Vicki McKenna Show - Democrat Front Runner Won't Answer Direct Question On Violent Crime

Good morning and welcome to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. All right. So we had a wild weekend. Well, if you were paying attention, there was a flight diverted from Chicago to Minneapolis to Madison. Someone tried to breach the cockpit several times on a plane. And the flight from Chicago to Minneapolis was forced to divert to Madison. So we'll touch on this. We'll get it. What's going on? Five, at least it was reported that five FBI agents were on the plane at the time. Interesting. Flight from Chicago to Minneapolis could have been an investigation to the fraud that's going on in Minnesota. There could be something else going on. They were able to manhandle the guy. until they were able to arrest him. But anyway, more on that coming up in the program. We've got a big contest that just launched today. The contest is the 250th USA giveaway. That's what we're doing. So beginning today, you're going to be able to win 25. hundred dollars this not every hour four times a day so you just had your first chance at eight o'clock you're going to have another chance at 11 then at two o'clock so i'll be on the air for one of those giveaways and then at five o'clock so again this is going to be um a i believe text to win are we doing text to win brandon just want to make sure people understand double check that because i don't have that in front of me yeah All right. Nope. Let's see. Looks like we're doing email to win on this one. Anyway, we'll get you the details on that before 11 o'clock so that you know how to play the contest. It is a $2,500 prize. This is our effort to help celebrate the 250th anniversary of the United States. We have a total of $250,000 in prizes we're going to be giving away. So look forward to that. Also ahead on the program. Finally, maybe, finally, the Trump administration via the Treasury Department is going to begin cracking down on these NGOs. So if anyone's been paying any attention to the rioting going on in New Jersey, what's going on in New Jersey, anti-ice rioting, Antifa rioting. It's all funded by a series of NGOs. It's so bad, in fact, that the Atlantic Magazine. is now writing articles about how these outside radical groups are just staging uprisings. These aren't native. These are not organic. They never were. But finally, we have some indication that...

Maybe the Treasury Department is going to go after their tax-exempt status. We do know that Scott Bessent Sedy is going to begin holding NGOs liable for the violence and the destruction that is caused by their agitators. That's going to be a whole lot harder than cutting off. their tax exempt status. It's easier to cut off their tax exempt status trying to hold them liable. That requires civil charges to be brought. Good luck. That's going to take forever. Anyway, we'll get into that coming up on the program. Let's see, we've got more on Tony Evers decision to try to empty out the prisons before he leaves. I'm not sure how this makes any amount of sense, but we will get to that coming up on the show. And we're also going to go back to the question of the cancellation of SAT and SAT and ACT for college admission and what that has done thus far. We are going to take a quick break in the Vicki McKenna show. Don't forget again, you're going to have a chance to win. We are going to get that information on how you enter. Brandon, is it an email to enter? Do we have the info on that? It looks like email to enter, but I'm not 100% sure. John has told me enter the keywords in on the website. It is a website to enter. Okay. So you just go to WIBA.com. That's all. Website to enter. Website to enter the keywords. I don't have a keyword for you this hour, but it's going to be, I have this email address here that says how to enter with an email address. Why is that in the instructions? I don't know. But you just go to our website and click on the contest link. Okay, simple dimple. We'll take a quick break. Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna show. And we've got Duke Pesta standing by Professor Duke Pesta, University of Wisconsin-Ashkosh. She also runs a wonderful school, classical education academy called Freedom Project Academy. And I have him on the program to talk about, well, education, of course. Duke, it's good to have you back on the show. Thanks for joining me. Hey, Vicki. How are you today? So I'm well. Thanks for asking. We were, and I want to talk about the SAT-A-C-T, the call to bring these testing. mechanisms back for college admissions. But before we do that, because we're going to focus on STEM, you know, we want to put all these kids into STEM, we've got all these diverse people we want to put into STEM. How do you get diversity into STEM? You get rid of the ACT and the SAT. You get rid of the clearing tests. But before we get to STEM, in anticipation of the conversation, I looked up reading levels. And only 32% of college students can read at 12th grade level. Over 60% read at eighth grade level or below. Now, these are national surveys, and they have been confirmed by various different mechanisms. So it's not just one survey. It's multiple different attempts to get at this question. College students are reading.

approximately at eighth grade or lower levels. So we have kids who aren't doing math at grade level, and they're entering STEM programs because they could evade the SAT and the ACT. But we also have kids who aren't reading. So what are they doing there? If 32% of kids are reading at 12th grade level, those are the 32% of kids who ought to be applying to college. Same with math. And yet that's not the case. Well, you know, how long have I been telling you on your show that they were reading at a seventh and eighth grade level? I think it's actually lower than that, especially with reading because the reality for the last 15 years under Common Core, they've been dumbing down what they expect to be grade level reading. I'm telling you, I'm seeing it in my universities. These kids are... hostile to reading. It is what you and I might have felt when we were freshmen in high school, daunted a little bit, having to read Shakespeare maybe, or having to read Paradise Lost by the time you're a junior, the anxiety of that. Today, reading a simple book or having to read more than a few paragraphs. engenders that same kind of panic that used to be for serious, serious books, hundreds of pages. And so we find ourselves in a situation where not only are we not teaching kids to learn how to read, which is much more important at the end of the day than math. You can get by in your life. Look at me knowing no math. You can survive it. but not being able to read anything because at the highest level, most math is reading. You have to be able to read symbols. Even by the time you get to be a junior and senior, you got to be able to read numbers. You have to be able to put them together like a language. The inability to read is killing these kids. Yes. Yes. Good. I was just going to say, as you were saying, one of the things that everybody always complained about, even back when I was in school was story problems and math. I loved story problems in math because I loved English. I loved language. So story problems and math were easier for me than looking at a bunch of symbols, right? And that is to what you're saying. That's why you get story problems in math, because language and math go hand in hand. So. As I'm listening to you, and I know that you teach classes, and I know that you really wish you could assign much more aggressive material, but you can't, right? So I know you're teaching C.S. Lewis. I looked up his books. The books that are widely consumed by Lewis are written at a sixth grade or, so I'm not talking about his philosophical stuff. Okay. I'm just talking about his stories. Sixth grade or ninth grade level. And these books now are a challenge to a 20-year-old adult. You know, I mean, that's the thing that's sort of sad. Harry Potter written at a fifth grade level. She wrote it for fifth graders or, you know, really good third graders.

And kids 15 years ago could read those books and they made them bestsellers. Now they got to watch the movies because fifth grade grade level reading that's 279 pages long as too much. That is going to hijack the ability of this country to survive. It already is. I mean, we have generations of kids, generations, at least two, probably three, under the 35, who actually find that reading is beyond them. They can't do it. The technology, I've said this before on your show, the idea of you're going to sit down and read a 10-page chapter, 10 pages in a 7th grade reading book. terrifies these kids because they only have had to read sentences or maybe short paragraphs. The ability to turn a page for 10 pages. on the left, text on the left and the right, you turn the pages, that stymies them because they don't have the ability to carry what they're reading over more than a few paragraphs. They just can't keep the thread because they have no ability. They have no. history of doing it. We used to do this in second and third, fourth, fifth grade. Now we're too busy talking to them about sexuality and all this and this stuff and more and worse than anything, Vicki. Now kids who can't or kids who absolutely will not read are now are sick. It's not because of any other thing than the poor kids have this problem, that problem, they have learning deficiencies. And now, they're being passed in the name of inclusion because nobody can be held back. Thank you, George Bush, with your no one left behind. The only way you can have a school system where you don't leave anyone behind is if you don't have any standards. And so these kids from going, they go from being illiterate and in some cases, some lazy and uninterested. They go from being illiterate now to be victims of culture and they need medicine. And the teachers now, as they figured out in the schools, when your kid is sick, not just lazy, the school gets more money for intervention. Right. And then the responsibility, the standards for those kids have to be lowered in the name of fairness. So, and that's, that, because IAP kids are in this, in mixed in the classroom. That's what, I mean, understand that that, evading that $300 million SOP to IAPs in Wisconsin schools that, that failed, thank goodness, they were going to throw 300 million more dollars at identifying more kids as being, quote, sick or needing an IAP, which would have gone into the general classroom, which would have lowered.

the standards even more, even for the kids who wanted to learn or wanted to read or wanted to do better. So I'm just having some fun looking this stuff up. One in three. Kids between the ages of 12 and 18, so 33% say they will read a book. They would be willing to read a book. Now, it doesn't say which book. It's not Paradise Lost. They don't say which book, but one in three. The other 66% actively say they dislike or hate reading. So that's where we are. Now, we'll get to STEM in a second here because we've got the same problem with math. And we're putting kids in college who cannot read, who hate reading, who are incapable of reading. And at the same time, we're doing the exact same thing with those kids who also cannot do math. And we're putting them in STEM. We have gotten rid of standardized testing. We've gotten rid of the clearance testing. And we're saying, welcome to college. Welcome to campus. You just had all these California professors. It's like a thousand professors across the California university systems say we want those standardized tests back because they got rid of them. Two thousand schools got rid of them. You're not getting them back. I mean, are you kidding me? They're not coming back. The money, the administrators are getting so much more money by being able to waive through students and you get to check all of those oppression diversity boxes because you can say we've increased a percentage of young people who are black or brown in STEM fields or whatever. Well, yeah, exactly. And your point there is, and what I said earlier is right, even if you bring them back, the text, these tests have been lowered. to meet where the kids where they are, not where they ought to be. Like with the DPI in Wisconsin is lowering the standards. That's how they fix the problem. Gee, we're getting better. No, you're just expecting way less from these kids. Same thing with the ACT and the S and the other ones. And so what you have is a bad situation. And you remember two weeks ago on your show we talked about this, Vicki. We had a young African-American teacher. who was complaining, public school teacher, he said now, and he was exactly right, all your kids, every kid now is a problem kid, that the norm in the public systems of education in this country have turned every single kid into a special needs kid. And that's because gross negligent, not, there's nothing wrong with the mind of these kids. It's gross.

These new ways of understanding and using technology and all the new ways of reinventing the wheel when it comes to reading and math and science, we've thrown them all out for political reasons. We've destroyed our kids in the name of ideology. But that's the point. I mean, I think people have to understand that. It's the point. Although you could see maybe some changes on STEM. I don't think you're seeing any changes on reading. And here's the other reason why. The reason I think you could see some changes on STEM is because the H-1B visas and the STEM opt visas are going away. At least they're being severely restricted. So you're not going to be able to backfill. And we already do have, you know, technically competent young people who could do these STEM jobs. But you're not going to be able to backfill them with foreigners, at least not under this administration. Republican administration unlikely under that administration as well. So there may be some, some, you know, effect of these 1,000 professors saying we need to go back to the SAT and the ACT, at least with regard to math and science. It's not going to change for reading. And here's why. AI. AI. I can put summarize Paradise Lost into AI and it will spit out a summary of that incredibly challenging work. Now that's 12th grade reading just so you know. That's the stuff that you used to have to do by the time you got to 12th grade. It will churn out. And then you'll say, I need an analysis of whatever. Whatever the professor asks you, let's say the professor's bold and assigns this reading. Whatever the professor asks you, chunk it into AI. I don't care which AI you use. Use Claude. Use chat GPT. Use whatever you like. You never have to read another book because there is a computer. There's a machine summarizing everything for you so that you never have to put the work in. Well, again, the AI is able to do math as well. They can do it as well. And one of the things that I find this semester I'm teaching a class that is typical kind of class for readers. And you can't even really AI check them anymore. Because when I look at all the programs that I'm using, six or seven free ones, I'm not going to spend hundreds of dollars on this because this is the same problem. They have figured out the AI programmers. how to not only give your kids the cheat code, telling them all about this and even writing their papers for them. They've also now scattered the way they've given it to the kids so that they make it. They actually have features that other AI programs can't find them anymore. So I'm reading some of these papers they're turning. It is 100% not their work. But when you put it into the AI I. checkers, zero, zero AI involved. And you can see in the programs, do you want us, once they create your writing assignment, do you want us to adjust it to look more real? Wow. And so you can't get around this. Wow. So you can say, look, I'm a terrible writer. Would you please adjust the wisdom of your response so that it sounds like my crummy writing style?

And by the way, this is the imperfect, as of right now, the imperfection of AI, because these kids are way lower in their reading than even AI is presenting it, right? So what they're sending me is obviously not their own writing, because the few bits of writing I'm able to do online or in the classroom, it doesn't match what they turn in. quote-unquote that we would call homework. As one of my colleagues said to me, as far as writing and reading goes, the only way you can fix this is to close your college door, make them put all their technology away, and make them write and read for the whole class. Don't even bother teaching history and philosophy. That's what you have to do. That's all you can do. But that's not college. You know, exactly. But you can, that would be the only solution is for math, you give someone, you know, the old school, you know, Texas Instrument calculator, and you make them calculate the, you know, the proofs by hand. You make them do the derivatives by hand. And you give them a calculator, because we all have calculators in the 80s. And with regard to writing, you have them read, and then you have them handwrite with handwriting. in the classroom, an analysis of what they've read. I think that is the only way to have any kind of success in teaching any longer. But no one's going to do that. No one's going to do that because no student wants to pay $60,000 for a four-year education and actually have to work hard now. Now they want the certificate. Now they want the degree. They want the credential. They don't want to work for the credential. It's like wanting to, it's like, you know, when we saw the survey that, you know, 80% of young people want to be influencers. They don't want to do anything. They just want to get money to, you know, to convince people just by, by breathing to buy things. They don't want to do anything. And so that's what we've created. Unless there is a hard push. For rigor and the way you do it in public school, I think is you literally just make people read and write in class without phones. But Vicki, the problem now is all these kids are sick. They have accommodations. This semester, I have dozens of kids who have told me I don't have to write in class. I don't. I'm sick. I, you under the first day of class every semester, I get almost threatening emails from kids. Now, you know, right, that this is an English class, but I don't have to do this. I can't read this way. If you're going to make me right in the classroom, I need double time to do it. This is, and the university always, always, always sides with the accommodations, even when you know that these kids are playing a game. Can't you just say as a professor, do you have zero authority to say, then you really don't belong in this class? Well, I can say that, but the accommodation tells them otherwise. And then it becomes a title, you know, one of the titles, right? That these kids are, yep, yours, exactly, right. Okay. This is, it's, education is doomed. It is doomed. Period. Unless you are a.

aggressively seeking out alternatives for your kids, unless you're using homeschool, unless you're using like Freedom Project Academy, which is a classical academy, you have to read, you can't cheat, unless you're willing to change the paradigm to the point where people say, well, no, thank you then. Then this cannot be fixed. It cannot be fixed. I appreciate the time, Duke. Thank you very much. Thanks, Vicki. Good to have you. You cannot fix this. Unless you let people like Duke say, no, you don't belong in my class, unless you change, I think it's Title VI, to say, no, you don't get an accommodation under the, every accommodation under this one where you can use a computer, you can cheat, essentially. Unless you do some of the things that almost make it sound antiquated in education, old TI-35 calculators for calc class, doing trigonometry on a graph paper, you know, reading books while you're sitting in class and then writing a paper by hand, I don't think it's going to change. And no one wants to do that because it seems like it's a throwback. It seems like a rotary dial phone, which were awesome, by the way. We'll take a quick break on the Vicki McKenna Show. Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. Here's a new thing we're seeing. Well, it's not that new. It's just in your face now. And that is radical leftists claiming that that God justifies all of their perversions. That's a, it's not a new thing, but it is one that has now been heavily promoted. Think James Talarico's candidacy in Texas. where you actually have a candidate saying, oh, no, no, no, Jesus is totally fine with abortion. And you have multiple offshoot female, almost always female, quote, pastors. I'm using finger quotes here, who are saying things like you heard one over the weekend say, Jesus would say, blessed are the women who end their pregnancies. Not, by the way, she didn't say, comma, after they confessed. just blessed are the women who end their pregnancy. So they claim the Bible justifies transing kids. prostitution, abortion. So wearing Christianity like a skin suit is a new thing that the left has decided to advertise, if not a new thing that they believe. Sean Carney from 40 Days for Life is standing by. And we can use James Talarico as a classic example because he is their poster child for this new Christian Democrat. Great to have you, by the way. Yeah, good to be back. So here we are, and you probably have seen this over the weekend as well. There was a, I don't know what she was. I stopped probably United Church of Christ, United Methodist, something like that. It was out there saying, oh, no, no, no. No, Jesus would have said, blessed are the women who abort their children? Not, you know, there's no prohibition to abortion in the Bible. There's, you know, and then you've got Tel Erika who not only says that, suggests Mary could have aborted Jesus.

And, you know, also claims that somewhere in the Bible is a defense of lopping off the private parts of kids. I mean, what is going on? And is it worse? Is it sticking? No, it's not sticking and it's great. And I think we need more of it because for years, actually decades, Planned Parenthood took a very professional approach to this and kind of dabbled in it. Are we going to do the God thing and abortion thing together? And they did Choice on Earth Christmas cards in 2005. And it had like the Holy Family going through, you know, exile. And it said Choice on Earth. It had the star. And, you know, they ended up firing Gloria Felt over that. That the I had an abortion T-shirt. And this just gives everybody the creeps. And so I'm glad we're having more of this. It's been tried. It's been failed many times. And you have. a bunch of groups of people and it doesn't market to any of them. You have the Christians who are just offended. You have the atheist, secular people who support abortion and are like, I don't want to think about Jesus and Mary having abortions and God supporting abort. Like, just get an abortion. Why do you have to justify it? So they're not part of it. And then you have just the normal people, if they're still out there, who support reproductive rights and are also kind of Christians themselves. And they obviously think God doesn't have a problem with abortion because they believe in it. But they don't want to hear about it. And they don't want to talk about it. And they definitely don't want it to be justified by using scripture. They know it's not in scripture. So that's the thing. The people who are kind of soft on it. So in the, you know, kind of permissive Protestant end. And I'm talking of even like United Methodists, you know, some of these others that have gotten way far afield. The people, they know it's not in scripture. They know it's not there. They just don't want to have to make a case against it. It's politically convenient or, you know, they feel bad for a woman or they don't like kids or whatever. But they know that what James Talarico and what some of these other people are doing is fundamentally a lie. So that's what they're trying to promote is a lie. And even the people who are amenable to the lie, who like, you know, the lie, who like to tell themselves the lie, no, it's not in scripture. Yeah, I know. And it just becomes awkward. And the, since the overturning of Roe, the messaging for the pro-abortion crowd has gone down the toilet. They need to just be stuck in. We support reproductive rights. We support a decision between a woman and their doctor. You know, just this generic thing. They're diving in and they're saying we want abortions through all 40 weeks. We don't want to give medical care to the baby if he or she survives the abortion. And by the way, God's on our side. It just doesn't – it's why comma the loss, frankly. And so this is why, you know, I have no problem with this. I want them to play the God card on things that you shouldn't play the God card with.

And I think it really helps. I think we can stay quiet, calm, and look like the reasonable side, particularly in midterms. You know, I live in Texas. I'm part of the, you know, we got rid of Dan Crenshaw. I live in Montgomery County. Texas has gotten redder. Texas has gotten far more conservative. And I think Ken Paxton is going to win handedly in November because of things like this. And this is why. You know, we see even though a lot of people disagree with the Iran war and, you know, Trump is losing a lot of people over that. He's not losing them politically. And I don't think the Republicans are shedding voters like, like people say. They're not shutting. I don't think they're shutting voters at all. I just, it doesn't seem like they're shutting voters at all. I'll tell you something that we don't have to go down this road. But the Spencer Pratt campaign. has lit people up. Inadvertently, even though it's just Los Angeles. I mean, it's got people in Texas excited. Had they drafted a candidate like Mansion or even John Fetterman, this is now beyond the American Democratic Party. They can't, if they had drafted a mansion like candidate, I don't know. Maybe he would have given Paxson a run for his money. But they didn't. They put up these weirdos. I mean, look at this, this creep in Maine. I mean, it's like scratch and sniff candidacies here. It's like, you know, it's like, gosh, I don't even want to be in the same car as this guy because it probably stinks. You know, it just, you get a sense these guys don't even bathe. I know it sounds visceral, but that's what they're doing. And I, and so you started out by saying, well, good. I hope they do more of this. Now that, I mean, that is in terms of if you want them to lose, you want them to do more of this. It also makes it when you, it's poking the bear in the, in the snows, snout. I'm sorry. When you keep doing it, the bear's going to respond. So you keep poking the Christians in the nose, in the eye, in the nose. You keep doing it. My goodness, I've never seen so. My social media feed is replete with Christians who are kind of casual, frankly, going, all right, this guy's nuts. That's evangelizing. Inadvertently, they, James Talarico, this creep, Graham Platner. They are inadvertently turning people into kind of armchair evangelists. And that's not a bad thing. No, and the whole Karl Rove playbook of, you run this guy, you'll lose in November. That just doesn't apply anymore since the election of Donald Trump. And the thing about the whole MAGA movement is it got a lot of Democrats and a lot of independence. And so, you know, Republicans being evil is no longer a campaign strategy.

You have to say something. And I agree with you. I think that they have run very weak candidates. Basically what you're saying is this is the death of Bill Clinton, you know, these sort of charming Democrats. They're just not doing that. They're doing weirdos. And they're doing freaks. They're doing, they're drafting. I mean, they draft a, a neo-Nazi communist who likes hookers on one end of the country. On the other side of the country, they draft a vegan Sally boy who's probably closeted gay, faking that he's got a girlfriend talking about how Jesus wanted Mary to, or God wanted Mary to abort Jesus. I mean, yeah. That's somebody who has something to say. I mean, when you're using your clip, I mean, you're on radio, you don't have a lot of time. And when you're saying Mary could have had an abortion, you don't have anything to say. You're just talking out your, you know what, because you just have nothing substantive to say. And voters, not only do they get uncomfortable with that, they just, they're like, I don't think I'd let this guy walk my dog. Like, what an idiot. And so that's, I think, what we have going for us. Oh, I would not trust the guy to walk my dog for a whole bunch of different reasons. I wouldn't trust anyone. I'd afraid one would eat it. I'd afraid one would eat my dog. And I'm, I don't even tell you what I would be afraid. The other one would do. But you're right. So, and then there's this, there's this not insignificant thing where the gatekeeping on social media has. dissipated where, and I'm just looking, this is, um, LifeSight News had posted this. Uh, Dr. David Prennis confirms unborn babies feel excruciating pain during abortions. Uh, it says here, particularly at 20 weeks and later. Now remember, in Wisconsin, every single candidate wants abortion until the ninth month. They just did it in Virginia. Um, you know, this is a thing. And so you've, now you've got science. You've got media tech, you know, you've got social media at least. You've got the freak show of, you know, the vegan hooker-loving communists, who, by the way, are also running for governor in Wisconsin. And it doesn't land, you know? And it doesn't. And what they really, really love to do is they love to light things on fire like they're doing in New Jersey right now, or like they did in Kenosha, or like they have been doing since the BLM riots. It's not landing like it used to. No, no, it's, it's, it's.

It's been tried and it's exhausting and people are over it. And also, you just can't pull this kind of crap when you have inflation and, you know, gas prices and all of these things that people are actually thinking about. And that probably would be the way to hurt Republicans, but they're too stupid to figure that out. Instead, they're talking about Mary having an abortion. I know. Yeah, I think that there is a... The whole thing is if Republicans can take advantage of the political opportunities because they're there. They hold all the cards. And historically, they've kind of blown these opportunities until recently. But we'll see if they take advantage because the Democrats are frustrated with the Democrats right now. And they see what you're saying, which is they're running a bunch of clowns. And so, you know, we'll see if the Republicans can take advantage of it. They're running clowns because they don't want to moderate. They're running clowns because they've moved past Joe Mansion. They're running clowns because John Fetterman, it might as well be maggot to them right now, even though the guy is an honest to Pete liberal. Yeah. You know, that's why they're running clowns because they, this is Obama. Obama said that it was his plan. We don't have to tack to the middle. We don't have to be moderate. We can be extreme. We can use small groups. They did it to great effect. And once we're in power, we impose our will. And then it's very difficult to unpack it, which is still true. And that is true. They have been successful there. But if, like you said, the Republicans kind of get their heads out of their butts, then they can undo some of this stuff. And look at Trump is trying to undo some of this stuff. And you'd swear the Republicans are like vampires being exposed to the light. I mean, get with the program. Because, you know, this should be, these should be just, you know, slam dunks after slam dunks. I mean, good grief. We should be beaten the Democrats by 100 points at this point. But it's always existential. So Sean Carney, 40 Days for Life. Thank you very much for joining me on the program. Thank you. Good to have you. And we'll take a break on the Vicki McKenna show. All right. Still head on the program. We're talking about Tony Evers wanting to empty out the prisons. Can't just do it. but he can work toward that end. So we'll talk about that, especially the lack of transparency surrounding that. But we're going to come back and talk about lawfare. More on lawfare. So what does the left have? They had the institutional invasion. They had the takeover the institutions, which they did. That's really hard to deal with. And now they've got lawfare. They can't win elections by just simply saying, hey, you know, God wanted Mary to abort Jesus. Or, hey, vote for me. I had a Nazi tattoo, but now I'm a communist. Yeah. See, people don't react to that well. And so law fair. And what's the latest in lawfare? Well, a federal judge just has temporarily enjoined the weaponization of government settlement. As I mentioned at the top of the show, we have multiple NGOs that need to have their tax exam status suspended. But what's in the way of that? Lawyers. So we'll get to all of that coming up on the program. I'll be right back. All right. Welcome back to the program. It's a Vicki McKenna show. Now this is already being challenged.

Speaking of lawfare, this is an executive order that the president signed. Who cares about executive orders, right? Just to hell with them. Who cares? They're the law, by the way. But who cares about the law? We don't like the law. This is the one about mail-in ballots. And what the president did was tasked the post office with... assuring that ballots being mailed to people and ballots being returned are being mailed to eligible voters and returned by eligible voters. So the post office, now they get money to do this, would be required to be a mechanism of accountability. Because right now, local election officials determine. mail-in voter lists, voter eligibility, what the ballot packets look like. Not anymore. This would standardize, for federal elections, this would standardize the envelopes. It would standardize the size. It would standardize, it would put a barcode on the envelopes. And it would have the USPS use an eligibility database.

It would be in place before these upcoming midterms. And of course, the Democrats are losing their ever-loving marbles over this. Why? Well, because right now, there's no accountability whatsoever. None at all in absentee balloting. And we have multiple examples of this from Pennsylvania to Georgia. And that's just talking about the munking around with the actual envelopes, the monking around with the size of the ballots, the voter list. That's not Wisconsin, but Wisconsin aside. We had our other issues with absentee balloting, not the least of which was indefinite confinement. and zero oversight on ballot harvesting in the 2020 election, which has gotten a little bit better since then. But this is just, okay, now the post office is going to be part of this. It also allows a voter to track their ballot. You can also track your ballot because ballots went disappearing. Giant piles of ballots found in bags. This happened, by the way, in Minnesota years and years ago. Just bags of ballots that were mailed in tossed. Postal workers who were not scanning. So this is a way to get at that problem. Dollars would be set aside for it. And the states want a bulk. Like Wisconsin. Why does Wisconsin want to bulk? Because Wisconsin has a secret photo registration list. It's secret unless you pay for it. It's not secret if you pay for it. You have 12 grand. You too can have access to the voter registration list. But other than that, they're claiming they can't provide the information to the federal government. There's a lawsuit going on right now in Wisconsin. Wisconsin refuses to comply. Department of Homeland Security wanted to use the save database against Wisconsin's photo rolls to see if there were any illegal aliens on the database on the Wisconsin voter roll list. Not allowed. Not allowed. Why? Because Josh Call and a whole bunch of other Democrat attorneys general decided they were going to refuse to comply with that executive order. That was done via executive order. So we're not cleaning our, no way. So the best we've got in Wisconsin would be unless that lawsuit is decided in very rapid fashion and unless it can be implemented in time is this.

But in the states where you can nick around the edges, absentee ballot fraud is nicking around the edges. So in purple states, that's where you're going to nick around the edges of absentee ballots. You're not going to turn in 100,000 of them, typically. You're going to turn in 250 more per precinct. in eight identified places in the state of Wisconsin where they wouldn't be so noticed. Maybe you'd notice them in Milwaukee, but you're not going to notice them in, you know, Germantown, something like that. That's how it happens. So anyway, this would get at that. You're not going to be able to sit down and fill out ballots for people. You're not going to be able to take advantage of that. Now, it doesn't do anything to the same-day voter registration because you're obviously going to be voting. in person on the day. So it has no impact on that whatsoever. But it does have impact on only people who would think that they would send in fake ballots for elections. It wouldn't hurt anybody else. It wouldn't stop a legal ballot from being processed. It wouldn't give, you know, somebody the ability to use a barcode to find out whether you voted for a Democrat or a Republican. But of course, we can't have that. That's what the Democrats say. They've already begun the legal challenges to this. So we'll talk more about this and more lawfare. They've challenged the weaponization fund. This is a private settlement between President Trump who privately sued the government being told he can't use his money for what he wants to use his money for. We'll get to that and a whole bunch of other things coming up in the next segment. And welcome back to the program. This is the Vicki McKenna show. Mike Pagliz is standing by and we're going to talk more about law fair and some other things as well. But I want to start with going into the weekend, of course, we had a left-wing judge, not even considering the merits of a case, Mike. issuing a temporary injunction against the weaponization of government fund, all right, a fund that right now I have a friend who desperately needs because he's facing persecution in Wisconsin in a criminal proceeding that is absurd. But we can't have anything like that going on despite the precedent under the Obama administration. which was a sue and settle scheme, and despite the fact that this is Trump suing for the injustices that were visited upon him. So let's start there, and we'll keep moving through the law fair as the segment continues. Well, first, on the settlement fund with the weaponization fund, that was a settlement of a case against Trump and what Trump had against the IRS for himself and his family members. It is a settlement. It's not just something created by Trump to on nilly-willy. It was part of a federal settlement. So this federal judge is taken upon himself, and the listeners need to understand this, that he is going to stick his nose not only and set precedent, not only on this.

case, but every federal settlement that comes down the pipe now. legitimately can be stopped by federal judge and say, hey, no, this is taxpayer's money. And that's not what this is about. Now, let's go to the merit of what this is about. It is about injustices done against these people. It doesn't mean that people that were actively wrong and doing violence against a police officer, which was minimal in the J6, that somehow gets lost in the shuffle, very minimal. We're talking about grandparents just walking through the open capital that were wrongly accused, put in jail. and prosecuted, and not only was put in jail and their freedoms taken away from them, but the enormous amount of money and expenses that cost them just to defend themselves on a misdemeanor charge at that. And these people need to be compensated. Now, if this federal judge is saying no to this, then let's end this reparation talk, period, because it's the same avenue we're going down, only this is much worse. We're talking real time, not something that happened centuries ago. And so the federal judges, that's where the problem is. And we need to start coming down and charging these federal judges. And I'm talking as a judicial officer myself. We need to come down and look at these guys and start holding them accountable for these errant decisions that are not based on the rule of law, but they're based on their own political biases. And that's what this is about. And it has to be ended. Judges have immunity. Let's get rid of that. Let's get rid of immunity. You know, if you want, I think immunity needs to be reined in because they are immune. So it's, you know, I'm just, I'm acting in my capacity as a judge. Maybe I made an error. So what? No, you were acting in a political capacity and they hide behind immunity, which, you know, which is by the way what Hannah Dugan in Milwaukee was trying to do. She wasn't able to do that. But now she's got a judge who is reconsidering setting aside the guilty verdict against her. and reconsidering the defense's claims on immunity and other things. So enough about, I mean, that's one of the problems. If you've got a judge, you can always. You can always find the judge that will enjoin this stuff, always. And they know that. That's why even though we've got, you know, the Democrats flailing with candidates, they are sitting pretty chuffed because they've got law fair and they've got institutional takeover. Absolutely. And getting back on this judicial immunity, there is decisions where a federal judge can commit a criminal act from the bench. And he is immune from prosecution either civilly or criminally. He's immune. Judges, these judges have a broad range of discretion in anything they do. And again, federal judges are appointed for life. And you can't touch them. Once they're there, you can't get rid of them because why? because our Congress doesn't take the steps necessary to hold them accountable and impeach them. Won't do it. We've got to judge down here in Georgia right now that was making decisions on the election fraud cases down here in Georgia and having sex in chambers with one of the heads of the Atlanta Police Department. And nothing is going to be done to her. Nothing ultimately is going to be done to her.

She, people heard it. I mean, yes, there are witnesses and she's fine. If she wants to tough it out, she's going to be fine. If she just wants to dig in, she's going to be fine. She might be embarrassed, but she's going to be fine. She can keep her job if she wants to. This is insane. So back to the settlement, the merits of this case, which are President Trump sues on behalf of his family, the IRS on behalf of his family. There's a whole long litany of abuses that had taken place. None of them. have any justification of the abuses, have no justification in law. And so Trump sued for $10 billion and decides to settle for $1.776 billion. The fund is not just for, you know, grandmas and grandpas who walk through the steps of the Capitol. The fund is also for people who are not able to fight their cases because they were told if they defended themselves by a judge. Federal judges told them if you defend themselves, if I find you guilty, it's going to be worse for you. And so they didn't even defend themselves. They took pleas. There are multiple cases like that where people wanted to go to court and fight and were told by the judge, if you defend your actions on January 6th, you're not going to be having a good time of it. You will be found guilty and the penalty will be harsher. There are other things that happen. Exculpatory evidence was denied multiple defendants. Multiple defendants were denied exculpatory evidence by the government, and that included video evidence. They didn't even commit the acts they were accused of, Mike. So these are the kinds of things we're talking about here. Or the persecution of John Eastman, the persecution of Mike Roman, the persecution of Jeff Clark, the persecution of Jim Troopus. These kinds of things are what this fund is for. And for reasons that make no sense, you've got Republicans in the Senate trying to bulk and slow down the process, whether there's an injunction or not. And even on this J6 deal, you know, they even control these federal judges control the attorney. I represented, as you know, I'd represent two J6ers. I had to enter into, first I ever did this. I had to enter into an agreement with the DOJ, the Biden DOJ at the time, that I would not disclose any discovery that was given to me. Now, let me tell you what that means. It means. It's kind of hard to be an advocate for your client when you have to make sure anything that you put in a motion that may be publicly filed might violate that agreement. And then your ass is on the line as the attorney. You're subject to a criminal proceeding. You're subject to contempt the court. And you're subject to all these sanctions that can come down to you, even disbarment. So it kind of put a leash on how I could even represent my client. And thank God. And what gets me? They held off to arrest my client until maybe a month before the election in 2024. It was all a political game just to make papers, put it in the news, thinking that Trump could not survive this. And thank God we got a new DOJ. Even I wasn't happy with Pam Bondi, but even though when Pam Bondi came in, you know, of course, Trump came across with the executive order. But getting back to your point, people put money, put their lives out for nothing. And they try to build this that it was some big insurrection.

No, what's the real insurrection? What's going on in Newark, New Jersey right now? That's the real insurrection. Where you got Cory Booker running his mouth and Cheryl, Governor Cheryl, running her mouth and causing obstruction. And these, we need to take a proactive stance judicially and start putting some of these asses in jail. I'm talking to some of these political asses. You've got Scott Bessent saying they're going to start pursuing civil liability against the NGOs that are funding this. Good luck. Cut off their tax exempt status. You're going to get sued. Either way, you might as well get sued on something that can be resolved quickly rather than dragging on for years and years against some NGO that's... That is, you know, two steps removed from the actions in Newark or the actions in Chicago or the wherever actions in Minneapolis, you might as well just cut off their tax at them status. And I will say this. The left already expects Scott Bessent to do it. And so they've already prepared their cases to protect the tax-exempt status of things like the Sunrise Movement or the Democrat Socialists of America or whoever else is out there, the multiple NGOs that have been identified as funding and fomenting the violence. You know, as an attorney, you want to be a zealous advocate for your client. Well, by God, you know, Todd Blanche, you are. You're my advocate right now. You're every conservative rights advocate to do the right thing and fight for democracy. Don't be an appeaser. And I'm not saying he is. I am seeing a little bit change from the Pam Bondi administration. But don't be, don't be an appeaser. We want, you know, go for it. Go go out and fight. Fight hard for us. That's all we're asking is Americans. Fight. We're tired of this. kicking the can down the road. We're going to do this. We're going to open an investigation. We're going to do this, that and the other. It never materializes anything. And you're right, Vicki, this idea that we're going to make a civil suit. That's going to last five or six years. Meanwhile, Trump's out of office. It's just going to be canned and buried. We're never even going to hear because there's going to be a new thing coming down the road. You know, we see what's writing, what's written on the wall. We've got the November midterms, and all the stakes are for November midterms. And that's what's coming down. Start walking some of these people in a curb walk, start arresting some of these federal judges. And I'm not saying weaponizing the DOJ, do what's right. They're obstructing justice. They're out here causing riot. They're out there, you know, totally destroying the fabric of this American Republic and putting our national security at risk. And nothing is being done. And we need to change that. And we've got to take a proactive stance. And we've got to go after these people. And I'm tired of hearing the Marjorie Taylor Greene and the Thomas Massie's that's going nowhere. Forget about them. I'm not worried about them. They are nothing. Let's stay on course and let's do what we need to do and end this. I want to talk. You said something about reparation. So that is what.

the Obama administration attempted to do in a stealth capacity. So we were talking about this weaponization fund. With the Obama administration, they set the precedent for this. They invited people to sue the government. And then they created a fund. It was a slush fund for reparations. They created a fund. This was an invitation, sue the government for past wrongs, racism. Sue the government. Then Eric Holder. settled the case and said, okay, here's $600 million. Feel free to just make a claim of racism. No evidence was even needed. No evidence was even needed. You just filled out a form and made a claim and you got paid. Nobody complained. They said this was great when Obama did this. That was Eric Holder and Barack Obama inviting lawsuits against the federal government so that a sue and settle scheme could commence. That's not what happened here. Trump sued the government for $10 billion for actual wrongs committed and agreed to settle for a fraction of that with all of the money being donated to everybody else. You make your application. You may qualify. We will judge this. And if you don't, sorry. But there is a, I mean, the precedent for this was a reparation slush fund that was a sue and settle scheme. This is not a sue and settle scheme, but it's the same legal principle that allowed the fund to be created. That's right. And Trump can do, if he settles a case, he can do whatever he wants with the money. That's his settlement. And a federal judge should not have the right to come in after the case has been settled and then turn around and say, no, I'm going to put a block on it because it's taxpayers' money. Every settlement against the government. that ultimately, you know, ends in a plaintiff's verdict or in a plaintiff's settlement comes from taxpayers' money. That's where the money comes from. But Trump, like you said, he settled this. And I don't see how a federal judge can stick his nose in it and somehow yell, oh, it's part of the appropriations and it has to go through here. Which, by the way, is what the judge is basically saying, which means every single settlement, every single claim against the government, no matter what justification for that claim, no matter under what legal principle it is. Every claim that you make against the federal government, the claim pays out, the government stole your house, the government should have, the government has to pay you. That is now in question. That is now in question. So, and if in fact a president like this, and if in fact a president like this stands, is that going to mean that previous settlements are going to be called into question? Because if this judge is claiming the principle itself, the constitutional principle is an error. then that would seem to me that the government would potentially at some point in the future be able to claw back some of that money. I agree 100% with that, what you just said. And it sets a slippery slope for any cases right now. I've got two or three right now with the federal government. Yep, can't do the government, which means you can't do the government. Yeah. And any point, and we get to me, the plaintiffs in this is anybody can come up and say, I don't agree with that. And I'm going to file a suit and get an injunction and stop it.

And in negotiations, do whatever you want. I mean, it opens a door. But get back to the point on this, these judges are now advocates and they're activists and they're political activists. They're no longer judges, you know, with, you know, when I closed and justice is blind attitude, they're out there for their own political purposes. And just like the NGOs that are funding these protesters in Newark, New Jersey. These federal judges have been appointed for decades now with one political point in mind, one political agenda in mind, is to do the bidding for the party to put them there. And we're saying it's a Democratic Party. And now it's not even just Democratic Party. It's the political left, which now we're bypassing socialism, and it's the communist left. And that's what we've got to worry about. That's what the judges are perfectly willing to do. And the idea that this Congress would ever get off its stuff and do something about judicial immunity is hilarious, only not in a terribly funny way, but it would make you kind of laugh if you actually thought it through. Thanks, Mike, for jumping on the show today. Great to have you as usual. Thank you, Vic. We'll have a good one. We will take a quick break. And welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show.

So we're Mitch McConnell and Thom Tillis. So, I mean, I don't see these rhinos, establishment, whatever you want to call them, giving us anything of substance between now and the end of the term. I just saw a newsletter from General Flynn. We don't have any of our diplomats in place. I mean, we don't have ambassadors in place throughout the world. I mean, we've got very few of the Trump ambassadors that have been confirmed by the Senate. So I don't know what they've been doing. for a year and a half, but I don't think they'll do anything from now until the end of the term. And, you know, that's a problem. That's a problem. We sent them up there to get the job done, and they're not getting it done. I mean, it reminds me of the first term when, you know, the Republican Congress did nothing. and the voters threw them out. And then we had, what, impeachment? We had chaos the last two years of the president's first term. And I'm sorry to say, that looks like that's what's coming. Yeah, that's the problem. I mean, this is apparent, but they're okay with it. The thing about it is the Bill Cassidy's and the Thom Tillis's and the Mitch McConnell's. This is fine. The chaos that has been ripping this nation apart is fine because they want to protect the institutions. People like us, the institutions are so rotted that people like us say, okay, when the institution is this rotted, you have to take apart the institution and rebuild it. We're not saying, you know, take apart all the institutions and leave them burning on the ground. That's what the Democrats want to do. We're the one saying you can't keep kicking the can, whether it's culturally, government, the debt, the unfunded liabilities. You know, I mean, it's, you know, you got to reset somehow or this country is done. And I guess they can die thinking, well, we protected the institutions. Right. Yeah, the institutions that have failed us, I mean, the institutions that are corrupt. The institutions that the American people want reform in, but they don't get it. I mean, we keep sending Republicans up there to get the job done and to change things. And listen, President Trump can only do so much. I mean, he's tried everything with executive orders, I mean, everything. But he needs Congress to cooperate. I mean, the Save America Act was a no-brainer. You know, it's a bridge too far for Dune and Thom Tillis and all of these establishment of Republicans. So we're in a mess. You know, what I'm hoping is the president's going to issue some pretty bold executive orders, maybe calling for a state of emergency. And that might be able to help insulate them from what's going to happen because the second the ink is dry, they're going to be challenged and there's going to be lawsuits. That's what they always do and they find favorable judges and they throw them out. And, you know, where are we? I mean, we're back to square one because Congress does nothing. All Congress does from what I can understand is get rich on insider trading and take vacations. I mean, I don't really see anything of substance that they do. No, they speechify.

They're good at that. They're good on social media. They're good on talk shows. They, you know, and the ones that want to do things are prevented by, it's not even the majority. I think, you know, I'm not sure what would happen if you had a majority of people and they all look like Ken Paxton. I'm not sure. Would all of a sudden all that rhetoric turn into, you know, come to think of it, we should protect the filibuster. I don't know. The filibuster one is the easiest one. People think it's the hardest one. First off, it's not in the Constitution. It is a norm. It is a norm that is easily overridden by a rule change. And you can even dial in the rule change really specifically for this one piece of legislation. You can say we're all. going to do it for the SAVE Act. And we're going to make it a talking filibuster. You don't even guarantee that it passes that way. You can do that. That's, I mean, that kind of political strategy. is foreign. When you go back to Obamacare, they use a reconciliation package. They swap in, they cut and paste Obamacare language into a reconciliation package that had 51 votes to pass, and it's the law of the land, and we can't even undo it. That's bold Democrats. I mean, that was pretty balsy. You got to give them some credit for that, and we would not even think of doing something. Remember in the first. By the way, we could demon pass with the SAVE Act, too. In the first Trump term, we came one vote away from getting rid of Obamacare and remember what John McCain did. I mean, he gave us the infamous thumbs down, so we couldn't even get that done, even though we sent them up there to get it done. And we still have Obamacare, which is outrageous. So, yeah, you're right. I mean, Democrats will do things the Republicans won't do. Democrats play cutthroat. Republicans try to play nice. Yeah, it's a whole different ballgame when you look at what the Democrats get away with because the media is in their corner, the deep state's in their corner. You know, they have allies that Republicans don't have. But really the allies of Republicans have are the people. I mean, the grassroots. I mean, the folks out here who are struggling. We're looking for some action. You know, they just like the way it is. They like the game how it's normally played. They don't want to upset the Apple Cards. So here we are. 39.3 trillion in debt. Yeah, 39.3 trillion, and it's going to keep growing. We're 120 plus trillion in unfunded liabilities. That's unsustainable. Ben Stein used to love to say the definition of unsustainable is that which cannot be sustained. That would be our debt load in the United States. How much of it is just lit on fire from fraud. I just saw someone last week say, if we got rid of just Medicaid, Medicare fraud.

We are on our way to having no budget deficit, not getting rid of our debt, but having no budget deficit, just the fraud. You just light that crap on fire. And we're out here. This is MAGA, so everybody understands what MAGA is. It's not we worship Trump. It goes like this. Would you stop? make it normal again. That's what MAGA should be called make America normal again. Because it's not some kind of weird populist, you know, fever dream of authoritarianism. It's just a lot of us remember the 80s and remember the 90s and think, can we be like that again? Is it okay? Well, just think about it. I mean, in 2008, our national debt was 10 trillion. And now we're 18 years later, and we have quadrupled the national debt. So, yeah, if we go back to, you know, pre-9-11 before all these government agencies were added, you know, our rights were taken away in the name of quote-unquote safety. Yeah, I mean, we could, we had a, I remember the discussion, we had who had surpluses. I mean, we had Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton even. They were creating surpluses. We've come a long way since then. That's for sure. I mean, this is. At the hands of Mitch McConnell, who is the one who, who it was the kickoff to the amazing, you know, era of debt that the United States is going from budget surpluses and freaking out when George Bush was running $186 billion deficit in one budget. I remember that. And we all lost our minds that there was $186 billion budget in George W. Bush's first term. We're looking at about $2.1 trillion ongoing. on top of the national that per year that keeps going up and up and up. So why not just go? Is it authoritarian to say, can't we just go back to the 90s? Does that sound fascist? Let's just go back to the 90s. It's so authoritarian to say, get less government, not more government. That just sounds so, right? That's so authoritarian. But that seems to be what, you know, what the press would say if we just said, let's just go back to when Bill Clinton was president. Well, and that's when you had reasonable Democrats that were somewhat centrist, and now you've got socialists who are on the border of being communists, and that's the Democrat Party now. I mean, back then, I mean, I remember Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan, they used to break bread and compromise on some things, and there used to be like collegial relationships between the parties. Now, I mean, you've got fire breathers on the left. I mean, these people are insane. And they're also advocating violence. And they're very dangerous people. And that's what the Democrat Party has really turned into. And I guess maybe these rhinos are just afraid of them. I don't know. But we need people to stand up and say, hey, yeah, we need to go back to sensible policies. And we need to go back to policies that are going to make this country work again. We are on an unsustainable track, no doubt about it. You know, if I'm thinking of the 90s, I mean, even the sex scandals were more tame.

And at least people got appalled. Now everyone's just like, oh, really? Next. Graham Platner's sexting hookers. Well, you know, six months after he marries his wife, next. What's up? Oh, well, next. I mean, even the scandals. At least people could be scandalized. At this point now, we're lopping genital parts off children. And if you say, that's wrong, you know, you are some kind of, you know, weird fascist, neo-Nazi hater. And again, we're spending more money for this. So I'm trying to figure out how spending all of this money has made us less authoritarian and less fascist and, you know, more decent and more loving and more, you know, supporting our poor people better. Yeah, it doesn't seem like that when you take a look at what's going on in Skid Row and San Francisco or Los Angeles. No. I mean, they're spending money and the people's lives are worse. And a lot of the insiders are getting rich. So, yeah, it's a tragedy what is going on. The people that are supposedly being helped are not being helped. So maybe we'll get a guy in there like Spencer Pratt who can turn things around. I certainly hope so. Everyone should pray for Spencer Pratt. And here's why the election's tomorrow, the primary elections tomorrow, because if he pulls this off, if he pulls it off, It is, it's, um, the momentum, I think that can be dragged out of that beyond the borders of Los Angeles, beyond the borders of California, um, could be momentous. I just, I, I, I really, I kind of want him. I don't think he can pull it off, but I want him to pull it off because I think it will be the window or backs rather than the window or fronts. I'd love for him to do it. I think it's almost impossible for him to do it in the environment that he's in out there. But I'd love for him to do it. I mean, I think he's going to make the runoff. And then he'll be in a runoff with Karen Bass. But the electorate out there is just so far left. Well, I mean, hopefully there'll be people that are. Yeah. Yeah. Right. The patronage machine is so big and is so powerful. And it's machine politics. And the entire state is that way. And unfortunately, machine politics also describes Congress as well. So, Jeff, thank you very much for jumping on the program today. I appreciate it. Hey, thanks for having me. It was fun. Appreciate it. Wonderful. Wonderful to have you, Jeff. crew air. I don't want to say the name wrong. And I just, I look at your name and I'm just like it doesn't look like crew air. So I have to phonetically write it out. But host of ringside politics on WGSO in New Orleans and also on Real America's voice. Thank you so much, Jeff. Thanks, Ricky. And we'll take a break. All right. Coming up at the two o'clock hour, you're going to have a chance to win. $2,500. But if you stick around for the next minute and a half, you're going to have another chance to win $2,500 because we're kicking off our 250th anniversary contest. $250,000 we're giving away as a company. You get to lay claim to $2,500 of that four times a day. So listen for your chance to win coming up and then at 2 o'clock as well. Plus, coming up on the program, we'll talk about Tony Evers trying to empty the Wisconsin prisons and not tell anybody. Have a great lunch.

Good afternoon and welcome to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. You have a chance to win $2,500. Not $1,000, $2,500 in our 250th anniversary giveaway. for the America's 250th anniversary. Our company has set aside a whole gigantic pile of money for you, $250,000 actually. And you can lay claim to $2,500 of that if you play our contest. And what you do is you go to the website, newstalk 1130.com, or you go to WIBA.com. And you enter the keyword. All you do is go to the website. It will be right there for you. Scroll down a little bit because it's not like a pop-up anymore. Too many people's pop-up stoppers. We're stopping our contest. So just scroll down a bit and you'll see it. When you type in the keyword, I can't do it. I've got it open up right here. And the keyword is liberty. Liberty, spelling counts, L-I-B-E-R-T-Y, Liberty. And you have until 55 minutes past the hour. We're only doing this one four times a day because it's a lot of money. And so we're doing these at 8 a.m. 11 a.m. 2 p.m. and then 5 p.m. So those are your four times to play this contest. Of course, you'll have the hour to play. You can do whatever you like with this $2,500. Put it toward a trip to see America. See the places in America you've never seen. Something like that. Go to the 250th anniversary party, the birthday of America party. If you can get a hotel room. I have a friend trying to get a hotel room and is having some difficulty. But anyway, that's what we've got going on for you. So play that contest. We are going to dive into... The Democrats plan to turn Wisconsin into Chicago, to turn Wisconsin into Milwaukee. I've seen this on social media. You know, Tom Tiffany has to tell people that Wisconsin's going to become Minnesota or Wisconsin's going to become Illinois. Don't say California. Don't say New York. Okay. Don't say Illinois. Don't say Illinois. Don't say Minnesota. say Chicago, say Milwaukee. People understand that. Because there are parts of Illinois that look totally normal. And there are parts of Minnesota that look totally normal. There's virtually no part of Chicago that looks normal at this point. And that is what they're planning to do. We're going to talk about Tony Evers and his commutations. Murderers in Milwaukee have applied for commutations. Of course, because you can. Why wouldn't you? We're going to talk about, we are going to talk about the proposal that's been introduced by Democrats to reduce the amount of maximum time served in Wisconsin prisons for homicide and other violent crimes. We'll talk about Francesca Hong being asked directly.

If somebody commits murder, should they go to prison? And her absolute inability to be able to answer that question. So what the Democrats want for Wisconsin is to turn it from a normal place where normal people have normal concerns into Chicago. In fact, I think you should do Chicago, probably not Milwaukee, because I think that's just more viscerally, people understand Chicago more viscerally. Because that is what they want. Their constituency, Francesca Hong, the Lesser Mandela, Sarah Rodriguez, all of the other also-rans. What's their constituency? Milwaukee and Madison. That's their constituency. But even more, their constituency are the people who use taxpayer-funded services. That's their constituency. A tiny little sub-segment of a tinier sub-segment of Wisconsin. That's their constituency. What do they have for normal people? What do they have? I'll tell you. That 400-year property tax increase that raised the average homeowner's property taxes by 8% overall and people in southeastern Wisconsin, closer to an average of 15%. Mine was 17%. I talked to someone who was 41%. You need to pay that money. You need to pay out that money, man. You know why? Because we have got a tiny sub-segment of a sub-segment of Wisconsin that we want to give stuff to and you got to pay for it. And in return for your generosity of working in Wisconsin and paying your taxes, you want to know what we're going to do? We're going to unleash. Violent crime across Wisconsin. It's going to spread from Milwaukee. It's confined in Wisconsin, right? If you're living in like German town, you're probably not experiencing it too badly. But if Francesca Hong or Mandela Barnes or Sarah Rodriguez have their way, your idyllic little life in Wisconsin. where you just now are struggling to pay your property taxes so that you can foot the bill for ever expanding government, they're going to make that suck. They want to make it hard for you. You're like, gosh, at least, at least if I accidentally leave my garage door open, I'm going to be okay. They don't want that anymore. Not for you. No, no, no, no, no. You have to pay. You have to be miserable about it because this is the Democrats' stealth slogan. The beatings and taxation will continue until morale degrades. We're going to take a break. Jim Pivarachak is going to join me. We're going to first talk about the commutation stuff. That's crazy. Then we'll talk about what the Democratic gubernatorial candidates have in mind for us, which actually is crazier. I'll take a quick break.

Hey, welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. So really, the Democrats have in mind for Wisconsin turning the entire state, including your idyllic life in Menominee Falls or Jefferson or Summit, wherever you're living into a Chicago-style nightmare. They really do. I've got Jim Pivivavarchek, State Rep, Jim Pivavarchak, standing by, and we'll first talk about the commutations. This was a stealth. move made by Evers in April, but for your news organization, Wisconsin right now. We would not have known about this at all. And now we have found that we're off to the races on the applications for commutation, Jim, with, as I'm going by the last dispatch at Wisconsin right now, 28 murderers in Milwaukee have applied for commutation of their sentences, including somebody who killed four people. Yeah. Yeah, thanks, Vicki. You're absolutely right. And make it clear, those were all based on open records requests that we asked for weeks ago. And so if you, you know, right now I'm sure the numbers are much higher. I talked to Barry Bratz, Washington County DA over the weekend. His office is getting several a week of these commutation requests. Leslie Bazy just reached out to me, told me that they currently have. 20 in their office, and that's in addition to Ted Oswald. So these things are coming in. They are overwhelming these district attorney's offices. They're already short staff. And now when these commutation requests come in, they're required to review them, to review the sentencing transcripts, and it's overwhelming their department. So this is in, by the way, they don't have to, they don't really have a say. But they do get the option to do this. What kind of people are we talking about here? So, like you said, we identify Wisconsin right now, 28 killers, and that was already several weeks ago. And we're talking about a woman who shot and killed a pregnant, another pregnant rival, including the fetus. We're talking about a man convicted of quadruple homicide. Several people were convicted of double homicides. And one shooting was an incident in which a racial and gay slurs were used. Another man was convicted of a double murder where victims were buried in a basement. So like I said, these are violent people. And Governor Evers, when he set out his parameters, he did not exclude homicide. People convicted of homicide, cop killers. He did not include that. And so I, along with 38 other Republican legislators last week, sent a letter to Governor Evers, essentially asking him to stop this process to review it, to not consider homicides or cop killers. And also victim notification needs to be greatly improved upon. Right now, we've heard of, you know, families are hearing about it through social media.

that person convicted of killing a family member is now rolled for this commutation request. So the notification process needs to be put out online, publicly updated every 24 hours so people can see who these people are that are requesting these things. And the victims can. And the victims can prepare. And I'm asking for 90 days. I don't think it's unrealistic to give victims 90 days notice before a hearing. Yeah, so that they can show up so that they can be there, so they can try to have an influence. But we shouldn't be putting victims in line to have to tell someone that the quadruple murderer should stay in prison. That shouldn't even be a thing, but that's what Tony Evers wants for us. He can't get the 50% emptying of the prisons. He couldn't get that. He got busted when he was trying to use parole by Wisconsin right now. And so now he's manipulating commutations. And what are, I mean, who gets to make the decision on whether the quadruple murderer is sufficiently rehabilitated to be reintroduced back into the community? What on earth could possibly be the argument to put that person back in, in line of new victims? So Governor Evers outlined that he would be creating a commutation board. However, it's important to note he did put in there the ability to have commutations bypass this board and go directly to his desk. So he can literally sign off on it without even having it go through a process. And again, what I'm so frustrated with is this is really a subversion of the judicial system. These computations allow one person, Governor Evers, to override the verdicts decided by judges and juries. It completely throws out our criminal justice system right out the window, and it disrupts the checks and balances that were established. And so we wrote this letter, I want to point out, the Milwaukee media was dead silent on it. We wrote it to the governor. We put it out in press releases. No one in the Milwaukee media, including the Journal Sentinel, even mentioned that we wrote this letter signed by 39 legislators. Now, of course, Journal Sentinel and Milwaukee Media have no problem publishing every single press release that Democrats put out. They have no problem doing these daily hit jobs on Tom Tiffany. But yet when we put out something, say, hey, Governor, we have a severe concern over these commutations. The media is dead silent. The media has been carrying water for the ACAB crowd, the defund police crowd, the empty the prisons crowd for a good deal of time at this point. They're always the enemy of the cops. They're always the bad guys. They never feature victim stories. They never feature victim stories ever. And so it doesn't surprise me. How about Madison media? Anybody cover it in Madison media? Because there's an awful lot of folks who are going to be airdropped into Madison if these commutations go through.

Yeah, I am aware of a couple. I know, like, you know, with politics put it out, I think Wisconsin Examiner, I do believe there are one or two outlets here in the Madison area. I say here. I'm in currently in Madison. I'm going to say alt. That's alt media. Miss politics is political media. And Wisconsin Examiner is alt media. Yeah. So nothing, for all intents and purposes, not widely consumed information. That's right. I imagine most of your listeners right now, Vicky, probably don't even know that we wrote that letter last week asking the governor to suspend it because it just simply wasn't carried by the media. So this is done through an executive capacity. He does that he did this as a governor's executive order. And so it's going to require him to say. I'm going to just put a pause on this until we can figure out how we do effective notification or I'll take under advisement the concerns that people have about violent criminals like this. So far, no response or has he at least told you he is going to, you know, take it under advisement? Nope. Nope, we got no response whatsoever. And, you know, we expect us to go through the summer. These applications will continue to come through. And I expect that Governor Evers not to take any action until after the November election and then look out. He's going to be emptying the prisons come the November election. He said explicitly he wanted to see a 50% prison reduction. He said that on the campaign trail. He is not going to put an albatross around the neck of the Democrats. They seem to be doing a good job of that themselves. But you're right. This is something that unless it is eliminated by the next governor. And incidentally, is anybody asking Francesca Hong, that lesser Mandela Barnes, Sarah Rodriguez, are you going to get rid of this commutation board? Are you going to make changes? No one's even asking this. You know, what blows my mind, you have the lead candidate. And we're going to talk about this a little bit later. I got Schimming coming on, Brian Schimming from RPW. The lead candidate, Francesca Hong, gave an interview where she refused to say she would put murderers in prison. Okay. She gave an interview on May 29th where she refused to say she would put murderers in prison. Lead candidate. And this is what Tony Evers is doing. Gee, if I'm an enterprising reporter, I'm picking up the phone and I'm saying, do you support this commutation board? Do you think that quadruple homicides convicted felons should be, you know, able to apply for commutation and potentially be released? Nothing. And it won't happen either. So. Just because if they can't do your letter for notification, they're not going to do that. Right. Yeah, again, they have no problem hitting Tom Tiffany with questions every day, peppering them with these questions. But they won't dare ask the Democrat candidate these questions. Here's one I want to see him asked too. And this is one that was just released. And it's going nowhere because right now we have a Republican-controlled legislature. I'm praying we do next time around because. And it...

It doesn't look as grim, I think, as people think it is because of all are retirements. Because a lot of these retirements are in good districts. So I don't flip out people. But Ryan Clancy, who's insane? maybe not certifiably insane, but, you know, I mean, this is nuts. Put out a law, this all goes together. You got Francesca Hong saying let's not put murderers in prison. You got Tony Evers saying let's let murderers out of prison. And here's Ryan Clancy with a piece of current legislation saying, let's just reduce violent criminal penalties entirely where the maximum amount of incarcerated time for a person convicted of first degree intentional homicide would be 25 years in prison. And then you add Tony Evers serve half of that and be able to apply for commutation. And we're talking about, you know, maybe a little bit over, you know, 12 and a half-ish years in prison. Yeah, you know, Vicki, I'm confident we're going to keep the majorities here in the assembly and the Senate. But God forbid if we don't, because we will become by far the most radicalized state in this country. I've got it sit on the floor. I listen to these crazy IDDs that these Democrats have, and we should never discount what they say. If they're going to say, if they're saying something, they will do it if given the opportunity to do so. And so that's why it's so crucially important that we elect Tom Tiffany and we keep the majorities in the legislature. Oh, my gosh. And if we don't, I think we are off to the races. And it won't matter that everybody in Waukesha County complains or people in Wausau complain. Once they seize control, look what happened with the one court case that obliterated the legislature's oversight on rulemaking. That court case alone. gives a Democrat governor and a Democrat majority legislature the ability to turn Wisconsin wholesale into Chicago almost overnight with a Supreme Court that would not do anything to rein it in. I mean, that's what we're talking about, Jim. Yeah, and it's important. I'm glad you mentioned that. People don't understand that when that happened. I mean, we even saw over the weekend that DNR is talking about ATV rules and UTV rules that were done bypassing the legislature, and that will continue to happen. They will continue to create, they will create laws without the use of the legislature, and we have to stop it. Well, and the thing is, staff in executive agencies will do the staff that survive. that will survive administrations. So you can't fire, it's what Trump has run into. You can't fire the entire, you know, compliment of federal government staff, and you're not going to be able to do that in the state of Wisconsin either. I don't care how awesome Tom Tiffany is. You're not going to be able to fire all the staff.

Oh my gosh, this is just nuts. Wisconsin right now is where you can find more on this. It really is the one place that actually wrote about, you know, could you please give us a heads up on these commutations? Don't you think victims deserve a little bit of rights here? Don't you think maybe we should take the cop killers and the murderers off the list? Because otherwise you're not confined. Right. I think and victims' notifications is a big deal for me being in law enforcement. We have to make sure these victims are not traumatized and put through this all over again needlessly. And so that's why we created in our letter and in my press release, I'm demanding that Evers really improves on the victim notification process. Jim Pivarach, thank you very much for joining me on the program. And folks, I will also say if you want to look this up, I would go to GROC. on x and look up ab 1210 wisconsin so you can see what we were referencing with regard to a piece of legislation authored sponsored by democrats can't pass now but it will if we lose the majority that would reduce violent criminal penalties radically in our state we'll take a quick break i'll be right back brian shimming is going to join me from r pw Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. So all eyes on Wisconsin because of our governor's race. Because it really does now depend the future of our state on who is governor because of what the courts have done to the legislative authority, et cetera. So we have the Democrat frontrunner, Francesca Hong, who is a state rep out of Madison. She's leading the Democrat polls. She's 100% Madison. And she was just recently asked what she would do about crime. Because crime, particularly violent crime in Milwaukee, Madison, is getting worse. Just have it. This is two minutes. I apologize for torturing you. But have a listen to her answers to direct questions about things like, would you put a violent criminal in prison? Here it is. The vision that I have presented is having policies that we enact that we enact today and having a vision that where everyone is safe. You know, those are, it's, if someone would be accused of, I'm sorry, AJ, can you You asked what should happen to them. If the system works as it should, if somebody is convicted of killing another person, if they're convicted of a repeat violent offense, repeat armed robberies, those kinds of things where there's reason to believe this person is a threat to society, should they be locked away in secure detention? There has to be accountability. I think if this were to happen, you know, it is moving towards a world where we are investing in public safety is going to take time and collaboration and building policies that we know will ensure that people's needs are met. If this were to happen tomorrow, there are laws in place and there has to be accountability for folks who commit crimes. Does accountability include incarceration and secure detention?

Accountability Are we talking, AJ, I think it's important that we put this in the context of under a Hong administration, correct? Is it if this were to happen in the next four, eight, 12 years? Correct. Yes. I think about if this were to happen in, let's say, a hundred years and we are moving towards a world where more people have their basic needs met, and there is not the economic instability and stress of what people are going through right now. Because if this were to happen, and if a crime hasn't committed, there should be accountability and incarceration and law enforcement are the systems in place right now for that accountability. And so I would, we would have to make sure that we're working within the confines of the laws. Wow. Brian Schimming, chairman of the Republican Party, is standing by. That was a conversation she was having with CBS 58, Milwaukee, CBS 58 reporter and anchor, AJ Beattipore. So she could not say yes. She could not. Would you put a murderer in prison? This is the lead candidate for the Democrats. And she could not say, yes, I would put a murder in prison. This is a good idea. We take these people out of the mix of society. I don't know what she wanted, ultimately, some utopia. She never got to it. But this is the lead candidate for governor. She can't say it for a simple reason. She doesn't believe it. That's why she can't say it, because she doesn't believe it. And frankly, it is now the picture of the modern Democratic Party. If you look at their tilt towards violence, threats against conservatives, all of that in the last 10 years, as I say, Craig Gilbert's story on how the Democrat... Primary audience is now 10 or 14 points to the left from where they were 10 years ago. She can't say it because she doesn't believe it. And if the other shoe is dropping on this, all the other Democrats are trying to do some version of her. I'm not sure I've heard any Democrat, not just Francesca Hong, any Democrat. be tough on crime. That's the problem. There's two shoes dropping. The number one with her, the number two with the rest of them. So, you know, what I say to them are there are people dying on the streets of Milwaukee because of Democrats like them. There are people every day dying on the streets of Milwaukee and other cities around the state because the Democrats want to take a pass.

and don't want to say you're guilty of murder, you're going to the slammer, and we're going to forget you, period. So here's the thing. There's legislation that would eliminate life sentences in Wisconsin from one of her key allies, Ryan Clancy in Milwaukee. There's legislation that would max out murder penalties in Wisconsin at 30 years. And then... because of Tony Evers commutation policy, you can make an application for commutation after 15 years. And it goes down the list of violent felonies, radically reducing criminal penalties for all of these violent crimes. That's Francesca Hong. Is it also the rest? of the Democratic contingent? Pretty much. Sarah Rodriguez says we spend way too much, quote, warehousing people instead of investing in prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation, especially for black men. Mandela Barnes says letting prisoners out of prison is sexy. He's overtly said we need to defund the police, as has Francesca Hong. I mean, you know, maybe this is not an issue outside Milwaukee. But good Lord, where do you think those murderers and those armed robbers are going to be living if they're not going to be in prison? Well, and Milwaukee's... problems, especially with respect to crime, radiate out from the city for a hundred miles. So Milwaukee, for the trouble that they have, they're literally going to be people dead on the sidewalk if she follows what she's doing. Not just not putting them away right away. See, part of the problem on the whole defund the police thing wasn't just... on or off, yes or no, are you going to defund the police? It was an attitude towards police budgets at that time a couple of years ago that ended up with police budgets getting cut right and left, not because they were being defunded alone, but because of the whole attitude, oh, we really shouldn't do that anymore. Well, that's the same crap the left has been doing since the 60s. We have seen a defunding of the police for... decades now, which is why you have the crime problems in Milwaukee and other cities. That's why it's because of this whole attitude on the part of the left. And she's just, in a way, she's just, she was being honest about it when she was saying she's defunding the police. But now that she's a candidate for governor, she has still put all these weasel words in and try to figure out different ways to say the same thing. They don't want to put people in prison. No, accountability means programs. Accountability means NGOs. Accountability means grants. Accountability means less policing, no incarceration, and more soft programs that have already been proved to fail every. We can go back to midnight basketball under Bill Clinton. These things don't work. But wait, there's more. This is another, this candidate, Francesca Hong, who is, again, the lead candidate.

Second in line is Mandela Barnes. They both support something that looks like our taxpayer money funding grocery stores for people who steal the shelves bare. So Francesca Hong overtly wants government-run grocery stores. Mandela Barnes wants taxpayer money sent to the grocery stores. that sees the inventory leave via theft loss. And so it's the same thing. Either the government starts the grocery store and runs it or the government pays for somebody else to run the grocery store. It's still government groceries. They both want government groceries, not for people like us, Brian. No, no, no, no, no. For the people who steal, because if you actually give them free stuff, they'll steal less. Well, and think about that for a minute. This is not some issue of, oh, we need to go into underserved neighborhoods and make sure you have basketball or make sure you have skating or make sure you have things that other neighbors. This groceries are not an option. People have to eat, okay? And so the question is not, is there a market for grocery stores? There's a market for grocery stores in every single. neighborhood in Milwaukee, poor, rich in between. The question is, can you run a grocery store to your point that won't be stolen blind? It's why you see Walgreens closing around the city. It's why you see all these other issues. It's not that the market is not there for them. It's that the people who operate the stores can't do it without getting held up or stolen blind. That's why there's not grocery stores. It's not because there's not a need. Everyone needs to eat. So there's a need. It's because you can't operate safely in some of these neighborhoods. Why is that? Because the liberals running, these cities won't allow you to do it. By the way, that's their constituency. That's Hong, that's Barnes, that's Rodriguez's constituency, is people who would steal their grocery stores empty, give them free groceries as a consequence of stealing. the grocery stores. That's their constituency. This is who they're running for. How about that 400-year property tax veto, which has resulted in a minimum property tax increase across Wisconsin of 8%. In my case, it was 17%. In some areas of Wisconsin, it was getting close to a 50% increase in property taxes. What do they think about that? Well, they think that we should maintain that 400-year veto. All of them.

think that. Rodriguez says, oh, no, it's great. Hong says, oh, you betcha. We're going to keep that thing in place, and so does Barnes. And so what's their answer for people being able to afford housing in Wisconsin? You ready for this? Go back to their constituencies, which are the people who already steal stuff and get stuff for free. We're going to set aside more of your money through those property tax increases for subsidized housing for people who don't work. No lie, that is their housing plan. All three of them, their housing plan is to go find welfare recipients and buy them houses or get them apartments. That's their plan. And the rest of us, the rest of the rich people, you know, the middle class and the blue collar folks, we're the ones who would be the left shouldering the burden. Income taxes, they need to go up, of course, according to these folks. My gosh. yeah it's it's scary because again like with groceries the problem isn't that the demand isn't there everyone needs to eat it's not the demand problem it's the problem of you've got to be able to go into neighborhoods and operate at a minimum level of safety and by the way the government's first job is to keep us safe that's why we have police departments and yet the Police Department is hundreds of officers down from where the minimums they should be. Well, you know what? That's not the neighborhood's problem. That's the problem of city officials and local politicians who won't prioritize and put the money into public safety. I always say it's a freedom issue. You don't have freedom if you live in a neighborhood and you can't send your kids down to the park a block. away. You're a prisoner. You're not free in neighborhoods where you have crime. That's not freedom. And that's, if the government wants to guarantee freedom, it's put cops on the street and put the bad people behind bars. It's actually pretty simple that way. And here's the thing. People say, well, she's, you know, Francesca Hong or Mandela Barnes, they'll turn Wisconsin into Illinois. They'll turn Wisconsin into Minnesota. No, they will turn the entire state of Wisconsin into Milwaukee. They will turn. the entire state of Wisconsin into Chicago. Those are the two things that you need to say. They want to turn all of the state of Wisconsin into the dumpster fire that is Chicago or Milwaukee. Every single major candidate on the Democrat slate wants to do that. Brian Schimming, I appreciate the time on the program as always. Thank you so much. And we will take a break on the Vicki McKenna Show. That's it for me on the program. Make sure you listen after 5 o'clock. You're going to have another chance to win in our 250th anniversary contest. Coming up on tomorrow's program, we're going to talk about President Trump's executive order on improving absentee ballot integrity using the United States Postal Service. Hans von Spakovsky will join me. Have a great afternoon. We'll see you back here tomorrow.