All Talk with Kevin Dietz ~ June 24, 2026 ~ Full Show

And good morning, everybody, glad we could have you along on our Wednesday morning, hump day. Beautiful forecast for the rest of the day. We might see some rain later on this afternoon, so we'll keep an eye out for that. Lots happening today. Again, I'm in for Kevin Dietz for today, and for tomorrow. He's got a couple of days off alongside we have Laura Hessan, our producer, and Jason Fisler, our engineer, helping us out along the way today. A lot happening today. Before we get started with the news of the day, though, I want to get this out of the way. Everybody loves to win something, right? Okay, so here's your chance to win a trip to see two country superstars, Jason Aldine and Luke Bryan in Vegas. Double the hits won for unforgettable night. We've got your flights, hotel concert tickets covered. The Double Down Tour, Aldine and Brian co-headlining with special guests, John Party and Chase Matthews, all live under the neon lights. Prize provided by BBR Music Group. Text this hour's national keyword open to 95819. That's open OPEN to 95819. We'll text you back to confirm your entry. Data and messaging rates apply. Please don't text and drive. You can get all the official rules and more information at wjr.com. Good luck, everybody. So let's get to the news of the day. Lots happening. The Senate passing a war powers resolution on Tuesday to block President Trump for taking any further military action in Iran as he threatens to resume fighting of a final agreement can't be reached. Pennsylvania Democratic Senator John Fetterman says it backs away from a promise to defend Israel. He told Fox he's standing by the Jewish state despite criticism from the progressives in his party. I'm going to continue to follow Israel through all of this in their interest and the kinds of security that they demand. And for me, that's why it was being the only Democrat that would vote and continue to vote for it. The president recently criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for civilian deaths in Lebanon. Continued fighting between the IDF and Hezbollah has put the United States talks with Iran in jeopardy. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps says it will close the Strait of Harmuz in response unless the U.S. can reign in Israel. So this is a developing story. for today. We're going to be talking more about it coming up in a few minutes when we are joined by Peter Meyer, former congressman and army veteran, to talk a little bit more about that. Now, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, not commenting on skepticism about the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran, as, again, Israel continues to attack Lebanon. Rather, he says Democrats are united in their efforts to end the conflict.

Fox businesses, Liz Clayman, asked Meta's Wearables vice president, Alex Himmel, how users can expect to utilize AI. And he said that he asked it for directions to a local restaurant while on a drive with his kids. on a California highway. So here's what he said he got in response. Car play on my car was telling me to go to McDonald's as the stop along the way. I asked my glasses if there was a better option and they know me. They know I have a nine-year-old, a seven-year-old, what they're into because I've been working with AI in the apps and on the glasses. And it suggested the first organization was a local drive-in that specialized in burgers and banana milkshakes. And guess what? Guess where they went? They went for the banana milkshake. Metaglasses start at $299. Himmel says a green light on the glasses will blink or pulse to alert bystanders when the user is taking a photo or recording a video. That was one of the questions we talked about. In talking about AI glasses, like I could be talking to you. I could be wearing the glasses. How do you know I'm not taking a picture of you or maybe even videotaping you? Well, there is this green light on the glasses that will indicate that. So just a fascinating update on the technology, both the good and bad. I don't know. Some people may not think being able to find the latest restaurant or the best restaurant is a thing to do. Just the two sides of the same technology. Wow, Nancy Guthrie unexpectedly disappeared four months ago, and there is new information being released on this. This left police with no suspect, no motive, no leads, despised extensive research and searches. However, new developments have emerged on June 22nd. Multiple news outlets reported that a ransom note set to a Tucson, Arizona TV station and other organizations claimed that Nancy Guthrie was dead. And Savannah Guthrie yesterday on the Today Show was on set while her colleagues did this story. And here's how she responded to the story. To ask people to really to beg people to come forward. Somebody knows something. We are in agony. We cannot be at peace. So now how much I try to come out here every day and smile and find that joy. And I will. I promise I will. This is a moment to tell you that we need your help. We're begging for your help. And we're going to talk more about Nancy Guthrie's disappearance coming up a little bit later on in the show and this new information that the family may have known for quite some time now that the ransom note indicated that Nancy Guthrie was dead. But we'll have more on that coming back, coming back in the next hour or so. Now, when we do come back, we'll be talking about the war in Iran and the talks and where they stand right now. We'll be back in just a moment.

President Trump yesterday celebrating the ongoing peace talks between the U.S. and Iran after the two countries agreed to extend their ceasefire for 60 days. The Iran economy has been crushed and their defense industrial base has been damaged so severely that it'll take them many years to rebuild, many, many years. And now we're trying to work out a deal that's fair. Yeah, but this is still getting a lot of headwinds. The Senate for the first time approved a war powers resolution yesterday seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran as lawmakers rarely watched President Trump's efforts to resolve the conflict that the administration launched on its own, and it now needs Congress to fund. Let us welcome in Peter Meyer, former Congressman and Army veteran, to chat a little bit about what is happening, the latest on these. talks. Welcome in, Peter. We're so glad you could join us. Always a pleasure, Marie. Thank you for having me. So the U.S. and Iran were in a dispute yesterday over whether Tehran had actually agreed to allow UN inspectors into its nuclear sites. There's been this back and forth. The United States says, yes, this was in the agreement. Tehran says, well, no, not so fast. What is the real truth here, do you think? Yeah, I think you have a memorandum of understanding that is written, something that's been like digitally signed, physically signed. And then you have everything, which is to be very clear, not intended to be a final, like this is the grand deal. This is our peace accord. This is just fixing a moment of time and saying, okay, hey. Like, you know what we can do? We can reopen the Strait of Hormuz. We can get the oil flowing. Both sides want this. The U.S. will take off its blockade of Iranian imports. Iran will stop harassing and targeting shipping in the strait. Cool. And here's where we maybe think we can go in the future. Now, one of the most... concrete goals of the Trump administration's kind of war efforts. And one that has seen a lot of receptivity on the Iranian side is around the nuclear program. And obviously, this has several different facets from the highly immersed uranium that Iran already has and how to secure and remove that to Iran pledging not to ever pursue or procure a nuclear weapon. So then, okay, well, how do you maybe support some of the civilian nuclear power plants that they have one? They maybe want to build more. How do you have an inspection regime to make sure that any civilian nuclear-ish facilities are not being used for weapons purposes? You know, that's where the IEA, or IAEA, excuse me, International Atomic Energy Agency, where those inspectors would be able to come in. Iran said, you know, or there were... We're reporting from people who are close to Iranian sources, you know, that said that that is obviously how that would be fulfilled. And then the AP is like, well, but there hasn't been anything scheduled yet. So I think you can chalk this up to it is in the ether. It's something that's been discussed. It's something that's probably been tentatively agreed to.

But we just don't have all those details yet because one of the most fluid things on the Iranian side is just who is actually well equipped, who is able to speak on behalf of and make decisions for Iran. And that is very much the challenge our negotiators are facing. And also the challenge that anyone trying to understand this is facing because you will have contradictory messages coming out of the Iranian camp, you know, sometimes within minutes of each other. all purported to be from folks speaking on behalf of Iran. Yeah, the contradictory messaging is very interesting because you see almost hour by hour you see that happening. So there is still this question, right, about who's in charge in Iran. And that actually makes me quite bullish because it is in the U.S.'s interest not to have that be one fixed hardline person, but to have it be a point of contention among the parties who are negotiating this. You know, in the short term, that can be challenging because a negotiator may not want to give up too much or if you go kind of too far to too many concessions to the U.S. Then it weakens that person's longer term position. But that also means that there are folks sitting there saying, hey, you know, I don't really think this is the path that we should be going down. They're talking about $300 billion coming from, you know, the Emirates and the Qataris and maybe the Saudis. Like, you guys are getting in the way of what could be transformational. So you start to get some of that incentive juice going and the people who are. you know, the hardline ideologues start to separate from the people who were like, yeah, I mean, we were saying that, but come on, you know. Right. There's some earthly temptations that'll be pretty hard to resist for some folks. So U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, well, I look at as kind of as a fence-mending mission, he's in the United Arab Emirates on the first leg of this three-nation tour of the Gulf. countries, and he's supposed to ease their concerns, really, about the result of this agreement intended to end the war with Iran. How much success is he going to be met with, do you think? What's his biggest challenge with these three countries? Who's going to put up the biggest resistance, do you think? You know, many of our Gulf allies have been... They've alternated between being ultra hawks and ultra doves. I mean, the Emirati's launched dozens of strikes. I mean, it was kind of hidden and not disclosed at the moment. They bombed Iran pretty significantly because Iran was bombing them pretty significantly. And they've seen, especially in the case of the Emirates, I mean, very significant economic consequences just from Dubai and Abu Dhabi. going from these kind of bastions of peace and safety in the region to now, you know, places that one-way attack drones have struck, you know, five-star hotels. And so this...

They're very concerned about the long term, you know, when it comes to Iran because they want to eliminate that threat. But on the other hand, it's at what cost and how can we, how can we shepherd this? So I think generally speaking, the kinetic phase of this war is over unless the Iranians, you know, really forced the hand of, called these ally powers, the U.S. and our Gulf allies. And so I think their number one concern isn't necessarily what's in this memorandum of understanding because they were very intimately involved in the drafting of that, especially the Qataris. The number one concern is we just want to make sure the U.S. doesn't, you know, give up on this entirely. And now we have to handle Iran by ourselves. What do you make of the Senate yesterday approving the war powers resolution? It really, it is, you know, we all understand it's largely symbolic and it doesn't carry the full force of the law, but will it, will it move the needle at all on anything? The height of the irony is that a lot of the same folks who voted for this war powers resolution, which I'm very much in favor of authorizations used to the military force, war powers resolutions, count me 100% in that camp. But they're going to move and pass that after, or in the wake of stinging criticism, the president's memorandum of understanding to end a war. So it's a very, you know, I would have a lot more belief that they were doing this for, you know, Article I, constitutional, prerogative incentive if they, if this had been something that happened in the first week or weeks of this conflict when we were in act of hostilities. You know, right now it's just, frankly, a bunch of members of Congress. feeling like they need to do something because they look at the polling on this and they want to get on the other side. Peter Meyer, former congressman and Army veteran, you're always a wealth of information, always a pleasure to have you on board to get your thoughts on what's happening in the world around us. Thank you, Peter. Have a great afternoon. We appreciate your time. Thank you so much. Take care. And when we come back here on WJR, we'll be talking about that Nancy Guthrie disappearance case and the latest that's developed out of that case. We'll be right back. Nancy Guthrie unexpectedly disappeared four months ago, leaving police with no suspect, no motive, no leads, despite extensive searches. This became a national story four months. However, there have been some new developments on June 22nd, multiple news outlets reported that a ransom note was sent to a Tucson, Arizona TV station, as well as other organizations. They claimed that Nancy was dead. This is new information, although many have suspected that this was the case for some time. We'd like to welcome in Alex Weber. He's the director and lead consultant for Cold Case Consultants of America. Alex, glad you could join us today. Good morning. Thank you for having me. You are new to WJR. Tell us, tell our listeners a little bit about the work you do very quickly before we get into talking about the Nancy Guthrie K's.

I have a small agency, co-based consultants of America, where we focus on unsolved cold cases and abductions are kidnapping, missing individuals. And you get brought in as a consultant, correct? That is correct. Yeah. So there are so many questions to ask about this case. Let me just get a quick overview from you. What do you think happened here in this Nancy Guthrie case? Initially, I was asked for an interview, I believe, February 10th of this year, shortly after her abduction. And my perspective was that the individual probably had scoped the residence, was familiar with Nancy, not necessarily a family member or a friend, but somebody that may have been an Uber driver, somebody who delivered something to her residence or had utility access. This individual felt that her being an elderly widow, isolated in a rather large residence. probably had financial means, plus her daughter being a public figure, probably drove the reason behind it. I think that the individual knew, of course, of the ringed doorbell. He tried to obstruct his approach. He removed it, which was a concern of mine initially, is if you're taking somebody and kidnapping them and you're going to request a ransom amount. The doorbell would have probably assisted him in doing that if they could see her leaving the residence under her own strength, right? Right. I've always felt that she probably was injured inside, based on the blood, driven so it was outside the door. And she may have not, she may have been deceased before she left the residence, in my opinion. I think they may have carried her out. If they're holding her outside the door, the blood drips down, it's not blood splatter. You know, there's no reason to take the camera out if you're going to request a ransom because he's already had a full face mask on. The only thing is exposed is his eyes and his mouth. It's minimal exposure. And as you leave, it's going to be the back of the only thing to get from that would be a gate or the way he walks, but you got that upon the approach already. So that wouldn't be a concern to me. But I do believe that the ransom may have been a misdirection. You know, it came approximately 48 hours later. And I think that at that point, she was definitely deceased. That's, you know, I had thought the same thing that she had probably died very early on. But this note reportedly said that she, that she had, that they didn't mean for her to die, that they, that maybe the ransom was the reason for the, for the abduction in the first place, but they didn't mean for her to die. And that now she's buried, quote, in nature, whatever that means. So. The media was asked to keep quiet about this particular development because they've known about it for some time. They complied. Was that the right thing to do? In some of these cases, it is, and some of them it isn't. And I believe in this case in particular, we could have used immediate to the advantage of the family and of the investigation. I think it's a community, an area where if they would have got out, a lot of this information is now being released. They might have been able to identify a suspect of person of interest early on. And whether Nancy was alive or not at that point.

I think that the second ransom communication was a means of them. If they do get eventually identified and they're brought to justice, it gives them an out. They could say, look, you know, she died naturally. And, you know, we didn't mean for this to happen. We just were trying to extort money, right? But here's another aspect you've got to look at, too. If that's the case, why not give the body up anyways unless there's some means of evidence, like was she shot, was she bad, was she injured, where it defies the fact that it was a natural cause. So then the perpetrator themselves, because they can't benefit from keeping the body, obviously, unless there's forensic evidence, identifies the individual itself. So this is another side of the coin that I look at often. A lot has been said about whether or not this investigation has been botched. What are your thoughts on that? I have to walk a thin line here. Yes. I do work with people in law enforcement. But here's what I'll say. Okay. I'll say that the crime scene was released too early on. It was contaminated. There was reporters there. I actually know a reporter that was on site, who I have a friendship with, who gave a lot of insight, details on what had happened. And, you know, the crime scene was just trampled upon. There was a lot of people going in and out. Then they close it off again. At that point, it's contaminated. There was a lot of mistakes that was made early on here. Now, whether that would have returned Nancy safely or not. I can't say that with 100% accuracy. What I can say, though, is it could have been handled in a better means. All right. So there's that. Now the question is this. So this ransom note or whatever we want to call this note indicated that she's buried in nature, as we said. That's a quote, direct quote, buried in nature. So what do you think that really means? How on earth does law enforcement possibly go anywhere with that? Like where do you start looking with just that kind of lead? Well, in my interview back in February 10th, I'd stated, I believe that she was probably buried somewhere in the local desert region. And that was my first instinct, assuming that she was in fact deceased at that time. And if that's the case, obviously she's not above ground or she would have been recovered at this point or stumbled across. It's a lot of land to cover. But with today's technology and the ability to get aerial views, you would be able to identify a body in an open region. Now, as far as the water bodies surrounding the area, she would have been discovered by now as well. Her body was dumped in one of those. So I think at this point, she's probably underground, to be honest with you. She probably was within 24, 48 hours of her abduction, in my opinion.

And I think there's going to be evidence when we do discover where she's at. And I do believe she will be brought home eventually. I think there'll be evidence that this was not an accident, that something happened inside the residence that injured her, obviously. And that was probably the cause of her death. Talk about the DNA. They do have some DNA, or we've been told they have DNA from inside the residence, but nothing has really clicked yet. Is there a chance that they'll ever get anything from this DNA evidence that was brought about? I don't have the specifics on the DNA itself. It could be a partial DNA profile, which kind of limits what they can and can't do with it, unless they have a direct suspect that they can bring in and draw DNA and then identify through that manner. So at this point, I really can't answer that question. What I do believe is that this case got complicated quickly. former company didn't need to be. And I think that there's still a chance that we can find Nancy and bring her home. Now, again, obviously, she's probably deceased at this time. But I think the family needs resolve and they need to return Nancy to the family for proper burial. Just like every other family of a missing person. And I think you said it correctly, that summation there that you said, this case got complicated, very complicated, more than it should have, very quickly. So Alex Weber, director and lead consultant for Cold Case Consultants of America. Our thanks for joining us today. We appreciate it. Hopefully we'll talk again soon. Thank you for having me. Have a wonderful day. And when we come back, we'll talk about keeping kids safe online. Is there legislation that maybe is heading in the direction to keep our kids safe? We'll have the story when we come back. The House Energy and Commerce Committee has reached a bipartisan agreement on a sweeping kids internet and digital safety act. It's called Kids Act. And it could be considered on the House floor as soon as next week. We are wanting to get more information on this. We've talked so much about kids' safety, the safety of our children online. How do we keep them safe? Some countries have actually moved on this, putting very strict guidelines on what kids can and can't do online in terms of social media. What can this country do legislatively to keep our kids safe? Debbie Dingell, Congresswoman from the 6th District, talking to us today about lawmakers' reach. this bipartisan deal. Congresswoman Dingell, thank you for taking time out of your day to talk to us. Marie, it is always good to talk to you, and I hope you are doing well. Yeah, we're all doing great here. So let's talk a little bit about what this agreement covers. It's 115 pages, I understand, this package. So, and I guess the...

The legislation looked at dozens of other online safety bills. So talk a little bit about what this agreement covers. So this was, look, we've needed to do something to protect our kids for years. And it's broken down not always on party lines, but it gets into California versus others as well. So this bill that compromise has been reached on. We will be voting on it in committee tomorrow. Combines pieces of a number of different child safety proposals. and changed some of the controversial parts of earlier versions that was keeping it from being passed. So the main elements of the bill, it includes strong parental controls and safety tools for parents and the minors. I think what's very important, and too many people young don't even think about it, know about it, adults don't think about it either, is it expands privacy protections for children and teens. you know, which is who has access, what's shared. People have no idea how data is being collected and being stored to use against them in 20 or 30 years. It requires, and this is very important, far greater transparency for the data brokers and the online platforms. And these platforms have got to create, and it requires them to do this, to create policies that are intended to reduce harms to minors. So, and then there are going to be measures in there on addressing issues on, say, for messaging, gaming protections, hot disclosures. And probably another major stumbling block in the past had been state preemption, you know, whether a state could have stronger laws. Yeah. And this allows states to keep or adopt stronger child protection rules rather than, you know, federal preemption. Talk a little bit about the parental empowerment on this. Well, I think that parents need to have, you know, not everybody's lucky enough to have a parent that cares either. But parents would be able to have oversight or establish guidelines for how they can protect their child. Okay. The measure of a successful law, I think you're going to agree on this, is will people buy into it? What can be done so people understand this legislation and how it's going to work? So I think one of the things that this bill will do is to give parents. more tools and it doesn't give them complete control over the child's online activity but it empowers parents and I think that matters you know sometimes parents don't even understand

all the things that they should be looking at or what they need to be doing. But on the other hand, you know, a lot of people are concerned that parents shouldn't have unlimited access to a child's communication. It doesn't, the platforms wouldn't have to turn over the message of a child to parents. So. You know, one of the questions I think we're still grappling with may or may not come up in tomorrow and committee with amendments is how far parental control should go for teenagers. But I think more and more people are understanding how, I mean, quite frankly, I do use the word dangerous. children's online activity can be, not only what they're reading and how it can impact their psychology, that they're getting bad information, but also that they're, you know, they're predators out there going after children. We've just, and then kids just write things to each other. They should never put in writing and are really awful things and the kind of bullying. And we've got to try to, this is probably not going to do that totally. But we've got to protect kids from being bullying, but we also have to protect kids from doing stupid things that could follow them for their lifetime. I understand that some of the safeguards that you're looking at here, or this looks at, is that there are mandated age verifications on a sexually explicit websites. It bans minors from using disappearing messaging features, which is a big concern for a lot of parents. And it requires AI chatbots to disclose that they're not human, which... I thought, well, wouldn't that just be logical? But no, apparently. It doesn't happen. Right. It doesn't happen. I mean, it's, you know, I have to, look, the things that are said online these days, I read what people put on my social, and it reduces me to tears. And it puts me, it can put me in funk for days when it's really bad. And. I have to remind myself, these are bots. You have no idea when something's a bot. And this bill would have protections around both the messaging, the bots and the jab pots. And, I mean, I think it's really, really important. And a lot of times these bots are being used for other things as well. Finally, Congresswoman Dingell from the 6th District talking about the bipartisan kids' online safety deal. So it now goes on, it'll be considered on the House floor, maybe next week. So, you know, we just want to know, what do you think the chances are of this actually moving through?

Well, first of all, it's got to get through committee tomorrow. So, yeah. And I think the votes are there. I think all the Republicans are for it. Most of the Democrats that I'm talking to do not have issues. You may see amendments. I'm not sure. Every member of Congress is asking, what is our schedule next week? Will we be in? Washington's kind of crazy right now, and Republicans have a way of canceling session, you know, like at 8 o'clock the night you're supposed to be leaving for. Okay. A week. So there are questions about whether we're in. All right. It should pass the house. All right. Well, we're going to, we're going to check back with you, Debbie Dingell, Congresswoman from the 6th District talking about this bipartisan kids' online safety deal. We'll be right back. Thank you so much.

And we are back. Glad you could stay with us here on our Wednesday morning. Lots to talk about in terms of news, both global and local. And, of course, top of mind that a lot of folks are talking about is the Senate passing the war powers resolution yesterday to block President Trump from taking any further action in Iran. He threatened to resume fighting if a final agreement can't be reached. He was Pennsylvania Democratic Senator John. John Fetterman says it backs away from a promise to defend Israel and he's standing by the Jewish state. Here's what John Fetterman had to say. I'm going to continue to follow Israel through all of this in their interest and the kinds of security that they demand. And for me, that's why it was being the only Democrat that would vote and continue to vote for it. And earlier in the show, we had Peter Meyer, the former congressman and an army veteran joining us, talking about this particular issue and where this agreement stands now. They've alternated between being ultra hawks and ultra doves. I mean, the Emirates launched dozens of strikes. I mean, it was kind of hidden and not disclosed at the moment. They bombed Iran pretty significantly because Iran was bombing them pretty significantly. And they've seen, especially in the case of the Emirates, I mean, very significant economic consequences just from Dubai and Abu Dhabi. going from these kind of bastions of peace and safety in the region to now, you know, places that one-way attack drones have struck, you know, five-star hotels. And so this, they're very concerned about the long term, you know, when it comes to Iran because they want to eliminate that threat. And that's what Peter Meyer had to say about U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio really being on a fence-mending mission. He's going to the United Arab Emirates on this first leg of a three-nation tour of the Gulf countries. He's trying to ease their concerns about the result of this agreement intended to end the war with Iran, and that was his take on what the Secretary of State will be doing on this mission that he is on right now. This is an eye-popping survey from Zillow. The bar for entry-level home ownership has never been higher. The typical starter home nationwide is $198,649. A record 242 cities now have starter homes valued at a million dollars or more according to a new Zillow analysis. 242 cities in this country, if you want to buy a starter home, it's going to cost you more than a million dollars. That is staggering. The typical starter home is defined for this analysis as a home in the third, lowest third of home values in a given region. The count of cities with million-dollar homes has grown from 226 just a year ago.

The landmark housing affordability bill is headed to President Trump's desk after winning some strong bipartisan support in Congress. This measure called the 21st Century Road to Housing Act is designed to address the nation's housing crunch by encouraging more home construction. easing local zoning and permitting barriers, and permitting barriers, and expanding opportunities for manufactured and modular housing. One of the bill's most significant provisions would prohibit large institutional investors. that are already owned hundreds of single-family homes from buying more. This is an effort at reducing competition for home buyers. You have these big mega companies coming in. They're buying up all these properties, then using them as rentals or they're flipping them. Mostly they are used as rental. And what happens? That cuts out people that are living in a community from buying homes. At least this is affordable, this 21st century Road to Housing Act, which is designed to ease the nation's housing crunch. But the fact is that 242 cities in our country now have starter homes that are at a million dollars or above. That is... really staggering for a lot of people. And if you know a young person who's trying to buy a house right now, you know what the story really is. All right. Let's turn it over to Steve Courtney, WJR Sports Analyst, chat a little bit about recapping the NBA draft. And Steve, we've got a little cut here of Kareem Lopez, the 21st overall pick. With the 21st pick in the 2006 NBA draft. the Detroit Pistons select Karim Lopez from Hermosio, Mexico, and the New Zealand breakers of the NBL. 19-year-old forward, Karim Lopez. This is a historic moment because Lopez is the first Mexican-born player to be drafted in the first round. He's from Hermesillo, and Lopez, he told Sports Illustrated that he wants to show people. that come from the same situation that I come from, that it's possible. And so, Steve, that is just one of the many stories from the draft. Yeah, and good morning, Marie. Hello again, everyone. In his pre-draft comments. The Pistons president of basketball operations, Trajan Langdon, said he would go for the best possible player with the 21st selection. Well, as it turns out, a little trade-up was necessary to do that. The Pistons Marie sending three future second-round picks to the Memphis Grizzlies. They move up four spots. And they get...

Stanford Guard Ibuka Okori. He's very young, 19 years old, but he has, as they say, speed to burn. He is listed at just 6 feet 1, and Trajan Linton said we're incredibly excited to have a guy like that, a weapon who can get paint touches at will, and can help not only score for us in the half court and in the full court, but can help distribute and have a little more creation for us all over the court. He could go as high as six feet, too. According to reports, 185 pounds while he was at Stanford, scoring 23.2 points per game. By the way, an average tied for sixth in the nation, regardless of class. That was his lone season at Stanford, shooting 46.5% from the floor. The quote, as he's excited to be a piston and playing, of course, with Cade. Abuka said, I feel like alongside Cade, I'll just be another playmaker. on the floor, another shot creator able to create for myself and others, and on the defense event, just bringing in intensity, using my quickness, getting in passing lanes, and getting a lot of deflections. He should help with the turnover situation. He averaged just 1.9 per game while at Stanford. Quickly, on the local front, Mores Johnson, out of the University of Michigan, selected number nine by guess who? The Dallas Mavericks, Dusty May in charge there now. Yaxel Lindenborg goes number 11 overall to the Golden State Warriors and the big fella from that national championship Michigan team Adai Mara. He goes to the Oklahoma City Thunder. Round two of the NBA draft scheduled for the Barclay Center in Brooklyn tonight getting underway at 8 o'clock. The Pistons currently do not have a second round pick. Marie, as they sent that to the Los Angeles Clippers in the 2020 draft night. trade that brought them Sadiq Bay. Eh, you know, he was here three years. Best year was 2021-22. He averaged 16.1 points per game. So we'll see, Marie, if Trajan Langdon decides to get involved, make a deal for a second round pick tonight. Steve Courtney, thanks for the update. We'll be right back here on All Talk. Tucker Carlson says he's no longer supporting the Republican Party ahead of the November midterm elections. The longtime conservative commentator and consistent defender of the party while speaking on the Can't Be Censored Podcast said there's no chance I would support the Republican Party. Well. That got us to thinking and really asking some important questions. And we wanted to bring in Roshina Yerakshkumar, political strategist, an attorney, and a host of the crisis files to talk a little bit about this. Roshini, thank you so much for taking time to talk with us today. Oh, absolutely. Great to be with you. So the question that we were asking ourselves is, does Tucker Carlson still matter? What are your thoughts on that? You know, I think he does still matter, but we also have to remember that people have individual choice. And frankly, I'm noticing, regardless of party, that a lot of these influencer types are kind of ticking off voters in general. So maybe even making these grandstands is forcing people to say, I need to figure out what I want and who I want to back.

Oh, I like your observation on that. Very interesting because we were kind of looking at this more like, well, does he even, you know, hold any political sway anymore? Do people really listen to him anymore? Who are people listening to? I mean, I wanted to talk a little bit about that. You know, what about the Megyn Kelly's? What about the Bill O'Reilly's? I mean, those are kind of the older set there, if you will. But are people turning to them to really get ideas for their political opinions? Look, if you count based on their following on social handles, and how many people are listening to their shows. I mean, they haven't gone away. Their influence is definitely there on some level. But also, if you look at the fact that we're in an economy right now where a lot of people are concerned about their own futures, and you look at some of these influencers, and they're rolling in the dough. And so there's also just that personal, like, who are you, you rich person out in New York or L.A. or Florida to tell me, who I should vote for, what I should believe. And I mean, I say this as an observer of it, right? Because I've also noticed you brought up Megyn Kelly. I've always been very impressed with her thoroughness. And when she interviews, she has her facts straight, she's got a lot of things together. But I also noticed some of her Instagram posts, which I'm sure were clips of things that were on any given show. And she's kind of going on the attack. She'll kind of be criticizing Megan Merkel for this reason or another. She'll. talk about now this Rosie O'Donnell is going to fill in on the nighttime circuits. I mean, there's also a meanness sometimes. And I've noticed that more and more in Megyn Kelly. And I'm wondering if people are also looking for kindness. So even if they want to have some real updates or insights on these politicians, I don't know that the attack mode is winning out anymore. I want to challenge you on one thing because you mentioned that people are looking at these so-called influencers and saying, you know, they're dealing with high gas prices and prices at the grocery store. And, you know, look, we're all a little bit shocked by the bill at the, when we go out to eat. Let's all be real here. So they're looking at these influencers and saying, okay, you're making all these comments, but here you're rolling in the dough. Does that translate? Because the first thing I thought of when you said that was I thought about all the imaging we see of the Oval Office with President Trump sitting in the Oval Office, which he has totally redone in the Gilded Age and that personification of wealth, that hasn't translated to President Trump because he's a very rich man.

Well, you're absolutely right. And I am absolutely not a defender of Trump. I mean, all of these elected officials are getting into, if you're biblical at all, you know, the days of kind of Sodom and Gomorrah. And eventually that got knocked out, right? So with these people, whether it's President Trump, whether it's pick your senator, pick your governor, regardless of red or white or redder, red or blue state, people are just a little fed up with this. flashing of the wealth or just living in these ivory towers. And that is what, you know, the political strategist in me says the party and the candidates that can show up on this election cycle that we're in right now and say, I'm really a regular person. I mean, you can't, you can't be doing that in a, you know, $5,000 Gucci suit either, but I'm a regular person and I get you. I understand you. And the messaging then has to match that. the messaging about prices of gas and food and housing and all of these kinds of things, that is the person or the candidate that will win, regardless of party. And at the higher level, the parties need to also see how out of touch they are with the regular person, with the voter they're trying to persuade. Do you think this had anything to do with the primary night in New York, which was a, you know, some people were saying it was a test for Zohran Mamdani's political movement and the three candidates he endorsed all won their races? Well, it's kind of, it's a big, you know, big time for him, right? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, everybody needs to wake up and, but I also go back to people want to elect people to them. And there's an honesty in if you just are a candidate talking with a voter. They almost don't care what your party is. All of New York felt when they elected Zohran Mamdani as mayor, you know, or at least the majority did. And these people that he's endorsing, maybe there's something about those candidates that are helping or making people feel like they're real people. And that's... triggering something or making them vote or influencing them in some way. And it even goes beyond the fact that some are identified themselves as socialists, which, you know, you and I growing up in our day, I would have never imagined someone who is a defined socialist would win the mayoral office in New York City. Wow, I was going to say my dad would have so much to say about that if he was still with us, but that's another story. We digress here. But you said, you know, making people feel like, making voters feel like real people. I think you hit on something there because let's not forget that in 2016, President Trump, candidate Trump, was, that's what he was credited with. He was credited with making people feel. like they were real and that they were seen, as the kids say, you know, I see you. So, you know, it's important to remember that. But getting back to talking about influencers and who's influencing who, especially in the political arena, do you see anyone standing out in the crowd? I think it's so interesting that you said they're ticking people off. So.

with that in mind. But is it Joe Rogan? Are there any women out there that you see who are capturing the attention of the electorate? Well, I don't know that I see one person that's capturing everyone. There definitely are people on both sides of the aisle or you label them Democrats or Republicans in their different spaces are capturing some, right? It seems though what's interesting to me is some of the comedians, and they're not necessarily running for office, but some of the comedians are really who are getting the attention or the popularity. So it'd be interesting to see. if they end up actually endorsing people or if they end up going on the campaign trail with anybody we noticed in the last presidential election the hollywood celebrity types did not end up helping joe biden in any way so the candidates themselves also need to look at who do they want in their tent with them going on the circuit with them because Everybody has optics connected with them. Everyone has what I call subtextual messages. And really, you as the candidate need to be the strongest, both in your subtextual messages and your overt messaging. And that's the person who, you know, is as a candidate, should be the one you're voting for. But anytime there are the possibilities of someone influencing on your behalf, whether you ask them to or not, you really want to hope that they are aligning. with what you're even standing for. Because if they're not, then they actually hurt your campaign. So as a political strategist, that's the advice you give them. That not only is it the message that you're physically giving, but it's also the subtext, the optics that are being given that are very important. Oh, absolutely. Optics are so important and they can help and hurt you. But it always starts with the candidate. What is the candidate saying? What are they doing? What are they putting, wearing? You know, all of those things are really important first. Rashini, Raksh Kumar, political strategist, attorney and host of the crisis files. Thank you again for joining us. Always a pleasure. Great to be with you. And we'll continue here on All Talk. We've been talking about this topic for the last several weeks. e-bikes. They're everywhere and they're getting more and more popular. They've exploded in popularity, not just among adults, but on teenagers and even younger kids too. But as more people are riding them, injuries have increased too, and doctors are sounding that alarm. We are joined this morning by Dr. Asha Shazahan. She is a Corwell Health Family Medicine expert. And doctor, we're so glad you could join us today to talk a little bit about the problems that doctors are seeing with injuries resulting in these e-bikes. Marie. Good morning. So what type of injuries? Explain to us what type of injuries you're seeing.

Well, the thing with the e-bikes is a lot of it is related to head injuries. So we're seeing like concussions. Some kids even get brain bleeds. And I think a lot of fractures are happening, breaking their ankle, breaking their various bones in their body. So it is not something to take lightly. Yeah, head injuries are really the most serious things that you could probably see in the emergency room. Yeah, I think the issue is that these e-bikes, they come at such high speeds. And when you have a high-speed collision, you really can't control the device that you're using. And I think that's the scary part. And these head injuries can be so serious and life-threatening. So Dr. Shahjahan is very right about this. So most kids, most kids really, can go about 10 miles per hour on a bike. An e-bike goes up to 28 miles per hour. So that is three times the speed that an ordinary bike kid can go on a bike three times. So if you're a parent or a caregiver and you're listening to this, you really need to consider that. Some experts are saying if you're... Child is not ready for a motorcycle or a moped. They are not ready for an e-bike. So on that point, Dr. Shahjahan, you are very correct. It is the speed that is key to these bikes. Yeah, and I think the other thing is the e-bikes are a little bit heavier too. So it's helpful you can lose control a lot faster. And, you know, we've talked about this in the past is that when kids are so young, the ages of, you know, 12, 14, 16, their brain is not well developed yet. Their reasoning skills are not there. They don't have them built in yet until they're much older. And so when you're going at a high speed and a car is coming, a pet, a pedestrian, or you see a stationary object, the kids just don't have the reflexes that adults do. And so I think that's another thing to consider when you are thinking about either getting your kid an e-bike or if your kid is going, already has one. I mean, you need to really think about, is my kid strong enough in terms of their reasoning skills. Does my kid avoid risky behaviors? And then also, you know, do I have a high-quality helmet that's certified for e-bikes? A lot of these kids I'm seeing are just wearing regular bike helmets, and that is not enough. We need helmet safety. And so looking for that NTA 8776 safety standard, those are thicker, better protective helmets. Give me the number on that helmet again, please. It's called NTA 8776. It's a safety standard for the e-bikes. Okay, so that's the safety standard for the e-bike. NTA 8776. That's what, I mean, you may not need to remember all of that, but you do have to remember this one thing, and that is that you can't just put a bike helmet on your child if they're going to go on one of these e-bikes. If you've determined your child is mature enough to handle the bike and maybe old enough to handle it, you really need to remember that they need a different type of.

helmet so if you can afford the bike but you can't afford the helmet you might want to reconsider whether or not your child rides that bike right doctor absolutely and I think there's also there's three different types of bikes and those they have different age standards yeah so making sure that your child's the bike that they have is according to the age standard most of the bikes are for 16 years and older and I'll tell you in my own neighborhood I'm pretty sure I'm seeing kids younger than 16 riding these e-bikes. And so really making sure that your child is old enough to operate an e-bike. You know, it's funny you should mention that because I heard some of the neighbors talking recently. And this has been on a couple of different occasions that they mentioned, wow, these kids are riding the, I live in a town where there's a downtown and very popular and lots of people are down there. And so they've commented about how there's all these kids on these e-bikes, e-bikes. And I'm thinking, well, that seems like an old person sort of thing to say. But then after I experienced it, I realized, no, they're right. Those kids are on their bikes. They're in these congested downtown areas with pedestrians. We're not just talking about e-bikes and car crashes. We're talking about e-bikes running into people, too. So that's something to keep in mind. Yeah, people, pets, I mean, and then stationary objects, like they could run into a tree. I think these are all things to consider. And I'm sure everyone listening might have had at least one experience with an e-bike of a kid zipping by, and you're like, whoa, that kid almost took me out. So, you know, we really want our kids to be safe and we want our kids to have fun. And this is not about limiting the fun of our kids. It's about keeping our kids protected. And, you know, as a physician, that's like my number one goal is to keep my patients safe. So we want. want to do that with this too. Well, I'm sorry to interrupt. I wanted to ask you, what do you hear when people come into the emergency room or what are you hearing from the emergency room doctors? What do these people say when they come in and they're injured? I didn't know how fast the bike could go or what are some of those things that they're saying? I think there's a lot of regret after an incident occurs. I think it's more of, it's not a big deal prior to an incident occurring, but I think once an incident occurs, there's a lot of remorse and regret from the parents and then obviously the children too. So I think, you know, why live in remorse and regret when we can prevent? So let's really just really look through what are the risks and the benefits of having an e-bike.

And there is like a tip sheet that's available. It's not www.4CIP.org slash e-bikes. And the neat thing about this is they have a readiness checklist for parents to go through and see, is your kid truly ready? And then they have a family e-bike agreement, which I think is great because that's a great way to. sort of talk to your kid about, okay, these are the expectations. You're not to go over a certain speed, and you need to look both ways. You need to pause at the intersections. I mean, it's basically like driving a vehicle. Like, you need to know some of the rules of the road. Yeah, and don't be afraid to assess your child's ability to ride that bike either. And for goodness sakes, don't forget they need the right kind of helmet. Again, Dr. Ajashan, that was four. as F-O-R-C-I-P-O-G. Is that what you said? Correct. Okay, dot-org, and that's the e-bike, and you can get more information there. There's different types of e-bikes. Keep that in mind. They're not all the same. And also, for heaven's sakes, again, that helmet is so important. Dr. Asha Shahzhan, thank you so much for joining us today. We really appreciate your time and your insight, as always. All right. Thank you. And when we come back, we'll be talking about the need for more public accountants. It's a serious problem here in Michigan. We'll talk about that when we come back. I did not know this, but there is a CPA shortage nationwide and one here in Michigan. And there's one organization that says there is something that could be done to. strengthen the pipeline for CPAs in the state of Michigan. Bob Doyle is the president and CEO of the Michigan Association of Certified Public Accountants. He is supporting Michigan's bipartisan legislation that would help support the state's effort to retain and attract talent and the impact failure to pass it would have on the state's talent pipeline. Bob, thank you so much for joining us today. You're welcome, Marie. Thanks for the opportunity to talk about the accounting profession and feature CPAs in Michigan. All right. Well, why don't you tell our listeners why it's important that they be concerned about the fact that there's really a nationwide shortage of CPAs and that Michigan needs to do something about beefing up its support of this profession. Yeah, absolutely. So, you know, there has been a decline in a number of students interested in accounting and going into accounting and becoming the future CPAs. There's more retiring in Michigan than those who are coming into the profession and becoming licensed. And as you mentioned, this is a nationwide problem. It's not just here in Michigan. So there's been a lot of effort across the country. to plan for the future to get more individuals into the pipeline. There are some things we've been working on, like really demystifying what accounting is and the great career that being a CPA is. I think some of it you see in the movies or that it's a boring profession or you just do taxes or whatever. But really learning the language of business, going to accounting and becoming a CPA is such an awesome profession. And it's very technology heavy too with AI implications and everything.

today. And you can work in every aspect of the profession from public accounting to industry, nonprofits, government, education. And, you know, CPAs range all over the state from the smallest firm to the largest and everything in between. So it's such a fantastic profession. We actually call being a CPA the coolest profession around. And so that's one of our messages. All right. So I think you might have a PR problem then. You need to get out on PR on this one to make it hipper maybe. Oh, yeah, absolutely. And, you know, and that's what we try to do. We get out into high schools, we get out into colleges, talk about, you know, being that trusted advisor as a CPA. And like I said, you can go into so many different directions, learning the language of business first and then being that trust that, you know, kind of the CPA owns. And it's been a profession that's been around for a long time. We're actually celebrating our 125th anniversary as an organization's advocating for and supporting Michigan CPAs. And, you know, it's a great history to look back on, but I'm especially excited for the future. And part of that is getting more students to go into accounting and become, or even those who may be looking for career change, going to accounting and become a future Michigan CPA. Tell us a little bit about why there's less interest in this field. I've always thought of it. We have a couple of accountants in our family. And so I've always known it to be. And by the way, they work in two very different areas. of business, which I thought was interesting. So, and that's something about what you're talking about. You can become an accountant, but you can do all these different things in the business world. You don't have to just be pigeonholed into like doing taxes or something. So why is there a decline in interest, do you think, in this field? You know, as I mentioned, some of it is just, you know, what is accounting? And that's something that us in Michigan, as well as across the country, we're working on trying to change that message. Secondly, you know, in some cases, the starting salaries had stagnated a bit. And so they weren't as competitive with other majors in the business school. So that was making students choose. perhaps to go a different path. That is changing, fortunately. We're starting to see some increase in starting salaries. And actually, just a recent study showed that accounting is the fourth best return on investment in your education, which is great. And then lastly, and that kind of leads to the bill that we'd like to talk about, is the education requirements. So now for several decades, it's been a requirement that CPAs have 150 hours of college education. And that was done. And again, across the country, because one thing that CPAs do enjoys mobility. So if you're licensed in Michigan, you can work across state lines, which is great, which is something we want to protect. And so it requires what we call the three E's, the education, experience, and exam.

So you need the 150 hours of college credit, which in a lot of cases is a bachelor's degree plus a master's degree, but it doesn't necessarily have to be. It could be however you get those 150 hours as long as you have the accounting background and business background. Plus one year of experience working under a CPA. then, of course, passing all four parts of the CPA exam. You know, the exam is, it's still, it's a difficult exam, but it's something that, you know, we encourage our recent grads to, you know, to study for it, pass the exam, and then you can become a licensed CPA, and you'll have that, you'll never have to take the exam again, and you'll have that, you know, that licensure for the rest of your life. But one thing we were finding is the 150 hours was kind of creating a barrier to students. You know, they were choosing, well, rather than staying for an extra year of college, I'd rather start working, of course. And so, you know, you can start making money, start getting that experience. And so there's been an initiative now across the country to offer an additional pathway to CPA licensure. So we want to keep the 150 hours because there are students that are still going to want to get that master's degree. There's awesome accounting master's programs in many colleges and universities across the state. But we wanted to give an option. So we're kind of tweaking the education and the experience part. You still have, of course, have to pass the exam. That doesn't change. But rather than 150 hours, we want to offer a bachelor's degree. So basically a bachelor's in accounting. So that's typically around 120 credit hours, but then two years of experience. And so we hope that will interest even more students to get their bachelor's and then start working, start making money, start studying for the exam, start learning on the job and working for our great firms and businesses that need accounts throughout Michigan. So are you getting support for this legislation? Yeah, absolutely. So it is a bill that was introduced last fall in the House, HB4893. It does have bipartisan support. This is really good policy. It passed out of committee 11-0. It passed with full bipartisan support out of the House. And it's now sitting in the Senate. And we're hopeful that we'll get through some, you know, it's. being held hostage a little bit for political purposes. And so we're hopeful that we'll be able to get some energy going behind this bill, get it passed, signed into law, and then we'll be able to start supporting these future CPAs. And actually today we even, we have individuals who for whatever reason didn't have the 150 hours college credit. But once we get this pass, we'll be able to license them right away and have an impact on the profession. So we're super excited about it.

There's already 44 states that have passed this. There's been a strong momentum across the country. So, you know, I'd hate for Michigan to be left behind. You know, this is kind of a brain drain issue. We don't want our students, you know, they're a little bit in limbo right now. We don't want them to go to another state and become a licensed CPA when we can keep them right here, have an impact immediately and here with our firms and our businesses. So we're hopeful to get this bill passed soon. And very, very quickly, this is, by the way, a big plug to get young women interested in this field, too. Oh, absolutely. Yes. It's definitely, actually, it's about 50-50 now, the number of women and men going into the profession, which is great to see. And, yeah, even we're seeing. some interest in individuals who might be looking for a career change or something too. So I love to talk to students and others who are interested in accounting. And you can reach out to us at our website, MICPA.org, or give us a call. We'd love to chat with them and help them through the process. Bob Doyle, president and CEO of the Michigan Association of Certified Public Accountants, making a plug for CPAs and the need for more of them here in the state of Michigan and nationally. Bob, thank you so much for joining us today. It was my pleasure, Marie. Thank you. And we will continue here on WJR with All Talk. We'll be back after the break. And welcome back, everybody. Covering a lot of topics this morning. Earlier in this show, we talked about the missing person case. Nancy Guthrie disappeared four months ago leaving police with no suspect. There's no motive, no leads. Despite extensive searches, we even have security camera video of the person likely who was the perpetrator in this kidnapping. And still, there are no solid leads in this case, except new details have emerged that on June 22nd, multiple news outlets reported that a ransom note was sent to a Tucson, Arizona TV station and other organizations. And in that ransom note, it claimed that Nancy was dead and that she was, quote, buried in nature. This... Savannah Guthrie made this heartfelt plea on the Today Show. She sat there as her colleagues opened the show and talked about this case and the new developments. And then when it came back to the entire group, she was sitting there and she said, look, I have to comment on this. And this is what she had to say. To ask people to really to beg people to come forward. Somebody knows something. We are in agony. And we cannot be at peace. So now how much I try to come out here every day and smile and find that joy. And I will. I promise I will. This is a moment to tell you that we need your help. We're begging for your help. And there is still a million dollar reward in this case being offered by the family. You can absolutely understand the...

gut-wrenching heartache that is involved in this case. Earlier in the show, we talked to Alex Weber. He's the director and lead consultant for Cold Case Consultants of America about this case. And he talked about how. Law enforcement should have really used the media to its advantage, and maybe that did not happen. I believe in this case in particular, we could have used immediate to the advantage of the family and of the investigation. I think it's a community, an area where if they would have got out a lot of this information that's now being released, they might have been able to identify a suspect of person of interest early on. And whether Nancy was alive or not at that point, I think that the second ransom communication was a means of them if they do get eventually identified and they're brought to justice, it gives them an out. Now, this information, these ransom notes, were made, the media was aware of these, but law enforcement had, as the family, had asked that the media not publicized this particular part of these ransom notes. And one of the theories that I heard about that was that if the, if... if the media came forward and say, look, one of these ransom notes claims that Nancy Guthrie is dead and that she's buried, that maybe people would lose interest in the case. People would stop caring about the case. People would maybe not come forward if they did have any information. So that information was kept from the public. But as you heard here from Alex Weber, that maybe the media could have been used in this case to really put this case even further and to see if this wouldn't shake somebody from the trees with information on the case. I just think a million dollars usually brings people out. I think good rewards, information, reward money does bring people forward. But in this case, it just hasn't moved the needle in this case. So again, Investigators continue, they still have DNA in this case that is being investigated and being processed. So hopefully there will be some kind of resolution to the case. Alex Weber did say that he believes at some point they are going to find her body and that this case in some way at least will be resolved on that front, that at least she will be returned to her family. Whether anybody will face justice on this is a whole other matter. Record temperatures, a relentless heat wave is gripping a lot of Europe, sending temperatures soaring well above normal and prompting health warnings across the continent. Forecasters say parts of France, Spain, and Portugal, as well as the United Kingdom, are seeing some of the hottest June weather on record.

with highs topping 100 degrees Fahrenheit in several areas. And of course, this is the peak travel season in Europe. Officials have opened cooling centers, closed hundreds of schools. They've urged residents to avoid outdoor activity during the peak afternoon hours. France has expanded red-level heat alerts to dozens of regions while transportation systems in several countries are dealing with heat-related disruptions. The dangerous conditions have already been linked to fatalities and dozens of drownings of incidents. As people sought relief from the scorching temperatures, people going swimming that didn't know how to swim and they lost their lives because of that. Meteorologists say a stubborn dome of high pressure is trapping hot air over Western Europe and climate experts warm extreme heat events. are becoming more frequent and more intense. If you're traveling to Europe, beware that that heat continues there. State officials clearing the way for a massive redevelopment of the former Lakeside Mall site in Sterling Heights. The Michigan Strategic Fund Board has approved a $270.7 million transformational brownfield incentive package for this project. It's going to be known as the Lakeside City Center. Developers say the incentives will help fund a $621 million mixed-use redevelopments spanning nearly 105 acres at that former mall property. And that is located on Hall Road. Lots of people have great memories of that. But it's going to be something else coming up soon thanks to this Michigan Strategic Fund Board approval. We will continue here on All Talk, on WJR. When we come back, we're going to be talking about Blue Cross and Blue Shield and how they are going to limit what therapists can provide in the state of Michigan. We'll be talking about that when we come back. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan will stop covering limited licensed mental health providers in private practice starting March 1st. This is a shift that some therapists will say will cut off care for thousands of people. Last week, we discussed this topic with a provider that had questions about this action and has said the impact on mental health treatment in Michigan would be profound. As a rebuttal, we wanted to invite Dr. Amy Maluski in. She's the vice president of clinical partnerships and associate chief medical officer at Blue Cross Blue Shield, Michigan, chatting with us a little bit today about Blue Cross Blue Shield's perspective on this. Hi, Dr. Maluski. Glad you could join us.

Hi Marie, thanks for having me. So let's talk a little bit about this change. Blue Cross said that this move is being made not because of cost, but because of quality of care. So do you have some data that demonstrates that limited licensed therapists in private practice provide maybe lower quality care compared to those in hospitals or other accredited centers? Yeah, thanks for the question, Marie. So Blue Cross has a responsibility to ensure that members receive the highest quality of care at all points of service, whether that be medical, behavioral, or pharmacy. Our members and our customers really depend on us for that. And we have been reviewing data and have demonstrated under our current payment policy that we can't assure that members are receiving that care from limited licensed providers all the time. Over the last few years, we have had numerous. instances where we've reviewed information and it has demonstrated that when we've had these behavioral health services billed incident to a participating provider, what the care was either inappropriate or low quality and in some cases fraudulent. And that's come in through both our data as well as some anonymous complaints that we've gotten from members or providers. And one example is, you know, we reviewed 176 records and 175 of those failed due to quality or incomplete record keeping. Now, that can mean either on side notes, which can demonstrate lack of supervision. incorrect billing or coding and diagnosis, missing information, things that aren't well documented. And so if we have an incorrect diagnosis or codes, those are things that are concerning to us. In one instance as well, or I'm sorry, a couple of instances, we also have seen where providers who were delivering care in these settings were doing so beyond their scope of practice. So what that means is that they're delivering services they weren't necessarily trained for. So me as a family doctor, that would be like, you know, I wouldn't take you for a knee surgery. And on the behavioral health side, you know, what we're seeing is some of these limited license like social workers billing for psychological testing services. And that should only be performed by a doctoral level psychologist. That really is the types of things that we are seeing. Dr. Maluski, you mentioned that you reviewed these 100-and-some cases and that you found a lot of issues with documentation, paperwork, coding, signatures, that kind of thing. So wouldn't it be better maybe to... issue clarifications on how this paperwork needs to be done and deal with the problem that way rather than just across the board saying that you're not going to cover this kind of mental health coverage anymore. I'm just, I just want to throw that out there and ask that.

that question. Yeah, no, it's a it's a fair question. Let me answer that and let me also clear up some misunderstanding as well. So we are still going to cover these services incident two for limited licensed providers. And that's where I think there's a lot of misunderstanding. We just are saying that they have to be delivered in a particular type of setting, a setting that allows, you know, limited license providers are basically in a time period where they're finishing their training. So for on the medical side of the system, that's consistent with what we see with like interns or medical residents who complete their training in facilities. And so, and the reason for that is because you have access, guaranteed access to fully licensed clinicians across several areas of expertise in the event they need to escalate care. And also, these types of settings provide for standards around patient quality and safety that we think is really important. We value the future behavioral health providers, the limited licensed providers in our system and the care that they provide. We just want to make sure it's treated with the seriousness that it deserves and feel that it's much more appropriate to have this be consistent with how we treat the medical side of the system. Okay, so just to go a little bit further on that, because I do see your point there. The point, we recently had a family member that had to have surgery in a, it was major surgery. And they were given the advice from another doctor, and they said, setting is important where you have this surgery. You want to go to. to a medical center, a major medical center, where in case you run into problems, they have the ability to deliver further care to you. And I remember thinking that makes so much sense, right? So that's a little bit about what you're saying here, that setting matters, that where these people are delivering the care matters, that they be... situations where if further case, if further, if something care needs to escalate, the care will be there for that individual. But in our interview that we did last week, we were told so much of the care, mental health care that is given today, is given in settings, you know, like settings outside of hospitals, outside of institutions like that. And that medical care, that mental health care is so vital. So the question is now we're going to have to move, now you're only going to cover the people that are getting their care in these institutions. And that may cut people out.

Yeah, so let me, I mean, I have a couple of things that I want to respond to related to that. So first of all, we are committed to providing this high quality behavioral health services for our members. We know that access to behavioral health providers is critical, and it's why we've worked so diligently over the last five, six years to expand our behavioral health network by 46%. We now have a total of over 22,000 fully licensed providers. here in Michigan and over 400,000 nationally. We can get people in for appointments within 48 hours. And we take that commitment very seriously. We not only meet but exceed the adequacy standards set by national organizations like CMS. So that's first. There are, as we talk about paying for these services in the future and moving that to to a facility-based setting. First of all, there's hundreds of facilities and hospitals that meet that requirement across the state of Michigan, as well as many practices that are considered outpatient psychiatric centers that also meet that designation or that qualification. And the reason that they meet that qualification is because they are bringing in that expertise, as we've talked about, right, across multiple disciplines so that care can be escalated. But then they're also, they have something called accreditation, right, which sets these standards in order to be able to guarantee quality and safety so that we know, you know, training is a very important time period in a clinician's development. And we want to make sure that that is treated appropriately and with the serious assistance needed and that people are getting the best experience and that our members are able to be sure that regardless of who they are seeing, they are getting the appropriate quality care at all of those touch points. Very quickly, because of course, whenever we're in these deep topics, we don't ever have enough time. But I understand the training for limited licensed therapists include a master's degree and hundreds of hours of observed training. And you're kind of saying that's not enough. Well, when you start training, you know, when you start into that training period, when you are taking care of people on your own, you are still learning. You are still in a very learning environment. This is no different than if you were to look at, like, for example, I'm going to liken it again to the medical side of the system. A medical student also has hundreds of hours of training, observed treatment. They graduate with a lot of information in a doctorate, and they continue to learn during their period of postgraduate training, and they have a similar type of provisional licenses, these limited licensed behavioral health providers.

And we expect that they continue their training in these types of environments where there are the standard set and accredited facility. Dr. Maluski, I'm so sorry. We are out of time. And I really apologize for cutting you short. You've been a wealth of information. Thank you so much for joining us today to discuss this important topic. And I have a feeling we'll talk about it again. Thanks again for joining us. And we'll continue here on All Talk. And we are back. Fireworks on Monday were awesome. The weather cooperated, that's for sure. We're going to talk a little bit here coming up about all the things that happened that night in terms of crowd control and concerns with the groups that were down there. Everybody had a great time. There weren't any major problems. There was a shooting. We're going to be talking about that coming up. And there were 180 curfew tickets that were issued to juveniles. But overall, it was a great evening, police chief medicine, saying the curfew, which was set earlier at 8 p.m. for unaccompanied teens, worked in that the event was one of the more peaceful in fireworks history. We talked a little earlier about this, too, but I think it's worth revisiting. Meta is incorporating artificial intelligence into its popular smart glasses. You might have seen these glasses. Folks have been out wearing them out and about. Meta's wearables vice president, Alex Himmel. talks about what users can expect and how they can expect to utilize this new form of AI. He talked with Fox Business, and he was telling them, he asked for directions to a local restaurant while on a drive with his kids on California's Highway 1. And this is what he had to say about that experience. Car play on my car was... telling me to go to McDonald's as the stop along the way. I asked my glasses if there was a better option and they know me. They know I have a nine-year-old, a seven-year-old, what they're into because I've been working with AI in the apps and on the glasses. And it suggested the first organization was a local drive-in that specialized in burgers and banana milkshakes. Unbelievable. So the AI knew his habits, knew that he had kids, knew that he was driving, and that the kids were likely in the car, and that's why he was heading to a restaurant. And the glasses literally were able to give him this new recommendations. I myself, I'm not so sure, I like this kind of intrusion into my life, but a lot of people do. Metal glasses are about 300 bucks. That's what they're going for right now. Now, a lot of people have talked about this in the past that they worry that these glasses, because they can take photographs and videos that people being photographed and video aren't going to know that. You know, right now you've got to obviously hold up your phone, so people are going to see you doing that. But maybe with these glasses, you can't.

You know, you're not going to know that. Well, he says that there's going to be a green light or that there is a green light on these glasses that will blink or they're going to pulse to alert bystanders when the user is taking a photo or recording video. Would you notice if someone was doing that? I don't know. This all scares me. And I'm not scared about AI. I use AI a lot. I know it's a great tool. But this particular thing about wearing it, I don't know. I have mixed feelings on it too. I do. I can see how this was useful for, you know, with the clip that you played, but I think some of it is getting to be a little too much. And this is not off topic, but it's kind of on topic. I was noticing, I think it was last week or the week before, I used the app ways when I'm driving. Oh, yeah. And it had to have been during a World Cup game. It was giving me score alerts as I was driving. Oh. And it was a Germany, I don't remember who Germany was playing, but Germany was playing somebody. And I got an alert on my dash. while driving that the game was starting. And then as I got to my destination, Germany had scored. And I didn't love, like, we're trying to, I think. You know, we are in a way trying to stop having so much tech with us while we're driving to distract us. So I thought it was really fascinating that there's now an element to an app that's, it was a distraction, adding to the distraction for something like that. But if you're going to, advertisers probably love it because they can start to pay for it. And someone is obviously adding that feature. And you can start, you know, imagine what it. NFL score is going to be able to do with that type of thing down the road. Absolutely. Or any of the sidebar stories that go along with, especially big sporting events like that. And you looked upon that as kind of an intrusion. You know, whenever your brain says, you know what, I don't want that information right now. I'm doing this. If your brain is telling you that. Anything else is going to be an interruption for you. And as you talked about, we were talking about this guy here talking about being in the car with his kids and looking for the restaurant, I wonder how you would feel. You've got two kids in the car. Look, I've traveled with kids in the car. I had three of my own. And when they're young and little and everybody's got an agenda and you're trying to get from point A to point B, I can't imagine another thing coming into my life. telling me, even if it's supposedly helpful information, maybe you should think about this restaurant or maybe you should do that. I just don't know if that's... That guy asked for it, though, didn't he?

I, he asked directions for a local restaurant. Yes, he did ask, and the restaurant knew that he liked McDonald's. So based on that information, that's how the information was getting to. And I've done that before when I'm driving and there's, you know, I'm coming from somewhere that I'm not familiar with and suddenly like, oh, I want to stop at the grocery store to come back. Where is the closest, you know, Meyer on my route? I have done that before. So, you know, it's a little bit suggested. But to me, I think he solicited for that versus when it's just... Pops up. But I bet they're testing that data. I bet they're testing that data. I bet they're testing that to see how it works. And the next thing is going to be how do they monetize that. Oh, absolutely. And that's where that's going to go. Absolutely. Also, it's an adventure living with an older individual. I'll just leave it at that. And it's my husband. And he'll every day it seems he'll come to me with his phone. Not naming names though, right? No, we're not going to name names, John Osborne. But he'll come to me with his phone and he'll say, you're not going to believe what an ad popped up on my phone. It was for whatever. Of course, he'd been searching for this, you know, the day before. And he's now deeply concerned because he thinks that, you know, this phone knows everything about him. But every day it seems it's like there's something new like this that is coming into his world that is totally... distracting to him. And he just thinks it's all intrusive. He just thinks it's all intrusive. So I'm just wondering, generationally, how are we going to get people acclimated to this kind of information? I don't, I think we just have to get used to it. I mean, we had the same reaction. I mean, we had the same reaction to an extent when it came to just the internet and then smartphones. And it's just, it's the latest thing. Well, we had an interesting discussion. I was at a... benefit a few months ago and there were a group of people at our table and we were talking about Siri and AI and whether or not like you know how you ask Siri questions like I'll let you know I'll set timers on my Siri when I'm cooking or you know asking for the forecast or whatever and somebody asked at the table do you thank Siri when it gives you this information do you think Siri no I yell at my bots oh I do Do you think you do, Danielle? I said, thank you, Siri, or thanks, Alexa. Okay, so. I yell at mine. Abby witnessed it yesterday. Ah, see, because the consensus at the dinner table that night was, oh, you better, you better be nice to the AI because you never know. When they start to take over, they're going to know who the nice people were. So Danielle is going to be safe and me and Laura are going to be out of here. That's okay. I never say thank you. And my husband will say,

Why don't you say thank you to Siri? And I'll say, because it's not a human being and I'm not going to be thanking the machine. I'm just not doing it. So that's my philosophy and they'll probably come for me after that. Well, that's interesting, Danielle. You'll be the last person standing here. Yeah, well, I don't use actually Siri at all. I only use Alexa, so I wonder if Siri is jealous of Alexa. Well, that's a good question. It's funny we're on this topic because our next guest is a comedian and part of his act talks about social media and live comedy shows. We'll have him with us when we come back. All right, let's end the show with something fun, okay? Well, we love comedy, and our next guest is hilarious. He was on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon last night. He's observational. He's clean. He brings his small-town perspective to life. And what can we say? But Netflix comedy special, need we say more? Ryan Hamilton, welcome to WJR. Thank you for having me. I appreciate it. Okay. I'm jumping up and down and clapping because we watched your Netflix special last night. Oh, you did? Wow. Yeah, we watched it. Thank you. And we loved it. We loved it. Oh, good. And we should tell our audience, the name of it is called This Just Hit Me, and there's a very special reason about why it's titled that. But, well, let's start there. Tell our listeners why this title is so meaningful to your Netflix special. Well, I was hit by a bus as a pedestrian and a crosswalk with the light. in January 1st of 2022. And I had some pretty severe injuries. I've recovered very well, but it was a big moment in my life that was significant and made me think about health and took me through this journey. And that's where the special starts, basically, is me. getting hit. Well, and I know people are going, wow, okay, I don't know if I'd want to watch that. But you were very, you were very funny and taught. And one of the things that you said was, well, if I came out here and didn't mention that this had happened to me, people would go, well, what the heck? The guy's not talking about this life-changing moment, right? Right. Yeah, it's a weird thing. I'd never had anything like that in my career that I felt. I couldn't escape talking, and I had to talk about it first.

you know that happens to you and not just for the audience but also for me it was so significant that i can't i think in the special i said so i can't come out here and just go i got a haircut today like i have to talk about it you know yeah because really really and what but what made me what made me kind of think about this was that um you know kevin hart had a special i don't i can't remember what streaming platform it was on maybe it was netflix i'm not sure uh where they were looking for america's next big comic okay And that person was going to get a... Oh, yeah. You're right? They were going to get a Netflix special. Yeah. Well, one of the comedians came out and started... This was at the end. He was one of the finalists. He came out and started a thread of jokes about alcohol. Alcoholics and alcoholism. And alcoholism. And one of the things that he said, and we just goffod when he told this joke, he said, yeah, so like I wonder, you know, if... Drinking and driving is so bad. Why do they have parking lots at liquor stores? And, of course, you couldn't help but laugh at that, right? And one of the comedians who was judging the finalists said, wow, you came out and told a drunk driving joke, and we were all on board. And that's the gift that comedians bring with them, and that's what you... I think exemplified in your special last night was you took this really dreadful topic and you took us for a ride on that. Well, I'm happy to hear that. Yeah, that's what I wanted to do. I mean, it seemed like I couldn't escape talking about it. And so let's do it in a way that is enlightening, hopefully, to what I've been through, but also entertaining. And I didn't really intend this, but I'm happy that this is a consequence of it. As I get a lot of people talking to me, not about a specific accident, but just a traumatic event that they went through. Because you hear a story and you go, oh, I experienced that feeling, whether or not, no matter how it came to you, physical or not, something traumatic happened. And you can relate to a person dealing with that. And so. It's an unintended consequence, but that's how it kind of happened. That's kind of the result, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I come from a family that nothing is sacred and we joke about everything. And so that's kind of our coping mechanism really. And we've seen some hard times. So we always try to make, not all the time, but we do try to find humor and things. We just talked about a few minutes ago about AI and dealing with our devices. This was in the last segment. And I thought this is a great segue to you because in your act, you said, Hey, we're not on our phones. We're at something live where we're at. Tell our listeners a little bit about that bit because I loved it. Yeah, I open it. You know, it is so interesting now that in order to focus and have a good time, like we have to plan it, you know, we go. You know, this is something that how was the bit? I say.

In the future, people will say society was very anxious and distraught because, you know, and so they would actually plan their laughter together at specific times, and they would gather themselves in laugh rooms. And there were laugh leaders who would try to encourage them, but it was ironic because they were often angry or sad. And this is the state of our minds, you know, that... It's interesting because, and I love stand-up comedy, and I think one of the real reasons that I love it is because it is protecting this kind of interaction with real human beings that is becoming more rare. Yeah. And I think we're seeking that. I think we're seeking, you know, these kind of live experiences are becoming popular. And stand-up comedy is in that circle. And we need it. And it's also. I it's so hard because you know we consume the stand-up through our phone and then you go to the show and you go oh this is a different experience that I really and I don't know I I I battle with it constantly because I I can't not be on these platforms. It's basically in today's world, the only way for me to have a career. And I tried to ignore it for a long time and I didn't make it a priority. And now I'm behind. And so I'm trying to catch up. But it is, I have to be very careful. I spend so much time on there. If I'm not, you know, we all are in this boat. And I think I said that too. I'm supposed to be a social media star. And by the way, I say to the audience, you are too. Because, you know, it doesn't matter who you are. You want to be a decent dentist in today's world. You better learn to shuck and jive on TikTok. That's just the way that we live. And it's hard transition to make, you know. It's like. I often think of these people with medical degrees who, they open their own practice. And then all of a sudden they're like, well, I need to make a funny sketch to get people in the door. Like, this is crazy. Yeah. You know? There's a great vet. There's a great vet that I follow on Instagram. And he, oh, my gosh, he is. hilarious. But he, you know, his whole platform is, you know, adopting foster, you know, fostering animals and adopting those that are in Charlotte. So he's got a great, but he's a veterinarian and he, oh, but his content is truly amazing. But you're right. Now even a dentist or a veterinarian has to have a platform or on social media. Your comments, your comments, too, about the dollar store were pretty good.

Oh, yeah. I love the dollar store. You know, I have this weird relationship with money. I can't navigate it. Well, I don't. I can't drive by a dollar store. I want to walk in there. I plant myself right up front and I look around for a minute and I go, this is a dump. But if I take a beat, I have this feeling that overtakes where I go, I want to buy everything in here. Yeah. I go, you know, round for everybody on me. It's like my whole thing changes. Ryan Hamilton, we are out of time. I'm so sorry. You're such a pleasure to talk to. Please watch the special. Take it from me. It was very good. You remind me, I hope this is okay to say. You remind me of Jerry Seinfeld. So you're very smart. You're very thoughtful and your comedy. Very clean. So, you know, you appeal to a large group of people. Ryan Hamilton is the name. Netflix special. This just hit me. Have a great afternoon, Ryan. Glad you could join us. And the rest of you have a great afternoon as well. We have focus with Paul W. Smith coming your way next.