This is Dan Caples and welcome to today's online podcast edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind, and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every single day on your favorite podcast platform.
No, no, you don't understand about lawyers. Here's the thing about lawyers. They will always find a way to bill you. They get paid by the fifteen minute increment. This is why when you talk to a lawyer and he says, oh, so, how are your kids doing? Is little Jimmy still at software ball practice? You say, shut the hell up, I am not paying you to talk about my son, and you get right down to business. Why because they're lawyers.
Oh here's the other thing about lawyers. Whatever, you ask a lawyer a question, you know what the answer is, Well, let me do some research on that. That's the answer. Well, I'll have to do some research. We'll get the paralegal involved, and we'll put together a letter that states our positioned on this. I just asked where the men's room is. That's what am I getting at the regular host of this program is an attorney. What does that mean in
real life that he's completely undependable. We don't know where Dan Capless is. He's got legal issues, he's out there lawyering. He's out there, you know, filtering this system. And what happens They give a call John John Caldera, We can't find mister, mister Capless, Can you come in? That's it, that's it. Like in real work, lawyers get paid hundreds and hundreds of dollars an hour, But who does all the heavy lifting? The twenty five dollars an hour paralegal
who actually knows everything, who does all the work. That's the same oppressive relationship I got going on with Dan Kaplis. Now. Oh yeah, he gets the nice little intro with the rocky music, he gets all that, he's got the hot wife, he's got the whole thing. And then who comes in to do the dirty work? Yeah yeah, I'm just I'm just a contracted janitor. Well enough, I'm taking this show over. I've it is enough, I've I've had it with the man. Down with the man. You know why because for the
next two hours it's no kings hours. Got that, no kings, which means no capitalists. So join me in our no capitalists parade. This is a protest against the man Dan Capless No Capitalists. Oh I like that. Oh, and you can also give me a call three oh three seven one three eight two five five seven to one three talk. I'm John Caldera. Unlike Dan's job where he gets to be all so important and talk like a lawyer, I run the Independence Institute, Colorado's Force for Freedom. Please check
us out at thinkfreedom dot org. Thinkfreedom dot org. Sign up for our newsletter so I can stay in touch with you, and check out Complete Colorado dot Com. That's our news service, which is always paywall free. Yeah, you're looking for Colorado news and views. We can give that to you without having to sign up for anything. Just go to Complete Colorado dot com. You will find original stories at the top, scroll down for aggregated stories from around the state. On the side, you'll see all of
our video and audio products for free. Enjoy. All right, let's jump into all this stuff. Speaking of No Capitalist Day, you know what was I think a shame about the No Kings protest. And I'm not a big military guy. I'm not militaristic. I am not one of those guys who thinks that the army does no wrong. But two hundred and fifty years of the United States Army is
a big frickin' deal. I seen bits and pieces of the parade, and I know it was meant to be perceived as this is a birthday present to Trump from Trump, that this is just him showing off. But for the things that I saw, it was actually a celebration of American armed forces throughout the centuries and how much we owe them. I don't think there was anything wrong with that. The only thing wrong with that was that the message was hijacked. And the left is really good at this.
Why because the media does their bidding. The media is part of the Left, even though they'll never admit it because they'll never see it. It's kind of like the guy with a drinking problem who will never admit to himself he has a drinking problem. The no Kings protests took all all of the media oxygen over the weekend. There was nothing about the parade. There was nothing about
the recitation of Washington's letters during the parade. There was nothing about the generations that have so gratefully saved our democracy. There what's so funny is that this whole made up narrative that our democracy is at risk, when in fact, the idea of the parade was to honor the men and women who for the last two hundred and fifty years have kept our democracy alive. And well, do you remember that was the army two hundred and fifty years ago that kicked out the king? You really want to
celebrate no kings? Trump's parade was a celebration of that. July fourth is the original No King's Day. In politics, there's the news cycle, and the new cycle is a fickle thing. It can be usurped, it can be manipulated. It can't really be controlled, but it can be influenced. And this weekend was a perfect example of how how the media usurped one story for another one. And I'm just curious, did you watch any of the parade? Did it mean anything to you? Was it a waste? Now,
personally I didn't need the parade. I would rather have the government keep the forty five million dollars, which is a drop in the bucket to the federal government. But nonetheless I'd rather that money go to servicemen and women than a parade. So let me ask first the veterans. If you're a veteran of the service. How how do you feel about the parade? Do you feel that you
what you've done in your years in the service. Do you think it was corrupted by Trump, that he used your hard work, your years of service to bring more glory to himself or do you believe that Trump was honoring you? Do you believe Trump and this parade was about you? Or was it about him? Three or three seven, one three eight, two five five seven one three top seven one three Talk who was it about? Do you think you were honored or were you used? You know
exactly what I'm talking about? Three o three seven one three eight two five five And those who went to the no King's protests? What king are we talking about? What king are you freaked out about? You mean the guy who won the election, the guy who won not just the electoral college, but won the popular vote. So you're pissed off that the guy who won the presidency is now the president. No, what you'll hear is no, he's trying to usurp that power. He's trying to gather
more control. He's trying to, through executive order, do all these things he doesn't have a right to do, to which I say, yeah, And he's doing exactly what Biden did. He's doing exactly what Obama did. Why weren't you hacked off when they tried to do through executive order what really needed to be done through active congress? What's the difference? Three or three seven one three eight two five five. Let's take a breather. I'm John Caldera in for mister Capless.
Keep it right here. You're on six point thirty k how.
And now back to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
I'm John Caldera on No Capitalist Per Protest Radio. Give me a call. Three or three seven one three eight two five five. Do we have a taker? No? No takers? Me Let me throw this out again, because I don't think you're listening. I want to know from veterans, do you feel like you were used by Donald Trump, that this parade that he had was at your expense? Or do you feel like he honored you? It's not a trick question. I am legitimately curious. Three or three seven
three eight two five five. That's seven one three talk. I find it disappointing how little attention the parade got. That the narrative, which I think is a false narrative, that This was an ego driven parade for Trump, not a parade to honor the military. Now I say that going, I don't need the parade, and then we could have saved the money. I would have been fine with that. The spin that this was this was somehow all about Trump and part of his usurping of power. I mean,
people are really losing all all reasonableness. You see, we've had presidents and for the role of president has continued to grow over the years. Why because Congress builds more government. They build more programs, they build more agencies, they write more laws, which means that the government, the federal government, has to create more rules and more bureaucracy. Who controls the bureaucracy, Well, according to our system of government, the executive branch is run by one guy. He is the
CEO of the executive Branch. He runs the shop that gives Trump and his appointees a whole bunch of leeway. Doesn't mean they can write new law without it going through Congress. But the more and more we give to the executive branch, the more and more power the president has. I don't remember people taking to the streets doing a No King's protest when Obama said that if Congress doesn't do what he wants, he can use his telephone and his pen. Now, think about what he said. He said, Yeah,
you guys were in Congress. You have the law. But I have the ability to talk to my subordinates and tell them what to do. I have the ability to write executive orders. And what happened he was taken to court a lot, And what happened to President Obama when he was taken to court over his executive overreach. Most of the time, certainly not all the time, he was pushed back the court said, you do not have the
ability to do that. So why wasn't there a no King's parade when Obama and Biden were doing exactly what this guy is doing. There is no consistency coming from the unh ringed left three h three seven one three five. Let's get to the phones. Let's talk to Carl. Carl welcome. You're with John.
Caldera, Hey John, how are you doing.
I'm great, Carl, Thanks so veteran and watched a little bit of the parade.
I think those guys were probably pretty honored to be there and doing that, especially the younger guys. I think they realized it's a bit historic. You could see it in their faces. I think they were. They're proud of their service and they were happy to do it.
So you don't think they were being used by our usurper in chief, no more.
Than the military uses any citizen. How do you mean, well, I mean you sign up to serve. You know, you write that blank check up to including your life. And if you know, if that's what the government asked, if that's what the situation.
Asked of you, let me let me rephrase it out.
So the left sees this as not honoring the military, not honoring the heritage, not honoring the freedom that the military has fought for, but as this is a stalinistic, communistic, dictator like show of military force, the same way that you'd see those wonderful military parades by the Kremlin in the glory days of the Soviet Union showing off there might In other words, if it goes towards the honor goes towards the military, it's people honoring the military with
a parade. Or is it the military saying, yes, we are in servitude to a tyrant which which we at we are only at his disposal.
Now I don't think so at all. I grew up in a military family. My dad was twenty years army and you know, throughout him his career, there were many many opportunities, uh to be involved in in similar displays on smaller scales, on basis, on army airfields, you know, different places around the world that we lived, and it was always uh yeah, it wasn't that it was uh.
So as a veteran, you felt honored, not abused.
Absolutely got it.
Thanks Nicole, appreciate it. Carl, have yourself a terrific afternoon. Let's sneak down to Pueblo and say he o to Leonard. Leonard, we're tight on time.
Hello. Yes, I'm I'm praid to be a veteran and I do not feel a president you the military because I bached upon my information at the break Army asked for it last year before Trump with President so well by you Blomber Bloomberg on Biden. I mean case which you didn't do a single thing.
So you were in the service, Yes, I was which branch Army and.
Training that if it's no, he prayed that was honor the people graduating that day.
Got it. So you were honored, not used. Got it? Hey, thanks for the call. I appreciate it. Listen, let's keep with this. Wait a second. The last two callers made it clear they felt honored by this parade, not that they were being used by a tyrant. Then what about all these No King's protests.
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
John Caldera in for Dan Kaplis, who apparently is doing legal stuff because he's so much better than the rest of us. He knows Latin. I don't know if that's true or not. Give me a call three or three seven, one, three, eight, two five five. My impression over the weekend was the media was at their best. They gave the parade to honor the armed services minor coverage at best. They gave the protests ridiculous coverage. And so I'm trying to figure out,
do you really think that Donald Trump used the military? No, I don't think so. I think he honored the military. But the left, and thanks to thanks to the media, stole the show. And it's what they constantly do, and they made it about their unreal fear, this narrative that he is somehow seizing can control of government, when all he is doing is exactly what his two Democratic predecessors did,
both Obama and Biden. He issues executive orders and tries to increase the power of the presidency, and the courts often push back. This is known as business as usual. Why is it when their guy does it, it's great When Trump does it, He's a tyrant. Let's go to the phones. Three or three seven, one, three, eight, two five five to Wells County. We go, Mary, Welcome, you're with John Caldera. Thank you, thank you.
How are you doing.
I'm terrific. Thanks for asking.
Well.
Good.
I just wanted to say I am so proud of President Trump for honoring the military the way we should and the fact that he portrayed the history, the true history of an America and how we all should love our military and our America. I think it was truly wonderful.
And anyone who protested didn't They didn't do any anybody any service, not themselves either. I think they should all be put away somewhere.
Well, they have the right to protest, and it's a good thing and.
Fine, but there was some some there was some ugly stuff going on, and then they used the no kings or whatever to hide behind and it's just I do they even know what they're protesting?
I don't know, what a beautiful question? What are you protesting? The one of them, Boulder. I looked at looked at some of the signs. The signs are all over the place. Uh there's you know, they're they're protesting enforcing the immigration laws. Heaven forbid. There's a guy they're waving a sign that says tax the rich. So that's why you're out here. It's not about kings, It's it's that you want to get the rich guys. All right, fine? And it just
kept going. These people need to emote, they need to protest, they need a virtue signal. They cannot not they can't not do it.
They're just a bunch of powders. They didn't get their way, and I just think it's sad they're missing out. They're missing out on so many wonderful things about our country and our president.
They're not going to like our president. I didn't like their president.
Now.
By the way, I'm.
Not a huge trumpy. I'm not, you know, but I'm not maga do or die. But understand I'm a.
Trumpy as far as his policies go. I think he's trying to do what's right.
We have a system where presidents try to absorb power, and unfortunately, we have a Congress which over the last hundred years has done nothing but centralized power in Washington, centralized power in government, and so whoever runs the government, by default is going to have more authority, more power. So when when Obama said I'm going to use my phone in my pen, he was cheered on. That's all Trump is doing. But he's a tyrant. No one sees the hypocrisy in this double standard.
Well, I think those who those who are on the right side of thinking, meaning you know, right at center it.
I agree with you. Hey, thanks for the call. Do we have Jimmy on the line? I need to run here on this. Hey, Ryan, do we have a So my friend Jimmy Sangenberger has been following the Mike Lindell case, my pillow guy case, and has has been working on that. Let's let's pull him on. I know it's a little off topic, but I hear a ruling might have come in. Jimmy. Welcome, you're with John Caldera. Where are you right now?
Hey?
John?
No?
I am I am home. I was on that koa earlier in hosting, so I couldn't be at the courtroom. But a verdict just came down in the defamation case of Mike Lindell My Pillow guy, and remind.
Us before you give us the punchline, what was the complaint?
It was?
This is a civil suit, not a criminal case. What was the charge? What was the allegation?
Yes, federal civil suit and it was a jury trial brought by former vice president of Dominion Voting Systems Eric Komer, alleging defamation by Mike Lindell, his company, My Pillow and Frank's speech which is one of his video platforms related to twenty twenty election claims, the false claims about a stolen election.
In that year. And the verdict came in. What was it?
Yes, So the verdict came in where Mike Lindell has in fact been found liable for defamation. However, there are a couple of caveats there. One he had requested, or rather Eric Komer had requested I think sixty two and a half million dollars in damages. The jury has awarded
two point three million dollars in damages. And in addition, they found that my Pillow, which is another defendant in the case, was not liable, but that Lindell had conspired with this company Frank's speech in what's called civil conspiracy to defame doctor Komer. So that's the bottom line is mich Lindell has lost, but is owing a significantly smaller sum than the plaintiff requested from the jury.
Wow, that is a huge difference. Not sixty million but two point three million. Does this surprise you? You were there for a lot of it?
Yes, I was. I was there for about five of the eight days of testimony. Was fascinating watching it all. I'm not sure I'm surprised. I mean a little bit. It is a surprising that it was significantly, like about sixty million dollars less. I thought maybe it would be then twenty million something like that. But there are a lot of complexities and different layers to this case that I think made it even such that I wasn't one
hundred percent confident that Kumer would win. I thought he probably would, but that there was a chance that Lindell would be successful because the Komer legal team did get off in a lot of different directions on delving into some things in the weeds about elections and so forth that I think might have made it a little harder for the jury to follow, and maybe that helped to make it to let Lyndell ows less than Komer would have left.
During this whole thing. Did Mike Lindell ever say, you know, I was incorrect on my analysis that the election was stolen? Or did he stick to his guns?
He is stuck to his guns on everything from calling Eric Komer a criminal and a trader. He doubled down on the stand over that he also stood by his claims regarding the twenty twenty election, just throughout all of his testimony. And I watched it was little more than two days of testimony, and I watched the majority of that, and it really was striking to see how he would double down and not even recant on anything. But here's
the thing, John, that I think is important. He had the opportunity to put forward any number of so called experts on elections. He claimed he had over thirty five that had worked with him over the past four and a half years, and he brought out not a single expert, not a single piece of evidence or anything to try to say, yeah, I was right about the twenty twenty election.
Now, on one was that you would think that a guy who made such a stink about it, who claims all this evidence, would bring up some evidence that it wasn't It wasn't defamation. It is what I truly believe. And here to the facts of why I believe it.
Yeah, it's a really good question. I would say there are a couple of reasons why. One is because they don't have the goods. You get experts on the stand to make claims. Who knows whether that would be something that could get somebody snagged with perjury or another issue of credibility number one and number two, his attorneys really tried to make this case that Lindell believed what he
thought back then, and that's what it was about. And none of these so called experts could have testified to his state of mind, because one of the components of a defense and a defamation case is whether or not you actually believed the claims that you were making. And so they sort of dismissed that idea, saying none of
them could speak about Mike Lindell's mind. And one other thing I'll say real quick is that on the stand, Lindell kept insisting that this case was not at all about the twenty twenty election or about voting machines that needed to be melted down and done away with. He said, this was all about Eric Komer blocking me. Now, what
do you mean by blocking? Being somebody who prevented Lindell in some way from getting out the word about the twenty twenty election and twenty twenty election machine evidence, the very stuff that Lindell says this case is not about. But in a bit of circular logic, it was about who he did, what he said, what he said about Eric Komer because Komer was blocking him from getting this information.
Jimmy, I got a run to a break. Can you stick up with us just a little bit longer? I want to ask you a few more questions, Jimmy Sangenberger. The Mike Lindell verdict comes in. He is found liable of defamation, but has to pay sixty million dollars less than what they wanted. I'm John Calderic. Keep it right here. You're on six thirty k how.
And now back to the Dan Tampless Show podcast.
I don't know if you noticed a nice little Heello reference there. Well done, Ryan, I'm John Caldera and for Dan Kampless on the line with us, Jimmy Sangenberger, who just got us the verdict in this trial against Mike Ladell. And mind you, it's a little bit like when.
O. J.
Simpson was found not guilty but then later found liable. That this is not a criminal case. This was a civil case, and you can sue anybody for anything. And it looks like it looks like he lost, but he could have lost a whole lot more. How's that? How's that for professionalism?
I find that fascinating. John, that's for Darren Shure, what's up?
All right? So so give me back to this one. I was curious about the First Amendment side of this that Lindell, even though he is a public figure, even though he does his TV ads, doesn't he have a right to spout off his opinion And his opinion is that this election was stolen and this guy Kumar is a is a scumbag. And that's my opinion. And I'm gonna say it, was that ever brought up in trial or was that something that just doesn't matter that was.
Sort of a big piece of the defense from Lindell's team was he believed it, he should be able to say it. But this isn't really a First Amendment case in the sense that when you get your trial in a defamation case, that is an exception under First Amendment law. At least in terms of a civil issue. You can't
be punished criminally for that kind of speech. But in the context of a civil matter that there's a specific carve out where you're not allowed to, in reckless disregard for the truth, speak ill about somebody and then have certain consequences. So in the case of Eric Kumer, he had to go into hiding, he had extraordinary death threats, he had people show up armed.
At his house.
He had all of these consequences, and he can't get work anymore in the election space, even though election officials will tell people that they think he's honorable guy, that he's somebody.
Who does a great job, that they trust him, but his reputation is so tarnished that nobody would hire him. And so those are some of the factors that would be considered by a jury in terms of, you know, what to award and also whether or not to hold somebody liable. Did Lindel show reckless disregard for the truth he did. And in this case, the jury also found that Lindell and his company, Frank Speech, one of his video platforms, had engaged in civil conspiracy to defan Kumar.
And that's a key piece to them.
Give me some definition civil conspiracy.
Civil conspiracy. Let me, you know, look back at a specific definition. But basically, as I understand it is that you had a It's where you coordinate between two different individuals conspire to accomplish some sort of an object if so in this case, it would be the defamation in this case, and that it was having his platform of Frank Speech with different hosts on there, sometimes with Lynn Dall.
I think Tina Peters had been on there, the former Mason County clerk and others who had engaged in defamation, defaming speech. And so because it's his company and people involved, you could say that they conspired to the fame. So that's sort of how you can get it that.
My guess is if I were Mike Lindell one, I'd have a great mustache. But too, I think I'd take this one as a victory. Two point three million dollars is a huge hit, but that a sixty two million dollars, which I'm surprised that's not what he got, and often these things are pled down. I take this mostly as a win for Lyndel. You real fast to hear the music.
No, I do not, in part because he claimed he's losched fifty sixty million dollars of his own money that he spent. He's ten million dollars in the hole, and here's another two point three million out the window.
Good point. Got to run. Jimmy Sangenberger, thank you so much. I'll be back after the news. John Caldera in for Dan Kaplis keep it here six thirty k. How