Right back on the Big One seven hundred WLW nine thirty five, Dan Carroll till midnight tonight. It is the Wednesday night edition of the Midweek Crisis. Great night for the UC Bearcats as they get the better of Alabama State. Not a great night for the Zabor Musketeers as they fall to Creighton by forty one. Forty one point loss for the Xavier Musketeers, and I thought they had things going the other way. So we'll see if coach Patino
can get them back on track. In the meantime, while the UC basketball was game was going on, President Trump made an address to the nation, and an address it only lasted eighteen minutes. If someone would have had me wager ahead of time, I would have wagered that this address would have gone way over eighteen minutes. And Daniel Turner, a power of the future, is here to is here to analyze what Trump had to say tonight. Daniel Turner, are you surprised it was only eighteen minutes?
That I am.
That's you know, considering this is.
Prime time and when the President asks for this coveted slot, I saw them say, you know, they they they preempted this season finale of survivor or something. I mean, this is a coveted Yeah, this is a coveted slot. And and.
You know, I think it was a very impassionate speech.
It was definitely brief, a lot of charts which I thought were interesting. We don't usually see presidents have visual aids, but I my general takeaway is I could sense the president's tremendous frustration that that not for credit, right, but frustration that that we forget about how bad things were
and where we were as a country just a year ago. Well, I mean, the border alone could be a whole hour conversation with you, Dan, But but but on energy, on on foreign affairs, on uh, the economy, on an I mean, just a plethora of issue. Not long ago, we had an executive order that required us to drive electric vehicles
by twenty thirty. Yeah. Right, there was a lot of stuff that the President inherited, and I think there was a sense of frustration that, yes, everything is not perfect, but by golly, remember where we were and it's only been eleven months. Stick with me because we're headed in the right direction.
Yeah. I think if he's in I think they've pretty much said what their game plan is going to be from here on out going into the midterms, and they are going to talk about the economy and economic issues and why Trump is better for the economy and that's why we need to hold the Republicans need to hold the House and hold the Senate. And I put a star by this when he put up the chart about wage games and how wages are now rising faster than inflation.
That struck me Daniel Turner as an area where I think he can get a lot of t I because that is something that is demonstrable. It is something that I think most people can get their head around that they they're making more money in that right now, and it's that it's not immediately going out of their pocket because inflation is taking such a big bite out of their paychecks. How do you see that?
I agree with you, And I think when you add in those other factors of a reverse migration or remigration U that will see less of it of a strain, less of a demand on things like housing and on things like healthcare, and those costs will start to come down as well. You know, we're always dealing with fixed commodities, and it's it's something I've been thinking a lot about in just an enlarge, thirty thousand foot conversations. Your energy is a fixed commodity, and and the question is how
is it allocated? And education is a fixed commodity. Barack Obama said, everyone has to go to college. We're going to give you money.
To do so. But we only have so many seats at university. And what happened? The price went through the roof.
Right, Barack Obama said, everyone has to have health care by law. Well, we only have so many doctors and so many clinics, and so what happened. Prices went through the roof because the demand went through the roof. But the supply was fixed. So we're always dealing with fixed commodities. And we have a president who is a supply sider, as we used to call ourselves on the right, that
we can increase the supply and bring down costs. But we're battling a Democrat party and a Biden administration legacy, which is a demand party, which is, how do we get people to want more of these things? How do we pay them to buy the things that we want. There was no effort to increase supply. There was no effort to produce more electricity. There was no effort to produce more energy. All there was was giving out money to force people to buy stuff.
Well, of course, prices went through the roof as a result.
So the president has a lot on his plate, and we are headed in a good direction. We're not there yet, right, there's no I'm not spiking a football, but by golly, we are headed in the right direction.
Well. Towards the end, he said an economic boom is on the way, and I think he really laid the groundwork for all the things that are going to help spur this economic boom. And he talked about energy prices and another thing that I thought that was important that another thing that people can get their head around is mortgage costs and how the cost of owning your own
home is going to come down. And you talk about affordability, especially for young people who've been priced out of the housing market mostly because of where interest rates are for mortgages. I think if that takes a turn and goes the right way, I think that's going to be a pretty big nutt right there.
I have a lot of reason to be optimistic for twenty twenty six. Like I said, there's not a I'm not spiking the football. But if I look at the future, I am fairly optimistic. Most of the tax provisions, the economic provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill, don't start until January first. I saw a guy on Fox Business this morning talk about five percent GDP in the first and second quarter. Now that's real optimism, right. But there are a lot of things happening in twenty twenty six,
and then they're even unifying things. The President mentioned our two hundred and fiftieth anniversary. There's the Winter Olympics in a couple of months. That's a unifying thing. There are lots of things happening next year that can give America sort of an injection of positivity. I think the Democrats they're only alternative. Their only option is to try to create tension and frustration. They're looking for a George Floyd incident, right,
That's why you have all these ice protests. They're looking to they're looking for violence, They're looking for anger to sow the seeds of discord, because that's how they thrive. They thrive in chaos. But there's a lot that could unify this country, and quite frankly, if the American people have a decent salary and can pay their bills and pocket some cash and go on vacation and love their spouse. They're not going to care about elections, and that's good, right.
They're not going to care about fighting.
For the because their life is fine, and that's the way it should be.
Right.
We shouldn't be vesting all of our effort into who controls the House and the Senate. The problem with that is that we were admitting government runs our lives. But if we get our lives back, then, then let all those idiots in DC fight and just let me be happy and prosperous in my own self sustained autonomy.
The way our founders envisioned.
Yeah, I think you're right. I think there was a time in this country, especially in my lifetime, where we didn't we didn't concern ourselves with the daily comings and goings of what happened in Washington, DC. And I don't know if it just because of the availability of all that information right now, or we spend so much time worrying about you know, is the House going to vote on this? Are they going to get the healthcare thing going? They're gonna you know, get another budget passed before the
government shuts down. We used to not worry about all that kind of stuff on a on a daily basis, and we do now. Did you see how he snuck in? Early next year he's going to introduce new Chairman of the Fed. Do you think that I think that's a little bit he.
May ask for Jerome's power resignation a little sooner than than may. I mean, he definitely is very frustrated with with with Jerome Powell.
No, you know, think of how many obstacles he has.
I mean, he had a fire that the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, because this was the woman who they had to they had to reverse her jobs numbers into the Biden economy by eight hundred thousand. And you say that's not an error, right, Like you don't get something wrong by eight hundred thousand. It reminds me when Pete Buddhaje Edge was told, hey, you spend eight
billion dollars, how many charging stations did you build? Margaret Brennan asked him and he was like, oh, seven or eight or eight.
He wasn't positive that was either seven or eight.
Right.
These these numbers are.
You should have.
Numbers are hard and.
When the when the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics is inflating your economy numbers by eight hundred thousand, we have a huge problem.
Right.
You almost wonder what were the real numbers? What were the real numbers at the border when they would give us fake So he has a lot of government, as they call it, the deep state, and Jerome Powell is just another one. Half of the FBI is another one. Right. There are a lot of bureaucrats in DC. And that goes back to my earlier part. My earlier the point. If DC has all this power, then they control our lives.
What he is doing with President tup is doing with the Department of Education, we should be doing across the board getting it out of DC and giving it back to the states. You in Ohio had way more power in Columbus than you guys ever will in Washington, DC. And if you want education for your kids, you are much more likely to get good education if education is out of Columbus. But if you have to go all the way to DC for your education, good luck, Chuck.
Right, that's what we should be doing.
Across the board, putting it back in the states. I can't disagree with that at all. From a political sense, he I think this is a brilliant move where he talked about the Warrior Dividend and one seven hundred and seventy six dollars to every member of our armed services, which I think, I don't know how that's the first I've heard of that he said this. The first time people heard about that was about thirty minutes ago. I think that's from a political standpoint, I think that's brilliant.
I don't know how anyone can stand up and be opposed to that.
Yeah, you know, one of the numbers about the Department of War, I almost called the DoD the Department of War. That really frustrates the left are the recruiting numbers, and
you have to struggle. They have to struggle with the fact that if you're a seventeen year old kid and you're thinking of joining the Marines, you look at someone like Pete Haigsas, and you look at at at at at General Kane, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and you say, I want to be like those guys, right like their their alpha, they're they're patriotic, their they're Biden gave us a bunch of of of men dressed as women with masks who were telling us about climate change,
and the numbers of the recruiting numbers dropped right, and they looked at look at the terrible withdrawal from Afghanistan. You know, that was not a problem. The withdrawal from Afghanistan. They stand by it. But if the d O D bombs a couple of narco terrorists in the Caribbean, they're all up in arms, right, so go go figure that.
But that's that's something that the left.
Struggles with, and that's why they hate the military. This, this warrior dividend is a lot President Trump's ethos of building back to military and then making America strong and making America patriotic, and and we started to lose that and I think we're getting it back and that's great for the country.
Yeah, one hundred percent of the jobs on the Trump went to American citizens, which I think is terrific and the whole idea. So again, he got a lot in there in eighteen minutes. And I don't know it did. Maybe it was a TV I was listening to. Did it sound like the audio quality was off a little bit? Well, how was the audio quality where as you were listening to it, my auto quality was fine.
So maybe maybe he just had had a bad connection.
But no mind was good.
And then and then I guess, somewhere is a dollar ninety ninety gallon. I know around here, I think we're around two thirty five, So a dollar ninety nine I would welcome that right now.
See, I would welcome that too. I think that they reported around two dozen gas stations.
I think the majority of them.
Are in Oklahoma where the gas has fallen below two dollars a gallon.
That's something really.
Positive, right because all of our farmers right now are getting ready to start thinking about spring, and they're going to do so at diesel, which is four seventy five a gallon and not eight bucks that it was under Biden. And that means that you're planting your crops next year is going to be a heck of a lot cheaper, which means harvesting those crops will be cheaper, which means your food will be cheaper.
So a lot of.
The inflation from the Biden era it took a while to trip into the economy, and it's going to take a while to get squeezed out of the economy. All of this is because of government tinkering. And that's again the government per government tinkering in the auto industry and the energy industry, in the military, in education, dei ESG. All of this nonsense, tinkering, tinkering, and all they did was create chaos. And it takes a while to undo chaos.
And all this stuff takes a while to happen. But one by one, the the opposition, the Democrats and the left are running out of cudgels to beat Donald Trump about the head and shoulders with with these these different issues. Daniel Turner, it's so great to have you on all the time. What do you let me ask you this? You mentioned diesel prices. People always ask her this question. I want to ask you this question. Wire diesel prices so much higher than regular gasoline prices.
Mostly because diesel we don't we don't refine a lot of it, and so diesel prices are high for the same reason why a lot of the California blends are high. When you have a refinery, refinery can produce lots of different products, but every time you want to change the product, you know, like, let's just put it simply, you have to you have to regulate the machine, calibrate the machine, and get it ready to create the new version of it.
We don't produce a lot of diesel, and so the main reason why diesel has expended is because it's a number of volume. What we produced the most of is regular unleaded, which is why it's the cheapest. But if we produced more diesel, right, diesel prices would go down. One of the things President Trump I wish he would address, and we will try to work with him. From the energy perspective, we need more refining capacity. We need to refine a lot. We have shut down a lot of refineries.
Gavin Newsom shut down several. We can produce all the oil we want, but if we have limited refining capacity, we're always going to have that bottleneck. And that's something I wish he would spearhead for next year. Build more refineries.
Yeah, what do you make out of what's happening with Venezuela right now?
I don't want to see boots on the ground.
You know, we've been through this before in regime change, and so I understand what the President's doing. I think his ultimate strategy, which maybe I shouldn't be saying on the air because I'm giving it away. Sorry, mister President. I honestly think this is a China play. Eighty five ninety percent of the oil from Venezuela goes to China. China doesn't have any domestic oil production. It imports all of it. It's twenty something million battles a day. So
why he has huge sanctions on Iran. Yes, sanctions on Iran to protect Israel and stop terrorism in the Middle East and terrorism worldwide. But also the majority of the Ranian oil sales went to China. The majority of the Venezuela and oil sales go to China. I think strategically
this is kicking China out of the Southern hemisphere. It's a little bit of Monroe doctrine, but it is crippling China because if they run out of oil imports, they will sit down at the negotiating table and take their place on the world stage under our boot where they belong like little communists. So I think it's a China play.
Quite frankly, you know what, I think that that analysis to me makes perfect sense. If he can choke off the main artery of their energy supply, or at least restricted, you know, a great deal where to where they're feeling the pinch on that, then they are work more likely to play ball and and do things favorable to to
what Trump wants. So I think that's uh, And that's what Daniel Turner, That's why I have you on the show man, because you see any of those things, you know, I can, I can ask you about anything, and I absolutely love it. Is Ford done making evs? Now have they seen the light?
You poor forge stockholders?
Right again, it's a publicly traded company that.
You always take that risk when you buy stock in a company. But but this is where CEOs have to face the tax the shareholders. You know, a long time we've talked about evs a ton on your program, and by the way, you know, at the end of this year, I have to remind you how much I love coming on your program, and I've enjoyed my years with you, and especially this last year. But many times we've talked
about EV's and I've always reminded your wonderful audience. The one company that stayed out from the very beginning was Toyota, and they took a lot of flack from the Biden administration, but Toyota, which is the world's largest auto manufacturer, said we don't see a market future in evs where it's going to stick with hybrids and combustion engines. So you know, again tinkering. The Biden administration decided they want an EV's. They forced it down Ford's throat and look at the result. Chaos,
pure chaos. Yep, huge loss for Ford. Daniel Turner, as always, man, I appreciate the time, I appreciate you being here and thanks for the analysis. Great work as always, and I certainly hope we can be talking again at least one more time before the new year.
How about that.
I would love to Dan anytime, but if not, Merry Christmas to you and your listeners.
Thank you so much, Bratan, Thank.
You, Daniel. All the best to you and yours too, my friend. I appreciate that. Daniel Turner Power the Future, great website. I check it out all the time if you want to see what's happening with energy in this country. It's just great stuff. Nine fifty four. We got to get to a break news coming up at the top of the hour, So what is your take on what
the Trumpster had to say tonight? And also Earlier today, the former prosecutor of Hamilton County, Joseph Theaters, was on this radio station and defending himself from the current prosecutor, Connie Pillach, who would suggest that somehow during his time in office that he engaged in behavior that saw an innocent man go to prison. Absolutely disgusting, and we're definitely going to talk about that as we roll on till
midnight tonight. Dan Carroll in the Wednesday night edition of The Midweek Crisis on seven hundred WLW, seven hundred WLW, it's ten oh five. I'm Dan Carroll, that says the Wednesday night edition for the Midweek Crisis. Joe Wandell running the Big Board in the seven hundred WLW Command Center. Front lines are open five to one to three, seven four nine, seven, eight hundred, the Big One, talking about what Trump had to say tonight and an eighteen minute speech.
He normally goes longer than that. Look, I'm I'm eighteen minutes. I'm perfectly fine with that. I think that is if you're you're gonna be on TV, you're canceling people shows that they want to watch, can they put up with, you know, eighteen twenty minutes? Of the president being on I would I would certainly hope. So I talked about, you know, a lot of the stuff is stuff we heard before when he talked about what was going wrong
when he took office. Took office, talked about the border, crime, the economy, drugs, women or men and women, sports, reminded everyone that he won the popular votes, talked about how bad Biden was. Now the border is closed, the border is strong. It's went from the worst to the best in typical Trump fashion. So that was that was some good stuff there. Let's see what Mark in Monroe has to say. And Mark, you're on seven hundred WLW.
Hey, Dan, I don't disagree with anything of the eighteen minutes, not to comput be compared to the Rosemary Wood eighteen minute missing minutes back in the day.
But anyhow, one by the infamous White House tapes, remember remember them?
Well, yes, sir, okay, I kind of want to shift just a little bit here, all right. I caught win with Dean bond Joni wanting to call it quits today.
Yeah, Dan Bongino, Yeah, he announced today that he is going to step down as Deputy director of the FBI in January.
Well, my concern is his main thing.
When he was doing his talk radio, he put all this emphasis on the pipe bomb thing, and I think that he's he's been undermined by the deep state to the point where he doesn't want to continue on anymore. I think, I.
Don't know, he's obviously changed his tune on that because he was so dead set that there was a lot more to it than meets the eye on the pipe bombing thing, and he was really leading the way on what was happening there. When different pieces of video would come out, he would do he would do entire segments, and I think he did a couple of shows where he did entire shows talking about the evidence that you know that was coming forward trying to catch the pipe bomber.
So he was he and he was pretty incredulous that they did. They really had no clue as to who this person was. And you know, we've come to find out subsequently that the Biden administration, under the FBI, under the Biden administration, had phone records that could have put the finger on this dude that they wound up arresting back in there. They could have done that back in twenty twenty one, had they followed up on on the
the information that they had. So Dan Bonngino, I don't know if he's being comp I would like to think that he's been around, he's savvy enough to not let that happen. It's going to be interesting to see how much liberty he's at to be able to speak frankly about his time as deputy director of the FBI. But and when the time comes when he's able to tell that story, I think it's going to be worth listening to.
Well, you know, if my opinion, there's a huge question mark that hangs over to head of this whole thing. And I know that, Yeah, I used to listen to his radio program, so I give him stack, you know, put stack in his integrity part of it. So there's something that really looms large and uh behind the scenes on this whole thing. So I guess kind of like what you're alluding to, we're going to get to see
how this whole thing pans out. But even as a whole I think our Department of Justice again beyond the end, you know, we failed with the Obama treaton thing, and I don't know where we're going to go with this COMI thing. But if we can't come up with convictions and the Department of Justice. And again, maybe there's where I'm putting my finger on this thing. Maybe he's just frustrated he's not gain in any ground with you know, like like I said, with convicting any of these people.
Maybe it is, Maybe it is a sense of frustration. Maybe it is he's just putting his throwing his hands up because he's not he sees a clear direction and he's for whatever reason, not able to follow that. So I don't know how you know, again, I don't know how candid he's going to be able to be when when he steps away, and I'm guessing he's going to go back to doing all the media stuff he was doing before, which I think will be great, and he'll he'll have, uh, he'll have a lot to talk about,
no doubt about it. Mark. I appreciate the I appreciate the phone call tonight.
Mark, thank you, thank you, thank.
You very much. And you know, I mean everything he's saying. It It goes to the trust that we have in these institutions. And why do we question what the FBI, what the Department of Justice, what investigators are saying about what happened with the with the pipe bomber. Why Why? Because for so long the FBI let itself be compromised and weaponized and let itself be controlled by political forces. And a story that came out a day or so ago,
and this was John Solomon, just the news. As the FBI raised doubts that a search warrant for Donald Trump's Florida estate met probable call standards, the Justice Department under Joe Biden, pushed to expand their search's scope, refused to cooperate with Trump's attorney, and discounted the agent's concern about
the optics of the raid. According to new emails turned over to Congress, the new evidence at surface may have more than political impact, As a top congressman warns, it may give Trump calls to sue for civil liberty violations or prompt prosecutor years to pursue a criminal investigation. This is going to go down as a dark chapter in American history, and President Trump may have recourse now to be able to see damages at some point in time,
said Representative Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin. The new emails were turned over to Congress after Attorney General Pam Bondi and the FBI director Cash Bettel, declassified them. They show that the Summer raid that the FBI in the summer of twenty twenty two raised repeated objections to raiding Trump's Mar A Lago home in Florida, expressed doubt that there was sufficient probable cause to believe the then former president had broken
the law in handling classified documents. The memos also show that the bureau's Washington Field office and its agents were pead tried to find alternative solutions to a contentious rate of the property, including having a reasonable conversation with Trump lawyers and limiting the search the search warrant to avoid
private areas of the estate. However, the Biden era Justice Department brushed aside these suggestions, expanding both the scope of the warrant and refusing any further discussion with Trump's personal lawyer. And so they've got the email documents to show this is exactly how it was all going down. So you know, they want to hold their hands up and say, wow, we didn't have anything to do with this, It was all on the up and up. Well, no, we we knew it wasn't from the very beginning, and we knew
that there were those in the FBI. I mean, thank god that said we this, this is wrong. We don't have the evidence does not support this idea of rating mar A Lago. But the Justice Department, who the FBI answers to, and I guess you know, the FBI leadership at the time, it didn't have enough wherewithal to be
able to shut this down. That and and and and the idea that they wouldn't speak with Trump lawyers, the idea that they wouldn't say, look, we've got a problem here, we need to get this worked out for a former president of the United States. Because I remember talking about this at the time that that was typically the way that these things were handled, that the lawyers get to If the Justice Department has an issue with something, you
contact the lawyers, you figure things out. You don't go in raid the home, start rooting through the underwear drawers of Malani and Trump, and raided in the bedrooms of Trump's son. The memos also show the bureau's Washington Field office and its agents repeatedly tried to find alternative solutions
to the contentious raid. The Justice Department originally wrote the Trump's lawyers on May eleventh of twenty twenty two, requesting that the former president return all classified documents in his possession. The deadline was set for May twenty fourth, but after the deadline passed, the attorney wrote back, claiming the Justice Department had said that the deadline was flexible. The Justice
Department said there would be no extension. In response, the attorney said the Justice Department would either have to compel compliance or try to reach an accommodation. The FBI believed that was entirely reasonable to try and reach an agreement with Trump's lawyers for the return of the documents. So
there was huge disagreement in there. But again, the people who were in charge, the people who make the decisions, the people who answered to Joe Biden and Joe Biden's top people, they were the ones who said no. They were the ones who, according to these emails, made the call and said that we were going in. I don't care what the Field Office says. Let me think about that.
And this is all coming to light now, and there's a lot more this kind of stuff that's been going on that that we've known about for a long time, and so we keep having the politicization of these different institutions and these the I mean, it just it pains me to say and I've and i've I've made this clear that the the FBI this one great institution, and cash Betel is I think he's doing what he can to try and restore the dignity and try and restore the trust that the FBI had for so many decades.
But that's a that that's a that's a big hill to climb. And the way this thing in with Brown University is being handled, I think most of that is on the local cops and we'll we'll see what happens there. But yeah, Dan Bongino stepping away announced it today that he was going to step down in January as deputy director. I mean, really wasn't there all that long. I think it's going to wind up being what seven eight months, maybe nine months when it's all said and done. So
it'll be interesting to see what he has. And I saw the what he put on his X feed about putting that out, and he just said to he thanks to the President. And you know, it was very classy about it. Didn't point fingers in anyone, nothing, nothing like that. So you know, it's had to stay tuned and see what see what Bongina has to has to say about that. The other thing I wanted to get into tonight was Connie Pillage, the Hamilton County prosecutor. And she earlier a
few days ago, I think it was late. I think it was Friday. Last week, she dismissed a murder case from nineteen ninety five, and this was the capital murder case against Elwood Jones. And she wrote that the decision follows month's long review of evidence and court filings, which reveals several issues, including a lack of physical or forensic evidence linking Jones to the murder, modern medical testing that excluded him as a suspect. And I've read as many
stories as I can about this. I don't know what medical testing she's talking about. That's what she has said. She has said that there is modern medical testing that excludes this guy as the murderer of rote to Nathan. Let's see here, you know, this was what's a date on this? That doesn't matter, But Pillage announced the she dismissed the nineteen ninety five capital murder case against Dulwood Jones.
Review was conducted in response to a twenty twenty two decision by Hamilton County Common please Court Judge Wendy Cross, overturning the Jones conviction, granting him a new trial. The previous prosecutor had appealed across his decision. On December fourth,
twenty five, the Highest Supreme Court affirmed the appeal. I did not take this extraordinary step lightly, Pillage said, But after reviewing the evidence, I'm not convinced that mister Jones killed wrote to Nathan, and so so here's what she threw in on this. Jones was convicted of the nineteen ninety four death of Nathan in the Blue Ash Motel spent twenty seven years on death row. She said her
review addressed several critical issues. A lack of physical and forensic evidence linking Jones directly to the murder, insufficient follow up on multiple witness statements pointing to alternative suspects. Modern day medical testing excludes Joan as a suspect, prior failure of the prosecutor's office to provide the defense with a
large volume of investigatory material before trial. And so it was that statement that got to our former Hamilton County prosecutor, Joe Dieters, who is now on the bench of the Ohio State Supreme Court. And so he wrote a letter at Connie Pillage. And that letter is posted on the seven hundred WIWX site, and if you want to read it for yourself, I suggest you do. And he starts the letter out saying that he is writing. He wants to be clear about the capacity in which he's writing.
He's doing as the if so is the former prosecuting attorney of Hamilton County as a citizen. And I covered Joe Dieters for years when I was a reporter at Fox nineteen, interviewed him, got to know him. I mean, look, we're not buddies. We're not we don't hang out, but I got to know him a little bit. There was never a hint of anything that was Joe Deeters did
everything in that office by the book. And trust me, there are plenty of political opponents who would love if they had the chance to take him down, if they possibly could. I mean, he ran that office with the highest amount of integrity. And he wrote a letter to Connie Pillage and he wrote, I've watched the in full of the press conference in which you dismissed the case
against Elwood Jones. During that conference, you publicly proclaimed that Jones had been cleared of the murder of Miss Nathan, asserting that your decision was based on modern day medical testing that excluded Elwood Jones as a suspect. He then went further. You publicly impugned the integrity of former members of my office, suggesting they cheated, and falsely implied that thousands of pages of evidence had been withheld from the defense.
You compounded these accusations by portraying your actions as a necessary correction to alladge past miss conduct, invoking the creation
of a conviction integrity unit as justification. And that's another thing that Connie Pillage has has going on here, but we got to get I'm going to continue this on the other side of the break the letter that Joe Dieters wrote to Connie Pillage, and if you did not listen to him earlier today as he and Mark Petemeyer were on the Bill Cunningham Show, I suggest to go back to the podcast and listen to that, because that was a compelling thirty minutes of radio, the likes of
which you do not hear every day. So I highly suggest that you go back and give that a listen, but we'll continue on with this. Your phone calls as well. Five one three, seven four nine The Big One Wednesday night edition of the Midweek Crisis on seven hundred WLW. Yeah, back on the Big One, seven hundred w l W ten thirty seven We roll till midnight tonight, five three hundred the Big One. I'm talking about Joe Dieters. He was on the Bill Cunningham Show today responding to Connie Pillach,
who decided that look is she looked at it. She looked at it. She decided that Elwood Jones didn't commit this murder. Back in nineteen ninety four, of Ruugh wrote a Nathan at the Embassy Suites in Blue ash.
Uh.
She her her job is to pursue justice. So Joe Dieters wrote a letter to her. He was in You heard a SoundBite from him on the during the news to the bottom of the hour when he was on with Cunningham earlier today and he he writes that he talked about how he watched her entire news conference where she dismissed the case. And then this is what really
upset Joe Deaders more than anything else. He says, you went Further, speaking to Ms. Pillage, you publicly impugned the integrity of former members of my office, suggesting they cheated, and falsely implied that thousands of pages of evidence had been withheld from the defense. You compounded these accusations by portraying your actions as necessary corrective to allege past misconduct. These assertions are not only outrageous, they are false, reckless,
and profoundly damaging. They constitute a gross disservice to the people of Hamilton County and an unjustified attack on honorable public servants. First, you claim that modern day medical testing excluded Jones from the murder is demonstrably untrue. You stated that because miss Nathan had hepatitis, Jones would necessarily have
contracted it had he been the perpetrator. Yet the defense's own paid expert testified that there was only a thirty three percent chance that Jones would have contracted hepatitis even if he were the person who beat her to death. A thirty three percent probability of transmission is not exclusion. Either you do not understand the meaning of that term, or you knowingly made a false statement or made a statement that was patently false. Your reference to thousands of
pages withheld evidence is likewise a red herring. After the defendant exhausted every available state appellate remedy, his council sought additional records in federal court, specifically police runs to the hotel and a questionnaire circulated by Blue Ash Police Department to hotel guests. These materials contained no exculpatory evidence whatsoever. They consisted of paper, nothing more, no facts, no forensic revelations, no information that would have altered the outcome of the case.
The Federal District Court explicitly found that these materials would not have affected jones conviction. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed that conclusion. If you have not read that opinion, you should have. The claim you advanced publicly is baseless. I was a prosecutor ultimately responsible for the decision to seek Jones's indictment. At no point did my
office cheat, as you so casually and irresponsibly allege. Mark Petemeyer is among the most respected prosecutors in the history of Ohio. Your statement about him and others were slanderous, unjustified, and wrong. If you are committed to transparency, I suggest you explain the following facts to the public. How many individuals possessed a master key capable of opening the locked
door to rode to Nathan's hotel room that morning. The answer is for how Jones sustained the infected wound to his hand, an injury consistent only with striking a human mouth. How the distinctive walkie talkie in Jones's possession the murder weapon was supposedly used by someone else, a question never answered. How Miss Nathan's unique piece of custom jewelry ended up in the toolbox in the trunk of Jones's car, which the defense claimed, without a shred of proof it was
planted by law enforcement. You also stated that Miss Nathan's family was merely disappointed by your decision, that that characterization borders on insulting. They are furious you may well have violated Marcy's law in the manner in which this decision was handled. Elwood Jones is no innocent victim of circumstance. He's a career criminal with prior arrest for aggravated burglary, assault on a police officer, multiple assaults on civilians, and
domestic violence. He served prison time for aggravated burglary and was released on parole, committed another aggravated burglary and returned to prison. You have chosen to release Jones after thirty years of incarceration based on mercy or policy considerations. That would have been your prerogative as an elected official. Reasonable people could disagree, but it would have been within your authority.
What is unforgivable is attempting to justify that decision through falsehoods and by maligning the reputation of dedicated public service or public servants. I should say, you stated that you struggled with this decision for months. If that is true, why did you never once consult the prosecutor who litigated this case for more than twenty five years. You spoke with defense counsel and even sent them a screenshot of your motion, yet you've never contacted me, not once. I'm
aware that you never tried a murder case. I do not know whether anyone on your staff has ever served as first chair in a death penalty prosecution. There is no shame in seeking guidance or experience when confronting matters of this gravity. I expected better judgment from you, respectfully, Joseph ted Eaters and I don't know how you I don't know how you say it better than that Ken and Mason. What say you?
Dan, I'm very familiar with that case. I've known Choe Dieters for almost sixty years. We played baseball together. As he's one of the most outstanding human beings that's ever lived on this earth, one of the most honorable men. And pitt Meyer is one of the greatest prosecutors of all time. And this was purely a political decision. Dan, She's pleasing her voting block, That's all she's doing, you know.
I mean, is Connie Pillich really need to enhance her bona fides with the Justice Project or these other groups that seek to uh, you know, release those from prison who have been wrongfully convicted? Does does does she really? I mean, she's she won the office, she's the prosecutor. Now does she really need to have this unit that's going to go out and seek justice for all these
who are wrong? Is she going to continue to malign the honesty and integrity of the work that Joe Dieters did and Mark pete Meyer and others in that prosecutor's office. I mean, I look when Joe Deeters, Joe Dieters bent over backwards to ensure public integrity and public trust in that office, in that hamlet, and it was probably the finest prosecutor's office in the state of Ohio and probably in the country during the time that he ran that office.
I Dan, you and I have as much experience as Connie Phillish does trying cases in court. Yeah, she has none. She has no experience of any kind in the statement Joe made that the fact she never contacted Joe, she never contacted Pittmeyer.
How do you not How do you not, even if, even if you're on the other side, which she is on, of the political aisle, How do you not have the professional integrity to contact the prosecutors of that case and say, look, I'm looking at this, here's what I found. Tell me where I'm wrong. How do you not challenge your own assertions? How do you not challenge your own conclusions on a
case of this magnitude? Don't you want to be right when you decide that someone who's convicted of murder, of taking this woman away from her family, who is on death row, and you're you know, tried by a jury and all the courts of appeals, the district courts, all these other courts that have looked at the during the appellate process. Don't you want to be right if you alone are going to make this decision. Don't you want to have your theories tested and with stand scrutiny. But
apparently Connie Pillage did. She spoke to the fuse attornies and never contacted Joe Dieters Ones. Unbelievable.
Well, Elwood Jones in his attorneys thought this for twenty five years, Dan, and never were they able to get anybody return reverse the decisions. The evidence was compelling, that was overwhelming. You know, the man killed the lady, there's no doubt about it. And the disservice they've done to her family also, can't I can't imagine the anger and the frustration they must be feeling. And Dan, as I said, this is purely a political move on Connie Pillich's part,
that's all. It is a political move. She doesn't know one iota of the case. Dan, I'm sure you know ten times what she knows about this case with Elwood Jones.
Well, I mean I didn't. I didn't cover this case back in the day, So I mean I know what I read about it. I've heard Joe Deeters talk about this case multiple times on the Cunningham Show. Mark Petemeyer was on with in the Studio with Cunningham and Joe Dieters today and all you have to do is listen to them talk. And they are look, if if they had a shred of doubt that this guy didn't do it,
then he would not be on death row today. And and they they, I mean they they used every bit of the forensic capabilities and the technology that they had back in the mid nineties to see to it that justice was done in this case. And then I saw Colin and Connie Pillach on TV earlier today and she's talking about, well if if someone goes to prison and they didn't do it, well that's not justice for that family either. Well, you know you're right about that. That's
a true statement. But to to not contact Pete Meyer and not contact Joe Dieters on this, and and and and at least challenge what they know on this, it's a sin. It's a sinal weakness. It's terrible.
It's you know, this lady is going to turn out to be a disaster.
Dan.
I've already heard comments stuff going on downtown that uh, it appears a lot of people were unhappy with unequal justice being applied in the courtrooms and Cincinnati right now, you know, and uh once again, you know, her prosecutors are catering to her voting block. It's just it's amazing. And I think then we were all afraid that things like this would happen, you know, they would turn justice
up on its up on its ear. I mean, we have a completely democratic, you know, set of politicians now downtown and this city it's in trouble, it really is. And I mean, I Connie Pillage, I would wag your guests Dan with you that ninety five percent of people that voted for didn't know who she was. She just tended to have a D by her name. You know, they could have.
She's run, She's run for several different offices over the years. I actually I interviewed her once when I was at Fox nineteen and uh, I forget I think she might have been running for state rep back at the time. But uh, I found her extremely distasteful then, just based on that one interaction that we have.
You know, I admire her service to the country.
Yeah, she was country.
She served comtry and I admire for that, But she has no legal background of any kind to run the position she's in. You know, it's like, you know, me going in and operating on someone's heart. God helped that poor guy.
I mean, not a good idea.
That's kind of what she's doing. I know, as a prosecutor, she's having people heading up the field of prosecution and she has no idea what she's talking about, what she's doing. You know, I'd like to be a fly on the inside her wall when she's asking people, what is that? What am I supposed to do? What is Marcy's law?
What?
What I mean? She probably is unaware of half the stuff going through office on a daily basis. She's probably had prosecutors that are teach her what's going on, and she's supposed to be the leader.
Well, it's insane at the very least in my opinion. She owes Joe Dieters and she owes Mark pete Meyer a sincere apology for what she said about them, And you know, this notion, it just it just is to me, it is absolutely jaw dropping that she would not consult with them on a decision of this magnitude This is just absolutely draw. I mean, she's a prosecutor. They were the prosecutor. I mean in that sense, are are Aren't
they on the same team? Are they? Are you telling me that Joe, Joe Deaters was not interested in justice? Are you you know? Are you telling me that that Joe Dieters ran a slip shot operation at the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office. I mean, remember when Tracy Hunter was was going through her difficulties and she wound up the court and what did he? What did Joe Deeters do?
He he went out and he got two of the of the very best defense attorneys that he could find, one one one day here in in Hamilton County, the other one in Claremont County. And he got uh and uh. He went and got these two defense attorneys to prosecute the case. Defense attorneys he who had no skin in the game, to make sure that the prosecution was above board and honest as possible. That's the way Joe Dieters
ran his office. So I mean, I mean, you talk about trust, you talk about integrity, you talk about high standards. I think all those things are being compromised now under the leadership of Connie.
Pillage Well, and that to get judge you're talking about Tracy Hunter. She was truly mentally affected by something. She was not all there and the things she did were as bad as any judge it's ever been in Cincinnati ever. I mean the way that the length she went to free her brother of trouble was so criminally criminally corrupt. I mean, and to this day, I imagine she's probably in Connie Pilch's office every day trying to get completely cleared of everything.
Well, it'll be interesting. It'll be interesting to see if any local reporters, when they have a chance to talk with Connie pillach Well, will challenge her with any of the any other things that Joe Dieters had to say.
She'll have no comment, She won't address it, Dan, and unfortunate and the media won't won't harass her about it either. Bill Cunningham and you will be the only people in town really speaking up against her.
Ken has always been we got to run. I always appreciate you listening, and I appreciate you picking up the fun Dan, great show Ken from Mason, Thank you very much. Yeah, so again comes to this conclusion. You know all these judges, all these pullet processes, everyone who's reviewed this case for twenty five years. Connie Pillach comes along says, you know what,
he didn't do it. You gonna dismiss the case. All good, unbelievable, And while she's doing it, she takes a swipe at two of the very best, if not the best, that Hamilton County has ever seen. Ten fifty five. We got to get to a break. More of your phone calls coming up. Five one, three, seven, four, nine, seven thousand, one, eight hundred, The Big One on seven hundred WLW. Back on the Big One, seven hundred WLW eleven O seven. We roll till midnight tonight. It is the Wednesday night
edition of the Midweek Crisis. Phone lines are open. Five one, three, seven, four, nine, seven thousand and one, eight hundred, the Big One, Come on. Ala Harris is out there continuing the book tour and going on any podcasts that'll have her. She's she's all over the place, and now the reports are is that she is laying the groundwork, laying the groundwork for another run at being president of the United States. That's just fantastic.
Twenty twenty five isn't even over yet and already they're talking about who's going to be next, who's going to who's going to be the candidate in twenty twenty eight. Axios reports that Harris has made has made clear to potential twenty twenty eight rivals that she is working to keep another White House campaign viable, even as concerns persist among Democrat donors and party officials about her electoral prospects.
I mean, her electoral prospects back in the Uh the early days of the twenty twenty four race were so bad that she dropped out before the first primary. And I saw a little, a little clip of this, uh, this podcast she was on and I and the guy, I forget exactly how he phrased the question, but he essentially asked her if she was just really just a DEEI hire. She got all indignant about that. No, no, no, no,
absolutely not. Some people have have said that she was the very best, the most qualified, most qualified person who ever run for ever run for president. Absolutely amazing. Uh. I. Meanwhile, there's a new poll out there that says Acasio Cortes Alexandria Ocasio Cortes is ahead of jd Vance for twenty two twenty eight hypothetical twenty twenty eight presidential race, Alexander Alexandria Okazio Cortes beats Vice President j d Vance by
two points fifty one the forty nine percent. The New York Democrat congresswoman known as aoc edges the likely Republican nominee fifty one to forty nine percent. But I mean, come on, the next race is until twenty twenty eight. How can you possibly how can you possibly have any polls that there are no polls that mean anything right now. So we were talking earlier tonight about Donald Trump speaking to the nation. That was at nine o'clock Eastern time.
Right before that, though, the House of Representatives passed a GOP healthcare bill without extending the enhanced COVID era Obamacare subsidies, which are set to expire on January first. Mike Johnson said Wednesday the bill will reduce premiums for all Americans by an average of at least eleven percent, and that's just the beginning. He said, there will be much more to come, more ideas than the first part of next
year to bring down the cost of health care. And what the bill did in addition to that, tonight, is it increases the quality of care and access to care. He further slammed Democrats for attempting to weaponize healthcare without a real solution and continue to shovel taxpayer dollars onto a broken system. So that begs the question, is Mike Johnson telling the truth when he talks about this healthcare bill? And you may recall the last time we debated a
healthcare bill, we had Obama NonStop talking about healthcare. And so, yeah, you've heard the montages before. This is probably the most complete one, and it's Obama and Obama and Obama, Obama at the State of the Union, Obama campaign rallies, Obama on television appearances, and if you've forgotten what that debate was like when Obama was selling out selling Obamacare. I mean, this montage is almost three minutes long, but it really
drives home this. This the way he sold this and others around him, is why we are where we are today on issue of health care and why I just had to read that last story because of the constant lines that Obama told about this and this is a little refresher on what he was selling back in the day. And Joe Wadell. Let's hear cut number two. We will keep this promise to the American people.
If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor period. If you like your healthcare plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan period. If you like your doctor or healthcare plan, you can keep it. Nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage of the doctor you have. The only change you'll see are falling costs as our reforms take hold. If you like your healthcare system and your doctor, the only thing reform will mean to you
is your healthcare will cause us less. I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, either now or in the future. It is a cost that will not, I repeat, will not add to our deficits. There will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the
savings we promised don't materialize. Because it is paid for and curbs the waste and inefficiency in our healthcare system, this bill will help reduce our deficit by as much as one point three trillion dollars in the coming decades, making it the largest deficit reduction plan in over a decad well actually reduce the deficit by four trillion dollars over the long term, healthcare reform must be and will
be deficit neutral in the next decade. We have built in the law all sorts of measures that in the years to come, health care inflation, which has been rising about three times as fast as people's wages, is finally going to start slowing down. Will eliminate way fraud and abuse in our healthcare system, but will also take on key causes of rising costs, saving billions while providing better
care to the American people. Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan. We've estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing healthcare system. The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies subsidies that do everything to pad their profits.
Will start reducing the.
Waste in the system for unnecessary tests to unwarranted insurance subsidies, so that over time. Americans are going to save money. Amilies will save on their premiums. Businesses that would see their costs rise if we do not act will save money now and they will save money in the future.
Save this gud. This goes on for about another minut and a half. And this was Obama and Grabian was the one that put that that montage together. And if you see it, they're all from different events every time, every and then and then for it seemed like for two years, that's all Obama talked about the Affordable Care Act. Of course we know it is the Unaffordable Care Act.
And I especially love the part where he's talking about the fraud, about how it's built into the system that there's not going to be any fraud that I mean this this bill is so air tight that they really are going to caught. And then that's how they're gonna I mean that that's one of the main components of how this bill is going to be so efficient and save so much money because they are really going to
cut down on the fraud. Well House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and the Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith, Energy and Commerce Committee chair Brett Guthrie are talking about a Government Accountability Office report revealing the staggering level of
fraud that occurs thanks to Obamacare subsidies. The Government Accountability Office released a report on the massive levels of fraud that come with the Advanced Premium Tax Credits and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, subsidy to health insurers to lower
the monthly health insurance premiums. Democrats shut down the government for weeks over the looming end of the year expiration of the Enhanced Premium Tax Credits, a more generous version of the tax credits that the left leaning party boosted through the Biden era Coronavirus stimulus pack the America Rescue Plan. Democrats continued the subsidies through the so called Inflation Reduction Act that will expire at the end of twenty twenty five.
The GAO, as part of its analysis, conducted covert operations, which included fictitious identities that flood ensures with unjustified sub subsidies. It found that one hundred percent of the fake applications were approved by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as recently as twenty twenty four, with ninety percent of the fraudulent applicants continuing to receive coverage in twenty twenty five.
So why is it that seemingly every government program that's ever been conceived has such a huge element of fraud and waste? It is? I mean, that's a question I would like to throw out there. Is it possible to have a single government program that isn't just riddled with fraud and ripoffs and overspending and unaccountable spending every time you turn around and look. I would never be able to figure out, how do you how do you set
up a grift that's going to rip off Obamacare? I don't know how to do it, but there's plenty of other people can figure out how to do it. Let me see if there's this is the Brightbart story on this. For years we were told we keep our plan, keep our doctor premiums, we go down. None of it happened. New report confirms what we already knew. Under Obamacare, hardworking Americans saw their premium skyrocket, health care choices shrink, all
while fraud benefited insurance companies. Obamacare was built on lies and broken promises that hurt families and drove up costs. Or Jordan said in a statement to Breitbart. While Democrats defend waste, fraud, and abuse, Republicans are taking action to lower health care costs protect care for all real living Americans.
The GAO report is troubling smoking gun shows how this broken system, shielded by Democrat policies, has led to the federal government shoveling tens of billions of tax dollars to insurance companies through identity fraud and calls healthcare costs a skyrocket for all Americans. The GAO report found fifty eight thousand social Security numbers that received the APTC. These tax credits matched Social Security Administration's deaf data, So that's fifty
eight thousand people who were dead. We're getting these subsidies and ripping off Obamacare. Seven thousand people had Social Security numbers that were dead before coverage began, meaning the applications used social Security numbers of dead people. Ninety four million dollars in tax credits was sent to a health sent to health insurers on behalf of deceased people. So just that part of the scam, or one scam alone, ninety four million dollars I know, ninety four million dollars dollars
doesn't sound like a lot. But that's only part, only part of the ripoff that was going on through Obamacare, and are talk about tens of billions of dollars. While Obamacare fraud is being confirmed by the Government Accountability Office and other outside reports, patients are suffering. They face higher health care costs, denied claims, delayed care when their providers struggle to verify which insurance is valid due to these
fraud schemes. So yeah, I mean all that crap from Obama, and we talked about it at the time, that all these promises he was making and the way Obamacare was going to be set up, it couldn't work. And now we're living that nightmare. Raphael, how are you doing tonight?
Pretty? I'm pretty good.
Brother Dad.
What's going on? You're getting off of work?
All right?
Yeah? Hopping in the car. And I caught the little little kid big h you know, the Obamacare and then fraud and Jim Jordans. I heard those three and I was like, oh boy, here was GoGet. Now what were you reading from?
Dan? You did? Was that Breitbart?
Some for Breitbart?
Yeah, Breitbart put this out there. The well, the government accountability I've got the government Accountability report right here, but Breitbart published the article based on this report. But no, I mean when it comes to let me say this, when it comes to Jim Jordan, when it comes to Jim Jordan, I agree with you. I laugh at that because Jim Jordan is a little bit like like Lindsey Graham's. Lindsey Graham has talked for years about how he's going to get to the bottom of this, that and the
other scandal and never does a damn thing. Jim Jordan has been investigating crap up on Capitol Hill for how many years now, and uh, I've never seen I've never seen one of his investigations resulting anyone being purple walked of view.
I thought I saw Jim Jordan in the vault when Heralda went down there and I composed the vault. I think Jim Jeorde was down here. I remember seeing a yellow tie. But anyway, he.
Talks a good game, but he's all talk. He's very very slim on the action.
He's Jim Jeorde.
What could you say, but Dan, Now, when your boy Elonna Khan Musk, when he was up there doing the whole fraud check in and everything like that and you know, going through the irs Rose and everything and getting his two hundred and fifty million dollars back that he donated to the campaign. But the must have stayed on board to uncover this rampant fraud through Obama Care.
Yeah, he said, I guess, I guess he didn't get to o'bobby. I mean he got to a lot of other fraud, so he claimed he.
Did, but I he was just getting his paybag. Then when from the money he donated Campaig, he just wined Darry. He got all that back, and then he said, okay, guys, I'm done. But now you know, I know you got other callers too.
I know I got news coming up. But I saw today that that they just recalculated Elon Musk's net worth and it's like in excess of six hundred and eighty five billion dollars. So you know Whatay two hundred and fifty mili to him, that doesn't mean crap.
Yeah, I have to drop in the bucket, you know, I have to play a power.
Yeah, well you got six that out there, but uh Rafael, we gotta run. I appreciate the phone.
Okay, hey, hey Dan, when I talk to you again. You got to tell me about this land grab in Venezuela, like we got to get the land. That's what I heard Don John say. But we'll talk about that another day, all right, Raphael.
I appreciate the appreciate you listening. Appreciate the phone call. Eleven twenty six, one hundred WIW seven hundred WILW eleven thirty seven, Dan Carroll till midnight tonight. Phone lines are open five one, three, seven, four, nine, seven thousand, one to eight hundred. The big one. The state of California issuing the Trump administration. The Department of Transportation is withholding
thirty three million dollars in federal funds. The funding was tied to commercial vehicle safety programs in the state's decision not to comply with federal English proficiency requirements for truck drivers. And we have seen just one horror story after another in recent months of illegal aliens who come into the country, go to California or other states and obtain a commercial driver's license, and they're not able to speak English, and they cause all kinds of murder in Mayhem out on
the highways. In May, the Department of Transportation reinstated the English language rule for commercial drivers. Is there anything that you can think of that is more common sense than that? If individuals are going to be driving big rigs around this country, should they not be able to read, understand, and speak English. It just seems like the one of the most common sense things that I can think of. But yet California, Pennsylvania, and New York they don't think so.
Those other states have all been warned by the DOT about the potential for losing federal funds if they fail to address issues with CDLs. The Department of Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy defended the move to take that money away from California. He says over nine five hundred truck drivers were removed from service since May for failing English proficiency checks. Think about that. Think about all the big rigs that you pass up on a daily basis when you're driving around.
If you're listening to me on the radio right now, you may be just feed away from a big rigs. Is that drivery illegal? Does that driver speak English? Does that driver know what they're doing? Department of Homeland Security put this press release out today today yet another avoidable tragedy caused by the Biden administration and sanctuary policies. The illegal alien who couldn't speak English causes deadly multi vehicle
pile up in Tennessee under Biden era work authorization. The Department of Homeland Secure Department of Transportation announced that an American was tragically killed due to a Chinese national with a commercial driver's license who failed the English proficiency test. After the crash on Tuesday, December ninth, this dude Huong h U A and g rear ended a semi tractor
trailer on I forty going westbound. How many times I've driven on that stretch of Highway I forty through Tennessee, causing a chain reaction crash that led to the death of Carrie Smith injuring two others long This Chinese national was distracted by a video on his phone at the time of the crash. So you can find one of these stories almost every single day, and at least they're doing something to try and shut it down. Over at NewsBusters dot Org, my buddy Curtis Halkin, other members on
the staff, Bro David Brosel, Brett Baker. Over at MRC NewsBusters, they've come up with their worst quote of the year and the worst quote of the year goes to Matthew Dowd And this was Matthew Dowd in the immediate aftermath of the Charlie Kirk shooting. And for this he was fired from MSNBC, which I think it's called ms now, but here it is the worst quote of the year. Joe, let's hear cut number one.
Yeah, and again emphasize what you just emphasized.
We don't know any of the details of this that we don't know if this was a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration or.
So, we have no idea about this.
But following up what was just said, he's been one of the most divisive, especially divisive younger figures in this who is constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech or sort of aimed at certain groups. And I always go back to hateful thoughts lead to hateful words,
which then lead to hateful actions. And I think that's the environment we're in that people just you can't stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and not expect awful actions to take place.
And that's the unfortunate environment we're in. Turning point you to say, is confirmed that he was shot.
There you go, there's Matthew Dowd. His initial thought was that the best thing he could conjure up was that this guy might have brought it on himself, because you know, he's just so hateful, just so hateful. So that was the according to NewsBusters, the worst quote of the year over who gets their Joe Joe Waddell, do you get your news from Apple News? Who gets their news from I don't know anyone that gets news from Apple News.
But they have done a study of Apple News and it shows only one right leaning outlet out of five hundred and sixty articles through November, Apple News is direct content of its top stories exposed as the platform's bias, especially since only one of the they examined five hundred and sixty articles. They examined five hundred and sixty articles in November, and they only had one that came from a right leaning source. So Apple News, I guess, I guess it's an aggregate site. I don't know. I don't,
I don't. I don't think I've ever looked. I don't know where I would find Apple News, but their bias is showing Katie Pavlich. If you're like me, you know who Katie Pavlich is. It's been on Fox News for a while. He's a great writer, a great guest, a great American. She is leaving Fox News. She is getting a new gig at NewsNation. Pavlich will host a new show over there at ten pm beginning weekdays beginning in twenty twenty six. The new gig marks our first primetime
hosting role. She worked at Townhall dot Com for sixteen years and has been appearing on Fox News as a contributor since twenty thirteen. And James always does a great job, So I think she's going to be great over there at at NewsNation. Fox News confirmed to The Daily Caller the Pablich is no longer a contributor to the network. Appeared as a frequent guest host on the five other
primetime shows. Sean Compton, the president of NewsNation, said Pablich has a unique voice, and he is a tremendous asset to the network. So she's going to do an hour of political news on NewsNation. So congratulations to her. Eric Swalwell is I mean, he is a He's out there on social media. I see a lot of the stuff that he posts, and he's very self righteous. He hates Trump. He thinks he's right about everything that he puts out there, and he I mean, the guy has no self awareness whatsoever.
There was a survey that has been done of how many votes these individuals cast, and it turns out that Democrat Representative Eric swalwere Swalwell Swalwell, I guess he's also running for governor now in California, has skipped more House votes than any active member of Concress, according to data analyzed by The New York Post. Since launching his campaign,
Swalwell has reportedly been rarely seen in Washington, DC. According to the Sacramento b Voting records collected by the nonpartisan website gov track show that of the three hundred and forty two House roll call votes in twenty twenty five, Swalwell missed ninety five since January, not including absences from committee hearings. By comparison, Swamwell missed more than or more votes than a fellow California Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi, who
suffered a hip injury after a fall. In December. NBC first reported, Oh, well, I don't care about that, So yeah, Eric Swalwell. Government track shows Swalwell has missed fifty of sixty one roll call votes, which is eighty two percent, between September nineteenth through this last Tuesday, I'm sorry, Tuesday, November eighteenth. Overall data from gov Track shows Swalwell has missed more than five hundred and fifty votes out of
seven two hundred and fifty three since entering Congress. While the average House member misses about two point one percent of votes, Swalwell is missing seven point seven percent of the votes, more than anyone else in Congress. So congratulations, Eric's Walwell. At least you are a a leader in something. And then I'm watching I'm watching the news yesterday and I'm flipping around, and all they could talk about on CNN or MS now was this story that showed up
in Vanity Fair. They did, they did a a a profile piece on White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and I and and they were still doing it today but all day, and I made it a point. I was getting ready for the show, and when I I wasn't in front of the TV all day, but when but when the one hour would come up, there I would I would check and see what they were leading
with on CNN and MSNBC. Susie Wiles, Susie Wilds, Well, she she gave some quotes to Vanity Fair magazine and and they were just I mean, look it, she said, I mean, she said. Some of the stuff she said is uh, I mean, it's it's interesting. And and she she made she had the one coming. Look, they took so many of these quotes out of context. And the one about Trump had she said alcoholic personality. She was comparing a Trump too, or she was actually talking about
her father at the time. It was Pat Summerl And I guess he was a drinker, and she talked about how he was an alcoholic. And you know, they're so driven. I guess that the personality is and and so they talked. She talked about that. She said some things about Gadie Vance, and she said some things about Elon Musk. And of course they love all this palace intrigue, and they love to take these things and take them out of context themselves and act as if the Trump White House is
completely out of control. So Peter Navarro, who's a buddy of President Trump's, wrote a great piece about the two parts of the Vanity Hit piece on Susie Wiles. He says, the Susie Wiles profiles are non journalists. They're a case study in how legacy media manufactures menutce by stitching conjecture to caricature, insinuation to Indian innuendo, and then calling the resulting resulting collage and exclusive. And he calls it vanity hit,
not vanity fair. He says, what Vanity Hit delivered across these two installments is not an investigation grounded in evidence, but a prolonged exercise in narrative escalation that is irresponsible, misleading, and dangerous. The method is consistent from the opening line to the final paragraph. The reader is primed to fear before being asked to think. Power in peril is not a neutral frame, It's a verdict rendered in advance from there.
The piece deployed of the piece is deploy of familiar arsenal adjectives standing in for proof, brutal, sketchy, chaotic, anonymous, consensus replacing sourcing many have called critics say and hypothetical elevated to headline status. This is not how facts are established, it's how outrage is curated. Across both parts vanity, hit repeatedly insinuates illegally without doing the work of demonstration. Immigration enforcement is described in language designed to shock, snatching, brutal
despite court orders. These are all words that were contained within the article without cases, files, warrant, docket number, timelines, chain of command. If there was court defiance, cite the order. If there was violations, show the remedy. Instead, readers are offered a mood, not a record. That approach does not inform, it in flames. The most reckless choice is the flirtation
with accusations of war crimes. Both pieces lean into overheated rhetoric about interdictions and lethal force, quoting secondhand claims and then retreating behind journalistic hedges possible and may have called. That is not caution, It is evasion. Allegations of war crimes carry extraordinary moral and legal gravity. To air them without adjudication, evidence, or authoritative finding is not courage. Its negligence.
Equally corrosive is the casual use of historically incendiary analogies reich Tag imagery, authoritarian trope, guardrails of democracy languages are deployed not to clarify, but to terrify. These analogies, collapse context to raise distinctions, and act as accelerants in a politicized society. Such rhetoric does not cool tensions. It licenses the belief that ordinary politics is an existential emergency. History
teachers where that road leads. When policy analyzes analysis falters, vanity hit pivots to personalization, readers are treated to amateur psychology, gossip and mockery, claims about impulse, stamina, dozing, and meetings and tone abroad. These are not arguments. There are shortcuts around evidence. If policies are wrong, argue the policies, if the outcomes failed, show the data. Instead. Authority is delegitimized by ridicule. The Epstein sectionist in part two of the
article is emblematic. There's no new evidence, no finding of wrongdoing, no adjudication, only the implication of proximity bi proximity and disappointment by rumor optics replace facts. Journalism becomes a parlor game. Who appears in a file, Who flew where? Who feels let down? Suspicion is allowed to linger because it serves the narrative, and it goes on. But that's all I've got time for right now. But Peter Navarro just nails it, and he talks about the tools of the trade and
the media. The suspect the left, the agenda driven media fell for it, hook line and sinker. So I find that Peter Navarro piece in the Washington Times and read it and is really well written. Now that's it for me. I got to get out of here. I am back tomorrow. We will do it again nine to midnight on the Thursday night edition on the midweek Crisis. Until then, have a great night. We'll see you next time on the Home of the Best Bengals coverage seven hundred WLW