S*#t You Need To Know: Wisconsin News And Minnesota Fraud

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

Time for some sh** you need to know.

All right, listen, it's long weekend.

Perhaps you'll be venturing outdoors.

The weather is supposed to be nice.

You'll be hiking around.

You'll be cutting the grass.

You'll be doing all kinds of things well.

Fear the deer tick.

Yes, more than half of tested deer ticks in Wisconsin are carrying the bacteria that causes Lyme disease.

According to a new Marshfield Clinic study, researchers analyzed nearly 12,500 ticks submitted by residents through a citizens science project of the 707 adult female deer ticks tested.

51% carried the Lyme disease bacteria, higher than expected.

Wisconsin has recorded a record 6,469 Lyme disease cases, or they did in 2024, cases quadrupled over the past 20 years.

Now, expert stress, the risk

risk of infection is relatively low, only about 3%.

Ticks must be attached for 24 to 36 hours to transmit the disease.

So what does that mean?

Yes, get home and just like monkeys, check each other for ticks.

It's going to be fun.

Turn it into something else if you're a consenting adult.

I don't want to get in your business, but just know there's ticks out there.

We don't ask questions.

Yes, I don't ask questions.

I just think of scenarios in my mind.

That's right.

Most of the ticks that were submitted for this were wood ticks.

They don't spread Lyme disease.

So the findings highlight the need for awareness, especially in high risk regions like Southwestern Wisconsin.

So again, be careful with the ticks.

I had one couple of weeks ago was gross.

Aspie and I went out for a hike this past week.

And when we came home, I pulled three off of her or four off

of her and

three off of me.

And

they were, yeah.

So they were just crawling around.

They still hadn't, you know, found a place to just kind of nest and do their thing.

But she's hilarious.

I always know when she's got a tick on her because she's got really short hair.

So she feels it start to crawl up that really short hair and she absolutely will not like let it go.

She absolutely won't and she will continue to turn.

She'll just sit down and tell somebody does something about it.

So I always know- Fix me, fix me.

Exactly.

So I always know when she has something crawling on her because she is very persnickety about how that feels and how that feels on her hair.

So I can usually mitigate.

those pretty quickly on her,

but they were in my

socks and everything when we

got home.

Oh, that's, that's gross.

My little one, my little dog is very fluffy.

Okay, hard to find her when we're walking.

And so yeah, but I spent the other night, we were cutting birds off of her for a

half

hour.

Yikes.

I'm like, Oh, okay.

Yeah.

So just

You and your dog and everybody be careful.

Use the

repellents if you have to.

And I know there's a lot of, when it comes to your pets, I know that there's a lot of people who are skeptical of the medicines.

I get that.

Talk to your vets, make sure that they're on something proper because here in Wisconsin, well, we don't have a shortage, obviously.

In other stories this morning, stuff you need to know.

This is good news if you've been following the cases

in

Minnesota because a woman there described as the mastermind of a

massive COVID-era fraud scheme has been sentenced to nearly 42 years in prison.

Her name is Amy Bach and she was convicted of wire fraud and bribery tied to the Feeding Our Future case.

Prosecutors say that scheme stole more than $250 million in federal funds with only about $50 million recovered.

Bach has been ordered to pay over $242 million in restitution.

The case is considered one of the largest pandemic

related fraud cases in the country.

Federal officials announced these new charges against 15 additional suspects linked to related fraud schemes.

Now, new cases involve more than $90 million in additional alleged fraud, including misuse of childcare and Medicaid funds.

Officials say some schemes involve falsifying meals for children and inflating staffing numbers so that they could collect the government money.

Authorities emphasize the crack that the crackdown is on

ongoing with a growing federal effort to investigate and prosecute fraud across the Midwest.

You know, it's funny.

This is great.

What I think is interesting is for all of the rhetoric that has been involved in this fraud scheme and that Nick Shirley video that we saw a few weeks ago, months ago now, time is just of the essence in my mind at this point, but that we saw

It turns out that it wasn't the Somali community that was prosecuted after all.

But they look different.

We got to go after them first.

No, this is good.

Minnesota, it shows and it takes all the argument away from these MAGA folks who were, what about Minnesota?

Yeah, they're investigating it.

And just like they're investigating the ice shootings and they're getting the job done.

So why don't we take a little.

cue from them and maybe prosecute people like they deserve to be prosecuted.

So yeah, good job.

Good job, Minnesota.

And well deserved punishment.

Yes.

You want to cheat?

You're gonna and you get caught.

Well, you got to pay the price.

All right.

This is good news.

The big story today is good news for Wisconsin voters because a federal judge has rejected the Trump administration's attempt to obtain Wisconsin's full unredacted voter registration list.

The administration has been requesting detailed voter data, including partial social security numbers or driver's license numbers, saying it needed it for verification efforts.

All right.

The Wisconsin Elections Commission refused, arguing that releasing that level of personal data would violate Wisconsin privacy laws protecting voters.

So the U.S.

Department of Justice sued the state, claiming the information was required to ensure compliance with federal election laws, including the Help America Vote Act and the National Voter Registration Act.

The DOJ also argued the record should be released under a provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1960.

Well, bad news for you because the Supreme Court's voting all of that away.

So we don't have to worry about that anymore US District Judge James Peterson disagreed He really he ruled that voter registration lists do not fall under that section of the Civil Rights Act and because of that finding the judge dismissed the case with prejudice Meaning the federal government cannot refile the same claim the ruling didn't address other arguments however focusing solely on legal questions of whether the Civil Rights Act applied

Voting rights advocates, including the ACLU, intervened in the case and warned the request could be used to create a national voter database or challenge voter eligibility.

And we're seeing that already start to happen in some places.

Advocates argued the effort could lead to eligible voters being wrongly flagged or removed from voter rolls.

And we saw this just the other day.

We reported on that too.

Wisconsin is one of 29 states in the District of Columbia targeted by similar lawsuits from the Trump administration.

I will let you divine why those 29 states are being targeted.

I don't need to tell you that you're smart enough.

Courts have now dismissed at least eight of those cases signaling growing legal resistance to the strategy.

It sounds like the same strategy they used after the 2020 election.

Yeah, while all these lawsuits.

Losing court.

time and time again and yet keep hammering on The lawsuit and the fact that we need we need this to get Voter voter registration and we got to get rid of all the the dead people and the illegal people that are voting and all the people that shouldn't be voting

I mean, it's it's just another way to a road trust and to make sure that as as we've said the

right people will put that in air quotes or actually voting in the elections.

What I thought was fascinating is that they tried to use the Civil Rights Act from 1960.

And specifically, I did a little deep dive into this.

They were looking at Title III as part of that law that they were trying to use so that they could get these records.

Now, that law does allow the attorney general to inspect election records to make sure voting rights are protected.

The key difference, though, is that oversight is not the same as

limited access.

And that

is

was the argument that Judge Peterson made in this particular case.

You just don't get to sweep up highly sensitive data like driver's license numbers and social security numbers without some sort of clear justified reason.

And that was essentially what the DOJ was trying to do to Wisconsin voter rolls.

And this has been an ongoing debate, right?

Just a few months ago when the vice president was here, they asked him specific

about the voter rolls and things like that.

And he made a point to say, yes, we're gonna, you know, it's, if you don't have anything to hide, you should be willing to hand them over.

Well, no.

I hate that.

I hate that reasoning.

What do you got to hide?

I don't know, my privacy.

Just because I don't want you to have my information doesn't mean I did something wrong.

Right.

And I don't care.

Parker, are you listening, I'm sorry, are you listening to something in there?

Do you

have something running in the background?

I'm hearing a guy.

I'm hearing some guy talking.

Do we have something

running in the background?

Anyway, we'll get that figured

out.

Sorry, yeah, it's trying to be nuts and I don't know if I'm the only one who can hear it.

No, I can hear it

once in a while too periodically.

I

know I'm like a dog, but squirrel, squirrel, squirrel, but I'm like, wait, we're talking.

And then if you're watching on the stream, you see me, I'm taking my headphone, I'm looking around like, I don't have any speakers on, I don't have anything on.

Yeah, I was just checking all my stuff too.

things

turned out, I've got all my,

no, you're good, you're good, I've got

all my stuff.

But somebody else probably was hearing it too.

Anyway, anyway, to your point, yes, that excuse that they were using, why don't you just turn it over?

Yes, and you know, and it's not, it's, the 2020 election, let's be clear once again, it was litigated from every angle.

There were audits, there were recounts, there were court cases, there were legislative reviews.

Even the investigator that was brought in by Robin Voss, Michael Gabelman,

investigate the 2020 election could find no fraud and then had his law license suspended for three years by the Wisconsin Supreme Court because of his role in the investigation of the 2020 election.

So no matter your politics, I mean, we should all agree that our personal information should be protected and that the federal government really has no right to have that information just readily on hand.

If you're somebody who's arguing for this, imagine if some sort of registry where they had a list of every person who had a gun and every gun they had in their house and they have part of your address.

How would you feel then?

Do you want to?

Well, listen, if you're not doing anything wrong with that gun, why would you be afraid of the state giving all your information to a national database?

Because I don't want them to know that's why.

Right.

Because it's none of their business, what my social, they know my social security number because I have to file taxes all the time.

Here's another question that I have for, for maybe Republican voters.

Do you care anymore?

It's been six years.

Your guy won two years ago.

Like,

do we care?

Here's the thing, though, Jamie, if we keep harping on that, it's it.

then we don't have to start it fresh for the next election.

We're still in a continuum of look how corrupt these elections are.

Look how rigged the system is.

There's widespread voter fraud.

We've been talking about this for the last 10 years.

So why would it have changed now?

It's all part of the bigger plan.

If you keep sowing mistrust, it's a perennial.

to

put it in gardening terms.

It's gonna keep blooming.

You don't have to replant it every election.

It's just there, and it's always going to come up.

I guess at this point, if no matter how you vote, the question should be, why do we keep relitigating it?

And let's move on.

Are we not going to start addressing some of the issues that are even bigger?

And I understand why they're doing it, but if you voted for this administration,

Do you care anymore?

And are you ready to just move on?

Because...

Well, we're starting to see that already, right?

In Congress.

A lot of the Republicans are like, this is this constant obsession with 2020 is hurting everybody down the ticket, which I'm all for.

Let me know.

That's okay.

But yeah, if you're a Republican, you got to be going, just shut up.

Right.

Move on.

We won.

We won.

And we're going to keep winning.

Everybody's winning bigger, better.