Vicki McKenna Show - Worse than Watergate Scandal

Good morning. Welcome to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. Happy Halloween, by the way. We've got a lot to get to a lot of ground to cover on the program today. More on the enemies list, secret subpoena attempt by the Democrats, led by the White House, the Biden administration, to dismantle the entire... conservative network in the United States, starting with battleground states. More on that. Lots more on that. And how it is eerily similar to something that already happened in Wisconsin, the John Doe investigation. So we'll get into that. We've got a proposal to get rid of absentee ballots. Wouldn't that be nice? Lots ahead on the program today. Anti-SLAPP legislation, which would make it a whole lot harder. for the government to try to silence speech through threats of litigation. Just piling on as much as I possibly can in the program today. Here's your word to win. Cash. Cash. That's your word to win. If you go to WIBA.com or if you go to our IHeartRadio app and play our contest, you could win $1,000. Cash is your keyword. Simply enter the keyword in our nationwide contest. You have until 55 minutes past the hour to play. We will call you, call you on the phone if you win. We will not leave messages. Do not screen your calls. Cash, C-A-S-H is your word. Speaking of Kash Patel, that is, word out from the FBI yesterday was that at least one of the agents that was involved in this secret, illegal investigation that makes Watergate look like nothing. that was run by the government to dismantle their political opponents and the network supporting their political opponents. This is why it's so eerily similar to John Doe. Kash Patel fired one of the FBI agents who had been promoted after being part of this Arctic Frost investigation. He was promoted. Christopher Ray gave him a promotion for doing this. There are four others that have appeared in these recent releases by Chuck Grassley. These are the most recent releases, not the enemies list releases, but the subpoena releases. There are four other FBI agents who participated, theorized, spitballed, brainstormed, signed off on, and generally participated in what was mass surveillance designed to find a reason. to charge people with crimes to dismantle the conservative network. Let me give you an example of how just scattershot and broad this was. Kim Strassel writing in the Wall Street Journal.

The Wall Street Journal finally paying attention. That's nice. That's because President Trump paid attention to this yesterday. She writes this, these were not targeted subpoenas designed to further existing evidence. They were free for alls. One example is from 10 days after Jack Smith was appointed, he demanded that targets turn over. They were not told to turn this over, by the way. They were. simply issued these subpoenas were issued in secret targets were turning over regardless of subject matter all documents and communications to from with or including any member employee or agent of a legislative branch any member employee or agent of donald j trump or any organization or person advocating in favor of his re-election and any person in the white house the executive offices of the president and the vice president and the justice department Let me read that again. Okay. This was what the subpoena demanded, that information, this was, again, not telegraphed to the targets themselves. These were subpoenas that were issued to telecoms, to their service providers, to Apple, to Yahoo, to AT&T. Incidentally, all of the telecoms were forced. to oblige gag orders and not share this information with attorneys or targets. Again, the subpoenas. demanded, this is just one element of the 197 subpoenas that were released, demanded in one instance, regardless of subject matter, all documents and communications, two from with or including any member, employee or agent of the legislative branch, any member employee or agent of Donald J. Trump or any organization or person advocating for his reelection.

One of the targets, by the way, they found this out later, was a group called America First Legal. America First Legal didn't even exist in 2020. They didn't exist on January 6, 2021. They didn't exist until 2022. However, the subpoenas on America First Legal were for all of this information, quote, regardless of subject matter, all documents and communications to, from, with, or including any member, employee or agent of the legislative branch, any member, employee, or agent of Donald J. Trump, or any organization or person advocating in favor of his reelection. This had nothing to do with challenging the election. This had nothing to do with January 6th. America First legal didn't exist. And yet, a secret subpoena was served on them to gather all the communication. This is just one of the groups we know about. Intold, in the 197 subpoenas, there were 497 groups or people targeted, and all of their information. via e-communications were seized by the federal government, seized by Jack Smith, in pursuit of at the time non-existent crimes. They were going to look through the information to see if they couldn't find a reason to conjure some interpretation of federal statute to charge people with crimes. Other organizations similarly were targeted. Other people similarly were targeted. Who signed off on all of this? Judge Bossaberg signed off on all of this. Secret gap secret subpoenas, you're good to go. gag orders on telecoms. The subpoenas were served on in pursuit of these targets. Good to go. Judge Bossaberg signs off on everything, signs off on everything. They spied on the entire conservative network, not just to see what they were doing. That was Watergate. Let's see if we can't get the playbook of the Democrats to see what they're up to, to see if we can't get a head start on the playbook and head off the playbook. This is let's spy on the entire conservative network to see if we can't find reasons to charge people with crimes, to see if we can't find reasons to put people in prison, just because we hate them. That's what this was. If you were having conversations about thinking the election of 2020 was hinky or that Wisconsin was not legally allocated to Joe Biden, and incidentally, the case before the Wisconsin Supreme Court presented in public proved it wasn't, you found yourself on this list.

If you were one of the big targets and you were having conversations with people about election fraud, thinking there was something hinky about the election, supporting Donald Trump, not even going back. Not even going back. Just going forward. These were ongoing surveillance efforts, and the only reason any of it was shut down was because Alien Cannon, a federal judge in Florida, shut down Jack Smith. This would have been ongoing in perpetuity had Alien Cannon, federal judge in Florida, not shut down Jack Smith as a special prosecutor. This would have never ended. Kash Patel fired one guy so far. One person's been fired so far. There are at least four others that show up in these documents. Judge Bossaberg finally has an act of impeachment introduced against him by Byron Donalds's in Florida. Will that go anywhere? Probably not. Pam Bondi is really the linchpin here. Pam Bondi needs to investigate all of this, but Pam Bondi's busy trying to get justice. for people who made contributions to Black Lives Matter. That's what her big announcement was yesterday. She's going to investigate people who made people's claims that when they made contributions to Black Lives Matter, they thought they were going to support an organization that was going to help black people. So she's doing a fraud investigation on behalf of left-wing idiots who sent money. to Patrice Cullors and the other scam artists at Black Lives Matter and now feel ripped off. No, Pampondi, that shouldn't be your priority. This should be your priority. This makes Watergate look like nothing. And that's the second time we've said that, isn't it? Because Russiagate made Watergate look like nothing. We'll take a quick break. Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. Going back to Kim Strassel in the Wall Street Journal, you know, I guess I'm not surprised that Kim Strassel, in her opinion piece, did a good job on this story at the Wall Street Journal. The Wall Street Journal has got to be dragged kicking and screaming to even cover this stuff. The Wall Street Journal doesn't want to cover something that is, that makes Watergate look like, you know, a child prank. I will quote from her again, though, the 197 Arctic Frost subpoenas encompassing some 430 Republican targets, including White House officials, members of Congress, Trump family members, party organizations, think tanks, nonprofits, companies, donors, and even journalists. On these massive general descriptions, all communication related. to anything that had to do with Republican politics, Republican presidential politics or Republican strategy. Brandon?

All right, we're back. Sorry about that. We had a hiccup. Matt Kittle is standing by to talk about how we're not unfamiliar with what's been going on with this worse than Watergate scandal that's now emerging that we all had a sense about, but now are getting some of the hard details on. We're not unfamiliar with it in Wisconsin, are we, Matt? No, this is John Doe writ large, of course, as we've talked about. Okay. So John Doe did the same thing in Wisconsin. People were targeted for what? Because they supported Scott Walker, because they supported the reforms, because they were part of a powerful conservative network that was winning statewide elections. That's why they were targeted. They had general warrants, very similar to what I read at the top of the show. General warrants and subpoenas issued in secret. in secret to their telecom providers, so the people who manage their emails, the phone companies that manage their phones for text messages, all of their financial records, all of it was subpoenaed, and everybody had a gag order. And we learned that was in fact the case with all of this as well, Matt. Yeah, well, it was all done in secret, just like the John Doe investigation. Thankfully, there were reforms to the John Doe law. There were also reforms that got rid of the government accountability board. But as the Who said, meet the new boss, same as the old boss with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, because you can't have... a new and improved election regulator when you have a lot of the same people from the corrupt GAB. But that's another issue altogether. Yeah. The thing is, though, they changed the government accountability board to the Wisconsin Elections Commission, and they're no better. They did improve the John Doe law, but they didn't get rid of it entirely. And nobody was held accountable. So that's my fear about this. You know, okay, so this guy gets fired at the FBI. Is Jack Smith going to be held accountable? Is Merrick Garland going to be held accountable? Is Joe Biden going to be held accountable? Is Chris Wright going to be held accountable? Because Kevin Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was never held accountable in the government accountability. But nobody, John Chisholm was never held accountable. No one ever faced one single second of pain. for what they did in Wisconsin. And I'm fearful that maybe minus a few firings, no one's going to see any pain here either. Yeah, I think about guys like David Buddy, you know, an absolute creep of an investigator with the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office, not held accountable. And you're right to be very concerned. You're right to talk about the lack of priorities or, you know, failed priorities. from the Department of Justice. You know, they have done some good things. I don't want to dismiss that.

But people are concerned that there won't be accountability because there hasn't been accountability. I know we're just nine months into this thing. These things take time. But as a watchdog I talked to earlier this week said about the Autopin scandal, which is another entire thing that the corporate media doesn't want to cover. The review time is over. The investigation time for a lot of this stuff is over. We have the receipts. Now it's time for prosecutions. Yeah, do we really need to spend much more time on the investigations here? We have the secret subpoenas. We know these are general warrants. We had that in Wisconsin. Nobody wanted to bring any charges. Why aren't charges being brought? See, you know, the best we got out of Wisconsin, and it was because everybody was too weak to do any better than this, was tweaking the John Doe law. and changing the government accountability board to another body that's so corrupt we can't trust the election process in Wisconsin, actually worse if you think about it in some ways. So, I mean, Brad Schimel did a deep dive investigation into John Doe. I was also surveilled in John Doe for Pete's sake. Yes, you were. And nobody. No one was ever, I mean, even fired in Wisconsin, at least maybe we'll get a couple of firings. But so the thing is, how does it stop this again? I remember when Deb Jordall was quoted as saying in a pretty good piece that I can't remember now, you know, they have everything on me and they hate me. If no one's held accountable and the information is not, you know, that has been, you know, gleaned is not destroyed, is not identified and destroyed, then when Donald Trump isn't president anymore, just like when Scott Walker wasn't governor anymore, what prevents someone else from blowing the dust off and just picking up from where, you know, from where the scandal left off? Nothing. Nothing. And what these. very evil people in the deep state of our federal government learned. Remember, these are the same, many of the same people that Obama had in his DOJ that were tied to the John Doe. But Wisconsin was the testing ground for this in so many ways. And they learned a lot from the John Doe investigations, but maybe most importantly, what they learned is. There is no will for accountability among the Republican Party. Now, there were some, like Tom Tiffany and Dave Craig, who were very much pushing for accountability. It never happened. And so that every time you have a situation like that, it emboldens bad actors to push farther. And that's what we have. Yeah, we had it. It was easy.

All you had to do was go look. And by the way, the feds were involved in the John Doe investigation. So all of this had the FBI was involved in the John Doe investigation. Why we needed to tear apart the conservative network again. They were trying to get to Scott Walker, just like they were trying to get to Donald Trump. And to get to Scott Walker, they went through like a freight train, all of the activists in Wisconsin who were part of multiple organizations that were considered one of the, that together were considered one of the most powerful. conservative networks in the country, in the country. And the Trump organization and the various different other organizations that supported the Trump campaign were considered among the most powerful conservative networks in the country. So they tore apart our conservative network in Wisconsin, didn't they Matt? Have they ever reformed it? Have we ever reformed it in Wisconsin? No, it has been shattered to the far heavens. And it's never come back together in a way that has been meaningful or effective since. Well, when you're spied on and you're gagged and you're told that you could be sent to prison for defending yourself in public, you know, that's weaponization of government. And I don't want to hear from the left about Donald Trump and their, you know, their. tired stories of he's weaponizing the government no he's he and hopefully the justice department are holding accountable the people who weaponized the government never lose sight of that because that's what our irresponsible accomplice media wants you to believe that Donald Trump is weaponizing the government there is a a bill of tender here and it has to be paid So, but it won't be. Let's go back to the Republicans having zero appetite for accountability. They have zero appetite for accountability. So it never changed. Nothing materially changed in our state except the conservative network was obliterated. It was obliterated. I mean, I could go, you and I could do three hours on how incredibly effective that network was, but it was obliterated. And that's what do we have now going forward? We have lawyers who don't want to defend Republicans, lawyers who don't want to, you know, make arguments that would challenge fraudulent elections. So they've torn apart the conservative legal network. And as we see with America First Legal, which was not even formed until 2022. They were part of the general warrants as well. They were a very effective legal group. That was to take out the lawyers at America first legal, which is a very potent, you know, I guess we could call them campaign legal support. team. That's what they're taking out. Anybody who would then, you know, let's say you're targeted or I'm targeted, I need to find a lawyer, Matt. I want to call one of the lawyers who's really good at this stuff. Where would I find one of those lawyers? I would find a lawyer under investigation. Or if I were able to find one, all our communications would have been absorbed, read, and dissected.

for potential interpretation of federal statute for criminal charges. And so why would, you know, why would lawyers after that's been revealed ever want to take on a case like this? Why would anyone even fight? No wonder some of the electors were induced into those hostage letters that they wrote claiming that President Trump misled them. Yeah. If you were subject to a bogus. a witch hunt investigation over campaign finance or communications, all of this stuff, election law, you would want the best election law attorney you could get. Unfortunately, Josh Call is trying to put him in prison. His name is Jim Truppus. He stood up and did the work that nobody would do in representing Donald Trump. And he did that with the law on his side. And he did that to the best of his ability. And what did they do to him? What have they done to him? And that's what they want more than anything. is to serve Jim Troopus up on a Graham Platner to send a message. If you as an attorney try to help anyone associated with Donald Trump and the MAGA movement in this country, conservatives, you will pay the price. Absolutely true. He was one of the 11 main targets in these subpoenas. Jim was one of the 11 main targets in these subpoenas. And again, remember what it said. They were free for alls, regardless of subject matter, all documents and communications, two, from with, including any member, employer, agent of the legislative branch, any member, employer, agent of Donald J. Trump, or any organization or person advocating in favor of his reelection. That's how the rest of us wound up on the enemy's list was because Jim Troop as Donald Trump's campaign attorney in Wisconsin was one of the 11 main targets of these subpoenas that were just released. Astonishing. And so, yeah, I would want the best attorney, right? I would want to call Jim. I would want to call John Eastman, right? I would want to call Clita Mitchell. I'd want to call Victoria Tensing. I'd want to call one of these people. But these people would say, I'm never touching these cases again. That's what they'd say. And they would be stupid to say anything else. Matt, you know, one last thing I'm going to ask you. And where's the media coverage on this? Well, that's the other crime as well. It's nowhere. You look at the New York Times, the Washington Post, after the grassly bombshell documents that anybody, any reporter in his right mind, her right mind, would know this is a story. Just like... Just like John Doe. Just like the John Doe. I remember, you know, and I reporting on this and we're scratching our heads going, even if you have a small, you know, small bit of curiosity as a journalist, this would be a story to investigate to dig in about government abuse.

But no, they're part of the government abuse. Correct. That's the problem. It was never a story. And because Republicans are fearful of demanding accountability, they never made it a story. And it's not just not the New York Times. It's not in the Wall Street Journal, but it's Kim Strassel in the Wall Street Journal, not the Wall Street Journal, news staff. It's the opinion staff. But here in Wisconsin, not the Wisconsin State Journal. None of the Gannett papers, including the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. which is, you know, the USA Today Milwaukee version. None of the television stations have touched it. No one. No one's touching this story. I appreciate the time. Thank you. Thank you. Good to have you. And we will take a break on the Vicki McKenna Show. Don't forget you've got a word to win for the 9 a.m. hour. We will be right back with state representative Lindy Brill, who's got a bill. Lindy Brill has a bill that I think a lot of you are going to like. We'll be right back. Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. Standing by on the Middleton Ford Hotline, Middleton Ford Family Owned and Your Good Neighbor Ford dealership. For nearly 75 years, a state rep Lindy Brill. who joins me to talk about a piece of legislation. It's a very good piece of legislation. You're all going to like it a lot. That would ban drop boxes for absentee ballots. Lindy, welcome to the program. Thank you for joining me. Thank you for having me, Ricky. All right. So we thought we already basically limited absentee ballot drop boxes. And we had a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision a few years ago that said, yes, these are not, you know, they cannot just be put willy-nilly, you know, places where, you know, you can harvest votes from Democrats. There have to be certain conditions. And the next Supreme Court just said, nah. Feel free to, you know, do as you please. Now there's actually a mayor in Wisconsin facing prosecution by Josh Call because he thought that state law allowed him to make sure that these drop boxes were secure, et cetera. Maybe we should just get rid of him, hey? Yeah, I mean, this is a simple bill that it's a one-sentence bill that takes a small yet important step in bringing voter election integrity back to our state. And there's no reason to have them. There's no reason to put bells and whistles on them. You know, there's been talk about how do we monitor them better? How do we make sure that there's cameras on them? How do we make sure that they're secure? And the fact is that just putting lipstick on a pig. It was a definite legally sound decision in 2022 in Tegan versus WAC. And we need to just do that. I mean, let's just get rid of them. There's no reason to have them in Wisconsin. Okay. So the, you know, everyone's like, okay, well, we'll put cameras on them.

Okay, you will. And then we'll have other things that we'll do. Okay, maybe we should just get rid of them because until the 2020 election, these were used sparingly in Wisconsin. They were not ubiquitous. And then once the 2020 election rolls around and COVID is the excuse, which no longer exists by the way as an excuse. We've got to have these things everywhere, and curiously, most of them located within heavily democratic areas. You know, absentee balloting is a privilege. Why are we trying to act like it's a right? Well, we're acting like it's a right, and not we like you and me, but others are acting like it's a right because we know that absentee ballot drop boxes are a vehicle for ballot harvesting. And so those who think that we need them, either a... think that we need to do election integrity with Democrats, which is a bad move, or B, they are Democrats and they want to rig the election. Okay, so you're talking about actually a Republican in the Assembly who seems to think that the Democrats have the right idea. How do you secure them? How do you stop ballot harvesting? How is Wisconsin? Thank you. You can't. Yeah, you can't do it. Right. Unless you set up cameras, unless you run sting operations, unless you have DAs willing to prosecute and police are willing to arrest, you cannot stop ballot harvesting at the absentee ballot boxes in Wisconsin. Correct. And that's exactly why I did this bill. And I was very excited to introduce it with seven of my colleagues in the assembly on October 3rd. And we've had others sign on. So one of those people who introduced it with me is the chair of the elections committee, Representative Maxey, which I was thrilled to have him on the bill at introduction because now we are going to have a hearing in his committee because he knows this is good legislation. He believes in election integrity alongside. me and the other seven that wanted to introduce this. or the other six beside Representative Maximi. And we resoundingly want to bring this to Wisconsin. And I'm thankful for the opportunity for the hearing and to see where this goes. We have some great people showing up to give testimony on Tuesday that have experience in this that are boots on the ground. This is a we the people legislation. This is not lobbyist driven. This is not driven by anything other than the people of Wisconsin saying, We want fair elections. And to make fair elections, we need to take steps. And this is one of those steps. Okay, nobody trusts our elections anymore in Wisconsin. That's just the, that's the facts. It's 2025. We should have been pursuing nonstop election integrity reform going back to the moment we learned.

that ballot harvesting now has become a cottage industry in Wisconsin, when we learned that the absentee ballot drop boxes were being placed in heavily Democratic areas, when we learned that they facilitated voter fraud, when we learned that they became mobile in Racine since 2020, but it's 2025. And I'm going to ask you this question, why isn't the entire Republican Assembly caucus signed on to this? That's a great question. I think sometimes we, Republicans focus, and I've said this, Republicans focus too hard on meeting in the middle where the Democrats aren't going to meet us instead of introducing true strong legislation that gets the state back to where we need to be a true conservative state. There's no reason that we shouldn't all be on this bill. And I'm excited to see what happens after the hearing. That's the beauty of the process. And the great part is we have a president who is leading an election integrity. He is unapologetic about his approach to it. He's unapologetic about his thoughts on absentee ballot drop boxes. And I'm honored to get to introduce it at the state level alongside what he's trying to push federally. So we should be looking to him for leadership in this. And that's where I look. And I'm calling on other Republicans in the state of Wisconsin to join me in that fight and say. President Trump has this right, or has this right. Wisconsin, it is time to ban absentee ballot drawboxes. Okay. So you have a hearing coming up and presumably people who are going to be at the hearing are going to be talking about the problems with securing the drop boxes, the problems with preventing fraud, the problems with preventing ballot harvesting, right? You know, I mean, so, you know, we're talking about a committee hearing, but is there a way to make this hearing a hearing of the whole so that everyone in the Republican caucus? can actually hear some of this testimony. Because I think what's really going on is that Republicans don't want to go, don't want to push back against the media, which is essentially made talking about election integrity and talking about voter fraud, akin to election denial, which of course is something the Democrats do routinely, but apparently you're never supposed to challenge any kind of election result if you're a Republican. I think that's what you're seeing. So is there a way maybe to get these. folks who have been on the ground watching this stuff, monitoring this stuff to share it with everyone. Yeah, I mean, it's a public hearing. My hope is that West Eye is going to cover it so people can watch it, tune in, share clips from it. We have to get this truth spread, and we are bringing truth to the Capitol on Tuesday. So please, people tune in to West Eye, if it's on, share clips from it. Make sure everybody understands the importance of this. This is not a conspiracy theory. It may be started as one of, as we know.

But we found out so many of those have come to be true. And we know, as we've talked about, absentee ballot drop boxes are a vehicle for ballot harvest seats. And so they need to be taken out of our state, a one sentence bill that does one small thing to bring a piece of voter integrity back to Wisconsin. This just makes sense. Everyone should be on board with this. So this is not, you know, a designated special voting deputy that is in a nursing home saying, okay, I'm going to, you know, I'm going to help you all vote, which, of course, I also have some serious questions and qualms about. This is someone who could conceivably just go collect ballots. and knock on doors high. We'd like you to vote for so-and-so. Mark your ballot, put it in a bag, walk, you know, and someone says, no, I'm going to vote for somebody else. That ballot may never make it into an absentee ballot drop box. That's the risk of ballot harvesting. The other risk of ballot harvesting is if you don't do anything to police it, then literally if someone, and we saw this in Michigan, there were 10,000 ballots in Michigan that were done like this. where one person had people filling out ballots so that they could be distributed in, you know, in bulk into ballot boxes. So that's another thing that you can have, you know, at risk of, which is, you know, certainly an overt crime, but someone, you know, just going door to door or having everybody come into a place and we all sit down and fill out our ballots together. There's all kinds of risk to that. But it helps the Democrats. It never helps the Republicans. And that's why we have them. Correct. Yeah, I mean, yeah, the Michigan case is a great example. We continue to have an incredible amount of evidence of ballot harvesting because of absentee ballot boxes. I think of Dinesh D'Souza. documentary on it i mean it was absolutely appalling as you watch some of that video and we're going to sit back and say well let's just put cameras on it how do you then decide when there are ballots stuffed into a bell box which ones were stuffed in and which ones aren't what does the camera do then are they all are they all now ballots that can't be uh can't be counted and i cameras isn't the answer Cameras are good for a lot of things, but not to mention, cameras do not make police make arrests. Cameras do not make DA's charge. Cameras do not stop the fraud from happening. Cameras do not remove the ballots. Cameras are just our tools so that we can see who did what. And sometimes you can't tell who did what, even if you have a camera. So to have that be the answer is absurd. What time is the hearing? When is the hearing? Where can people listen to the hearing? How can people attend the hearing? Especially if people have evidence that they can't get anyone to listen to. Maybe they'd like to sign up for public comment. Yeah. Thank you for asking. It is Tuesday, November 4th. We're starting at 1031 in 412 East in the Capitol. You can submit. If you can't make it, but you still want to submit comments, you can via the...

or the chair committee, Representative Maxie's office, you could submit written testimony in favor of her against. So please, yeah, please show up. Tell people your stories. This is our chance to let people know why these no longer, let your legislators know why these do not belong in Wisconsin and why you know and you've seen it firsthand why we should be fighting for this and getting this fill up to the governor's desk. Absolutely. And first off, you've got to start passing these bills. Tom Tiffany, as a leading candidate, has got to commit to signing a piece of legislation that would get rid of these things and run on it and run on it. It's the number one or number two issue with the Republican base in Wisconsin is absentee ballots and absentee ballot drop boxes and voter integrity. Voter integrity, election integrity is number one or number two on the list of people's concerns. tend to just ignore it. I appreciate the time, Lindy. Thank you very much. Thank you so much, Vicki. Have a great day. You as well, Representative Lindy Brill. She's a new one, by the way, new-ish. So, you know, not jaded. And this is just one of those things. The Republicans were cowed by the press into silencing self-censoring and silencing themselves on this issue. We'll be right back. And welcome back to the program. You've got another chance to win. $1,000 in our nationwide fall fortune cash contest. This is week what, week five. I think we have one week left of it. Don't hold me to that. I don't have my information, my file up in front of me. I just think this is week five. Feels like week five. Your word is bank. B-A-N-K, enter the keyword bank at our website, W-I-B-A.com, or at our I-HartRadio app, which you can get for free at Google Play Store and the App Store if you have an iPhone. You have until 55 minutes past the hour to play. We'll call you if you win. We won't leave messages. Don't screen your calls. Speaking of Apple. Speaking of Apple, this Justin is being reported today by Newsmax first and then the Gateway Pundit, which is a MAGA-leaning news site out of St. Louis, for those of you don't know. But Newsmax first reporting that Newsmax host Ed Henry, some of you may know Ed Henry, is included. by name in the 197 subpoenas that were released by Chuck Grassley. So an explicit subpoena was issued against Ed Henry. He wasn't just on the enemy's list for future reference. Let's go after these people. No, he got an explicit subpoena. He was never told about it. Why? Why did he get a subpoena from Jack Smith, but never told about it? Because Apple was ordered by Judge Bossaberg not to tell him. Apple. What would Apple need to provide to the Justice Department on Newsmax host Ed Henry? His Apple account, his music account, it was based on his support of a song. He supported a song that was being produced to help the J6 prisoners.

So again, well after the election of 2020, he was being accused of helping to produce a song. The song is called Justice for All. It was sung by the January 6th prisoners from jail. He wanted to help raise money and awareness for their plight. So it has nothing to do with the election. Ed Henry was not part. of the January 6 protests. He had sympathy for the January 6 prisoners who were being held without trial in a gulag in Washington, D.C. And he helped them get their song produced and uploaded to Apple Music. That's why he was subpoenaed. And he didn't know about it. And Apple was told they could not tell him anything. So that's one of the pages he saw where his name was that detailed Apple music. There was probably more that was ascertained in communications between Ed Henry and his sources or his guests or his friends or other people he knew. But this is what he found out. For helping to produce a song and get it loaded to Apple Music, he was spied on by Jack Smith in a secret subpoena signed off on by Judge Bosphorke. No Kings, huh? Okay. How about no dictators? I don't know. No, no dictators. Maybe we could, maybe we could have you guys update your rhetoric on, maybe no dictators. But then you'd have to protest your own people. Why would you need information about some guys' Apple Music account? So that they could, here's what it was. So that they could twist. The information, they also wanted a social security number, by the way. They got his social security number. Apple was forced to provide a social security number. So they could twist what he did into some kind of attempt to raise money for criminals in furtherance of an effort toward insurrection. There's nothing to do with the election. There's nothing to do. with challenging election results. It is everything to do with just being sympathetic and supportive of the people who thought they had a right to assemble on January 6th, who thought when doors were open and they were not stopped from walking into the Capitol that it was okay to go in there. People like me, you know, have sympathy for folks like that. Secret investigation. So how many more journalists are going to show up on the subpoena list? How much more information is there that we still don't know about? Are there other subpoenas we don't know about? Probably. We had 197 subpoenas, which included these 197 subpoenas only included.

13 people in 163 companies. But we know that there were 437 people who were subject of subpoenas. Give us their names. Publish the subpoenas. All of them. There's more. All right. Real quick update. It looks very much like Democrats are cracking. Senator Katie Britt from Alabama, who is the chair of the Appropriation Subcommittee, is indicating that Democratic senators are funneling information about their desire to end the shutdown to Chuck Schumer. So she is communicating with Chuck Schumer on behalf of Democrats who want to end the shutdown. This is probably because they lost CNN. Washington Post editorial board just put out an editorial telling the Democrats to knock it off and end the shutdown, blaming the Democrats as well for the shutdown. The largest federal employees union comprising 890,000 people, has called for the Democrats to end the shutdown. And most recently the Teamsters, the Teamsters have called for the Democrats to end the shutdown. So pressure is building. It does appear from inside. And they're funneling, get this, Democrats are so afraid of Chuck Schumer. They want Katie Britt to funnel the information to him, a Republican. They're so afraid they want the Republican to do it. She's doing it. John Thune is not confirming anything, but also suggesting that there are multiple Democrats who are reaching out on ways to facilitate the beginnings of the appropriations process again. All right. We're going to take a break on the Vicki McKenna Show. Bonner Cohen is going to join me from Citizens for Constructive Tomorrow. Lots of fun information coming out from the realm of energy and climate change. And then we're going to talk about the crisis of illegal alien truckers. on the roads, not just the safety crisis, but also the job displacement that is taking place of American workers. And what that potentially leads to if we don't do something about it. All of that's ahead. I'll be right back. Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. And I have our pal Bonner Cohen from CFAC, Citizens for Constructive Tomorrow, on the phone to talk about some kind of big deal stories that have popped up. One is, this is just a headline. Bonner, EV sales have completely cratered. Why would that be the case, Bonner? Why would EV sales, which were already poor, but they were subsidized? Why would they crater all of a sudden? Well... There was a certain day, September 30th, 2025. And that was the last day on which qualified buyers could purchase an EV and get a big fat $7,500 tax credit.

So, in the rest to cash in and get the cars that they wanted, a lot of people bought EVs. As soon as that deadline came and went, the purchases collapsed. It was completely predictable because the phony EV market had been propped up for years by the handout that the Biden administration gave purchase. electric vehicles, minus the handout, people will go elsewhere. It was also a problem that doesn't get that much attention. But second-time EV buyers were few and far between. A lot of these people had bad experiences the first time out, say if they were living in northern Minnesota in January and found out that EVs don't work well, putting it mildly in cold weather. So there were all sorts of problems associated with this, including a woefully inadequate national recharging system, the extremely high cost of repairs. When the battery and the EV dies, so dies to the vehicle itself. And you've got to start all over again and go out and get another one. You can't sell it. That's right. There's not a good secondary market for it either. And then you're just like, you know what, I'm not doing this twice. I don't think I'm going to do it twice. Plus the electricity charges. I'm just not going to do it twice. I think I'll go back to gas powered vehicles. I mean, which, so you called it a phony market. It wouldn't have existed. You would not have had companies producing all of these EVs. but for the $7,500 tax credit that you could get. Or the pressure from the Biden administration shoveling out gazillions of dollars in printed money for car companies to commit to ESG and all of this nonsense. It wouldn't have happened but for fake printed money and a tax credit. Yes, and think of these facilities that the Biden administration funded. These were... things that the automobile manufacturers, GM, Ford, Stalantis, these were facilities that were found, shall we say, off campus, but they were to be built in support of the booming EV market. Well, the EV market didn't boom. The monies went out the door, and what we have now done is we have created, and you watch this all across places like Michigan, Ohio, and elsewhere. We have created, for taxpayers' money, what will effectively wind up being empty buildings, where they were supposed to support the manufacturer of electric vehicles when GM and Ford have acknowledged that they're actually cutting back the production of these things because they respond to markets. buyers don't want these things in sufficient numbers to keep them propped up. And that means that the massive transition, the green transition that we were told was going to be our future, has fallen completely apart. And by the way, it's not coming back anytime soon because none of the problems that have brought it low have been solved and will be solved. People are moving on.

Yeah, and I mean, you had governments that bought buses and the companies that were subsidized by the federal government to create the buses go under. And now you've got these boondoggle like Madison, Wisconsin has, these boondoggle systems that can't be fixed. Nobody knows what to do about them. They're pretty much, you know, just very expensive, you know, paper weights on the pavement is what they've become. So the whole thing is collapsed. Oh, yeah. Don't forget the electric school buses. that were produced. I never worked. It was the linchpin of electrification, though. That's right. And EVs were the linchpin of the demand for full electrification. Electrification, electrification, that's all you heard for five to eight years. We're going to have a full electrification. We're not going to use regular H-FAC systems. We're going to use ground source heat pumps. We're going to do all of these. Electrification. And we're going to do it without oil or natural gas or coal. That's right. Electrication without electricity. Yes, it didn't work. So let's talk about electrification because that's dead too. It's dead, dead. And it's dead because of AI. It's dead because of the demand on the grid of the data centers, which right now are not going to be able to rely on coal. They're going to have to rely on natural gas. They decommissioned too much coal. We don't have enough nuclear to support them. So it's natural gas. So natural gas prices are going to explode, meaning, again, those EVs are just not going to, you know, nobody's going to want to. to plug them in and charge them because utility rates are going to go up. And electrification, which already was impossible because we don't have enough high transmission lines laid, is also dead in the water because the demand for electricity from AI data centers is going to completely explode costs. Yeah, AI-driven data center. turned out to be the black swan for green energy, meaning wind, solar, and battery powered. Those things suck up energy in amounts that we can't begin to imagine. And are going to continue to do so. Why? Because the number of data centers is going to explode and as explode it must if the United States is to remain competitive with China in AI because the last thing you want is to have. China dominate AI. If China dominates AI, China dominates AI, China dominates us. So out with the wind turbines and the solar panels, because they will never be able to provide not even decent supplemental energy to data centers. These data centers are going to have to become self-esteem. sufficient in terms of energy. That is, we can't have these things sucking electricity off the grid. We need that for businesses. We need that for homes.

where you're going to see small modular reactors and other things that are going to have to go up around data centers to keep them going. In the interim, they're going to hook on, as you pointed out, to natural gas. Because natural gas works 24-7 where it's available where you have sufficient pipelines and sufficient transmission lines, you're going to have those data centers taken care of. But they're not going, not even the people in Silicon Valley who have been singing Hosanas to renewable energy and the virtues of a clean, green planet. These people are turning their backs on wind and so well because they cannot meet their needs. Of course, but you said the P-word pipelines. Oh, no. Oh, we're going to have pipelines. You mark my word. We're going to have more nuclear. We're going to have mini nuclear. And we're going to have more pipelines. Because people are going to be crying, uncle, at the exploding costs of natural gas. We are too reliant on natural gas. But in the interim, it is going to be very painful. because of the amount of power that is needed for these AI data centers. So you're exactly right. You wait. You watch Bill Gates. Bill Gates pivot was all because of AI. All because of the AI, right? Absolutely. Bill Gates, Bill, I'm just going to predict this on this show right here. In the next five years, Bill Gates is going to be angling for pipeline expansion. He's going to be doing. He has to enter in the interim. We're going to see something else that no one thought possible just. two or three years ago. Coal-fired power plants, some of those already decommissioned are going to come back online. And some of those scheduled to be decommissioned are not going to be decommissioned. They're going to see their life expectancy extended somewhat. Why? Because we need the electricity, and we need it now. It's never, King Cole has never come back. It'll never be king again. But it will be, it will still be in the nobility because it still provides reliable affordable. energy and we can't afford to lose it now because we need the electricity that those coal-fired power plants combined with natural gas and nuclear but nuclear is going to take a while are going to produce. Right on. All of this other stuff, it's pure garbage. Black is the new green. Right? That's right. That's right. It is hilarious. I think you're exactly right. We're just throwing this out there because it's going to happen, and we want to be the first people to say it on the air. So I want to not miss an opportunity to talk about what Trump is doing on rare earths. You know, everybody's like, oh, we're going to be completely dependent on China for rare earth minerals. Not so fast. He's just made a big, bold move on rare earth minerals in the United States. What's going on?

Yes, actually that bold move was in the works anyway, but it turns out to have been actually facilitated by none other than Xi Jinping, who in his brilliant foresight two weeks ago, decided it would be a good idea to limit exports of Chinese rare earths to the world at large, but his primary target, of course, was the United States. He wasn't concerned about limiting exports to Luxembourg. Well, what that did is that awakened a sleeping giant. And the sleeping giant was actually already beginning to toss in turn because of the extremely crucial role that rare earths will play in our lives from here on out. It turns out that the United States is extremely well endowed with rare herbs. We have just about everything your little heart desires. The problem is, of course, extracting it, processing it. You have to separate it. It's very complicated, but the technology is there to make it happen. And what Trump is doing is he is going to speed up the permitting for the extraction and processing of where it is because the Chinese were very smart about this. They saw that the United States twiddle its thumb for two or three decades. We were once the world's leader in rare earths, 30 years ago. Then we sat by and did absolutely nothing. The Chinese saw the opportunity, wisely seized it. And now, they were absolutely convinced that they had us right where they wanted us. They had an administration in power for four years. had no clue about any of this. Well, that has changed. And now, the United States isn't going to happen overnight, but we are going to become competitive in rare earths. They are all over the place. They're not rare. That's a misnomer. What is difficult is... extracting them and disentangling them from the other minerals that surround them. This is tricky business, but believe me, it can be done and it will be done. Oh, and you're going to, you're not, you'll hear one or two people pop up and say, but the caribou, but the caribou. And you're not going to hear much of that either. I think you're going to see all of a sudden everyone's just going to shift and suddenly try to find ways to take advantage of whatever is left of the environmentalist movement when this is all said and done and just pivot to capture whatever dollars are available. Bonner Cohen, fun talking to you. Thank you so much. Talking with you as always. And we're going to take a break on the Vicki McKenna show. That was Bonner Cohen from C-Fact. We'll be right back. Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. And I want to talk more about this crisis. I mean, we are at crisis levels. We learned that California has issued 60,000 CDLs to commercial driver's licenses to non-

Citizens, a significant portion of those 60,000 are not English proficient. How many of those 60,000 can't speak English at all? No idea. But non-English proficient. Can't read road signs. Can't understand, you know, the safety issues, don't know the manual, and somehow got CDLs. That's just California. We don't know what the numbers are coming out of New York. We know that other states have done this as well. including the state of Illinois, where Mike Kacharski is based, who owns a refrigerated trucking company, one of the largest in the country, to talk about this, Mike? I mean, we're now learning about it because truckers... God bless them, have been filming all of this stuff. So it's the other truckers on the road that are letting us know. I saw one guy who drove into a parking area where a lot of truckers are, and he identified all the non-English speaking truckers. And there were probably, I don't know, 40 or 50 of them in that area where truckers park and rest. It was stunning. This problem, I didn't even think this was a problem until all of a sudden they started crashing into the back of minivans. No, Vicki, thanks for me, Aaron Sharigan. You're right. You know, this is a very serious, I would say, crisis issue. There's a loophole of, number one, unlicensed and inexperienced CDL drivers, you know, endangering the motor public. You know, the two main reasons are going to be safety and liability. And this industry depends on trust, you know, these tragedies that keep happening, like to remind us that, you know, that's not just about reform. or just about policies, about human lives. You know, everybody's out in the More Republic, our fathers and mothers, children, grandparents. You know, I mean, we have to protect these people. And, you know, what California has done is, and I think that number is a little bit higher because I think Sean Duffy said it was just, you know, 160,000, 180,000. Holy kids. If I remember correctly. Yeah, it's a lot. I feel like he's struggling to say the correct number because he is still crunching the numbers. This morning I saw articles, something saying that Sean Duffy rejected or, excuse me, canceled 200,000 licenses. But I didn't have time to read the article. But that's a lot of licenses for non-domincial drivers, excuse me, to happen. And the really annoying part about this is that we have so many rules in place. You know, back in 2016, if I remember correctly, they stopped giving CDLs to people that had work visas. So all my drivers that had worked visas, when their license expired, they just had a park. And they said, look, the new rule is you have to be a U.S. citizen, you have social security, or you have to have a green card, and working towards your thing, and you could get a CDL. And so I was like, okay, well, I respect that because, you know, for federal mortgage carriers of that's all. So let's, let's do it. American truckers, let's do it that way. And we get a slap in the face. You know, we actually got two black eyes because the trucking business has got a black eye saying, look. We put in all these non-dominald drivers on the road and the government gets a black guy, whoever is responsible for putting these drivers on the road in the first place.

Shouldn't have put them on the road in the first place. I know there's a problem with getting people interested in getting into this job as a career. I get that. But you don't sacrifice safety. State of Oklahoma has pinched over 200 licenses. They only had like a four-day, you know, two, I think it was like less than 200 or I forget how many miles, 50 miles stretch, something like that. They pinch 200 licenses in four days. In two days they had 125 and then people got word that if you drove through Oklahoma, through these major, you know, interstates that you would have to travel as a cross-country trucker, you could face getting pulled over and losing your license entirely. That was just a handful of days. And they're pinching 200 licenses. We learned that Georgia, that they busted a scam, I don't know, this was a couple years ago, where there were guys who were selling. CDL licenses by offering to go take the test themselves and then basically selling the endorsement including hazmat endorsements which blows my mind to people who had no business on the roads in a truck anyway never mind carrying hazardous materials I didn't realize how deep the hole on this was until people started dying on the roads No, it's been very bad. And I love to you brought up the hazardous license. These people are from other countries for security of our nation. You know, I was this. Number one, you could use a truck as an object to run people over. You know, there was a terrorist attack in Germany a couple years ago that a gentleman drove through a crowd of people at, I believe, a Christmas mart or something like that. And that could be a hazard. And on top of that. So this guy could get a license, get a hazard license. You could get a whole tanker of gasoline or some flammable, you know, I don't know, jet fuel and decide to run into the side of a federal building or into the side of a school. That is unacceptable to me. And I think that is a huge, huge, huge problem. I mean, and first I just want to say, you know, I want to thank Sean Duffy for number one putting a spotlight, the presence of these foreign truck drivers operating in the U.S. We don't speed or read English. and I want to, you know, God bless him for not only protecting the public, but also to support the vast majority of the professional drivers who do the things the right way every day. And it's expensive to do the things the right way, isn't it? It's expensive. I went back and forth for years with a guy who eventually left the state of Wisconsin, but he used to use the list. He's a hazmat endorsed. trucker and he would you know he'd say good grief it takes me this much money this much time i have to put in this much effort in order to get these extra endorsements so i can make more money driving and then they're going to just simply give these things away or let people cheat to get them and you know in the meantime i got to go through the all the hassles and the hoops and the backflips to do this it isn't cheap to become a driver it isn't cheap to get your endorsements it's a lot of time it's a lot of money And, you know, you wonder why maybe we're down 80,000 drivers nationwide, U.S. drivers nationwide. Maybe it's because you make it really hard to be a driver.

Correct, correct. You mean, and obviously the trucking population, the older population is retiring and new population coming in. But, you know, the number one of the thing I want to say, you know, protecting American jobs and ensuring the integrity of all workforce is absolutely essential, you know. The DOT rule is a step towards restoring fairness in the system, which I support 100%, making sure every driver on the road, regardless of background. meet the same rigorous safety and licensing standards. You know, at the same time, it's important we remember that many hardworking law-abiding immigrant drivers have built careers in this industry, including my father. He came here from Poland, the immigrant, got a Social Security card, came through New York, started a business, and then another business started JKC, our family business. and helped, you know, keep supply chain moving, especially during the critical shortages. You know, the goal shouldn't be to exclude people, but to ensure accountability and proper training across the board. Well, follow the rules. Nobody in the United States, nobody rational in the United States is saying, let's just exclude everybody from the United States. I mean, that's not what we are. It's not what we do. Follow the damn rules. That's what people are getting kind of sick and tired of. Who's hiring these guys? Who's hiring the dude who can't even read the road sign? I just saw a police officer pull over a guy. He's almost naked in his cab. He doesn't understand put your pants on. I'm sure you've seen this video. He doesn't understand. No, I'm not. Oh, you've got to see it. Michael, send it to you. He says, put your pants on. The guy doesn't understand. Put your pants on. Then the cop pulls him out of the cab and makes him identify basic road signs. Wrong way. Merge. Slippery pavement. No parking. The guy can't understand any of them. None. And he's driving. And he's driving. And never mind the now infamous case in California where the non-English speaking driver who is high on dope. was accelerating into the back of several cars and killed three people, couldn't understand a single word of English. And he had a CDL. That's, I mean, that's the kind of stuff that you say, you know, we're making our guys do backflips. And then, because we don't have enough of them, we're threatening them with autonomous vehicles to maybe lose their job someday. And the answer is, you know, instead of maybe making it a better glide path to get more people interested in this job in the United States is to give, you know, crazy people who can't speak English, CDLs who are high on drugs? You got to be kidding me. You mean, I, we're not ready for autonomous, but I'd rather take my chances with autonomy. And, you know, it's a great question that you ask, who is you giving these licenses, you know? And who's hiring the companies? Who's hiring the companies? So I could only speculate, but if I could speculate who is, so I mean, these guys are getting licensed in California. And there's a lot of jobs out there. They do leased to own trucking, right? So you go and they lease you a truck and they say, look, okay, here you owe us like $2,000 a month for the truck and the maintenance and for the insurance. And then usually those same companies give you liability insurance, which is very, you know, questionable because I can't get liability insurance for my drivers unless they have two years of war experience.

These guys are getting it with zero experience. And on top of that, you know, I mean, I'm thinking usually these least-owned companies also have their own brokerage. They're also getting loads from these same people. They're, they, there's something fail-safe in this job that they should stop. Like, for example, all my workers are W-2 workers, my truck drivers. They have to, especially in California. California pushed to do every W-2 workers. And, um. How are these people, you know, they have no social security or if they have a, you know, they have no such security number. I mean, are they, do they leave that part blank? Do they not do background checks? Right, that's what they do. That's what they do. Now, that's what they do. We've confirmed that in California at least. So they're non-W-tude workers. They're getting lease to own vehicles and then they're using brokers so that someone who needs to ship something is just picking the cheap driver. Well, that person who's doing that, you know, ultimately it's on the government. It's their responsibility. But the company that's using a broker and not doing due diligence on who the driver is, shame on that company. Maybe if we started going after those companies, we'd have a little bit more success a little bit faster. I agree. Shame on those. And there's one more layer that I forgot to mention is that, you know, obviously the volume, which the truckers are still dealing with volume volatility due to aftershocks of COVID, inflation. Consumptions down. Rates are down due to demand, right? Our expenses are still skyrocketing. All our truckers are fighting for the same business. Freight goes to the lowest bidder. But on top of that, these new non-dama cell truckers cut the rates further, you know, because they don't need to make as much money. Well, my question is, you know, I'd like to see if they're paying taxes or if they're paying all the expenses that we are paying. But it's causing the demise of many American family trucking businesses to go out of business. Cuing generations of truckers every day, you watch this in the news, that put blood. sweat and tears into their companies and now they're going out of business because of these people and this decision. It's not just death. It's death in a bunch of different ways, including of American businesses. You know, I mean, this needs to be fixed. This problem needs to be fixed sooner rather than later. I'm glad Secretary Duffy, we loved him here when he was a congressman. I'm glad he's getting it done as DOT Secretary, but I don't think, you know, I mean, fix it yesterday. I learned so much when you come on my program, Mike. I really do appreciate you coming on my program. Jay, Kay. I'm sorry, I was going to say your company name because I forgot to introduce you as the owner of JKC Trucking. But thanks so much for jumping on the show today. Always great to have you. Thank you for your support. My pleasure. And we're going to take a break on the Vicki McKenna show. We will be right back. And welcome back to the program. I want to share this story that just posted maybe an hour or so ago. The FBI has announced that it has foiled a potential terrorist attack.

that was to take place in Michigan planned for today and tomorrow. So Halloween weekend. It says here, the FBI informed the Dearborn police that it had made arrests. It did not ask the Dearborn police for assistance. That is probably wise. Dearborn is the city where the mayor told, a man who complained that street signs were in Arabic, that if he didn't like it, he could leave, and he should leave. Dearborn is becoming majority Islamic. So Dearborn is where at least one of the suspects. We're not getting confirmation on how many suspects, but there were multiple suspects. At least one of them was arrested in Dearborn. And this apparently was a plot. that was set to be deployed in Detroit or near Detroit. So making arrests from someone in Dearborn for an attack that was expected to take place in Detroit, the FBI is not saying if it was ISIS or Al Qaeda or something like that, but they are saying that the group of conspirators to commit an act of terror on Halloween weekend does have a nexus. to quote foreign extremism. That's what they're saying. So they're not saying which foreign extremism or anything like that. But they are saying that the people they arrested have a nexus with organized foreign extremists. So yeah, so there's that.

More information is expected to be shared. This is very sketchy at this point. But it was confirmed that the Dearborn police, that the FBI had informed them they had made arrests in their community. Think about how bad it is when the FBI can't trust a local police department to assist with arrests. But clearly they didn't. And so what ultimately do we learn about this? I don't know. But remember what I said about the book, The Gathering Storm. I think I've mentioned this like 10 times now by Pineapple Press. Go read that book. We'll be back at 2 o'clock with Jim Pipavarchek. He's going to talk about his new anti-slap bill. It sounds weird, but it's actually really important. And it may stop the government from harassing us. Have a great lunch. Good afternoon. Welcome to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. Before we get to anything, hopefully you heard the keyword, but if you didn't. It's Czech, C-H-E-C-C-K. That's our Fall Fortune Cash Contest Keyword, nationwide fall fortune cash contest keyword. Enter it at our website. That's what the promo says. It doesn't give the website, right? So I will. NewsTalk-1130.com is one of the websites you can use, or W-I-B-A.com. B is in Ball. You can also play on the I-Hart Radio app. You have until 55 minutes past the hour. We will call you if you win. Don't screen your calls because we're not leaving messages. Simple as that. All right. I was going to have Jim Troopus on the program today. He was otherwise occupied. And I'll tell you exactly how. He's a family commitment. She said, I've really got to do something. If you don't mind, can we do this Monday instead? I said, what? He says my granddaughter's mom can't take her to her school Halloween party. And she really wants Grandpa to take her. So I don't know how you say, geez, Jim, you told me two days ago you'd be on the program. I want to talk about the dragnet, the, you know, the horrible things that we have discovered through these docu dumps and whistleblowers about everybody being surveilled by the government. So I think you should let your, you know, four-year-old, five-year-old granddaughter just twist in the wind on Halloween. So I was, of course, didn't say that. I said, of course, we'll do this Monday. Anyway, just since I mentioned yesterday, he would be on, that's why I bring that up. I'm happy to take. my place behind a cute five-year-old girl in a Halloween costume. Okay, here's what's coming up. I want to talk about that anti-SLAPP legislation. Jim Pivarcheck is going to join me from Wisconsin right now. There have been a number of attempts by government to use lawyers and threats of lawsuits to shut people up.

If this piece of legislation were to pass, that would likely be a thing of the past, not entirely, but for the most part it would be. I also want to check in with Kalyn Dees, who is an investigative journalist for the Washington Examiner. He has been looking at these docu drops, at the Dragnet Enemies List. We've got to come up with a name for this. Jack Smith and Merrick Garland. 100% universal jihad against the conservative movement using all mechanisms of federal power in a totally illegal fashion. You know, I don't know how to say it. Got to give it a gate name. But anyway, Kailen's going to join me on the program. This just in, a federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to pay SNAP benefits, even though the government shut down. Ordered. So there's $9 billion in a contingency fund that's supposed to be for farmers in the event that a disaster happens. And a federal judge just ordered the USDA to empty out that fund and pay two weeks of SNAP benefits. Ordered. Okay. That may continue the fight. I'm not sure what's going to happen in the courts, but it's not going to get us more than two weeks. It's not going to get us more than two weeks. So then what? If the government is continuing to be shut down, even though all the polling says, open up the damn government. You know, okay, fine. You just emptied out a contingency fund for farmers. And what's next? You're going to go ask for the, you know, women's and infants fund that funds infant formula? Is that the next thing you're going to hit? Ask federal judges to force a repurposing of funds from that. Already $23 billion in tariff revenue has been repurposed to pay people and to keep benefits paid. But I had an email. That's just in today. I had an email or come up with a great idea. She has a great idea. She says, you know, They dump about one to two million pounds of MREs every year because they go bad. So they dump one to two million pounds, either throw it away or give it off for donations or to be sold, resold at surplus stores. There's your answer. Everybody on EBT benefits can claim. expired MREs. They're still good. They're good for years and years past their expiration date. I'm not sure if anyone suggested this, but it's a really good idea. Because if the point of EBT is food and it's supposed to be not selling it for cash and then getting your nails done or buying liquor or smokes, then that makes a lot of sense, don't you think? I don't know if anyone's looking into that, but one to two million pounds wasted per year. Yeah, I mean, I think we could float the EBT program for a few months on just expired MREs. Anyway, I wanted to throw that out there. If anyone can get the information to anyone who can make a decision. We are going to take a break, though. Jim Pibavarcheck is going to join me in just a second to talk about a really good piece of legislation. And then we'll also check in with investigative reporter Kalin Dees from the Washington Examiner. This is the Vicki McKenna Show.

Welcome back to the program. It's the Vicki McKenna Show. And state rep Jim Pivarcheck is standing by on the program. And based on, well, actually you did this before, you got word that Moms for Liberties, Scarlett Johnson finally. won her case. The government had essentially sued her because she criticized it. But you had already been working on a piece of legislation called anti-SLAPP legislation. So how would anti-SLAPP legislation work? Let's use Scarlett's example. How would it work to stop something like that from happening? Yeah, good afternoon, thanks, Vicki. You're exactly right. Scarlett, the lawsuit against Scarlett is the exact thing that my bill would stop from happening and would protect her. And I have been working on it for a couple months now. It's coincidental of Bill dropped basically at the same time that Scarlett finally prevailed in her case. But you're right. So is it back up a little bit? Anti-SLAP stands for an anti-strategic lawsuit against public participation. Okay? There are attorneys, and there's a strategy out there, that in order to silence people from their First Amendment right of free speech, They will file lawsuits, and they will drag them through the process for what seems like forever. In Scarlett's case, it went on for a long time. It can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend yourself. Luckily in Scarlet's face, Will came to her defense. I can't imagine what would happen if she didn't have Will protecting her this time around. But my bill... specifically says that if a defamation of character type of a lawsuit or a slap lawsuit is filed against someone, they have 60 days to request a hearing in front of a judge, and the plaintiff is then responsible for laying out the information and trying to explain to the judge why they think they would prevail in a lawsuit. That judge then has 60 days to make a determination, and if that judge determines that this lawsuit is frivolous, Then the defendant can actually come back after the plaintiff for attorney class and court fees and things like that. So this is strategic litigation to prevent public participation. That slap, this is anti-SLAP. That's why we're calling it that. So that's what we're going to be referring to. It doesn't always result in a lawsuit. In fact, A lot of times it doesn't. A lot of times it begins and oftentimes ends with the attorneys sending threatening letters. And that has happened to media, not just to activists, but to media. Matt Kittle, for instance, at the Federalist was working on stories about Sun Prairie and the goings on at Sun Prairie, also some stories that were coming out of Verona School District. The Corp Council said, if you do not cease and desist, we will bring action against you.

That is, you know, if that corp counsel thought it had to go before a judge, would it ever send a letter in the first place? Correct. And we, so all my work to Wisconsin right now, I can tell you, Jessica and I have received the similar type of letters of threatening letters. We aren't intimidated by them. We never, you know, we never bow to them. But it is something that is used. And it, but this does, this legislation actually does go after it protects people from the actual lawsuit that's filed against them. So, and it's happening to activists as well. We had that. I believe it was in the Kettle Moraine School District, where moms were trying to get information. This is going on all over the country. I know Goldwater Institute has been working on legislation in other states. Most states, just not us. actually have this protection already so that so that public bodies so that government can't use it's pretty much unlimited resources just to harass people into stopping criticizing government um you know so my my my wonder because because anti slap typically will protect um fewer leftists than it will protect conservatives is there an appetite for bipartisanship on this legislation So you're exactly right. And that's how this bill is. This is not a Democrat bill. This isn't a Republican bill. This is a free speech bill. And in my research, you're right. Like both liberals, liberal activists and conservative activists are targets to these type of lawsuits. And so I do expect bipartisan support. And I would expect Governor Evers to sign this bill because, again, it protects everyone in their freedom of speech. This is kind of the basis of lawfare that if you can, you know, begin by threats. I'm not, you know, I would love to see something a lot more rigorous regarding the multifaceted problem of lawfare. But in legislation, it's difficult to do, you know, nine things at the same time. So, you know, do we have, I guess when you have the public hearing first, actually first, I should say, has everyone signed onto your bill? Is it still circulating? So we just put it out for circulation just on Wednesday. I know I do already have some legislators on board. Sometimes it takes people a few days to, you know, read the emails and digest what I'm sending out. But it has been, it is being, that my Senate lead on it is Senator Eric Winberger. He's an attorney. He really likes the bill. So I do have both Senate and Assembly support on this. I'm waiting to hear from the Democrat. Okay, so no Democrats have reached out to you on this yet. How about the Attorney General? This is a guy who's a super fan of law fair, but certainly we should expect to hear something since he's running again. Have you, as a reporter, or as the sponsor of this legislation, reached out to Josh Call?

We have not yet, but that is something that we'll do. We'll reach out to Josh Call and probably Eric Tony also and get his opinion on this. Yes, I would love that. So I think he would make an excellent witness at a hearing. Perhaps the Attorney General would like to come in and weigh in on what he thinks of a piece of legislation that most states, not us, but most states have that protect individual members of the public and the press from being dragged into court on phony defamation charges just to shut them up. We will definitely invite him. I know Scarlett said she plans to attend our hearing. It should be good. I hope to get a lot of people come and testify. And I do want to clarify that we have about 38 states in the country that do have similar anti-SLAPP legislation already. 14 states have adopted this exact legislation. This legislation comes from the Uniform Law Commission. They're bipartisan. And when I reached out and took a look at their bill, I really liked it. Other states around us like Minnesota, I already have this exact legislation and it's been tested in the courts. And so it's important that we don't become an island without this protection because then we'll have these ambulance chasing attorneys coming into Wisconsin filing these lawsuits. Again, this law is to protect everyone in Wisconsin of their... Well, that's a good point. You made a good point because it doesn't necessarily have to be. I mean, what if Jim Petivarcheck and Jessica McBride write a story about, you know, the appalling... behavior of, I don't know, a mayor in Indiana, right? So if that person, that it does, so slap isn't just inside a state. It can, it can cross state lines. And if you don't have protections, then we get to be the place where everybody gets targeted. Shut up. Wisconsin right now. Shut up McIver Institute. Shut up Scarlett. Shut up all the moms and the activists out there that have been doing such good work. Shut up turning point. Shut up federalists. So, you know, and we know, Vicki, it's not necessarily the outcome of these lawsuits that will take us out. It's the process. And it's the emotional toll. And it's the expense that goes on for years sometimes. And this bill makes it, I kind of look at it like it's a preliminary hearing. All right, you get a lawsuit filed against you for defamation of character. You get a preliminary hearing in front of a judge very fast, and then that judge has to make a fast determination if it can move forward. And I do want to make it clear. If the judge decides that there is cause, then it can go forward. This doesn't prevent anti-defamation type lawsuits. This just prevents frivolous losses. Right, so let's talk about Scarlett's case because we're using Scarlett's case as kind of the quintessential case. Scarlet posts on social media about a social justice coordinator in, was it Wawatosa, I think, schools. So she posts about a social justice coordinator. She uses the phrase white savior, woke, and social justice warrior to describe this person.

The government claimed that somehow defamation. First off, you can't defame the government. I'm just saying that. So that was dumb on its face. But those phrases are not defamation, right? My worry is that you're still going to put it in the hands of a judge. So let's say we're in Dane County. You know, you've still got a judge because she did. She had a judge in the very first, you know, the very first judge she had this went three years, multiple levels of the court system, who said, yeah, I think that should go forward. I think we should, you know, go after Scarlett and her husband, as she detailed, financial records, bank records, text messages, you name it. I'm, you know, that does still kind of worry me because some of these judges are not there for justice. Well, and we even saw, and you're correct. And we saw, I think, in the appeals case, there was actually one of the judges with Judge Colon, I think, ruled, you know, disagreed with the ruling and thought that defamation did exist. So you're right, there are judges that definitely can still rule against a defendant. But this gives us added protection. You know, nothing's ever going to be 100% when we have liberal judges. But it's at least a tool to help protect the speech in the state. Yeah. And understand that, you know, calling someone woke, calling them a social justice warrior, first off, to have defamation, these things have to not be true. So that's number one. Calling someone a white savior, these are not things that are provable in any court of law. as defamation should have been thrown out from the get-go. But again, to your point, it's not perfect. It's a beginning. And I certainly hope you have an enthusiastic endorsement. And I hope you have an endorsement as well by media, because they are the ones being threatened with these slap lawsuits. And I would like to know, I would personally love to see how many media have just caved to avoid the lawsuit instead of doing the hard reporting like you guys do. Yep. You're exactly right. I expect media to get behind me on this bill, even the left, even the lefty Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. I would expect them to come out and praise this bill. Because again, this isn't a left or right issue. This is a free speech issue. Protects journalists, protects activists, protects anyone that wants to get out in the public and speak their mind. Yeah, and you don't have to, you know, and good luck getting an insurance policy to cover frivolous lawsuits from lunatic political activists because that's going to be hard to come by. It's also very expensive. All right, so bill number, next steps, when's the hearing, or do you not have that yet? We don't have it yet. Like I said, just went out for co-sponsorship. We have not yet. It hasn't been assigned to a hearing, but I will keep you updated and we'll keep everyone updated on that. All right. Jim Pivavarcheck. Thank you from Wisconsin right now, it's a reporter, but also state legislator. And look for the bill number on that. But everyone right now can still reach out to their legislator and say, I heard Jim and Vicki talking about SLAP, SLAPP, anti-SLAP legislation. We want you to support that.

And they'll know what it is because the co-sponsorship memo has already been sent out. There is an article on Wisconsin right now about it, and you can read the bill right there. Perfect, Wisconsin right now.com. Jim Pivarcheck. Thanks so much. Thanks, Vicki. And we're going to take a break on the Vicki McKenna Show. I'll be right back. Welcome back to the program. And I have standing by on the program, Kalin Dees from the Washington Examiner, one of the few outlets doing due diligence on the story. I don't even quite have a name for the story. Do we call it Enemies List? Do we call it, you know, kitchen sink subpoena gate? But Kalin is doing the hard work of actually reporting on this. I'm sorry to say not everyone is, including the Wisconsin media, despite 38. prominent Republicans being on these lists. Kalin, welcome to the program. Thank you for joining me. Thank you so much. It's great to be back, thank you. All right. So the story changes. By the minute, it seems like we're getting new information, or maybe it's just the time that it takes to go through 1,700 pages or 200 pages. But we now have learned that... Ed Henry from Newsmax was being monitored because he tried to get a song uploaded to Apple Music to help J6 prisoners. We now know that America First Legal was subpoenaed and monitored secretly. And they didn't even exist until 2022. So what did they have to do with January 6th or what did they have to do with the election? And we know pretty much. You know, half the conservative movement in some key players in the conservative network were under surveillance and we're not sure exactly what the predicate crime would have been to put us all under surveillance. What have you found out? Yeah, the predicate is still a grand mystery to everyone looking at this. At this point, the only assumptions that we have is that the... Arctic frost probe was attempting to be so wide and so vast. that it was seeking information that could be potentially damning to President Donald Trump from all corners of his network of supporters, from people who are directly close with them to people who just have tangential relationships. And so that's why we see such a broad net that was cast. But it is a drag net. And in a lot of ways, everyone who is wrapped into this who had no contextual involvement to... anything involving the 2020 election or anything related to Trump's final weeks in office where he was raising grief about the election. So many people who have no relation to that whatsoever were wrapped into this. And I think it's something that...

we're going to need to get more answers. You know, basically, I mean, the Senate and the House, whenever, if they're ever able to get Jack Smith to sit for a deposition, they need to have a thorough, it needs to be six to eight hours plus interview with them in order to understand and gather information that could. at least, you know, go down the list of individuals one by one, line by line, and try to understand the predicate for each last one of them, because that is, at the very least, with no sort of perhaps financial compensation or any sort of, you know, like, reparation for the damage that was caused by people who were, had no business or did not deserve to be surveilled by the FBI. This is the bare minimum of justice that can be brought for people. who, you know, rightfully should be angry about having any other information out there. And I think that that is what the committees need to do. That's what, you know, Jim Jordan needs to make sure, as, you know, happens. And he needs to ensure that there's a transcript that can be put out. But first, we've got to get Jack Smith to sit down in that chair. And thus far, he's been very, you know, apprehensive and he's been trying to push for some sort of public hearing. But Jim Jordan, to my understanding, is still trying to keep that as a closed-door transcribed hearing. And I believe, you know, in the next coming days and weeks, we could see a subpoena filed for Smith because it doesn't seem like he's going to budge right now on this. We know Rick Scott was another senator that can be added to the list of senators who were surveilled. So Senator Rick Scott, we already know Ron Johnson. Our Senator Ron Johnson was on that list. We also know that there were multiple FBI agents that were promoted for their work on this political drag nut operation, that anybody who is anyone who had a connection with someone who might have been working for the Trump campaign. I'm barely being hyperbolic there. So we know that all of them. need to sit every single one of them and subpoenas should be flying as we speak because we've learned some other things as well we've learned gag orders were issued to AT&T and gag orders were issued to Verizon and gag orders were issued to Apple turn over this information and we also know that none of the people whose information was turned over under these so-called subpoenas or even just letters we're not sure all of this was done through subpoena Some of it could have just been letters. Gag orders were issued and signed off by Judge Bosaberg. So this, I mean, this is starting to shape up to look like a conspiracy, quite frankly. It is, Vicki. And the thing about the AT&T versus Verizon discrepancy that's so interesting to me is that AT&T is saying in their letters to the Senate Judiciary Committee that they did not receive subpoenas from special counsel, Jacksonville, ultimately after they were informed that they might be coming. And this is very interesting because this is...

what happens whenever a company has a backbone and they're willing to stand up for the rights of their customers. Because AT&T was skeptical and they say on May 23, special counsel Smith said AT&T a grand jury subpoena that included a request for fund records associated with AT&T accounts for two other members of Congress. However, when AT&T raised questions with the special counsel says concerning the legal basis for seeking records of those members, the special counsel did not pursue the subpoena further and no records were produced. So it's like, you know, a perfect encapsulation of like, you know, knowing your rights. And then seeing what happens whenever a company, a person, you know, knows the rights and states it to the government, they back down. And that is not what happened with Verizon. Verizon is, you know, they took a completely 180 approach and they were just compliant, compliant, compliant. with what happened and that's how we got to you know having eight senators one representative uh and now we're we're learning more it was like around 11 or 12 having Rick Scott and uh one other person uh i believe into that into that um old so it is something that i think is you know I think Verizon should have to, you know, perhaps have one of their CEOs or some represented from the company come in and also be part of this investigation, too, because it would be interesting to learn some of the insights that went into why they decided to go along with it whenever a similar phone carrier, AT&T, was not willing to do that. And the fact that Boseberg was the person that signed off on this gag order is so... So poetic. It is, it is, could not be more, you know, vindicating to the people who have been raising questions about his, the way he's ruled on several things, dating back to at least most recently in March, the, the order involving mass deportation. And so I think that for what, for what Bozberg did, he essentially kept, you know, senators like Ted Cruz in the dark about what was happening, what efforts were underway to surveil his phone tolls. And I think that that is something that, you know, Ted Cruz is called for his impeachment over. There's so many things that I think Bozberg has been criticized over the last few months. It is honestly a wonder to me why the House has not at least started. some sort of impeachment proceedings, even though the bar is set very hard to actually remove a judge. I think that it's a very minimum, there should be something that they do to send a message because that has been, that has been the call for the last several months over. To Byron Donalds's credit, he says he intends to introduce an impeachment proceeding against Judge Bosaberg. But how about you just bring him in? How about you just drag him in? Since he appears to have been rubber stamping kitchen sink general warrants, which are illegal. General warrants are illegal. Since he's been the one doing that, how about you bring him in too? How about you light that chair on fire and make it really uncomfortable for this judge and let him cite the law?

that he thinks he has that allows these kitchen sinks subpoenas. I want to throw Apple under the bus as well. They just caved, again, going back to Ed Henry from Newsmax, they turned over Ed Henry's social security number to the FBI, nobody, and to the Justice Department. Nobody knows what else has gone on with that social security number, but they decided to turn, not that the feds couldn't get it another way. But Apple was willing to just open up everything. You can see his bank account. You can see the kind of stuff he does on our system. So how about some Apple executives having to fry their butts on a chair too in front of these committees? See, there's ways to do this without just throwing everybody in jail. And there's ways to dissuade this without throwing everybody in jail. It's just that everyone seems to think that, you know, if we can't throw them in jail, let's not do anything. There's lots they can do. Yeah, I mean, it's, it's, there's, there's, there's, there's so much that. could be done here that it's going to be one of those big remains to be seen, you know, outcomes. I mean, it's good at the very least that we're being made aware of this. It's sad that, you know, a lot of this was sort of among, you know, the, among members of this, you know, conservative movement and MAGA. A lot of people sort of had this expectation that this was going down. I think a lot of people, from what I've heard, are disappointed to see how much they've been blown even more away. by just how vast and sweeping the surveillance was. I want to also point out, too, you know, there's an interesting line in some of the recent information that was dropped by the House Judiciary Committee, and we learned more about how the conservative partnership institutes had Ed Corrigan was one of the names also. Another very innocent, very, you know, has what it wouldn't harm a fly type figures that was. placed into the FBI's musings and speculation out of the Seattle field office. They were saying that there was concerns that he was... secretly in charge of the House Freedom Caucus and that he wanted to bring about some kind of Civil War-type scenarios and that he had some foreign, that he had some sort of like foreign, like Russian, like, you know, affinities and things like that, just completely preposterous and ludicrous slander against Ed Morgan. And, you know, we're trying to get to the bottom of who might have tipped the Seattle office with that false and misleading tip. And trying to learn more about, you know, like who could have been behind that claim because I think that could be, you know, a key piece to the puzzle as well that I hope that not only reporters like me, but also lawmakers are trying to get to the bottom of who told the Seattle Field Office that type of false information. Because I think it's, you know, obviously the FBI, we want them to pursue all credible leads. But if they get that type of tip and they decide to.

you know, take it seriously. I mean, it's just, it's just something that I cannot. Yeah, it's crazy. So some political actor smears Ed Corrigan and the FBI is like, let's go get him. By the way, musings and speculations, this is all over the document where they're laying out different things like they're spitballing. It's like they're sitting around and brainstorming. It's like a bunch of idiots having a beer together and getting a little bit too inebriating coming up with really dumb ideas. And that's in these documents. It's unbelievable because you're like, is this, this is, if I wrote this and tried to, you know, make it into a TV show, they'd say, oh, no, no one's going to believe it. That's so dumb. But that's exactly what happened. Yeah, I mean, you really could, you know, turn this into a series at this point just to kind of give the American people, I think, a little bit of an expository view of how just, you know, mistrusting their FBI has become over the years. And I think that this is the challenge for Kash Patel going forward. I mean, he's been, you know, having this challenge ever since he stepped on an office. But, you know, there's still a large cohort of the MAGA base. And rightfully so, I think, you know, who have these talks about why do we even still have an FBI? Why do we still have trust that this is going? And I think it's a relatable question. I would say, however, though, that, you know, with the way that Kash Patel has managed the FBI thus far, I think that he's trying at least to show signs that they're going back to sort of the old school criminal, you know, conduct investigations. And I think that he's... made an example in recent time. Just, you know, even last night, there was a, there was a law enforcement corruption bus that was announced by the co-duty, Andrew Bailey. And I believe there were around 14 local law enforcement that were involved in that. It was involving drug trafficking. So, I mean, it's an example, too, that, you know, this FBI is willing to. search all corners and places where illegal conduct might be happening. We also have, you know, the NBA gambling bus that Kash Patel made an appearance that that obviously wasn't started under his tenure. That started under a previous FBI. But I think that they're trying to go out and make public appearances and show that this FBI currently is not just all about, you know, going after Catholics and trying to, you know, do all these politics in January 6th. Yes, yes, our politics. But, but, you know, like, like, like what we saw under Ray. But now we're seeing a bit of a return to normal where the FBI is doing things that we would assume that they should be doing, not the things that we would not like them to be doing. Well, and start firing people. That'll make me happier too. Kalyn Dees from the Washington Examiner. Washington Examiner.com. Thank you very much for joining me. Thank you, Vicki. Have a great afternoon, and we will take a break on the Vicki McKenna Show. Well, that is going to do it for me on the program. I hope everybody has a nice, safe weekend.

And, you know, I'm not sure if EBT cards are running dry or if the money from USDA is going to be repurposed in time to stop looting. But you know what? Just kind of stay frosty this weekend. Good idea. Always a good idea to stay frosty. Coming up on Monday's program, as I mentioned at the top of the show, the top of this hour, Jim Troopis is going to join me on the program. So definitely tune in for that. And John Lott on claims that. Democrats are now making, you know what, you really all don't need to be practicing self-defense. Self-defense is too dangerous and shouldn't be trusted with citizens. So we'll talk about that as well. Have a great weekend.