America was like, no, no, this is a mistake.

Doctors like.

like, no, this is a mistake.

Well, what if we get too much fluoride?

You're not getting too much fluoride.

We don't believe you.

We were on the internet, bubba.

And these towns all decided they were going to stand up because it was woke to have fluoride, even though they all had their teeth partially because of that fluoride.

It didn't matter.

They were going, oh, we're going to make a stand.

And then all of a sudden, a couple of years later, they realized, boy, this was a mistake.

We should have listened.

It's like another

branch of the anti-vax

movement.

It is essentially what

it is, right?

We

are now all in the and find out stage.

Right.

Right.

Of the equation.

But here's what I'm also going to say, because you know, I couldn't go a block talking about this, especially all the people who have been ousted from that board.

It's why local elections also matter, because, right?

I mean, people were able to stand up, speak out, vote people out, and also hold a recall election and all of that as

well.

So, you know, there's that aspect of it too.

So local politics does matter.

And it's okay to do a little bit of research, but realize you also don't have a medical degree and you are not a dentist.

You're not the American Dental Association and you're not a pediatric physician or dentist and you don't know and just because you read some clickbait article that says his fluoride giving you three heads in a tumor It's probably not true.

I wanted you to click on that story.

So

You know, I guess good for the forest at this point.

Yeah, but doing the right thing.

Okay.

Yes.

Yeah, I can't believe that this is where we're at when people actually do the right thing cities communities individuals.

We have to be like yay you

spent all morning all morning just

Hey, you did your, it'd be like, it'd be like if every day the boss is, you know, the owner of the company came in and said, hey, good job, you stay down the air for three hours.

Yeah, that's the base.

That's the baseline.

That doesn't even take into account anything that we did for those three hours.

We just were here for the three hours of the

show.

Parker every day.

Now at the end of this show, we're going to make sure that we tell you good job for

keeping us on the air.

Good job for wearing a shirt.

Thank you for wearing a shirt to work.

Thank you, Parker.

You wore a shirt as you were awake.

That's a baseline.

That's all we expect from you.

Wear a shirt.

We don't even ask pants anymore, because I don't see you below the waist.

So a shirt and stay awake.

That's all.

Your shirt is very long.

It's almost like a mini dress.

Good job.

If you got yourself up and out of bed today and you made it to work, good job, you.

It was tough.

Oh my

gosh.

The whole world is a participation trophy.

It is.

Everybody gets one.

It is just for show it up.

Oh, it's time for the big story.

Yeah, there's more work on the ballroom.

But it seems like cracks are forming in the foundation pun intended of Republican support for this ballroom.

Senate Republican leaders are expected to abandon a proposal for $1 billion in security money for the White House complex and the president's ballroom today after members of their own party

Question the timing and the lack of detail in the Secret Service request.

He's gonna be so mad.

There's not a solid ketchup bottle in all of the White House.

Wow.

He's going to be upset.

I can't wait to hear the names.

He's going to call people.

He will threaten to primary everybody, even himself.

He's just, he's going to be apoplectic.

Wow.

And I can't wait.

I can't wait to see that orange head getting ready to explode and spittle flying out.

I have so many

questions about this, considering this is like an active construction site, but I'm going to let you get through the rest of this.

So

we have all of the details.

Let's figure it out.

Yeah.

Let's see if we can answer the.

questions so republicans have tried to add the money to a roughly 70 billion bill to restore funding to ICE and Border Patrol but the security proposal met with backlash from some GOP lawmakers who were questioning the cost and how taxpayer dollars would be used.

Hey another participation you're doing your job thank you.

The bill's text has not yet been released yet because there is no plan he just wants more money and he's going to do it for security.

quote-unquote.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune from South Dakota, Jamie's home state, acknowledged ongoing vote issues on Wednesday as leaders tried to measure Republican support as well as ongoing parliamentarian issues as they try to figure out what will be allowed in the bill under the chamber's rule.

The president has already called for the parliamentarian to be fired.

One, because she's a woman, he actually said they've had somebody who's a woman.

Yeah.

And for a caller, call her many names.

He does it because she said

she couldn't make a decision.

Right.

Well, because she's following,

she wouldn't understand this.

Women's or women's are too emotional to make any kind of big deal.

We're building things like men do.

We don't need ladies saying things.

Democrats have criticized Republicans for trying to fund the ballroom when voters are concerned about fake affordability issues.

So it's good to see.

But, but the main thing is, and think about, think about Caesar.

A lot of the senators are not happy with the way that he is primaring people, and especially that he went and backed Ken Paxton as in Texas against John Cornyn.

Because John Cornyn, there are always consequences, Thune said, of taking on the United States Senate.

So.

You went, you overplayed, and I said this earlier in the show on something else.

He's overplaying his hand, and somebody's gonna smack

it.

I do find this to be fascinating, because we're at this complete standstill with this ballroom.

And the other day, I was watching TV, and the president was basically in the middle of a construction site, while

these

workers were just milling around behind him, because they...

can't actually work right now because everything's at a standstill.

There's no funding.

There's an injunction on it.

Yeah, there's an injunction.

There's

no funding for this thing.

So now a house that basically the American people own has been completely destroyed with no congressional oversight.

There's a gaping hole in basically the ground next to the White House.

So what he's basically done is demolish property that people of this country owed with

no back up.

He's a renter.

He's a renter who is coming in and trying to put an addition on a house that he doesn't.

Here's the other

thing.

We've seen the blueprints for this thing.

Let's say hypothetically that this thing eventually gets passed, right?

Eventually we find the funding, whatever it might be, taxpayer, okay, hypothetically.

Okay.

presumably only has a couple of years left in office.

How long is this thing gonna take to actually build?

Because I don't see this being quick unless it's gonna not be well-constructed.

I

have so many questions.

Well, Jamie, when you're in your forever house, you don't worry about how long it's gonna take.

Oh my gosh.

And I firmly believe, listen, he's Mar-a-Lagoed the whole place.

He's not planning on leaving.

Yeah.

The midterms go his way.

He's staying forever.

You know, and unless Republicans get a spine and decide to be a co-equal branch of government.

They're starting.

I actually, at this stage of the game, I would actually have a little bit more faith.

in Senate Republicans.

It's minor.

It's the house.

It's the house that's the biggest problem.

House is the

issue.

Because as long as Mike Johnson is there, the house is not

doing

anything.